With resistance to President Obama's health care law culminating with the Supreme Court deciding the fate of the most important social policy since enactment of Medicare and Medicaid in 1965, the failure to win popular support for health care will be studied for many years to come. Racism has clearly emerged as a significant factor underlying opposition to the law and must be a part of any honest attempt at understanding how some Americans formed opinions about the Affordable Care Act.
For twenty years, the majority of Americans favored reforming the health care system. However, unlike during former President Clinton's reform efforts in the early 1990s, support for the Affordable Care Act was not only sharply divided along ideological grounds, but by race as well. Former President Carter sparked a national debate with his September 2009 comments noting that racism was partly motivating tea party activists who staged widely-covered angry outbursts at town hall meetings hosted by members of Congress and anti-government protests that featured racially offensive signs denouncing Obama and the health care bill.
While President Obama refuted Carter's claims, questions about the role of race continued. Indeed, in November 2009, 54 percent of adults indicated that race was at least a minor factor driving the opposition to President Obama's policies. But since then, more studies have revealed the ugly truth behind why some are vehemently against "Obamacare" and see its passage as a threatening symbol of the power of the nation's first black president.
Analysis of data from the American National Election Survey show prior to 2009, racial attitudes had a small, non-significant influence on white Americans' opinion on whether "health care should be voluntarily left up to individuals." As debate over Obama's health care proposals increased, a significant change in racialization on health care opinions was observed, according to a study published in February by Micheal Tesler, a political scientist professor at Brown University. Antiblack stereotypes, which had no independent influence on preference for governmental insurance in March 2009, became a strong predictor of views on this issue by September of the same year. Additionally, Tesler found that when the same health care proposals were attributed to Obama as opposed to Clinton, racial resentment and antiblack stereotypes significantly reduced support for health care reform.
Demonstrating similar results with the economic stimulus package, these findings support Tesler's argument that President Obama's racial identity cues racial attitudes that "spillover" onto policies associated with him. These attitudes are activated despite the Affordable Care Act containing no explicit or implicit racial cues, according to Vanderbilt researchers Monique Lyle and Syndey Jones, who reported similar results as Tesler.
Lyle and Jones argue that because racial groups can activate strong, automatic emotional responses, such reactions to the health care law are believed to be triggered by cognitive associations that link Obama's racial identity to negative perceptions about African Americans. These emotional responses influence evaluations of the law. Consistent with this theory, Knowles and colleagues found unconscious antiblack prejudice was associated with negative attitudes about Obama and diminishing support for his health reform plans.
The use of specific terms by the media and political leaders can also trigger associations about certain groups and thus shape public opinion. For example, "government spending" is synonymous with welfare to the public and is associated with blacks, the poor, homeless and other vulnerable groups (see Schneider and Jacoby). The extent to which these groups are believed to be responsible for their circumstances (and not disadvantaged by structural or social barriers) influences one's opinion on whether the government should take steps to correct inequities in society.
It's no secret that liberals and conservatives differ wildly on this front. The battle over health care has ignited emotions on both sides but has sparked a much more powerful response among those who want to preserve the status quo and push back against an expanded role for government, even if it means fighting against their own self interests. Whether driven by racial attitudes, the fear of "big government/socialism" or the loss of liberty, conservatives have succeeded in making the health care law unpopular, even though the majority of Americans like and want to keep many of its provisions.
Follow Judy Lubin on Twitter: www.twitter.com/judylubin
I like visiting Dr. Christian because he is cut from the same cloth as I. He is a small wiry guy without an ounce of fat, and keeps his hair tied behind in a ponytail. Nothing like treating your patients through example. He has served as the team doctor on several Himalayan expeditions, reaching the incredible altitude of 25,000 feet without oxygen. He includes Mount McKinley and Aconcagua on his resume.
The Mad Hedge Fund Trader
They want Obama out because he was able to get the Swiss to release names of people who were hiding funds. Their thought is that he may negotiate other nations to do the same with other nations. This is not a race issue, work on what they are hiding and where.
Did you know that before "Obamacare" insurance companies could deny you health insurance if you were the victim of domestic violence?
Did you know that before "Obamacare" insurance companies could discriminate based on disability?
Did you know that before "Obamacare" insurance companies could impose a "lifetime limit" on your coverage and tell you that you have used up all of your insurance and you are no longer covered?
Did you know that before "Obamacare" insurance companies could just drop patients once they got sick?
Did you know that before "Obamacare" insurance companies did not have to tell patients what they were spending money on? They used to just hide thousands of dollars of charges in "administration fees". Now they must be specific.
Did you know that before "Obamacare" insurance companies could make any percentage of profit they wanted but now there is a limit to prevent price-gauging patients?
I ask you if all these stupid ranting by the republicans make any sense at all? It only show how easy it is to brainwash people of this country.
The important statement you made is " an individual who can't afford insurance they will get help from the government" . Who is paying for this? Us dummies who work on the books
And, do you notice that the GOP started "Obamacare" as an insult, but now everybody's using it and, if the polls are right, that terminology isn't being seen as a net negative anymore, and the numbers keep getting better?
And, I will bet you my bottom dollar that if those poll numbers continue to improve, it won't be long before they accuse the President of naming it after himself? Just wait. They'll do it.
The choice could not be clearer this November...
I've seen them. They come in to get free toys for Toys for Tots. I'm a 16 yr vet of the Marine Corps. In Nov and Dec I'm working 80 hr weeks to help collect as many toys as possible. My wife and child hardly ever see me.
Then I see it. The young "lady" with 5 kids comes in to get the free fruits of my labor. She drives a nicer car than me. She has a new iPhone. She has a new weave and nails. And sometimes, she'll even have the audacity to b*tch about the quality of the free toys she's getting from my backbreaking work.
Do you all see the problem here?
yeah right.
this "story", or perhaps we should say "scenario" shows up in every elction cycle without fail. its a tired tail...and of course the lady with the "5 kids" is black... right??
At times, I wonder if the folks that do not want social welfare understand the ramifications of what would happen to our country. An underclass of broke, unhealthy people would tear this country apart. Ever heard of the French Revolution? If not for social programs, you have a society of so much crime and despair, that it would not be safe. You would be talking about an underclass that would have to do whatever it takes to survive.
Although I happy with the ruling yesterday, I still believe it is not close to enough to what we should do for less fortunate Americans.