Are Americans really opposed to the health care reform law?

[Pangloss]

One of the points that opponents have used to fuel the fight against this bill was that the American people didn't want it. But I was struck a while back by an argument that I caught from Paul Krugman one day, suggesting that once the reform took hold that Americans would support it a lot more willingly. Much that it pains me to credit Krugman, that may be happening even faster than he predicted. (Side note: Does anybody by any chance have a link to Krugman saying something along those lines? Least I can do is give the guy credit, but this really was a while ago.)

 

USA Today and Gallup released a poll on Tuesday showing that 49% of Americans now say that the legislation is a "good thing", and only 40% say it's a bad thing.

 

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/03/health_care_gets_positive_gall.html

 

These numbers are supported by Pollster.com:

http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/markos-moulitas/88675-gops-worst-nightmare

 

Yet the Pollster.com aggregate polling on healthcare shows that 51.3 percent of Americans oppose the president’s healthcare plan, a bare majority of the public. At best, “the will of the American people” is just slightly negative on the healthcare plan.

 

A weekend poll by CNN showed a somewhat different result, but in detail the news wasn't exactly better for the GOP (from the same link as above):

 

A CNN poll taken over the weekend found that while 59 percent of Americans opposed the healthcare legislation, only 43 percent opposed it because it was too liberal. Fully 13 percent opposed it because it was not liberal enough.

 

Even worse for Republicans, that CNN poll found that asked whom they most trusted to make health policy decisions, 51 percent of respondents said President Barack Obama, while just 39 percent said Republicans.

 

It gets even worse for Republicans from there:

 

A Newsweek poll in late February found that 81 percent supported the new insurance exchange. A mid-February Washington Post/ABC News poll found that 80 percent supported the ban on pre-existing conditions, 56 backed an insurance mandate with tax credits for low-income people to pay for it, and 72 percent supported the employer mandate requiring businesses to offer insurance to their full-time employees. A January poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that 56 percent were more likely to support reform that cut the federal deficit “by at least $132 billion over 10 years.” And will anyone really oppose the closing of the Medicare prescription drug “doughnut hole” coverage gap?

 

Bear in mind that many Republicans supported some of those measures, but their inclusion in the bill does make it harder for Republicans to argue that the bill should be fought.

 

Looked at in terms of realpolitik, it seems to suggest that the GOP faces an uphill battle to fight this legislation. I think it reflects American exhaustion of all the fighting over the cost issue, and gradual recognition of some of the more beneficial aspects of it. The situation seems analogous to the wife getting home from the mall with the kids in tow and the credit cards newly maxed out and waving the honey-do list. Yeah it sucks, but what're you gonna do? Answer: Go back to work and get those bills paid.

 

What do you all think?

[padren]

I think there's a huge difference between being skeptical of whether or not we should enact a specific plan, and being confident that (after committing to it) it can be made to work.

 

I think people were skeptical of the plan because it sounds risky and like a lot of work to pull it off due to it's many imperfections. Those imperfections haven't changed, but lacking another option people coming around to giving it a try. You don't have to think duct tape the best material for fixing that lawnmower and may only give it 5:1 odds, but when you realize you have that duct tape in hand and nothing else at your disposal in sight, you'll suddenly get that "okay, this could work" feeling regardless of the reservations.

 

 

 

Honestly I thought it was all an intellectual exercise until very recently since it appeared to be doomed. If you want to talk about Health Care Bills that are doomed to never pass this one really is pretty lame. When this bill is considered within the context of something that actually can and did pass - suddenly it doesn't seem that bad of a place to start. And as irrational as it may be, you don't have to see the odds as favorable to believe they can be overcome.

[jryan]

I wouldn't put much stock in afterglow polling. This is the same polling phenomenon that had Obama at 65% approval after the election while garnering 52% of the vote.

 

 

The polls right up until passage showed a 10.7 point advantage to the opposition. At this point a lot of people are hoping beyond their previous judgment that this bill will work out.

Edited March 24, 2010 by jryan

[ecoli]

I always suspected it had more support than conservative pundits believed. (that's probably one of those memes that can be traced back to some Fox news commentator and watch how it spreads until people think it's the truth.

 

I hope people are aware enough to be able to see what affects the bill actually has and be able to ascribe credit or blame to where it's really do. I have realistic expectations about this, though.

[jryan]

I always suspected it had more support than conservative pundits believed. (that's probably one of those memes that can be traced back to some Fox news commentator and watch how it spreads until people think it's the truth.

 

I hope people are aware enough to be able to see what affects the bill actually has and be able to ascribe credit or blame to where it's really do. I have realistic expectations about this, though.

 

Look at the broad base of polls before the vote was made, ecoli. Nobody was showing majority support for the bill. That is as close to reality as the polling will get for a while.

[iNow]

One of the points that opponents have used to fuel the fight against this bill was that the American people didn't want it. But I was struck a while back by an argument that I caught from Paul Krugman one day, suggesting that once the reform took hold that Americans would support it a lot more willingly. Much that it pains me to credit Krugman, that may be happening even faster than he predicted. (Side note: Does anybody by any chance have a link to Krugman saying something along those lines? Least I can do is give the guy credit, but this really was a while ago.)

Here ya go:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/26/opinion/26krugman.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

And reform remains popular. Earlier this year, many conservatives, citing misleading poll results, claimed that public support for the Massachusetts reform had plunged. Newer, more careful polling paints a very different picture. The key finding: an overwhelming 79 percent of the public think the reform should be continued, while only 11 percent think it should be repealed.

 

Interestingly, another recent poll shows similar support among the state’s physicians: 75 percent want to continue the policies; only 7 percent want to see them reversed.

 

<...>

 

But just as reform advocates predicted, the move to more or less universal care seems to have helped prepare the ground for further reform, with a special state commission recommending changes in the payment system that could contain costs by reducing the incentives for excessive care.

 

<...>

 

Still, if the Massachusetts experience is any guide, health care reform will have broad public support once it’s in place and the scare stories are proved false. The new health care system will be criticized; people will demand changes and improvements; but only a small minority will want reform reversed.

 

 

 

You don't have to think duct tape the best material for fixing that lawnmower and may only give it 5:1 odds, but when you realize you have that duct tape in hand and nothing else at your disposal in sight, you'll suddenly get that "okay, this could work" feeling regardless of the reservations.

I love this. A very adept description.

 

 

 

 

Look at the broad base of polls before the vote was made, ecoli. Nobody was showing majority support for the bill. That is as close to reality as the polling will get for a while.

Your point seems to brush over peoples reasoning for their lack of support. What your post suggests is that people don't support it because they don't want it, when (in fact) a large portion of peoples lack of support is because they actually wanted far MORE... like a universal system, or even just one with a public option. Trying to lump those people with the ones who fear big government and whatnot is a bit disingenuous.

 

My point? It's important to look at why people say they didn't support the current bill, because MANY of them wanted something far bigger than what we got.

[jryan]

Here ya go:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/26/opinion/26krugman.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

And reform remains popular. Earlier this year, many conservatives, citing misleading poll results, claimed that public support for the Massachusetts reform had plunged. Newer, more careful polling paints a very different picture. The key finding: an overwhelming 79 percent of the public think the reform should be continued, while only 11 percent think it should be repealed.

 

Interestingly, another recent poll shows similar support among the state’s physicians: 75 percent want to continue the policies; only 7 percent want to see them reversed.

 

<...>

 

But just as reform advocates predicted, the move to more or less universal care seems to have helped prepare the ground for further reform, with a special state commission recommending changes in the payment system that could contain costs by reducing the incentives for excessive care.

 

<...>

 

Still, if the Massachusetts experience is any guide, health care reform will have broad public support once it’s in place and the scare stories are proved false. The new health care system will be criticized; people will demand changes and improvements; but only a small minority will want reform reversed.

 

 

So how does Paul Krugman establish "more careful" in this context other than that this poll agrees with his expectations?

 

 

 

 

Your point seems to brush over peoples reasoning for their lack of support. What your post suggests is that people don't support it because they don't want it, when (in fact) a large portion of peoples lack of support is because they actually wanted far MORE... like a universal system, or even just one with a public option. Trying to lump those people with the ones who fear big government and whatnot is a bit disingenuous.

 

I never made a qualification of the dissent one way or the other, iNow. Arguing that you can toss out public dissent because you believe it is split on two sides of the debate misses the point entirely.

 

My point? It's important to look at why people say they didn't support the current bill, because MANY of them wanted something far bigger than what we got.

 

Well, sure it is, because it is important to know a broad base of what Americans want in their legislation and create programs that the majority of Americans support. They failed to do that in this case by a rather wide margin.

[jackson33]

If the question is "Would you support, less expensive Health Care, easily accessible and at least held to today's quality standards", the probability is 95% would say YES. No question here. You could ask hundreds of questions, getting some very positive responses (Would you favor a 2 month vacation- with pay, free utilities for every residence or that Government should subsidize gasoline price to .20 per gallon through out the Country, just a couple. It's the reality of what is possible, practical or the road required to get anything desired.

 

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

 

Review the above said "Real Time Debt Clock". My mind, not unfamiliar with numbers, cannot digest these figures or conceive a way out of the pending and unavoidable consequences. If accurate, today we have spent 3.5T$, with a 1.4T$ deficit for this year alone and the FY does not end until October 1st 2010. Our GDP is near stagnant at 14.3T$ and that 12.7T$ NATIONAL DEBT, could place us over the 100% of GDP early in fiscal year 2011, budgeted to be and increasing to an additional 8T$ over the next 9 fiscal years (W/O, HC Reform or anything thing else added in the future). If your not convinced yet, look at the DEBT obligations not figured into these or future figures as they materialize of 108T$. If you want to vilify republicans, be my guest, prescription drugs represent 18T$ of this figure and not 9 years into the program. a five year old article on that and as will be the HC Bill/Cost, nothing has been done to correct that...

 

President Bush thought that millions would welcome his intervention. But the effort has not gone as planned. Costs are spiraling out of control, and many of the people we wanted to help are protesting that the situation is worse than ever. Three years later, the entire poorly conceived enterprise is in jeopardy. [/Quote]

 

http://www.slate.com/id/2134456/

[Mr Skeptic]

One of the points that opponents have used to fuel the fight against this bill was that the American people didn't want it.

 

There's a difference between support for something in general and support for something specific (especially if the specific thing is extremely vague). The things I've heard: 1) most Americans support healthcare reform, 2) Most Americans opposed the Democrat's bill (at various points in time at least) 3) A lot of people who opposed the "Democrat's bill" changed their mind and supported it when they were told what was actually in it.

 

But I was struck a while back by an argument that I caught from Paul Krugman one day, suggesting that once the reform took hold that Americans would support it a lot more willingly. Much that it pains me to credit Krugman, that may be happening even faster than he predicted.

 

Now, there's something about supporting an unfinished bill. Consider this: Do you support not killing puppies? Do you support a controversial unfinished and not-yet-passed 2000 page bill to save puppies?

 

Now the bill is passed and we can actually count on the things that are "in" it to, in fact, be in it. They're not in limbo anymore.

 

To echo what padren said, this is pretty much the plan that we're stuck with. If it is repealed, it could be years or decades before another is passed (the people rejected it, pundits will say). Many people weren't even confident that the Democrats could pass this thing. Best to fix it up than try to start from scratch.

 

Also I think that soon enough people will be clamoring for and being less afraid of the public option, especially if we could save absurd amounts of money by implementing it.

 

What do you all think?

 

Eh, give it some time for the actual details of the bill to be worked out and sink in, then maybe we'll have more accurate perceptions. After all there was not much sense analyzing a 2000 page bill that might get revised at any time. At least now we know what we're talking about.

[bascule]

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

 

Review the above said "Real Time Debt Clock". My mind, not unfamiliar with numbers, cannot digest these figures or conceive a way out of the pending and unavoidable consequences. If accurate, today we have spent 3.5T$, with a 1.4T$ deficit for this year alone and the FY does not end until October 1st 2010. Our GDP is near stagnant at 14.3T$ and that 12.7T$ NATIONAL DEBT, could place us over the 100% of GDP early in fiscal year 2011, budgeted to be and increasing to an additional 8T$ over the next 9 fiscal years (W/O, HC Reform or anything thing else added in the future). If your not convinced yet, look at the DEBT obligations not figured into these or future figures as they materialize of 108T$. If you want to vilify republicans, be my guest, prescription drugs represent 18T$ of this figure and not 9 years into the program. a five year old article on that and as will be the HC Bill/Cost, nothing has been done to correct that...

 

I thought you gave up arguing about the debt already

 

That said I was much more opposed to this legislation until I read a summary of the CBO report. I am certainly not happy they tossed out the public option and ended up spending even more money. I would've preferred a cheaper bill that had a much more robust public system.