The majority of Americans oppose President Obama’s health care proposal and support for it has reached a new low, according to a new national poll.

Overall, 56 percent of Americans surveyed oppose the current proposal, and only 41 percent favor it, based on the latest Rasmussen Reports study.

“Senior citizens are less supportive of the plan than younger voters. In the latest survey, just 33% of seniors favor the plan while 59% are opposed,” the report said. “The intensity gap among seniors is significant. Only 16% of the over-65 crowd Strongly Favors the legislation while 46% are Strongly Opposed.”

The poll noted the latest results show for the first time that a tiny plurality of voters don’t see the legislation becoming law this year.

The proposed health care plan also splits largely along political parties. Seventy-five percent of Democrats favor the plan, while 79 percent of Republicans oppose it. Also, 72 percent of “unaffiliated” voters oppose it.

“The most important fundamental is that 68% of American voters have health insurance coverage they rate good or excellent … Most of these voters approach the health care reform debate fearing that they have more to lose than to gain,” wrote Scott Rasmussen in a recent Wall Street Journal article. “A Rasmussen video report shows that 53% of those with insurance believe it’s likely they would have to change coverage if the congressional plan becomes law.

Full results of the poll are available here.

Almost all U.S. drivers surveyed believe texting while driving is dangerous and such practices should be banned, according to a new study commissioned by the Ford Motor Co.

Eighty-six percent of U.S. drivers defined texting while driving as "very dangerous," and 93 percent support a nationwide ban on texting, the study found. Conversely, only 42 percent believe drivers would actually stop texting if the practice was banned.

However, more than 74 percent said there would be more compliance with such a ban if hands-free or voice-activated technologies were available, the survey stated.

Ford commissioned the study as part of research into distracted driving impacts. The online survey was conducted Sept. 18-21 by Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates and included 1,000 licensed drivers.

The car company has endorsed a proposed nationwide ban on handheld texting introduced by Senator Charles E. Schumer (D-NY) and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY).

 “Research shows that activity that draws drivers’ eyes away from the road for an extended period while driving, such as text messaging, substantially increases the risk of accidents,” said Jim Vondale, director of Ford’s Automotive Safety Office. “That is why we support a nationwide ban on handheld texting while driving and why Ford has developed hands-free and voice-activated technologies to allow drivers to remain connected, but to do so while keeping their hands on the wheel and their eyes on the road.”

The survey shows that 67 percent of drivers said they believed voice-activated technology is a safe alternative to texting, and 76 percent said such a feature would be an appealing feature in a car.

Many drivers don’t understand the laws in their own states regarding cell phone use and/or texting while driving, the survey found. As of now, 18 states have enacted such bans but nearly 40 percent of drivers in these states indicated they were unaware of the ban in their own state.

According to government studies, 80 percent of all accidents involve driver inattention, where drivers take their eyes off the road, even if for a few seconds, the study said.

“A growing number of drivers are using handheld wireless communications and music-playing devices while driving,” said Dr. Louis Tijerina, Ford senior technical specialist.  “Research clearly shows that manual operation of those devices that takes the driver’s eyes from the road for an extended period of time creates the kind of distraction that causes accidents.”

Let us know what you think. Should there be a national ban on texting while driving? Register today and leave your comments.

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) – U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK) released the following statement today after the Senate passed the 2010 Department of Interior appropriations bill.

 The Senate accepted Coburn amendments strengthening border security, promoting transparency and requiring competitive bidding of earmarks.  The Senate rejected a Coburn amendment requiring the Senate to prioritize spending on maintenance.

 “The public has a dim view of Congress because we continue to ignore reality.  The Senate is continuing to spend taxpayer dollars as if the economy is booming and the treasury has a surplus of funds.  Across America, families are making tough decisions and prioritizing their spending.  Members of Congress, however, continue to believe that every spending bill deserves a significant increase.  This bill, for instance, increases Department of Interior by $4.6 billion (16 percent) over last year’s funding, which doesn’t even account for the more than $10 billion the department received in stimulus funding,” Dr. Coburn said.

“The American people are smart enough to know that an underfunded Department of Interior is hardly one of our most pressing economic challenges, particularly when the department just received a $10 billion bonus,” Dr. Coburn added.   “What does concern the American people is the fact that Congress is now borrowing from future generations 43 cents for every dollar it spends.  Americans are making sacrifices every day.  It’s time for members of Congress to start making tough choices as well.”

“What is outrageous about the Senate’s actions, however, is not just its new spending but its complete failure to examine what taxpayers are already financing.  The priority of the federal government should be to maintain the one-third of the land in our nation that it already owns, beginning with clearing the more than $13 billion maintenance backlog for critical projects like levees and dams.  Our priority should not be to spend more money, take property from private citizens and leave what we already own to fall to decay and disrepair.  With every bill the Senate is passing we are earning our dismal approval ratings,” Dr. Coburn said.

 This bill authorizes nearly $400 million for land acquisition while the Department of Interior currently faces a maintenance backlog ranging from $13.2 billion and $19.4 billion.  There are over 303 earmarks in the bill costing taxpayers $244.5 million.  The Environmental Protection Agency was given a 33 percent budget increase.  The national inflation rate is currently 1.6 percent.  

Following Thursday’s Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the canceled missile defense site in Eastern Europe, U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), a senior member of the committee stated, “Obama’s plan makes us more vulnerable.”

“Everyone agrees that Iran poses a threat to our nation’s security by developing nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them,” Inhofe continued.  “Everyone also agrees that we need to have the necessary defenses in place to defeat this threat before Iran reaches its goal.

 The Ground Based Interceptors (GBI) that were supposed to be located in Eastern Europe would have provided such a defense by 2013.  Even now, despite the setbacks the administration handed the program, the European-based Third Site could be fielded the same year that intelligence estimates have said Iran would have a long-range ballistic missile capability – 2015.”

“The Obama administration’s alternative, the SM-3 2B, is only a concept and will not provide the same type of protection that the Third Site would have provided until 2020, leaving us more exposed for five years.
 This is unacceptable.  While abandoning our commitment at the last minute is dangerous for our allies in Europe, we must be even more concerned about the safety and security of America.

 The new plan the administration wants to pursue leaves us more vulnerable to a missile attack for five years, from 2015 to 2020.  It is not too late to scrap the Obama plan, and reestablish the multi-layered Eastern European missile defense shield that includes

GBI which could intercept and destroy long range Iranian missiles capable of striking Europe and the United States between 2015 and 2020.”

Remember the days when the press ooohed and aaaahed every time Barack Obama and Michelle went out to dinner? The President’s jump shot … the First Lady’s arms … the adorable kids … the dog search … the vegetable garden … it was Operation Razzle Dazzle run by an image machine working overtime. Team Obama believed that if people saw the First Family as cool and fun, they would be more likely to think Obama’s "remaking of America" was cool and fun, too. Of course, it didn’t work out this way.

Americans, it turns out, are sophisticated enough to separate their personal appreciation for the Obamas from their views on the President’s policies. At this point, the entire White House operation is starting to have the look and feel of a tired Vegas lounge act. The economic forecast looks grim to most of us, who wonder why Washington can’t cut back on spending in the same way our own families have. Everything Obama proposes carries a hefty price tag — which ends up further burdening already beleaguered taxpayers and small businesses, who sooner or later pick up the tab for this profligate spending. The health-care debate has turned out to be a referendum on how well Washington manages big programs. The answer? Not well.

Clearly, there is a genuine opportunity today for any politician who is willing to stand with these Americans who feel Washington just doesn’t give a damn about them. These people are looking for a voice of reason amidst the chaos and insanity of a world where numbers like $10 trillion are casually tossed around.

This feels like 1993, the last time I recall such widespread, intense anger with Washington. Back then, Gingrich’s Contract with America tacked its sail to these prevailing winds, helping a demoralized GOP coast to a stunning 54-seat congressional coup. We need a new blueprint for a new age that our fellow Americans can read and think about. I suppose we could just sit back and hope to beat Democrats by default, but that would be foolhardy. Obama is a master campaigner and loves competition. The GOP needs to outline a coherent platform of specific ideas that every Republican candidate can run on in 2010 — that way there’s a clear post-election agenda that, assuming big GOP pick-ups, brings its own mandate. Call it "10 for 2010."

1) Taxpayers’ Bill of Rights (TABOR). Limit federal spending growth to the percentage in population growth plus the rate of inflation; provide taxpayers the option of filing a post-card sized return using a low, flat tax rate of 25%

2) End Tax-funded abortions. Stop federal payments to Planned Parenthood and prohibit any taxpayer-subsidized health insurance plan from covering abortion

3) Defend American Borders. Complete America’s border-protection initiatives using remaining funds from the so-called stimulus bill

4) King Dollar. Preserve a strong dollar so that Americans’ savings aren’t wiped out by inflation and the U.S. dollar remains the world’s reserve currency

5) Empower American Business. Immediately slash corporate tax rates to 15% and scrap the corporate capital-gains tax altogether

6) Defend America. Strengthen America to defend our homeland and fully fund an operational, layered missile-defense system

7) Statism Exit Plan. De-fund czars; immediately cease bailout payments to failed companies; ban future bailouts

8) End Generational Theft. As few believe America’s entitlement programs will be able to pay benefits to future generations, provide younger workers the choice of diverting payroll/Social Security taxes into personal retirement accounts

9) Restore America’s System of Justice. Introduce British-style penalties for frivolous lawsuits, where those who launch unsuccessful lawsuits are liable for the defendants’ legal bills

10) American Energy Independence. All-of-the-Above strategy that embraces alternatives, expands and accelerates exploration and production of oil and natural gas, and jumpstarts dramatic increases in nuclear power