Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Login | What's Hot
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Dick Morris and Eileen McGann :: Townhall.com Columnist
Elderly Lead Opposition on Obama Health Care
by Dick Morris and Eileen McGann
Forward Print Share Single Page
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Will Congress pass Obamacare by the end of the year?

In 1993-1994, when the Clintons tried to pass health-care reform, the opposition to their proposals was concentrated among middle-age voters, galvanized by the Harry and Louise ads. But opposition to the Obama proposals centers among the elderly, who suspect that it will mean a sharp curtailment of their medical care.

The Fox News-Opinion Dynamics Poll of July 21-24 found that voters over 65 opposed the Obama plan by 35 percent to 47 percent. They oppose a government-run insurance plan to compete with private plans by 31 percent to 56 percent and believe that the Obama plan will "cost me money" rather than "save me money" by 57 percent to 20 percent! Only 24 percent of the elderly feel that the Obama plan will lead to better health care for "you and your family," while 45 percent believe the quality of care will be worse.

By 61 percent to 29 percent, elderly voters reject the idea that "it is possible to have major health-care reform without increasing the budget deficit." And they also say it is impossible to have it without raising taxes, by 65 percent to 29 percent. Three-quarters expect their personal taxes to go up if the plan passes.

Oddly, for a population that now gets its health services through government-run Medicare, they would rather be in a privately run system than one managed by the government by 67 percent to 7 percent.

Most resistant to change, the elderly voters cite fears that they "will have to change existing health-care arrangements" as the greatest reason to oppose the Obama plan.

The political impact of these findings is enormous. Instead of facing an inchoate unease about Obama's proposals, Democrats who vote for them are likely to find themselves running into the teeth of strong, concentrated elderly opposition. Fears of rationing and the denial of care are stoking opposition to a fever pitch among the elderly. So widespread is the dissatisfaction with the Obama plan that it may drive the elderly into Republican ranks as surely as Bush's Social Security reforms alienated them in 2005 and drove them into the arms of Democrats. Continued...
1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Forward Print Single Page
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Dick Morris, a former political adviser to Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and President Bill Clinton, is the author of Condi vs. Hillary: The Next Great Presidential Race. To get all of Dick Morris’s and Eileen McGann’s columns for free by email, go to www.dickmorris.com
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Dick Morris' column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.

Join The Debate!

Post Your Comment
(53 comments so Far)
View in ascending order     View in descending order
Reply # 1
Date: Jul 30, 2009 - 7:45 PM EST
If the Government option
is so great, let's see the entire Federal government try it out first for at least a year! There is a way to stop the baloney we're getting from these jacka$$es.

We need a new American Revolution. We may be able to accomplish this without firing a shot. What has to happen is the states have to call a Constitutional Convention to repeal the 16th Amendment that established the income tax. The states have to approve the Amendment after the Convention is done, so the scare stories of a "runaway Convention" rewriting the Constitution are total baloney. After we take away the Federal Government's taxing powers, the states tell them to go jump in the lake for all laws outside the strictly limited powers granted to them by the U.S. Constitution. They may point to the "General Welfare" provision, so the states will point to the 10th Amendment. To wit:

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

See: http://64.203.107.114/histdocs/constitution/
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 2
Date: Jul 30, 2009 - 2:43 PM EST
Assault Against Seniors


"...The Congressional majority wants to pay for its $1 trillion to $1.6 trillion health bills with new taxes and a $500 billion cut to Medicare. This cut will come just as baby boomers turn 65 and increase Medicare enrollment by 30%. Less money and more patients will necessitate rationing. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that only 1% of Medicare cuts will come from eliminating fraud, waste and abuse.

The assault against seniors began with the stimulus package in February. Slipped into the bill was substantial funding for comparative effectiveness research, which is generally code for limiting care based on the patient’s age. Economists are familiar with the formula, where the cost of a treatment is divided by the number of years (called QALYs, or quality-adjusted life years) that the patient is likely to benefit. In Britain, the formula leads to denying treatments for older patients who have fewer years to benefit from care than younger patients.

When comparative effectiveness research appeared in the stimulus bill, Rep. Charles Boustany Jr., (R., La.) a heart surgeon, warned that it would lead to “denying seniors and the disabled lifesaving care.” He and Sen. Jon Kyl (R., Ariz.) proposed amendments to no avail that would have barred the federal government from using the research to eliminate treatments for the elderly or deny care based on age..."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240529702046190045743 20421050552730.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Flag as Offensive
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
 *
State:
 *
Zip:
 *
Phone:
       
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.