« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Rasmussen: 54/42 against health care rationing.

It would seem that finally putting out all the various versions, alternates, and fevered mutterings of what the Democrats are trying to call ‘health care reform’ has helped to clarify matters for voters some more. It’s just not clarifying matters in a fashion that will make the current ruling party happy. Rasmussen’s latest snapshot:

Now that the Senate Finance Committee has passed its version of health care reform, 42% of voters nationwide favor the health care reform plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. That’s down two points from a week ago and down four from the week before.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 54% are opposed to the plan.

It is perhaps unkind to point out two details about the 42%:

  • The current state of affairs means that the number represents support for the hope that there will eventually be an acceptable health care bill.
  • Hope is not a plan.

…but it’s probably necessary.  Watching the… seven*?… Democratic factions try to reconcile the mess that they’ve created for themselves should be remarkably engrossing.

Moe Lane

*Well, you’ve got House progressives & Senate liberals; like vulnerable House members and ‘moderate’ Democratic Senators, there’s the House/Senate split on outlook to consider.  So that’s four.  Then there’s the House’s and the Senate’s leadership, with the two groups being barely civil to each other these days.  That’s two more.  And then there’s the White House, who pretty much caused this mess by letting the other six factions have free rein over the process.  So, seven.

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • ellisclarke

    Harry Reid would lead us all to believe that any health care reform bill is not a huge economic decision but rather just a fiscal housekeeping matter!

    His political reasoning for this is based on the fact that by labeling such a bill as only a housekeeping matter, the bill would only require 51 votes to pass the Senate and move forward!

    We have a so called non-partisan position in the person of, Alan Frumin, the Senate Parliamentarian but of course with our current high unemployment rates he would take into account his job security before ruling on such a nuclear proposal by Reid. Would he not?

    In my humble opinion, should Reid attempt to take this procedural course of action, it would be an abuse and misrepresentation of parliamentary rules.

    Further most likely unconstitutional and in no way could such legislation be legally construed as a fiscal housekeeping matter.

    By attempting to take this course of action, Reid would be lying to Congress and thus subject to criminal charges and removal from office. Could this be public`s quickest way to say bye, bye to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi?

  • Mark D

    I mean, didn’t the Chosen One get elected based on this? Hope seems like a perfectly cromulent plan to me.

  • majic

    We have seen these kinds of numbers and support for the last 6 months, and the democrats and the RINOs in Washington keep pushing this garbage bill through the process. The political elite don’t care what we think or what we want, they know our memories will not stop us from reelecting them on the next election ballot. The (so called) Republican leadership has failed (by accident?) to do anything useful this year, hell my dog has better leadership qualities. The economy is dying and we are spending all this time on a bill / policy that no one wants (except the elite). Unemployment is to the level of ridicules and the elite want to pass a new gas tax. The dollar is falling and the deficit is raising and we continue to follow the DNC distraction. Our people are dying in a war the ?The Obama? says is a good war and we continuing following the media lies. Our country is badly in need of leadership (and right now I really don?t can if it has a ?D? or ?R? after its name) and we listen to the rookie in the White House argue with Fox news.

  • http://charlemagne-the-hammer.blogspot.com/ DerKrieger

    that the only income group supporting this disaster are those making <$20k/yr per Rasmussen. That likely skews the overall numbers a little. It’s easy to support something you won’t have to pay for.

  • http://www.jeannie-ology.com jeannieology

    n/t

    www.jeannie-ology.com

  • http://www.suvstrategery.blogspot.com SoFiMil

    Group #8: 40+ Pro-Life Democrats who will not vote for any health care bill that does not explicitly ban elective abortions (to include accounting gimmicks.) http://www.lifenews.com/nat5562.html

    Group #9: Liberals who will not vote for any health care bill that does not explicitly include elective abortions.

    Group #10a Democrats who won’t vote for any health care bill that includes a public option.
    Group #10b Democrats primaried-out because of Howard Dean.

    Group #11a Democrats who won’t vote for any health care bill that does not exclude a public option.
    Group #11b Democrats primaried-out because of Howard Dean.