Let me start with a few quotes.
"I'm not just promising free this and free that and everything."
"I do not believe there are any free lunches. And certainly there's not going to be any free education."
“There’s not anything free in America. We all have to pay for something. Education is not free. Health care is not free. Food is not free. Water is not free. I think it’s very misleading to say to the American people, we’re going to give you something free.”
The first quote is from Hillary Clinton from a rally last night. The second is from James Clyburn (SC-06), Assistant Democratic Leader in the House. The third is from John Lewis (GA-05).
Bernie Sanders is calling for universal public goods or expanded economic/social rights. Deriding that as just “free stuff” is adopting the very rhetoric that Republicans use to undermine existing social programs and, in doing so, aiding that effort. Republicans will be calling the more modest goals that Hillary is proposing mere “free stuff.” Indeed, they already have. She and her surrogates would be wise not to push that right-wing frame. When you speak with the frames of your opponent, you are already losing.
Saying that there are no “free lunches” sounds like a direct attack on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps) or the school lunch program. And if there should be no “free education,” should we get rid of the public school system? Is that just a “handout” now? Saying “no free health care” sounds like an attack on the Medicaid expansion, something Democrats should be actively pushing for at the state level.
I’ll end with a quote from my friend Kathleen Frydl, in an excellent piece you should read:
If proffering the value of government, and shifting its ambit away from enforcement and towards services, is an approach that will ultimately strengthen the Democratic party, then politically expedient attacks upon it should be seen for what they are: self-serving, and coming at the expense of progress.