July Poll, support for a National Insurance Plan grows - Medicare for All

[slipslidingaway]

while support for a public option drops. This is one of the few polls that asks about a SP national insurance system and a public option...we'll see what the August poll shows.


Public option, April, June, July

67,67,59

National insurance plan for all Americans, such as expanded Medicare

48,47,58


April poll, page 7
http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/upload/7893.pdf

June poll, page 6
http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/upload/7924.pdf

July poll, page 5
http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/upload/7944.pdf



http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/upload/7923.pdf

"Methodology

This Kaiser Health Tracking Poll was designed and analyzed by public opinion researchers
at the Kaiser Family Foundation led by Mollyann Brodie, Ph.D., including Claudia Deane
and Carolina Gutiérrez. The survey was conducted June 1 through June 8, 2009, among a
nationally representative random sample of 1,205 adults ages 18 and older. Telephone
interviews conducted by landline (804) and cell phone (401, including 157 who had no
landline telephone) were carried out in English and Spanish by Princeton Survey Research
Associates.

The margin of sampling error for the total sample is plus or minus 3 percentage points. For
results based on subgroups, the margin of sampling error is higher. Note that sampling
error is only one of many potential sources of error in this or any other public opinion poll.
Trends in this document come from surveys listed on the last page.

Values less than 0.5% are indicated by an asterisk (*).

“VOL” indicates that a response was volunteered by respondent, not an explicitly offered
choice.

Due to rounding, percentages may not add to 100."

[FiveGoodMen]

1. Crossing fingers...

[slipslidingaway]

7. And making calls, speaking to people etc...

I sent an email to the CBO the other day after it was reported that they will score HR 676, hopefully they will answer. A staff member at my reps office is also supposed to be checking with the CBO, exactly what are they scoring and anticipated completion date.

IMO we also need to pressure the other committees to hold hearings on HR 676.

Conyers Rips Rangel, Waxman for Backing Off Single Payer
http://www.singlepayeraction.org/blog/?p=919

"...Rangel and Waxman were co-sponsors last year.

But they are not co-sponsors this year.

Rangel, Waxman and George Miller (D-California) each chair committees that will be hearing health care reform proposals.

Only Miller is cooperating with Conyers – remaining a co-sponsor of HR 676 and holding hearings.

In fact, Miller’s committee today held the first ever Congressional hearing on HR 676.

Conyers spoke last night on Capitol Hill at a dinner in honor of outgoing Public Citizen President Joan Claybrook.

“There are three committees that have been designated to work on (health care) on the House side,” Conyers said. “ three dear buddies of mine – Charlie Rangel, Henry Waxman and George Miller. Guess what? All of them were on single payer (HR 676).”

“Guess what? All of them got off except for George Miller of California. Not only did he not get off, he said — you want a hearing, you got a hearing.”

“It’s one thing to go down in defeat, which I don’t plan to do by the way,” Conyers said. “But it’s another thing to say – we don’t want to hear the most popular bill. I’ve got 79 co-sponsors. Seventy-nine men and women saying – let’s get this thing on. We’ve got 300 to 400 unions. We’ve had three polls. The American people have spoken.”

“And here I am in the most Democratically controlled legislature in my life. And they are saying – it’s kind of too late because we have to get this thing through by the end of July. And we don’t have time.”

[ejpoeta]

2. medicare for all makes sense.... just allowing anyone to buy into it makes sense...

it has a track record. people understand it. they know it. It is already there and would need only be expanded. And healthy individuals participating would help sustain it, because they would be paying in and not needing to draw on it most likely. Sure it's not perfect.... but I think it makes sense.

[SoCalNative]

3. We already pay into it

we should be allowed to access it

[ejpoeta]

4. i know we pay into it... but we would have to pay into it like we pay insurance premiums.

it wouldn't work unless we did... of course, said paying in should be income contingent. Like if you have a regular job and make a decent living, you would pay towards it like you do your insurance now, only it would go to medicare. If you are not working, then you wouldn't be paying towards it, but be able to access it....

[bkkyosemite]

5. It really upsets me when Obama says we can't have it now cuz the employers have insurance for

employees. Who cares except the insurance companies. Medicare for all HR 676 27 pages of easy read.


some sites for HR 676 to better explain for those who need it.

http://www.healthcare-now.org/hr-676/

http://www.hr676.org/

the actual bill:

http://www.pnhp.org/docs/nhi_bill_final1.pdf

[slipslidingaway]

9. You mentioned a key part - "healthy individuals participating would help sustain it"

:thumbsup:

[defendandprotect]

29. True . . . we don't have reinvent the wheel . . . and with many more involved . . .

and Obama administration now going after corporations/pharmaceutical companies who

rip off Medicare -- we can get other positive changes made --- like getting rid of

Bush's drug program and putting in a good drug program!

Citizens also need to have dental and all optical services included --

[redqueen]

6. That's weird...

a couple of DUers were saying that recent polls showed that support was slipping.

Hmmmmm.

[bkkyosemite]

8. Unless we start hollering like the rethugs we are not going to get across what people will be losing

[slipslidingaway]

11. Did they post a link? Many of the polls do not even mention a Medicare

for all option, the widely cited poll that 72% want a public option does not even have a question such as a SP, Medicare for all plan. That poll was taken after a marketing campaign to push the public option and marginalize SP, links in this thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6289091&mesg_id=6289091

Hopefully the August poll will continue to ask similar questions.


Link here to the 72% poll mentioned above...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8582100&mesg_id=8582422

The widely cited poll that 72% want a public option never asked the question about SP, maybe I missed the question, but I do not think so. Also the question states "something like Medicare coverage" which as pointed out by Kip Sullivan and Dr. Himmelstein this public option is not like Medicare.

"q68 Would you favor or oppose the government offering everyone a government administered
health insurance plan -- something like the Medicare coverage that people 65 and older
get -- that would compete with private health insurance plans?"

[redqueen]

13. Of course not.

Just more woesy-woe Eeyore bullshit prompted by some blathering talking head most likely. Fucking tiring.

[slipslidingaway]

19. Unless it is something that we all know or just pure opinion then

we should try and post links...IMHO.

[redqueen]

20. Oh yes, I did ask for a link...

I got one to a poll about a Senate race... didn't even bother asking how that related to the convo... I just dropped it.

[abumbyanyothername]

16. Support for the public option is slipping

Support for Medicare for all is gaining.

Proving once again that it is highly likely that perhaps as many as a majority of Americans are too stupid to live.

[redqueen]

17. Ah FFS...

now I have a headache. :banghead:

[defendandprotect]

30. Yes . . . mysterious . . .

[MisterP]

10. no!!! universal is non-moderate and thus sinister

we must remain firm!!!111
:sarcasm:

[slipslidingaway]

12. Well I have not budged :) n/t

[wildflower]

14. That's exactly what they should have started with, IMO

And I was personally in favor of calling it "health security"; but calling it "Medicare for All" would ease the worries of senior citizens who for some reason think Medicare is going to be taken away.

[slipslidingaway]

21. I agree and as stated above the plan could have been used to

calm people's fears and sell the plan to seniors... Medicare does need the insurance money from the younger generation.

Instead what they are hearing is that hundreds of billions of dollars from Medicare will be used to fund the public option. I happen to agree that any savings from Medicare will be needed For Medicare, estimates are that the number of enrollees will go from 46 million to 79 million over the next two decades. Where is that money going to come from? And that will be happening at the same times as the general budget needs to start paying back the SS Trust Fund to the tune of 2 Trillion plus.


:shrug:

[defendandprotect]

31. Clinton tried to get Medicare age changed to 57 . . . would have been great if ...

that had been done --

The other good thing about MEDICARE FOR ALL is that you can gradually add people in

10 year steps as you set up the health care system for them.

And it's ready to go -- they're trying to get this postponed for years, even if they

pass a plan!!!

[EC]

15. People understand Medicare

it's not new...I wish it would happen - even lowering the age to 45 would be a great help because that is the age the premiums really jump. After that age it's harder to afford, makes it harder to find a job when employers are looking at the added expense, and by that age most have pre-existing conditions.

[slipslidingaway]

22. The only reason to try and make this more complicated is to keep

the middle men making profits, yes people understand Medicare and do not want to give it up. The Dems could have held conferences with representatives from other countries, talk about the profits made for just handling the money etc. instead they took it off the table.

[defendandprotect]

32. They keep pretending they have to reinvent the wheel . . . !!!

MEDICARE FOR ALL is ready to go -- and they don't want that -- they want plans which

won't work, which will cost more -- and which they can delay and delay!

Agree with you!

[ipaint]

18. Helen Thomas gets it and so don't the majority of americans.

"President Obama is making a big mistake by ignoring the single-payer proposal.

Because the words "single payer" have been subjected to such pervasive demagoguery and misrepresentation, its polling numbers do not reflect how popular it really is.

In a Kaiser Family Foundation poll last month, 58 percent of Americans either strongly or somewhat favored a program to provide insurance "through an expanded, universal form of Medicare-for-all."

That's basically the same as single payer. But once the same poll actually used the words "single payer" to describe the program, support dropped to 51 percent.

In 2003 before he became a U.S. senator from Illinois, Obama actually called himself a single-payer "proponent." But now that he is president, Obama has buckled to Republicans and conservative Blue Dog Democrats in pursuit of consensus. My question is if Congress passes a watered-down version of health care that doesn't truly cover everyone, is the result worth it?

The president has given no hearing to the advocates of a single-payer system and neither has the media."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?blogid=14&entry_id=45426



I am convinced if single payer was actually presented as a viable option the majority of americans would actively and forcefully demand it. The insurance companies certainly understand that fact hence the 4 decade old "single payer is not feasible" meme that gets pulled out every time reform is mentioned.

[slipslidingaway]

23. IMO the Democrats took SP off the table and tried to confuse people

by saying that the public option is the same as SP. Kucinich had it right when he said what is lacking is political leadership and that the Dems are not really truthful when it comes to health care. There already is majority support among citizens and doctors, but the Dems continue to compromise with the corporations. Link to the July poll is in the OP and they did switch the wording a bit, both with the public option and SP, I used the highest support numbers for both in the OP.


In case you missed this thread from last night...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6289091&mesg_id=6289091

"...Similar strong support for Medicare for All was found the last time health reform was on the top of the nation’s agenda, during the Clinton administration. In 1993, a citizen jury sat for 8 hours a day for five days in Washington, DC before making their choice among the then-leading options for health reform: managed competition (supported by Clinton), medical savings accounts, and single payer. Single payer received 17 out of 24 votes (70 percent). There were 5 votes for Clinton’s plan, and none for medical savings accounts. Focus groups conducted that year by Democratic pollster Celinda Lake reported the same strong support for single payer. “After conducting extensive focus groups on health care, pollster Celinda Lake discovered that the more people are told about the Canadian system, “the higher the support goes.” In contrast, according to Lake, working Americans found the managed competition idea “laughable.” (“It’s Time for a Real Debate on National Health Insurance”)

So, how come Democratic pollster Celinda Lake now claims Americans won’t support single payer, and instead favor a plan that is a variant of managed competition? Because her latest research was brazenly biased. Kip Sullivan explains how and why..."

[ipaint]

24. Yes, when I started hearing them try and co-opt the term

single payer to describe the public option I knew two things- Single payer is considered a huge threat to democrats as well as the republicans and the public option would be crap considering they are already lying about it.

That "Uniquely American" phrase stuck out like a sore thumb. I didn't know the particulars behind the phrase at the time but after hearing it in a speech by obama it just dripped industry pr.

The support in the public for medicare for all exists despite the industries best efforts to manipulate and deceive. Kucinich is right, we need a leader to put it out there as a viable option. The people would do the rest. The radical fringe on the right could scream and yell all they want, no one believes them now and they are protesting gov. controlled universal health care. They'd only succeed in permanently marginalizing themselves.

Unfortunately the compromised plan that emerges will be useless and the right will claim victory setting reform back years. I don't think that is an accident either. It's choreographed on both sides to maximize chaos and drama.

[slipslidingaway]

26. Yes there were many clues, on one hand the Dems badmouth the

insurance companies, on the other hand they exclude the largest challengers from the discussions and invite the insurance companies to the table.

Well I guess that makes sense.

:crazy:


"It's choreographed on both sides to maximize chaos and drama."

Sadly I agree.

[defendandprotect]

33. If Obama and Dems don't do Single Payer/Medicare, they're going to confuse their re-elections-!

[hootinholler]

25. That's a 10 point jump for single payer.

:greenboucnythangojoy:

-Hoot

[slipslidingaway]

27. And just imagine if the Dems tried to sell the plan ....

love the :greenboucnythangojoy:

:)

[defendandprotect]

34. Right . . . GOP has called their fascists out . . Where are Dems calling us out -- ?????

GOP is running fascist rallies all month long --

They've got their "pro-lifers" out murdering people ---

and the NRA trying to arm kindergardners --

Where are the labor groups calling out Democrats?

Where are the women's groups calling out women and all Dems?

Where are the Democrats -- ????!!!!

[slipslidingaway]

38. "Where are the labor groups calling out Democrats" ....

This opened my eyes back in 2007, the AFL-CIO had pages to help members decide on the candidates which were broken down by subject. The page on trade was totally false when it came to listing the votes on the China trade bill, anyone can make a mistake, but there were several mistakes on this particular page.

They omitted the Dem candidates that voted in favor of the bill, but they also omitted the No vote by Kucinich. So the "more acceptable" candidates who voted for the bill were made to look better, while the "less acceptable" candidate (Kucinich) was not given credit for standing against the free trade bill.

You have to wonder how much of this goes on behind the scenes that we do not even know about, sure members could have looked up the info themselves, but how many do that.

Many unions do support a single-payer system, but at the national level they seem to go along too often with those in charge.

:(

Thanks for the other kicks in the thread.

:)


http://journals.democraticunderground.com/slipslidingaway/32

There's something happening here...AFL-CIO issues page

Posted by slipslidingaway in General Discussion
Mon Sep 10th 2007, 07:26 PM

Working Families Vote 2008 > Issues
Trade & Manufacturing

I came across this page when looking back on the votes for the China Trade bill in 2000. What is interesting is how the page includes information on the China Trade bill for certain candidates and excludes vote information for other candidates. I would assume this page is compiled for the benefit of their members so why would they be selective on the voting records of the candidates? Does anyone else find this strange?



YES

Biden
Dodd
Edwards

NO

Kucinich


Republican YES votes are mentioned

Brownback
McCain
Thompson

Republican NO votes are NOT mentioned

Hunter
Paul
Tancredo


FWIW articles before and after passage....

[defendandprotect]

39. The unions have all been under attack and presumably that also includes . . .

infiltration and co-option --

Needless to say there would be no benefit in for union members in having their

unions taken over by Mafia figures -- but elites would have an interest in that as

a way to destroy unions and their reputations.

I think the highest we ever got with unionization was about 39% -- and I think we're

below 9% now ???????

Another great disappoint is that women's groups and labor unions have never been able

to get together and combine their strength!!


Your catching the misinformation is interesting -- there was a big push a few years

ago to move unions further in support of GOP.

[slipslidingaway]

42. During Congressionsal testimony Gerald Shea of the AFL-CIO

stated at one point that he thought SP would be the best system, but he was quickly shut down by a member of Congress (might have been Baucus)

So the agenda had already been set and if you wanted to be a player in the discussions then you had to play by their rules.

I wish so many would not compromise so soon.

That old page on the candidates was rather interesting.

:hi:

[slipslidingaway]

28. kick n/t

[defendandprotect]

35. k i c k

[SoCalDem]

36. no no no no no this can't be true.. The media says everyone HATES the idea

:rofl:

[slipslidingaway]

37. The media says what they are told to say, with only few exceptions...

such as Moyers etc.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6289091&mesg_id=6289091

Americans Support Single payer. Why Doesn't Celinda Lake?

"...Similar strong support for Medicare for All was found the last time health reform was on the top of the nation’s agenda, during the Clinton administration. In 1993, a citizen jury sat for 8 hours a day for five days in Washington, DC before making their choice among the then-leading options for health reform: managed competition (supported by Clinton), medical savings accounts, and single payer. Single payer received 17 out of 24 votes (70 percent). There were 5 votes for Clinton’s plan, and none for medical savings accounts. Focus groups conducted that year by Democratic pollster Celinda Lake reported the same strong support for single payer. “After conducting extensive focus groups on health care, pollster Celinda Lake discovered that the more people are told about the Canadian system, “the higher the support goes.” In contrast, according to Lake, working Americans found the managed competition idea “laughable.” (“It’s Time for a Real Debate on National Health Insurance”)

So, how come Democratic pollster Celinda Lake now claims Americans won’t support single payer, and instead favor a plan that is a variant of managed competition? Because her latest research was brazenly biased. Kip Sullivan explains how and why..."

[TexasObserver]

40. Recommend

[SammyWinstonJack]

41. K&R