Buttigieg Denounced for Spouting 'Pack of Lies' About Medicare for All While Swimming in Insurance Industry Cash

South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg—the leading recipient of campaign cash from the healthcare industry among Democratic presidential candidates—went on the offensive against Medicare for All with right-wing talking points during Tuesday night’s debate, bashing the popular proposal as a tax hike on the middle class that would kick “150 million Americans off of their insurance in four short years.”

Buttigieg’s debate performance was met with enthusiastic applause from cable news talking heads and conservative commentators, but progressive critics and health policy experts said the mayor’s attacks on Medicare for All were deceptive at best and, at worst, blatant falsehoods.

“Mayor Pete was spinning a pack of lies about Medicare for All last night,” The Week‘s Ryan Cooper tweeted Wednesday morning.

“The problem with Pete Buttigieg’s ‘Medicare if you want it’ is it won’t bring the administrative costs down of private insurers or maximize negotiation with Big Pharma and hospitals.”
—Rep. Ro Khanna

In a column on Wednesday, Cooper argued that Buttigieg’s two primary lines of attack against Medicare for All during the debate—that it would hike taxes on the middle class and cost trillions of dollars—were highly misleading.

Buttigieg took aim at Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) for refusing to “acknowledge” Medicare for All would raise taxes on middle-class Americans, echoing attacks he leveled against Warren and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in the days leading up to Tuesday night’s debate.

Cooper wrote that it is “very obvious” why Warren refuses to describe Medicare for All as a tax increase on the middle class, “and it is arguably more accurate for her to do so.”

“What really matters here is that, while Medicare for All would require some additional taxes on the middle class, those increases would be more than compensated for by zeroing out premiums, co-pays, and deductibles,” Cooper noted.

Buttigieg’s claim that Medicare for All would cost trillions of dollars—and that his incremental plan, called “Medicare for All Who Want It,” would cost less—was also false, Cooper said.

“He was likely referencing the study from the libertarian Mercatus Center about how much additional tax revenue would be needed to finance Medicare for All—just over $30 trillion, as Joe Biden said later. What that figure leaves out is that total healthcare spending under universal Medicare would go down by some $2 trillion over a decade,” Cooper wrote. “Those savings would necessarily be less in more fragmented systems which would preserve private insurance—like the one proposed by Pete Buttigeig. In other words, Mayor Pete’s plan would be more expensive than Medicare for All.”

Others joined Cooper in pushing back against Buttigieg, who appears to be positioning himself as the establishment alternative as Biden fades in the polls.