Large disparities in how much residents worry about health care costs by race, ethnicity, income, and education.
NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J. (May 14, 2024) – Three-quarters of New Jerseyans say they are either “somewhat” or “very” worried about the cost of health care services and unexpected medical bills, while more than 6 in 10 are “somewhat” or “very” worried about their monthly health insurance premium and prescription drug costs. These results come from the latest poll in the New Jersey Health Matters series by the New Jersey Health Care Quality Institute in partnership with the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll.
Forty-five percent are “very” and another 30 percent “somewhat” worried about unexpected medical bills; 16 percent are “not too” worried, while 7 percent are “not worried at all.” Similar numbers feel worried about the cost of health care services: 44 percent “very,” 31 percent “somewhat,” 15 percent “not too worried,” and 8 percent “not at all.”
Thirty-six percent are “very” and 29 percent are “somewhat” worried about their monthly health insurance premium; 19 percent are “not too worried,” and 13 percent are “not worried at all.” Likewise, 33 percent are “very” and 28 percent are “somewhat” worried about their prescription drug costs, while 24 percent are “not too worried,” and 13 percent are “not worried at all.”
“Health care affordability continues to be a top issue for most voters in New Jersey, with about 75 percent of voters reporting being very to somewhat worried about the cost of health care services for themselves or their families,” said Linda Schwimmer, president and CEO of the New Jersey Health Care Quality Institute. “Even though more people are now insured, people continue to worry about the underlying costs of using that insurance when they go for care or services.”
“New Jerseyans echo national sentiment on worry over health-related costs,” said Ashley Koning, an assistant research professor and director of the Eagleton Center for Public Interest Polling (ECPIP) at Rutgers University–New Brunswick. “Concern is even greater among some of the key demographic groups who are impacted the most.”
Black residents and Hispanic or Latino residents are more likely to say they are “very” worried – by double-digits – than white residents when it comes to unexpected medical bills, the cost of health care services, and their monthly health insurance premiums; over half of Black respondents, as well as over half of Hispanic or Latino respondents, say they are “very worried” about the first two, in particular.
Women are more likely than men to be “very” worried about these health-related expenses. Worry about these costs declines as household income and education rise. Worry is lowest among those 65 years or older compared to younger age cohorts.
Results are from a statewide poll of 1,512 adults contacted through the probability-based Rutgers-Eagleton/SSRS Garden State Panel via web and live calling from March 26 to April 8. The full sample has a margin of error of +/- 2.9 percentage points.
# # #
Broadcast interviews: Rutgers University–New Brunswick has broadcast-quality television and radio studios available for remote live or taped interviews with Rutgers experts. For more information, contact Jessica Ronan-Frisch at jronan@eagleton.rutgers.edu.
ABOUT RUTGERS UNIVERSITY–NEW BRUNSWICK
Rutgers University–New Brunswick is where Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, began more than 250 years ago. Ranked among the world’s top 60 universities, Rutgers’s flagship university is a leading public research institution and a member of the prestigious Association of American Universities. It is home to internationally acclaimed faculty and has 12 degree-granting schools and a Division I Athletics program. It is the Big Ten Conference’s most diverse university. Through its community of teachers, scholars, artists, scientists and healers, Rutgers is equipped as never before to transform lives.
ABOUT THE EAGLETON CENTER FOR PUBLIC INTEREST POLLING
Home of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll, the Eagleton Center for Public Interest Polling (ECPIP) was established in 1971 and is the oldest and one of the most respected university-based statewide polling operations in the United States. Now in its 52nd year and with the publication of over 200 polls, ECPIP’s mission is to provide scientifically sound, nonpartisan information about public opinion. To read more about ECPIP and view our press releases, published research and data archive, please visit our website: eagletonpoll.rutgers.edu. You can also visit us on Facebook and X (formerly Twitter).
ABOUT THE EAGLETON INSTITUTE OF POLITICS
The Eagleton Center for Public Interest Polling is a unit of the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers University–New Brunswick. The Eagleton Institute studies how American politics and government work and change, analyzes how the democracy might improve and promotes political participation and civic engagement. The Institute explores state and national politics through research, education and public service, linking the study of politics with its day-to-day practice. To learn more about Eagleton programs and expertise, visit eagleton.rutgers.edu.
ABOUT THE RUTGERS-EAGLETON/SSRS GARDEN STATE PANEL
The Rutgers-Eagleton/SSRS Garden State Panel is a probability-based panel of New Jersey adults age 18 or older. Members are recruited randomly based on statewide representative ABS (Address Based Sample) design. The ABS sample is drawn from the Delivery Sequence File (DSF) maintained by the U.S. Postal Service. Population coverage of the DSF is in the 98%-99% range. During the recruitment process, full demographic information on panelists is collected. This data is stored securely and used to determine eligibility for specific studies (if needed). The Rutgers-Eagleton/SSRS Garden State Panel is a multi-mode panel. Internet households participate via web while all non-internet households (including those who have internet but are unwilling to take surveys online) participate via phone. Panelists also have the option of taking surveys in their preferred language (English or Spanish).
About the New Jersey Health Care Quality Institute
The New Jersey Health Care Quality Institute’s (Quality Institute) mission is to improve the safety, quality, and affordability of health care for everyone. Our membership comes from all stakeholders in health care. Together with our 100 plus members, we are working towards a world where all people receive safe, equitable, and affordable health care and live their healthiest lives.
QUESTIONS AND TABLES START ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE
Questions and Tables
The questions covered in this release are listed below. Column percentages may not add to 100% due to rounding. Respondents are New Jersey adults; all percentages are of weighted results. Interpret groups with samples sizes under 100 with extreme caution.
Q1. How worried, if at all, are you about being able to afford each of the following for you and your family?
Unexpected medical bills
| Very worried | 45% |
| Somewhat worried | 30% |
| Not too worried | 16% |
| Not at all worried | 7% |
| Don’t know | 2% |
| Unweighted N= | 1478 |
| Party ID | Gender | Race or Ethnicity | Age | ||||||||||
| Dem | Ind | Rep | Man | Woman | Wht | Blk | Hisp | Other | 18-34 | 35-49 | 50-64 | 65+ | |
| Very | 47% | 46% | 40% | 39% | 50% | 38% | 56% | 57% | 45% | 51% | 45% | 48% | 34% |
| Somewhat | 29% | 30% | 32% | 33% | 27% | 34% | 22% | 23% | 32% | 27% | 28% | 32% | 34% |
| Not too | 16% | 16% | 17% | 19% | 14% | 20% | 10% | 13% | 15% | 11% | 19% | 14% | 22% |
| Not at all | 7% | 6% | 9% | 8% | 6% | 8% | 8% | 5% | 6% | 6% | 7% | 5% | 10% |
| DK | 2% | 2% | 1% | 1% | 2% | 1% | 5% | 1% | 2% | 4% | 1% | 1% | 1% |
| Unwt N= | 590 | 602 | 278 | 723 | 755 | 908 | 139 | 255 | 175 | 382 | 354 | 397 | 341 |
| Income | Region | Education | |||||||||||
| <$50K | $50K-<$100K | $100K-<$150K | $150K+ | Urban | Suburb | Exurban | Phil/
South |
Shore | HS or less | Some college | College grad | Grad work | |
| Very | 61% | 46% | 42% | 25% | 50% | 47% | 41% | 41% | 43% | 56% | 47% | 39% | 32% |
| Somewhat | 22% | 33% | 32% | 35% | 26% | 29% | 35% | 30% | 32% | 25% | 28% | 38% | 33% |
| Not too | 8% | 17% | 20% | 25% | 17% | 17% | 13% | 15% | 19% | 11% | 18% | 18% | 23% |
| Not at all | 6% | 3% | 6% | 14% | 5% | 5% | 8% | 12% | 5% | 6% | 6% | 5% | 11% |
| DK | 4% | 0% | 1% | 1% | 2% | 2% | 2% | 2% | 1% | 3% | 2% | 1% | 1% |
| Unwt N= | 389 | 400 | 258 | 319 | 236 | 503 | 176 | 260 | 303 | 351 | 340 | 350 | 436 |
The cost of health care services
| Very worried | 44% |
| Somewhat worried | 31% |
| Not too worried | 15% |
| Not at all worried | 8% |
| Don’t know | 1% |
| Unweighted N= | 1480 |
| Party ID | Gender | Race or Ethnicity | Age | ||||||||||
| Dem | Ind | Rep | Man | Woman | Wht | Blk | Hisp | Other | 18-34 | 35-49 | 50-64 | 65+ | |
| Very | 41% | 47% | 42% | 40% | 47% | 37% | 53% | 55% | 46% | 49% | 43% | 48% | 35% |
| Somewhat | 34% | 28% | 32% | 32% | 30% | 34% | 23% | 26% | 35% | 25% | 34% | 31% | 35% |
| Not too | 15% | 16% | 16% | 16% | 15% | 19% | 12% | 11% | 12% | 16% | 15% | 15% | 16% |
| Not at all | 9% | 8% | 9% | 10% | 6% | 9% | 9% | 7% | 6% | 7% | 8% | 5% | 14% |
| DK | 1% | 2% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 3% | 1% | 1% | 3% | 1% | 1% | 1% |
| Unwt N= | 594 | 601 | 277 | 726 | 754 | 908 | 139 | 256 | 176 | 382 | 353 | 398 | 343 |
| Income | Region | Education | |||||||||||
| <$50K | $50K-<$100K | $100K-<$150K | $150K+ | Urban | Suburb | Exurban | Phil/
South |
Shore | HS or less | Some college | College grad | Grad work | |
| Very | 58% | 47% | 39% | 26% | 52% | 44% | 38% | 40% | 45% | 54% | 47% | 39% | 31% |
| Somewhat | 26% | 34% | 36% | 33% | 25% | 32% | 40% | 32% | 28% | 26% | 30% | 37% | 34% |
| Not too | 7% | 14% | 16% | 27% | 14% | 17% | 11% | 13% | 20% | 11% | 15% | 18% | 21% |
| Not at all | 6% | 5% | 9% | 14% | 8% | 6% | 10% | 14% | 6% | 7% | 7% | 6% | 14% |
| DK | 3% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 2% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 2% | 2% | 0% | 1% |
| Unwt N= | 390 | 400 | 259 | 319 | 237 | 504 | 176 | 260 | 303 | 351 | 340 | 351 | 437 |
Your prescription drug costs
| Very worried | 33% |
| Somewhat worried | 28% |
| Not too worried | 24% |
| Not at all worried | 13% |
| Don’t know | 2% |
| Unweighted N= | 1475 |
| Party ID | Gender | Race or Ethnicity | Age | ||||||||||
| Dem | Ind | Rep | Man | Woman | Wht | Blk | Hisp | Other | 18-34 | 35-49 | 50-64 | 65+ | |
| Very | 31% | 34% | 33% | 28% | 37% | 28% | 45% | 38% | 35% | 34% | 33% | 40% | 23% |
| Somewhat | 31% | 25% | 31% | 29% | 28% | 29% | 18% | 30% | 34% | 24% | 27% | 30% | 33% |
| Not too | 24% | 25% | 22% | 26% | 23% | 27% | 18% | 21% | 20% | 24% | 23% | 21% | 29% |
| Not at all | 13% | 14% | 14% | 16% | 11% | 15% | 16% | 9% | 10% | 14% | 16% | 8% | 15% |
| DK | 1% | 2% | 1% | 2% | 1% | 1% | 4% | 1% | 1% | 4% | 1% | 1% | 1% |
| Unwt N= | 592 | 598 | 277 | 724 | 751 | 905 | 138 | 256 | 175 | 383 | 348 | 398 | 342 |
| Income | Region | Education | |||||||||||
| <$50K | $50K-<$100K | $100K-<$150K | $150K+ | Urban | Suburb | Exurban | Phil/
South |
Shore | HS or less | Some college | College grad | Grad work | |
| Very | 48% | 34% | 25% | 18% | 38% | 34% | 26% | 30% | 33% | 42% | 37% | 27% | 20% |
| Somewhat | 26% | 33% | 30% | 24% | 22% | 27% | 34% | 33% | 28% | 26% | 29% | 31% | 29% |
| Not too | 14% | 24% | 28% | 34% | 26% | 24% | 23% | 21% | 25% | 19% | 23% | 26% | 30% |
| Not at all | 9% | 9% | 16% | 23% | 11% | 13% | 16% | 15% | 12% | 11% | 9% | 14% | 20% |
| DK | 3% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 2% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 2% | 2% | 1% | 1% |
| Unwt N= | 386 | 400 | 258 | 319 | 235 | 502 | 176 | 259 | 303 | 347 | 339 | 351 | 437 |
Your monthly health insurance premium
| Very worried | 36% |
| Somewhat worried | 29% |
| Not too worried | 19% |
| Not at all worried | 13% |
| Don’t know | 2% |
| Unweighted N= | 1480 |
| Party ID | Gender | Race or Ethnicity | Age | ||||||||||
| Dem | Ind | Rep | Man | Woman | Wht | Blk | Hisp | Other | 18-34 | 35-49 | 50-64 | 65+ | |
| Very | 33% | 39% | 37% | 32% | 40% | 32% | 44% | 42% | 40% | 37% | 37% | 43% | 26% |
| Somewhat | 33% | 26% | 29% | 29% | 30% | 29% | 25% | 30% | 33% | 27% | 31% | 29% | 31% |
| Not too | 18% | 21% | 18% | 23% | 16% | 22% | 14% | 17% | 16% | 19% | 17% | 18% | 25% |
| Not at all | 15% | 11% | 15% | 15% | 12% | 15% | 13% | 10% | 10% | 12% | 15% | 10% | 18% |
| DK | 1% | 2% | 1% | 1% | 2% | 2% | 4% | 2% | 1% | 5% | 1% | 1% | 0% |
| Unwt N= | 593 | 602 | 277 | 726 | 754 | 908 | 140 | 255 | 176 | 383 | 353 | 397 | 343 |
| Income | Region | Education | |||||||||||
| <$50K | $50K-<$100K | $100K-<$150K | $150K+ | Urban | Suburb | Exurban | Phil/
South |
Shore | HS or less | Some college | College grad | Grad work | |
| Very | 48% | 38% | 30% | 24% | 40% | 37% | 27% | 35% | 39% | 45% | 40% | 31% | 24% |
| Somewhat | 28% | 30% | 33% | 26% | 27% | 29% | 38% | 29% | 25% | 27% | 29% | 34% | 30% |
| Not too | 11% | 22% | 21% | 26% | 20% | 19% | 17% | 19% | 22% | 15% | 21% | 20% | 24% |
| Not at all | 10% | 9% | 15% | 23% | 12% | 13% | 16% | 15% | 11% | 10% | 8% | 14% | 22% |
| DK | 3% | 1% | 0% | 1% | 2% | 1% | 3% | 2% | 2% | 3% | 2% | 0% | 1% |
| Unwt N= | 391 | 399 | 260 | 319 | 237 | 502 | 178 | 260 | 303 | 350 | 341 | 351 | 437 |
Methodology
This Rutgers-Eagleton Poll was conducted from March 26 to April 8, 2024 with a scientifically selected random sample of 1,512 New Jersey adults, 18 or older. Sample came from the Rutgers-Eagleton/Garden State Panel.
The Rutgers-Eagleton/Garden State Panel is a probability-based panel of New Jersey adults age 18 or older. Members are recruited randomly based on statewide representative ABS (Address Based Sample) design. ABS sample is drawn from the Delivery Sequence File (DSF) maintained by the U.S. Postal Service. Population coverage of the DSF is in the 98%-99% range. During the recruitment process, full demographic information on panelists is collected. The Rutgers/SSRS Garden State Panel is a multi-mode panel.
This study employed two recruitment methods: calling with live interviewers (n=1,486) and web recruitment (n=26). Distribution of recruitment method in this sample is:
| Call | 2% |
| Web | 98% |
The data were weighted to be representative of the residential adult population of New Jersey. The weighting balances sample demographics to target population parameters. The sample is balanced to match parameters for sex, age, education, race/ethnicity and region. Benchmark parameter distributions were derived from 2022 American Community Survey PUMS data.
Base weights were computed to account for sampling probabilities at the time of the initial recruitment and the sampling from the panel for this particular data collection effort.
The final stage of weighting calibrates sample demographics to match target population benchmark distributions. This weighting was accomplished using SPSSINC RAKE, an SPSS extension module that simultaneously balances the distributions of all variables using the GENLOG procedure. Weights were trimmed to prevent individual interviews from having too much influence on survey estimates. The use of these weights in statistical analysis ensures that the demographic characteristics of the sample closely approximate the demographic characteristics of the target population.
Post-data collection statistical adjustments require analysis procedures that reflect departures from simple random sampling. We calculate the effects of these design features so that an appropriate adjustment can be incorporated into tests of statistical significance when using these data. The so-called “design effect” or deff represents the loss in statistical efficiency that results from a disproportionate sample design and systematic non-response. [1] The total sample design effect is 1.33.
All surveys are subject to sampling error, which is the expected probable difference between interviewing everyone in a population versus a scientific sampling drawn from that population. Sampling error should be adjusted to recognize the effect of weighting the data to better match the population. In this poll, the simple sampling error for 1,512 New Jersey adults is +/-2.5 percentage points at a 95 percent confidence interval. The design effect[2] is 1.33, making the adjusted margin of error +/- 2.9 percentage points. Thus, if 50 percent of New Jersey adults in this sample favor a particular position, we would be 95 percent sure that the true figure is between 47.1 and 52.9 percent (50 +/- 2.9) if all New Jersey adults had been interviewed, rather than just a sample.
Sampling error is only one possible source of error in a survey estimate. Sampling error does not consider other sources of variation inherent in public opinion studies, such as selection bias, non-response bias, question wording, context effects, or reporting accuracy, which may contribute additional error.
This Rutgers-Eagleton Poll was fielded by SSRS through the Rutgers-Eagleton/SSRS Garden State Panel. The questionnaire was developed and all data analyses were completed in house by the Eagleton Center for Public Interest Polling (ECPIP). Jessica Roman assisted with analysis and preparation of this report. The Rutgers-Eagleton Poll is paid for and sponsored by the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, a non-partisan academic center for the study of politics and the political process. Full questionnaires are available on request and can also be accessed through our archives at eagletonpoll.rutgers.edu. For more information, please contact poll@eagleton.rutgers.edu.
Weighted Demographics
1,512 New Jersey Adults 18+
Overall Margin of Error = +/- 2.9 percentage points
Please note: Totals may equal slightly more or less than 100% due to rounding.
| deff | MOE | deff | MOE | |||||
| Man | 48% | 1.35 | +/- 4.2% | White | 55% | 1.36 | +/- 3.7% | |
| Woman | 52% | 1.31 | +/- 4.0% | Black | 12% | 1.23 | +/- 9.1% | |
| Hispanic | 20% | 1.27 | +/- 6.8% | |||||
| 18-34 | 27% | 1.28 | +/- 5.6% | Other | 14% | 1.24 | +/- 8.2% | |
| 35-49 | 25% | 1.28 | +/- 5.8% | |||||
| 50-64 | 26% | 1.37 | +/- 5.7% | <50K | 30% | 1.32 | +/- 5.6% | |
| 65+ | 22% | 1.39 | +/- 6.1% | 50K-<100K | 29% | 1.35 | +/- 5.6% | |
| 100K-<150K | 19% | 1.36 | +/- 7.0% | |||||
| Democrat | 39% | 1.35 | +/- 4.6% | 150K+ | 22% | 1.28 | +/- 6.2% | |
| Independent | 42% | 1.31 | +/- 4.5% | |||||
| Republican | 19% | 1.32 | +/- 6.6% | Urban | 17% | 1.27 | +/- 7.1% | |
| Suburb | 35% | 1.34 | +/- 5.0% | |||||
| HS or Less | 34% | 1.18 | +/- 5.6% | Exurban | 13% | 1.29 | +/- 8.2% | |
| Some College | 23% | 1.30 | +/- 6.0% | Phil/South | 18% | 1.33 | +/- 6.9% | |
| College Grad | 19% | 1.32 | +/- 5.9% | Shore | 17% | 1.34 | +/- 6.5% | |
| Grad Work | 24% | 1.30 | +/- 5.3% |
[1] The composite design effect for a sample of size n, with each case having a weight, , is computed as .
[2] Post-data collection statistical adjustments require analysis procedures that reflect departures from simple random sampling. We calculate the effects of these design features so that an appropriate adjustment can be incorporated into tests of statistical significance when using these data. The so-called “design effect” or deff represents the loss in statistical efficiency that results from a disproportionate sample design and systematic non-response.