The stupidest unforced error of Trump's presidency
Killing Medicaid expansion is probably the only clear path we have to President Robert Francis O'Rourke
No doubt encouraged by the president's recent victory over the Russia truthers and his roughly 42 percent approval rating, the Trump administration decided last week that the best way to prepare for next year's election is to challenge the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act in the Supreme Court.
This apparently includes arguing against the ACA's expansion of Medicaid, which has brought coverage to 25 million Americans. It is one of the only unambiguously successful parts of ObamaCare. If it disappeared, nearly one in 10 Americans would lose their health care overnight.
This has the potential to be the easily the stupidest unforced error of Trump's presidency. Looking ahead to 2020 it is nothing short of suicidal. Killing Medicaid expansion is probably the only clear path we have to President Robert Francis O'Rourke. Even President John "Mom Loved Deepthroat" Hickenlooper is probably a shoo-in if his messaging is disciplined.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
It has long been rumored that there are good reasons to vote for Republicans. Not among them is the GOP's position on health care. Between 2008 and 2016 deductibles increased at eight times the rate of wages. More than 40 percent of Americans say they cannot afford their current health-care expenses. To these and dozens of other similarly staggering statistics the Republican response has been to suggest that maybe people would like to open special bank accounts to keep the money they don't have to pay for health insurance. Another surefire winner is the idea that perhaps in addition to being able to choose between 9,000 different in-state health care plans with names like BronzeCareShieldPlusAct Network Lite — not to be confused with the BronzeCareShieldLiteAct Network Plus or the Silver, Gold, Platinum, Diamond, and Sapphire iterations of the various Cares and Shields and Plus Networks — the American people would like to sort through millions of rival versions currently available outside their home states.
Why in the world is Trump doing this? According to The New York Times, it is largely at the urging of Mick Mulvaney, the clownish White House budget director who has also called for eliminating food stamps or replacing them with things like broccoli vouchers, a vegetable totalitarianism of which even Michelle O never dreamed.
It is difficult to see why Mulvaney believes or wants these things. In this spendthrift administration it cannot have anything to do with saving money. Nobody else in the country actually wants to replace the Affordable Care Act with anything except some form of single-payer. It has been obvious for years that the GOP does not actually believe any of their think tank-approved talking points, which is why in 2017 they repeatedly torpedoed their own attempts to repeal and repeal ObamaCare. Vice President Pence opposed the move carried out by the Justice Department at Mulvaney's behest, as did William Barr, the attorney general. Republicans in Congress agree with them and are quietly praying for the Supreme Court not to side with the administration.
What is the endgame here? Is this another ploy to convince a certain element of the Republican base — which overlaps with the segment of the American people who have benefited from the expansion of Medicaid and from the regulations governing provision of care to those with pre-existing conditions — that Trump and co. are sticking it to the libs without actually taking anything from anybody? Gestures like these are what make all of us sick of politics.
This is why a perverse part of me almost wishes that John Roberts would play against type and side with the administration here. A decision that got rid of the ACA by judicial fiat would force us to have a more serious and focused national conversation about health insurance. At the very least, the GOP would finally be punished for the irresponsibility of the bad-faith arguments it has been making for nearly a decade now.
No rhetorical point is actually worth the price of denying medical care to millions of people — but it would be exactly what Trump and his party deserve if their cynicism cost them an election they are otherwise capable of winning handily.
Create an account with the same email registered to your subscription to unlock access.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Matthew Walther is a national correspondent at The Week. His work has also appeared in First Things, The Spectator of London, The Catholic Herald, National Review, and other publications. He is currently writing a biography of the Rev. Montague Summers. He is also a Robert Novak Journalism Fellow.
-
'Horror stories of women having to carry nonviable fetuses'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Harold Maass, The Week US Published
-
Haiti interim council, prime minister sworn in
Speed Read Prime Minister Ariel Henry resigns amid surging gang violence
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Today's political cartoons - April 26, 2024
Cartoons Friday's cartoons - teleprompter troubles, presidential immunity, and more
By The Week US Published
-
Arizona court reinstates 1864 abortion ban
Speed Read The law makes all abortions illegal in the state except to save the mother's life
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
Trump, billions richer, is selling Bibles
Speed Read The former president is hawking a $60 "God Bless the USA Bible"
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
The debate about Biden's age and mental fitness
In Depth Some critics argue Biden is too old to run again. Does the argument have merit?
By Grayson Quay Published
-
How would a second Trump presidency affect Britain?
Today's Big Question Re-election of Republican frontrunner could threaten UK security, warns former head of secret service
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
'Rwanda plan is less a deterrent and more a bluff'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By The Week UK Published
-
Henry Kissinger dies aged 100: a complicated legacy?
Talking Point Top US diplomat and Nobel Peace Prize winner remembered as both foreign policy genius and war criminal
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Last updated
-
Trump’s rhetoric: a shift to 'straight-up Nazi talk'
Why everyone's talking about Would-be president's sinister language is backed by an incendiary policy agenda, say commentators
By The Week UK Published
-
More covfefe: is the world ready for a second Donald Trump presidency?
Today's Big Question Republican's re-election would be a 'nightmare' scenario for Europe, Ukraine and the West
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published