Can Dems salvage their standing in ObamaCare debacle?

posted at 2:20 pm on March 16, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

That’s going to be the question this week, and for the rest of the year, and a new survey from Barack Obama’s own pollster says … maybe.  John Anzalone did polling for Obama’s presidential campaign, back when he got much better numbers than he and his party see today, and says that only 35% of voters in swing districts support the ObamaCare proposal.  With Democratic “education” efforts on the issue, that number rises to 51%, but that presumes that no one else is talking:

A survey conducted across vulnerable Dem districts shows most voters warm to the proposal once they learn more about it, according to a copy of a memo obtained from Capitol Hill and political sources. Included in the poll were 92 districts held by Frontline Dems and Blue Dogs, districts where Dem incumbents would feel the most heat for supporting the legislation.

Dems will target white middle-aged voters, white women under 65 and white married women. Those groups respond most positively when Dems explain what is in the bill, pollsters found.

The poll, conducted by prominent Dem pollster John Anzalone, who conducted some polling for Pres. Obama during the ’08 campaign, shows a plurality of voters currently oppose the health care bill; just 35% of swing voters favor the bill based on what they know about it. But when they hear more about it, 51% of all voters, and 50% of swing voters support the measure.

Dems should focus on provisions of the bill that require coverage even if someone has a pre-existing condition, and on a provision that requires members of Congress to have the same coverage as other Americans, Anzalone writes in the polling memo.

“Not only are they the most popular components of reform among voters overall, but also among key audiences, including seniors. Based on these results, any messaging in support of reform — to any audience — should prominently highlight these components,” Anzalone and pollster Matt Hogan wrote.

Yes, but they’re not the only components in the bill.  Democrats have already campaigned for almost a full year on these very points.  The problem for Democrats is that Republicans point out the other components of the ObamaCare debacle: individual mandates enforced through the IRS, government “comparative effectiveness” panels created to inform decisionmaking on treatments, deep Medicare cuts with the savings used to expand other entitlements, and spending, spending, spending.

Obama’s pollsters apparently “educated” these voters in a vacuum and presume that one will exist in the midterm elections.  That makes the 51% figure a pretty weak showing, and certainly not predictive of what will happen over the next seven months.  Another issue with this methodology: the survey was conducted for the labor unions, which calls into question what kind of “education” the respondents received.  It sounds very much like push polling, which again makes the 51% figure a rather poor result.

Of course, none of this comes into play if ObamaCare doesn’t pass.  This is one of the main arguments from Democratic leadership to wavering moderates, which is that the only way to get through to salvation is a half-mile through the sewer pipe, in a manner reminiscent of The Shawshank Redemption.  This poll seems designed specifically to bolster that argument, but if it convinces any Representatives to start down the sewer, they deserve their eventual escape from Congress.

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

Not when Obama is having police drag out a man from his speech yesterday by pretending he fainted.

uknowmorethanme on March 16, 2010 at 2:24 PM

Standing? What standing?

Rocks on March 16, 2010 at 2:24 PM

just 35% of swing voters favor the bill based on what they know about it. But when they hear more about it, 51% of all voters, and 50% of swing voters support the measure.

Wow. Even lying through their teeth barely garners support over the halfway mark. What a crappy bill.

LibTired on March 16, 2010 at 2:25 PM

quag·mire   /ˈkwægˌmaɪər,kwag-mahyuhr,
–noun

1.a situation from which extrication is very difficult

trubble on March 16, 2010 at 2:27 PM

So if PBHO is Warden Norton, and Pelosi is Captain Hadley, does that mean Reid has the role of Bogs?

Bishop on March 16, 2010 at 2:27 PM

no

katy on March 16, 2010 at 2:27 PM

Dems will target white middle-aged voters, white women under 65 and white married women. Those groups respond most positively when Dems explain what is in the bill, pollsters found.

I’m one of those middle-aged white married women, and so are all my friends, and we hate this bill and are mobilized to defeat anyone who votes for it.

rockmom on March 16, 2010 at 2:27 PM

Dems will target white middle-aged voters, white women under 65 and white married women. Those groups respond most positively when Dems explain what is in the bill, pollsters found.

The h#ll we do.

Wethal on March 16, 2010 at 2:28 PM

Yes, but they’re not the only components in the bill.

Another strategy is to point out the bad things that happen when this “good sounding” provisions are enacted.

MarkTheGreat on March 16, 2010 at 2:28 PM

The democrats have been exposed for what they really are … progressives, Marxists, Communists … whatever floats your boat. Too late to cover it up. Obama’s race to Utopia has been his undoing.

They may be able to still lie to a few folks, but the rest have figured them out.

darwin on March 16, 2010 at 2:29 PM

That whole “But, but, they LIKE certain elements in the bill” routine was the whole talking point over the weekend. Must have heard it three times on “This Week” and I usually skip over straight to the roundtable.

This is akin to saying that a car that only goes 25 MPH, gets 10mpg, and has no seat belts and bad brakes, of course people don’t like that car. But when asked if they liked the CD Player, plush seat covers, and GPS, why, yes, those were the things they liked about the car.

Doesn’t change the fact the whole thing is a pile of crap.

JamesLee on March 16, 2010 at 2:29 PM

the only way to get through to salvation is a half-mile through the sewer pipe

Let’s make that a thousand miles.

dont taze me bro on March 16, 2010 at 2:29 PM

Of course they can. By abandoning President Obama, and renouncing him and openly admitting that he was a fraud, he duped the public with the help of the media and his Presidency is a FAILURE.

Will they?

No.

portlandon on March 16, 2010 at 2:30 PM

So if PBHO is Warden Norton, and Pelosi is Captain Hadley, does that mean Reid has the role of Bogs?

Bishop on March 16, 2010 at 2:27 PM

Was Bogs one of the ‘sisters’…?

Seven Percent Solution on March 16, 2010 at 2:31 PM

Not when Obama is having police drag out a man from his speech yesterday by pretending he fainted.

uknowmorethanme on March 16, 2010 at 2:24 PM

uknowmorethanme:Rush is working on this!

A caller called in,and she mentioned this.Obama is speaking,
and you hear somebody yell something,next thing your hear is
Obama saying the guy or gal needs a medic!!

canopfor on March 16, 2010 at 2:31 PM

does that mean Reid has the role of Boggs?

Bishop on March 16, 2010 at 2:27 PM

I think that would be Rahm…the man that confronts people naked in the showers.

WashJeff on March 16, 2010 at 2:31 PM

Dems will target white middle-aged voters, white women under 65 and white married women. Those groups respond most positively when Dems explain what is in the bill, pollsters found.

I fit this criteria. Fat chance bozo’s. ;)

capejasmine on March 16, 2010 at 2:32 PM

quag·mire   /ˈkwægˌmaɪər,kwag-mahyuhr,
–noun

1.a situation from which extrication is very difficult

trubble on March 16, 2010 at 2:27 PM

My definition would be….a character on Family Guy, with Bill Clinton type tendencies. ;)

capejasmine on March 16, 2010 at 2:33 PM

I think Dick Morris was right on this last night. If this bill passes with only Democratic votes, the Democratic Party will OWN the health care system in the U.S. And it isn’t going to get better as a result of this bill; for most voters it is going to get worse, and fast. I believe there will be some massive layoffs at insurance companies and dropping of corporate coverage well before November. Suburban voters with jobs who have health insurance that they like now are only going to see it getting more expensive and have more trouble getting to see a doctor. Their parents are going to lose their Medicare Advantage plans.

In short, the swing voters who have already turned against Democrats in droves are going to be fighting mad by November, because this bill is going to screw them and they will know who is to blame. There is no way the Democrats can spin this to their advantage.

I predict that not only will this thing get repealed, but it will get repealed by the Democrats in a lame duck session right after the election.

rockmom on March 16, 2010 at 2:33 PM

Democrats Debaucherous Debauckle,er Debacle!
============================================

No,there screwed!!

And Obama is worse screwed!

canopfor on March 16, 2010 at 2:33 PM

Let’s see …

A dem pollster asks union and left leaning obamaboobs what they think about the “best” parts of the health care bill and the best they can come up with is 51% in favor of it?

Let’s pass this thing!

Mark Boabaca on March 16, 2010 at 2:35 PM

A survey conducted across vulnerable Dem districts shows most voters warm to the proposal once they learn more about it

What do the mean “learn”. Being fed dishonest talking points on an issue by issue basis?

forest on March 16, 2010 at 2:36 PM

There is no way the Democrats can spin this to their advantage.

rockmom on March 16, 2010 at 2:33 PM

Howabout that they made good on their bipartisanship pledge; albeit in opposition to this bill.

WashJeff on March 16, 2010 at 2:36 PM

I think that would be Rahm…the man that confronts people naked in the showers.
WashJeff on March 16, 2010 at 2:31 PM

You would be correct, an almost perfect match.

So Reid would have to be who, the perp who confessed to being the real killer of Dufresne’s wife and lover?

Bishop on March 16, 2010 at 2:36 PM

Of course they can. They have the vast majority of democrats who still are in orgasmic love with Obama, with a traitorous press that will do anything to spin Hell Care into a positive light for the dems.

Never underestimate the power of large groups of stupid people.

cntrlfrk on March 16, 2010 at 2:37 PM

What do the mean “learn”. Being fed dishonest talking points on an issue by issue basis?

forest on March 16, 2010 at 2:36 PM

They have people watch presentations on the bill.

WashJeff on March 16, 2010 at 2:37 PM

Delusions.

ted c on March 16, 2010 at 2:38 PM

Was Bogs one of the ’sisters’…?
Seven Percent Solution on March 16, 2010 at 2:31 PM

The leader.

Bishop on March 16, 2010 at 2:38 PM

“comparative effectiveness” panels

call them what they are ED == Death panels

unseen on March 16, 2010 at 2:38 PM

Democrats Little Bighorn,

with Hopey,as Custer!

canopfor on March 16, 2010 at 2:38 PM

Come on November!

GarandFan on March 16, 2010 at 2:38 PM

So Reid would have to be who, the perp who confessed to being the real killer of Dufresne’s wife and lover?

Bishop on March 16, 2010 at 2:36 PM

I think you nailed it…

Seven Percent Solution on March 16, 2010 at 2:39 PM

Can Dems salvage their standing in ObamaCare debacle?

What’s to salvage? The dems have firmly ensconced themselves in the pantheon of aspiring dictators, criminals, and juntas. They are attempting a coup d’etat, without any question, at all, and this will be remembered for a long, long, long time. Whether they pass this health scare or not is now beside the point, as the dems have irreparably broken our system. It’s only a matter of time until it all falls apart.

Honduras was a warning to America, and The Precedent’s ridiculous and insane attempt to help Zelaya complete his coup should have let Americans know what was coming down the pike for us. Well … it’s here.

neurosculptor on March 16, 2010 at 2:39 PM

The h#ll we do.

Wethal on March 16, 2010 at 2:28 PM

Of course you do. Nobody is “against” healthcare reform. The public is against Obamacare and all that comes with the state seizure of 1/6 of the economy with the clear intent to use the leverage from this windfall to push through even more radical legislation.

Women in the age demographic targeted are more likely to have empathy for the anecdotal stories and all the emotional crap that the left attaches to this issue. Wearing a dead sister’s dentures (even though dental coverage hasn’t ever been discussed) or mythical deaths due to untreated pre-existing conditions is par for the course.

But, here’s the rub. Even with “education” the filthy lying coward and his party can only barely muster 50% of the public in support when there is nobody out there factually challenging the rat bastard traitor on his claims. This is not legislation that should be allowed to make it into public because it clearly represents the views of the radicals in charge of the government and not the will of the American people.

highhopes on March 16, 2010 at 2:39 PM

Can Dems salvage their standing in ObamaCare debacle?

Yes, they could act like adults instead of spoiled children.

Chip on March 16, 2010 at 2:40 PM

So Reid would have to be who, the perp who confessed to being the real killer of Dufresne’s wife and lover?

Bishop on March 16, 2010 at 2:36 PM

Obama comes to mind actually since he is not the one that is going to directly suffer the consequences of his actions in 2010. But the warden probably makes more sense since he is the Prez.

WashJeff on March 16, 2010 at 2:40 PM

call your congressman. I just called the martinsville va office where unemployment in that area is at 20%. got answering machine but no room in mail box. then called charlottesville va (UVA) office & said NO.

keep calling. call the ones who have competition this november.

keep it up. the TEA partiers are there today, so they are the front line. keep calling.

kelley in virginia on March 16, 2010 at 2:41 PM

In the grand scheme of things, I remain unconvinced that it matters greatly who wins the congressional elections later this year, if Obamacare is passed into law. If it does, the Demotyrants will be emboldened to ram through some kind of cap and tax legislation, and amnesty. If they get away with engaging in procedural flim-flammery to pass ‘health care’, then they’ll use similar side-steps for everything else, as well. Whatever the outcome of the elections in November, there will not be enough Republicans to override an Obama veto, so repealing these legislative nightmares will not happen. Obama/Pelosi/Reid will have succeeded in the lefty Dems long-dreamed for big kick of America to left.

I’m finding this all so depressing that I can barely stand to follow the news this week.

ProfessorMiao on March 16, 2010 at 2:41 PM

Democrats really are looking at this with the equivalent of beer goggles. Because it helps “the poor” and “the uninsured” they think that politically it is unassailable. But those people are already Democratic voters living in solid Democratic districts. And those people won’t get their subsidized coverage for FOUR MORE YEARS. Meanwhile, the most immediate effects of the bill are going to be bad and they are going to disproportionatly hit suburban voters in swing districts. For every one unfortunate person who had been denied coverage due to a preexisting condition that now gets it and is grateful to the Democrats, there are going to be 100 that lose their coverage, and a handful that are going to lose their JOBS. Guess who those folks won’t vote for, ever, for the rest of their lives???

It blows my mind that Democrats cannot see this.

rockmom on March 16, 2010 at 2:43 PM

rockmom on March 16, 2010 at 2:33 PM

Most telling to me (per Drudge) is that the Dems are beginning to make noises that the vote in the House may not come before the Easter/Passover recess. If they are truly as close to victory as has been suggested by Pelosi and others, delay is an admission that they still don’t have the votes necessary to rahm this through on a party-line vote. I suspect backlash to the Slaughter Solution is also coming into play where some Dems would be able to weather the outrage from voting yes but not if the vote comes down to deeming it into law.

highhopes on March 16, 2010 at 2:44 PM

There he goes again in that pic, trying to show Nancy how to do The Bird (while he gives us the middle finger bird)

America, have you heard? I got a brand new dance and it’s called “The bird”
You don’t need no finesse or no personality, you just need two arms and an attitude.
And everybody sing with me, come on now!
Whawk! Hallelujah! Whoa!

Brat on March 16, 2010 at 2:45 PM

O/T: In the picture linked to this article, doesn’t Obama look like he’s competing in a farting contest?

Mark Boabaca on March 16, 2010 at 2:45 PM

quag·mire   /ˈkwægˌmaɪər,kwag-mahyuhr,
–noun

1.a situation from which extrication is very difficult

trubble on March 16, 2010 at 2:27 PM

Giggity…

Skywise on March 16, 2010 at 2:46 PM

highhopes on March 16, 2010 at 2:39 PM

Even if what you say is true, that will last only until their parents start losing their Medicare Advantage plans and see their premiums go up for everything else. Most women I know still have at least one parent living, and they are all having problems with Medicare already and terrified about this legislation. And that isn’t becuase they have been scared by Sarah Palin or Fox News. They know what is going on with Medicare, and so do their adult children.

rockmom on March 16, 2010 at 2:47 PM

Democrats really are looking at this with the equivalent of beer goggles. Because it helps “the poor” and “the uninsured” they think that politically it is unassailable.

rockmom on March 16, 2010 at 2:43 PM

I think you give the Democrats too much credit for doing this crap for well-intentioned reasons. I believe that this was never about healthcare reform but, rather, a vehicle for wealth redistribution by so tying the government to healthcare that virtually every one of their radical goals can be executed on the excuse of health-related reasons. Nancy Pelosi has even said this is gateway legislation.

highhopes on March 16, 2010 at 2:48 PM

Can Dems recover? It depends on the state and on the district. Pelosi won’t need to recover, she’s safe. Rosa DeLauro, my rep (unfortunately), will be fine. Will some Blue Dogs suffer? Absolutely. The Dims won’t see a universal ‘pass’ or ‘fail’ in the fall. It’s all in the hands of the folks they represent.

joejm65 on March 16, 2010 at 2:49 PM

Obama’s womanly leadership
==============================
http://www.imao.us/#008912

canopfor on March 16, 2010 at 2:50 PM

Dems will target white middle-aged voters, white women under 65 and white married women.

Isn’t that, ummmm, whats the word for it…….??

RACIST!

Chip on March 16, 2010 at 2:50 PM

The lefties smear anyone who disputes the Cult of Gaia as tools for the oil industry, yet this clown stands to reap tens of millions of dollars with his carbon trading business, yet he’s credible?

The lesson here is that the left always lies. Always.

NoDonkey on March 16, 2010 at 2:51 PM

The key here is that there ARE things which many Americans like… right up until they realize the price.

Obama is trying to sell this as a Free Lunch… but Americans KNOW that “There Aint No Such Thing as a Free Lunch” (TANSTASFL)…. someone, somewhere, always pays.

And the American people know it will be THEM, and their Children, who pay.

Romeo13 on March 16, 2010 at 2:52 PM

Isn’t that, ummmm, whats the word for it…….??

RACIST!

Chip on March 16, 2010 at 2:50 PM

And… SEXIST!

Romeo13 on March 16, 2010 at 2:52 PM

Kill the Bill
==============

http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=19508

canopfor on March 16, 2010 at 2:57 PM

The headline picture is great, but I still prefer this one.

LibTired on March 16, 2010 at 2:57 PM

Dems will target white middle-aged voters, white women under 65 50 and white UNmarried women.

Heck…. thats the pool of women I ask out for DATES!

Romeo13 on March 16, 2010 at 2:59 PM

I fit this criteria. Fat chance bozo’s. ;)

capejasmine on March 16, 2010 at 2:32 PM

Me too and…fat chance too.

NJ Red on March 16, 2010 at 3:00 PM

Obama’s pollsters apparently “educated” these voters in a vacuum and presume that one will exist in the midterm elections.

Push polling? Say it ain’t so, O!

Pablo on March 16, 2010 at 3:07 PM

Dems will target white middle-aged voters, white women under 65 and white married women. Those groups respond most positively when Dems explain what is in the bill, pollsters found.

I believe they are talking about the subset of these women who are fans of “The View” and think Joy Behar is the voice of reason.

Lily on March 16, 2010 at 3:08 PM

Those groups respond most positively when Dems explain what is in the bill, pollsters found.

Translation: Trust us, we’re gonna give all kinds of free stuff and it won’t cost anyone anything!!
(Skittle farting Unicorn optional equipment, your mileage may vary, see terms and conditions when you register to vote Democrat)

Chip on March 16, 2010 at 3:08 PM

The h#ll we do.

Wethal on March 16, 2010 at 2:28 PM

Their point, of course, is that women are either gullible or stooooopid. But they’ll tell you it’s because you’re so “compassionate”.

LibTired on March 16, 2010 at 3:09 PM

Heck…. thats the pool of women I ask out for DATES!

Romeo13 on March 16, 2010 at 2:59 PM

That’s blatentblue’s demographic also, although I don’t think he cuts ‘em off at 50.

thomasaur on March 16, 2010 at 3:12 PM

I was listening via internet to WJR this morning in Detroit and a woman called in, sounded like she was in that Demographic and said she was a RN. She was absolutely convinced that there was a “groundswell” of support for this bill and that anyone who voted against it would be voted out of office.
She was convinced. I think that is exactly what the yahoos in DC believe.
They will only recover if they pass another montrosity giving themselves power for life.

ORconservative on March 16, 2010 at 3:17 PM

I believe they are talking about the subset of these women who are fans of “The View” and think Joy Behar is the voice of reason.

Lily on March 16, 2010 at 3:08 PM

ROFL!!! If Joy Behar is the voice of reason, I’m Mother Theresa, reincarnated!

capejasmine on March 16, 2010 at 3:18 PM

Dems will target white middle-aged voters, white women under 65 and white married women. Those groups respond most positively when Dems explain what is in the bill, pollsters found.

I sure hope they target me cause then I can tell them how I really feel about this POS. I’m sure I’d be excluded once they hear how I feel.

Brat4life on March 16, 2010 at 3:23 PM

Does anybody trust anything that is now being done or polled?

Especially what our lying president is saying?

If you want to know the answer to your question — Trust is not a renewable resource. Nor is health care the only thing on the tea party menu … remember it was taxes, repressive taxes, that started the Revolution. When it was felt that the despotism of oppressive taxes too high, it spelled the end for British rule.

And what do you think running up debt so high it can never be repaid does to your economic freedom? Slavery by debt. Sound familiar?

tarpon on March 16, 2010 at 3:26 PM

I think you give the Democrats too much credit for doing this crap for well-intentioned reasons. I believe that this was never about healthcare reform but, rather, a vehicle for wealth redistribution by so tying the government to healthcare that virtually every one of their radical goals can be executed on the excuse of health-related reasons. Nancy Pelosi has even said this is gateway legislation.

highhopes on March 16, 2010 at 2:48 PM

Exactly. This has NEVER been about healthcare. This is about power over every aspect of our lives and keeping the democratic party in power for the foreseeable future.

Aviator on March 16, 2010 at 3:31 PM

Nobody is “against” healthcare reform.

highhopes on March 16, 2010 at 2:39 PM

There is very little healthcare reform that is actually good. Tort reform is another matter.

Even a law to not consider pre-existing conditions is very bad news. That pretty much requires everything else, because unless there is a law requiring otherwise, people will avoid insurance when they are healthy. That in turn will make insurance extremely expensive. Either people are required to recognize the dreadful risk they are taking by not having insurance, or everyone has to be mandated to have it.

pedestrian on March 16, 2010 at 3:31 PM

A survey conducted across vulnerable Dem districts shows most voters warm to the proposal once they learn more about it, according to a copy of a memo obtained from Capitol Hill and political sources.

I wonder if those voters are told:

They’ll lose their current health care plan

They’re going to pay more taxes

They’re going to pay taxes for four years before they see any benefits

Abortion will be funded with Federal Tax dollars

Adding millions of patients to the existing system (who will abuse it) will bring services to a crawl. Rationing will ensue.

Medicare will be cut in half and many doctors will opt out of it.

It will add $1trillion to the deficit after adjusting for the Chinese accounting in the plan

I wonder if those “warm up” voters are told those facts.

orlandocajun on March 16, 2010 at 3:46 PM

That’s blatentblue’s demographic also, although I don’t think he cuts ‘em off at 50.

thomasaur on March 16, 2010 at 3:12 PM

LOL… yeah… and he’s a tad bit younger than me I believe…

I’ll be 51 next month… LOL

Romeo13 on March 16, 2010 at 3:46 PM

The worst part is, if Obamacare doesnt pass, it will improve Obama’s chance at reelection in 2012. How ironic is that?

http://alecsavestheworld.blogspot.com

alecj on March 16, 2010 at 3:48 PM

Uhm … in the Senate version that I read … yes, there was an individual mandate.

But …

I’m pretty sure it had no penalty whatsoever for not buying insurance. There were no criminal charges, no civil charges, no fines from the IRS or anyone else, not even really a letter or reprimand from the government to buy insurance – just a statement that you were supposed to.

Can someone point to me the exact language that assesses a penalty for not buying insurance?

My point here – is that without even the slightest penalty – then the mandate doesn’t work. People who aren’t buying insurance because they’re young and healthy – still won’t buy it. And in order for the insurance companies to survive with all the new regulations levied by O’Care, they will need those healthy “payers”.

I believe there is no penalty – and I believe that’s by design. The Democrats want the insurance companies to fail. Let me know if I’m wrong about this but the version of the bill I saw specifically ruled out ANY penalty whatsoever for violating the individual mandate.

HondaV65 on March 16, 2010 at 3:50 PM

HondaV65 on March 16, 2010 at 3:50 PM

The penalty is described on page 322. The penalty is no more than $2250 per individual indexed by inflation, with various exemptions.

pedestrian on March 16, 2010 at 4:10 PM

The penalty is described on page 322. The penalty is no more than $2250 per individual indexed by inflation, with various exemptions.

pedestrian on March 16, 2010 at 4:10 PM

And according to this article…

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/2009-09-15-insurance-costs_N.htm

Average costs?

2009: $4,824 for an individual, $13,375 per family.

Thus you save almost HALF if you do not get insurance, until you get sick (as they will have to take preexisting conditions)…

Romeo13 on March 16, 2010 at 4:25 PM

Polls of policy changes don’t matter unless they explicitly consider tradeoffs.

A ban on denial of coverage because of pre-existing medical problems has long been one of the most popular consumer protections in the health care debate. Some 82 percent said they favored the ban, according to a Pew Research Center poll in October.

In the AP poll, when told that such a ban would probably cause most people to pay more for their health insurance, 43 percent said they would still support doing away with pre-existing condition denials but 31 percent said they would oppose it…

The health care debate is full of such trade-offs. For example, limiting the premiums that insurance companies can charge 50-year-olds means that 20-year-olds have to pay more for coverage.

“These trade-offs really matter,” says Robert Blendon, a professor at the Harvard School of Public Health who follows opinion trends. “The legislation contains a number of features that polls have shown to be popular, but support for the overall legislation is less than might be expected because people are worried there are details about these bills that could raise their families’ costs.”

Note also that the CBO talks about effects on premia (net of subsidies) in broad classes of insureds (individual, small group, large group) but completely sidesteps the issue of whether the impacts on any given insured (say, you or your family) are positive or negative. It’s too complicated to predict, you see.

I agree with you, rockmom, that there are gonna be a lot of pissed-off people over the next couple of years (starting with the folks who lose Medicare Advantage, followed by those who see their premia jump in the next year, unless the review boards just disallow all the increases…).

DrSteve on March 16, 2010 at 4:35 PM

Thus you save almost HALF if you do not get insurance, until you get sick (as they will have to take preexisting conditions)…

Romeo13 on March 16, 2010 at 4:25 PM

If you pay the premium you actually get insurance. If you pay the mandate tax and break a leg, you will get nothing, unless you are willing to wait for the paperwork to go through before you visit the hospital.

As a healthy male, I’ve had miniscule health expenses for decades. The $4,824 average would include the elderly. So a $2250 charge is quite high compared to the benefit for such people. For a family of 4, it is more than I pay for a pretty good insurance plan.

pedestrian on March 16, 2010 at 4:38 PM

HondaV65 on March 16, 2010 at 3:50 PM

pedestrian on March 16, 2010 at 4:10 PM

Romeo13 on March 16, 2010 at 4:25 PM

I’m sitting here nodding my head. You’re all absolutely right. Guaranteed issue has to come with a real mandate or any fool who can compare two numbers is going to game the system. Meanwhile adverse selection rages, the pools shrink, the premium increases are denied by the review bodies, the insurance companies start to go out of business…

The speeches are already written, don’t you know? “The insurance industry just couldn’t compete; it couldn’t handle the 21st-century demands of American health care; market failure; blah blah blah.”

DrSteve on March 16, 2010 at 4:39 PM

DrSteve on March 16, 2010 at 4:39 PM

Most of the uninsured are that way because it is cheaper for them to pay as you go. The Democrats are just using the scare tactics in order to get wealth transfer towards their base. What most of the country wants is for costs to go down, and Obamacare does nothing for that.

pedestrian on March 16, 2010 at 4:47 PM

pedestrian on March 16, 2010 at 4:38 PM

The article states that the numbers are from of study of companies who PAY for insurance premiums for their people…

Not Medicare folks… who are covered by the Government…

IE, this is the current price for those who PAY for insurance.

Under these conditions (avg price and the “penalty”)… I can see many people NOT getting insurance… because the only time they would end up worse off is if it was a catostrophic accident situation…

Cancer? Sickness? anything long term? You could get insurance and they’d have to cover you…

Broken arm? still cheeper to cover that yourself, plus the “tax fine” for noncoverage in a year.

IMO the Pool of those covered will decrese under these conditions… because the fine is NOT High enough…

(heck, just look at all the people driving around without CAR insurance… same deal…).

Romeo13 on March 16, 2010 at 4:49 PM

Other question I have about this “plan”…

I’m retired Military… and thus covered under TriCare and by the VA….

Now, does my employer still have to “pay” for me for get fined?

Romeo13 on March 16, 2010 at 4:52 PM

pedestrian on March 16, 2010 at 4:47 PM

LOL… sorry… misread… we agree on this…

Romeo13 on March 16, 2010 at 4:53 PM

Most of the uninsured are that way because it is cheaper for them to pay as you go. The Democrats are just using the scare tactics in order to get wealth transfer towards their base. What most of the country wants is for costs to go down, and Obamacare does nothing for that.

pedestrian on March 16, 2010 at 4:47 PM

I agree completely, with one reservation — there are risk-preferring people as well; those who wouldn’t buy full insurance at even actuarially fair rates.

But you’re totally right on the cost question. I’ve been studying these issues for 20 years and all I can see is the cost curve going up. Cost-reducing impacts from pool size effects and prevention are going to be swamped by all the cost effects from coverage requirements and guaranteed-issue. They’ve gotta be hoping people can’t see through the subsidies, but I’m thinking it’ll be clear soon enough that we created an expensive, expansive new entitlement program with no brakes on it.

Until collapse and global budgeting under single-payer, of course, which is ultimately what they want.

DrSteve on March 16, 2010 at 5:01 PM

“Obama’s pollsters apparently “educated” these voters in a vacuum ”

yeh, the vacuum between people’s ears.

It’s so ludicrous. You could take Mein Kampf, pick out selected passages, and make it sound like eternal bliss.

These people are lunatics.

And we are in their kill zone.

notagool on March 16, 2010 at 6:44 PM