Survey says: Americans don’t like Obamacare

Last Friday, the Kaiser Family Foundation released the results of its recent survey of what Americans believe about Obamacare.  Apparently Americans have heeded then Speaker Pelosi’s advice…we have to pass the bill before you can see what is in it. 

They did, and we did.

…only 34% of respondents have a favorable view of the Affordable Care Act, down from 41% in September.  Notably, the decline was due to losing Democratic supporters, who dropped to 52% from 65% month to month.  Meanwhile, 51% of the public is opposed to the vast new government health-care entitlement, up from a prior 2011 average of 45%. [emphasis in original]

And then there is this poll,

[t]he current Real Clear Politics average of all health polling puts opposition at 50.6% and support at 38.4%, down from a summer high of 41.5%.

From those numbers, I can only assume that the missing 11% are still plodding through the 2700 page bill, and thus haven’t yet formed an opinion.

But, here is perhaps the most revealing piece of the poll.

The most important question Kaiser asked was whether national health care would leave Americans better or worse off.  Some 44% said worse off, a 10 percentage-point jump from September, while only 18% believed they would be better off. [emphasis supplied]

Thus, it is no surprise that,

Democrats have also been running away from it, as shown by their recent demand that members of Congress not be able to refer to ‘ObamaCare’ in their government-paid mail to constituants. [emphasis supplied]

There are some good things about Obamacare, such as coverage for those who have pre-existing conditions, (although, very few have taken advantage of this provision as most states already provided this coverage), but, under Obamacare, Americans now see that they will be worse off with Obamacare than without it. 

Yes, Madam Speaker, we Americans can now see what is in the bill, and we don’t like it.

 

20 replies
  1. Dimsdale
    Dimsdale says:

    Thus explaining why the Democrats and ?bama had to ram through ?BAMACARE without people, particularly those voting on it, had a chance to read it and digest it.
    ?
    “Just sign here, sir.? Don’t bother with the fine print”…..

  2. sammy22
    sammy22 says:

    Since most of the provisions of Obamacare have not taken effect yet, I find it hard to understand how 44% of the responders feel that they are worse off.

    • SoundOffSister
      SoundOffSister says:

      You are correct, sammy, most of the provisions have not taken effect yet.? But, here is what they have seen…the disappearance of child only insurance policies due to the guaranteed issue community rating requirement that has taken effect; the rise in Rx prices due to the multibillion dollar tax on drug companies that has taken effect; the rise in medical device prices due to the multibillion dollar tax on device manufactuerers that has taken effect; the rise in premiums due to the last 2 items; and the fact that, but for waivers (which will expire in 2014) they may have lost their employer provided insurance, which they also know they will completely lose in 2014.

      • Lynn
        Lynn says:

        As usual SOS, you did not miss one point. Thank you for continuing your coverage of this outrageous onslaught of our rights.
        ?

    • Dimsdale
      Dimsdale says:

      Not “are worse off”, but “would be worse off”.
      ?
      I wonder how many pages ?BAMACARE will be after decades of tinkering by politicians to fix what they got wrong in the beginning??? I imagine something like the tax code….

  3. sammy22
    sammy22 says:

    My health care insurance premium will go up 1% or so in 2012, so I am will not complaining. Too bad I will never know how much it would have up (never down) without Obamacare! Maybe when it gets repealed (or it gets ruled unconstitutional) I’ll squawk.

    • Dimsdale
      Dimsdale says:

      If you could predict the future, you wouldn’t need government health care (but they would make you buy it anyway….).

  4. sammy22
    sammy22 says:

    Missed the point again.? SOS, as usual whacks away at “future” considerations. Why is it so hard to deal with what is happening instead of constructing future disasters?? And what is the meaning of insurance, Dims??

    • Dimsdale
      Dimsdale says:

      I believe that the Democrats and ?bama are “constructing a future disaster”, not us.? We would very much like to prevent one.? Apparently, even from what little people know about ?BAMACARE, they see the oncoming train wreck.? You apparently prefer to just roll with the punches, i.e. “just suck it up”.? We have time to take the “suck” out of it.
      ?
      Insurance is designed to assess risk and indemnify us against that risk.? What is your definition?? ?BAMACARE was designed to put price controls over assessed risk.? This will cause costs to skyrocket even more than they are doing now, with government just meddling instead of nationalizing.

      • Lynn
        Lynn says:

        Crass capitalist that I am. That was so simply and eloquently put, “Even a Caveman can understand”, Geico ad.

  5. JBS
    JBS says:

    ?BAMACARE = State control. Sounds like socialism to me.
    A friend pays for family health coverage to the tune of almost $900 per month. That includes everything, dental and prescriptions included. He thinks that ?BAMACARE will benefit him. I contend not.
    LOL.

  6. sammy22
    sammy22 says:

    Not dismissive at all, Dims. Just pointing out that in the comments before Lynn’s, you resorted to “disaster” theory.

    • Dimsdale
      Dimsdale says:

      I call ’em the way I see them, and apparently, so do the majority of survey respondents.? I think that puts you in the minority.

Comments are closed.