
With the big, ugly bill, the rich get richer and everybody else pays
Advertisement
Even after people at the bottom of the ladder get hosed, those tax cuts (plus big boosts in funding for defense and so-called border security) are projected to
Hey, it's all for a noble cause: Remaking the country into a GOP utopia, where the rich get more handouts, and the poor have only themselves to blame.
To sell this money grab, Republicans are using a tactic that has worked ever since
Advertisement
'If you don't want to work, you're the one that decided you don't want health care,'
You tell 'em, Senator! Scott and his fellow-travelers deplore those who abuse the system. Never mind that most Medicare fraud happens on the provider side. Or that Scott himself once headed a hospital chain
States like ours have pretty good systems to catch all kinds of fraud, which,
'
$20 billion budget for Medicaid, known here as MassHealth, in 2024.
Be that as it may, Republicans want to introduce Medicaid work requirements that will finally get the freeloaders off their butts. Let's take a closer look at these miscreants, shall we? Of the 2 million people who get MassHealth to cover their medical care,
Republicans are using a problem that barely exists to kick millions out of the system, and proposing a so-called solution that doesn't work anyway. In
Advertisement
In addition to the work requirements, the giant bill being debated in Washington means Massachusetts would lose billions more in Medicaid funding in coming years – as punishment for
The thing is, the medical needs of those kicked off MassHealth won't go away. They'll just get worse, more deadly, and more expensive for everyone. They'll get dealt with in emergency rooms already at their breaking points. And they'll put the squeeze on struggling health centers, hospitals and, ultimately, state budgets.
'These are cuts that are going to impact the entire program, and have a ripple effect across the Massachusetts economy,' said Kate Symmonds, senior health law attorney at the Massachusetts Law Reform Institute. 'It will reduce revenues for community health centers, hospitals, and medical providers, and it will destabilize our health industry.'
Guy Fish, CEO of Codman Square Health Center, has a good idea how much it will cost if Republicans get their way on Medicaid. His Dorchester health center serves about 26,000 patients each year, almost all of them
Fish said his MassHealth patients are often working multiple part time jobs with no benefits, and that even then, some have to be convinced to apply for the program.
Advertisement
'The narrative couldn't be more wrong,' he said. 'These are hard working people, some who don't know how to access the system.'
Kicking them off MassHealth won't make them any healthier.
'They will still have medical needs, and if they can't see us, where are they going to go,' he said. 'The state will have to pick that up, or they are not going to be seen, so they are going to be sicker and end up in emergency rooms. You pay more later for not paying for coverage now.'
If Codman loses funding from MassHealth, that will mean staff cuts. Unemployment ripples out into families, and to local businesses, because fewer people have money to spend. The whole community will be worse off.
'There is a whole domino effect that happens here,' Fish said. 'And the tragedy is, it is not just in Massachusetts or blue states, but in red states too. There are community health centers in every single state… including deep red ones.'
Those states will be left holding the bag, pulling money from education and transportation and law enforcement to make up the shortfalls.
Ah yes, but by then, the billionaires' pockets will be even fatter.
Downright evil.
Globe columnist Yvonne Abraham can be reached at
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
37 minutes ago
- The Hill
Late Virginia lawmaker's former chief of staff wins Democratic primary to replace him
Fairfax County Supervisor James Walkinshaw (D) has won the Democratic primary in Virginia's special election race to fill the late Rep. Gerry Connolly's (D-Va.) seat in Congress, Decision Desk HQ projects. Walkinshaw, who worked as Connolly's chief of staff for more than a decade before serving as county supervisor, emerged on Saturday from a crowded field of candidates vying for the 11th Congressional District seat. He had announced a bid to replace his former boss this spring after Connolly decided he would not seek reelection amid a battle with cancer, setting off a scramble on both sides of the aisle. The longtime lawmaker died just weeks later after endorsing Walkinshaw as his successor. 'This is not a moment for on-the-job training. We need a strong representative, experienced in addressing national issues that affect our community, who can stand up to Trump and lead from day one. I believe James Walkinshaw is that leader,' Connolly said in early May. As early voting kicked off in Old Dominion earlier this week, social media accounts for the late congressman urged Democrats to vote for Walkinshaw, calling the election 'our first chance to stand up for our workers, our schools, our democracy, and everything Gerry fought for.' The move drew some criticism online. 2024 Election Coverage Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) set a July 11 deadline for parties to pick their nominees, who will advance from Saturday's contest to square off in a Sept. 9 special election. Ten candidates were running on the Democratic side, including state Sen. Stella Pekarsky (D), state Del. Irene Shin (D), Fairfax County planning commissioner Candice Bennett, retired Navy officer Joshua Aisen, attorney Amy Roma, and attorney Leo Martinez. Seven candidates Republicans were jostling on the GOP side. The heavily Democratic district, which includes Fairfax City and much of Fairfax County in northern Virginia, went to former Vice President Kamala Harris by 34 points in the 2024 presidential election. Connolly won reelection by 34 points.

Wall Street Journal
41 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Barclays Analyst on What Investors Should Know About Trump's Tax Bill - WSJ's Take On the Week
In this episode of WSJ's Take On the Week, we jump straight into a topic on many minds: the GOP's One Big Beautiful Bill. Co-hosts Gunjan Banerji and Telis Demos are joined by Michael McLean, public policy senior analyst at Barclays, to unpack what some investors are paying attention to when it comes to the GOP's One Big Beautiful Bill. McLean explains the differing viewpoints between Washington and Wall Street and the role of a rising U.S. deficit. Plus, the hosts share and answer listener questions about tax policy asked at WSJ's Future of Everything conference in May. The conversation also explores what economic growth the tax and budget bill can bring and why investors and government officials alike are watching to see how this tax bill addresses concerns with Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. This is WSJ's Take On the Week where co-hosts Gunjan Banerji, lead writer for Live Markets, and Telis Demos, Heard on the Street's banking and money columnist, cut through the noise and dive into markets, the economy and finance—the big trades, key players and business news ahead. Have an idea for a future guest or episode? How can we better help you take on the week? We'd love to hear from you. Email the show at takeontheweek@ To watch the video version of this episode, visit our WSJ Podcasts YouTube channel or the video page of Further Reading Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' Gets Slimmed Down in Senate The Tax Bill Would Deliver a Big Win for Private Schools—and Investors The Path to Record Deficits For more coverage of the markets and your investments, head to WSJ's Heard on The Street Column, and WSJ's Live Markets blog. Sign up for the WSJ's free Markets A.M. newsletter.

Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
Democrats wrestle with how to conduct oversight as Trump officials threaten, arrest and charge them
WASHINGTON — Just hours after she pleaded not guilty to federal charges brought by the Trump administration, Rep. LaMonica McIver of New Jersey was surrounded by dozens of supportive Democratic colleagues in the halls of the Capitol. The case, they argued, strikes at the heart of congressional power. 'If they can break LaMonica, they can break the House of Representatives,' said New York Rep. Yvette D. Clarke, chair of the Congressional Black Caucus. Federal prosecutors allege that McIver interfered with law enforcement during a visit with two other House Democrats to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Newark. She calls the charges 'baseless.' It's far from the only clash between congressional Democrats and the Republican administration as officials ramp up deportations of immigrants around the country. Sen. Alex Padilla of California was forcibly removed by federal agents, wrestled to the ground and held while attempting to ask a question at a news conference of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. At least six groups of House Democrats have recently been denied entry to ICE detention centers. In early June, federal agents entered the district office of Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) and briefly detained a staffer. Congressional Republicans have largely criticized Democrats' behavior as inflammatory and inappropriate, and some have publicly supported the prosecution of McIver. Often in the dark about the Trump administration's moves, congressional Democrats are wrestling with how to perform their oversight duties at a time of roiling tensions with the White House and new restrictions on lawmakers visiting federal facilities. 'We have the authority to conduct oversight business, and clearly, House Republicans are not doing that oversight here,' said New Jersey Rep. Rob Menendez, one of the House Democrats who went with McIver to the Newark ICE facility. 'It's our obligation to continue to do it on-site at these detention facilities. And even if they don't want us to, we are going to continue to exert our right.' The prospect of facing charges for once routine oversight activity has alarmed many congressional Democrats who never expected to face criminal prosecution as elected officials. Lawmakers in both parties were also unnerved by the recent targeted shootings of two Minnesota lawmakers — one of them fatal — and the nation's tense political atmosphere. 'It's a moment that calls for personal courage of members of Congress,' said Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.). 'I wish that we had more physical protection. I think that's one of those harsh realities that members of Congress who are not in leadership recognize: that oftentimes, we do this job at our own peril, and we do it anyway.' The arrests and detentions of lawmakers have led some Democrats to take precautionary measures. Several have consulted with the House general counsel about their right to conduct oversight. Multiple lawmakers also sought personal legal counsel, while others have called for a review of congressional rules to provide greater protections. 'The Capitol Police are the security force for members of Congress. We need them to travel with us, to go to facilities and events that the president may have us arrested for,' said Rep. Jonathan Jackson (D-Ill.). As the minority party in the House, Democrats lack the subpoena power to force the White House to provide information. That's a problem, they say, because the Trump administration is unusually secretive about its actions. 'There's not a lot of transparency. From day to day, oftentimes, we're learning about what's happening at the same time as the rest of the nation,' said Rep. Lucy McBath (D-Ga.), who led a prayer for McIver at the Capitol rally. To amplify their concerns, Democrats have turned to public letters, confronted officials at congressional hearings and used digital and media outreach to try to create public pressure. 'We've been very successful when they come in before committees,' said Rep. Lauren Underwood (D-Ill.), who added that she believed the public inquiries have '100%' resonated with voters. Congressional Democrats say they often rely on local lawmakers, business leaders and advocates to be their eyes and ears on the ground. A few Democrats say their best sources of information are across the political aisle, since Republicans typically have clearer lines of communication with the White House. 'I know who to call in Houston with the chamber. I think all of us do that,' Rep. Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas) said of how business leaders are keeping her updated. Garcia said Democrats 'need to put more pressure' on leading figures in the agriculture, restaurant and hospitality sectors to take their concerns about the immigrant crackdown to President Trump's White House. 'They're the ones he'll listen to. They're the ones who can add the pressure. He's not going to listen to me, a Democrat who was an impeachment manager, who is on the bottom of his list, if I'm on it at all,' Garcia said. Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.) had a working relationship with a for-profit ICE facility in his district until the Department of Homeland Security in February ended reports as part of an agency-wide policy change. A member of Crow's staff now regularly goes to the facility and waits, at times for hours, until staff at the Aurora facility respond to detailed questions posed by the office. Still, many House Democrats concede that they can conduct little of their desired oversight until they are back in the majority. Rep. Marc Veasey (D-Texas) said that 'real oversight power and muscle' only comes 'when you have a gavel.' 'Nothing else matters. No rousing oratory, no tours, no speeches, no social media or entertainment, none of that stuff,' Veasey said. 'Because the thing that keeps Trump up at night more than anything else is the idea he's going to lose this House and there'll be real oversight pressure applied to him.' Brown writes for the Associated Press.