Is a national model for health planning appropriate?

In this article, a "point-counterpoint" format is used to discuss a fundamental issue concerned with the design and implementation of P.L. 93-641. Dr. Cyril Roseman first examines some implementation obstacles and argues that basic forces are at work militating against effective implementation of an implicit national model, and he argues that multiple models for planning should be formulated under the existing law. Boyd Palmer then counters with a view that the existing national model is flexible enough to accommodate the basic forces without undertaking the drastic changes implied by Dr. Roseman.