Washington (CNN) - The majority of registered voters in battleground states and across the country consider the federal health care law "a bad thing," according to a new survey.
The USA Today/Gallup Poll released Monday showed 53% of swing state voters and 50% of voters nationwide have a negative view of the law, compared to 38% of battle ground voters and 42% of voters nationwide who consider it a "good thing."
– Follow the Ticker on Twitter: @PoliticalTicker
The figures come two years after President Barack Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the month before the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments over its constitutionality.
However, the majority of respondents in both categories said the law has not affected their families, 72% to 69% respectively.
When asked about the affect of the law in the long run, 42% of swing state voters said it will have a negative impact on their families, while 41% of voters nationwide agreed. Twenty percent of voters in both categories said it would make their situation better while 34% of swing state voters and 33% of Republican voters said its impact would be minimal.
USA Today and Gallup surveyed voters of all political leanings in a dozen of the most competitive states in the presidential election: Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Virginia and Wisconsin, in addition to voters nationwide.
Previous CNN polling on the issue has shown that a more liberal segment of the electorate does not support the law because it does not go far enough, which accounts for a notable amount of negative findings.
The survey also showed Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney has a health care problem, with 27% of Republican and Republican-leaning independents in battleground states saying they are less likely to support his candidacy based on health care law he signed as governor of Massachusetts that resembles the current national law. Seven percent of respondents said it makes them more likely to back him.
The poll interviewed 1,137 registered voters between February 14 and February 21 in the battleground states and 881 registered voters nationally between February 20 and February 21 with a sampling error of plus or minus four percentage points.
Gingrich tells evangelicals: 'We need to stand up for ourselves'
Limbaugh front and center in pro-Santorum mailer
Romney: 'I can't be perfect'
Graham, McCain predict big primary night for Romney
As the article states...most Americans have not yet been impacted by the new legislation. It won't be completely rolled out for another 2 years. Until it personally impacts them the polls will be negative. I believe the same results were happening back when Social Security legislation was signed by FDR. 75 years later the vast majority of Americans love it. Back then SCOTUS ruled that SS law was constitutional. I imangine they will do the same re the ACA this summer.
Malory Archer - No Taran, what it means is that a terminally ill 87 year-old cancer patient in hospice with a 3-week life expectancy will no longer get that $100k hip replacement surgery
What is this crock? Another one of Obama's made up stories?! Enough with the fiction because this NEVER happens. Liberals and the truth, mutually exclusive.
BTW, why should the rest of us be paying for your medical treatment from a recreational accident? If you have enough to pay for all the skiing equipment, ticket, etc. then you can afford to pay for the medical treatment. Or in your case, the money might be better spent on ski lessons.
It just goes to show how uniformed the public still is. The day heathcare for everyone is a bad thing is the day you arrived in hell.
i guest the repubs have won! now we should sit back and allow the free market insurance companies to go buck wild on the american people, just like the free market oil companies are doing to us now. hey these same people curst obama for bailing out the auto industries, i guest the majority is not always right after all.
When foreign owned media with a hint of Saudi, Fox, and every elected republican who caters to the wealthy, blast the Affordable Care Act 24/7, this is not surprising. Uninformed people believe lying republicans, and are willing to sacrifice their own social security, medicare, veteran's benefits, and the ACA, without the facts.
Why do I have to pay for republicans without health care that show up at emergency rooms? We are stuck with paying for republicans, and it is tiring.
KatR - As the article states...most Americans have not yet been impacted by the new legislation. It won't be completely rolled out for another 2 years. Until it personally impacts them the polls will be negative
Do people sit on the railroad tracks as a train approaches to wait and see if they get hurt? For the 80% with healthcare in this country, we already KNOW what Obamacare will give us, a DISASTER. Name one government entitlement that has done what it claimed when it was instituted. Name one government entitlement plan that hasn't gone on to become a fiscal disaster. This is how we have fundamentally transformed the USA into an entitlement society that is rapidly going bankrupt.
Most people also don't want to pay for health insurance at all.
That's because most people don't have the slightest idea about what's in it. It's called being ignorant...which we have alot of in this country. Ask the people who are already benefitting from it...the college kids who are still covered under their parents insurance and the many others who can now get medical treatment they could never afford. And most the provosions haven't even kicked in yet. People have just listened to the Republican barrage against it and don't take the time to see if they are full of it or not. (They are.) What's the Republican plan? Anybody know? Oh, that's right....keep giving the insurance companies the right to run roughshod over their customers. Already did that.....didn't work.
What's the percentage of those polled have read the healthcare law in it's entirety?
Americans really are more intelligent than Obama gave us credit for when he signed this bill after it only passed congress by an exotic reconciliation maneuver in The Senate. This bill showed the worst side of Washington politics and had a lot to do with the spectacular losses by the Democratic party in the 2010 mid-term elections. It will be important this November as well. America deserves better than partisan hack legislation both in health care and in our economy. Romney 2012!
50%......................so what your saying is those other 50% needs do not mean anything because of the 50% who are against it? WTHevea.........................why on earth should the 50% who agree do without?
Of course they think it's a bad thing. They've been inundated with Republican tripe telling them so. Even though they know nothing about it and how it actually HELPS them.
Negativity,falsehoods, and outright lies coming out of the Tea Party and the GOP have turned people against the healthcare reform act.
The state I live in requires me to carry auto insurance. It will be interesting to see what comes out of the Supreme Court on the insurance mandate. If that is considered unconstitutional, then so is the auto insurance mandate posed by my state (and many others)!!
It's true. I've seen it with my own eyes. I've heard it with my own ears. The majority of the people are stupid and will believe anything if you say it over and over again. Ask yourself, why does 500 mg asprin in the hospital cost $480.00? Easy, Your paying for those who can't or won't pay for themselves. Ask yourself, did my doctor become a doctor because they want to heal people or to get Rich? Ask yourself, How is it doctors run off to treat patciants in third world countries who cant pay a dime but I'm expected to pay $50,000.00 for a simple surgery? Capitalism is nice at times but if your healing people for the right reasons you shouldn't even ask. healthcare coverage for all or non at all.
To echo what others have said, the said part about people opposing this legislation is that those are the people that don't understand it. It doesn't raise taxes (because it's NOT socialized medicine) and will lower the cost of healthcare over time. The only downside is that it will hurt the profits of insurance companies that can no longer r@pe you on premuims or reject you outright for having a pre-existing condition.
"If you have enough to pay for all the skiing equipment, ticket, etc. then you can afford to pay for the medical treatment. Or in your case, the money might be better spent on ski lessons."
Wow. Are there any accidents you wouldn't blame on the victim? Maybe we should start there, because right now you're spewing smokescreens.
...Name one government entitlement that has done what it claimed when it was instituted. Name one government entitlement plan that hasn't gone on to become a fiscal disaster. ....
How can buying your own health insurance possibly be another government entitlement?
People argue that government should not be able to force you to buy something. They claim that that has never happened before? The government makes you buy lots of stuff. For starters, they make you go out and buy clothes and wear them. If you have a child, they make sure you clothe, as well as go out and buy some food to feed your child.
@Fair is Fair, you are correct, so many people on here and in this country still don't have a clue. They are either choosing blindness or they really are brainless. I'm not sure which, but neither is good for this country.
Truth, that it goes against your ideology doesn't make it incorrect.
As I stated in my first post, I have medical insurance and DID pay my own way, thank you very much. And everybody who falls on the slopes is in need of skiing lessons? REALLY?! If that's the case, everyone at the resort is in need of lessons, including my ski instructor husband could use some lessons as well, as he fell more than I did (wet, grainy snow makes for terrible conditions), and he's only been skiing for 40+ years! LOL at your stupidity!
My point, since it was far to in-depth for your comprehension was if you DON'T have insurance and you are injured whether through a recreational activity or other means and are in danger of losing the use the use of a vital limb, and you CHOSE to not have insurance, then why should the taxpayer be on the hook for you when you show up in the ER? Additionally, if you don't have insurance and can no longer work because of your disability, we're all on the hook for your self-inflicted permanent injury in the form of federal disability payments.
"@Fair is Fair, you are correct, so many people on here and in this country still don't have a clue. They are either choosing blindness or they really are brainless. I'm not sure which, but neither is good for this country."
Please stop projecting your own inadequacy issues on others.
Just ask seniors in Florida how the ACA is affecting them. I'm sure those RX checks are coming in handy. Or ask those parents who can keep their kids on theor policies up until they're 26. I know quite a few parents who like that provision. I triple dog dare a republican to repeal the ACA.
Anonymous - Wow. Are there any accidents you wouldn't blame on the victim? Maybe we should start there, because right now you're spewing smokescreens.
Well, maybe those that like to ski, rock climb, parachute, bungy job, etc. should be required to prove they have medical coverage before being allowed on the slopes, etc. No coverage? Sign the form accepting financial responsibility for your treatment. Yes, full disclosure to the clueless and irresponsible would be a good thing.
CNN, the question you should have asked all these people you have polled was do the know what the heath care law entails? I'd bet the majority of those who are so venomously opposing it, haven't a clue as to what's in it. All they know is president Obama wanted it and that makes it a bad thing. Me personally, I wished these haters of the the heath care law could opt out of it. Let them try and find affordable heath care on their own in the "free" market when that time comes. Let it be like car insurance, if you are not covered, you are totally responsible for what ever happens. No free rides and no government intervention.
Health insurance companies would love to pick up millions of new customers. Insurers do not complain one lick about mandatory auto insurance, so why do they complain about mandatory health insurance?
Simple. The health insurers do not like the coverage mandates, but it would be most politically incorrect to complain. So, they have come up with a straw argument that government cannot make you buy something. They make you buy clothers, don't they?