Bernie Sanders Blocks Pediatric Cancer Bill That Had Unanimous House Support
A recent event in the U.S. Senate provided a moment so brazen it ought to make your blood boil.
“He is literally killing kids in front of us because of his political movement,” Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), who forcefully supported the Give Kids a Chance Act, said. “It is ridiculous.”
And who was the culprit behind this gutless act? Surprise, surprise: it was none other than Vermont’s own Senator Bernie Sanders. In a move that defies all logic and decency, Sanders single-handedly torpedoed the Mikaela Naylon Give Kids a Chance Act. This wasn’t some radical proposal; it was a completely bipartisan bill designed to help children with cancer get access to promising new drug treatments.
This bill had already passed the House of Representatives with a unanimous vote. Think about that. In today’s divided climate, everyone agreed on this. It was ready for a quick vote in the Senate and a trip straight to President Trump’s desk to become law. It would have delivered immediate hope to countless families in their darkest hour. But Bernie Sanders decided his own agenda was more important.
To grasp the true cruelty of this maneuver, you have to know about Mikaela Naylon. She was a 16-year-old girl from Colorado who was dying from a vicious form of bone cancer. Instead of spending her final days resting, she fought. She used what little energy she had left to lobby Congress, pleading over Zoom calls for them to pass this very bill so other kids might not suffer her fate.
Mikaela died just hours after one of those calls. Her incredible courage shamed Washington into action, and the House passed the bill in her name, unanimously. It was a rare, beautiful tribute to a selfless young patriot. And Bernie Sanders took a match to the whole thing.
So why would the self-proclaimed champion of healthcare block a bill for dying children? For the most cynical reason imaginable: leverage. Sanders admitted he supported the bill in theory, but he blocked it because he wanted a “quid pro quo.” He demanded that his own unrelated spending priorities—like funding for community health centers—be attached to it.
Frankly, this is how the socialist mind works. It’s an all-or-nothing game. Rather than accept an undeniable, tangible win for suffering children, Sanders chose to hold them hostage for his broader political wish list. He would rather everyone get nothing than allow a simple, good thing to happen without advancing his own revolution. And in his quest for ideological purity, kids with cancer were just collateral damage.
The mask didn’t just slip; it was ripped off for all to see. This wasn’t a procedural disagreement. It was a profound moral failure that exposed the cold, calculating heart of the far-left movement. When given a clear choice between helping dying children and flexing his political muscle, Bernie Sanders made his priorities clear. And that’s a choice no American should ever forget.
“He is literally killing kids in front of us because of his political movement,” Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), who forcefully supported the Give Kids a Chance Act, said. “It is ridiculous.”
And who was the culprit behind this gutless act? Surprise, surprise: it was none other than Vermont’s own Senator Bernie Sanders. In a move that defies all logic and decency, Sanders single-handedly torpedoed the Mikaela Naylon Give Kids a Chance Act. This wasn’t some radical proposal; it was a completely bipartisan bill designed to help children with cancer get access to promising new drug treatments.
This bill had already passed the House of Representatives with a unanimous vote. Think about that. In today’s divided climate, everyone agreed on this. It was ready for a quick vote in the Senate and a trip straight to President Trump’s desk to become law. It would have delivered immediate hope to countless families in their darkest hour. But Bernie Sanders decided his own agenda was more important.
To grasp the true cruelty of this maneuver, you have to know about Mikaela Naylon. She was a 16-year-old girl from Colorado who was dying from a vicious form of bone cancer. Instead of spending her final days resting, she fought. She used what little energy she had left to lobby Congress, pleading over Zoom calls for them to pass this very bill so other kids might not suffer her fate.
Mikaela died just hours after one of those calls. Her incredible courage shamed Washington into action, and the House passed the bill in her name, unanimously. It was a rare, beautiful tribute to a selfless young patriot. And Bernie Sanders took a match to the whole thing.
So why would the self-proclaimed champion of healthcare block a bill for dying children? For the most cynical reason imaginable: leverage. Sanders admitted he supported the bill in theory, but he blocked it because he wanted a “quid pro quo.” He demanded that his own unrelated spending priorities—like funding for community health centers—be attached to it.
Frankly, this is how the socialist mind works. It’s an all-or-nothing game. Rather than accept an undeniable, tangible win for suffering children, Sanders chose to hold them hostage for his broader political wish list. He would rather everyone get nothing than allow a simple, good thing to happen without advancing his own revolution. And in his quest for ideological purity, kids with cancer were just collateral damage.
The mask didn’t just slip; it was ripped off for all to see. This wasn’t a procedural disagreement. It was a profound moral failure that exposed the cold, calculating heart of the far-left movement. When given a clear choice between helping dying children and flexing his political muscle, Bernie Sanders made his priorities clear. And that’s a choice no American should ever forget.
70-79, M
