Rasmussen: GOP now more trusted on health care than Democrats
posted at 1:55 pm on August 13, 2009 by Allahpundit
For the first time in more than two years. Change:
Democrats held a four-point lead on the issue last month and a 10-point lead in June. For most of the past two years, more than 50% of voters said they trusted Democrats on health care. The latest results mark the lowest level of support measured for the party on the now-contentious issue.
Public support for the health care reform plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats has fallen to a new low with just 42% of U.S. voters now in favor of it. That’s down five points from two weeks ago and down eight points from six weeks ago.
Overall, Republicans lead Democrats in terms of voter trust on eight out of 10 key issues for the second consecutive month, and the two are tied on one issue.
Among those eight out of 10: Social security and education, which suggests the backlash is no longer isolated to ObamaCare but is spreading to the whole statist Great Society agenda. And yet … something in the way of health-care reform is guaranteed to pass, whether in the form of a public option or a “co-op” with government oversight a la Fannie/Freddie, and once it does the federal role is bound to expand over time until even the conservative agenda incorporates it as a political fact of life. (Just as it’s done with, er, social security and education.) To see what that portends for the future of the GOP, check out the abuse Daniel Hannan’s taking from British conservatives for daring to warn Americans that national health care is a clusterfark waiting to happen. Quote from Tory leader David Cameron: “I support the NHS 100% and the Conservative Party supports the NHS 100%.” With the British public having been weaned for decades on “free” health-care, he has no choice but to take that line, really; radical change in the form of a return to private health-care would be even more explosive than the GOP pushing privatization of social security. Result: Bipartisan British “consensus” that socialized medicine is the truth, the way, and the light. I’m looking forward to it here circa 2040.
Here’s Hannan on last night’s Hannity, refusing to quiet down.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4
They weight their sample to reflect likely voters.
The other’s on RCP use registered voters or all.
It has nothing to do with being an outlier.
jhffmn on August 13, 2009 at 3:50 PM
What small business would that be? You say you’re “self-insuring” your 22 employees? Do you also provide a 401K plan? Do you match their contributions? You must be doing very well with a very high profit margin. Are you incorporated? Gosh, I have a ton of questions for you. It’s not often you run into a liberal small business owner.
Rod on August 13, 2009 at 3:57 PM
Allah I truly hope you are wrong and this dies a complete death. Lets put a stake in it. Socialized health care just does not work.
dogsoldier on August 13, 2009 at 4:00 PM
My God, Allah…you act as if all this is a fait accompli. Or however you say it. I am not so sure. Whatever is voted on, it will not come to fruition until about 2013 and it would seem to me that leaves sometime to undo or mitigate it.
Terrye on August 13, 2009 at 4:06 PM
For what its worth…a case study from the 1990′s.
In the early 90′s the gov’t forced HC providers to accept reimbursements on medicare/medicaid based on DRG’s (diagnostic related groups). The gov’t calculated a “fair” premium charge that they would be willing to pay based on an individual diagnosis. Each DRG has a specific standard of care with expectations…such as procedure, treatment, length of stay, etc. The amount the gov’t paid averaged around 20% to 30% under the “true” cost of providing the care. For example, the procedure costs $100, the gov’t was willing to $70. HC providers had two choices: close their doors or pass the cost on to private insurers. Some providers did close, others passed on the cost. So now private insurance carriers were paying $130 for the $100 procedure.
Then around mid 90′s the private insurance carriers went back to the providers (in most cases) and basically said what’s good for the gov’t is good for us and re-negotiated HC costs by DRG. This forced the providers to cut costs. At first, providers did this by cutting non-clinical services and employees. Eventually, they had to cut clinical specialities and closed medical units and hospital wings.
Gov’t forced the costs down, but services were also cut creating several voids in health care in areas of the country that were least able handle the cuts. The private insurance carriers then had to contract services to fill the void which negated any real cost savings to the system.
No conclusions here, just thought it was an interesting point. I can only imagine what will be cut by providers to meet any single-payer demands. Technology did help some back in the 90′s in reducing length of stays and less invasive surgey created quicker recovery, but the motivation to invent back then was supported by a healthy economy and a pro-capitalist gov’t.
just say’n.
jbh45 on August 13, 2009 at 4:07 PM
hottieinthehouse:
If you really care, here is an overview of the GOP position on health care, there is more to it than tort reform.
Terrye on August 13, 2009 at 4:11 PM
Sorry, the link did not go through. Here it is again.
Terrye on August 13, 2009 at 4:12 PM
Why are our republican/independent Senators and Congressmen so quiet? We some support. We need help. Where is our leadership?
Shack on August 13, 2009 at 4:31 PM
Speaking of whom, I miss Baldilocks. Baldi? Are you still around?
Mary in LA on August 13, 2009 at 4:34 PM
If your enemy is eviscerating himself, you don’t want to interrupt, lest he miss an vital organ.
-Or-
They could be spineless weenies.
ROCnPhilly on August 13, 2009 at 5:34 PM
Where can we find these 40 million people who can’t afford insurance? Here’s a hint, genius….choosing to spend your money on something else because you don’t want to pay for health insurance doesn’t mean you can’t afford it. It’s not a national crisis, or my responsibility to provide health insurance to people who choose to spend a couple hundred bucks a month on their cell phone plan instead of getting health insurance.
xblade on August 13, 2009 at 6:50 PM
Devastating!
Sapwolf on August 13, 2009 at 6:59 PM
Hannan’s days as a Euro MP are numbered.
He held up Iceland as an economic model for the world to follow. Iceland is now bankrupt.
I have experience with the NHS and $350 a month US insurance. The NHS does a great job considering how much it costs. Private insurance companies thrive in the UK because people who want the extras can pay for it but everyone in the UK can sleep well knowing that catastrophic disease or an accident will not cause their financial ruin.
Everyone is getting sick about the lies being propagated here and elsewhere about the NHS. Even Conservatives in the UK think the debate here in the US is getting stupid and it is sad that readers aren’t getting the facts or being fed straight up lies.
lexhamfox on August 13, 2009 at 8:35 PM
Rasmussen: GOP now more trusted on health care than Democrats
Why?
I’m a Republican and I don’t trust these guys to flush the toilet.
Dr. ZhivBlago on August 14, 2009 at 12:11 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4