NBC/WSJ Poll: Support for Public Option Growing

Check out the latest numbers teased from this evening's forthcoming NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showing that support is growing for the public option and that more than seven in ten in this country believe it is important to give Americans a choice of a public option.


Images grabbed from MSNBC -- click to enlarge

Per Chuck Todd, the favor/oppose question on the left is "a straightforward question that we've been asking for four months... For the first time, this is the largest gap between favor and oppose we've shown." Todd later explained that these numbers are "good news for public option advocates and probably good news for Senator Reid." Indeed. At a time when the Senate is moving towards an important debate over the public option, polling showing that support for a public option has reached a new high despite sustained criticism from the right and that 72 percent of the country believes it to be important to give Americans a choice of a government-run program only strengthens the hands of proponents of the public option.

Tags: 111th Congress, Harry Reid, healthcare reform, Public Option (all tags)

Comments

23 Comments

Support for Public Option Growing

 Hard to feel bad about those numbers.

by QTG 2009-10-27 09:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Support for Public Option Growing

Especially considering that NBC uses McCain's pollster...

by LordMike 2009-10-27 09:54AM | 0 recs
ACTION: We Haven't Won the Public Option Yet!
It's not the time to let up in our push for the public option! Let's keep up the pressure on our elected officials to do the right thing by us on the public option. Call Members of the House today on a robust public option that's tied to Medicare plus 5% rates: (202) 224-3121


Also: Ask them to remove the Eshoo amendment in the House bill that would ban brand name biologics from ever being available as generics. It means sick people who can't afford brand-name biologics would never be able to get them as generics.


Please CALL your Representative today at (202) 224-3121! And if you can, please write letters to the editor starting today about the Eshoo amendment, (http://my.barackobama.com/page/speakout/ HealthCareLetter) and why it MUST be removed from the final conference bill. And in the letter, please ask your Representative and Senator to remove this provision from the bill.


More info on these actions: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/1 0/27/797623/-We-Havent-Won-Yet-On-The-Pu blic-Option!

by judybrowni 2009-10-27 10:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Support for Public Option Growing

With the public option starting to look like a fait accompli, I think there's still room to fight for the best public option we can get - with the two biggest issues being the number of people who are eligible and the implementation date.

We probably have reached the zenith of what we can accomplish in the Senate (and the bill still needs to pass, of course) but there is still an opening to make the House bill better, in which case it all gets hashed out in conference.  I think I saw a report this morning that Nancy Pelosi is still looking to make the bill more progressive, which means we need to identify the best way to push for that goal.

by Steve M 2009-10-27 09:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Waiting for it...

...and if we can't improve the number of people covered or the implementation date then someone has failed...

Whatever, let's go for it!

Should we use the same techniques that have proven so effective thus far? How much more mileage do you think we can get out of bashing the President and calling Harry Reid names? And those Blue Dogs, I think we can get them to move a few blocks Left!

by QTG 2009-10-27 09:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Waiting for it...

I believe the process in which the White House floated any number of trial balloons about taking a compromise approach, and progressives responded by screaming bloody murder each and every time, was tremendously helpful in reaching the strong position we are in now.

I understand that you believe there was never any such thing as a trial balloon, that the White House has always been 110% committed to the most progressive policy outcome possible, and that progressives were working themselves into a frenzy for no reason whatsoever.  I respect your right to believe those things.  But in neither scenario did the snark of people like you make the slightest contribution towards a positive policy outcome, that much I know for sure.

by Steve M 2009-10-27 10:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Waiting for it...

"But in neither scenario did the snark of people like you make the slightest contribution towards a positive policy outcome, that much I know for sure."

I understand you believe that.

I'd like you to prove it.

by QTG 2009-10-27 10:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Waiting for it...

You want him to prove that the squeaky wheel gets the grease rather than the silent one? Odd request.

by bruh3 2009-10-28 09:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Waiting for it...

My wife's snark actually gets the attention of my congressman quite frequently.

In fact, she was told by his CoS to appologize for "hurting his feelings" when she pointed out that he was behaving like a blue dog on reform.

by lojasmo 2009-10-28 11:11AM | 0 recs
Wyden wants to try

to make the public option available to more people. Obviously the bigger it is, the greater the potential to bring down costs.

Politically, Democrats are at risk if we pass a public option and most Americans find out belatedly that they can't choose it because they already have (crappy, overpriced) insurance.

by desmoinesdem 2009-10-27 12:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Wyden wants to try

I know some Progessives don't like it, but I agree with Wyden's approach. The benefit for workers of reducing costs through a more inclusive option far outweigh the fear that employers will dump employee health care plans. I say this because no one has yet explained to me why they would do that since they can already do that now.

by bruh3 2009-10-28 09:23AM | 0 recs
Re: NBC/WSJ Poll: Support for Public Option Growin

Lieberman is trying to put the brakes on the public option ...

He would probably run as a republican in the next election..

by lori 2009-10-27 10:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Running as a Republican in Connecticut

For Lie berman, the next election is way off in the distant future. But I'm not sure I could even guess what motivates that asshole.

by QTG 2009-10-27 10:47AM | 0 recs
Re: NBC/WSJ Poll: Support for Public Option Growin

Here's the link:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/100 9/28788.html

Joe Lieberman: I'll block vote on Harry Reid's plan

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) said Tuesday that he'd back a GOP filibuster of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's health care reform bill...

"I feel this way about a national, government-created health insurance company - whether it's a trigger or not," he said. "My answer is - we're - we have the opportunity to do some great reforms here.

These exchanges that we're talking about, I think, are going to drive competition and probably bring the cost of health insurance down or at least contain the cost increases for a lot of people.

Let's give that two or three years to see how it works to see how it works before we talk about creating another entitlement that will end up increasing the national debt and putting more of a burden on taxpayers."

by jeopardy 2009-10-27 11:10AM | 0 recs
Re: NBC/WSJ Poll: Support for Public Option Growin

He is going to lose the next election and is doing a hail mary.

by bruh3 2009-10-28 09:24AM | 0 recs
Pssst. Someone should tell Sore Loserman (I-CT)

That he's on the wrong side here.

by NoFortunateSon 2009-10-27 11:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Pssst. Someone should tell Sore Loserman

Of course he's on the wrong side here.

But I'm not sure what anybody can do about it.

He ran as an Independent, and is not up for reelection for a long time, so electoral pressure seems unlikely.

He'll get wads of cash from the industry for this.  

by jeopardy 2009-10-27 11:48AM | 0 recs
He has to lose his gavels

And the same goes for anyone else threatening to filibuster healthcare.

Reid was very gracious in allowing Lieberman to retain his chairs. And I'm sure Lieberman could be "incentivized" further (ugh).

But

In the 110th Congress, Lieberman is Chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which is responsible for assuring the efficiency and effectiveness of the Federal Government. In addition, he is a member of the Environment and Public Works Committee; Senate Armed Services Committee, where he is Chairman of the Subcommittee on Air Land Forces and sits on the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities; and the Small Business Committee.

All that has to go. And the people of Connecticut must know it. I wonder how popular the PO is there...

by NoFortunateSon 2009-10-27 12:21PM | 0 recs
Re: He has to lose his gavels

No one gets punished just for threatening something.  Much as we might like it, it's probably not possible to run the Senate in such a heavy-handed fashion.

The consequences for actually filibustering health care, which presumably would be shared with Lieberman before the vote, are a different question about which we can only speculate.  But I have my doubts that even Joe Lieberman would be willing to go down in history as the guy who filibustered health care reform.  Until proven otherwise, it's best to regard this as yet another attention-whore ploy on his part.

by Steve M 2009-10-27 12:32PM | 0 recs
Re: He has to lose his gavels

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/10/s omebody-buy-joe-lieberman-puppy.html

"The reason this is a little scary for Democrats is because the usual things that serve to motivate a Congressman don't seem to motivate Joe Lieberman....

Lieberman's objections don't make any sense. He says he's worried about blunting "the economic recovery we're in" even though the public option provisions wouldn't kick in until 2013.

He says he's worried about debt-reduction when the public option would make the bill more deficit-neutral.

And he campaigned on a public-option type alternative called "MediChoice" in 2006.

What Joe Lieberman wants, in all probability, is attention. He wants Harry Reid to have to stand up and say things like : "I don't have anyone that I've worked harder with, have more respect for, in the Senate than Joe Lieberman."

He wants face time on Meet the Press. He wants to make liberals feel some pain -- especially those who tried to get Ned Lamont elected in his place. He wants everyone to know how maverick-y he is.

But while a Nelson or a Lincoln is liable to have a fairly rational set of concerns -- basically, they want to ensure they get re-elected -- it's tough to bargain with people like Lieberman who are a little crazy.

In certain ways, he resembles nothing so much as one of those rogue, third-bit Middle Eastern dictators that he's so often carping about, capable of creating great anxiety with relatively little expenditure of resources, and taking equal pleasure in watching his friends and enemies sweat."

by jeopardy 2009-10-27 12:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Pssst. Someone should tell Sore Loserman
You don't seem to understand where Joe Lieberman's weakness lies. He agreed with the Democratic Caucus in January to go along with the party in exchange for Harry Reid allowing him to keep his committee Chairman ship. Here is what you don't understand so I will fill you in:
A chairman is a powerful position. When the Dems took over in 2006, by long standing custom, they got the chair positions for all the big committee's in Congress. I told another of my Democrat friend the morning after the 2006 elections that WE HAVE WON A HUGE VICTORY--WHY? he asked: BECAUSE THE COMMITTEE'S IN CONGRESS WILL BE RUN BY DEMOCRATS STARTING IN 2007. THAT MEANT THAT NO MORE WHACK JOB BUSH PROGRAMS OR POLITICAL APPOINTEE'S WOULD GET THRU EITHER HOUSE OR THE SENATE--BECAUSE THE CHAIRPERSONS WOULD NOT ALLOW THE REPUBLICAN'S TO PUSH THRU A WHACK JOB PERSON FOR A FEDERAL JUDGE JOB OR FOR MONEY FOR SOME WILD ASS SCHEME TO INVADE A COUNTRY LIKE THEY DID IN 2003 IN IRAQ.
NOW, GETTING BACK TO HERR LIEBERMANN AND HIS DISLOYAL CONDUCT ON THIS PUBLIC OPTION ISSUE--THE DEMS CAN TAKE AWAY HIS CHAIRMAN JOB. IT MEANS THAT HE WILL BE RELEGATED TO THE LOWEST LEVEL OF MEMBER OF THE SENATE. HE WOULD BE JUST LIKE AN SENATOR WHO HAS NO POWER, NO STAFF, NO SPECIAL PARKING AT THE CAPITAL, NO BUDGET FOR MUCH OF ANYTHING. EVEN IF THE REPUBLICAN'S TRIED TO MAKE NICE AND TAKE HIM INTO THEIR CAUCUS, IT WOULD NOT MATTER SINCE THE DEMOCRATS CONTROL ALL ACTIONS IN CONGRESS.
HARRY REID NEEDS TO INVITE JOE OUT TO THE WOODSHED FOR A SERIOUS ASS KICKING DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS MATTER AND HE NEEDS TO DO IT NOW.
by hddun2008 2009-10-27 01:09PM | 0 recs
NBC/WSJ Poll: Support for Public Option Growing

S0 WHAT'S THIS IS JOE LIEBERMAN?  HARRY REID NEEDS TO TAKE THAT GUY TO THE WOODSHED TODAY AND THRASH OUT HERR LIEING-BER-MAN'S POSITION TODAY (TUESDAY)ON THE PUBLIC OPTION--HE CAME OUT TODAY AND SAID HE IS AGAINST IT -- CRAZY JOE NOW SAYS HE IS AGAINST THE PUBLIC OPTION. HARRY REID NEEDS TO KICK LIEBERMAN'S ASS AND REMIND HIM THAT ONLY BY THE THINNEST OF MARGINS IN THE DEMOCRAT CAUCUS DID LIEBERMAN KEEP HIS COMMITTEE CHAIRMANSHIP BACK IN JANUARY. LIEBERMAN SHOULD BE REMINDED THAT THE DEMOCRATS DON'T NEED HIM IN THAT CHAIRMAN ROLE AND IF HE DOESN'T AGREE TO BACK THE PUBLIC OPTION, THE DEM CAUCUS WILL KICK HIM OUT OF THE CHAIR AND GIVE IT TO A LOYAL DEMOCRAT...SCREW THAT GUY FOR BEING SO DISLOYAL TO THE DEMOCRATS WHO HAVE ALLOWED HIM TO KEEP HIS POWERFUL COMMITTEE POST.....

by hddun2008 2009-10-27 12:57PM | 0 recs
match rhetoric with policy

great poll on po-but like wyden says if u told people the reality-the po would be open to only 10pct of folks the poll results would not be as great. time for rhetoirc to meet policy. dems say u will have a choice. so lets get a bill with that choice for all.

by art3 2009-10-27 02:57PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads