Skip to main content

poll on partisan view on what ACA will deliver
Here's both a confirmatory and a fascinating finding from Gallup:
A majority of Americans say the U.S. healthcare law that the Supreme Court recently upheld as constitutional will make things better for those who do not have health insurance and for those who get sick. At the same time, Americans say the law will make things worse rather than better for taxpayers, businesses, doctors, and those who currently have health insurance. Americans are about evenly divided on the impact of the law on hospitals and on themselves personally.
Sure, you knew that, But ... look at that partisan breakdown. Perhaps it's true that "a majority of Americans say the U.S. healthcare law that the Supreme Court recently upheld as constitutional will make things better for those who do not have health insurance and for those who get sick." But that's true despite Republicans thinking the opposite.

Republicans think the law will hurt sick people. That's a +67 for Democrats, (i.e., those who feel the law will help sick people minus those who think it will make things worse.) It's a +22 for independents, who worry about the effects on taxpayers and businesses.

However, it's a -32 from Republicans, who are convinced that this law will make things worse not just for those groups, but for sick people. And they can't even bring themselves to say it's a good thing for those without insurance to actually get insurance. They break even on that one, their most positive opinion in the poll.

Bottom line: It is impossible to reach consensus or to expect majority support on issues where Republicans have chosen to use their own belief systems in place of facts.

Want to see that in action in a fun and informative way? Run the same poll in Massachusetts on Romneycare.

Originally posted to Greg Dworkin on Mon Jul 16, 2012 at 06:56 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (18+ / 0-)

    "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

    by Greg Dworkin on Mon Jul 16, 2012 at 06:56:10 AM PDT

  •  I look at this and see a lot of selling needed (15+ / 0-)

    I mean indies need to be convinced that the ACA helps fols who have insurance.  Because most folks have insurance and if they feel they're personally worse off for it - people vote their own personal interests.  

    In the very least Dems need to really work on "you, personally" and "people who currently have health insurance" categories.  

  •  Cognitive Dissonance (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SoCalSal, lgmcp, ferg, Matt Z

    Of all the categories, the one that is most striking is that TeaPublicans (and even a few Independents) believe that hospitals will be worse off for the Affordable Care Act.

    We can certainly debate all the other categories, but not hospitals.

    Besides individuals and their families, hospitals may well be the greatest beneficiary of the ACA.

    Once the additional 30 million people have insurance, hospitals will no longer be on the financial short end of someone requiring emergency care.

    Once people start utilizing the general health screening, they will no longer show up at emergency rooms requiring immediate care for something that was preventable.

    The people in the TeaPublican party have the same mentality of the naysayers who fought against Social Security - which has reduced poverty amongst elderly to something around 10% (it was over 40% when enacted).  Similar statistics support Medicare.

    I cannot help but feel sorry for a group of people who time and time again are proven wrong.  The ACA will be another of those instances.

    •  Hospitals lobbied vigorously FOR the ACA (0+ / 0-)

      so anyone who professes to trust the wisdom of the market, had darn well better believe the ACA helps hospitals.

      "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

      by lgmcp on Mon Jul 16, 2012 at 04:40:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  ACA Needs Adjustment (0+ / 0-)

    I don't think ACA will work as envisioned without a lot of change.  Those without bucks will end up on medicaid or exchanges.

    The flaw with Medicaid is it doesn't reimburse enough so most doctors won't take it and if many get on it in 2014 then one faces the danger of hospitals being bankrupted.

    Problem - medicaid is underfunded.  I don't think ACA will work unless the high cost of medicine is addressed - pharma, fraud, insurance, education costs, etc.

    States are strapped for tax revenue and the feds are bumping up against $17 trillion in debt.

    So where does the revenue come to pay for it all?  My two cents is you have to go after the big players in the medical vertical and I'm waiting to see if Congress will take any action on this.

    If not we get a two tiered system.

    •  You argue like a Republican concern troll (7+ / 0-)

      Are you?

      Those without bucks who you complain will end up in the exchanges or on Medicaid will be covered, most of them for the first time. What's the downside for them?

      Medicaid doesn't reimburse enough, you complain. What is the reimbursement now for the uninsured who get care only in Emergency Rooms? So what is the downside of extending Medicaid?

      The current system does not address the high cost of medicine. It makes that high cost worse. So what is the downside of taking the poor out of expensive ERs and getting them cheap preventive care? What is the downside of funding research into what works better at lower cost, and making that information publicly available?

      States are strapped for tax revenue mainly where Republicans have cut taxes to the bone and beyond, and put in balanced budget amendments to prevent stimulus spending and investment, even when interest rates are at historic lows. But the Federal government will pay for 100% of Medicaid expansion for the first few years. States will pay at most 10% later on, but will get the benefits of reduced Emergency Room usage, improved public health (see the TB debacle in Florida for the Republican plan), and other benefits. So what is the downside?

      The ACA goes after costs, starting with the 80% rule. Insurance companies have to pay out at least 80% of premiums in benefits, or refund the difference. What is the downside?

      We have a two-tiered system now, among the best in the world for the Haves, third-world for the have-nots. Have you not noticed? We are bringing millions of people into the Have system, with the public paying their way where necessary in order to get the reductions in Emergency Room care, public health, improved educational outcomes for children, and much more. What is the downside?

      Children can stay on their parents' insurance until age 26. There are no lifetime limits on benefits. There can be no exclusions in future for pre-existing conditions. People cannot lose their insurance for getting sick. There is much more.

      What is the downside?

      Hands off my ObamaCare[TM]

      by Mokurai on Mon Jul 16, 2012 at 12:28:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm making the comment above into a Diary n/t (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lgmcp, Uncle Moji, askew

        Hands off my ObamaCare[TM]

        by Mokurai on Mon Jul 16, 2012 at 12:34:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Not Trolling (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        My comment was medicaid is underfunded and therefore people on it are treated like crap.

        So if you want people to have more than insurance, but also the same care - then money has to be found for it and the high cost of medicine must be addressed.

        The Feds will not pay for new additions to medicaid that currently qualify for it - so states need to find the revenue.

        So I think it needs work if people are to have proper care and I think everyone should.

        BTW - I am on medicaid and I can tell you first hand - doctors will not see you and everything is a fight - not nice when you're sick.

        •  I looked at your other comments (0+ / 0-)

          and I see that you are indeed one of us, not a Republican, not a troll, not a sock puppet, but a newly-joined Kossack. Welcome.

          I agree that Medicaid needs better funding, but I don't see how to get it given Republican intransigence. Meanwhile, I find that expanding Medicaid is a net benefit. You seemed to be arguing against that. Were you?

          Hands off my ObamaCare[TM]

          by Mokurai on Tue Jul 17, 2012 at 07:31:39 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I want it to work (0+ / 0-)


            My desire is that everyone has the same healthcare.  I do not want anyone to go through what I did.  We are an advanced society and can only progress forward if those with the least are taken care of in terms of basic necessities.

            Not just in the US, but globally.  So I don't care how it works only that it works.

            Meaning I am not wed to expanding medicaid or another method - only what gets it done.

            I agree the repubs are going to fight ACA tooth and nail, which means Congress will continue to fight and nothing will get done - bad for the country.

            My attitude is that the bill is passed and SCOTUS has upheld it so now we must find a way for the bill to actually deliver on making the intent of the bill a reality.

            Expanding medicaid is pointless unless it reimburses enough - so my concern is that it remains underfunded and then the newly insured won't be able to see doctors, get hassled at hospitals, etc.

            Now I think HC for all is very doable, but one has to go through the weeds and modify it in the right way.

            I don't think it's financially doable without lowering the cost of the care, which means we have to go after lobbyists who in my estimation want no change and try to achieve this by polarizing people.

            I think with added people on the system large medical players will gain more revenue at lower margin so they will have to adjust their business models to handle this - very doable.

          •  Global Warming is a similar fight (0+ / 0-)

            The whole medical topic is quite similar to global warming.

            Progress has been stopped by the fight between those that believe in it and don't.  If one steps away from this argument - we can all agree that less and ultimately no pollution is a great thing.

            So let's go around the AGW impasse and sell it on no pollution.  It should also be sold from a national security/economic point of view.  

            The US spends $700-800 billion per annum on foreign oil.  Now imagine in 20 years if we are all driving EVs, hydrogen or other alt energy vehicles.  That's $700-800 billion per annum staying in the US + we're not giving countries that don't like us money.

            Would be great for the economy, employment and the environment and we can get off oil based inflation.  

            If we lead the way on alt energy then lots of new high tech jobs in the US + manufacturing, which of course we can start exporting = attacking the trade deficit in two ways (no foreign oil + manufacturing/exporting).

            Trust me there are solutions to all problems, but one must not get wed to a given ideology rather whatever makes the end goal a reality.

            Above all, as a people, we have to find a way to keep lobbyists from dividing us.  Time for the majority of the country to be represented.

    •  some points (9+ / 0-)
      Those without bucks will end up on medicaid or exchanges.
      That, actually, is the idea. It gives people insurance the cheapest possible way (using the existing commercial-government hybrid of insurance coverage, and excepting medicare or single payer.)
      The flaw with Medicaid is it doesn't reimburse enough so most doctors won't take it and if many get on it in 2014 then one faces the danger of hospitals being bankrupted.
      Not true. In fact, hospitals stand to benefit the most because Medicaid reimbursement is better than no reimbursement at all, but the costs remain the same. The losers are expensive specialists among docs. The winners are the patients themselves.

      I agree vertical costs are an issue, but the biggest issue on the table for Congress is Medicare costs, rising as baby boomers age. ACA helps with that which is why it lowers the rise in medical costs.

      Debt needs to be looked at in relation to the economy as a percentage, and what the costs would be without ACA.

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Mon Jul 16, 2012 at 12:57:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  You lost me at "Republicans think". (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jazzmaniac, Phil S 33

    If you never let the facts get in the way of what you believe, you just might be a Republican.

    by kitebro on Mon Jul 16, 2012 at 04:38:30 PM PDT

  •  Still flogging this quiz. How do YOU score? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chrississippi, SoCalSal, Odysseus, askew
    Kaiser Permanente Healthcare Refore Quiz
    The sad fact is that the crosstabs on the results show that half the population INCLUDING DEMS get half the answers wrong.  Regular readers of Daily Kos will do better than average.  But how much better?  

    I think this is a fabulous teaching tool to convince the somewhat-teachable.   Please try it, and share it widely.

    "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

    by lgmcp on Mon Jul 16, 2012 at 04:38:52 PM PDT

    •  That is a GREAT link! ... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
    •  Great quiz. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      What does it say that, as an Australian, I answered all 10 questions correctly off the top of my head, "better than 99.6% of Americans"?

      •  Fascinating. (0+ / 0-)

        I think it says not only that you are informed person who follows the news, but also that the barrage of misinformation has not been exported overseas.

        I got a perfect score, but only because I read here regularly.  Even so, I hesitated over a few.  I think the small-business provisions, in particular, are poorly understood.  (Fewer than 50 employees equals no new requirements BUT eligible for incentives.)

        "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

        by lgmcp on Tue Jul 17, 2012 at 08:00:58 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  So, let me try to wrap my head around this: (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Phil S 33, ferg, ahumbleopinion

    Republicans think that if uninsured people get insurance, it will harm them.
    Are they stupid?  Evil?  Both?

    Fun Fact To Know And Tell: Out of the four justices who voted to overturn the Affordable Care Act, all four have guaranteed for life government provided health insurance!

    by jazzmaniac on Mon Jul 16, 2012 at 04:47:25 PM PDT

  •  AS a provider who is whole heartedly in favor (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SoCalSal, ahumbleopinion, Odysseus

    of the ACA, let me say that there is a lot that we will discover about the law and its implementation  only in going forward. There may be added benefits that we didn't realize, and there  may be unanticipated problems, that may be difficult to solve.  We don't really know how the addition of millions of people to insurance and medicaid rolls will play out, we can make educated guesses based on Massachusetts, and other models but those are only guesses, and we will have to deal with each new problem as it comes. Also, the staggered buy-ins of the states into the exchanges will complicate matters greatly. All I really know is that the present status quo  was unworkable, and becoming more so every day.

    Necessity is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.-- Wm.Pitt the Younger

    by JeffSCinNY on Mon Jul 16, 2012 at 04:49:51 PM PDT

  •  "straight ticket" poll answers (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    You don't root for a player on the rival team, even if you know they're better. Pollsters surely know better, so why ask partisans to give any credit to the other side?

  •  Romneycare is popular in Mass (0+ / 0-)

    with providers and patients.  And it is more far-reaching than Obamacare.

    This was Romney's best act as our crappy Governor, and he's run as far from it as he can.  

    He is an ass, personified. or retroactively, whichever works best at the moment for your convenience.

    "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation -9.75 -6.87

    by Uncle Moji on Mon Jul 16, 2012 at 05:03:52 PM PDT

  •  When you defrag your system (0+ / 0-)

    there sometimes appears a section labeled "Cannot be moved." Republicans are like this with ACA, they don't care about specifics at all! My Fox-watching mom falls back on the "it's meant for illegal aliens" meme. I have tried explaining that Republicans had two terms of Bush to do something about the problem (she knows there is an actual problem itself), but that just bounces off teflon-style.

  •  Better for My Doctor (0+ / 0-)

    I have had Individual Insurance for the past decade in CA and before that had insurance though my employer for 15 years. I have never had a  complete physical workup or had the doctor even suggest it was a good idea. My new insurance policy covers complete yearly physicals and in the past week the doctor that I see on the rare occasions that I have a problem has sent me a brochure on why I should have a physical now and has called my house to schedule one.

    I am going to say that this is going to say the mandated covered preventive care is going to be a huge boon both to the health of the general population and the doctors that preform them as well as all of the labs that run the test.

  •  those are scary numbers (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Partisan polarization is nothing new, but I'm not used to triple-digit gaps. (Of course they're only possible when looking at "net" measures, such as favor minus oppose.) I need to look around some more.

    I suspect that this issue is particularly polarized because, so far, sufficiently little of the law is in effect that partisans are pretty much relying on their respective party leaders for the "facts."

    Umm, having said that, didn't you (maybe someone else) recently report some numbers on whether people thought their taxes had gone up or down since Obama took office? What's the partisan divide on that?

    •  dunno about last few months, but... (3+ / 0-)

      this was a year and a half ago.

      Here's the poll question: "In general, do you think the Obama Administration has increased taxes for most Americans, decreased taxes for most Americans or have they kept taxes the same for most Americans?"

      The answer:
      • 24 percent of respondents said they INCREASED taxes.
      • 53 percent said they kept taxes the same
      • And 12 percent said taxes were decreased.

      Of people who support the grassroots, "Tea Party" movement, only 2 percent think taxes have been decreased, 46 percent say taxes are the same, and a whopping 44 percent say they believe taxes have gone up.

      Those answers must frustrate the president who has highlighted its tax cuts for the middle class in almost every speech.

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Mon Jul 16, 2012 at 06:42:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  so that gap surely was smaller -- but huge (0+ / 0-)

        I couldn't find a crosstab by party ID, but it would be surprising if more than 30% of Democrats thought taxes had gone down. So the net swing might be 70 points or so (quite possibly smaller). The overall partisan gap would be somewhat smaller.

        I wonder what the partisan gap is on gasoline prices. How obvious do facts have to be before people agree about them? Yes, and how many times must the cannonballs fly before they're forever banned?

  •  Dem, this is not about reality. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Send these Republicans to Canada or abroad.  

    How do we get the message to the independents?   Clearly they have children under 26.  Many have no healthcare.

    Somehow the message about how much they are currently paying for people who go to the Emergency Room has to be made clear to them.

    If the question "Should hospitals turn away people without insurance?" and "Should taxpayers be responsible for paying for these people?" has to be framed for them.

    The Muslim said "I wished I had met Christ before I met the Christians" - Rev. Marvin Winins

    by captainlaser on Mon Jul 16, 2012 at 05:45:14 PM PDT

    •  Another thing indies NEED to know (0+ / 0-)

      Businesses fare BETTER under ACA. Those providing health care already will actually make out pretty well with new tax credits, and those not doing it might be able to afford it again, because of those tax credits. And the larger companies that fail to, will stop getting a goddamned free ride making their employees get "Free Care" or live off of Medicaid.

  •  Doctors by specialty (0+ / 0-)

    I'd be curious to see doctors broken down by specialty, or at least broken down between specialist and PCP. In my experience generalists are more in favor of Obamacare than specialists.

  •  why call it obamacare? (0+ / 0-)

    Usually I am not big on language but this bothers me.  Obamacare is a derisive name made up by the right wing.  Why are we using it?

    "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Rianne Eisler

    by noofsh on Tue Jul 17, 2012 at 03:54:48 AM PDT

    •  he should get credit for it (0+ / 0-)

      and will. Embrace it.

      I'm not one to lecture people on language. People use what people use.

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Tue Jul 17, 2012 at 07:37:31 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Polling in MA (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Is exceptionally good.

    Here's where fact meets opinion: the Dems are right in pretty much ALL the questions. Businesses get a nice tax credit for providing - we've seen the video from, was it the Ed Show? - where two normal small businesses state that their existing situation (providing employees with health care already) got BETTER due to the ACA. As in, they got better credits, and one owner decided to take over the entire payment of the premium for their employees, the other was able to hire more.

    In MA, our Governor has the power to tell the insurance co's NO you cannot have a 13% increase this year. This has been HUGE. Our premiums have been rising at an exponentially smaller amount the last few years. Couple that with the rules that state an insurance co cannot have more than X% amount of their health care spending being administrative. No shit, people I know in my state got CHECKS back from insurance co's who failed to meet that standard.

    And of course, we have 97%, or essentially full, coverage here. We're going to see the results of this in a few years...better health outcomes and longer life expectancy and infant mortality down, etc.

    Gonna be awesome.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site