NATIONAL POLL: VOTERS REVOLT AGAINST INSURANCE MANDATES WITHOUT PUBLIC OPTION

[Better Believe It]

NATIONAL POLL
VOTERS REVOLT AGAINST MANDATES WITHOUT PUBLIC OPTION

For Public option: 59% to 31%.

For Mandates without public option: 33% to 56%.

Voters overwhelmingly say Obama didn't fight Lieberman hard enough: 63% to 29%.

This Research 2000 National Poll was conducted for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee and Democracy for America from Dec. 16 through Dec. 17, 2009. A total of 800 likely voters were interviewed by telephone. Margin of error is 3.5% overall.

(Research 2000 also does polling for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Lexington Herald-Leader, Fort Wayne News Sentinel, South Bend Tribune, and Reno Gazette-Journal.)

Read the details on all of the following poll questions asked:

PUBLIC OPTION
Would you favor or oppose creating a public health insurance option administered by the federal government that would compete with plans offered by private health insurance companies? (Wording of CNN poll)

PUBLIC OPTION + MEDICARE BUY-IN
If Congress proposed passing a strong public health insurance option PLUS allowing people age 55 to 64 to buy into Medicare, would you favor or oppose this idea?

INSURANCE MANDATE
Would you favor or oppose requiring all Americans to buy health insurance -- the so-called mandate -- even if they find insurance too expensive or do not want it?

INSURANCE MANDATE, NO PUBLIC OPTION AND MEDICARE EXPANSION
Would you favor or oppose a health care bill that does NOT include a public health insurance option and does NOT expand Medicare, but DOES require all Americans to get health insurance?

INSURANCE SUBSIDIES, BUT NO INSURANCE MANDATE
Would you favor or oppose a health care bill that does NOT include a public health insurance option and does NOT expand Medicare and does NOT require all Americans to buy health insurance -- but DOES provide significant subsidies to low- and middle-income families to help them buy insurance?

WHITE HOUSE TALKING POINT -- "PROVIDES?"
If the government requires 30 million uninsured Americans to buy health insurance, and gives subsidies to some Americans to help them afford this insurance, would it be accurate to say this plan, quote, "PROVIDES" 30 million Americans with health insurance?

OBAMA VS. LIEBERMAN
President Obama has said he favors a public health insurance option. Senator Joe Lieberman is widely credited with forcing Senate Democrats to take the public option off the table in order to win his vote. Do you think President Obama should have done more to pressure Lieberman to allow the public option to move forward?

Read the detailed poll results at:

http://act.boldprogressives.org/cms/sign/natpollresults121809/?source=bp

[stray cat]

1. We prefer the status quo to having to buy insurance

[Proud Liberal Dem]

10. The status quo is actually better?

No public option AND no subsidized private insurance AND no regulations is BETTER? I have my issues with private insurance but isn't having mandated (but subsidized) health insurance better than going into bankruptcy after being in a freak accident? Just because somebody is healthy one day doesn't mean that they will be healthy tomorrow and when they get sick- perhaps even catastrophically so- they may be in a position where they might have to deplete their bank account to pay for their care. Who pays for medical care if you don't have any insurance, exactly? It sure as hell ain't free. Everybody having some form of health insurance just seems sensible to me. I agree that we should have some more options (i.e. Public Option) and that we should definitely continue working for them but, at least for me, maintaining the status quo is WORSE than doing nothing.

[Lorien]

2. I'll say it again: until we demand ELECTION REFORM we'll never see meaningful

health care reform....or any other legislation that will benefit the people while denying corporations excessive profits.

[glitch]

8. +infinity. nt

[depakid]

3. No surprise there-

Leave it to the timid (or complicit?) administration and the Senate to take an overwhelmingly popular and modestly effective piece of legislation and turn into into a substantially unpopular bill that rewards the very corporations that have caused the problems- while ensuring that many of the most important benefits don't kick in- if they kick in at all- until 2014!

And- with their failure to stand up and fight- they've even taken it off of the table as a campaign issue!

Good luck with it, Dems- you "fixed it" now you own it.

[chimpymustgo]

12. Why they couldn't have fucked it up better if they'd TRIED.

:sarcasm:

[BrklynLiberal]

4. So remind me again... just who is it that the Congresscritters are representing there in DC???

Oh yes.. Insurance companies, Big Pharma, Banks, ......

[jtrockville]

5. It couldn't be any clearer.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

6. The "provides" question is arch... but an amusing point

[Faryn Balyncd]

7. K&R.Time for Nancy to drag the bums into the sunlight (CSPAN) & ram the Pub Opt down Harry's throat:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7402961



Let Harry & Max try to defy the American people WITH THE CAMERAS ROLLING!

[ChiciB1]

9. Ain't Gonna Happen!! At Least From What I'm Hearing! n/t

[Blue_In_AK]

11. Like it matters...

They're going to do what they're going to do in spite of overwhelming opposition. We know who has the power in this country, and it ain't "we, the people."

[Vidar]

13. K&R.