Most Favor Health Care Reform In New Poll

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Most Favor Health Care Reform In New Poll stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 07-14-09 04:00 PM   |   Updated: 08-14-09 05:12 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Health

A new USA Today/Gallup poll finds wide public support for overhauling health care this year. There is, however, concern about its high costs and the implications for the country.

The study says that 56 percent favor a bill, 33 percent oppose it, and 12 percent do not feel strongly either way. Just over half say controlling costs should be its priority, and most of the rest say it should focus on expanding coverage.

To finance the bill, 61 percent believe employers who do not provide insurance should pay a fee. Fifty-eight percent say the wealthy should pay higher taxes to help fund it.

The House health care plan (PDF), released Tuesday, includes provisions to do both things.

While short-term costs will likely be significant, various experts say a strong piece of legislation will save money and reduce the federal deficit in the long-run.

Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, sees the status quo as a road to fiscal disaster. "We have to do something about health care costs; it's really not an option," he said in an interview with the Huffington Post. "If we do nothing, the deficit goes through the roof and the economy is going to melt down."

Important insiders agree. Peter Orszag, director of the Office of Management and Budget, believes that health reform done right will save money in the long-run. Orszag considers mounting health care costs "the real deficit threat," and affirms that Obama's reform plan will be "deficit neutral over the next decade."

Karen Kornbluh, chief policy director for Barack Obama (and dubbed by some as Obama's "brain"), echoed Orszag, declaring that health care costs are the single biggest contributor to the budget deficit. "Fixing health care is the way to stop the hemorrhaging," she said in a speech at Pitzer College.

Story continues below
advertisement

Skeptics say reforming health care will be expensive and raise the deficit. Kornbluh disagreed, and said that the administration's plan will reduce the deficit. "There is a bit of a free lunch in that sense," she said.

The most controversial aspect of the health care debate is the public option, which the White House and most Democratic leaders have championed.

"The public option does two things," Baker said. "One is it will save immediately on administration costs, and secondly, it creates a mechanism through which we can hold down provider costs and offer more comprehensive and cheaper care to people."

Whether reform will include a public option remains uncertain as conservative Democrats are uncertain and Republicans flatly oppose it, partly out of nervousness over costs and implications for businesses. But a health care bill without a public option may not solve the flaws in the system.

"We need the public option to realistically hold down costs," said Baker. "Private insurers have relatively little incentive to focus on controlling costs. They haven't contained costs to date and there's no reason to think that absent a public plan, prices won't continue to rise at an unsustainable rate in the long-run."

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

A new USA Today/Gallup poll finds wide public support for overhauling health care this year. There is, however, concern about its high costs and the implications for the country. The study says that ...
A new USA Today/Gallup poll finds wide public support for overhauling health care this year. There is, however, concern about its high costs and the implications for the country. The study says that ...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
214
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next › Last » (4 pages total)

It is time to pack up and leave for Mexico.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:22 AM on 07/16/2009

Two to three years from now the economy is not going to be in a much different condition than it is today. In Maryland's recent foray into soaktherichonomics, they tried to plug a budget shortfall by tagging millionaires with a surcharge (the economic success penalty). Guess what happened? Before the new charge 300,000 millionaires filed tax returns. After it was implemented, only 200,000 filed in Maryland. In essence they left the state. Maryland actually ended up losing $100 million in revenue.

Having observed this, the turds on Capitol Hill figure that they will find their healthcare extravaganza by sticking it to the millionaires nation-wide. Guess what? I'd wager that they and their money will leave the country in increasing numbers. We'll be left hear with the mediocre, government handout seeking near do wells. I am not a millionaire, but I am thinking about cashing in what assets I have and leaving this country. In 40 years, things have changed from "Ask not what your country can do for you" to "Ask not what you can do for your country". We are moving towards becoming irrevocably becoming a handout nation, which is what I would wager is what the majority of people who post on this site are hoping to create.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:26 PM on 07/15/2009
- jmpurser I'm a Fan of jmpurser 154 fans permalink

Well sorry America. We won't get health care reform this year which probably means not in the next 4 years. We've opted to rearrange the deck chairs on the titanic instead.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:03 PM on 07/15/2009
- onenvrnos I'm a Fan of onenvrnos 29 fans permalink
photo

Well, I guess that is the price you pay when your taxes have actually gone down during the Bush years, and ours have gone up. Not to mention the tax havens you so readily seek with no questions asked. About time you pay the piper. Like you say to all of us "low-lifes"...If you don't like it, you can always move somewhere else.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:51 AM on 07/15/2009
- flossophy I'm a Fan of flossophy 322 fans permalink
photo

The head|ine should read:

"Most favor using the government to take away money from the rich minority so that the lower classes can become dependent on the political class in charge of confiscating the wealth."

Isn't democracy great!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:29 AM on 07/15/2009

Irrelevancy has spoken. Nice try floss, but you fell short. Maybe you need to show those leadership skills and just quit.

The majority of the public just want businesses to pay their fair share. Since they sent our jobs overseas for cheap labor and basically sc.re.wed the American people, the American people want them to pay for something else.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:13 AM on 07/15/2009
- flossophy I'm a Fan of flossophy 322 fans permalink
photo

High taxes, over-regulation and a failed public school system has shipped our jobs overseas.

Thanks, Democrats!

FTL, using the power of government to confiscate the wealth from people or companies you don't like is not a healthy thing for a free society. But you knew that, right?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:18 PM on 07/16/2009
- 2bad I'm a Fan of 2bad 16 fans permalink

How do you think this, "rich minority" as you put it, got that way?

25 plus years of Reaganomics. You know, trickle-down economics? The one George H. W. Bush referred to as "Voodoo Economics". Any of this ringing a bell?

This "minority" of rich people amassed great sums of wealth by a system that has stomped on the backs of working Americans, who's income during that same period actually went down!

When Saint Reagan came to office, America exported more finished goods, imported more raw materials, and held the debt of more countries than all the others combined. Now each of those three economic indicators are the opposite.

You're damn right they should be taxed for health care for the middle class!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:46 AM on 07/15/2009
- flossophy I'm a Fan of flossophy 322 fans permalink
photo

There have been wealthy people throughout time... going back much farther than Reagan (gasp).

You have simply been whipped up into desp|sing this rich minority, so you would have no problem with the government taking their wealth by force, to redistribute to their constituencies.

It's interesting that you think that the capita|ists have 'stomped down on the backs of working Americans'... while at the same time this was happening, fasc|sts, s0cialists and c0mmunists were stomping down on the thr0ats of people who didn't think correctly. They destr0yed 90-120 million people who weren't des|rable.

The transition from an industrial economy into a service economy is the natural evolution of life on this planet. Once we have become so affluent, who wants to spend their lives working in a factory? Every post-industrialized nation experiences this.

You have too much anger towards the affluent minority. It's unhealthy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:25 PM on 07/16/2009

The headline should read:

REPUBLICANS STAND WITH INSURANCE COMPANIES AND AGAINST THE WILL OF 72% OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WHO WANT A PUBLIC OPTION

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:53 AM on 07/15/2009
- flossophy I'm a Fan of flossophy 322 fans permalink
photo

Funny, I heard 73% are happy with their current health care, and are reticent to want to change it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:25 PM on 07/16/2009
- oakley9 I'm a Fan of oakley9 20 fans permalink

They didn't poll me.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:16 AM on 07/15/2009
- Cleanerman I'm a Fan of Cleanerman 15 fans permalink
photo

Public option: Yes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:38 AM on 07/15/2009
- Halter I'm a Fan of Halter 9 fans permalink
photo

Granted, we need to bring the tax system back to pre-reagan days, but health care for all would cost the same as health care for some does now if we eliminated the for-profit health insurance business which accounts for 1/3rd of health care costs. Plus, if everyone had health care, you wouldn't be paying for the guy in the next bed who has no health insurance and no way to pay but cannot be turned away. Medicare for all -the only rational option.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:05 AM on 07/15/2009
- Avanti2 I'm a Fan of Avanti2 6 fans permalink

But a big part of the problem is that the Government has been unwilling to charge sufficient Medicare Premiums to keep Medicare from going broke.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:18 AM on 07/15/2009
- mrfreeze I'm a Fan of mrfreeze 139 fans permalink
photo

Isn't it interesting how much time we spend focusing on the rich: who they are, what they own, why it's so terrible to tax them, how they utilize "the Universal Laws" better than the average person, how they capitalized when "preparedness met opportunity." The rich in America are the uber-menchen, the ideal! Therefore, if they are taxed or put-upon they threaten to quit "trickling-down" wealth or they won't "invest" their precious wealth so losers like us won't have a job.

The most frustrating thing of all is how many people will carry the wealthy's water under the mistaken notion that some magical power called the "free market" makes all of this possible. Well, after having worked in a number of different industries over the years I can guarantee you that the wealthy don't give a damn about anyone but themselves. I vote we tax the hell out of them.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:36 AM on 07/15/2009
photo

But thinking about what the rich people own is the way that I keep myself from thinking about the fact that I work full-time and can barely afford groceries....

Oh, wait, I see your point. ;-)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:31 AM on 07/15/2009
- StellaRay I'm a Fan of StellaRay 212 fans permalink

While the rich understand the diminishing power of the ideal of "progressive taxation,"­---because they have so profited from its demise---I fear the middle and working class are ignorant of how far we've strayed from that ideal.

Here's a gobsmacking fact for you. Under Eisenhower, any income over 3 million---8 million in today's money----was taxed at 90%! And you know what, no one complained. In fact, from the end of WWII up til Regan, we did not suffer the bubble-bur­st-bubble-­burst we have suffered since Regan, because the rich were paying their fair share.

The progressive income tax ideal IS NOT about punishing the rich. It IS about the fact that the rich take the most out of this country in resources, and make the most on its hide. For instance, next time you take a vacation that puts you on the highway system, note all the trucks around you that represent the major corporations of this country. It is these trucks and the weight of them that tear up our highways far more than your family's Toyota. And that's just one example.

Not to mention the civil idea that from that which you take so much, you need to give back.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:21 AM on 07/15/2009
- Avanti2 I'm a Fan of Avanti2 6 fans permalink

Right after WW2 the Income Tax top rate was 90% then reduced to 70%. Very very few people paid those rates because of all the deductions and legal options that were available. Others, when they got to the 50% to 60% brackets just quite working for the rest of the year.

The top tax rate means nothing. What is important is the EFFECTIVE Income Tax Rate. That is the amount that you effectively pay income tax on.
----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­-
Your truck example is not a good one. Over the road carriers pay over 60% of the Road Taxes in the US and deliver 87% of the nations goods and services to there final destinations. In fact, trucks pay there way many time over through license fees and fuel taxes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:03 AM on 07/15/2009
- StellaRay I'm a Fan of StellaRay 212 fans permalink

Not biting on your portrayal of "over the road carriers" delivering 87% of the nations goods and services as if they are some sort of angels on wheels. These "over the road carriers" deliver the goods that their companies need to get to their final destinations to make any money---and in most cases, like say Wal Mart, lots of money.

I would also like a link to your assertion that "over the road carriers" pay over 60% of the ""Road taxes" in the us. We all pay license fees and fuel taxes so I'd also like a link that proves trucks pay their way more than we do.

And you assertion that others, when they got to the 50 to 60% bracket just quit working for the rest of the year is ridiculous. Companies don't quit working when they've crossed a tax bracket. And while there were certainly loop holes and deductions, then as well as know, I promise you the rich paid more of their share then.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:10 AM on 07/15/2009
photo

In actual fact it costs eight times more to build roads for large 18 wheel commercial trucks than for ordinary passenger vehicles.
Trains are ten times more efficient.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:05 AM on 07/15/2009

Here's another plan. Go back to where the taxes were pre-Raygun. Back then, the first million was taxed at the normal 35%. Anything over that million was taxed at a higher 70% (not positive about the 70% but it's in the same neighborhood). That would help to eliminate the excess bonuses given out even when the company is failing.

Another thing would be to tax over seas work. Tax them the difference between what they're paying the foreign worker vs what a US citizen would make doing the same job. Not realistic I know, but we need to make the Corporation pay for sending our livelihood to other countries.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:56 PM on 07/14/2009
photo


It is time to look at the tax breaks and exemptions for the rich and corporate America. Corporate America gets bailed out while the average person is demonized and deemed unworthy of enjoying the American dream.
In California our Governator calls public sector working people, the poor, etc "special interest groups"; cuts our pay and benefits while the rich get tax breaks and exemptions.
I, too , wonder why GOP hates average Americans who work hard, pay into their pension plans and social security? It is all about business and the entrepeneur as if people who are employees count for nothing. It will be a sad day when all human services are privatized; we need a public option for health care.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:49 PM on 07/14/2009
photo

Given there is an estimated $700 - $800 billion in unpaid tax revenue in offshore accounts, I'd say this is a justifiable means of funding healthcare.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:09 PM on 07/14/2009
- Avanti2 I'm a Fan of Avanti2 6 fans permalink

Where the heck did those figures come from?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:06 AM on 07/15/2009
- x004Ronin I'm a Fan of x004Ronin 31 fans permalink

I would have preferred to pay for healthcare reform at least partially by taxing health plans offered by employers worth over a certain amount (say, worth more than the current average). Bear with me: Right now, even if you make $500,000 a year with a company, your health benefits are subsidized if you get your health insurance from your employer. Moreover, odds are you have very good health insurance if you earn that much money, which again, is subsidized.

So, in a way, the subsidy for employer-sponsored health insurance, although it does benefit everyone who gets insurance through their employers (including the middle class), it benefits the rich more. And if you're too poor to get health insurance through your company, but not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid...well, you're not in luck (lower-middle class gets screwed). That's why I oppose the subsidy, even though the middle class does benefit from it - the lower-middle class doesn't benefit at all, and the rich benefit more.

I would have preferred that this surtax on the rich mostly be used for deficit reduction.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:49 PM on 07/14/2009
photo

End the travesty of American companies paying zero in taxes because they have a P.O. box overseas.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:18 PM on 07/14/2009
- sparky73 I'm a Fan of sparky73 27 fans permalink
photo

or even in the case on some cities that give major tax breaks to companies like the hard rock cafe in order to get them to open a shop in town. Its crazy. I know Washington DC does that all of the time...they try to get business to their city buy saying you wont have to pay property taxes or income taxes while your company is employing people....crazy!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:36 PM on 07/14/2009
- flossophy I'm a Fan of flossophy 322 fans permalink
photo

They pay 35% taxes to Uncle Sam regardless of where they exist... We need to lower our corporate tax rate to Happy S0cialist Sweden's rate of 15%.

They only save money by using cheaper labor overseas... but they don't escape our high corporate tax rates. Perhaps if you told the Democrats not to tax the b3jeezus out of our companies, they might stay ashore.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:33 AM on 07/15/2009
- flossophy I'm a Fan of flossophy 322 fans permalink
photo


photo

This comment is pending approval and won't be displayed until it is approved.

They pay 35% taxes to Uncle Sam regardless of where they exist... We need to lower our corporate tax rate to Happy S0cialist Sweden's rate of 15%.

They only save money by using cheaper labor overseas... but they don't escape our high corporate tax rates. Perhaps if you told the Democrats not to tax the b3j3`3zus out of our companies, they might stay ashore.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:34 AM on 07/15/2009
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next › Last » (4 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect