Well, way to pick and choose your polls. The Quinnipiac poll from July 27-Aug 3rd shows 52% of Americans oppose President Obama's health care plans and 39 approve (www.quinninpiac.edu). If you look at the trends, the more people learn about the plans and the cost, the less popular it is.

You are seeing a grass-roots movement building against this program and that is why the rhetoric is heating up so much.

The response from the Democrat elite is to label people who insist that Congress read the bill before voting "extremists."

IMO, many Democrats and the far-left extremists who are in the administration and in charge of the party right now don't really understand how the average American thinks or feels. Moreover, those same elitists feel contempt for the opinions of the average American and believe they are easily manipulated. They may be manipulated in the short term, but I have great faith in the real Americans and sooner or later they figure it out. That is why President Obama's poll numbers are coming down rapidly. In fact, they are equal to what G W Bush's were in July 2001.

This isn't empirical, but I have an opinion of the generational split you mention. It is similar to the metamorphosis most intelligent people go through as they get older. You start out very liberal as a youth, especially during the far-left indoctrination from public school and most colleges. Once you get out into the real world and start having to pay your own way and see the result of government getting involved in things you tend to get more conservative.

Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it." - George Bernard Shaw

"If the Government is big enough to give you everything you want, it is big enough to take away everything you have."-- Gerald Ford

By the way, I agree with Jeff on beer. Just not about many other things.

Isn't it notable that over 65 aren't supportive of change to the system, since they have theirs and are afraid of any change? But, but but... Medicare isn't really a govt. single payer health care plan, right?

Same phenomena when it comes to paying for education. Seniors don't want to pay taxes for children's education. The reason they always give, " My kids are grown, let someone else pay." And this always from the most affluent seniors. I'm four years from 65. I will be happy to have Medicare. But seniors as a group are a self-preoccupied, selfish bunch. They require younger people to pay for their social security and their medicare, and their subsidized housing. But screw anyone who wants them to pay for something in return.

The day may come soon when younger adults build a movement to bring an end to this, especially if seniors try to sabotage universal health care for younger generations.

The great thing about the internet is that you can easily find timely polls to support whatever viewpoint you chose to take.

A more meaningful article on polling with regards to health care is to contrast the recent polling trends from January until now. It is not a pretty picture.

Ignoring other trustworthy polls also detracts from your point.

The most important poll was the one in Nov. The number one issue was universal access to affordable health care. Democrats elected a president and strong majorities in the Congress to pass universal health care. The failure to do that will result in the virtual extinction of that same party. That's what matters, and I have to think Dem. elected officials know that. Here's why they will pass some version of a health reform bill and why the teabagger nut cases, and their health insurer financiers won't prevail:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/07/why_democrats_will_at_the_end.html

Not one person is ignoring the other trustworthy polls. Those "trustworthy polls" and all polls are just tools used to buttress or chip away at another's political ambitions.

I cannot blame Mr. Alworth for posting a poll that is actual "news" to me in lieu of a compendium of multiple polls on Healthcare Reform. Likewise, I cannot blame Tedd Piccolo over at NW Republican for only citing Rasmussen because it gives him the numbers that he and his like-minded commentators want to see in lieu of a compendium of polls that show close to 60% job approval of President Obama.

Polls are conducted by individuals with political biases one way or another. It is readily apparent in the wording of questions, which is the main reason why polls on the same issue deviate from another even on what appears as the same question.

Not one person is ignoring the other trustworthy polls. Those "trustworthy polls" and all polls are just tools used to buttress or chip away at another's political ambitions.

I cannot blame Mr. Alworth for posting a poll that is actual "news" to me in lieu of a compendium of multiple polls on Healthcare Reform. Likewise, I cannot blame Tedd Piccolo over at NW Republican for only citing Rasmussen because it gives him the numbers that he and his like-minded commentators want to see in lieu of a compendium of polls that show close to 60% job approval of President Obama.

Polls are conducted by individuals with political biases one way or another. It is readily apparent in the wording of questions, which is the main reason why polls on the same issue deviate from another even on what appears as the same question.

I really dont know why we concentrate on "Obama's" plan, it aint got a chance in hell. We will get Congress's plan, which will be horrible beyong belief. Real progressives should be joining the Tea baggers because we are all going to suffer under the plans working their way through Congress, the only winners being the Large Health Insurance Corporations, yeah those that pay off Congress.

KenRay wrote,

This isn't empirical, but I have an opinion of the generational split you mention. It is similar to the metamorphosis most intelligent people go through as they get older. You start out very liberal as a youth, especially during the far-left indoctrination from public school and most colleges. Once you get out into the real world and start having to pay your own way and see the result of government getting involved in things you tend to get more conservative.

Ken, Ken, Ken, you're way off on this one, methinks. Try polling seniors on whether Medicare should be eliminated [the conservative opinion]. I predict you would find the vast majority strongly against eliminating their own government run health insurance program.

It has been shown in many polls that seniors are easily frightened by rumors that their benefits might be cut. this is exactly what Republicans and the insurance/provider industries are doing now. I seniors' fears are allayed, they will support reformed healthcare for the rest of us.

Much like the so-called free trade agreements, if whatever Congress is doing was really about getting everybody health insurance, say like single payer or some derivative thereof, the bill would take about 3/4 a page. Simply: healthcare is a human right and all people who present themselves in need of treatment will be covered. Actually, less then 3/4 page.

Nice post but clearly the distinguished Senior Senator of Oregon disagrees with you. According to Senator Wyden and his Republican friends who wrote an op ed in the WAPO today, "it's time to stop trying to figure out what the pollsters say the country wants to hear from us and focus on what the country needs from us."

Well Senator, the country needs a cost effective healthcare system for all of its people. You seem to be placing bi-partisanship above all, Mr. Senator...writing talking in this article of "the two-sides", as if they are Democratic and Republic. Looks to me like the two sides are The Village and The People.

Wyden pains me so, riding to stardom on the Grey Panther wave. Wouldn't he agree that Medicare is one of this country's most successful programs ever? How many Republics voted for Medicare's creation? What if the country had failed to get Medicare because a group of senators, heavily supported by the industry, told the people that it was "bipartisanship or the highway." Grandma Dina is rolling in her grave.

PS Medicare for all!!!

Zenith watches Longines watches Vacheron Constantin watches Patek Philippe watches

I sometimes, but very rarely, agree with the contributors to this site when it comes to policy ideas. That being said, I genuinely believe that those contributors..kari, carla, jeff, steve,etc...honestly believe in the intellectual honesty and viability on the policies that support and defend. I may disagree with them, but these are not stupid people and I recognize that they have some valid points which support their respective positions. However, the healthcare debate is a mind boggling outlier in that respect....there is absolutely no way that any intelligent, thinking person can possibly support a single payer, government run healthcare program in the country...and there is no way, none, that any of you who advocate for such a program actually, honestly believe that such a monumental disaster of an idea would benefit America...you're just not that dumb. Obama clearly received lots of support as presidential candidate...but support that is dwindling because Americans recognize that this helathcare proposal would be one of the greatest self-inflicted catastrophes this country has ever seen. Supporting this garbage simply because your chosen presidential candidate does is no excuse..so..lets all cut the BS here...you're all far too intelligent to believe in this....if you want to talk about the virtue of raising taxes or gutting the military's budget..fine...go right ahead..but there are enough crazy people out there advocating for all sorts of nonsense..you all joining in the chorus on this train wreck of an idea is a disservice to us all..so lets move along or go sound crazy someplace else...we're all stocked up here....

The question is, "Do these people who respond to these health care/insurance polls understand what these plans are about?" Witness the irate protester who told a Republican Congressman that he liked his Medicare and he wanted the government to keep its hand off it. (From a Paul Krugman column.) Then there are others screaming about socialism when they are talking about plans written by insurance corporations.

".there is absolutely no way that any intelligent, thinking person can possibly support a single payer, government run healthcare program..."

Winston Churchill supported the British single-payer health plan and he was very conservative. So did many graduates of the leading universities in Europe support single-payer when it cam to their own nations.

Here is a recent poll which is more telling about voter attitudes towards health care. People are insecure and worried that they will have health care, that their bills will be covered: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0709/Insecurity_not_satisfaction_with_heath_care_system.html

It's hysterical how the Rs go on about how much they love seniors and Medicare when they've been trying to destroy it for the last 44 years. A slight of hand that just keeps on going.. all the while claiming it's not a govt. run program.

Here's a moment of truth from Roy Blount, congressional leader from Missouri, now a senate candidate. http://www.dailykostv.com/w/002000/

The most important poll was the one in Nov. The number one issue was universal access to affordable health care.

You are deceiving yourself. Most people voted for Barack Obama simply because he was not George Bush. It was all about Change, remember? And if health care was the #1 issue, then why was the economy 65% of the pre-election conversation?

And now the economy is deliberately not part of the conversation since this philosophy by Obama to throw huge gobs of money at each and every perceived problem is why many will not vote for him in 2012.

JJ wrote:

there is absolutely no way that any intelligent, thinking person can possibly support a single payer, government run healthcare program in the country...and there is no way, none, that any of you who advocate for such a program actually, honestly believe that such a monumental disaster of an idea would benefit America...you're just not that dumb.

I'll ask you what I have asked others who condemn single-payer in such strong terms. Why does it work so well in several other countries, yet would be certain disaster in the US?

OK, cut through the ideology.

Which of these is better: current fee for service or putting doctors on salary so that they actually have time to treat patients?

Get Dr. Kitzhaber, Doc. Bates, Dr. Dean, Dr. Coburn, and all the other doctors in public life to enter this debate. Go here and find the debate between Dr. Frist and Dr. Dean---one of the more intelligent health care debates I have seen. http://www.charlierose.com/schedule/

Which is better: fixed fee for a particular treatment or "depends on what insurance the patient has " (Doc. Bates has a great story about that!).

If someone has an accident, should they be treated without worrying that the cost will drive them bankrupt? Or is the current system better-- where people are lucky who find out that their insurance (if they have insurance) will pay, but if not tough luck because at least it isn't "socialized medicine".

Prevention (from tests to well baby visits) either at reasonable cost or free because an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure; or people in low wage jobs not being able to afford such things, much less schedule doctor visits if they have an unpredictable work schedule?

Jason Atkinson survived a freak accident---but if he'd been in a serious accident as a fast food employee, what would have happened to him?

Talking about the dangers of socialized medicine, Canada, British system, etc. doesn't answer those questions.

Which is why, if Atkinson runs for Gov. there will be one issue which tells me if he is a serious candidate or not.

Given his inside experience with the health care system, what does he propose to protect those less fortunate (retail and fast food employees for instance) and provide them with life-saving health care if needed.

"Sorry, you may have to go into debt for the rest of your life because we must oppose government run health care", as too many Republicans seem to think. would be an automatic turnoff.

However, if he were to talk about the need to provide the same level of health care for all that he got, without the sloganeering, that would show him to be a serious candidate. Esp. if he talks about the local hospital Rogue Valley Medical Center----are they adequately staffed? In an area where so many employed people are just grateful to have a job, with or without any benefits, where the homes for sale/foreclosure rate is so high, does rhetoric solve anything? Or are actual solutions needed?

Of course, all that requires thought. Going to a town hall meeting and shouting down a speaker is the action of boorish bullies like the 2000 LET RALPH DEBATE Nadershouters.

Do Republicans have any positive ideas, or just political attacks and confrontation?

The over 50 set was the least supportive demographic of Obama in the election, IIRC. There may be other factors at work here besides fear of losing benefits.

The "greatest generation" received huge government benefits, such as the GI bill that provided college and home ownership to millions, that improved their lives and changed our culture. It is ironic and sad that as a group they are not supportive of much-needed progress.

As part of the over-50 set myself, I sincerely hope that I die before my brain rots to the point where conservative rubbish "makes sense".

Good article, useful for my job.... thanks very much...

As a member of the over 50 group but not on medicare may I offer a bit of clarification? It's not so much "government run healthcare" that's scary but the high probability that the final legislation will amount to another transfer of the taxation power from government to the private sector. The so called individual mandate is a given in all the plans being considered and for those of us whose income growth has leveled off or begun to decline and which will soon enough become fixed (and barely adequate to expenses) the prospect of being forced to pay 20 to 25% of(gross)income to an insurance company for the next 10 or 15 years means an impoverished retirement if any. We "boomers" have been the boogie man all along in the "health care crises" and it's easy to see how a compromise could be achieved by throwing us under a bus.

"Of course, all that requires thought. Going to a town hall meeting and shouting down a speaker is the action of boorish bullies like the 2000 LET RALPH DEBATE Nadershouters."

LT: I was with you until you came up with this. Nader had clear and valid points to offer, but he was "ambushed" by the establishment - Democratic and Republic party oligarchs and the fawning corporate media. The only difference between them and the "shouters" (past and present) is that the establishment operatives did their dirty work behind closed doors.

Dennis Kucinich got similar treatment. He did manage to get on stage, but the party oligarchs and the media hacks serving as moderators made sure he was side-lined.

I wonder how the respondents to health care polls would vote if they read this article - White House Affirms Deal on Drug Cost - before they were polled.

For the record, the Billy Tauzin referred to in the article was the lead congressman who pushed through the Medicare prescription bill for Big Pharma and left Congress for another job with Big Pharma that was reputed to pay him a million bucks a year. Chump change when you consider how much Big Pharma benefited from that prescription bill.

The relationship of the sellout DP "option" to patriotism:

“Give me liberty or give me a reasonable facsimile thereof.”

The Democrats’ Single-Payer Razzle-Dazzle (http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/08/the-democrats%E2%80%99-single-payer-razzle-dazzle/comment-page-1/)

Single Payer Advocates to Congress: Defeat Obamacare (http://www.singlepayeraction.org/blog/?p=1294)

It's the insurance industry and Big Pharma, stupid.

The T-B's (both Tea Bobs and Tea Bags) are getting some temporary pay-off from elderly scare tactics (lies about euthanizing seniors, imagined theft from Medicare funds etc.)

Wait until they find out the core of the anti-health care reform Republicans wants to end Medicare. Two Rep. Fl State Reps have introduced a constitutional amendment to that effect. We need to throw this one back in their face, perhaps in Rovian fashion, treating this as the essence of their message.

My guess is half of all private insurance policy holders over the age of 50 have, once or more times been screwed by their insurance company.

Add these to the 95% of Medicare holders that bloody well love their "public plan" (although studies show 30% of those over 67 don't even know Medicare is not a private company, such is it's institutional staying power.)

Educate the public into the fact that the real enemies are the greed-is-good players from private insurance. We especially need to start working with these two groups of elders and we can pull seniors support for public option well over 60%.

The scale of economies for Medicare for All actually, according to at least one study, actually strengthens Medicare for seniors. We need more work in this area of the economics of the issue.

I personally hope they eliminate employer based mandates because they are also a drag on our numbers and probably not a good idea economically- being industry subsidy gimmicks at heart.

And here is what La Palin says today, "ANCHORAGE, Alaska — Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin called President Barack Obama's health plan "downright evil" Friday in her first online comments since leaving office, saying in a Facebook posting that he would create a "death panel" that would deny care to the neediest Americans.

"Who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course," the former vice Republican presidential candidate wrote on her Facebook page, which has nearly 700,000 supporters.

"The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil," Palin wrote

LEt's all join her Facebook and then... hurt her a little.

<h2>Nice info, Useful for my job...this has made my life (my projects) goes a lot easier. Keep up the good work, thanks very much... :)</h2>