Subscribe now

Medicare for All could become one of the most consequential issues in the midterm elections as Democrats face growing pressure from their party's socialist wing, Newt said during an appearance on Fox Business' Kudlow.

Newt warned that proposals to replace private health insurance with a government-run system could carry enormous financial costs and leave Americans with fewer choices about their medical care.

“The idea of Medicare for All is madness,” Newt said, arguing that the proposal would put Washington bureaucrats between patients and their doctors.

He pointed to the rising cost of health insurance as a major affordability challenge for American families and credited President Donald Trump with advancing transparency, drug pricing reforms and efforts to eliminate corruption.

Beyond health care, Newt predicted that the demands of the Democratic Party’s far-left faction could create serious divisions if Democrats regain control of the House. He suggested that more moderate Democrats could find themselves voting with Republicans rather than supporting their party’s most progressive proposals.

With Election Day approaching, Newt also expressed optimism about Republican prospects, citing Speaker Mike Johnson’s fundraising and campaign efforts and the possibility that Republicans could retain control of the House.

Refer a friend

How to Win 2026

The 2026 midterms could be a defining moment for America. Follow Newt Gingrich and Gingrich 360’s latest columns and analysis on the ideas, policies, and strategies Republicans need to win the big arguments, grow the American majority, and deliver real results for the American people.

How to Win 2026 is part of a larger effort to identify the ideas, policies, and arguments that can create a lasting American majority.

Explore our latest columns, research, commentary, and analysis on the Republican Opportunity in 2026.

Republican Opportunity

You can manage your subscription preferences to choose the updates, newsletters, and alerts you want to receive on the website.

Subscribe now

Newt says President Trump's renewed engagement and growing scrutiny of Democratic candidates are shifting momentum ahead of the midterm elections.

With Election Day approaching, 50th House Speaker Newt Gingrich warned that Republicans face a far more competitive midterm election than many anticipated, with several closely contested Senate races potentially determining the balance of power in Washington.

Appearing on Fox News’ Special Report with Bret Baier, Newt pointed to unexpectedly competitive races in traditionally Republican states such as South Carolina and Kansas as evidence that the party cannot take victory for granted.

He also identified potential Republican opportunities in Minnesota and Michigan, along with the closely watched Senate race in Maine, where Sen. Susan Collins is seeking another victory.

Newt cautioned against predictions of a sweeping Democratic victory, arguing that the number of competitive races suggests a more complicated electoral landscape. However, he emphasized that Republicans should not underestimate the challenges ahead.

“Any Republican who’s comfortable misunderstands this is going to be a nail biting night,” Newt said.

While Newt believes Republican candidates may be performing better than polling suggests, he stressed that Election Day turnout will ultimately determine the outcome.

“Every single Republican has to go vote if we’re going to have a chance of pulling this out,” he said.

Refer a friend

How to Win 2026

The 2026 midterms could be a defining moment for America. Follow Newt Gingrich and Gingrich 360’s latest columns and analysis on the ideas, policies, and strategies Republicans need to win the big arguments, grow the American majority, and deliver real results for the American people.

How to Win 2026 is part of a larger effort to identify the ideas, policies, and arguments that can create a lasting American majority.

Explore our latest columns, research, commentary, and analysis on the Republican Opportunity in 2026.

Republican Opportunity

You can manage your subscription preferences to choose the updates, newsletters, and alerts you want to receive on the website.

On the day before the election, I can report that Callista and I have voted absentee since we are in Switzerland. We have already been told our ballots have been received. Florida is efficient — an amazing contrast to places like California, where votes are counted at a snail’s pace.

Read more

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Subscribe now

Newt argued that despite today’s political divisions and widespread pessimism, America’s greatest achievements may still lie ahead. Advances in space exploration, medicine and emerging technologies could create unprecedented opportunities for future generations.

Pointing to American technology companies and SpaceX’s development of reusable spacecraft, Newt described how entrepreneurship and innovation continue to distinguish the United States from the rest of the world.

Newt also emphasized the importance of combining grassroots populism with policies that encourage hard work, lower taxes, fewer regulations and economic opportunity. He argued that President Donald Trump’s entrepreneurial approach to governing could have a lasting influence beyond his presidency.

Drawing parallels to the transformative period under President Theodore Roosevelt, Newt predicted that the coming decades could bring extraordinary advances in prosperity, longevity and human achievement.

“I think we’re at the edge of a revolution,” Newt said.

Rather than focusing on political negativity and pessimism, Newt urged Americans to recognize the possibilities ahead and embrace a future defined by innovation and opportunity.

Refer a friend

How to Win 2026

The 2026 midterms could be a defining moment for America. Follow Newt Gingrich and Gingrich 360’s latest columns and analysis on the ideas, policies, and strategies Republicans need to win the big arguments, grow the American majority, and deliver real results for the American people.

How to Win 2026 is part of a larger effort to identify the ideas, policies, and arguments that can create a lasting American majority.

Explore our latest columns, research, commentary, and analysis on the Republican Opportunity in 2026.

Republican Opportunity

You can manage your subscription preferences to choose the updates, newsletters, and alerts you want to receive on the website.

Newt Gingrich and Dr. Joel Zinberg Examine Medicare for All, Medicaid Reform, and Healthcare Fraud

Subscribe now

Medicare for All is gaining popularity, but do Americans understand what the proposal would actually change? As the 2026 midterm elections approach, Newt Gingrich welcomes Dr. Joel Zinberg, director of the Public Health and American Wellbeing Initiative at the Paragon Health Institute and former White House health policy advisor, to examine the promises and potential consequences of a government-run healthcare system. Drawing on his recent Wall Street Journal op-ed, Zinberg explains why he believes Medicare for All could eliminate existing insurance choices, increase taxes, reduce access to medical care, and undermine the Medicare program seniors depend on today. Their conversation explores why public support declines when voters learn more about the proposal and what Americans can learn from healthcare systems in Britain and Canada.

The discussion also turns to the future of Medicaid and the growing challenge of healthcare fraud. Zinberg offers an inside perspective on the Trump administration's Medicaid reforms in the One Big Beautiful Bill, including work requirements, restrictions on provider taxes, and stronger eligibility verification. Gingrich and Zinberg examine how improper payments, questionable enrollment practices, and financial incentives within federal healthcare programs are placing additional pressure on taxpayers. With healthcare costs rising and major policy decisions ahead, their conversation raises a fundamental question: How can America protect access to quality healthcare while ensuring taxpayer dollars reach the people who genuinely need assistance?

Listen to their conversation below, or scroll down for an edited transcript.

Edited Transcript

This conversation has been condensed and lightly edited for clarity.

More Newt's World

Newt Gingrich

I’m pleased to welcome Dr. Joel Zinberg, director of the Public Health and American Wellbeing Initiative at the Paragon Health Institute. Joel recently spent 19 months in the White House advising President Trump on healthcare and deregulation. He’s also a board-certified surgeon, lawyer, and former senior economist at the Council of Economic Advisers.

We’re going to discuss his recent Wall Street Journal op-ed, “Medicare for All Isn’t Medicare as We Know It,” along with Medicaid reforms, the sustainability of federal healthcare programs, and the fraud costing taxpayers billions of dollars.

Joel, welcome to Newt’s World.

Dr. Joel Zinberg

Great to be here. Thanks for having me.

Newt Gingrich

Bernie Sanders first introduced Medicare for All in 2017, and despite repeated reintroductions, the legislation has never received a floor vote in either chamber. Yet it’s become a progressive rallying cry this election cycle.

In your op-ed, you warn that voters should be careful what they wish for. Why?

Dr. Joel Zinberg

The problem is that Medicare for All is a very catchy title. It sounds wonderful, but most people don’t understand what’s actually in the bill.

It would eliminate the current public-private insurance system, including employer-sponsored plans that cover more than half the country. It would also eliminate the choices people currently have in Medicare, whether that’s traditional Medicare, Medicare Advantage, or privately administered Part D prescription drug plans.

All of those choices would be replaced with a single government plan.

I also believe it would decrease access to care, require enormous increases in government spending, and make significant tax increases inevitable. Once people understand those consequences, support for the proposal drops dramatically.

Newt Gingrich

When Medicare for All was reintroduced in 2025, it had 104 original House co-sponsors and 16 in the Senate. Why are so many Democrats embracing this slogan?

Dr. Joel Zinberg

I think it’s part of the broader movement toward democratic socialism within the Democratic Party. It’s an appealing political slogan, but it doesn’t accurately communicate the consequences of the policy.

It sounds good until people understand what it would actually mean for their healthcare.

Newt Gingrich

What strikes me is that Medicare for All has become a slogan without a clear understanding of the policy.

Americans are understandably frustrated by healthcare costs. Could that frustration lead people to accept a system similar to Britain’s National Health Service or Canada’s single-payer system?

Dr. Joel Zinberg

Americans should look at what’s happened in countries that have adopted these systems.

In Britain, satisfaction with the National Health Service is extremely low. In Canada, patients face significant waiting periods for medical care, and some travel to the United States to receive treatment.

The problem is that when you eliminate cost-sharing, demand for healthcare increases. But the supply of medical services doesn’t automatically increase with it.

You can end up with longer waits and a situation where people with less urgent needs displace those requiring more immediate treatment.

Newt Gingrich

You cite polling showing how support for Medicare for All changes when people learn more about it.

When respondents learn that private insurance would be eliminated, support falls to 52 percent. When told it could threaten the existing Medicare program, support drops to 38 percent. When higher taxes are mentioned, it falls to 35 percent. And when people learn it could delay medical tests and treatments, support drops to just 24 percent.

Doesn’t that suggest the public’s support is relatively shallow?

Dr. Joel Zinberg

Absolutely. The initial support comes from the appealing name and the promise of universal coverage.

But once people understand the potential effects on their insurance, taxes, and access to physicians, their views change.

Proponents also claim the system would save money by eliminating inefficiencies. I don’t think there’s good reason to assume a government-run system would necessarily be more efficient.

There are important questions about administrative costs, incentives, and fraud prevention that often get overlooked.

Newt Gingrich

Isn’t Medicare Advantage, in some ways, an example of moving away from a purely bureaucratic government system?

Dr. Joel Zinberg

Medicare Advantage gives people choices. They can compare plans and select the one they believe works best for them.

Nobody is required to enroll in Medicare Advantage. Traditional Medicare remains an option.

That flexibility is important. Many beneficiaries find they can save money or receive additional benefits through Medicare Advantage.

Under the Medicare for All proposal we’re discussing, those choices would disappear.

Newt Gingrich

You also cite estimates suggesting that physician access could fall dramatically for people currently covered by employer insurance, while medical productivity could decline.

Why would that happen?

Dr. Joel Zinberg

The proposal would lower reimbursement rates, potentially to Medicare levels or below.

When providers receive lower reimbursement, the supply of medical services can decline. At the same time, eliminating patient cost-sharing increases demand.

That combination of reduced supply and increased demand means longer waiting times and less access to care.

There are also consequences for medical innovation. If government-imposed price controls reduce the financial rewards for developing new treatments and technologies, innovation could suffer.

The United States has been a world leader in medical innovation, and we shouldn’t take that for granted.

Newt Gingrich

Let’s turn to Medicaid reform and the One Big Beautiful Bill, which passed while you were serving in the White House.

What was President Trump trying to accomplish with those reforms?

Dr. Joel Zinberg

Medicaid spending has been growing enormously, and we needed to get that under control.

Our objective was to make sure taxpayer dollars were going to the people the program was intended to help, rather than being lost to fraud, waste, and abuse.

The legislation included Medicaid work requirements, restrictions on provider taxes, more frequent eligibility determinations, and efforts to eliminate duplicate enrollments.

Provider taxes were particularly important. States could tax healthcare providers and use those funds to draw down substantial federal matching payments.

In Medicaid expansion states, the federal government covers 90 percent of certain costs. That creates powerful financial incentives for states to maximize federal funding.

The reforms were designed to limit those practices while also providing $50 billion for rural healthcare transformation.

Newt Gingrich

The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the work requirements alone would save $326 billion over 10 years.

When we passed welfare reform while I was speaker, there was overwhelming public support for the principle that able-bodied adults should work.

The provider tax arrangements are also remarkable. States could essentially create taxes that generated additional federal subsidies without necessarily contributing meaningful new resources of their own.

Dr. Joel Zinberg

That’s right. Medicaid is a federal-state partnership, and states receive matching funds from Washington.

For expansion populations, a state can receive nine federal dollars for every dollar it contributes.

Provider tax arrangements allowed states to take advantage of that financing structure. The One Big Beautiful Bill places new restrictions on those arrangements and phases out certain practices.

The larger goal is to protect federal resources and make sure the money is used appropriately.

Newt Gingrich

Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program now cover roughly a third of Americans, and spending is approaching $1 trillion annually.

How much reform will be necessary to make these programs sustainable?

Dr. Joel Zinberg

We have seen a tremendous expansion in Medicaid enrollment and spending, particularly following the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion.

It’s critical that we eliminate fraud and improper enrollment.

One issue my colleagues at Paragon have examined is the problem of phantom enrollees, including individuals who are enrolled in subsidized insurance programs but may not actually qualify or may not even be aware they have coverage.

We also need to strengthen eligibility verification and ensure that people who have moved, obtained other coverage, or are otherwise ineligible are removed from the rolls appropriately.

Newt Gingrich

How much of this is simply administrative error, and how much is deliberate fraud?

Dr. Joel Zinberg

There are financial incentives that encourage states to maximize enrollment and expand the range of services covered under Medicaid.

That can include services such as transportation, nutrition, and housing, because states can receive additional federal matching funds.

Those incentives can encourage practices that increase spending without necessarily improving the delivery of medical care.

Newt Gingrich

Minnesota has become a particularly striking example.

A federal prosecutor suggested that as much as half of the $18 billion in Medicaid payments in Minnesota could involve fraud. That’s an extraordinary potential figure.

We also saw a national healthcare fraud enforcement action in June involving 455 defendants and $6.5 billion in alleged fraud.

This is a very large problem.

Dr. Joel Zinberg

It is. And the important thing for the public to understand is that money isn’t unlimited.

We cannot continue increasing spending on Medicaid, the Affordable Care Act, and healthcare generally without considering the consequences for other national priorities.

We have to refocus these programs so the money goes to the people who genuinely need help rather than being diverted through fraud and abuse.

Newt Gingrich

The administration has also been identifying unauthorized Obamacare enrollments.

You mentioned that Paragon estimated approximately six million phantom enrollees on the exchanges. How did your colleagues reach that conclusion?

Dr. Joel Zinberg

They examined enrollment patterns after enhanced subsidies made zero-premium coverage available to people within certain income ranges.

In some states, the number of people claiming incomes within those ranges was two or three times higher than Census Bureau estimates suggested.

They also observed unusually large numbers of enrollees who never filed medical claims.

Those patterns raised concerns about improper enrollment.

CMS developed criteria to identify potentially questionable enrollments, including missing or unverifiable information, no medical claims, and enrollment through brokers who receive commissions.

Insurers were instructed to attempt contact using two different methods. Individuals who did not respond within 30 days could be disenrolled.

The objective was to verify eligibility and address improper enrollment.

Newt Gingrich

If Democrats gain control of Congress after the midterms, do you believe they’ll attempt to reverse these reforms?

Dr. Joel Zinberg

I’m certain they’ll try. They may not be able to reverse everything in one package, but I expect they’ll attempt to chip away at various provisions.

Newt Gingrich

Joel, thank you for joining me.

Your work raises important questions about healthcare costs, patient choice, and the sustainability of federal programs.

Listeners can read your Wall Street Journal op-ed, “Medicare for All Isn’t Medicare as We Know It,” and explore your research at the Paragon Health Institute.

I’m grateful you could share your insights with us.

Dr. Joel Zinberg

Thank you. It’s been a real pleasure.

Refer a friend

About the Guest

Dr. Joel Zinberg is director of the Public Health and American Wellbeing Initiative at the Paragon Health Institute. He previously served as special assistant to the president for economic policy at the White House National Economic Council, advising President Donald Trump on healthcare policy and deregulation. During the first Trump administration, he served as general counsel and senior economist at the Council of Economic Advisers.

A board-certified surgeon and attorney, Dr. Zinberg practiced general and oncologic surgery at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York for nearly 30 years. He is also an associate clinical professor of surgery at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai.

More Newt's World

Latest from America’s New Majority Project

Read More

You can manage your subscription preferences to choose the updates, newsletters, and alerts you want to receive on the website.

A Gallup poll found that 43% of Americans now view socialism positively, the first time the figure has topped 39% since Gallup began tracking it in 2010. Among Democrats, socialism is now tied with free enterprise at 65%, while their positive view of capitalism has dropped from 42% last year to 35%. Young adults have moved too: Americans aged 18 to 34 view socialism more favorably than capitalism, 57% to 43%.

The energy on the left is real. The Democratic Socialists of America have endorsed dozens of candidates this cycle, and several have beaten longtime incumbents in Democratic primaries.

Subscribe now

On Sept. 1, the House passed a resolution condemning socialism in all its forms and the DSA by a vote of 220-192. Only eight Democrats voted for it. Two voted present, and 11 did not vote. But many who voted against the resolution adamantly stated they did so not because they were for socialism.

Rep. Haley Stevens of Michigan argued that Democrats opposed it not because they support socialism but because it included voter ID language, writing on X, “This is a cynical, Republican-forced vote designed to present a false choice: that standing up for voting rights means embracing socialism.”

House Democratic Leadership wrote in a statement, “The decision by two of our colleagues to blindside the entire House Democratic Caucus and join with the Republican majority to pass a procedural rule on the brink of failing represents a significant breach of trust. It is an action that necessitates a serious response, and we have asked the Committee on Caucus Rules to take this up in short order.”

This isn’t the first time Democrats have voted against a resolution denouncing socialism. Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar of Florida created a resolution titled Denouncing the Horrors of Socialism, and 98 Democrats voted against it while 86 voted with the Republicans.

Democrats insist they are not socialists and instead say this debate is a distraction, but they will not vote against socialism when they have the chance.

Socialism may be surging, but it is still a minority view. Capitalism is still viewed positively by 55% of Americans, free enterprise by 77%, and small business by 95%. The biggest shift came among independents, whose positive rating of socialism jumped from 37% to 45%, yet they still favor capitalism overall. Democrats understand that embracing socialism may win primaries but may not win general elections.

The party cannot decide whether socialism is its future or a liability.

Refer a friend

How to Win 2026

The 2026 midterms could be a defining moment for America. Follow Newt Gingrich and Gingrich 360’s latest columns and analysis on the ideas, policies, and strategies Republicans need to win the big arguments, grow the American majority, and deliver real results for the American people.

How to Win 2026 is part of a larger effort to identify the ideas, policies, and arguments that can create a lasting American majority.

Explore our latest columns, research, commentary, and analysis on the Republican Opportunity in 2026.

Republican Opportunity

Latest from America’s New Majority Project

You can manage your subscription preferences to choose the updates, newsletters, and alerts you want to receive on the website.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I’m happy to report that “America’s Golden Age” is a best seller! This is in large part thanks to your support and your willingness to share this book with your friends and family.

The book debuted at No. 4 of the New York Times Best Seller List for hardcover (and No. 3 for all formats).

We also placed No. 27 on the USA Today list and No. 9 in nonfiction.

Thank you so much for your help making “America’s Golden Age” a success. And if you haven’t got your copy yet — or want to buy a copy for someone else (Christmas is right around the corner) — you can pick it up here.

Your friend,

Newt

Read more

For decades, Americans have routinely entered hospitals knowing more about their diagnosis than what their treatment will cost. That may finally be changing, and the consequences could reach far beyond the doctor’s office.

On Oct. 5, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, through the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), finalized new regulations strengthening federal healthcare price transparency requirements. The rules are designed to give Americans clearer and more reliable information about what their insurance covers and what they could pay before receiving care. The changes also seek to improve the quality of publicly available pricing data by reducing duplicative information, providing greater context for in-network prices, increasing available out-of-network pricing information, and requiring stronger accountability for the accuracy and completeness of published data. Health plans and insurers will also be required to provide personalized cost-sharing information by phone in addition to existing online tools. The regulations build on healthcare price transparency requirements established during President Donald Trump’s first administration.

Subscribe now

Transparency Creates Competition

Speaker Newt Gingrich has argued that the principle behind healthcare price transparency is straightforward: Patients ought to know what their care will cost before they receive it. He has maintained that transparency creates the foundation for competition because patients who can compare prices give hospitals greater reason to compete on both cost and quality.

That argument is now receiving another real-world test. Transparent prices can begin shifting power away from a system in which patients frequently make enormously consequential purchases without clear upfront costs. The goal should not simply be publishing more healthcare data. It should be creating useful information that lets families make better decisions and encourages providers and insurers to compete for their business. That fits Speaker Gingrich’s broader vision of a person-first healthcare system built around choice, competition, and accountability rather than greater bureaucratic control. His earlier writing argued that making medical prices public could allow a genuine healthcare market to emerge.

How This Impacts the United States

Healthcare affordability is ultimately a kitchen-table issue. When people understand prices before choosing nonemergency care, they have a better opportunity to compare options and make informed decisions. The Federal Trade Commission underscored this principle on Oct. 5 when it sent letters to 24 large healthcare services companies reminding them of their obligation to provide timely, accurate, and complete pricing information. The agency said inadequate price information can prevent consumers from comparison shopping and undermine competition.

There is also considerable public support for the underlying idea. Speaker Gingrich cited America’s New Majority Project polling showing 72.8 percent support for requiring hospitals to publicly post treatment and service prices, including negotiated rates with insurers. ()

That makes transparency more than a healthcare reform. It offers policymakers a concrete affordability agenda centered on giving Americans greater control over one of the most important expenses their families face.

Related Inner Circle Content

· Patients Deserve to Know What Their Care Will Cost by Newt Gingrich. This is the strongest companion piece because it directly discusses price transparency and cites the 72.8 percent ANMP finding.

· Putting Patients Back in Charge of American Healthcare argues that price transparency is central to a patient-first healthcare approach. Trump, To Cut Health Care Costs and Boost Quality, Lays Groundwork for ‘Radical Transparency’ by Newt Gingrich connects price disclosure directly to creating a functioning healthcare market.

· How to Win 2026 Part 5: A Healthier America

Refer a friend

How to Win 2026

The 2026 midterms could be a defining moment for America. Follow Newt Gingrich and Gingrich 360’s latest columns and analysis on the ideas, policies, and strategies Republicans need to win the big arguments, grow the American majority, and deliver real results for the American people.

How to Win 2026 is part of a larger effort to identify the ideas, policies, and arguments that can create a lasting American majority.

Explore our latest columns, research, commentary, and analysis on the Republican Opportunity in 2026.

Republican Opportunity

Latest from America’s New Majority Project

You can manage your subscription preferences to choose the updates, newsletters, and alerts you want to receive on the website.

Finally, after billions of dollars in mostly negative advertising, endless rallies, more commercials than any of us can stand, public mud-slinging campaigns, pollsters with limited faith in their own polls, and talking heads who pontificate by contractual obligation, we are down to the last weekend.

Subscribe now

I have one strong piece of advice about pre-election analysis, take it with a huge grain of salt. In fact, take it with an entire shaker.

The truth is: None of us know much until the first precincts report.

The reason is simple.

The most decisive factor in elections is who decides to vote.

If a polling firm calls you at home, you can have an opinion without getting out of your chair or off the couch. But voting takes time and effort. Do you care enough to show up, wait in line, and go out of your way — even if it inconveniences you?

One of the people I really pay attention to understand what’s happening over time is . Seth’s focus isn’t on polling. It is on registration. Like voting, voter registration takes time and effort. Over time, you can sense long patterns of which party is gaining or losing support.

According to Keshel’s studies, the drift away from Democrats and towards Republicans has been steady in most of the country since then-candidate Donald J. Trump came down the long escalator on June 15, 2015.

Give a gift subscription

Keshel recently did a study of Congressman Mike Lawler’s district in New York and reported on a vote so one-sided I could hardly believe it.

He looked at Rockland County and reported “there are 11 precincts in the Ramapo area in which Trump won over 95% of 500 or more votes (28 total precincts with Trump at over 95% of the vote).”

In the town of Ramapo’s 55th precinct, Trump won 987 votes. Kamala Harris earned one. This meant trump had a 99.8% margin. The margin was similar in 2020. But in 2016, the same precinct went 657 votes for Hillary Clinton, and 42 for Trump. So, the precinct changed from being 87.9% for Clinton to almost entirely for Trump.

In fact, Keshel reported that Trump’s margin in the 28 precincts in which he got over 95 percent of the vote, Trump earned 13,217 votes, Harris earned 176, and 30 votes went to other candidates. So, Trump’s margin over those 28 precincts was 97.2%.

I don’t know of any other place in America where Republicans run up 97% margins. The Orthodox and Hasidic Jews have clearly been mobilized by the antisemitic and anti-Israel wing of the Democratic Party. With that kind of support, Congressman Lawler is likely to win again.

Keshel has also been looking at patterns among Hispanic voters. He lives in Arizona, and he reported that Yuma County, which is 66.8%, Latino is voting early. The Republican turnout is up, not down.

I want to stress that Keshel is relying on actual voting records, not polls or complex analysis.

Prepare to settle in Tuesday night and watch the real polls — the only ones that matter — pour in all over the country.

My hunch is that Republicans will do better than people expect, but not as well as Republicans want.

I study history in part because I can explain the past after it has happened easier than I can predict a future which is unknowable.

I will be right there with you as the first precinct numbers come in. Then, I can write about what happened rather than what I thought would happen.

It is going to be a long night or two to get the last contested votes counted. It will be time well spent for maintaining self-government and free society.

Refer a friend

How to Win 2026

The 2026 midterms could be a defining moment for America. Follow Newt Gingrich and Gingrich 360’s latest columns and analysis on the ideas, policies, and strategies Republicans need to win the big arguments, grow the American majority, and deliver real results for the American people.

How to Win 2026 is part of a larger effort to identify the ideas, policies, and arguments that can create a lasting American majority.

Explore our latest columns, research, commentary, and analysis on the Republican Opportunity in 2026.

Republican Opportunity

Latest From America’s New Majority Project

You can manage your subscription preferences to choose the updates, newsletters, and alerts you want to receive on the website.

Hi Inner Circle,

We thought we’d switch things up a little and take you behind the scenes of a pretty exciting Friday here in Southwest Florida!

Thanks to the RNC, I had VIP tickets to President Trump’s rally at Florida Gulf Coast University in Fort Myers. And since I spend most of my time working behind the scenes here at Gingrich 360, I figured it would be fun to bring you along for a change!

Now, let me tell you how this day started. I ended up walking up to the arena behind Republican National Committeewoman Kathleen King. Talk about an entrance!

Read more

Mike Johnson and his family recently celebrated his first three years as Speaker of the House.

I was startled when I realized it was the third anniversary of his election. It seemed like it was just yesterday that he came out of nowhere to lead the House GOP.

Subscribe now

Speaker Johnson’s emergence as a national leader seemed wildly improbable at the time. He was a relative backbencher with only six-and-a-half years of service in the House. The highest rank in leadership he had attained was vice chairman of the House Republican Conference.

His predecessor, Kevin McCarthy, had taken a longer road. He was active as a Young Republican and then worked for Congressman Bill Thomas, who became Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee after a career as a professor of political science and a member of the California Assembly. Thomas was remarkably competent and knowledgeable — and a great mentor.

McCarthy went on to win a seat in the California Assembly and was elected leader as a freshman. Then he won the congressional seat when Thomas retired. McCarthy ultimately became leader and led the House GOP back from its defeats in the 2018 election.

He was hard-working, clever, a solid strategist, and led the party back into the majority. Sadly, he made a mortal enemy of Congressman Matt Gaetz of Florida. Gaetz was smart, a good salesman, a remarkably effective manipulator, and totally destructive. He gathered a band of rabble-rousing House Republicans who were prepared to invent a national scandal if that is what it took to drive McCarthy from office. Their first attack took 15 ballots as the House Democrats cheerfully watched their Republican counterparts tear themselves apart.

When McCarthy finally accepted the inevitable, the GOP went through a period of publicly stumbling around in the wilderness. Several strong and well known leaders sought to become the next speaker. They all failed.

In exhaustion, the GOP Conference turned to Rep. Johnson of Shreveport, La. He chaired a subcommittee and was well liked but not well known by the public. Yet, he was suddenly on the national stage.

All the recent speakers had spent years growing into the leadership. I had 16 years of experience before the Contract with America led to the first GOP majority in 40 years. Johnson had about 15 minutes to go from congratulations to dealing with the national press — and a party ready to keep fighting itself.

Give a gift subscription

We all rapidly learned Johnson was more than prepared to lead. He is a lawyer with a superb understanding of the U.S. Constitution and a dedication to religious liberty. He has a wonder wife and family, who I credit with providing Johnson with the unshakable calmness he has displayed over these three years.

As I grew to know Johnson, I realized that he naturally has one of the greatest skills any senior leader can hope to obtain; he knows how to listen and is patient enough to do it endlessly.

My own pattern, which I learned over a lifetime, is listen, learn, help, and lead — in that order. Johnson practices it instinctively and with enormous endurance.

With such a narrow majority — and some of the self-defeating cannibalism inherited from the assault on McCarthy — Speaker Johnson proved he had the patience of Job as he listened to complaint after complaint and idea after idea.

But Johnson is a natural southern conservative. He was comfortable becoming the leader we needed in the House. He knew that his only hope was to work closely with President Donald J. Trump and deliver for his huge base of supporters.

Working together, they won vote after vote no matter how narrow the margin. President Trump leaned on the House to set up the much harder to manage Senate.

Johnson found himself at Mar-a-Lago the day the would-be shooter was discovered on the golf course. This second attempt on President Trump’s life seemed to really impact the President, and he and Johnson went away to a private room to pray for an hour. I’m sure this moment of mutual sympathy strengthened their relationship.

The election is less than a week away, and no one has done more to win it for the GOP than Speaker Johnson. He has tirelessly crisscrossed †he country and raised more money than any Speaker in history. His work dwarfs my efforts from the late 1990s.

Whatever happens next Tuesday, Speaker Johnson will go down in history as a remarkably successful, sincere, courageous, and hard working leader.

My hunch is he has a lot more ahead of him.

Refer a friend

How to Win 2026

The 2026 midterms could be a defining moment for America. Follow Newt Gingrich and Gingrich 360’s latest columns and analysis on the ideas, policies, and strategies Republicans need to win the big arguments, grow the American majority, and deliver real results for the American people.

How to Win 2026 is part of a larger effort to identify the ideas, policies, and arguments that can create a lasting American majority.

Explore our latest columns, research, commentary, and analysis on the Republican Opportunity in 2026.

Republican Opportunity

Latest From America’s New Majority Project

You can manage your subscription preferences to choose the updates, newsletters, and alerts you want to receive on the website.

Artificial intelligence is quickly becoming the defining technology of the 21st century, and its impact on government may prove just as significant as its impact on business. As federal agencies explore new ways to improve efficiency, strengthen national security, and better serve citizens, AI is emerging as a powerful tool that could fundamentally transform how government operates.

From processing large volumes of data to improving cybersecurity and streamlining administrative functions, AI offers government leaders the ability to do more with fewer resources. Rather than replacing human decisionmakers, AI can help public servants focus on higher-value work while reducing bureaucratic bottlenecks that have frustrated Americans for decades.

Subscribe now

This technological revolution comes at a pivotal moment. In his new book, “America’s Golden Age: Trumpism and an Era of Limitless Possibilities,” Newt Gingrich argues that the United States stands at the beginning of a new era of growth, innovation, and national renewal. AI is increasingly viewed as one of the key drivers that could make that vision a reality.

Much as the internet transformed commerce and communication in the late 20th century, artificial intelligence has the potential to reshape virtually every aspect of society. In government, that could mean faster services, smarter infrastructure management, more effective healthcare delivery, stronger national defense capabilities, and improved disaster response. For citizens, it could mean a government that is more responsive, efficient, and capable.

The race for AI leadership is also a global competition. Countries around the world are investing heavily in artificial intelligence research and deployment, recognizing that technological leadership will shape economic and geopolitical influence for decades to come. “Whoever builds the largest SI ecosystem will set the global standards and reap the economic and security rewards,” according to SI.gov. The United States remains uniquely positioned to lead thanks to its world-class universities, innovative private sector, and entrepreneurial culture. However, maintaining that advantage will require continued investment, smart policy decisions, and a regulatory environment that encourages innovation.

At the same time, policymakers must address legitimate concerns surrounding privacy, security, workforce transitions, and responsible AI development. The challenge will be striking the right balance: encouraging rapid technological advancement while ensuring safeguards that protect Americans and preserve public confidence.

As Gingrich and other advocates of an American resurgence have argued, breakthrough technologies have historically fueled periods of extraordinary growth and opportunity. If the Industrial Revolution defined one era and the internet defined another, artificial intelligence will almost certainly define the next.

The question is no longer whether AI will change government. It already has. The real question is whether America will seize the opportunity to use AI to build a stronger, more innovative, and more prosperous future. If it does, AI may become one of the foundational pillars of America’s next Golden Age.

Refer a friend

How to Win 2026

The 2026 midterms could be a defining moment for America. Follow Newt Gingrich and Gingrich 360’s latest columns and analysis on the ideas, policies, and strategies Republicans need to win the big arguments, grow the American majority, and deliver real results for the American people.

How to Win 2026 is part of a larger effort to identify the ideas, policies, and arguments that can create a lasting American majority.

Explore our latest columns, research, commentary, and analysis on the Republican Opportunity in 2026.

Republican Opportunity

Latest from America’s New Majority Project

You can manage your subscription preferences to choose the updates, newsletters, and alerts you want to receive on the website.

We experienced several amazing things this week. Callista and I went to Palm Beach for the Sean Hannity-Ainsley Earhardt wedding and reception. The wedding was at Bethesda by the Sea, a magnificent stone Episcopalian Church (which is also where then-businessman Donald Trump married Melania Trump). The setting is magnificent and well worth visiting if you ever find yourself in Palm Beach.

Read more

Over the past several days, I have had the opportunity to travel, appear on television, join radio programs, and speak with podcast hosts across the country about my new book, “America’s Golden Age.”

Throughout these conversations, one thing has become increasingly clear to me: There is an enormous appetite for a positive, optimistic vision of America’s future.

I wrote “America’s Golden Age” because I believe our greatest achievements are still ahead of us. The next 50 years could be the most exciting and extraordinary period in American history, if we have the courage, imagination, and determination to make it happen.

I want to personally thank everyone who has purchased a copy, shared the book with friends and family, or helped spread the word.

Now, I have one small favor to ask.

If you’ve received your copy and started reading, I would love to hear what you think.

Please take a moment to leave a review on Amazon:

• Review the Hardcover Edition

• Review the Audiobook Edition

Your reviews help other readers discover the book and, more importantly, become part of a much larger conversation about the kind of America we want to build for our children and grandchildren.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts and continuing this important conversation about America’s next 50 years.

Your friend,

Newt

Read more

Subscribe now

Newt argued that the United States has confronted waves of political violence before, including unrest in the late 1960s and 2020. He emphasized that Americans have the right to protest, speak freely and run for office, but violence has no place in the political system.

He also dismissed the prospect of a successful radical revolution, pointing to the stability of America’s constitutional system throughout its 250-year history.

Newt warned that increasingly radical candidates and movements are pushing the Democratic Party further outside the political mainstream. He suggested that the more these movements embrace confrontation and disorder, the more they alienate ordinary Americans.

“The American people want things to work,” Newt said, emphasizing that families want safe communities and the freedom to live their lives without fear of violence.

Refer a friend

How to Win 2026

The 2026 midterms could be a defining moment for America. Follow Newt Gingrich and Gingrich 360’s latest columns and analysis on the ideas, policies, and strategies Republicans need to win the big arguments, grow the American majority, and deliver real results for the American people.

How to Win 2026 is part of a larger effort to identify the ideas, policies, and arguments that can create a lasting American majority.

Explore our latest columns, research, commentary, and analysis on the Republican Opportunity in 2026.

Republican Opportunity

You can manage your subscription preferences to choose the updates, newsletters, and alerts you want to receive on the website.

Inspired by Newt's new book, America's Golden Age, available now, this episode explores the coming golden age of space—and the policies that will help America get there first.

Subscribe to Newt's World for more conversations about American history, innovation, public policy, and the future of our nation.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Democrats who favor Medicare for All have given Republicans a huge opportunity.

Far from hiding from the healthcare debate, Republicans should be piling on and forcing Democrats to defend their crazy idea of a Washington-run national healthcare system. Republicans should also offer a positive alternative.

There are three major reasons to reject Medicare for All.

Subscribe now

First, Sen. Bernie Sanders’ Medicare for All bill could force American taxpayers to pay for healthcare for illegal immigrants. The bill makes residency, not citizenship, the basis for coverage and contains no explicit exclusion for people here illegally. Sanders himself has said they would be covered.

An April 2025 poll by America’s New Majority Project found that 62 percent of voters opposed states using taxpayer money to provide Medicaid benefits for illegal immigrants, with 43 percent strongly opposed. Another 62 percent favored a federal law prohibiting it. Three out of four Americans supported stronger identity verification for Medicaid applicants, compared with just 18 percent opposed.

The questions were about Medicaid, not Medicare for All, but they reveal strong opposition to taxpayer-funded coverage for illegal immigrants.

As inarticulate as the GOP often is, Republicans should be able to win 75 percent-to-18 percent debates.

Second, Medicare for All would create an enormous new Washington healthcare bureaucracy. This is not speculation. Under Sanders’ bill, Washington would determine hospital budgets, set doctors’ fees, decide which drugs are covered, and prohibit private insurance that duplicates government coverage.

There are serious problems with today’s insurance companies. They deny claims, restrict networks, and bury doctors in paperwork. But the answer to private-sector bureaucracy is not an even bigger government bureaucracy.

Under Medicare for All, hospital budgets are described as “negotiated.” But when Washington writes the rules and controls nearly all the money, what kind of negotiation is that?

That is not simply government paying the bills. It is government controlling healthcare.

Third, guaranteeing health insurance is not the same as guaranteeing healthcare.

Congress can pass a law guaranteeing every American healthcare. It cannot pass a law creating more doctors, hospital beds, or available appointments.

Consider Britain. Under England’s National Health Service, patients generally have a legal right to begin nonemergency specialist-led treatment within 18 weeks. Yet in July 2026, the NHS had 7.3 million cases on its waiting list, including more than 2.5 million who had already waited longer than 18 weeks.

The government guaranteed treatment within 18 weeks. More than one-third of those on the waiting list had already waited longer.

Canada offers a similar warning. A 2023 international survey found that only 31 percent of Canadians who needed a specialist saw one within a month, compared with 57 percent of Americans. One-in-10 Canadians waited a year or longer.

Waiting for care is one problem. Government deciding which treatments to cover is another.

In Britain, the government refused to cover Enhertu, a treatment shown to extend the lives of patients with advanced breast cancer, because it was considered too expensive for the benefits provided. American patients had access to the treatment more than four years before Britain began covering it in September 2026.

Give a gift subscription

That is the difference between promising healthcare and delivering healthcare. Or as Dick Morris warned, Medicare for All could become “Medicare for None.”

However, the Republican advantage is more than an argument against the Democrats’ proposal.

With President Donald J. Trump’s leadership, Republicans have been developing big ideas to lower costs, improve access, and give Americans more control over their healthcare.

The President’s Great Healthcare Plan would send assistance directly to eligible Americans instead of insurance companies, require plain-English insurance information, and hold powerful healthcare institutions accountable.

TrumpRx is already helping Americans find lower cash prices for participating prescription drugs and compare prices for hundreds of generic medicines.

These are important steps toward a dramatically better system. Republicans should build on them.

As healthcare economist John Goodman has argued, two additional reforms could give Americans even more control.

First, let Americans buy insurance that meets their needs and budgets. Obamacare requires individual and small-group plans to cover a Washington-defined list of essential health benefit categories. Americans should be free to choose their own coverage instead of being forced to buy what Washington mandates.

Second, let insurers offer non-network plans. Patients should be able to choose any properly licensed doctor without being restricted to an insurer’s approved network. Their coverage should retain its value when they choose that doctor.

I would add a third reform: build on President Trump’s initiatives and extend transparency and accountability throughout the healthcare system. Before scheduled treatment, Americans should know the price, what insurance pays, and what they will owe. They should know which doctors and hospitals deliver the best results. Insurers, hospitals, and middlemen should be accountable for prices, performance, and treatment of patients. The Patients Deserve Price Tags Act would accomplish much of this and should be passed and sent to the president before the end of the year. Republicans should also protect Medicare and Medicaid by rooting out fraud.

The choice should be clear. Democrats want Washington to control healthcare. Republicans should offer lower costs, more choices, and decisions made by you and your doctor — not Washington and insurance company bureaucrats.

That is a debate Republicans should be eager to have.

Refer a friend

How to Win 2026

The 2026 midterms could be a defining moment for America. Follow Newt Gingrich and Gingrich 360’s latest columns and analysis on the ideas, policies, and strategies Republicans need to win the big arguments, grow the American majority, and deliver real results for the American people.

How to Win 2026 is part of a larger effort to identify the ideas, policies, and arguments that can create a lasting American majority.

Explore our latest columns, research, commentary, and analysis on the Republican Opportunity in 2026.

Republican Opportunity

Latest From America’s New Majority Project

You can manage your subscription preferences to choose the updates, newsletters, and alerts you want to receive on the website.

Inspired by Newt's new book, America's Golden Age, available now, this episode explores the promise and the risks of artificial intelligence—and how America can lead the way.

Subscribe to Newt's World for more conversations about American history, innovation, public policy, and the future of our nation.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.