******************** THIS BLOG HAS MOVED TO WWW.LEGALINSURRECTION.COM ********************

This blog is moving to www.legalinsurrection.com. If you have not been automatically redirected please click on the link.

NEW COMMENTS will NOT be put through and will NOT be transferred to the new website.

Friday, December 4, 2009

Thomson Reuters Public Option Poll Details Obtained - Exclusively Here

Yesterday, Thomson Reuters issued a press release regarding the results of a poll which it says showed that 60% of Americans support a "public option."

Needless to say, this poll is being used by supporters of a government-run plan to pressure Congress. SEIU even used the poll to claim that Republicans were engaging in "Health Care Busting." The punch line of the poll is being picked up throughout the blogosphere and electronic media. The Hill termed the poll "important" but only linked to the press release, not the actual polling questions and data.

But past experience shows that polls on the public option can be highly misleading in the way the questions are framed. For example, when Consumers Union polled on the public option, it prefaced its questioning with a highly positive description of a public option designed to achieve positive answers. A CBS/NY Times poll similarly phrased the question in a manner designed to portray the public option as positive, and a prior CBS/NY Times poll on health care reform used skewed sampling. A WaPo/ABC poll on health care also used skewed sampling.

How the questions are asked, what information is given prior to the questions, and who was polled, can make a huge difference. Only by seeing the questions (and any prefatory information) and the data set can the merits of the poll be evaluated.

So I searched for a copy of the questions and data backing up the Thomson Reuters poll, but could not find a publicly available link. Yesterday afternoon I e-mailed the person designated by Thomson Reuters to respond to inquiries regarding the poll, and requested either a public link or a copy of the questions and data set.

I received a response today, and Reuters provided me with the specific question asked, and a break down of responses by various categories. This information is embedded below. They also provided the sample via e-mail, which breaks down as follows:
Republican – 857
Democrat – 971
Libertarian – 54
Independent –
791
Other – 47
I have not yet received information in response to my request for the the full series of questions and prefatory information, and I'll update this post if that information is received.

The information provided by Thomson Reuters was very interesting. The question was not as simple as the press release made it sound: "60 percent of Americans believe a public option should be included in final healthcare legislation." Here is the question:
For this next section, please rate the statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means "Strongly Disagree" and 5 means "Strongly Agree". The higher the number, the more you agree with the statement. You can use any number in between. (READ AND ROTATE)

6a. The quality of healthcare delivered in our country will be better 12 months from now.
6b. It will be easier for people to receive care they need 12 months from now.
6c. The value of care delivered will be better 12 months from now.
6d. The total amount of money your family spends on healthcare will decrease 12 months from now.

7a. Do you believe a "Public Option" (like Medicare for everyone) should be included as part of the final legislation that Congress passes into law?
a. Yes
b. No
c. DK/NS
d. Refused
A few points. In the question, the "public option" was described as "like Medicare for everyone." Needless to say, none of the public options that are or have been under discussion fit that description.

Second, whereas the other question allowed people to rank the strength of their feelings on a scale of 1-5, the public option question did not provide for any level of nuance. You're either for it or against it or not sure.

Third, in the results according to Thomson Reuters, 59.9% answered "Yes" and 40.1% answered "No." Does that mean that no one (or at least fewer than one-tenth of one percent of people) didn't know or were not sure? That strikes me as very strange.

The result is that this poll, like so many others, is not what it seems. I do not suggest any bad intent on the part of Thomson Reuters, but why not try other questions which presented the public option in a less rosy context? For example, why not ask:
  • Do you believe a "Public Option" (like Medicare for everyone) should be included as part of the final legislation that Congress passes into law if it meant you had to wait for medical procedures?
  • Do you believe a "Public Option" (like Medicare for everyone) should be included as part of the final legislation that Congress passes into law if it meant you had to give up your private insurance?
  • Do you believe a "Public Option" (like Medicare for everyone) should be included as part of the final legislation that Congress passes into law if it meant that government ran the entire health care system?
The question as phrased in the Thomson Reuters poll was not neutral, which seems to be a persistent problem when it comes to polling the public option.


Thomson Reuters PULSE Public Option Survey Question and Data


--------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
Lying About The Public Option With Polls
Consumer Reports' Specious Stand On Health Care Reform

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

5 comments:

  1. You might add this Q:

    Do you believe a public option (like Medicare) should be included if it means cutting $500 billion from the existing Medicare program for seniors?

    I suspect that Q alone would lop 10% off the Yes group.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Looks like this poll also oversamples Democrats. Most recent party identification poll by Rasmussen shows that the gap between Democrats and Republicans is only 2.9% right now.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2009/12/03/rasmussen-partisan-gap-narrows-more/

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/partisan_trends

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anyone who chose Agree or Strongly Agree for questions 6a through 6d is a complete and total idiot. How can healthcare be improved within 12 months if the non-tax provisions of the bill don't even take effect until at least 2013?

    ReplyDelete
  4. The last time I checked, we have something called 'referendums' by which legislators ascertain popular support. How did these discount Polls (of such statistically and politically skewed samplings) come to replace our democratic process?

    Just 2,720 were polled of which there were 857 Republicans and 971 Democrats. 114 more Democrats. How is this statistically objective?
    2,720 constitutes 60% of America's vote?!!

    How about Thomson Reuter poll the 20,000 plus protesters at the Nov. 5 DC Rally?

    And where was this question on the Poll?: Can you detailed how Public Option will be funded?

    or (for the under 35): Can you state your state's Medicaid annual expenditure?

    ReplyDelete
  5. The fact remains that big insurance by refusing care to patients and reimbursement to doctors over typos has ticked everyone off. They have a monopoly over the whole process and a well financed lobby team (including Lieberman's wife) and representatives on both sides of the isle.

    A friend of mine recently laid off just he and his spouse is paying $2,500.00 dollars a month for his COBRA. Health insurance costs more than his mortgage. Anyone taking up the insurance industry's cause doesn't know what they are talking about.

    If you think the insurance companies are going to voluntarily lower their cost while having a monopoly over the process – you are being disingenuous …Over 60% of all US bankruptcies are attributable to medical problems. Most victims are middle class, well educated and have health insurance - (The American Journal of Medicine)

    The insurance companies and their representatives in Congress would love to perpetuate a business model that is crippling our overall economy – a bunch of great Americans aren’t they?

    90% of the wealth concentrated in 1% of the population is no way to run a country but a heck of a way to establish a royalty ruling class. Yacht sales can not sustain 350 million people. I'm for the public option, competition and a level playing field or break up the big insurers like we did AT&T.

    A slavish focus on profit margin might be good for the individual or a business, but it is one helluva lousy way to "govern" a Country. The GOP being a wholly owned subsidiary of Corporate America has a hard time with that concept.


    Paul Burke
    Author-Journey Home

    ReplyDelete