Did ABC/WaPo poll stack the deck against public plan?
June 24, 2009 8:49 am ET by Jamison Foser
ABC and the Washington Post has released a new poll that is sure to get a great deal of attention, as opponents of a public health care plan will use it to claim that the public doesn't really support such a plan. Many reporters will, no doubt, interpret it the same way. But the poll's actual wording appears to stack the deck against a public plan.
Here's how the Post described the poll results:
Survey questions that equate the public option approach with the popular, patient-friendly Medicare system tend to get high approval, as do ones that emphasize the prospect of more choices. But when framed with an explicit counterargument, the idea receives a more tepid response. In the new Post-ABC poll, 62 percent support the general concept, but when respondents were told that meant some insurers would go out of business, support dropped sharply, to 37 percent.
So, it sounds like the ABC/Post poll asked whether people support a public option like the "patient-friendly Medicare system," then asked if they still support a public option if it meant some insurers would go out of business, right? The Washington Post presents this as framing the question "with an explicit counterargument."
But that isn't really what the poll did. Here's the actual wording of the two questions:
21. Would you support or oppose having the government create a new health insurance plan to compete with private health insurance plans? (IF SUPPORT) Would you rather have that plan run by a government agency, or run by an independent organization with government funding and oversight?
21a. (IF SUPPORT) What if having the government create a new health insurance plan made many private health insurers go out of business because they could not compete? In that case would you support or oppose creating a government-run health insurance plan?
Note that 21 does not actually include an argument in favor of a public plan. It doesn't indicate that a public option could be better and cheaper than private insurance. It does not link a public plan to "the popular, patient-friendly Medicare system," as the Post's write-up implied. But 21a does offer an argument against the public plan -- that "many" private insurers might go out of business.
The Post's write-up suggests that the poll shows what the American people think when presented with an argument for the public plan and an argument against it. In fact, it merely shows what people think when they hear only an argument against it.











The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles




Stupidism wins again.
We've made progress. Bottom line, this isn't going to hurt anyone but the insurance companies who practice bad policy that hurts the people. The conservatives say they are for a free market, but not a FAIR one, obviously.
Don't give up! Chin up, 38 elections are coming up! Vote your congressman out if he doesn't support the interests of the community.
If we don't get meaningful health reform--with 60 Democratic Senators--I'm through with the Democratic party.
I will not give them one dime. I'll be through with politics, too.
Screw it. (This is my line in the sand.)
You'd think they would have learned something from the first time Republican Special Interests butchered Healthcare Reform, but they apparently didn't. They have also learned nothing from the propaganda shellacking they have taken for the last 15 years. Republicans still control the public discourse, contrary to their whining about a "Liberal Media".
I think, unfortunately, the blame cannot be laid entirely at the Republicans' feet. Democrats aren't standing up the way they need to, either. Money is talking and Congress is listening to the cash, not to their constituents.
IMO, repubs couldn't care less about your situation....they want to get back to the WH....its all that matters.
Do you prefer
a) Government Controlled health care
or
b) Patient Controlled health care
------------------------------------
What's wrong with these options? Well, YOU HAVE TO BE A PATIENT FIRST!
Because it won't change any control between you and your doctor. They are simply offering a cookie cutter of Medicare to those who want it.
What's wrong with that?
Don't by the rhetoric from the right. Some are trying to block what 75% of American's want, and some are just poor pawns of the Corporations who buy into the fear rhetoric and get out their picket signs. These people work for the right wing scare tactics fear mongering media. Nice, huh?
They are working for the man, against their own interests!
you are outnumbered, could it be you are wrong?
could it be that you are getting alarmed over things that you don't need to be getting alarmed about?
Your comment has no basis in fact and is not supported by 75% of Americans.
Try again.
They both oversensationalized the Public Option. Dianne by putting a scary emphasis on "GOVERNMENT!" and Charlie whining "But Mr. PRESident, HOW are we gonna PAY for this?"
Shameful. I wonder how much money they got from the lobbies to spin it that way.
But Obama's pure class. He didn't know what they were gonna do beforehand and handled it beautifully. The man's a mental NINJA with class and patience. This emphasises their "gotchas" as insincere and staged.
SHAME ON YOU ABC! Trying to get the freeks of your stoop?