Support for UHC suffers, therefore, not from disregard of constituent health care but from legislative anticipation that voters will reject increased taxes, regardless of purpose. Legislators in Oregon, as elsewhere, balk at raising taxes for fear of constituent revolt. In contrast to national surveys indicating voter rejection of higher taxes, this survey demonstrates that 62% of Oregon voters would “definitely” or “probably” support a state-administered UHC plan that doubled or tripled state taxes. Respondents were told that the plan would reduce total health care spending for typical households, but “…would require an additional health care tax of two to three times as much as you pay in state income tax.” Respondents were asked whether they would definitely vote for such a proposal, probably vote for it, probably vote against it, or definitely vote against it. 5 Question 10 asked respondents about a hypothetical, tax-funded state-administered, UHC proposal that would replace “premiums and other health care expenses” with a new tax. All numbers presented are weighted percentages.Ī complete description of questions, methods, analysis, and results can be found at the website of the survey sponsor. The margin of sampling error is ± 5.18 at 95% confidence for full-sample analyses. Congressional District was derived from the voter registration list. The data were weighted by age and party affiliation to reflect the Oregon electorate. Respondents were asked eleven questions, including ones asking what health care problems they considered most important and the desirability of UHC. Final completion rate was 2.3% (completed/total dialed) and final cooperation rate was 24% (completed/contacted). In total, 1648 voters were contacted and 402 interviews were completed. Up to six attempts were made to contact a voter at each number before a substitute number was called. In July 2019, Elway Research called 17,337 randomly selected names from the Oregon voter registration list. This survey question is of import to state legislators who will want to know whether voters will accept the increased taxes needed to finance a statewide UHC plan. 5 This survey was unique: no previous survey has asked voters about increasing taxes to fund statewide UHC. A July 2019 survey by Elway Research (Seattle, WA) assessed Oregon voter support for a state-administered, tax-funded UHC plan that doubled or tripled state taxes. This distaste for new taxes may not extend to health care funding. Thus, a publicly funded, statewide, universal health care plan in Oregon would require doubling state tax collections. 3 Tax increases to fund statewide UHC plans must be large: a 2017 RAND Corporation study in Oregon found that current statewide private health care spending ($18 billion) approximates current total state government spending ($16 billion). Half of Americans report that their federal income tax is too high. Legislative approval of UHC requires confidence that voters will accept new taxes. Even then, it refused to enact new taxes to fund it. Consequently, of 18 state legislatures that have considered them, 1 only Vermont’s legislature passed a UHC bill. Many state legislators fear voting for universal health care (UHC) bills, believing their constituents will reject the requisite new taxes.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |