Poll: Public Divided Over Tying Requirements to Obamacare Subsidies

MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif., June 2, 2015 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- With the Supreme Court case King v. Burwell keeping Affordable Care Act subsidies in the news, HealthPocket conducted a nationwide poll of public sentiment regarding the idea of tying health insurance subsidies to personal requirements. Using data from a two-part survey with over 2,500 respondents, HealthPocket found the public significantly divided on the subject of tying personal requirements to Affordable Care Act subsidies, with no position securing a majority of support and a significant segment of the public uncertain of their position.

The first question of HealthPocket's two-part survey asked, "Do you believe any requirements (e.g. no smoking) should be placed on people in order to receive Obamacare health insurance subsidies?" Respondents could select one answer from the options "No, requirements would be unfair," "Yes, requirements would be fair," and "I'm not sure." Of the three potential answers, "I'm not sure" was chosen most often at 37%. Close behind this percentage was "No, requirements would be unfair" at 34% and "Yes, requirements would be fair" at 29%. None of the three options were able to attract a majority of respondents.

Those respondents who answered "Yes, requirements would be fair" were then asked, "In your opinion, what requirements should be placed on people in order to receive Obamacare health insurance subsidies?" Respondents could pick one or more answers from six options displayed in randomized order. The most popular was "abstain from illegal drug use," chosen by 71% of respondents to the follow-up question. A prohibition on smoking was nearly as popular at 65%. Maintaining preventive care such as flu shots (43%) and maintaining weight below obesity levels (37%) both failed to attract support from at least half of respondents. Least popular among the subsidy requirements was requiring subsidies to be temporary (30%) and 8% of respondents to this question did not support any of the requirements listed among the options.

"Given that healthcare costs are partially driven by behavioral issues such as diet and smoking," said Kev Coleman, Head of Research & Data at HealthPocket, "we may see future policy discussions that explore the pros and cons of tying health insurance subsidies to behaviors that seek to improve overall public health and reduce healthcare utilization."  

The full results of the survey along with its methodology can be reviewed at "Public Divided Over Tying Requirements to Health Insurance Subsidies" at HealthPocket.com.

HealthPocket.com is a free website that compares and ranks all health insurance plans, helping individuals, families, and small businesses to make their best health plan decisions. HealthPocket publishes health insurance market analyses and other consumer advocacy research. HealthPocket's research is nonpartisan and uses only objective data from government, non-profit, and private sources that carry no conditions that might restrict the site from serving as an unbiased resource. HealthPocket, Inc. is independently managed and based in Mountain View, California. Learn more at www.HealthPocket.com.

For more information, please contact Ryan Hughes, Shirley & Banister Public Affairs at [email protected] or 703-739-5920/800-536-5920.

SOURCE HealthPocket

Related Links

http://www.HealthPocket.com