Michigan Voters Show “No Love” for a Mandatory
State Government-Run Health Plan
Voters are deeply alarmed by the financial costs and risks of the proposal to Michigan taxpayers. The survey found that three out of four voters, a whopping 74 percent, would not support this proposal when they learned that similar plans have failed in other states, requiring hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer bailouts. “Once voters are aware of the serious financial risks, not even cupid’s arrow could kindle much love for a mandatory state government-run health plan for public employees,” said King.
Nearly two-thirds of voters, a solid 65 percent, say they would be less likely to support this proposal knowing it would give the state new power to review and overrule decisions and treatment plans that patients and their doctors have agreed on, similar to the so-called Obama health plan. The intensity of the opposition is striking with 85 percent of Republicans and 65 percent of Ticket Splitters opposed to a proposal that would increase government power over public employee health care.
The argument that the proposal will align public employee health plans closer to those in the private sector is not winning over voters. After hearing that statement, voters are evenly split with 45 percent supporting and 45 percent opposing the proposal. A majority of Republican voters (51 percent) and a plurality of the swing voting “ticket splitters” (47 percent) are more likely to oppose the proposal after hearing this argument. “The line used by proponents to entice voters to support this proposal is actually a turnoff for ticket splitters and Republicans,” said Paul King.
Michigan voters continue to show “No Love” for a mandatory State government-run health plan. “Creating a new state government-run health care plan for public employees doesn’t make sense to voters, especially if it means they will pay more in taxes and give government increased power over health care,” said King. “It seems voters view this proposal like they do a heart-shaped box of Valentine chocolates: it may look enticing now to some, but we’ll be paying for it later.”
MRG Michigan Poll Details
Field Dates: January 24-27, 2011
Sample: n=600 Likely Voters
Margin of Error: ± 4%
Methodology
A sample of 600 likely voters was drawn in the State of Michigan and stratified by city and township within county, based upon average voter turnout in past statewide general elections. All respondents were screened to assure that they are registered to vote in Michigan at that address and likely to vote in the next general election.
The cluster sample of likely voters was drawn from a central database of voters likely to vote in next year's general election. A “likely voter” is determined based on his or her past voting history. Individual voting records within this database are updated monthly from the Michigan Qualified Voter File. A random cluster sample is then drawn from the subset of Michigan likely voters.
Given the sample size of 600 and the method of random selection, the statistical margin of error can be reliably set at ±4 percent within a 95% degree of confidence. In other words, in 95 out of every 100 responses, the “surveyed value” will be within plus or minus 4 percent of the “true value.”
Question Language
1. The Michigan Legislature is considering a number of proposals to balance the state budget. One proposal would restructure the health care benefits for all state and local government and public school employees in Michigan. The proposal would mandate that Michigan's 400 thousand state and local government and public school employees and retirees get their health insurance coverage from a single health care plan operated by state government much like the Obamacare health plan.
ROTATE A & B:
A: Supporters of the plan say it would save as much as 400 million dollars a year by eliminating duplication in negotiations and administration of health insurance benefits, creating a large pool to negotiate lower costs with private insurers, and requiring public employees to pay higher health care premiums. Supporters also say the plan is needed because public employees have rich benefit packages and do not pay enough out of their own pockets toward their health insurance.
B: Opponents of the proposal to create a government run health plan say it is an unnecessary and expensive expansion of government at a time when state government can't afford the programs it runs today. The opponents say it will cost hundreds of millions of dollars to set up and manage, add billions in new financial liability to the state budget and that mandatory health insurance plans for public employees that already operate in other states recently required hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer bailouts and tax increases. Opponents also say that this proposal would put Lansing politicians in charge of the state health plan and force local employees to give up the health plans they have today.
From what you know, do you favor or oppose this proposal?
(IF FAVOR/OPPOSE ASK: Would you say you strongly (favor/oppose) it or just somewhat (favor/oppose) it?)
Strongly favor 18%
Somewhat favor 12% TOTAL FAVOR = 30%
Neither favor nor oppose 4%
Somewhat oppose 16%
Strongly oppose 40% TOTAL OPPOSE = 56%
Don’t know (Volunteered) 9%
Refused (Volunteered) 1%
Now I would like to read you some statements you may hear about this proposal to create a government run public employee health care system. After each statement please tell me if it makes you more likely or less likely to support the proposal.
(IF (MORE/LESS) LIKELY ASK: Would you be much (more/less) likely to support it or just somewhat (more/less) likely to it?) (ROTATE STATEMENTS)
Much Somewhat Makes Somewhat Much
More More No Less Less Don't
Likely Likely Difference Likely Likely Know Refused
2. State government-run health plans in other states have failed to reduce health care costs and required huge taxpayer bailouts. Last year North Carolina's state health plan ran out of money and taxpayers were forced to pay for a $658 million bailout.
6% 7% 4% 21% 54% 7% 3%
TOTAL MORE LIKELY 12%
TOTAL LESS LIKELY 74%
-MORE-
Much Somewhat Makes Somewhat Much
More More No Less Less Don't
Likely Likely Difference Likely Likely Know Refused
3. The proposal is much like the Obamacare health insurance plan because it gives state government new power to review and overrule decisions and treatment plans that patients and their doctors have agreed on.
11% 12% 3% 16% 49% 7% 2%
TOTAL MORE LIKELY 22%
TOTAL LESS LIKELY 65%
4. The proposal will standardize coverage forcing all public employees and retirees to choose from the same set of health benefit plans which will be more closely aligned with those offered to public employees in other states and in the private sector.
22% 23% 2% 17% 28% 6% 2%
TOTAL MORE LIKELY 45%
TOTAL LESS LIKELY 45%