It's Just Another Big Lie: "Cutting Healthcare to Pay for Tax Cuts"

It's repeated propaganda and it's been working, but it's not too late

A quote often attributed to Nazi Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda Joseph Goebbels (yes, that was his official title) goes:

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”

There is no verified citation to him saying that exact phrase, but it aligns with his and the Nazi’s overall belief system. Today, in the United States, we are watching and experiencing that tactic unfold in real time.

Since the “One Big Beautiful Bill” Act (OBBB) was first conceived—and still now— the most common description is that it “cuts health care to pay for tax cuts.” That is a lie, and it is a lie that has been repeated by everyone on the political spectrum to the point where it is accepted—if not as truth, but at least as the framework around which the discussion takes place.

To be clear, it is not the truth. But that phrase has been nagging at me since this bill first was talked about. Only recently did it click, did I understand, why it was bothering me. Maybe I’m late to the party, but when I hear Senators continue to talk about the OBBB in these terms, I don’t think so.

That phrase has become little more than propaganda that shapes the argument. It makes what is happening sound more rational. But there is nothing rational about what’s happening, about the cruelty that’s unfolding.

I. “Cutting health care…”

Those three words are a distillation of what will happen, to be sure, but are an oversimplification to a fault. Depending on who you are listening to, the OBBB is going to kick anywhere from 10 to 16 million people off Medicaid and will affect children disproportionately. The greater truth is that everyone in the country will feel the effects: overburdened emergency rooms, higher insurance premiums for everyone, closed hospitals and clinics, and the moral toll of greater inequality and privilege.

What those words do, however, is appeal to the still popular idea that there are “takers” in this society and it’s unfair to the “makers” that they get healthcare for free. The myth of “welfare queens” gaming the system while the rest of us work for what we get still lingers.

This argument is as specious now as it was when Reagan-era conservatives made it popular. The vast majority of “takers” are workers who pay their share but, for example, can’t afford healthcare and—thankfully—have the option of Medicaid. Further, many of the so-called “makers” get advantages and subsidies not available to those less fortunate. Said differently, the real takers are those who benefit most from public systems without giving back proportionally, a system the OBBB would further entrench. And yet, the language of “cutting health care” still appeals—because that’s what propaganda is designed to do.

II. “…To Pay For…”

By saying the healthcare cuts are “to pay for” tax cuts makes it sound like a rational, balance sheet trade-off. If this were really about fiscal discipline, the deficit wouldn’t be projected to balloon by trillions—analyses across the spectrum expose that lie. The cuts to Medicaid, SNAP, etc. don’t pay for anything. All the cuts do is strip support from the vulnerable: they kick people off healthcare, make children go hungry, and make college harder to afford. There is no actual relationship between the healthcare cuts and the tax cuts—that’s just propaganda to make the issue easier to swallow.

Put differently, if they actually paid for the tax cuts, why are all impact estimates regarding the OBBB saying the debt and deficit will balloon in the trillions of dollars? If making cuts to Medicaid is so important “to pay for” the tax cuts, why didn’t the first Trump administration include them in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA)? Saying “to pay for” simply puts a thin veil over the cruelty of what’s happening. It gives the cuts a sheen of rationality, that kicking people off health care is actually for something, not just an act that will make lower-income families struggle that much more.

III. “…Tax Cuts”

For the most part, the tax cuts in the OBBB are merely making permanent the tax cuts in the TCJA. By generically saying this is for tax cuts, however, many people will think that they will benefit. After all, who doesn’t want a tax cut? Simply saying this is for “tax cuts,” however, is a cynical act of framing. It makes people think they’ll be better off, when in fact most will see no change—or worse, many will see their economic situation deteriorate as a result.

In conclusion, the phrase “cutting healthcare to pay for tax cuts” sounds like a budgetary tradeoff—just numbers on a ledger. But it’s not. It’s a lie that cloaks cruelty in the language of responsibility. It makes it seem like a tough-but-necessary decision, like there's a natural zero-sum logic to it. This is the latest effort by the Grover Norquists of the country—those who say they reject taxation but what they truly reject is the very idea of community and of common purpose. To them, taxes are theft, and helping others impinges on their freedom. Their idea of “freedom,” however, is freedom from any obligation to others, freedom to hoard wealth and power, and freedom to pretend the suffering of others has nothing to do with them.

The phrase—the trade-off—in “cutting healthcare for tax cuts” seems inherently reasonable. Too many stopped before questioning the premise, and the concept has become normalized. By accepting the phrase, as we all have, by repeating the phrase without any nuance, the truth is almost lost.

In truth, it’s little more than another “Big Lie.” The OBBB impacts everyone in this country. It puts the lives of millions, including millions of children, at greater risk. And yet the most common phrase associated with it, the best-known summary of it, makes it sound like little more than a budget trade off. It’s subtle, it’s powerful, and it’s effective. The Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda would be proud.

Call your representative. Call your senators. It’s not too late.