What The Public Really Thinks Of ObamaCare

I am not a big fan of the health care reform passed by the Democrats and signed by President Obama (commonly referred to as ObamaCare). But while I don't think the reform went nearly far enough (a single-payer program should have been enacted, or at least a public option offered), I do admit that the reforms enacted were better than doing nothing at all -- and I think it would be a serious mistake to repeal the reforms.

Of course the Republicans have nothing good to say about the health reform. They opposed it in spite of the fact that it incorporated nearly all of the ideas for health reform proposed by Republicans during the Clinton administration. It seems that the simple act of President Obama agreeing to these Republican ideas made them no longer acceptable to Republicans. Now they call it socialism and keep telling us that most Americans would like to see the program repealed.

But is that what the American public really thinks about ObamaCare? Do they really want the health care reform repealed? The folks at The Economist decided to find out, and they hired YouGov Polling to find out. The Economist/YouGov Poll was conducted between August 20th and August 23rd of a random sample of 1,000 adults nationwide (and had a margin of error of 3.7 points).

According to this new poll there is not a majority of Americans wanting to repeal ObamaCare, but there is a plurality that would like to see it repealed. Here are the numbers:

WOULD YOU FAVOR OR OPPOSE THE REPEAL OF OBAMACARE?
Strongly favor...............26%
Favor...............15%
Neither favor nor oppose...............25%
Oppose...............12%
Strongly oppose...............23%
Total favor...............41%
Total oppose...............35%

That would seem to favor the Republican position (even though it's not a majority). But it's a little bit more complicated than that. When you ask these same people about the separate parts of ObamaCare you find that the people actually support most of what the program does. Here is what the people think about the individual parts of ObamaCare:

SHOULD EMPLOYERS BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE INSURANCE OR PAY A PENALTY?
Favor...............43%
Oppose...............30%
Neither favor nor oppose..........26%

SHOULD INSURANCE BE REQUIRED TO COVER CHILDREN UP TO THE AGE OF 26?
Favor...............48%
Oppose...............26%
Neither favor nor oppose..........26%

SHOULD INSURERS BE PREVENTED FROM CHARGING MORE TO COVER THOSE IN POOR HEALTH?
Favor...............58%
Oppose...............19%
Neither favor nor oppose..........23%

SHOULD INSURERS BE PREVENTED FROM IMPOSING LIFETIME LIMITS ON BENEFITS?
Favor...............59%
Oppose...............17%
Neither favor nor oppose..........24%

SHOULD ALL POLICIES BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A PACKAGE OF MINIMUM BENEFITS?
Favor...............60%
Oppose...............13%
Neither favor nor oppose..........28%

SHOULD GOV. PROVIDE A SUBSIDY FOR A FAMILY (OF 4) MAKING LESS THAN $88,000 TO HELP THEM BUY INSURANCE?
Favor...............46%
Oppose...............25%
Neither favor nor oppose..........29%

SHOULD ACCESS TO INSURANCE BE GUARANTEED FOR THOSE WITH PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS?
Favor...............71%
Oppose...............7%
Neither favor nor oppose..........22%

When we look at the individual parts of ObamaCare, we find that the people are actually in favor of them (and most people would not like to see these things repealed). There is only one individual aspect of ObamaCare that a majority of Americans oppose. It is:

SHOULD CITIZENS BE REQUIRED TO PURCHASE HEALTH INSURANCE OR PAY A PENALTY?
Favor...............24%
Oppose...............52%
Neither favor nor oppose..........24%

I think this is because people have heard too many lies and not completely thought this through. The Republicans have given people the impression that this will be an onerous financial obligation that will be forced on working people who cannot afford it. That is simply not true. A family of four making less than $88,000 will receive help from the government to help defray the cost of purchasing insurance (and the less a family makes the more help they will get).

Also, this will actually help people financially. All families will have a medical emergency sooner or later, and having the insurance they were "forced" to purchase will prevent them from being stuck with enormous medical bills -- bills that could destroy their finances and even drive them into bankruptcy. People without health insurance are playing "russian-roulette" with their financial well-being.

The provision requiring everyone to purchase insurance will actually drive down the cost of insurance. In fact, it is the only provision of those discussed here that will help to drive down the cost -- all of the others will tend to drive up the cost. Currently the doctors and hospitals must inflate their bills to cover the cost of giving care to people with no health insurance coverage (and no way to pay). These inflated costs are included in the bills the insurance companies must pay, and the insurance companies pass those costs on to their customers through higher premium costs.

When everyone has insurance, there will be no need to inflate medical costs to cover people without insurance. In addition, the insurance companies can keep premiums down because they are selling a lot more policies and therefore receiving a lot more income from the policies they sell. But since there will not be more money being paid out, they won't need to raise premium prices as much or as often as they currently do.

Those opposed to repealing health care reform need to do a better job of explaining both the advantages and necessity of requiring everyone to have insurance coverage. Once this is done, I believe the majority will even agree with this provision.