,
5 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
This piece is presented as a “fact check,” but that’s misleading.
The only fact to check here is whether the Medicare for All Bill that Harris co-sponsored, if enacted with no changes, would “end” private health insurance. And it’s undisputed that it would not, not entirely, even though there would be vast systemic changes.
From there, we depart from the realm of fact to issues of presentation and rhetoric.
Are the systemic changes being contemplated so massive that candidates should be obliged say things that aren’t technically accurate in an effort to convey their scale?
Are the systemic changes being contemplated so massive that candidates should be obliged say things that aren’t technically accurate in an effort to convey their scale?
Does a legislator who cosponsors someone else’s a bill have to strictly color within the lines of the proposal as written? Or might she reasonably still communicate about what she practically expects a final policy to look like, maybe even prefers it to look like?
There are many ways to answer these and other presentation and rhetoric questions and even make harsh value judgments about how Harris is conducting herself. But that isn’t remotely fact checking. It’s opinion.
