NY Times/CBS News Poll: Wide Support For Government-Run Option Competing With Private Insurers

New York Times:

Americans overwhelmingly support substantial changes to the health care system and are strongly behind one of the most contentious proposals Congress is considering, a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

Read the whole story: New York Times

Comments

[fireW]

Graham (and other GOP politicians) insists he's against gov't run health care. He forgets to mention it already exists; medicare & Congressional health care. So it's fine by him if taxpayers pay for his health care (as a member of Congress), but taxpayers receiving health care paid for by their own money is "bad". O.K. Lindsey boy. What's wrong with this picture?

[kasinca]

Will Ms. Graham opt out of the taxpayer paid universal plan we furnish him and the rest of the senate and congress? Will he let that go and take what he is offering us? Hell no. This is another republican hypocrite.

[ropadopa]

This is the fear among Republicans and Blue Dog Dems. They have first hand experience how well the government funded health care works and are fearful that not even the best private provider will be able to match it for cost and service.

[Grunty1]

We already know that Rushpublicans are also against Medicare. That's why Dubya signed the Plan D stuff to bankrupt it.

[Lorianne]

Forget the Republicans
Democrats can pass any healthcare bill they want.
Why aren't they passing a universal health CARE bill?

[theone718]

72 PERCENT. THAT is a bipartisan majority! Time to FIGHT for this public option, time to keep on fighting for change. Let's keep it up or we will lose this fight.

[LemonMeringue]

The Democrats AND the GOP are being stoopid on this issue.

Whichever party brings us real health care reform - real reform that works, regardless of the short-term political consequences and dissatisfaction of the bribers, er, lobbyists - will have a permanent majority in Congress.

Democrats are more vulnerable than they think, all because of this issue.

SINGLE PAYER not some band-aid on a broken system.

There are more voters who want it than there are people in the insurance industry.

[bygollymissmolly]

I was really surprised to see that 50% of the respondents who identified themselves as Republicans were for a public option. That has got to be scaring the Republicans in Congress.

[JuliaRain]

I guess they're realizing that praying to god isn't helping them get better.

[superbowl3]

There is a pole you can trust. Keep spreading the Obama talking points. How come the Huffing Post isn’t showing their viewers the new Gallop pole that shows Obama’s approval rating at his lowest point yet? Just wondering?

[kesmarn]

You may have to hop a plane to Warsaw to find a Pole you can trust. But this poll seems trustworthy enough...certainly more so than anything Rasmussen puts out.

[JuliaRain]

I trust my flag pole. It is very dependable even on a windy day.

[bygollymissmolly]

It's "poll" m o r o n. There are several polls that show his numbers down and several that show it holding steady. His favorables are still in the 60's so I guess his numbers dropping one point isn't really news, now is it.

But, this is news and should be reported. From the WSJ/NBC poll:

Generally speaking, do you think of yourself as a Democrat, a Republican, an independent, or something else? (IF "DEMOCRAT" OR "REPUBLICAN," ASK:) Would you call yourself a strong (Democrat/Republican) or not a very strong (Democrat/Republican)? (IF "INDEPENDENT," ASK:) Do you think of yourself as closer to the Republican Party, closer to the Democratic Party, or do you think of yourself as strictly independent?

Strong Democrat............................21
Not very strong Democrat ............10
Independent/lean Democrat........10
Total Democrat or leans ..............41

Strictly independent ............18

Independent/lean Republican ..9
Not very strong Republican........7
Strong Republican ....................14
Total Republican or leans........30

So, this shows that only 21% of Americans call themselves Republicans today and of that only 14% call themselves strong Republicans. If you add that to the Gallup poll the other day that said that 34% of Republicans aren't happy with the way their party is going, I say that the Republican party is in deep trouble.

Not sure..........................4

[jesseandrews]

New gallup poll 40 percent are conservative 35 percent moderate and only 21 percent liberal.

[Grunty1]

[There is a pole you can trust.]

In the men;s room with a wide stance?

[kasinca]

Bush never got above 40% his last four years. Did that upset you, wingnut? Get a life.

[LeftCoastLarry]

Meaningful health care reform is cost effective. There is no rational argument that it would cost too much. That is an argument of last resort that is totally false.
In contrast though are the plans promoted by the Republicans, where they propose subsidies to people to buy insurance. Contributing to the current bloated bureaucracy - now that's expensive - makes no sense, and benefits no one. Except the insurance companies.
That's what the Republicans are all about - protect the insurance companies - and they don't care how much it would cost.

[bygollymissmolly]

Dennis Kucinich did a study of what it would cost if we put all Americans on Medicare. The results were that it would cost much less than what it costs now for employers to pay for private for-profit health insurance for their employees and what retirees are paying for Medicare today.

We already have a government-run health care plan in Medicare and it works very well. Medicare operates at a lean 4% overhead. Other than the fact that payments to providers are too low (Bush starved the providers hoping to k i l l Medicare), physicians like Medicare. I talked to my physician about Medicare and she said that they rarely, if ever, deny care to a patient and they pay the provider in a timely manner. This is unlike the for-profit health insurer who denies 20% of recommended treatments and can take up to 6 months to pay a claim.

[jesseandrews]

Please medicare is going bankrupt and it does pay way to low and it does deny coverage alot. My wife is disabled and on medicare.

[Lorianne]

Forget the Republicans
Democrats can pass any healthcare bill they want.
Why aren't they passing a universal health CARE bill?

[northstar11]

there was a little gal comment ing on this site a week back about the canadian 62 year old who went to michigan to be treated for brest cancer.

her bragging point was the wait time (dubious) in canada was 6 months with they had her in and treated
her surgically in 60 days

what the goodie two shoes spokesperson did not mention was the cost..
in canada--- visitors would have to pay parking fees if they chose to visit --her cost---0$

i wonder what her bill was for the US SURGERY or did the hospital bill the canadian government
and at what rate.

[droftim]

Debunking Canadian health care myths

http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_12523427

[vagabondvet]

Yes, doctors do decide how health care is rationed in Canada, not politicians!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jc2n8JxYXgs

[JuliaRain]

This one too:

Republican Lies About Canada's Superior Health Care

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diane-francis/republican-lies-about-can_b_201521.html

[Lorianne]

Forget the Republicans
Democrats can pass any healthcare bill they want.
Why aren't they passing a universal health CARE bill?

[bygollymissmolly]

She's also lying about the wait time. If you have a non-urgent need, you may have a wait time. But for life threatening treatments, there is no wait time.

[jemcanada]

Yes, that's true. I'm a Canadian who currently has cancer. I started treatments 2 1/2 weeks after I was diagnosed with cancer. I spent a week and a half having MRIs, CTscans, X-rays, blood work, and doctor exams, all covered by health insurance. I'm finishing 6 weeks of radiation, chemotherapy, and brachytherapy just 2 months after my original diagnosis. I haven't paid for anything out of pocket. All the cancer patients I've talked to at the Cancer Centre have received surgery and treatments just as quickly after their diagnoses at no cost.

[PabloCasati]

Access to health care is a basic right. It is also a national security issue. High rates of obesity and diabetes in our younger population are preventable. Repubs need to wake up and realize the national security implications of denying so many basic health care...

[JuliaRain]

"Access to health care is a basic right."

I agree and most industrialized nations do too.

I don't know how the USA can call itself an "industrialized nation". Other industrialized nations have UHC for their citizens. The USA isn't qualified to call itself an advanced nation when so many Americans are denied health care.

Not having a UHC system is killing USA slowly and painfully.

[vagabondvet]

Rates of obesity and diabetes would be lower if there weren't subsidies for corn and corn syrup and tariffs on sugar.

[Lorianne]

Forget the Republicans
Democrats can pass any healthcare bill they want.
Why aren't they passing a universal health CARE bill?

[olderdem]

Without a public option, there is no reason to bother.

[northstar11]

if anyone tries to convince you the public option health care plan is too expensive

invite them to look at the military budget and the TARP----- NEVER A SHORTAGE OF FUNDS --just a debate on who will get them

[FaceReality2]

Why doesn't everyone realize this?

[droftim]

A public option would be expensive. It would be a convoluted add-on to the same dysfunctional, bankrupting model that everyone knows is unsustainable. Many employers are decreasing insurance and will continue to do so; they aren't going to let it drive them down the road GM took.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/15/business/15insure.html

Insurance is the *problem* not the answer. Single-Payer, Universal Healthcare is the solution.

Healthcare for All http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91971170

[NCYvonne]

People here still whining about single payer are like PUMAs still whining about the Democratic primary. THAT SHIP HAS SAILED!!!

There will be no single payer and every minute you spend whining about it is time lost fighting for a public option. This is why liberals lose so many battles. Still fighting games when the other team has already left the field instead of putting everything into the battles we can actually win.

Clue???

[droftim]

"The reason liberals lose so many battles is that they compromise before the discussion gets started.

A "public option" would not be a "win". Insurance is about getting doctors and physicans paid, it is not about delivering care to all. If you doubt it, look at what has happened in Massachusetts where coverage has gone up to 98%

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/16/health/policy/16mass.html?

Like all the other plans under discussion, the House Plan is built on a collapsing model -- employer-paid insurance. Guess what? Employers have already decided that model is unsustainable and are trying to avoid becoming the next GM.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/15/business/15insure.html

[NCYvonne]

You make my point. Who cares?????? It's over. There will be no single payer plan so why are your wasting your breath. Get a clue and fight the war that's still going on, not the one that we lost a year ago.

Sheez.

[bygollymissmolly]

If there is a public option, eventually there will be single payer.

[Whinger]

Wide support, narrow opposition from the usual selfish sources!

[northstar11]

""""Congress is considering, a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll."""""

what they took a poll to find out what congress is considering???

who exactly did they poll ??

[droftim]

Senator Lindsey says there is no way he would vote for a government run plan,

and immediately misrepresented it as putting a government bureaucrat in between the patient and the doctor.

The media is not our friend in this...these weasels can say anything they like and no one corrects them.

[FaceReality2]

Lies and half truths are all they have.

[bygollymissmolly]

Which would you rather have? A government employee between you and your doctor or a for-profit health insurance company employee (who will get a bonus for denying you care) between you and your doctor? Me, I'll take the government employee who has no financial interest in providing you health care.

[pkohan]

"...77 percent said they were very or somewhat satisfied with the quality of their own care. "

But what does "care" mean in this question? We all seem to like our doctors, it's our INSURANCE PROVIDERS we are not satisfied with. Because we trust that our finely-trained doctors would be delivering even better healthcare without the insurance companies tieing their hands by telling those doctors what tests are"necessary," what treatments are "experimental," and therefore, not covered.

We applaud the medical profession - it's the medical insurance bureaucracy and callousness we loathe.

[LeftCoastLarry]

And will the insurance company be there for you when you need them most? If you lose your job and find yourself without insurance, can you buy insurance if you have a previously existing condition? Will your new employer's insurance cover that condition?
Why do we need a system in this country, of all places, where so many people end up hurting? Are profits for insurance company executives that important?

[northstar11]

yes------ and sick guys are a drag on the quest for profits.

[FaceReality2]

The right wing continually conflates health care with health insurance because they know people like their doctors. Their phrases "government run health care" and "government takeover of health care" are intentionally misleading, intended to engender fear about losing one's doctor. In every other country besides Britain, health care is provided by the private sector, not by the government, and they know that. Lies and half truths are all they have.

[droftim]

Exactly, that's why they always talk about the UK system -- because it is the least attractive model to most Americans.

We need to take advantage of every opportunity to educate people about what Single Payer, Universal Healthcare really means.

Healthcare for All - http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91971170

[bygollymissmolly]

The one argument they make that makes no sense is the one about how you won't be able to choose your doctor. Ignoring the fact that you are not able to choose your doctor under for-profit plans (you have to choose one from their list), if everyone has the same coverage then all doctors will operate under the plan. This will give you a blanket ability to choose whatever doctor you want.

[myscreennameistoolong]

HaHa! Gov't run health-care. Think that will ever pass? I don't and I don't want govt in charge of anything for me ESPECIALLY health-care. We've seen the bang up job they are doing and they are sooooooooo honest. I mean it'd be dumb not to trust them with alllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll that money.

cha-ching.

[teron678]

"Idi0t" is not long ....

[droftim]

And yet, the VA is the best run healthcare system in the country and its patients are the most satisfied.

In reality though, Single-payer healthcare doesn't mean "government run" healthcare. Get yourself educated and see what it means around the world.

Healthcare for All - http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91971170

[Pigeon2]

Are you serious??? The majority of VA hospitals are deplorable....Ask any Vet...

[LeftCoastLarry]

No one is suggesting, no one wants "government run health care".
Get up to speed before making such comments and you won't come across as being so uninformed.

[northstar11]

dont get sick and dont lose your job.-- you may find yourself up shat creek

[bygollymissmolly]

It would serve him right to lose his health insurance and end up with no access to health care. If that happened, he would change his tune in a hot minute.

[Grunty1]

[We've seen the bang up job they are doing and they are sooooooooo honest. I mean it'd be dumb not to trust them with alllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll that money.]

Your argument applies to the insurance companies.

[Coinyer101]

Our healthcare system is too broken and so is the nation's economy. While a public option is a nice sounding compromise, and was fine during the campaign, I don't think it goes far enough, and i do think it will cost too much to be maintained. They never should have taken single-payer off the table.

[teron678]

Coinyer .... Single Payer was never on the table ... as much as Single Payer is the ideal way to go .... It would've never passed in the Congress we have today .... sad to say ....

[droftim]

A Black President was never on the table either ... until we elected him.

We can't let ourselves be fooled by the bogus argument over a "public option". A public option will be a crippled, expensive add-on to a system that is collapsing. Employers consider our current system unsustainable. The public option will be designed to protect the for-profit insurance industry...which is at the heart of our problems,

Do not fold and accept something that has no hope of getting us where we need to go.

[StevieRae]

Check out what non-postal Federal employees pay for their healthcare

http://www.opm.gov/insure/health/rates/nonpostalhmo2009.pdf

Maryland - United-Healthcare Family Plan - Monthly Prem. $682.47 Gov't Pays $511.55
Employee pays = $172.52 A MONTH for total family coverage

That's $2070.24 a year.

Are your "private" healthplan, employer provided (and, yes, subsidized to some extent) monthly premiums this low?

Isn't the bottom-line resistance in Congress about House and Senate members simply they desperately need the campaign funds receive from healthcare special interests?

[FaceReality2]

I told my Republican congresswoman she should drop her federal health insurance since she opposes a public plan for everyone else. Will she do it? Hell no.

[TheIndependenceParty]

Thank you SR! The "divide and conquer" approach of BOTH parties will become the undoing of reform.

Today I read that Max Baucus Democratic Senator of MT, reveals he has negotiated a 50% discount for Medicare recipients in the uncovered "doughnut hole" period during which drug coverage ceases.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/21/us.health.care/index.html

To that I ask why not discount the drugs 60% year round to the government, ... and remove the "hole" altogether?!!! Are the Fall months safer to stop taking medications you need year-round?

Or is Baucus trying to mollify the anger he experienced at every meeting in his home state?

[Grunty1]

I don't think that your comparison will necessarily work for everyone though. For Federal Employees, the government IS their employer, so we certainly cannot count on the 80% being paid by the government. Of course, your own employers will still subsidize a part of it.