Don’t Skip the Fine Print | Alright. I think it’s time we admit something as a society: We’ve taken Venmo too far. Nobody actually wants to buy the bride a drink on her bachelorette party! And we certainly don’t need to be sending Uncle Sam a hundred bucks to help pay off his debt: If you scoff at the notion of Venmoing the government, you are not alone. [1] It’s not as if a measly (or not so measly) contribution made from the Treasury Department’s “Gifts to Reduce the Public Debt” page would do anything: Axios ran the numbers and found that you’d need to donate $999,999.99 every 18 seconds just to keep up with the national debt clock. The latest contributor to that debt is, of course, President Donald Trump’s recently enacted tax and spending law, which is expected to add $3.4 trillion to US deficits over a decade. It’s also expected to strip 10 million people of the health insurance they get through Medicaid, a fact that the Bloomberg Editorial Board has covered at length. “Instead of addressing the program’s core deficiencies, the party instead fixated on shrinking it. The likely result? Needless disruption and little in the way of serious savings or reform,” it writes. Beyond that headline number, Lisa Jarvis says the Trump administration is letting crucial parts of the Affordable Care Act quietly “wither on the vine,” leaving millions of Americans in the lurch with little to no explanation as to why their coverage has changed. During Joe Biden’s presidency, a record-breaking 24.2 million people got health coverage thanks to enhanced subsidies and a robust outreach program. Under Trump, that’s all set to change: “Out-of-pocket premiums will go up on average by 75% — and people in at least a dozen states could see those fees double or more. Retaining marketplace insurance will cost a typical family of four living on $65,000 per year an additional $2,400,” writes Lisa. The Trump administration’s moves to curtail enrollees amount to “stealth sabotage,” says Harvard physician Benjamin Sommers. “Many folks won’t even see the small print that led to that outcome.” Lisa walks us through some potential scenarios: “Some will log in to sign up for care in 2026, only to discover their plan has gotten a lot more expensive — and an estimated 4.2 million of them will risk going uninsured because of it,” she explains. “Others will never know they could have had affordable insurance, because the government will make far less of an effort to advertise its existence.” Curious, isn’t it, how the government can make it so easy for you to donate your money, but makes receiving it (in the form of affordable, accessible health care) an ordeal. American elections are kinda like holidays: They never really go away, even if you want them to. Hallmark is releasing a brand-new Christmas movie on July 26. Halloween Kit-Kats are in supermarkets already. And come January, we’re all going to be watching an Emily Henry film adaptation about summer vacation. It’s madness!!! Which brings me to politics: Why else would people be salivating over elections that aren’t set to take place for *checks calendar* another 467 days? The Democrats’ rationale for the head start is simple: “Trump’s first six months in office have been a madcap dash to consolidate executive power and steamroll over political norms and the rule of law,” writes Mary Ellen Klas. “The 2026 midterms are likely America’s last chance to defeat Trump’s march toward authoritarian rule.” If Democrats want to have a shot at winning, Mary Ellen says they’d better wake up and smell the four-alarm fire that’s burning in Texas: “Trump is attempting a massive power grab in Texas and most Americans aren’t aware of it,” she writes. “This week, the Texas Legislature convened a 30-day special session to take up a host of issues — including Trump’s exhortation to redraw the state’s congressional districts to help the GOP retain its narrow majority in Congress next year.” But what happens in Texas, stays in Texas, right? Wrong. The White House reportedly wants to split the coalitions of three districts represented by Black and Latino lawmakers in Houston and Dallas. “That would likely spark a legal challenge,” explains Mary Ellen. “If sustained by the courts, the changes would dilute the voting strength of minority districts and mark the death knell of the 40-year-old Voting Rights Act, endangering the protections for communities of color across America.” Meanwhile in Maine, David M. Drucker says Democrats have their eyes on the ever-elusive seat of moderate Republican Senator Susan Collins. “In 2020, Susan Collins’ Democratic challenger raised so much money, she couldn’t spend it all. Yet Sara Gideon lost in a blowout,” he writes. This time around, Dems are hoping for a different outcome: “With the 2026 midterm elections drawing near, Collins again looks vulnerable as voters across the country, especially in Maine, show signs of souring on the leader of her party.” But even if Collins finally loses her seat, it won’t be easy for Democrats to take the Senate: David says North Carolina — an R+3.2% state — is their best bet, since every other GOP-held seat that’s up for grabs favors the Republicans by double digits. Then there are Michigan and Georgia — seats that are blue now, but could turn red in a heartbeat. OK, fine. I guess I’m starting to see why we’re talking about November 2026 already. Bonus US Politics Reading: ICE’s new detention tactics threaten to turn the agency into judge, jury and jailer. — Patricia Lopez | 
