Yes, People Want Bipartisanship — If They’re Not Told Getting GOP Support Changes Policy
One of the things that gets this blog stamping its feet is the method the big polling firms have used to measure how much the public wants lawmakers to craft a health care bill that has bipartisan support.
Again and again, the major polling firms have in effect framed the question this way: Which do you like better, partisanship or bipartisanship? Not surprisingly, the public keeps saying they want a bipartisan solution.
What the pollsters refuse to do, though, is ask voters whether they want a bipartisan bill if getting GOP support results in actual policy consequences they don’t like. Here’s the latest framing of the question from Quinnipiac:
Do you agree or disagree with the following: Congress should approve a health care overhaul plan even if only Democrats support it.
Agree 37%
Disagree 57%
Not surprising. But when Research 2000 recently posed the question in a policy context, asking whether people prefer a Dem-only bill with a public option versus a bipartisan bill without one, the numbers shifted dramatically, with a majority, 52%, wanting the partisan bill.
Brian Beutler notes that when the question is asked this way, “the public is perfectly fine with partisanship.” True, but it’s actually more than that: The public wants the partisan bill when it contains policy specifics they like, and cares more about the public option than about bipartisanship for its own sake.
I submit that this latter framing is a much more accurate reflection of the choice that the public and lawmakers face right now. Yet we’ve only seen one solitary poll ask the question that way. Would be nice if the big polling firms tried a bit harder to really probe public attitudes on this stuff.
This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
Sounds about right. I’d enjoy if the fiscal conservatives on the Republican side, that were serious about getting Americans health insurance, minus those speaking for insurers, were to really drill down into every aspect of this thing and make it as cost effective as possible.
But, unfortunately, Republicans are only interested in getting back into power at all costs, regardless of Americans suffering.
It’s always all about the question so it depends on what the pollster is really trying to get people to say.
I agree with you Greg. Of course I’m not usually a fan of polls but I was calling for more of them on HCR because like you I believe people are fine with a partisan bill. They want what they want – which is real reform.
Would be nice if the big polling firms tried a bit harder to really probe public attitudes on this stuff.
But that means people have to think hard! No fair!
“But, unfortunately, Republicans are only interested in getting back into power at all costs, regardless of Americans suffering.”
How much more clear can they make tha? Republicans have told people to their faces now who have told tragic stories of their problems with the system “too bad. You can go to the ER.”
They’ve been just flat mean to people about it.
Greg, It would be nicer if you called out those “big” polling firms for their false framing of questions. Your yesterday’s post accepting repugs “pulling even” with dems for example.
amk, didn’t I just do that right now?
In a way, President Obama is the one who sold a lot of people on the need for Bipartisanship. He pushed the need for for that, all through the campaign, and many people fell in love with the concept. What he did not do, was stress enough that it takes two to tango, and if no partner can be found, then to hell with the tango. Time for President Obama to borrow a pair of shoes from Michael Flatley, and go all Riverdance all over The Recalcitrant Republicans’ Obstructionist Arses!
Let the dance begin.
Time to pass a Strong People’s Option.
Greg, yes you did. Thank you for that. I want that kinda questioning the CW from all false polls as well as from the media. Blogs are all about being sceptic about corporate media and polling firms, aren’t they ?
BTW, aren’t these polling firms seem to be going into a frenzy in this presidency parsing his every move ?
“Liam | October 8th, 2009 at 10:59 am
In a way, President Obama is the one who sold a lot of people on the need for Bipartisanship. He pushed the need for for that, ”
He did and I happen to think it was purposeful and part of his strategy. As was his giving the GOP all the time in the world to come up with their own plan. Which they refused to do.
“BTW, aren’t these polling firms seem to be going into a frenzy in this presidency parsing his every move ?
”
Yes. There’s a poll every 15 minutes, just like there are more questions raised every 15 minutes over this president than any other and gee I wonder why?
They should start polling on the polling. Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree with the results of the Quinnipiac poll? *sigh*
Progressive States Network, a group representing state legislators across the country, announced today that 1057 state legislators from all fifty states have signed letters to Congress asking for real health reform, including a public health insurance option, strong affordability protections, and shared responsibility among individuals, employers and government for health care costs.
State legislative leaders, along with mayors from around the country, will be coming to Washington, D.C. next week to bring this message of state support for reform to Capitol Hill and the White House.
“State legislators have been on the front lines of health care reform for decades,” said Texas Representative Garnet Coleman, co-chair of Progressive States Network, “Most proposed elements of federal reform are based on ideas already debated and in many cases enacted in the states. So state legislators know what is needed to make reform work.”
In addition to these letters showing broad-based state legislator support for reform, the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) in August voted to support federal health care reform, including a public health insurance option. The vote at the annual NCSL conference was overwhelming, with representatives of 38 states supporting the resolution. As Iowa State Senator Jack Hatch (D, Des Moines), who introduced the amendment, said at the time, “We sent a very clear message to people dragging their feet in Washington: the time to act on health reform is now. We need a public health insurance option to make sure working families and small businesses are free to choose the best health care available at a price they can afford.”
http://www.progressivestates.org/node/23719
Me thinks strong PO is going to be reality, one way or another. So long scott.
People are in favor of a lot of things in the abstract – promoting democracy in the Mideast, bike paths, reducing pollution, more qualified teachers, etc., etc.
Real life is often about trade-offs. More X means less Y, or more X costs $Z out of a finite budget.
To really understand what’s going on, you have to ask is X more important than Y, (regular people can tell you that) and how much more important (regular people have a very hard time characterizing that in a meaningful way).
Even more tellingly, how much of X would you give up to get or reduce how much of Y.
All this makes better polling harder and more expensive to do, and to report. So we usually get generic – cheap and fast, but not as informative as we might like.
There is an analogous process in product development. Take cars, Do people want good mileage, comfortable seats, low price, choice of interiors, doors that go “thunk”? Well, yes. Getting the trade-offs right is not easy.
“Me thinks strong PO is going to be reality, one way or another.”
It is.
The only thing that bothers me is that the opt-out PO is getting talked up. The only good I can see coming out of that is someone will sue if that’s what they decide to implement. I hope someone sues all the way up to the SCOTUS cause I fail utterly to see how a patchwork system that lets states choose what to do is constitutional.
It’s like letting states choose to integrate their schools. That’s a federal matter – it’s settled. So is this IMO – it’s not a state matter and equal protection will kill state choice IMO.
In real life, when something is bad, and getting worse all the time, only Morons and Republicans will insist on not trying something new.
How can they possibly think it’s ok to let states choose on behalf of their citizens whether or not they are going to get health care? How does that solve anything, when Texas has the highest number of uninsured in the nation and they let Texas continue to refuse to give people access to health care? I don’t get it.
Health Care Reform is needed to rescue the nation’s economy.
That makes it a vital National Security Issue. Without a thriving economy, with good paying jobs for the working class, we will not be able to afford strong National Security.
The Current Private Insurance sytem is draining the economy of the ability to generate small and medium business jobs. That weakens our National Security.
We must take action now.
We need to pass The Patriotic People’s Option now!
I just read over at HuffPo that California is right on the edge of legalizing.
O god all it takes is a couple of states and the rest will fall like dominoes.
God I’d love to quit chasing drug dealers around – I hate having to deal with criminals – they are so unreliable.
Liam
I like your new name, maybe it will catch on.
And Greg
These polls are driving me crazy. I guess because we’re in such a state of flux right now trying to pass huge legislation. Like everyone else I sort of believe the ones that support my opinions and question the ones that don’t.
LOL
We’re very principled out here in CA. We need the money.
“Like everyone else I sort of believe the ones that support my opinions and question the ones that don’t.”
We’re all looking for that one ray of ultimate hope.
“We’re very principled out here in CA. We need the money.”
Whatever works. When Oakland decided to pass a a marijuana tax, I knew what was coming.
ANd I can’t wait.
“If getting GOP support results in actual policy consequences they don’t like.”
I think Greg meant, “If getting Blue Dog and moderate Dem support results in actual policy consequences they don’t like.” The Baucus bill is the result of an effort to obtain 60 Dem votes in the Senate.
Imsinca,
Sorry that I could not work Brad Pitt into the name, for you. Pass on the new marketing name for the PO.
It is now The Patriotic People’s Option. Only those who hate America will vote against it!
Did you catch Wanda Sykes on Leno last night? She is against legalizing pot. She said that it will rob people of all initiative. She said no one has ever met a Pothead with a to-do list.
She said that the should legalize Cocaine. That way people will work 48 hours straight, and clean up the air, by running to work, instead of driving.
@tena and lmsinca: It’s very easy to get a prescription for medical marijuana here in CA. And once you have that there are dozens of dispensaries. You can view the product online and some even deliver to your door.
I do have a problem with the disingenuous approach being taken toward legalization, though – “for medical purposes.” That is such a load of bull – you and I and everyone else here knows that we want to legalize it for recreational use (and to a lesser extent for the much smaller percentage of folks with a legitimate medical need).
I also have a big big problem with the young people. I have some experience with teenagers who have had access to pot and it really screwed some of them up big time. We will have to be very careful about this. And while pot smoking doesn’t cause cancer – it can contribute to a host of other pulmonary conditions.
“It’s very easy to get a prescription for medical marijuana here in CA. And once you have that there are dozens of dispensaries. You can view the product online and some even deliver to your door.”
Yes I know. I’m not in LA.
‘
And I have a legitimate medical problem – so you can stuff it.
I have glaucoma. IF they want to pretend it’s all medical use, fine – I don’t care. Whatever works!
sbj – your concern for young people is moving… really..
“I also have a big big problem with the young people. I have some experience with teenagers who have had access to pot and it really screwed some of them up big time. We will have to be very careful about this. And while pot smoking doesn’t cause cancer – it can contribute to a host of other pulmonary conditions.”
So what? Are you going to tell me there aren’t problems associated with alcohol, which is legal?
An 11 year old can more easily buy a pound of pot that a 6-pack of beer or a package of cigarettes. Because those things are regulated by the government. If pot was legal and regulated, it wouldn’t be nearly as easy for minors to procure it.
You can not like legalization – I couldn’t care less. I still think it’s right on the verge of happening. Canada legalized and they haven’t fallen apart.
See what happens here? I make a perfectly reasonable post -and tena tells me to stuff it. amk comes after me with some kind of sarcasm – I guess.
wtf?
“An 11 year old can more easily buy a pound of pot that a 6-pack of beer or a package of cigarettes.”
utter and complete BS
I didn’t even write that I was opposed to legalization and I am attacked. What gives people?
Calm down, please. You won the last few elections, you’ve got congress, you’ve got the Presidency, you got the stimulus bill, you’re about to get h/c reform, you got Sotomayor, Pelosi’s the speaker, the liberal agenda is being implemented far and wide. You won for cripe’s sakes – why aren’t you happy?
“So what? Are you going to tell me there aren’t problems associated with alcohol, which is legal?”
No, I am going to tell you that there are problems with alcohol – big big big problems. (Funny that your concern about h/c reform doesn’t extend to this area?) In fact, there are such big problems in this country with alcohol that I think we should tread very carefully when it comes to pot. There are cultural differences here in the USA that means, IMO, that we are much more likely to abuse recreational drugs.
““An 11 year old can more easily buy a pound of pot that a 6-pack of beer or a package of cigarettes.”
utter and complete BS”
O no it isn’t.
Iz you nuts? Dude, I spent almost 20 years in criminal justice. An 11 year old can buy heroin easier than a pack of cigarettes. Don’t kid yourself.
@Tena,
Time for your you to keyboard yourself, again!
oh poor sbj – “why everyone is picking on me ?” …
pathetic.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8hrIwPLR00
Tena:
How can they possibly think it’s ok to let states choose on behalf of their citizens whether or not they are going to get health care?
Aren’t state governments democratically elected? If a state opts out, isn’t that the equivalent of the citizens themselves opting out? Why are you opposed to allowing state commnities more rather than less freedom to choose the kind of system they will operate under?
I hate having to deal with criminals
You made a very curious choice in professions, then.
You continue to not address, and encourage the healthcare debate ignore Medicare’s $38 Trillion in unfunded liabilities.
When framing your pollster questions, why not encourage every respondent to know that to cover 2007 commitments every taxpayer must TODAY cut a check for 20 times their annual Social Security, Medicare and Payroll tax payments? I wonder being somewhat informed on our financial condition might influence respondents preferences for plans that clearly don’t fill the current canyon of a hole?
@sbj re why the response
In brief, you’ve essentially self-identified yourself as a heretic vis-a-vis the dominant progressive orthodoxy here. You know what usually happens to heretics in an orthodox environment.
Funny to see the wingnuts whining about the “libruls” sticking to their guns while these nuts parrot debunked and failed right wing talking points.
We just couldnt leave your website before saying that we really enjoyed the quality information you offer to your visitors… Will be back often to check up on new stuff you post!