Lefty Trump Is At It Again
Donnie + Bernie = Harmony??
With the goal to align U.S. drug prices with those in other developed countries, President Trump signed an executive order on May 12, 2025 directing the Department of Health and Human Services to negotiate lower drug prices with manufacturers within 30 days. The order warned of regulatory action if no progress is made within 180 days.
One of the strategies that we have credited Trump for in the past is his willingness to go with the popular opinion, despite party lines and the wishes of those who may have funded his campaign. If it is going to make 80% or more of Americans happier, he is likely to get behind it. This executive order is one of those examples of stealing a talking point of the Left and making it his own.
Senator Bernie Sanders (D-VT) made the following statement on the order:
“I agree with President Trump: It is an outrage that the American people pay, by far, the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs. It is beyond unacceptable that we pay, in some cases, ten times more for the same exact prescription drugs than people in other major countries. But let’s be clear: The problem is not that the price of prescription drugs is too low in Europe and Canada. The problem is that the extraordinarily greedy pharmaceutical industry made over $100 billion in profits last year by ripping off the American people.”
That has to be difficult for Sanders, who has been pushing this idea for ages but without any real support from even his own party. Now Trump is doing it on his own.
Or is he? Sanders points out that it will be difficult to actually accomplish the objective of Trump’s order without some legislation to codify it. Enter the “moderate” of the Democratic Party: Representative Ro Khanna (D-CA). Khanna is collaborating with Representative Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) to bring forth legislation aimed at making law out Trump's executive order on prescription drug pricing.
Emphasizing that this legislation would prioritize patients over pharmaceutical companies, Khanna stated:
“There's no gimmick in this. It's the president's executive language. I don't see why we wouldn't codify it.”
With both parties stepping up to push this legislation, we see what seems to be a shared concern over high drug prices and a willingness to establish policies that would reduce the cost to the consumer. We emphasize that it is “what seems to be” because it is really difficult to tell with politicians who have accepted so much campaign funding and enjoyed other benefits from the pharmaceutical industry. With so much support from their constituents on this issue, Trump (and now Khanna and Luna) has painted all of the Republicans and Democrats into a corner. The spotlight is on the legislators now. They are torn over whether to uphold their duty to their constituents or serving their corporate masters.
That is a characteristic of this administration that increasingly seems rare, if not unique: they are willing to put legislators of both parties in a compromised position. By saying “this is what the people want and this president supports what the people want,” the loyalty of each legislator is put on display.
As Sanders goes around yelling and screaming about “fighting the oligarchy” (have you noticed that it’s only the Democrats who yell and scream in their “speeches”?), Trump seems to be stealing one of Bernie’s main talking points right out from under his nose. As a counterpoint, some see the push from Sanders, Khanna, and others to codify Trump’s order in legislation as calling him out or holding his feet to the fire. Skeptics note that it is easy to write an order that has no teeth, but it will force Trump’s hand if actual legislation takes root.
The even more skeptical think that price controls will backfire altogether. If most Americans want lower drug prices and the pharmaceutical industry actually does charge more in America for certain medications than they charge in other countries, then what exactly does opposition to this legislation look like (other than a bunch of sellouts)? The claim from the industry that innovation and competition would suffer seems pretty thin.
Since the majority of Americans get private insurance through employers, both the executive order and the legislation may prove to be limited in efficacy. Since private insurance negotiates independently, it will really only benefit those on Medicare. Perhaps most Americans will see no savings and perhaps most will end up with a higher co-pay as the pharmaceutical manufacturers attempt to offset their loss of Medicare revenue.
Bringing It On Home
Frankly, we here at Meet Me in the Middle are skeptical that either the executive order or proposed legislation will amount to anything really positive. We are less skeptical about the notion that Trump might be trying to steal Bernie Sanders’ thunder on this issue. Regardless, what really delights us is the compromise — a willingness to move forward in concert for what is purported to be the good of the people.
THAT is what we have been talking about!
Is the larger public ready to grow more willing to see that Trump is no ordinary Republican. He is no Democrat, either. He is something different. He is legacy-oriented (perhaps legacy-obsessed) and seems willing to completely overlook party interests to achieve the legacy he desires. What kind of legacy do you think such an egotistical person might desire? Considering the tone of some of his messaging about his current administration, such as it being a “Golden Era,” it seems clear: he wants to go down as one of the greatest presidents ever.
What would that take? Perhaps bringing about lasting world peace? Perhaps repositioning the United States as the clear global power for generations? Perhaps redefining global economic order? Perhaps blowing up the most divisive aspects of modern culture? Perhaps unprecedented global stability?
If he accomplished those things, he is probably at least worthy of a spot on Mount Rushmore (along with two slave masters in Washington and Jefferson, a man who thought blacks were inferior to whites in Lincoln, and a brutal imperialist in Teddy Roosevelt). What if he actually was the greatest president in history? Even if he accomplished those monumental feats, would his opponents ever admit to his greatness? He certainly would not be the first flawed man to be celebrated for generations and centuries to come.
It seems President Trump has a vision of being the greatest. What would that take? It certainly would take something other than doing things the way they have been done for decades. It certainly would take compromise. He seems very comfortable going against the grain. Who knows? If he keeps finding ways to meet in the middle, he just might get there!