Baldwin Says Trump Used Hungry Children As Political Pawns
Senator warns Wisconsinites could lose health care in wake of shutdown fight.
Sen. Tammy Baldwin. Photo taken Nov. 12, 2025 by Graham Kilmer.
U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin said President Donald Trump and Republicans are jeapardizing healthcare access for millions of Americans and using hungry children as pawns in the shutdown fight that roiled Washington, and national politics, for the past month.
The government shutdown has hinged on Democratic senators refusal to approve an appropriations bill that excluded funding for health insurance subsidies. The subsidies lower insurance premiums on plans available through the public marketplace created by the Affordable Care Act (ACA), often referred to as Obamacare for its passage under former President Barack Obama.
After the longest shutdown in U.S. history, eight Democrats broke with their party and joined Republicans to pass a bill to fund the government, with Baldwin voting no. The break came after the Trump administration refused to provide funding for food assistance through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
“He used hungry children and hungry families as political pawns,” Baldwin said during a press conference at Outreach Community Health Centers, 220 W. Capitol Drive.
As Baldwin spoke in Milwaukee, the House of Representatives was moving to vote on an appropriations bill excluding funding for enhanced premium tax credits for ACA marketplace health insurance plans. Once passed and signed by the president, the shutdown would be over.
The tax credits make health insurance more affordable for $22 million Americans, Baldwin said. If Congress does not reauthorize them, they will not be available for insurance plans in 2026. During the final vote in the Senate, Baldwin forced a vote on an amendment, alongside Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elissa Slotkin, that would have extended the subsidies for another year. Senate Republicans unanimously voted against the amendment, including Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson.
“And that is what is at the center of the government shutdown and debate in Washington D.C.,” Baldwin said. “We know the impact of taking away these tax breaks. For 275,000 Wisconsinites, their healthcare costs will double, triple, or even more.”
Thousands of Wisconsinites are expected to lose health insurance after premiums rise beyond their means. One resident on the verge of losing her health care joined Baldwin Wednesday.
Nancy Peske is self-employed; she provides editorial services like publishing consulting, editing and ghostwriting. She gets her health insurance through the marketplace. Two years ago, because of a mammogram covered by her ACA plan, she found out she had a rare form of metastatic breast cancer. She’s in remission now and at 63 is on the verge of losing her health insurance, with her premium set to triple next year.
“I cannot afford $1,165 a month, and I cannot afford to have my cancer come back,” Peske said. “It is stage three.”
Right now, without political change in Washington, Peske is having to consider shutting her business down and taking a low-wage job to become eligible for Medicaid.
“I think you want to keep people like me in business, generating money, adding to the economy,” Peske said. “And being able to to live and not die of cancer.”
Peske said she remembers the health insurance marketplace before the ACA and warned of the “premium death spiral” that could follow rising marketplace premiums. Insurance is a risk pool, and as more people drop out of the pool the risk goes up and prices rise.
“It’s not just my health insurance that’s going to go up. It’s everybody’s,” Peske said “We’re all in this together.”
Republican leadership in the Senate has promised Democrats a vote in December on the subsidies. It remains to be seen if they will honor the promise. But a bill will also need to be passed in the House and Speaker Mike Johnson has refused to guarantee a vote on the subsidies.
“That’s why I thought [the ACA subsidies] had to be attached to what we call a ‘must pass bill’,” Baldwin said.
The potential cuts to ACA subsidies would only add to the damage of the president’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which cut billions from Medicaid over the next decade, Baldwin said.
If Senate Democrats can secure passage of the subsidies it may provide the pressure needed to get the House to hold a vote, too, Baldwin said. The senator noted that the government funding resolution ending the shutdown expires on January 30.
“We’ll have another opportunity to play hardball then,” Baldwin said.
If you think stories like this are important, become a member of Urban Milwaukee and help support real, independent journalism. Plus you get some cool added benefits.
So it looks like my 2026 monthly premium for my healthcare plan purchased thru the “healthcare.gov” website rose 50 percent from 2025. (This will be a 410 percent increase from the premium I paid in 2014). The ACA subsidies lessen the pain but it is not the answer to our healthcare problem. Too bad we have a portion of the Democratic Party that wants to champion this system. (My 2026 monthly premium will be $1500 before the subsidy which covers roughly 2/3 of the premium cost).
The economy of the US is pretty much FUBAR at this point.
Hi Duane, sorry about your premiums.
Tammy is right 42 million people without snap vs those without healthcare. Now, we were seeing Air Traffic go down. What was gonna get shutdown next?
Jan 30 the next fight starts. Snap has a year of coverage. Trump can’t starve people.
@bigb Republicans supported funding bills for troops, federal workers, air traffic, and SNAP, while Democrats opposed them. Republicans want to pay essentials but cut extras; healthcare to illegal aliens and $500 million for NPR.15 or 16 times the Republicans voted to open the government and 15 or 16 times the the Democrats voted to keep the government closed and thus troops, federal workers, air traffic controllers didn’t get paid & SNAP(food stamps) payments were withheld. Democratic Whip Katherine Clark admitted that American families were being used as leverage in the shutdown. Trump had no vote in this.
Jsalmon, Trump’s did worse than vote against SNAP.
He went to the Supreme Court to block SNAP benefits from being released from emergency funds.
What votes Mike Johnson sent the house on vacaction for 7 weeks ago.
During the shutdown Trump found 40 billion to loan Argentina. Where did that money come from. That is basically a give away because Argentine has a terrible track record on loans. Fitst A in MAHA is Argentina now.
@jSalomn or I should say first A in MAGA is now Argentina.
@bigb
They needed 60 votes from the Senate to get the bill to the House of Representatives to re-open the government and then Trump signed it. That’s how it works. Trump had no vote.
15 or 16 times the Senate voted to re-open the government and 15 or 16 times the Democrats voted no to keep the bill moving forward to the House of Representatives. It was the Schumer and Jeffries who held Americans hostage.
Regarding the $40 billion loan to Argentina it wasn’t a loan;
MSNBC: “How does a $20 billion bailout of Argentina help Americans?”
BESSENT: “Do you know what a swap line is?”
MSNBC: “It’s a currency swap. Yes.”
BESSENT: “But what is that? Why would you call it a bailout?”
BESSENT: “In most bailouts, you don’t make money. The US Government made money. The government’s going to make money—There’s a lot we could have been doing for American farmers. But Democrats CLOSED the government.”
@jsalom1169, TRUMP WENT TO COURT TO BLOCK EMERGENCY FUNDS DURING THE SHUTDOWN FROM BEING USED FOR SNAP! Its his job to distribute that money and didn’t.
Where did the USD come from to buy, Bessent calls a swap, Argentina Pesos? Gov’t was shutdown because it was out of USD. Also so independent analysis.
Matthew Klein “U.S. taxpayer money is propping up the peso, allowing hedge funders to sell their Argentine assets at inflated prices, after which the peso will promptly fall again.”
@bbb 16 times the Republicans voted to open the government with the clean CR, 16 times the Democrats voted no to keep the government closed. Address that.
I agree that there is a problem with health care, and I agree that something should be done.
What I don’t understand is why want. Why wasn’t the health care problem addressed years ago? Why wait? Didn’t the Democrats know that the tax credits were going to expire?
Look at all of the money WASTED PAYING GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES for doing nothing. MONEY WASTED because the Democrats voted as a block and cared more about I’m not sure than keeping the government open.
The Democrats voted against a clean continuing resolution. The Democrats cost the country billions – because they wanted what?
The Democrats couldn’t discuss the problem of healthcare? And, is increasing tax credits for insurance companies – paying insurance companies the answer?
Wasn’t it the job of Congress to pass the budget?
The emergency funds were for SNAP?
The President did agree to use the Emergency Funds after being directed to by the courts (the courts saying that the emergency funds could be used for SNAP). There wasn’t enough in the Emergency Funds account to cover full SNAP Payments.
The President returned to court when the judge ruled that funds for school lunch programs could also be used to pay for SNAP, and the court sided with the President.
Sad that there wasn’t Congressional approval to fund the government.