A majority of Medicare enrollees now say that the federal health insurance program should remain primarily for people age 65 and older, according to eHealth's report, "Medicare Beneficiaries on 'Medicare for All.'"
eHealth surveyed more than 1,000 individuals who purchased Medicare insurance plans through its online platform, and found that support among beneficiaries is down for Medicare for All. Just over a third (37 percent) of the respondents say that all Americans should have access to Medicare or Medicare-like coverage, compared to 41 percent in 2019 and 31 percent in 2018.
In fact, the opposition is growing: 58 percent of Medicare beneficiaries now say Medicare should remain primarily for people age 65 and older, up from 42 percent in each of the prior two years.
Perhaps not surprisingly, support for "Medicare for all" is varied among beneficiaries of different income levels. The proposal is most appealing to highest-income earners: 47 percent of those with annual incomes of $100,000 or more support Medicare for All, followed by 42 percent for those with incomes less than $25,000 per year. For middle-class beneficiaries with incomes between $75,000 and $100,000, just 33 percent support expanding the federal program (the survey results do not detail the support level among people with incomes between $25,000 and $75,000).
"We have been tracking consumer sentiment on Medicare for All proposals for some time now but the results of our most recent survey surprised us," says eHealth CEO Scott Flanders. "As we get deeper into election season and Medicare beneficiaries listen to candidates and weigh the pros and cons of various proposals, it seems that support for a radical revamp of the Medicare program, and for Medicare for All candidates, is dropping."
Support for Medicare for All candidates is decreasing among Medicare beneficiaries: 32 percent of respondents now say they would support a Medicare for All presidential candidate (at this point, just Sen. Bernie Sanders), down from 35 percent in 2019. Opposition is rising: 43 percent now say they would not a support a Medicare for All candidate, compared to 36 percent in last year's survey, while 25 percent told pollsters that they are still undecided on whether they would support a Medicare for All candidate, compared to 29 percent in 2019.
Broken down by gender, 48 percent of men and 38 percent of women now say they would not support a Medicare for All candidate for president, up from 44 percent of men and 31 percent of women in 2019.
Of all of the respondents, 52 percent say they consider it very or somewhat unlikely that a Medicare for All program would be implemented even if a Medicare for All candidate would be elected president. Just 26 percent of respondents consider it very or somewhat likely the program would be successfully implemented, compared to 31 percent in 2019.
However, when broken down by age, the youngest Medicare beneficiaries are more likely than older ones to consider Medicare for All possible: 38 percent of respondents younger than age 65 consider it very or somewhat likely that a Medicare for All program would be successfully implemented if a candidate supporting it were elected, compared to 19 percent of those age 80 and older (the survey results do not detail the sentiment of respondents between the ages of 65 and 79).
Katie Kuehner-Hebert is a freelance writer based in Running Springs, Calif. She has more than three decades of journalism experience, with particular expertise in employee benefits and other human resource topics.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWrongful-Death Case Against Adult Day Care Sparks Call for State Regulation
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Luigi Mangione Defense Attorney Says NYC Mayor’s Comments on Case Raise Fair Trial Concerns
- 2Revisiting the Boundaries Between Proper and Improper Argument: 10 Years Later
- 3Hochul Vetoes 'Grieving Families' Bill, Faulting a Lack of Changes to Suit Her Concerns
- 4Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Customers: Developments on ‘Conquesting’ from the Ninth Circuit
- 5Biden commutes sentences for 37 of 40 federal death row inmates, including two convicted of California murders
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250