Candidates and Medicare for All Messaging
By Laurel Bliss
Medicare for all continues to be one of the most hotly debated topics of the Democratic primary cycle. Thus far, healthcare has received the most talking time of any singular issue during the debates. It is also one of the more contentious issues among the Democratic candidates and voters. The disagreements about Medicare for all are largely focused on cost and proposed sources of funding.
Support for different versions of the Medicare for All bill and how it could be funded, however, have similar levels of support. In a November poll by Data for Progress, 5,881 registered voters surveyed between November 21st and December 3rd, respondents were randomly assigned to see either a head tax proposal, similar to Elizabeth Warren’s, or a payroll tax similar to Bernie Sanders’ idea. The payroll tax version was that “The policy would be paid for by increasing the payroll tax on earnings by 9 percentage points (half of which would be paid for by employers), an increase in income taxes on those earning more than $200,000 by 9 percentage points, and a 2% tax on accumulations of wealth worth more than $50 million” and the head tax proposal was that “The policy would be paid for by a 6 percent tax on the wealth of those with over $50 billion in assets and a tax on companies for each employee they hire.” There was no significant difference in support between the two versions of Medicare for All proposals that were tested and, in fact, they were almost equal at 51% support. Given the popularity of these proposals, are the attacks Trump and others are launching having any success among the American people?
Attacks on Medicare for all have come from all directions. Democrats, like Biden, Buttigieg, and others have said Medicare for All is unrealistic and costly. In an interview with PBS Newshour, Former Vice President Joe Biden said of Elizabeth Warren: “She's making it up… look, nobody thinks it's $20 trillion. It's between $30 trillion and $40 trillion, every major independent study that's gone out there that's taken a look at this.” Most recently, President Donald Trump has entered the fray. Trump claims that “Medicare is under threat like never before… almost every major Democrat in Washington has backed a massive government health-care takeover that would totally obliterate Medicare.” Trump claims that “Your taxes are going to go up at a level you’ve never seen before.” But do these arguments actually work?
In the same November poll conducted by Data for Progress, respondents were asked if they would vote for the Democratic candidate who supports Medicare for all or Donald Trump alongside one of three messages about Medicare for all that represent popular critiques. Respondents were randomly assigned to see one of three potential criticisms on Medicare for all: “who says Medicare for All is a is a socialist takeover of the healthcare system,” “who says that Medicare for All would require a massive $15,000 a year tax increase on the middle class workers,” or “ who says that Medicare for All would require lead to people waiting months for routine procedures.” The “socialist takeover” message and the “waiting for procedures” message returned similar results, both with about 52% of respondents indicating that they would support the Democratic candidate. Forty-seven percent of respondents support Medicare for All in the tax increase version, still a 7 point advantage, a comfortable general election margin.
Given these findings, it is clear that people are open to the idea of Medicare for All. Even after hearing arguments for and against the policy, voters support it.
Laurel Bliss is a senior majoring in Political Science at Tufts University.
Between November 20th and December 3rd, 2019 Data for Progress surveyed 5,881 registered voters nationwide using the Lucid online panel. Post-stratification weights were implemented to make the sample nationally representative of American registered voters by gender, age, region, education, race, and the interaction of education and race.