Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Do Americans oppose health-care reform? Why?

te0b87zgiu-8ug0b11ozng.gif

That's the latest Gallup poll on health-care reform. In case you think it's an outlier, here's Pollster.com's trend line on health-care reform. Last night, Stephen Colbert asked me if "everybody" hates health-care reform. The answer is no. The country is closely divided on health-care reform, with a slight plurality in opposition. Moreover, health-care reform is actually getting a bit more popular as it nears passage. Presumably, that's because people are hearing more about the bill and less about why the bill is failing.

But Gallup did something interesting and asked respondents who disapproved of the bill why they disapproved. The top reason was that the bill "will raise the cost of insurance or make it less affordable." It's understandable why people say that. But the best evidence we have is that it's not true.

When the Congressional Budget Office looked at this question (pdf), they found that for Americans in the large-group market (134 million of us), premiums would go down by 1 to 3 percent. For Americans in the small-group market (25 million of us), the change in premiums would be between an increase of 1 percent and a decrease of 2 percent -- so the likeliest outcome was a savings of about 1 percent. And they found that people in the individual market (32 million of us) would find that a given insurance product would become 7 to 10 percent cheaper, but that they'd purchase much better insurance under the bill (that meant their premiums would go up, but because they could now buy something better). And that's before accounting for subsidies, which make things even more affordable for small businesses and people in the individual market.

The next most common objection was that the plan "doesn't address real problems." I'm not really sure what this means, so I can't comment on it. But it's followed by people who simply want more information on how this would all work. I'm not certain this can properly be called opposition. Later in the series, you have 3 percent of people who don't like the plan naming the public option as their problem. The public option, of course, isn't in the plan any longer. Some people think the plan is "socialism." By definition, it is not. Some people simply think we should take more time with the legislative process. They are hardy souls.

The argument over reconciliation was always a distraction. If you follow the rules, you're following the rules. The GOP's more salient objection was that it's somehow unethical to pass a bill that polls show doesn't have support. That wasn't the party's position during George W. Bush's administration, but that doesn't make it wrong.

But it only works if you think that Americans are really against this bill. If you think they don't know much about it, or have been misinformed about it, then it is not only proper, but core to how our government was structured, for the representatives of the people to assess the legislation and make the decision they think to be in their constituents' best interest. Then, of course, an election will happen, and those representatives will have a chance to defend their decision and their constituents will have the opportunity to render a verdict. Gallup's poll is evidence, first, that the public is closely divided on health-care reform, and second, that many of those in opposition do not know that much about the bill.

By Ezra Klein  |  March 9, 2010; 6:45 PM ET
Categories:  Health Reform , Polls  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Iron Man 2
Next: Reconciliation

Comments

I don't think the CBO has 'scored' Obama's bill yet.......and I don't think it will be pretty when they do.

Posted by: ernielayman581 | March 9, 2010 6:59 PM | Report abuse

When questions about individual policies in the bill separately, most of them enjoy majority support. It is relentless, egregious, purposeful, systematic lying about the bill and what it does by repiglicans that make "health care reform" as an entity unpopular.

Posted by: srw3 | March 9, 2010 7:05 PM | Report abuse

Nancy Pelosi:

“But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it."

Please. Don't assume that you know why I am against this bill.

It would take 2700 pages to discuss the "why nots."

Posted by: easttxisfreaky | March 9, 2010 7:06 PM | Report abuse

No Americans aren't against health care reform. But Americans aren't confused that this bill, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (H.R. 3590), is about health care reform. Just because it uses the word 'reform' doesn't mean that's what it does. Americans don't want the Fedral Government running 16% of the US economy. They don't want THIS BILL.

Posted by: PanhandleWilly | March 9, 2010 7:10 PM | Report abuse

A vast majority of the people who oppose reform are misinformed thanks to the health insurance industry their fronts and members of the Republican party who are bought and paid for by the insurance companies. The lies, fear mongering have work well and one of the largest targets have been older people. One the flip side the Dems including Obama have failed to get the message out and have allowed the insurance companies and the GOP to take control of the message to smear it out of control.

Posted by: rl5614 | March 9, 2010 7:16 PM | Report abuse

Luckily this bill does not apply to 16% of the US economy - it doesnt "run" anything - its 100% private, and really mainly applies to the uninsured (though there are measures to start trying much needed cost control and regulate the most egrarious practices of insurance companies)... So Americans may not "want the Fedral Government running 16% of the US economy", but that is not in the bill so if that is their problem then they should not have one!

The point is not that no-one on this board should dislike the plan - we are better informed than most of the general public about what's in the bill (or should be) and may have decided that we dont like the bill - fair enough!

The point is that many, many Americans have less than no idea what is in the bill - they have had fox news and republicans telling them that the govmt is going to take away their doctor, take over medical care in the US and kill their granny, and so many people do not like a bill that doesn't really exist...

Posted by: lazza11 | March 9, 2010 7:18 PM | Report abuse

Hello,everybody,the good shoping place,the new year approaching, click in. Let's facelift bar!
===== HTTP://steezeclothing.com ====

Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33

UGG BOOT $50

Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35

Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&g) $35

Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16

Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30

Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,Armaini) $16

New era cap $15

Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $25

FREE SHIPPING

Posted by: loveshoppingus | March 9, 2010 7:22 PM | Report abuse

Now, for the rest of the story...

For context on reconciliation see the Wall Street Journal's excellent coverage:

Abuse of Power
'An undemocratic disservice to our people and to the Senate's institutional role.'
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704625004575089362731862750.html


To see what the CBO did not score relative the Bills presented see the full Ryan transcript from the WaPo:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/25/AR2010022504074.html


Posted by: SayWhat4 | March 9, 2010 7:27 PM | Report abuse

If you think providing healthcare to 30 million people that can pay their bills now will lower your costs, I have a brooklyn bridge that I will sell you.

Posted by: sportsfan2 | March 9, 2010 7:37 PM | Report abuse

Obama made up his mind that "health care reform" (no reform here) - to buy the 15-20 million votes of those who are presently illegal aliens. By passing the health care bill - and going on to then pass immigration reform - he will add over 11 million illegal aliens (soon-to-be-citizens) to the "free" or "subsidized" health care rolls.

All he has to do is to line up his minions and make a declaration. I honestly don't know why he bothers with all of the media...he certainly doesn't need to.

Posted by: easttxisfreaky | March 9, 2010 7:47 PM | Report abuse

Ezra,

Is it even conceivable to you that maybe the CBO is wrong (not even mentioning what we know the CBO has not accounted for in its estimate) and that this will be an outrageously expensive bill that will not lower the cost of health care?

Steve

Posted by: FatTriplet3 | March 9, 2010 7:48 PM | Report abuse

Not everyone, indeed likely not "most", who oppose this bill oppose healthcare reform. This administration is just painting them that way for rhetorical reasons.

I, personally, am for a public option and healthcare reform. However, I am not for federal funding of infanticide, pork-barrel spending unrelated to healthcare, and special backroom deals Reid used to buy votes on this bill. Basically, I am NOT for this bill, but I am for healthcare reform.

Posted by: RealTexan1 | March 9, 2010 7:51 PM | Report abuse

you lie ezra! stop cherry picking one poll to argue the majority position isnt 'nay'. 9 out of 10 polls show a majority opposing this bill. and have for MONTHS!

Posted by: dummypants | March 9, 2010 7:54 PM | Report abuse

You're not as smart as you think you are.

Posted by: fallsmeadjc | March 9, 2010 7:55 PM | Report abuse

I'd imagine that the percentage of the bill's supporters that "don't know much about it" is similar to the percentage of the bill's opponents that "don't know much about it."

That doesn't take away from the argument that our representatives are elected to make decisions that they think are in the public's best interest, and not necessarily what polls say the public thinks.

Posted by: youngjova | March 9, 2010 7:55 PM | Report abuse

i dont get. they dont know anything about the bill so lets make up their mind for them and ram this through on a party line simple majority vote? i liked the dems a lot more when they were passionately arguing that republicans should not be pushing through sweeping, divisive plans on a narrow base of support.

when push comes to shove its clear that obama rhetoric about fiscal responsibility and transparency and bipartisanship gives way to his ideological crusade.

"I know its right" - spoken like a true believer.

Posted by: dummypants | March 9, 2010 7:58 PM | Report abuse

Yes, being for reform is much different than being for any particular bill proposed. I imagine if you could possibly poll most people and explained exactly what you're looking for, an honest answer to whether our present healthcare situation, inlcuding coverage and care, needs to change for the better, most people would answer in the affirmative -- but, this doesn't mean they will approve a large, comprehensive bill, because most see good and bad about what we have -- they want to change the bad and keep the good, and perception of good and bad varies from individual to individual. So, polls proves nothing, really, except a lot of disagreement over what should be done..

Posted by: mdfarmer | March 9, 2010 8:01 PM | Report abuse

People that support the bill understand even less than those that oppose it. If you support the Democratic concept of healthcare reform then you have absolutelly no incentive to actually read the bill and figure out what it will actually do. People in opposition have a much greater incentive to dissect this nonsense and point out the flaws.

Posted by: fallsmeadjc | March 9, 2010 8:02 PM | Report abuse

Also, don't forget that a huge percentage of those who supposedly "oppose" the bill do so because they think that it does not go far enough! They want *more* health care reform than the bill delivers, so they express disapproval for this particular measure in the polls because they think it's too weak. But these people would of course be very happy if the bill passed, for they would obviously see it as a step in the right direction. That the media outlets aren't pointing this out, and that some Democrats still think that passing this bill might damage their political fortunes, suggests that the supposed political "elites" are politically completely tone-deaf. I guess some Democrats kind of deserve to get bluffed by Republicans into letting the bill fail, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory in November.

(For some telling data, see for example p.3 of this poll http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/poll_obama_011110.pdf -- a whopping 61 percent of Americans think, for example, that the bill is either about right or does not go far enough in regulating health insurance companies.)

Posted by: opinionpieces | March 9, 2010 8:05 PM | Report abuse

There is the CBO and then there is WMD in Iraq.

Its illogical that prices go down. We are flooding the health insurance market with money and prices drop? Ho Ho Ho

Posted by: Maddogg | March 9, 2010 8:05 PM | Report abuse

Tuesday, March 09, 2010

Fifty-seven percent (57%) of voters say the health care reform plan now working its way through Congress will hurt the U.S. economy.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 25% think the plan will help the economy. But only seven percent (7%) say it will have no impact. Twelve percent (12%) aren’t sure.

Posted by: screwjob11 | March 9, 2010 8:05 PM | Report abuse

Americans are not opposed to health care/insurance reform - they are opposed to THIS bill.

Any partisan bill that can only pass if members of the Party have to be given "incentives" for their votes raises all kinds of red flags.

Several weeks later, when this same group of legislators ask Americans to trust them to fix the bill AFTER its signed into law, sends even more red flags popping out form among the pages of this bill.

And then there are the 12M to 20M illegal aliens, plus all their illegitimate anchor babies, the primary abusers of our health care and social services system. They drive the cost of health care upward, yet are exempt from the "forced insurance buy" or pay-as-you-go, and encouraged to continue using hospital ERs as their FREE non-emergency health care facility ... without recourse.

With that many red flags popping up all over the place, anyone who really believes this bill comes anywhere close to being the stepping stone to historical health care and insurance reform greatness is insane.

Posted by: asmith1 | March 9, 2010 8:16 PM | Report abuse

Beginning on page 1,000 of the measure, Section 3403 reads in part: ". it shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection."


In other words, if President Barack Obama signs this measure into law, no future Senate or House will be able to change a single word of Section 3403, regardless whether future Americans or their representatives in Congress wish otherwise!!


Note that the subsection at issue here concerns the regulatory power of the Independent Medicare Advisory Board (IMAB) to "reduce the per capita rate of growth in Medicare spending."

That is precisely the kind of open-ended grant of regulatory power that effectively establishes the IMAB as the ultimate arbiter of the cost, quality and quantity of health care to be made available to the American people. And Reid wants the decisions of this group of unelected federal bureaucrats to be untouchable for all time.


No wonder the majority leader tossed aside assurances that senators and the public would have at least 72 hours to study the text of the final Senate version of Obamacare before the critical vote on cloture.


And no wonder Reid was so desperate to rush his amendment through the Senate, even scheduling the key tally on it at 1 a.m., while America slept.

True to form, Reid wanted to keep his Section 3403 poison pill secret for as long as possible, just as he negotiated his bribes for the votes of Senators Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Bernie Sanders of Vermont behind closed doors.

The final Orwellian touch in this subversion of democratic procedure is found in the ruling of the Reid-controlled Senate Parliamentarian that the anti-repeal provision is not a change in Senate rules, but rather of Senate "procedures." Why is that significant?

Because for 200 years, changes in the Senate's standing rules have required approval by two-thirds of those voting, or 67 votes rather than the 60 Reid's amendment received.

Reid has flouted two centuries of standing Senate rules to pass a measure in the dead of night that no senator has read, and part of which can never be changed. If this is not tyranny, then what is?


Posted by: PanhandleWilly | March 9, 2010 6:16 PM

Posted by: obamaalmighT | March 9, 2010 8:17 PM | Report abuse

It's funny, that when Obamakraut is ranting and raving about insurance companies, he neglects to admit his part in making back room deals with them; AND, he neglects to tell his listeners that although they will be taxed immediately, they won't be able to use the benefits until 2014. When he is back on his farm in Kenya, since the Indonesians don't seem to want him.


And I'm not talking about how it impacts the insrance cos, I'm talking about the fact that although you will be accepted with pre-existing conditions; you won't have ACCESS to the benefits for at least 4-5 years from now.

So now America has been reduced to Lay Away Plans for health insurance? This guy is despicable.

And to those who keep harping on folks that listen to Fox- at least they aren't held hostage to the White House, and the only reason most of you idiots keep saying it's a joke is because almighty Obamakraut has said so! You don't even have a mind of your own.

Everyone knows that ABC, CBS, MSNBC, NBC are OWNED and CONTROLLED by LIBERAL JEWS, who are the puppet master's REAL bosses. So maybe you all should stop only looking at, and listening to Marxist Branded news. I listen to them ALL, and make my OWN informed conclusions.

Besides, anyone who ran under the New Party, PROCLAIMED Democratic Socialists can't be all THAT trustworthy, can they? After all, didn't Obamakraut say in his Mistake of Illusion Lecture that he knows Americans are tired of the back room deals to get votes?


YET- he appoints Matheson's brother to a Circuit Judgeship? Yeah right, but at least he was TRANSPARENT with his BRIBERY! He's a real TOOL!!


I OPPOSE more government intrusion. Now they're trying to sneak in the Real ID Act under the guise of a work card. What next??

http://nakedemperornews.com

Posted by: obamaalmighT | March 9, 2010 8:20 PM | Report abuse

Listening to Democrats talk about healthcare reform is starting to remind me of how the Bush Administration talked about WMDs. They're convinced they're right with the zealotry of a true believer but will there really be "WMDs"?

Posted by: fallsmeadjc | March 9, 2010 8:37 PM | Report abuse

Even though I oppose this legislation in its current form, it is, nonetheless, hilarious to see Republicans fizzle, and dance, and mislead, and misrepresent.

Posted by: Maddogg | March 9, 2010 8:40 PM | Report abuse

When did we start getting so many ... not-so-smart?... flamers who obviously don't read the blog on the Comments section?

If I wanted to read the incoherent and ignorant garbage that passes for their opinions/comments, I'd go to other websites like politico.com.

I really hope they just pass the bill, so that these folks move on to whatever their next obsession is. Which hopefully doesn't involve posting odious comments in any blog with the word "healthcare" in it.

Posted by: JERiv | March 9, 2010 8:58 PM | Report abuse

GOD, WHAT COMMIE-LOVING LIBERAL GALL


Kid, what IQ is required to know that GOVERNMENT SCREWS UP?

Not much, EINSTEIN.

Next: the kid thinks Chicago is an honest town.

What a ma-roon.

Posted by: russpoter | March 9, 2010 9:01 PM | Report abuse

Thank you, Ezra...

This is a good post with real information. It's good to see that nearly half the nation now supports the Health Reform bill... and I suspect that among those who oppose it, it's because it does not do ENOUGH (count me in as someone who would love to see the Public Option)

The great news for Dems is that, if the main reason people are against the bill is because the think their premiums will rise, they will be in for a nice surprise when their costs actually decrease, making Obama's bill even more popular once implemented.
Hopefully they will realize the savings by November this year... THEN what will the GOP talk about?

Posted by: jgarrisn | March 9, 2010 9:07 PM | Report abuse

People who are likely to vote oppose this bill in great numbers.

"The latest Rasmussen Reports national survey finds that 42% favor the plan while 53% are opposed."

These figures include just 20% who Strongly Favor the plan and 41% who are Strongly Opposed."

This health care bill will be the ultimate consumers' nightmare, just like ERISA, which DEMS passed in 1974.

We must demand, and get, better health care legislation, from the Obama and our DEM congress, or the result could be ERISA-like (DEM) federal legislation with draconian lack of recourse !!!

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ERISA#Health_benefit_plans , look at ERISA preemption.

In 35 years, the onerous ERISA health care provisions have never been substantially altered!!!

The Senate bill makes no changes to basic ERISA law and lays groundwork for ERISA like denials for those covered under this HCR.

Posted by: johnowl | March 9, 2010 9:14 PM | Report abuse

When you ask the public why they are against the bill, a huge number of those want stronger reform, not no reform. That is where the polls go all wrong. Many of those against are upset because reform is too weak. They want more health reform than we will get. Why doesn't the media get that right? Because they are the corporate media and they tow the conservative line. They want to make it seem that people really want to keep things the way they are, when they don't.

Posted by: goldie2 | March 9, 2010 9:42 PM | Report abuse

Betting it all for less than 0.5% of total spend.

The healthcare bill as written does not improve healthcare. It improves the government's control and oversight of each of our healthcare services (which is not necessarily a good thing). Those who oppose this bill do so due to a deep concern that it will drastically alter the relationship between the government and the governed. It will continue to provide a means for the government to spend money we do not have. This is a fundamental question, do you want more or less government? Where does it stop?

Finally, anyone who believes the CBO can acccurately predict the costs and savings on a bill that is projected out 10, 20, 30 years governing the total healthcare spend of the US which is predicted to be $30 - $40 Trillion is incredibly naive. There is no way to accurately account for the incredible number of variables, especially those variables that will come in the form of follow-on legislation. For instance, Social Security started at a tax rate of 1% in 1937 with a ramp to 3% by 1960. Now we are at 6.2%. Why would anyone presume the Government won't add costs to this bill over the next 10, 20, 30+ years?

Why would you bet control of your healthcare along with abdicating control of $30-40+ Trillion dollars directly to a government that has balanced a budget in only 5 of the 40+ years I've been on this planet just for the "HOPE" of saving $132B (<<0.5% of the total spend) the first ten years of this bill?

Posted by: wcmpatriot | March 9, 2010 9:46 PM | Report abuse

Cost is the key to opposition to this health reform bill, and the fear that people who are happy with their health insurance will have to change. The CBO figures were based on what the bill includes as funding, which is almost entirely bogus. Congress, if its track record counts for anything, is not going to fund the bill as advertized, and most of us know it, even the CBO probably knows it. Oh, except in one area, Medicare advantage, which complements the elderly's health coverage. The bill is going to take that away. The elderly know this too, and they are going to vote accordingly.

Posted by: erkenbra | March 9, 2010 9:47 PM | Report abuse

This is just more "Americans-don't-know-what's-good-for-them-and-we-on-the-left-are-just-SO-much-smarter-than-the-rest-of-you.

Leftist arrogance, nothing more.

The government WILL screw this up. They are incompetent, and they are lying or incapable of projecting the costs.
Name one major government program that has EVER met it's projected costs. Just one.
This isn't "mis-representing" anything. It's a fact, they've never met their projections.

Posted by: websterr1 | March 9, 2010 10:09 PM | Report abuse

There is no doubt most think we should have some regulation of insurance companies, cost reform with increased competition and of course tort reform. But no one in their right mind wants this massive invasive expensive health care take over by the Feds. No one wants 116 new government agencies we all know will be a cesspool of waste and fraud.
Our family is outraged, fearful and furious with these deaf arrogant politicians who could care less if we fell off the curb. This is a takeover pure and simple. We do not like the President's plan, the Senate plan, the House plan or the plan of the day. We are sick of the bribes, double talk, the hiding of the bills, the deals with slimy companies or unions, and the bold faced lies. Start from scratch or kill the bill.

Posted by: greatgran1 | March 9, 2010 10:32 PM | Report abuse

Wow Ezra, the wingnuts are coming out in force today. I wish they would do a gatekeeper question and ask respondents to first name what country Washington DC is located in, then possibly what country won the Civil War. If they're 0-2 or even 1-1, possibly eliminate them from the results.

Posted by: Jaycal | March 9, 2010 10:33 PM | Report abuse

The current bill is a GOP bill designed to make a Dem "reform" fail. It is also a tax. It will also shock a teetering economy.

We need to go with single payer when things get better. This is not a time to risk a huge shock to the economy. This is the funny thing, the backers will say, "health care is x% of the economy so we have to do something about it." True.

But such a significant portion of the economy having to change at such a time as now represents a shock to the economy. The time is wrong.

Posted by: jonavery2000 | March 9, 2010 10:35 PM | Report abuse

Premiums will go up 10-13% in the individual market because people will be *required* to purchase more comprehensive insurance. That's not a win for consumers in my view. As for the group market, CBO says premiums should go down slightly because employers with expensive plans will dump them. You don't mention that only 18 million will qualify for any subsidies out of a country of 300+ million newly mandated to buy the private insurance product.

Posted by: bmull | March 9, 2010 10:36 PM | Report abuse

Time debating this reform bill has come and gone. Misleading and incorrect information has lead many to inaccurate views and representations of said bill. This is not a perfect health care reform bill, I don't believe that anyone has called it such. Everything leading up this point has to have a conclusion. Over a year of debating and reconciling over an issue must have a conclusion. We must put our differences aside to tackle this issue needing address for far too long. Please research the facts and you will find that it is not perfect, but , again, it is a start, one that Sen. Kennedy might not roll over in his grave over.

Posted by: Skinsfanindenver | March 9, 2010 10:44 PM | Report abuse

While it's quite surprising to find such a high concentration of anti-reform comments on this blog, you've got to appreciate the irony.

Ezra writes a post in which he argues that the polling is quite close but may be skewed by the fact that many people don't understand the Bill. Before you have time to think about whether there's any evidence for that claim, a plague of wingnuts marches in and regurgitates more misinformed talking points than you could shake a stick at.

Posted by: AndrewNYC | March 9, 2010 10:59 PM | Report abuse

MORE COMMUNISM, PLEASE


Stupid cannot be fixed.

It can just be told, "we're CUTTING OFF YOUR WELFARE."

++++++++++++

When you ask the public why they are against the bill, a huge number of those want stronger reform, not no reform. That is where the polls go all wrong. Many of those against are upset because reform is too weak. They want more health reform than we will get.

Posted by: russpoter | March 9, 2010 11:09 PM | Report abuse

The way I interpret the current polling in the health care reform bill is as follows: do you trust the government to set fair health care costs or do you trust the insurance companies to set fair health care costs? I am surprised to see how many think the insurance companies are more trustworthy? The goal of the insurance business to make a profit. To that end they want to insure primarily healthy people who don't need care and charge as much as the market will bear, not what is a fair price. Also, what isn't talked about is what happens if this bill doesn't pass? The status quo is not an option. Medicare will incur cuts because it is presently near insolvency. Insurance premiums will raise because insurance companies are itching to recoup costs from young and health individuals dropping health coverage in the face of economic hardship, leaving a higher percentage of older, sicker members. Health care must change, and we either do it now ahead of the tidal wave or wait until the wave crests, which will certainly cost more in the end. Most individuals have no understanding what unregulated market forces will do to health care when we finally must address our enormous deficits, which is cuts, cuts, cuts to services and a more, more, more in the price of premiums. BTW, all those republican senators will be cruising along with their cadillac health care plans.

Posted by: citizen4truth1 | March 9, 2010 11:28 PM | Report abuse

Ezra,
Anyone with half a brain can see through your pathetic bias. Funny how we didn't see you analyzing any of the polls for months that showed opposition in double digits. Even a poll released two days ago by Rasmussen has the "bill" (of course it hasn't been seen or scored yet) down 11 points. But you found one you liked so it gets trumped up. By the way, did you notice that in all of these polls the "strongly oppose" outnumber the "strongly favor" by a margin much worse? Or that independents are generally against the bill 2-1? Those little things are what put Brown in Kennedy's old seat.

As for the CBO saying it will bring down rates, the CBO has to score what's put in front of them, but most people see through the accounting tricks. Even you do, as you acknowledged last week the con of 10 years of taxes for 6 years of benefits.

Posted by: josettes | March 9, 2010 11:48 PM | Report abuse

" And they found that people in the individual market (32 million of us) would find that a given insurance product would become 7 to 10 percent cheaper, but that they'd purchase much better insurance under the bill (that meant their premiums would go up, but because they could now buy something better). "

As one of the 32 million I would welcome cheaper. Frankly, I'd much prefer Single Payer, 30% cheaper for same medical care. I'll support the current efforts, but continue pushing for Single Payer.

Perhaps I'd buy something better if the net cost is the same. We see this in people who buy houses & cars - "What would you like to pay each month?" is the starting question.

Posted by: boscobobb | March 9, 2010 11:55 PM | Report abuse

As to the "buying the votes of illegals" that is provably false.

Would you agree the Bush Administration was obsessed with finding and prosecuting illegal alien voters? How many illegals were convicted for voting by the Bush Administration?

11 - yes a mere eleven convictions.

You could count them all on your fingers and still need only one toe. Even after stacking the deck with US attorneys obsessed with ACORN, that's all they ever convicted.

If they're illegal they CAN'T VOTE and they haven't voted. So Obama and the Dems gain no votes from them.

Illegals are not covered in the House bill, and reimbursement for the uninsured is already baked into our medical system costs.

Why don't you complain about the 12-30% markup in your insurance for absolutely no medical care? That's where we're being fleeced.

Posted by: boscobobb | March 10, 2010 12:00 AM | Report abuse

Articles like this are why traditional newspapers sales are going into the toilet. Ezra doesn't even try to understand an opposite point of view yet instead he chose to steam forward on how people who disagree with the current purposed legislation are uninformed or wrong. Strange, he didn't mention that many members in Congress find the bill confusing nor did he find information that indicates those who support the bill are more informed. Simply because you are for this bill does not indicate that you are any more or less informed regarding the 2000+ pages of proposed legislation. But what do I know, my guess is that Ezra and others assume I am an idiot because I think we could go about this reform in a different manner.

Posted by: mestizo888 | March 10, 2010 12:11 AM | Report abuse

Dear Virginia: You said that if you read it in the Washington Post, it must be true. Your little friends are wrong. What you said is in the Health Bill is true. If it passes and if someone can't afford to buy health insurance, they will be fined and if they can't pay the fine, they will go to jail. Virginia, you can tell your little friends that if the Health Bill passes, and if the daddies of any of your friends lose their jobs, they will probably go to jail.

Posted by: hurleyvision | March 10, 2010 12:17 AM | Report abuse

WE WANT real heath care , not a watered down insurance co. backed plan ! Yes we want real heath care .

Posted by: msgilfoy | March 10, 2010 12:23 AM | Report abuse

The CBO can be wrong. But I would still go with the CBO and Obama's estimates a million times over GOP "analysis". The GOP has no credibility anymore.

It is clear that many Americans who oppose healthcare reform, oppose it because they are misinformed. Is it so politically incorrect to say so? Ezra, you is right.

Posted by: DavidH3 | March 10, 2010 12:30 AM | Report abuse

If you are wondering about the contents of the National Health Care bill, then wonder no more. Watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoE1R-xH5To

Now I understand how the Jews felt when their train opened it's doors at Auschwitz.

Posted by: jauregui_john | March 10, 2010 2:01 AM | Report abuse

Klein, Dionne, Krugman and others confuse the Obama/Reid health care bill with health care reform. They are not the same.

"Reform" has become the most abused word in the English language. Reactionaries seek education "reform" by scapegoating educators for the failures of students. Groups supporting illegal immigrants want immigration "reform" to reward millions who broke significant laws. Health care "reform" that leaves twenty some million people uninsured in ten years, delays most reforms until 2014, reduces Medicare benefits, requires a mandate, but allows inadequate or no subsidies for millions, etc. are not reforms.

Posted by: Aprogressiveindependent | March 10, 2010 2:43 AM | Report abuse

Of course Americans want health-care reform. But where it's needed, not just where it's beneficial for politicians. What about nursing home reform? Everyone knows it's a nightmare. My mother, Evelyn Calvert, was killed by the inaction of the CEO of Sun Healthcare Group Inc while Sun was even committed to a Calif state injunction, he refused to replace the HVAC system to patient rooms. Yet months later started a P.A.C. that has given millions to Senators and Representatives of the House. He and his wife even generously donated $25,000 to President Obama's Inaugural Committee in Jan 2009. Yet I was compensated $17,000 for my mother's death and pain & suffering. Mr. Matros, CEO, even apologized for harm done to my mother through his P.A.C. manager, Julie Campbell. Then three yrs later passed on threats to me in mediation through my corrupt attorney I successfully sued for malpractice. That attorney died 2 weeks later.
Who do I ask to prosecute the CEO for willful misconduct? Because the Attorney General refuses to prosecute Sun for the deaths in their Sunbridge Newport Beach, California facility from 2003. Why? POLITICAL CORRUPTION AT IT'S BEST!
www.sunhealthcaregroupinc.blogspot.com
Deb Calvert
Newport Beach, California

Posted by: DeborahCalvert | March 10, 2010 3:29 AM | Report abuse

When has the government ever done anything and made it cheaper? The best they'll end up doing is shifting costs elsewhere. And raising taxes, those Medicare cuts are as abig a sham and hoax as anthropogenic global warming.

Posted by: ronjaboy | March 10, 2010 6:34 AM | Report abuse

Once again Ezra cherry picks a poll to make his beloved Obamacare appear as popular as possible. Pretty telling that the best he can do is a poll that says 45% of the population wants congress to vote for it. Ezra keeps saying that this bill won't take over the healthcare system in this country and that's true in that there won't be a single payer, Ezra preferred, healthcare system. However under this bill the government will have it's hand in every single aspect of healthcare from mandating the minimum type of health insurance you can buy to mandating that you buy health insurance. The government will acquire vast new regulatory powers over the healthcare system and will spend vast new sums of money on the healthcare systems. Private insurers will on paper remain independent private companies but in reality will become appendages of the federal government. If this isn't a take over of the healthcare system by the federal government then I don't know what is.

Posted by: RobT1 | March 10, 2010 7:50 AM | Report abuse

According to Ezra, then, the insurers and providers get hefty subsidies through tens of millions of new captive customers, and you get the same health-care expenses you've always had (minus 1-2 per cent). Mind you, these are the health-care expenses that are 2-3 times as expensive per capita as the bill people in Europe and Japan pay, and that bankrupt millions of Americans every year, but I'm sure the 1/100th reduction in their health-care bills will make it all better. What's not to like?

Posted by: redscott | March 10, 2010 8:35 AM | Report abuse

Ezra: What about a breakdown of those who favor the bill and why they favor it.

I suspect their answers would be equally clueless.

Posted by: MDLaxer | March 10, 2010 8:40 AM | Report abuse

When the Congressional Budget Office looked at this question (pdf), they found that for Americans in the large-group market (134 million of us), premiums would go down by 1 to 3 percent. For Americans in the small-group market (25 million of us), the change in premiums would be between an increase of 1 percent and a decrease of 2 percent -- so the likeliest outcome was a savings of about 1 percent.
-----------------------------------------
And the additional Taxes to compensate for a significant increase in Medicaid? And the additional Taxes to deal with Medicare? And the additional taxes from the new surcharges on unearned income and Medicare for high earners? And the fact that based on Medicare projections, CBO figures are probably off by a factor of 5 (conservative) ten years out? Can't just count premiums, as the effect of the plan would be a redistribution of income.

I can love each part of a twelve course meal at the Ritz for 19.95, but when I am later told that the total price of the meal was $600.00...I may object to.

Might it be that the people who are favoring the plan are looking at the elements, and those who disfavor it are looking at costs?

Posted by: Paladin7b | March 10, 2010 9:18 AM | Report abuse

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/09/health/policy/09rates.html

Obamacare = New federal authority to force bankruptcy on any and every insurance company in the USA!

Now I understand that many of you WANT a Govt-run Single Payer system, so I understand why you are FOR this.

But do you NOW understand why Republicans are united against it?

Posted by: FastEddieO007 | March 10, 2010 9:22 AM | Report abuse

If you think providing healthcare to 30 million people that can pay their bills now will lower your costs, I have a brooklyn bridge that I will sell you.

Posted by: sportsfan2 |

Hey sportsfan2 here's the mistake you made with your above statement.
If you think providing healthcare to 30 million people who can pay their bills now will lower your costs, I have a brooklyn bridge I can sell to you.

Of course you are misinformed because there are subsidies that can lower the cost but then again there are people who makes minimum wage who can not afford to pay for medical care much less food.

Posted by: beeker25 | March 10, 2010 9:53 AM | Report abuse

People that support the bill understand even less than those that oppose it. If you support the Democratic concept of healthcare reform then you have absolutelly no incentive to actually read the bill and figure out what it will actually do. People in opposition have a much greater incentive to dissect this nonsense and point out the flaws.

Posted by: fallsmeadjc
--------
Funny thing is that I have read the bill especially the Senate bill and many of the opposition to the bill falls on the line of falsehood and propaganda with no basis in fact. Does Betsey McCaughey ring a bell? As a matter of fact, Factcheck.org has outed her lies so many time that she is gasping for air and resorted to name calling. Something you did not take into account in making that assertion.

Posted by: beeker25 | March 10, 2010 10:00 AM | Report abuse

For or Against is not the real issue... how about AFFORD it? What H/C program has actually been under cost estimates? NONE, all are over budget and we cannot afford those either.
Are we on the brink of being an Argentina or Greece... it would appear so. In the mean time keep feeding cake to the peasants??

Posted by: NeoConVeteran | March 10, 2010 10:10 AM | Report abuse

Thanks comment trolls, for a great heaping pile of crazy to start my morning with.

Posted by: etdean1 | March 10, 2010 10:27 AM | Report abuse

Ezra,

I believe the point of your article is that Americans want health care reform. I agree with that, but I want to fix medicare before we add another entitlement program.

http://pov9.blogspot.com/

Posted by: pparris | March 10, 2010 10:35 AM | Report abuse

Wow! It never, ever ceases to amaze me; the blatant ignorance of the MAJORITY of Americans! Complete, ignorance in areas such as this, inasmuch as the poor under-educated, non-thinking, reactionary, emotion driven, neurotic, (and MORE THAN JUST "MANY" ADDICTED TO "FEEL GOOD" DRUGS), offer opines about things for which they have no knowledge and no understanding. Why the eff do any of you think this moron in the White House got elected, Pelosi got elected, Reid got elected??!! My God in Heaven.. give me a break!!

Posted by: wilsonccjr | March 10, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Look, folks.. please. this is NOT about health care, or even non-health care. It is ALL about P O W E R. In Washington; given to Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and the rest of the dirt bag scumballs who are NOT representing ANY of you! Get real, wake up America!!!!! Wake up.. Open your eyes, clear your mind and T H I N K!!! This is NOT about healthcare.. It is about destroying the foundations of our very culture!! My God! What will it take for Americans to open their blinded eyes and SEE???!!!!!!

Posted by: wilsonccjr | March 10, 2010 10:41 AM | Report abuse

It's easy to cherry-pick aspects of a bill that a majority of the American people favor - just as it would be easy to cherry-pick aspects that they don't like. What matters is the totality of the bill. And polls have consistently shown that, whatever they may think about specific aspects contained therein, a solid majority of Americans oppose the overall bill(s).

What's more, the vast majority of Americans do not want to see these bills passed on a party-line vote:

"More than four in five Americans say it's important that any health care plan have support from both parties. And 68 percent say the president and congressional Democrats should keep trying to cut a deal with Republicans rather than pass a bill with no GOP support."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100309/ap_on_bi_ge/us_ap_poll_health_care

Posted by: tbass1 | March 10, 2010 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Look at this.. Please.. Just look, read, r e a d thoroughly, each and every comment. Here we are, dumbed out, non-thinking, emotion driven, ignorant Americans, debating something that is not even debatable, unworthy of debate; it is NOT about healthcare. It is about DIVIDING America and destroying our very culture. Unite, Americans..u n i t e.. or you, your children's, your loved ones, all of us, will perish under the dictatorial rule of a group of greedy, power hungry, truly unqualified to govern, liars, cheats, and theives.. These creeps who are behind this so called "reform" (My Goodness!!! Really!! Give US a break!! "Reform?") are wolves in sheeps clothing!!! Americans!! Hey.. psst.. hello? Open your eyes and your minds; THINK!

Posted by: wilsonccjr | March 10, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

"United We Stand, Divided We Fall," a favorite toast, in varying forms, of political orators from Benjamin Franklin to Abraham Lincoln. It gained currency after John Dickinson's "Liberty Song" was published on 18 July 1768, in the Boston Gazette. The work contained the lines:

Then join in hand, brave Americans all—
By uniting we stand, by dividing we fall!

The slogan regained widespread usage three-quarters of a century later when the popular writer George Pope Morris's "The Flag of the Union" appeared. The poem quoted the sentiment as given above, from the motto of Kentucky, which had been adopted in 1792. Gaining new currency during times of national crisis, the phrase was most recently a popular slogan after the attacks upon the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on 11 September 2001.

Posted by: wilsonccjr | March 10, 2010 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Poll numbers are more kabuki theater

- the golden rule - the guy with the gold makes the rules - is what governs this Country -

everything else and I mean everything is window dressing.

Stop wasting time arguing among yourselves and focus on solutions

- everyone - everyone agrees health care is crippling the overall economy bleeding the middle class and making business less competitive - here's a solution to HELP those of us not in politics and who could give a hoot over which side scores political points - vote your pocket books!

“Use Senate reconciliation and expand Medicare via the Senate’s buy-in provisions. The CBO has already signed off on this as a means of saving money.

More importantly, if more Americans can do a buy-in with Medicare, it creates more cost control (because there’s a genuine “public option” competitor).

It also helps to solve the problems of pre-existing conditions, because Medicare does not deny coverage on this basis.

Allowing a Medicare buy-in to Americans under 65 would give people a genuine alternative to private insurance and thereby render the pre-existing question moot.

It would also lower Medicare costs by expanding the risk pool of patients (the great bulk of medical expenses are accounted for by a small number of people, mostly the elderly, requiring very expensive treatment).

And it would substantially enhance the global competitiveness of American corporations. After all, in what other country in the world is health care a marginal cost of production for business?” - Roosevelt Institute Marshall Auerback

Posted by: JourneyHomeBurke | March 10, 2010 11:55 AM | Report abuse

saywhat4,

Please don't quote the Wall Street Journal editorial page as the gospel. The same folks who brought you Fox News are in charge of the WSJ and that really shows with the columns they choose to print on the editorial page.

Posted by: Northstar1 | March 10, 2010 12:16 PM | Report abuse

It is scandalous that healthcare is not universally provided in the wealthiest nation in the world. It is a fundamental human right and it seems absurd that the republicans have painted it as an evil enterprise against the common good. But then, on the other hand, this is what makes American politics so fascinating compared to the petty squables of British politics.

Posted by: DavidfromLondon | March 10, 2010 1:04 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Klein: You've ignored the important issue that the public has figured out that the rosy scenario CBO budget projections are based on budget gimmickry and enough phony assumptions to make Bernie Madoff blush.

Posted by: ElmerStoup | March 10, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

It would be foolish to think Obama's monster government health plan would work when they can't even manage, fix or provide proper oversight for Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security.

Posted by: 45upnorth | March 10, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

I am all for my family owning a BMW or a Mercedez Benz, however I am deadset-100% AGAINST the act of committing my family's money toward purchasing one.

Posted by: FastEddieO007 | March 10, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

As an American, I was "hoping" that the United States would join the developed world in recognizing the essentially civil right of a human being to health care! I believe all of the so-called G8 plus nations have recognized this fact and provide varying types of national health care. The obvious to me was to extend MEDICARE to all Americans and, if that was not possible, at least a Public Option Insurance Plan. Now, both are off the table and we are about to transfer billions and billions of tax dollars to the "For Profit" Health Insurance industry, an ATM for Wall Street! For Profit Health Insurance is counterintuitive and an oxymoron! I support increased regulation of the health insurance industry, but this is a far cry from what I thought would be the result of the proposed Health Care Reform agenda. Once again, American people are the losers!

Posted by: kemcb | March 10, 2010 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Ezra: Interestingly that you did not follow through after concluding that "...many of those in opposition do not know that much about the bill.” You did not ask that same question to those in favoring of the bill that they indeed know that much about it – or, better, even more? (Gallup actually details the reasons of their favor of the bill and it is not all about the knowing). More questions for your conclusion: If both of those for or against the bill do not know much about the bill, would you draw the conclusion as posted? Why is said omission of yours? Are there two standards of burden of evidence? Why not applying the same criteria that any reasonable debate should address to both sides? Why is relentless focus one side (that does not agree with you)?

Posted by: sun127 | March 10, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

I am opposed to the current concept of "Health Care Reform" because it does not in any way address the real costs or accessibility of health care. This is Insurance Reform. The whole package is a scheme for transferring the cost of healthcare from the economically challenged to those with greater resources. Wealth transfer from the haves to the have-nots is socialism, no matter what sort of clothing you dress it up in. Give me a plan that addresses rising costs of drugs and procedures; give me a plan that addresses the lack of adequate primary care providers; give me a plan that controls conflict of interest within the healthcare industry- then you might gain my support...

Posted by: cwarner7_11 | March 10, 2010 2:59 PM | Report abuse

For those who accuse the author of cherry-picking a single poll, please re-read the second sentence of the article. It includes a link to a compilation of 23 different polls, the sum total of which matches the single poll cited here.

According to that compilation poll, the highest level of opposition recorded is 52%. That doesn't sound like the "overwhelming majority" that the Republicans keep raving about.

Posted by: arlorant | March 10, 2010 5:09 PM | Report abuse

I don't want my representative to vote for a bill that HE doesn't fully understand and hasn't read, and that is the only responsible position. The disgraceful part of this unethical process is that the supporters of the bill know no more about it than the opponents. How dare they vote for it?

Posted by: jacko1 | March 10, 2010 5:18 PM | Report abuse

And for those who keep objecting to the reform bill on the grounds that it will have a high cost to the government and/or to you ... you provide a perfect example of dogmatism by clinging to your predetermined beliefs and rejecting any facts that disagree with them.

Obama says: If you like the insurance you have, you can keep it.
Republicans respond: He wants to take away our insurance!

Obama says: This bill will help America's small businesses and entrepreneurs.
Republicans respond: He's a socialist!

Obama says: The bill is paid for, and will reduce the federal deficit over the next 10 years.
Republicans respond: He wants to bankrupt the country!

If there was any evidence to show that the president's true intentions are the opposite of his stated intentions, you might have a point. But since there isn't, these positions are silly at best and counterproductive at worst.

Posted by: arlorant | March 10, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

NOBODY knows what is in the bill, jacko.

Remember? There are back-room deals going on even as we speak - you know, what Obama calls the "Fix-It" bill.

Stop painting this negative picture of citizens - YOU are unpatriotic to do so. What do we see? A bunch of lying, manipulating, thieving, deal-making, unethical "representatives" - twisting our system to get their way.

Pelosi doesn't know what is in the bill. The president must NOT know what is in the bill - he lied Monday about how much the plan was supposedly to save.

So - oh wise one - what is in the bill?

YOU don't know either.

Which is why this is just so much insanity...and Americans have a responsibility to not allow the circus performers to let the tigers out.

Posted by: easttxisfreaky | March 10, 2010 7:12 PM | Report abuse

Hi Erza first timer here.

In reading these comments, I see the same ol talking points against "this" reform that we've been hearing for months.

*yawn*

People complain that no one know what's in the "2000+ page" bill yet when others try to bring the facts to light, they poo-poo it.

You just keep doing what you're doing, Erza. Thank you!

Posted by: Rebecca_RN | March 10, 2010 8:17 PM | Report abuse

Yes they oppose it and for one very simple reason. They dont understand it. So either the government finds a way turn to this project easy for the common people to
understand or it will be a disater in practice. It may be a God send for lawyers
though as they will certainly study it, find contradictions and loopholes.What a loss of time for a government that has so many more important challenges to face.

Posted by: jeanpierregamet | March 10, 2010 10:53 PM | Report abuse

"I am notreally sure what it means so I cant comment on it "
It seems to me that this is the core of the
problem. And this is why the polls show divided opinions. This bill is too large and complex for the people to understand it . How then can you expect them to be in favour ? Its nonsense. Either the government finds a way to simplify it so that the normal people can apreciate it and understand it is destined to be a disaster even if it becomes law. Lawyers
will probably have a field day as they find a lot of contradictions and loopholes.
In other words in practice it may not work . If that happens there will be a political hurlyburly

Posted by: jeanpierregamet | March 10, 2010 10:58 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Klein seems to have a lot in common with Mr. Obama, he obfuscates and dodges but does not address the issue at hand.

I am against the bill for a number of reasons. Mr. Klein states...

"The next most common objection was that the plan "doesn't address real problems." I'm not really sure what this means, so I can't comment on it."

If Mr. Klein does not know what that means it is only because he has not been listening. The primary problem that this bill (which does not actually exist yet) totally ignores tort reform. Also, the bill claims to be a "solution" to "a lack of health care in the U.S.", but does not even address actual care, only health insurance. There are many people in this country who do not have health insurance, some refuse to buy it since they see no need for it, some desire to pay for their care out of pocket, and some have insurance that meet their needs but not the government imposed standard. Some of the people who are against the plan (myself included) do not trust the current administration because Obama has stated on numerous occasions, what is and is not in the plan, yet when he made these statements there was no plan, so in reality he was misinforming the public, and he has done very little in the interim to indicate that he has gained any honesty since making those statements, in essence he has proven himself to be be a blatant liar and has done nothing to dispel that fact. So why should we trust him or the other politicians that have followed him, in lockstep, in pushing for this phony bill? I read the first proposal put out by the Senate, and the first one put out by the House, when I called Reid and Pelosi's offices and my own Reps and Senators to ask about these bills I was met with a hail of commentary about what was "Really" in the bill, much of the commentary I got from Reid and Pelosi was outright propaganda, directly contradicted by what was in writing. So the main reason I am against this bill is that the people trying to sell it to us have a very large credibility deficit, and have done NOTHING to indicate to me and the rest of the nation that they are NOT trying to sell us a health care dictatorship that we will not be able to repeal if all the bad press is correct, after the fact.

Posted by: jonweiss1 | March 10, 2010 11:40 PM | Report abuse

The main RED FLAG in this entire debacle of a Health Care Bill is that the politicians who wrote it REFUSE to include themselves. If it is such agreat program why doe they not include themselves and their families under the bill and why for the first time in the History of the country, does this bill mandate that just for living in the U.S. that you MUST buy a product? (Health Insurance)

Posted by: jonweiss1 | March 10, 2010 11:59 PM | Report abuse

citizen4truth1
"Medicare will incur cuts because it is presently near insolvency."

Yes, MEDICARE is near insolvency. And those who back the current proposal want that same governement that put Medicare on life support to force people into a mandatory health care insurance system.

Which begs a simple question....

"Why should we trust a governement with our health care under a new program, when it has already devastated the old one?"

Posted by: jonweiss1 | March 11, 2010 12:10 AM | Report abuse

arlorant,
"According to that compilation poll, the highest level of opposition recorded is 52%. That doesn't sound like the "overwhelming majority" that the Republicans keep raving about."

If 52% is by your definition, not an overwhelming majority. What does that make the 32% of eligible voters that voted for Obama? Yet he claims to have a "Mandate for Change". Sounds like more left wing obfuscation.

Posted by: jonweiss1 | March 11, 2010 12:30 AM | Report abuse

I have heard a couple of different times that according to the CBO, some people may pay 10 to 13% more for a plan that offers more coverage. That is just an educated guess. Speculation, you might say. One thing that is not speculation, is the fact that many of the insurance companies want to raise the premiums on their customers by 20 to 40% RIGHT NOW. That is an absolute undisputeable FACT. And that will probably continue year after year. It's not to hard to figure which is more.

Posted by: scorplar | March 11, 2010 1:51 AM | Report abuse

Ezra said: " The top reason was that the bill "will raise the cost of insurance or make it less affordable." It's understandable why people say that. But the best evidence we have is that it's not true. "

You ought to tell Sen. Dick Durbin that because he obviously disagrees. And the American people understand that almost NO government program making promises of efficiency and lower cost has EVER delievered.

Ezra, if you were a bit older you might know what I am talking about.

Posted by: MikesAmerica | March 11, 2010 11:31 PM | Report abuse

The attached CBO is dated on November 09, that's a long time ago. There has been changes, deleting and adding provisions in the bill which should require a new version. I am not totally in favor of the bill although I believe the health care in this country needs some kind of reform, but not Obama's 2400 pages bill that is filled with socialized programs that has nothing to do with the health care issue.
I believe if these provisions that are belong to vested interest lobbyests are taking off the bill, it will bring the cost down tremendeosely and it will gain more favorable polls.
www.honorinoffice.org

Posted by: sdabboussi | March 13, 2010 3:33 AM | Report abuse

Obama made up his mind that "health care reform" (no reform here) - to buy the 15-20 million votes of those who are presently illegal aliens. By passing the health care bill - and going on to then pass immigration reform - he will add over 11 million illegal aliens (soon-to-be-citizens) to the "free" or "subsidized" health care rolls.

All he has to do is to line up his minions and make a declaration. I honestly don't know why he bothers with all of the media...he certainly doesn't need to.

Posted by: easttxisfreaky
____________________________________________
I think this is all about Obama. I agree that immigration will be next, because that will be the only way Obama has a chance at a second term. It's obvious that B.O. loves the lime light. He cannot stay away from it even for a day. Personally, I think it is an insult to American intelligence to state that "we have no idea what is even in the health bill." WRONG. We know what is in it, but more than that....we disapprove of the motives behind the politicians pushing this on the majority of America that disagrees. We also disapprove of the methods the Obama government and Senate are using to complete "THEIR" task. If you are smart ...you would be wise to listen to the constituents.... or start packing..2010/2012

Posted by: Intuition1010 | March 13, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company