Is this the next phony “survey” likely to be in circulation at the Statehouse, following George Till’s online survey monkey nonsense?
This one has been created by a prominent employer benefits administrator in Vermont, Hickok and Boardman, and distributed to their employer clients statewide. Not necessarily their issue, but a quick search of the Secretary of State’s site reveals that President Scott Boardman of H&B (who are also in the real estate business) to be a longtime Brian Dubie and Jim Douglas campaign contributor, so…
Here’s the link to the online survey which, again, seems to have no restrictions on who can take it, or how many times (assuming you delete your browser cookies or restart your computer before taking it again): healthcare-reform.questionpro.com.
On the Till survey, since our initial report on the absurdness of it all, there have been a couple media reactions. VPR this morning discussed the issue head-on. No surprise there, as they take their jobs as journalists pretty seriously.
The Times Argus and Rutland Herald seem to have doubled down, though. I dunno – maybe it’s Pulitzer-Prize winner Moats’ issue with us blogmaniacs, or maybe it’s right-wing publisher Mitchell’s political determination. I suspect the latter in the case of this weekend’s op-ed which uncritically references the Till survey (paywall – no link available).
However, neither notion accounts for Vermont Press Bureau reporter Peter Hirschfeld’s equally uncritical accounting. He references questions around the survey in his weekend piece, gets a quote from Till and counter-quotes from single-payer advocate Dr. Deb Richter.
The problem is, this isn’t a he-said-she-said situation. The Till “survey” was objectively ridiculous. In fact, you can find such online surveys routinely ridiculed, and they are never – never – cited by reputable media outlets as legitimate. Never. (See jvwalt’s diary here that includes reference to the Vermont AP’s explicit rejection of the survey) Hirschfeld chose to play simple stenographer here instead of reporting, and it’s a shame. If he was uncomfortable stating the objective reality that the Till survey was bunk himself, he could easily have put a call into any academic anywhere who could have told him that online, browser-driven surveys like that aren’t just un-scientific, they are anti-scientific. Unfortunately, he didn’t – just chose instead to leave it hanging out there as though reasonable people might consider it to be legitimate. In doing so, he did not fulfill his responsibility as a journalist and did his profession no favors.
Perhaps he was acting under orders of Publisher Mitchell? Who knows, but I no longer believe that Hirschfeld is promoting his own agenda when he does something like this. I think he’s better than this, and was just sloppy. Live and learn.
But I know that having the Times Argus and Rutland Herald powers-that-be wax intellectual and professional while promoting the merits of a half-assed survey monkey poll is… well, as a Vermont media person myself, it’s embarrassing. Do we have to embrace such hokum and make ourselves look like backwoods clods? Ouch.
The VT GOP are having a field day with this. It’s straight out of the classic Glenn Beck/other-stupid-pundit school of disinfo that has served them so well for years: take a lie or a bit of fabrication, get it amplified and “purified” thru the mighty Wurlitzer of the mainstream media, then trot it out as irrefutable “fact”, thus moving the goal posts ever further towards your own unreasonable and irrational position.
We may laugh at the clear rift that has opened up on the far right between the tea bags and the traditional GOP, but Till’s “survey” tells us quite a bit about the disarray among the Democrats. Because surely the party shouldn’t let someone like Till get away with sabotaging a pivotal strategic issue with such a sloppy and embarrassing bit of propaganda? We saw it in DC when so-called Democrats like Conrad and Bayh destroyed much of health care reform by requiring massive compromises before negotiations even began to take place across the isle.
The survey suffers from basically all of the same flaws as Rep. Till’s survey. You just choose from a set of options given with each question.
Here are the questions on the survey:
How closely has your organization been following healthcare reform legislation in Vermont?
How would you describe your organzation’s level of support for the legislation?
What concerns do you have, if any, about the proposed legislation?
What effect, if any, do you think this legislation will have on medical costs (or medical trend) in Vermont?
What do you view as the most important aspect of Green Mountain Care?
What financing method would you be most likely to support for Green Mountain Care?
How do you think most Vermonters feel about Green Mountain Care?
How do you think most providers, including hospitals, feel about Green Mountain Care?
What effect, if any, do you think passage of the legislation would have on Vermont’s economy?
What effect, if any, do you feel passage of this legislation will have on job creation in Vermont?
In your opinion, what impact will Green Mountain Care have on the decisions of companies considering locating in Vermont?
What effect, if any, do you think passage of the legislation will have on worksite wellness efforts?
What effect do you feel Green Mountain Care will have on the health of individual Vermonters?
What impact, if any, do you think feel Green Mountain Care will have on the quality of providers, including hospitals, in Vermont?
Has your organization been actively involved in the process either through testimony or talking with legislators?
In your opinion, which two of the following aspects of Green Mountain Care are most likely to prove successful in containing rising medical costs?
The Hsaio Report proposed funding a single-payer system through a payroll tax shared between the employer and employee. Have you calculated how this payroll tax would affect your organization?
Based on your calculations, what impact would Dr. Hsiao’s proposed payroll tax have on your organization’s costs compared to what you currently spend on medical premiums?
What effect, if any, do you think Green Mountain Care will have on your organization?
Do you have any other comments regarding Green Mountain Care?
Why can’t we cook up one of our own? Oh, right, because then the media will notice somebody’s cheating…
These two are likely to be answered incorrectly in disproportionate numbers. Both are worded in a way that if one skims, as one tends to do w/online polls, one may check the “negative” option – if one thinks that costs will go down (move in the negative direction) – when one intends the “positive” option, which is only clear if one reads the parenthetical statement next to the option:
There’s also some tricky framing in several of the questions (aka push-polling), and one of the questions asks you to choose two options, but is not set up to allow you to check more than one.
Rep. Till addressed the Democratic caucus today concerning the brouhaha with his survey. Basically, he was angry with the fact that the survey had been tainted by “contaminants”. He referred to the fact that some members of the caucus had accessed it, as well as maybe some others in the building. He admitted that he was naive in the way he developed the survey, trusting perhaps that it would be only answered by physicians, but now on second thought said he should have put in some failsafe mechanisms like perhaps requiring some form of identification.
He was looking to rescue the survey and make it salvageable in some form, and asked that any in the caucus who took it come forward or if any member knew of people who had taken it to notify him. If from what VT Buzz, the BFP political blog, said, Rep. Jewett had indeed taken the survey, and he was in the room as Rep. Till gave his address to the caucus. Talk about an uncomfortable moment.
Also interesting was the mention that websites had provided a link to the survey. Anyhow he mentioned how much time and effort he had put in (100+ hours in his reckoning) and around $1000. He was upset at how advocates had compromised the survey. C’est la vie. There is still more to this story as Dr. Till tries to resurrect the credibility of his survey.