Medical expenses rank among the financial concerns weighing most heavily on the electorate as polling day draws nearer. Data gathered by KFF's Health Tracking Poll on October 6 show that roughly three in five voters express concern about being able to pay for medical care, with close to half identifying healthcare costs as a top priority they want candidates to address.
Across election cycles, candidates running in 2026 have positioned healthcare affordability — not merely access — at the center of their pitch to voters, raising questions about which parties stand to gain financially from the system's elevated costs.
Across candidate platforms, three recurring policy debates have taken shape around how people gain access to health coverage, what that coverage ultimately costs them, and how much influence the pharmaceutical industry holds over the system — condensed into shorthand labels such as "Medicare for All," "Lower healthcare costs," and "Take on Big Pharma." The first of these labels points to a single-payer arrangement built on the architecture of the existing Medicare program, in which a federally administered plan would extend coverage to the broader population. Adults of older age make up the largest share of those receiving the benefit, alongside other qualifying populations.
A KFF poll tracking the question since 2016 found that roughly two in three Americans — 66 percent — now back Medicare for All, a share that has not been recorded higher at any point in the survey's history. Among the three groups surveyed, backing for the measure ran highest with Democratic respondents at 84 percent, while independents came in at 72 percent and Republicans at 34 percent.
While healthcare proposals circulating ahead of the 2026 election differ in their details, the predominant model being put forward would eliminate or sharply reduce out-of-pocket costs such as premiums, deductibles, and copays under a broad coverage framework. Expanded room for drug-price bargaining would open up under that arrangement. Those who back the Medicare for All proposal point to potential gains in affordability and access to healthcare, whereas those who oppose it raise concerns about higher tax burdens, the future of private insurance markets, and the possibility of extended waiting times for treatment.
A number of candidates have placed the Medicare for All proposal near the center of their electoral platforms. Beriont, a New Hampshire Democrat seeking a state House seat, has put universal lifelong healthcare coverage at the center of her platform through backing for a single-payer model. Coverage under the package would extend to eye care, dental treatment, and mental health services.
Stratton, who is seeking a Senate seat as a Democrat and currently holds the office of lieutenant governor in Illinois, has built her platform around Medicare for All, with her campaign framing access to healthcare as a fundamental right rather than something tied to personal wealth or circumstance. Among the policy areas Stratton has cited in her campaign is a record of broadening healthcare availability and bringing down the cost of prescription medications for Illinois residents.
Koh, who is seeking the 6th District House seat in Massachusetts as the Democratic nominee, has put forward a health coverage proposal built around automatic Medicare enrollment for all Americans, paired with an opt-out pathway for those who want to hold onto private plans — a framework his campaign positions within the wider goal of reducing healthcare costs rather than under the Medicare for All heading.
Affordability measures also feature in candidate platforms without requiring a wholesale restructuring of the healthcare system. Among the ideas under consideration are reductions to monthly premiums, out-of-pocket spending, and the cost of prescription medications, alongside calls for greater pricing transparency, broader access to health savings accounts, and tighter oversight of insurance companies and pharmaceutical intermediaries.
Klobuchar, running in the Minnesota governor's race, has outlined an agenda centered on reducing what residents pay for healthcare, drawing on her record of taking on drug manufacturers over pricing. According to her campaign, reducing insurance premiums, bringing down the cost of prescription drugs, and maintaining access to healthcare are among her stated policy priorities. Her stated position has been one of opposition to single-payer "Medicare for All" legislation.
Running for reelection in Arizona, Sen. Mark Kelly has built his Democratic platform around a set of healthcare priorities — among them, pushing for negotiated reductions in prescription drug costs, placing a ceiling on what older adults pay out of pocket, and strengthening medical benefits for veterans — while also pointing to his vote in favor of legislation that ended unexpected billing practices in healthcare settings.
In Georgia's race for governor, Republican Rick Jackson has put forward a healthcare platform centered on cutting prescription drug prices, deploying technology to streamline the system by reducing the number of middlemen involved, and bringing expanded medical services to rural areas that currently lack adequate coverage. The measure targets the influence that major pharmaceutical firms hold over both drug prices and policy decisions.
Pappas, a Democratic congressman running for the U.S. Senate seat in New Hampshire, points to his legislative record on pharmaceutical pricing — including a role in advancing measures that allowed Medicare to negotiate drug costs, set a $35 ceiling on insulin, and placed limits on what seniors pay out of pocket. Legislation Pappas joined as a co-sponsor that July would have obligated the administration to open its drug-pricing negotiations to outside scrutiny, with independent analysts tasked with assessing whether the resulting agreements delivered genuine cost reductions for both patients and the public purse.
Ossoff, Georgia's Democratic senator, has taken aim at the lobbying power wielded by drug manufacturers, contending that their influence over policy feeds into the elevated cost of medications for patients. Among the legislative achievements he highlights are two drug-pricing measures tied to Medicare: a cap that limits what beneficiaries pay out of pocket each year to $2,000, and a separate ceiling of $35 per month on insulin costs.
Hinson, an Iowa Republican running for the Senate, has pledged to pursue bipartisan cooperation in pushing back against large pharmaceutical manufacturers and health insurers as a way to bring down the cost of medications and coverage premiums.
Voters seeking to verify their ballot information can turn to the relevant state or local election office. Voter registration details and state-level election guidance are accessible through two federally recognized online directories — one maintained by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission and another operated under the Can I Vote platform. Through VOTE411, an online resource maintained by the League of Women Voters, voters can look up where each candidate stands on the issues.
