Did Democrats Blow It on the Government Shutdown?
Plus: Obamacare subsidies take center stage, the abundance agenda meets socialism after Mamdani’s win, and the differences between liberals and libertarians
This week, Reason editors Peter Suderman, Katherine Mangu-Ward, and Matt Welch are joined by the editor in chief of The Argument, Jerusalem Demsas, to discuss the end of the government shutdown and what Democrats actually gained from it. They examine the renewed focus on Obamacare subsidies and how both parties are struggling to articulate a coherent health care vision that moves beyond stale talking points.
The group then turns to Zohran Mamdani's win in New York and what it reveals about the uneasy overlap between the abundance movement and the rising progressive wing of the Democratic Party. The panel digs into President Donald Trump's talk of $2,000 tariff "dividends," and whether it undermines his claim that affordability is "a con." They also examine the differences and similarities between modern-day liberals and libertarians. A listener then asks whether fixing America's broken health care system should start with reforming insurance or dramatically expanding the supply of doctors.
0:00—What did Democrats gain from the government shutdown?
19:34—Obamacare subsidies and healthcare in the spotlight
26:30—The abundance agenda vs. socialism
41:34—Tariff dividend checks and the affordability "con"
46:14—Listener question on health insurance
57:07—Difference between liberalism and libertarianism
1:13:11—Weekly cultural recommendations
Mentioned in This Podcast
"Reopening?" by Liz Wolfe
"America's Longest Government Shutdown Shows Why We Must Free Air Traffic Control from Politics," by Robert Poole
"Mamdani's Win Suggests a Socialist Future for Democrats and a Rocky One for American Politics," by J.D. Tuccille
"No Excuses for Zohran Mamdani and Radical Socialism," by Robby Soave
"Mamdani Teaming Up With Lina Khan Paints a Grim Picture of What's To Come," by Elizabeth Nolan Brown
"New York Voters Say Yes to Faster Housing Approvals," by Christian Britschgi
"Mamdani Claims 'Mandate' for Bigger Government: 'There Is No Problem Too Large for Government To Solve,'" by Joe Lancaster
"6 Zohran Mamdani Campaign Promises That New York City Can't Afford," by Jack Nicastro
"The People Who Wrecked N.Y. Schools Love Zohran Mamdani," by Matt Welch
"Trump Seems Very Confused About 'Affordability,'" by Eric Boehm
"Abundance Makes the Case for 'Supply-Side Progressivism,'" by Virginia Postrel
"The Death of Contrarianism," by Matt Welch
- Producer: Paul Alexander
- Video Editor: Ian Keyser
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
End all govt participation in health insurance.
What Chumby said
That can be done, but it would also mean a major chunk of the US population losing access to health care.
Major chunk? How many is that?
I though Major Chunk was Fatfuck Jeffy’s similarly obese ChiCom military officer cousin.
No it wouldn't. That's not how markets respond to opportunities.
Government subsidizes demand and restricts supply. Get government out of the way and the market will match supply and demand.
The government got involved in health care because the free market failed to deliver. There is no reason to think it would be any different if tried again.
Like lasik?
Cite?
Because that's not why government got involved in healthcare you stupid commie scum.
What is your 'fair share' of what someone else has worked for?
If you faced cancer and had to choose between living or keeping your 1963 split window corvette until the cancer takes you, which would you choose?
I see you’re hell bent on continuing your streak.
Free markets failed? We haven't had free markets in health care since FDR. You really are ignorant. The more government meddles, the worse they fuck it up.
The government delivered dramatically worse than the free market ever attempted to.
when Obama Care kicked in I lost a premium coverage where I worked. No more. Then the local doctor closed his office and that small building has remained empty now for ten years. The only health care we have available is corporate run "Family health centers" where doctors are nothing more than pill pushers. It's all about profits for big pharma.
A cousin left the practice and works in hospice care. He told me how bad it has become as corporations and hedge funds have taken over health care. The days of the family doctor are long gone and will never return.
You really do live up to your title, Dr. Retard.
What free market?
But it would mean a major chunk of thieving greedy deadbeat losers would have to figure things out that the successful people the loathe and take from have successfully accomplished?
Notice Chumby said insurance and you conflated it with health care?
Because you're a stupid commie.
It is the retard not understanding. Saw an ad trying to ban guns under the auspice of suicide gun deaths that ended with, “Let’s agree to agree on ending gun deaths.” Some gun deaths dovetail well with the NAP. Like a woman riding public transportation being attacked by a rapefugee wielding a weapon.
They can pay for it if they want it. Choice is like that. So are consequences of choice.
Through the totalitarian socialist translator: "If you do this people will suffer". Nothing ... but insurance salesmen.
But according to Suderman that isn't a plan, they need a comprehensive magical replacement that covers everything for everyone for free.
What did Democrats gain from the government shutdown?
The ire of Hollywood.
Did Democrats Blow It on the Government Shutdown?
Yes. Does this even need to be discussed.
No winners in this continuing resolution. Need an actual balanced budget and preferably a little extra revenue to start paying down the debt for a winner to be declared.
It's already too late for that. The cost of servicing the debt is already too high.
We should get rid of the democrats while there’s still a chance of fixing things, it’s impossible while they still exist.
What is your plan for doing that?
It's a problem without a solution really. Have a plan to move somewhere else while it falls apart? The problem is the global financial system will probably see a synchronized collapse next time.
Yes, it's too late. We can't possibly continue servicing the national debt. It will drag us into a complete economic collapse in the not too distant future. There's no avoiding that now. Stock your bunker or prepare to end your life.
I know which neighbors have stocked bunkers and a firearm. Isn't that enough preparation?
Supposedly it helped them in the elections last tuesday but I'm not convinced.
This might be the first time I've ever watched this podcast, mostly because I was curious about the guest lady. KMW's initial analysis is that this shutdown was messy and gross. That's the managing editor. Messy and gross. But I'm bored watching the end of this football game so I'll keep listening.
.
Checked her X. Yep, she's an idiot.
"People memory-holed this but Biden's approval rating took a massive hit during the botched Afghanistan withdrawals which were in large part about the failure to evacuate refugees!
64 percent of *REPUBLICANS* wanted to bring in refugees who feared repression from the Taliban"
https://x.com/JerusalemDemsas/status/1987903710710927737
Pronouns in her bio.
So, not a smart person.
Checked her X. Yep, she's an idiot.
Clicked the substack link. Saw "We're libbing out." Didn't need to see anything further.
After the shaming women and child castration in the name of tolerance phase, I don't want to know where liberalism is "libbing out" to.
I stopped listening a long time ago. KMW contributes nothing to any conversation and has no ability to articulate a libertarian argument. Suderman is a child who tries to argue dumb points like a freshman nerd who learned some new words. Welch is a slimy shitbag whose tone expresses that he loves the smell of his own farts. Gillespie used to be better and would counterbalance them a but by offering some bit of measured reasoning. He has since gone full tds and argues for progressivism while not understanding he makes the same arguments.
I won't bother listening to this one either, but it is telling that they are still trying to pump up the "abundance agenda" slogan progressives are using to dupe normies into thinking that they're policies aren't the same socialist bullshit. It might as well be another NPR show without the veneer of serious professionalism.
They also examine the differences and similarities between modern-day liberals and libertarians.
If they talk about Reason libertarians then they have similar policies, liberals are just too loudly calling it socialism.
Unhappy about the lockdowns, EBT bitches not getting recharged, and govt employees being off ain’t libertarian.
The end (of the govt shutdown) was nigh, when the FAA shutdown private jets into the 8 major airports with FAA staffing caused flight restrictions. Very often, those flying by private jet are those with US Senators on speed dial. I was just surprised that the Trump Administration took a couple days between imposing the flight restrictions to banning private jets into and out of these airports. A Dem Administration, of course, would have ignored the issue entirely.
I loved her line that (paraphrasing) "clearly, health care is worth the cost of subsidies", as if she did the math. (Then, as noted by another poster, pronouns in Twitter bio.) I suppose it's strictly better than the alternative when a left-wing ideologue masquerades as a liberal technocrat, because at least that kind of lip service betrays recognition of a demand for something other than progtard talking points. But it would be nice if there were people on the left who actually *believed* what they were saying.
Miss Jerusalem, Liberal Socialist, Talks too fast, like a college teenager explaining the social benefits of her tax plan. I doubt that she has a point, but just in case, She, should know that logical persuasion is not a high word count job.
"clearly, health care is worth the cost of subsidies",
I'm sure she doesn't see it as the 21st Century version of "Slavery was worth it so that everyone could have cotton."
The democrats were all in this for the power. Nothing else. For the Democrats, it's all about power and control.
Hell, Chuckie Schumer can't even grill burgers and Haughwwkeem Jefferies, the dimestore Obama, wouldn't know one end of a bank statement from the other.
But don't worry, it will all be fixed when AOC becomes President.
Hey, Herr Schicklgruber! It's all the fault of the Jews, right, asswipe?
Did Democrats Blow It on Everything?
Yes. Yes, they did.
Next question?
I'm not bothering to listen to this. It's more of the sheep-like behavior of our pathetic media. It's hore race coverage that I thought we were supposed to have exorcised 20 years ago. Sigh.
Why not write about how the GOP blew it? Or write about possible alternatives to the ACA subsidies or the ACA itself? We all know the news cycle will be completely different next week and who won or lost the shutdown won't matter. The media are all goldfishes. They are more eager to pontificate about winners and losers instead of looking at the actual policies and the possibilities for change. Reason does better than most in that department, but come on, jumping on the horserace bandwagon?
Democrats failed when they decided they could take the American people hostage and did not vote to keep the government open.
“They examine the renewed focus on Obamacare subsidies and how both parties are struggling to articulate a coherent health care vision that moves beyond stale talking points.”
So best case scenario for libertarians, right?
Right?
The ACA is a miserable failure.
Jerusalem Demsas
Are they naming them regionally now? When does Schumer start identifying as Washington Demsass?
Does Jerusalem Demsas support Israel's actions in Gaza or is she a "Gays for Palestine" retard who publicly, obliviously, calls to "from the river to the sea" herself 2-3X over?
The Steve Urkel look certainly isn't doing her any favors either.
The entertainment value of all this is that the harpies over on The View are absolutely losing it. Whoopie must be having a mental collapse and Joyless Behar is trying not to swallow her tongue. Imagine that both are rolling on the floor gurgling saliva and screeching curses. Their bodies rising from the floor and their heads turning 180*. As for Chuckie Schumer, he should be looking into retirement and Adam Schiff is looking toward a nice vacash in a federal prison. LOL!
"Fixing" medical insurance must begin with the recognition that the resources do not exist to provide state of the art medical care for everyone.
I call bullshit
Gotta love the poster behind her, "Become an American Citizen" in a Soviet art style. I don't think she hung that up ironically.
Thanks Reason for letting the Eh Team bring us up to snuff on this latest combination trainwreck and looter dumpster fire in DC. You done us proud as always.
It is annoying that no one pushed back on her certainty that immigration wasn’t the cause of housing prices. Housing prices have been rising since the 90s. 100M more people have moved here since then, but 100M more houses have not been built. Millions of undocumented came during the Biden years (no one seems to know how many), and housing prices spiked during those years.
I know libertarians and leftists are open boarders, but I would love someone to explain to me how more people doesn’t affect the supply and demand of housing and doesn’t affect prices?!? Especially when we can’t build a lot of things here.