logo
Kentucky would be sicker, hungrier and poorer under U.S. House plan

Kentucky would be sicker, hungrier and poorer under U.S. House plan

Yahoo16-05-2025

House Committee on Energy and Commerce Chairman Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., left, and ranking member Frank Pallone, D-N.J., right, speak during a markup of Medicaid budget cuts that are now before the full House, May 13, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by)
The U. S. House of Representatives is now considering a radical budget and tax plan that would take health coverage and food assistance away from more than 100,000 Kentuckians, all to offset a fraction of the cost of cutting taxes for America's wealthiest people and corporations. If passed, it would be the largest funding cut to both Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) in history.
More than 1 in 3 Kentuckians use Medicaid to see a doctor or afford medicine, but the new House plan would make it harder to get, keep and use that health coverage. It includes:
Burdensome work reporting requirements that put 197,000 to 282,000 Kentuckians at risk of terminated health coverage for those caught up in new red tape.
Mandatory copays that would delay or prevent working class Kentuckians from getting needed care.
More frequent checks for eligibility leading to needless coverage-ending mistakes.
Cuts that make coverage options more expensive for those who purchase health insurance on kynect – adding thousands of dollars for many families.
SNAP, meanwhile, helps more than 575,000 Kentuckians afford their groceries. But this House plan would radically restructure the 50-year-old program by:
Increasing red-tape requirements that will kick older people and parents off the program, putting 135,000 Kentuckians at risk for the first time.
Shrinking SNAP by shifting up to $190 million in annual costs to the already-underfunded state budget, equal to the cost of hiring 2,354 Kentucky public school teachers.
Preventing future benefit changes to match updated nutrition standards or a rapid rise in cost of food, as we've all experienced recently.
As a state where so many people are able to receive medical care and put food on the table because of these federal programs, Kentucky would be left sicker, hungrier and poorer by these cruel and unnecessary changes. The cuts will pass huge new costs down to Kentucky's budget, potentially squeezing out state investments in everything from education to infrastructure. And the cuts will weaken our economy as well, especially in rural Kentucky.
Medicaid keeps the doors open at many hospitals. Cuts that result in terminated coverage or less care threaten the jobs of nurses and providers across the state. At the same time, SNAP stimulates local economies and supports jobs at farmers' markets and grocery stores. In 2024, more than $1.3 billion in federal SNAP benefits went to more than 4,700 retailers across the state.
These cuts are being proposed in part because many politicians in Washington want to extend key parts of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act that overwhelmingly benefit the wealthy. The richest 1% in Kentucky would receive over $45,000 in annual tax cuts from those extensions, while the poorest 20% would get $70. The House bill also adds even more giveaways to the wealthy by further increasing the estate tax exemption, expanding the pass-through deduction loophole for super-rich investors, and creating a new tax credit for the exact kind of private school vouchers that Kentuckians roundly rejected in the Amendment 2 vote last year.
And that's just some of the dangerous changes in this plan. The proposal also hurts immigrants and their U. S. citizen children, makes the cost of student loans go up and denies the full child tax credit for the very poorest kids who would benefit the most from the added income. It kills energy tax breaks that have helped fuel new jobs at battery plants and power installations all across Kentucky.
Taken as a whole, the House plan is a recipe for greater hardship and the redistribution of wealth from hard-working Kentuckians and their kids to the pockets of the richest people in our country.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Speaker Johnson teases follow-ups to the ‘one big, beautiful bill'
Speaker Johnson teases follow-ups to the ‘one big, beautiful bill'

Yahoo

time30 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Speaker Johnson teases follow-ups to the ‘one big, beautiful bill'

The 'one big, beautiful bill' may not be so singular, after all. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is teasing follow-up legislation to the megabill of President Trump's tax cut and spending priorities that Republicans can push though using the same special budget reconciliation process that requires only GOP votes. That tool can be used once per fiscal year, with the current fiscal year ending on Sept. 30. So after Republicans are done with the 'big, beautiful bill,' the GOP trifecta has, in theory, two more shots to muscle through party-line legislation before the next Congress comes into power after the midterms. Johnson floated plans for a second reconciliation bill while rebutting concerns from deficit hawks on the budget impact of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — which includes an extension of tax cuts and boosts to border and defense funding, with costs offset in part by new requirements on low-income assistance programs like Medicaid and food aid. 'Everyone here wants to reduce spending,' Johnson said Friday morning on CNBC. 'But you have to do that in a sequence of events. We have a plan, OK? This is the first of a multistep process.' 'We're going to have another reconciliation bill that follows this one, possibly a third one before this Congress is up, because you can have a reconciliation bill for each budget year, each fiscal year. So that's ahead of us,' Johnson continued, also pointing to separate plans to claw back money based on recommendations from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). 'We're also doing rescissions packages. We got the first one delivered this week from the White House, and that will codify many of the DOGE cuts.' The promise of another reconciliation bill is somewhat surprising given the crux of the debate that dominated the early weeks of the year: Should Republicans divide up their agenda into two bills, passing the first quickly to give Trump an early win on boosting funding for border enforcement and deportations? Or would putting all of Trump's priorities into one bill — which would contain both bitter pills and sweeteners for different factions of the razor-thin majority — be a better political strategy? Trump eventually said he preferred 'one big, beautiful bill,' a moniker that became the legislation's official title in the House last month. It's not clear what would be in a second piece of legislation. Multiple House Republicans who spoke with The Hill were unaware of plans for more reconciliation bills and were not sure what could be included in them. 'I think we need to see what's left on the table after the first one,' Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas) said. And to muster through multiple reconciliation bills is a delicate prospect. If members know more reconciliation bills are coming, that complicates the argument that everything in the current package — even policies some factions dislike that others love — need to stay in one megabill. The Speaker declined to elaborate on what might be in such a package when asked in a press conference last week. 'I'm not going to tell you that,' Johnson said. 'Let's get the first one done.' 'Look, I say this is the beginning of a process, and what you're going to see is a continuing of us identifying waste, fraud, abuse in government, which is our pledge of common sense, restoring common sense and fiscal sanity. So we have lots of ideas of things that might be in that package.' Republicans had started planning for the current legislative behemoth months before the 2024 election so they would be prepared to quickly execute on their policy wish list if they won the majority. 'This isn't something we just drew up overnight. So, we'll go through that same laborious process,' Johnson said. But some members have ideas of what else they'd like to see. Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) said that he'd hope a second bill would do more to tackle rolling back green energy tax credits and make further spending cuts. Ultimately, though, it will be Trump's call, Norman said: 'I know when the president gets involved, it adds a lot of value.' And Rep. August Pfluger (R-Texas) speculated that passing the 'big, beautiful bill' would inspire members to keep going with another bill. 'People like the feeling of winning,' Pfluger said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Republicans Offer Cowardly Lack Of Pushback To Hegseth Suggesting Marines Could Quell Protests
Republicans Offer Cowardly Lack Of Pushback To Hegseth Suggesting Marines Could Quell Protests

Yahoo

time30 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Republicans Offer Cowardly Lack Of Pushback To Hegseth Suggesting Marines Could Quell Protests

Congressional Republicans have offered a disturbing lack of pushback to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth suggesting that active-duty Marines could be sent to quell immigration enforcement protests in Los Angeles. 'I don't think that's heavy-handed,' House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said when asked about Hegseth's proposal on ABC News's 'This Week.' Hegseth raised the idea in a post on X Saturday evening, writing, 'If violence continues, active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton will also be mobilized.' His remarks come after President Donald Trump ordered National Guard troops to Los Angeles on Saturday, a move that's not typically made without the support of a state's governor, which he does not currently have. The White House has claimed that it took this step because it's addressing violence at these protests that targeted ICE offices and agents, while California leaders have said that they don't needthe troops. The deployment of active-duty Marines would be another major escalation and a move that's rarely employed by a president in response to protests. 'The deployment of active-duty troops under federal authority in response to civil unrest is a rare step, one that usually requires the president to find under the Insurrection Act that they are needed to enforce the law or restore order,' write The Wall Street Journal's Eliza Collins and Nancy A. Youssef. 'The George H.W. Bush administration deployed US Marines to help restore order after violent protests erupted in California in the wake of the 1992 acquittal of four police officers in the beating of Rodney King…[marking] the last invocation of the Insurrection Act.' During Trump's first term, Defense Secretary Mark Esper stated that active duty military should only be used to respond to protests in 'the most urgent and dire of situations,' and that 'we are not in one of those situations now,' breaking with the president. Rather than criticizing Hegseth's post about Marines, however, Johnson and other Republicans have either been open to the idea or declined to denounce it. 'You don't think sending Marines into the streets of an American city is heavy handed?' ABC News anchor Jonathan Karl asked Johnson. 'We have to be prepared to do what is necessary and I think the notice that that might happen might have the deterring effect,' Johnson responded. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) also declined to repudiate the idea directly, when asked about it on CNN's 'State of the Union.' Instead, he said 'it won't be necessary,' because the National Guard's response will be sufficient. And Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) downplayed the role of the Marines in a possible response without rejecting Hegseth's statement out of hand. 'Active-duty Marines are not going to be put into local law enforcement,' Lankford said on NBC News's 'Meet the Press.' 'They would be in support roles on it, as we have at the border. We have active-duty military at the border, but they're not doing law enforcement tasks. They're doing logistical tasks behind the scenes.' 'Local law enforcement should take care of this, but again when you're seeing burning cars and federal law enforcement and law enforcement being attacked on the streets…we want to make sure those protests don't spiral out of control,' Lankford said. Democrats have emphasized that Trump's use of the National Guard is only adding tension in Los Angeles, and have been incredulous at the possibility of active-duty military being sent in as well. 'The Secretary of Defense is now threatening to deploy active-duty Marines on American soil against its own citizens,' Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote in a Sunday post on X. 'This is deranged behavior.'

Horse trading session has arrived at N.H. State House
Horse trading session has arrived at N.H. State House

Yahoo

time30 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Horse trading session has arrived at N.H. State House

Both the New Hampshire House of Representatives and Senate worked late into the night Thursday as they tried desperately to revive bills that the other branch didn't want. The political game of chicken is expected to continue this week when the two bodies return to session to create committees of conference that will be charged with trying to work out differences between competing versions of a bill. This stage in the budget process signals that the 2025 session, barring a negotiating meltdown, will conclude in the coming weeks. Once named, the conference committees will have until June 19 to come up with an agreement that the Legislature must act upon by June 26. Both bodies must vote to create these panels with three state senators and four House members. Any agreement requires all conferees to sign onto the proposal; it then returns to the House and Senate for an up-or-down vote, meaning lawmakers at that final meeting are unable to amend it in any fashion. The two-year state budget is the biggest and most consequential of the disputes, with the Senate last week approving its measure that spent nearly $250 million more than the House-approved version. All of this one-upmanship resulted in some strange bedfellows, like when the Senate voted to add to a bill increasing the penalty for wrong-way driving (HB 776) and a Senate-passed bill to declare the Virginia opossum the state marsupial (SB 30). Sen. Donovan Fenton, D-Keene, thanked his colleagues for this act taken because the House put his own bill at risk when, earlier this month, it had tacked onto it new penalties for improper application of fertilizer. Senate Democratic Leader Rebecca Perkins Kwoka of Portsmouth couldn't resist a punning quip. 'I'm glad the senator from Dist. 10 (Fenton) has not played dead on his bill,' she joked. The House responded last week, adding to a bill raising the personal allowance that residents of nursing homes are allowed to keep (SB 118) the House-passed bill that would allow medically eligible patients to grow their own marijuana rather than have to buy it at alternative treatment centers at market costs. House keeps pushing cannabis agenda Rep. Gary Daniels, R-Milford, tried to convince his colleagues to drop this last-ditch effort. 'The Senate has rejected every single cannabis bill the House has sent it. Do we really want to put a good bill at risk by insisting this be included?' Daniels asked rhetorically. Rep. Wendy Thomas, D-Merrimack, a cancer survivor, said as an eligible patient she takes marijuana every day and that the underlying personal allowance issue is already contained in versions of the state budget. The House voted 215-103 to keep the marijuana bill as part of the House position. Not all of these gambits succeeded. Rep. Judy Aron, R-Acworth and chairman of the House Environment and Agriculture Committee, had wanted to add to legislation that designated Coos County as an economically distressed area to (SB 180), an unrelated bill from her committee to enhance state rules regarding the approval of future landfills that the Senate had rejected (HB 707). The House voted 166-163 against that idea, choosing to keep the Coos County economic bill clean. In one of its last moves, the Senate voted to add onto a temporary youth operator driver's license bill (HB 612) its legislation to declare the third week in September each year "New Hampshire Service Dog Week." Moments earlier, the House had voted, 179-144, to kill that service dog bill (SB 198). "We don't need a special holiday in order to say, 'Good dog,'" said Rep. Erica Layon, R-Derry. Here are some other issues that are likely to need more negotiation before they are settled: • Mandatory Minimums (SB 14): This Gov. Kelly Ayotte-priority bill that cleared the Senate set stiff mandatory prison terms for offenders selling large amounts of fentanyl and for anyone convicted of selling drugs that causes someone else's death. The House changed it to give a judge broad latitude to approve a lesser punishment if the offender meets certain criteria. The House also added to this bill a measure the Senate rejected to decriminalize possession of up to three-quarters of an ounce of psilocybin, otherwise known as magic mushrooms. This change would bring the mushrooms in line with how state law decriminalizes marijuana possession. • Risk Pools (SB 297): Secretary of State David Scanlan convinced the Senate to adopt a bill that gave his office greater power over groups that manage insurance coverage for units of government. The House instead rejected Scanlan's approach in favor of letting these risk pools decide if they would rather come under the regulation of the Insurance Department. • Tenancy Law Changes (HB 60): The House approved this bill that would permit landlords to give notice to any tenant 60 days notice that they would not be extending their lease and require tenants be evicted if they resisted this move. The Senate adopted this proposal but it would only kick in once the state had a 4% vacancy rate; currently this tight housing market has less than one-half of 1% vacancy in it. klandrigan@

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store