The item includes a video, and text about the Georgia Congresscritter, and a real mean copyright statement so the excerpt is short and readers are exhorted to go to the original MSM linked item. Briefly -
[video omitted]
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) on Tuesday called out House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) for not providing any plans on a Republican alternative to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and tax subsidies set to expire at the end of the year.
“You left out that I said I have no respect for the House not being in session passing our bills and the President’s executive orders,” Greene wrote on social platform X, in response to a post from Punchbowl News’s Jake Sherman following a recent GOP conference call.
“And I demanded to know from Speaker Johnson what the Republican plan for healthcare is to build the off-ramp off Obamacare and the ACA tax credits to make health insurance affordable for Americans,” she added.
“Johnson said he’s got ideas and pages of policy ideas and committees of jurisdiction are working on it, but he refused to give one policy proposal to our GOP conference on our own conference call,” the Georgia Republican continued.
[,,,] The comments come after Johnson said Monday that House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) was working with the heads of three committees to develop a Republican health care plan.Greene and Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) have been among Republicans who see health care premiums as being a serious risk to their campaigns in the 2026 midterms.
[...]
According to a recent poll sponsored by Undue Medical Debt and led by the nonpartisan research firm PerryUndem, 69 percent of respondents believe health care is too expensive.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed
Well, leaving the video and analysis out but only excerpting their direct quoting, the poll included, and acknowledging the copyright statement by presenting it; fair use. Read it all at MSM. So, big copyright chestbeating while it's mostly quoting from Greene's X post, get real, live with fair use by Crabgrass.
UPDATE: While the noted/quoted item above omitted linking about Josh Hawley's backfilling, there is NBC:
Hawley, on his congressional site, https://www.hawley.senate.gov/hawley-op-ed-dont-cut-medicaid/ - spends much disingenuous text repudiating one of the major provisions of the bill he voted for, to cover his ass, apparently, as he mixes in dissing the dems and touting Trump. (NOT worth reader time).
HAZELWOOD, Mo. — Four days after President Donald Trump signed his “big, beautiful bill” into law, one of the Republicans who voted for it wasn’t interested in touting the measure’s high-profile tax, immigration or health care provisions.
Instead, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., held an event here Tuesday centered on a less-noticed part of the nearly 1,000-page bill: an expanded fund for victims of nuclear waste, a bipartisan issue he worked for years to get across the finish line.
And when asked about the steep Medicaid cuts in the bill, Hawley continued to criticize them. Hawley said his “goal” is to ensure the provider tax changes, which will limit state reimbursement for Medicaid, don't go into effect in Missouri in 2030 — even as he helped to pass a piece of legislation that will do just that.
It illustrates the challenges Republicans face as they turn their attention to selling to the public the massive bill they’ve been working on for months, ahead of next year’s midterm elections.
“I think that if Republicans don’t come out strong and say we’re going to protect rural hospitals, then, yeah, I think voters aren’t going to like that,” Hawley told NBC News in an interview at St. Cin Park. “The truth of the matter is, we shouldn’t be cutting rural hospitals. I’m completely opposed to cutting rural hospitals period. I haven’t changed my view on that one iota.”
Hawley suggested he would work with Democrats to cut prescription drug pricing, a priority Trump has said he wants Congress to focus on, to pay for the tax cuts made permanent by the new law.
[UPDATE] Hawley, on record, "Republicans need to open their eyes: Our voters support social insurance programs. More than that, our voters depend on those programs. And there’s a reason for this that Republicans would do well to ponder. Our economy is increasingly unfriendly to working people and their families." [end UPDATE - highlighting added]
On the topic of health care, MSM has reported: Many voters say health care unaffordable, are open to new insurance system: Poll - the item stating in part -
New polling has found that the majority of voters say health care in the U.S. is unaffordable and are open to a health insurance system that doesn’t tie coverage to employment.
Undue Medical Debt, a nonprofit that works to eliminate medical debt and supports policies to prevent new debt, sponsored the poll, which was led by the nonpartisan research firm PerryUndem. Along with a national survey, focus groups were also asked for their opinions on health care.
The poll was provided first to The Hill.
So, while the first quoted item negligently declined to link to the poll, we now have it: https://unduemedicaldebt.org/bipartisan-support-for-policies-that-protect-people-from-medical-debt/ - stating in part:
Voters Show Strong Bipartisan Support for Policies that Protect People from Medical Debt - New Study —
October 2025A new study sponsored by Undue Medical Debt finds that 2024 voters across party ID (Republicans, Independents and Democrats) agree that healthcare is unaffordable and health insurance coverage is failing people.Many respondents are under intense economic stress, and the high cost of healthcare is adding to the pressure. An overwhelming majority of voters recognize medical debt as a real and persistent threat — even those not experiencing a financial burden. For this reason, there is broad bipartisan support for states to pass commonsense laws that protect people from medical debt and associated burdens when they access healthcare.
The goal of this study is to identify common ground among people of all political affiliations and backgrounds when it comes to protecting patients from medical debt. PerryUndem, a non-partisan research firm, conducted a series of focus groups and a survey. The following are insights from this research.
About the Study
The study involved a 12-minute national survey of 1,319 2024 general election voters. The survey was fielded online from August 21 to September 2, 2025, using NORC’s nationally representative AmeriSpeak panel. The margin of sampling error for total survey results is ± 3.63 percentage points.
The remainder of that item is quality content, so read it there. At this point, the study is well presented in this item and in the "Download Study" linked item, so Crabgrass readers are strongly urged to follow the link after reading the balance of this item, as linked to earlier. As worthy of copyright protection, deference is given the study; no excerpt, read it all on the copyright holder's site. They deserve the full hit-count readers will provide, if readers do rotor over.
FURTHER: Title of Study - Healthcare Affordability and Medical Debt - Findings from a National Study of 2024 Voters
[Copyright is a thicket since it seems "fair use" is in the eye of the beholder. And copyright can be a fertile field for SLAPP litigation, big guy deep-pocketing little guy, via Stretegic Litigation Against Public Participation.
Leave it at that.]