Opposition and Antipathy towards Obamacare: Explanations from System Justification and Cognitive Dissonance Theory

• In Event: 433 - Section on Altruism, Morality and Social Solidarity Roundtable Session (one-hour).
  In Refereed Roundtable: Section on Altruism, Morality and Social Solidarity Roundtables (one-hour). Table 01. Public Policy and Conflict

Abstract

The ultimate fate of the nation’s first universal health care act may rest on subjective perceptions of the law by politicians and voters. This paper will address two questions. First, why have conservatives and Republicans resolutely persisted in their opposition and refused to become part of the solution? Second, given that public opinion about the ACA/Obamacare has been unfavorable and essentially unchanged since the law was passed, why should we expect this to remain the same, reflecting a continuing antipathy towards the program even as enrollments increase?. The answer to the first rests on the theory of system justification and to the second on a hybrid of cognitive dissonance and system justification theory. People who hold strong conservative ideological views faced the prospect of having have to change their cognitions regarding a government run health insurance market which conflict with their views on the autonomy of individuals to make personal economic and health decisions This suggests that when individual and group needs and interests are high in salience or strength, members of advantaged groups will provide stronger support for the social system and its authorities since they will have a stronger need to reduce ideological dissonance through system justification. Since the US exhibits a degree of social and economic inequality strong efforts were and will continue to be made to justify the status quo ante as of 2008. The struggle is to ensure that one’s moral values are preserved in or removed from the law.

Author

• Harry Perlstadt, Michigan State University