1:28The U.S. Capitol is shown from the foundation of the Washington Monument, Nov. 13, 2025, in Washington.Rahmat Gul/AP
With the federal government reopening after the House approved a temporary funding measure Wednesday, Democratic voters nationwide contemplate their party’s handling of the impasse — and the reality that, ultimately, Democrats could not prolong the Affordable Care Act subsidies they triggered the government closure over in the first place.
Carl Davidson, a 64-year-old auto salesperson from Oakland, California, mentioned in an ABC News interview that he will be "significantly impacted" by the expiring subsidies.
"My California insurance may potentially rise from $580 to $1,240," Davidson stated.
In parallel, Teresa White, a 67-year-old office assistant also from California, informed ABC News that she is primarily concerned about her son, whose "premiums are expected to double."
"These are young men in their 30s. They are not high-risk … many of their friends will simply forgo insurance, and that's incorrect," White remarked.
The U.S. Capitol is pictured from the base of the Washington Monument, Nov. 13, 2025, in Washington.Rahmat Gul/AP
White and Davidson, along with the other voters mentioned in this article, took part in an ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll and were contacted again to be interviewed about their viewpoints.
Even individuals not directly affected by the anticipated increases in health care premiums consider it a worthwhile endeavor. Jeffrey Martin, a 54-year-old electrician from Berkeley, Massachusetts, indicated to ABC News that he was "completely" supportive of congressional Democrats' advocacy for ACA subsidies.
"I believe they could have persisted, because I think they were correct. I think they were advocating for something significant," Martin declared.
Similar to Martin, 58-year-old Kevin Wolfe of Parkville, Maryland, wished congressional Democrats had "persevered" for a longer duration concerning the subsidies. Wolfe conveyed to ABC News in an interview that he is "somewhat displeased that they voted to end" the closure, even suggesting that he thinks Democrats "should initiate another shutdown."
"I’m uncertain if we would have gained anything, but I believe they could’ve prolonged it a bit to evaluate," Wolfe expressed.
The government closure — which extended for 43 days in total, rendering it the longest shutdown in U.S. history — is funded solely until Jan. 30, leaving the chance for another government shutdown if Congress fails to reach an understanding on health care spending by the close of January.
Echoing Wolfe, White also mentioned that the Democrats should initiate another government shutdown when the temporary funding bill expires, despite potential disruptions like air travel.
"People are not required to travel, but they must eat. And in the event of a medical emergency, they need care," White explained.
However, while voters such as White, Martin, and Wolfe desired Democrats to fight for a more extended period, many indicated that they believe Democrats were successful in drawing national attention to the health care debate unfolding in Washington.
"I don’t believe it achieved its overarching objective, but I do think it amplified awareness of what is about to transpire," Wolfe suggested.
"I don’t think individuals had any realization of what will occur with premiums," he further stated.
Davidson appended that closing down the federal government "concentrated the attention of numerous individuals who don’t regularly follow politics."
The singular point of agreement among numerous Democratic voters: Republicans bear responsibility for the shutdown. And with the 2026 midterm elections swiftly approaching, many surmise that the government shutdown will prove a blemish on Republicans seeking reelection.
"People retain a memory when it impacts their finances, so it may have some consequences for Republicans in the midterms," Davidson said.
"I believe that the Republicans, holding the House, the Senate, the presidency, and the Supreme Court, are accountable for the shutdown," remarked 71-year-old Curtis McLeod of Greensboro, North Carolina.
"I hope that all the Republicans who resisted lose their seat in the upcoming election. That’s my sole consideration," McLeod included.
However, there were some Democratic voters who held more ambivalent sentiments regarding the battle over ACA subsidies, particularly those affected by federal cuts to SNAP implemented during the shutdown.
People receive food aid bags during a free food distribution at the Young Family YMCA in Atlanta, November 6, 2025.Erik S Lesser/EPA/Shutterstock
Dora C., a 59-year-old in southern Texas, communicated to ABC News in an interview that the government "should have never been shut down initially."
"I’m a grandmother caring for three of my grandchildren, and I am — and continue to be — receiving SNAP benefits … When they revoked that for a brief duration, it affected me — naturally it did — as I’m not only feeding myself, but I’m feeding three kids," Dora mentioned.
"Yes, these SNAP benefits were reintroduced to my card, but not in their entirety," Dora appended.
Others described the government shutdown as a "lose-lose situation."
"I believe the Democrats consistently appear somewhat weak because the Republicans tend to do as they wish and evade repercussions … I believe [Democrats] were attempting to push back. And the one instance they push back, it erupts in this manner," stated Brittany D., a 29-year-old small business proprietor from the suburbs of Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
Vicki, a 57-year-old Democrat from Pennsylvania who preferred to withhold her last name, confided in an ABC News interview that, ultimately, the choice congressional Democrats confronted to end the shutdown was "a Solomon’s Choice."
"Do you prioritize individuals requiring sustenance, or do you prioritize individuals requiring health care? I would have struggled to decide on a course of action," she commented.
Sourse: abcnews.go.com
