No, President Trump: The sanctity of life is not ‘flexible’



This September marks the 50th anniversary of the Hyde Amendment’s first passage in the House of Representatives — the annual appropriations rider that bars federal funding of elective abortion.

No one should be surprised that Democrats would mark the moment by extending Affordable Care Act subsidies that help enable backdoor abortion funding in blue states. What did surprise pro-lifers was President Donald Trump’s recent declaration that Republicans “have to be a little flexible on Hyde.”

Human lives aren’t negotiable. Neither is the Hyde Amendment.

“We’re all big fans of everything, but you have to have flexibility,” Trump told House Republicans in Washington on Jan. 6. He urged them to “work something” out on health care, a line that seemed to suggest Hyde could become a bargaining chip.

For millions of GOP voters, it cannot.

Just one year ago, the president aligned himself with them. On his fourth day in office, he signed an executive order declaring that “consistent with the Hyde Amendment,” it is the policy of the United States “to end the forced use of Federal taxpayer dollars to fund or promote elective abortion.”

The same president helped overturn Roe v. Wade, restored the Mexico City policy ending funding for overseas abortions, and declared himself the “most pro-life president” in history.

If his position has changed, Americans have the right to know.

The Hyde Amendment is estimated to have saved more than 2.6 million lives over the past five decades. It forbids the use of federal tax dollars for abortions except in cases of rape, incest, or a life-threatening medical emergency.

Yet the abortion lobby found a work-around. Twenty state Medicaid programs cover elective abortions using state funds, and millions of enrollees in those plans receive federal subsidies to help pay their premiums.

In plain terms, federal tax dollars indirectly support abortion in blue states, regardless of Hyde. It’s the same moral and fiscal problem that drove Congress to defund Planned Parenthood in Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act spending package last July. Why cut off one pipeline while leaving another one wide open?

The Jan. 1 expiration of Biden-era enhancements to Obamacare subsidies offered Republicans a chance to close this loophole.

RELATED: ‘Fraud ... for abortion’? Vance announces probe into Planned Parenthood's $88M taxpayer-funded loans at March for Life

Photo by Kyle Mazza/Anadolu via Getty Images

House Republicans, to their credit, tried. In December, they passed H.R. 6703, which would explicitly block federal dollars from helping pay for a Medicaid plan that covers elective abortion. The Congressional Budget Office projects that the bill would lower Obamacare premiums by 11% on average through 2035 — nearly double the estimated reduction in the Democrats’ plan — and shrink the national deficit by $35.6 billion.

Then 17 Republicans defected.

On Jan. 8, they voted with Democrats to force a “clean” three-year extension of Obamacare subsidies with no language protecting taxpayers from subsidizing abortion.

Now the bill moves to the Senate, where negotiations reportedly continue on a bipartisan package. Thankfully, contrary to Trump’s calls for “flexibility,” Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) has signaled that Hyde will remain non-negotiable in any deal.

“We want to ensure that, if we do anything, it’s done in a way that reforms these programs and ... ensures that those dollars aren’t being used to go against the practice that’s been in place for the last 50 years around here, when it comes to taxpayer dollars being used to finance abortions,” Thune told reporters on Jan. 6.

The president — and any Republicans tempted to treat Hyde as disposable — should follow Thune’s lead. Trump may have a gift for “the art of the deal,” but the values at the center of the Republican coalition are not bargaining chips.

The GOP has long cast itself as a party of abolitionists, freedom fighters, and defenders of the vulnerable unborn. It should not compromise those claims for short-term political convenience — and become what it says it opposes.

Respectfully, Mr. President, human lives aren’t negotiable. Neither is the Hyde Amendment.

The Obamacare subsidy fight exposes who Washington really serves



The failure of both Democrat and Republican plans to extend or partially replace enhanced Obamacare subsidies offers a clear lesson: Escaping an entitlement trap almost never happens.

Yes, the House of Representatives on Thursday voted to extend the COVID-era Affordable Care Act subsidies that expired at the end of 2025. Seventeen Republicans even joined a unanimous Democratic Caucus in voting for the extension. But Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said Republicans have “no appetite” for an extension — at least not without reforms.

Republicans remain an impediment to the necessary reforms and are working hand in hand with Democrats to bring on economic collapse. Time is not on our side.

The reality is, once government creates a welfare entitlement, logic and sustainability exit the conversation. Politicians do not debate whether to grow the program. They argue only over how much to increase spending and how to disguise the costs. That pattern now governs the fight over enhanced Obamacare subsidies.

Why the premise never gets challenged

When the Senate rejected a nearly identical bill in December, the Wall Street Journal reported that Congress faces “no clear path for aiding millions of Americans facing soaring Affordable Care Act insurance costs next year.”

The Journal’s framing accepts the entitlement premise without question. It treats “aiding millions” as morally self-evident while ignoring the coercion necessary to fund that aid. Government assistance does not materialize from thin air. It transfers responsibility, money, and risk from one group of Americans to another.

Once imposed, that transfer only grows.

Both rejected plans would have sent more taxpayer money to insurers than the ACA already guarantees. With no deal in sight, the Journal observed last month that hope for extending the subsidies is fading. That assessment may be accurate politically, but an extension does not deserve hope. It deserves scrutiny.

How entitlement politics works

Democrats want Republicans to extend an expansion they never voted for of a program they never supported. Republicans respond by proposing modest adjustments to reduce political damage without challenging the underlying structure.

Rep. Max L. Miller (R-Ohio), who voted for the bill, summarized the dilemma perfectly. “I just want to make this abundantly clear: This is a Democratic piece of legislation. It is absolutely horrific. Now, it is the best alternative to what we have at the moment.”

That is how entitlement traps operate.

For decades, big-government advocates have followed a reliable strategy. They create a benefit for a defined group, allow costs to spiral, then dare the opposition to take something away from a newly entrenched constituency. When the moment arrives, those who claim to favor limited government retreat or propose cosmetic reforms that leave the core system untouched.

That dynamic explains why the country remains locked into the socialist ratchet, the uniparty routine, and a political class that acts as tax collector for an ever-expanding welfare state.

RELATED: Democrat senator makes stunning admission about Obamacare failures

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Trapped voters, trapped taxpayers

Entitlements squeeze the nation from both sides. They trap recipients by discouraging work and mobility, and they trap taxpayers by locking future governments into permanent obligations.

The Affordable Care Act stands as one of the most powerful modern examples of this system. The law forced millions into government-regulated insurance markets while guaranteeing insurers a growing pool of subsidized customers. The result was predictable: higher costs, deeper dependency, and a massive political constituency invested in permanent expansion.

Not a single Republican voted for the ACA. They understood what the law would do. Democrats passed it anyway, and it worked exactly as designed.

Who Obamacare was really built to serve

As Connor O’Keeffe has argued at Mises Wire, federal health care policy has long served industry interests. Government interventions channel money toward providers, pharmaceutical companies, and insurers under the guise of helping patients.

Obamacare accelerated that process by mandating coverage and expanding what insurers must provide, driving demand and cost growth in tandem. Once people rely on government assistance to afford insurance, any reduction becomes politically unthinkable.

Republicans now scramble to avoid electoral consequences. House Speaker Mike Johnson says the GOP will advance health care proposals without extending subsidies, yet many lawmakers privately admit that only an extension prevents immediate pain ahead of the 2026 midterms.

That admission exposes the trap. Spending limits become cruel. Taxpayer costs disappear from the conversation. Only the next premium increase matters.

Why conservatives keep losing

History explains where this leads. Entitlement debates almost always end with higher spending. Political power depends on payments to voters. Reducing benefits means losing elections.

Progressives act decisively when in power. Conservatives obsess over procedure and restraint, even as the administrative state grows unchecked.

Last week alone offered two examples. The House overturned President Trump’s March 2025 executive order blocking collective bargaining for over a million federal employees, with 20 Republicans joining Democrats. Even Franklin Roosevelt opposed public-sector unions. Modern conservatives could not summon the resolve to block them.

On the same day, Indiana Republicans declined to redraw their congressional map despite the risk of losing the House and triggering impeachment proceedings against Trump. They clung to unwritten norms while their opponents prepared to exploit the outcome.

RELATED: If conservatives will not defend capitalism, who will?

Leontura via iStock/Getty Images

This pattern defines conservative failure. Republicans manage decline. They preserve a decaying system rather than reverse it.

Donald Trump broke from that habit. A former Democrat, he understands power. Win elections, then act. Trump restored a political energy absent on the right for decades.

His approach to entitlements focuses on restraining growth outside Social Security while expanding private-sector freedom to increase economic output. The goal is not austerity. It is to shrink government’s share of the economy by growing everything else faster.

Reform or collapse

That strategy may succeed or fail. It remains the only alternative to collapse. Without reform, federal spending and debt will overwhelm the system within a decade, possibly sooner. Borrowing costs will explode. Inflation will surge. Control will vanish.

The United States approached that danger under unified Democrat control and Joe Biden’s autopen in 2021 and 2022. Voters halted the slide by electing Republican majorities and returning Trump to the White House.

Trump failed to drain the swamp in his first term, largely because congressional Republicans refused to legislate when they had the chance. In his second term, he has advanced reforms through executive action. Congress has responded with delay and timidity.

The country will escape the entitlement trap one way or another. Reform can arrive through disciplined growth and economic expansion, or through collapse driven by massive overspending.

With their conservative approach to governance, Republicans remain an impediment to the necessary reforms and are working hand in hand with Democrats to bring on that collapse. Time is not on our side.

9 Republicans aid Democrats to advance Obamacare subsidies



Nine Republicans voted to advance the Democrat-led health care bill Wednesday, defying the GOP to extend Obamacare subsidies.

Republican Reps. Nick LaLota of New York, Thomas Kean of New Jersey, Mike Lawler of New York, Ryan Mackenzie of Pennsylvania, David Valadao of California, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Max Miller of Ohio, Rob Bresnahan of Pennsylvania, and Maria Elvira Salazar of Florida joined Democrats to bring a vote on the health care subsidies that expired at the end of 2025.

'DEMOCRATS have increased health care costs exponentially.'

Notably Lawler, Fitzpatrick, Bresnahan, and Mackenzie also signed onto House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries' (D-N.Y.) discharge petition last month that would have forced a House vote to extend the subsidies.

A final vote on the bill is now expected to take place Thursday.

RELATED: Senate tanks GOP solution to Obamacare subsidy problems

Kent Nishimura/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Lawler defended his vote aiding Democrats, saying the solution to fix the "broken" health care system is "through a bipartisan approach."

"Republicans and Democrats can agree that our healthcare system is broken and must be fixed through a bipartisan approach," Lawler wrote. "Enough of the blame game on both sides. Let’s focus on actually delivering affordable healthcare for Americans."

RELATED: California Republican suddenly dies at age 65

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has maintained that the Affordable Care Act, especially the COVID-era subsidies, are responsible for skyrocketing premiums.

"Obamacare was created and passed entirely by DEMOCRATS," Johnson said in a post on X during the 2025 government shutdown. "Since Obamacare took effect, health insurance premiums have SKYROCKETED. The Obamacare COVID-era subsidies were also passed entirely by DEMOCRATS, and set to expire at the end of this year."

"DEMOCRATS have increased health care costs exponentially, and are now shutting down the government — as they try to cover up THEIR OWN FAILURES and somehow blame Republicans."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Senate tanks GOP solution to Obamacare subsidy problems



The Senate failed to pass the Republican-led health care bill as the deadline to extend Obamacare subsidies fast approaches.

The Health Care Freedom for Patients Act failed to pass in a 51-48 vote after one Republican, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, joined 47 Democrats to vote against it. 51 Republicans voted in favor of the legislation, but the bill ultimately failed due to the 60-vote threshold. Notably, Republican Sen. Steve Daines of Montana was not present for the vote.

The bill would also foster competition and broaden health care.

Certain subsidies from former President Barack Obama's landmark health care bill, known as the Affordable Care Act, are set to expire at the end of the year. Notably, these ACA subsidies are the reason Senate Democrats decided to shut down the government in October.

Despite facilitating the longest government shutdown in history, Senate Democrats have not struck a deal with Republicans to address health care.

RELATED: Democrat senator makes stunning admission about Obamacare failures

Kayla Bartkowski/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The Health Care Freedom for Patients Act, authored by Republican Sens. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Mike Crapo of Idaho, would have allowed these Obamacare subsidies to lapse, instead directing funds to individual health savings accounts.

While this bill ultimately failed, other Republican lawmakers have drafted their own legislation to address the impending problem.

Republican Sen. Rick Scott of Florida introduced the More Affordable Care Act, which would also redirect federal subsidies to HSA-style accounts called Trump Health Freedom Accounts. The bill would additionally foster competition and broaden health care options for states by establishing the Health Freedom Waiver Program.

RELATED: Republicans race to pass competing health care bill as clock ticks on Obamacare subsidies

Photo by Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images

The companion bill to Scott's legislation was also introduced in the House by Republican Study Committee Chairman August Pfluger. At this time, no vote has been scheduled on the bill in either the House or the Senate.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Republicans race to pass competing health care bill as clock ticks on Obamacare subsidies



With the deadline to extend Obamacare subsidies fast approaching, Republican lawmakers are leading the charge.

Former President Barack Obama's Affordable Care Act has been the focal point of health care discussions on Capitol Hill as ACA subsidies are expected to expire at the end of the year. These are the same subsidies Senate Democrats cited as the basis of their record-breaking shutdown.

The Republicans' legislation blocks funds for 'gender transition procedures' and abortions.

In response, several Republicans introduced their own legislation, including the Health Care Freedom for Patients Act penned by Sens. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Mike Crapo of Idaho.

With just weeks until these subsidies lapse, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (S.D.) will hold a vote on that key legislation on Thursday.

RELATED: Senate Democrats insist the shutdown was 'definitely' worth it despite fully surrendering to Republicans

Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

The Crapo-Cassidy bill would allow the Obama-era subsidies to lapse, instead boosting funds for health savings accounts. Eligible adults under the age of 50 would receive $1,000 deposited into their HSA while those between the ages 50 and 64 would get $1,500.

It would also fund cost-sharing reduction payments and provide eligible Americans the option to purchase "bronze" or "catastrophic" health care plans. Notably the Republicans' legislation blocks funds for "gender transition procedures" and abortions.

Although Republicans are expected to vote for the legislation, it is unlikely to pass due to the 60-vote filibuster threshold. Assuming all 53 Republicans vote in favor of the bill, at least seven Democrats would have to cross the aisle for the legislation to pass the Senate.

RELATED: Democrat senator makes stunning admission about Obamacare failures

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

Other Republicans, like Sen. Rick Scott of Florida, are also introducing alternative health care bills. Scott introduced his More Affordable Care Act alongside Republican Study Committee Chairman August Pfluger (Texas), who spearheaded the companion bill in the House.

Scott and Pfluger's bill would create Trump Health Freedom Accounts, redirecting federal subsidies traditionally sent to insurance companies to these HSA-style accounts held by individual Americans. The bill would also establish a Health Freedom Waiver Program, allowing states to broaden their health plans and expand competition to offer fairer prices.

At this time, there is no vote scheduled for Scott's legislation.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

ROOKE: Republicans Missing The Point On Obamacare Subsidies

'giving them the perfect opportunity to expose Democrats as the painmakers'