Comments on: Dueling polls gauge physician support for public option

By: max

max — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 16:03:17 +0000

Wow, this article is so fair and unbiased. Are we sure this isn’t meant for the editorial section? Eh, “Independent”?

By: David Hindera

David Hindera — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 14:36:35 +0000

Bottom line is that we are fighting with people that will look you in the face and tell you that facts aren’t facts. Look at these crazy idiots – here’s what we need to push back against. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a3b_1252966753

By: David Hindera

David Hindera — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 14:29:45 +0000

I’m surprised that this discussion centers on groups that are already discredited. Do we really have time to chase red herrings in the debate over health care? Lewin Group is owned and operated by United Health Care that covers 1/3 of the insured people in the US. There opinion is not credible in any way – if it was they would simply be honest about who they are. Plus they have already been widely spotted as liars. (http://www.prwatch.org/node/8482) As for IBD – the Stephen Hawking statements alone should tell you they can’t be trusted. They are simply a front group for the insurance companies. I’d like to know when common sense is going to kick in!! For example; why would we be pandering to seniors about “death panels” trying to get them to believe some huge conspiracy theory when there are real issues as stake here? The real thing fear here is that people who work hard and pay their bills are still one illness away from bankruptcy at any moment. That is a situation that is unbearable. Last year California HMO’s denied 1 out of 5 claims after the care had been given. You don’t have to be brilliant to know those denied claims represent bankruptcies and life savings up in smoke. It’s not right that you can work your whole life and do what you are supposed to only to have some insurance company sink you!! These companies are not playing fair and they are destroying the lives of hard working Americans. So please try to move the discussion away from already discredited notions and fear stories promoted by insurance companies and back on to health care. We need that public option!!

By: Keith

Keith — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:16:53 +0000

The NEJM poll methodology is a joke: one of the first rules of survey methodology is that you don’t give respondents a chance to cop out and choose the middle ground (unless, of course, that’s the result you’re looking for). Respondents have a natural aversion to choosing “extreme” responses. Consequently, when presented with an odd number of choices, we would expect people to be more likely to choose the central one. The NEJM poll gave only three choices: 1) single-payer; 2) mixed public-private; and 3) private only. In addition to the problem presented by having just three options, the options are skewed to the left. The opposite of a single-payer plan is a completely private plan, with no Medicare/Medicaid.

A better question would have four, balanced options, thereby forcing respondents to fall on one side of the middle. These options could have been something like: 1) single payer (Medicare/Medicaid for all); 2) Public option for some (Medicare/Medicaid for the old and for those under a certain income) with private coverage for the rest; 3) Medicare/Medicaid for the old and poor (no expansion) with private insurance for everyone (including subsidies for those not eligible for Medicaid but too poor to afford insurance); or 4) private insurance for everyone (subsidies for the poor, switch those from Medicare/Medicaid to private insurance).

Also….

@Tom Hill:
Please read the NEJM article (available at http://healthcarereform.nejm.org/?p=1790&query=home). While I agree completely that we need more information about the methodology of the TIPP/IBD poll, please note that the NEJM poll was also a “mail in” poll. In addition, like the TIPP/IBD poll, responses are still coming in for the NEJM poll.

@Michael Fremmer:
Really, ad hominem attacks? Yes, the Lewin Group’s estimate of the number of American who would be covered by a public option (131 million) is probably high because they used the absolute worst-case scenario. But consider that even the left-leaning Urban Institute, which used a rosier scenario, estimates that the public option would cover 47 million Americans (http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/411915_public_plan_option.pdf). The truth probably lies somewhere in-between and is, by any reasonable measure, far greater than the 5 percent (~15 million Americans) figure quoted by the CBO. (And if we really want to resort to ad hominem attacks, consider that the head of the CBO is appointed by the Speaker of the House – Nancy Pelosi.)

By: Tom Hill

Tom Hill — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:28:36 +0000

Sirs:
The fringe and far right believe the IBD poll even though it was a “mail in” poll which is the least reliable poll one can conduct. Besides, it is hardly a poll that stands the statistical “smell test.” The Sept. 15 IBD article posted on-line reads: “with 1,376 practicing physicians chosen randomly throughout the country taking part.” What does that mean? Did 1,376 doctors respond or were 1,376 questionaires sent out and every doctor who got one responded? Either way, it is hardly a reliable survey because IBD goes on to say that “responses are still coming in.” This is not even close to a scientific poll. Rather, it is closer to a “fill in the blanks” letter(s) to the editor.

By: Michael Fremer

Michael Fremer — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:13:06 +0000

Investor’s Business Daily is the same “great institution” that claimed Stephen Hawkings would be dead if he had to rely upon the UK’s health care system. Of course Hawkings is a UK citizen and did in fact rely upon and thrive within that system. IBD’s survey is about as credible as The Lewin Group’s “study” showing a majority of people would choose the public option. The Lewin Group, of course is a wholly owned subsidiary of UnitedHealthCare, one of America’s largest health insurance companies.