The recent announcement of auto tariffs by President Trump has sparked discussions on their potential impact, particularly within the American auto industry. UAW President Shawn Fain, in a conversation with CNN’s Kaitlan Collins, addressed the challenges and expectations surrounding these tariffs, especially considering the one-month delay before their implementation on April 2nd.

UAW President Shawn Fain

According to the UAW website, the union has long advocated for fair trade policies that prioritize American jobs and manufacturing. The organization emphasizes the need for government action to prevent outsourcing and strengthen domestic production, aligning with Fain’s stance on the importance of these tariffs.

The Feasibility of Shifting Production

When asked whether automakers would shift production within the one-month period before tariffs take effect, Fain dismissed the idea, stating that it is logistically impossible to shut down a plant and move it in such a short time. However, he emphasized that auto companies are making crucial production decisions right now.

For example, Stellantis has already laid off 2,000 workers at the Warren Truck Plant in Michigan, shifting overflow production of the Ram truck to Mexico. According to Fain, this decision could still be reversed if the company chose to prioritize American jobs. Similarly, John Deere is considering moving a factory to Mexico, while MC Truck workers in Pennsylvania face uncertainty as the company mulls shifting new truck production out of the state.

Fain highlighted that these tariffs should serve as a motivator for companies to prioritize American workers rather than seek cheaper labor overseas.

The Impact of Uncertainty on Companies

The auto industry, like many others, has been dealing with uncertainty regarding tariffs and trade policies. While the Big Three automakers were initially told that tariffs would be implemented, they were later granted an exception. Other industries, such as those dealing with groceries, oil, and fertilizers, also received exemptions. This back-and-forth has left companies scrambling to prepare for possible changes.

Despite this uncertainty, Fain argued that businesses have had sufficient time to plan. He pointed out that ever since the election, discussions about trade policy changes have been ongoing. Companies, therefore, should not be caught off guard.

Worker and Consumer Concerns

One major concern raised about the tariffs is their potential to increase vehicle prices. Critics argue that additional tariffs will force companies to pass costs onto consumers. However, Fain rejected this notion, stating that price hikes are a choice made by corporations, not a necessity.

Drawing a parallel to the UAW’s recent negotiations with the Big Three, Fain noted that automakers claimed the new labor contracts would devastate their businesses. Instead, the contracts resulted in fairer wages for workers while automakers continued making billions in profits and distributing dividends to shareholders.

Fain also pointed to the long-term damage caused by trade agreements such as NAFTA, which led to the closure of approximately 90,000 factories. He stressed that American workers should not be forced to bear the burden of fixing a trade system that has already cost them jobs and stability.

Fain’s Surprising Support for Trump’s Tariffs

One of the more unexpected aspects of the discussion was Fain’s support for Trump’s tariff policies. Despite being a vocal supporter of Vice President Harris during the election and previously referring to Trump as a “scab,” Fain acknowledged that the issue of broken trade laws transcends political affiliations.

While he remains critical of many of Trump’s policies, Fain emphasized that his priority is advocating for American workers. The UAW is prepared to work with the administration to ensure that trade policies benefit the working class, which has suffered due to decades of unfair trade practices.

The implementation of auto tariffs remains a contentious issue, with significant consequences for workers, consumers, and manufacturers. While Fain’s stance may seem surprising to some, his primary focus remains on protecting American jobs and ensuring fair trade policies. Whether these tariffs will effectively encourage domestic production or lead to unintended economic consequences remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: the future of the American auto industry is at a critical crossroads.

We have taken up this task to carefully examine each bill that is claimed to take away Medicaid and Medicare. These programs are essential to millions of Americans, including approximately 92 million Medicaid recipients and 53 million Medicare beneficiaries. Within these numbers, about 18.4 million Black Americans rely on Medicaid, while 7.2 million depend on Medicare for their healthcare needs. The continued fear-mongering surrounding these programs has caused unnecessary anxiety and stress, and we believe it is necessary to set the record straight with the facts.. We know how vital these programs are to seniors and the Black community. The continued fear-mongering is creating so much anxiety and stress that we thought it appropriate to set the record straight on each bill that is claimed to take away someone’s Medicare and Medicaid.

On March 11, 2025, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 1968 – The Full-Year Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2025. This bill keeps the government open and ensures continued funding for essential programs, including Medicare and Medicaid.

Does This Bill Take Away Medicare or Medicaid?

No. H.R. 1968 does not cut or eliminate Medicare or Medicaid benefits. If you are on these programs, you will continue to receive the same healthcare coverage as before.

What’s in the Bill for Medicare and Medicaid?

1. Medicare Sequestration Explained:
   • Medicare sequestration is a budget reduction process that automatically cuts payments to healthcare providers, hospitals, and insurance plans to reduce government spending.
   • This does not reduce your Medicare benefits or what is covered, but it lowers the reimbursement rates for doctors and hospitals, which could lead some providers to limit Medicare patients.
   • H.R. 1968 extends sequestration without increasing the percentage of cuts, meaning no new drastic reductions.
2. Medicaid DSH Payment Reductions Delayed:
   • The planned payment reductions for hospitals that serve Medicaid patients were originally part of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), signed into law under President Obama.
   • The ACA by Obama assumed that more Americans would have health insurance, reducing the need for hospitals to provide uncompensated care. As a result, the law included gradual cuts to DSH payments.
   • However, because many states did not expand Medicaid, millions remain uninsured, and hospitals still depend on DSH payments to serve low-income patients.
   • H.R. 1968 delays these cuts until 2028, ensuring that these hospitals can continue to receive funding and provide necessary care to Medicaid patients.
3. Medicare programs like telehealth services and support for low-income beneficiaries are extended, so patients will continue to have access to care and assistance.

Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries

Hakeem Jeffries’ Misleading Claims

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries has claimed that H.R. 1968 slashes Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security, but the facts do not support his statements. The bill does not cut or eliminate these programs. Instead, it ensures continued funding for Medicare and Medicaid while delaying previously planned Medicaid DSH cuts from the Obama Affordable Care Act (ACA). Jeffries’ rhetoric, suggesting that Republicans are taking a “chainsaw” to these programs, is political fear-mongering that does not align with the bill’s actual provisions.

There is no way that Jeffries could have read the bill in its entirety before making these claims. He stood on the House floor the same night of the vote and made false accusations about the bill’s content. Are we elected to govern responsibly, or are we elected to grandstand for the cameras without even reading the bills we vote on? This kind of reckless misrepresentation only adds to public anxiety and division. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries has claimed that H.R. 1968 slashes Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security, but the facts do not support his statements. The bill does not cut or eliminate these programs. Instead, it ensures continued funding for Medicare and Medicaid while delaying previously planned Medicaid DSH cuts from the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Jeffries’ rhetoric, suggesting that Republicans are taking a “chainsaw” to these programs, is political fear-mongering that does not align with the bill’s actual provisions.

There has been a lot of fear-mongering and misinformation about Republicans wanting to take away Medicare and Medicaid. This bill proves that is not happening. The passage of H.R. 1968 ensures that both programs continue without interruption or cuts to benefits.

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer

Following the House’s passage of H.R. 1968—the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2025—by a narrow margin of 217 to 213, with only one Democrat voting in favor, the bill now moves to the Senate, where Democrats hold the majority. Senate Democrats, led by Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, will determine the bill’s progression, including potential debates, amendments, or votes. Given the lack of bipartisan support in the House, the Senate may propose modifications to the bill to address Democratic concerns. Any amendments made by the Senate would require the bill to return to the House for approval before proceeding to the President for signature. Now, if the government shuts down, it’s on the Democrats.

Bottom Line:

This is not a support for a Republican agenda; this is only in support of the truth. The facts matter, and misrepresenting legislation only fuels unnecessary fear and division.

This bill keeps Medicare and Medicaid running without taking away coverage. Some providers may see small payment adjustments due to sequestration, but the programs themselves remain intact.

If you are a Medicare or Medicaid recipient, you will continue to receive your benefits as usual. This bill ensures stability, not cuts, in government healthcare funding.

For those who still have doubts, read the bill for yourself. Here’s the full text of H.R. 1968 so you can see exactly what’s in it.

House Bill HR 1968 by damonkjones on Scribd