The Power of the Word Medicare -

When the word Medicare is used in the various polls, the number of people who favor the plan automatically jumps, it makes no difference if the question relates to the public option or a national insurance system such as single-payer...the word "Medicare" has a favorable connotation.

The Kaiser Health Tracking poll is one of the few recent polls that asks about a single-payer plan or government run insurance plan for all, many of the polls leave SP out altogether and that includes the widely cited poll from June saying that 72% of people want a public option.

What Kaiser did, at times, was half sample certain questions.

For instance if they were sampling 1200 people, they would ask about a public plan "like Medicare" to only half of the people. The other half they would leave out the word "Medicare" and the support for a public plan, or single-payer, would drop.

Back in July their poll showed a jump in support for SP and I posted about it below, when there was a half sample I used the highest number, regardless of whether or not it was about a public option or SP.

Links to prior polls...
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/slipslidingaway/64

Main link...
http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/trackingpoll.cfm


Now their August poll has just been released and they did not half sample the public option or single-payer questions, what they did do is include the word "Medicare" when asking about the public option and exclude it from the question about single-payer, guess what happened to the single-payer poll...it dropped.

In addition to the charts that they post, they also post the questions with the numbers listed for each question from prior polls. You would think there might be consistency in listing prior numbers, but that is not what they did with the August list, they posted the higher number for the public option and the lower number for SP.


August poll charts link, page 9

http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/upload/7965.pdf

August poll questions, pages 10 and 11

http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/upload/7964.pdf


The devil is in the details.

;-)

it isn't confusing or foreign to them. that's why i don't understand why we don't just expand medicare to let everyone in. it would help with solvency, because people would be paying into the system as opposed to a private insurer.... and we could work out flaws in the medicare system instead of starting all over. even if instead of single payer we use medicare as THE public option, it would make more sense and be harder for those who are lying to get away with it.

As I and my family need hell of a lot less meds and care than my parents. I am sure that pretty much works well down the line.

don't use it as much... so there is less strain on the system. medicare right now has mostly people in it that are going to need to use it more by the time they qualify to be on it. we all pay into it, but if we could participate in medicare, then boyond our payroll deductions we could pay into it like we do currently with our employer based insurance. spreading it out like that would help sustain the program long term while lowering costs for everyone.

Basically, Social Security is to retirement what "Medicare for All" would be to Health Care. If Putting everyone into the payer option would fix Medicare, mwhy doesn't it work for Social Security?

If "Medicare for All" was our slogan, it would generate massive enthusiasm for reform legislation. People understand Medicare. If they don't have it themselves, their neighbors and relatives do. It is non-threatening. The "Public Option" is confusing and scary to many. They don't know what is involved -- largely because it has deliberately not been adequately explained. I can only conclude that the Obama administration wants to kill any real health care reform, preferring to benefit private insurers with mandated insurance and few regulations for insurers. If they really wanted to pass reform, they would champion "Medicare for All".

Medicare and Medicaid? What about other government health care programs. If this is the case then we should definitely be talking about expanding medicare.

being discussed is creating a health insurance exchange that anyone could participate in. this would not affect any other insurance.... might expand people who qualify for medicaid though... but it will not replace medicare OR medicaid.

about using money from these programs to help fund the new bill. They will try and make these programs more efficient and there definitely is room for that to be done, but I do have concerns about the future Medicare costs as baby boomers become eligible for the program.

A program which expands Medicare to all or a certain segment of the population is not on the table.


This was my recent post in another thread about concerns...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6363750&mesg_id=6364954

knr - Also I believe the protesters do have a point....
not about death panels or whatever they are saying.

We know that many baby boomers will be eligible for Social Security And they will also be eligible for Medicare.

We are told that we can partially fund health care reform with hundreds of billions of dollars in savings from Medicare.

What happens when millions of new people start to enroll in Medicare over the next decade and stay on the program for another 20 years?

Estimates are that the current number of people on Medicare will grow from 46 million to 79 million over the next two decades and that the influx of new people begins in 2011.

Even without knowing all the details of the numbers, that is a hell of a lot of people moving to Medicare and I believe that any savings will be needed for the Medicare program.

In addition to covering everyone, a Medicare for All program would also help to minimize the projected strain on the Medicare system.

What is in it for the young folks?

Not having to worry about being covered yourself.

Not having to worry about parents and other relatives struggling to find the money for supplemental Medicare plans.

Not facing the possibility of increased taxes to support a struggling Medicare system in the future.

Not sorting through different insurance plans.


Maybe I am missing something, if so please share.

severely disabled and would be one of the first rejected by private insurance. Medicaid and Medicare have kept her alive for 51 years and you both have relieved my fears with this answer. Thank you.

strong.

:)

http://www.wpasinglepayer.org/PollResults.html

Oct. 2003

Washington Post/ABC News Poll

Which would you prefer – (the current health insurance system in the United States, in which most people get their health insurance from private employers, but some people have no insurance); or (a universal health insurance program, in which everyone is covered under a program like Medicare that's run by the government and financed by taxpayers?)
62 % Universal
33% Current
6% No opinion

MEDICARE FOR ALL -- EVERYONE IN, NO ONE OUT --

:loveya:

:(

:hi: