Trump Approves Of Massive Medicaid Cuts (After Promising Not To Cut It)

The following is part of a post by Dan Rather:

Trump said time and again on the campaign trail to trust him, entitlements were safe. After he was elected, he promised to “love and cherish” Medicaid. As recently as February 18, he reiterated that pledge to Sean Hannity on Fox “News.” “It’s going to be strengthened but won’t be touched. Medicare, Medicaid, none of that stuff is going to be touched.”

On social media a day later, Trump reversed himself, endorsing the Republican House budget plan that included a directive for the Energy and Commerce Committee to find $880 million in cuts. Most or all of those cuts are likely to come from Medicaid. “The House Resolution implements my FULL America First Agenda,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

But Trump can’t have it both ways. Enabled by his MAGA brethren in Congress, the new administration is looking for $1.5 trillion in savings over the next decade to fund tax cuts for corporations and the wealthiest Americans. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, this cannot be accomplished unless cuts are made to entitlement programs, specifically Medicaid, at least to start.

Medicaid is designed specifically to help Americans most in need — who also have the least political clout. The program provides health insurance to more than 72 million poor and disabled Americans. That’s one in five people. Eighty percent of poor children (and 39% of all American children) get insurance through Medicaid. It also provides coverage for 63% of nursing home residents and 41% of adults with disabilities and pays for 41% of all births.

Under the current system, the federal government and state governments share the cost of coverage, though the federal government shoulders considerably more of the costs than the states. Any federal cuts will mean states will either have to reduce coverage or raise taxes to make up the budget shortfall.

America is the richest nation in the world. How much more money do the already-wealthy need? And is lowering taxes for the rich at the expense of the poor and disadvantaged really good for the country — short- and long-term?