The Idea of Accountability – February 6, 2026

For the purposes of this conversation, narrow the scope of this conversation to the Federal Government being accountable to the people. By slight extension we can touch on political party establishment and also complicit media participation, where it might apply.

Loaded question alert – Do you feel Congress is accountable to you?

One aspect that has to be mentioned is under the Current 119th Congress there has been two government shutdowns, one the longest in US history and the other partial just recently. Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies was central to the long shutdown, where Republicans who have long sought to kill ACA decided to end subsidies for exchange purchased policies harming some 22 million Americans.

Over 1 million decided to not renew their policies and the going average increase for those that did is anywhere from 110% to 120% depending on source. Some plans tripled in costs.

Entirely contrary to the intention of ACA, there are guesstimates that another 2 million plus will walk away from healthcare insurance coverage over this year. Most being young adults, say 35 years old and younger, deciding the cost increases is worth taking healthcare risks. All to satisfy this long standing goal of damaging Obama’s arguably signature moment from his Presidential legacy. The good and not so good impacts from the original ACA implementation.

On the argument of accountability, a sister challenge is who or what became the biggest beneficiary of ACA subsidy loss. One area to explore is the labor market, but in a slightly different regard from the yearbook narrative from politicians and mainstream media.

One winner, arguably, is the Federal Budget. Again depending on source the loss of ACA subsidies to people is $31 Billion the government not spent in 2026. The argument made by Republicans is doing this tilts the tables back towards employer-sponsored coverage. A counter to the long standing argument that ACA subsidies encourages people to leave the workforce.

That happening or not, either direction, is up for debate but one still has to ask how the argument keeps Congress accountable to the people. For those who ended up with massive cost increases, at a time of uncertainty in the economy, was the idea at all wise.

Do you feel the longest shutdown in history, over killing ACA subsidies, made Congress more accountable to you?

Before answering consider two items.

The first being that during the 43 day shutdown the impact to the economy could have been as much as a permanent $14 billion direct loss, with as much as $11 billion reduction in real GDP as measured. We have answered the why part before, in that the Federal Government is a participant in the economy as is everyone they employ. To that end, any reduction in Government Spending is a direct impact to GDP.

To answer on accountability we can ask if this move by Republicans made Congress accountable to the people, to the budget, to the economy, etc.

On the budget itself, the answer may be mixed. For Fiscal Year 2026 the Federal Government is projected to spending roughly $7.29 Trillion. As stated above, killing ACA subsidies killed about $31 Billion from that spend. Doing a little napkin paper math this shutdown trimmed less than half of one percent from that spend projection keeping in mind the cost to the economy. So, arguably, accountable to neither the budget or the economy.

The second being the people, and we accidentally also answered that.

Too many not having healthcare insurance at all, and the rest seeing one hell of a new bill for whatever coverage they retained. On the point of people rushing back to work, that is not happening either. The January 2025 documented Labor Participation Rate in this nation was 62.6%, and as of last month it fell to 62.4%. The Unemployment rate in January 2025 was 4.0% and at the end of last year it jumped to 4.4%. By all measure the exact opposite trends exist to what the yearbook answer from Republicans suggest harmed employment.

Granted, it is near impossible to take any one move the Federal Government makes and on a macroeconomic level point to the precise impact, however these trends and prevailing economic concerns are not going anywhere anytime soon.

Which suggests a consideration for this conversation, that kicking over 2 million people off of healthcare is not holding Congress accountable to really anyone but a single goal of a vengeful Republican Party. This conversation will continue to address that point.

Another loaded one – What is the best measure of a President’s success?

Well, kinda loaded but really interpretational and somewhat standard.

A good argument can be made that core factors determine the legacy of every President, building while in office and retrospectively looking back. Subjects like the ability to lead during times of crisis, moral and ethical vision, handling economic headwinds harming the people, international affairs, and of course ability to connect to the people.

Only recently has the nation had to revisit a President’s adherence and respect for the Constitution and Rule of Law, but that is another conversation for another time.

Inevitably that perception of success can translate to accountability. Keep that in mind for this conversation.

How a President of the same party as majority control over Congress handles that all important midterm election cycle is a glimpse into legacy and success, where in the modern era the likely outcome is the remaining Presidential term having to work with opposition controlling that next Congress. This has come up in several other conversations.

By most polling, no one outside of the hardcore Republican base gives President Trump or Congressional Republicans high approvals. By most polls they are very underwater on the economy, trade, international relations, domestic matters, etc. Even in the context of general favorability, or likability, very much in the negatives with more disapproving than otherwise.

Not exactly accountable to the people, or anything else.

How to establish Accountability

One possible answer is a reset on how issues are defined, then spoken about at party and national level. Perhaps rejecting the nationalized themes Republican and Democrats campaign on by appealing to any audience where tougher questions are asked designed push stated motives.

The intention being return to a time where digesting talking points, overly simplistic messages to key issues, is rejected and replaced with critical thought.

The ask is to evaluate how accountability is achieved against the storylines and narratives from politicians to supporting media and commentary. Ultimately challenging along the lines of benefit to the voter, some sense of their importance as major political events play out.

This does mean becoming somewhat adversarial to the common rhetoric from politicians often saying “the American people want <insert something here>” but when you get down to it all that means when translated is someone in Congress “telling the voters who support them what they should want.” Perspective trying to control perception.

How to flip the tables

One means is to consider differently the never ending game of who wins and as consequence who loses. Usually means following the money and control, as an argument could be made that Medicaid was a winner in this dispute.

The possible reason being healthcare insurance market instability with premium hikes for unsubsidized plans may force more low-income earners to remain on, or entirely transition to, state Medicaid. Because of the various methods to determine how much state to state Medicaid is funded by the Federal Government, anywhere from 50% to as much as 77% of the cost is funded by Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) you end up with a control as a factor. (The averages work out to 65% to 68% by the way.)

Meaning the Federal Government will face more fiscal pressure to cover increased stress on Medicaid costs. They will pay anyway, sort of, based on political pressures but in the end Republicans still got the win of harming ACA.

Really consider that, in the end no real savings as “taker states” will likely continue to take in terms of taxation from by Federal outlays to. A political swipe at an opponent from something signed into law back in 2010 might be the only goal. The motivation was strong enough that shutting down the government was in the cards too.

That is an example of flipping the narratives, deconstructing the listed motivations and potentially revealing the actual intentions. On paper the Federal Government spent $7.01 Trillion for FY2025, we listed above the projection for FY2026 at $7.29 Trillion. As in, more spending. And Medicaid spending by the Federal Government is projected to go up over 8.5% from FY2025 to FY2026.

We did not have to follow the money that far.

Now, is this Dollar to Dollar level swap?

Not entirely. ACA subsidies went to the plans at the point of purchase ultimately going to private health insurance companies. Where as the Federal Government paying states to supplement Medicaid costs has different rules, different manipulations and math, and ultimately each state may see wide discrepancy of percentages covered by the Federal Government. Think, political protectionism for certain states and the inverse of states that see less.

Weaponized power of the purse, it is not unheard of.

Consider all these things when looking at the subject of politicians and the concept of how they are Accountable to the people. Outside of election cycles, typical midterm pressures, and abnormal events impacting voter sentiment. Actual accountability in explaining themselves on positions taken, party line voting strategies, etc.

The hope is that these examples, there are others, in this conversation should serve as a means to add in a dose of skepticism to common rhetoric.

Research the numbers, look at the likely impacts, and determine how accountability comes into the mix. We might further chip away at the idea of expected voter behavior at the hands of various seats in Congress designed around the idea of politicians picking their voters.