WaPo Poll: 76% Support Public Option As Currently Proposed

While the Village and some in the "progressive" blogosphere are spinning as hard as they can against the public option, it is worth noting that the Washington Post poll they are using for this purpose actually shows 76% support the current public option proposals. Question 22A of the poll asks the 42% who are opposed/no opinion on a "public option" (55% support s "public option") the following question:

22a. (IF OPPOSE/NO OPINION FOR A GOVERNMENT PLAN) What if this government-sponsored plan was available only to people who cannot get health insurance from a private insurer - in that case, would you support or oppose it?

Support - 47, Oppose - 47, No opinion - 6

Since the plan described in Question 22A is in fact what is on the table, this means 76% (55% who support a "public option" plus 47% of the 45% who oppose or have no opinion on "public option = 76%) support the public option currently being proposed in Congress. That is a fact you won't hear in the Village, or apparently, in the "progressive" blogosphere.

Speaking for me only

< The Village (And "Progressive" Bloggers) Insist Dems Dump Their Base | Baucus' Base: Big Pharma >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Taking on the system, (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by lilburro on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 09:42:02 AM EST
    crashing the gate, only to embrace the most moderate tendencies of Barack Obama.  

    At this point I no longer just believe some of these writers are bad at political negotiating, I believe they also just do not care about the public option as an issue and have a different ideology than I do.  I'm not saying Ezra Klein is George Will, but we have different beliefs.

    Concluding 76% Support It Makes (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by Dan the Man on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 10:48:16 AM EST
    the assumption the none of the 55% who supported the public option for everyone would change their minds if it was restricted to only people who had cannot get health insurance from a private insurer.

    True enough (none / 0) (#8)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 10:55:10 AM EST
    But that means the pressure if for MORE, not less.

    Depends on what's meant by "cannot get" (none / 0) (#11)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Tue Sep 15, 2009 at 01:19:56 AM EST
    BTD, to paraphrase, you've said:
    a government-sponsored plan available only to people who cannot get health insurance from a private insurer is in fact what is on the table.

    I imagine people who don't have health insurance "cannot get" it because they can't afford it. Or, they "cannot get" it due to pre-existing conditions. So, if the plan that's on the table intends to cover everybody who "cannot get" private insurance, for the sake of argument, wouldn't that cover EVERYBODY who is uninsured?

    Imo, the answer is a hypothetical "well maaaybe" and, in practical terms, it's a big fat "NO".



    I'd feel more confident of those... (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by EL seattle on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 11:42:45 AM EST
    ...numbers if they corresponded to a question that was phrased as: "What if this government-sponsored plan was available only to people who cannot afford health insurance from a private insurer".

    When I hear the wording "cannot get health insurance" my first thought is of those folks who have their coverage turned down for pre-existing conditions, which is a smaller sub-set of those who do not have health coverage.

    BTW (none / 0) (#2)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 09:43:45 AM EST
    There are currently 47 million uninsured Americans.

    Or, if you prefer, 5% of the population equals 15 million.

    That Seems Suspiciously Similar (none / 0) (#3)
    by The Maven on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 09:51:47 AM EST
    to the percentages I believe I remember hearing a number of months ago, in the time before all the insanity and misinformation campaigns broke out.  In other words, Americans' opinions really haven't changed much, depsite all the heated rhetoric.  And importantly, most of the media continues to portray the public option as something only of value to the far left, redefining the center to be something only minimallly different from the status quo.

    Breaking through the penumbra of received opinion among the Villagers (and the Village Wannabes) has always been one of the most difficult tasks, and with the "progressive" ranks seemingly divided here, the job becomes even more daunting.  I can only shake my head in wonderment and dismay at the fecklessness of so many I had once felt were my allies in these battles . . .

    Actually, a few months (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by dk on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 09:55:57 AM EST
    ago, that percentage (ok, I exagerate, it was only 72%) supported the option of government run insurance for everyone who wanted it (not just for a very small number of people).

    Yes, You're Right (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by The Maven on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 10:13:31 AM EST
    I'm pretty sure that was the figure and the poll question I had been thinking of, so perhaps that's an indication, then, that public opinion has been shifted somewhat in favor of the more restrictive proposals -- in which case, sadly, the mal-intentioned shouting has had an effect.  The fact remains, however, that there is no need for calls to ditch all forms of the public option on grounds of anything other than weakness and a lack of faith in basic principles.

    Well, I'm not sure. (none / 0) (#6)
    by dk on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 10:26:08 AM EST
    It seems like most of the "progressive" blogosphere was against a really robust (i.e. public option open to everyone) plan from the start.  I didn't see any of the A-listers pushing a public option open to everyone back in June.  The A-listers have always been to the right of American public opinion, IMHO.  That they are now isn't anything new.

    So all the polls are asking questions in such a (none / 0) (#9)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 11:39:18 AM EST
    fashion to skew the number that they are going to proclaim at the end of the day that support the public option.  That's pretty sick.  I get tired of the attempts to play me like I'm some kind of idiot.

    "Support Joe Wilson" (none / 0) (#12)
    by randy80302 on Tue Sep 15, 2009 at 01:46:31 AM EST
    This add appeared in my google rss feed for this story, the link led to his campaign website. I clicked on it several times to cost him a few extra pennies.