Obama’s Health Care Address: Have We Seen This Movie?
As President Obama prepares for tomorrow night’s address on health care reform, there’s a cautionary note from the last go ’round: With Bill Clinton as a guide, the evidence suggests that a good speech, in and of itself, won’t do it.
Clinton’s health care pitch – the last attempt at wholesale reform – came Sept. 22, 1993, in an address, like Obama’s, to a joint session of Congress. On one level it worked: The effort was well received, with a spike in support for Clinton’s proposals in immediate post-speech polls. But it didn’t last. Concerns about his plan quickly regained their footing; support quickly ebbed.
One reason cuts to the challenge of presidential speechifying. These addresses to some extent represent an exercise in preaching to the choir, or at best to choir applicants; people who tune in tend to be favorably inclined, or at least willing to lend an ear. Those who are movable may move, yet stay open to further debate. And outright opponents are hard to reach and hardest to turn; it’s a challenge for Obama that in our latest data half the public opposed the reform plan he and the Congress are developing, with four in 10 “strongly” opposed.
Addresses also, naturally, accentuate the positive; rebuttals and debate follow, all part of the mix of substantive evaluation. As we’ve reported previously, the chief lesson from the Clinton effort is that pushback to health care reform resonates powerfully – did then, does now.
Reviewing our polling from the 1993-94 debate, never did more than half of Americans think Clinton’s proposals would improve the quality of care for most Americans, and never did more than about a quarter think it would improve their own care. Half or more, meanwhile, thought it would raise their cost; majorities steadily thought it would raise costs for most Americans.
Health care is a public issue but also a uniquely personal one; cost is important, but concerns about care are essential. In a poll we completed Sept. 19, 1993, 31 percent of Americans thought Clinton’s plan would worsen their own health care, substantially more than the 19 percent who foresaw improvements. The night of the speech he moved that to par – a 27-27 percent better-worse split (the rest thought their care would stay the same). But that reverted to form in a Washington Post poll completed Oct. 10, just over two weeks later – 34 percent worse, 19 percent better. And it stayed there for the duration.
Similarly, before Clinton’s speech just 36 percent though his plan would improve care for most Americans. Immediately after he spoke that hit 50 percent – but two weeks later it was back down to 39 percent. And it was similar on costs – right after the speech, a 7-point drop in Americans’ views that the plan would raise their health care expenses. Oct. 10, back where it was. (Another measure, views on costs for most people, barely budged even briefly.)
Clinton is not the only worrying precedent for Obama. Gallup data recently presented by Mollyann Brodie of the Kaiser Family Foundation showed opposition to Harry Truman’s health reform efforts rising from 38 percent in March 1949 to 60 percent in November 1950 (among those who’d heard about it). Truman had proposed creating a government-run health insurance program; critics, including the American Medical Association, characterized it as "socialized medicine." (Sound familiar?)
Obama’s position today particularly echoes Clinton’s in September 1993. In our last poll Americans by 33 percent to 19 percent thought their quality of care would be worsened rather than improved under the plan being developed by Obama and Congress. Respondents by 41-19 percent thought their costs would worsen, and by 40-14 percent thought their coverage would get worse.
Obama may be blessed by not having Harry and Louise enunciate these concerns; yet they are concerns nonetheless. He’ll likely try to address them, as Clinton did. It’s clearly worth the shot; he may move the dial, as Clinton did. But whether it stays moved is another question entirely.
There are, of course, arguments in support of reform that also resonate. The current system is hardly popular. While most people are satisfied with their current care, coverage and even costs, most also are unhappy with waste in the system overall, concerned about the uninsured and worried about their future costs and coverage alike.
These conditions, too, held some sway in the Clinton days; for most of the period of debate more than half called his plan “better than the present system” – peaking, again, immediately after his speech, and tailing off to 49 percent only in the plan’s death throes nine months later. But better than the present was not good enough; overall support for Clinton’s plan drew a clear majority of Americans just once in nearly a dozen ABC/Post polls – the one done on the night of his address to the nation.
Views on Clinton’s Health Plan – 1993
Pre- Post- 2 weeks
speech speech later
Clinton plan:
Approve 43% 56 51
Disapprove 41 24 39
Own care:
Better 19 27 19
Worse 31 27 34
Same 46 42 44
Care for most:
Better 36 50 39
Worse 29 19 29
Same 31 25 30
Own cost:
More 56 49 56
Less 10 10 7
Same 29 33 29
Cost for most:
More 61 57 63
Less 13 16 11
Same 21 20 20
Source: ABC/Post and Washington Post polls
Email
Rick Santorum Sweeps 3 States
Pentagon to Open Additional Jobs to Women
Obama has given a number of speeches, town halls and such already and has not succeeded in moving the dial. Where this might differ – and differ from Clinton – is that it is a chance for Obama to change from his failed tactic (letting the slow deliberations of Congress grind for months) to one more likely to yield results (accept Republicans are going to obstruct everything and sit down with just Democrats, Snowe, and maybe Collins in the room).
The speech is unlikely to do anything, but a shift in strategy could make the difference.
Posted by: jhw539 | September 8, 2009, 2:22 pm 2:22 pm
jhw539 : If he uses that strategy the dems might actually lose the house and maybe even the senate—-plus, go down as the most devisive POTUS in recent history.
Posted by: 1azcowboy | September 8, 2009, 6:06 pm 6:06 pm
With the implosion of Canadian healthcare, the tripling of US debt in record time, a costly, bloody needless war and a great mistrust for a government that caters to lobbyists, it will take more than smooth talk to get the glaze from my eyes.
Posted by: Helen | September 8, 2009, 6:25 pm 6:25 pm
I disagree on the speech not having ann effect. I think if it’s going to have any effect, the President MUST reiterate our obligation as a nation to provide health care to ALL American familys, he MUST point out the liars on the right and the interests that they have vested upon destroying a bill like this, and he MUST let the people know he not only stands by the public option still but is willing to go down for it if that’s what it takes. And only then will the difference be that the American people will stand up yet again and let it be known loud and clear that we’ll settle for nothing less from our congress and our senate then a public option. If voters threaten to replace a politician if they don’t get on board in the interest of the middle to lower class and our voices WILL be heard.
Posted by: LeftOfCenter44 | September 8, 2009, 7:02 pm 7:02 pm
President Clinton didn’t have a majority in the Congress and the Senate
to pass the bill. President Obama does.
However, the Public Option must be implemented. This bill should pass without the Republican shenanigans. We should all remember that in the last November’s elections Obama won the presidency with a majority of 52.9% of the popular votes to McCain’s 45.7% and
365 electoral votes to 173. This result gave him the needed mandate to implement the rapid end to the Iraq war, Energy Independence and Universal Health Care ,as promised during the 2008
Presidential Campaign. That’s what the majority voted for!The noise we hear now are the voices of the sore losers.
Posted by: Daniel | September 8, 2009, 8:54 pm 8:54 pm
Lived in Canada for 30 Months. Appointments were 4 months, A minor surgery was 6 months and the surgeon was
my landlord. For each 1500 added to the
covered would need a doctor where are yougoing to get them. You can’t educate that many,with our education system. Medicare is failing, as the doctors income are dropping.
All you have to do is look carefully at
the bills we receive.The fees are dropping. Veterans
RX are less because most are generic..
Posted by: Wayne A Frostad | September 9, 2009, 3:41 am 3:41 am
President Obama Health Care Reform Bill dont pass this time….
You will see a lot of Private Insurance Compaines going out of business in the near future because people want be able to afford them anymore!
I canceled my health care insurance a year ago !
The Gop will be at fault if Health Care don’t pass this time……
It has become clear to me that the GOP is not interested in compromise or cooperation.They are only interested in regaining power even if it means opposing something that is good for the country as a whole. Mark my word, once we get past the “public option” hurdle the GOP will waste no time identifying some other element of health care reform to railroad comprehensive overhaul of the US health care system. Think about it, a success for President Obama does not help their cause to regain power. So why cooperate or compromise on policies which benefit the incumbent if your goal is to remove the incumbent from office? President Obama has the potential to do something good for this country. If he is allowed to succeed it would prolong the return of the GOP to power. So don’t look for any cooperation from the GOP. The only thing we can expect from the GOP is continued opposition. Democrats need to do what’s best for the country and forget about bipartisanship that’s the word the Gop is using as a weapon to stop the health care reform bill from passing this time!…
If the Republican Party want to regain there dignity and respect back they are sure going about it the wrong way you are being so transparent in your quest !
Posted by: Brendett | September 9, 2009, 8:33 am 8:33 am