Interesting Survey Results on what Americans Want

[REACTIVATED IN CT]

in Health Care Reform


http://www.ebri.org/pdf/briefspdf/EBRI_IB_7-2009_HCS-09.pdf

They sampled 1000 people chosen randomly last month.

Executive Summary (excerpt) (Lots more at link)

PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR HEALTH REFORM: Findings from the 2009 Health Confidence Survey—the 12th annual HCS—
indicate that Americans have already formed strong opinions regarding various aspects of health reform, even before details
have been released regarding various key factors. These issues include health insurance market reform, the availability of a
public plan option, mandates on employers and individuals, subsidized coverage for the low-income population, changes to
the tax treatment of job-based health benefits, and regulatory oversight of health care. These opinions may change as details
surface, especially as they concern financing options. In the absence of such details, the 2009 HCS finds generally strong
support for the concepts of health reform options that are currently on the table.

U.S. HEALTH SYSTEM GETS POOR MARKS, BUT SO DOES A MAJOR OVERHAUL: A majority rate the nation’s health
care system as fair (30 percent) or poor (29 percent). Only a small minority rate it excellent (6 percent) or very good
(10 percent). While 14 percent of Americans think the health care system needs a major overhaul, 51 percent agree with the
statement “there are some good things about our health care system, but major changes are needed.”

NATIONAL HEALTH PLAN ELEMENTS RATED HIGHLY: Between 68 percent and 88 percent of Americans either strongly
or somewhat support health reform ideas such as national health plans, a public plan option, guaranteed issue, expansion of
Medicare and Medicaid, and employer and individual mandates.

MIXED REACTION TO HEALTH BENEFITS TAX CAP: Reaction to capping the current tax exclusion of employment-based
health benefits is mixed. Nearly one-half of Americans (47 percent) would switch to a lower-cost plan if the tax exclusion
were capped, 38 percent would stay on their current plan and pay the additional taxes, and 9 percent don’t know.

[Cleita]

1. Thanks. Your third point comes up time and time again in the 60% to 80%

range in various polls, both formal and informal. This is something to grow on by letting our Reps and Senators know that the majority of their voters want this.

[REACTIVATED IN CT]

3. Not "my" point - I'm just posting an interesting piece of

research that I came across today with some facts that would be handy for us to have - and to share as you suggested.

Does this group (EBRI) have a bias ? Probably not:

The Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) was founded in 1978. Its mission is to
contribute to, to encourage, and to enhance the development of sound employee benefit
programs and sound public policy through objective research and education. EBRI is the only
private, nonprofit, nonpartisan, Washington, DC-based organization committed exclusively to
public policy research and education on economic security and employee benefit issues.
EBRI’s membership includes a cross-section of pension funds; businesses; trade associations;
labor unions; health care providers and insurers; government organizations; and service firms.

[John Q. Citizen]

4. Every group has a bias. Look at their members, and particulary the funders of the study.

They asked 1000 people who have employer based health insurance a lot of questions that certain people want the answers to.

You may notice they didn't ask people the answers to questions they didn't want the answers to. People with employer based insurance make up less than half of the US population.

edited to add- Still information is power. So I think having this information is better than not having it, for sure. I'm interested in it, just not yet making conclusions based on it.

i wonder why they didn't adjust based on household or personal income?

My guess is higher income people have better coverage and are probably more satisfied with their employer based insurance. Of course, depending some union organized workers also might have better insurance.

[REACTIVATED IN CT]

5. They made random phone calls. The methodology is

outlined in the study. Nowhere does it say these folks have employer based health insurance. All you can assume safely is that all the people in the sample were willing to discuss the subject for 20 minutes.

[John Q. Citizen]

6. And that it was funded by insurance companies

From the study posted in the OP

MIXED REACTION TO HEALTH BENEFITS TAX CAP: Reaction to capping the current tax exclusion of employment-based
health benefits is mixed. Nearly one-half of Americans (47 percent) would switch to a lower-cost plan if the tax exclusion
were capped, 38 percent would stay on their current plan and pay the additional taxes, and 9 percent don’t know.

What about the 16% percent of Americans that have no insurance at all? It doresn't say what they would do.

Or the 13.7% of Americans who are on Medicare, most of who are retired. Doesn't say what they would do either.

And the 13% on Medicade and SCHIP?

Or the 9.1% who buy there own insurance with out an employer?

And what about our service people? the 3.1% of Americans getting Military health care?

[clear eye]

12. And big investment cos.

http://www.ebri.org/about/members/ many of whom have large stakes in the health insurance industry.

Look to the wording of their question. They didn't ask if those surveyed wanted a major overhaul of the funding mechanism for health care, but instead asked if they wanted a major overhaul of the health care system. Would you have been sure what they meant? I know I wouldn't. They could have been speaking about MD education or how hospitals function or anything else related to health care. I doubt I would have answered that I wanted a major overhaul of the whole system even though I passionately want a complete replacement of the funding mechanism.

There's a pretty good chance that the poster, though a long time member, has important financial ties w/ the industry. His journal also shows posting of health insurance industry studies. Why else would he be studying industry publications?

[clear eye]

10. Vaguely worded survey gives misleading responses.

They asked about an overhaul of the "health care system", not the funding mechanism for it. Could have meant how hospitals function of how we educate our MD's for all the respondents knew. In the one question were they asked about funding people's opinions were clear--they preferred any funding other than for-profit insurers.

I'm not sure who you are, but someone posting a survey done by a group including only traditional opponents of single-payer is a questionable source of reliable info IMO. Here is a link to ERBI's biggest contributors: http://www.ebri.org/about/members/

[clear eye]

9. Self-delete

[clear eye]

11. This poster has a history of posting studies by health insurance co. associations

See the second item (from Mar. of 2007) in his journal. Good circumstantial evidence that he either works in a fairly high position or is heavily invested in the industry. Who else would be getting those newsletters?

[Cleita]

2. Dupe

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

7. a survey of people ignorant of the choices will get ignorant answers

The MSM doesn't publicize the truth that most developed countries have single payer and
you don't need private insurance.

[clear eye]

8. Asking whether you want a major overhaul of the "health care system"

is misleading because the health care system includes a lot more than the funding for it. I would not know for sure what the question referred to (could be talking about hospitals and MD education, for instance) and I might not have said I wanted a total overhaul even though I passionately want a complete change of the funding mechanism to single-payer.