Audience members greet Senator Bernie Sanders during an event to introduce the “Medicare for All Act of 2017” in Washington, DC, September 13, 2017.(Reuters / Yuri Gripas)
Donald Trump and the Republican candidates he is struggling to shore up in the election are so afraid of the momentum in favor of Medicare for All that they are now lying about this practically, economically, and morally necessary health-care reform. It is always troubling when a president lies. It is also troubling when the media amplify those lies. But the fact that USA Today published a repurposed set of partisan talking points from the president as an op-ed piece on Wednesday—under the scorchingly dishonest headline “Democrats [sic] ‘Medicare for All’ plan will demolish promises to seniors”—should be read as evidence that the movement to replace health-care profiteering with a single-payer health-care system is winning.
The unwitting president and his minions are agitated about the momentum that the movement for Medicare for All has gained in recent years—so agitated that they are making up arguments against a reform that the August Reuters-Ipsos survey found 70 percent of Americans (85 percent of Democrats, 52 percent of Republicans) now support.
With their desperate lies about Medicare for All, Trump and his fellow Republicans are inviting a debate that they will lose.
Trump’s opinion piece was nothing more than a rehash of the frantic line of attack that Republican strategists have been spinning out for the party’s candidates in congressional races around the country. The presidential diatribe was so riddled with inaccuracies that Washington Post fact checker Glenn Kessler determined that “almost every sentence contained a misleading statement or a falsehood.”
In a transparent attempt to scare seniors, Trump claimed that proposals to expand the popular Medicare program to cover all Americans “would end Medicare as we know it and take away benefits that seniors have paid for their entire lives.”
That’s the same line that Republican Senate candidates have been peddling in recent weeks as part of a desperate attempt to lie their way into competition against Democratic incumbents who believe that every American has a right to get needed care without being forced into bankruptcy by corporate racketeers. This week, when US Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) faced her right-wing challenger in their first debate, Republican Leah Vukmir attacked the incumbent for backing Medicare for All legislation sponsored by Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders.
“[Under] her plan,” claimed the Republican, “Medicare goes away.” “Senator Baldwin’s plan is going to gut everything. Everything!” ranted Vukmir.
Baldwin settled the matter with logic, explaining that “Leah Vukmir, unfortunately, thinks that expansion of Medicare gets rid of Medicare.”
Vukmir may not be the ablest advocate for the insurance industry she has for so many years served as a conservative state legislator and a national leader of the corporate-funded American Legislative Exchange Council. But her bumbling recitation of anti-reform talking points echoed that of Republican candidates across the country—including embattled incumbents such as Texas Senator Ted Cruz. And the president has now upped the volume on the false premise that building on the successful model of Medicare “would eviscerate Medicare.”
Trump also sought to confuse Americans regarding the cost of reform. He argued that the Sanders plan “would cost an astonishing $32.6 trillion during its first 10 years,” without acknowledging the whole story of the study—by the Koch-funded Mercatus Center at George Mason University—from which his numbers are drawn. That study determined that, under the Medicare for All plan proposed by Sanders, Baldwin, and other progressive senators, “national personal health care costs decrease by less than 2 percent, while total health expenditures decrease by only 4 percent, even after assuming substantial administrative cost savings.”
That’s right. A report that was supposed to discredit the single-payer solution found that, even after the benefits of a Medicare for All program are realized—”additional health care demand that arises from eliminating copayments, providing additional categories of benefits, and covering the currently uninsured”—it would cost less than maintaining the current system.
What’s at stake this November is the future of our democracy. Yet Nation readers know the fight for justice, equity, and peace doesn’t stop in November. Change doesn’t happen overnight. We need sustained, fearless journalism to advocate for bold ideas, expose corruption, defend our democracy, secure our bodily rights, promote peace, and protect the environment.
This month, we’re calling on you to give a monthly donation to support The Nation’s independent journalism. If you’ve read this far, I know you value our journalism that speaks truth to power in a way corporate-owned media never can. The most effective way to support The Nation is by becoming a monthly donor; this will provide us with a reliable funding base.
In the coming months, our writers will be working to bring you what you need to know—from John Nichols on the election, Elie Mystal on justice and injustice, Chris Lehmann’s reporting from inside the beltway, Joan Walsh with insightful political analysis, Jeet Heer’s crackling wit, and Amy Littlefield on the front lines of the fight for abortion access. For as little as $10 a month, you can empower our dedicated writers, editors, and fact checkers to report deeply on the most critical issues of our day.
Set up a monthly recurring donation today and join the committed community of readers who make our journalism possible for the long haul. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has stood for truth and justice—can you help us thrive for 160 more?
Onwards,
Katrina vanden Heuvel
Editorial Director and Publisher, The Nation
That was a point Baldwin made in this week’s Wisconsin debate, where the Democrat countered Vukmir’s deceptive claims—and, by extension, the half-truths the president is now peddling—by explaining that “The study that you cite actually shows that doing nothing would cost more.”
That is a point that cannot be made frequently enough. As National Nurses United union co-president Jean Ross, RN, says: “What even this corporate-funded study concedes is that we can actually guarantee health care for everyone in this country, without the devastating, rising costs of premiums, deductibles, and co-pays–at less than we spend as a nation today on health costs.”
Senator Sanders has actually thanked the Koch brothers “for accidentally making the case for Medicare for All!” Now, the senator can thank Donald Trump for turning attention to the movement for genuine health-care reform and providing an opportunity to counter the president’s “numerous lies about Medicare for All.”
Sanders and advocates for Medicare for All are not just ready for that debate; they are racing to engage with it.
“No, Mr. President,” the senator declared after reading Trump’s opinion piece on Wednesday. “Our proposal would not cut benefits for seniors on Medicare. In fact, we expand benefits. Millions of seniors today cannot afford the dental care, vision care or hearing aids they desperately need because Medicare does not cover these vitally important needs. Our proposal covers them. In addition, Medicare for All would eliminate deductibles and copays for seniors, and significantly lower the cost of prescription drugs.”
That’s a winning argument. And it will prevail.
As Sanders says, “The time is now for the United States to join every other major country on Earth and guarantee health care to every American as a right not a privilege, and Donald Trump, the insurance companies and the drug companies will not stop us.”
John NicholsTwitterJohn Nichols is a national affairs correspondent for The Nation. He has written, cowritten, or edited over a dozen books on topics ranging from histories of American socialism and the Democratic Party to analyses of US and global media systems. His latest, cowritten with Senator Bernie Sanders, is the New York Times bestseller It's OK to Be Angry About Capitalism.