The Down Range Forum

Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: Rastus on August 07, 2009, 03:23:58 AM

Title: H E A L T H * C A R E * P O L L
Post by: Rastus on August 07, 2009, 03:23:58 AM: The only thing going for the Dems is that this health care debate vote is going to happen after the peak of summer. Those of us from the 60' and 70's remember the anti-war protests. There are beginning to be some disturbing parralels to the protests emerging. The most salient fact is the difference this time from then. Last time the protests were largely supported by radicals who did not work; many of whom had clandestine Soviet support where mommy and daddy's money did not come through. Now, the protests are largely from productive Americans towards radicals who have been elected to government.

If nothing else it will be interesting to see if people who have been worshipping personal peace and prosperity will return to their sheepish ways when the going gets tough.
Title: Re: H E A L T H * C A R E * P O L L
Post by: Pathfinder on August 07, 2009, 06:23:26 AM: One other key difference Rastus - the 60's protests were well organized from a central committee. These protests today are truly grass-roots, with no discernible organization (except in attack response from the WH), stemming from the disgust and anger over the federal gummint's actions.
Title: Re: H E A L T H * C A R E * P O L L
Post by: MikeBjerum on August 07, 2009, 07:47:14 AM: I agree with Path on the organization of these protests. I had the "great cnn" on for a little this morning, and they are blaming the RNC for the protests. My problem with this theory is that the protesters are all over the place with their protest. There is no central chant or disagreement ...

This is the sheeple waking up and joining the other side!

Like the race riots of the '60s I don't see that this will be an organized revolt, so we won't be seeing the large volume rope sales. However, we are going to see revolt at the individual grassroot level, and I would avoid crowds at political sights like these AARP "townhall" or should we say "rubber stamp" events. If things don't change we will see this spread to everyday life.
Title: Re: H E A L T H * C A R E * P O L L
Post by: WatchManUSA on August 07, 2009, 09:00:37 AM: people coming to the events because they heard about it from a conservative radio person or got an email from some conservative organization.

SO WHAT? The liberals do it all the time.

Have do the democratic operatives look at the demographics of the crowds? These people are from every walk of life and span multiple generations. My 72 year-old father in-law want to go to a town hall meeting. He is a Korean War vet who is quiet and mild mannered. He has never publicly protested against anything. He is so riled up at ObamaCare about this he wants to have his voice heard.

The problem is the questions asked at the town halls are really good questions. The major problem the democrats have is that they have no reasonable answer. They cannot articulate any benefit ObamaCare provides the majority of Americans.
Title: Re: H E A L T H * C A R E * P O L L
Post by: MikeBjerum on August 07, 2009, 09:46:48 AM: Quote from: WatchManUSA on August 07, 2009, 09:00:37 AM

The problem is the questions asked at the town halls are really good questions. The major problem the democrats have is that they have no reasonable answer. They cannot articulate any benefit ObamaCare provides the majority of Americans.

Just wait - There is coming a time when questions will need to be pre-screened >:(

This has happened in the past, and I have seen it coming for a while. Your last paragraph made me think of it again. Soon we will see selected audiences, prescreened questions, and even the protesters will be selected so they can be polite and converted on camera.

In the 60's, 70's & 80's we saw many Sci-Fi movies on this way of governmental control, and it is slowly moving in. Let's rename ObamaCare Soilent Green ... That would make everyone happy except you and me.
Title: Re: H E A L T H * C A R E * P O L L
Post by: tt11758 on August 07, 2009, 11:19:21 AM: Quote from: m58 on August 07, 2009, 09:46:48 AM
Just wait - There is coming a time when questions will need to be pre-screened >:(

This has happened in the past, and I have seen it coming for a while. Your last paragraph made me think of it again. Soon we will see selected audiences, prescreened questions, and even the protesters will be selected so they can be polite and converted on camera.

In the 60's, 70's & 80's we saw many Sci-Fi movies on this way of governmental control, and it is slowly moving in. Let's rename ObamaCare Soilent Green ... That would make everyone happy except you and me.

Good idea.....they have to have SOME plan for the bodies of those who die because treating them wouldn't be "a good use of the plan's resources".
Title: Re: H E A L T H * C A R E * P O L L
Post by: Timothy on August 07, 2009, 11:25:52 AM: Soylent (soy beans and lentil) Green was based in 2022. If they change the 22nd ammendment, BHO could still be the president! Should have lots of dead foks to feast upon by then!

;)
Title: Re: H E A L T H * C A R E * P O L L
Post by: Kid Shelleen on August 07, 2009, 03:05:53 PM: I am thrilled to see so many protests and I hope and pray that this is just the smallest tip of the iceberg. Americans across the land are fed up with the "Change" that we are getting.

We have not yet begun to fight!!!
Title: Re: H E A L T H * C A R E * P O L L
Post by: WatchManUSA on August 07, 2009, 04:08:07 PM: Quote from: Timothy on August 07, 2009, 11:25:52 AM
Soylent (soy beans and lentil) Green was based in 2022. If they change the 22nd ammendment, BHO could still be the president! Should have lots of dead foks to feast upon by then!

;)

"Soylent Green is people! We've got to stop them somehow!"

Detective Robert Thorn (Charlton Heston)
Title: Re: H E A L T H * C A R E * P O L L
Post by: Pathfinder on August 08, 2009, 06:30:29 AM: Quote from: Timothy on August 07, 2009, 11:25:52 AM
Soylent (soy beans and lentil) Green was based in 2022. If they change the 22nd ammendment, BHO could still be the president! Should have lots of dead foks to feast upon by then!

;)

Not until the dead have voted a few time though. It's the chikago way! ;D
Title: Re: H E A L T H * C A R E * P O L L
Post by: Rastus on August 08, 2009, 09:15:09 AM: http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/07/21/it-will-be-a-cold-day-in-hell-before-he-socializes-my-country/ (http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/07/21/it-will-be-a-cold-day-in-hell-before-he-socializes-my-country/)

This happened with Kathleen Sebellius in Reserve, Louisiana. I haven't had time to see it, but hear it is good. The press is a co-conspirator in this farce, this is not on most of the local news and I would not have known about it had I not been on vacation working down here.
Title: Re: H E A L T H * C A R E * P O L L
Post by: tombogan03884 on August 08, 2009, 11:09:28 AM: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090808/ap_on_re_us/us_health_care_threat

WASHINGTON – As they head home to their congressional districts for the August recess, lawmakers who support health care reform are bracing for protests and demonstrations that threaten to turn violent.

In North Carolina, a congressman who backs overhauling health care had his life threatened by a caller upset that he was not holding a public forum on the proposal.

Democratic Rep. Brad Miller received the call Monday, one of hundreds the congressman's office has fielded demanding town-hall meetings on the health care proposal, said his spokeswoman, LuAnn Canipe. She said the callers were "trying to instigate town halls so they can show up and disrupt."

"We had one of those kind of calls that escalated to what we considered a threat" on the congressman's life, Canipe said Friday. "These are some strong-arm tactics, and we are trying to deal with and trying to talk to people in good faith about health care reform."

Earlier this week, White House officials counseled Democratic senators on coping with disruptions at public events this summer.

In the week since the House began its break, several town-hall meetings have already been disrupted by noisy demonstrators.

The latest occurrence was at back-to-back town hall meetings held by Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., which got so raucous police had to escort people out.

Dingell vowed Friday to push ahead with Democratic-led efforts to extend coverage to all, saying he won't be intimidated by protesters.

"I am eager to talk about the bill with anyone who wants to discuss it. That doesn't open the door to everyone who wants to demagogue the discussion," Dingell said in a statement.

The boos, jeers and shouts of "Shame on you!" at the events in a gym in Romulus, Mich., mirror what other Democrats are encountering around the country. Activists have shown up at town-hall meetings held recently by Arlen Specter, D-Pa. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., was greeted by about 200 protesters at an event in Denver, about half supporting Democrats and half opposed.

In Saratoga Springs, N.Y., about 20 protesters showed up at an event held by Democratic Rep. Scott Murphy to let him know they oppose the health care plans in Washington. They carried signs saying: "Obamacare Seniors beware! Rationing is here," and "If socialized medicine is best ... why didn't Ted Kennedy go to Canada?"

The episodes have drawn widespread media attention, and Republicans have seized on them as well as polls showing a decline in support for President Barack Obama and his agenda as evidence that public support is lacking for his signature legislation.

Pushing back, Democrats have accused Republicans of sanctioning mob tactics, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., accused protesters earlier this week of trying to sabotage the democratic process.

Miller never had plans to hold a town-hall meeting during the August recess, Canipe said. Instead, he was sitting down with smaller groups of people to discuss the plan. During one of those smaller gatherings on Friday, hundreds of people from a group called Triangle Conservatives peacefully protested at Miller's Raleigh office.

The threatening caller, when told by a staffer that Miller was not planning a meeting, claimed the congressman didn't want to meet with people face to face because he knew it would cost him his life, according to Canipe. The staffer then asked if the caller was making a threat. The caller, said Canipe, replied that there are a lot of angry people out there.

The U.S. Capitol Police confirmed Friday they were looking into a threat against a congressman, but wouldn't provide further details.

NO, THIS is the Chicago way and we need to think seriously about it if we want to keep America free
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g0RLyxP13o&feature=PlayList&p=3982A8A9B7215701&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=6
Title: Re: H E A L T H * C A R E * P O L L
Post by: tombogan03884 on August 08, 2009, 06:18:27 PM: http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_08_02-2009_08_08.shtml#1249752171

Columnist Charles Lane - full disclosure, an old friend and a
journalist who I have admired going all the way back to his Central
America days in the 1980s - has a striking piece in today's Washington
Post, [1]"Undue Influence: the House Bill Skews End-of-Life Counsel."

About a third of American adults have some form of living wills,
advance care directives, and so on, but, notes the column:

When seniors who don't have them arrive in a hospital terminally
ill and incapacitated, families and medical workers wrestle with
uncertainty -- while life-prolonging machinery runs, often at
Medicare's expense. This has consequences for families and for the
federal budget.

Enter Section 1233 of the health-care bill drafted in the
Democratic-led House, which would pay doctors to give Medicare
patients end-of-life counseling every five years -- or sooner if
the patient gets a terminal diagnosis.

On the far right, this is being portrayed as a plan to force
everyone over 65 to sign his or her own death warrant. That's
rubbish. Federal law already bars Medicare from paying for services
"the purpose of which is to cause, or assist in causing," suicide,
euthanasia or mercy killing. Nothing in Section 1233 would change
that.

The [2]actual text of section 1233 can be found here via Thomas, the
Library of Congress data base (if the link doesn't get you to section
1233, search the data base using H.R. 3200, then go to section 1233).
But as the column goes on to point out, the bill creates an undue
conflict of interest for doctors. It is not just, as Lane says, that
Section 1233 "addresses compassionate goals in disconcerting proximity
to fiscal ones." (Mickey Kaus has made this same point.) The column
raises a much more specific concern and conflict of interest for
doctors:

Though not mandatory, as some on the right have claimed, the
consultations envisioned in Section 1233 aren't quite "purely
voluntary," as Rep. Sander M. Levin (D-Mich.) asserts. To me,
"purely voluntary" means "not unless the patient requests one."
Section 1233, however, lets doctors initiate the chat and gives
them an incentive -- money -- to do so. Indeed, that's an incentive
to insist.

Patients may refuse without penalty, but many will bow to
white-coated authority. Once they're in the meeting, the bill does
permit "formulation" of a plug-pulling order right then and there
So when Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) denies that Section 1233
would "place senior citizens in situations where they feel
pressured to sign end-of-life directives that they would not
otherwise sign," I don't think he's being realistic.

What's more, Section 1233 dictates, at some length, the content of
the consultation. The doctor "shall" discuss "advanced care
planning, including key questions and considerations, important
steps, and suggested people to talk to"; "an explanation of . . .
living wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses" (even
though these are legal, not medical, instruments); and "a list of
national and State-specific resources to assist consumers and their
families." The doctor "shall" explain that Medicare pays for
hospice care (hint, hint).

Admittedly, this script is vague and possibly unenforceable. What
are "key questions"? Who belongs on "a list" of helpful
"resources"? The Roman Catholic Church? Jack Kevorkian?

Ideally, the delicate decisions about how to manage life's end
would be made in a setting that is neutral in both appearance and
fact. Yes, it's good to have a doctor's perspective. But Section
1233 goes beyond facilitating doctor input to preferring it.
Indeed, the measure would have an interested party -- the
government -- recruit doctors to sell the elderly on living wills,
hospice care and their associated providers, professions and
organizations. You don't have to be a right-wing wacko to question
that approach.

In a separate post, I want to consider something that the column
mentions in passing - that, according to the section's backers, it is
merely "trying to facilitate choice -- even if patients opt for
expensive life-prolonging care." I'll try to find a moment to post on
what I see as the relationship between that and the current love
affair (I share the love, in part, to be sure) with behavioral
economics.

In one sense, in other words, section 1233 can be understood as a
[3]Nudgy move to reset the default rules. The question then becomes,
is it merely trying to set the default rules for addressing a topic
that people would rather skip addressing - end of life issues, living
will issues, health care directives - or is it a nudge for getting
people, including ones now terminally ill, to shift their social
default settings on whether or not to consume expensive resources,
while putting it in the context of seemingly making your own decision
about it? They are, clearly, two quite different propositions - and
both of them amenable to the Nudginess setting of default rules
analysis and, depending on how one sees it, either "facilitation" or
"manipulation."

This question is implied by Chuck Lane's column, because he is
pointing to a conflict of interest on the part of the provider of this
advice, on which the distinction in part turns. But it also goes a
long way further than the Post column, to a discussion of
Nudge-the-book and the ways in which it can be either a means of
facilitating the choices that people would rationally make but can't
quite step up to the plate to make, or else a means of manipulating
human psychology toward public policy ends that someone else has
decided are the rational ends, whether people would agree to them or
not. The principles of Nudge seem disconcertingly applicable to either
agenda.

I'm a big fan of it as a facilitation process. I even buy the idea
that there is a form of justified "libertarian paternalism" that is
not merely an oxymoron or simple paternalism. But the one, libertarian
paternalism and the facilitation of the choices that people will make
for themselves and consider themselves rational for doing so, slides
really, really easily into the other, paternalism, and manipulating
choices. All it really takes is an apparatus of public policy and
disconnected group of technocrats willing to decide the things the way
that presumably All Rational People Would Decide If Only They Were
[fill in the blank with your favorite technocrat - e.g., Ken
Anderson]. (I'll try to get back to this, but probably not soon.)

References

1. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/07/AR2009080703043.html
2. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c111:1:./temp/~c111yReBCV:e513253:
3. http://www.amazon.com/Nudge-Improving-Decisions-Health-Happiness/dp/014311526X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1249750306&sr=8-1
Title: Re: H E A L T H * C A R E * P O L L
Post by: tombogan03884 on August 11, 2009, 10:45:00 AM: 2 related stories from Rasmussen
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/august_2009/32_favor_single_payer_health_care_57_oppose

Thirty-two percent (32%) of voters nationwide favor a single-payer health care system where the federal government provides coverage for everyone. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% are opposed to a single-payer plan.

Fifty-two percent (52%) believe such a system would lead to a lower quality of care while 13% believe care would improve. Twenty-seven percent (27%) think that the quality of care would remain about the same.

Forty-five percent (45%) also say a single-payer system would lead to higher health care costs while 24% think lower costs would result. Nineteen percent (19%) think prices would remain about the same.

There's wide political disagreement over the single-payer issue. Sixty-two percent (62%) of Democrats favor a single-payer system, but 87% of Republicans are opposed to one. As for those not affiliated with either major party, 22% favor a single-payer approach while 63% are opposed.

Investors oppose a single-payer system by a three-to-one margin. However, a narrow plurality of non-investors favor such a plan.

Data released earlier today shows that 51% of voters fear the federal government more than private insurance companies when it comes to health care decisions. Forty-one percent (41%) have the opposite fear.

Recent polling has shown that the public is fairly evenly divided about the health insurance proposals being made by the president and congressional leaders of his party, but most remain convinced that the plans will raise costs and hurt the quality of the care they receive. Those who feel strongly about the issue are more likely to oppose the reform effort.

As Congress has debated potential reforms, confidence in U.S. health care system has increased. Just 19% of Americans now rate the overall system as poor while 48% say it’s good or excellent.

Voters are fairly evenly divided in their views of those protesting the health care reform plans at congressional town hall meetings, but 49% believe they are genuinely expressing the views of their neighbors. Thirty-seven percent (37%) believe the protests are phony, encouraged by special interest groups and lobbyists.

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

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

ublic support for the health care reform plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats has fallen to a new low as just 42% of U.S. voters now favor the plan. That’s down five points from two weeks ago and down eight points from six weeks ago.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that opposition to the plan has increased to 53%, up nine points since late June.

More significantly, 44% of voters strongly oppose the health care reform effort versus 26% who strongly favor it. Intensity has been stronger among opponents of the plan since the debate began.

Sixty-seven percent (67%) of those under 30 favor the plan while 56% of those over 65 are opposed. Among senior citizens, 46% are strongly opposed.

Predictably, 69% of Democrats favor the plan, while 79% of Republicans oppose it. Yet while 44% of Democratic voters strongly favor the reform effort, 70% of GOP voters are strongly opposed to it.
Most notable, however, is the opposition among voters not affiliated with either party. Sixty-two percent (62%) of unaffiliated voters oppose the health care plan, and 51% are strongly opposed. This marks an uptick in strong opposition among both Republicans and unaffiliateds, while the number of strongly supportive Democrats is unchanged.

Despite the loss of support, 51% of all voters still say it is at least somewhat likely that the health care proposal will become law this year. That figure has hardly budged since the debate began and now includes 18% who say passage is very likely. Thirty-nine percent (39%) say passage of the plan is unlikely, but only 10% say it is not at all likely.

Congress is now in recess until early September, but Democratic congressional leaders have vowed to pass some form of the health care plan when they return to Washington. Town hall meetings many of the congressmen are holding to get public feedback on the plan have turned into protest sessions, and the New York Times reports today that the president and Democratic leaders are revamping the sales strategy for the reform effort because they find themselves on the defensive.

As for the protesters at congressional town hall meetings, 49% believe they are genuinely expressing the views of their neighbors, while 37% think they’ve been put up to it by special interest groups and lobbyists.

The latest polls shows that 26% of voters believe that passage of the Congressional health care plan will lead to a better quality of health care. But most voters (51%) disagree and say the quality will get worse. Seventeen percent (17%) expect it to stay the same.

Voters ages 18 to 29 are closely divided on the question of quality, but those in all older age groups by sizable margins expect quality to worsen.

Seventy-five percent (75%) of Republicans and 59% of unaffiliated voters say passage of the health care plan will cause the quality of health care to go down. Among Democrats, 41% say quality will improve, 25% get worse and 26% stay the same.

Fifty-one percent (51%) of all voters say the cost of health care will go up if the reform proposal passes. Nineteen percent (19%) say costs will go down, and 21% say they will stay the same.

Voters in all age and income groups, again by large margins, believe passage of the reform measure will drive up health care costs.

Republican voters overwhelmingly say costs will go up with the new plan. By a two-to-one margin, unaffiliated voters agree. Democrats are fairly evenly divided as to whether costs will go up or down.
When it comes to health care decisions, 51% of voters fear the federal government more than private insurance companies. But 41% fear the insurance companies more.

Yet only 25% agree with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that health insurance companies are "villains."
While Congress has debated reforms to the U.S. health care system, Americans have begun to show greater confidence in it. Forty-eight percent (48%) of adults now say the health care system is good or excellent, and only 19% say it’s poor.

Fifty-four percent (54%) of voters say tax cuts for the middle class are more important than new spending for health care reform, although the president’s top economic advisers have indicated that tax hikes may be necessary to fund the reform plan. That helps explain why 76% say it is likely that taxes will have to be raised on the middle class to cover the cost of health care reform, and 59% say it’s very likely.

Thirty-two percent (32%) favor a single-payer health care system where the federal government provides coverage for everyone, but 57% are opposed to a single-payer plan.
Title: Re: H E A L T H * C A R E * P O L L
Post by: tombogan03884 on August 12, 2009, 10:44:19 AM: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/august_2009/support_for_congressional_health_care_reform_falls_to_new_low

Public support for the health care reform plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats has fallen to a new low as just 42% of U.S. voters now favor the plan. That’s down five points from two weeks ago and down eight points from six weeks ago.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that opposition to the plan has increased to 53%, up nine points since late June.

More significantly, 44% of voters strongly oppose the health care reform effort versus 26% who strongly favor it. Intensity has been stronger among opponents of the plan since the debate began.

Sixty-seven percent (67%) of those under 30 favor the plan while 56% of those over 65 are opposed. Among senior citizens, 46% are strongly opposed.

Predictably, 69% of Democrats favor the plan, while 79% of Republicans oppose it. Yet while 44% of Democratic voters strongly favor the reform effort, 70% of GOP voters are strongly opposed to it.
Most notable, however, is the opposition among voters not affiliated with either party. Sixty-two percent (62%) of unaffiliated voters oppose the health care plan, and 51% are strongly opposed. This marks an uptick in strong opposition among both Republicans and unaffiliateds, while the number of strongly supportive Democrats is unchanged.

(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.

Despite the loss of support, 51% of all voters still say it is at least somewhat likely that the health care proposal will become law this year. That figure has hardly budged since the debate began and now includes 18% who say passage is very likely. Thirty-nine percent (39%) say passage of the plan is unlikely, but only 10% say it is not at all likely.

Congress is now in recess until early September, but Democratic congressional leaders have vowed to pass some form of the health care plan when they return to Washington. Town hall meetings many of the congressmen are holding to get public feedback on the plan have turned into protest sessions, and the New York Times reports today that the president and Democratic leaders are revamping the sales strategy for the reform effort because they find themselves on the defensive.

As for the protesters at congressional town hall meetings, 49% believe they are genuinely expressing the views of their neighbors, while 37% think they’ve been put up to it by special interest groups and lobbyists.

The latest polls shows that 26% of voters believe that passage of the Congressional health care plan will lead to a better quality of health care. But most voters (51%) disagree and say the quality will get worse. Seventeen percent (17%) expect it to stay the same.

Voters ages 18 to 29 are closely divided on the question of quality, but those in all older age groups by sizable margins expect quality to worsen.

Seventy-five percent (75%) of Republicans and 59% of unaffiliated voters say passage of the health care plan will cause the quality of health care to go down. Among Democrats, 41% say quality will improve, 25% get worse and 26% stay the same.

Fifty-one percent (51%) of all voters say the cost of health care will go up if the reform proposal passes. Nineteen percent (19%) say costs will go down, and 21% say they will stay the same.

Voters in all age and income groups, again by large margins, believe passage of the reform measure will drive up health care costs.

Republican voters overwhelmingly say costs will go up with the new plan. By a two-to-one margin, unaffiliated voters agree. Democrats are fairly evenly divided as to whether costs will go up or down.
When it comes to health care decisions, 51% of voters fear the federal government more than private insurance companies. But 41% fear the insurance companies more.

Yet only 25% agree with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that health insurance companies are "villains."
While Congress has debated reforms to the U.S. health care system, Americans have begun to show greater confidence in it. Forty-eight percent (48%) of adults now say the health care system is good or excellent, and only 19% say it’s poor.

Fifty-four percent (54%) of voters say tax cuts for the middle class are more important than new spending for health care reform, although the president’s top economic advisers have indicated that tax hikes may be necessary to fund the reform plan. That helps explain why 76% say it is likely that taxes will have to be raised on the middle class to cover the cost of health care reform, and 59% say it’s very likely.

Thirty-two percent (32%) favor a single-payer health care system where the federal government provides coverage for everyone, but 57% are opposed to a single-payer plan.
Title: Re: H E A L T H * C A R E * P O L L
Post by: Woody on August 13, 2009, 01:15:53 PM: They can keep their experiments away from me. Sounds like a good way to get out of Social Security and retirement benefits. I don't trust them with my body. I've seen their track record so far.