My Washington colleague Tucker Warren, follows up on my earlier post about health reform with thoughts about how much the environment has changed in Washington since the last pitched battle over health care reform in 1994.

Recent health reform discussions in Washington make it easy to be skeptical – a sentiment aided by the controversy about draft legislation that carries a price tag of more than $1.6 trillion while still leaving 15 million people uninsured.

But a symposium on Wednesday reminded me just how far we’ve come on discussion around health reform.

The National Pharmaceutical Council (Edelman client) brought together key players from government, industry and advocacy to discuss reform and the role of comparative effectiveness research (CER) and evidence-based medicine (EBM).

Everyone agreed that quality and consistency of care must improve, cost must be reduced, and evidence and comparative effectiveness play a key role in determining what works. And while there was spirited debate about how to accomplish these things, there was much agreement among people who not long ago found little common ground.

It’s important to remember that in 1993, the health reform process focused primarily on engaging Washington policy wonks and the tone carried a very strong partisan flavor. Fast forward 16 years and we are seeing a much more engaging level of discussion. All stakeholders, including the general public, are being asked for input. And having all parties at the table willing to “lose a little skin” gives us our best shot at a system that places the patient at the center.

During this summer and fall, there will be plenty of posturing by all sides that will challenge even the most optimistic; but I believe health care reform will happen because voters want it (see this week’s Kaiser survey) and because the process has been much, much better. And in some ways that’s as important as the product itself.

Tucker Warren is a senior account supervisor in Edelman’s health practice in Washington, D.C.