Meet the MAHA Commission: The Architects of America’s Next Great Looting

How Public Health will be Sold Off to Private Capital Under the Guise of Reform

The MAHA Commission is a façade for privatising public health, shifting blame onto individuals while funnelling public funds to private capital. This article breaks down what we know so far, analyses the players and their conflicts, and situates it in the broader neoliberal looting project.

Introduction

The Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission is not a health initiative; it is a neoliberal project dressed up in the language of reform, a political manoeuvre designed to strip public health infrastructure and hand it over to private interests. What we are witnessing here is not new—this is the same playbook used in neoliberal and neocolonial economic takeovers around the world, now turned inward on the American people. Steve Bannon famously described the strategy as “fire hosing” and “flooding the zone with shit,” a swarm of disinformation that overwhelms critical resistance by sheer volume, keeping opponents scrambling to address each new attack whilst the structural changes are pushed through unopposed. This is shock doctrine politics at its most blatant, and the MAHA Commission is a textbook example of how the US government has historically dismantled economies abroad through “public-private partnerships,” deregulation, and economic “reforms” designed to benefit corporate interests at the expense of the people. Now, those same tactics are being unleashed domestically, weaponising public health policy to justify the looting of the public purse.

As an autistic trans woman, I cannot afford to ignore this. This commission is a direct threat—not just to public healthcare as a whole, but specifically to disabled people, trans people, and anyone who relies on public health services. We have already seen how “personal responsibility” rhetoric has been used to blame individuals for systemic health disparities, shifting focus away from corporate malfeasance, environmental harm, and policy-driven healthcare exclusion. MAHA will push the same narrative: that poor health is the fault of bad choices rather than poverty, pollution, or lack of access. But this is more than just ideological gaslighting. The commission’s real function is to set up the conditions for privatisation—gutting regulations, defunding public services, and redirecting public money into the hands of corporate actors, all whilst claiming to “fix” a crisis they themselves are deepening. This is a blitzkrieg approach to policy—overwhelming in scope, rapid in execution, and devastating in its consequences.

This is why I am taking the time to dissect not just the ludicrous premises behind the Executive Order that created this commission, but also the people involved. The list of appointees is revealing: this is not a panel of health experts, but a collection of neoliberal policy architects, corporate strategists, and hard-right political operatives whose careers have been built on deregulation and wealth extraction. These are the people who will determine the “future of American health,” and it is critical to understand their roles, affiliations, and the broader strategy they represent. The following is not just a rundown of names and titles; it is a roadmap of the machinery behind the dismantling of public health in real time.

Meet the MAHA Commission Members

1. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – Secretary of Health and Human Services (Chair)

A former environmental lawyer and long-time advocate against vaccines, Kennedy has shifted from his traditional Democratic roots to align with the Trump administration. He chairs the MAHA Commission and has led organizations such as Children’s Health Defense, known for its promotion of anti-vaccine narratives. He also founded the MAHA Alliance, a political action committee advocating for health policy reforms.

2. Vince Haley – Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy (Executive Director)

A conservative policy strategist with deep Republican ties, Haley previously served as a policy director for the American Conservative Union and worked with Newt Gingrich's American Solutions for Winning the Future. His background includes crafting conservative legislative initiatives and advising Republican leadership.

3. Brooke Rollins – Secretary of Agriculture

A key figure in conservative policy circles, Rollins is the former president and CEO of the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF), a think tank promoting free-market policies. She also led the White House Domestic Policy Council during the Trump administration, where she worked on deregulation efforts and economic policy.

4. Scott Turner – Secretary of Housing and Urban Development

Turner is a former U.S. congressman from Texas and served as the Executive Director of the Opportunity Zones Initiative, promoting economic development in distressed communities. His legislative work has aligned with conservative housing and economic policies.

5. Linda McMahon – Secretary of Education (Nominee)

A business executive best known as the co-founder of World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE), McMahon ran twice as a Republican for U.S. Senate in Connecticut and later served as Administrator of the Small Business Administration (SBA) under Trump. She has strong ties to Republican fundraising networks.

6. Douglas Collins – Secretary of Veterans Affairs

A former U.S. Representative from Georgia, Collins is known for his hardline conservative stance. As a former Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, he played a key role in Trump’s impeachment defense and has a strong record on veterans' issues.

7. Lee Zeldin – Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency

A former Republican congressman from New York, Zeldin has a background in national security and environmental deregulation. He served on the House Foreign Affairs Committee and has been a vocal critic of climate change regulations.

8. Russell Vought – Director of the Office of Management and Budget

A staunch conservative, Vought was formerly vice president of Heritage Action for America, the lobbying arm of the Heritage Foundation. He served as Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) during Trump’s first term, where he oversaw federal spending cuts and deregulation efforts.

9. Stephen Miller – Assistant to the President and Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy

One of the most controversial figures in Trump’s inner circle, Miller is known for his role in shaping restrictive immigration policies. He previously worked as a speechwriter and communications director for Senator Jeff Sessions and played a key role in implementing Trump’s hardline domestic policies.

10. Kevin Hassett – Director of the National Economic Council

An economist with extensive experience in Republican administrations, Hassett was formerly a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and chaired the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) under Trump. He specializes in conservative economic policy, tax cuts, and deregulation.

11. Stephen Miran – Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers (Nominee)

A conservative economic policy expert, Miran served as a senior advisor at the U.S. Department of the Treasury. He co-founded Amberwave Partners, an investment firm focused on economic resilience and free-market principles.

12. Michael Kratsios – Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (Nominee)

A technology policy strategist, Kratsios was the U.S. Chief Technology Officer under Trump, overseeing AI, cybersecurity, and deregulation efforts. He previously worked at Thiel Capital, an investment firm founded by Peter Thiel, a major conservative donor.

13. Dr. Marty Makary – Commissioner of Food and Drugs (Nominee)

A Johns Hopkins surgeon and public health researcher, Makary is known for advocating for healthcare transparency and free-market medical reforms. His public commentary has included critiques of government health interventions.

14. Dr. David Weldon – Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Nominee)

A former Republican congressman from Florida and physician, Weldon has a strong background in healthcare policy. He previously practiced internal medicine and served in Congress, where he was involved in legislation on health and medical research.

15. Dr. Jay Bhattacharya – Director of the National Institutes of Health (Nominee)

A professor at Stanford University and research fellow at the Hoover Institution, Bhattacharya gained prominence for opposing COVID-19 lockdowns and promoting alternative pandemic strategies. His research focuses on public health policy, with a conservative-leaning approach.

Given this list, the MAHA Commission is not about improving public health—it is a vehicle for neoliberal restructuring, shifting responsibility for health outcomes onto individuals whilst setting the stage for privatisation and corporate profiteering. Its leadership is stacked with conservative policy architects, corporate strategists, and deregulation advocates, ensuring that any recommendations will prioritise “free-market solutions” over systemic interventions.

At its helm is RFK Jr., whose history of promoting conspiracies lends credibility to the idea that this commission may push pseudoscience as a means to justify dismantling public health infrastructure. The rest of the commission is dominated by Republican operatives, think tank figures, and corporate policy enforcers, from Stephen Miller’s hard-right domestic policy influence to Russell Vought’s deep ties to Heritage Foundation-backed austerity measures. The inclusion of figures like Jay Bhattacharya, known for opposing COVID-19 public health measures, suggests an agenda that will erode regulatory safeguards and dismantle public healthcare in favour of corporate control and profit extraction.

How the Commission Functions as a Neoliberal & Neocolonial Health Reform Tool

1. Shifting Health Responsibility onto Individuals

   • By framing health as an issue of personal choice (diet, exercise, lifestyle) rather than systemic issues (poverty, environmental pollution, lack of healthcare access), the commission removes accountability from corporations and the state.

   • This aligns with historical neoliberal approaches to social services—reduce state intervention and let the “free market” dictate access.

2. Weaponising "Health Reform" to Justify Privatisation

   • The commission will likely recommend “choice” and “innovation” as euphemisms for privatising public health services, particularly in Medicaid and other federally funded programs.

   • Past Republican healthcare policies (e.g., Orange Man’s attempts to dismantle the ACA) have already aimed to reduce state-run healthcare in favour of private insurance and corporate-driven solutions.

   • This will open the door to private companies profiting off what should be public health resources—essentially, a looting operation.

3. Neocolonial Aspects: Deregulation & Extraction of Public Wealth

   • Expect deregulation of healthcare, making it easier for corporations to profit from lower-quality services.

   • The MAHA Commission’s focus on childhood health may be a vehicle to expand corporate control over school nutrition programmes, early childhood healthcare, and medical research grants, redirecting public funds to private interests.

   • If the commission recommends “alternative medicine” approaches (aligned with RFK Jr.’s anti-vax stance), it could weaken public health infrastructure whilst enabling grift industries (supplements, wellness schemes, for-profit “health coaching” programmes).

4. Potential Attack on Trans Healthcare & Disability Rights

   • Stephen Miller and other right-wing operatives will likely use the “protect children” rhetoric to argue for restrictions on gender-affirming care whilst defunding disability accommodations in schools.

   • This could lead to policies that strip away healthcare rights under the guise of “protecting kids” from “experimental” or “dangerous” treatments.

   • It also aligns with broader Republican attacks on Section 504 and disability protections, which could be reframed as an economic burden on the healthcare system.

5. Surveillance & Biopolitical Control Through Health Policy

   • The commission’s 100-day and 180-day reports could justify increased surveillance of individuals’ health choices, potentially enabling corporate data collection and AI-driven health monitoring.

   • If the recommendations tie health outcomes to employment, insurance eligibility, or social benefits, it could be weaponised against marginalised groups (e.g., forcing work requirements for Medicaid or linking food assistance to “healthy behavior” compliance).

Projected Outcomes: Looting the Public Purse Under the Guise of Health Reform

• Privatisation of public health resources (Medicaid, school nutrition, disability services).

• More corporate subsidies under the guise of “public-private partnerships” for health reform.

• Market-based solutions (high-deductible insurance, out-of-pocket costs, and health savings accounts) as a replacement for universal coverage.

• Elimination of regulations that protect public health (environmental protections, corporate liability for pollutants, medical safety oversight).

• Attacks on trans and disability rights disguised as “protecting children’s health.”

Final thoughts …

The MAHA Commission is just one front in a broader neoliberal offensive, a fire-hosing of policies meant to disorient and exhaust opposition whilst corporate interests pillage what remains of the public sector. This is not just about healthcare; this is the blueprint for governance under the new regime. Expect similar efforts across multiple sectors—education, housing, social security, infrastructure, environmental protections—each dressed up in the language of reform, each designed to dismantle, privatise, and extract. This is a full-spectrum economic coup, where regulatory dismantling is passed off as “innovation,” privatisation as “efficiency,” and austerity as “fiscal responsibility.”

The corporations and private capital groups that funded the Tangerine Tyrant’s election campaign did so for a return on investment, and now they’re collecting. This is a looting operation, pure and simple, using public-private partnerships to funnel taxpayer money into private hands. The rhetoric will be different in each case—whether it’s “fixing healthcare,” “modernising infrastructure,” or “protecting children”—but the function will remain the same: deregulation, privatisation, and wealth extraction.

And the Democrats? They’ll perform outrage, they’ll call for oversight, but they will let it happen. The Democratic Party is not a resistance force; it is simply another faction of the corporate establishment, beholden to the same donor class that funds the Republicans. They will bemoan the gutting of healthcare whilst refusing to fight for a true nationalised health service. They will rage about environmental rollbacks whilst continuing to take fossil fuel money. They will watch as trans healthcare and disability rights are dismantled, issuing strongly worded statements but little else.

This is what unfettered neoliberal governance looks like—chaotic, overwhelming, relentless. The scale of it is meant to make resistance seem futile. But recognising the pattern is the first step. This isn’t just policy—it’s an economic war against the public, and the only way out is to reject the premise entirely and fight for real, systemic alternatives.