"It can't hurt", in addition to not being 100% accurate (but I'd agree its unlikely to hurt), doesn't mean much if its unlikely to help much. And even if those pushing it think it will help they have to measure the help against the cost, including the opportunity cost of not using the funds to do other research or to conduct other types of lobbying efforts to oppose reform.
And that assumes the point for these companies is to oppose reform, when it isn't. Their point is to make money. Most of them would rather manipulate reform to toss money their way, they would rather use their lobbying efforts to rent-seek rather than to push political points.
Also beyond the point of those who would automatically massively discount such research and analysis because of its source (or the source of its funds if they pay for it rather than doing it directly), there is the fact that if they make a solid honest effort, there isn't any way of guaranteeing that the US will come in at number 1 in their calculations (they could guarantee it by manipulating the methodology, but then its even less likely that the study will have an impact as opponents will search for manipulation and faults and call them on it). Even if it would be pretty safe to conclude the rank would be noticeably higher than WHO's rank, a conclusion that the US is number 8, or 4, or even 2, might not have much impact. Someone would look at number one and say "we should change to be more like them", not "we should keep the status quo" (and again the insurance and drug companies' interest is money not specifically the status quo)
And once more the whole idea of these rankings is a pretty bogus one, and I suspect many who you would look to, to fund other rankings, would likely agree with that point. |
