As we at CFIF often highlight, strong intellectual property (IP) rights - including patent rights -…
CFIF on X CFIF on YouTube
Senate Must Support Strong Patent Rights, Not Erode Them

As we at CFIF often highlight, strong intellectual property (IP) rights - including patent rights - constitute a core element of "American Exceptionalism" and explain how we became the most inventive, prosperous, technologically advanced nation in human history.  Our Founding Fathers considered IP so important that they explicitly protected it in the text of Article I of the United States Constitution.

Strong patent rights also explain how the U.S. accounts for an incredible two-thirds of all new lifesaving drugs introduced worldwide.

Elected officials must therefore work to protect strong IP and patent rights, not undermine them.   Unfortunately, several anti-patent bills currently before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee this week threaten to do exactly…[more]

April 02, 2025 • 08:29 PM

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
The Truth Behind the Medicaid Melodrama Print
By Betsy McCaughey
Wednesday, March 05 2025
If the demagoguery succeeds and the Republican majority gives up on achieving a budget bill that curbs spending, everyone will suffer.

Get ready to be bombarded with ghoulish paid ads and Democratic politicians warning about grandmothers dying, children denied needed cancer treatments, and pregnant women suffering. The demagoguery is in full swing against Republicans' efforts to control federal spending on Medicaid and stabilize the nation's debt.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul screamed last week that "House Republicans just voted to rip health care away from up to 1.8 million New Yorkers  all to bankroll giveaways for billionaires." Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) parroted the message ("tax breaks for their billionaire buddies") and warned that "moms and babies will lose health care coverage." Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) shrieked, "People will die."

These are lies. Helpless children, the elderly, pregnant women and the disabled are not going to lose their health care. And the Medicaid changes are designed to help all Americans, not just billionaires.

The economic impact of Congress not containing Medicaid spending is what's truly scary.

If the demagoguery succeeds and the Republican majority gives up on achieving a budget bill that curbs spending, everyone will suffer. Inflation will rise. Interest rates on car loans, credit cards and mortgages will likely go up. President Donald Trump's tax cuts probably would not be renewed, and some companies, suddenly facing unfavorable tax rates, would leave the U.S. for lower-tax locations, possibly taking your job with them.

But first, here's why the fearmongering filling the air waves is untrue.

Since 1965, Medicaid has provided a safety net for those in medical need, and no one is proposing "gutting" it.

A decade ago, then-President Barack Obama and Congress expanded Medicaid to cover healthy adults, whether they were willing to work or not. Rep. Nancy Pelosi boasted that everyone should have the freedom to pursue "your own happiness" of, for example, being a writer, or "whatever you want to do," without having to hold down a job and pay for health insurance. Pelosi's promise made working people into patsies supporting the freeloaders.

Now congressional Republicans are calling for a "work requirement" for healthy people who don't have to care for a child or elderly dependent. "Work" overstates the toughness. Anyone who is employed for 80 hours a month, or attends school, a training program or drug recovery program, and is low-income will still be eligible for free care. Just not moochers.

House Speaker Mike Johnson tweeted last week, "Medicaid is for single mothers with small children who are just trying to make it. It's not for 29-year-old males sitting on their couch playing video games."

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates the "work" requirement would save $140 billion over the next decade.

Republicans are proposing another $100 billion in savings by allowing states to check eligibility for Medicaid more than once a year. The Biden administration put into effect a wacky rule in 2024 that barred states from checking eligibility more frequently, allowing some people to stay on Medicaid after their income was too high or they were no longer disabled or caring for a dependent. Let's spend Medicaid dollars on the truly needy.

As for Hochul's bombast that changes to Medicaid will bankroll billionaires, the truth is that current federal spending is "unsustainable," per the nonpartisan General Accounting Office. Without changes, everyone in the U.S. will be clobbered with higher inflation and interest rates.

Take it from Javier Milei, Argentina's president, elected in 2023. He campaigned with a chainsaw, pledging deep cuts to his government's out-of-control spending. At that time, his country had one of the highest inflation rates in the world. A year later, inflation is coming down fast.

Congress isn't taking a chainsaw to Medicaid, but Republicans are looking to slow spending growth. That will allow Congress to renew Trump's 2017 tax cuts, which are about to expire.

Before 2017, the U.S. was losing 10 multinational corporate headquarters a year to countries with lower corporate taxes. After Trump's 2017 cuts, the exodus stopped. Renewing those corporate tax cuts is essential to save American jobs. Possibly yours.

Hochul doesn't get that. Like several Democratic governors before her, she's oblivious to the damage done by uncontrolled spending and high taxes  a major reason swaths of upstate New York are wastelands.

When you hear the demagogues oppose Medicaid "cuts," remember that not making these changes is what is dangerous to you  your job security and your ability to afford necessities and even to buy a home. Don't fall for the phony sob stories.


Betsy McCaughey is a former lieutenant governor of New York State and co-founder of Save Our City at www.saveourcityny.org. 

COPYRIGHT 2025 CREATORS.COM

 

Related Articles :
Notable Quote   
 
"Will this law review article 'promote DEI values'? Does it cite scholars from 'underrepresented groups'? Will it have 'any foreseeable impact in enhancing diversity, equity, and inclusion'? And why did one team of editors solicit 'only white, male authors'?Those are some of the questions that editors at the Harvard Law Review asked in internal documents obtained by the Washington Free Beacon. The…[more]
 
 
— Aaron Sibarium, Washington Free Beacon
 
Liberty Poll   

Should any "peace" agreement with Iran specifically and unconditionally force the country to halt all nuclear development?