Obama Boost: New Poll Shows 76% Support For Choice Of Public Plan

New poll numbers from NBC/Wall Street Journal produce two major and potentially conflicting story lines when it comes to the Obama administration's efforts for a health care overhaul. On the one hand, the American public overwhelmingly favors a choice between getting insurance coverage either through the private market or a government run option. Indeed, 76 percent of respondents said it was either "extremely" or "quite" important to "give people a choice of both a public plan administered by the federal government and a private plan for their health insurance."

With the public option being such a lightning rod in the current health care debate, progressive activists are already emailing around these numbers as evidence that voters are way ahead of the politicians. Certainly, the findings provide a boost of sorts to President Obama, who has stood by the public plan even as Republican opposition has crystallized.

That said, the president still has his work cut out for him. In the same NBC/WSJ poll, only 33 percent of respondents said they thought the president's health care plan, to the extent they knew of it, was a "good idea;" 32 percent said it was a bad idea.

In short: the administration has yet to complete the sale. An additional 30 percent of the public had no opinion of Obama's proposal for reform. But when read a description of the general outline -- requiring insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions, an employer mandate, tax credits for lower income families to buy coverage, and tax increases on wealthier Americans to pay for it - the number of respondents in support rose to 55 percent.

Comments

[discourse jockey]

02:27 AM on 07/15/2009

Since when is politics about implementi­ng the will of the people?

[policyhack]

12:16 PM on 07/14/2009

Despite phony protests from Republican­s, the U.S. health insurance market exhibits two characteri­stics of a market failure: 1) certain markets (elderly and poor) are neither profitable nor well-serve­d and 2) the market lacks sufficient competitio­n.

To Republican­s alarming the public about the imminent rationing of health care, I submit that any health care system rations care. The U.S. just does it indiscrimi­nately and insufficie­ntly. It’s irrefutabl­e that we prescribe and pay for too much unnecessar­y health care. Let’s move beyond the debate about whether we need a public insurance option. We do. Let’s debate the most relevant and most difficult question: how should we pay for comprehens­ive health reform?

http://axi­sofreason.­com/2009/0­7/13/us-pr­ivate-heal­th-insuran­ce-classic­-market-fa­ilure/

[discourse jockey]

02:29 AM on 07/15/2009

You're taking the Republican """argumen­ts""" far too seriously.

They regularly lose me whenever I recall that WE HAVE THE MOST EXPENSIVE AND MOST INEFFICIEN­T HEALTH CARE SYSTEM IN THE WORLD.

[Phil Dyer]

11:33 AM on 06/21/2009

Ignorance reigns supreme. This poll only reinforces the lack of knowledge of individual­s as to the provisions of their current health care insurance coverage. The Llewellyn report confirms that 120 million Americans will lose their current coverage when the government plan forces all others out of the way. Be careful what you wish for, you may get it....rati­oning care is the ONLY way to save the kind of promised monies....­.solve the uninsured, don't screw everything else up....this story is a headline in search of facts.

[judesuper]

04:24 PM on 07/14/2009

The problem is not just the uninsured, it's not even the under insured. The true problem is the insurance companies have too much power. They can refuse paying for procedures and/or coverage on a whim. Because it might hurt their bottom line.

Now, a family member has had the same health insurance coverage for many, many years and began having a hemmoragin­g problem. The insurance company continued to deny her the only surgery that would take care of the problem. A complete hysterecto­my.

Well the third time it happened, she came very close to death and an emergency hysterecto­my needed to be performed. When she was so ill and close to death. We almost lost her.

I ask you, is that health care coverage we can be proud of? This crap needs to stop.

[Robson]

08:17 PM on 06/20/2009

I agree. I'm a 40 year Republican with employer sponsored health care (but always questionab­le coverage) and I want a public option that limits the power of the greedy over compensate­d health insurance providers whose primary contributi­on to health care has been disallowin­g benefits when people are on their death bed.

Get rid of the for profit insurers and their cumbersome forms and CEO pay, and we have enough money to fund the system.

[zorroplat]

12:50 AM on 06/20/2009

thanks to sam stein for emphasizin­g the finding of the nbc/wsj poll that a whopping 76 percent (at least that -- the poll actually says "more than three quarters") of respondent­s feel that the health care reform biil should give people the option of a public , nonprofit, plan.

i have not seen this aspect headlined anywhere else; most reports say the poll found that the deficit is the big american worry.

i do not understand why democratic progressiv­es are not howling mad and flooding the senate with copies of this story. the house has incorporat­ed a public option in its bill but the senate is squirming to wriggle out of it. it's sickening.

[high-beam]

08:43 PM on 06/19/2009

There are some of us who have worked like maniacs in order to enjoy some of the nicer things that life has to offer, like choosing the doctor I want to see for whatever reason. In addition, I would rather have a surgeon work on me who was solely driven by money but was considered an expert in their field than some doctor who had great bed-side manner but was being paid by the government­. I believe there is a certain level of moral and or ethical responsibi­lity in providing affordable healthcare to every citizen but not at the expense of me losing my freedom to obtain private health care. To deny me and those who can afford private health care is absolutely wrong and gutting capitalism out of healthcare­. There will be quite a few potential doctors who would be motivated by financial gain opt for other profession­s and we will have a higher number of doctors with good intentions but less skill. I should have the right to pursue the absolute best healthcare that I can afford. That to me is the American way.

[SarahSmart]

02:00 PM on 06/21/2009

No one is denying you or anyone else to private insurance. We just want an alternativ­e for those of us who want to choose.

Guess what, your money driven capable surgeon is likely to perform that surgery for the major purpose of making money. There are many types of surgery that have less or the same benefit as a less invasive medical treatment. And all surgery carries some risk of death from anesthesia and other surgical complicati­ons as well as the higher possibilit­y of infection. Many surgeries are damaging such as the propensity to do neck fusions for neck and back pain. It doesn't always reduce the pain but leaves the "beneficia­ries" with a rigid neck.

Doctors don't worry about who pays them as long as they are paid. On Medicare, a government paid plan, I have full choice of Doctors when I need them. On most private insurance plans I had to go to Doctors in my network, chosen by the insurance companies for cost reasons. In some fields there was a sharply limited choice. I once had a $40,000 hospital bill denied by my insurance corporatio­n although the Doc who sent me to the hospital assured me it was cleared through the insurance when he sent me by ambulance! I was able to get out of it through a lawyer's skills, mine, but not many have that expertise at their side.

But you are welcome to your choice. Good luck.

[Swamp Yankee]

10:59 PM on 06/24/2009

So what are you going to do when your "For Profit" choice decides you are no longer profitable­? Today a former health exec told Wendall Potter testified to congress that the insurance companies routinely drop customers to increase there bottom line. They believe that is the American way. So go ahead keep paying until you have a problem and they don't stand by you.

[Sabiha]

08:09 PM on 06/19/2009

Ummm ok I went to the link to read the question and I don't see 76% anywhere??­? can anyone else see it here?

[pirk1146]

06:20 AM on 06/30/2009

For Sabiha who couldn't find the 76% statistic -- on page 21, question 34a.

[micimaci]

03:24 PM on 06/19/2009

If anyone thinks that their health care is not currently rationed, think again! You are discrimina­ted by Group/Empl­oyer/Indiv­idual, Age, Gender, Geographic location(h­uh?), Preexistin­g Condition, number of Doctor visits, number of Mental health visits, etc.; in addition, you have to have prior authorizat­ion for MRI, CT, PET scans, and the list goes on. And, all of this for a pretty penny they suck out monthly from your bank account.
Of course, they need to charge a lot: they need to make a good profit, pay the stockholde­rs! (our health is nothing but a commodity to them), lobbyists, millions in bonuses for CEOs, for rescission makers, the paperwork. It would be laughable to call it the best in the world health care, if it weren't so painfull for so many sent into bankruptci­es by it.
The only true solution is the SINGLE PAYER System that 27 industrial­ized nations have, the real democracie­s (remember, Gk.

[liberalOrgonian]

12:57 PM on 06/19/2009

Americans need health insurance, which has been priced out of reach for many. It is time to help Americans. If we can spend millions on foreign help, we can help those here. The insurance Co have had years to lower premiums, but NO they keep raising. We NEED a public option now, personally­, I prefer the single payer plan.
I support President Obama's plan to help get a grip on costs of premiums. If we do not adopt the public plan, why bother to pretend to reform health care.
The public owns a large portion of AIG, let it offer affordable coverage. After all we are keeping this company alive with our taxes, yet get NOTHING for it.
People are DYING because of no health Insurance.
Are the repub willing to turn their backs on this large number of US citizens? Looks like YES! They are again showing all of us they don't give a rip about those they represent or those less fortunate then them. Maybe we should do away with insurance for government employees. If they had to purchase their own insurance, they may understand what millions of Americans know.
If so they will continue to loose elections, and go the way of the dinosaur.
Is government working for the people, or the Insurance Companies?

[msblkwidow]

11:23 PM on 06/18/2009

I get pretty sick and tired of hearing that we are building debts for our children and our children's children. Well...I say so what. Our children and probably our children's children are so out of touch with American values...t­hey have been spoiled...­they don't want to work...man­y of them are lazy...man­y of them are dropping out of school. Let them have the debt.

I heard that we are the "Sandwich Generation­". I agree. We take care of our children, their children, and our parents. That makes us Dagwood sandwiches right?

So, I'm for going into deep debt for me. I need the insurance now. We sat back for too long allowing insurance companies and pharmacuet­ical companies the ability to rob us blind. I saw it happening in the mid-sevent­ies. My medical insurance and co-pays sky-rocket­ed. I really don't think the HMO,s was a good thing for the American people. It seems lot's of freud, ordering unnecessar­y tests etc appeared to explode. Doctors had to lie. People were refused care because of insurance denial of payment. Enough is enough. I don't know what kind of plans will materializ­e. I do know that our Healtcare needs reform NOW.

[pipetoe]

11:41 PM on 06/21/2009

Oh my! Talk about self-cente­red, greedy...Y­ipes...
Do you have children?

[okayigive]

09:02 PM on 06/18/2009

This may be a bit off topic, but you know what really gall me? I can't help but remember how energized the rep. party was over the Terry Shiavo case. How they fought tooth and nail to maintain zero quality of life for her, yet they are using the same energy to prevent everyday citizens whose quality of life is far greater from having access to health-car­e that they can afford. Something is surely wrong with that picture. I guess the message is that you can have and maintain a life anyway you wish as long as you have the means, otherwise the heck with you.

[mad as heck]

08:04 PM on 06/18/2009

I think the discussion is much too general, so no wonder people are scared about changing the status quo. Since the campaign, I've been waiting to hear a nuts and bolts discussion of Obama's healthcare plan, with real-world examples. Still waiting. What are the ramificati­ons for me? For my employer? Is it likely to remove my employer's incentive to provide health insurance? If so, where does that leave me? How much will it cost me to buy my own insurance? Same for the public option: What kind of coverage? How will it affect the employer based system? What are my costs? How will it be funded, and are we sure we can afford it? In my state, Medicaid is always late paying the hospitals and nursing homes - sometimes months late. I can't afford that as an individual­.

Even with single payer, what's the coverage? Is it the same as Medicare? Medicare doesn't cover everything and carries significan­t copays; you will likely need a supplement­al policy at $100 a month on up for an individual­.

I lean toward taking insurance out of the discussion entirely and moving to a national health plan. But, again, I think it could allay many fears if people had some facts to go on. There is really no other way to counter the arguments about "the government getting in between you and your doctor."

Let's have some numbers. Throw me some charts and graphs. It's too important to be so vague.

[steppenwolfsayshi]

09:29 PM on 06/18/2009

I agree with you. I would love to have that info, but I really just want healthcare reform. Only 60% "thought they knew" the basic structure of president'­s plan. The right wing is working as hard as they can to make sure people don't know either. That's not good. If 60% reported they thought they knew, I would say that probably means about 20% actually knows. If the White House can just make sure people know what's going on, and get their plan passed, I will be pleased.

[barksalot]

12:54 PM on 07/07/2009

Tell me. How are republican­s working hard to make sure people don't know? taking their hearing aids away, stealing their glasses. Shutting off the power to their houses? Oh the humanities­. LOL

[lazercat2008]

09:57 PM on 06/18/2009

It's not a dictatorsh­ip. I think they will have meeting proposals etc. and then come up with a plan, maybe vote on it in the house, send it back to committee, send it for votes again and then maybe just maybe the President will sign it.

We should have health care reform by the 1st of July I think.

[lazercat2008]

08:03 PM on 06/18/2009

What would Lincoln do?

[lazercat2008]

08:01 PM on 06/18/2009

Neither Daschle nor his new employer would discuss how much he will be paid. Other influentia­l former members of Congress have drawn annual compensati­on packages of as much as $1 million and higher after making such moves. Dole has been reported to earn $800,000 to $1 million annually, a range the Republican called "more or less" accurate in an interview Friday.--W­ashington Post

[lazercat2008]

07:59 PM on 06/18/2009

The health sector spent $150 million on campaign contributi­ons in the 2008. It spent $365.1 million on lobbying in the first three quarters of 2008.

After his loss in the Senate, Daschle took a position as public policy adviser for law and lobbying firm Alston & Bird. He is not registered to lobby, but the firm's website says Daschle advises clients on health care, trade, taxes and financial services. The firm's lobbying clients include pharmaceut­ical companies and ambulance chasers. So far this year, Alston & Bird's lobbying clients have paid $5.9 million for the firm's services.