logo
Duckworth warns Medicaid cuts will impact 60,000 people in Peoria County

Duckworth warns Medicaid cuts will impact 60,000 people in Peoria County

Yahoo7 hours ago

PEORIA, Ill. (WMBD) — The Senate budget bill would kick 60,000 people in Peoria County off Medicaid, Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) said at a Thursday press conference with local health care advocates and Medicaid recipients about the consequences of Medicaid cuts.
The Senate's version of the budget bill, released Monday, includes even deeper cuts to Medicaid than the House bill. It imposes stiffer work requirements, while the House version provided some exemptions.
'We are, again, at a tipping point where the health and even the lives of millions of Americans are at risk because President Trump and his heartless Republican cronies. Make no mistake, there's no way to fund Trump's $4 trillion in tax cuts for the billionaire class without putting it on the backs of Americans who are already struggling to pay the bills,' said Duckworth.
In the state of Illinois, 3.4 million people depend on Medicaid, including nearly 60,000 people in Peoria County. One of those recipients is Dallas Anne Prentice from Chillicothe, a stay-at-home mom with rare genetic disabilities that prevent her from working. Her prescriptions would cost $2,000 without Medicaid. Right now, she pays $40 a month. She said losing her Medicaid benefits would be a death sentence.
'So the consequences are quite literally, I die. I require my medication and my regular health care to be able to simply function, to get out of bed in the morning. And if I lose my health care, my children lose their mother. I am telling you with all honesty, without Medicaid, I wouldn't be alive today. That's not an exaggeration,' she said.
The Senate budget bill also caps Medicaid reimbursements to states, which would then have to pick up the tab. In rural areas like Peoria County, Duckworth said Medicaid covers more than 50% of services.
'So, for states that like Illinois, for example, we were the first state in the country that extended post-natal care for a year. We would have to fund 100% of that, when that was more of a matching with the federal government. And so it's a way to push the costs onto the states, which the states can't fund without saying, oh, we're cutting post-natal care,' said Duckworth.
Tracy Warner is, executive director of Illinois Critical Access Hospital Network, which represents 60 small and rural hospitals across the state. She said three in four patients at these hospitals depend on Medicaid or Medicare.
'For these hospitals, Medicaid is not a side issue; it's a lifeline. When Medicaid funding is cut, the impact is immediate and painful. More than 40% of rural hospitals in Illinois are operating at a financial loss. These hospitals are already facing low reimbursement rates, workforce shortages, and rising costs,' she said.
Medicaid cuts will push these rural hospitals even further into financial distress, Warner said. Hospitals will be forced to make difficult decisions like cutting services and jobs, which will also impact people who are not on Medicaid.
'That ripple does not stop at hospital doors. When a rural hospital cuts services, local jobs are affected, small businesses lose customers, and patients are forced to travel even longer distances for basic care,' she said.
'So that compounding impact, especially on a rural communities, is very real and very significant to the extent that it will be absolutely devastating not only for health care and health care access, but our economies across the state and across the country as well,' added Duckworth.
U.S. Rep. Darin LaHood (R-Ill.) sent a statement to WMBD defending Medicaid cuts in response to Duckworth's presser.
'House Republicans are focused on strengthening and investing in Medicaid for those who need it most by ensuring the program continues to provide high-quality patient care for expectant mothers, children, people with disabilities, and the elderly. To protect Medicaid for future generations, we must establish a common-sense approach to address waste, fraud, and abuse. House Republicans have taken a scalpel approach by enacting work requirements for the 4.8 million able-bodied adults without dependents who are choosing not to work and removing 1.4 million illegal immigrants from the program. I remain committed to supporting rural and underserved communities and prioritizing care for our nation's most vulnerable populations.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Oil Futures Diverge on U.S. Holiday Price Lag, Contract Expiration
Oil Futures Diverge on U.S. Holiday Price Lag, Contract Expiration

Wall Street Journal

time15 minutes ago

  • Wall Street Journal

Oil Futures Diverge on U.S. Holiday Price Lag, Contract Expiration

Oil prices were mixed in European afternoon trade on Friday, with Brent crude down more than 2% to around $77 a barrel and West Texas Intermediate edging 0.7% higher to $74 a barrel. Brent futures fell after President Trump set a two-week deadline to decide whether the U.S. will strike Iran, easing fears of an imminent military intervention. The international oil benchmark had settled 2.8% higher on Thursday at $78.85, its highest close since January.

I tossed my expensive makeup to get rid of my acne. Here are the noncomedogenic products I use now
I tossed my expensive makeup to get rid of my acne. Here are the noncomedogenic products I use now

CNN

time15 minutes ago

  • CNN

I tossed my expensive makeup to get rid of my acne. Here are the noncomedogenic products I use now

Noncomedogenic makeup quick picks Skin tint: Make Beauty Diffusion Dew Radiant Skin Tint Highlighter: Haus Labs by Lady Gaga Bio-Radiant Gel-Powder Illuminating Highlighter Setting powder: RMS Beauty Un Powder Brow gel: Kimiko The Brow Sensei In my mid-twenties, I was hit with a wave of stubborn cystic acne that covered my face seemingly overnight. After trying countless products, the real shift came when I switched to Clearstem — a noncomedogenic (aka non-pore-clogging) skin care line designed to tackle breakouts and wrinkles. While my skin finally started to clear, I still couldn't shake some breakouts — until I realized my makeup products might be the culprit. It turns out even beauty products can clog pores! So, I did something dramatic and expensive: I cross-checked my makeup ingredients using Clearstem's Pore-Clogging Ingredients Checker, tossed everything I owned and started fresh. After lots of trial and error, I finally found the best noncomedogenic makeup, from Charlotte Tilbury to Rare Beauty and more. Merit Great Skin Instant Glow Serum There's a reason this serum has 'glow' in its name. Worn with makeup or by itself, it leaves my skin looking lit from within, thanks to ingredients like hyaluronic acid and niacinamide. Make Beauty Diffusion Dew Radiant Skin Tint This lightweight foundation features skin-mimicking pigments that blur, smooth and brighten. It's sheer yet buildable, making it perfect for a second-skin or full-coverage glam look. Rare Beauty Warm Wishes Effortless Cream Bronzer Stick You may have seen this bronzing stick all over TikTok, and I can confirm it's worth the hype! It glides on effortlessly and melts into my skin for the most natural, sun-kissed glow. Huda Beauty Easy Blur Primer My colleague, associate testing writer Carolina Gazal, also has acne-prone skin and said she's "extremely careful when it comes to [her] makeup choices." She swears by this silicone-free, noncomedogenic primer. "I love this jelly-like, antioxidant-rich formula that blurs pores instantly," she said. "It's also made with glycerin to control oil, making foundation last longer without that dreaded T-zone shine." Haus Labs by Lady Gaga Bio-Radiant Gel-Powder Illuminating Highlighter Leave it to Lady Gaga to create the best highlighter on the market. This pressed-powder formula is packed with glow-boosting ingredients that make my cheekbones truly shine. Priia Lip Butter Balm Summer Fridays, who? This under-$10, buildable vegan lip butter balm is infused with acne-safe botanicals and leaves my lips looking and feeling hydrated and plump. Charlotte Tilbury Airbrush Flawless Setting Spray Good news: Not all Charlotte Tilbury products include pore-clogging ingredients! That includes the brand's ultra-viral setting spray, which locks in makeup all day long. RMS Beauty Un Powder Formulated with silica, this nontoxic setting powder instantly absorbs oil and minimizes the appearance of pores. Best of all, it's never drying, so it's great for all skin types. Kimiko The Brow Sensei Not only does this clear gel style and keep my brows in place but it's made with growth- and hair-enhancing peptides. I swear, my brows have never looked fuller! Olio E Osso Tinted Balm Associate deals editor Elena Matarazzo said she stocks up on these sensitive skin-friendly multisticks for friends and family. They're made with natural oils and waxes but none that are flagged as pore cloggers. "The clear one is great for chapped hands, cheeks and other areas that need a bit of hydration, while the tinted version doubles as a lip balm and blush," she said. Know how pore cloggers work Your first step to putting your best face forward? Staying up to date on what might actually be clogging your pores in the first place. Danielle Gronich, co-founder and CEO of Clearstem, suggests 'thinking of pore cloggers as ingredients that create a sticky, occlusive film on your skin. This film traps dead skin cells, oil and bacteria inside your pores, leading to congestion, blackheads, whiteheads and, ultimately, pimples.' Look for the right products When sourcing the right noncomedogenic products for your skin, it helps to know which ingredients are worth prioritizing. 'We want ingredients that are both skin-loving and noncomedogenic,' Gronich said. 'Look for hyaluronic acid, niacinamide, zinc oxide, green tea extract and kaolin clay.' While sourcing the best noncomedogenic ingredients is a solid place to start, it's only part of the equation. Consider steering clear of what our experts deem pore-clogging ingredients as well. 'Some ingredients that may be considered pore clogging include cocoa butter, isopropyl myristate, coconut oil and ethylhexyl palmitate,' Dr. Marisa Garshick, a board-certified dermatologist at MDCS Dermatology, said. Learn more about your own skin What works for one person's skin might yield a breakout in another, so it helps to track patterns in your own skin or book a consultation with a skin specialist or dermatologist to gain tangible insights into what might fare best for you. 'Just because ingredients may be pore clogging, it doesn't mean everyone who uses them will necessarily experience breakouts,' Garshick said. The following FAQs have been answered by Dr. Marisa Garshick and Clearstem co-founder and CEO Danielle Gronich. What is noncomedogenic makeup? What is noncomedogenic makeup? 'Noncomedogenic makeup is formulated without the heavy, occlusive ingredients that are known to clog pores,' Gronich said. 'It allows your skin to 'breathe' and function properly, helping minimize the risk of breakouts. It's designed to be gentler and more compatible with acne-prone skin.' However, Gronich also said that just because 'noncomedogenic' is on the label, that doesn't guarantee that a product is truly acne-safe. 'The term isn't tightly regulated, so some products may still contain ingredients that can clog pores — especially for those with sensitive or acne-prone skin,' she said. 'Always check the full ingredient list for pore cloggers. What works for one person may trigger breakouts in another, so being your own skin detective is key!' How do I check for pore-clogging ingredients in makeup? How do I check for pore-clogging ingredients in makeup? 'I always tell people to check the ingredient list,' Gronich said. 'We created an online resource, Clearstem's Pore-Clogging Ingredients Checker, where you can input your products and see if they have pore cloggers.' In addition to checking new products you want to try, Garshick said to check for pore-clogging ingredients every time you repurchase a product too. 'Brands can change their formulations for a variety of reasons at any time, so it's always best to double-check,' she said. Besides impacting acne-prone skin, how else do pore-clogging ingredients negatively affect skin? Besides impacting acne-prone skin, how else do pore-clogging ingredients negatively affect skin? 'In some cases, pore-clogging ingredients may lead to milia formation, even in those who are not acne-prone,' Garshick said. 'Some ingredients may also be irritating on the skin, which should be considered for those with sensitive skin.' The dermatologist also said that pore-clogging ingredients may even create a barrier on the skin, which can make other products less effective since they won't penetrate as well. For this article, we consulted the following experts to gain their professional insights. Dr. Marisa Garshick, board-certified dermatologist at MDCS Dermatology in New York and New Jersey Danielle Gronich, co-founder and CEO of Clearstem Here at CNN Underscored, we make it our job to stay up to date on all the latest products, but we don't just find them; we also rigorously test products from hundreds of brands to make sure every product we recommend is worthy of your money. In addition to hands-on testing many of the products we feature, we also consult top experts to understand what qualities, benefits and possible downsides each item offers. We also seek out important considerations and advice from our experts to help give you the information you need to make smarter shopping decisions. For this article, our director of social, Stephanie Griffin, shared her favorite noncomedogenic makeup and tips for finding products that won't clog your pores.

Trump Administration Live Updates: Juneteenth Goes Uncelebrated by White House as President Grouses About Holidays
Trump Administration Live Updates: Juneteenth Goes Uncelebrated by White House as President Grouses About Holidays

New York Times

time18 minutes ago

  • New York Times

Trump Administration Live Updates: Juneteenth Goes Uncelebrated by White House as President Grouses About Holidays

A federal appeals court on Thursday cleared the way for President Trump to keep using the National Guard to respond to immigration protests in Los Angeles, declaring that a judge in San Francisco erred last week when he ordered Mr. Trump to return control of the troops to Gov. Gavin Newsom of California. In a unanimous, 38-page ruling, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the conditions in Los Angeles were sufficient for Mr. Trump to decide that he needed to take federal control of California's National Guard and deploy it to ensure that federal immigration laws would be enforced. A lower-court judge had concluded that the protests were not severe enough for Mr. Trump to use a rarely-triggered law to federalize the National Guard over Mr. Newsom's objections. But the panel, which included two appointees of Mr. Trump and one of former President Joseph R. Biden Jr., disagreed with the lower court. 'Affording appropriate deference to the president's determination, we conclude that he likely acted within his authority in federalizing the National Guard,' the court wrote, in an unsigned opinion on behalf of the entire panel. The ruling was not a surprise. During a 65-minute hearing on Tuesday, the panel's questions and statements had telegraphed that all three judges — Mark J. Bennett, Eric D. Miller and Jennifer Sung — were inclined to let Mr. Trump keep controlling the Guard for now, while litigation continues to play out over California's challenge to his move. Mr. Trump praised the decision, saying in a Truth Social post late Thursday that it supported his argument for using the National Guard 'all over the United States' if local law enforcement can't 'get the job done.' Mr. Newsom, in a response on Thursday, focused on how the appeals court had rejected the Trump administration's argument that a president's decision to federalize the National Guard could not be reviewed by a judge. 'The president is not a king and is not above the law,' Mr. Newsom said in a statement. 'We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump's authoritarian use of U.S. military soldiers against citizens.' The Trump administration had urged the appeals court to find that the judiciary could not review Mr. Trump's decision to take control of a state's National Guard under the statute he invoked, which sets conditions like if there is a rebellion against governmental authority that impedes the enforcement of federal law. The appeals court declined to go that far. Supreme Court precedent 'does not compel us to accept the federal government's position that the president could federalize the National Guard based on no evidence whatsoever, and that courts would be unable to review a decision that was obviously absurd or made in bad faith,' the appeals court wrote. But, the judges said, the violent actions of some protesters in Los Angeles had hindered immigration enforcement, and that was sufficient for the judiciary to defer to Mr. Trump's decision to invoke the call-up statute. The appeals court also rejected the state's contention that the call-up order was illegal because Pete Hegseth, the defense secretary, sent the directive to a general in charge of the National Guard, even though the statute says any such edict must go 'through' the governor. The court said the general was Governor Newsom's agent, and that was good enough. 'Even if there were a procedural violation, that would not justify the scope of relief provided by the district court's' order stripping Mr. Trump of control of the guard, the ruling added. The state could choose to ask the full appeals court to rehear the matter, or it could directly ask the Supreme Court to intervene. But the state might also just move on from the current part of the dispute, since the ruling on Thursday pertains to a short-lived temporary restraining order that will soon be obsolete anyway. Either way, litigation in the case is set to return on Friday to the San Francisco courtroom of a Federal District Court judge, Charles Breyer, for a hearing. He is weighing whether to issue a more durable preliminary injunction restricting what Mr. Trump can do with some 4,000 National Guard troops or 700 active-duty Marines his administration has also deployed into the city. Judge Breyer's temporary restraining order concerned only the National Guard and whether it was lawful for Mr. Trump to mobilize them under federal control. At the hearing on Friday, he is also set to address a state request to limit troops under federal control to guarding federal buildings, and to bar them from accompanying Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents on the workplace raids that sparked the protests. That request centers on a 19th-century law, the Posse Comitatus Act, that generally makes it illegal to use the military for domestic law enforcement. The Trump administration has argued that the troops are not themselves performing law enforcement tasks, but rather are protecting civilian agents who are trying to arrest undocumented migrants. Mr. Hegseth suggested that he might not obey a ruling from the lower court, telling senators on the Armed Services Committee on Wednesday that he doesn't 'believe district courts should be setting national security policy.' Conditions in Los Angeles have calmed significantly over the past week, and Mayor Karen Bass of Los Angeles announced on Tuesday that she was ending the downtown curfew, a week after it had first been imposed. She said local law enforcement efforts have been 'largely successful' at reimposing order. California officials have said from the beginning that local and state police could handle the protesters, and that Mr. Trump's decision to send in federal troops only inflamed matters. But speaking with reporters outside the White House on Wednesday, Mr. Trump said he felt empowered to send troops anywhere violent protests erupt. 'We did a great job. We quelled that thing,' the president said of the demonstrations in Los Angeles. 'And the fact that we are even there thinking about going in, they won't bother with it anymore. They'll go someplace else. But we'll be there, too. We'll be wherever they go.' Greg Jaffe contributed reporting.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store