The Debate Over Federal Medicaid Cuts: Perspectives of Medicaid Enrollees Who Voted for President Trump and Vice President Harris

The Republican-led Congress is considering plans to cut Medicaid to help pay for tax cuts, with the House budget resolution targeting $880 billion or more in potential reductions to federal Medicaid spending. Medicaid is the primary program providing comprehensive health and long-term care to one in five people living in the U.S and accounts for nearly $1 out of every $5 spent on health care. Reductions in Medicaid could have implications for enrollees as well as plans, providers, and state budgets. While there are several policy options under consideration in Congress to achieve savings, it is not clear how much support there is from Republicans (including President Trump) about these specific policies. The discussions in Congress come at a time when support for the Medicaid program continues to be strong. According to KFF polling, Medicaid is viewed favorably by a large majority (77%) of the public and an even larger share of those on the program (84%). As Congress considers reducing Medicaid spending, nearly half (46%) of all people and nearly two-thirds (62%) of Medicaid enrollees believe the federal government is currently not spending enough on the program.

To better understand the experiences of Medicaid enrollees and their perceptions of potential changes to the program, KFF conducted five virtual focus groups in January, including three groups with participants who had voted for President Trump in the 2024 election and two groups with participants who had voted for Vice President Harris. Focus group participants were asked about their experiences with their Medicaid coverage, views on government’s role in health care, and perceptions of the recent election. Participants were also asked for their reaction to current proposals to reduce federal spending on Medicaid and impose work requirements. Despite differences in who they voted for in November 2024, participants had consistently favorable experiences with Medicaid and concerns with potential cuts to the program. Key findings from our groups include the following:

  • Many Trump and Harris voters said that their top voting issue in the 2024 election was the economy, though some Trump voters cited immigration, and some Harris voters cited women’s rights as their top issues, and most participants said they did not recall hearing about changes to health care programs (including Medicaid) during the campaign. Most participants said the government has a role to play in making health care more affordable and accessible, but some Trump voters argued the private sector does a better job of controlling costs. When asked about fraud in the Medicaid program, many participants said they thought fraud exists, but views differed on whether it is a major issue and what was the primary cause. Several Trump voters believed the problem was due to people enrolled who were not eligible; however, other participants, including both Trump and Harris voters countered that state verification procedures prevent individuals from defrauding the program on a large scale and that providers and insurance companies were more likely the main source of program fraud.
  • At the time of the focus groups, most participants had not heard about proposals to reduce federal spending on Medicaid, and while most did not know why the reductions were proposed, some Trump voters suggested they were part of the crackdown on illegal immigration and aimed at removing undocumented immigrants from the program (undocumented immigrants are not eligible for federally-funded Medicaid). Participants opposed cutting Medicaid funding to pay for tax cuts that they did not believe would benefit them. Both Trump and Harris voters expressed fears that these changes would jeopardize the program, take away access to health care, result in worse health outcomes, and increase out-of-pocket costs. A few Trump voters did not believe Trump would follow through on the cuts to Medicaid because they believed he understood their financial struggles.
  • Both Trump and Harris voters valued their Medicaid coverage and the access to health care services, mental health services, and medications for themselves and their children it provides. Participants also valued Medicaid because it helps to protect them from financial disaster, alleviates stress, improves health outcomes and often supports their ability to work. Participants said losing Medicaid would “be devastating” and lead to serious consequences for their physical and mental health and exacerbate pre-existing financial challenges.
  • If work requirements were introduced to Medicaid, participants who were working generally felt confident in their ability to meet the requirements; however, they worried about the burden of monthly reporting requirements when those were described to them. Many participants across parties noted that access to treatment for chronic conditions, including prescription medications and mental health treatment, were key in helping to support their ability to work. More Trump voters supported a work requirement but some who were not working were convinced they would qualify for an exemption. Other participants, including both Trump and Harris voters, who were not currently working felt they would face challenges in meeting the requirements. Those who were not working said they wanted to work (and many had been previously working for many years) but were generally unable to because of disability or because they were caring for young children or a sick parent.
  • Both Trump and Harris voters wanted policymakers to focus on improving Medicaid instead of cutting it. For example, some participants said they would like to see enhanced dental benefits, increased doctor availability, and fewer prior authorization requests. Focus group participants wanted policymakers to consider the implications of federal cuts to Medicaid for people, their health, financial stability, and ability to be productive members of society.

General Situation

Most focus group participants were experiencing financial challenges and were managing an array of physical and/or mental health conditions. Medicaid eligibility requirements mean those on the program, by definition, have low incomes. Most participants described struggling with high food prices and noted the past few years have been financially difficult. Some focus group participants reported difficulties with the current job market or described injuries or disabilities that made it difficult to find employment. Focus group participants were managing an array of health conditions including high blood pressure, diabetes, physical disabilities, chronic pain, asthma, and anxiety and depression. Some were managing more complex and potentially disabling conditions, such as cystic fibrosis and hidradenitis suppurativa (HS). Along with managing their own conditions, some participants were also caring for parents or other family members in nursing care.

Times are tough right now. You know, everything’s overpriced and no one’s working and can’t afford anything and my health is terrible, so it’s kind of tough times. – 50-year-old, White female (Trump voter, Nevada)

Experiences with Medicaid

Participants valued their Medicaid coverage and the access to health care services, mental health services, and medications for themselves and their children it provides. Along with regular physical exams for themselves and their children, focus group participants reported using Medicaid to see specialists, access mental health and substance use disorder treatment, receive necessary surgeries, and get prescription medications. Some participants with health conditions requiring frequent visits with specialists or multiple daily medications said they could not imagine day-to-day life without Medicaid.

Doctor’s visits, I take 30 pills a day, so it covers all that, which is nice. I see the ENT like every other week.– 35-year-old, White female (Trump voter, North Carolina)

I’m really grateful for it. When I first got on it, it covered for 90 days for me to go to a rehab and then it has covered my prescriptions with no questions asked. – 33-year-old, White female (Trump voter, Arizona)

Participants described Medicaid coverage as affordable, noting that it protects them from financial disaster and alleviates stress. Participants expressed gratitude that they could access necessary medications with little to no cost sharing, and in general were appreciative that they had no premiums and low out-of-pocket costs. Participants said that having Medicaid reduces stress related to unexpected medical costs. Prior to enrolling in Medicaid, many participants had been uninsured and had gone long periods of time without seeing a doctor. These participants were grateful that they were now able to access regular care. Those who had previously looked into or been enrolled in private insurance described Medicaid as a more affordable source of coverage.

I never took insurance from where I was employed at because it was always so expensive. By the time they would take out the money, there wasn’t much of a check. So I was basically gonna be paying for insurance, which I know a lot of people have to do. Went a while without anything so Medicaid’s been really great as far as helping me out with doctor appointments, used to help me out with dental. I used it a little bit for mental therapy when I lost my daughter unexpectedly. So it’s been good. – 61-year-old, White female (Trump voter, Kentucky)

While participants said Medicaid was generally working well for them, some would like to see improvements, including enhanced dental benefits, increased doctor availability, and fewer prior authorization requests. Participants noted that it can be difficult to find doctors accepting Medicaid and frustrating to navigate prior authorizations for needed care. Other complaints included high turnover rates among providers at clinics that accept Medicaid and certain prescriptions not being covered by the program. Many focus group participants also wished that their state either covered dental benefits or had more generous dental benefits.

There’s not like every doctor available, thankfully the doc I had before, I still am on the same doctor ’cause he is under my Medicaid, which is good. But there’s not coverage everywhere and certain things, so that’s kind of, you know, slight disadvantage there. – 59-year-old, White male (Harris voter, Pennsylvania)

Views on Government’s Role in Health Care

Participants felt that being able to easily access affordable health care services is essential to ensuring they can work and lead productive lives. Across voting parties, most participants felt that everyone deserved access to affordable health coverage, with many saying that people should not have to pay for what they described as “life or death” care. Some participants noted that being able to access health care services helps them to work, be more productive, and contribute to society. However, a few Trump voters talked about the need for people to take responsibility for their health suggesting that they did not believe health care was a right for everyone.

Healthcare is a right because you want the American people to work. So in order for the American people to work, they need to be healthy to work. – 52-year-old, Black female (Trump voter, Pennsylvania)

If we’re healthier, it makes our country healthier and we produce. If you got a bunch of sick people that have no insurance, all you’re gonna do is cause debt, death, and god knows what else. – 56-year-old, White male (Harris voter, Ohio)

Most participants said the government has a role to play in making health care more affordable and accessible; however, some Trump voters opposed government playing too large a role in running the health care system. Both Trump and Harris voters said the government has a role in making coverage more affordable, but some Trump voters noted that they felt private businesses may be more effective at keeping health care costs affordable than the federal government. More Harris voters (and some Trump voters) felt that the government should play a role in helping everyone access health care and in making the system work better. Both Trump and Harris voters compared the U.S. to other countries with nationalized health care systems, though takeaways from these comparisons differed. Some Trump voters referenced long wait times for care in other countries as evidence for why they did not think the U.S. should move to a socialized medicine model. Others (including both Trump and Harris voters) noted that the government should offer free care for all citizens, similar to other countries.

It should be available for everybody. And it should be affordable. Because not everybody can afford the same thing… it’s usually the private sector does a better job with lowering costs and making things affordable and having options for people, not the government. I pay enough already in taxes that I don’t need to control anymore what I have to pay taxes for. – 45-year-old, Black male (Trump voter, Kentucky)

It shouldn’t be an issue in a country this rich that people are going without it. I mean, it shouldn’t even be a question. It should be cut and dry. And we look at other countries, you know, it’s something they already have that the citizens have. And for a country that’s rich as America, it shouldn’t be your money or your life. You shouldn’t have to choose between medicine or buying food, or medicine and paying your life bill. It’s a right of an American citizen. – 61-year-old, Black female (Harris voter, Kentucky)

Election Experiences

Many Trump and Harris voters said that their top voting issue in the 2024 election was the economy. Most Trump and Harris voters cast their ballot based on economic concerns and which candidate they thought would address their pocketbook issues, including housing costs and grocery prices. Some Trump voters noted that their standard of living was better under the first Trump administration while some Harris voters were worried that Trump would cut benefits. Immigration was a top voting issue for some Trump voters, especially for those living in border states. A few Harris voters cited women’s issues and preserving democracy as the motivations for their votes.

When Trump was in office from ‘16 to ‘20, you know, my standard of living was better than it is now. – 43-year-old, White male (Trump voter, Pennsylvania)

Someone who’s not about to cut food stamps, cut housing, cut WIC, cut many stuff that we everyday people need. – 45-year-old, Black female (Harris voter, Ohio)

Most participants said they did not recall hearing either candidate mention changes to health care programs (including Medicaid) during the campaign. Because other issues, including immigration and the economy, dominated the campaign, most participants were unaware of either candidate’s health care priorities and any policy changes they planned to make. Some Harris voters recalled Harris discussing women’s health care and abortion access, and a couple of participants said they heard that Trump would either try to get rid of Obamacare (the Affordable Care Act) or would fix it. However, for the most part, health care issues were not a dominant factor in the election for these voters.

I didn’t hear a peep about healthcare. Nope. It’s immigration for me. –56-year-old, White male (Trump voter, Arizona)

I think Kamala talked about healthcare like for women’s rights a lot. I feel like that was kind of one of her main points… I had never really heard Donald Trump talk about it. I heard about it in like Project 2025. – 25-year-old Black female (Harris voter, Pennsylvania)

Proposals to Reduce Federal Medicaid Spending

At the time of the focus groups, most participants had not heard about proposals to reduce federal spending on Medicaid, but Trump and Harris voters had different opinions on why the cuts were being proposed. No Trump voters and only a very few Harris voters said they were aware of proposals in Congress to reduce federal spending on Medicaid, and many were surprised to hear of the proposed cuts. Although most participants were not sure why the spending reductions had been proposed, some Trump voters theorized that it was part of the administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration and an effort to remove undocumented immigrants from the program (undocumented immigrants are not eligible for federally-funded Medicaid). A few Trump voters did not think Trump would follow through on the cuts because they believed he understood their financial struggles. Some Harris voters felt the proposals reflected a pattern by Republican lawmakers to reduce benefits for poor Americans.

I’m a border state, so we’ve had so many illegals coming through and the previous administration they got all free social services. So I imagine that’s part of the thing that we were giving Medicaid to people who have been here hours and stuff. And so it’s one way to prevent or to get some cost cutting. – 59-year-old, Hispanic female (Trump voter, Arizona)

Their goal is to make sure that we don’t have anything. So why they’re taking everything outta everything because the rich wanna get richer. – 58-year-old, Black female (Harris voter, Ohio)

I think Trump knows that people are struggling right now, and I don’t think he’s gonna do, at least not right now, cut anything Medicaid because he just knows people’s financial problems right now. – 45-year-old, Hispanic male (Trump voter, Arizona)

When asked specifically about fraud and abuse in Medicaid, some participants across both groups believed there is fraud and abuse in the Medicaid program, but opinions were mixed on whether the source of the fraud is people enrolled who should not be or providers and insurance companies taking advantage of the system. The Trump administration has tied current actions to reduce federal spending to eradicating fraud, waste, and abuse within government programs. Many focus group participants agreed there was fraud in the Medicaid program; however, some described fraud as a major problem in the program and others reasoned there is fraud in Medicaid because there is fraud everywhere. When identifying the source of fraud in Medicaid, several Trump voters believed fraud was primarily due to people enrolled who were not eligible. Other participants, including both Trump and Harris voters countered that it would be too difficult for individuals to defraud the program on a large scale, describing how their states verify their income and other information at application and renewal. Some participants believed that providers and insurance companies overcharging the program or billing for services they did not provide were to blame rather than individuals. These participants offered examples of providers in their states who were convicted of fraud.

Fraud is probably pretty prevalent, just like it was in everything else… People can abuse anything, so. If they have access to that, I’m sure there’s been some fraud over the years with Medicaid. – 56-year-old, White male (Trump voter, Arizona)

I think it’s organizations more than people. I think it’s kind of hard to defraud with Medicaid. I mean, what are you doing going and asking for prescriptions and then selling them on the side? I mean, I don’t know how you would or having a high paying job and pretending you don’t work. I mean everything is available now on the internet. Everything’s tied in. Like me, our local Medicaid in Arizona was able to access my paychecks even before I saw what I was going to get one time they had it already on their screen. – 59-year-old, Hispanic female (Trump voter, Arizona)

Most of the fraud that I’ve heard about comes from the actual provider billing for things they didn’t do. – 45-year-old, Black female (Harris voter, North Carolina)

Both Trump and Harris voters opposed cuts to the program fearing that Medicaid spending reductions would jeopardize the program and take away access to health care for poor people. Likely because of their reliance on the Medicaid program, participants opposed reducing spending on Medicaid, and many used strong language to describe the dire consequences of making major cuts to the program. Some participants predicted people would lose coverage if cuts were made to the program, and one participant suggested the economy would suffer because many of the people currently on the program would no longer be able to get the care they need. Others anticipated that states would cut benefits, particularly for prescription medications and mental health care, and that providers would stop participating in the program.

We shouldn’t have to suffer because of somebody wanting to propose cuts to it, you know, because we, we didn’t do anything. So, you know, let it, it can come from somewhere else. I just, I would oppose it. – 60-year-old, Black male (Trump voter, Missouri)

People would be unable to take care of themselves and be healthy and get mental health issues taken care of, to get vision and dental; people would suffer. They wouldn’t be able to work. And the economy would suffer. – 55-year-old, White female (Trump voter, Oklahoma)

I would oppose [cutting Medicaid] just because there’s a lot of people who need it, who would be affected by it negatively. – 29-year-old, White male (Trump voter, Pennsylvania)

Participants opposed cutting Medicaid funding to pay for tax cuts that they did not believe would benefit them. Participants explained that because they had low incomes and were already in a low tax bracket, they did not expect their taxes would change much under any tax cut proposal. Both Trump and Harris voters said they would prefer Medicaid coverage to continue unchanged, arguing that the negative consequences of any changes to Medicaid would outweigh any small benefits they would experience from tax cuts. They said other government spending should be targeted to finance tax cuts.

I don’t make much money to get my taxes affected by that. It would hurt my Medicaid, my medical more. – 50-year-old, White female (Trump voter, Nevada)

They need to start taxing the right people properly first and then we can discuss that matter. Because we’re the only ones that are paying the taxes… They could put more into the programs if they tax the proper people properly. – 56-year-old, White male (Harris voter, Ohio)

Participants expected significant changes to the Medicaid program if federal funding were reduced and they worried they would lose coverage or face higher costs. Possible Medicaid spending cuts felt very personal to participants who expected they would be negatively affected by the proposed changes. Participants expressed anxiety over how reduced federal spending may affect out-of-pocket expenses, doctor availability, and covered benefits. Some described life and death consequences of not being able to access mental health care and prescription medications to manage their chronic conditions. Others focused on the financial implications of losing coverage and the impact that would have on their ability to work as well as on out-of-pocket costs for needed care. For participants with family members in nursing homes, the challenge of caring for them at home seemed daunting.

I would be very worried. It would [mean] not being able to get my antidepressants [and] see a psychiatrist. Yeah, it would, it might crush me. – 45-year-old, Hispanic male (Trump voter, Arizona)

States are gonna have to start dropping people off the rolls. People like us who are probably single and childless. – 45-year-old, Hispanic male (Harris voter, Arizona)

It’s gonna be higher out of pocket costs for sure. You know, and that’s something I can’t afford. It’s not just me, it’s me and five other people, you know. So I can’t afford that for me, nonetheless them. – 45-year-old, Black female (Harris voter, Ohio)

Work Requirements

While some participants were working full-time, many who were working part-time or not working said they wanted to work or work more hours but were unable to because of disability or because they were caring for young children or a sick parent. Participants were working a variety of jobs, including home health aide, dental assistant, tax preparer and gig and contract work, but they needed Medicaid because they were not offered insurance through their work. Several said they were working part-time or not working because of illness or disability or because they were caring for young children or aging parents. Others said that they wanted to be working but have been unable to find employment. For those who were not working for a reason other than disability or illness, several said that to be able to work, they would need supports like affordable childcare, transportation, internet access, or better opportunities in their communities.

I do self work with Instacart because …I get to pick and choose the days I’m able to work and dealing with my dad, getting in that nursing home and also dealing with my mom now because she’s getting into that phase where she’s needing more doctor appointments. – 52-year-old, Black male (Trump voter, Missouri)

I can’t work right now because of my back. And I mean, I believe that my back got as bad as it did because I couldn’t go to the doctor when I didn’t have insurance. – 41-year-old, White female (Trump voter, North Carolina)

Ever since I haven’t been working, I haven’t been able to find a job that’s legal or decent enough for working from home…They all want somebody in the office to stand up or sit down for long periods of time. I can’t even walk to my vehicle without being in pain. Or get into a vehicle and drive that vehicle because of the stress all behind that. – 51-year-old, Black female (Harris voter, Oklahoma)

Participants who were working said having Medicaid meant they could get the care they needed, especially medications, and provided financial peace of mind that enabled them to work. With high rates of chronic disease among focus group participants, the ability to manage their conditions was described as critical to their ability to work. This was especially true for participants who said their work sometimes exacerbated their health conditions, such as asthma or chronic pain. Keeping Medicaid was important to participants who were working, and several participants noted the challenge of managing work hours to maintain eligibility. One participant described how she lost coverage for one month because she worked too many hours. The income volatility that many workers on Medicaid experience can put them at risk of losing coverage and access to needed prescriptions and health care for a month or longer.

I can say that even doing the part-time work, if I did not have Medicaid or wasn’t able to do pain management, I wouldn’t even be able to do those, those small amount of hours. – 45-year-old, Black female (Harris voter, North Carolina)

It would be really hard for me to work a full-time, 9-5 job with all my doctor’s appointments as well as I’m immunocompromised. It’s definitely positive that I can do something I like, something I wanna do and not work as much and still be able to get insurance. – 35-year-old, White female (Trump voter, North Carolina)

I found out with Medicaid that there’s a cap on how much I can earn. I wasn’t aware of that. And so actually in the fall I was kicked off for about a month because I apparently had earned too much. – 59-year-old, Hispanic female (Trump voter, Arizona)

Some participants who were not currently working expressed concerns about imposing work requirements in Medicaid, saying they would face challenges meeting the requirements, while others who supported the policy were convinced they would qualify for an exemption. While most participants had not heard about proposals to introduce work requirements for Medicaid, many Trump and Harris voters who were not working said they did not think they would be able to meet the requirements because of chronic pain or other disabilities. Although not currently working, several of these participants described the high demands of jobs they previously held, noting they had to leave those positions because of injuries or other health conditions. More Trump voters than Harris voters supported a work requirement policy, but several Trump voters who were not working and supported the idea of work requirements strongly believed they would qualify for an exemption because they have a disability or caregiving responsibilities. However, most participants with a disability were not receiving disability income and, therefore, may not meet disability exemptions, which in past proposals have been based on receiving Supplemental Security Income (SSI).

I can’t because I have chronic pain and I just can’t. I worked until I couldn’t work no more. – 57-year-old, White female (Trump voter, Missouri)

There’s nothing out here from miles and miles. I live in between two towns and it’s still nothing, you know, so people don’t always have the resources or availability to do what they ask. – 39-year-old, Black female (Harris voter, North Carolina)

I mean, if you’re able bodied then, then you should still be working and trying and proving to them that you’re able to, ’cause like I said earlier, I want to work, but because of daycare costs, financially I can’t. –34-year-old, White female (Trump voter, Kentucky)

I already know I am exempt because I’ve seen this proposal and I already know I was exempt from it. But no, I wouldn’t be able to meet it if I wasn’t exempt. –57-year-old, White male (Harris voter, Pennsylvania)

Participants who were working generally felt confident in their ability to meet the requirements; however, some worried about the burden of monthly reporting requirements. Given the number of hours they were working, most participants who were working felt that they would be able to meet any new requirements. But on the issue of reporting on work status monthly, participant opinions diverged. Some said that they were already submitting this information regularly to programs such as SNAP, so they were not worried about this requirement also being required in Medicaid. Others, however, expressed concern about having to report to the state each month, noting that they are human and prone to forget and that reporting requirements can be onerous. They also worried about the consequences of losing coverage for a month if they forget to report their work information in a month. As an alternative to submitting additional paperwork, some suggested an automated system, similar to how income is verified at renewal, would be more efficient.

Required? Oh yeah. Easy. Oh yeah, absolutely. Mind you, I can’t do certain jobs. I can’t drive, if you will, but yeah, I can, I could do it. I can make it work. – 45-year-old, Hispanic male (Harris voter, Arizona)

It’s gonna be devastating and upsetting to, you know, if you lose your health insurance if I forget as we tend to, we are only humans, sometimes we forget things. So if I don’t do this [report work hours], it affects the rest of my household and I don’t like that. – 45-year-old, Black female (Harris voter, Ohio)

I would be very worried about them making mistakes. There’s been many times I’ve sent in paperwork and they didn’t get it and coverage was stopped. You know, a lot of room for clerical error and things like that. – 50-year-old, White female (Trump voter, Nevada)

Consequences of Losing Medicaid Coverage

Both Trump and Harris voters said that losing Medicaid coverage would be “devastating” and would lead to serious consequences for their physical and mental health. Participants emphasized that the health care services and prescriptions they and their children receive through Medicaid helps them “survive.” Across groups, participants said that losing their Medicaid coverage would create financial challenges and expressed anxiety at the thought of being unable to afford prescriptions, doctor visits, or higher premiums on top of pre-existing financial challenges if there were major changes to Medicaid. Although focus group participants were not aware of the nuances of congressional proposals, all participants were residing in Medicaid expansion states and those who were eligible due to Medicaid expansion could be especially vulnerable to proposed changes in the program.

I think obviously, not having access to healthcare, or having to have the financial ability to pay for your medical needs, your basic medical needs, is something that we shouldn’t have to worry about because we worry about how we’re going to eat. We worry about how we’re gonna pay our bills… Not having Medicaid would be, not distressful, it would be detrimental because I need to see a primary care doctor, I need to see my specialist. – 58-year-old, Black female (Harris voter, Ohio)

For me it would, it would probably lead to death, and that’s kinda harshly speaking, but it’s the way that it would be. I’ve relied upon Medicaid for myself in order to survive. For my son, it would be survivable, but it would be difficult. He has real bad allergies, he wouldn’t be able to hear. –55-year-old, White female (Trump voter, Oklahoma)

When asked to respond to proposals to reduce federal Medicaid spending, participants appealed to policymakers to consider how these changes would negatively impact people. Participants felt that reducing federal funding for Medicaid would have serious consequences and hurt many people on the program. Some participants pointed out that many people enrolled in Medicaid could not afford any other alternatives and would have no way to access care if they were to lose coverage. The message of several Trump voters to policymakers was to focus on improving Medicaid instead of cutting it. Across groups, participants asked policymakers to remember the human impact of potential changes to the program.

If you take money from Medicaid, you’re just creating another problem elsewhere. It’s gonna be a group of people that are being hurt over here to help the people over there so it doesn’t add up. It doesn’t make sense. –45-year-old, Hispanic male (Trump voter, Arizona)

Leave it alone and make it better. –57-year-old, White female (Trump voter, Missouri)

I would just beg them please to do their best to keep medical coverage for people that need it. And I mean, I live every day, day to day taking my meds and I need it. I don’t know what I would do without it. –39-year-old, Black male (Trump voter, Ohio)

Well, I think they should step back and look at it and realize that we’re not just a number on a spreadsheet or something that. We’re actually people and what they decide to do has consequences. –39-year-old, White male (Harris voter, Kentucky)

Ask yourself, if you’re the person to make the decision to cut [Medicaid], if it was you and someone in your family [who would be affected], what would you do if it was you? – 59-year-old, White male (Harris voter, Pennsylvania)

Methodology

KFF Headquarters: 185 Berry St., Suite 2000, San Francisco, CA 94107 | Phone 650-854-9400
Washington Offices and Barbara Jordan Conference Center: 1330 G Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005 | Phone 202-347-5270

www.kff.org | Email Alerts: kff.org/email | facebook.com/KFF | twitter.com/kff

The independent source for health policy research, polling, and news, KFF is a nonprofit organization based in San Francisco, California.