Health

5 Things: Public Opinion Behind Government on Health Care

Published

9 years ago

June 26, 2015

Jessica Ellis, right, with “yay 4 ACA” sign, and other supporters of the Affordable Care Act, react with cheers as the opinion for health care is reported outside of the Supreme Court in Washington,Thursday June 25, 2015. The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the nationwide tax subsidies under President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, in a ruling that preserves health insurance for millions of Americans. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

EMILY SWANSON, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Most Americans wanted the Supreme Court to side with the government on whether the federal government could continue subsidizing insurance premiums in all 50 states under President Barack Obama’s health care law, according to polls conducted before the justices’ ruling Thursday.

In a ruling that preserved health insurance for millions of people, the court upheld the nationwide tax subsidies.

Polling ahead of the decision showed that few people had much confidence that the court could rule objectively in King v. Burwell.

Five things to know about public opinion on the Supreme Court’s decision on the health care law:

___

MOST WANT LAW UPHELD

Fifty-six percent of those questioned wanted the court to rule in favor of the Obama administration, according to an April Associated Press-GfK poll.

Thirty-nine percent preferred a ruling for those who brought the case. The plaintiffs had argued that actual wording of the law should have limited the government to subsidizing premiums in states that had set up their own health insurance exchanges, rather than relying on the federal government exchange.

Nearly three-quarters of Democrats and a slim majority of independents wanted the court to rule in favor of the government; a majority of Republicans wanted the court to limit insurance subsidies under the law to states with their own exchanges.

Among people who opposed the health care law generally, 58 percent wanted the court to limit the government to subsidizing premiums only in states with exchanges. But a significant minority of the law’s opponents (39 percent) thought the court should have ruled that the government could continue to subsidize premiums in all states.

___

LITTLE CONFIDENCE IN COURT’S OBJECTIVITY

Nearly half of Americans were not too confident or not confident at all that the Supreme Court could rule objectively in the case, according to the April AP-GfK poll. Just 1 in 10 were very or extremely confident, while another 4 in 10 were moderately confident.

Six in 10 opponents of the law, compared with 44 percent of the law’s supporters, were not confident in the court’s ability to rule objectively.

A CBS News-New York Times poll released Monday found that three-quarters of Americans thought the justices sometimes let their personal or political views influence their decisions rather than deciding solely based on legal analysis.

___

FEW CLOSELY FOLLOWING CASE

In the April AP-GfK poll, just 13 percent of Americans said they were following news about the health care case extremely or very closely, while 60 percent said they were not following the case closely.

Likewise, a Kaiser Family Foundation poll conducted in June found that 44 percent of Americans had heard nothing at all about the case, and 28 percent had heard only a little.

That’s true even though the vast majority of Americans, 78 percent, called health care a very or extremely important issue in the AP-GfK poll.

___

MOST WOULD HAVE WANT CONGRESS ACTION

If the court had ruled against the government, 51 percent of Americans in the April AP-GfK poll said they would have liked Congress to update the law to allow the federal government to subsidize premiums in all states. The poll found 44 percent would have preferred that Congress leave the law as is, letting states decide if they wanted to create exchanges that would allow people to receive subsidized premiums.

The Kaiser Family Foundation poll conducted in June also found most said Congress should pass a law if necessary so that people in all 50 states could be eligible for financial help. And 55 percent of Americans living in states without their own exchanges said they would have wanted their state to create one if necessary.

___

CONTINUED DIVIDE OVER HEALTH LAW

In general, the April AP-GfK poll found that 27 percent of Americans support and 38 percent opposed the 2010 health care law, while 34 percent were neither in favor nor opposed.

But there was a significant partisan divide over the law, with 52 percent of Democrats supporting the law, but only 11 percent of independents and just 5 percent of Republicans saying the same.

The poll found 44 percent of Americans approved and 55 percent disapproved of the way Obama has handled health care. But more Americans trusted the Democratic Party than the Republican Party on handling the issue, 34 percent to 24 percent.

___

The AP-GfK Poll of 1,077 adults was conducted online April 23-27, using a sample drawn from GfK’s probability-based KnowledgePanel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 3.4 percentage points.

Respondents were first selected randomly using phone or mail survey methods, and later interviewed online. People selected for KnowledgePanel who didn’t otherwise have access to the Internet were provided access at no cost to them.

___

Online:

AP-GfK Poll: http://www.ap-gfkpoll.com

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

The Fasting Mimicking Diet Has Many Health Benefits, New Study Finds

Don't Miss

Republicans Push Back Against Proposed Dietary Guidelines

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Community

Diabetes Continues to Largely Impact Low-Income Black and Brown Communities

Communities of color, particularly Black and Brown people, are amongst the most affected by Type 2 diabetes (T2D) due to socioeconomic status, cultural, and environmental factors. More than 38 million people in the US have diabetes, with up to 95% having Type 2 diabetes. While individuals aged 45 and older are typically the age range for those being diagnosed, more and more children and young adults are developing the chronic illness, according to the CDC.

Published

4 days ago

September 12, 2024

Oakland Post

Dr. Kevin Peterson, vice president of Primary Care at the American Diabetes Association, said in an email that the environments where Black and Brown people historically live, such as areas of high carbohydrate diets, contribute to the prevalence of this illness.

By Magaly Muñoz

Communities of color, particularly Black and Brown people, are amongst the most affected by Type 2 diabetes (T2D) due to socioeconomic status, cultural, and environmental factors.

More than 38 million people in the US have diabetes, with up to 95% having Type 2 diabetes. While individuals aged 45 and older are typically the age range for those being diagnosed, more and more children and young adults are developing the chronic illness, according to the CDC.

Of the 1 in 10 people with diabetes, 16.4% of Black people and 14.7% of Hispanic people make up the highest rates among different groups.

But family history can also have a part to play in someone’s diagnosis. Although it is not always a determining factor, first-degree relatives, like parents, with Type 2 diabetes can increase someone’s risk of developing the same condition.

Doctors recommend that if there is that direct link, taking precautions such as a healthy diet and exercise can minimize or eliminate the chances of having T2D.

But Peterson also acknowledged that there can be difficulties with maintaining a healthy lifestyle for Black and Brown communities.

“It can be difficult in low-income communities to access healthy eating choices, and opportunities for activity can often be limited,” Peterson said. “Being creative in finding an activity that is available in your situation, finding a friend to assist you, and identifying healthy foods that you like and are available is a struggle worth taking on.”

Food deserts are one systemic factor in how people, especially low-income communities, develop chronic illnesses that can cause irreversible damage. These deserts are areas that lack easy accessibility to fresh and healthy food options.

Dr. Lloyd Stockey, MD, Internal Medicine at Kaiser Oakland Medical Center, said low-income people of color would be less susceptible to chronic illnesses like type 2 diabetes if they had more access to nutritious food.

“When you go into lower income areas or areas where people of color live, you typically see a lot of things that affect diabetes – tobacco, alcohol and fast food,” he said. “When you go out to other more affluent areas, you see more farmers’ markets, more boutique places to eat, and healthier choices. You don’t see all of that fast food.”

One of the most important things to do when talking to patients about their diagnosis, Stockey said, is meeting them where they are at. People come from all different walks of life whether that socioeconomic status, education levels, or willingness to listen to the problems they have that are contributing to their T2D.

He’s encountered patients who know exactly what the illness is, how they want to make lifestyle changes and who want to keep up with their medicine, but then there are many who are the complete opposite. These patients can be harder to get through to but no resource is left unturned for them.

Dr. Walter Acuña, MD, Internal Medicine at Kaiser Oakland Medical Center, said it’s also important to understand people’s cultures and upbringings. He understands that Latino and Black patients might be used to certain kinds of diets that are carb heavy, but added that making little changes can prevent people from having to give up the food they love.

Acuña also explained that lower income people often have time restraints or live in neighborhoods where they don’t feel safe taking a 30-minute walk. Exercising in the living room or watching online workout tutorials are excellent alternatives and can help to improve overall health.

T2D is a lifelong chronic illness but it doesn’t have to dictate someone’s life, doctors say. As long as you’re taking your prescribed medicine, watching what you eat and actively trying to make lifestyle changes, the long term risks, like liver or kidney problems, eyesight issues or early death, can be reduced.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Bay Area

Congresswoman Lee Celebrates Federal Green Transportation Investments for California

Published

4 days ago

September 12, 2024

Oakland Post

Congresswoman Barbara Lee

OAKLAND, CA — Congresswoman Barbara Lee (CA-12) today celebrated the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) announcement of two grants for California to expand clean transportation infrastructure. The DOT announced that Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) will receive over $14 million to install Level 2 EV charging ports at all BART-managed parking facilities for use by customers and community members. The DOT also announced that the California Department of Transportation will receive $102 million for the West Coast Truck Charging and Fueling Corridor Project to deploy charging and hydrogen fueling stations for zero-emission medium- and heavy-duty vehicles along 2,500 miles of key freight corridors in California, Oregon, and Washington.

The transportation sector is the largest source of U.S. carbon emissions. According to the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a 50 percent reduction in carbon must be achieved by 2050—and as much as a 91 percent decrease by 2100—to stay within the globally accepted goal of limiting the planet’s warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

“Today, I am excited to announce that BART has been selected to receive this critical federal funding to help expand mobility and end fossil fuel dependence,” said Congresswoman Lee. “It is especially important the first phase of the project will prioritize deployment at stations in or near disadvantaged communities. BART is an essential part of our public transit system, and these funds will improve transit for its riders in throughout the Bay Area.”

By installing chargers at BART stations that are close to multifamily housing, workplaces, medical facilities, schools, and retail, the project will support robust EV adoption across a wide range of socioeconomic groups and road users.

Furthermore, because of discriminatory policies, highways were built near and through Black and brown communities, making these communities much more vulnerable to chronic illnesses associated with disproportionate exposure to air pollution. A reduction in gas-powered cars will be especially beneficial to communities of color and low-income communities who have been disproportionately harmed by infrastructural and environmental injustices.

The West Coast Truck Charging and Fueling Corridor Project will enable the emissions-free movement of goods connecting major ports, freight centers, and agricultural regions between the U.S. borders with Mexico and Canada.

On this funding, Congresswoman Lee said: “This funding will go a long way toward not only combatting the climate crisis, but it will create good-paying jobs as well. I thank the Department of Transportation and the Biden-Harris administration for their continued commitment to a cleaner and healthier environment.”

Last year, alongside the California delegation, Congresswoman Lee sent a letter to DOT Secretary Pete Buttigieg urging support for the grant application of the West Coast Truck Charging and Fueling Corridor Project through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law’s Charging and Fueling Infrastructure program.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

California Black Media

Gov. Newsom Rejects Plans to Expand Air-Quality Monitoring in Refineries

On Aug. 19, Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a bill aiming to expand the State’s air-quality monitoring system to include more refineries. Newsom cited concerns regarding local control and high implementation costs. State Sen. Lena Gonzalez (D-Long Beach) authored Senate Bill (SB) 674, legislation that required real-time air monitoring of nearby petroleum refineries to keep track of sites producing biofuel and other pollutants.

Published

5 days ago

September 11, 2024

Oakland Post

Courtesy of Gov. Newsom’s Office.

By Bo Tefu, California Black Media

On Aug. 19, Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a bill aiming to expand the State’s air-quality monitoring system to include more refineries.

Newsom cited concerns regarding local control and high implementation costs.

State Sen. Lena Gonzalez (D-Long Beach) authored Senate Bill (SB) 674, legislation that required real-time air monitoring of nearby petroleum refineries to keep track of sites producing biofuel and other pollutants. The bill would have required communities close to refineries such as Chevron Refinery in Richmond, to get notifications when pollutants were dangerously high, requiring local governments and state agencies to address the poor conditions.

Newsom stated that although the bill had good intentions, the state had no funding to reimburse the refineries for implementing the required systems. The proposed bill obligated refineries to cover the costs of implementing the air monitoring systems, paying various fees over multiple years. However, State officials were unable to secure funding that could help expand programs that monitor air quality in all the refineries.

Oscar Espino-Padron, a senior attorney at Earthjustice, confirmed that two air quality districts in the Bay Area and South Coast Air Quality Management District supported SB 674.

Espino-Padron argued that the air quality districts would be “empowered to implement measures and to exercise their discretion to tailor this monitoring program based on when it’s appropriate in their jurisdictions.”

“It’s really a setback, not only for air quality but also for community safety,” he said.

According to SB 674, a report by the American Lung Association indicated that all 19 refineries in California are located in counties that received failing grades for particulate matter pollution. Environmental groups argued that communities are being deprived of data and information that could help them take proper and timely precautions as well as protect their families from pollution caused by the refineries.