Healthcare's Big Moment

As most of you are probably aware, President Obama will be addressing both houses of Congress tomorrow evening about health care reform. 56% of Americans, and 52% of Independents, say that they plan on watching the President’s speech, so when we look back on this debate, regardless of the outcome, this will, in all probability, be a big night. So, here are some thoughts on where the debate stands, what President Obama might say (based on public polling data,) and, most importantly, what to look for (in terms of polling data) after Wednesday.

The Current Environment: In the latest CBS poll on healthcare, 67% of respondents say that they are confused by the healthcare debate and plan, and a full 60% claim that President Obama has not explained his healthcare plan well enough (65% among independent voters.) Though confused, the public finds healthcare ‘important’ by a margin of 93-6% and 73% believe that healthcare reform will affect them personally, according a Pew Report. And, Americans recognize that a minor change will not create the change they think is necessary in healthcare, with 60% stating that a ‘complete overhaul’ or ‘major reform’ is needed, according to an NBC poll.

While the majority of Americans may not understand the healthcare plan and view major reform as important in general and to their families, they are split on whether they would advise their Congressperson to vote for or against the bill, with 37% voting for and 39% voting against, leaving a full 24% unsure of, at this point, what to do with healthcare reform, according to a Gallup poll. However, of those people who are unsure about healthcare reform, only 36% say it will be a ‘major factor’ in how they vote for Congress come 2010. Though Gallup does not release their crosstabs, I would wager that the ‘unsure’ group is disproportionately made up of moderates, independents, and ‘leaners,’ which means while healthcare might be an important partisan issue in 2010, it might not influence those in the middle as much as we think (in fact, if the economy rebounds or falls further, that will be a bigger issue, as it is, right now, to most Americans.)

As it stands right now, Americans are unsure about healthcare, though they are interested and will tune into the President’s speech. 28% of Independents (19% of Republicans and 23% of Democrats) are unsure of how their Congressperson should vote – though partisan, this issue needs clarification before the public really makes a decision on the issue. With President Obama’s approval hovering around 50%, his ability to take these unsure voters and create supporters will help him pass healthcare, which, in turn, would help his stalled approval numbers.

What we might hear from The President: On September 3^rd, Joel Benenson (President Obama’s pollster) sent a memo to Congress with the basic premise that, when people hear about the President’s plan for healthcare, support increases. Specifically, he points to an NBC poll that, initially, puts public support for the President’s plan at 36%, with opposition at 42% (17% have no opinion initially.) However, after hearing that his plan

1. Will require insurance companies to cover people with pre-existing conditions
2. Mandate that most employers provide healthcare to their employees
3. Provide tax-credits for lower- and middle- income families to pay for healthcare, which is offset by increased taxes on the wealthiest

Support jumps to 53% (with 43% in opposition and 4% still undecided.) If this proves nothing else, it shows that when confused Americans are told about the President’s plan, they become substantially more supportive of his program.

During the President’s address tomorrow evening, he is sure to bring up all three points, especially mandating insurance companies cover people with pre-existing conditions. Another point he will, probably, stress is an increased focus on prevention programs to catch disease early. In the most recent Kaiser poll, 63% of Americans said that such a piece of the plan was ‘very important;’ however, 32% said that the most important part is helping Americans afford healthcare insurance – stressing both should increase support for his plan.

The public option (which polls at 59% support in the Kaiser poll) will come up – it has been at the center of the recent debate and President Obama must address this point. He can do one of two things – write it off as just a piece of his plan to placate Blue Dog Democrats and moderate Republicans into passing a healthcare bill or come out fighting for it in order to build up more public approval for the plan, forcing Blue Dog’s to realize that their constituents, once they understand the offering, want a public option. There is no doubt that President Obama will address the public option, the question, which even polling data can’t address, is whether he will come out fighting for it (attempting to turn public opinion in his favor) or drop it as just a piece in order to accomplish the other parts of his healthcare agenda. Right now, it is anyone’s guess.

Lastly, he must address the fact that 48% of Americans are worried that the government might play ‘too big’ a role in deciding their care, under the President’s reform efforts. Americans’ want a system where everyone is covered and insurers cannot drop them, but they are terrified of the consequences of such a plan. In his address, Obama must say that he understands the public’s fear, but reassure them (and explain to them) that his plan will increase their choice, NOT decrease it.

Overall, tomorrow President Obama will lay out the plan he has tried to disseminate from the start, to an audience that has heard mixed things about what he truly wants his healthcare reform to look like. He should talk about requiring insurance companies (who are never popular with the American public) to cover everyone, regardless of their conditions, mandating, through various mechanisms, coverage for everyone, the public option (though the jury is out on what he will say about that), and, finally, that his plan is about putting the decisions back in the public’s hands – that with more preventative care, American’s will be healthier, but, when they have to make a decision, it will be up to them and their doctor, not a bureaucrat in Washington or administrator in New York. If he can do that, as the NBC poll shows, he can convince the undecideds (and maybe some of the decideds) to give his reform a second thought, making reform and the 2010 election much easier for him and his Democrat’s in Congress.

What to look for: After his speech, pundits and prognosticators will convene on network and cable news to proclaim success or failure – half will be correct, the other half will look awfully foolish in retrospect. But, we won’t know until Americans’ tell us. After tomorrow, look for changes in the number of undecideds in the polls regarding healthcare, especially when asked if they support President Obama’s plan. Also, look for what happens to Obama’s approval on the healthcare issue – this will be important to see if people have come around to his plan, which will affect his overall approval ratings. Lastly, look at the number of people who say they are confused about the plan. If the number remains around 65%, the President didn’t do a good job selling his plan to the public – actually, he’ll have wasted a great opportunity.

This being said, there are three potential outcomes from this speech:

1. Support for Obama’s healthcare plan increases across the board and the number of undecideds decreases as the move into the support column
2. Obama’s speech decreases support as more people become aware of what healthcare reform will actually mean, which will cause Obama’s approval rate to drop below 50% and, probably, stay there for some time
3. The worst case scenario is that there is little or no movement on the debate, and a sizeable portion of Americans remain confused about the plan. Here, Obama will have wasted crucial resources getting little from the public (at least if they hate it after Obama talks to them, we will know that they know about it and have an opinion on it.)

The outcome of the President’s speech tomorrow will be seen by the public’s support for his plan, his approval on the healthcare issue, and how many Americans remain confused and undecided on the issue of healthcare in America. A successful speech could dramatically change public opinion; pushing Obama’s plan through Congress with the support of Americans and lead the charge to the 2010 elections. A bad speech could doom the initiative and slow Obama’s progress as a President for a while. There could be a lot hanging on tomorrow night – for now, we’ll just have to wait and see.

New Jersey – One More Time

I’ve gotten some feedback on my last post on the NJ Governor’s race, especially concerning my exit polling analysis of the race. Since then, two ‘new’ polls have come out from Quinnipiac and Farleigh Dickinson. So, here is a quick analysis of the race as it stands according to the latest polls (though with my luck, some more polls will be released early this week and I’ll have to re-do by analysis yet again.)

Baseline results: In the Quinnipiac poll, Christie continues to leads Corzine by 47-37% with 6% undecided. Thus, according to Quinnipiac, even if Corzine were to get all the undecided voters, he would still lose 47-43%. And, there seems to be no significant trend in the multiple Quinnipiac polls taken. Of course, when it comes to Christie’s favorables, we see a net positive rating of 11%, down from a net 16% rating in early August. Corzine, on the other hand, is at a net favorable rating of –23%, down from –17% in early August (the same is true for Corzine’s approval rating.) Even more shocking in the Quinnipiac poll is Barack Obama’s approval rating, which dropped from 60% in July to 51% (though, other polls put it higher in NJ.)

The Farleigh Dickinson poll puts the horse race at 42-47% in Christie’s favor (however, Daggert gets only 1% when he has been polling over 5% in most polls, which seems strange.) In terms of favorability, Corzine has a net negative rating of 17%, whereas Christie has a net positive rating of 3% (however, 25% of respondents state that they have no opinion of Christie, which, with Corzine’s campaign constantly on attack, could only help Corzine by raising Christie’s unfavorables.) In terms of voters’ perceptions of the candidates, neither Corzine nor Christie has an advantage on being seen as ‘honest or trustworthy;” however, by 13% respondents see Christie as the candidate concerned with problems of the average person, whereas Corzine is seen as having the proper background and experience to be governor by a margin of 13%.

Overall, these polls tell us what we already know – Corzine is still down, but not out. It is a tough race and voters in New Jersey have yet to make up their minds. The next two months of campaigning will be crucial. After another two weeks, I would like to see what happens to Christie’s numbers as voters come back from summer vacation (and summer mode in general) and start really paying attention in an attempt to deicide which lever to pull in November. Corzine has a lot of ammunition, while it looks like Chrisite may be running out (but the next month will be crucial.)

Previous Analysis: My last look at this race painted the situation as quite hopeful for Corzine, because key Democratic voters (liberals, people identifying themselves as Democrats, and young people are not saying they will vote for him at equal levels as they did in 2008 or 2006.) In the Quinnipiac poll, Democrats split their vote 74-15% for Corzine. In the two past elections, almost 90% of Democrats voted for the Democrat. Further, in the FDU poll, only 73% of Democrats say they will vote for Corzine (while a huge 18% say they are voting for Christie.) Again, this is the same problem we have seen in previous polls, and if (when) the Corzine campaign starts to focus on these crucial voters (and these voters finally make a final decision) it will give the needed votes to put Corzine back in Trenton.

I would have thought that a shift would start to appear now; however, there is still plenty of time. If by mid-October these numbers of Democrat’s voting intentions are still this poor, then there will be cause for alarm in the Corzine campaign. But, New Jersey voters are notorious for taking a long time to make up their minds (I pointed out the 2006 Senate race in my last post.) For instance, in today’s Washington Post, the director of the Quinnipiac poll is quoted as saying, “New Jersey is a goofy state as far as voting goes…Jersey always makes up its mind late.” As people looking at these numbers, we just have to wait until they do.

What to look for in the next few polls: Right now, in interpreting NJ polls, we need to look at how the campaigns are affecting the favorable/unfavorable numbers and people’s perceptions of the candidates, this will be an indicator of potential voting behavior come November. It is much easier for people to take a favorable or unfavorable view of a candidate than to say they will vote for him (of course, 25% haven’t taken any view in the FDU poll, so these voters still haven’t made up their minds on that question.) If by late September the Corzine campaign continues to struggle to move Christie’s numbers more (though they have done a pretty good job of moving them thus far), then, again, there will be some cause for alarm.

So far, I am sticking by my analysis. In the next month, people need to concentrate on voter perception, not the horse race. Come October, the election will be closer, people will be more forced to make a ‘real’ decision about the election (where their perceptions of the candidates will matter), and hopefully Democrats will come back to Corzine pushing him over Christie and putting him back into Trenton.

For the full Quinnipiac Poll, click here

For the full FDU Poll, click here

Why Corzine can (and will) win in 2009

The Democracy Corp poll released on Thursday finally puts Corzine in the race for Governor; however, after reviewing the numbers, Corzine might not be in as much trouble as many think (click here for link.) Doing a simple exit poll analysis, it is quite clear that Corzine is losing amongst three key constituent groups – Liberals, Democrats, and Young People.

That’s right – key Democratic voters, it seems, are not supporting Corzine at the same levels they supported either Obama or Senator Robert Mendez in 2008 and 2006, respectively. Of course, this raises an essential problem for the Corzine campaign, but one that is easily remedied, by concentrating resources on core supporters who are accessible, open to Corzine’s message, and, most importantly, easier to persuade than Independent voters.

Based on 2006 exit polls (click here for link) and the recently released Democracy Corps poll, if Liberals, Moderates, and Conservatives were to vote the same way in 2009 as they did in 2006, Corzine would end up beating Christie 50.4% to 47.06%. In 2006, 87% of Liberals supported Senator Menendez; however, now only 74% support Corzine. Even with the shift in affiliation observed from 2006 to the Democracy Corp poll, with 11% more conservatives, Corzine still wins if he can bring voting levels up to 2006 standards. Actually, even if only Liberals vote the same in 2009 as they did in 2006 (and the Moderates and Conservatives vote as they say they will in the Democracy Corp poll), Corzine still ends up eking out a victory 44.91% to 43.27%. While not a mandate or stunning victory, it still secures Corzine’s place in the Governor’s mansion.

Again, the same trend is seen in how Democrats, Independents and Republicans are voting. Currently, only 77% of Democrats say they will vote for Corzine, while 92% voted for Menendez in 2006 and 89% voted for President Obama in 2008. If Corzine can get 90% of Democrats to vote for him (a similar level to 2006 and 2008), he will beat Christie by almost four points – 46.77% to 42.99%. Now, in each of these estimates, there has still been about 5 to 10 percentage points on the table, but that is the range that Independent Chris Daggert is coming in at – there is no need to win half the votes to win the election, a plurality will put Corzine back in Trenton for four more years. And, by convincing Liberals and Democrats to come out for Corzine, he can defeat Christie.

The most striking group that lacks support for Governor Corzine is, by far, young people (18 to 39 year olds.) In the Democracy Corp poll, only 37% say they will vote for Corzine. While exit polls don’t do their age range in such a way, in both 2006 and 2008 at least 57% of voters aged 44 and younger voted Democrat. What is even more interesting is that this same group overwhelmingly approves of the job President Obama is doing in Washington. Obama’s favorability score in the Democracy Corp poll is 59.9 (out of 100) among 18 to 39 year olds. If Corzine can reverse this trend and have 55% of young people (18-39 year olds) vote Corzine, he will beat Christie 45.03 to 43.11%. Here again it is clear that if Corzine can get three core Democratic groups to vote for him at similar levels as 2006 and 2008, he can beat Christie, not necessary in a landslide, but a convincing solid win.

Moving forward, then, two things become abundantly clear. First, the Corzine campaign needs to use its outreach and field operations to contact and persuade the standard Democratic voters. Voter contact (direct mail, canvasses, and calls) to these key Democratic constituents will increase their support for Corzine and, as we have seen above, lead the Governor to victory. Secondly, the campaign should continue to capitalize on the popularity of Obama. Even as many polls put his popularity around 50% nation-wide, among these key groups in NJ, he is still extremely popular. These groups are more apt not only to follow the President but also listen to his message. If that message happens to be reasons to vote for Corzine, they are much more likely than other voters to hear the message and put it in the mix when deciding whom to vote for in 2009. By focusing energy and money on these three crucial groups and using the popularity of President Obama, Corzine can increase his numbers among these three critical groups that he needs in order to maintain the Governor’s mansion.

Lastly, if we quickly revisit history, we will find a similar trend. In late August and early September of 2006, many polls put Thomas Kean, Jr. ahead of Senator Menendez. Looking back at a poll conducted in late August of 2006 by Farleigh Dickinson university, Menendez had similar low levels of support among Democrats and Liberals that Corzine has today (click here for link.) However, when it came closer to the election and time to really make a decision, most of these voters, as we know from the exit polls, went with Menendez. For whatever reason, New Jersey Liberals and Democrats seem to like to consider other candidates before the end of October rolls around and they decide to vote Democrat.

This same shift might well happen again in 2009, and if Corzine focuses his attention and energy on these groups, it is more likely to happen, and he is more likely to remain in Trenton.

For the 2008 Presidential Exit Polls in New Jersey, please click here.

Follow Up: Corzine gaining, seems fast enough

Just a quick follow up on yesterday's post. Today, Democracy Corps released a poll that puts Corzine within striking distance of Chrisite. He now leads Governor Corzine 43 to 41%. If this weren't bad enough, my hypothesis about President Obama remains true in New Jersey, with 55% of voters viewing him 'warmly' (aka favorably) in New Jersey - the highest rating among the candidates for Governor and the political parties. His influence in the race could push Corzine to over take Chrisite in the next few polls we see.

Also, an article in the Newark Star-Ledgar that came out today pointed to the same Quinnipiac poll I talked about yesterday that showed taxes (and property taxes specifically) as the most important issue to voters. The Ledgar asks why neither candidate is addressing the issue. For Corzine, he is strongest when he is painting Christie as a hypocrite and advocating his economic plan - it is difficult for an incumbent to tout plans on property taxes when, in the eyes of the voters, he has not done much to relieve their pain in the last four years. For Christie, the more marred in turmoil and scandal he gets, and the more the Corzine campaigns continues its successful attacks, the less credible he will be to unveil any plan for property taxes - the voters will not trust his plan, not matter how good it is. And, even if he does, the Corzine campaign only need use his weak stance on ethics reform in his past political career to continue to paint Christie as a politician who talks the talk but won't and can't walk the walk. The issue is a non-starter for both candidates, which is why it isn't being brought up. In many ways the economy can be a stand in for taxes in this election, so by emphasizing his economic credentials and performance, Corzine will do well with voters concerned about their high taxes - taxes don't seem so high if people can get secure well paying jobs.

More to come this weekend, hopefully.

For the results of the Democracy Corps poll, click here.

For the full Star-Ledgar article, click here

Corzine gaining, but will it be fast enough?

On Monday, Neighborhood Research, a Republican polling firm, released a poll that, when ‘likely voters’ are considered, puts Governor Corzine ahead of Chris Christie 37-35% (with Chris Daggett receiving 6%.) (click here for link.) Hopefully, this won’t be the last poll to put Corzine ahead of Christe, but, still, 22% of ‘likely voters’ remain undecided about which candidate they are going to vote for come November. This, of course, is good news for Corzine, but it means he must continue the hard work he has endured throughout August – the relentless attack on Christie while pushing his credentials to be Governor can not cease or even relent mildly. Still, in order to understand where Corzine should go, we need to look at how he brought his sagging poll numbers up to, at the very least, a drawl so far. Since the last time I too a look at this very competitive race a lot has happened, so we need to start by figuring out what happened, how that affects the candidates, and what Corzine needs to do moving into the last 2 months of this intense campaign.

Context: The last time I looked at this race, I made one thing clear – Corzine can’t win on his popularity, he must win by making Christie the greater of two evils. The Corzine campaign has done just that, and it has had some benefits. In a recent Quinnipiac poll, from July 14^th to August 11^th, Christie’s unfavorables versus his favorables increased by a margin of 2 to 1; however, there is still 28% of the voters who haven’t heard enough about him to make a decision. However, one thing seems certain, the Christie camp is having a difficult time decreasing the Governor’s favorables. In the same Quinnipiac study, Corzine’s favorables increase by 3% while his unfavorables decrease by 4% - at the very least, Corzine’s campaign is solidly defending the Governor, at its best, the campaign is changing public opinion about the Governor. Either way, it doesn’t seem Christie’s campaign is having a great impact on voters, at least towards Corzine (click here for link.)

These numbers are in spite of the fact that on June 23^rd, Christie’s former place of employment (i.e. the US attorney’s office) arrested over 30 people, several of whom were elected officials, in one of the biggest corruption scandals in New Jersey. Christie’s message of ending state-wide corruption surely got a boast from this story. However, since mid-August, Christie has been rocked by scandal as well. First, President Bush’s ex-deputy chief of staff, Karl Rove, admitted to conversing with Christie while he was serving as US Attorney, possibly a violation of the Hatch Act. In addition, it was revealed that Christie failed to disclose a loan he made to a member of his staff at the US Attorney’s office (the staff member has subsequently resigned from the office) and the New York Times, as well as other news outlets, have chronicled Christie’s lack of effort as a freeholder to bring about ethics reform to his county. With all this adding up, the Corzine campaign has done nothing but bang the drum of hypocrisy at Chris Christie, which, it seems, hasn’t had the greatest effect on his election campaign.

Messaging and Moving Forward: When it comes to what the NJ Governor’s race will truly be about, one thing is clear – it is about the economy. 51% of voters (in the same Quinnipiac poll) believe that taxes or the economy are the most important issues facing New Jersey. Another 14% believe that a ‘lack of ethics’ or ‘politicians’ in general are the biggest issue facing New Jersey. This can all play right into the hand Governor Corzine has been dealt.

Though Christie still scores better with voters on who they think can fix most of New Jersey’s problems, Corzine is gaining ground, and it is clear that his campaign has had an impact on Christie – to succeed, this needs to continue.

1. First, the Governor must continue his unrelenting attacks on Christie’s hypocrisy – Corzine needs to paint him as a politician that will say one thing, yet do another. This will weaken Christie’s ‘ethics’ position and increase his unfavorables. If Christie’s ‘go-to’ position is weakened, he will be forced to talk about the pressing issues (taxes and the economy) in a real way. And, as he talks about them, voters will come to learn that his campaign lacks any real plan to fix the problems New Jersey faces.
2. President Obama is still very popular in New Jersey. A Daily Kos poll gives him an approval rating of 62% (61% among independents), whereas neither Corzine nor Christie break the 50% mark (click here for link.) Using the President to highlight the fact that New Jersey added over 13,000 private sector jobs while reducing public sector jobs by over 7,000 in the month of August could be a successful strategy in two regards. First, it will motivate the Democratic base, which, in New Jersey, must come out in full force to support Corzine if he is to win. Secondly, and equally important, Obama’s push on a positive economic outlook thanks to Corzine’s hard work will play well with Independent voters who like Obama but are leery of Corzine – it could just be the push they need to reconsider Christie (especially in the wake of his scandals.)
3. Lastly, Corzine needs to counter Christie’s recent attacks on him being a ‘wizard of Wall Street.’ Firstly, a majority of voters do not believe that Corzine’s prior career will make a difference on his ability to govern – and this is a trend that cuts through party ID. So, these attacks will, probably, be unsuccessful; however, it is important to counter – and counter strong. Corzine needs to come out and reiterate his economic expertise as a way to get New Jersey back on track. He can use this as an opportunity to call Christie out on his economic and tax plan (or lack thereof) and remind people of his budgetary accomplishments as governor. This must be used as an opportunity to turn the conversation around and say, ‘I know how to get us out of this mess, I’m already doing it – but it seems all Christie knows how to do is point figures, not create jobs.”

Corzine’s success in the next two months will rely on his ability to paint Christie as a typical politician – a champion of ethics reform, so long as it isn’t for him, and a critic of the Governor, without any real plans that will help New Jersey. By leveraging the current bad press Christie is receiving and allowing President Obama to trumpet his economic accomplishment, Corzine can create disillusionment with Christie while rallying Democrats and swaying Independents to his cause. When all is said and done, if he can pull this off, Christie will not be left standing.

Text Message Marketing: Why teens are changing the mobile marketing game

According to a recently released study from Pew (click here for link), cell phones are increasingly becoming the communication device of choice, especially among teens. 71% of all American teenagers have a cell phone, and among high school aged teens, that number is 83%. This is up from only a 45% penetration rate in 2004 – more than a 50% increase in usage over the past 5 years, and at what seems like an exponential pace. It seems that cell phone ownership sharply increases between the ages of 13 and 14 (when most teens enter high school) from 53% ownership to 72% ownership until ownership levels off in pre-college years at around 85%, which puts it at a higher rate than the average adult ownership rate (77%.) As more of these young cell phone users enter their adult years, the adult ownership rate can only increase to the 85% level seen in the pre-college teens.

What is more important than ownership, especially to the budding marketer or campaign strategist, is usage. Teens, while they do not disown the landline phone, are predominately on their cell phones. 38% of teens send text messages daily (up from 27% in 2006) while 36% make a phone call on their cell phone daily. To contrast that, only 29% spend time with friends in person daily outside of school and 24% IM daily – the people they won’t see daily after school are the ones they are texting and calling. Moreover, as teens migrated to a world of social networking, they become increasing reliant on their cell phones, with 54% of teen social network users sending text messages or IMs to friends through those sites. It seems that, when it comes to communicating, teens are becoming increasing dependent on this mobile technology to connect to and communicate with their peers.

Adults, on the other hand, have mixed feelings about the use of mobility. 39% are considered ‘motivated by mobility’ while 61% believe that ‘stationary media’ is fine for them. However, 18% of adults who are ‘motivated by mobility’ are, what Pew calls, ‘ambivalent networkers.’ (click here for link.) These networkers skew male, but are primarily in their early 20’s and have, ‘folded mobile devices into how they run their social lives, whether through texting or social networking tools online.’ As more of these teen texters grow up, they will, most probably, enter the world as ‘ambivalent networkers’ increasing their dependence on their mobile devices to run their social life and connect with friends and colleagues.

So, while it doesn’t seem like teens will abandon more traditional media and communication tools (still, 32% talk on a landline daily) they are adding the cell phone as into their repertoire and increasing their mobility and connectivity to friends and family. Meanwhile, their mobility will continue to increase as the use of smartphones replaces the old call-n-text cell phones of yesterday. According to the Wall Street Journal, the smartphone market grew by 78% between 2007 and 2008, and is expected to grow by over 350% by 2012 (click here for link.) As teens get their hands on this vital new piece of information technology, their communication habits and social networking abilities will just increase and more and more will enter adulthood as ‘ambivalent networkers.’

So, why is any of this important? As more teens rely on their cell phones to communicate, marketers and politicians will need to find new creative ways to use this medium to connect to their target audience. It gives companies and elected officials a chance to communicate to teens on their level – the challenge is getting the awareness and message in just about 160 characters. However, if done successfully, cell phones and smartphones, in the hands of teens, can become a powerful tool for marketers, campaign managers, and public health officials.

Take North Carolina, for example. The pregnancy prevention campaign of North Carolina set up a free text line where girls can text their question to an expert anonymously and, within 24 hours, have a professional non-judgmental text response to their question or concern (click here for link.) Or, Abilene Christian University that handed out iPhone’s to its freshman class to allow them to get digital handouts and class podcasts on their phone. Here, educators and public health officials are tapping into teen cell phone use (and, perhaps, abuse) to get them important information in a format they are comfortable with (click here for link.)

Of course, the most well-known, or at least well-documented, use of the cell phone to communicate a message has been President Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign for President, which enlisted the help of the mobile phone to reach out to young supporters. And, it works. According to a Gallup study conducted in October of 2008, 38% of registered voters had been contacted directly by the Obama campaign, as opposed to only 30% by the McCain campaign. Moreover, when it came to voter contact in the crucial ‘purple’ states, Obama’s people contacted 53% of registered voters, as opposed to McCain’s 44%. Surely, this made a difference, and cell phone communication had something to do with it – particularly with the 18 to 29 year old age group, of which 40% were contacted by Obama’s staff, double the amount that were contacted by McCain’s people (click here for link.)

This, of course, raises the question: what made President Obama’s outreach successful? The answer, according to Distributive Networks, consists of 5 crucial components:

1. Seize control of the mobile channel
2. Build the opt-in list aggressively
3. Develop robust participant profiles
4. Optimize message frequency
5. Leverage mobile’s unique strengths

(click here for link.)

What this means for mobile marketing is that, it must be both personal and ubiquitous, while adding value to the consumer. Just as knowing who President Obama selected as his Vice President added valued to the millions that registered their mobile number to find out, businesses must create systems that enhance value for the consumer, not just deliver a message. Allowing consumers to check their account balance through their mobile phone, as Bank of America allows, is just one way marketers can capitalize on this ongoing and ever growing trend among today and tomorrow’s consumers (click here for link.)

On such a personal device as someone’s cell phone, successful mobile marketing campaigns will be one’s that add value to the users experience. These types of campaigns will reap the rewards of an ever-growing trend among America’s teens. On the other hand, marketers who fail to increase utility and see the phone as another mechanism to bombard the consumer with messaging will not only fail but also invade personal space, which could have increased backlash. Just as AT&T dealt with tremendous backlash from consumers when they spammed former American Idol text message voters with a reminder about the upcoming season, so too will other brands be hurt if they only communicate and don’t interact – don’t create a value-added experience for the user.

As teens become adults and move into the ‘ambivalent networker’ category with their smartphones buzzing from text messages, phone calls, and Facebook alerts, marketers will have to work harder to promote their brands and interact with customers, but in an increasingly mobile society, those who invest into smart campaigns that enhance the users experience will be rewarded, others will find that they have lost their signal.

More Up Soon, But Something For Now

Tomorrow and/or over the weekend, I'll be posting commentary on the NJ Governor's Race (and, perhaps the VA Governor's Race,) the 2010 and 2012 races (from the data we have now,) Healthcare Reform with a focus on the Press and Messaging (obviously,) and some comments on recent economic and consumer spending numbers.

For now, I'm simply posting a link to an article by Peter Wehner and Michael Gerson in Commentary Magazine. Titled, "SPECIAL PREVIEW: The Path to Republican Revival" (link here), it makes some very solid points about what the minority should do to regain its former glory. More importantly, it should wake Democrats up to realize that just because we are the majority today doesn't mean that will be the case come 2010 or 2012. We need to focus on reforming the Healthcare system and getting this economy back on track (it is what we were elected to do.) Nevertheless, give it a read, at the very least you'll be prepared if Republican strategists listen to this pretty insightful analysis from two former advisors to President Bush (Sr. and Jr.)

Vacation

I will be traveling on leisure starting today and ending August 12th. While I might get an opportunity to post something here, I would not bet on it. As such, I will promptly return to reporting on all things data related in the world of politics, marketing, or whatever else is out there on August 13th. Sorry...but, I will be back..

Poll Helps RNC Look to Defeat Obamacare

For the Huffington Post article and the RNC poll, click here

Cynics are often leery of polls and pollsters – believing they are mechanisms used by politicians to create inoffensive sound bites and policy that will get them and keep them elected. Usually this is not the case – polls are used to inform politicians where they are with the public and what aspects of their plan/policy needs to be emphasized, whether the electorate is informed about them and their ideas and, subsequently, the best message to use to inform them. They are not entirely evil.

However, the Huffington Post reports about an RNC poll that is just that – evil. Democratic polls on healthcare (click here for Democracy Corps’ poll) concentrate on the President’s plan and what aspects of that plan Americans support and which they might need more explanation on before they are convinced will create a better healthcare plan. The RNC poll, on the other hand, concerns itself with one focus – defeating Obamacare.

One line of the recommendations based on the polling data is especially stunning. As Sam Stein reports, the strategist at the RNC concluded, “If Obama is allowed to sell this…he wins.” Winning and losing might be appropriate terms when dealing with elections, but not with proposed reforms of the healthcare system. Here, it should not be about winning but about enacting the best reforms in order to insure that Americans have access to the best healthcare in the world while not breaking the budget. Michael Steele, apparently, is only concerned with beating the President – shameful!

All of this aside, let’s take a look at what the RNC poll says about healthcare and what it means for the Democrats moving forward.

(Note: the poll was conducted between June 15-17, 2009, thus the results are somewhat outdated; however, the messaging aspects of the poll are still somewhat relevant as we move into August without a healthcare bill. Another note, the poll segments the population into Democrats, Independents, Republicans, and ‘Ticketsplitters.’ While I have some idea what they might be referring to, without the full data, I will not discuss this segment.)

Findings and Insights: Disregarding approval ratings, favorability, and generic congressional ballot numbers (they are now over a month old) there is still some interesting gems hidden in this poll. First off, when asked if people would prefer a Congressional candidate that is a ‘check and balance’ on the President versus one that will help Obama with his agenda, 50% prefer the former (61% among independents.) With more than a year to go before the midterms, positioning candidates as checks on a popular President might be a successful strategy, especially if the President’s popularity keeps supporters home from the polls.

Turning to the healthcare debate, 51% of respondents say their biggest concern, when it comes to healthcare, is costs while only 20% say access and 6% say quality. Further, 59% (62% among independents) support the government having an active role in lowering the cost of healthcare, but not a government-run system (only 32% support this notion.) While Americans are split 56-44 on whether America has the best healthcare in the world, an overwhelming majority (70%) believe the system is in need of reform. And, when it comes to that reform 49% say they trust the Democrats to fix the system, whereas only 29% of respondents trust the Republicans to fix it.

Americans yearn for reform to healthcare, but want the costs to be controlled and do not want the government to run it. As House Democrats and the President look for ways to offset the costs of their healthcare plan, the faster they can show the public that it will be budget neutral, the faster they will gain support. Additionally, if they can emphasis that the public plan is not government-run healthcare but, instead, a system that keeps health insurance companies honest, they will win support on that side of the debate as well.

Public Opinion on Obamacare Specifics: 88% of Americans support making ‘quality healthcare coverage affordable and accessible to every America.’ Further, 71% support forcing insurance companies to cover Americans regardless of pre-existing conditions. And, when it comes to helping small businesses provide healthcare to their employees, an impressive 79% of Americans is in support of this aspect of Obamacare.

When it comes to what Obama is proposing, Americans are if full support; however, the devil is in the details here. If the President can get this accomplished without increasing the deficient, then he will, in the words of the RNC, ‘win.’

Messaging: Especially because Obamacare will not get through the House or Senate until after the August recess, messaging will be especially important – President Obama and his ‘opponents’ will have a month to move public opinion in their corner. The RNC’s poll focuses on messaging we have seen them using in the recent debates and, probably, will continue to use. One of the most powerful messages, that over half of Americans ‘strong agree’ with, is that Americans should not be forced into a government-run system where they will loose their current coverage and choice of doctor. An even more powerful message, which 77% of Americans agree with (57% strongly agreeing), concerns turning healthcare into a bureaucracy similar to the IRS and the DMV. Lastly, the most unfavorable message for Obamacare concerns the costs, which, when quoted at ‘over a trillion dollars’ makes 65% of Americans less favorable towards Obama’s plan. Summing up, Republicans are telling Americans Obamacare will drop them from their current coverage with their current flexible choices, create a system as loathed as the DMV (which isn’t even a federal agency), and will cost each taxpayer over $7,000.

These are powerful messages that score very well. If Democrats want to sway public opinion, they must overcome these messages by emphasizing that reform will mean getting to keep your current coverage (if you want to), decreased health insurance costs because the government will create more competition and more competition drives prices down, and that the plan will be budget neutral or save money in the long run (this, of course, still needs to be worked out in the final bills in the House and Senate, unfortunately.)

Democratic counter messaging: From a messaging basis, it is possible to confront the Republican attacks. The RNC poll has people split within the margin of error (2.9%) over support of Obamacare after they hear a description. This means there is much work to be done if public opinion will turn in the President’s favor; however, it is possible. Taken apart, 58% of Americans support creating a government plan that will compete with private insurers. Democrats have to stress the competition and the healthcare exchange that will provide people with ample information about all available plans – a market, which creates competition and will drive prices down. On universality, 57% of Americans support this notion of Obamacare – this works to counter Republican attacks of dropping people from their plan. Democrats can confidently say that in order to insure everyone (which has majority support) government needs to assist in creating a system and helping those who need the support (whether it be the poor or small business.)

63% of Americans do not support the government ‘setting prices for services and deciding what treatments it will and will not cover.’ This, of course, is not the case – if Democrats can stress quality medicine where doctors are compensated based on merit and not the number of tests they perform, this bleak figure can be overcome. If Democrats can frame this situation in a ‘merit pay’ argument (compensation for better care and not more care) then Americans will get behind Obamacare.

When it comes to ‘fining’ companies that do not provide health insurance or raising taxes and cutting Medicare to pay for this reform, 54% and 71%, respectfully, oppose this portion of the President’s plan. However, while these aspects of the plan have not yet been set in stone, Democrats need to do all that is necessary to cut costs – even if some taxes need to be raised to pay for healthcare, Democrats must stress creating budget neutrality and the reform paying for itself in reduced costs (both in Medicare and in general.) While Democrats do not have the strongest position here, especially in light of recent CBO scores, they can and must confront the increased tax argument Republicans are bound to throw them – tiny tax increases are a small price to pay to keep healthcare reform from increasing the deficit.

Lastly, 59% of respondents do not believe President Obama when he says that health care reform will be budget neutral. This, thus, makes it an even bigger priority and, once established, needs to be emphasized not only by Democrats but also by touting out experts to reassure the American public of the reform’s budget neutrality. Having this message come from people that appear non-partisan will go a long way in convincing the public that reform will fulfill the President’s budget pledge.

Conclusion: In any reform battle, the status quo usually has the better position; however, Democrats can successfully counter the Republican attack machine. By emphasizing that a government plan will compete with private insurance to reduce cost, create competition, and produce transparency will counter attacks about the government-run system. Stressing ‘merit pay’ for quality care over the quantity and complexity of care will counter the RNC’s attempts to paint Obamacare as having bureaucrats dictate care. And, lastly, budget neutrality must be achieved in policy and repeated over and over again to the American public by experts that appear non-partisan. If the Democrats can successfully do this, the RNC will not beat Obama and the real winners will be the millions of Americans who live in fear of being dropped from their healthcare plan or slipping into bankruptcy because of one illness. If they don’t, Americans will be the real losers in this debate – stuck with an inadequate healthcare system for the greatest nation in the world.

RT@Twitter: How effective are you? Update

Today, AdAge had another post about Twitter setting up a Twitter 101 website to help companies establish a presence on Twitter and communicate with their customers (link here.) If you take a look at the case studies they post, Dell is an excellent example of how Twitter can have a positive impact on a brand.

Dell began its venture into Twitter by thinking they would tweet to customers about deals, new products, etc... Little did they know that people would tweet back with their experiences, comments, and questions. Since Dell's first foray into the world of Twitter in 2007, they have come to think of the medium as a way to communicate with customers. And, it works! Dell has booked more than $3 million in sales as a result of Twitter (coupons and promotions on Twitter.)

Capitalizing on Twitter's unique social network requires interaction and persistence on the part of the brand, but it can have a pretty big pay-out, as Dell is a testament to. It might also help solve Twitter's persistence problem - 60% of new users leaving after one month (as reported by Nielsen and re-reported in the AdAge article.) Twitter working with brands to create value for Twitter users surely can raise all boats. How companies take these best practices and case studies to develop their own Twitter image will be worth watching, might even save you a few bucks and keep you on Twitter too boot.

For the article at AdAge, please click here.

@Twitter: How effective are you?

Newsworthiness aside, I feel as though I have heard more about Twitter as an engine for social media change than I have about the House’s cap-and-trade bill (though, admittedly, Twitter is much more fun to talk (or tweet) about.) From June of 2008 to June of 2009, Twitter’s audience grew by over 1,900% according to Nielsen (and, no, that is not a typo.) In comparison, Facebook only grew by 198% and Myspace lagged at a mere 6% growth rate.

The variety of opinions on what Twitter will become and what phase of growth it is in stuns the best two-handed economist. However, thanks to Harris Interactive, and their recently released poll, we know what advertisers and consumers think about the force that is Twitter. The poll makes one thing abundantly clear, most people don’t know enough about Twitter to answer questions about it – 69% of adults and 55% of adults age18-34 say they do not know enough about Twitter to have an opinion. Even the social networking generation, less than half can answer a question about that ‘big new craze’ Twitter. While I have not seen comparable stats for Facebook, to put this in perspective, Nielsen says that, as of June 2009, Facebook had 138,635,000 users, whereas Twitter had only 20,950,000. That means Facebook has over 6 times more users than Twitter – for anyone to say that Twitter can’t expand or isn’t in its infancy seems silly.

The more important question remains: will consumers find Twitter an effective way for marketers to reach them with information. The answer, unsurprisingly, is mixed. 50% of consumers believe that Twitter will either be very or somewhat effective in promoting products or ideas, while the other 50% believe just the opposite (with 19% stating that it will be ‘not at all effective.’) Meanwhile, advertisers have more faith with 58% believing that Twitter will be effective in communicating and promoting their ideas, products, and promotions.

Twitter does have one benefit, the ability to start a conversation that can become viral, global, and constant – all in 160 characters. In a Web 2.0 age, campaigns that stir up conversation will become successful, at least according to a recent piece in Ad Age (link here.) Campaigns like Dove’s ‘Campaign for Real Beauty’ might translate well to a Twitter age or Nike’s ‘athletic nirvana’ campaign. If, while following friends, consumers are also following, participating in, and shaping an ongoing conversation about a product and the idea behind it, there is no telling how effective Twitter may become. At least for now, we’ll just have to wait and tweet.

For the complete poll from Harris Interactive, click here

For the Nielsen information about Social Media, click here

Does Going Green Help Create Green?

For the released polling data from PSB, click here

In a recently released study by Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates (in conjunction with Landor and Burson Marsteller), consumers are prodded to see if a company’s green efforts make a difference in their minds and at the store. This study shows that, not surprisingly, people say they are willing to pay more for socially responsible companies or take home less pay to work for these same companies but cannot identify any companies that truly stick out.

The Marketplace:

When it comes to paying more for a ‘socially responsible product,’ 86% of respondents say they would, at least, spend $1 more on the purchase (based on a $100 purchase.) Further, over one-third is willing to pay at least 16% more to purchase a socially responsible product, quite a difference. However, when it comes to identifying socially responsible brands, there are no clear winners. Wal-Mart, Coca-Cola, Johnson & Johnson, and Microsoft score the highest when asked; however, these companies are cited 8% of the time in Wal-Mart’s case and 4% for the others – not a stunning display of public support.

This lack of public knowledge of socially responsible companies is also shown in the lack of knowledge about which brands are the most socially responsible. Comparing respondent’s perception of brands on a CSR index compared to the CRO 100 (a comprehensive index measuring the practices of brands and companies), Apple scores rather low with consumers, at 68, but the second highest on the CRO at 206. It seems that consumers’ perceptions of brands, when it comes to CSR, are not correlated with the actual CSR efforts of the company itself, which can create a problem for those companies attempting to create a value proposition using their CSR initiatives.

The Workplace:

At the work place, 56% of respondents believe that working for ‘a company that is socially responsible’ makes some difference (21% believe it makes a significant difference.) 25-34 year old and 35-49 year olds seems to put the most stock in working for a socially responsible company, with 62% and 61%, respectfully, saying it makes a difference. Another interesting trend emerges in income segmentation. Among people making less than $35,000 a year, only 52% believe that it is important to work for a socially responsible company; meanwhile, 58% of those making over $100,000 a year believe it makes a difference – not that surprising, given the current economic climate.

In these rough economic conditions, 40% of respondents said they would be willing to take at least a 1% cut in pay to work for a socially responsible company, while 15% were willing to take at least a 6% cut in pay. This might be a growing trend with 21% of young people age 18-24 and 28% of respondents’ age 25-34 saying they would take cuts of at least 6% to work for a socially responsible company.

Side note: More and more in polling data, I have seen a disconnect between young people (18-24 or 18-29) and middle-aged people (25-34 or 29-39). While the middle aged seem more idealistic and ‘liberal’ this new generation of young people seems a bit more self-centered and ‘conservative.’ Hopefully, I will get a chance to explore this further in another post. As of right now, this is just a generic observation – hopefully to be flushed out soon.

But, while people are willing take home less pay to work for a socially responsible company, 71% cannot name any socially responsible practices of their employers. However, again we see the young-middle complex, where 70% of 18-24 year olds cannot name a practice that is socially responsible but only 64% of people aged 25-34 can’t name such a practice. Overall, though, employees are unaware of their employer is doing when it comes to social responsibility creating a disconnect between their desire to work for a socially responsible company and their current place of employment.

Communicating to Capitalize on CSR:

Companies that value CSR can clearly profit from their stance; however, if consumers do not know a brand is socially responsible, they won’t be willing to pay extra for its products. When it comes to stressing its CSR values, emphasizing fair, just, and equal treatment of employees, environmentally responsible practices, and community outreach and philanthropy top the list of what consumers are looking for in a company they consider socially responsible, at 20, 17, and 10% respectively. Furthermore, companies looking to increase sales through CSR messaging should focus on ‘honesty and trustworthiness,’ ‘treating employees fairly,’ ‘ethical leadership,’ and ‘community values and philanthropy.’ Among statements that will most likely influence consumers, these are the CSR messages that rank above average and, if a company is looking to tap into the extra profit afforded to socially responsible companies, these are the messages they need to send to their consumers.

Overall, people are interested in social responsibility when it comes to their purchases and employment, but companies need to do a better job providing the consumers and employees with the CSR they want a company to perform and communicating those types of CSR initiatives to the prospect. If a company can succeed in doing that, they may see an increase in sales and gain a better position at the bargaining table.

Advertisers: Do They Really Know What We’re Thinking?

For the full polling data from Harris Interactive, please click here

In a recent poll released by Harris, in collaboration with LinkedIn, they survey consumers and “advertisers from agencies or corporations who are involved in the advertising decision making process.” The results are quite interesting.

The first apparent finding is that, overall, advertisers believe that their ads will be more effective than consumers actually find them. When it comes to the effectiveness of characteristics of advertising, in each characteristic advertisers consistently rank the characteristics very effective more often than the consumer does. However, taking this into account, there are some similarities and a few differences in the effectiveness the professionals are delivering and the characteristics the market wants.

First, the top five advertising characteristics are the same for both advertisers and consumers (they are: ‘ads that make me stop and think,’ ‘ads that give me new information,’ ‘ads that are entertaining,’ ‘ads that are informative,’ and ‘ads that are funny.’) Of these, consumers rank ‘ads that are entertaining’ and ‘ads that are funny’ as the most effective, with 34% and 33% saying these types of ads are highly effective, respectfully. Advertisers, on the other hand, rank ‘ads that make me stop and think’ and ‘ads that give me new information’ as the most effective.’ While these two categories are not far off from the effectiveness of the consumers top two choices, at 30 and 29% saying they are very effective respectfully, they are slightly lower. And, though some might think that while ‘funny’ or ‘entertaining’ ads might also have a high percentage of respondents saying they are ineffective, that is not the case. In the long run, it seems that advertisers, while overestimating the effectiveness of their ads, know what the consumers find most effective.

Some differences emerged when dealing with the current economic situation. According to consumers, the most effective way to position to them in the recession is using the ‘value proposition’ (i.e. discounts, coupons, etc…). Advertisers seem to understand this with 61% stating that they are using this in their branded communications. However, the second most effective position, according to consumers, is clearly ‘luxury for less’ with 34% believing this messaging works well or very well. However, advertisers seem to be using the ‘empathy’ proposition as their second gun in their arsenal, while only 18% are employing the ‘luxury for less’ position, which even losses to the ‘cheerleading’ message by 7%. There is, obviously, a clear message/position that can be employed and exploited here by marketers; especially for those targeting consumers aged 18-34 (51% believe the ‘luxury for less’ position works well or very well.)

As the recession continues, advertisers have and will continue to reposition their products to appeal to consumers who must tighten their belts. And, while they seem to be doing a pretty good job gauging which ads and positions are effective with their audience, it seems they are lagging in the ‘luxury for less’ position. Typically in a recession, consumers tend to treat themselves to small luxury items (i.e. higher quality chocolate) because they cannot afford more expensive luxuries. The lack of positioning seen within the advertising community and consumers willingness to purchase ‘smaller’ luxury items leaves a hole in the market that, if filled, could produce a huge return in this tough time.

President Obama’s Approval Ratings

Questions abound about what this decline means. Is the President exiting his ‘honeymoon’ period? Are Americans disillusioned with his handling of the economy and healthcare? Will this affect his attempts at reform on healthcare and environmental policy?

As of July 21, 2009, Real Clear Politics (RCP) puts Obama’s approval averages at 56.1 approve versus 38.6 disapprove – a 17.5% differential in favor of the President (link to averages here.) The most apparent change is an increase in those who disapprove of the President’s performance. And, while I have not examined the crosstabs, I would wager that this increase represents many independent voters and moderate republicans moving form the “don’t know” category to the “disapprove” category. If this is the case, Democrats running in 2009 (Corzine in NJ and Deeds in VA) and, possibly, in 2010 need to worry.

However, even as Independents and moderate Republicans come out of the woodwork against the President, this does not necessarily mean the President is in bad shape. Gallup has released a memo (link to memo here) showing that the President’s average approval rating in his third quarter as President exceeded his two immediate predecessors and is in line with several of his modern peers. (To view an interesting interactive chart from USA Today regarding Presidential approval ratings, click here)

Moving forward, it seems that Obama and other Democrats should be more worried about the ‘why’ when it comes to approval. According to another Gallup poll released on July 15^th, of those who approve of the President’s job performance, 54% cite his leadership, while only 17% name issues as their reason. Conversely, when it comes to disapproval, 65% Americans who disapprove of the President cite issues as their primary reason for disapproval (link to memo here.) As we have seen in recent polls, many Americans support/approve of the President though they may not approve of his policies. On healthcare, for example, 49% of people approve of the job he is doing. And, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll (link to poll here), of all the items asked, only the situation in Afghanistan garners more approval than the President himself.

This, of course, suggests that the honeymoon may still be ongoing and more erosion is expected in his approval ratings as people begin to learn more about healthcare and Republicans continue to link healthcare to the ever-growing budget deficit (the lowest scoring issue at 43% approval.)

Moving forward, Democrats and the President need to keep a close eye on why people approve/disapprove of Obama and how they view the President’s performance on the issues of the day. Though it seems, at least from this observer, that the President needs to retake control of his agenda. While letting Congress deal with the details on policy might create bedfellows on Capitol Hill, it confuses most Americans and makes them unsure of what is going on in Washington. Take healthcare as an example – the President continues to talk about what he wants in healthcare, but everyday Americans are bombarded with new proposals and new scores from the CBO. They do not understand this and don’t have the time to figure it out, which makes them frustrated, confused, and, most damaging to the President, upset that the President cannot present a clear plan on what he wants. Of course, the President knows what he wants on healthcare and a myriad of other issues; it is now time for him to dictate policy to Congress and allow them to tinker with it, as opposed to the other way around. If he does this, he will not only gain leadership points but also allow citizens to judge his policy for what it is, not a hodgepodge of suggestions and proposals that come in and out of fashion in a Congressional Committee. If President Obama does this, he will accomplish what he came to Washington to do and help propel his eroding poll numbers (or, at the very least, stabilize them.) If not, he will lose control of his agenda and the support of the people who elected him.

Down But Not Out

First, I would like to apologize for being MIA for the past week or two. I am trying to find a way to get more content into my blog, and that is what I have been focusing my efforts on in the past few days. More up-to-date posts will begin in the coming days. I look forward to getting back to blogging about all the glorious polling data available!

Looking at Healthcare

For the full polling data from Democracy Corps, please click here

To read Stan Greenberg's article in The New Republic, please click here

About a week ago, I posted Stan Greenberg’s piece in The New Republic. Now, let’s take a look at Mr. Greenberg’s numbers and the New York Times numbers to get a sense of where the healthcare debate is and where it should be heading.

Just as Stan Greenberg wrote, the numbers from 1993 to 2009 haven’t changed much. But, instead of concentrating on the similarities to the past (if you want that, please see Mr. Greenberg’s piece), let’s look at the present and, more importantly, what should be done moving forward.

Current Situation: While only 7% of Americans believe that Healthcare is the most important issue facing America right now, according to a recent NY Times poll, the Obama administration seems to be concentrating what little energy they have, while wrangling this beast of an economy back to ‘normalcy’, on healthcare.

A plurality of Americans, 48%, feel that ‘major changes’ are needed to the insurance healthcare system in America. Further, 58% say they are dissatisfied with the current healthcare system (43% say they are very dissatisfied and every group, except seniors, are either dissatisfied or split.) However, while Americans are dissatisfied with the current system generally, 72% are satisfied with their health insurance. This fact, not too unusual in American Public Opinion, will make this issue difficult for the administration – any change they propose may be seen by 72% of Americans as a break away from the satisfied service they are already getting from their insurance company. And, generally, people are willing to except the beast they have, as opposed to the beast they don’t know, so the administration has a tough sell ahead.

When it comes to the ‘nuts and bolts’ of reform, the nation is split over their concerns. 48% say they are more concerned that the current system will increase costs too much and become out of control than with the government taking over healthcare and reducing quality. Meanwhile, 46% of respondents believe the opposite is true. So while Americans are split, Independent voters are more concerned with the government taking over healthcare by a 13% margin.

Americans feel that the healthcare system in this country needs to be reformed, while leaving their own insurance plan alone. What’s more, while they feel the situation needs to be fixed, they are split over the government taking over and controlling the system and the current system becoming too unwieldy for proper management.

Goals and Concerns: American’s are conflicted over the process of reform, but are somewhat more clear on the goals they hope such reform will achieve. 39% (the largest percent of respondents) says that reducing costs should be the goal of any reform. And, while that ranks the highest, expanding coverage to children (33%), preventing insurance companies from denying coverage because of a pre-existing condition (31%), guaranteeing no one will lose coverage if they are sick, move, et cetera (29%), and expanding coverage to those without insurance (28%) are also on the priority list. Overall, Americans want reform to reduce cost, protect their current coverage, and expand coverage to more Americans.

When it comes to Americans concerns, they are most concerned with a Government run system restricting choice and becoming costly. 30% of respondents say their largest concern is that healthcare decisions will no longer be made by them, but by the government and 27% say that they are concerned that they will no longer be able to choose their own doctor. Meanwhile, 24% are concerned with an increase in taxes because of the reform.

Americans want costs to be reduced, coverage expanded and protected while not creating a Government run system that limits their choice and does not increases taxes – simply put, they want their current insurance expanded to everyone and guaranteed to them all at no additional charge.

Messaging and Moving Forward: 44% of likely voters favor President Obama’s healthcare proposal, while 18% do not have an opinion – a huge constituency. In a recent NY Times poll, 44% say they approve of the way the President is handling healthcare, but 22% don’t have enough information to make an opinion. With such large numbers of American’s without an opinion on what will continue to dominant the political arena, there is much room to change public opinion.

After a ‘critical argument’ is presented to voters under 65, the number in favor of the President’s plan increases from 47% to 55% while the number opposed increases to 40% from 36%. In the ratio, the President is winning when the argument takes place 2 to 1. However, to make sure that this ratio remains strong and splits the 18% without an opinion on the President’s plan to being in favor of the President, the right elements and messages must be used.

With over 84% support, Americans want to be given of choice between keeping their own health insurance or switching to a public plan, which is front and center in the President’s plan (he just has to spread the word.) 77 to 74% (depending on how the question is worded) support employers being required to either cover their employees or contribute to a fund to help them pay for coverage, with small business being given tax credits for such participation. Third on the list of highest supported initiatives is a potential plan is the requirement that insurance companies cover everyone at the same rate, regardless of pre-existing conditions, with 68% of respondents supporting it.

When it comes to positive messages that convince respondents to support the President’s plan, stressing the security and ‘peace of mind’ the plan offers scores at 72% convincing, while creating more choices for people comes in at 70%. No surprises there. These messages emphasis the goals Americans want out of healthcare reform. Further, when asked what ‘stood out’ about the positive aspects of the arguments respondents heard, universal coverage, affordability, and choice garnered 34, 22, and 15%, respectively.

On the negative side, “will force Americans to wait in line for care” and “puts Washington bureaucrats in charge of healthcare” scored 61 and 57%, respectively. And, when it comes to the worries people have the Obama health plan, the government’s involvement and increased costs are, by far, the largest with 52 and 38%, respectively.

So far, we have seen the Republican attack machine come out and say, over and over and over again, that the President’s plan will put Washington in charge of which doctor you see and what care you receive. If President Obama and his team are to be successful, they will have to emphasize increased coverage, choice, and how their plan will lower costs. Most importantly, they need to rebuke the myth that a man in Washington will pick the care a woman in California receives. If Democrats can successfully stress their strengths while negating the largest Republican attack (government control will be inefficient and reduce choice), than public opinion, at least, will be on the President’s side. If not, than Stan Greenberg might be right in thinking 1993 might repeat itself.

Note: All polling numbers are from the Democracy Corps poll cited above, except where the New York Times is cited. For the complete poll from The New York Times, please click here.