The Ancients and the Actuaries
It’s All Greek to Me
by Craig Hanna
 PDF version
At the risk of oversimplifying the contributions of ancient Greek civilization
to modern philosophy, mathematics, the arts, and government, I suggest the following: There are particular lessons to be learned from the ancients that have relevance to the actuarial profession and to its role in public policy.
The opportunity to analogize across
disciplines is especially pertinent because
the very first Academy was
formed in Athens by Plato in 387
B.C. as a place to discuss, teach,
raise consciousness, and influence
the politics of the day. Furthermore,
it’s through such discourse on ethics
and the public good that Greek thought
laid the foundation for the development of
the Western values that form the fabric of our
social, civic, and commercial lives in the
modern era.
In our contemporary world, full of global uncertainties,
there seems to be a predilection more toward
absolutes than consciousness raising.
Instant
breaking news emanates from numerous
platforms and technologies;
the planet is at once a more
intimate community and a more insecure
one, due in part to daily barrages of
all the news that’s fit to depress you.
Through it all, we skeptically question
the relevance of so much information to
our daily lives: our personal security, financial
security, and the well-being of our loved ones. And,
just as Greek cynics sought the “one truth,” so do we all seek
answers to our daily challenges.
Such truths are especially sought from the actuarial profession,
which naturally tends to identify with the Greeks
more from the perspective of applying mathematical symbols
to weigh sensitivities. It’s out of this practice of fully
probing for certainties and accuracies that the profession
is sought by public policy-makers, who, with the zeal of
Diogenes searching for an honest man, look to shine the
light on the indisputable answers to the challenges that
face us all. Or not.
Certain truths such as critical action needed to resolve
Social Security and Medicare solvency shortfalls, federal
or state reforms to address the asbestos and medical malpractice
litigation crises, the need for expanded coverage
opportunities for the health care uninsured, implementing
a permanent federal terrorism risk insurance backstop,
and others, can be ignored if they don’t neatly fit into the
objectives of the stakeholders who must weigh constituent
political realities against immediate and long-term needs.
And the sensitivities that surround each of these issues are
driven by their relevance to large numbers of Americans,
which should not be discounted.
The appropriate forum for such sensitivity testing is in
the legislature, but as we’ve seen thus far in the 109th Congress,
there seems to be little consensus surrounding proposals
to resolve these major challenges. While the need to
act is widely acknowledged, the political will to overcome
philosophical and practical differences has been elusive.
Of course, realities can change by
changing leadership or by setting a new
tone through a concerted public opinion
campaign (because leadership without followership
is an incomplete political equation).
One of the greatest gifts from the ancient
Greeks, small “d” democratic (demos = people, crates = rule, or govern) government,
vests the real power in its citizenry.
In our representative form of government,
the former is achieved by elections, the latter
by expending considerable resources
either through grass-roots mobilization or
mass media/public relations campaigns.
Acting as a change agent in either of
these respects may not produce optimal
results. The Academy’s credibility would
be forever altered were it to engage in
political contests to sway outcomes. And
waging an effective, nationwide campaign
to influence public opinion is no small feat,
as any advertising executive will attest. It
doesn’t require an actuarial opinion to
conclude that a grass-roots campaign by
18,000 foot soldiers in a nation of just under
300 million people won’t have a high
probability of success. The odds are further
complicated by the false prophet of
conviction. It would be a Herculean feat
for actuaries to produce unanimity of
opinion and purpose behind each and every
public policy campaign in every practice
area given the versatile nature of the
profession.
But unanimity isn’t everything. Whether
as a Greek chorus in a tragedy commenting
while events unfold or as Cassandras
foreseeing calamities behind every
trend, actuaries risk losing their voice in
the discourse of public policy if they aren’t
heard or heeded because they don’t speak
the language of their audience.
Recognizing that the competing needs
and motivations of political leaders don’t
always match
those of thought leaders is important to
the Academy’s approach to delivering a
message, especially if the news is particularly
bad and requires considerable expenditure
of political capital. The mythic
proportions of the Social Security and
Medicare solvency debates are generally
well understood in the marbled temples
of Washington, D.C. But the day of reckoning
to address change has been put off
to an uncertain future date when the immediacy
of insolvency looms large enough
to overcome the perceived political pain
acting (presumably in a bipartisan fashion).
No amount of compelling evidence
to the contrary—that to delay not only
postpones the inevitable but makes the
problems more acute and the options fewer—
will spur action on these issues before
the mid-term congressional elections.
And truth be told, those intractable
problems—such as medical malpractice
reform, asbestos reform, health insurance
coverage for the uninsured, and reversing
declines in defined benefit plans—involve
perennial skirmishes on Capitol Hill between
entrenched interests that make
cost-benefit assessments and find little
reason to compromise.
These epic battles, like the great battles
of the Greek city-states, involve very intricate
alliances and partnerships among
far-flung groups who may have no greater
stake in the outcome than the premise of
thwarting a common adversary. Others
run up against the stark reality of fiscal
shortfalls and equitable resource allocation
(budget deficits and unfunded mandates)
Still others wax and wane according to the
fickle cycles of public opinion polls. And
all the while, there exist other, unforeseen
or too-long-ignored events, such as the
AIDs pandemic or avian flu,
that have the potential to tip the scales of
humanity in ways perhaps no one can fully
comprehend.
No public policy debate can ensue
without political discourse. The nature of
human interaction dictates it. However,
the character of that debate needs to be
honestly engaged and the integrity of the
profession preserved through its standards
and the Code of Conduct. Otherwise, we
risk a dissembled jumble of sophistry that
advances no cause except to diminish future
potential influence.
The measure of each foray into the
public domain is indelibly imprinted on
the consciousness of the community and
forever shapes impressions and biases
based on the execution and performance
of that public effort.
The Academy’s credibility in the public
policy arena has been painstakingly built
out of non-partisan, unbiased analysis, in
addition to an open-door policy for all parties
in the public sector to seek advice and
counsel. And while such analysis often becomes
the raw material for advocates who
engage in lobbying efforts, for the Academy
to wage that campaign itself would fundamentally
alter its identity within the public
policy and political arenas and place its relationships
with particular players in those
sectors above its public policy mission.
Whether current events give you cause
to mount your own soapbox, tutor world
conquerors, or sip your own brand of
hemlock, there is a collective forum for
effecting productive change through the
work of the Academy in all of its functions:
as consciousness raiser, educator, ethical
standard-bearer, and even political rabblerouser.
Within reason, of course.
Craig Hanna is director of public policy for the American Academy of Actuaries in Washington.
Contingencies (ISSN 1048-9851) is published by the American Academy of Actuaries, 1100 17th St. NW, 7th floor, Washington, DC 20036. The basic annual subscription rate is included in Academy dues. The nonmember rate is $24. Periodicals postage paid at Washington, DC, and at additional mailing offices. BPA circulation audited.
This article may not be reproduced in whole or in part without written permission of the publisher. Opinions expressed in signed articles are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official policy of the American Academy of Actuaries.
|
