Gallup: Dems say Obamacare’s unconstitutional, want to keep it anyway

Interesting results from a recent Gallup poll, as reported by Politico:

Gallup found that 47 percent of Americans want a GOP president to repeal the law, while 44 percent oppose that.

However, 72 percent of Americans believe the individual mandate in the health care reform package is unconstitutional, while 20 percent believe it is constitutional.

Along party lines, a majority of Democrats — 56 percent — believe the health care mandate is unconstitutional and 37 percent defend it as constitutional. Among Republicans, 94 percent view that part of the law as unconstitutional.

Meanwhile, a USA Today/Gallup poll of swing states shows that a majority of crucial swing state voters oppose the law. In fact, 53 percent of swing state voters see the health care reforms as a “bad thing,” while 38 percent see it as a “good thing.”

The two key takeaways for me: 1) a clear majority of self-identified Democrats say Obamacare is unconstitutional, and 2) the health reform is unpopular in swing states by a clear majority.

Regarding the first point: Gallup also reported that Democrats oppose repealing the law, 14-77, while Republicans support repeal 87-9. So, while Republicans’ views of the laws’ constitutionality more or less track their opinion of whether it should remain law, Democrats are more likely than not to acknowledge Obamacare violates the Constitution and yet believe it should remain law anyway.

I don’t think we can divine much from this about whether Republicans would support a law they believed to be unlawful, since they opposed Obamacare from the get-go. It’s clear, however, that many Democrats have no problem supporting an unlawful law. Which would seem to track well with their broader apathy (at best) about what the nation’s founding document does or doesn’t say or allow.

Second, I wonder how much Obamacare’s apparent unpopularity in swing states has to do with the stronger support Rick Santorum has in many of them compared to Mitt Romney, according to a couple of recent polls. It’s true that Santorum, as the last GOP candidate to get a full vetting in this race, may be only temporarily held in higher esteem by these voters. But it’s also true that Romney has not been able to create daylight between Obamacare and his reform in Massachusetts in voters’ minds — which is one big reason he’s been able to close the deal with GOP voters in this primary, at least so far. If the latter is the larger factor, Romney’s “electability” argument is seriously damaged.

– By Kyle Wingfield

Find me on Facebook or follow me on Twitter

103 comments Add your comment

Linda

February 27th, 2012
4:00 pm

Wish these polls included the Supreme Court judges.

Jimmy62

February 27th, 2012
4:04 pm

The Constitution is often dismissed when it doesn’t allow what people want. That’s when you see peoples’ true deep-down love for authoritarianism come out.

MarkV

February 27th, 2012
4:25 pm

The opinion of the Democrats as well as of the Republicans regarding the constitutionality of the health care law has just about as much value as the opinion of those on this blog – zero. It is only the Supreme Court’s opinion that will count.

Finn McCool

February 27th, 2012
4:26 pm

It’s going to change over time but there is no way it is all going away. They’ve been implementing since they day after the ACA was signed. In fact, some have speculated that implementation has already reached the point that it would be MORE expensive to dismantle what has been set up than to just keep on going in this direction.

Is it legal? That’s above my pay grade.

Stephenson Billings

February 27th, 2012
4:30 pm

Liberals have always had a problem with our constitution because it’s a LIMITING document in that it limits the government’s power; it tells the government what it can’t do, not what it can do and is the biggest obstacle they have to achieving their goals. The Constitution is a document that empowers citizens. It empowers the individual over the state, and that is despised by people like Obama. That’s despised by most Democrats. It is the state, many doofuses believe an altruistic state, which is to have dominion over citizens. Citizens are a bloc of nameless, faceless robotic parts to be collectively controlled and manipulated and shaped and formed by the altruistic state.

The Constitution has proscriptions against government. The Bill of Rights tells government what it cannot do. Obama and his buddies have a name for this. They say the Constitution is a set, if you will, of negative liberties, negative liberties from the point of view of the government. If you believe government should be all powerful, the Constitution’s your enemy, it’s an impediment. And that’s why Obama, whenever he can, is just ignoring it.

MarkV

February 27th, 2012
4:36 pm

There is no doubt that Romney has a problem with the Republican base because of the Massachusetts health care reform. No matter how he and his supporters try to argue that it is ok for a state to have an individual mandate but it is not ok on a federal level, he and they have failed to present a rational argument in support of that contention.

Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)

February 27th, 2012
4:41 pm

It’s clear, however, that many Democrats have no problem supporting an unlawful law.
———————-

Many Democrats went to public schools. Their ability to think starts out at a retarded condition, and their politics, however they acquired them, merely reinforce their disdain for the Constitution and real freedom.

MarkV

February 27th, 2012
4:42 pm

Stephenson Billings @4:30 pm: “Liberals have always had a problem with our constitution because it’s a LIMITING document in that it limits the government’s power; it tells the government what it can’t do, not what it can do …”

That is an interesting formulation. According to it, there should be no constitutional problem with Obamacare. Does the Constitution say that the Congress CANNOT pass this law? Where? (Don’t the conservatives always argue “if it is NOT in the Constitution …”?).

Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)

February 27th, 2012
4:46 pm

The Constitution says the federal government can’t do anything not specified (”enumerated”) in the Constitution.

Obozocare: Unconstitutional.

The Anti-Wooten

February 27th, 2012
4:58 pm

I’m among those Democrats that feel that ACA is constitutional under the Commerce Clause. I would also have liked to see the legislation go much further than it did.

But the key here is that ACA is not going to be a very large electoral issue come November.

Ayn Rant

February 27th, 2012
5:01 pm

Again, what’s the problem with health care for all Americans? It costs less, it reduces the federal deficit, and it serves a basic human need.

Are the Republicans who oppose the affordable health care act constitutional lawyers like President Obama? Aren’t those Republicans the very ones who try to impede the constitutional rights of women to choose abortion?

Are there some Americans who do not “deserve” health care? Who are they? Should people without health care insurance be required to pay a small premium for their access to emergency care, or should they be denied emergency care?

Please stop the ignorant “Obamacare” and “Romneycare” designations. Those healthcare plans address the way we pay for health care, not actual health care. Health care is left up to the same private practitioners that Medicare, Medicaid, TRICOR, and private health insurance providers use now.

No one has proposed any government health care, only better and cheaper ways to pay those who provide health care.

Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)

February 27th, 2012
5:04 pm

what’s the problem with health care for all Americans?
——————-

None whatsoever. How much did you contribute to charity last year to make that a reality?

Didn’t think so.

Hypocrite.

Stephenson Billings

February 27th, 2012
5:09 pm

‘ It costs less, it reduces the federal deficit, and it serves a basic human need.”

Not intended to be a factual statement.

Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)

February 27th, 2012
5:11 pm

Per person cost of federal high-risk medical plan doubles

Medical costs for enrollees in the health-care law’s high-risk insurance pools are expected to more than double initial predictions, the Obama administration said Thursday in a report on the new program.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/per-person-cost-of-federal-high-risk-medical-plan-doubles/2012/02/23/gIQAX3xVWR_story.html?tid=pm_national_pop
————————–

A “better and cheaper way to pay those who provide health care” my a$$.

GodHatesTrash, Superstar

February 27th, 2012
5:12 pm

Well, there’s a member of Kyle’s Kavalcade of Konservative Kooks and Krazies in Alaska that thinks a “mulatto” president is unconstitutional.

Go figure

I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...

February 27th, 2012
5:14 pm

Romney’s biggest “problem” is being Plastic Lib Man.

And dummycrats could care less about the Constitution when they see a way to grab up other people’s money.

GodHatesTrash, Superstar

February 27th, 2012
5:16 pm

Fifty years ago most good Georgians thought blacks voting was unconstitutional.

Go figure!

murph

February 27th, 2012
5:20 pm

“Many Democrats went to public schools. Their ability to think starts out at a retarded condition”

Please explain what you mean by “retarded condition”. Many people of both political persuasions find the word “retarded” insensitive and unacceptable. How did you mean to use it, here?

Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!

February 27th, 2012
5:23 pm

“Again, what’s the problem with health care for all Americans? It costs less, it reduces the federal deficit, and it serves a basic human need. ”

No, it doesn’t, at least in the first two instances.

In the third, food fills a basic human need, but do you want to government to provide THAT to you as well? Don’t bother answering that. Of course you do. You want cradle to grave support for your entire life, don’t you, Ayn?

“Are there some Americans who do not “deserve” health care?”

No one is talking about what is deserving, Ayn. Just what people should do to get and pay for it.

Health care is NOT a right.

Do what??????

February 27th, 2012
5:24 pm

Well yeah, he had to buy votes from his own party. Most of them were voted out of office in 2010.

Do what??????

February 27th, 2012
5:25 pm

“Well, there’s a member of Kyle’s Kavalcade of Konservative Kooks and Krazies in Alaska that thinks a “mulatto” president is unconstitutional.

And here is Trash the super star dumb @$$ making racist comments.

Do what??????

February 27th, 2012
5:25 pm

“Not intended to be a factual statement.

Someone’s been hanging around Kookman’s blog.

GodHatesTrash, Superstar

February 27th, 2012
5:25 pm

When do we get to vote on the Constitution? Never, you say?

Well, never mind then.

Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!

February 27th, 2012
5:26 pm

And really, Kyle. An article on Democrats wishing to ignore the Constitution?

Not exactly earth-shattering, my friend . . . ;)

Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!

February 27th, 2012
5:30 pm

“I’m among those Democrats that feel that ACA is constitutional under the Commerce Clause. I would also have liked to see the legislation go much further than it did.”

Is there any wonder why conservatives feel that liberals don’t think?

How can your desire for legislation “go much further” when you clearly believe the lesser bill is un-Constitutional? :roll:

Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!

February 27th, 2012
5:31 pm

“When do we get to vote on the Constitution? Never, you say? ”

Anytime a Constitutional Convention is called, Trash.

And I’d hate to see that happen. Too many grotesquely stupid people out there who can vote.

On BOTH sides.

Puck

February 27th, 2012
5:33 pm

I wonder why the republicans are not lining up to repeal EMTALA, you know the law that says a hospital emergency room has to treat you regardless of your ability to pay. Clearly requiring someone to provide a service without reimbursement is unconstitutional.

Linda

February 27th, 2012
5:34 pm

Stephenson@4:30, Well said.

Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!

February 27th, 2012
5:39 pm

I wonder why Puck can’t stay on topic; you know, the one where there is an actual legal challenge in front of the U.S. Supreme Court?

Oy . . . :roll:

Bernie

February 27th, 2012
5:40 pm

Funny how we all must be riminded that President Obama expertise is Constitutional Law. Surely a Man of his stature would insure that all elements of his healthcare bill fall within the legal framework of the Constitution. Unlike, the “PATRIOT ACT”, passed and signed by George W Bush & The Republicans on a Sunday night after midnight in a state of fear, without debating or allowing anyone to view the law until after it was signed into LAW! Now some please explain, how Consittutional that law and process is.

Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!

February 27th, 2012
5:40 pm

“No matter how he and his supporters try to argue that it is ok for a state to have an individual mandate but it is not ok on a federal level, he and they have failed to present a rational argument in support of that contention.”

Present a rational argument? Yes, they have.

Have it internalized by an unthinking electorate? No.

Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!

February 27th, 2012
5:42 pm

Ah, more deflection by Bernie.

When you can’t speak to the topic at hand, move onto something else that you can complain about.

Linda

February 27th, 2012
5:44 pm

Ayn@5:01, Gets my reward for the most lies in one comment, i.e. every sentence, every partial sentence.

Linda

February 27th, 2012
5:46 pm

Bernie@5:40, You are so funny! You mean that old Patriot Act Obama extended?

Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!

February 27th, 2012
5:50 pm

Just because Obama extended it doesn’t mean that it’s Constitutional, Linda.

Bernie has valid point, it is just not on topic.

Linda

February 27th, 2012
5:56 pm

Let’s give the Democrats a little slack. It’s not primarily the Democrats. It’s the progressives who want to trash (no disrespect intended, Mr. Trash) the constitution. Half the Democrats have no idea who the progressives are, what their goals are & what they are up to (which says a lot about Democrats, in general).

Sure, both parties have passed laws that were unconstitutional, but this is the first time in history one party has passed an unconstitutional law that nationalized over 20% of our economy.

And Bernie compares it to the Patriot Act!

Linda

February 27th, 2012
5:56 pm

You, as a Citizen of America has the constitutional right make choices on your morality and religious belief, unless you are relgious and the Left does not agree with the policy. At that point, the Constitution is not important to anybody — because the left know how to run your life and morality better than you do or God does. The overstep in Government is unreal. It is policies like that which will lead us to failure. Indeed, a sad day in our Nation when the HHS was madated and shoved down our throats.

Linda

February 27th, 2012
6:04 pm

Waivers for health care — but mandated following for religious affiliations. In other words, the government is targeting religion and mandating policies based on beliefs.

GodHatesTrash, Superstar

February 27th, 2012
6:06 pm

Great, Tiberius! Can’t wait for the next constitutional convention. Oh wait, the last one was in 1787.

Never mind.

Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!

February 27th, 2012
6:08 pm

And there have been rumblings to call for one for years, Trash.

Sorry to burst your ignorant bubble.

GodHatesTrash, Superstar

February 27th, 2012
6:14 pm

Doo, just reporting the facts. One of you racist Obama-haters filed a lawsuit in Alaska saying Obama is not qualified to be president because he’s a ‘mulatto’.

GodHatesTrash, Superstar

February 27th, 2012
6:17 pm

The rumblings of tea-bagging fools. Like dogs to their vomit they return to their tired tirades and grumbling. Sure, the last few years a black president has added to their impotent ire, but don’t hold your breath waiting for a constitutional convention, fool.

md

February 27th, 2012
6:22 pm

No, Bernie does not have a valid point…….not in context with his post he doesn’t. He wants to have his cake and eat it too…..

Yes, the point is valid…..but not in the manor Bernie presented it, which really makes him look silly.

Linda

February 27th, 2012
6:23 pm

Kyle, Someone is using my name @ 5:56 & 6:04.

retiredds

February 27th, 2012
6:23 pm

Well, Kyle, and others that’s what the US Supreme Court is for. If the SC deems it unconstitutional then it will be. If they don’t then the R’s can cry about an activist SC. We’ll find out soon enough as the Court will decide in a few months. In the mean time, we’ll have to listen to all the arm chair constitutional scholars from the right and the left opine their views.

As Brett said to Scarlet, “frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn.”

P.S. Thank God for the founding fathers (brothers) who created the system we have today of executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government. I am convinced that in today’s world this could never happen. There just are not enough well educated and statesmanlike politicians who understand the value of compromise and being willing to meet and talk with your opponent and make policy for the better of the nation. From my perspective the system is crumbling from within and that is what usually happens to republics and other forms of government that are on the decline.

md

February 27th, 2012
6:25 pm

And if we are going to travel down the “commerce clause” slippery slope, folks need to understand that would be all encompassing……Uncle Sugar can then dictate much of what we do in the name of healthcare and commerce. No more Mickey D’s, Twinkies, Beer, Wine, cigarettes, etc etc…..all of it is bad for us and makes our gov’t provided healthcare too expensive…….

carlosgvv

February 27th, 2012
6:26 pm

Two things for all of you to remember:

1. The Supreme Court will settle this, not you.
2. The Constitution is what the Supreme Court says it is.

The Pitiful GOP field

February 27th, 2012
6:34 pm

Somehow I feel that the brilliant men who wrote our constitution around 250 years ago could not have expected the world to change in the ways it has. I do not believe they could have imagined the internet, air travel or even the industrial revolution. So how can we expect a document forged in the 1800th century to not be fluid and change as America and the world changes around us? That would be where amendments come in people. So the “unconstitutionality” to provide affordable healthcare is ludicrous. How can someone say any American does NOT have the right to get basic health care? Clearly the system we have now is not sustainable. We have the most expensive healthcare in the world and yet our life expectancy is way down on the list. The right in America makes up lies and exaggerations to protect vested interests rather than reform the system in favor of the people. So why are the European countries such as Sweden or Switzerland deemed “socialist” by the GOP idiot candidates doing so much better than America is in education and life expectancy. Sweden, which still has a very generous welfare state, is currently a star performer, with economic growth faster than that of any other wealthy nation.

jconservative

February 27th, 2012
6:44 pm

“The Constitution is a document that empowers citizens. … It empowers the individual over the state,…”

If that were true there would be no chance of anyone getting between an woman’s right to choose and the state.

However,the SCOTUS has on many occasions held that at times the State has an overriding reason to lay aside individual rights for the perceived good of the whole.

Personally I am a 9th Amendment guy. Most things are none of the government’s business.

Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!

February 27th, 2012
6:50 pm

“So how can we expect a document forged in the 1800th century to not be fluid and change as America and the world changes around us?”

Because “rights” are not fluid. Technology changes.but “rights” do not. That concept apparently escapes you, Pitiful (and a great moniker you’ve chosen for yourself in THAT regard).

“That would be where amendments come in people. So the “unconstitutionality” to provide affordable healthcare is ludicrous.”

Really? Making ANYTHING affordable is the role of government? Is is a right to make cars affordable? What about a house you deem to be large enough for you and your family now that you’ve deemed housing a “right”? Does the government have the responsibility to make expensive housing affordable?

“How can someone say any American does NOT have the right to get basic health care?”

Easy. Health care requires that someone besides yourself provide a service to you whether they want to or not. In other words, to make health care a “right” you must enslave at least a doctor to do your bidding. That is why health care can never be a right, Pitiful.

“Clearly the system we have now is not sustainable.”

The first thing you’ve been right about.

“We have the most expensive healthcare in the world and yet our life expectancy is way down on the list.”

Remind me to school you in the difference between statistical analysis when using differing value systems and differing levels of freedom sometime, Pitiful. In addition, I’ll let you in on a little secret. Doctors have already admitted why healthcare costs are so high here. It is due to the extra and unnecessary tests they perform in order to avoid malpractice lawsuits. Their own estimates show that the cost of health care in this country would go down by 30% with tort reform across the nation.