As part of the ongoing poll series, Debating Health: Election 2008, the Harvard Public Opinion Research Program at the Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) and Harris Interactive® conducted a new survey focused on how voters think the presidential candidates' health care reform plans would affect them personally – rather than how they think the plans would affect the nation as a whole. The survey found that voters view the candidates' plans differently from this perspective. Four in ten registered voters don't believe one candidate's health care plan would be better for them than the other. (This includes those who think there wouldn't be a difference for them between the plans (27%) and those who don't know if there would be (13%)). More voters think Senator Barack Obama's plan would be better for them than Senator John McCain's plan (33% vs. 27%). This survey was conducted September 17-21, 2008, by telephone among a national cross section of 935 registered voters in the United States.
"The most interesting finding is not that Obama does better than McCain (Obama has a more substantial lead in other polls about which candidate is better at handling health care), but that Obama's lead is narrower on these questions that focus on how the plans would affect them personally," says Humphrey Taylor, Chairman of The Harris Poll®. "These are not bad results for the McCain campaign."
Among several critical voting groups, many don't see one plan as offering an advantage to them over the other. Among independents, a majority either see no difference in whether the two candidates' health care plans would be better for them or don't know if there would be a difference (51%). Those who do feel there would be a difference are split in a statistical tie (26% for McCain vs. 24% for Obama). Among seniors, a near majority see no difference or don't know which plan would be better for them (46%), and those who do see a difference are also tied (27% vs. 27%).
"Ultimately independents are the key to winning this race, and at the moment they are up for grabs in terms of whether they see McCain's plan or Obama's plan as better for them," says Robert J. Blendon, Professor of Health Policy and Political Analysis at the Harvard School of Public Health.
On the other hand, certain segments do believe Obama's plan would serve them better. More women think Barack Obama's health care plan would be better for them personally than John McCain's plan (38% vs. 21%), even though a large share also thinks there would be no difference between the plans or doesn't know if there would be (41%). By comparison, men are tied, even among those who think there would be a difference between the plans (29% vs. 32%). Thus, women appear to be driving Obama's current lead on this question. The uninsured are also more likely to think Obama's health care plan will be better for them (53% vs. 26%), as are the disabled (37% vs. 22%).
Obama's plan leads the most on the issue of providing insurance coverage. Those who are uninsured believe Obama's plan would be more likely to provide them with coverage (45% vs. 14%). And, people who are currently insured believe that they would be more likely to be protected from losing their insurance under Obama's plan (31% vs. 19%).
Obama has a smaller lead with respect to views of the cost and quality of health care under his plan. More people think Obama's plan would require lower payments from them (27% vs. 19%) and would deliver better quality of care for them (27% vs. 21%). But, the plans come out equally in terms of how long it would take to get an appointment with their doctor (19% vs. 18%) and how much they would pay in taxes (33% vs. 32%).
The previous poll in this series focused on health care for veterans: "Americans Believe Wounded Iraq War Veterans Are Not Receiving High Quality Medical Care When They Return to the U.S.; Families With Military or Veteran Connection Also Hold Critical View; McCain Seen in Poll as Best Candidate on Issue." This topic was discussed as part of the first presidential debate. (The Veterans survey can be found at:
http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/allnewsbydate.asp?NewsID=1309 )
Methodology
This survey is part of the series, Debating Health: Election 2008. The series focuses on current health issues in the presidential campaign. The survey design team includes Professor Robert Blendon, Gillian SteelFisher, John Benson and Kathleen Weldon of the Harvard School of Public Health; and Humphrey Taylor, Scott Hawkins and Justin Greeves of Harris Interactive.
This survey was conducted by telephone within the United States among a nationwide cross section of adults aged 18 and over, and statistics here focus on those who are registered to vote. The survey was conducted September 17-21, 2008 among a representative sample of 935 respondents. Figures for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, region, number of adults in the household, size of place (urbanicity) and number of phone lines in the household were weighted where necessary to bring them into line with their actual proportions in the population.
All sample surveys and polls are subject to multiple sources of error including sampling error, coverage error, error associated with nonresponse, error associated with question wording and response options, and post-survey weighting and adjustments. The sampling error for registered voters is +/- 3.2% in 95 out of 100 cases for results based on the entire sample. For results based on a smaller subset, the sampling error is somewhat larger.
Source: Harvard School of Public Health
Related stories:
It's time to make sure all children have health care
The current economic downturn has many faces, including those of children. Economic indicators show that the worst of the recession may be yet to come and many economists are predicting that the unemployment rate will rise to as much as 9 percent next year. If that occurs, approximately 3 million additional children will fall into poverty, with many losing their health-care coverage.
Test-tube babies profitable business for the state
Increased financial support for IVF fertilization would be downright profitable for the state. Test-tube babies are an investment for the future, not an expense. This is shown by Anders Svensson, who studied this issue in a bachelor's thesis in economics at Lund University School of Economics and Management in Sweden. His article on the subject was recently published in
Scandinavian Journal of Public Health (
SJPH).
It's that time of year: Medicare shifts
This is the time of the year when we give thanks. And also talk about Medicare. The two topics are not necessarily related.
Despite national guidelines, private insurers, ER, federal and state agencies fail to routinely test for HIV
While the U.S. AIDS epidemic simmers largely unnoticed by most Americans, a failure to widely implement routine HIV testing continues to fuel its spread, HIV researchers and experts said today. Almost 60,000 Americans were infected with HIV last year, and, nationwide, 50-to-70 percent of new sexually transmitted infections are spread by people who do not know they are infected.
Guidelines issued two years ago by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommend that all Americans ages 13-64 be routinely tested in all healthcare settings. Now, data show that although such testing could save years of healthy life and limit the spread of HIV, they are largely not being implemented.
Medical societies: Adults need vaccines
The American College of Physicians (ACP) and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) have released a joint statement on the importance of adult vaccination against an increasing number of vaccine-preventable diseases. The statement has been endorsed by 17 other medical societies representing a range of practice areas.
Affordable medicine plan goes global
An innovative plan to get new life-saving drugs into the hands of millions of people around the world who need medicines but can't afford the massive costs will be unveiled to key decision makers in London and Washington over the coming weeks.
Heart disease patients may not benefit from depression screening
Results of a new study call into question recent clinical guidelines issued by leading cardiovascular groups, including the American Heart Association, which recommend patients with cardiovascular disease be screened for signs of depression and treated accordingly.
New findings on the role of inflammation in prevention of coronary heart disease
This year, about 450,000 Americans will die of coronary heart disease – the leading cause of death for both men and women. Although we have made great strides in preventing and treating heart disease, we continue to explore the complex mechanisms involved in cardiovascular disease, and we are eager to refine risk assessment tools and preventive strategies to reduce the incidence of heart attack and stroke.