Summary

A Gallup poll shows 62% of Americans believe the government should ensure universal healthcare coverage—the highest support in over a decade.

While Democratic backing remains strong at 90%, support among Republicans and Independents has also grown since 2020.

Public frustration with the for-profit healthcare system has intensified following the arrest of a suspect in the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, reportedly motivated by anger at the industry.

Recent controversies, including Anthem’s rollback of anesthesia coverage cuts, and debates over Medicare privatization highlight ongoing dissatisfaction with the system.

  • @squirrelwithnut
    link
    123 hours ago

    Sounds like 62% of Americans should have voted for the candidate that might have actually made that possible.

    • @iMastari
      link
      541 minutes ago

      Bernie Sanders tried but did not get enough votes when he ran for president because the government paying for your healthcare is apparently bad for some reason.

    • @BeMoreCareful
      link
      English
      33 hours ago

      Might is doing some heavy lifting in that sentence.

      • @InternetCitizen2
        link
        English
        62 hours ago

        Its important to make incremental progress. Kamala was a standard dem like Joe. Still they are open to hearing good ideas; compared to Trump.

  • @Shardikprime
    link
    3
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    I don’t think this has ever been contended. I believe the issue dividing camps is in the how

  • Lord Wiggle
    link
    44 hours ago

    Why though, many of them voted for Trump, next month antivax RFK Jr. will be health minister. Trump has claimed a healthcare plan will be ready “next week” for the past 8 years. People wanted Obamacare gone. So what do you want? Healthcare or no healthcare?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    Wish granted. $100k deductible for all. GiGa subsidies for insurance corporations.

    “We did it Patrick, we did Healthcare reform!” - democrats probably

  • @crystalmerchant
    link
    3623 hours ago

    Not “coverage”, “affordable coverage”. I don’t want coverage through whatever capitalist exploit insurance company. I want affordable healthcare without lifesucking middlemen

    • Ellen_musk_ox
      link
      fedilink
      English
      33 hours ago

      The coverage the fire department provides is affordable. And my Library. And my streets. And the storm water system. And K-12.

  • katy ✨
    link
    fedilink
    371 day ago

    and yet a good portion of y’all voted for trump and the republicans…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      4
      edit-2
      12 hours ago

      Only 23% of people living in the USA voted for Trump

      That is 65% more than the percentage of people that, according to this post, dont want health coverage for everyone

    • Dragon Rider (drag)
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1117 hours ago

      And a lot of people who want healthcare didn’t bother voting.

      Your inactions have consequences.

      • @normalexit
        link
        34 hours ago

        Tbf the Democrats aren’t particularly interested in addressing healthcare either… the money has to be removed from the system for it to improve. It is currently working as designed.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        78 hours ago

        “but I couldn’t vote for the Democrats in good faith!!!”

        Well now you’ve helped elect Trump. Hope that aligns with your morals!

        (General “you”, not you specifically)

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          5 hours ago

          Aren’t you concerned at all with the large number of people that are under represented by their choices in the voting booth?

          State level electoral reform will give more political parties the chance to be involved in future elections with no chance of a spoiler effect.

          People would be free to vote for their preferred candidate, safe in the knowledge that their vote would still be counted against the republicans.

          Who could say no to more democracy? Who could possibly be against ensuring their fellow country men/women/and more are fully represented to the best of our ability? Republicans? Yes, of course they are against democracy. How about the democratic party? Do they support democracy?

          More political parties means more chances to beat the Republicans. More political parties means more people are involved in politics. More people being involved in politics statistically means more votes for the democratic party.

          Why is the DNC saying no to these easy extra votes? Why wouldn’t democrats use every tool at their disposal to defeat the republicans?

          Perhaps they view their poltical party to be more important then the nation state itself. Party over country, at all costs.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            14 hours ago

            Aren’t you concerned at all with the large number of people that are under represented by their choices in the voting booth?

            Yes, but they should still vote. Anyone who didn’t vote decided that they’re okay with Trump. Generally, anyone not okay with Trump who didn’t vote is either stupid, ignorant, or lying about not being okay with Trump being elected.

            State level electoral reform will give more political parties the chance to be involved in future elections with no chance of a spoiler effect.

            Yeah, I agree. But you don’t have that. So we work with the system we have.

            Who could say no to more democracy? Who could possibly be against ensuring their fellow country men/women/and more are fully represented to the best of our ability? Republicans? Yes, of course they are against democracy. How about the democratic party? Do they support democracy?

            If you think that Trump is worse than the Democrat candidate, then you vote Democrat. Deciding not to vote doesn’t give you more democracy, it gives you less.

            More political parties means more chances to beat the Republicans. More political parties means more people are involved in politics. More people being involved in politics statistically means more votes for the democratic party.

            Not with FPTP. I’m in Canada, where we realistically have a 3-party system. What happens in some parts of the country (including Federally) is the Left vote gets split and the Right vote often ends up winning.

            Why is the DNC saying no to these easy extra votes? Why wouldn’t democrats use every tool at their disposal to defeat the republicans?

            If it were that simple and easy, they’d do it. But it’s not. If the Right doesn’t split too, and if FPTP isn’t replaced with something better, then the Left has just screwed itself out of ever being elected again.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1123 hours ago

      The average American is stupid and thus easily confused. Hell, half of us read at a 6th grade level…

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    517 hours ago

    What % of Congress agrees? There’s lots of stuff the public wants that Congress doesn’t get lobbied to get. Health insurance companies spent $113 million on lobbying Congress JUST in 2024. Until the public can pony up that kind of money, Congress is going to listen to their masters.

  • @Maggoty
    link
    1923 hours ago

    The midterm campaign should literally just be, “Death to Health Insurance, Public Health Now”.

    No other issues. Campaign on that as a mandate. If we can only change one big thing at a time then we should only promise one big thing.

    • @FuzzyDog
      link
      13 hours ago

      Some of Tim Walz’s largest donors are health insurance and professionals. They have financial incentives to keep the status quo. With Democrats like this, who needs Republicans?

      • @Maggoty
        link
        12 hours ago

        Walz doesn’t have a seat anymore. And what do the Democrats have to lose by actually moving left?

        • @FuzzyDog
          link
          12 hours ago

          I’d say the reason the Democrats won’t move left is because the party elite have a lot of donors they’d piss off by actually supporting serious leftist economic policy.

          Maybe I’m wrong. Hell, I’d love to be wrong. But I’ve sort of lost hope that the democratic party is ever going to deliver.

          • @Maggoty
            link
            138 minutes ago

            Yeah I get that. But it would be the kind of move that shakes up losing all of the swing states, the popular vote, and both legislative bodies. Political parties want to get elected and “normal” campaigning isn’t doing it anymore. A few more losses like this and there won’t be a democratic party.

      • @Shardikprime
        link
        23 hours ago

        Why even complain? We all know Dems will vote blue no matter who next cycle

        • @FuzzyDog
          link
          12 hours ago

          Well tbf the reason I’m complaining is that the status quo sucks and isn’t going to get better, even if the Dems sweep next election.

      • @Maggoty
        link
        12 hours ago

        The Democrats have the infrastructure. Screw the big donors. Run an actual grass roots campaign. It’s not like they can do any worse at this point.

    • @witten
      link
      823 hours ago

      Historically we can change zero big things at a time. But I agree with you. Our rate of change has got to change. (Mathematics/physics joke goes here.)

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      161 day ago

      They have some form of decent coverage through work and no one in their personal sphere is overly sick to the point of causing them pain. They wish to block others from getting adequate access least they lose some advantage over them. They’re squarely in the F U I have mine camp. Of course as soon as something happens and theirs isn’t good enough, they’ll have a change of heart, while everyone else still in their camp holds them down.

      • bitwolf
        link
        fedilink
        523 hours ago

        “Muh tax dollars cant be wasted on someone else’s health”

        Proceeds to vote for their tax dollars to be wasted on bailing out another business

  • 🐋 Color 🍁 ♀
    link
    fedilink
    English
    261 day ago

    It’s good that the majority support it, but it’s also concerning that 38% didn’t. The USA should have universal healthcare. I don’t want to say where I live or where I don’t live but if you live in a country which doesn’t have universal healthcare I genuinely feel bad for you.

    • @LifeInMultipleChoice
      link
      20
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      It’s because they don’t understand how the system works. Most people I know who are against it always go straight to “how could we pay for it”. Not understanding that countries that do it work directly with the manufacturers of the medicine and hospitals so they get much better rates. 2022 showed 6500 per person for full coverage in Canada. 12,500 per person in the U.S… with no coverage for the most part.

      We know some Republican candidates know this as well, which is why Desantis promised lower health care costs in Florida by cutting a deal with Canada to import their lower cost drugs by trying to skirt buying them from the companies the are giving tax breaks to and not addressing.

      Years later… No drugs have been shipped from Canada and no deals were settled because Canada doesn’t want to ship their drugs to Florida and have shortages.

      Much like an insurance company can say, I’m only going to pay $150 for that MRI instead of the $1,600 quoted, the government can do the same, and instead of lining the pockets of middlemen, it comes back as savings to the people. In general I believe I saw if we implemented a plan like Canadas, the average American would save 20% on their income taxes, and have full coverage. Meaning no longer having co-pays, deductibles, out of network doctors, etc. etc.

      To me it just says, if you want further specialists outside of the ones provided, you can pay for them just like you do now. And the government could pitch in only the cost that they would pay towards a standard patient procedure.

      • @Maggoty
        link
        623 hours ago

        “Medicare for all” became a slogan because it’s insanely more efficient than private healthcare. And we’ll pay for it with taxes, the same way we pay for anything. But if your taxes do go up, it will be by less than you were paying previously, so people are still saving money. They can only use the most reductive and cliche arguments because the evidence is all against them. A public health plan would be cheaper and provide more care.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 day ago

        I’m wondering if this is like the British NHS and reports that “NHS pays 5 gazillion pounds for <med>” and the reality is we’re paying a fiver, or something.

        • @LifeInMultipleChoice
          link
          31 day ago

          Over 17% of our GDP goes to healthcare. Around 4.5 trillion dollars a year last I saw.

          $4,500,000,000,000. And the people pay out of pocket still for most everything they need.

          For reference, we pay more money than any other country besides China makes in an entire year.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    361 day ago

    And the other 40% rely on the help and care of others every day while blabbering on about being “self-made” which actually just means “selfish asshole”.

    • @IhaveCrabs111
      link
      51 day ago

      America just voted to allow Ramaswamy and Elon to cut government by 75%. This will absolutely include healthcare. What will happen to that 75% that was under government? It will go to the private sector obviously. Now they can can become even richer. Holy shit Ramaswamy is like a real life Shooter McGavin

      • @Maggoty
        link
        123 hours ago

        They need Congress to slaughter their sacred cows for that to happen.

      • @Bytemeister
        link
        English
        11 day ago

        Thats not going to happen.

        The only thing they love more than bitching about government overspending, is benefiting from it. The whole DOGE will have less power in the government than the meme it’s based on, and the people who will run it are looking to line their pockets with your money for the least effort on their part.

        • katy ✨
          link
          fedilink
          11 day ago

          elon and ramaswamy are idiots sure but republicans will absolutely gut medicaid (first since it’s easier to take from disabled people than seniors) and the aca.

          • @Bytemeister
            link
            English
            21 day ago

            They wont gut Medicaid, they’re just going to force it to take on huge debt while they cut taxes for the 1% and then say that it’s Democrat’s fault for overspending.

            • @Maggoty
              link
              123 hours ago

              Naw that one they will. They will straight up sell it to a company like UHC.

  • Flying Squid
    link
    1751 day ago

    How many of those 62% voted for the guy who wants to let insurance companies deny even harder?

  • @jordanlund
    link
    105
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Here’s the thing… having health coverage doesn’t mean jack crap.

    I’ve told my story before, it got best of’d on reddit and such, but it bears repeating why we need Universal Health Care:

    tl;dr lost my doctors due to an insurance change 4 weeks in to a 6 week open heart surgery recovery…

    In 2018, my company was in the process of being sold. No big deal, above my paygrade, nothing for me to worry about.

    Then I got sick right after Thanksgiving. Really bad heartburn that lasted 5 days. It wasn’t heartburn. I had a heart attack. 12/3/2018 I had open heart surgery, single bypass, and that started a 6 week recovery clock.

    On 1/1/2019, the sale of my company closed and we officially had new owners. I also officially lost all of my doctors because the new employers don’t do Kaiser in Oregon. They do it in WA and CA, but each state has to be negotiated and they never had presence here.

    1/2/2019 I start working with Aetna to find doctors, hospitals, etc. Beyond the cardiologist I need a new pharmacist, podiatrist, diabetes care and a general “doctor” doctor.

    Fortunately, my new employer is a big enough fish, they have their own concierge at Aetna and she gets me into the Legacy Health system.

    On 1/3/2019 I start developing complications, but I don’t know it at the time. It starts with a cough. All the time. Then, when I try to lay down, like to sleep, I’m drowning, literally choking and gagging.

    The concierge and I try to get an appointment, we’re told 2-3 months. For a dude still recovering from open heart surgery? Best they could do is 2 weeks. 1/14/2019.

    I can’t lay down to sleep so I buy a travel neck pillow and sleep sitting up.

    I get to see the new doctor at the “official” end of the 6 week recovery. He doesn’t know me or my history so he wants to run tests.

    I’m sitting at home playing video games and waiting on test results when the call comes… Congestive heart failure. Report to the ER immediately.

    My heart developed an irregular heart beat, which caused fluid build up in my chest. They admitted me and were getting ready to pull fluid off me.

    “What happened to your foot?”

    “I dunno, what happened to my foot? I can’t feel my feet.”

    Remember when I said I was sitting around playing video games, waiting for test results? Yeah, my foot was touching a radiator and I didn’t know it. 3rd degree burns, first four toes. Pinkie was spared.

    So I’m in the hospital a week. I lose 4 liters of water per day. 50 lbs. of water. No wonder I was drowning. Regular bandage changes.

    So now I’m facing two procedures. Electrocardio version to fix my heart, skin grafts to fix my toes.

    This whole time the new insurance covers 80% until I reach the out of pocket maximum of $6,500. Then it will cover 100%.

    The old insurance? ER visit for heart attack, hospital admission, 8 days in the hospital, open heart bypass… $250. $100 for meds and all the oxygen bottles I can carry.

    So we hit the out of pocket maximum almost immediately. My wife had a problem with her foot running through the Seattle airport. The doctor who did her toe amputation was decided to be out of network so that was another $1,100.


    I was never unemployed through all this. I had enough vacation and sick time banked to cover it. Cobra didn’t apply. Continuity of care didn’t apply because the new hospital DID have a cardiac department. Buying my old insurance wasn’t an option, it was far too expensive without employer backing. Income is too high for assistance (thank god) and I took steps to max out my HSA account, which is good because we drained it twice.

    Three 1 week hospital stays (2 for me, 1 for my wife), multiple ER visits, two more major medical procedures… That would be enough to break most people even with good insurance.

    So if you read any of that, let me ask you something… Why does the quality of my health care and my quality of life have to depend on who I work for and what insurance companies they choose to work with?

    • @Modern_medicine_isnt
      link
      21 day ago

      Aside from agreeing with you. Question. Why didn’t cobra apply? I would have thought it could. And did you have an option to pay the full cost of coverage out of pocket for any length of time? Not that any of this should matter, just curious in case I, or anyone I know, ends up in the same situation.

      • @btaf45
        link
        81 day ago

        . Why didn’t cobra apply?

        Because he didn’t leave his company. His company changed their insurance.

        • @Modern_medicine_isnt
          link
          119 hours ago

          I thought it was more about the insurance than the company. :( it should be.

    • @Allonzee
      link
      28
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      I vote blue out of harm reduction, but don’t kid yourself.

      The single greatest acheivement Democrats crow about was a healthcare band-aid originally conceived by the Heritage Foundation and instituted by a Republican governor designed to further enshrine private, for profit insurers like United Healthcare cut in as the entire point.

      When the people screamed “Help us left wing from this for profit deathcare hell! Here’s a supermajority!” they protected the profit motive in what gets covered and declared victory.

      They can make excuses, there’s always several, but as the decades go by and nothing changes, advocating patience starts to sound like “well just be patient, maybe my nepo great grandkids will magically decide to start being civil and equitable with your peasant great grandkids, lol.”

      • @a9cx34udP4ZZ0
        link
        101 day ago

        There is no planet on which UHC or anyone else wanted to be forced to cover patients with pre-existing conditions at anything resembling a reasonable cost.

        Do I think Obama gave up way too much in negotiations? Absolutely. Do I think you’re a moron if you think this was “all part of private insurance’s master plan”? Absolutely.

        There’s a reason Trump keeps talking about “replacing” Obamacare. And it’s not just his ego, private insurance wants it gutted.

        • @Allonzee
          link
          6
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          For profit insurers absolutely did, because they did the math and knew the mandate would more than make up for the new rules, and it did, hence the ever rising profits since. I’m sure neoliberals and Republicans don’t see that as a problem because herp derp it’ll trickle down lol, but everyone else correctly does.

          That was the supposed trade, but surprise surprise, for all the protections the ACA proponents claim it enshrines, they still find way to initially deny 1 out of 7 claims, and now some with AI.

          Great deal, a larger captive customer base without a public option, and still denying swaths of claims using technicalities and loopholes their floors of attorneys never stopped working on in bad faith since. Because publicly traded companies never, ever operate in good faith towards their customers, there’s always an angle to goose earnings beyond what was overtly agreed to.

          It helped some people, but it didn’t address the core problem of American Healthcare that makes it the most expensive on Earth with some of the worst outcomes in the developed world at all: the profit motive middleman dictating who gets what care instead of doctors. The more Americans who prepared for illness and paid them in good faith that they murder, the more gold in their pockets, to the applause of the profiteers on Wall Street.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          31 day ago

          Just to be clear, the primary negotiator for ACA was Biden, not Obama. What did he do? Biden immediately gave away the public option as a show of good faith so they could pass something with bipartisan compromise (which always means corpos are screwing the people.) The result was pretty much what we have today, 30mil extra Americans funneled into the pockets of private insurance companies for worse care at greater expense.

          It sounds like you’re saying scrapping this and letting private insurers go back to not covering people with pre-existing conditions is Trump’s plan. Hope you’re wrong, that would be exceedingly cruel.

          There shouldn’t be a profit motive in denying people healthcare - in fact healthcare should be a basic human right we guarantee to everyone in the richest country in the world, which means private insurers have no business in this business.

          • @btaf45
            link
            31 day ago

            What did he do? Biden immediately gave away the public option as a show of good faith

            Nope. We only lost the public option because of Joe Lieberman saying he wouldn’t support it and we needed all 60 Dem senators to vote for it.

    • GHiLA
      link
      fedilink
      21 day ago

      Rioting, violence, maybe a war, who knows, societal collapse? It’s all extremely interesting if not insanely frightening.

      There’s tons in store for us over the next little while.

      Here’s hoping the raving gangs of warlords that inherit the earth have a Morpheus type figure among them who is benevolent.