Taking the data available requires contextualizing said data in order to make any sense of the numbers. For example, below are graphs representing expanded access to healthcare services. This language of access has been popular as of late neoliberal political circles. While the data shows modest gains in access to care, the availability of care to many rural populations has decreased. This conflation between “access to” and having healthcare is one such disaster area. Below are examples of different portions of the population and their reported “access” to health services:
Certainly, access to care has shown steady, if not modest growth since data had begun to be collected in 2010. For example, while single people and cohabitating partners saw steady gains in insurance coverage, Americans living right at or below the poverty line saw the largest gains. This is partially explained by the individual mandate and rapid expansion of Medicare in many states passed through the Affordable Care Act. Some states, as we know, did not participate in expanding Medicare, a program to cover those who live below the poverty line and whose recipients are mostly rural. However, data shows a different story.