But Americans aren’t just looking backward. More than three-quarters of the country (76%) express optimism about the role of science and technology in building a better future a sentiment that reflects the same pioneering spirit that shaped the republic 250 years ago.

Image generated by AI using NotebookLM and data from America’s New Majority Project and edited by humans.

When asked which fields of scientific advancement make them most optimistic, voters ranked their priorities clearly. Treatments for disease lead the way, with 59% of respondents citing hope for new breakthroughs against deadly and debilitating illnesses. Cleaner energy follows at 47%, reflecting broad interest in more sustainable power sources. Understanding the aging process drew 33%, while artificial intelligence and robotics garnered 22% and 13% respectively.

Space exploration, though ranked last at 7%, carries symbolic weight that outpaces its polling numbers. The push toward Mars and beyond represents a continuation of the American tradition of venturing into the unknown the same impulse that drove the founders to imagine a new form of government nearly two and a half centuries ago.

America’s celebration of 250 years arrives at a moment when Americans feel anchored by their constitutional heritage and energized by scientific possibility. The data paints a portrait of a nation that honors where it came from while remaining eager to reach for the stars to see what comes next.

All data is from surveys conducted by America’s New Majority Project (ANMP).

America’s New Majority Project asked nearly 900 voters to describe, in their own words, no multiple-choice, what matters most to them right now and what it would take to earn their trust. The answers point to something campaigns should pay very close attention to, which is voters have moved past the debate about whether the economy is an issue. They’re ready for the next conversation. What are you going to do about it, and how will I feel it in my daily life?

That shift matters. Nearly half of respondents said the single most convincing thing a leader could do is deliver visible cost relief on the things they buy every week. More than a third want named policies with real timelines attached. Put those together and roughly four in five voters are essentially saying “Give me something concrete and I’ll listen.” That’s a road sign you can’t ignore this election cycle.

Image generated by NotebookLM using orignal data from ANMP and enhanced by human editing

And here’s what makes the opening even wider: this demand crosses every partisan line. Republicans, Democrats, and Independents all rank kitchen-table costs as their top concern at nearly identical rates. They all apply the same test, “Can I feel it when I fill up the tank, buy groceries, pay rent?”. A candidate who can connect a specific action to a specific result that voters experience in daily life has a built-in audience that includes the middle, not just the base.

The survey also found a constituency that’s been largely overlooked. Rural voters name economics and healthcare access as their dominant concerns — with healthcare running at roughly triple the national average. These are communities dealing with hospital closures, provider shortages, and long drives for basic care. They’re not asking for rhetoric. They’re asking for a doctor within driving distance and prescriptions they can afford. Whoever speaks to that first owns the issue.

What comes through most clearly in the data is that Americans haven’t tuned out. They’ve just raised the bar. They want to feel improvements in their daily lives. Improvements at the pharmacy counter, reductions in their monthly electric bill, and lower prices in the checkout line. The candidate who figures out how to connect policy to that felt experience isn’t just winning a messaging war, they’re meeting voters exactly where they already are.

Like David Allen Coe says, “Actions speak louder than words don’t you know/Flowers all grow from the seeds that we sow/ But a weed’s still a weed boy wherever it grows / And actions speak louder than words.”

Leave a comment

The survey data is striking in its clarity. More than four-in-five registered voters affirm that the core principles of the Declaration of Independence equality, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness remain relevant today. This is not a narrow majority or a partisan lean. It is a consensus figure that holds across demographic lines — the kind of number that rarely appears in modern polling on any subject. Americans are not ambivalent about their founding ideals. They claim them emphatically.

And yet nearly two-in-three of those same voters believe the country is moving further away from those principles, not closer. Only a small fraction roughly one-in-six see the nation trending in the right direction on this question. The gap between reverence and reality is enormous, and it carries a specific emotional charge heading into the celebration of America at 250: Americans feel they are losing something they still deeply value.

Share

This tension extends to how voters regard the founders themselves. A commanding majority believe the founding fathers should be honored for their accomplishments even while acknowledging they were wrong about slavery. A similarly large share go further, agreeing that honoring the founders is essential to unifying a diverse country. These are not culture-war responses. They reflect a practical judgment: that the founding generation built something worth preserving and that the framework they left behind — particularly the Constitution — remains the most credible common ground available in a fractured nation.

That framework, however, is under pressure from competing visions of what rights mean and who they protect. The First Amendment remains a touchstone, but the polling reveals real fault lines beneath the surface. When asked whether preventing discrimination should take precedence over preserving speech and religious liberty, voters tilt toward protecting the First Amendment but not overwhelmingly. The margin is single digits, suggesting a public that takes both values seriously and resists being forced to choose.

On specific applications, the pattern holds. Strong majorities oppose government censorship of religious texts, even when framed as a measure to prevent discrimination. Voters draw careful lines around protest rights most believe political dissent should be protected, but support for speech protections drops sharply when expression crosses into endorsing violence. These are not contradictions. They are the boundaries of a public that wants robust liberty with enforceable limits and expects its institutions to manage that balance rather than collapse it.

The question for July 4, 2026, is whether political leaders will meet the electorate where it stands. The data describes a public that wants to celebrate the founding, believes the constitutional framework still works, and is frustrated that the country’s direction does not match its stated values. This is not cynicism. It is an invitation — one that arrives with a deadline, a national birthday, and a population that still believes the original promise is worth keeping. Whether anyone in power takes this seriously is the open question the data cannot answer.

Most Americans say they oppose Operation Epic Fury, however, surveys by America’s New Majority Project, collected in 2024 and 2025, showed support for military action against Iran. That support was strong, it held up even when people were told it could lead to a bigger conflict, and the data suggests it can be recovered.

In February 2024, when armed groups funded by Iran were attacking American troops in the Middle East, nearly 54% of voters said the United States should strike Iran directly. When the survey warned that strikes could lead to a wider war, support barely dropped — still above 51%. Almost half of voters said they were more worried than before about the safety of troops overseas. Only about 28% thought the government was doing enough to protect them, while close to 47% said the response was not strong enough. Americans were ready for action and frustrated that it had not happened.

That frustration ran deep. Only 35% of voters believed a peace deal between Israel and Hamas would stop Iranian-backed groups from attacking American forces. In April 2025, just over half of registered voters said they believe “Death to America” is a genuine call for violence, not just political talk.

Share

The lesson for today is that when military action is tied to protecting troops and stopping Iranian aggression, most voters support striking Iran. A Reuters and Ipsos poll conducted right after the strikes backs this up — nearly half said they would support the war if it ended Iran’s nuclear program or led to a friendlier government in Tehran. As Republican pollster Bill McInturff put it: “Attitudes shift in this country based on results.” The support is not gone. It is waiting.

The bottom line, before the war, most Americans believed Iran was a serious threat, diplomacy had failed, and force was justified. The path to building support for Operation Epic Fury is clear: explain the goal in terms of U.S. interests and show results. A March 2026 McLaughlin & Associates national survey of 1,000 likely voters reinforces this point: 51% approved of military action to eliminate Iran’s nuclear program, rising to 57% when voters were reminded of Iran’s decades of hostility, and 59% agreed the U.S. should finish the job rather than face the same threat again later.

Leave a comment

Share America's New Majority Project

Key Takeaways

• Trump RX reinforces Trump’s promise to lower health care costs.

• Awareness is still low — only about one-third are following the launch.

• Price comparisons and insurance integration would boost usage.

• Voters say insurers and middlemen must now lower prices too.

Most voters are not closely following news about the launch of Trump RX and say they are unlikely to use the site to check whether they can obtain lower prices for their medicines. However, a majority do agree that the website launch is an example of President Donald J. Trump keeping his campaign promises to lower the cost of health care. Many also say practical improvements to the website — particularly tools that make it more relevant for patients with insurance — would make them more likely to use it.

Share

Why it Matters

Affordability remains Americans’ top economic concern, and health care costs are a central part of this anxiety. Demonstrating credible ways to lower costs — especially prescription drug prices — has clear political benefits. Initiatives that show tangible savings for patients are likely to resonate with voters and reinforce broader economic messaging.

How to Use This Data

Messaging should emphasize that Trump RX is a platform that will expand over time, adding more medicines and tools that help patients find the lowest prices. It should also be framed as a transparency tool that exposes the real prices of drugs, helping hold insurance companies and pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) accountable.

The data also provides guidance on the improvements voters want most — particularly features that allow comparisons with insurance prices and other discount programs.

View the full data by clicking below.

Subscribe now

Most Say Trump RX is Example of Trump Keeping His Campaign Promises

• Just 35% of voters say they are following news about the launch of Trump RX, including 42% of Republicans, 33% of Democrats and 27% of independents.

• At the same time, 52% of voters say Trump RX is an example of President Trump keeping his campaign promises — suggesting that increasing awareness of the clearinghouse for lower-cost drugs could have political benefits.

• Those agreeing include 81% of Republicans, 27% of Democrats, and 48% of independents.

• 27% of independents are following the launch, and 48% see it as promise-keeping.

• Among target voter groups, 67% of Unconverted MAGA (those who approve of Trump policies but are undecided or voting Democrat in the midterms) and 53% of New Majority leaners or undecided voters agree Trump RX shows the President is keeping his promises.

Most Say They’re Unlikely to Use Trump RX — But Changes Would Boost Usage

• 42% of voters say they are likely to check Trump RX to see if they can obtain medicines at a lower cost, while 54% say they’re unlikely to do so.

• There is a significant partisan divide: 61% of Republicans say they will check the site, compared with 26% of Democrats.

Despite this partisan difference, the results suggest growth opportunities lie in practical improvements rather than branding changes.

• 60% say they would be more likely to use Trump RX if it allowed users to compare prices with other discount sites and the price they would pay using insurance.

• 50% say they would be more likely to use it if purchases through Trump RX counted toward their insurance deductible.

• 43% say they would be more likely to use it if the platform had a nonpolitical name.

Drug Companies Receive Some Credit for Lower Prices — But Voters Say the Rest of the System Must Follow

• 49% agree that the lower prices on Trump RX show the drug companies are willing to lower prices to help American patients, though just 13% strongly agree. 37% disagree.

• 82% agree it is time for other parts of the health care system to do their part to lower prices for patients, including 47% who strongly agree.

The Bottom Line

Trump RX may not yet be widely used, but it already reinforces a powerful political message: Republicans are taking action to lower drug prices and expose health care middlemen. If awareness grows and the platform continues expanding, it can become a symbol of the broader Republican argument on health care affordability heading into the midterms.

What’s Next

We will have more analysis on voter attitudes about the government’s role in health care and other data on pressing issues.

We want to hear from you! We not only enjoy hearing from our subscribers, but we also use your feedback to bring you the most recent and engaging policy information available. Share how you’re using this data or tell us what new insights you’d like to see.

Get in touch with us anytime, and let’s make an impact together!

Leave a comment

In Case You Missed It

• Workforce and Apprenticeship: What Voters Really Want

• Voters Prioritize Insurance Company Accountability in Health Care Reform

• Insurance Companies Bear the Blame

• Healthcare Costs: What Voters Really Want Changed

• Grocery Cost Woes Dominate Among Voter Concerns About the Economy

Share America's New Majority Project

Key Takeaways

• There is overwhelming, bipartisan support for expanding apprenticeship programs, with Republicans, Democrats, and Independents all in strong agreement.

• Broad, cross-partisan consensus exists for offering tax incentives to businesses that create apprenticeship positions.

• A majority of Americans support shifting cultural emphasis away from four-year degrees toward alternative pathways.

• Americans strongly prefer private-sector or public-private partnership leadership in developing apprenticeship programs, with the federal government ranking last as the least preferred option.

Voters overwhelmingly support expanding apprenticeship programs, tax incentives for businesses that create them, and shifting away from the four-year degree as the default pathway to the middle class.

Share

Why it Matters

The timing of this sentiment shift is no accident. Student loan debt has reached crisis levels, and AI is rapidly reshaping the labor market—displacing white-collar jobs once considered degree-dependent while creating urgent demand for skilled tradespeople who can build and maintain the physical infrastructure AI cannot replace. As the cost of a four-year degree climbs and its return grows less certain, voters are making a more clear-eyed calculation about what actually prepares people for the economy ahead.

How to Use This Data

This data offers advocates a clear, evidence-based foundation. Bipartisan supermajorities support expanding apprenticeship programs, incentivizing business-led training via the tax code, and reducing the cultural primacy of four-year degrees. Voters reject federal leadership in implementation at 9%, with 53% favoring private-sector or partnership models.

Advocates can frame apprenticeship expansion as a market-driven, community-based workforce solution, which has the broadest public support.

View the full data by clicking below.

Subscribe now

84% Support Expanding Apprenticeship Programs

• 86% of Republicans, 83% of Democrats, and 81% of Independents support expanding apprenticeships where young people earn a salary while learning skilled trades.

• Among target voters, 73% of Unconverted MAGA voters (those who approve of Trump’s policies but are undecided or voting Democrat on the generic ballot) and 81% of New Majority voters who are leaning or undecided support expanding apprenticeship programs.

82% Back Tax Incentives for Business-Led Apprenticeships

• 87% of Republicans, 80% of Democrats, and 79% of Independents support encouraging businesses through tax incentives to create apprenticeship positions combining on-the-job training with classroom education.

• Unconverted MAGA: 76% support / New Majority Leaners (Lean R/Lean D/Und.): 80% support.

61% Say Reduce the Cultural Emphasis on Four-Year Degrees

• 69% of Republicans, 55% of Democrats, and 58% of Independents support reducing the emphasis on four-year degrees compared to other pathways.

• Only 21% oppose. 18% are undecided.

Who Should Lead Apprenticeship Development?

• Business-Government Partnership: 33% (top choice).

• Educational Institutions: 17%. State Governments: 9%. Federal Government: 9% (last).

• Republicans favor private business (21%) and business-government partnership (37%). Democrats split between educational institutions (23%) and business partnerships (28%).

The Bottom Line

Americans are reconsidering that a four-year college degree is the only path to a good career. Polling shows broad support for expanding apprenticeship programs where young people earn while learning trades, with voters wanting tax breaks for businesses creating these opportunities. Rising college costs, student debt, and AI’s impact make trade skills more valuable.

Importantly, voters prefer businesses and communities lead this effort over the federal government.

What’s Next

Stay tuned—in the coming days, we will be posting more findings from our latest poll.

We want to hear from you! We not only enjoy hearing from our subscribers, but we also use your feedback to bring you the most recent and engaging policy information available. Share how you’re using this data or tell us what new insights you’d like to see.

Get in touch with us anytime, and let’s make an impact together!

Leave a comment

In Case You Missed It

• Voters Prioritize Insurance Company Accountability in Health Care Reform

• Insurance Companies Bear the Blame

• Healthcare Costs: What Voters Really Want Changed

• Grocery Cost Woes Dominate Among Voter Concerns About the Economy

• 71% of Voters Support Updated Dietary Guidelines but Few Know of Changes

This week, major technology companies that power America’s data center ecosystem will gather at the White House to formally sign the Ratepayer Protection Pledge President Trump announced in his February 24 State of the Union address. The initiative is designed to ensure that the rapid expansion of AI-driven computing infrastructure does not translate into higher electricity costs for local communities — a commitment that aligns closely with voter sentiment.

The scale of that expansion is staggering. According to data firm Cleanview, nearly 680 data centers are currently planned across the United States, requiring energy equivalent to roughly 186 large nuclear power plants. That is not a marginal increase in demand — it is a structural shift in America’s energy profile. Meeting it will require substantial new generation and transmission capacity. The question is no longer whether more power will be built, but how — and whether communities will support it.

For years, data center advocates have rightly emphasized the economic upside of large facilities: jobs, investment, and tax revenue. But as communities confront the electricity demand required to power those facilities — and the infrastructure that follows — resistance has surfaced, even in generally pro-growth regions. That’s where both this week’s pledge and recent polling from America’s New Majority Project, Building Consensus: Voters Back Energy Infrastructure When Communities Benefit—But Draw the Line at Eminent Domain, provide a practical roadmap.

There is an important strategic caution. Data center proponents should avoid trading one obstacle for another — overcoming objections to a data center by promising a power plant, only to run into opposition to the plant itself. Power generation facilities raise their own questions about siting, land use, and fairness. Simply saying “we’ll build our own power” does not eliminate friction; it shifts it.

Subscribe now

The good news is that opposition is not fixed. Our survey results show that support for new energy infrastructure rises dramatically when projects deliver tangible, local benefits. Eighty-four percent of voters say they are more likely to support new power plant construction if companies provide electric bill discounts to residents. Eighty-three percent say local hiring commitments increase their support. More than three-quarters say annual payments to local governments — investments in schools, roads, and community priorities — significantly boost support.

Just as important, voters draw a clear line at heavy-handed tactics such as using eminent domain for private projects. Respect for property rights and voluntary partnership remains foundational. Community trust is not built through mandates; it is built through mutual benefit.

There is historical precedent for how to do this right. Community Benefits Agreements (CBAs) — legally binding contracts between developers and host communities — have been used successfully for decades. The 2001 Los Angeles Staples Center agreement, negotiated with more than 30 community groups and labor unions, established a template of binding local hiring and fiscal commitments that built durable support rather than sustained opposition.

More recently, the Block Island Wind Farm offers a closer analogue for energy infrastructure. In response to community friction, Deepwater Wind invested $2.5 million in island internet infrastructure, $2.5 million in support for local organizations, and maintained a dedicated community liaison. The project avoided litigation entirely and has operated since 2016 with sustained community backing. The data center siting challenge is not structurally different.

That insight is directly relevant to the Ratepayer Protection Pledge. By committing to shoulder the energy costs required to power their facilities — whether through on-site generation, long-term power purchase agreements, or other mechanisms — technology companies signal that local ratepayers should not be left holding the bill for grid upgrades driven by data center demand. That is an important first step.

But signing a pledge is only the beginning. To secure durable community support for the energy infrastructure that 680 planned facilities will require, data center advocates must pair ratepayer protection with the benefits voters say matter most: electricity bill relief, local jobs, and meaningful community investment — ideally formalized in enforceable agreements.

America needs both digital infrastructure and expanded energy capacity. The path forward is not to minimize community concerns, but to align growth with shared prosperity. Done right, the Ratepayer Protection Pledge can be more than a policy gesture — it can anchor a durable consensus for building the power that America’s digital future demands.

Share

America’s New Majority Project creates and shares trustworthy opinion research and strategic messaging guidance. We work with partners to empower candidates and activists who are committed to bringing power back to everyday Americans and restoring a government of, by, and for the People.

Share America's New Majority Project

Key Takeaways

• Voters prioritize insurance-focused reforms: curb steering, increase transparency, ensure savings reach patients.

• Insurer and middleman accountability is the strongest performing center-right message.

• Most voters believe insurer-provider integration raises prices and a plurality supports limits on insurer ownership.

• Voters oppose penalizing patients for choosing lower-priced, independent providers.

Voters prioritize reforms targeting insurance companies — especially proposals that curb insurer steering, guarantee savings flow directly to patients, and increase upfront transparency on total and out-of-pocket costs. Reflecting these priorities, among four center-right positioning statements tested, the message emphasizing insurance company and middleman accountability performed best.

Most voters also believe vertical integration in health care — particularly insurer ownership of providers — raises patient costs.

Share

Why it Matters

Recent ANMP surveys show health care costs are voters’ No. 2 economic concern, driven largely by rising premiums and out-of-pocket costs. Voters consistently blame insurance companies more than other parts of the health care system for affordability challenges.

These findings identify which reforms prioritize most and which candidate messages generate the strongest support.

How to Use This Data

Candidates and advocates should frame health care reform around:

✓ Increasing insurer and middleman accountability

✓ Protecting patients from unfair practices

✓ Guaranteeing savings reach patients

View the full data by clicking below, or read key highlights in the summary.

Voters Prioritize Insurer-Focused Reforms

• Reforms targeting insurer steering, passing savings directly to patients, and enhancing transparency draw the broadest support from voters.

• The most intense support, with 39% saying it is a “top priority,” is for requiring insurance companies to pass 100% of discounts on medicines directly to patients at the pharmacy counter.

• Prohibiting PMBs from making more money when patients are steered toward higher priced drugs is the next most intense – with 37% saying the reform is a top priority.

• Demographic differences by party and race are minimal. Older voters react more intensely to reforms they see as saving them money on prescription drugs.

Insurer Accountability Message Tests Strongest

• A candidate focused on curbing insurer and middleman abuses and requiring savings to be passed directly to patients tests strongest out of the four positioning statements tested, defeating the other three candidates by a roughly 20-point margin.

• Candidates focused on price transparency and drug price controls were less effective, while a candidate focused on expanding Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) tested the worst.

• These results strongly reflect the priority level voters give to certain reforms, not their overall popularity.

• Independents favor the transparency-focused candidate more than other demographic groups, though the insurer focused candidate still performs best with them.

  

Voters Skeptical of Vertical Integration in Health Care

• 59% believe vertical integration in health care – specifically insurers owning providers and other parts of the system – makes health care more expensive.

• 68% say insurers should not be allowed to charge patients higher out-of-pocket costs if they choose a lower priced, independent provider not owned by the insurer.

• 43% – a plurality – favor more limits on insurers owning other parts of the health care system. 26% oppose.

• Demographic differences by party are minimal, but there are some differences by race and age. Black voters make up the only group who believes fewer limits should be placed on this sort of ownership, while older voters are more likely to favor more limits than younger.

The Bottom Line

Health care reform messages centered on insurance company accountability, patient savings, and transparency generate the broadest and most intense voter support. Candidates emphasizing insurer and middleman crackdowns hold a clear advantage over those focused primarily on transparency, drug pricing, or HSAs.

What’s Next

We will have more analysis from this health care survey, data on apprenticeships, and more.

We want to hear from you! We not only enjoy hearing from our subscribers, but we also use your feedback to bring you the most recent and engaging policy information available. Share how you’re using this data or tell us what new insights you’d like to see.

Get in touch with us anytime, and let’s make an impact together!

Leave a comment

In Case You Missed It

• Insurance Companies Bear the Blame

• Healthcare Costs: What Voters Really Want Changed

• Grocery Cost Woes Dominate Among Voter Concerns About the Economy

• 71% of Voters Support Updated Dietary Guidelines but Few Know of Changes

• Building Consensus: Voters Back Energy Infrastructure When Communities Benefit – But Draw the Line at Eminent Domain

Share America's New Majority Project

Key Takeaways

• Voters define the health care affordability crisis primarily through insurance costs.

• Premiums are the dominant concern, followed by out-of-pocket costs.

• Insurance companies are seen as the primary source of financial strain and most in need of fixing, though providers do not escape blame.

• Overall, insurers are viewed as most responsible for voters’ top concerns.

The cost of health insurance premiums is by far the biggest concern of voters when it comes to health care, both when specifically asked about health care costs and the state of health care in the United States overall. Out-of-pocket costs, waste, fraud, and abuse, prescription drug costs, and surprise bills rank as second-tier concerns.

Most voters say insurers are more responsible for premiums and out-of-pocket costs, while voters more often blame the entire system for surprise bills and waste, fraud and abuse.

Why it Matters

Recent America’s New Majority Project surveys ranked health care costs as voters No. 2 economic concern and showed the popularity of reforms increasing transparency and patient control of their health care dollars.

These results reinforce earlier results: premiums should be the central affordability focus, and insurers the primary reform target.

For candidates, appearing to let insurers off the hook is a clear liability.

How to Use This Data

Messaging should lead with lowering monthly premiums and holding insurance companies and middlemen accountable. Health care agendas should clearly answer the question: “How does this lower premiums, reduce out-of-pocket costs, and increase health insurer accountability?”

Click on the image below to view the full data or read the summary below.

Premiums Are the No. 1 Health Care Concern

• 31% say the cost of insurance premiums is their greatest concern when it comes to the state of health care in the United States. Focusing on health care costs alone, 37% say premiums are the top concern.

• The cost of premiums is the top health care cost concern of all demographic groups, with Democrats (41%) and Baby Boomer and older voters (42%) most concerned.

• Out-of-pocket expenses (20%), waste, fraud and abuse (14%), and prescription drug costs (14%) are second-tier concerns. Notably, Republicans and independents are significantly more focused on waste, fraud, and abuse than Democrats.

Rising Premiums Seen as Economy-Wide Burden

• 65% of voters agree that higher health insurance premiums are a major reason for lower wages and less hiring, with strong agreement at 19%.

• This agreement is shared by a majority among all demographic groups, with minor ideological and partisan differences in intensity of belief.

• 72% agree that higher health insurance premiums are a major factor contributing to higher prices throughout the economy, not just in health care, with strong agreement at 24%.

Health Insurers Seen as Most in Need of Fixing

• 34% say insurance companies are the part of the health care system most in need of fixing.

• It was the top choice of all demographic groups with Democrats (39%) and younger voters (Gen Z: 37%, Millennials: 37%) the most focused on insurance companies.

• Government health care programs (20%) and drug companies (17%) are second-tier targets for reform, with older voters (Gen X: 19%, Boomers: 19%) more focused on drug companies than younger.

Health Insurers Seen as Cost-Adders, Not Cost Savers

• Respondents were asked to imagine the impact on health care prices if health insurance didn’t exist and everyone paid for health care directly out-of-pocket.

• 51% said prices would be less expensive, while 35% said prices would be more expensive.

• Demographic differences in responses were small, suggesting that how respondents answered had more to do with their personal experiences than ideological or partisan worldview.

Who Voters Hold Responsible

Returning to the areas of most concern in the health care system, respondents were asked who was more responsible: the health insurance companies or the health care providers (including the doctors, hospitals, pharmacies, drug and medical device companies, and other organizations involved in providing and creating health care.)

• 58% of voters say health insurance companies are more responsible for the cost of premiums, including a majority or plurality among all demographic groups.

• 53% say health insurance companies are more responsible for out-of-pocket costs, including a majority or plurality among all demographic groups.

• A plurality of voters also say health insurance companies are more responsible for prescription drug costs, coverage restrictions and delays to getting care.

• Health care providers were seen as more responsible for quality and access challenges, not financial burdens.

• Target voters – Unconverted MAGA and New Majority Undecideds and Leaners – were more inclined to blame both insurers and providers than other demographic groups for the cost of premiums and out-of-pocket costs, though more still blamed insurers.

The Bottom Line

Premiums are the central affordability concern, and voters across every demographic agree.

Insurance companies bear the blame: majorities say insurers are more responsible than providers for both premiums and out-of-pocket costs.

Notably, a majority believe health care would be cheaper without insurers in the mix. Voters support reform that directly confronts both the cost and the cause.

What’s Next

We will have more analysis from this survey identifying the health care reforms Americans say should be lawmakers’ top priorities, new data on apprenticeships, and more.

We want to hear from you! We not only enjoy hearing from our subscribers, but we also use your feedback to bring you the most recent and engaging policy information available. Share how you’re using this data or tell us what new insights you’d like to see.

Get in touch with us anytime, and let’s make an impact together!

Leave a comment

In Case You Missed It

• Healthcare Costs: What Voters Really Want Changed

• Grocery Cost Woes Dominate Among Voter Concerns About the Economy

• 71% of Voters Support Updated Dietary Guidelines but Few Know of Changes

• Building Consensus: Voters Back Energy Infrastructure When Communities Benefit – But Draw the Line at Eminent Domain

• Most Support Building More Power Plants, but the Type of Plant Matters

Share America's New Majority Project

Key Takeaways

• 76% of voters say healthcare costs are on the wrong track.

• 93% say it is important to have clear, upfront prices for healthcare services, including any fees not covered by insurance. 84% support requiring providers to give patients this information.

• 70% support universal access to Health Savings Accounts.

• 55% support redirecting Obamacare subsidies directly to patients rather than insurers.

Healthcare costs rank #2 among voters’ economic concerns, with 76% saying they are on the wrong track.

Recently proposed reforms receive broad support. 84% support strengthening price transparency laws by requiring healthcare providers to post clear, upfront prices, including fees not covered by a patient’s insurance, and 70% support giving every American access to a Health Savings Account (HSA), putting healthcare dollars directly in patients’ hands.

Why it Matters

Voters aren’t just frustrated. Bipartisan majorities are angry, aligned, and demanding action. On healthcare, the public has already reached a verdict: it’s broken and needs to be fixed.

This is a rare moment when overwhelming public demand and transformative policy opportunity are in perfect alignment.

Price transparency is the foundation of reform, with sustained support. In a May 2023 America’s New Majority Project survey, it commanded 85% support and holds at 84% nearly three years later. 93% say price transparency it personally important. This isn’t a flash in the pan, it’s a consistent call for reform.

How to Use This Data

Advocates should focus their healthcare messaging on accountability, transparency, and patient control.

Click on the image below to view the full data or read the summary below.

84% Support Price Transparency and Advanced Explanation of Benefits

• This includes 90% of Republicans, 78% of Democrats, and 83% of Independents.

• 93% say clear upfront prices are important to them personally, including 96% of Republicans, 92% of Independents, and 91% of Democrats.

• Among target voters, 79% of Unconverted MAGA voters and 88% of New Majority voters support price transparency.

70% Say Everyone Should Have Access to a Health Savings Account

• This includes 79% of Republicans, 67% of Democrats, and 62% of Independents.

• There is no divide by gender. 71% of women and 69% of men support universal HSA access and 75% of both say it’s personally important.

• Overall, 76% say HSA access is personally important, including 81% of Gen Z, 81% of Millennials, and 78% of Gen X.

• Among target voters, 68% of Unconverted MAGA voters support universal HSA access, and 76% of New Majority voters support it.

55% Say Cut Out the Middleman—Send Healthcare Dollars Directly to Patients

• This includes 73% of Republicans, 43% of Democrats, and 49% of Independents.

• 66% say it is important that subsidies go directly to eligible Americans rather than to insurance companies.

• Among target voters, 59% of Unconverted MAGA voters support direct subsidies, and 64% of New Majority voters support it.

What Voters Would Do with a Health Savings Account and Direct Subsidies

• 40% choose a savings-oriented approach (save or invest 33% plus catastrophic plus save 8%) versus 25% for comprehensive insurance.

• Younger voters are 3 to 6 times more likely than older voters to choose catastrophic-only coverage.

When You Give Patience the Money, Demand to See Prices Increases

• 73% say price transparency becomes more important once voters control the money. This includes 81% of Republicans, 72% of Democrats, and 67% of Independents.

• 73% of swing voters say price transparency is more important once they control the dollars, and middle-class voters hit 73%.

The Bottom Line

Price transparency, direct subsidies, and universal HSA access are three proposals that work as one system.

When voters have control over their healthcare dollars through HSAs and direct subsidies, demand for transparent pricing doesn’t fade, it intensifies. Nearly three in four say it becomes even more important. Support holds across party, gender, generation, and class.

The logic is simple. Once the money is in their hands, voters behave like consumers, and consumers demand to see prices before they buy. This isn’t a platform to sell. It’s one voters are already waiting for.

What’s Next

Stay tuned—in the coming days, we will be posting more findings on health care reform, as well as data on support for apprenticeship programs in the United States.

We want to hear from you! We not only enjoy hearing from our subscribers, but we also use your feedback to bring you the most recent and engaging policy information available. Share how you’re using this data or tell us what new insights you’d like to see.

Get in touch with us anytime, and let’s make an impact together!

Leave a comment

In Case You Missed It

• Grocery Cost Woes Dominate Among Voter Concerns About the Economy

• 71% of Voters Support Updated Dietary Guidelines but Few Know of Changes

• Building Consensus: Voters Back Energy Infrastructure When Communities Benefit – But Draw the Line at Eminent Domain

• Most Support Building More Power Plants, but the Type of Plant Matters

• How Americans Really Feel About Energy Costs and Renewables

Share America's New Majority Project

The cost of groceries is the #1 concern of American voters when it comes to the economy, with 78% saying they’re on the wrong track and 60% ranking them as one of their top two indicators if the economy is moving in the right direction. Overall, 57% of voters say the economy is on the wrong track, with gas prices seen as an exception to an otherwise dismal outlook.

Why it Matters

Kitchen-table economics matters more to voters than macroeconomic stats on growth or job creation. Advocates must communicate with language and examples that reflect voters’ real-world experience.

How to Use This Data

Frame economic policies around affordability, not growth and job creation. Every proposal should answer the question: “Will this reduce what families pay for food, healthcare, and housing?”

Lead with visible, everyday metrics, such as $2.85 gas, when discussing economic progress. Prioritize cost-of-living issues over job statistics or GDP growth. Focus on grocery affordability, especially when targeting women and suburban family voters.

Click on the image below to view the full data or read the summary below.

Economic Perceptions and Finances

• 57% say the economy is on the wrong track.

• The partisan divide is stark: 84% of Democrats and 60% of independents say it is on the wrong track, compared to just 27% of Republicans, who are positive by a 2:1 margin.

• 41% say their personal finances have gotten worse over the past year, compared to 37% who say they’ve stayed the same, and 22% who say they’ve improved.

• Income differences offer a window into the economy. Upper middle class and wealthy voters report positive momentum in their finances, while the middle class and lower middle class are negative.

Grocery Costs Concerns Dominate Among All Demographics

• The cost of groceries earns the worst marks of any economic indicator: 78% say they’re on the wrong track, with half saying costs are moving “much more” in the wrong direction.

• The concern dominates among all demographics: Nearly 9 in 10 Democrats (89%), more than 8 in 10 Independents (82%), and nearly two-thirds of Republicans (65%) say costs are on the wrong track.

Grocery costs are also the #1 indicator of economic health for voters

• The gap between groceries and everything else is massive. Groceries at 60% are nearly double healthcare at 34%, 2x housing (27%), 3x wages (18%), and 4x job availability (13%).

• There is a modest gender divide. 64% of women rank groceries as a personal economic priority compared to 57% of men.

• When asked what would most convince them the economy is heading in the right direction, 35% say declining grocery prices—three times higher than any other response. Lower healthcare costs rank second at just 10.4%.

Convincing Evidence of Improvement

• Among a battery of facts tested about the economy, voters were unconvinced by official economic statistics that did not align with their personal experiences.

• Gas prices at a $2.85 national average was the only message that respondents found convincing that the economy is moving in the right direction.

• This aligns with voter perceptions over the past year regarding gas prices: 49% say they’re moving in the right direction, the highest level tested.

The Bottom Line

Voters judge the economy by what they pay for everyday items, not by GDP growth or job statistics. With 40% saying their personal finances have worsened versus only 22% reporting improvement, messaging must focus on everyday affordability at the checkout counter and the pump.

What’s Next

Stay tuned—In the coming days, we will be posting more findings from our latest poll on health care, health savings accounts, and transparency in pricing.

We want to hear from YOU! We not only enjoy hearing from our subscribers, but we also use it in order to bring you the most recent and engaging policy information available. Share how you’re using this data or tell us what new insights you’d like to see.

Get in touch with us anytime, and let’s make an impact together!

In Case You Missed It

• 71% of Voters Support Updated Dietary Guidelines but Few Know of Changes

• Building Consensus: Voters Back Energy Infrastructure When Communities Benefit – But Draw the Line at Eminent Domain

• Most Support Building More Power Plants, but the Type of Plant Matters

• How Americans Really Feel About Energy Costs and Renewables

• Plurality Prefer Phase-Out of Obamacare’s Enhanced Premium Tax Credits

Share America's New Majority Project

Standard polling on healthcare subsidies typically measures public sentiment: Will my costs go up? Should Congress prevent that? These are legitimate questions that yield useful data. But they capture what voters think about the problem rather than how voters want to see the problem solved. America’s New Majority Project set out to answer that next question not just whether Americans want help, but what kind of help they actually want.

The results should reframe how Washington approaches this debate.

Share

Beyond Yes or No

In December 2025, ANMP presented voters with three substantive choices: keep the enhanced subsidies permanently, end them immediately, or phase them out while implementing real reforms to the underlying system.

This approach reflects ANMP’s core mission: giving voters meaningful options and discovering how they want to see challenges resolved.

The plurality choice: phase out and reform.

• 36% of voters prefer phasing out the emergency subsidies while structural reforms take effect

• This includes 39% of Republicans, 32% of Democrats, and 37% of independents

• Among swing voters the constituency that decides elections 41% want a responsible phase-out

• Only 28% want permanent extension of emergency measures

• Only 23% want immediate expiration

The middle path responsible transition combined with genuine reform commands the broadest coalition across partisan lines.

Americans See the Deeper Problem

These enhanced subsidies were emergency measures passed during COVID. They were explicitly temporary, never designed as permanent policy. ANMP’s research reveals that American voters understand this context and have drawn clear conclusions about what it implies.

Nearly two-thirds of voters (65%) agree with a fundamental proposition: if we still need emergency subsidies a decade after the Affordable Care Act’s implementation, then the ACA itself requires significant reform. This includes 26% who “strongly agree” and just 7% who “strongly disagree.” Majorities across every demographic group reach the same conclusion. Those most likely to strongly agree are Republicans (40%) and Baby Boomers (31%).

The depth of this sentiment is striking. When asked what level of change Obamacare needs:

• 31% say Obamacare should be repealed and replaced entirely

• 20% say it needs a major overhaul

• That’s 51% calling for major changes including 77% of Republicans, 52% of independents, and 28% of Democrats

• Just 28% say the program needs only targeted fixes

• Only 11% say no changes are needed

That’s a 51-39 advantage for major changes to Obamacare.

Subscribe now

Finding Solutions, Not Just Opinions

This preference for fixing the problems in Obamacare rather than just hiding them matters for a Congress caught in familiar gridlock. The House passed a three-year extension. The Senate rejected it. Bipartisan negotiations repeatedly stall. Each side knows what the other opposes, but neither has clearly mapped where genuine agreement might exist.

ANMP’s data shows voters want a phase out of the subsidies paired with reform. The political path exists. The data to illuminate it exists. What remains is the political will to act on it.

A Path Forward

Alternative solutions have been proposed that would lower premiums in the individual market, give patients more control, and reduce taxpayer spending. The current focus on enhanced credits could serve as an opportunity to pass long-desired reforms rather than simply perpetuating emergency measures.

ANMP’s research suggests two strategic imperatives:

Flip the script. Use the focus on enhanced credits as proof that Obamacare needs major changes. If emergency subsidies remain necessary after a decade, the underlying system has failed to deliver on its promises.

Take the high ground. A phase-out of enhanced credits in exchange for significant reforms represents exactly the kind of responsible governing that voters are looking for not cold-turkey cuts, not permanent emergency measures, but a genuine path to a better system.

The Bottom Line

Americans are not simply asking Washington to subsidize a broken system indefinitely. They are asking for something more substantive:

• A responsible phase-out, not abrupt termination that disrupts coverage

• Structural reforms that address why costs remain unsustainable

• Greater individual control over healthcare decisions

• An end to permanent emergency measures that substitute for actual solutions

Voters aren’t rejecting help but they don’t want emergency policy turned into permanent law. Instead, they want to fix the system that made emergency measures necessary in the first place.

ANMP’s mission is to discover not just what Americans think about the challenges facing the country, but how they want to see those challenges resolved. That’s how to truly restore a government of, by, and for the People.

On Obamacare, the answer is clear: fix the system, don’t just extend the emergency measures. The data exists to move past the current impasse. The question is whether Washington is ready to use it.

Share

America’s New Majority Project creates and shares trustworthy opinion research and strategic messaging guidance. We work with partners to empower candidates and activists who are committed to bringing power back to everyday Americans and restoring a government of, by, and for the People.

More than 2-in-3 Americans support the new federal dietary guidelines when they are explained. Low attention to the story shows the need to actively communicate the changes.

The post 71% of Voters Support Updated Dietary Guidelines But Few Know of Changes appeared first on America's New Majority Project.

Why It Matters

This poll reveals two critical disconnects: Americans overwhelmingly support the recommendations of the new Dietary Guidelines, but news of the changes is not being closely followed and trust in the government to provide the advice is low.

How to use this data

Like the new Food Pyramid, flip the typical government messaging approach. Instead of leading with “the federal government recommends…”, lead with the substance, “more whole foods, more protein, less processed food and sugar.”

For school messaging, emphasize what makes sense for kids’ nutrition rather than compliance with federal mandates—supporters chose “common-sense nutrition” over “federal authority” by 2-to-1.

Click on the image below to view the full data or read the summary below.

Awareness of new guidelines is low

• 52% of voters are closely following news of the new guidelines – 17% very closely. For comparison, 80% are following other news stories such as the ICE protests in Minneapolis and President Trump’s remarks on Greenland.

• College-educated voters (59%) are 16 points more likely to follow the story than those without a degree (43%)

• Hispanic/Latino voters are more highly engaged, at 56% (Very Closely 23% + Somewhat Closely (33%).

• The partisan gap is small, with Democrats (55%) and Republicans (54%) being nearly equally attentive.

71% support these guidelines—but only when you explain them

• 68% support the new federal nutrition guidelines when given information about what they recommend and how they are used. Just 8% oppose.

• Support is bipartisan: X of Republicans, X of Democrats, and X of independents support the guidelines.

• Support increases from 67.5% to 71.0% (+3.5 points) when voters are given more context about the specific changes. “Strongly support” jumps from 28.5% to 35.6% (+7.1 points).

Trust in government nutrition guidance

• 39% trust the government (9% completely + 30% mostly) as a source of reliable nutrition advice. 24% distrust. 36% are neutral.

• Republicans have 58% trust in government guidelines (Completely Trust 16% + Mostly Trust 42%), compared with Democrats who have only 28% Trust (Completely Trust 6% + Mostly Trust 23%).

• Trust is lukewarm—only 8.5% “completely trust” government nutrition advice. The largest group (36.4%) is neutral, suggesting an opportunity to build credibility.

Expected personal impact

• 49% expect SOME personal impact (32% small + 17% large)

• Black Americans (28%) and Hispanics (25%) are say they believe the new guidelines will have a “Large Impact” on their eating habits than White Americans (16%).

• 60% of Gen Z (18-29) say it will have an Impact on their eating habits (43% A Small Impact +17% A large Impact), which is higher than other age groups..

Parents support schools adopting the guidelines

• 41% support because “the nutrition recommendations make sense”

• 19% support because they view federal guidelines as “evidence-based”

• Supporters cite common-sense nutrition (41%) over federal authority (19%) by more than 2-to-1. When talking about schools, emphasize “more whole foods, more protein, less junk”—not “federal guidelines say so.”

The Bottom Line

Advocates must invest time and resources into making voters aware of the new guidelines with messaging that emphasizes the value of whole foods, protein, and minimally processed items rather than government authority. Focus on explaining the changes clearly, emphasizing the core substance, and letting the content speak for itself.

Share America's New Majority Project

Americans are divided on the nation’s energy strategy—but when it comes to local projects, renewables, natural gas, and next generation nuclear face far less opposition. Here’s what that means for policymakers.

The post Building Consensus: Voters Back Energy Infrastructure When Communities Benefit—But Draw the Line at Eminent Domain appeared first on America's New Majority Project.

Voters want cleaner local power—but not at the expense of affordability and reliability

Public opinion on the nation’s energy priorities is split between those emphasizing reliability and an “all of the above” strategy, and those who prioritize using renewable power. However, when asked what types of power plants they would support being built in their area, Americans show a clear preference for perceived cleaner forms of power generation.

Why It Matters

The United States must rapidly expand electricity generation to meet growing demand from data centers, advanced manufacturing, and changing consumer behavior. While wind and solar enjoy strong local support, they face reliability and geographic limitations.

The data suggests policymakers should avoid over-committing to any single source and instead pursue a balanced strategy—leveraging renewables where feasible while expanding natural gas and next-generation nuclear to ensure affordability and reliability.

How to use this data

Policymakers can use these findings to design practical energy policies aligned with public desires: affordable, reliable power from a diverse mix of sources supported by a modern grid.

Researchers can also use this data to test how information, framing, and trade-offs influence public opinion on different forms of energy production.

Click on the image below to view the full data or read the summary below.

Americans Divided on National Energy Priorities

• When asked whether the U.S. should prioritize all kinds of energy or focus mainly on renewables, respondents showed a split: 45% supported a balanced approach, while 48% favored emphasizing renewables.

• Along party lines, 68% of Republicans prioritize using all types of energy; conversely, 68% of Democrats support using renewables.

• People living in the Western part of the country show a stronger support for renewables at 54%, compared to 44% in the Midwest.

Cost and Reliability Rival Renewables in Importance

• A split sample with different wording from the question above revealed a similar split. 47% of respondents preferred prioritizing affordable and reliable sources, slightly more than the 44% who supported focusing only on renewables.

• 65% of Republicans said they favor affordable, reliable energy, while 60% of Democrats favored renewable energy over affordable, reliable energy production.

• Among those younger than 44, a majority of 51% favored renewables, while among those over 44, 51% opted for affordable energy.

Local Support Varies Sharply by Energy Source

While 57% support building new power plants in their area, the types of plants they would support vary.

• Solar power plants enjoyed the highest support, at 80%, with only 15% opposed.

• Wind power was also highly supported, with 74% in favor and only 21% opposed.

• Natural gas plants received nearly two-thirds support at 64%, with 27% opposing, reflecting the role natural gas plays as a flexible, lower-carbon fossil fuel.

• Nuclear power had divided opinion but still received a plurality of support at 46%, with 44% opposed.

• Notably, given information about small modular nuclear reactors (SMR), 60% support building an SMR power plant in their area.

• Coal plants were opposed locally, with just 36% in support and 55% against.

The Bottom Line

Americans want more power generation—but they want it done responsibly. Renewables lead in local support, while natural gas and next-generation nuclear offer pathways to reliability and affordability. The path forward isn’t choosing one source—it’s building a smarter mix.Want to explore the full results?

Why It Matters

This data shows most voters aren’t choosing sides in an energy debate—they’re choosing affordability and reliability first. Rising electricity bills and growing demand are shaping public opinion more than ideology, and voters broadly support a balanced, all-of-the-above energy approach that includes renewables alongside dependable sources like natural gas and nuclear.

How To Use This Data

For policymakers, the messaging takeaway is clear: lead with lower costs, reliability, and practical solutions, not abstract climate goals, renewable mandates, or energy tradeoffs.

Click on the image below for the report with crosstabs or read the summary below.

Most Report Higher Energy Bills

• A substantial majority (70.1%) reported an increase in household electricity bills over the past year, with 27.5% indicating a significant rise and 42.7% a slight rise.

• Among those who say the country is headed in the wrong direction 74% say their electric rates have increased and those who see the country heading in the right direction only 63% say they have seen an increase.

• Across all income levels 68% said their energy costs have risen.

Americans are Split on How to Meet Energy Needs

• 47% prioritize producing more electricity with new power plants and electrical infrastructure. This includes 60% of Republicans, 45% of independents, and 35% of Democrats.

• 41% prioritize using less electricity. This includes 29% of Republicans, 40% of independents, and 52% of Democrats.

Impact of Renewable Energy Regulations on Electricity Prices

• 42% believe renewable energy mandates raise electricity costs (18% a lot, 24% a little) while 27% believe they decrease their electric bill.

• On a party line, 56% of GOP voters, 40% of Independents and 30% of Democrats say it increases their electric costs.

• The group most likely to say it lowers their electric costs are Generation Z woman at 34%.

The Bottom Line

Rising electricity costs are reshaping public opinion. Voters support a balanced energy strategy that lowers bills, meets growing demand, and pairs clean energy with reliable power.

The post Plurality Prefer Phase-Out of Obamacare’s Enhanced Premium Tax Credits appeared first on America's New Majority Project.

The post No Clear Winner in Shutdown Fight appeared first on America's New Majority Project.

The post Voters Want Shutdown Resolved — and Plurality Support Targeted Filibuster Reform to Do It appeared first on America's New Majority Project.

The post Voters Say: The Cost of Living Is Still the Main Thing appeared first on America's New Majority Project.