Half of American voters favor gov. guaranteed universal healthcare, but 43% say better run privately

[flpoljunkie]

Most folks evidently do not understand that Medicare is a single payer program administered by the government and delivered by private, not public, physicians, hospitals, and other health care providers. Medicare is also government guaranteed universal health care coverage for those 65 and over.

50% Favor Government Guaranteed Health Care Coverage

Thursday, September 20, 2007

Half (50%) of American voters favor government guaranteed universal health care coverage. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey also found that a plurality (43%) believe such a program would be better run by private companies than by the government.

The survey was conducted shortly after Senator Hillary Clinton unveiled her health care proposal to the nation. Clinton’s plan would require every American to purchase health insurance and provide financial assistance through tax breaks and other means to help keep in affordable.

Sixty-two percent (62%) of voters now say that the U.S. health care and health insurance system needs major changes. Twenty-seven percent (27%) say modest changes are needed. In evaluating Senator Clinton’s proposal, 49% of voters believe it calls for major changes and 24% say Clinton is seeking modest changes. Another 7% say she is proposing only minor while 20% are not sure.

Seventy-seven percent (77%) of liberal voters say that major changes are needed. Only 39% of liberals believe that Clinton is proposing major changes.

more...

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/50_favor_government_guaranteed_health_care_coverage

[ananda]

1. Boy that corporate run propaganda is powerful!

Privately???

Give me a fukkin break!

[flpoljunkie]

2. Incredibly powerful, and helped along by American's willful ignorance of their system.

[redqueen]

6. AND by dems who REFUSE to get off the corporate tit

and tell the TRUTH about it.

[sandnsea]

9. Only 36% support govt run

"only 36% believe that such a program would be better run by the government."

This is what some of us have been saying. It isn't a question of what program is better than the other, it's a question of what we can pass.

And unless you want this piece of shit tax credit crap, you better wake up and start honestly comparing the proposals of our presidential candidates. Those are our choices. Single payer isn't among them. I would hope people have the ability to say "I support single payer, but absent that, candidate *xyz* has the next best solution". We cannot wait for the country to turn against capitalism to get health care for people.

[LibDemAlways]

3. That's what you get when the sheeple are told over and

over by the repukes that government "is the problem." They start to believe it. My parents are in their 80's - both chimp-hating Dems. But they have same age friends who collect Medicare and Social Security who are staunch repukes and very much against universal health care for everybody else because they are against "socialism." It's pitiful.

[tigereye]

4. similar to the Mass proposals/ actions right?

It has too much of a feel of "blame the victim" for my taste. I don't like the way she's presented this.

[gratuitous]

5. Wouldn't it be interesting . . .

Wouldn't it be interesting to delve a little deeper with the 43%, and find out just what their objections are? Maybe lay the two proposals side by side, without a title or a label, and asked them which system they preferred?

Remember that 50% of Americans have reached this conclusion about universal health care with virtually no positive coverage of it, and plenty of negative coverage.

[Vinca]

7. A good point and in any case, the last time I checked, 50% trumps 43%. nt

[ProudDad]

8. The 43% have been convinced by

the puke and "moderate" Dems that Single-Payer means that the "big bad government" will take over all of the hospitals, Docs and Nurses and dictate who and what they can treat...kind of like the current situation with the private, for-profit insurance company leeches dictating who and what they can treat Nothing could be further from the truth.

Just check out HR676...

These people don't realize that Single-Payer is ONLY a funding mechanism. It would also serve as an organizing principle that would leverage the power of "We the People" against the for-profit agents of overly-expensive "health care technologies". In other words, with one People's financing agency we can FORCE big pharma to give us the same price breaks they are forced to give the Civilized countries who have Single-Payer already.