Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy has a well-documented history of lying, and so it was reasonable to believe he was lying again during his January confirmation hearing when he said he is “not anti-vaccine” and promised he wasn’t going to take vaccines away. Still, it’s both alarming and remarkable how swiftly he’s moved to take away COVID-19 boosters that have helped millions of Americans avoid becoming seriously ill from this still-novel virus. Last week, the Food and Drug Administration announced plans to deny access to the vaccine for people under 65 without an underlying health condition.
This fits in with Kennedy’s long-standing history of eugenics-tinged notions that disease is a good thing, falsely claiming that it strengthens the gene pool, and insinuating that it makes survivors stronger. (In reality, vaccines boost overall immunity while disease often weakens it.) But the particulars of the policy also reveal something about Kennedy’s reactionary class politics, which contradict his family’s history of progressivism. As Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo noted on Bluesky, “I strongly suspect you’re going to have doctors leaning forward on what constitutes a preexisting condition in this case.” Which is to say, people who want the booster can get around the FDA ban by asking their doctor for a prescription.
But as many folks, including myself, immediately pointed out, forcing people to go to the doctor requires time and usually money. Previously, most people could get the vaccine, often with no copay, by breezing into a pharmacy while grocery shopping. The people who don’t have the time or money to go through the onerous process of a doctor’s appointment are more likely to be working class or poor. Even middle-class people who can afford a copay struggle to find the time to do so. This policy is turning what was once a 10-minute process into a half-day ordeal, if you’re lucky. In effect, Kennedy isn’t banning the vaccine — he’s just making sure that only well-to-do people like himself have access.
Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics? Subscribe to her newsletter Standing Room Only.
The “Make America Healthy Again” slogan — shortened to “MAHA” — has a lot of surface appeal. Worse, Kennedy is smart about floating attention-grabbing policy ideas, like banning artificial food dyes, that are unlikely to happen but snag a lot of headlines, misleading people into thinking he’s serious about improving public health. Looking away from Kennedy’s empty, lie-laden rhetoric to his actions, however, and another narrative emerges: He’s taking away health care, with a special emphasis on limiting access for women, minorities, children, and working people. On the latest episode of my YouTube show, “Standing Room Only,” journalist Lindsay Beyerstein and I discussed how much Kennedy is taking away.
Of course, the most prominent assault from Republicans on health care is Donald Trump’s new tax bill, which aims to kick over 10 million eligible people off Medicaid. The mechanism for cheating people out of their coverage is phony “work requirements.” In reality, it’s a paperwork requirement that uses red tape to keep eligible people from accessing benefits. “It’s going to be creating this administrative bureaucracy and devastating amount of poor people who, despite being eligible, are going to lose coverage so that Congress can fund tax cuts for the wealthiest,” MaryBeth Musumeci of George Washington University told the Washington Post. Ironically, the people most affected will often be those who work full time, because they have the least free time to navigate the paperwork labyrinth.
Kennedy, who grew up in a famously progressive household, surely knows this. But he cynically joined in the lie that eligible people are “cheating” the system by penning a New York Times op-ed earlier this month that falsely claimed “able-bodied adults on welfare are not working at all” and “we don’t even ask them to.” Kennedy and his co-authors hope readers are picturing lazy young men who refuse to work so they can sit around playing video games. We know this because Jesse Watters rolled out the blunter form of this message on Fox News, claiming Medicaid recipients “play softball on the weekend, sell ecstasy on the side” and don’t “even look for a job.” As if young men don’t have any need for money other than for paying their medical bills.
But, as John Knefel at Media Matters explained, “92% of people on Medicaid are working, have a disability, or are performing duties — such as going to school or caregiving — that could qualify for an exemption from meeting work requirements.” Those 92% are in danger of losing access because of the paperwork maze requirements. Of the other 8%, four out of five are women. And they aren’t young or lazy. On average, they’re 41 years old and were recently forced out of the workforce, often to care for family members, especially elderly ones. Most have only a high school degree or less, and their median annual income is $0. That’s not a typo. This is a group of very poor women.
This is where the GOP’s traditional classism and racism meld with Kennedy’s unsubtle eugenicist impulses. He speaks frequently of disabled people as if they are useless parasites. During his confirmation hearing, Kennedy said this about people with disabilities or chronic illnesses, a category which includes anyone with diabetes or asthma: “A healthy person has a thousand dreams. A sick person has only one.” That was his scripted remark, and even then, he was arguing that a person with any chronic health condition, from someone in a wheelchair to someone who needs daily medication to manage depression, does not have a life worth living. Punishing for the “sin” of caring for disabled family members fits into this bleak, anti-human worldview.
It will not make America healthy to let people die because they don’t have the wealth to pay for health care out of pocket. Social Darwinism was a bad idea in the 1900s. It’s even dumber now. We have decades of medical evidence showing that robust, functioning health care systems are how you improve public health. The entire history of public health research shows that the “rising tide” model isn’t just more humane, but more effective than the “culling the herd” model. Sickness spreads, often directly through viruses or indirectly by depleting family resources, putting stress on people that degrades their health. Taking away health care from the people Kennedy thinks are the undeserving sick will not make others healthier. That’s not even really the goal of the Medicaid cuts, which are about funding massive tax cuts for the rich. Pulling a few food dyes out of your snacks is no substitute for what Americans need, which is the health care support for all to live full and productive lives.
Read more
about this topic
