The White Mountain Rotary Club last Saturday participated in a Community Health Care Survey in front of Walmart in Show Low. Volunteers tabulated the response to three core questions on health care of passers by. (See the results* in detail below)
Some 200 citizens offered opinions on health insurance, medical treatment access, affordability and national health care reform. In general, the results were predictable – most had health insurance, most had access through a private physician, and a bare majority thought the federal government should provide universal coverage of all US citizens.
For our purposes here we did not differentiate between Medicare, Medicaid, Federal or State or Local government plans. Private providers appear to be a niche market.
Only 12% said they could not afford health insurance.
A narrow majority (55%) favored health care as a federal entitlement -- this excluded many seniors who were on Medicare but felt younger working persons should pay their own way.
According to the current week’s Economist, the US public pays $7200 per capita for health care, vs. the OECD average of $2600, most of which are single payer systems.
US health outcomes also lag those of European nations on heart disease, diabetes, and most cancers, some of which may be preventable with better practices.
Rotary Clubs in the region are considering support for a program called subscription health care which allows most medical care to be accessed through a private provider for a fixed monthly cost more affordable for working families. These plans favor wellness programs such as smoking cessation and baseline physicals to help avoid disease.
The on-line survey the campaign is currently asking supporters to fill out should be titled, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" because they don't ask the hard questions so supporters don't have the chance to tell the campaign about any problems or negative experiences encountered while volunteering.
All the survey's questions are framed in the positive and the answer options are only positive. They are as useful and insightful as asking, "Which superlative would you use describe our phenomenal campaign staff?"
a. fantastic
b. wonderful
c. fabulous
d. the best darn team ever to run a campaign
Is this anyway to collect meaningful information?
The survey never asked
a. What did the campaign do that impeded your volunteer efforts?
b. Were the on-line tools easy to use?
c. Were the on-line tools were useful?
d. Was your training adequate?
e. Did you feel your phone calling or canvassing had a positive effect on voters you contacted?
f. Did the state or national Obama campaign headquarters provide appropriate support to the office where you volunteered?
g. What did you like least about your volunteer experience?
I hope I'm wrong, but it seems Plouffe and company don't ask the tough questions because they don't want supporters to tell them the sometimes ugly truth.
The Pickens Plan: For those who would like to become an active participant in a solution for our nations energy needs I urge you to join with T.Boone Pickens in his quest for a cleaner planet through alternative energy.
Also see Green Wave Energy: Green Wave was founded by Mark Holmes and was formulated for viable alternative energy solutions. Green Wave Energy is promoting state-of-the-art energy-saving products and services throughout the country.
Green Wave Energy understands alternative energy technology will become “main stream” when
Call 949.645.1701 for information on how Green Wave Energy can help you save the planet.
Alternative EnergySource: David Apperson
url: http://veterans.barackobama.com/page/community/tag/alternative-energy
Listening to NPR the other day there was a passing comment regarding the relationship of the US economy to consumer confidence – about 2/3 of the US economy is directly connected to consumer spending. Not news in itself but with confidence in Bush at an all time low what could be the potential economic impact of Obama just winning the election. Some of the data is pretty surprising.
According to recent survey by the International Council of Shopping Centers and Goldman Sachs, 8% of respondents said they are likely to increase holiday spending because of the election of Sen. Obama. Although it does not say how much the spending is likely to improve, a little back-of-the-napkin math can help put this into perspective.
In the 2007 there was about $70b in holiday spending and according to Mastercard about 40% ($28b) was spent online. If 8% of people spent just 5% more that translates into an additional $280m. If it is more like 8% of people spending 25% more the number jumps to $1.4b, or an overall increase of 2%.
Another survey by the National Retail Federation projects that 2008 holiday spending will increase 1.9 percent over 2007 spending. In a nutshell, Obama could provide a lift in Holiday shopping that could double the expected growth in 2008 spending.
Even more impressive is the overall potential impact on the US and the global economy. Gallup daily tracking poll of consumer confidence in the US has shown a 9 point drop (80 to 71) in the people who view the economic outlook as “negative” just over the last week. Not significant? The negative score has not been at 71 since February.
This evening, someone in NV called my cell phone for a survey about this year's election. I had fun with it for 23 minutes, though!
At least it's a light-hearted break from the seriousness!
*sigh*
EMK
From CenteredPolitics.com
Right now, one of the candidates for president is struggling to clear a threshold that would even qualify him to lead the nation in this time of crisis -- and the entire national press corps has been following the other candidate.
It is not all that surprising that the national press corps followed Barack Obama through the Middle East and Europe because the conventional wisdom of the moment is pointing to the question of whether Barack Obama can meet a minimum acceptability standard on the Commander in Chief dimension. Casting Obama as Ronald Reagan by analogy to his 1980 victory over Jimmy Carter, this widely repeated analysis makes the central question one of whether Obama can assure voters that they can feel comfortable with him on foreign policy issues and in command of the military. This view may be correct, as far as it goes, but it places far too much emphasis on foreign policy in an election where voters are almost completely focused on their economic insecurity.
Priorities can always shift, but right now it looks like voters will be going to the polls in November to vote for change in the direction of the economy [period, full stop]. If John McCain cannot contest that turf, there will be no contest in November.
A very large high school conducted a poll and Mr. Obama won. Although my granddaughter is too young to vote, she is at least beginning to have awareness of issues, and she is on th te road to preparing for active and effective citizenship.
Excellent activity: a poll among the young people to get their opinion of the process.
From Reuters:
----BEGIN ARTICLE----
US doctors support universal health care - survey
Mon Mar 31, 2008 5:00pm EDT
WASHINGTON, March 31 (Reuters) - More than half of U.S. doctors now favor switching to a national health care plan and fewer than a third oppose the idea, according to a survey published on Monday. The survey suggests that opinions have changed substantially since the last survey in 2002 and as the country debates serious changes to the health care system. Of more than 2,000 doctors surveyed, 59 percent said they support legislation to establish a national health insurance program, while 32 percent said they opposed it, researchers reported in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine. The 2002 survey found that 49 percent of physicians supported national health insurance and 40 percent opposed it. "Many claim to speak for physicians and represent their views. We asked doctors directly and found that, contrary to conventional wisdom, most doctors support national health insurance," said Dr. Aaron Carroll of the Indiana University School of Medicine, who led the study. "As doctors, we find that our patients suffer because of increasing deductibles, co-payments, and restrictions on patient care," said Dr. Ronald Ackermann, who worked on the study with Carroll. "More and more, physicians are turning to national health insurance as a solution to this problem." PATCHWORK The United States has no single organized health care system. Instead it relies on a patchwork of insurance provided by the federal and state governments to the elderly, poor, disabled and to some children, along with private insurance and employer-sponsored plans. Many other countries have national plans, including Britain, France and Canada, and several studies have shown the United States spends more per capita on health care, without achieving better results for patients. An estimated 47 million people have no insurance coverage at all, meaning they must pay out of their pockets for health care or skip it. Contenders in the election for president in November all have proposed various changes, but none of the major party candidates has called for a fully national health plan. Insurance companies, retailers and other employers have joined forces with unions and other interest groups to propose their own plans. "Across the board, more physicians feel that our fragmented and for-profit insurance system is obstructing good patient care, and a majority now support national insurance as the remedy," Ackermann said in a statement. The Indiana survey found that 83 percent of psychiatrists, 69 percent of emergency medicine specialists, 65 percent of pediatricians, 64 percent of internists, 60 percent of family physicians and 55 percent of general surgeons favor a national health insurance plan. The researchers said they believe the survey was representative of the 800,000 U.S. medical doctors. (Reporting by Maggie Fox; Editing by Will Dunham and Xavier Briand)
© Reuters 2008 All rights reserved
----END ARTICLE----
Here is the survey and an editorial about the survey: survey and editorial. See also the summary if the article is a bit confusing and this response, which is on page 2 of the link. Based on the orginal article, it should be more interpreted as a plurality instead of a majority. What do you think? Questions? Comments? Suggestions?
By Steve Holland Thu Mar 27, 4:24 PM ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A controversy over Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's former pastor has not hurt Obama, a new poll found on Thursday, even as more potential trouble surfaced involving his church.
A poll by the Pew Research Center said videos of sermons by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Obama's subsequent speech on race in America last week have attracted more public attention than any events thus far in the 2008 presidential campaign.
The March 19-22 survey of 1,503 American adults found that despite the flap, Illinois Sen. Obama had maintained a 49 percent to 39 percent advantage over New York Sen. Hillary Clinton in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Read more... http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080327/pl_nm/usa_politics_obama_pastor_dc
(The last question of this poll most resembles Obama's Health Care Plan. The first question looks to find out how the person views the Health Care situation in America as it stands. Questions 2 and 3 are the same plan (mostly resembles Clinton's). Notice that no matter which way the Clinton's plan is presented - Obama's is favored by more Americans.)
Health Care Delivery
NPR/Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard School of Public Health survey. Feb. 14-24, 2008. N=1,704 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3 (for all adults). Fieldwork by ICR.
"An issue that has received attention in the news lately is the number of Americans who do not have health insurance. How serious do you think this problem is? Very serious, somewhat serious, not too serious or not at all serious?".
79% Very Serious 19% Somewhat Serious 4% Not Too Serious 2% Not at All Serious 1% Unsure
"Next, I'm going to read you a description of a plan to make sure everyone has health insurance, and then I'm going to ask you if you support or oppose this plan. This proposal would require all Americans to have insurance. Most people would still get insurance through their work. People who don't get insurance from work would have to buy it themselves, or pay a fine if they don't. People with lower incomes would get help from the government paying the cost of health insurance. Would you support or oppose this kind of plan?" N=853 (Form A)
47% Support 44% Oppose 8% Unsure
"Next, I'm going to read you a description of a plan to make sure everyone has health insurance, and then I'm going to ask you if you support or oppose this plan. This proposal would place requirements on individuals, employers, the government, and insurance companies so that everyone shares in the responsibility. Individuals who don't already have insurance would be required to buy it or pay a fine, with financial help from the government for people with lower incomes. Employers would be required to cover their workers, or pay money into a pool that helps people buy insurance. Government health insurance programs would be expanded. Insurance plans would be required to take anyone who applies, even if they have a prior illness. Would you support or oppose this kind of plan?" N=851 (Form B)
59% Support 33% Oppose 8% Unsure
"A different proposal for increasing the number of people covered by health insurance would NOT require all adults to have insurance, but would require that parents get insurance for their children. Most children would still be covered by plans through their parents' employers. Parents who aren't covered through work would have to buy insurance for their children, or pay a fine if they don't. Parents with lower incomes would get help from the government paying the cost of health insurance or their children would be enrolled in public programs. Would you support or oppose this kind of plan?"
65% Support 31% Oppose 4% Unsure
This was first "published" as a diary on Daily Kos.
Here we will explore where to look on the web for political content and news content which have a progressive flavor. Since this is an introductory article, we will not be covering RSS feeds, newsgroups or environmental websites, although you can certainly find out a lot about the environment at some of the websites mentioned.
Let’s start with AlterNet, http://www.alternet.org/. This is one of the largest, most highly regarded progressive websites, with truthful news, columnists, videos and blogs. Sign up for email newsletters on the topics which are of interest; you can do that with almost all of the websites listed here. There are many “threads” of discussions going on at any given time over quite a few of the articles. You can email or print anything and pages print with print large enough to read, even with Internet Explorer (6 or 7). One of the finest blogs in existence for us progressives and for anyone concerned with the truth is Daily Kos, http://www.dailykos.com/, which is hosted by one Markos Moulitsas Zuniga. It gets a hefty traffic of a half a million readers per day. He and his contributors really tell the truth without embellishment, and this website can be counted on to separate the chaff from the wheat. Be sure you check out the "diaries". As with many of these websites, you need to register with your email, often providing a username and almost always a password, for full-featured access. Another great one is Common Dreams, http://www.commondreams.org/, the non-profit news and views website with a couple of hundred links to news and blog websites and columnists. I must be an old curmudgeon; I liked their old page format better.....but it's absolutely one of the best liberal web sites out there.
If you want a good dose of the real left, try http://www.truthout.org/, which has hundreds of news stories and turns up a LOT of dirt on the Administration. I understand America Online has restricted their users on this one.
Now, about "the truth." There are a few websites which make it their business to check the media, politicians and candidates' statements and tell YOU, the (news) "consumer" just what is true and what is false, and to what degree. Here are a couple of the best: http://www.factcheck.org/ (sign up for the email newsletters from this one) and from down in St. Petersburg, Florida (yes, Florida), http://www.politifact.com/. You won't always see what you want. If you are a Clinton OR (even) an Obama supporter you may find a few lies exposed, and if you are any kind of a progressive, you may dislike finding some of the claims made against McCain debunked. But you will always get the truth from these two websites.
One of the best progressive magazines is The Nation, http://www.thenation.com/, and if you are of an intellectual bent you will like Harper's, http://www.harpers.org/, which magazine has been around since 1850. Both of these are also print magazines, and the websites want you to subscribe but you can still read them online for free. One of my very favorite places to stop by is Talking Points Memo, http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/, where you have your own profile and blog. Be sure you read the news and check out such features as Muckraker, Election Central, the Café, and by all means read "The Horse's Mouth." If you care about the "spinning" of the news and corporate control over content, be sure to check out Media Matters for America, http://mediamatters.org/index.
Also check out The Nation Institute, http://www.nationinstitute.org/, which is a very impressive website where you can learn a lot. A little more arcane is The Rockridge Institute, http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/, which is about "framing" the debate in American society from the progressive point of view. The Republicans were framing the debate before progressives knew what framing was!!
Let me take a moment to relate something I referenced at FactCheck.org. Washington lawmakers are notoriously influenced by lobbyists, so I want to show how that pertains to the upcoming Presidential election. Lobbying is a regulated profession; you have to be registered to be an active lobbyist. Let's look at Obama and Clinton, versus the leading Republican candidate, John McCain, in terms of the number of lobbyists working on the candidates' campaign staffs. There are 59 registered lobbyists working on McCain's staff, 20 for Hillary Clinton, and ten who were formerly registered as lobbyists working on Barack Obama's campaign staff (Public Citizen, January 29, 2008). John Edwards had three “bundlers” (fundraisers) working on his campaign who were ex-lobbyists. You can find Public Citizen (founded by Ralph Nader) at http://action.citizen.org/. Be sure and check the Press Room for current stories. The preceding should give you an idea of just who -- and how much -- each candidate is "influenced" by corporations, but it is this plus the donations themselves which tell the full story. It is very useful and convenient to have the two resources, www.factcheck.org, and www.politifact.com (which is a page of the St. Petersburg Times), at one's fingertips to check the facts out and have the truth at hand.
Here are some more serious, very good progressive blogs and websites. You may ask, if these blogs are just online diaries, what can I really learn from them? Ah, grasshopper, you are showing your online naiveté. A blog can be just as much a serious vehicle as The New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com) is as a newspaper and (conventional) website. It's just that ANY website which takes the form of a dated series of communications, usually with an archive, and with the newest entry at the top is a blog, or weblog, by definition. A great blog you will want to check out is The Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com, and it's always a good idea to stop by Fire Dog Lake, http://firedoglake.com/. If you want to check out the people who absolutely infuriate conservatives in the know, go to MoveOn.org, http://www.moveon.org/. Seventy percent of the 3.2 million members of MoveOn.org who voted, asked the site to publically back Barack Obama, and they are actively campaigning for him as well as other progressive candidates. This is also the site for people who want to get involved and put their name and email on petitions; just click the "Campaigns" button at the top. A great resource is The American Prospect, http://www.prospect.org/, whose slogan is “liberal intelligence.”
Perhaps you’d like to see speeches by Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama (or be infuriated by those of Bush and Cheney). Google’s video website YouTube, http://www.youtube.com/, has free registration, after which you can search many millions of videos, make comments, save the ones you like or download them in Real Player format, and share links to them. A search for “Barack Obama” yielded about 43,100 results, but the links to the most relevant videos are on the results page provided.
If you feel so inclined and are among those who are getting up in years, try AARP, the American Association of Retired People, http://www.aarp.org/. Be sure to visit the magazine, http://www.aarpmagazine.org/, and especially the Bulletin, http://www.aarp.org/bulletin/. You can join for a modest fee if you are 50 or older. AARP has been extremely successful at lobbying Congress about social programs. Back at the beginning of 2006 when the Bush administration was trying very hard to privatize Social Security, AARP ran a singularly effective campaign which squashed this attempt. Another great website to visit is http://www.now.org, for the National Organization of Women. There is a lot of real news and factual information to be found here. They support Hillary Clinton.
Another group the Bush administration hates is the American Friends Service Committee. That’s right, the Quakers. You can find them and join their efforts for peace and relief at http://www.afsc.org/. Apparently being against the war in Iraq is enough to make you an enemy of the administration even if you are a notably Christian group! Ah, but not the right sort of Christian. All conservatives reserve a special venom for the ACLU, the American Civil Liberties Union, http://www.aclu.org/. When you’ve joined the ACLU, you’ve reached a certain level of status in the progressive movement. I will only note that this group defends the civil rights of everyone, including conservatives. Related is TalkLeft, http://www.talkleft.com/, which is about the politics of crime and injustice.
The New York Times infuriated its online readership when it began charging for full access a couple of years ago; the current day’s news is still free. The Washington Post is still completely free; you will find it at http://www.washingtonpost.com/.
Although you will not find too much news there with a progressive slant, there is good general news coverage at Yahoo news, http://news.yahoo.com/. It's certainly not a progressive source per se, but they do a pretty good job with the news. The progressive coverage is at the bottom of the page. Yahoo, fighting off a $44.6 billion takeover attempt by Microsoft, is in talks with the media giant Rupert Murdoch (see http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2004/07/b122948.html). If Yahoo goes that route, you can expect any remaining evenhandedness in their news coverage to go out the window. The Center for American Progress, http://www.americanprogress.org/, referenced above, is the website of a think tank that has, besides the homepage, sections on national security, domestic and economy, media and culture, and others.
If you just want a summary of the news, with links to the full articles, try the Progressive Blog Digest, http://pbd.blogspot.com/. Recently it has been the number one website listed in the search results for "progressive blogs" from Google. There is good news coverage and there are some great blogs at Mother Jones News, http://www.motherjones.com/. Fareed Zakaria of Newsweek called OxBlog, http://oxblog.blogspot.com/, "a great read," and you should also check out Buzzflash, which is a whole family of websites. Try http://www.buzzflash.com/ and http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/. A favorite of mine here is Buzzflash.com’s GOP Hypocrite of the Week, http://www.gophypocrites.com/index.php.
Finally, let me conclude this survey of the progressive scene with Tom Paine's, "common sense," which can be found at http://www.tompaine.com/. It's a gritty, well thought out website which should not be passed up. Thomas Paine, more than any other thinker, motivated citizens of the British colonies in America to rebel in the American Revolutionary War. A pamphlet called Common Sense was perhaps most influential. One of his sayings was, “When the government fears the people, you have liberty. When the people fear the government, you have tyranny.”
I might note that this discussion entirely omits foreign websites, of which there are several excellent sources.
Check out BLS Series LNS13327709. Take it seriously, this is the official government, not some partisan rinky dink group. You have to type the ID code "LNS13327709" into the box. Set it to give you the data from 1998 to 2008.
http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/srgate
Very very informative. Don't listen to the Republicans who tell you that the economy is great because employment is rising. Even without this survey, I always say "Uh huh, and so is the cost of health care, education, gas, and just about all basic costs of living...". Huzzah, a raise in the amount of ridiculously low wage, non-family friendly, insecure jobs. Big whoop.
But this survey provides fresh insight. Bush can only brag about low unemployment rates RELATIVE to those maudlin times post September 11th- perhaps the greatest tragedy our country has ever had to deal with. Gee, awesome. We managed to descend down from our lovely 10's into the 9 percent range and then the 8 percent range.
But look, as soon as Bush first took office, unemployment rates started to steadily ascend. And guess what? Now they're on the rise again. January 2008: 9.0% !
Compare all this to Clinton's second term when unemployment steadily DEscended into the low 7 percents and even 6.9...
Bush's descent period was nothing special and is stupid to brag about. It's all relative.
Dear Friend:
Thanks to your support, my youth activism campaign continues to be a vibrant, growing movement. Looking ahead to 2008, my campaign is committed to expanding our outreach. In order to continue to fight for Honest Government, Youth Rights, Education for All, and World Peace, I invite you to take our quick survey.
http://www.ASHERHEIMERMANN.com
The survey is located on the homepage of my website. This survey will better help us know a little more about you and how we can best inform you about our upcoming events and projects. This survey is only 8 questions. This survey will also help us continue to make my website user friendly.
My next radio show will air live on Tuesday, December 4th at 5:00pm ET / 4:00pm. This will be a 90 minute edition of the Asher Speaks Live radio program. We will discuss the 2008 presidential candidates as well as talk about the latest news and events that happend over the weekend.
Also, Tonight (November 28th) is the first ever CNN/YouTube Republican Debate. The debate, broadcast from St. Petersburg, Florida, will air live at 8:00pm ET / 7:00pm on CNN. This debate will be moderated by Anderson Cooper, but the questions are from voters all over the United States who submitted questions by video on YouTube.
With Warm Regards, ASHER HEIMERMANN Wisconsin's Youth Activist http://www.ASHERHEIMERMANN.com
While just clicking around Obama's website today, I noticed a sidebar on the "Issues" page that invites people to submit their ideas on addressing the country's issues. Now, I have to admit that I often speak as if I have answers to major social issues, but in reality, I don't have the answers. Like most people, I recognize the major issues--healthcare, environmental depletion, foreign relations, etc.--but figuring out how to solve these is a major task (which is why I support Obama because I think he has great ideas!)
But this idea of asking people what they would do is wonderful. I would love to see the Obama campaign team go out on a limb and do a major online survey to ask the American people what they think about the issues. Ask people what issues are important to them and what approach they would take to solving it.
This is a risk. Obama's team would have to be confident that the outcome of the survey would support Barack's ideas and agenda. But I think it is a risk that would be worth taking. If anything, he could say that he is really asking the mass American public to tell him what to do.
It is a major pet peeve of mine that elected officials often want to follow their own agenda forever. Aren't these people elected to support the desires of the people? "Government of the people, for the the people, by the people." So they should really put themselves out there and directly ask the people what they think.
Anyway... I think Barack's team should put together the biggest online survey ever! Publicize the heck out of it and see what the people have to say.
Take PRESIDENTIAL SURVEY on issues + who you support + your results - mine is included
Please take the survey to better understand where you are and why. This might be a good idea to pass around to those who support clinton to let them see who their results of the survey lead them to in how their results show.
http
://www.positivepress.
com/president/survey.cgi
Link
This survey could help us as supporters of barack Obama better understand where we are as a whole. Maybe we could make a blog with the results. I know i have left my results here in this email and at the newsvine blog below.
://LAUHAL63.newsvine.
com/_news/2007/06/29/809399-preditential-politics-survey?email=text
Danielle Clarke MY RESULTS in READ MORE
