Kamala Harris is at it again, this time pitching a Medicare expansion that sounds more like a half-baked attempt to buy votes rather than a real solution. On Tuesday, she proposed broadening Medicare benefits to cover home health care, all while making it seem like she’s swooping in to rescue overworked caregivers. Sure, Harris is painting herself as a champion for the so-called “sandwich generation” — people juggling kids and aging parents — but is her plan really the fix it’s cracked up to be, or just another expensive band-aid?
During her appearance on “The View” (because why not start the week with a friendly chat on daytime TV?), Harris tried to sell the idea that adding home health care to Medicare will preserve the dignity of aging Americans and ease the financial burdens on families. And if you think this is just another campaign gimmick, you’d be right. After all, with nearly a quarter of American adults fitting into this “sandwich generation,” Harris knows exactly which voter demographic she’s pandering to.
Her proposal claims that Medicare enrollees could be evaluated to see if they need help with daily activities like eating or bathing. If deemed necessary, they’d get some help at home — but not too much! Just an average of 20 hours a week, according to the campaign’s numbers. The cost would be covered for those with modest incomes, but the rest would have to chip in. Typical Washington, right? A half-baked, expensive plan that leaves taxpayers holding the bag.
Speaking of costs, this whole thing isn’t cheap. Estimates from the Brookings Institution peg a “very conservative” version of the program at a whopping $40 billion a year. Yet Harris, in typical fashion, glossed over the fine print, saying it’ll be paid for by expanding drug price negotiations and implementing international tax reform. Sure, Kamala, because when has Washington ever stuck to a budget?
Oh, and that’s not all! Harris wants to throw in hearing aids, eye exams, and new glasses under Medicare too. Because apparently, this plan wasn’t expensive enough already. And she’s taking aim at states that recover Medicaid funds spent on long-term care by seizing seniors’ homes, as if this plan magically solves that problem too.
Let’s be real here: Long-term care is expensive. A home health aide costs nearly $69,000 a year for just 40 hours of care each week. A full-time nursing home stay? That’s over $100,000 a year. Most seniors simply don’t have that kind of cash. Yet under Medicare’s current setup, these folks are paying out-of-pocket or leaning on Medicaid if they’re lucky enough to qualify.
So Harris’ solution is to throw Medicare at the problem, making it look like she’s doing something without really addressing the deeper issue: the astronomical costs of care. The media isn’t helping, either. They’re all too happy to let her ramble on about the personal hardships of caregiving, as if that personal touch magically turns her proposal into a well-thought-out plan.
Take her story about caring for her late mother. Yes, we get it, she’s been there. But instead of using that experience to push for real reform, she’s offering band-aids and hoping the media eats it up, which, unsurprisingly, they are. According to a survey by AARP, two-thirds of caregivers have difficulty balancing work with caregiving responsibilities. So, sure, expanding home care coverage sounds good on paper. But without serious thought on how to pay for it, or how to manage the increasing costs, Harris’ plan is more fantasy than fix.
And let’s not forget the political angle here. Care in Action PAC, a group that champions care workers, announced a multimillion-dollar investment in battleground states just as Harris rolled out this Medicare proposal. Coincidence? Hardly. This is just more of the same political grandstanding we’ve come to expect.
In the end, Harris’ appearance on “The View” was less about solving real problems and more about polishing her image. She may have promised long-term care solutions, but what she’s really offering is more government overreach, another bloated program, and a hefty bill for taxpayers. Meanwhile, her media blitz continues, as she cozies up with friendly interviewers like Stephen Colbert and Howard Stern — because nothing says “serious policy debate” like a late-night talk show.
So while Harris tries to sell this Medicare expansion as the answer to long-term care, don’t be fooled. It’s just another example of the vice president offering high-priced promises with little substance to back them up. The media will fawn, the political action committees will cheer, but at the end of the day, it’s the taxpayers who’ll be left holding the bag.
