The Shutdown That Sells Out Seniors
Trump warns that Democrats are endangering Social Security and Medicare—while Republicans control every branch of government and use that power to engineer the shutdown.
At a Tuesday press conference, Donald Trump warned that Democrats were putting Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid “in danger” by refusing to pass his administration’s preferred funding bills. “Theirs is death because they’re going to lose Social Security, they’re going to lose Medicare,” Trump said, painting a picture of a bankrupt America if Democrats didn’t accept cuts to health care programs he described as “free care for illegal aliens.”
But this shutdown—now entering its third week—was not caused by Democratic obstruction. It was created by a Republican Party that currently controls all three branches of government: the presidency, both chambers of Congress, and a Supreme Court with a conservative supermajority. The same faction that demanded loyalty oaths to “fiscal discipline” is now weaponizing its dominance to force through cuts that could never survive open debate.
White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson echoed Trump’s language, accusing Democrats of “wanting to give free health care to illegal aliens.” But that framing hides the truth: the funding bill Republicans are demanding includes cuts to Medicaid and health subsidies that millions of low- and middle-income Americans depend on.
Social Security and Medicare are not luxuries. They are the lifeline for roughly 53 million Americans—retirees, people with disabilities, and families who paid into these systems their entire working lives. When Trump claims Democrats are threatening those benefits, he’s performing a political inversion. The real threat comes from the very cuts his own administration is demanding.
The Trump administration’s fiscal brinkmanship is not a matter of gridlock—it’s an exercise in dominance. With unified control of the federal government, Republicans could pass a clean funding bill at any time. Instead, they are choosing to hold essential programs hostage to extract ideological concessions. It’s a form of political extortion that relies on confusion: if voters believe “both sides” are responsible, the powerful side gets away with it.
This shutdown mirrors earlier Republican strategies, such as the debt ceiling crises of the 2010s, designed to erode confidence in government. The tactic is cynical but effective: create dysfunction, then point to that dysfunction as proof that government doesn’t work.
The same lawmakers who passed a $1.9 trillion corporate tax cut now insist that America can’t “afford” to fund its own social safety net. Yet according to the Congressional Budget Office, the Social Security Trust Fund remains solvent through at least 2033. Even after that, if Congress takes no action, the system would still pay roughly 77% of scheduled benefits—an easily fixable gap if lawmakers lifted the payroll tax cap above its current $176,100 wage base or modestly increased the contribution rate on high earners.
For Medicare, projections from the Medicare Trustees’ 2024 Report show the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund solvent through 2036, three years longer than last year’s estimate, thanks to strong job growth and wage gains. These aren’t signs of collapse—they’re signs of programs doing exactly what they were designed to do: support Americans in tough times and adapt through incremental reforms.
But none of this fits the conservative narrative. The administration isn’t trying to fix these programs—it’s trying to delegitimize them. The goal is not solvency; it’s privatization. If voters can be convinced that public programs are doomed, Wall Street and private insurers can swoop in as “saviors,” turning guaranteed benefits into investment opportunities.
Trump’s repeated invocation of “illegal aliens” is not fiscal argument—it’s racial scapegoating. By suggesting that immigrants are siphoning benefits meant for citizens, he primes resentment among white working-class voters, distracting them from who is actually profiting: corporations, hedge funds, and the ultra-wealthy.
This narrative serves a deeper purpose. It divides people who share the same economic struggles and reframes solidarity as theft. When the government cuts Medicaid or delays Social Security payments, the people most affected are not undocumented immigrants—they are elderly Americans in small towns, single parents in rural counties, and veterans dependent on disability benefits.
As historian Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor has noted, austerity politics and racial resentment go hand in hand: both rely on convincing one group that another is the cause of their pain. When Trump warns that “the country will go bankrupt,” what he’s really saying is that Americans should accept scarcity so that wealth remains concentrated at the top.
Progressives can’t afford to argue this on Trump’s terms. The question isn’t whether we can “afford” Social Security or Medicare—it’s why billionaires can afford to avoid taxes while everyday Americans are told to tighten their belts.
We should reframe the issue as one of national inheritance. Social Security is not welfare—it’s earned insurance, paid for through decades of work. Medicare is not a handout—it’s the collective purchase of dignity in old age. These programs prove that government can function as a force for good, and that terrifies conservatives whose ideology depends on convincing voters it can’t.
Fiscal responsibility doesn’t mean balancing a spreadsheet—it means keeping promises to the people who built this country.
When talking with skeptics, shift the focus from abstract numbers to real lives. Ask them: who in your family depends on Social Security? How much would your parents’ medication cost without Medicare Part D? These questions make the issue tangible.
Stories stick where statistics fade. The grandmother who can afford groceries because of her monthly check. The disabled veteran whose treatments are covered by Medicare. These are the faces of the “entitlements” Republicans claim to oppose.
By centering those stories, we remind people that public programs are not about politics—they’re about decency.
“Democrats want to give free health care to illegal aliens.” → Dog Whistle (Euphemistic Reframing)
This is coded xenophobia dressed as fiscal prudence. It diverts anger from billionaires and corporations to marginalized groups.
Takeaway: Reframe it as, “No one’s getting free care—working families are fighting to keep the benefits they’ve earned.”
“We can’t afford these programs; the country will go bankrupt.” → Hyper-Skepticism (Weaponized Doubt)
The U.S. can afford wars, tax cuts, and corporate subsidies. Claims of insolvency only surface when the spending helps ordinary people.
Takeaway: Emphasize that true fiscal responsibility means protecting citizens, not CEOs.
“Democrats shut down the government.” → Projection
Republicans control every branch of government and engineered this crisis to push through cuts under the guise of negotiation.
Takeaway: Remind others that refusing extortion isn’t obstruction—it’s integrity.
Deeper Dive
“The Deficit Myth” by Stephanie Kelton – Explains why governments that control their own currency never “run out of money” and how austerity myths hurt the public.
“Dark Money” by Jane Mayer – Documents how billionaire networks manipulate fiscal policy to dismantle social welfare programs.
“Social Security Works!” by Nancy J. Altman and Eric R. Kingson – A clear, data-driven defense of the program’s solvency and social value.
“Listen, Liberal” by Thomas Frank – An incisive look at how Democrats ceded economic populism to the right.
Trump built his empire on bankruptcy—six of them, to be exact—and now he’s doing it again with the federal government. The only difference is that this time, the collateral isn’t a casino—it’s your retirement. If Social Security were one of his hotels, he’d already be renaming it “Mar-a-Pension” and charging seniors for valet parking.
Another excellent post! I especially appreciate the point that the administration seems to have plenty of money to spend on the war machine, sending troops into our American cities, tax cuts for billionaires, and a ridiculously large gilded ballroom, but they claim insolvency when it comes to healthcare and other services for regular people who have worked hard and paid into the system for years.