Yes. I think Ciez said in another thread it's a high-skill high reward unit, like the Kugel or snipers. However, we already have the veterancy system to reward high skill and good unit preservation. I think the Jackson should be more durable and do less damage to make it easier to use. Unlike early game manpower only units, losing one is just too punishing for the US because of their lack of reliable AT and the high fuel cost. OKW, on the other hand, can survive the loss of a Panther because of their shreks and pupchens. Sometimes Wehrmakt can even survive the loss of a Tiger.
The US has it's own fueless AT options between the 57mm and Bazookas. While the Bazooka is pretty much just plain worse than a Panzerschreck the 57mm is actually pretty solid with it's 70 range at Vet1. I love the US AT gun aside from the garbage penetration but you can boost it when it matters most.
I don't really like your suggestion because it basically dilutes what makes the Jackson unique. It is a glass cannon tank destroyer with a turret and superior damage. If you remove the bonus damage and buff the health then it's just an SU-85 with a turret.
I think players can adapt to it's fragility with a better front line and by learning the best spots in each map to deploy it. It will take time for players to get used to it.
If they don't want to get used to it then they can probably find some solace in the M10 Tank Destroyer. It's not actually more durable (less so actually!) but it is cheap.
I would be in favor of a "tank only targetting" mode for it.