Connect with us

Kaiser Health News

Republicans Once Wanted Government out of Health Care. Trump Voters See It Differently.

Published

on

kffhealthnews.org – Noam N. Levey – 2025-02-27 04:00:00

Like many Americans who voted for Donald Trump, Jason Rouse hopes the president’s return will mean lower prices for gas, groceries, and other essentials.

But Rouse is looking to the federal government for relief from one particular pain point: high health care costs. “The prices are just ridiculous,” said Rouse, 53, a retired Michigan firefighter and paramedic who has voted for Trump three times. “I’d like to see a lower cap on what I have to pay out-of-pocket.”

Government regulation of health care prices used to be heresy for most Republicans. GOP leaders fiercely opposed the 2010 Affordable Care Act, which included government limits on patients’ costs. More recently, the party fought legislation signed by former President Joe Biden to cap prescription drug prices.

But as Trump begins his second term, many of the voters who sent him back to the White House welcome more robust government action to rein in a health care system many Americans perceive as out of control, polls show.

“That idea that government should just keep its hands off, even when things are tough for people, has kind of lost its sheen,” said Andrew Seligsohn, president of Public Agenda, a nonprofit that has studied public attitudes about government and health care.

“We’re wandering around the country with a set of old, outdated frameworks about what ordinary Democrats and ordinary Republicans like,” he said.

Republican voters strongly back federal limits on the prices charged by drug companies and hospitals, caps on patients’ medical bills, and restrictions on how health care providers can pursue people over medical debt.

Even Medicaid, the state-federal insurance program that Republican congressional leaders are eyeing to dramatically cut, is viewed favorably by many GOP voters, like Ashley Williamson.

Williamson, 37, a mother of five in eastern Tennessee who voted for Trump, said Medicaid provided critical assistance when her mother-in-law needed nursing home care. “We could not take care of her,” Williamson said. “It stepped in. It made sure she was taken care of.”

Williamson, whose own family gets coverage through her husband’s employer, said she would be very concerned by large cuts in Medicaid funding that could jeopardize coverage for needy Americans.

For years, Republican ideas about health care reflected a broad skepticism about government and fears that government would threaten patients’ access to physicians or lifesaving medicines.

“The discussions 10 to 15 years ago were all around choice,” said Christine Matthews, a Republican pollster who has worked for numerous GOP politicians, including former Maryland governor Larry Hogan. “Free market, not having the government limit or take over your health care.”

Matthews and fellow pollster Mike Perry recently convened and paid for several focus groups with Trump voters, including Rouse and Williamson, which KFF Health News observed.

Skepticism about government lingers among rank-and-file Republicans. And ideas such as shifting all Americans into a single government health plan, akin to “Medicare for All,” are still nonstarters for many GOP voters.

But as tens of millions of Americans are driven into debt by medical bills they don’t understand or can’t afford, many are reassessing their inclination to look to free markets rather than the government, said Bob Ward, whose firm, Fabrizio Ward, polled for Trump’s 2024 campaign.

“I think most people look at this and say the market is broken, and that’s why they’re willing for someone, anyone, to step in,” he said. “The deck is stacked against folks.”

In a recent national survey, Fabrizio Ward and Hart Research, which for decades has polled for Democratic candidates, found that Trump voters were more likely to blame health insurers, drug companies, and hospital systems than the government for high health care costs.

Sarah Bognaski, 31, an administrative assistant in upstate New York, is among the many Trump voters who say they resent profiteering by the health care industry. “I don’t think there is any reason a lot of the costs should be as high as they are,” Bognaski said. “I think it’s just out of pure greed.”

High health care costs have had a direct impact on Bognaski, who was diagnosed four years ago with Type 1 diabetes, a condition that makes her dependent on insulin. She said she’s ready to have the government step in and cap what patients pay for pharmaceuticals. “I’d like to see more regulation,” she said.

Charles Milliken, a retired auto mechanic in West Virginia, who said he backed Trump because the country “needs a businessman, not a politician,” expects the new president to go even further.

“I think he’s going to put a cap on what insurance companies can charge, what doctors can charge, what hospitals can charge,” said Milliken, 51, who recently had a heart attack that left him with more than $6,000 in medical debt.

Three-quarters of Trump voters back government limits on what hospitals can charge, Ward’s polling found.

And about half of Trump voters in a recent KFF poll said the new administration should prioritize expanding the number of drugs whose price is set through negotiation between the federal Medicare program and drug companies, a program started under the Biden administration.

Perry, who’s convened dozens of focus groups with voters about health care in recent years, said the support for government price caps is all the more remarkable since regulating medical prices isn’t at the top of most politicians’ agenda. “It seems to be like a groundswell,” he said. “They’ve come to this decision on their own, rather than any policymakers leading them there, that something needs to be done.”

Other forms of government regulation, such as limits on medical debt collections, are even more popular.

About 8 in 10 Republicans backed a $2,300 cap on how much patients could be required to pay annually for medical debt, according to a 2023 survey by Perry’s polling firm, PerryUndem. And 9 in 10 favored a cap on interest rates charged on medical debt.

“These are what I would consider no-brainers, from a political perspective,” Ward said.

But GOP political leaders in Washington have historically shown little interest in government limits on what patients pay for medical care. And as Trump and his allies in Congress begin shaping their health care agenda, many Republican leaders have expressed more interest in cutting government than in expanding its protections.

“There is oftentimes a massive disconnect,” Ward said, “between what happens in the caucuses on Capitol Hill and what’s happening at family tables across America.”


We’d like to speak with current and former personnel from the Department of Health and Human Services or its component agencies who believe the public should understand the impact of what’s happening within the federal health bureaucracy. Please message KFF Health News on Signal at (415) 519-8778 or get in touch here.

The post Republicans Once Wanted Government out of Health Care. Trump Voters See It Differently. appeared first on kffhealthnews.org

Kaiser Health News

Opioid Cash Grab: As Federal Funding Dries Up, States Turn to Settlement Money

Published

on

kffhealthnews.org – Aneri Pattani – 2025-02-25 04:00:00

Opioid Cash Grab: As Federal Funding Dries Up, States Turn to Settlement Money


At a recent Nevada legislative committee hearing, lawmakers faced off with members of the governor’s administration over how to fill gaping holes in the state’s upcoming budget.

At issue: whether opioid settlement money — paid by health care companies that were sued for fueling the opioid crisis and meant to help states abate addiction — should be funneled to two counties for a safety-net program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, which is aimed at helping low-income children and families.

Previous funding “will no longer be available after June 30, 2025,” the budget proposal says. By then, billions of dollars in covid-era relief from the federal government — including a set-aside for TANF, which can cover emergency aid, job training, child care, and more — is likely to have expired.

Recognizing both the need for and uptake of this assistance, Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo’s budget proposal directs $5 million in opioid settlement cash to shore up the program in the state’s most populous counties, Clark and Washoe.

The prospect of such trade-offs is smacking many states in the face as they embark on budget season.

Not only is the river of federal pandemic relief that flowed to public health, education, food assistance, child care, and more over the past few years drying up, but a deluge of actions from the Trump administration has thrown into question once-reliable federal funding for a myriad of social services and health care programs. Congressional Republicans have also threatened cuts to Medicaid, a joint federal and state health insurance program for many low-income people.

Together, these financial headwinds have left many states hunting for alternative funds to maintain crucial services.

Opioid settlement money can seem like an attractive option. More than $10 billion has landed in state and local government coffers in recent years and billions more are set to arrive over the next decade-plus.

But recovery advocates, family members who have lost loved ones to addiction, and legal experts say that money has a specific purpose: to address the ongoing addiction and overdose crisis.

Even if $5 million is a small portion of the hundreds of millions Nevada has received, some say spending it elsewhere sets a troubling precedent. Nevada Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager, a Democrat, raised this concern at the February hearing.

“There doesn’t seem to be a direct link to opioids” in the governor’s proposal directing these dollars to TANF, he said. Settlement money should not be used “to backfill budget accounts.”

Richard Whitley, director of the state’s Department of Health and Human Services, insisted at the hearing that this was an appropriate use of settlement dollars. The money flowing through TANF will help “relatives who are raising children whose parents are substance-abusing,” he said.

In addition, Elizabeth Ray, a spokesperson for the Republican governor, told KFF Health News that the money would help families at risk of losing custody of their children due to substance use, with the goal of keeping kids in their homes and “ultimately reducing the need for foster care placements.” Implementing this program through the state’s TANF system would “reduce start-up costs and implementation time,” she wrote in a statement.

But TANF is available to many families living in poverty and it was unclear how these dollars would be targeted to such a subset.

Similar budget conflicts have surfaced in Connecticut — whose Democratic governor, the CT Mirror reports, is asking lawmakers to redirect opioid settlement money to social services that were previously funded through other means, including federal dollars — and Arizona, whose legislature transferred $115 million in settlement money to the state prison system last year to help close a $1.4 billion budget deficit.

National recovery advocate Ryan Hampton expects to see more efforts like this nationwide.

“I have a very high level of fear that states are going to be tapping into these settlement dollars in every creative way they can to fill some of these budget shortfalls,” he said. “It’s a grave misuse of funds and one that is going to have dire consequences.”

Although national overdose deaths have declined recently, tens of thousands of Americans are still dying from overdoses each year. In a few states, including Nevada, such deaths increased in the 12 months leading up to September.

“The intent of these dollars is to save lives right now,” said Hampton, who is in recovery from opioid addiction and founded a Nevada-based recovery advocacy organization. He submitted a public comment opposing the Nevada governor’s budget proposal.

Hampton and other advocates worry that using opioid funds for services that, even if crucial, are only tangentially related to addiction risks a repeat of the tobacco settlement of the 1990s.

At that time, cigarette manufacturers agreed to pay state governments billions of dollars annually. Initially, states spent a chunk of that money on anti-smoking programs, said Meg Riordan, a vice president of research at the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, which tracks states’ spending on tobacco prevention programs.

But over time, states encountered budget crunches and many raided or dissolved trust funds they’d set up to protect tobacco money. Instead, they funneled the cash directly into their general funds and spent it on infrastructure projects and budget shortfalls.

“Once the funds start going somewhere else, there’s a risk that they won’t come back,” Riordan said.

Tobacco use remains a leading cause of preventable death in America.

The opioid settlements have more guardrails than the tobacco settlement did, but KFF Health News’ multiyear investigation found lax oversight and enforcement.

Nevada and Connecticut are among 13 states that have explicitly restricted the practice of supplantation, or using opioid settlement funds to replace existing funding streams.

Whitley, Nevada’s DHHS director, and the governor’s office have insisted that none of their proposed uses of settlement funds are examples of supplanting.

At the February hearing, Whitley repeatedly suggested that the budget proposal was misworded, creating a false impression. “We’ll clean that up with the language,” he said.

But he also emphasized the importance of settlement dollars as federal funding sources diminish. “As ARPA [the American Rescue Plan Act] goes away and other flexible funding goes away to address problems, this becomes one that really we have to rely on,” he said.

That perspective seems reasonable to JK Costello, director of behavioral health consulting for the Steadman Group, a company that he said is helping about a dozen local governments across the country administer the settlements.

Ideally settlement money adds to existing services, he said, but realistically, some safety-net programs, even if they don’t directly address addiction, can be a lifeline for people with opioid use disorder. If major cuts in federal spending imperil those programs, using settlement funds to save them could be worthwhile.

“Getting people into great treatment when their housing voucher is cut isn’t really that helpful,” Costello said. “Treatment isn’t going to work if they’re not able to eat or feed their kids.”

The tricky thing is that many community organizations that work directly on addiction and recovery issues are also feeling the crunch of expiring federal aid and expected federal program changes that would reduce their resources, Costello said. When everyone is strapped, deciding where limited settlement dollars can do the most good becomes increasingly challenging.

Some places presciently set aside opioid settlement funds in “emergency” or “sustainability” accounts that could be tapped for addiction services in case of declining federal aid. South Dakota has such a fund with more than $836,000, according to its 2024 opioid report. None of it has been used yet.

Kristen Pendergrass, vice president of state policy for the addiction-focused nonprofit Shatterproof, hopes states turn to rainy day funds first, before raiding settlement accounts.

Nevada has $1.23 billion in its rainy day fund, more than the national median, according to The Pew Charitable Trusts.

“It would be a slippery slope if we stop paying attention now” and allow settlement funds to be used for anything, Pendergrass said. “The money was won to remediate harms and save lives. It should be used that way.”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.

This article first appeared on KFF Health News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Read the full article

The post Opioid Cash Grab: As Federal Funding Dries Up, States Turn to Settlement Money appeared first on kffhealthnews.org

Continue Reading

Kaiser Health News

Montana’s Medicaid Expansion Conundrum – KFF Health News

Published

on

kffhealthnews.org – Sue O’Connell – 2025-02-24 04:00:00

SUMMARY: Montana’s Republican-led legislature and GOP governor are poised to extend the state’s Medicaid expansion program, covering 76,000 adults, beyond its June 30 expiration. With potential changes at the federal level, state lawmakers must act quickly. Discussions prioritize preparing for possible federal rollbacks, including cuts and work requirements. Recent legislation passed in the House to make expansion permanent, while other proposals suggest tightening eligibility and cost control. Although concerns over increased state costs loom if federal support decreases, some lawmakers argue against making adjustments based on uncertain federal policies. Bipartisan opposition has surfaced regarding proposals to curtail the expansion.

Read the full article

The post Montana’s Medicaid Expansion Conundrum – KFF Health News appeared first on kffhealthnews.org

Continue Reading

Kaiser Health News

Texas Measles Outbreak Nears 100 Cases, Raising Concerns About Undetected Spread

Published

on

kffhealthnews.org – Amy Maxmen – 2025-02-21 10:15:00

SUMMARY: A measles outbreak in West Texas has led to private school closures, overwhelming local health departments. Since the outbreak began three weeks ago, 90 cases have been confirmed, mostly in children under 18, with 16 hospitalizations. Health officials fear the outbreak will worsen, and some parents may be avoiding testing their children. The outbreak has been exacerbated by low vaccination rates, particularly in communities like Gaines, which has one of the lowest vaccination rates in Texas. Local officials are working to contain the virus through pop-up clinics, mobile testing, and educating schools, but the situation remains challenging.

Read the full article

The post Texas Measles Outbreak Nears 100 Cases, Raising Concerns About Undetected Spread appeared first on kffhealthnews.org

Continue Reading

Trending