Rasmussin: On Health Care, 51% Fear Government More Than Insurance Companies

[SnyderShrugged]

interesting breakdown and it really shines a light on the partisan nature of the points of view as well.



http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/august_2009/on_health_care_51_fear_government_more_than_insura nce_companies

When it comes to health care decisions, 51% of the nation’s voters fear the federal government more than private insurance companies. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 41% hold the opposite view and fear the insurance companies more. Seven percent (7%) are not sure who they fear the most.


Among those who have insurance, 53% fear the government more than insurance companies while 39% take the opposite view. Those without insurance fear the insurance companies more.


Adults under 30 fear the insurance companies more while those in their 40s are evenly divided. However, a solid majority of those over 40 fear the government more.


These findings help explain fears by some of a government "takeover" of health care under the reform plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats.



Not surprisingly, there is a huge partisan divide on this question. Sixty-seven percent (67%) of Democrats fear private insurance companies more than government while 82% of Republicans hold the opposite view. As for those not affiliated with either major party, 53% fear government more.




*Click Link for rest*

[Burgold]

Well, that's because most of us know how the insurance companies are going to screw us, but we aren't quite sure how the government will. Honestly, I think it's go with the devil you know rather than risk what's behind door number three. Door number three could be a brand new car, but it also might be a llama. You never know with Monte.

[AsburySkinsFan]

And the margin of error is?


Among those who have insurance, 53% fear the government more than insurance companies while 39% take the opposite view. Those without insurance fear the insurance companies more.
That's the real tell tale right there, for me why should those with health insurance fear the government more, especially when the bills allow them to keep their insurance? IMO all this study indicates is that the case has yet to be made and that there is a lot of confusion and misinformation among the public about the reforms.

[Major Harris]

Most voters believe that middle class tax cuts are more important than new spending on health care.



buried down in the bottom, with no percentages...i wonder what it would be?

[cjcdaman]

Door number three could be a brand new car, but it also might be a llama.


Which is why there is no need to rush the healthcare bill.


for me why should those with health insurance fear the government more, especially when the bills allow them to keep their insurance?

For how long is the question. Yes, immediately after you will be able to keep your plan. But there's also a possibility that in a few years, private insurance will be wiped out leaving people with no option but to take the public plan.

You know this administration is doing well when people trust insurance companies more than the government. :rotflmao:

[Thiebear]

I see the Hawaii Childcare bill.
That was revoked, due to everyone dropping the private insurance to get the public one for free / or close too...

That they then couldn't pay for.

[Larry]

The admittedly snarky response that occurs to me is "Yeah, and half of that 51% believe that Obama was born in Kenya."

:)

[Teller]

For purple mountains majesty! Across the astrotuuuuuurffff!!!!!

[stevenaa]

I see the Hawaii Childcare bill.
That was revoked, due to everyone dropping the private insurance to get the public one for free / or close too...

That they then couldn't pay for.

I don't know how anyone can believe it will be any different.

[Teller]

I don't know how anyone can believe it will be any different.

I disagree. We've seen how effiectively the far more complex CARS program was managed. There's no reason to believe healthcare won't go the same route, is there?

[Teller]

Serious question. Has the federal government ever managed, run, or done anything more effectively, efficiently, and/or cheaper than the private sector? Ever???

[Rdskns2000]

I participated in a Rasmussin automated phone poll this weekend.

[desioreo87]

Serious question. Has the federal government ever managed, run, or done anything more effectively, efficiently, and/or cheaper than the private sector? Ever???

well tricare health insurance for those in the military is a fantastic program which is run by the government. I am a pharmacy tech and have seen basically every plan and most insurance companies suck ass. They are disgusting companies who take your money and give very little in return. I have never seen a problem with tricare, apart from the fact that they won't pay for brands if generics are available, but that really isn't a problem considering they are the same thing.

[SnyderShrugged]

well tricare health insurance for those in the military is a fantastic program which is run by the government. I am a pharmacy tech and have seen basically every plan and most insurance companies suck ass. They are disgusting companies who take your money and give very little in return. I have never seen a problem with tricare, apart from the fact that they won't pay for brands if generics are available, but that really isn't a problem considering they are the same thing.


tri Care is fully administered by Private insurance companies.

[Burgold]

Serious question. Has the federal government ever managed, run, or done anything more effectively, efficiently, and/or cheaper than the private sector? Ever???

If we rule out cheaper, I'd say the U.S. military... and based on what free market contractors charge the DOD, the military might even be cheaper than a privately run militia.

I mean can you imagine it if the free market ran the military:

Eight years ago:

President Bush: We need to go into Iraq to protect the United States from the threat of imminent destruction.

Free Market Military: Um... No, can do, Mr. President. We already went to Iraq once and it is considered a pre-existing condition, therefore the U.S. Military won't cover it.

[SnyderShrugged]

If we rule out cheaper, I'd say the U.S. military... and based on what free market contractors charge the DOD, the military might even be cheaper than a privately run militia.


I think the best and most efficient parts of the federal overnment are those parts that strategically rely on the innovation and quality methodologies in partnering with private industry.

I think thats why the moon landing efforts were so successful. the Feds realized that they couldnt do it alone so they farmed out key aspects. What we ended up with was a nice mix of innovation with dedicated resources to attain a goal.

[Burgold]

The government actually does a lot right often despite itself. The biggest proof is that America still exists and is a world economic superpower.

[SnyderShrugged]

The government actually does a lot right often despite itself. The biggest proof is that America still exists and is a world economic superpower.


agreed. Though my hopes are that our superpower status remains inspite of Federal overreach, largesse and debt.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Serious question. Has the federal government ever managed, run, or done anything more effectively, efficiently, and/or cheaper than the private sector? Ever???

So by your argument we should disband the military and hire private mercenaries. :doh:

[Burgold]

I think I'd also be really wary of a private-run court system. Though again, while I'm not sure it is the most cost effective system, it is a pretty darn good system.

[Cooked Crack]

Only time I pay attention to Rasmussen is during election time. His opinion polls take a swing to the right to get more publicity.

[gbear]

I'd argue the gov does a pretty good job on the research side as well. When it comes to providing unbiased data on contentious issues.

[SnyderShrugged]

I'd argue the gov does a pretty good job on the research side as well. When it comes to providing unbiased data on contentious issues.

That is also done in collaboration with private entities most of the time.

[Burgold]

I think what's telling is how often a private contractor (read free market guy) comes in underbudget and ahead of schedule when trying to do government work. Sure, the free market is efficient and cheap. Sure..... :evilg:

[Smoot Point Really]

The admittedly snarky response that occurs to me is "Yeah, and half of that 51% believe that Obama was born in Kenya."

:)

Allow me to snarkily retort: Half of the other 49% believe Cheney was piloting the 9/11 planes remotely, yet trust Government to take care of their health care.

[Larry]

That is also done in collaboration with private entities most of the time.

So your question is "Has the government ever done anything whatsoever which did not involve a single non-government employee?"

[Larry]

Allow me to snarkily retort: Half of the other 49% believe Cheney was piloting the 9/11 planes remotely, yet trust Government to take care of their health care.

Can you link me to that polling data that shows that one-fourth of the population believe that?

[Peeping Wizard]

The government actually does a lot right often despite itself. The biggest proof is that America still exists and is a world economic superpower.

You know what they say about a blind squirrel...

[LaxBuddy21]

That is also done in collaboration with private entities most of the time.

The private entities provide funding for their name on the paper that comes out of the research. They do not provide much support outside of that. They sometimes provide drugs and such. All the scientific direction is done via government mechanisms. NIH controls what gets done and what doesnt and without the government aspect of it, so much would get overlooked by the private companies only looking for what is profitable.

[Kilmer17]

Only time I pay attention to Rasmussen is during election time. His opinion polls take a swing to the right to get more publicity.

Where do you get that info from?

[The Evil Genius]

Where do you get that info from?

The contention is based on Rasmussen being a paid Dubya consultant in 2004. And that pollsters contending that his polls swing conservative because he only polls "likely" voters.

Either way, robocalls are annoying.

[Kilmer17]

The contention is based on Rasmussen being a paid Dubya consultant in 2004. And that pollsters contending that his polls swing conservative because he only polls "likely" voters.

Either way, robocalls are annoying.

How would only polling "likely" voters lead to a more conservative lean?

His polls during 06 and 08 were by far the most accurate. There is no vote to justify these numbers, so it seems like people who dont like the results have an easy out by claiming he's biased in some way.

[The Evil Genius]

How would only polling "likely" voters lead to a more conservative lean?

His polls during 06 and 08 were by far the most accurate. There is no vote to justify these numbers, so it seems like people who dont like the results have an easy out by claiming he's biased in some way.

Likely voters typically skew Republican - not sure why - but polling that way does provide that result. For example, Rasmussen was the only poll to show Obama with an upside down approval rating last week (well, 2 weeks ago really).

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html

[SnyderShrugged]

Likely voters typically skew Republican - not sure why - but polling that way does provide that result. For example, Rasmussen was the only poll to show Obama with an upside down approval rating last week (well, 2 weeks ago really).

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html

if this were true, then how does he gain the percentage of "Polled" democrats and Independents in his analysis?

[The Evil Genius]

if this were true, then how does he gain the percentage of "Polled" democrats and Independents in his analysis?

Not sure what you are asking.

[SnyderShrugged]

Not sure what you are asking.

How can he come up with this statement if he wasnt polling Democrats and Indy's?

"Not surprisingly, there is a huge partisan divide on this question. Sixty-seven percent (67%) of Democrats fear private insurance companies more than government while 82% of Republicans hold the opposite view. As for those not affiliated with either major party, 53% fear government more. "

[The Evil Genius]

How can he come up with this statement if he wasnt polling Democrats and Indy's?



Who said he wasn't?

The contention is that by polling only likely voters, the majority of those polled are conservative (and/or republican). But at no time is the idea that Dems aren't polled.

[Kilmer17]

Who said he wasn't?

The contention is that by polling only likely voters, the majority of those polled are conservative (and/or republican). But at no time is the idea that Dems aren't polled.

IS that a fact, or just an assumption?

[SnyderShrugged]

IS that a fact, or just an assumption?

It actually doesnt matter, he polled registered voters in a representative distribution.

At no time is there a distinction between conservative to Liberal. he only can go by the voter registration roles and has no ability to determine their core beliefs.

[JimboDaMan]

Oh, I definitely believe that statistic is on the up-and-up. You have the right-wing opinion makers, the people who tell other people what to think, filling people up with nonsense about death panels, euthanasia, government doctors, six-month waiting lists, and arrests for eating cheeseburgers. I'm not going to go into exactly what might be wrong with the people who believe this tripe, but its clear a good many do.

[The Evil Genius]

IS that a fact, or just an assumption?

I don't know - I am just relaying the contention. For example, if you poll likely voters vs registered voters and the likely voters polls 5% more conservative. Does it really tell you anything?

Or, if you have one poll (Rasmussen) whose approval ratings have almost always been 3-5% lower for Obama than any other major poll and whose disapproval ratings have been almost always 10-15% higher than any other major poll, does it really tell you anything? Are all the other polls wrong? Is this one an outlier?

Hard to tell.

[Major Harris]

Oh, I definitely believe that statistic is on the up-and-up. You have the right-wing opinion makers, the people who tell other people what to think, filling people up with nonsense about death panels, euthanasia, government doctors, six-month waiting lists, and arrests for eating cheeseburgers. I'm not going to go into exactly what might be wrong with the people who believe this tripe, but its clear a good many do.

so, if you don't trust the government with health care, these are the reasons why? awesome.

[Cooked Crack]

Where do you get that info from?
Looking at his polls and then look at other polls. Rasmussen leans to the right. Read right wing message boards and Rasmussen polls come up more than any other (now that the election is over). I don't get how Gallup says 70% support a public option to 51% fear the government more than insurance companies.

[Kilmer17]

Looking at his polls and then look at other polls. Rasmussen leans to the right. Read right wing message boards and Rasmussen polls come up more than any other (now that the election is over). I don't get how Gallup says 70% support a public option to 51% fear the government more than insurance companies.

I dont disagree that CURRENTLY his polls are favoring the GOP side. That just doesnt mean that his polling is flawed, it's a reflection of the way people feel right now.

Where is that Gallup poll?

[Cooked Crack]

I dont disagree that CURRENTLY his polls are favoring the GOP side. That just doesnt mean that his polling is flawed, it's a reflection of the way people feel right now.

Where is that Gallup poll?
My bad it was Quinnipiac.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1344

[Kilmer17]

I like their polling as well. It's completely possible that both are accurate.

[twa]

I like their polling as well. It's completely possible that both are accurate.

All in the wording:silly:

I support reform and options for the public,but don't trust government and don't like the public plan in the house bill nor mandated coverages.

[Larry]

How would only polling "likely" voters lead to a more conservative lean?

Democrats are lazy. Many of them don't bother to vote. :)

[Kilmer17]

Democrats are lazy. Many of them don't bother to vote. :)

Or work.

;)