{"title":"Oregon's Senate Joint Resolution 12: Understanding the Implications of a Constitutional Right to Healthcare","authors":"Anna Starr","doi":"10.15760/hgjpa.2021.6.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15760/hgjpa.2021.6.5","url":null,"abstract":"Problems persist throughout the U.S. healthcare system including exorbitant costs, poor health scores, high rates of uninsured, and lack of access to services among marginalized groups. Among many proposed solutions is a constitutional provision to healthcare. Largely based in ethics, healthcare as a right is also expected by many to improve health outcomes. However, while constitutional provisions for healthcare are found in countries around the world, empirical research results are limited and mixed at best. In the wake of social justice movements and resurgence of vibrant conversations about human rights, and with international pressure mounting for the U.S. to follow suit, it is an important issue for Americans. While amending the federal constitution remains daunting and unlikely, states can amend their own constitutions. In November 2022, Oregonians will vote to amendment the Oregon constitution making healthcare a human right under Senate Joint Resolution 12, previously “the Hope Amendment.” This paper strives to provide a well-balanced understanding of its potential aftereffects and a brief examination of its aspirational influence on health outcomes.","PeriodicalId":123243,"journal":{"name":"Hatfield Graduate Journal of Public Affairs","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128971312","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Governmental Persuasion Strategies on Social Media during COVID-19: A Comparative Study of the US and China","authors":"Fan Wang","doi":"10.15760/hgjpa.2021.6.8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15760/hgjpa.2021.6.8","url":null,"abstract":"This study compared persuasive strategies of the governments of the U.S. and China during a public health crisis using social media messages. Collecting data with R and Python from two national public health sectors' official accounts on Twitter (N = 1,630) and Sina Weibo (N = 3,554), the researcher investigated how the organizations' messages reflected Cialdini's seven principles of persuasion and whether other emergent messaging patterns occurred. According to the different phases that the two countries had gone through during the pandemic, the researcher also conducted a pooled times series analysis to investigate the relationship between the frequency of daily posts and the number of daily COVID-19 positive new cases in the two countries. The study found that the principle of authority was the most often used rule by the two countries, and a combination of directive and non-directive messages was detected. The research discussed the effectiveness of Cialdini's principles in an online context and provided recommendations regarding timely responses towards the development of the disease on social media, which may also help build up the organizations' credibility in public health crises.","PeriodicalId":123243,"journal":{"name":"Hatfield Graduate Journal of Public Affairs","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126008102","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}