U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent shakes hands with U.S. Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS) during testifying at a Senate Finance Committee hearing on U.S. President Donald Trump's budget request for the Department of Treasury, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., June 12, 2025. REUTERS/Nathan Howard
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS) took to X on Wednesday to tout a bailout fund for rural hospitals included in President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill" of tax cuts, narrowly passed by the Senate on Tuesday and currently under debate in the House as GOP leaders try to force through a vote with no changes.
"We have set up a $50 billion rural health fund within this reconciliation bill — we are giving rural hospitals a lifeline to survive," wrote Marshall.
But he was immediately deluged with scorn by commenters, as many people, including his colleagues on Capitol Hill, noted the only reason rural hospitals needed a "lifeline to survive" is that the bill cuts almost $1 trillion from Medicaid, kneecapping a major source of funding for them.
"The reason rural hospitals need this 'lifeline' to begin with is because you’re killing them," wrote Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY).
"Gutting the Medicaid system that keeps folks healthy and reimburses costs to rural and urban hospitals that depend on those payments and THEN patting yourself on the back for sending a fraction of that money back to rural hospitals is nothing to brag about," wrote Rep. Sean Casten (D-IL).
"They only need a lifeline because you are trying to kill them," wrote Mother Jones D.C. bureau chief David Corn.
"This is like shooting someone in the face and then giving them a band aid to make up for it," wrote urbanist activist Sam Deutsch.
"This Republican budget bill treats rural hospitals the same way it's treating everyday Americans: take a dollar from them, give back a penny, and then expect a thank you," wrote former Democratic Senate staffer Michael Linden.