Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

US: Health Care (Kaiser 7/7-14)


Kaiser Family Foundation
7/7-14/09; 1,205 adults, 3% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews

(Kaiser: summary, release, toplines)

National

State of the Country
33% Satisfied, 61% Dissatisfied

Do you think (____) would be better off or worse off if the president and Congress passed health care reform, or don't you think it would make much difference?

You and your family: 39% Better off, 21% Worse off
The country as a whole: 51% Better off, 23% Worse off

Do you favor or oppose...

Creating a government-administered public health insurance option similar to Medicare to compete with private health insurance plans

59% Favor, 36% Oppose

Requiring all Americans to have health insurance, either from their employer or from another source, with financial help for those who can't afford it

68% Favor, 29% Oppose

 

Comments
IdahoMulato:

Good numbers. And with the kind of news I'm getting, the healthcare/health insurance legislation will be passed.

____________________

IdahoMulato:

Good numbers. I'm more hopeful than any other day.

____________________

Stillow:

Luckily I heard the public option was dropped....as was suspected its a watered down version of what the liberals wanted.

____________________

IdahoMulato:

@Stillow
I don't care whether they're blue dogs or red dogs or whatever.
This is what I know. Prez Obama's goals for the healthcare overhaul are based on 3 main important thrusts (1) spread health coverage to millions (between 45 - 50 million) who now lack it; (2) slow the skyrocketing growth in health care costs and (3) a ban on insurance company denials of coverage based on pre-existing conditions.

The first goal can be achieved by helping lower-income families afford insurance --This can be achieved by employer-sponsored insurance -- a requirement that big businesses offer insurance to their workers or the govermnet may provide subsidies to low-income families to afford insurance. In this case, employers would have a choice between offering coverage or paying a portion of any government subsidy that non-insured employees would receive.
The second goal can be achieved by competition lacking in the market currently. The plan that most people support is the government insurance option -- a provision in which the government would sell insurance in competition with private industry. Any attempt to water-down this option or remove this provision will be a disaster.
The third goal is self-explanatory and should be non-negotiable.
It's regretable that the dems have allow the repubs to be lieing about reforms still born. As somebody said elsewhere "The Repubs are masters of noisy catchphrases over policy, and that is what so many people end up hearing: "worried about all the spending" "governmnent control of healthcare" - it is always the distorted Republican talking-points that the media and wider public pick up on. Because, however false or shallow or dishonest, their catchphrases stir the emotions (not the head) and are easy to remember. There is a gut reaction. The news networks can pick the soundbites up. Yes, the GOP appeals to the lowest basest emotions, but their strategy has worked time and again." That's why it's important that the Dems settle on a "plan" for marketer-in-chief Obama to sell it to the public.
Many are suggesting Obama and his white house aides should have written the bill and present to congress for debates and vote. However, he has learnt a big lesson from what happened to Clinton in 1993 and would not like to repeat that mistake. It's heart warming to learn today of progress being made. What Obama needs to do is to use the LBJ playbook he used to get the civil rights bill passed through arm-twisting of congress. This may be done individually especially the so-called blue dogs.

____________________

Stillow:

Man, you the a total cookie-cutter fringe liberal aren't you? You simply don't understand the debate at all.

First, the 45-50 million is a lie. About 15 million ar eillegal aliens. Anohter 15 millions are so are younger, healthy people who choose not to be covered because they do not want to sepdn the money...those numbers are slightly debatable, but you get the point....well maybe not you, but most do.

Secondly, can you name me one, just one instance where g'ment involvment has lowered costs for anything? All g'ment involvement does is increase the burocracy, lead to higher prices, lower quality and the entitlement eventually goe bankrupt, as it the case with nearly all our current entitlement programs, they are all out of money or running out of money....yet being a liberal your completely clueless....and despite a mountain of examples to the contrary, you still beleive g'ment involvement will lower prices. This is just due to your inability to think for yourself and see reality. Maybe there are one or two examples of g'ment loweirng the costs, increasing efficiency of soemthing....I cannot think of any right now, but for every one youcan name I can name five where the oppositte is true. Beofre you spout your big g'ment nonsense, try, please try to look at some facts on what g'ment involvement does.

A public option will not make it i nthe final draft. You cannot ask private carriers to compete with a entity that can print its own money or simply raise taxes to make up any short fall it has. See, i nthe real world companies hav eto make profit or they cannot function, in liberal land you just print money and raise taxes to pay for your nanny state ideas.

The guy who you treat as a king, Obama is losing populairty, his approval numbers are sliding down....there is a resistance forming to all this natonalizing of everything. During the campaign Obama said he would amke the plan congress has now for health care available to all of us....well that was a bold faced lie, he engineered with Pelosi's help some nonsense bill that they know will be so bad they exempted themselves and all other federal employees. So why they subject you to inferior treatment, subject you to rationing, long waiting lists, denails based on age, etc....they will enjoy top notch treatment at your expense....and the sad part is that you thank for them for it.

Another thing, you keep balming the GOP....excuse me, but your side controls the House by a huge margin, you have a supermajority i nthe Senate, you occupy the whtie house, you control about 85 percent of the media...........and yet you still balme the GOP....they don't have the votes nor the media presence to stop anythignt he Dems want to do....so stop your damn whining about the GOP..............geeeez.

Also take a look around.....Corzine is getting killed in NJ, McDonnell is taking a good lead in VA...the two big elections coming up and hte trend is goign to the GOP....people are getting nervous about thsi big g'ment stuff your throwing at them....

You have got to get out of the hole your mind is stuck in, g'ment is not the answer to all lifes problems. You libs just throw money at a problem, doesn't matter if it works or not, lets just throw money at it. Despite nearly everything g'ment touchin going bankrupt, you still want them involved.

In case you missed it, we have a huge debt and increasing deficits...and what do you as a liberal want to do? Spend more money, who cares if we have it or not, lets just spend it. You totally lack any understanding of the geopoltical fallout from our out of control debt. China is slowly moving its reserves to metals and away fro mthe dollar....who's going to finance your previous liberal utopia? There is no damn money Idaho.....you cannot keep spending what you do not have....but, as a liberal you will never understand life i nthe real world. Your so happy and content with your obedience to g'ment you are totally void of any common sense. tax tax tax, pend spend spend....that's all you know how to do.

You lack any ability to think for yourself, every issue you post about on this site you blame the GOP....even thoug hthey are totally powerless, you balme the GOP.....as I said you are a typicalbrain washed kool aid drinking liberal living out o nthe fringe.

____________________

IdahoMulato:

@Stillow
There's no way the progressive caucus is going to sign off or agree to a reform w/out a strong public option. The so-called blue dogs are not going to decide what everybody should agree on. I don't think we're going to allow the blue dogs to water-down the reforms. Anything short of a strong public options that have the elements of consumer protection will be unacceptable. I encouraged our salesman in chief to keep hammering these points until it becomes a reality. We should not allow the blue dogs and the neo-conservatives to take center stage in the debates. We should not allow false, shallow, dishonest, and distorted neo-cons catchphrases and talking-points stir people's emotions against the reforms.
I think we democrats should market the refoms more on the benefits side and not the cost side. These same arguments were made more than 75 years ago in respect of the medicare legislation until LBJ decided to use arm-twisting he's best known of. This is the time to use LBJ playbook to get this thing done.
I don't think the gubertorial races in NJ and VA are wrapped up yet although the repubs have big leads. Everything is about the economy. That's why most governors have very low approval ratings. It's not totally their faults; there're many external forces or forces outside their control. Anything can happen from now until the votes are counted. We live to see!

____________________



Post a comment




Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.

MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR