This article discusses the recent success of DSA-endorsed candidates in recent elections, as well as local elections, and how each candidate aligns with the message behind FHCNW. It analyzes multiple case studies, including Mamdani, El-Sayed, Markey, and Pearson. It highlights the ways in which the principles of FHCNW assisted their respective victories.
Introduction:
“A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.” Those were the words of President Trump regarding the ongoing war with Iran, made in a post on Truth Social. The war has become a very public stain on the current administration and has only grown less popular among US citizens, who believe the administration is burning money on an ambition Americans have far less interest in pursuing. As it stands, only 33% of Americans think the war is “worth fighting,” according to a poll conducted by the Associated Press. Additionally, across all partisan leanings, support for the war effort has been declining over time. This shows that Americans have been growing less fond of the war effort, and of moderate politicians backing it.
At the same time, Americans are facing various crises stemming from the same administration’s gutting of public services, most notably the passage of the “One Big Beautiful Bill” by Congress. This bill includes cuts to various public programs, such as an enormous $1 trillion cut to Medicaid over the course of a decade, while adding over $150-$156 billion to military spending through the 2029 fiscal year alone. In short, the bill gutted billions of dollars in public services in the name of preventing “fraud” while vastly inflating military spending, despite only about 6% of net Medicaid spending being tracked as fraudulent, and 77% of that fraudulent spending being due to administrative errors.
While opinions on the US healthcare system are nuanced, the majority of Americans (66%) support some form of government-led healthcare, according to the Pew Research Center. Of that majority, more than half support creating a single national health insurance system run by the government. That is to say, they support the creation of a universal healthcare system similar to those of every other ‘developed’ country on Earth, while the United States stands as an outlier for relying instead on Medicare/Medicaid, which has proven volatile and ineffective at securing medical benefits for many Americans. The recent gutting of this system has placed many Americans at risk, namely those with disabilities.
All in all, most Americans feel that the current administration has repeatedly worked against their interests. Interestingly, the inverse relationship between military and healthcare spending has led politicians to unite the two issues under a single rhetorical framework in their platforms, promising to reallocate military funding to public services. Among those politicians, however, is a clique of progressives who advocate for a larger focus on delivering some form of universal healthcare to Americans. As of now, US elections are currently illustrating how effective that platform is in winning local elections and primaries.
Foreshadowing: Mayor Mamdani’s Victory in NYC
While the election for the mayor of NYC is, of course, a local one, it garners significant national attention as one of the country’s most important cities. Mayor Zohran Mamdani ran on a platform that helped him defeat former Governor Andrew Cuomo. During his campaign, he was a fiery critic of escalation between the US and Iran and stated he would use his position to voice this opposition to the White House on behalf of New Yorkers. In addition to this, Mamdani has taken steps to curb the effects of federal cuts to medical assistance, stating, “Health care is a human right, not a privilege reserved for those who can afford it… While the federal government chooses to take health care away from working people, New York is choosing a different path.” These steps include:
- Low- or no-cost, comprehensive health care services at the NYC Health Department, through NYC Health + Hospitals’ facilities and community health centers regardless of immigration status or insurance coverage
- Free enrollment counselors through the NYC Health Department to help individuals and families compare coverage options and complete enrollment
- NYC Care, an NYC Health + Hospitals healthcare access program that guarantees low-to-zero-cost health care services for New Yorkers who do not qualify or cannot afford insurance
- A financial counselor to learn about transitioning to a new insurance option, available over the phone (1-844-692-4692) or in person at any NYC Health + Hospitals facility
While these programs and sources of care are not as robust as a full universal health program, they are as close to it as possible coming from the Office of the Mayor. With many struggling to afford health insurance today, many New Yorkers have found relief through these programs. This platform, through which Mamdani highlighted the disharmony between federal budget cuts and his constituents’ needs, helped him get into office and foreshadowed what was to come in later primary elections for the midterms.
Progressive Promises vs Moderate Rhetoric: Abdul El-Sayed vs Haley Stevens
Michigan’s Senate primary was a clear example of the tension between the establishment’s moderate candidates and the growing desire to see progressives take high office, and of how it connects to both opposition to the war effort and the bid for Universal Healthcare. While the more moderate Haley Stevens ran on a campaign opposing Trump’s decisions in office and the war with Iran, she has taken more moderate positions on healthcare in America, backing a “public option” for insurance coverage. It is worth noting that Stevens had not introduced such a bill during her time in the Senate and rescinded her support of “Medicare for All” in 2018.
El-Sayed, armed with a medical degree from Oxford University and years of experience in the healthcare sector, has run multiple campaigns to bring universal healthcare to Michiganders, with his sights currently on the Senate. His more progressive outlook also saw him highlight the connection between military spending and declining investment in funding healthcare on the national level, asserting that, “in an era where many of us can’t afford basic things like groceries or rent or healthcare, the idea that your government is sending your tax dollars to buy bombs and tanks for foreign governments seems anathema.” While El-Sayed’s victory was certainly slim, it is worth noting that his campaign managed to defeat Stevens while spending only around 5.8% of Stevens’s $60 million campaign total.
The Incumbent Progressive in Massachusetts: Senator Ed Markey
Ed Markey has been a senator from Massachusetts for 13 years and has served in Congress for a total of 50 years. In the wake of the new Trump administration, Markey has been emboldened to speak on behalf of his constituents regarding both opposition to the war with Iran and the growing demand for a universal healthcare program. At a press conference with Massachusetts Peace Action in April, he referenced the esteemed Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., reciting, “A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom.” He then went on to discuss recent cuts to Medicaid and Medicare and the inflated military budget, succinctly stating, “The American people want healthcare, and not warfare.” Markey is the favorite to win the upcoming Senate primary, with Moulton trailing in the polls, albeit by a small margin.
Under the Radar: Justin Pearson’s Fight in Tennessee
After being denied entry to the Tennessee legislature during its conference to remove the only black-majority district in the state, Justin Pearson’s political ambitions came to light for many voters and came to a head with his victory in the recent democratic primary for the House seat of Tennessee’s 9th district. Pearson has run a campaign focusing on delivering “healthcare for all,” while also condemning the massive increase in military funding. In the wake of the war with Iran, Pearson released a post captioned, “Trump is treating our military and country like a game, while kids are going to bed hungry. This administration needs to get its priorities in order—we do not want another forever war! We want affordability; we want our democracy back. We need investment in public education, healthcare, and support for families.” Pearson’s triumph may have flown under the radar to many election-watchers, but his campaign is a sign of a larger trend of refocusing federal funding for an egregious military campaign towards the literal healing of the American citizenry.
It’s Your Money. It’s Your Ballot.
On the first day of the US-Israeli war on Iran, the United States ordered a missile strike and triple-tapped the Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School, killing 165 people. Most of them were children. This facility had not been connected to the Iranian military for about a decade, and was not deemed a military target. This is just one example of what American taxpayer dollars are funding, and Americans are certainly taking notice. At the same time, they are, in many cases, denied life-changing medical care because they fear they cannot afford it. Americans have made it known through their voices and ballots that they do not support this war. Their concerns center on the affirmation of human rights at home and abroad, including access to medical care. Should this current trend of progressive success in the midterms continue, they may get exactly what they are demanding.