
Why Medicaid work requirements place extra burdens on low-income families
Republican lawmakers have been battling over a bill that includes massive tax and spending cuts. Much of their disagreement has been over provisions intended to reduce the cost of Medicaid.
The popular health insurance program, which is funded by both the federal and state governments, covers about 78.5 million low-income and disabled people—more than 1 in 5 Americans.
On May 22, 2025, the House of Representatives narrowly approved the tax, spending, and immigration bill. The legislation, which passed without any support from Democrats, is designed to reduce federal Medicaid spending by requiring anyone enrolled in the program who appears to be able to get a job to either satisfy work requirements or lose their coverage. It's still unclear, however, whether Senate Republicans would support that provision.
Although there are few precedents for such a mandate for Medicaid, other safety net programs have been enforcing similar rules for nearly three decades. I'm a political scientist who has extensively studied the work requirements of another safety net program: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF).
As I explain in my book, Living Off the Government? Race, Gender, and the Politics of Welfare, work requirements place extra burdens on low-income families but do little to lift them out of poverty.
Work requirements for TANF
TANF gives families with very low incomes some cash they can spend on housing, food, clothing, or whatever they need most. The Clinton administration launched it as a replacement for a similar program, Aid to Families With Dependent Children, in 1996. At the time, both political parties were eager to end a welfare system they believed was riddled with abuse. A big goal with TANF was ending the dependence of people getting cash benefits on the government by moving them from welfare to work.
Many people were removed from the welfare rolls, but not because work requirements led to economic prosperity. Instead, they had trouble navigating the bureaucratic demands.
TANF is administered by the states. They can set many rules of their own, but they must comply with an important federal requirement: Adult recipients have to work or engage in an authorized alternative activity for at least 30 hours per week. The number of weekly hours is only 20 if the recipient is caring for a child under the age of 6.
The dozen activities or so that can count toward this quota range from participating in job training programs to engaging in community service.
Some adults enrolled in TANF are exempt from work requirements, depending on their state's own policies. The most common exemptions are for people who are ill, have a disability, or are over age 60.
To qualify for TANF, families must have dependent children; in some states pregnant women also qualify. Income limits are set by the state and range from $307 a month for a family of three in Alabama to $2,935 a month for a family of three in Minnesota.
Adult TANF recipients face a federal five-year lifetime limit on benefits. States can adopt shorter time limits; Arizona's is 12 months.
An administrative burden
Complying with these work requirements generally means proving that you're working or making the case that you should be exempt from this mandate. This places what's known as an ' administrative burden ' on the people who get cash assistance. It often requires lots of documentation and time. If you have an unpredictable work schedule, inconsistent access to child care, or obligations to care for an older relative, this paperwork is hard to deal with.
What counts as work, how many hours must be completed, and who is exempt from these requirements often comes down to a caseworker's discretion. Social science research shows that this discretion is not equally applied and is often informed by stereotypes.
The number of people getting cash assistance has fallen sharply since TANF replaced Aid to Families With Dependent Children. In some states caseloads have dropped by more than 50% despite significant population growth.
Some of this decline happened because recipients got jobs that paid them too much to qualify. The Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan office that provides economic research to Congress, attributes, at least in part, an increase in employment among less-educated single mothers in the 1990s to work requirements.
Not everyone who stopped getting cash benefits through TANF wound up employed, however. Other recipients who did not meet requirements fell into deep poverty.
Regardless of why people leave the program, when fewer low-income Americans get TANF benefits, the government spends less money on cash assistance. Federal funding has remained flat at $16.5 billion since 1996. Taking inflation into account, the program receives half as much funding as when it was created. In addition, states have used the flexibility granted them to direct most of their TANF funds to priorities other than cash benefits, such as pre-K education.
Many Americans who get help paying for groceries through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program are also subject to work requirements. People the government calls ' able-bodied adults without dependents ' can only receive SNAP benefits for three months within a three-year period if they are not employed.
A failed experiment in Arkansas
Lawmakers in Congress and in statehouses have debated whether to add work requirements for Medicaid before. More than a dozen states have applied for waivers that would let them give it a try.
When Arkansas instituted Medicaid work requirements in 2018, during the first Trump administration, it was largely seen as a failure. Some 18,000 people lost their health care coverage, but employment rates did not increase.
After a court order stopped the policy in 2019, most people regained their coverage.
Georgia is currently the only state with Medicaid work requirements in effect, after implementing a waiver in July 2023. The program has experienced technical difficulties and has had trouble verifying work activities.
Other states, including Idaho, Indiana, and Kentucky, are already asking the federal government to let them enforce Medicaid work requirements.
What this may mean for Medicaid
The multitrillion-dollar bill the House passed by a vote of 215-214 would introduce Medicaid work requirements nationwide by late 2026 for childless adults ages 19 to 64, with some exemptions.
But most people covered by Medicaid in that age range are already working, and those who are not would likely be eligible for work requirement waivers. An analysis by KFF —a nonprofit that informs the public about health issues—shows that in 2023, 44% of Medicaid recipients were working full time and another 20% were working part time. In 2023, that was more than 16 million Americans.
About 20% of the American adults under 65 who are covered by Medicaid are not working due to illness or disability, or because of caregiving responsibilities, according to KFF. This includes both people caring for young children and those taking care of relatives with an illness or disability. In my own research, I read testimony from families seeking work exemptions because caregiving, including for children with disabilities, was a full-time job.
The rest of the adults under 65 with Medicaid coverage are not working because they are in school, are retired, cannot find work, or have some other reason. It's approximately 3.9 million Americans. Depending on what counts as 'work,' they may be meeting any requirements that could be added to the program.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that introducing Medicaid work requirements would save around $300 billion over a decade. Given past experience with work requirements, it is unlikely those savings would come from Americans finding jobs.
My research suggests it's more likely that the government would trim spending by taking away the health insurance of people eligible for Medicaid coverage who get tangled up in red tape.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CNN
12 minutes ago
- CNN
Live updates: Trump and Musk escalate public feud over agenda bill
Update: Date: Title: Elon Musk says Trump would have lost the election without him Content: Elon Musk said President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans would have lost the 2024 election without his support. 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate,' Musk said in a post on X. Musk was responding to Trump's statement in the the Oval Office today that he didn't need the tech billionaire to win the election. 'I would have won Pennsylvania regardless of Elon,' Trump said. 'I'm very disappointed with Elon.' Musk spent more than $290 million on the 2024 election, according to filings with the Federal Election Commission. The massive sum was rivaled by only a handful of competing mega donors. Update: Date: Title: Republican senators downplay Musk pressure campaign Content: Republicans senators are so far brushing off Elon Musk's call to his massive social media following to turn up the heat on Republican elected officials. 'I don't know,' GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina told CNN when asked if his office was receiving more pressure. 'Nobody is calling me.' GOP Sen. Bernie Moreno of Ohio also said that he has not received an uptick of constituent calls, telling CNN, 'No. I mean, honestly, as you know, most normal people don't watch the inconsistencies of how the sausage is made.' He said that usually those that do call have only seen 'misinformation' about the bill. 'There's a difference in mandatory spending and discretionary spending. So once we explain to them what we're actually doing, they buy into the whole process.' Asked about Musk's influence and platform, and how that could affect support for Trump's agenda, Moreno shot back: 'President Trump has the biggest platform on earth, and the platform that he's advocating for is to prevent that $4 trillion tax increase, fund our military, secure our border and strengthen Medicaid.' GOP Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama said 'nah' when asked if he felt like he was under more of a spotlight since Musk made a direct ask to his followers to call elected officials. 'The deal is not done. We got three more weeks. And it will change many times between now and three weeks from now,' Tuberville said. GOP Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, who has been publicly opposing the legislation, said: 'I'll say in my office, most of the calls, the vast majority, are voting no. But my guess is that's not coming from either my supporters or President Trump's supporters. I take that seriously. I look at it.' Update: Date: Title: Trump is the "key person" to end war in Ukraine, says German chancellor Content: German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said that President Donald Trump is the 'key person' to bring about an end to the war in Ukraine 'by putting pressure on Russia.' 'We both agree on this war and how terrible this war is going on, and we are both looking for ways to stop it very soon. And I told the president … he is the key person in the world who can really do that now by putting pressure on Russia,' Merz said. The German leader reiterated his country's steadfast commitment to Ukraine, adding that the horrific images from the battlefield are caused by 'Russian weapons against Ukraine.' 'Ukraine is only targeting military targets, not civilians, not energy infrastructure. So this is the difference, and that's the reason why we are trying to do more on Russia,' Merz added. Update: Date: Title: Elon Musk live-posts responses to Trump during bilateral meeting Content: In a stunning real-time response on X, Elon Musk responded to President Donald Trump's comments about him after the tech billionaire slammed his signature legislation. Musk, until recently a White House special employee who oversaw the administration's cost-cutting efforts, denied Trump's claim that the Tesla CEO knew the inner workings of the president's so-called 'big beautiful bill.' Musk also countered that the elimination of America's electric vehicle tax incentives has nothing to do with his opposition to the massive domestic policy bill. 'False, this bill was never shown to me even once and was passed in the dead of night so fast that almost no one in Congress could even read it!' Musk wrote. 'Whatever. Keep the EV/solar incentive cuts in the bill, even though no oil & gas subsidies are touched (very unfair!!), but ditch the MOUNTAIN of DISGUSTING PORK in the bill,' Musk said in a separate post. 'In the entire history of civilization, there has never been legislation that both big and beautiful. Everyone knows this! Either you get a big and ugly bill or a slim and beautiful bill. Slim and beautiful is the way.' Update: Date: Title: Trump sidesteps on Russia sanctions and compares Ukraine war to children's fight Content: President Donald Trump declined to offer specifics on sanctions on Russia during a meeting with German Chancellor Merz in the Oval Office. 'It's in my brain, the deadline, when I see the moment where it's not going to stop,' Trump said, and then looked on to Merz, saying, 'I'm sure you're going to do the same thing.' Trump then added, 'we'll be very, very, very tough,' when pressed about sanctions on Russia. 'And it could be on both countries to be honest. You know, it takes two to tango,' Trump said. Without directly addressing whether he would impose Russian sanctions, the president described a conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin, in which he said he gave an analogy likening the war to a playground fight. 'Sometimes you see two young children fighting like crazy. They hate each other, and they're fighting in a park, and you try and pull them apart. They don't want to be pulled, sometimes you're better off letting them fight for a while and then pulling them apart.' Trump continued: 'And I gave that analogy to Putin yesterday, I said, president, maybe you're going to have to keep fighting and suffering a lot, because both sides are suffering before you pull them apart, before they're able to be pulled apart.' Update: Date: Title: Trump says US will 'hopefully' have a deal with EU Content: President Donald Trump on Thursday struck a positive tone on a potential trade deal with the European Union during a meeting at the White House with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. 'We'll have a good trade deal,' Trump said. 'I guess that will be mostly determined by the European Union, but you're a very big part of that, so you'll be involved,' Trump said to Merz. Trump's major tariffs on the EU, including a threatened 50% tariff, have been delayed until July 9. Germany is still impacted by tariffs including Trump's 25% tariff on autos, which is in effect. The president said that 'hopefully' there will be a trade deal, or the United States will 'do the tariffs.' 'I mean, I'm okay with the tariffs, or we make a deal with the trade, and I guess that's what we're discussing,' he said. Trump's optimistic remarks came hours after the president separately spoke with Chinese President Xi Jinping on a phone call. Investors and economists have been on edge about the impact of the president's trade war. Wall Street in recent weeks has started to bet that Trump will back down on his most aggressive trade war threats. That's spawned the phrase TACO trade, which stands for Trump Always Chickens Out. US stocks were in the green during the meeting between Trump and Merz. The Dow rose 130 points, or 0.3%. The S&P 500 was also up 0.3% and the Nasdaq Composite was up 0.5%. Update: Date: Title: Trump says he's "very disappointed" in Musk, confirming their deteriorating relationship Content: President Donald Trump appeared to confirm the deterioration of his relationship with Elon Musk, saying he was 'very disappointed' in the tech billionaire, who exited his top advisory role at the White House and subsequently railed against the president's sweeping tax and spending package. 'Elon and I had a great relationship. I don't know if we will anymore,' Trump told reporters in the Oval Office less than one week after the two exchanged effusive praise on Musk's last day. Since then, Musk has strongly criticized what Trump calls his 'Big, Beautiful Bill' that has passed the House and faces an uncertain path forward in the Senate, calling the bill, which is a major Trump priority, a 'disgusting abomination.' Trump and Musk have not spoken since Musk lashed out at the legislation, a source familiar with the dynamic told CNN. 'He knew every aspect of this bill. He knew it better than almost anybody, and he never had a problem until right after he left,' Trump said. The president predicted that though Musk had not personally attacked him, he could soon. 'I'm sure that'll be next. But I'm very disappointed in Elon. I've helped Elon a lot,' Trump said. Kristen Holmes and Hadas Gold contributed to this post. Update: Date: Title: Trump says he and Xi 'straightened out complexity' of trade deal in phone call Content: President Donald Trump said Thursday that trade talks with China remain on track and that he and Chinese President Xi Jinping 'straightened out any complexity' after a long-awaited phone call earlier in the day. 'We had a very good talk, and we've straightened out any complexity. This is very complex stuff, and we straightened it out,' Trump said from the Oval Office after welcoming German Chancellor Friedrich Merz to the White House. 'I think we're in very good shape with China and the trade deal,' Trump said. 'We're going to just make sure that everybody understands what the deal is.' The president added that he expected to be traveling to China at some point. 'By the way, he invited me to China, and I invited him here. We both accepted. So I'll be going there with the first lady at a certain point, and he'll be coming here, hopefully, with the first lady of China.' Update: Date: Title: Trump explains why Egypt not part of travel ban after Egyptian national's antisemitic attack in Boulder Content: President Donald Trump said Thursday that Egypt was not included in the list of countries subject to a new travel ban because he believes the country '(has) things under control.' CNN previously reported that Trump made the final decision to sign the proclamation after the antisemitic attack in Boulder, Colorado. The suspect in the attack was an Egyptian national. Asked why Egypt was not one of the banned countries unveiled on Wednesday, Trump said, 'Egypt has been a country that we deal with very closely. They have things under control. The countries that we have don't have things under control.' The travel ban, Trump added, 'can't come soon enough. Frankly, we want to keep bad people out of our country. The Biden administration allowed some horrendous people, and we're getting them out one by one, we're not stopping until we get them out.' The countries included, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said Wednesday, 'include places that lack proper vetting, exhibit high visa overstay rates, or fail to share identity and threat information.' Update: Date: Title: Trump says he thinks Harvard is 'starting to behave' Content: President Donald Trump said Thursday he thinks Harvard is 'starting to behave,' suggesting the university would be handing over a list of international students attending the school. 'Harvard didn't want to give us that list. They're going to be giving us the list now. I think they're starting to behave, actually, if you want to know the truth,' he told reporters in the Oval Office while meeting with German leader Friedrich Merz. On Wednesday, Trump signed a proclamation suspending international visas for new students at Harvard University. The proclamation temporarily blocks the entry of nearly all new international Harvard students under visas most use to study at US universities or participate in academic exchange programs. Trump on Thursday was asked if he would allow Chinese students into US universities after speaking with Chinese leader Xi Jinping earlier in the day. 'Chinese students are coming. No problem. It's an honor to have them, frankly. We want to have foreign students but we want them to be checked, you know. In the case of Harvard and Columbia and others – all we want to do is see their list. There's no problem with that,' the president said. Update: Date: Title: NOW: Trump greets German chancellor at White House Content: President Donald Trump is meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz at the White House. It's the first time the two are meeting in-person and comes amid a series of high-stakes International issues. Update: Date: Title: Lawmakers respond to Trump administration's travel ban Content: Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley and Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin, leaders on the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee, shared contrasting perspectives on the travel ban that the Trump administration imposed on 12 countries last night. Grassley, the GOP chair of the committee, said the president was within his rights to impose the ban, referencing national security priorities and 'some terrorist attacks we've had in the United States.' Grassley said he is 'very comfortable' with Trump's proclamation, 'because the president's number-one responsibility is the national security of the United States. And I don't know what the basis was for him making that decision, but I assume it's come because of some terrorist attacks we've had in the United States.' Trump made the final call on signing the proclamation after the antisemitic attack in Boulder, Colorado, according to a White House official. He was considering it beforehand, but Sunday's assault put it into motion faster. Grassley continued, saying 'not only that, but it's a foreign policy issue, and you know how the Constitution gives the president of the United States wide sway in foreign policy.' Durbin, meanwhile, criticized the move, saying, 'I don't understand it.' 'The president said this situation, terrible crime in Boulder, was the reason for this. The individual in Boulder was from Egypt,' the Illinois Democrat said. 'The president did not include Egypt on his list of nations of people we don't want in the United States. I can't follow his thinking on this at all.' Update: Date: Title: Trump proclaims Xi call had "very positive conclusion" on trade issues Content: President Donald Trump concluded a long-awaited 90-minute telephone call with President Xi Jinping of China, saying he was encouraged that ongoing trade tensions could soon be resolved. Calling the conversation 'very good,' Trump said follow-up talks would occur 'soon' between the countries' economic teams, and that Xi invited him to visit China. 'During the conversation, President Xi graciously invited the First Lady and me to visit China, and I reciprocated. As Presidents of two Great Nations, this is something that we both look forward to doing,' Trump wrote. Trump said the call focused almost entirely on trade, without touching on other geopolitical issues like an Iran nuclear deal or the Russia-Ukraine war. The call 'resulted in a very positive conclusion for both Countries,' Trump wrote on Truth Social. He singled out the issue of rare earth minerals — which China had placed restrictions on — as an area where he made progress with his counterpart. 'There should no longer be any questions respecting the complexity of Rare Earth products,' Trump wrote. Update: Date: Title: Democratic lawmakers criticize Trump's travel ban as discriminatory Content: Democratic lawmakers slammed President Donald Trump's proclamation to ban travel from several countries to the US. Here's what they've said: Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar, the first Somali-American in Congress, blasted Trump's policy, comparing it to the president's first term, when he barred travelers from seven majority-Muslim nations from coming to the US. 'This discriminatory policy is beyond shameful. Just like his first Muslim Ban, this latest announcement flies in the face of basic morality and goes directly against our values. This racist policy will not make us safe, it will separate families and endanger lives. We cannot let it stand,' Omar said in a post on X. California Sen. Adam Schiff posted on X: 'This is Trump's reckless first term travel ban all over again. Just like before, Trump's expanded ban on travelers from around the world will not improve our national security and will only further isolate the U.S. from the rest of world. Bigotry is not a national security strategy.' Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington pointed to economic harm due to the ban and suggested it would lead to a dangerous precedent. 'Further, banning people fleeing dangerous countries like Afghanistan — a country where many people are in danger due to their work assisting the U.S. military — the Congo, Haiti, and Sudan will only further destabilize global security,' Jayapal said in a statement posted on her social media. Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey said Trump's travel ban won't make America safer, saying in a post on X: 'We cannot continue to allow the Trump administration to write bigotry and hatred into U.S. immigration policy.' Update: Date: Title: Trump and Xi speak in long-awaited trade call, source says Content: President Donald Trump held a phone call with China's Xi Jinping, a person familiar with the matter said, as the two leaders tussle over trade policy. The White House did not immediately confirm the call, which was also reported by Chinese state media. Remember: Tensions have been rising between the two sides in the weeks after they agreed to a 90-day trade truce last month, which hit pause on their tit-for-tat escalation of tariffs. Trump last week accused China of 'violating' the agreement — a charge Beijing has denied, while it accused the US of taking steps to 'seriously undermine' that consensus. US officials had signaled in recent days that a call between the two leaders could help jump-start progress in expected upcoming trade talks, which had appeared to stall following the initial truce reached in Geneva. Update: Date: Title: Trump issues travel ban on 12 countries Content: President Donald Trump signed a proclamation yesterday evening to ban travel from several countries to the US, citing security risks. The ban will fully restrict entry of nationals from the following 12 countries: People from these seven countries will have partial restriction: The proclamation includes exceptions for lawful permanent residents, existing visa holders, certain visa categories and individuals whose entry serves US national interests. The president made the final call on signing the proclamation after the antisemitic attack in Boulder, Colorado, according to a White House official. He was considering it beforehand, but Sunday's assault put it into motion faster. Trump said in a video posted yesterday that new countries could be added to the travel ban as 'threats emerge around the world.' Update: Date: Title: Republicans downplay impact of Musk blasting Trump's signature legislation Content: Elon Musk lashed out yesterday at President Donald Trump's agenda bill, calling it a 'disgusting abomination.' Both GOP leaders and White House officials are downplaying the actual impact of the tech billionaire's outburst, even as some vent frustration with Musk behind the scenes. White House officials, while annoyed by the matter, said they ultimately did not believe the comments would impact how senators vote on Trump's prized bill. Two administration officials even went as far as suggesting Musk's opposition could actually help Trump's measure, given how toxic the Tesla CEO has become over the course of his time in Trump's orbit. House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune both evinced no worry whatsoever that it would change Republicans' minds or sink the massive border, tax and spending cuts package. While several GOP senators had been expressing doubts about the bill for weeks, none cited new concerns over Musk's comments. Republican leaders remain bullish that they can deliver the legislation to Trump's desk by July 4 — an ambitious timeline. Watch more from CNN's Kaitlan Collins: Elon Musk lashed out at President Donald Trump's agenda bill — which the president is pressuring GOP senators to support — calling it a 'disgusting abomination.' CNN's Kaitlan Collins reports. #cnn #news Update: Date: Title: Speaker Johnson says he will put DOGE spending cuts on House floor next week Content: Speaker Mike Johnson said yesterday that he will put the White House's spending cuts request on the House floor next week. 'Next week, we will put the rescissions bill on the floor of the House and encourage all our Members to support this commonsense measure,' Johnson said in a joint statement with House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, House Majority Whip Tom Emmer and House Republican Chair Lisa McClain. The White House earlier this week sent the $9.4 billion spending cuts request — known as 'rescissions' — to Congress as it seeks to formalize the Department of Government Efficiency's slashes to federal funding. If the package comes to a vote, it can clear both the House and the Senate with a simple majority, meaning Republicans can advance it without Democratic support. Johnson said Monday that he expects there may be 'multiple' such packages coming to the hill in the next few months. 'It's a big priority for me,' Johnson said. Update: Date: Title: Senate leader sets ambitious timeline for vote on Trump's domestic policy bill Content: Senate Majority Leader John Thune is setting an ambitious timeline for a vote on President Donald Trump's domestic policy bill, with the goal of sending it to Trump's desk by July 4 after senators make changes to the House bill. 'I think we're on track — I hope, at least — to be able to produce something that we can pass through the Senate, send back to the House, have them pass and put on the President's desk by the Fourth of July,' Thune told CNN. He added his chamber would amend the House bill, but said 'it will have to be tracked fairly closely, obviously, with the House bill,' citing House Republicans' 'fragile majority' and how they had to strike a 'delicate balance' in the House GOP conference to adopt the package last month. However, Thune did acknowledge that 'there are some things that senators want added to the bill, or things that we would do slightly differently,' than the House. Pressed on whether he would consider overruling the parliamentarian if she objects to anything in the package, which must abide by strict budget rules, Thune insisted that 'we're not going there.' Thune also indicated that the Senate could move on sanctions against Russia before July 4, but noted that they are working with the Trump administration on timing so as not to disrupt negotiations. The resolution, led by Sens. Lindsey Graham and Richard Blumenthal, currently has over 80 co-sponsors in the Senate.
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
GOP tax and spending bill dings states that offer health care to some immigrants here legally
Demonstrators gather for a protest organized by the Minnesota Immigrant Rights Action Committee calling for the continuation of MinnesotaCare for undocumented adults outside of the Governor's Reception Room at the Minnesota State Capitol Tuesday, May 27, 2025. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer) The Republican budget bill the U.S. House approved last month includes a surprise for the 40 states that have expanded Medicaid: penalties for providing health care to some immigrants who are here legally. Along with punishing the 14 states that use their own funds to cover immigrants who are here illegally, analysts say last-minute changes to the bill would make it all but impossible for states to continue helping some immigrants who are in the country legally, on humanitarian parole. Under the bill, the federal government would slash funding to states that have expanded Medicaid and provide coverage to immigrants who are on humanitarian parole — immigrants who have received permission to temporarily enter the United States due to an emergency or urgent humanitarian reason. The federal government pays 90% of the cost of covering adults without children who are eligible under Medicaid expansion, but the bill would cut that to 80% for those states, doubling the state portion from 10% to 20%. That's the same penalty the bill proposes for states that use their own money to help immigrants who are here illegally. Ironically, states such as Florida that have extended Medicaid coverage to immigrants who are here on humanitarian parole but have not expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act would not be harmed by the bill, said Leonardo Cuello, a Medicaid law and policy expert and research professor at the Center for Children and Families at Georgetown University's McCourt School of Public Policy. It is 'wildly nonsensical and unfair' to penalize expansion states for covering a population that some non-expansion states, such as Florida, also cover, Cuello said. 'It would appear that the purpose is more to punish expansion states than address any genuine concern with immigrant coverage.' Republican tax bill could slash billions for Oregon Health Plan, state officials say West Virginia is one of the states where lawmakers are nervously watching U.S. Senate discussions on the proposed penalty. Republican state Rep. Matt Rohrbach, a deputy House speaker, said West Virginia legislators tabled a proposal that would have ended Medicaid expansion if the federal government reduced its share of the funding, because the state's congressional representatives assured them it wasn't going to happen. Now the future is murkier. Cuello called the proposed penalty 'basically a gun to the head of the states.' 'Congress is framing it as a choice, but the state is being coerced and really has no choice,' he said. There are about 1.3 million people in the United States on humanitarian parole, from Afghanistan, Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, Ukraine and Venezuela as well as some Central American children who have rejoined family here. The Trump administration is trying to end parole from some of those countries. A Supreme Court decision May 30 allows the administration to end humanitarian parole for about 500,000 people from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela. Not many of those parolees qualify for Medicaid, which requires a waiting period or special status, but the 40 states with expanded Medicaid could be penalized if immigrants qualify for the program, said Tanya Broder, senior counsel for health and economic justice policy at the National Immigration Law Center. It would appear that the purpose is more to punish expansion states than address any genuine concern with immigrant coverage. – Leonardo Cuello, Georgetown University research professor Meanwhile, an increasing number of states and the District of Columbia already are considering scaling back Medicaid coverage for immigrants because of the costs. The federal budget bill, named the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, is now being considered by the Senate, where changes are likely. The fact that so many states could be affected by the last-minute change could mean more scrutiny in that chamber, said Andrea Kovach, senior attorney for health care justice at the Shriver Center on Poverty Law in Chicago. By her count, at least 38 states and the District of Columbia would be affected by the new restrictions, since they accepted some options now offered by Medicaid to cover at least some humanitarian parolees without a five-year waiting period. 'They're all going to be penalized because they added in parolees,' Kovach said. 'So that's 38 times two senators who are going to be very interested in this provision to make sure their state doesn't get their reimbursement knocked down.' The change to exclude people with humanitarian parole was included in a May 21 amendment by U.S. Rep. Jodey Arrington, a Texas Republican who chairs the House budget committee. Arrington's office did not reply to a request for comment, though he has stressed the importance of withholding Medicaid from immigrants who are here illegally. '[Democrats] want to protect health care and welfare at any cost for illegal immigrants at the expense of hardworking taxpayers,' Arrington said in a May 22 floor speech urging passage of the bill. 'But by the results of this last election, it's abundantly clear: The people see through this too and they have totally rejected the Democrats' radical agenda.' Some states already are considering cutting Medicaid coverage for immigrants, though Democratic lawmakers and advocates are pushing back. Washington, D.C., Democratic Mayor Muriel Bowser has proposed phasing out a program that provides Medicaid coverage to adults regardless of their immigration status, a move she says would save the District of Columbia $457 million. Minnesota advocates protested a state budget deal reached last month with Democratic Gov. Tim Walz to phase out health care coverage for adults who are here illegally, a condition Republican lawmakers insisted on to avoid a shutdown. Similarly, Illinois advocates are protesting new state rules that will end a program that has provided Medicaid coverage to immigrants aged 42-64 regardless of their legal status. The program cost $1.6 billion over three years, according to a state audit. The state will continue a separate program that provides coverage for older adults. 'Our position is that decision-makers in Illinois shouldn't be doing Trump's work for him,' said Kovach, of the Shriver Center on Poverty Law. 'Let's preserve health coverage for immigrants and stand up for Illinois immigrant residents who have been paying taxes into this state for years and need this coverage.' Illinois state Sen. Graciela Guzmán, a Democrat whose parents are refugees from El Salvador, said many of her constituents in Chicago may be forced to cancel chemotherapy or lifesaving surgery because of the changes. 'It was a state budget, but I think the federal reconciliation bill really set the tone for it,' Guzmán said. 'In a tough fiscal environment, it was really hard to set up a defense for this program.' Oregon Democratic Gov. Tina Kotek is among the governors holding firm, saying that letting immigrants stay uninsured imposes costs on local hospitals and ends up raising prices for everyone. 'The costs will go somewhere. When everyone is insured it is much more helpful to keep costs down and reasonable for everyone. That's why we've taken this approach to give care to everyone,' Kotek said at a news conference last month. Medicaid does pay for emergency care for low-income patients, regardless of their immigration status, and that would not change under the federal budget bill. Franny White, a spokesperson for the Oregon Health Authority, said her state's Medicaid program covers about 105,000 immigrants, some of whom are here illegally. She said the policy, established by a 2021 state law, can save money in the long run. 'Uninsured people are less likely to receive preventive care due to cost and often wait until a condition worsens to the point that it requires more advanced, expensive care at an emergency department or hospital,' she said. California was among the first states, along with Oregon, to offer health insurance to immigrants of all ages regardless of their legal status. But it now is considering cutting back, looking to save $5 billion as it seeks to close a $12 billion budget deficit. In May, Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed freezing enrollment of immigrant adults who are here illegally, and charging them premiums to save money. 'It's possible that other states will decide to cut back these services because of budgetary concerns,' said Drishti Pillai, director of immigrant health policy at KFF, a health policy research organization. If the federal budget bill passes with the immigrant health care provision intact, states would have more than two years to adjust, since the changes would not take effect until October 2027. 'We have time to really understand what the landscape looks like and really create a legal argument to make sure folks are able to maintain their health care coverage,' said Enddy Almonord, director for Healthy Illinois, an advocacy group supporting universal health care coverage. Stateline, like the Capital Chronicle, is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Thune plows ahead to pass Trump's megabill as Musk continues to bash it
Senate Republican Leader John Thune reiterated that "failure is not an option" as he works to get GOP holdouts on the megabill advancing President Donald Trump's legislative agenda in line -- especially amid Elon Musk's efforts to tank the bill. "This is a team effort, and everybody is going to be rowing in the same direction to get this across the finish line. Failure is not an option, and we intend to deliver, along with the president for the American people on the things that he committed to do and that we committed to do in terms of the agenda," Thune told reporters after he left a meeting with Trump at the White House on Thursday. As things currently stand, Thune can afford to lose only three of his GOP members to pass the package, and right now, he has more members than that expressing serious doubts about the bill. MORE: Trump tries to shore up support for megabill among Senate GOP at White House meeting The House-passed legislation extends the Trump 2017 tax cuts, boosts spending for the military and border security -- while making some cuts to Medicaid, SNAP and other assistance programs. It could also add $3 trillion to the deficit over the next decade, according to an analysis out Wednesday from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. As the Senate weighs possible changes to the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap as part of the tax portion of the bill, House Republicans from blue states are already threatening to derail the bill's prospects. "Let's be clear — no SALT, no deal," New York Republican Mike Lawler said Wednesday in a post on X. New York Rep. Nick LaLota is on the same page, posting on X: "No SALT. No Deal. For Real." The House-passed bill raises the deduction limit of state and local taxes from federal income tax filing from $10,000 to $40,000 for joint filers making less than $500,000 per year. The cap increases then by 1% every year thereafter. MORE: What will Trump's megabill do to programs like Medicare and SNAP? Thune signaled changes could be coming to the SALT deal that was struck in the House, but the details are still unclear. "It would be very, very hard to get the Senate to vote for what the House did," Thune told reporters. "We've just got some people that feel really strongly on this." Speaker Mike Johnson said he spoke to the SALT caucus on the floor during House votes Wednesday and plans to "communicate" their red line with Senate leaders. The SALT deal is "a very delicate thing and we have to maintain the equilibrium point that we reached in the House, and it took us almost a year… so I don't think we can toss that," Johnson said. Not helping Thune's endeavor to sway the defectors are frequent posts from Musk targeting the bill -- and on Thursday targeting the president. Musk on Thursday quoted a 2013 post from Trump criticizing Republicans for extending the debt ceiling, with Musk writing, "Wise words." Earlier, Musk slammed the bill, calling it a "disgusting abomination" and later urged all members of Congress to "kill the bill." Trump touted the bill from the White House on Thursday -- brushing off the scathing criticism from Musk. "I'm very disappointed because Elon knew the inner-workings of this bill better than almost anybody sitting here better than you people. He knew everything about it. He had no problem with it. All of a sudden he had a problem," Trump said. MORE: 'KILL the BILL': Elon Musk continues to blast Trump's bill in barrage of social media posts Johnson said he plans to speak directly to Musk on Thursday, a day after the speaker said the billionaire was "flat wrong" in his criticism of the bill. Johnson said Musk "seems pretty dug in right now. and I can't quite understand the motivation behind it." "But I would tell you that what we're delivering in this bill is not only historic tax cuts, but historic savings as well. He seems to miss that," Johnson added. Thune said Wednesday that although he can't speak to Musk's motivations for his opposition, he will continue to push for the bill's success in the Senate. Musk's public bashing of the bill came up in senators' meeting with Trump on Thursday, said Republican Sen. Roger Marshall, describing it as a "laughing conversation for 30 seconds." "It was very much in jest and laughing, and I think he said something positive about Elon appreciating what he did for the country," Marshall said. ABC News' Will Steakin, Mary Bruce, Molly Nagle and Kelsey Walsh contributed to this report.