The Kaiser Family Foundation initiated a family planning resource tracking project in 2013, adapting the methodology it has long used to track door government spending on HIV. Previous versions: November 2016 November 2015 November 2014 November 2013
Global Health PolicySee more about Global Health Policy
- view as grid
- view as list
Public Split On What to Do About the Health Care System, Though More Support Building on ACA Than Repealing It, Replacing with a GOP Alternative, or Creating a Single Payer Plan
Following Flint Water Crisis, Nearly Half Worry about Their Community’s Water Supply Almost Half of Public is Concerned about a Widespread Zika Outbreak in U.S. This Year The latest Kaiser Health Tracking Poll finds the public as divided as the remaining presidential candidates over their vision for the future of…
The February Kaiser Health Tracking Poll finds Americans are divided on possible changes to the current health care system with 36 percent of Americans saying policymakers should build on the existing law to improve affordability and access to care, 16 percent saying they would like to see the health care law repealed and not replaced, 13 percent saying the current law should be repealed and replaced with a Republican-sponsored alternative, and 24 percent saying the U.S. should establish guaranteed universal coverage through a single government plan. When asked specifically about universal coverage through a single government plan, half say they favor the idea while 43 percent say they oppose it, and some opinions swayed after hearing counterarguments. Opinions also differ depending on the terms used to describe the idea of expanding health insurance coverage to all Americans. This month’s poll also examine awareness and attitudes of the top health policy news stories- the unsafe lead levels in Flint Michigan’s water and the Zika virus outbreak.
The rapid spread of the Zika virus in the Latin America and the Caribbean region, the appearances of cases of Zika in the United States, and the association between Zika infection and serious birth defects has generated attention and concern among the public, policymakers, and the media. The WHO declared…
In the latest post in the Policy Insights series, Jen Kates, Josh Michaud, and Allison Valentine examine how rapid emergence of Zika virus in the Americas, and its association with a severe birth defect, impact women as some health officials are calling for women to avoid pregnancy even though they…
In the latest post in the Policy Insights series, Jen Kates, Josh Michaud, and Allison Valentine examine how rapid emergence of Zika virus in the Americas, and its association with a severe birth defect, impact women as some health officials are calling for women to avoid pregnancy even though they have limited reproductive health access in some of the affected countries. They also examine the role of the U.S. government in addressing Zika and its impact on women in Latin America and the Caribbean.
In this Policy Insight, Jen Kates and Josh Michaud look at the prospects for the future of U.S. global health policy, examining whether long-term bipartisan support may be tested during a time of political transition, and identifying key areas of consensus among policymakers and the public.
The U.S. Government and International Family Planning & Reproductive Health: Statutory Requirements and Policies
This fact sheet summarizes the major statutory requirements and policies pertaining to U.S. global family planning/reproductive health (FP/RH) efforts over time and identifies those currently in effect.
The Kaiser Family Foundation has tracked public opinion on global health issues in-depth since 2009. This most recent survey examines views on U.S. spending on health in developing countries and perceptions of barriers and challenges to making progress on the issue. Two-thirds of Americans (65 percent) overall and majorities of Democrats, independents and Republicans alike, say that the United States should play at least a major role in world affairs, including roughly one in five overall (18 percent) who say the U.S. should take the leading role. The survey also finds a general skepticism on the part of the American people when it comes to the effectiveness of global health spending, with seven in ten saying the “bang for the buck” of U.S. spending in this area is only fair or poor, and more than half believing that spending more on global health efforts won’t lead to meaningful progress (a share that has grown since 2012). Although many Americans have concerns about the value of global health spending, six in ten say the U.S. spends too little (26 percent) or about the right amount (34 percent) on global health, and three in ten say it spends too much. Most also recognize benefits to such spending, both for Americans at home as well as for people and communities in developing countries.
New Survey, Analysis Suggest a Growing Partisan Split About U.S. Government Engagement on Global Health
While U.S. global health programs have enjoyed bipartisan support in the past, a new survey of the public and findings from interviews with global health and foreign policy experts suggest a growing partisan divide, as the country gears up for the 2016 election. Half (53%) of Americans say the U.S.…