Rasmussen: Opinions on ObamaCare hardening
posted at 1:36 pm on December 30, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Have recent revisions to ObamaCare in the Senate improved its standing with likely voters? According to the latest Rasmussen polling, not at all. And updating voters on the plan’s provisions make almost no difference at all:
Many have questioned whether those who favor or oppose the health care plan in Congress really know what’s in it. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey suggests that they have a decent understanding of the bill and that voter attitudes towards the legislation have hardened.
While several individual components of the plan are popular, reminding voters of what’s included in the plan has virtually no impact on support for the overall legislation. This suggests that there are not major surprises in the legislation that will cause people to change their opinion of it.
Thirty-nine percent (39%) of voters nationwide support the plan, and 58% are opposed. That’s consistent with our weekly tracking of the issue which has found support between 38% and 41% every week from just before Thanksgiving to the end of 2009.
However, the continuing debate over ObamaCare and its provisions are making a difference to some people … mostly state governors looking at gigantic unfunded mandates via Medicaid. It isn’t red-state governors doing all of the objecting, either:
The governors of the nation’s two largest Democratic states are leveling sharp criticism at the Senate health care bill, claiming that it would leave their already financially strapped states even deeper in the hole.
New York Democratic Gov. David Paterson and California GOP Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger are urging congressional leaders to rework the Medicaid financing in the Senate-passed bill, warning that under that version their states will be crushed by billions in new costs.
After the Senate passed the bill in a Christmas Eve vote, Paterson said the expansion would leave New York $1 billion in the lurch. The state faces a $6.8 billion budget shortfall heading into the 2010 fiscal year.
“[I] am deeply troubled that the Senate version of the bill worsens what was already an inequitable situation for New York and I will continue to be an advocate on behalf of New Yorkers to ensure we are treated fairly by this critical federal legislation,” Paterson said in a statement.
The Governator says that he’s shocked, shocked! to find that he’s been misled on cost-shifting to the states:
“When asked for my support, I was assured that federal legislation would not increase costs to California or include new unfunded mandates,” Schwarzenegger wrote. “Unfortunately, under nearly every scenario we can predict, the federal health care reform legislation being debated would cost California’s General Fund an additional $3 billion to $4 billion annually.”
Harry Reid would tell Arnold that he should have had more competent Senators lining up at the trough. No one should be surprised in the least to see states get slammed with additional Medicaid costs, though, least of all the governors who acted as cheerleaders for ObamaCare all year long. The Medicaid expansion was a key part of every plan Democrats advanced, and we consistently warned that states would wind up bearing a large part of the cost as a means to get better scoring from the CBO.
Voters seem to understand that. For Paterson, Schwarzenegger, and other ObamaCare cheerleading governors who find themselves suddenly aware of billions in unfunded mandates, I’ll award the final 2009 Captain Louis Renault award: