Below are links to tributes from across the web to our friend Bruce Herschensohn, who served on CFIF…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Tributes to Bruce Herschensohn (September 10, 1932 – November 30, 2020)

Below are links to tributes from across the web to our friend Bruce Herschensohn, who served on CFIF's Board of Directors from its inception until his death on November 30, 2020. May he R.I.P. The Happiest Warrior, by Troy Senik, in City Journal Remembering Bruce Herschensohn, by John Gizzi, in Newsmax Bruce Herschensohn, RIP, by Timothy Sandefur, in The Dispatch Remembering Bruce Herschensohn, by Hugh Hewitt, The Richard Nixon Foundation Bruce Herschensohn: A Friend of Freedom, by Larry Greenfield, in Jewish Journal Bruce Herschensohn, R.I.P., by Arnold Steinberg, in National Review School of Public Policy Mourns the Loss of Bruce Herschensohn, by Pepperdine School of Public Policy Bruce Herschensohn (September 10, 1932…[more]

December 04, 2020 • 11:17 AM

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
Home Press Room CFIF Unveils National Survey Highlighting Voters’ Health Care Priorities Ahead of the November Election
CFIF Unveils National Survey Highlighting Voters’ Health Care Priorities Ahead of the November Election Print
Wednesday, October 21 2020

ALEXANDRIA, VA – The Center for Individual Freedom (CFIF) today released key findings of a national survey measuring the health care priorities of voters nationally and in 12 key swing states ahead of the November 2020 election.   

The survey, which was conducted by Public Opinion Strategies for CFIF from September 28 – October 5, shows the top issues voters say will determine how they vote for president are coronavirus (36%), economy/jobs (34%), and health insurance costs and coverage (29%). Of the issues tested, those of least importance to this election are prescription drug costs (4%), education (6%) and crime (8%).

Looking specifically at health care, the most important issue for majorities of voters, across party, is addressing the cost of health insurance coverage (55%). High-quality care and services (73%) along with low out-of-pocket costs (64%) are what voters say they value most in health care.

When it comes to addressing those priorities, the survey finds that:

  • Voters, across party, overwhelmingly prefer the role of the federal government to be that of providing oversight and incentives to health care providers, prescription drug companies and health insurers to encourage competition to lower prices in the health care system (70%) rather than having the federal government set prices and determine what services and medicines are covered by private health plans (30%).  

  • Also by overwhelming margins, voters are much more supportive of measures that address specific drivers of health care costs (reducing wasteful spending, capping out-of-pocket costs, providing incentives) rather than putting in place a single government-run health insurance system with one plan that covers all Americans. Seniors, which have the most experience with government-run health coverage, are the most opposed to this approach.

  • Voters’ preference for incentives over government mandates in health care plays out across issues, such as the proposed “Buy American” policy for the medical supply chain. For example, more than six in ten voters (61%) believe the U.S. government should provide more incentives to encourage drug companies to manufacture more of their products in the U.S., rather than requiring drug companies who want to sell their products in the U.S. to entirely source and manufacture them here as well (39%).

“When it comes to health care, it is no surprise that high-quality care and services along with low out-of-pocket costs are what voters care about most,” said CFIF President Jeffrey Mazzella. “The policy preferences of voters in tackling those issues, however, are not those that have dominated recent headlines. Voters prefer focusing on cost drivers that do not impede quality or access and are far less interested in policies that threaten both, such as a Medicare ‘public option’ for all and government price controls.” 

“Most voters, across party, agree that effective spending and incentives would go further in lowering health care costs than single-payer, universal health care,” added Timothy Lee, CFIF’s Senior Vice President of Legal and Public Affairs.  “In fact, seniors—those with the most experience with government-run coverage—were actually the most opposed to a single, government-run health insurance system,” Lee concluded. 

To read the entire Key Findings Memo of the survey results, click here.  View the Executive Summary slide deck below.

Methodology:

Public Opinion Strategies conducted the national online survey among N=1,000 registered voters with an oversample in 12 key general election swing states to reach an N=800 in these states from September 28-October 5, 2020. Key swing states were defined as: AZ, CO, FL, GA, IA, MI, MN, NC, NV, OH, PA, and WI.  The confidence interval for N=1,000 is +/-3.53% and for N=800 is +/-3.95%.

###

Related Articles :
Question of the Week   
How long was the United States Information Agency (USIA) in operation?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"Many elected officials have told Americans for months to stay home and forego everything from religious gatherings and team sports to holiday dinners and even funerals to stem the spread of the coronavirus. And yet we keep seeing news reports about officials flouting their own rules with a nice dinner out or a trip.The rules just don't seem to apply to America's political class. Their refusal to…[more]
 
 
—Sally Pipes, Pacific Research Institute President, CEO, and Thomas W. Smith Fellow in Health Care Policy
— Sally Pipes, Pacific Research Institute President, CEO, and Thomas W. Smith Fellow in Health Care Policy
 
Liberty Poll   

Are the numerous controversies over Election 2020 increasing or decreasing your engagement in political activism?