Fivethirtyeight.com reviews some polling on whether voters want a public option.  Their conclusion?  Nobody knows what the hell that term means.

Just 37 percent of the poll's respondents correctly identified the public option from a list of three choices provided to them. . . . This should serve as something of a reality check for people on both sides of the public option debate. If the respondents had simply chosen randomly among the three options provide to them, 33 percent would have selected the correct definition for the public option. Instead, only 37 percent did.

When you label a complicated policy with an ambiguous name, then neglect to explain it to people, these are the results you can expect.

Another key indicator: 23% of Democrats polled think that "public option" means "creating a national healthcare system like they have in Great Britain."

I know the President has had some trouble filling out the ranks of his top staff, but there's got to be someone in the West Wing capable of communicating with the average voter.  Why isn't anyone even trying?  Go reassign the guy busy writing inane Twitters!  Who would have thought that George W. Bush was better at anything policy-related than Obama, but here's one important example -- Bush was able to speak to Americans like they were three-year olds. 

In other words, please make it simple.  Twitter can help.

Hey, remember when Barack Obama was all, I know how the Facebook works, and Internet this and email that and here, let me communicate some relevant information to you!  Remember that?

Okay, now pretend, say, you have no idea what the hell this "public option" thing is.  And you want to know.  You want to be informed.  You want to get angry when the guy on cable news says something outrageous and, well, you want to know when he's saying something outrageous.  You think to yourself, that Obama -- he probably has a website that will tell me what this "public option" thing is.

So you switch on the Internet Explorer and click on over to the whitehouse.gov and there's a search box.  Confident that your civic curiosity is about to be satisfied, you type in "public option."  And this is what comes up.

First result: a list of people who attended a White House Forum on Health Reform.  No info on the reform, or ideas discussed, just some names.  Next result: a speech about the relationship between the United States and Turkey.  Third result: a speech about the relationship between the United States and Trinidad and Tobago.  Next: a transcript of a press briefing that begins with Robert Gibbs asking if people like his tie.  Followed by: a press release concerning the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility, and Disclosure Act of 2009.  Hey, you think to yourself, where's my relevant information?

You're about halfway through the results now.  The next one is another press briefing transcript, and -- oh good.  Robert Gibbs has something to say about the public option.  He says, "a strong public option is necessary to ensure competition."  Well, that's something?  Right?  And so on. 

But that Obama, he's always one huge step ahead of the game.  He's the Bobby Fischer of presidents.  He knew you'd go to the wrong website.  In fact, he probably has a special reform-specific website somewhere with all the relevant information you will ever want.  Why, you'll be deluged with so much information you'll need to build an ark to survive.

Sure enough, you find it.  HealthReform.Gov.  Brought to you by the Department of Health and Human Services.  And it has a search box.  So you type in "public option."  The excitement builds.  Enlightenment is on its way.  Ignoramus, no more!

One result.

Seriously?

And you have to scroll down for it.

President Barack Obama's health secretary told reporters that Obama strongly supports a national "public option" insurance plan. "The president supports a true public option that would be a (health) benefits program run by the government that can compete side-by-side with private insurers, and help hold down costs and offer some choice to consumers," said Kathleen Sebelius.

That's it!  That's everything the health reform website has to offer.

Sigh.  You turn on the TV and there's the cable news guy saying how the Democrats are wavering on the whole "public option" thing and might drop it altogether.  This is terrible! someone says.  No, it's smart! says someone else.  Whatever.  It's probably not that important, anyway.

Abram Sauer's piece in The Awl is really quite fantastic.

Many in the media and elsewhere are trying to understand what tea partiers want. That's a dead end. Mostly they just want to complain. This is not a group of listen and respond; this is a group of respond and respond. The worst of the Culture of My Opinion; Twitter in real life.

Remember this monstrosity?

It's the flowchart that John Boehner concocted to cast Obama's health insurance reform plans as frighteningly complicated. Well, nobody hates bad design quite like a graphic designer, and Robert Palmer of California decided to clean up Boehner's diagram. Palmer's version is, well, downright beautiful:

(Click pic for bigger versions)

Says Palmer:

Dear Rep. Boehner,

Recently, you released a chart purportedly describing the organization of the House Democrats' health plan. I think Democrats, Republicans, and independents agree that the problem is very complicated, no matter how you visualize it.

By releasing your chart, instead of meaningfully educating the public, you willfully obfuscated an already complicated proposal. There is no simple proposal to solve this problem. You instead chose to shout "12! 16! 37! 9! 24!" while we were trying to count something.

So, to try and do my duty both to the country and to information design (a profession and skill you have loudly shat upon), I have taken it upon myself to untangle your delightful chart. A few notes:

- I have removed the label referring to "federal website guidelines" as those are not a specific requirement of the Health and Human Services department. They are part of the U.S. Code. I should know: I have to follow them.

- I have relabeled the "Veterans Administration" to the "Department of Veterans' Affairs." The name change took effect in 1989.

- In the one change I made specifically for clarity, I omitted the line connecting the IRS and Health and Human Services department labeled "Individual Tax Return Information."

In the future, please remember that you have a duty to inform the public, and not willfully confuse your constituents.

Sincerely,

Robert Palmer

(via)