April 2025 Public Opinion on Medicaid
These tables provide results from a survey we conducted April 7 – 27 using the probability-based SSRS Opinion Panel. We surveyed more than 1500 U.S. residents (roughly half who identified as Black and half who identified as White) and weighted the results to reflect national population distributions. Our findings have a margin of error of +/- 3.2 percentage points.
We present percentages below for the overall sample and for subgroups of respondents – by political party identification, insurance status, and whether they live in a “red” or “blue” state, according to the results of the 2024 electoral college.
Exhibit 1 shows the percentages of people who wanted Congress to “increase,” “keep the same,” or “decrease” spending on Medicaid.
Exhibit 2 shows the percentages of people who thought protecting Medicaid from cuts in federal funding would be “very effective,” “effective,” or “somewhat effective” compared to those who thought it would be only “slightly effective” or “not at all effective” in producing four different outcomes.
Exhibit 3 shows the percentages of people who were “extremely likely” or “likely” to engage in a variety of advocacy-related behaviors compared to those who were “neither likely nor unlikely,” “unlikely,” or “extremely unlikely” to do so.
Exhibit 4 provides a summary of the sample demographics.
| Exhibit 1. Responses to the question, “Do you want to see Congress increase spending on Medicaid, decrease spending on Medicaid, or keep spending on Medicaid about the same?”1 |
|---|
| Overall |
(N=1571) |
|
|---|---|---|
| + | Keep the same/Increase | 75% |
| – | Decrease | 18% |
| By Party2 | Republican (N = 518) |
Democrat (N = 495) |
Independent (N = 383) |
No Preference (N = 139) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| + | Keep the same/Increase | 51% | 94% | 81% | 82% |
| – | Decrease | 40% | 3% | 14% | 6% |
| By Insurance Status | Medicaid Beneficiary (N = 160) |
Non-Medicaid Beneficiary (N = 1262) |
Uninsured (N = 120) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| + | Keep the same/Increase | 88% | 73% | 83% |
| – | Decrease | 6% | 20% | 11% |
| By State of Residence 2024 Electoral College Results |
Red States (N = 1037) |
Blue States (N = 535) |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| + | Keep the same/Increase | 74% | 78% |
| – | Decrease | 20% | 15% |
Notes. 1 Weighted to Black & White U.S. adults. Margin of Standard Error: +/- 3.2%. 2 Party column omits “Another party” (N = 35).
| Exhibit 2. Responses to the question, “How effective do you think protecting Medicaid from federal funding cuts would be for each of the following?”1 |
|---|
| Overall |
(N=1571) |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Keeping people from becoming uninsured | + | Somewhat/Effective/(Very) | 79% |
| – | Not at all/Slightly | 21% | |
| Protecting access to health care | + | Somewhat/Effective/(Very) | 80% |
| – | Not at all/Slightly | 20% | |
| Protecting against increases in medical debt | + | Somewhat/Effective/(Very) | 77% |
| – | Not at all/Slightly | 23% | |
| Protecting the health of people and families with low incomes | + | Somewhat/Effective/(Very) | 81% |
| – | Not at all/Slightly | 19% | |
| By Party | Republican (N = 518) |
Democrat (N = 495) |
Independent (N = 383) |
No Preference (N = 139) |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Keeping people from becoming uninsured | + | Somewhat/Effective/(Very) | 67% | 90% | 80% | 80% |
| – | Not at all/Slightly | 33% | 10% | 20% | 20% | |
| Protecting access to health care | + | Somewhat/Effective/(Very) | 68% | 92% | 79% | 82% |
| – | Not at all/Slightly | 32% | 8% | 21% | 19% | |
| Protecting against increases in medical debt | + | Somewhat/Effective/(Very) | 66% | 89% | 76% | 81% |
| – | Not at all/Slightly | 34% | 11% | 24% | 20% | |
| Protecting the health of people and families with low incomes | + | Somewhat/Effective/(Very) | 71% | 94% | 82% | 79% |
| – | Not at all/Slightly | 29% | 6% | 18% | 21% | |
Notes. 1 Weighted to Black & White U.S. adults. Margin of Standard Error: +/- 3.2%. 2 Party column omits “Another party” (N = 35).
| Exhibit 3. Intentions to Advocate to Protect Medicaid Among respondents who think Congress should increase or keep Medicaid spending the same1 |
|---|
| Responses to the question, “There are many activities that a person could do to protect your state’s Medicaid program from cuts in federal funding. How likely are you to do the following in the next 12 months?” | Overall (N = 1179) |
State of Residence 2024 Electoral College Results |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Red States (N = 415) |
Blue States (N = 764) |
||||
| Contact elected officials to urge them to take action to protect Medicaid in your state. | + | Likely/(Extremely) | 40% | 41% | 39% |
| – | Neither/Unlikely/(Extremely) | 60% | 59% | 61% | |
| Volunteer your time to campaign for a political candidate because they support protecting Medicaid in your state. | + | Likely/(Extremely) | 21% | 22% | 19% |
| – | Neither/Unlikely/(Extremely) | 79% | 77% | 81% | |
| Search for information about protecting Medicaid in your state. | + | Likely/(Extremely) | 56% | 54% | 56% |
| – | Neither/Unlikely/(Extremely) | 44% | 45% | 44% | |
| Try to raise awareness about the effort to protect Medicaid in your state. | + | Likely/(Extremely) | 45% | 46% | 44% |
| – | Neither/Unlikely/(Extremely) | 55% | 54% | 56% | |
Notes. 1 Weighted to Black & White U.S. adults. Margin of Standard Error: +/- 3.2. 2 Party column omits “Another party” (N = 35).
| Exhibit 4. Sample Characteristics | Unweighted | Weighted | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | % | N | % | ||
| Age (Mean) | 1552 | 48.6 yrs | 1571 | 49.8 yrs | |
| Gender | Woman | 937 | 60.4% | 813 | 51.8% |
| Man | 594 | 38.3% | 735 | 46.8% | |
| Another/Multiple | 21 | 1.4% | 22 | 1.4% | |
| Race/Ethicity | White (non-Hispanic/non-Black) | 797 | 51.4% | 1295 | 82.4% |
| Black (non-White) [5.3% Hispanic] | 755 | 48.6% | 276 | 17.6% | |
| Political Party | Republican | 333 | 21.5% | 518 | 33.0% |
| Democrat | 612 | 39.4% | 495 | 31.5% | |
| Independent | 368 | 23.7% | 383 | 24.4% | |
| Another Party | 38 | 2.4% | 35 | 2.2% | |
| No Preference | 201 | 13.0% | 139 | 8.9% | |
| Household Income | $0 – $24,999 | 211 | 13.6% | 192 | 12.2% |
| $25,000 – $49,999 | 329 | 21.2% | 290 | 18.5% | |
| $50,000 – $74,999 | 314 | 20.2% | 309 | 19.7% | |
| $75,000 – $99,999 | 241 | 15.5% | 238 | 15.1% | |
| $100,000 – $124,999 | 142 | 9.1% | 161 | 10.3% | |
| $125,000 – $149,999 | 93 | 6.0% | 110 | 7.0% | |
| $150,000 or more | 218 | 14.0% | 265 | 16.9% | |
| Refused | 4 | 0.3% | 6 | 0.4% | |
| Employment Status | Employed Full-time (36+ hrs/week) | 817 | 52.6% | 747 | 47.5% |
| Unemployed | 105 | 6.8% | 108 | 6.9% | |
| Retired | 312 | 20.1% | 382 | 24.3% | |
| Student only | 35 | 2.3% | 34 | 2.2% | |
| Student also employed | 25 | 1.6% | 31 | 2.0% | |
| Full-time homemaker | 63 | 4.1% | 74 | 4.7% | |
| Employed Part-time (<36 hrs/week) | 138 | 8.9% | 139 | 8.9% | |
| Other | 57 | 3.7% | 56 | 3.6% | |
| Disabled/Handicapped | 0 | 0.0% | 0 | 0.0% | |
| Children in Household | No children | 971 | 62.6% | 1088 | 69.2% |
| 1 child | 258 | 16.6% | 221 | 14.1% | |
| 2 children | 181 | 11.7% | 150 | 9.5% | |
| 3 or more children | 141 | 9.1% | 111 | 7.1% | |
| Refused | 1 | 0.1% | 1 | 0.1% | |
This research was conducted through the Collaborative on Media and Messaging for Health and Social Policy and included contributions from Drs. Jamila Michener, Sarah Gollust, Jeff Niederdeppe, Norman Porticella, and Erika Franklin Fowler.
Support for this research was provided by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (grant #79754). The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Foundation.