Harvard-NPR Poll: Obama's health care plan preferred to Clinton's, 65% - 59%

[dailykoff]

February 29, 2008 · A new poll on health care from NPR, the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Harvard School of Public Health finds that a majority of Americans are backing key elements in the health reform proposals of Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

{snip}

One aim of the poll was to find out how people feel about the idea of requiring all individuals to buy health insurance. That's a centerpiece of Clinton's plan. When asked whether they would support a broad proposal that would require everyone to get coverage, 59 percent said they would support it.

{snip}

When asked whether they would favor a proposal {like Obama's} that would not require all adults to get insurance, but one that would require parents to get health coverage for their children, support was higher: 65 percent support that proposal, including a majority (54 percent) of Republicans.

link: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=87783148

[dkf]

1. HA! Exactly what I have been saying.

Mandates decrease support.

[GoreVidalIsGod]

2. It all comes back to the mandates.

Indies and moderates don't go for that.

[Colobo]

3. Awesome!

[Occam Bandage]

4. Well, yeah. We've been saying that this whole time. Clinton's package doesn't pass the Senate.

[Major Hogwash]

11. Is that why she doesn't try to get this plan introduced onto the Senate floor?

Then why does she think it will pass if she is the President?

[Independent-Voter]

14. Word. HRC's had plenty of time to put this on the floor and hasn't bothered to.

[LSK]

26. so no Senate Seats are going to change this year????

:shrug:

[FrenchieCat]

12. Sounds like Hillary selling a whole lot of "false" hopes?

Vellly intelesting!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIfbCCtWr5I

[SoxFan]

5. 65-59

Diebold must have tallied the results...

[grantcart]

6. you beat me to it lol

[jlake]

8. You must not be able to read.

[FrenchieCat]

10. Probably when asking respondents.........

some may not have had a preference....which would generate overlapping stats.

[SoxFan]

20. I understand that

I just wanted to make a cheap Diebold joke.

Thank you for responding in a civil manner, unlike the poster above you!

[MojoMojoMojo]

7. How would they vote if told Hillarys is $900 cheaper ?

Because we wouldnt be paying extra to cover the slackers.

[FrenchieCat]

9. Instead we would be paying for enforcement of the garnishment

of wages. Think that bureaucracy won't cost anything? :shrug:

In addition, Obama's plan include a choice of an individual opting ratroactively by paying back coverage or paying fines.

More folks believe like me that I'll be damned if the government forces me to write a check to an insurance corporation.

[yourguide]

13. Considering there are no specifics on subsidies listed

I wouldnt tout that as accurate info. I have been trying to get from the HRC supporters how eaxactly those "slackers" (the unemployed, working poor, etc) would be covered.

Dont pull this BS math here...

[Onlooker]

15. I gather none of you saw Sicko

Clinton and Obama's proposals are nothing more than boons to the insurance industry who have every motivation to keep people from going to the doctor and getting proper medical care.

[Vinca]

17. Exactly. Both plans are nothing more than boons to big insurance.

They should be embarrassed to be running on their plans as "universal health care."

[cooolandrew]

16. The least public resistance the more it will pass...

Let alone with insrance enforced by law if the GOP return they wil swipe the discounts that make it cheper leaving americans with mandated insurance by law and no subsidies to meet the cost. Optional is best or Dennis' plan but wee bit late for that now.

[eridani]

18. Wonder what would happen if they included single payer as an option? n/t

[dailykoff]

19. Turns out there's even less support for Clinton's plan than it appears.

From the link:

"But when the question was asked a different way — without emphasizing government subsidies, employer mandates and requirements on insurance companies — support dropped to 47 percent in favor and 44 percent against. That's an even split, given the poll's margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

"The finding suggests that support for requiring everyone to buy insurance may be iffy."

So basically Clinton's gun-to-the-head approach isn't going to fly.

[AtomicKitten]

21. Ouch! That's gonna leave a mark.

[FrenchieCat]

22. And so it should.

[rinsd]

23. I guess Obama knows what he is doing when he misrepresents Hillary's program

Also from the link

When asked whether they would support a broad proposal that would require everyone to get coverage, 59 percent said they would support it. Such a proposal would require employers to provide coverage or pay into a pool. The government would help low-income people get coverage, and insurance companies would be required to take anyone who applies. People who don't get coverage through one of these channels or purchase it themselves would pay a fine.

But when the question was asked a different way — without emphasizing government subsidies, employer mandates and requirements on insurance companies — support dropped to 47 percent in favor and 44 percent against. That's an even split, given the poll's margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

[ORDem]

24. This is a no-brainer really. Both plans are essentially "unknowns"

to voters. No one really knows what would end up actually being enacted in a Clinton or Obama administration. So, who wouldn't opt for the one that offers more of an "out" in terms of mandates. Of course, it sure doesn't help your cause when you say bonehead stupid stuff like "we'll go after their wages". Oy vey!


:dem:

[LSK]

25. IT DOESNT MATTER

What matters is that they both have plans and talk about this.

Congress WILL CHANGE EITHER PLAN.

This whole argument is so irrelevant.