Gallup: Congressional approval drops sharply
posted at 8:48 am on October 7, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
In the spring, Congress enjoyed a spike in approval, hitting a six-year high of 39% as Democrats took control of the agenda and promised economic recovery. Just six months later, that spike has completely dissipated, according to Gallup. Approval has dropped 18 points to its lowest rating since January, and ten points in a month:
Americans’ approval of the job Congress is doing is at 21% this month, down significantly from last month’s 31% and from the recent high of 39% in March.
Congressional approval rose sharply in the months after President Obama’s inauguration, from 19% in January to 31% in February and 39% in March. Approval then began to slip gradually, dipping to 31% by the end of the summer, before falling precipitously in October. Given the current 21% reading, it appears that any “honeymoon” period for the 111th Congress has eroded.
Approval of Congress today is significantly below the average 36% rating found across the past two decades.
In fact, it’s close the the approval rating in 2006, which resulted in Republicans losing control of both chambers in the midterm elections. This time, however, the decline comes mainly from Democrats. Gallup notes that Democratic approval of Congress had been at a majority since March and peaked at 63% in May. Last month, 54% of Democrats approved of the job Congress was doing. Now it’s at 36%, a precipitous 18-point drop.
What has caused disillusionment among Democrats? Gallup suggests that the failure to move health-care overhaul legislation has caused disillusionment among the party faithful. That certainly makes sense, but it could also be that the legislation itself has become less popular as its details get made public. Rasmussen, polling likely voters rather than adults, shows Democratic support for ObamaCare dropping to 56%. Most likely, it’s a combination of both, and perhaps some effect of the upcoming cap-and-trade legislation may be part of that mix, too. Gallup needs to test on those questions in its next poll.
If Democrats are watching the polls for a hint at next year’s midterms, they should take note of a seven-point drop among independents from last month too, from 23% approval to 16%. In March, 34% of independents approved of Congress’ performance, and it remained in the 30s through June. That was when the CBO finally began scoring ObamaCare proposals, and the effect has been a predictable flight of independents from Democratic efforts since. The 16% approval rating is slightly more than half the support independents gave Democrats four months ago.
Democrats may be disillusioned in part by Democratic futility, but independents have been disillusioned by the radical nature of the Democrats. That won’t get fixed by forcing that radical legislation down our throats, and their flight makes the upcoming midterms look very difficult for Democrats.
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 Next »
If by some miracle Nan get defeated in the next election, can’t you just see her on Dancin’ With The Stars doin the chacha? Reid of course will go back to being an undertaker.
Kissmygrits on October 7, 2009 at 9:42 AM
I can’t for the life of me seem to recall what party Madoff supported which may have seen it to their benefit to turn a blind eye…?
Hmmmm….
mankai on October 7, 2009 at 9:42 AM
No chance of that happening. She’s from a very liberal district and is wildly popular with her constituents.
She truly does represent them.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 9:43 AM
Every news story or proponent of anything from this administration of felons makes the hair stand up on my neck, because I know, now, that it is some sort of new scam they are trying to push through to screw us with.
Cybergeezer on October 7, 2009 at 9:45 AM
I think really its their arrogance people are sick and tired of…the “better than you”, “you don’t know what’s good for you”, attitude. Elected officials shouldn’t also aren’t put in the office to lavish themselves with perks and their special interests with pork, either. We didn’t put them on a pedestal, we put them in an office to do a job.
scalleywag on October 7, 2009 at 9:46 AM
Yes, the government dictating to people, business and medical professionals what they should do and how to do it is radical.
It’s not the government’s job parent people.
darwin on October 7, 2009 at 9:47 AM
Congressional approval was so low the last time I saw any figures, that if it has “dropped sharply”, it must be near zero, which is totally appropriate!
GFW on October 7, 2009 at 9:47 AM
I think they are not used to people scrutinizing them. They have been blah-blahing to one another, in a vacuum, really for years. Nobody cared.
However, the crash changed that. People are paying attention.
And they obviously don’t have good skills at talking to their voters, except in campaign-speak, which is all hubba-hubba stuff.
They have failed absolutely miserably in talking straight to people, with the exception of some.
They are also letting the media set the agenda for them. That is stupid.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 9:48 AM
No, it’s really not. States now regulate the industry, and they frankly aren’t doing it well. That’s obvious. Seriously, we have a huge problem with insurance companies practicing absolutely deceptive practices right now. Unbelievable. I don’t think we’ve seen this type of insurance scams since the 1930′s.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 9:51 AM
As I reminded my Liberal brother recently; Democrats took over control of our government in 2006. Their track record started some (3) years ago. When Democrats took over control of both houses in 2006, unemployment was hovering around 4.7%. Americans tend to be focused on their own lives and what is going on within their own homes, while trusting government to do it’s job and stick within certain guide lines. When Americans see lay-offs taking place across the board, fear starts to set in. This seems to make most Americans more focused on governments roll in everything. With Democrats taking over portions of the private sector, appointing non elected czars to oversee portions of the private sector, while paying cronies huge amounts of our tax payer dollars… Calling us childish names and accusing us of racism isn’t going to help these losers at election time either.
If the GOP is smart, they will start to run on a platform that includes drilling for our own oil, mining for our own natural gas, coal, and every other source of homegrown energy available including nuke plants.
Keemo on October 7, 2009 at 9:51 AM
Yup. Virginia is not stupid. Also Deeds looks like a doofus.
nyx on October 7, 2009 at 9:52 AM
Just for fun I thought I would share this with all of you. The picture of Nancy reminded me of it. AHHHH, if only.
The Pope and Nancy Pelosi are on the same stage in front of a huge crowd. The Madame Speaker and The Pope, however, have seen it all before.
To make it a little more interesting, Madame Speaker says to the Pope, “Did You know that with just one little wave of my hand I can make every
Democrat in the crowd go wild?”
He doubts it, so she shows him.
Sure enough, the wave elicits rapture and cheering from every democrat in the crowd. Gradually, the cheering subsides.
The Pope, not wanting to be outdone by such a level of arrogance, considers what he could do…….”That was impressive, the Pope says,
“But did you know that with just one little wave of MY hand I can make many people in the crowd, and many around the world, go crazy with joy?
This joy will not be a momentary display like that of your subjects, but will go deep into their hearts, and they will forever speak of this day and rejoice.”
The speaker seriously doubts this, and says so. “One little wave of your hand and so many people will rejoice forever? Show me.”
So the Pope slapped her.
milwife88 on October 7, 2009 at 9:57 AM
Congressional Misrepresentation
I sense a bloodsport in our future, politically that is.
ted c on October 7, 2009 at 9:59 AM
They have been running on that platform. The problem is people don’t seem to notice how important domestic energy production is until gas hits 4 bucks a gallon.
It may take something as disastrous as crap-and-betrayed before people finally get it.
Doughboy on October 7, 2009 at 10:02 AM
LOL! That would be worth a Mass!
OldEnglish on October 7, 2009 at 10:07 AM
Oh baloney, insurance scams, are much more from the public side, scamming the insurance companies. Claiming things stolen or broken, or destroyed that never were. Even phony accidents.
You show me $1 million of an insurance company scamming people and I will show you $1 billion of the public scamming the insurance companies.
What deceptive practices…not insuring illegal’s?
Maybe reverse mortgages, or something like that.
But show me the scams from any of the top 5 companies…which handle about 90% of all the claims.
Links please….
right2bright on October 7, 2009 at 10:08 AM
Jeff from WI on October 7, 2009 at 9:15 AM
I keep thinking about what Yuri Bezmenov said: that the “true believers”, the ones who think communism is such a lovely idea, will be the ones lined up against a wall and shot when communism takes effect. They could be shown the evidence of stench over and over and never believe it, but when it happens to them they will be the fiercest attackers of the people who betrayed their trust. That’s why the communist powers-that-be (like Obama’s controllers, Soros and VAlerie Jarrett) will exterminate them first, before they have a chance to fight back.
Mankai, people like your folks need to hear what Obama’s lifelong cohorts have said from their own mouths. Like Glenn Beck’s audio recording of a guy speaking at the ACORN convention where Obama also said that ACORN would shape policy even before the inauguration. The guy said that in order to have revolutionary change in America we need a financial and foreign policy crisis that would kill the current foundations.
Then they need to read the Cloward-Piven plan and Alinsky’s tactics. They need to read “Prairie Fire” by Ayers, Dohrn, and comrades. They need to listen to Larry Grathwohl talk about Weathermen Underground. They need to hear George Soros’ claims to be God and the need to have America fail in the “war on terror” so capitalism will finally fall. They need to know that the rent-a-mob that pushes illegal immigration in their own hometown (as in the small town where I live) is funded by Soros.
I think it was Goebbels in Hitler’s regime who said that people will believe a big lie before they will believe a little one. I wonder if that’s because when a lie is so big there is just no way to hold someone’s attention long enough to let them see the gravity of what is before them. In 5 minutes or less, try to document just how putrid the whole Soros machine is. Can’t do it. Simplify it to a manageable length and they’ll say you don’t have proof. Give proof and they’ll say it’s too long.
My daughter’s AP goverment assignment was to come up with ways to increase voting. I say people who are incapable of earnestly researching and thinking will be the death of this nation. If people don’t have the stamina and will to see the iceberg in front of us then they should not be given the wheel. If we want to increase voting and still survive we’re going to need to do a major overhaul of education, media, and government accountability. Without those changes, America simply doesn’t have the will or stamina to preserve this nation.
justincase on October 7, 2009 at 10:09 AM
Then show them to me. I want to see a list of all these insurance companies engaging in unbelievable deceptive practices.
While you’re at it maybe you can point me to the list of people that are dying the in the streets because they don’t have health insurance.
Why are you so quick to blame insurance companies? The ones you should be angry at are the people who try to rip off insurance companies everyday with scams.
darwin on October 7, 2009 at 10:15 AM
Actually, the huge problem we have is jobs, something the liberals care NOTHING about and are doing NOTHING to remedy. When the Democrats lose their majorities it will be because they are doing nothing to ameliorate the highest unemployment since the Depression. They don’t even talk about helping private sector jobs… instead they focus on medical insurance. Yet the vast majority of American’s are happy with their medical insurance and don’t want the government to take it from them. Nor do they want some cr*ppy VA/Indian-Health-Services/British-NHS style health care. Ever wonder why so many Brits have crooked, discolored teeth? We’ll soon find out.
theCork on October 7, 2009 at 10:15 AM
Their approval rating dropping faster then Letterman’s pants.
Wade on October 7, 2009 at 10:16 AM
If Leno doesn’t use that one…
right2bright on October 7, 2009 at 10:17 AM
BTW, Mike Meyers in his Austin Powers movie wore that mouth piece as a dig at the excremental dental care available to most Brits. Of course VIPs get great preferential service, as do the wealthy who can travel for out of pocket care.
theCork on October 7, 2009 at 10:19 AM
We have 3 major class action suits going right now. One is against BC. I believe another one is Wellpoint. The facts of the cases involve being purged upon the insured actually filing a claim.
Here’s the one story I recall: A woman was in the middle of breast cancer treatment and was purged. The reason? She failed to disclose some condition on her application. However, the supposed failure involved a note written by her doctor in her file. He never discussed his thoughts with the patient. He never followed up on the supposed notion. She never had any idea that he even wondered about her having the condition.
That, by anyone’s standards, is absolutely outrageous practices on the part of the company.
There are some other cases that are equally ridiculous.
These are not fair business practices. They should be stopped.
Now, I do agree with R congresspeople who have discussed this type of problem and point out that a bill that focused on national regulation of the industry could be passed with solid bi-partisan support. We don’t need a huge reform bill to address this nonsense.
However, it absolutely needs to stop.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 10:19 AM
I have never believed that government can create jobs. They can seed programs, cut capital gains taxes, cut corporate taxes, etc., in hopes of stimulating the job markets.
But I’ve never really seen that there’s much correlation of any of those methods.
The public always clamours for it.
Having said that, understand I really don’t know zip about economics, particularly not on that level.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 10:22 AM
You’re talking about one or two cases out of millions of people that have health insurance. That is not indicative of a systemic problem and secondly you really don’t know the facts on each case.
I sincerely doubt there is a corporate mentality to screw they very people who provide a living for people who work for these insurance companies. Talk about buying into conspriacy theories.
“Yes! It’s those greedy insurance companies! You know, the ones who average about a 4% profit margin? Yeah, them! They’re trying to screw all their clients! Yeah, pretty soon they won’t have any clients left! That’ll teach those stupid people to deal with those really smart and dastardly insurance companies. Oh wait …”
darwin on October 7, 2009 at 10:27 AM
That breast cancer story is fake. You made the mistake of actually believing what Obama says. Here’s the story:
“The president’s second example was a Texas woman “about to get a double mastectomy when her insurance company canceled her policy because she forgot to declare a case of acne.” He said that “By the time she had her insurance reinstated, her breast cancer more than doubled in size.”
The woman’s testimony at the June 16 hearing confirms that her surgery was delayed several months. It also suggests that the dermatologist’s chart may have described her skin condition as precancerous, that the insurer also took issue with an apparent failure to disclose an earlier problem with an irregular heartbeat, and that she knowingly underreported her weight on the application.”
Fact-Check
Besides her lying on insurance forms, the woman eventually was treated successfully. Her story is nothing compared to those of retired vets I know who have to deal with the VA.
theCork on October 7, 2009 at 10:29 AM
And again: Liberals care nothing about fostering private sector jobs that drive the economy. Cutting capital gains, like JFK did, would help that issue.
theCork on October 7, 2009 at 10:31 AM
This isn’t an Obama tale. This is a CA lawsuit.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 10:31 AM
Dont look now, polling is saying opposition to healthcare is dropping-especially among seniors, light up the phoneboards people!
TheVer on October 7, 2009 at 10:33 AM
It’s a class action suit. I’ll go find the links. It’s really bad. Again, let me remind you guys that many good R congresspeople are NOT in the dark about these issues, either.
Their solutions are different. That’s all.
They agree. This type of practice must be stopped.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 10:33 AM
not that polling means jack, but if its positive they will jump on it
TheVer on October 7, 2009 at 10:33 AM
Wow. If it happened… she can sue? We won’t be able to sue the feds under a public option. We’ll just be screwed with no recourse.
theCork on October 7, 2009 at 10:37 AM
Yep, you’ve already convicted the insurance companies just because well … they’re an evil insurance company. Just like Nancy Pelosi said.
You automatically assume they’re guilty just because there’s a lawsuit.
Additionally, it was probably expanded to a class action because the lawyers can make more money by demanding a much bigger settlement.
Always follow the money. It’s all about the money.
darwin on October 7, 2009 at 10:39 AM
Here’s one article. It doesn’t cover the suit I referred to, but I’ll keep looking.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/insurance/2007-01-28-insurance-1a-usat_x.htm
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 10:40 AM
We won’t need the ability to sue under the public option because the democrats/communists will have everything perfect. I hear in Europe when you get a colonoscopy rainbows shoot out of your a$$ for days afterward. It’s just wonderful!
darwin on October 7, 2009 at 10:41 AM
Ann, as opposed to having a few bad anecdotes to report, if you lived in Britain and experienced their public option, you’d have systemic failures to report.
New stories every day
theCork on October 7, 2009 at 10:42 AM
It’s really great to hear that we can actually still sue under our system. In public health systems, there’s no ability to sue. What a heart-warming fact. And we can also choose different insurance providers! Choice, what a grand thing that is. Thanks, Ann, you’ve helped remind me why our system is so superior.
theCork on October 7, 2009 at 10:45 AM
There are too many suits to dig that story out. It was on the radio news.
But here’s a link to a host of articles on this issue.
http://attorneypages.com/hot/toc_684.htm
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 10:45 AM
No, this is a systemic problem right now. When I googled? Omigosh, it’s not just in CA. There are pending class action lawsuits in every state.
I personally think that insurance companies should be required to investigate applications prior to claims being filed and before a single premium is accepted.
Anything short of that constitutes bad faith business practices.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 10:47 AM
Right, the radio news which reported Obama’s speech. You know, the one that was chock-a-block full of fake facts.
theCork on October 7, 2009 at 10:49 AM
Again, this wasn’t an Obama story. It wasn’t the acne deal at all.
This was a round-up news on CA lawsuits with major insurers here. It had nothing to do with reform at all.
Sorry that I can’t find the specific story. The condition wasn’t related to her actual claim. I do remember that.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 10:52 AM
A systemic problem means system-wide failure. Since the vast majority of people in the US are happy with their medical care, we cannot, by definition, have systemic failure. In Britain, the vast majority are UNHAPPY with their medical care. That is systemic failure.
theCork on October 7, 2009 at 10:52 AM
off to work, stay well!
theCork on October 7, 2009 at 10:53 AM
I think it has to do with all the private policies being sold right now.
Read about the practices. I have no problem with the companies investigating true fraud. But the practice of purging after-the-fact simply isn’t right. Investigate BEFORE you accept premiums.
That’s only fair to consumers. Wouldn’t you agree?
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 10:54 AM
Defeated? Hell, they should go to jail.
Mr. Grump on October 7, 2009 at 10:57 AM
Great point! Gotta love them fundament rainbows! TTFN
theCork on October 7, 2009 at 10:57 AM
I don’t get it…this is an argument for the insurance company. They are asking for the doctors to follow procedure so they won’t get ripped off. The insurance company is not the doctor, they are insuring the doctor and requesting the doctor to do his job.
Now, you do understand that, right? The insurance company is claiming that the doctor is in the wrong, the patient should be going after the doctor. Let the malpractice insurance company handle it.
Wow, I sure hope you are never on a jury panel…you just argued a point that the insurance company is doing their job, but should be held liable for doing their job.
Next time you are called for jury duty, hand them your post, you will be excused…
right2bright on October 7, 2009 at 10:58 AM
Whew*…..pretzel thinking.
She’s the insured. Not the doctor. And she was the one whom they denied care during breast cancer treatments.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 11:03 AM
That is an attorney’s advocate site…you don’t know much about class action suits do you?
Read up on them and see how insidious they are…now your responses make sense, well not make sense, but I see upon what your information is based on.
right2bright on October 7, 2009 at 11:03 AM
You don’t understand that it was the doctor who did the wrong and got her disqualified?
The insurance company had a procedure, the doctor did not report his finding so the insurance company did not have the correct information.
I will give you an example. Here is what I did yesterday…………
Now you tell me what I did yesterday. See if I don’t give you the information, you will not be able to know what I did.
The doctor did not tell the insurance….oh never mind, you won’t understand, or admit that you goofed.
right2bright on October 7, 2009 at 11:06 AM
In short, the states aren’t overseeing proper underwriting standards.
I suspect this is because of the proliferation of private policies. The industry burst out and implemented some very risky methods of underwriting, knowing that their state wouldn’t do much.
Now that it’s a national topic, they are in hot water. And they should be.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 11:07 AM
I followed your thinking, but legally I think you’re on the wrong track.
She sues the insurance company. If they have a problem with the doctor, then they have to work that out.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 11:08 AM
I didn’t finish my own thought.
She’s the one who paid the premium and thought she was insured. The liability is on the insurance company.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 11:09 AM
Google the topic. You guys are arguing with many solid Republicans on this one.
I think the issue of purging has been settled. It is a bad business practice, sloppy underwriting, and there’s no real defense.
It’ll stop, too. That’s one thing I’m optimistic about.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 11:11 AM
HELLO? Is this thing on? *Tap Tap* Is anyone home?
CynicalOptimist on October 7, 2009 at 11:12 AM
Why it appears as if they need a consultant to discuss their end of life choices.
Take a pill Dems, you’re a drag upon the society that foolishly elected you, as you thwart democracy and turn America into a Marxist wimp of a nation.
Don L on October 7, 2009 at 11:13 AM
I would rather be struck down with a lifetime case of bad farts before I would want to see this shrew on Dancing With The Stars!
pilamaye on October 7, 2009 at 11:13 AM
Is it just me, or does anyone else notice the resemblance between Reid in this picture and the male farmer in the “American Gothic” painting?
Dr. Charles G. Waugh on October 7, 2009 at 11:18 AM
Couldn’t have happened to a nicer bunch.
Yakko77 on October 7, 2009 at 11:19 AM
I hope Ann isnt allowed on any committees to fix any portion of our health care. Or any jury trials. Ever. Good gravy.
di butler on October 7, 2009 at 11:20 AM
lol, actually, I see her becoming Queen member of Code Pink.
bridgetown on October 7, 2009 at 11:20 AM
Here’s your real argument.
The problem I point out doesn’t require a huge reform bill. It can be addressed through a small reform bill that really would get bi-partisan support at this point.
Nobody wants to see people jerked around right when they are fighting cancer or whatever. That’s insane.
But it doesn’t require a public option to fix. LOL*
There’s the commonsense response.
The next big issue is pre-existing conditions. Same thing. Either we make insurance companies knock that off, or we offer a plan through the government.
Right now, if you have really serious medical issues, you’re pretty much out of luck. You’re stuck with underinsurance via Medicaid.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 11:24 AM
Its comforting to know that the most powerful member of the Legislative branch, and 2nd in line to the Oval Office, is fully supported by those who practice public scrotum inflation.
BobMbx on October 7, 2009 at 11:27 AM
I’m sorry, could someone please refresh my memory and tell me what Dubya’s lowest numbers were?
oldleprechaun on October 7, 2009 at 11:27 AM
So Medicaid practices the same cost-saving measures as those evil private insurers?
Medicaid is evil.
BobMbx on October 7, 2009 at 11:30 AM
Saw on Greta last night that Rep. Shaddeg found in the Waxman healthcare bill that Dems are granting insurance companies absolute immunity under State law for any wrongdoing that would result in civil litigation, such as wrongfully denying claims resulting in death. This is via ERISA laws. So I guess AnninCa is opposed to the Dem healthcare reform plan, right, since it would benefit the big, bad insurance companies? Too bad, so sad for the general public.
txmomof6 on October 7, 2009 at 11:31 AM
Low 30′s, IIRC.
BobMbx on October 7, 2009 at 11:31 AM
That’s the real discussion, in my opinion. Yes, the price-setting methods really do limit people.
That’s the legitimate concern. BUT, I’m still not quite sure I agree that’s a deal-breaker. If you’re stuck without an employer, and a lot of people are, you might still prefer that restricted insurance over some bogus private policy that plays games if you should actually dare to file a claim.
Isn’t that the real debate going on?
I think a lot of people trust their insurance, but then they are shocked when they actually try to use it.
That’s the crummy part of this entire story.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 11:39 AM
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 11:41 AM
Want my real opinion? She was elected by her peers because she’s a woman. Then she completely blew off all complaints that there was sexism galore in the primaries.
I have zip respect for her. Zip.
And they should not have that far-left representative in charge.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 11:43 AM
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 10:19 AM
This happened to my friend also. Only she had an appeal hearing and somebody in the group noticed that her doctor had only speculated that since her dad had glaucoma she might need to be checked for it regularly. Like the case you cited, she had never been told anything about it. Her doctor had just made a note to himself about it. But the insurance company tried to say that she knew she was at increased risk for glaucoma and didn’t inform them when she applied for the insurance.
If healthcare records are made accessible by anybody and everybody, insurance companies won’t have the excuse that pre-existing conditions weren’t revealed in the application for coverage. If they (or a government option) are required to cover everybody I would imagine it would end up in high premiums for anybody whose doctor seriously considered what could be causing various symptoms.
Perhaps if insurance companies were required to have a list of things they ASK on their applications regarding pre-existing conditions so that a person would be guilty if they specifically LIED about a question, it would eliminate the “fishing expedition” style of getting rid of people they don’t want to cover any more.
Just switching to a government option would just mean the government would charge an arm and a leg for insurance based on the same kind of corrupt practices.
Somebody on Glenn Beck’s radio show a while back suggested a sign for a Tea Party that would say:
“The compassion of the IRS, the efficiency of the Post Office, the effectiveness of Katrina. And you want the government to run healthcare?”
justincase on October 7, 2009 at 11:52 AM
A lot of that investigation is the trust the insurance company puts in the consumer to tell the truth in the application. It would be ridiculous to have to spend thousands to investigate each application.
Tell the truth … that’s only fair to the company who agrees to insure you.
darwin on October 7, 2009 at 11:52 AM
Dentists Recommend
Sugary gum to patients
More than they like Nan…
Haiku Guy on October 7, 2009 at 11:52 AM
Excellent post. I copied it all, so people would reread it.
I agree, that’s the danger. If we turn the page on the current trust level people have in Medicare, then we’ve turned the page forever.
And that IS the danger with the proposals on the floor right now.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 12:07 PM
I couldn’t disagree with you more, Darwin.
Either conduct your pre-signing with good faith….
Or get out of the business of underwriting.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 12:08 PM
BTW, that’s the only part I don’t agree with you on. I like the postal service.
I thought Katrina was a disaster with FEMA because Bush had not paid attention to infrastructure support. I don’t know why he did that, other than to cut costs for his tax cut during a war.
I disagreed with Bush mostly on that. You have to pay for war. Legitimately.
He got caught trying to fund it through taking too many risks by cutting Federal programs.
I think if gov’t implements a program, then it must be funded and supported. Otherwise, cut the program entirely.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 12:17 PM
Just the ugly factor could probably account for that.
infidel4life on October 7, 2009 at 12:17 PM
OK, I’m shallow: It makes my heart glad that super-rich Nancy Pelosi looks like she oiled her face before going on camera. Ick.
alice on October 7, 2009 at 12:20 PM
I was not sure it was even possible to get lower than they were, in approval.
Aren’t these guys due for a dead cat bounce or something?
rogersnowden on October 7, 2009 at 12:21 PM
No, it’s really not. States now regulate the industry, and they frankly aren’t doing it well. That’s obvious. Seriously, we have a huge problem with insurance companies practicing absolutely deceptive practices right now. Unbelievable. I don’t think we’ve seen this type of insurance scams since the 1930’s.
AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 9:51 AM
So the answer to 50 governments failing at manipulating health insurance is to bring in a 51st?
BTW, I’m sure the feds will do as good a job with health care as they did with the housing market.
18-1 on October 7, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Remember the case of 0bama’s grandmama, who was securing health insurance while unpacking from a trip to see her son-in-law that she cut short because of stomach pains. Gee-haw-golly, it turned out to be stomach cancer!
The reason she had such a fight is because the insurance company made a reasonable guess that she had gotten a diagnosis back in Indonesia (stomach pains could be an ulcer, and ulcers are not worth cutting a trip short for) and was being less than truthful when applying for US insurance.
Quite often, we are seeing one side of the story. The woman in that claim may have had a reasonable suspicion of having that condition when she applied for insurance, or something could have happened that triggered a “fraud flag.” In any case the appeal and the suit can sort that out.
Sekhmet on October 7, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Actually, FEMA has pre-positioned post Katrina supplies before the hurricane hit, and outside of Louisiana and especially New Orleans, did about a good a job as government can in handling the aftermath of such a disaster.
Of course, some “racists” might claim that with Louisiana infamous for “misappropriating” infrastructure funds this might explain the results differing by state without having to blame Bush – but those fuddy duddies are no fun.
18-1 on October 7, 2009 at 12:36 PM
Hey nanzi botox,
Your ratings are lower than Boooosh’s!
Surprise!
Mangy Scot on October 7, 2009 at 1:01 PM
Local governments and state government are first in line over the FEDERAL government to respond to local emergencies. It was the EPIC failure of the mayor and the governor to not get New Orleans evacuated properly before Katrina. They had PLENTY of warning. Amtrak trains left partially empty right before the storm. School buses were left there, never even put to use to get people to higher ground.
Bush has staged FEMA in pre-storm position, but the feds are NOT allowed to go into an emergency until after the fact and declared by the governor. That particular governor was too damn stupid to find her own behind with her hands, how could she handle that emergency. And that mayor was unbelievably stupid, not to mention corrupt.
Katrina was a perfect example of how the government is badly run and unable to handle large scale emergencies. And these fools (democrats), want the government to run health care??!!!
ACK!!!!!!!!!!!
And then you mention Bush “cut” FEMA funding. Link please. I don’t believe the actual $$ amount was cut from year to year funding. It is entirely possible the size of the INCREASED funding could have been cut, but actual $$ cut? I don’t think so.
karenhasfreedom on October 7, 2009 at 1:15 PM
I *heart* wilwife!!!
Laura in Maryland on October 7, 2009 at 1:18 PM
Well obviously they didn’t poll me because my rating would have been a minus quantity. Largest collection of out of touch dolts in history.
jeanie on October 7, 2009 at 1:19 PM
This Astroturfy, un-American talk reminds me of the scary rhetoric I used to hear in the ’70s in San Francisco. It’s so bad, it makes my eyes bug out of my head.
HAnthonyWayne on October 7, 2009 at 1:25 PM
It always amazes me how some people believe in politicians who live to lie to your face and thinking their interested in fixing a problem that they’ve created in the first place.
chickasaw42 on October 7, 2009 at 1:42 PM
Problem is, disliking Congress, and disliking the specific human being that represents my district, are two very different things.
.
wkgdyw on October 7, 2009 at 1:53 PM
Hey anybody remember those photos of Nagin’s Navy during Katrina? Hundreds of unused school buses… unused by the mayor of NO, Nagin? Government efficiency at its most visual.
But back on topic: This Democratic-led congress is less popular than a fart in the face. Farms throughout California are being seized, farmers bankrupted because of this Congress-created dustbowl.
theCork on October 7, 2009 at 2:00 PM
Is that a joke? Here’s an idea….if you’re concerned about getting purged down the road for committing insurance fraud….DON’T COMMIT INSURANCE FRAUD!
You truly are an idiot, aren’t you?
xblade on October 7, 2009 at 2:00 PM
You thought? BS. You don’t think about anything, you simply parrot what some other idiot has fed to you.
xblade on October 7, 2009 at 2:10 PM
As much as I hate to say this….Ann does have a point.
When my wife filled out an application for health insurance, it asked her to list every medical issue going back 10 years. That is just begging to omit something as nobody can possibly remember every medical event over a decade. And if some day – God forbid – my wife gets sick, the insurance company can point to a dr appt she had in 2001 for the flu that she didn’t disclose and drop her from the policy.
While I am 100% opposed to the public option, things like that need to be overhauled.
angryed on October 7, 2009 at 2:24 PM
Hopefully, after pushing policies that guarantee unemployment, Nancy and Harry will have the opportunity to experience it. If not, I’m writing California and Nevada off as lost causes.
jimmy2shoes on October 7, 2009 at 2:48 PM
CA Lawsuit. Nuff ‘Ced
Wade on October 7, 2009 at 2:51 PM
Most “ethical and clean”, scrubbed down, Congress, ever.
Schadenfreude on October 7, 2009 at 3:16 PM
When it gets to zero or below, let me know. Otherwise it means nothing.
Cybergeezer on October 7, 2009 at 4:07 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »