{"id":2673695,"date":"2026-10-01T07:46:41","date_gmt":"2026-10-01T11:46:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/utm_sourcerssutm_mediumrssutm_campaignhouse-democrats-propose-trillions-of-dollars-in-unsustainable-entitlements\/"},"modified":"2026-10-01T07:50:59","modified_gmt":"2026-10-01T11:50:59","slug":"utm_sourcerssutm_mediumrssutm_campaignhouse-democrats-propose-trillions-of-dollars-in-unsustainable-entitlements","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/utm_sourcerssutm_mediumrssutm_campaignhouse-democrats-propose-trillions-of-dollars-in-unsustainable-entitlements\/","title":{"rendered":"House Democrats Propose Trillions Of Dollars In Entitlements"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">16<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Futm_sourcerssutm_mediumrssutm_campaignhouse-democrats-propose-trillions-of-dollars-in-unsustainable-entitlements%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2673695&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p>The article critiques the Democratic policy proposals outlined in a House Democrats\u2019 healthcare working group report. It highlights that despite claims of promoting affordability, many plans are likely to be extremely costly for the federal government. The 84-page document includes numerous initiatives such as expanding medicare and Medicaid, implementing socialized medicine gradually, and enshrining taxpayer-funded abortion rights. It also advocates for immigration amnesty linked to healthcare workforce needs and proposes bailouts for Medicare Part D insurers, resulting in notable long-term expenses. these proposals are estimated to cost trillions of dollars,with little to no concrete plan for funding them,raising concerns about fiscal sustainability. While some less contentious ideas like telehealth expansion and stronger antitrust enforcement are included, the report underscores the likelihood of policy conflicts if Democrats regain control of Congress, serving as a call for conservative voters to participate in upcoming elections.  <\/p>\n<p class=\"readmore\">\n    <button onclick=\"showReadMore()\" id=\"readmorebtn\">Read more&#8230;<\/button>\n<\/p>\n<hr id=\"line\">\n<span id=\"more\"><\/p>\n<div>\n<p>The corporate media won\u2019t say so, but Democrats\u2019 policy agenda for the midterm elections comes with an inherent irony. Even after lawmakers preach \u201caffordability\u201d for the middle class, their proposals would prove unaffordable for the federal government.<\/p>\n<p>That\u2019s the upshot of the report House Democrats\u2019 health care working group delivered to House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., earlier in September and which was made public last week. One anonymous source <a href=\"https:\/\/www.politico.com\/news\/2026\/09\/25\/jeffries-healthcare-medicare-for-all-maha-rfk-abortion-01093672\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">told<\/a> Politico that the document \u201cwas a kitchen-sink-type document where everyone got their idea put in. \u2026 Nobody was told no, it seems.\u201d That pretty much describes every Democrat document ever, amounting to the policy equivalent of <a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=pviYWzu0dzk\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Oprah\u2019s<\/a>: \u201cYou get a car! You get a car! Everybody gets a car!\u201d<\/p>\n<h2><strong>Socialist Proposals<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>Some quick word searches within the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.politico.com\/f\/?id=000001a0-da3a-d276-aff6-fb7f2c380000\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">document<\/a> reveal Democrats\u2019 priorities. In the span of an 84-page paper, Democrats use the word \u201cestablish\u201d (as in \u201ccreate new programs\u201d) 64 times, some variation of \u201cexpand\u201d (as in \u201cenlarge existing programs\u201d) more than 100 separate times, and some variation of \u201crequire\u201d (as in \u201cimpose new federal mandates\u201d) over and over. These word choices speak volumes as to the party\u2019s philosophy of (big) government.<\/p>\n<p>The document proposes 18 separate \u201cpotential [pieces of] legislation for the first 100 hours\u201d \u2014 a legislative package that would leave little time for members to consider anything else (or to sleep or eat) during the initial four days of the 120th Congress. Within the laundry list of proposals for the first 100 hours and beyond, several themes become apparent:<\/p>\n<p><strong>Socialized Medicine:<\/strong> Regardless of whether or when Congress considers full-on single-payer legislation, the report cites myriad options to get there incrementally: lowering the eligibility Medicare age, creating Medicare for kids under age 26, expanding Medicaid in states that have not embraced Obamacare\u2019s expansion to able-bodied adults, and on and on.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Taxpayer-Funded Abortion on Demand: <\/strong>Beyond just codifying <em>Roe v. Wade<\/em>, the report endorses legislation to \u201censure that every person who receives care or insurance through the federal government could receive abortion services at no cost to the patient. It also prohibits political interference in decisions by <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/bidens-plan-to-fight-covid-19-through-winter-includes-stricter-rules-for-travelers\/\" title=\"Biden...s Plan To Fight COVID-19 Through Winter ... Stricter Rules For Travelers\">private health insurance companies<\/a>, including [Obamacare] marketplace coverage, to offer coverage for abortion care.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><strong>Immigration Amnesty:<\/strong> The report calls on Democrats to \u201cpass the American Dream and Promise Act to provide permanent protections and a pathway to citizenship for [Temporary Protected Status] holders and Dreamers, preventing the loss of thousands of health care and care workers who are essential to hospitals, nursing homes, and patients.\u201d The report does not limit the \u201cpermanent protections and a pathway to citizenship\u201d only to immigrants who are health care workers, instead using health care as an excuse to pass the amnesty Democrats have long supported. <\/p>\n<p><strong>Insurer Bailouts:<\/strong> As with a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.finance.senate.gov\/imo\/media\/doc\/061626_sfc_drug_pricing_rfi.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">document<\/a> that <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2026\/06\/26\/democrats-fix-for-a-5-trillion-medicare-spending-increase-is-the-same-proposals-that-caused-it\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Senate Democrats<\/a> released earlier this summer, the House report calls for perpetuating two bailouts of Medicare Part D insurers \u2014 one the <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2024\/08\/12\/medicare-agency-just-gave-kamala-harris-an-in-kind-contribution-with-your-tax-dollars\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Biden administration<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cms.gov\/newsroom\/fact-sheets\/cms-releases-2025-medicare-part-d-bid-information-and-announces-premium-stabilization-demonstration\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">imposed unilaterally<\/a>, which the Trump administration will <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2026\/08\/05\/why-the-trump-administration-was-right-to-end-the-medicare-part-d-insurer-bailout\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">end next year<\/a>, and a second one established in statute scheduled to end in 2029. Both bailouts were necessary because Democrats\u2019 Inflation (Reduction) Act caused an <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2026\/04\/08\/how-bidens-so-called-inflation-reduction-act-screwed-taxpayers-with-massive-medicare-bailouts\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">explosion in Part D spending<\/a> that could <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2026\/06\/26\/democrats-fix-for-a-5-trillion-medicare-spending-increase-is-the-same-proposals-that-caused-it\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">cost trillions of dollars<\/a> over the long term.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Trillions in Spending:<\/strong> Fully estimating the cost of all the Democrat proposals might require the advanced AI that Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., wants to ban. I\u2019m only half joking.<\/p>\n<p>Undoing the savings provisions of last year\u2019s budget reconciliation bill would cost at least $1 trillion over a decade, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cbo.gov\/system\/files\/2025-10\/PL-119-21-Medicaid%20_0.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">according to<\/a> the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cbo.gov\/publication\/61570\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Congressional Budget Office<\/a>. Reinstituting the <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2021\/03\/02\/how-democrats-covid-bill-gives-welfare-to-the-wealthy\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">enhanced Obamacare subsidies<\/a> that expired in January would cost <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cbo.gov\/system\/files\/2025-09\/61734-Health.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">$350 billion<\/a> over the same time frame. Back in 2019, CBO concluded that expanding dental and vision coverage in Medicare would cost <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cbo.gov\/system\/files\/2019-12\/hr3_complete.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">$358 billion<\/a> over 10 years \u2014 a number that has likely increased since then.<\/p>\n<p>Then there is the cost of the coverage expansions I mentioned above under \u201csocialized medicine,\u201d the would-be expansion of long-term supports and services, the proposed $5,000 out-of-pocket cap on seniors\u2019 spending in traditional Medicare, and the proposed 8 percent of income cap on all Americans\u2019 out-of-pocket spending (including premiums, deductibles, and all other forms of cost-sharing), including those with <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/cbo-reports-show-socialized-medicine-would-make-americans-poorer-and-sicker\/\" title=\"CBO ...s Show Socialized Medicine Would Make Americans Poorer And Sicker\">employer-provided health coverage<\/a>. I could go on, but you get the idea. <\/p>\n<p>This is what Democrats call \u201caffordability\u201d \u2014 trillions of dollars in spending, at a time when even <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2026\/09\/25\/rising-interest-rates-push-washington-toward-another-fiscal-crisis\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">committed leftists concede<\/a> that the federal government suffers from dangerously high structural deficits. And to answer the obvious question, no, the Democrat paper didn\u2019t include any proposals to pay for all of this new spending, save for more price controls on insurance companies and drug manufacturers, which likely wouldn\u2019t begin to cover the full cost.<\/p>\n<h2><strong>Policy Contrast<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>The report does include some less controversial, and even potentially bipartisan, items. It contains positive mentions of telehealth, <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2026\/05\/19\/heres-why-your-hospital-bills-are-so-big-and-why-congress-doesnt-care\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">site-neutral payment<\/a> (i.e., not paying more when a procedure is done in a hospital vis-\u00e0-vis a doctor\u2019s office), several policies it describes as MAHA-friendly, and stronger enforcement of antitrust laws (necessary in part because Obamacare <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2023\/12\/01\/like-trump-elizabeth-warren-believes-obamacare-sucks\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">encouraged health care conglomerates to consolidate<\/a>). It also includes a section on strengthening women\u2019s health \u2014 its commitment to \u201cguaranteeing abortion\u201d aside. But a cynic might note that implementing such policies would first require Democrats to define what a \u201cwoman\u201d is.<\/p>\n<p>In the main, however, the report illustrates the many policy conflicts likely to arise if Democrats regain control of the House and\/or Senate next year. All of this should motivate conservatives to vote accordingly on Nov. 3.<\/p>\n<hr>\n<div>\n<p>      Chris Jacobs is founder and CEO of Juniper Research Group and author of the book &#8220;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/dp\/1645720020\">The Case Against Single Payer<\/a>.&#8221; He is on Twitter: <a href=\"http:\/\/twitter.com\/chrisjacobsHC\">@chrisjacobsHC<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<p><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Democrats\u2019 costly health plans clash with affordability claims<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":521,"featured_media":2673696,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/53214224969_b8c60e7632_k.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[33651],"tags":[32412,4344,5894,47320],"class_list":["post-2673695","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-western-journal","tag-government-spending","tag-housing","tag-politics","tag-social-programs"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/53214224969_b8c60e7632_k.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2673695","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/521"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2673695"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2673695\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2673699,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2673695\/revisions\/2673699"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2673696"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2673695"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2673695"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2673695"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}