Iowa Debate-Watchers Unsure On Health Care Differences

Undecided Iowa voters watching this round of Democratic debates aren’t that interested in the finer points of the private option vs. Medicare for All discussion. They want health care for all, they say, but they’re largely unsure how it should be achieved.

Voters at Des Moines debate watch parties both Tuesday and Wednesday night weren’t strongly attached to any specific approach the candidates brought up, and some were simply confused as to the differences between the plans.

“I don’t understand all the issues with Medicare for All that well,” said Bob Raker of Des Moines. “But they might be wrestling with semantics here on what the definitions of these things are.”

Ryan Crane said he doesn’t know whether a private option should be left in a Medicare for All bill.

“I have mixed feelings about Medicare for All,” Crane said Wednesday. “I think it’s good to have a public option that’s available to people, but the moderators are framing this wrong … The way the moderators framed it is antagonistic. Kamala attacked Biden. Biden attacked Gillibrand. I don’t think it’s constructive.”

Anthony Spoerl, also of Des Moines, said he believes there should be a private option, but added, “I don’t know.”

“I’m not sure where I land on it,” Spoerl said, unsure of his answer. “I lean towards having it mixed with a private option I suppose?”

Advertise on Iowa Starting Line

Spoerl said the first 30-minutes of Tuesday night’s debate didn’t help him understand the issue any better. 

“Right now, I haven’t used Medicare for myself enough to make a decision on how I feel about it,” said Beverly Ellis of Des Moines. “I need to read about it. I’m retired and I’m on Medicare, so it doesn’t affect me that much.” 

When asked whether she supported a private option, Hillary Naven, of Des Moines said, “I’m not really sure.”

Randy Henderson, of Des Moines, said he’s on Medicare and he thinks it’s great and he’d like to make sure everyone is insured.

“That’s the bottom line,” he said. 

He didn’t have an opinion as to whether a private option should be offered other than he’s been “screwed big before” by private insurance companies.

After watching the Medicare for All debates, Heather Dunn simply doesn’t think American is ready for Medicare for All.

“I think that I’m more on the board with staying on Obamacare,” Dunn said.

The only person at the Des Moines debate watch party either night who seemed to be confident of their opinion on Medicare for All said she thought the candidates were confusing voters more than they were helping them.

“I’m a public benefits attorney,” Romain said. “What I don’t like is I think Bernie is being disingenuous about the status of Medicare is. Because people on Medicare do pay copays, they do have deductibles and most of them do have a form of private insurance called Medigap coverage or Medicare supplement.”

“I don’t like that it’s confusing people,” Romain said. “I don’t like it when Republicans do it. I don’t like it when Democrats do it. I guess personally, I’m not saying I’m against government sponsored healthcare but in the short term, I would be in favor of some of the options being discussed where you would add a public option to the existing Obamacare structure and still keep talking about this.”


by Paige Godden
Photo by Julie Fleming
Posted 7/31/19

2 Comments on "Iowa Debate-Watchers Unsure On Health Care Differences"

  • The public benefits attorney is either being disingenuous or is ill informed. Bernie’s bill (and Pramila Jayapal’s House bill) are improved versions of Medicare without co-pays and deductibles and will not require supplemental insurance for necessary care. They also include vision and dental. Letting that quote stand without correction is irresponsible on the part of this blog.

  • I’m with Lisa, for the most part.That attorney was “mis-informed.” I still, however, lean more toward Harris’ proposals, due, in part to transition period (just far shorter than 10 years!) for people who currently have employer-sponsored health plans. People need insurance they can take with them from job-to-job (or into retirement). Thing is, what I’ve seen in my limited view is that people aren’t so enamored of their plan, but they sure do love them some doctors. And once a full-on M4A is established, that would not be a problem. There would be no “in-network” or “out-of-network”. And M4A would, then, remove employers from the healthcare equation entirely – which is a good thing.
    I sympathize, though, with many who watched the debates. It’s hard to find policy when all one gets from the debaters are soundbites. This last debate format, attempting to start a circular firing squad was no help in that regard. It wasn’t designed to give us much information.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *