Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

AARP: Voters Favor Candidates Who Support a Plan For National Health Care

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
cal04 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 12:36 PM
Original message
AARP: Voters Favor Candidates Who Support a Plan For National Health Care
AARP: Voters Favor Candidates Who Support a Plan For National Health Care Coverage
More than three quarters (77 percent) of those likely to go to polls in November say they are likely to vote for a candidate who supports a plan for national health care coverage, finds a new election poll commissioned by AARP.

As the mid-term election nears, AARP has been polling baby boomer-age and older voters on the issues its members have indicated they want to hear about in national and state political debate.

"Health care has become less affordable and less accessible," explained David Sloane, senior managing director of government relations for AARP. "The voter anxiety reflected in this poll is the result of a system that is inefficient, at the mercy of uncontrollable costs and is leaving tens of millions of people without health insurance."

The AARP poll measured opinions of likely voters age 42 and above. It found that nearly eight in 10 (78 percent) agree that the federal government should see that everyone has at least minimum health insurance benefits. The greatest numbers of respondents who support minimum benefits are boomer voters (ages 51 to 60). That same age cohort remains largely undecided with 61 percent saying they have yet to decide who they will vote for.

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=73963
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
1. That would be the Democrats
Doncha think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bread_and_roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
24. Well, where are the Ds loudly calling for National Health Care?
I'm sure there are some out there, but it's hardly on the lips enough to qualify as a campaign, from my limited perspective. Would be happy to find out that I am wrong, and have simply missed the pertinent stories.

My recollection is that Big Pharma and Big Insurance cover the $$ bases with the Ds, even if they give less than to the Rs. Making it unlikely we'll see any system that doesn't put Pharm/Insurance profits FIRST until we have public funding of elections and make the Pols accountable to US instead of to THEM.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #24
31. Bush's Medicare/Medicaid on Hiatus...
Edited on Mon Oct-09-06 07:42 PM by Tellurian
My mother, Upon receiving a boiler plate notice from Medicare (she is not a subscriber)stating
Temporarily, she would no longer be able to purchase her prescriptions through them.
And to make other plans to purchase her prescriptions.

She was happy she had not depended on them to take care of her blood pressure medication.
Her exact words were: "They can hang for all I care!"

Yup, this is definitely a sore sport with seniors..If we want their vote..
Gotta take care of GrandMa and GrandPa..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
2. I'm not sure if AARP is just trying to get supporters back after
they supported Shrub's Plan D drug program, or if they really have changed their mind. My gut tells meit's a business decision only!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eShirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I'm not sure...
Wouldn't that cut into their business as a Medicare Part D insurer?
I'm not sure what to think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #3
12. That's the thing. AARP has lost people who are willing the buy
insurance through them! If they mend the fences, so to speak, and get people back on their side, they will sell MORE insurance they will be able to sell.

What I think they need to do more than support Dems, is to sponsor ads to repeal the stupid portion of the Med. Pt. D. that prevents Medicare from negotiating script prices!

Then maybe they'll begin tomend the fence with ME!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cosmicdot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #3
19. AARP piggy-backs United Health's program
Edited on Mon Oct-09-06 05:35 PM by cosmicdot
I can't imagine that yielding too much profit, but who knows, it might.

"United HealthCare Insurance Company (United) manages AARP Pharmacy Services through its subsidiary United HealthCare Products, LLC and contracts with licensed pharmacy vendors..." from AARP's website


just a little side story:

When I signed up Medicare's 'system' spit out 3 'top' choices:

United Health
AARP (United Health)
PacifiCare (which United Health recently bought)

(of course, United Health merged with Humana in 1998)

so much for choices, eh?


another side note: Clinton's Secretary of the Dept. of Health and Human Services (where Medicare is part of), Donna Shalala, sits on United Health's Board of Directors (since 2001 - revolving door).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
allisonthegreat Donating Member (586 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. yeah it does
Edited on Mon Oct-09-06 05:48 PM by allisonthegreat
not that consumer friendly either re: pricing!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reprobate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #2
10. I read tht over 1/3 of their income is from insurance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. At LEAST 1/3! I thought I read it was even a higher % than that! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
4. Did the AARP Figure This Before or After Supporting Bush?
What they did, was a disgusting slap in the face when they came out in support for Bush....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. They endorsed BUSH for president?
I didn't know that. Do you have a link? I thought they gave luke-warm support to the awful perscription plan, which was stupid but not intolerable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. supported "awful perscription plan"
and I don't think it was "lukewarm" support.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #11
17. No I think it was lukewarm - but it still pissed me off.
Typical delusional thinking, like Ted Kennedy getting in bed with the republics over No Child's Behind Left, with similar results.

AARPs actions convinced me not to join them. I think they have sort of figured that out as I was not the only one.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
6. No Democratic presidential candidate
that passes muster with the leadership is allowed to advocate UHC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Bacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
7. Just wait, Harry and Louise will be trotted out again
And you'll see the same ads...

"Louise, do you know that Canadian s wait for over a year for medical care"

"Harry, look at that busload of Canadians coming across the border to get the health care they can't get in Canada"

"Louise, do we really need GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRATS rationing health care"?

Just wait. Harry and Louise will soon make another appearance and any serious attempt to enact any kind of national health insurance will be thwarted. Then the churches will get in line and oppose national health care because they don't want abortions or gays and lesbians covered.

The United States will NEVER have national health insurance because people are too selfish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fooj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 01:35 PM
Response to Original message
8. I guess Arnold is COMPLETELY screwed then.
He just vetoed a health care bill that was passed by the state legislature in CA. I KNEW that would haunt him. Yippee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
diamidue Donating Member (606 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. Why didn't Angelides bring this up in debate?
He mentioned he was for universal health a couple of days earlier on the radio, but didn't bother to bring it up during the debate. If this AARP poll is correct, then Angelides blew a golden opportunity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Bacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Angelides opposed single payer
Edited on Mon Oct-09-06 03:15 PM by Joe Bacon
his own website says he opposes it!

http://www.angelides.com/news/philinthenews/2006_0725_s...

Angelides on Monday staked out several positions in direct opposition to Schwarzenegger, saying he would work to pass legislation covering all children and requiring large employers to provide insurance.

According to Single Payer websites, Angelides OPPOSES single payer. Now I really have to hold my nose to vote for him. But I still will. I hate Arnold so much I would crawl over ground glass to get to the ballot box to vote against that Nazi.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
diamidue Donating Member (606 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. You are right...
What he said was that he says he favors "moving California toward universal health care".

Translation: forgetaboutit

What a sneaky jerk.

I'll be holding my nose, too, I guess.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogi...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #8
26. Single payer vs. universal care
Look at the question as asked.

Ask people if they want everyone covered and you'll get one answer.

Ask everyone if they would want a state run program to replace the current system and you will get a different answer.

Ahnuld vetoed that Angelides was not a supporter of Kuehl's bill. This will likely not hurt him.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0rganism Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 01:36 PM
Response to Original message
9. Of course this is *before* the insurance industry runs its campaign ads
I've seen this happen time and time again. Given a perfectly reasonable idea represented on a ballot, whether by candidate or referendum, with ostensibly solid public support, and then the big players come along to outspend on the issue by 3-to-1 or more. By the time elections come along, the tables have turned, and half the people who were at one time fervent supporters of the concept wouldn't dare admit it in public.

All Big Insurance has to do is play on people's greed ("nice idea, but I don't want to pay for it") and fear of government regulation ("they'll pick my doctor for me!"), and public opinion swings around like a flag on a windy day.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Bacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. I still remember Prop 104 in California going down in 1994
Edited on Mon Oct-09-06 03:17 PM by Joe Bacon
Prop 104 would have created Single Payer in California. It was supported by a majority of voters UNTIL Harry and Louise appeared and their Insurance masters poured 100 MILLION dollars of YOUR HEALTH PREMIUMS into defeating it. The propostion went down 3-1.

Just think of all the health care that 100 million would have provided...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0rganism Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #15
32. Yep, classic case right there
We've seen it happen over and over again, with everything from health care to ultility re-regulation to environmental protection. The people support these positions until they are filled with righteous propaganda from their corporate masters, and then they turn aside, thinking things like, "well maybe I was wrong, things aren't so bad the way they are now," or, "sure, it's a great idea but this legislation does it the wrong way," and go back to pretending that everything's okay in the world, government regulations are unnecessary, and polluters really do care about the public good.

This should be textbook stuff for progressive candidates and issue advocates, cos it is definitely part of basic training for the other side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 05:46 PM
Response to Original message
20. Sounds about right to me. Everyone is worried now about health care.
One wrong misstep and you, and your family, are in debt to the big banks, forever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Bacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. And you have NO debt shielding thanks to "bankruptcy reform"
You can thank Joe Backstabbing Biden for that. Thanks to Joe and his pals, you'll be a slave for the rest of your life to the banks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 05:55 PM
Response to Original message
23. A national plan doesn't automatically mean single payer
I wish people on the left would understand that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bread_and_roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. Technically true - but
that does seem to be what people MEAN when they talk about "National Health Insurance." A Medicare/Medicaid type program for everyone. I rather doubt that too many people are clammoring for a mess like Hillary put forward, that attempted to provide National "coverage" while protecting profits for Insurers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. "A Medicare/Medicaid type program for everyone."
Well look at the question asked, "do you feel that everyone should have a minimum level of coverage". This is like one of those question where pople are asked if they are racist and you have 90% say no.

If you said would you want a nationalized healthcare system , you may get another answer.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #25
29. It's not a choice between the two
Edited on Mon Oct-09-06 07:08 PM by sandnsea
They likey MEAN a sliding scale subsidized insurance, because people don't trust government directed heath care. That's why they rejected Hillary care, they were convinced the government was going to control the whole thing. The American nightmare is heath care disintegrating into county hospitals and public clinics. The only way to assure people that won't happen is a plan that keeps private care and private insurance to pay for it. We will never get from here to single payer without going through that loop. And if it's fully funded, it works. It's what we have in Oregon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lovuian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 06:57 PM
Response to Original message
27. Pretty Soon Voters are going to DEMAND Universal Health
Congress will not be able to stop it...

ITS TIME!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 09:13 PM
Response to Reply #27
33. Dem mantra: "We're Tired of Being Treated Like A Third World Country."
Sort and Sweet!

Because it's TRUE!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Bacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 10:30 PM
Response to Reply #27
35. Harry and Louise will come to the rescue of the insurance companies.
Twice in my lifetime I worked my ass off for national health insurance. We were just on the edge of getting something passed in 1974 with the Kennedy-Mills bill, only to see hopes dashed by Watergate. We came VERY CLOSE to having it passed under Nixon, then it stalled with impeachment.

In 1994, I worked my ass off for Prop 104 in California, which would have established single payer. Day after day, I handed out sample health insurance cards and talked to people one on one. Sadly, too many of them were brainwashed by Harry and Louise. They bought the bullshit about government rationed care, even though I explained to them time and time again that American health care is rationed by the amount of money you have. It wouldn't sink in. Then in the last 2 weeks ALL the Fundy churches and Cahtolics came out against single payer because it would allow abortion and they also didn't want gays and lesbians to have access to health care.

Too many times I have seen idiots manipulated by Jesus into voting against their own interests. Even now, people are falling into the Medicare D donut hole and they STILL don't want any help.

This country will NEVER pass universal health insurance. Ever since Reagan asked in 1980 "Are YOU better off", people are only interested in themselves. There is NO social conscience, NO desire to better others. We're all too busy looking out for #1. That is what will destroy America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rene Donating Member (758 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 07:26 PM
Response to Original message
30. Can you imagine how many more jobs there would be if everyone
had the Medical, Dental and Mental Health coverage they deserve. Full use of the Healthcare facilities should bring prices down.
We had better begin a massive education of Health Care professionals....start training them right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoFerret Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 09:22 PM
Response to Original message
34. Single payer system
Medicare for all.
(About time.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Jul 28th 2014, 04:15 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC