Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Just Asking Questions
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Print Subscription
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password
Reason logo

Thank you for supporting us during our webathon!

Reason is supported by:
Shane

Donate

Politics

Support Wanes When Costs Considered for Congressional Action to Guarantee Health Insurance: Evidence from Reason-Rupe and Gallup Polls

Emily Ekins | 3.29.2012 3:06 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

A previous post analyzing Reason-Rupe poll data demonstrated popular support for the new health care law's community rating provision when considered in isolation of costs, yet support wanes when increased premiums, wait times, taxes, or decreased health care quality are considered.

In the 1990s, Gallup asked similar questions and found similar results. In 1994 Gallup found that 79 percent of Americans supported "a health care reform package that guarantees every American private health insurance that can never be taken away." A slightly smaller majority (59 percent) continued to favor guaranteed coverage if taxes increased and a slim majority (50 percent) if premiums increased.

If guaranteed coverage created major costs for small businesses, opposition reached a majority (55 percent). More strikingly, if guaranteed coverage "limited the availability of health services" support plummeted and opposition reached 69 percent.

Similar to the Reason-Rupe poll findings, Gallup found that Americans are not willing to sacrifice health care quality and availability of services in exchange for the benefits promised with guaranteed coverage.

Gallup's 1994 Question

 Reason-Rupe 2012 Question

 

Gallup's Question Wording:

22. Would you support or oppose a health care reform package that guarantees every American private health insurance that can never be taken away?

25. Suppose the effect of guaranteed coverage was to limit the availability of health services. Would you still favor guaranteed coverage if you thought that the availability of health services would be limited, or not?

27. Suppose the effect of guaranteed coverage was to cause individual Americans' taxes to go up. Would you still favor guaranteed coverage if you thought that individual Americans' taxes would go up, or not?

29. Suppose the effect of guaranteed coverage was to cause individual americans to pay more for health care. Would you still favor guaranteed coverage if you thought it would cause individual Americans to pay more, or not?

31. Suppose the effect of guaranteed coverage was to create major new costs for many small businesses. Would you still favor guaranteed coverage if you thought it would create major new costs for many small businesses, or not?

Source: Gallup/CNN/USA Today, January 28-30 1994 Wave 2, accessed through Roper Center iPoll.

Reason-Rupe Question Wording

30. The new health care law has a provision that prohibits health insurance companies from charging some customers higher premiums based on pre-existing conditions or medical history. Do you favor or oppose this provision?

31. Suppose the effect of this pre-existing conditions provision were to increase taxes. Would you be willing to pay higher taxes in order for health insurance companies to not charge higher premiums based on medical history?

32. Suppose the effect of this pre-existing conditions provision were to increase wait times to see your doctor or specialist. Would you be willing to wait longer to see a doctor or specialist in order for health insurance companies to not charge higher premiums based on medical history?

33. Suppose the effect of this pre-existing conditions provision were to increase premiums. Would you be willing to pay higher premiums in order for health insurance companies to not charge higher premiums based on medical history?

34. Suppose the effect of this pre-existing conditions provision were to lower health care quality. Would you be willing to have lower quality health care in order for health insurance companies to not charge higher premiums based on medical history?

Source: Reason-Rupe March 2012, March 10-20th 2012

Full Reason-Rupe March 2012 poll results found here.

Emily Ekins is the director of polling for Reason Foundation where she leads the Reason-Rupe public opinion research project, launched in 2011. Follow her on Twitter @emilyekins.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Watch Peter Schiff on the Federal Reserve at Reason HQ. NOW!

Emily Ekins is a research fellow and director of polling at the Cato Institute.

PoliticsPolicyCivil LibertiesReason-Rupe SurveysGun RightsCommunity RatingHealth Care
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Show Comments (4)

Latest

Massachusetts Church's 'ICE Was Here' Nativity Scene Is Protected Speech, Even if ICE Doesn't Like It

Autumn Billings | 12.10.2025 11:15 AM

Free Parking Isn't Free. Black Market Entrepreneurs in Guatemala Have a Solution.

Katarina Hall | 12.10.2025 10:30 AM

French Far-Right Politicians Want To Reopen Brothels as Sex-Worker Cooperatives

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 12.10.2025 10:10 AM

MAGA Asceticism

Liz Wolfe | 12.10.2025 9:30 AM

Court Blocks Trump's Ban on Wind Power, but Other Anti-Renewable Policies Remain

Jeff Luse | 12.10.2025 8:30 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2025 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

I WANT FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS!

Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.

Make a donation today! No thanks
r

I WANT TO FUND FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS

Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.

Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
r

SUPPORT HONEST JOURNALISM

So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.

I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK

Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.

My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
r

HELP KEEP MEDIA FREE & FEARLESS

Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREE MINDS

Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.

Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK AGAINST SOCIALIST IDEAS

Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BAD IDEAS WITH FACTS

Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BAD ECONOMIC IDEAS ARE EVERYWHERE. LET’S FIGHT BACK.

Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

JOIN THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM

Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BACK JOURNALISM THAT PUSHES BACK AGAINST SOCIALISM

Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BACK AGAINST BAD ECONOMICS.

Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks