This Week in Coronavirus: June 18 to June 25

Published: Jun 26, 2020

Every week we recap the past week in the coronavirus pandemic from our tracking, policy analysis, polling, and journalism.

This week saw reports of an increasing number of coronavirus hotspots at the same time the U.S. surpassed a new record — the highest daily increase in new confirmed, cases so far in this pandemic: 39,972 on June 25. Our analysis finds that as of that same day, 26 states have 14-day upward trends in COVID-19 cases and test positivity rates. Most are states that were not hit hard earlier in the pandemic. There are multiple possible policy, epidemiologic, and other factors driving these increases, including: when stay-at-home orders were lifted (and how long they were in place); the pace of reopening; the use of other social distancing measures (such as face mask requirements); increased population movement due to warming weather; outbreaks in congregate settings; the Memorial Day Holiday period; and, potentially, protests.

And as states relax social distancing measures, the latest KFF Health Tracking Poll finds that Americans are leaving their homes more often to shop, visit close family and friends, and go to work than they did in April. The poll finds 9 in 10 (89%) adults say they left their home to shop for food, medicine, or essential household items in the past week, including 61% who say they did this multiple times — up from 44% in April. Just over half (54%) say they left home to visit close friends or family in the past week, up from 30% in April. Less than half (45%) say they went to work in the past week, up from 33% in April. About three in ten (29%) report dining at a restaurant in the past week, while few (7%) rode on public transportation.

Here are the latest coronavirus stats from KFF’s tracking resources:

Global Cases and Deaths: Total cases worldwide passed 9.6 million this week – with an increase of approximately 1.1 million new confirmed cases between June 18 and June 25. There were approximately 35,300 new confirmed deaths worldwide between June 18 and June 25, bringing the total to approximately 489,000 confirmed deaths.

U.S. Cases and Deaths: There was an approximate increase of nearly 231,000 confirmed cases between June 18 and June 25. Approximately 6,000 new confirmed deaths in the past week brought the total to over 124,000 confirmed deaths in the US.*

*Total death and case counts are approximate. New Jersey is reporting probable deaths for Thursday June 25.

U.S. Tests: There have been over 29.2 million total COVID-19 tests with results in the United States —with about 3.8 million added since June 18. In the past week, 1.1% of the total U.S. population was tested.

Race/Ethnicity Data: Black individuals made up a higher share of cases/deaths compared to their share of the population in 32 of 48 states reporting cases and 33 of 45 states reporting deaths. More than half of deaths were among Black people in two states: Louisiana and Mississippi. Meanwhile, 75% of those who have died in Washington, D.C. due to COVID-19 were Black. Hispanic individuals made up a higher share of cases compared to their share of the total population in 35 of 44 states reporting cases. COVID-19 continues to have a sharp, disproportionate impact on American Indian/Alaska Native and Asian people as well in some states.

Adults at Higher Risk of Serious Illness if Infected with Coronavirus: 38% of all U.S. adults are at risk of serious illness if infected with coronavirus (92,560,223 total) due to their age (65 and over) or pre-existing medical condition. Of those at higher risk, 45% are under age 65 and at increased risk of serious illness if infected with coronavirus due to their existing medical condition such as such as heart disease, diabetes, lung disease, uncontrolled asthma or obesity. Among nonelderly adults — low-income, American Indian/Alaska Native & Black adults have a higher risk of serious illness if infected with coronavirus. In both cases – for race and household income – the higher risk of serious illness if infected with coronavirus is chiefly due to a higher prevalence of underlying health conditions and longstanding disparities in health care and other socio-economic factors.

State Reports of Long-Term Care Facility Cases and Deaths Related to COVID-19 (Includes Washington D.C.)

  • Data Reporting Status: 47 states are reporting COVID-19 data in long-term care facilities, 4 states are not reporting
  • Long-term care facilities with known cases: 10.430 (across 44 states)
  • Cases in long-term care facilities: 253,938 (across 43 states)
  • Deaths in long-term care facilities: 52,428 (in 41 states)
  • Long-term care facilities as a share of total state cases: 14% (across 43 states)
  • Long-term care facility deaths as a share of total state deaths: 45% (across 42 states)

State Social Distancing Actions (includes Washington D.C.):

  • Social Distancing: 51 states have eased at least one social distancing measure.
  • Stay At Home Order: Original stay at home order in 6 states, stay at home order eased or lifted in 39 states, no action in 6 states
  • Mandatory Quarantine for Travelers: Original traveler quarantine mandate in place in 9 states, new traveler quarantine mandate in place in 3 states, traveler quarantine mandate eased or lifted in 16 states, no action in 23 states
  • Non-Essential Business Closures: Some or all non-essential businesses permitted to reopen (some with reduced capacity) in 46 states, no action in 5 states
  • Large Gatherings Ban: Original gathering ban/limit in place in 6 states, gathering/ban limit eased or lifted in 44 states, no action in 1 states
  • Restaurant Limits: Original restaurant closures still in place in 2 states, restaurants re-opened to dine-in service (some with reduced capacity) in 48 states, no action in 1 state
  • NEW: Face Covering Requirement: Required for general public in 19 states, required for certain employees in 20 states, allows local officials to require them for general public in 4 states, no action in 9 states
  • Primary Election Postponement: Postponement in 15 states, no postponement in 36 states
  • Emergency Declaration: There are emergency declarations in all 51 states.

State COVID-19 Health Policy Actions (Includes Washington D.C.)

  • Waive Cost Sharing for COVID-19 Treatment: 3 states require, state-insurer agreement in 3 states; no action in 45 states
  • Free Cost Vaccine When Available: 9 states require, state-insurer agreement in 1 state, no action in 41 states
  • States Requires Waiver of Prior Authorization Requirements: For COVID-19 testing only in 5 states, for COVID-19 testing and treatment in 6 states, no action in 40 states
  • Early Prescription Refills: State requires in 18 states, no action in 33 states
  • Premium Payment Grace Period: Grace period extended for all policies in 4 states, grace period extended for COVID-19 diagnosis/impacts only in 4 states, expired in 8 states, no action in 35 states
  • Marketplace Special Enrollment Period: Marketplace special enrollment period still active in 5 states, ended in 7 states, no special enrollment period in 39 states
  • Paid Sick Leave: 13 states enacted, 2 proposed, no action in 36 states

State Actions on Telehealth (Includes Washington D.C.)

38 states overall have taken mandatory action expanding access to telehealth services through private insurers, including:

  • New Requirements for Coverage of Telehealth Services: Parity with in-person services in 6 states, broad coverage of telehealth services in 6 states, limited coverage of telehealth services in 6 states, no action in 33 states
  • Waiving or Limiting Cost-Sharing for Telehealth Services: Waived for COVID-19 services only in 7 states, waived or limited for all services in 9 states, no action in 35 states
  • Reimbursement Parity for Telehealth and In-Person Services: Required for all services in 17 states, no action in 34 states
  • Require Expanded Options for Delivery of Telehealth Services: Yes in 35 states, for behavioral health services only in 1 state, no action in 15 states

Approved Medicaid State Actions to Address COVID-19 (Includes Washington D.C.)

  • Approved Section 1115 Waivers to Address COVID-19: 2 states (Washington and New Hampshire) have approved waivers
  • Approved Section 1135 Waivers: 51 states have approved waivers
  • Approved 1915 (c) Appendix K Waivers: 50 states have approved waivers
  • Approved State Plan Amendments (SPAs): 45 states have temporary changes approved under Medicaid or CHIP disaster relief SPAs, 1 state has an approved traditional SPA
  • Other State-Reported Medicaid Administrative Actions: 51 states report taking other administrative actions in their Medicaid programs to address COVID-19

 

The latest Coronavirus Policy Watch posts:

The latest KFF COVID-19 resources:

  • States with Upward of 14-Day Trends in COVID-19 Cases and Positivity Rates (Slide)
  • June 2020 Health Tracking Poll – Coronavirus, Delayed Care, and 2020 Election (Poll FindingNews Release)
  • Where are the COVID-19 Hotspots? Tracking State Outbreaks (Issue Brief)
  • Drew Altman: The Front-line Workers Most At Risk From Coronavirus (Axios Column)
  • At-Home SARS-CoV-2 Testing: What Are the Options? (Interactive)
  • State Efforts to Expand Medicaid Coverage & Access to Telehealth in Response to COVID-19 (Issue Brief)
  • Options to Support Medicaid Providers in Response to COVID-19 (Issue Brief)
  • Potential Impacts of Delaying “Non-Essential” Reproductive Health Care (Issue Brief)
  • U.N. SG Criticizes Lack Of International Cooperation On Pandemic; As Virus Continues Global Spread, Nations Work To Contain Resurgent Outbreaks (KFF Daily Global Health Policy Report)

 Trackers and Tools

  • Updated: State Data and Policy Actions to Address Coronavirus (Interactive)
  • Updated: COVID-19 Coronavirus  (Interactive)
  • Updated: Medicaid Emergency Authority Tracker: Approved State Actions to Address COVID-19 (Issue Brief)

The latest KHN COVID-19 stories:

  • Seniors In Low-Income Housing Live In Fear Of COVID Infection (KHNCNN)
  • Lost On The Frontline (KHNThe Guardian)
  • Sweeps Of Homeless Camps Run Counter To COVID Guidance And Pile On Health Risks (KHNNPR)
  • KHN’s ‘What The Health?’: The Pandemic Shifts; The Politics, Not So Much (Podcast)
  • Watch: Fauci, Other Health Officials Weigh California’s COVID Response (California Health Line)
  • Packed Bars Serve Up New Rounds Of COVID Contagion (KHNHuffPost)
  • Officials Seek To Shift Resources Away From Policing To Address Black ‘Public Health Crisis’ (KHN)
  • Fearing The Deadly Combo Of COVID-19 And Cancer (KHNPeople)
  • As COVID Cases Spike, California Shifts Its Strategy (KHN)
  • Cities Brace For ‘Collision Course’ Of Heat Waves And COVID-19 (KHNNPR)
  • Airlines Want Flyers To Feel Safe, But Grab Bag Of COVID Policies Adds Turbulence (KHNUSA Today)
  • The Hidden Deaths Of The COVID Pandemic (KHNTime)
  • Pandemic Forced Insurers To Pay For In-Home Treatments. Will They Disappear? (KHN)
  • US Nurses At For-Profit Hospital Chain To Strike Over Cuts And PPE Shortages (KHNThe Guardian)
  • Lost On The Frontline (KHNThe Guardian)
  • Is A Second Wave Of Coronavirus Coming? (KHNPolitiFact)
  • COVID Pandemic Jeopardizes Vote On Oklahoma Medicaid Expansion (KHNUS News)
  • As Problems Grow With Abbott’s Fast COVID Test, FDA Standards Are Under Fire (KHNDaily Beast)
  • Easy To Say ‘Get Tested.’ Harder To Do. Here’s How. (KHN)
  • Readers And Tweeters Ponder Racism, Public Health Threats And COVID’s Cost (KHN)
  • Sex In The Time Of COVID: Gay Men Begin To Embrace A ‘New Normal’ (KHNMen’s Health)
  • Drinking Surged During The Pandemic. Do You Know The Signs Of Addiction? (KHNNPR)
  • How Those With Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder Cope With Added Angst Of COVID (KHNScientific American)
  • Listen: Threats, Pressure Prompt Some California Public Health Officials To Leave Office (KHN)
  • Listen: Navigating The Pandemic And Protests As The U.S. Reopens (KHN)
  • Listen: Pandemic Shifts Health Care And It May Be Hard To Get Genie Back In Bottle (KHN)
  • Watch: Are Administration Medical Experts Muzzled? (KHN)
  • Behind The Byline: ‘Contactless Reporting’ (KHN)

The Secret to a Safe Reopening

Published: Jun 26, 2020

As countries around the world begin to reopen, those that waited for the right time to ease lockdown restrictions seem to be in better shape than those who reopened despite higher levels of coronavrius transmission and lower public health capacity. In an article for Foreign Affairs, KFF’s Jen Kates and Josh Michaud discuss different countries’ approaches to reopening after months of lockdown to mitigate the spread of coronavirus.”Countries that proceeded cautiously, maintaining lockdowns until their outbreaks were mostly under control and their health systems were ready to handle new outbreaks, have fared better than those that opened rapidly and prematurely. Similarly, those that followed careful—and reversible—stepwise processes while communicating effectively with their publics have had more success handling inevitable surprises than those that flipped the ‘on’ switch all at once. In other words, the when and how of reopening has proved enormously consequential.”

News Release

Poll: Americans are Leaving Home More Often Now Than in April as States Ease Social Distancing Restrictions, though Coronavirus Fears Remain

Most People Who Put Off Getting Dental or Medical Care Due to Coronavirus Expect to Get It Soon

Published: Jun 26, 2020

As states continue to ease social distancing restrictions, Americans are leaving their homes more often to shop, visit close family and friends and go to work than they did in April in spite of their concerns about contracting coronavirus, the latest KFF tracking poll finds.

The poll finds 9 in 10 (89%) adults say they left their home to shop for food, medicine, or essential household items in the past week, including 61% who say they did this multiple times – up from 44% in April.

Just over half (54%) say they left home to visit close friends or family in the past week, up from 30% in April. Less than half (45%) say they went to work in the past week, up from 33% in April. About three in ten (29%) report dining at a restaurant in the past week, while few (7%) rode on public transportation.

Many of those who report leaving their homes to engage in these activities are at least somewhat worried that they may expose themselves to coronavirus in the process. For example, almost half of those who went shopping (48%) and nearly as many (44%) who went to work say they are worried about exposure to the virus.

The poll continues to find partisan differences in how Americans are reacting the coronavirus pandemic. Republicans are more likely than Democrats to leave their homes to engage in some of these activities, while Democrats are more likely to worry about exposure to the virus while doing so.

For example, Republicans are more likely to report leaving their homes to go to work in the past week (49%, compared to 37% of Democrats). Among those who went to work, Democrats are more likely to say they are worried about coronavirus exposure (62%, compared to 42% of independents and 32% of Republicans).

Republicans also are twice as likely to say they ate at a restaurant at least once in the past week (46%, compared to 21% of Democrats).

The poll also probes into how the pandemic is affecting Americans’ use of medical and dental services. The share of the public who say they or a family member has skipped or delayed care in the past month has not changed much since our May poll. Half (52%) of the public says they or someone in their family has skipped or delayed getting medical or dental care because of coronavirus this month – similar to the share who said so last month (48%).

The types of care most often put off include dental check-ups and procedures (37% of all adults) and regular check-ups or physical exams (30% of all adults). Fewer report skipping or postponing doctor visits for symptoms they were experiencing (15% of all adults), doctor visits for chronic conditions (13%) or preventive screenings (12%).

There are some signs that people are beginning to catch up on their care skipped because of coronavirus, including 7% who say they or their family member have already gotten the care they initially delayed. An additional 70% say they expect to catch up on the missed care within three months, including a third (34%) who expect to get the care within a month. Very few (2%) say they don’t expect to get the care that was skipped or postponed.

When asked why the coronavirus pandemic led them to skip or postpone care, people most often say that the doctor’s office or facility was closed or offering limited appointments (43% of all adults). Many (27% of all adults) say that they felt unsafe visiting a doctor’s office or other medical facility during the outbreak.

More than a quarter of those who say they or a family member skipped or postponed care because of coronavirus (27%, or 14% of all adults) say their or their family member’s condition worsened as a result.

The poll looks ahead to the presidential election in November and examines how voters view the biggest problems facing the country, and which presidential candidate they trust most to handle them.

When asked about who they most trust on various issues, more voters say presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden than President Donald Trump on health care (53% vs. 38%) and coronavirus (50% vs. 41%). President Trump holds a narrow trust edge on the economy (49% vs. 44%), while former Vice President Biden leads on other issues including maintaining law and order (51% vs. 41%), police violence (55% vs. 36%), and race relations (58% vs. 34%).

Designed and analyzed by public opinion researchers at KFF, the poll was conducted June 8-14 among a nationally representative random digit dial telephone sample of 1,296 adults. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish by landline (297) and cell phone (999). The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points for the full sample. For results based on subgroups, the margin of sampling error may be higher.

KFF Health Tracking Poll – June 2020

Published: Jun 26, 2020

Racism, Protests, And Racial Disparities

Key Findings:

  • Amid weeks of protests over the death of George Floyd that have drawn national attention to issues of institutional racism and police violence, the latest KFF Health Tracking Poll finds that seven in ten Black adults say they have experienced serious incidents of discrimination in their lifetime, including half who say they have felt their life was in danger because of their race or ethnicity, and about one in five (rising to 30% of Black men) who say they have been a victim of police violence. About six in ten Black adults also report experiencing unfair treatment in various settings in the past 12 months, including four in ten who experienced this while shopping (44%) or at a bar, restaurant, or entertainment venue (41%), and 30% who experienced unfair treatment in interactions with police. Hispanics are also disproportionately likely to report discrimination and unfair treatment compared to Whites, including 45% who report experiencing unfair treatment in the past 12 months and 41% who report ever experiencing specific serious forms of discrimination.
  • Majorities of the public overall support two key reforms aimed at reducing the use of excessive force by police – banning police from using chokeholds and strangleholds and banning no-knock warrants – though Republicans are less supportive (52% support banning chokeholds and 34% support banning no-knock warrants). There is broad and bipartisan support for several other police reform proposals, including requiring officers to intervene to stop the excessive use of force by other officers, requiring verbal warnings before shooting, mandatory public release of disciplinary records, and allowing individuals to sue police officers if they feel they were subjected to excessive force.
  • Two-thirds of the public support the recent protests against police violence, and 9% say they personally attended a protest or rally in the last 3 months either to protest police violence or in support of Black Lives Matter or other anti-racist causes. At the same time, a majority of the public (56%) say they are worried that recent protests may lead to an increase in coronavirus cases in their area. Democrats and Black adults – groups that are most likely to support the protests – are also among the most likely to say they are worried about the protests leading to an increase in coronavirus cases.
  • Big partisan differences remain when it comes to perceptions of racism, protests, and police violence. Large majorities of Democrats say racism (82%) and police violence against the public (65%) are “big problems” in the U.S., while much smaller shares of Republicans agree (25% and 14%, respectively). Conversely, 62% of Republicans compared with 24% of Democrats say “violence caused by protesters” is a big problem. Partisan differences also extend to knowledge about the disparities faced by Black and Hispanic adults when it comes to health care and experiences with police. For example, Democrats are twice as likely as Republicans to know that Black Americans are more likely than White Americans to get sick or die from coronavirus (69% vs. 34%). Similarly, 64% of Democrats know that Black Americans are less likely than White Americans to be covered by health insurance, while most Republicans (70%) say there is no difference. Nearly nine in ten (87%) Democrats know that Black Americans are more likely than White Americans to experience police violence, while 52% of Republicans say there is no difference.

Large Shares Of Black Adults Report Experiences With Racial Discrimination

At a time when protests across the country are highlighting issues of structural racism and discrimination, 63% of Black adults and nearly half (45%) of Hispanic adults say they have been treated unfairly in a variety of situations in the past 12 months because of their race or ethnicity. Most commonly, about four in ten Black adults and about a quarter of Hispanic adults say they have been treated unfairly due to their racial or ethnic background when they were shopping (44% and 28%, respectively) or when they were at a restaurant, bar, theater, or other entertainment place (41% and 25%). Black adults (30%) are nearly three times as likely as Hispanic adults (11%) — and ten times as likely as White adults (3%) to say they have been treated unfairly in dealings with the police due to their race. About one in five Black and Hispanic adults say they have experienced unfair treatment due to their race at work (20% and 18%, respectively) and about one in six say they have been experienced unfair treatment while getting health care (17% and 14%, respectively). Very small shares of White adults say they have experienced any of these types of unfair treatment due to their racial or ethnic background.

Figure 1: About Six In Ten Black Adults And Over Four In Ten Hispanics Say They Have Been Treated Unfairly Due To Their Race Or Ethnicity

When asked about more specific experiences of discrimination or violence due to their race or ethnicity, the disparities are no less stark. About half of Black adults (48%), including 60% of Black men and 38% of Black women, say they have ever been afraid their life was in danger because of their race. This compares to about a quarter (26%) of Hispanic adults and 16% of White adults. Black adults are also much more likely than Hispanic or White adults to say they have been denied a job for which they were qualified (40%, 15%, and 8%, respectively) or denied housing they could afford due to their race (26%, 8%, and 3%). When it comes to interactions with police, Black adults are more than twice as likely as Hispanic adults and eight times as likely as White adults to say they have been stopped or detained by police because of their racial or ethnic background (41%, 16%, and 5%, respectively). Moreover, about one in five Black adults (21%) – including 30% of Black men – say they have been a victim of police violence due to their racial background. Overall, seven in ten Black adults (71%) say they have ever experienced at least one of these more specific instances of discrimination due to their race or ethnicity, compared with four in ten Hispanics (41%) and a quarter of Whites (24%).

Figure 2: Nearly Half Of Black Americans Say They Have Been Afraid Their Life Was In Danger Due To Their Racial Background

Public Broadly Supports Proposals To Address Police Violence

In recent weeks following the death of George Floyd and ensuing nationwide protests, a number of reforms have been proposed to address police violence and excessive use of force. New York and Iowa have recently banned police from using chokeholds or strangleholds, Congressional Democrats have introduced a police reform bill to address racism and excessive force by police, and U.S. Representatives Justin Amash and Ayanna Pressley have introduced a bill to end qualified immunity for police officers, which would make it easier for victims of police misconduct to successfully sue officers in civil court.1 ,2 

When asked about a number of proposals aimed at reducing excessive use of force by police officers, majorities of the public express support. Americans overwhelmingly support requiring police to intervene and stop excessive force used by other officers and report these incidents (95%) and requiring police to give a verbal warning, when possible, before shooting a civilian (89%). About three in four support requiring states to publicly release disciplinary records for law enforcement officers (76%) and allowing individuals to sue police officers if they feel they were subjected to excessive force (73%). Two-thirds support banning police from using chokeholds and strangleholds (68%) and about half (52%) support banning no-knock warrants that allow police to enter a person’s residence unannounced.

Figure 3: Majorities Support Various Proposals Aimed At Reducing Excessive Use Of Force By Police Officers

There is bipartisan support for many proposals aimed at reducing police violence, including requiring officers to intervene to stop the excessive use of force by other officers, requiring verbal warnings before shooting, mandatory public release of disciplinary records, and allowing individuals to sue police officers if they feel they were subjected to excessive force. When it comes to banning police from using chokeholds and strangleholds, large majorities of Democrats (82%) and independents (70%) are in support, compared with a bare majority (52%) of Republicans. And while majorities of Democrats and independents support banning no-knock warrants, only about a third of Republicans (34%) support this proposal.

Table 1: There is bipartisan support for many policies aimed at reducing police violence.
Percent who support each of the following proposals:DemocratsIndependentsRepublicans
Requiring police to intervene and stop excessive force used by other officers and report these incidents97%96%95%
Requiring police to give a verbal warning before shooting at a civilian959083
Requiring states to publicly release disciplinary records for law enforcement officers897562
Allowing individuals to sue police officers if they feel they were subjected to excessive force857455
Banning police from using chokeholds and strangleholds827052
Banning no-knock warrants that allow police to enter a person’s residence unannounced655634

Most Support Recent Protests Against Police Violence; One in Ten Say They Have Participated

About two in three Americans (64%) support the recent protests against police violence while three in ten oppose the protests (30%). There are sharp partisan divisions on the recent protests with an overwhelming majority of Democrats (86%) and two in three independents (67%) saying they support the protests while about six in ten Republicans (57%) oppose. Majorities across racial/ethnic groups support the protests including about eight in ten Black Americans (84%) and about six in ten White Americans (61%) and Hispanics (64%).

Figure 4: Two-Thirds Of The Public Support Recent Protests Against Police Violence, Including At Least Six In Ten Across Race And Ethnicity

At the same time that a majority of the public supports the recent protests, more than half (56%) say they are very or somewhat worried that protests may lead to an increase in coronavirus cases in their area. Notably, Democrats and Black adults – groups that are most likely to support the protests – are also among the most likely to say they are worried about the protests leading to an increase in coronavirus cases (73% and 68% respectively).

Figure 5: A Majority Of The Public Are Worried About Increase In Coronavirus Cases From Protests

Eleven percent of adults say they have attended a protest, march, or demonstration in the last three months, including 9% who say they attended an event to protest police violence or in support of Black Lives Matter or other anti-racist causes (less than 1% of adults say they attended a protest to ease stay-at-home restrictions implemented due to coronavirus in the past three months). While a majority of Americans are worried that recent protests may lead to an increase in coronavirus cases in their area, most of those who say they attended a protest or demonstration in the last 3 months say they are not too worried (29%) or not at all worried (49%) that they may have exposed themselves to coronavirus when attending such an event.

Figure 6: About One In Ten Americans Say They Have Attended A Rally, Protest Or Demonstration In The Past Three Months

Who are the 9% of Americans who have been protesting police violence and racism in the past few months? Recent protesters are likely to be younger adults, with more than eight in ten being under 50 years old, including half (52%) who are between the ages of 18 to 29. Most of those who report attending recent protests against police violence and racism are college graduates (53%). These protesters are likely to be Democrats (42%) or independents (46%) with just 6% of protesters identifying as Republicans.

Figure 7: Protestors Against Police Violence And In Support Of Black Lives Matter More Likely To Be Younger, College Graduates

Partisans Differ in Perceptions of Racism, Police Violence, and Protests as Problems

Large shares of Americans view racism, police violence, and violence caused by protesters as at least somewhat of a problem in the U.S. today. About six in ten (58%) say racism is a “big problem,” while about four in ten say the same about police violence against the public (42%) and violence caused by protesters (38%).

Figure 8: Majority Of Americans Say Racism Is A Big Problem In The U.S. Today

While majorities across racial and ethnic groups view racism as a big problem in the U.S., the share is largest among Black adults (85%) compared with those who are Hispanic (62%) or White (53%). Racial and ethnic divisions are deeper when it comes to perceptions of the problem of police violence – 77% of Black adults say police violence against the public is a big problem, compared with just under half (47%) of Hispanic adults and about a third (34%) of White adults.

Partisan divisions in perceptions of these problems run deep. Eight in ten Democrats (82%) and a majority of independents (59%) say racism is a big problem in the U.S. today, compared with 25% of Republicans who say the same. Democrats are much more likely to say police violence is a big problem (65%) than violence caused by protesters (24%). Conversely, Republicans are much more likely to say violence caused by protesters is a big problem (62%) than to say the same of police violence against the public (14%).

Table 2: Black adults, Democrats are more likely to say police violence is a “big problem”
Percent who say each of the following is a “big problem” in the U.S. today:Party IDRace/Ethnicity
DemocratsIndependentsRepublicansWhiteBlackHispanic
Racism82%59%25%53%85%62%
Police violence against the public654114347747
Violence caused by protesters243662392745

Many Recognize Racial Disparities in Health Care and Experiences with Police Violence, but Partisan Perceptions Diverge

Overall, many adults in the U.S. recognize the disparities faced by Black and Hispanic people when it comes to health care and interactions with the police. Seven in ten adults (69%) think Black Americans are more likely than White Americans to experience police violence and a majority (56%) think Hispanic Americans are more likely than White Americans to experience police violence. A KFF analysis has shown that early data suggest coronavirus is disproportionately affecting communities of color.3  Half of the public (50%) recognize that Black Americans are more likely to get sick or die from coronavirus while fewer (36%) are aware of the disproportionate impact of coronavirus on Hispanics.4  About four in ten Americans think Black adults and Hispanic adults are more likely than their White counterparts to receive poor quality health care (42% and 38%, respectively) and to lose their job or income as a result of coronavirus (40% and 44%, respectively). More than four in ten think Black and Hispanic adults are less likely to be able to access the health care they need (44% and 45%, respectively) or to be covered by health insurance (45% and 49%, respectively).

Figure 9: Seven In Ten Say Black Americans Are More Likely To Experience Police Violence Compared To White Americans

There are partisan differences in perceptions and knowledge of disparities faced by Black and Hispanic adults when it comes to health care and experiences with police. Democrats are twice as likely as Republicans to know that Black Americans are more likely than White Americans to get sick or die from coronavirus (69% vs. 34%). Similarly, 64% of Democrats know that Black Americans are less likely than White Americans to be covered by health insurance, while most Republicans (70%) say there is no difference. Nearly nine in ten Democrats (87%) know that Black Americans are more likely than White Americans to experience police violence, while 52% of Republicans say there is no difference.

Table 3: Democrats and independents are more likely than Republicans to recognize disparities faced by Black and Hispanic Americans
 Compared to White Americans, do you think Black Americans are more or less likely to…Compared to White Americans, do you think Hispanic Americans are more or less likely to…
DemocratsIndependentsRepublicansDemocratsIndependentsRepublicans
…experience police violence
More likely87%73%38%77%59%25%
Less likely247233
No difference112152203671
…get sick or die from coronavirus
More likely694734573615
Less likely132342
No difference294662365681
…be covered by health insurance
More likely5610878
Less likely644818645129
No difference264270243963

Coronavirus, Delayed Care And 2020 Election

Key Findings:

  • Amid easing social distancing restrictions, the latest KFF Health Tracking Poll finds that people in the U.S. are venturing out of their homes more frequently than they did two months ago, including just over half who say they visited with close friends or family and three in ten who report dining at a restaurant in the past week. Many of those who have engaged in these activities say they are worried about exposing themselves to coronavirus when they do so, including about half who worry about exposure while shopping for essential items and four in ten who worry about exposing themselves at work.
  • Partisan differences exist, with Republicans more than twice as likely as Democrats to report dining at a restaurant (46% vs. 21%) and Democrats more likely than Republicans to say they worry about potential coronavirus exposure when they do venture out.
  • About half of adults (52%) say they or another family member in their household skipped or postponed some type of medical or dental care because of coronavirus, including 42% who personally skipped or postponed care. In May, similar shares (48%) said they or a family member skipped or delayed care due to the coronavirus. Dental care was the most likely to be skipped or postponed, followed by regular check-ups or physical exams. The most common reason for skipping care was that the provider’s office or facility was closed or offering only limited appointments (82%), but about half of those who say they or a family member postponed care say that feeling unsafe about visiting a medical facility during the outbreak was a reason for their decision.
  • The poll also examined voters’ views of the biggest problem facing the country and voter preference on who they trust to better handle issues such as health care, the economy, and the coronavirus outbreak. Voters give President Trump a slight edge over Democrat Joe Biden in trust to handle the economy, but prefer Biden when it comes to handling health care and coronavirus.

Public Reports Easing Up On Social Distancing In Recent Weeks, Though Many Still Worry About Coronavirus Exposure

As most states move to ease social distancing restrictions, the latest KFF Health Tracking Poll finds that U.S. adults report venturing out of their homes to go to work, shop, or visit friends and family more frequently than they did in April, though few say they have eaten at a restaurant or used public transit in the past week. Nine in ten (89%) say they have left their home to shop for food, medicine, or essential household items in the past week, including 61% who say they’ve done this at least twice (up from 44% in late April). Just over half (54%) say they have left home to visit close friends or family in the last week, up from 30% in April, and the share who report going to work at least once in the last week has increased from 33% to 45%. About three in ten (29%) report dining at a restaurant in the past week, but just 7% say they’ve ridden public transit (not asked in April).

Figure 1: Compared To April, Public Reports Leaving Home More Frequently To Shop, Visit, And Work

Many of those who report leaving their homes to engage in various activities are doing so with some trepidation. Among those who’ve left their homes to shop in the past week, about half (48%) say they are at least somewhat worried that they may expose themselves to coronavirus when doing so. Similarly, more than four in ten (44%) of those who’ve worked outside their home say they are at least somewhat worried about exposure to the virus at work, while just over half (56%) say they are not too worried or not at all worried. Among those who report dining out or visiting friends or family in the past week, most say they are not worried about exposure during these activities (63% and 75%, respectively).

Figure 2: Many Of Those Who Have Left Home In Last Week Worry About Coronavirus Exposure, Particularly While Shopping And Working

There are some partisan differences, both in engaging in activities outside their home, and how much they worry about exposing themselves to coronavirus when they do so. For example, Republicans are more than twice as likely as Democrats to say they have left home to dine at a restaurant at least once in the past week (46% vs. 21%). Even when looking at only those counties with more than 25 deaths attributed to coronavirus, this partisan difference remains with Republicans in those counties more likely than their Democratic counterparts to report leaving the house to dine at a restaurant (45% vs. 20%).

Figure 3: Republicans More Likely Than Democrats To Report Leaving Home To Dine At A Restaurant, Go To Work

Among those who have engaged in each of these activities at least once in the past week, most Republicans say they’re not too worried about exposing themselves to coronavirus while shopping, going to work, dining out, or visiting friends and family. Among Democrats, most of those who’ve left their house to shop or go to work in the past week are at least somewhat worried about virus exposure (62% for each).

Figure 4: Democrats Who Engage In Activities Outside The Home More Likely To Worry About Coronavirus Exposure During Those Activities

Half Say They Or A Household Family Member Skipped Or Delayed Care Due To Coronavirus, Most Commonly Dental Care And Routine Check-Ups

While many Americans report resuming some of their regular activities in recent weeks, many report putting off certain types of medical and dental care. About half of adults (52%) say that they or another family member living in their household skipped or postponed some type of medical or dental care in the past 3 months because of coronavirus. This includes 42% who say they personally skipped or postponed care.

Figure 5: Half Say They Or A Family Member Skipped Or Postponed Medical Or Dental Care Due To Coronavirus

Women and older adults are more likely than their counterparts to say they personally skipped or postponed care. Those with higher incomes are also somewhat more likely than those with lower incomes to report postponing care, as are those with health insurance compared to the uninsured. This latter finding may reflect the fact that those with lower incomes or without insurance may use less care under normal circumstances, and so are less likely to report skipping or postponing visits due to coronavirus. Notably, the March 2019 KFF Health Tracking Poll found that about half of adults (51%) said they or a family member had skipped or postponed health care due to cost in the past year, with uninsured adults under age 65 (76%) and those with lower household income (62%) more likely than their counterparts to say they had skipped or postponed care.

Figure 6: Adults 30 And Older, Women, And The Uninsured Are More Likely To Report Skipping Or Delaying Care Due To Coronavirus

Among those who say someone in their household skipped or delayed care, the most common types of care missed are dental check-ups or procedures (71% of those who skipped or postponed care, or 37% of all adults) and regular check-ups or physical exams (58%, 30% of all). This is followed by about a quarter who say they or a family member skipped or postponed doctor visits for symptoms they were experiencing (28% of those who skipped/postponed care, or 15% of all adults), doctor visits for chronic conditions (25%, 13% of all), and preventive screenings (23%, 12% of all).

Figure 7: Most Common Type Of Care Skipped Or Delayed: Dental Visits, Followed By Routine Check-Ups

Overall, 27% of those who say they or a family member skipped or postponed care (14% of all adults) say that either they or their family member experienced a worsening medical condition as a result. When asked to name the condition that got worse, responses reflect the type of care that people report skipping or postponing, with by far the most common response being dental problems, named by 44% of those who say their own or a family member’s condition got worse after skipping care. Other responses include back, joint, or bone pain or problems (mentioned by 14% of those who say a condition got worse), eye or vision problems (7%), mental health conditions (4%), and kidney problems (4%). Since much of the care that people report skipping or delaying is in the form of routine check-ups and preventive screenings, it may be several months before the effects are recognized in terms of delayed diagnoses or missed opportunities for early treatment of cancers or other conditions.

Figure 8: Some Of Those Who Say They Or A Family Member Skipped Care Report Worsening Medical Conditions As A Result
Figure 9: Dental Problems Most Commonly Reported As Conditions That Worsened As Result Of Skipped Or Delayed Care

When asked about the details behind their reasons for skipping or postponing care amid the coronavirus pandemic, large shares report that the doctor’s office or facility was closed or offering limited appointments (82% of those who say they or a family member missed out on care, or 43% of all adults). About half (53%) of those who say they or a household member skipped care due to coronavirus (27% of all adults) say that they felt unsafe vising a doctor’s office or other medical facility during the outbreak. Far fewer (11% of those who say they or a family member missed care due to coronavirus, or 6% of all adults) cite cost or affordability concerns as a driving factor. While this question was asked specifically of those who said they skipped or delayed care because of the coronavirus, previous KFF surveys have found that prior to the pandemic, about half of adults said that they or a household family member had put off or skipped some sort of health care or dental care in the past year because of the cost.

Figure 10: Office Closures Are Most Common Reason For Delaying Care Amid Coronavirus, But Many Also Report Feeling Unsafe Visiting Facilities

Similar to results from the May 2020 KFF Health Tracking Poll, most of those who say they or a family member skipped or postponed care due to the pandemic say they expect to get the care relatively soon, with seven in ten saying they expect to get the care within the next 3 months. Indeed, with many states easing social distancing restrictions, a third (34%) of those who say they or a family member skipped or delayed care due to coronavirus expect to get care in the next month and 7% say they have already gotten the care that was delayed. Very few (2%) say they don’t expect to get the care that was skipped or postponed.

Figure 11: Most Who Delayed Care Expect To Get It Relatively Soon, Including Some Who Have Already Gotten It

Joe Biden Has Edge With Voters On Most Issues, But President Trump Trusted More To Handle The Economy

In the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, an economic downturn, and weeks of protests against racism and police brutality, the latest KFF Tracking Poll looks ahead to the presidential election in November and examines how voters view the biggest problems facing the country, and which presidential candidate they trust most to handle them. Partisanship has a heavy hand in voters’ views when asked to say in their own words what they think is the biggest problem facing the country, with responses like “President Trump” (named by 17% of registered voters, including 31% of Democrats and 18% of independents), “political polarization” (named by 8% of voters), and “Democrats/liberals/the political left” (named by 7% of voters, including 19% of Republicans and 5% of independents) appearing among top responses to an open-ended question. Several of the issues driving recent news also appear among voters’ list of top problems, including racism and race relations (12% of voters, 20% of Democrats), coronavirus (7%), and the economy and unemployment (5%).

Figure 12: Partisan Voters Have Vastly Different Views Of Top Problem Facing Country

This month’s poll also takes a look at the critical group of swing voters who have not yet made up their minds about their vote for president in November. At least one in ten swing voters offer racism and race relations (15%), President Trump (10%), and political polarization (10%) as the biggest problems facing the country.

Defining Swing Voters

In this month’s poll, 30% of registered voters say they are “definitely going to vote for President Trump” and 37% say they are “definitely going to vote for Joe Biden.” Overall, 29% are defined as “swing voters,” including those who say they are undecided in their 2020 vote choice (7%) or are “probably” going to vote for President Trump (8%) or Democratic nominee Joe Biden (14%) but have not made up their minds yet.

Figure 13: Swing Voters Name Racism, President Trump, And Political Polarization Among The Biggest Problems Facing The Country

When asked which candidate they trust to do a better job of dealing with various issues, more voters say they trust Joe Biden than Donald Trump in a variety of areas. This includes a roughly ten percentage point gap in favor of Biden on which candidate they trust to do a better job maintaining law and order (51% trust Biden vs. 41% trust Trump) and the coronavirus outbreak (50% vs. 41%). There are even larger gaps in favor of Biden on issues including health care (53% vs. 38%), police violence (55% vs. 36%), and race relations (58% vs. 34%). When it comes to handling the economy, similar shares of voters trust President Trump (49%) as trust Biden (45%).

Figure 14: Voters Give Joe Biden The Edge Over President Trump On Most Issues, With The Exception Of The Economy

Not surprisingly, large majorities of voters from each political party say they trust their own party’s candidate to do a better job dealing with each of the issues tested in the poll. Among independent voters, Joe Biden has the clear edge over President Trump on trust to handle race relations (58% vs. 31%), police violence (54% vs. 35%), and health care (54% vs. 37%). Independent voters are more divided on which candidate they trust to do a better job on the economy (51% trust President Trump compared to 40% who trust Joe Biden) and to handle maintaining law and order (46% trust Joe Biden and 42% trust President Trump).

Table 1: Among voters, partisans trust their party’s candidate to do a better job dealing with each of the issues compared to the other party’s candidate.
Percent of registered voters who trust each candidate to a better job dealing with each of the following:Democratic votersIndependent votersRepublican voters
The economy
Donald Trump14%51%90%
Joe Biden81428
Maintaining law and order
Donald Trump64287
Joe Biden91469
The coronavirus outbreak
Donald Trump84184
Joe Biden864910
Health care
Donald Trump53784
Joe Biden915411
Police violence
Donald Trump43576
Joe Biden915415
Race relations in the U.S.
Donald Trump53174
Joe Biden915818

Among swing voters who are yet to make up their minds, a slight majority (53%) trust Donald Trump to do a better job dealing with the economy (compared to 36% who trust Joe Biden). However, they are more likely to trust Joe Biden than to trust Donald Trump to do a better job dealing with all other issues tested, including majorities who prefer Joe Biden to better deal with race relations (66% vs. 20%), police violence (58% vs. 25%), health care (55% vs. 29%).

Figure 15: Among Swing Voters, Biden Has Edge Over Trump On Most Issues, With The Exception Of The Economy

Methodology

This KFF Health Tracking Poll was designed and analyzed by public opinion researchers at the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF). The survey was conducted June 8th-14th, 2020, among a nationally representative random digit dial telephone sample of 1,296 adults ages 18 and older, living in the United States, including Alaska and Hawaii (note: persons without a telephone could not be included in the random selection process). The sample included 291 respondents reached by calling back respondents that had previously completed an interview on the KFF Tracking poll at least nine months ago. Computer-assisted telephone interviews conducted by landline (297) and cell phone (999, including 719 who had no landline telephone) were carried out in English and Spanish by SSRS of Glen Mills, PA. To efficiently obtain a sample of lower-income and non-White respondents, the sample also included an oversample of prepaid (pay-as-you-go) telephone numbers (25% of the cell phone sample consisted of prepaid numbers) as well as a subsample of African American respondents who had previously completed interviews on the SSRS Omnibus poll (n=86). Both the random digit dial landline and cell phone samples were provided by Marketing Systems Group (MSG). For the landline sample, respondents were selected by asking for the youngest adult male or female currently at home based on a random rotation. If no one of that gender was available, interviewers asked to speak with the youngest adult of the opposite gender. For the cell phone sample, interviews were conducted with the adult who answered the phone. KFF paid for all costs associated with the survey.

The combined landline and cell phone sample was weighted to balance the sample demographics to match estimates for the national population using data from the Census Bureau’s 2018 American Community Survey (ACS) on sex, age, education, race, Hispanic origin, and region along with data from the 2010 Census on population density. The sample was also weighted to match current patterns of telephone use using data from the January- June 2019 National Health Interview Survey. The weight takes into account the fact that respondents with both a landline and cell phone have a higher probability of selection in the combined sample and also adjusts for the household size for the landline sample, and design modifications, namely, the oversampling of prepaid cell phones and likelihood of non-response for the re-contacted sample. All statistical tests of significance account for the effect of weighting.

The margin of sampling error including the design effect for the full sample is plus or minus 3 percentage points. Numbers of respondents and margins of sampling error for key subgroups are shown in the table below. For results based on other subgroups, the margin of sampling error may be higher. Sample sizes and margins of sampling error for other subgroups are available by request. Note that sampling error is only one of many potential sources of error in this or any other public opinion poll. Aduts of all racial and ethnic groups, including Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, are included in the total, however only groups with sufficient numbers of responses to ensure statistical validity are broken out for individual analysis. Due to an inadvertent rounding error, an earlier version of this topline initially reported the net percentage of adults who attended a protest against police violence/in support of Black Lives Matter in Q14b/Q15 Combo Table as 10%. Kaiser Family Foundation public opinion and survey research is a charter member of the Transparency Initiative of the American Association for Public Opinion Research.

GroupN (unweighted)M.O.S.E.
Total1,296± 3 percentage points
Registered voters1,094± 4 percentage points
Party Identification
Democrats405± 6 percentage points
Republicans305± 7 percentage points
Independents465± 5 percentage points
Race/Ethnicity
White811± 4 percentage points
Black211± 9 percentage points
Hispanic177± 8 percentage points

Cross-tabs

Endnotes

  1. “N.Y. Bans Chokeholds and Approves Other Measures to Restrict Police”. The New York Times. (June 12, 2020). https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/nyregion/50a-repeal-police-floyd.html ↩︎
  2. “Amash, Pressley introduce bipartisan legislation to end qualified immunity” (June 4, 2020). https://amash.house.gov/media/press-releases/amash-pressley-introduce-bipartisan-legislation-end-qualified-immunity ↩︎
  3. “Communities of Color at Higher Risk for Health and Economic Challenges due to COVID-19”. KFF. (April 7, 2020). https://modern.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/communities-of-color-at-higher-risk-for-health-and-economic-challenges-due-to-covid-19/. ↩︎
  4. “COVID-19 in Racial and Ethnic Minority Groups.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/need-extra-precautions/racial-ethnic-minorities.html ↩︎

States with Upward of 14-Day Trends in COVID-19 Cases and Positivity Rates

Published: Jun 26, 2020

Source

KFF analysis of cases and testing data from the Johns Hopkins University COVID-19 Dashboard and The COVID Tracking Project.

News Release

4.7 Million Uninsured Adults Could Become Eligible for Medicaid by 2021 if All Remaining States Expanded the Program under the ACA

Published: Jun 25, 2020

About 4.7 million uninsured adults could gain eligibility for Medicaid by 2021 if the 14 remaining non-expansion states were to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, a new KFF analysis finds.

That figure includes an estimated 2.8 million adults who already were uninsured prior to the coronavirus pandemic and would fall in the “coverage gap” – meaning they have incomes too high to qualify for Medicaid but too low for ACA marketplace subsidies – as well as 1.9 million more people who are at risk of losing health insurance due to job loss during the pandemic and otherwise would end up in the coverage gap.

An additional 3.3 million adults could become newly eligible for Medicaid coverage instead of ACA marketplace coverage if the remaining 14 states expanded Medicaid. Medicaid is more comprehensive than marketplace coverage and the federal government would pay ninety percent of the bill but that would require additional state expenditures.

Even prior to the pandemic, the potential for covering millions of uninsured people had become the focus of political debate in a number of non-expansion states, including ballot initiatives in Missouri and Oklahoma as well as debate in North Carolina and Kansas. The COVID-19 crisis highlights the implications for the uninsured in states that have not expanded. That is partly due to increased health risks, but also because some people who lose income, jobs and potentially employer-sponsored health insurance amid the pandemic may lack an affordable coverage option that protects against catastrophic health costs and facilitates access to care.

The current economic downturn is the first during which the ACA, including the Medicaid expansion, will be in place as a safety net for people losing their jobs and health insurance. Without it, many more people would likely end up uninsured as the U.S. moves through a recession.

News Release

Greater Than AIDS, with Support from Walgreens and Orasure Technologies, to Provide 10,000 Free In-Home HIV Tests to Community Partners

The Collaboration Expands HIV Self-Testing in High-Need Areas During COVID-19

Published: Jun 25, 2020

 

San Francisco, CA, June 25, 2020 – With in-person health services limited due to COVID-19, Greater Than AIDS, a public information initiative of KFF, and Walgreens today announced a new program to provide 10,000 OraQuick® In-Home HIV Test kits to support expanded testing options in high-need areas. Local health agencies and community-based organizations will distribute the FDA-approved, self-administered tests at no cost to those unable to get tested in person.

Just ahead of the 25th anniversary of National HIV Testing Day (June 27), the announcement comes at a critical time with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimating that HIV testing is down 50 to 70 percent since February.

“As COVID-19 continues, we are seeing how it threatens other health responses,” said Tina Hoff, a senior vice president at KFF, which directs Greater Than AIDS. “This program aims to support frontline HIV service organizations as they transition to new ways of providing care during these difficult times.”

Walgreens is providing a donation for the purchase of 9,000 OraQuick HIV test kits with an additional 1,000 donated by OraSure Technologies, Inc., the manufacturer of the rapid oral swab HIV self-tests. KFF, through Greater Than AIDS, is managing distribution of the test kits to community partners.

“While HIV testing efforts may look different than in years past, we’re honored to collaborate with Greater Than AIDS in our 10th year of working together to highlight the critical role testing plays in prevention and care,” said Luke Sauter, vice president, specialty pharmacy, Walgreens. “Walgreens continues to advocate for HIV testing, education and care in the communities we serve with over 3,000 HIV-trained specialists in our stores.”

A record 325+ community partners, including health departments and HIV service organizations, in 215 cities in 47 states had signed on to provide free HIV testing in Walgreens stores across the country as part of the 2020 Greater Than AIDS/Walgreens National HIV Community Partnership when the in-store activation was put on hold due to COVID-19. These community partners — including those in the 48 counties in the Federal Ending the HIV Epidemic: A Plan for America — will be prioritized to receive the free HIV self-tests through this program.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently issued new information about the OraQuick In-Home HIV Test to support wider use, and a Dear Colleague Letter from the CDC in May encourages offering HIV self-testing to PrEP clients during COVID-19. Quarterly HIV testing is required as part of the prescribing protocols for PrEP, the HIV prevention pill.

“When it comes to eradicating HIV, the first step is to know your HIV status. On this year’s National HIV Testing Day, we are honored to work with Greater Than AIDS and Walgreens to provide OraQuick In-Home HIV Tests to allow testing at home or wherever is convenient,” said Stephen S. Tang, President and Chief Executive Officer of OraSure Technologies. “COVID-19 has interrupted so much of ‘normal’ life. Let’s make sure it doesn’t halt the fight against HIV/AIDS.”

Greater Than AIDS and Walgreens will also provide community partners with informational materials and digital promotions to support awareness and outreach.

For more about the Greater Than AIDS/Walgreens National HIV Community Partnership and other efforts to expand HIV testing, go to: greaterthan.org/walgreens.

About Greater Than AIDS

Greater Than AIDS is a leading national public information response from KFF focused on communities most affected in the U.S. Through targeted media messages and community outreach, Greater Than AIDS and its partners works to increase knowledge, reduce stigma and promote actions to stem the spread of the disease.

Since 2011, the Greater Than AIDS/Walgreens National HIV Community Partnership has joined with health departments and HIV service organizations across the country to provide more than 57,000 free HIV tests in Walgreens stores in support of National HIV Testing Day (NHTD). In 2019, the Partnership accounted for more than three quarters of NHTD events reported by the CDC.

Filling the need for trusted information on national health issues. KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation) is a nonprofit organization based in San Francisco, California (not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente). KFF develops and runs its own policy analysis, journalism and communications programs, sometimes in partnership with major news organizations.

About Walgreens

Walgreens (walgreens.com), one of the nation’s largest drugstore chains, is included in the Retail Pharmacy USA Division of Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc. (Nasdaq: WBA), a global leader in retail and wholesale pharmacy. Walgreens is proud to be a neighborhood health, beauty and retail destination supporting communities across the country, and was named to FORTUNE* magazine’s 2019 Companies that Change the World list. Approximately 8 million customers interact with Walgreens in stores and online each day. As of August 31, 2019, Walgreens operates 9,277 drugstores with a presence in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, along with its omnichannel business, Walgreens.com. Walgreens also provides specialty pharmacy and mail services and offers in-store clinics and other health care services throughout the United States, most of which are operated by our health care strategic partners.

About OraSure Technologies

OraSure Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: OSUR) empowers the global community to improve health and wellness by providing access to accurate, essential information. Together with its wholly-owned subsidiaries, DNA Genotek, Diversigen, CoreBiome (now operating under the Diversigen brand) and Novosanis, OraSure provides its customers with end-to-end solutions that encompass tools, services and diagnostics. The OraSure family of companies is a leader in the development, manufacture, and distribution of rapid diagnostic tests, sample collection and stabilization devices, and molecular services solutions designed to discover and detect critical medical conditions. OraSure’s portfolio of products is sold globally to clinical laboratories, hospitals, physician’s offices, clinics, public health and community-based organizations, research institutions, government agencies, pharma, commercial entities and direct to consumers.

How Many Uninsured Adults Could Be Reached If All States Expanded Medicaid?

Authors: Rachel Garfield, Robin Rudowitz, and Anthony Damico
Published: Jun 25, 2020

Data Note

Summary

As the country grapples with the public health and economic consequences of the coronavirus pandemic, there has been a renewed focus on coverage options that may be available to individuals who lose income, jobs and potentially employer sponsored insurance (ESI). The Affordable Care Act (ACA) established new coverage options through Medicaid or subsidized coverage through ACA marketplaces. Millions of people are enrolled in or eligible for coverage through these new pathways. However, in states that do not expand Medicaid, many adults, including almost all childless adults, fall into a “coverage gap” because their incomes are above Medicaid eligibility limits but below the poverty level, which is the lower limit for Marketplace premium tax credits. As more people lose their jobs and accompanying ESI, more may fall into the coverage gap, particularly starting in 2021 after unemployment benefits expire for many who have lost their jobs and incomes are likely to drop below the minimum threshold for marketplace subsidies. This analysis estimates how many uninsured adults—including those uninsured even before the pandemic and those who could become uninsured as a result of it— could become eligible for Medicaid if states that have not yet expanded the program do so. Methods underlying the analysis are detailed in the methods section at the end of the brief. Key findings include the following:

  • If the 14 states that have not adopted the Medicaid expansion to date do so, an estimated 2.8 million adults who were uninsured in 2020 would move out of the coverage gap by 2021 and instead have access to Medicaid coverage. An additional 2.1 million previously uninsured adults who are eligible for marketplace subsidies in non-expansion states would instead become eligible for Medicaid, with much lower out-of-pocket costs for premiums and cost sharing.
  • In addition, some people who lose employer sponsored coverage and become uninsured as a result of the current economic downturn would become eligible for Medicaid rather than fall into the coverage gap. Based on analysis estimating that nearly 27 million could lose ESI and became uninsured as a result of recently becoming unemployed, we find that 1.9 million more who otherwise would be in the coverage gap could gain Medicaid eligibility by January 2021 if all states adopted the expansion. Just over a million additional people who could potentially lose ESI and became uninsured with incomes between 100-138% FPL would also become eligible for Medicaid instead of marketplace subsidies.
  • In total, if non-expansion states expanded Medicaid under the ACA, about 4.7 million adults who would otherwise fall into the coverage gap by 2021 would gain eligibility, and an additional 3.3 million adults would become newly eligible for Medicaid coverage instead of marketplace coverage. In addition, there are a small number of uninsured adults already eligible for Medicaid in non-expansion states; their eligibility would not change if their states expanded, but increased outreach could lead them to enroll in coverage. Including the small number of currently eligible non-elderly adults in these states, the total reach of Medicaid among uninsured nonelderly adults in non-expansion states could be nearly 10 million.

Potential Reach of Expansion among Adults Uninsured Prior to Pandemic

In states that have not expanded Medicaid, many uninsured adults below poverty, including most childless adults, fall into a “coverage gap.” Under the ACA, Medicaid eligibility is extended to nearly all low-income individuals with incomes at or below 138 percent of poverty ($17,609 for an individual in 2020). While the Medicaid expansion was intended to be national, the June 2012 Supreme Court ruling essentially made it optional for states. As of May 2020, 14 states had not expanded their programs. Medicaid eligibility for adults in states that did not expand their programs is quite limited: the median income limit for parents in these states is just 41% of poverty, or an annual income of $8,905 for a family of three in 2020, and in nearly all states not expanding, childless adults remain ineligible. Further, because the ACA envisioned low-income people receiving coverage through Medicaid, it does not provide financial assistance to people below poverty for other coverage options. As a result, in states that do not expand Medicaid, many adults, including all childless adults, fall into a “coverage gap” of having incomes above Medicaid eligibility limits but below the poverty level, which is the lower limit for Marketplace premium tax credits.

Among adults uninsured even before the pandemic, an estimated 2.8 million poor uninsured adults would fall into the “coverage gap” that results from state decisions not to expand Medicaid by 2021. This number includes the 2.3 million in the coverage gap without accounting for the effects of the pandemic and an additional half a million individuals in non-expansion states who did not have insurance in early 2020 and are estimated to lose Marketplace eligibility by 2021 due to job losses. Individuals in the gap have income that is above current Medicaid eligibility but below the lower limit for Marketplace premium tax credits. Reflecting limits on Medicaid eligibility outside ACA pathways, most people in the coverage gap (81%) are adults without dependent children. Adults left in the coverage gap by 2021 are concentrated in the South, which accounts for 9 out of 14 states that have not expanded. Of those in the gap, one-third live in Texas, 18 percent in Florida, 12 percent in Georgia, and eight percent in North Carolina. There are no uninsured adults in the coverage gap in Wisconsin because the state is providing Medicaid eligibility to adults up to the poverty level under a Medicaid waiver.

If states that are currently not expanding their programs adopt the Medicaid expansion, all of the 2.8 million adults in the coverage gap would gain Medicaid eligibility (Table 1 and Figure 1). In addition, 2.1 million uninsured adults with incomes between 100 and 138% of poverty (most of whom are currently eligible for Marketplace coverage) would also gain Medicaid eligibility, substantially lowering the out-of-pocket costs for premiums and cost-sharing they would otherwise face. A smaller number (about 757,000) of uninsured adults in non-expansion states are already eligible for Medicaid under eligibility pathways in place before the ACA. If all states expanded Medicaid, those in the coverage gap and those who are instead eligible for Marketplace coverage would bring the number of nonelderly uninsured adults eligible for Medicaid to about 5.7 million people in the fourteen current non-expansion states. The potential scope of Medicaid varies by state.

Figure 1: Nonelderly Adults in Non-Expansion States Who Were Uninsured Before the Pandemic and Would be Eligible if Their State Expanded, January 2021

Potential Reach of Expansion among People Losing ESI after Job Loss

The economic consequences of the coronavirus pandemic have led to historic level of job loss in the United States. Social distancing policies required to address the crisis have led many businesses to cut hours, cease operations, or close altogether. Between March 1st and May 2nd, 2020, more than 31 million people filed for unemployment insurance and an estimated nearly 78 million people lived in a family in which someone lost a job. Most people in these families (61%, or 47.5 million) were covered by ESI prior to job loss. Previous KFF estimates showed that nearly 27 million people could lose ESI and became uninsured following job loss. In some cases, employers may be continuing health benefits for furloughed or laid off workers, but that will likely end if unemployment remains high. Some people in this group can elect to continue ESI for a period by paying the full premium (called COBRA continuation) or may become eligible for Medicaid or subsidized coverage through the ACA marketplaces. While the state unemployment insurance benefit payments and federal supplement available to most people mean few will fall into the coverage gap immediately, a larger number could find themselves in the gap after these benefits expire.

Nationally, coverage losses among people who previously had ESI and lost their jobs could lead an additional 1.9 million adults to fall into the coverage gap by January 2021. Recent analysis shows that by January 2021, when unemployment insurance (UI) benefits cease for most people, an estimated 1.9 million could fall into the coverage gap. People who lose ESI and find themselves in the coverage gap by January 2021 are concentrated in Georgia (21%), Texas (20%), and Florida (18%).

If all states adopted the expansion, 1.9 million newly uninsured adults who otherwise would fall into the coverage gap would instead be eligible for Medicaid (Figure 2 and Table 2). If all states adopted the expansion, these individuals would be eligible for Medicaid. In addition, an estimated 1.2 million individuals with incomes between 100-138% FPL who otherwise would be eligible for marketplace subsidies would also become eligible for Medicaid if all states expanded. Counting the 1.1 million adults in non-expansion states who are already eligible for Medicaid even without expansion (and whose eligibility would not change), the total number of newly-uninsured adults who could be eligible for Medicaid in non-expansion states would be 4.2 million.

Figure 2: Nonelderly Adults Who Became Uninsured Due to Pandemic Job Losses (March 1 – May 2) and Would Be Medicaid Eligible if Their State Expanded, January 2021

In total, if non-expansion states expanded Medicaid under the ACA, about 4.7 million adults who would otherwise fall into the coverage gap by 2021 would gain eligibility (Table 3). An additional 3.3 million adults would become newly eligible for Medicaid coverage instead of marketplace coverage. Including the small number of currently eligible non-elderly adults in these states, the total reach of Medicaid among uninsured nonelderly adults in non-expansion states could be nearly 10 million.

Looking Ahead

Given the health risks facing all Americans right now, access to health coverage after loss of employment provides important protection against catastrophic health costs and facilitates access to care. This is the first economic downturn during which the ACA will be in place as a safety net for people losing their jobs and health insurance. Without it, many more people would likely end up uninsured as the U.S. heads into a recession. However, if all states adopted the expansion, more people would have options for affordable coverage and not fall into the coverage gap. These estimates show increases in eligibility but do not account for take-up or enrollment in coverage. Individuals currently in the coverage gap as well as those who may be newly eligible for coverage due to job loss may not know they are eligible for ACA coverage or may need assistance in applying to enroll in coverage. The federal government covers 90% of the cost of coverage for Medicaid expansion enrollees, leaving states with 10% of the expense, an amount that could grow if job losses increase. However, some research that pre-dates the pandemic shows that states may experience net budget savings following Medicaid expansion after accounting for resulting reductions in the cost of other state programs.

Methods

This analysis draws on KFF’s estimates of the number of adults that fall into the Medicaid coverage gap as well as ACA eligibility among people losing employer-sponsored insurance (ESI) due to the coronavirus pandemic. Detailed methods underlying both those analyses, both of which are based on the 2018 American Community Survey, are available via the links above. Notably, in contrast to previous coverage gap estimates, the estimates in this brief are based on estimated 2020 population. In order to estimate the 2020 population within each state, we linearly extrapolated 2020 state population estimates based on 2018 and 2019 population estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau to determine a population increase factor between 2018 and 2020 within each state. We then applied this multiplier to the weight of each individual in the microdata to approximate state population sizes in mid-2020 rather than mid-2018. Coverage gap numbers in this analysis also differ from previous KFF estimates in that they include people who, absent the pandemic and estimated related job loss/loss of income, were uninsured but eligible for marketplace premium subsidies; with the loss of jobs and income, they instead fall into the coverage gap.

Robin Rudowitz and Rachel Garfield are with KFF. Anthony Damico is an independent consultant.

Tables

Table 1: Nonelderly Adults in Non-Expansion States Who Were Uninsured Before the Pandemic and Would be Medicaid Eligibleif Their State Expanded, January 2021
Newly Eligible for Medicaid if State Expands
StateTotalEligible for Medicaid under non-ACA PathwayIn the Coverage Gap(<100% FPL)Eligible for Marketplace Coverage(100%-138% FPL**)
All Non-Expansion States5,679,000757,0002,802,0002,119,000
Alabama275,00032,000155,00088,000
Florida1,022,00096,000491,000435,000
Georgia656,000105,000342,000208,000
Kansas97,00012,00047,00038,000
Mississippi203,00025,000114,00065,000
Missouri255,00027,000134,00094,000
North Carolina457,00056,000234,000167,000
Oklahoma232,00034,000117,00082,000
South Carolina250,00030,000127,00093,000
South Dakota37,0006,00016,00016,000
Tennessee292,00050,000138,000104,000
Texas1,772,000195,000878,000699,000
Wisconsin*109,00087,00022,000
Wyoming21,000N/A10,0008,000
NOTES: * Wisconsin provides Medicaid eligibility to adults up the poverty level under a Medicaid waiver. As a result, there is no one in the coverage gap in Wisconsin. ** The “100%-138% FPL” category presented here uses a Marketplace eligibility determination for the lower bound (100% FPL) and a Medicaid eligibility determination for the upper bound (138% FPL) in order to appropriately isolate individuals within the range of potential Medicaid expansions but also with sufficient resources to avoid the coverage gap. Totals may not sum due to rounding. N/A: Sample size too small for reliable estimate.SOURCE: KFF. See Methods for more details.
Table 2: Nonelderly Adults in Non-Expansion States Who Became Uninsured Due to Pandemic Job Losses (March 1st thru May 2nd) and Would Be Medicaid Eligible if Their State Expanded, January 2021
Newly Eligible for Medicaid if State Expands
StateTotalEligible for Medicaid under Non-ACA PathwayIn the Coverage Gap(<100% FPL)Eligible for Marketplace Coverage(100%-138% FPL**)
All Non-Expansion States4,225,0001,127,0001,924,0001,174,000
Alabama225,00053,000115,00057,000
Florida741,000149,000351,000241,000
Georgia802,000209,000398,000195,000
Kansas112,00029,00052,00031,000
Mississippi113,00029,00058,00027,000
Missouri242,00050,000119,00073,000
North Carolina367,00086,000178,000104,000
Oklahoma163,00043,00074,00046,000
South Carolina211,00052,00099,00061,000
South Dakota15,000N/A7,0005,000
Tennessee206,00057,00086,00063,000
Texas798,000173,000382,000243,000
Wisconsin*213,000189,00024,000
Wyoming16,000N/AN/AN/A
NOTES: * Wisconsin provides Medicaid eligibility to adults up the poverty level under a Medicaid waiver. As a result, there is no one in the coverage gap in Wisconsin. ** The “100%-138% FPL” category presented here uses a Marketplace eligibility determination for the lower bound (100% FPL) and a Medicaid eligibility determination for the upper bound (138% FPL) in order to appropriately isolate individuals within the range of potential Medicaid expansions but also with sufficient resources to avoid the coverage gap. Totals may not sum due to rounding. N/A: Sample size too small for reliable estimate.SOURCE: KFF. See Methods for more details.
Table 3: Nonelderly Adults in Non-Expansion States Who Were Uninsured Before the Pandemic or Lost ESI due to Pandemic and Would be Medicaid Eligible if Their State Expanded, January 2021
Newly Eligible for Medicaid if State Expands
StateTotalEligible for Medicaidunder Non-ACA PathwayIn the Coverage Gap(<100% FPL)Eligible for Marketplace Coverage(100%-138% FPL**)
All Non-Expansion States9,904,0001,884,0004,727,0003,293,000
Alabama500,00085,000270,000145,000
Florida1,764,000245,000842,000676,000
Georgia1,458,000315,000740,000403,000
Kansas209,00041,00099,00069,000
Mississippi317,00053,000171,00092,000
Missouri497,00077,000253,000167,000
North Carolina825,000142,000411,000271,000
Oklahoma395,00077,000190,000128,000
South Carolina461,00082,000226,000153,000
South Dakota52,0009,00023,00020,000
Tennessee499,000107,000224,000167,000
Texas2,570,000368,0001,260,000942,000
Wisconsin*322,000276,00046,000
Wyoming37,0007,00017,00013,000
NOTES: * Wisconsin provides Medicaid eligibility to adults up the poverty level under a Medicaid waiver. As a result, there is no one in the coverage gap in Wisconsin. ** The “100%-138% FPL” category presented here uses a Marketplace eligibility determination for the lower bound (100% FPL) and a Medicaid eligibility determination for the upper bound (138% FPL) in order to appropriately isolate individuals within the range of potential Medicaid expansions but also with sufficient resources to avoid the coverage gap. Totals may not sum due to rounding. N/A: Sample size too small for reliable estimate.SOURCE: KFF. See Methods for more details.