What Do MoveOn Members Think About Health Care?
Supporters of single payer health care -- many of them people who've worked on this issue for years and paved the way for today's universal health care debate -- recently launched an online petition asking MoveOn staff to consult MoveOn members on the best way to win health care for everyone.
The issue at hand is MoveOn's participation in the Health Care for America Now coalition, an alliance of groups including SEIU, Planned Parenthood, AFSCME, and USAction who've launched a big effort to win universal health care. Health Care for America Now (HCAN) is supporting the National Public Health Insurance approach. The folks who are petitioning favor a Single Payer strategy and are asking us to consult MoveOn members on the question.
We're big fans of online petitions! And this one's reasonable enough.
In fact, we had already consulted MoveOn members on these two approaches.
Here's what we found:
On a pure policy level, most MoveOn members think both options are great. Many members would be thrilled to see single payer health care. Many also say they'd love to see national public health insurance. So we have no bone to pick with the single payer movement -- our members agree that if we could get there, it'd be a big step forward. And they believe that the Obama/HCAN policy would be a big step, too.
That brings us to the next question: How can we win, given the huge campaign we'll face from private insurance companies, HMOs, and pharmaceutical companies? So we asked MoveOn members which they think is the best strategy for progressives to take. The answer: Most MoveOn members think we should support a national public health insurance plan like what Health Care for America Now is talking about.
Here are the polls we sent to random samples of MoveOn members (our typical approach when we have a decision to make):
http://pol.moveon.org/healthcare/members.html
On a heated subject, it's impossible to write a poll in language that no one will differ with, so we've since sent several other polls to be sure this result wasn't just a function of how the question was written.
In one, we asked our members the same question without naming the supporters on either side.
In another, MoveOn staff didn't use our own words at all. Instead, we gave our members full-length arguments written by single payer leader Rose Ann DeMoro of the California Nurses Association and Health Care for America Now director Richard Kirsch.
The outcome: However we ask the question, our members prefer the strategy of pushing for national public health insurance.
Here are a few representative comments from MoveOn members explaining why:
I believe single payer is the best system, but I don't believe it will succeed in the U.S. at this time. Getting everyone covered and doing it quickly is my priority. I am a health care provider (certified nurse-midwife) and I see people suffering daily for lack of insurance. I am unable to provide the basic care that women need because they can't afford to pay for it. I can't wait any longer for the system to be fixed in an ideal fashion. They need coverage now.--Cheri V., Washington State
Forcing people to change is a set up for defeat and failure. Giving people options, choices, increases their freedom and decreases anxiety.--Jonathon R., Louisiana
While I think the single payer plan is a great idea, I agree that people aren't going to like being told that they have to switch. I think they will be more likely to switch after they see how successful the single payer plan is.--Brian V., Kansas
People who can afford their own don't want to be told what to do. So if they keep paying for their own insurance to retain that choice, why shouldn't they? But health care should be available to everyone else also. And if it does work, they'll eventually switch to it.--Beth B., Indiana
MoveOn joined Health Care for America Now because most MoveOn members are aligned with HCAN's strategy -- and because we think it's essential to join together with other progressives since we'll need to work together to win.
If progressives succeed in electing Barack Obama, there will be a lot more strategic and policy decisions for us all to make together. For example, the details of an acceptable health care bill are yet to be worked out.
MoveOn's decisions on that and other questions will continue to be driven by MoveOn members.
I want to thank the single payer folks who initiated this conversation for their critical work raising awareness of the health care crisis and for engaging us in this debate. Right now, we have an important strategic disagreement. But this fight will take all of us, and I am hopeful that MoveOn members and our other partners in this movement will be able to work together going forward in pursuit of our shared goal: quality, affordable heath care for all Americans.
Loading comments…
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
Pragmatism.
It worked for Al Gore in 2000.
It worked for John Kerry in 2004.
And Democrats will succeed once again at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory by taking a so-called pragmatic approach to health care.
Would MoveOn’s polling have produced the same results had those responding been fully informed on the policy implications?
The private insurance model in the United States has little resemblance to the private plans used by some European nations with universal programs. The European models are nonprofit, social insurance programs that serve the public good, with a mission to remove financial barriers to care. The U.S. model is a business model with a mission to improve its financial success by using innumerable innovations to avoid paying for care.
The HCAN approach would increase regulatory oversight to make the private insurers perform more like a social insurance model. For-profit insurers (and the nonprofits using their wretched innovations) would have to modify the amoral business ethic that drives them, requiring a massive transformation of the industry. That would be a much greater task, politically and administratively, than merely replacing them with a more efficient single payer national health program.
We are already having trouble paying for private health insurance products. Ending adverse selection, requiring guaranteed issue, requiring adequate benefits, establishing equitable risk pooling, eliminating under-insurance, etc. would create insurance products that would be unaffordable for all but the wealthiest of us, and they would crash in the death spiral of adverse selection.
Congress will be too busy with other issues to overhaul the private insurance industry. We will see an expansion of SCHIP and a tweaking of Medicare, and another window of reform will have closed on us.
Is it just me or does it seem that the vast majority of people posting responses hear (please exclude mine because I have definitely gone overboard) favor universal single payer health care financing? How does this jibe with moveon's "polling" results????
So when exactly did moveon do its "polling". Anybody? Anybody? Beuhler?? Eli???
You get to feel like a human being, how about that?
Is there a question what they think? They want others to pay for their care and the care of losers.
Medicare for all.
Single payer. Universal.
Does this mean everyone pays for their care or do you want successful people to pay for everyone?
Are you insinuating that "successful" people are the only people deserving of access to health care? How do you define success? Single payer is certainly the most fair and comprehensive way to provide for the financing of health care. That's how I define success, by running the numbers and seeing which system does the best job. That leaves the HCAN proposal (if you can even figure out exactly what they are proposing) in the dust.
If the "successful people" are unhappy with contributing to the society that allowed them to be wealthy in the first place they can always relocate to Uganda and allow their economically superior genetics reconstitute a fortune there ... of they can strip naked and throw rocks at the moon for all I care.
The bottom line is the United States is, and has always been, a community of mutual support ... the "successful people" rely on the contributions of the "unclean under classes" whether they want to accept it or not, so they can reciprocate.
Under Republican "Ike" the top tax rate was 91% ... that seems right by me. Mortals hoarding wealth is unseemly ... Universal Single Payer Health Care benefits the entire American Society, not just the poor.
Correction:
Eli says "MoveOn joined Health Care for America Now because most MoveOn members are aligned with HCAN's strategy"
Actually, Moveon joined HCAN well before they did any "polling", then, after they got enough flack from people who actually know something about the subject, they decided to ask slanted questions to bolster their stupid decision.
How about posing these two questions:
1) Do you support a system like the current one in which you get to buy insurance with copays, deductibles, limited choices of providers, or, in the case that you are bankrupt due to a medical condition, have publicly funded insurance provided to you so that the insurers can be guaranteed a profit at the expense of taxpayers
or
2) Do you support a system in which you get to choose your doctor, there are no copays, deductibles, or denial of coverage due to preexisting conditions, is not tied to your employer or employment status, and provides comprehensive medical, dental, vision, and mental health care at a cost that is 1/2 to 2/3 of what you are currently paying for your coverage as described in question (1)
HCAN can't even propose legislation that describes their incremental approach, because it simply can't be done. Single payer has HR676 at the national level and many state level proposals, most notably SB840 in California.
Don't trouble yourself with actually studying the issue, listen to the money, not the grassroots (60% of doctors and 70% of people support single payer).
Thank you! tegrat
I wonder where moveon's big donation came from to support HCAN - could it be - INSURANCE COMPANIES
Please take a moment to vote -
http://pol.moveon.org/listening/healthcare4.html?r=4012&id=13401-6641385-1SvHF
Between Single Payer and a poorly explained plan that would keep the PRIVATE PROFIT making INSURANCE COMPANIES in the middle of our health care.
this deceptively worded survey is part of a "random sampling" that was sent to -- 500-1000 MoveOn
members, supposedly to poll the opinions of ------------ MoveOn's 3.2 million members on
single payer vs. a private/public hybrid.
Seems it was worded to get the answer MoveOn wanted to support affiliating with HCAN.
Move On falsely asserts that if we choose to keep the PRIVATE INSURANCE COMPANIES
in our health care we can still keep our own private plan exactly as it is,
as well as assure universal coverage,
plus a medicare for everyone who
chooses it.
It simply isn't so.
http://pol.moveon.org/listening/healthcare4.html?r=4012&id=13401-6641385-1SvHFXx
as a moveon member, i cannot even begin to express my disappointment at this turn of events...single payer should be the goal...I am OK with supporting a phased approach. I am ok with supporting something less ( such as a two-tier system ) in the short term. I am not ok with this mess. Watchdogs? Govn't oversight? I see more layers of fat on an already bloated system. There's a reason Canada can spend half as much per person for equivalent to slightly better care ( +2 years additional life expectancy ) and that's because their system is simplified to the extent that administrative costs are 1% of the total.
so i guess this is where moveon and I part ways. good luck.
"+2 years additional life expectancy"
What does that have to do with health care? In the USA the numbers they take don't account for car accidents, murder, etc. which are more likly to happen here.
You must have failed statistics. Some 2.5 million Americans die every year, the number attributed to murder and traffic accidents is but a drop in the bucket, and the differential between our numbers and other industrialized nations even less. It would help if you did some research instead of basing your statements on baseless right wing talking points. Please remove the "un" from your handle.
Eli, here is a slogan idea ...
"What, are you sick? Single Payer's the Cure!"
Negotiation with insurance companies on this is pointless ... they aren't part of the problem of US Health Care ... they ARE the problem with US Health Care. We should stop pretending there is anyway to include them in the process and still make it work ... excise the insurance companies.
Furthermore, any Universal Health care initiative should include full scholarships for any student with the grades, talent, and desire to go into the Medical field ... tuition should never be an impediment to training Doctors, Nurses, and Medical Technicians.
And a reminder regarding public response ... nobody likes change, so there will always be passionate arguments against any Universal Healthcare Initiative, whether that is single payer or not, so that can't be the main concern, Prove a system works by making a case study of a region ... setup the single payer system, refine it, improve it, expand it ... Act! Don't get locked into endless negotiations with corporations, they live for that ... leverage the Congress, expose the foot draggers, and make single payer happen.
I am a proponent of universal health insurance or universal health care, single pay or not. I have a chronic illness that makes me basically uninsurable. I am on COBRA right now, but it will run out in about 11 months, and then I will be without. We need universal health care policies for every legal resident and citizen of our country. The time is now. I really like the French health care ideal, from what I have read. I am a disabled nurse. I have had health care insurance for the past 16 years. Now that I can no longer work, I am beginning to realize that we need health care for everyone. When one sees the percentage of our population without health care, it is atrocious.
So you are in favor so that I would have to pay for your care . . . what do I get?
You get to feel like a human being, how about that?
UnbiasView: What, you'd rather your tax dollars were used for boondoggles, such as immoral wars, bridges to nowhere, the world's biggest military, stealth planes, tax breaks for ultra successful corporations, pensions for already rich government ex-employees, beginning with the POTUS all the way down to congressmen, health care for the same employees and their families, billions for contractors on no-bid contracts, bailouts for corporations who didn't calculate their risk properly, etc? How very enlightened of you, I must say!!!!
It is heartening to hear the pragmatism of the MoveOn members and to see the strong stand that HCAN has made about health reform in the next Administration. Having participated in the failure of the Clinton health plan fifteen years ago, I feel we need to be clear about what our choices are in this electio: Electing Barack Obama is our most important goal right now. Obama has the better plan for reform. Once he is President, he will need all of us to support him, and it won't hurt at all to have a large proportion of supporters pushing a single payer plan. But -- what single payer supporters need to understand is that Obama's "public option" is similar to what we already have in Medicare, our uniquely American single payer plan for seniors. As some commenters have noted, once people get a taste of the security that a "public" option can give them, it will attract more and more enrollees. What's important is electing Obama and giving people a choice of a public plan. We need to keep our eyes on that goal right now. For a summary of the differences between Obama and McCain, lest anyone doubt there are real differences see my post a few weeks ago -- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/linda-bergthold/two-roads-diverge-in-heal_b_115852.html --
Unfortunately Linda, having the public option in conjunction with insurance companies cherry picking the healthy people out of the risk pool is exactly why this approach will never work. You must know this. Haven't you seen the numbers comparing single payer to "mixed" systems?? The enrollees attracted to the public option will be either poor, sick, or otherwise uninsurable in the private system. Why would I pay money into a public option if I am young and healthy, or rich? I would be a fool. The only system that works is one in which the risk pool is everybody, and resources are distributed amongst everybody equitably and to the degree that everybody can support financially.
I agree that the ideal is one risk pool, like Medicare, where everyone is covered. I don't agree, however, that "the only system that works is one in which the risk pool is everybody..." There are options for coverage that can work but fall short of one single payer plan for the U.S.. For example, expanding access to Medicare or to the Federal Employees Health Plan (FEHBP). Both options build on programs that have been reasonably successful in terms of keeping administrative costs low and still offering plan choice to participants.
What is your alternative for the currently uninsured? Would you make them wait for a single payer system to happen?
Thanks for explaining the differences between the two sites.
What makes me sick to my stomach is that everyone seems to have given in to the Lobby Blood money that wants to privatize everything in this country for profit. Whether it's Halliburton, KBR, making showers that electrocute soldiers and making billions or Mitch Daniels privatizing health care in Indiana. No one seems to care that this is costing us TRILLIONS of dollars. Some things for profit I could give a rats ass about, because I have a choice to go to a movie, buy certain clothes. I have no choice in getting sick.
Asclepios
How much for the middleman?
July 17, 2008 • Volume 8, Issue 29
" The lobbyists did not mention that, for every dollar they receive, insurance companies on average pay 87 cents for medical care, with some plans paying even less. Original Medicare spends about 3 cents on the dollar on administrative costs. No money is diverted towards marketing or profit."
Insurance companies are not the only middlemen-
A Medicare loophole may be causing some senior citizens to lose their prescription drug coverage, while allowing multi-million dollar pharmacy benefit managers to rake-in record profits.
http://www.pssny.org/web/2008/05/pbms_make_millions_while_senior.aspx
Where will this lead us???, see minute 5 from "60 Minutes" US Government Immorality Will Lead to Bankruptcy -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS2fI2p9iVs
I need to become a white collar drug pusher.
I was one of the MoveOn members who received a link to the poll via email. I completed the questionnaire, and did not find either the single-payer or the national health insurance positions to be under-represented, skewed or slanted.
While I would have no problem with either option, and philosophically am very comfortable with transitioning to a single-payer system, I do think that progressive policy-makers MUST be highly pragmatic in the way they approach this - whichever way we ultimately go. President Obama and HHS Secretary Clinton are going to have their hands full trying to knock down and expose the avalanche of propaganda we can expect from the insurance and pharmaceutical lobby. It's going to make Harry & Louise look like a couple of Bolsheviks.
Remember: It was Hillary's scorched-earth machinations that doomed health care reform the last time it was on the table - early during Bill's first term. Let's not make the same mistake again...
MM
We need to get the Insurance companies out of our healthcare system. We need a not-for-profit healthcare system for every American - a system that goes with you through out your life-from birth to death - it is our human right - our human responsibility. Single Payer HR676 is the answer-HR676 will give everyone the right to see the Dr.'s and Dentist of their choice when needed, no co-pays – no deductibles - no being denied for pre-existing conditions.
Speak out - Kick the insurance companies out – Kick out the CEO and the graft – Keep our healthcare money where it belongs – In healthcare - not in for-profit pockets. Don’t buy another CEO- another car, boat , or Island.
Not another mistress, another apartment, another golf course, another airplane.
Yes, let's surrender in advance to the insurance industry! Pragmatism, as I understand it, is doing what works. The "mixed" system has not, and will never work. All the numbers point to single payer. The insurers will do fine selling other types of insurance, just like what happened in Canada. Please, have some gumption, people!
The mixed option DOES work in other countries such as the Netherlands. I choose my insurer, and my insurer is required to provide certain coverages. Other coverages are optional. I STILL PAY LESS (even with the dollar so low against the euro) than I paid with a group plan through my employer a decade or so ago in the US, and I have no co-pays (neither drugs nor office visits) and few procedures covered at less than 100%. In the US, I paid $10 per prescription and $15 per office visit as co-pays.
Lastly, access is much easier -- my doctor sees "walk-ins" every morning (the wait time can be up to one hour, but I've never waited more than twenty minutes), and appointments are generally available within the week that one seeks an appointment. At other places of medical service, one seldom waits more than a few minutes. I remember waiting HOURS in the US even with an appointment. The Economist magazine (highly respected worldwide) rated the Dutch system as one of the finest based upon quality, cost, and delivery of services (how timely and well delivered).
IMAGINE !!!!!!!!
Imagine how much more the Doctors and Nurses who provide healthcare could be paid if the Insurance Company did not take 30 % to 42 % of the health care dollars as profit !!!!!!
Imagine how much cheaper the equpiment would be for hospitals it were bought in bulk instead of individual contracts.
Imagine how many live could be saved if all doctors had to meet miniumn requirements to prastice medince.
Imagine never being told your doctor ordered operation will not be performed till it is medically neccessary. ( HMO speak for if problem don't kill you first)
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
