Friday, December 04, 2009

About that "60%of Americans Support a Public Option" Claim

Like so many things with Obamacare, that claim is bunk.

The question was not as simple as the press release made it sound: "60 percent of Americans believe a public option should be included in final healthcare legislation." Here is the question:

For this next section, please rate the statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means "Strongly Disagree" and 5 means "Strongly Agree". The higher the number, the more you agree with the statement. You can use any number in between. (READ AND ROTATE)

6a. The quality of healthcare delivered in our country will be better 12 months from now.
6b. It will be easier for people to receive care they need 12 months from now.
6c. The value of care delivered will be better 12 months from now.
6d. The total amount of money your family spends on healthcare will decrease 12 months from now.

7a. Do you believe a "Public Option" (like Medicare for everyone) should be included as part of the final legislation that Congress passes into law?
a. Yes
b. No
c. DK/NS
d. Refused


A few points. In the question, the "public option" was described as "like Medicare for everyone." Needless to say, none of the public options that are or have been under discussion fit that description.

Second, whereas the other question allowed people to rank the strength of their feelings on a scale of 1-5, the public option question did not provide for any level of nuance. You're either for it or against it or not sure.

Third, in the results according to Thomson Reuters, 59.9% answered "Yes" and 40.1% answered "No." Does that mean that no one (or at least fewer than one-tenth of one percent of people) didn't know or were not sure? That strikes me as very strange.

As always, the important part of any poll is the way the questions are phrased. If you want an abortion-supporting poll, you describe everything in terms of "choice." If you want a life-supporting poll, you describe everything in terms of the baby. The debate in health care seems to be much the same way. Calling Obamacare "Medicare for everyone" is deceptive. As William Jacobson notes, none of the proposals equate to "Medicare for everyone." Then Jacobson gives some more representative questions that won't be asked:
Do you believe a "Public Option" (like Medicare for everyone) should be included as part of the final legislation that Congress passes into law if it meant you had to wait for medical procedures?

Do you believe a "Public Option" (like Medicare for everyone) should be included as part of the final legislation that Congress passes into law if it meant you had to give up your private insurance?

Do you believe a "Public Option" (like Medicare for everyone) should be included as part of the final legislation that Congress passes into law if it meant that government ran the entire health care system?

We won't see questions like these, of course, since they don't portray Obamacare as free candy for everyone.