Debates
19 Jan 11
19 Jan 11
2 edits
I'm going to try to beat some people to the punch.
CNN released a survey today that concluded approximately half of Americans support a repeal of Obama's health care reform package. CNN should also release a caveat, if not an apology, about the nature of their survey.
1) The survey, for whatever reason, did not include Americans between the ages of 18 and 34. Not exactly a representative sample.
2) The survey merely presented respondents with a dichotomy: either you want to repeal all aspects of health care reform, or you want to preserve all aspects of health care reform. In reality, that's simply not an accurate portrayal of options available to legislators, and probably not representative of the opinions of the American public (which overwhelmingly supports outlawing denial of coverage based on pre-existing conditions, expanding coverage for college graduates, etc.).
I'm usually confident in CNN's polling, but this makes me somewhat skeptical. But beyond that I am saddened that so many people (including politicians, pundits, etc.) will look at this survey and immediately conclude that the bill should be scrapped. Unfortunately, bad math can lead to bad politics.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/01/18/cnn-poll-half-favor-repealing-health-care-law/
Edit: I just took one more look at the methodology on CNN's page, and I discovered that CNN merely wanted to reflect the "options" available to the House tomorrow during the repeal vote. There lies the root of the problem - Republicans know that they could vote to repeal portions of the bill, and yet they choose not to just to make a symbolic statement of opposition.
19 Jan 11
Originally posted by wittywonka"Thinking about the health care bill which was passed into law last March, do you favor all of the proposals in that bill, favor most of them, oppose most of them, or oppose all of them?"
I'm going to try to beat some people to the punch.
CNN released a survey today that concluded approximately half of Americans support a repeal of Obama's health care reform package. CNN should also release a caveat, if not an apology, about the nature of their survey.
1) The survey, for whatever reason, did not include Americans between the ages of ...[text shortened]... of the bill, and yet they choose not to just to make a symbolic statement of opposition.
Favor all 6%
Favor most 39%
Oppose most 34%
Oppose all 16%
No opinion 5%
"And if you had to choose, would you rather see Congress vote to repeal all of the provisions in the new law or would you rather see Congress vote to leave in place all the provisions in the new law?"
Repeal all provisions 50%
Keep all provisions in place 42%
No opinion 8%
Looks like the 'Oppose Most' and 'Oppose All' groups would like to start over.
19 Jan 11
2 edits
Originally posted by spruce112358These polls all assume that everyone knows exactly what is in the current healthcare law.
"Thinking about the health care bill which was passed into law last March, do you favor all of the proposals in that bill, favor most of them, oppose most of them, or oppose all of them?"
Favor all 6%
Favor most 39%
Oppose most 34%
Oppose all 16%
No opinion 5%
"And if you had to choose, would you rather see Congress vote to repeal al ion 8%
Looks like the 'Oppose Most' and 'Oppose All' groups would like to start over.
And it gives the impression that everyone who favors repeal wants to go back to the previous status quo. I'm sure a certain percentage of those who want to repeal most of it favor replacing it with something more to the left, such as a single payer system. No1 would probably fall into this category.
There should have been a question asking these people if they want to go back to the previous status quo.
19 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by wittywonkaThat's politics in the good ol USA..aint it grand!!😏
I'm going to try to beat some people to the punch.
CNN released a survey today that concluded approximately half of Americans support a repeal of Obama's health care reform package. CNN should also release a caveat, if not an apology, about the nature of their survey.
1) The survey, for whatever reason, did not include Americans between the ages of of the bill, and yet they choose not to just to make a symbolic statement of opposition.
19 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by wittywonkaFirst of all, you're either misrepresenting or not understanding the 18-34 bracket situation. They did not specifically omit people of that age group; i.e., they did not say to the guy on the phone "What? You're 27? <click>" The results just show "N/A" for that age group; probably because they simply didn't get a large enough sample to meet their standards to generate scientifically significant data. Random things happen in random polls, and this could simply be one of them.
I'm going to try to beat some people to the punch.
CNN released a survey today that concluded approximately half of Americans support a repeal of Obama's health care reform package. CNN should also release a caveat, if not an apology, about the nature of their survey.
1) The survey, for whatever reason, did not include Americans between the ages of of the bill, and yet they choose not to just to make a symbolic statement of opposition.
Second, that IS the dichotomy that voters are faced with in this specific vote. That's all that CNN is trying to gauge. It's not a pollster's responsibility to "get the the root" of every issue during every poll.
In any case, polling on individual sub-components of the bill is silly. The people that wrote the bill no doubt had the give on some issues in order to take on others. For example, without the individual mandate, perhaps premiums would be so high (since healthy people may opt out of insurance), that outlawing denials for pre-existing conditions would be too expensive. Yes, when presented with a choice of something in a vacuum that sounds good, most people will favor it; but that doesn't mean that it's practical in real life.
I see nothing inherently wrong with this poll; other than perhaps that you don't like the result.
20 Jan 11
Originally posted by twhiteheadHoorah, you're correct t, polls generally cost money to run and there's no way people want to pay for a poll that isn't going to give them a result they're looking for.
You shouldn't be. You should maintain a healthy skepticism towards all polling as polls are frequently riddled with bad methodologies, errors, incorrect conclusions from the data, biased pollsters etc.
20 Jan 11
Originally posted by WajomaHoorah, you're correct, police generally cost money to run and there's no way people want to pay for police that isn't going to give them a result they're looking for.
Hoorah, you're correct t, polls generally cost money to run and there's no way people want to pay for a poll that isn't going to give them a result they're looking for.
Do you think my adaptation of your post is true, Wajoma? Remember, the money is ethnically distributed.
20 Jan 11
3 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderScrap the individual mandate and who's going to pay for all the great stuff like insuring 26 year old "children" and banning denials for pre-existing conditions?
Scrap the individual mandate and repeal supporters would probably be around a 1/3 at most.
The individual mandate is an integral component because it forces healthy people to buy insurance and thus subsidize the sick and the older "children" with no jobs.
Scrap the individual mandate and it's time to start over.
20 Jan 11
Originally posted by sh76BS. Even without the mandate the vast majority are going to purchase insurance esp. with the generous subsidies the bill provides. The idea that healthy people are going to try and game the system by waiting until they get very sick (and thus potentially incurring thousands of dollars of costs they'll have to pay as well as denying themselves preventative care) to buy insurance is absurd and contrary to human nature. People are heavily risk aversive and desire certainty and stability. If people really were as cold bloodedly calculating as the supporters of the mandate claim, the relatively minor financial penalties of the mandate wouldn't persuade them to buy insurance anyway.
Scrap the individual mandate and who's going to pay for all the great stuff like insuring 26 year old "children" and banning denials for pre-existing conditions?
The individual mandate is an integral component because it forces healthy people to buy insurance and thus subsidize the sick and the older "children" with no jobs.
Scrap the individual mandate and it's time to start over.
20 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76So maybe the GOP could get the ball rolling now with their most excellent alternative way to provide the funding so that everyone can afford health insurance. Then, before we scrap the existing plan, we could compare their awesome new plan with the existing one and then decide which one is better.
Scrap the individual mandate and who's going to pay for all the great stuff like insuring 26 year old "children" and banning denials for pre-existing conditions?
The individual mandate is an integral component because it forces healthy people to buy insurance and thus subsidize the sick and the older "children" with no jobs.
Scrap the individual mandate and it's time to start over.
20 Jan 11
Originally posted by MelanerpesFabulous idea.
So maybe the GOP could get the ball rolling now with their most excellent alternative way to provide the funding so that everyone can afford health insurance. Then, before we scrap the existing plan, we could compare their awesome new plan with the existing one and then decide which one is better.
20 Jan 11
Originally posted by no1marauderI never said anything about gaming the system. But if premiums continue to skyrocket and insurance companies are forced to subsidize people with pre-existing conditions and 26 year olds who live with their parents, there's going to come a point where going without insurance may be a sound actuarial decision for a healthy working 27 year old. If those people drop out of the system and stop subsidizing sick people, you have to find another way to pay for all the goodies. The "relatively minor financial penalties" will, by definition, affect people on the margin, or there would be no point in having them in the first place.
BS. Even without the mandate the vast majority are going to purchase insurance esp. with the generous subsidies the bill provides. The idea that healthy people are going to try and game the system by waiting until they get very sick (and thus potentially incurring thousands of dollars of costs they'll have to pay as well as denying themselves preventativ ...[text shortened]... ively minor financial penalties of the mandate wouldn't persuade them to buy insurance anyway.
20 Jan 11
Originally posted by MelanerpesI'm not interested in speaking for the GOP on this issue. Personally, I'm happy to see a robust public option. I've advocated allowing everyone to sign up for Medicare, with a sliding premium scale based on income. I'm coming at Obama from the left on this one, in some sense.
So maybe the GOP could get the ball rolling now with their most excellent alternative way to provide the funding so that everyone can afford health insurance. Then, before we scrap the existing plan, we could compare their awesome new plan with the existing one and then decide which one is better.
But the issue here is whether Obamacare is severable into its parts and whether they can each exist in a vacuum. They plainly cannot.