Brutal Clinton-Trump exchange on ACA’s 1332 waiver thing

I’m sure many viewers found the detailed health policy conversation boring in Sunday night’s presidential debate. Trump’s waving off a question about Monica Lewinsky to name-check Dan Diamond’s Andy Slavitt interview didn’t go unnoticed among health wonks. Who knew that Trump was so into the details of MACRA or the various efforts to stabilize marketplace risk pools? I’ll have to do some digging to figure out if Trump got all the details right.

Oh, you watched a different debate? One in which one candidate evinced no basic familiarity with any aspect of health policy? And in which the other candidate was never asked what she might actually do to improve ACA’s challenges given the reality of a polarized Congress? This guy did, too, more here at

PS: bonus footage of Betsey McCaughey, the Trump campaign’s most visible health policy voice. (h/t @AllyRoche).

Author: Harold Pollack

Harold Pollack is Helen Ross Professor of Social Service Administration at the University of Chicago. He has served on three expert committees of the National Academies of Science. His recent research appears in such journals as Addiction, Journal of the American Medical Association, and American Journal of Public Health. He writes regularly on HIV prevention, crime and drug policy, health reform, and disability policy for American Prospect,, and other news outlets. His essay, "Lessons from an Emergency Room Nightmare" was selected for the collection The Best American Medical Writing, 2009. He recently participated, with zero critical acclaim, in the University of Chicago's annual Latke-Hamentaschen debate.

One thought on “Brutal Clinton-Trump exchange on ACA’s 1332 waiver thing”

  1. Harold: remember your own prediction that Trump will not only be defeated, but disgraced. This is incompatible with your CW assertion in the linked post that Clinton will have to deal with a Republican House and at best a narrow Senate majority.

    It is if course unsafe to make the contrary assumption that Trump will generate a GOP catastrophe with both a Senate and a House Democratic majority. But as of today these are entirely possible outcomes. Disgrace is looking good.

Comments are closed.