As the tumultuous political arena gears up for the 2020 Presidential elections, Social Security and Medicare have emerged as critical showdown topics between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. In an incessant battle of formidable claims and counterclaims, both sides have strived to sway public sentiment towards their favor. However, the credibility and feasibility of these assertions remain a subject of heated debate.
To begin with, let’s dissect the claims made by Kamala Harris, the Democratic nomination for the vice presidency. In recent discussions, Harris accused President Trump of planning to cut Social Security. This contention is grounded on a chain of tweets by the President in August, wherein he proposed to permanently eliminate payroll taxes if re-elected. Presumably, such a step could inadvertently affect the Social Security trust fund, given that payroll taxes serve as its lifeblood. Nevertheless, counter-arguments bring attention to Trump’s repeated assurance that Social Security benefits would not be affected as the funds would be derived from the general fund.
Harris did not stop her criticism at Social Security. She also asserted that Trump is in court right now trying to get rid of Medicare. This claim refers to the Trump administration’s support of a lawsuit seeking to eliminate the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare. The lawsuit argues that the entire ACA is unconstitutional. If the lawsuit succeeded, it could theoretically disrupt Medicare’s expanded benefits, prescription drug costs, free preventive services, and the framework for future improvements.
On the other side of the spectrum, we find President Trump also formulating potent claims regarding Social Security and Medicare. Primarily, he blamed the Democrats for allegedly attempting to destroy both Social Security and Medicare. This stems from Trump’s interpretation of the Democrats’ plan to provide healthcare for all, which he believes would lead to rationing of services, triggering insolvency for both programs. However, such an outcome is speculative at best, as it depends on numerous unpredictable and complex factors.
Furthermore, Trump accused the Democrats of stealing from the Social Security trust fund to pay for other governmental programs. However, this claim is highly questionable since the Social Security trust fund has only two legal uses: to pay benefits and administrative costs. The law also strictly prohibits it from being redirected towards other governmental expenses.
The quintessence of this discourse on Social Security and Medicare lies in the understanding that while claims from both sides may entail elements of truths and concerns, they also possess moments of exaggeration or misinterpretation. Therefore, voters are called upon to peel back the layers of political rhetoric and investigate the facts surrounding these assertions. Should the electorate choose to delve into the complexities of these claims, they will assure themselves an informed choice, based not on mere propaganda, but on a well-rounded comprehension of the intricacies of Social Security and Medicare policies.
