logo
How healthcare cuts in the ‘big, beautiful bill' will affect Americans

How healthcare cuts in the ‘big, beautiful bill' will affect Americans

Mint07-07-2025
After the House narrowly passed President Trump's tax-and-spending-cuts bill, he signed it into law on Friday.
The passage of President Trump's 'one big, beautiful bill" has left some hospitals, doctors and patient-advocacy groups reeling. Millions of people will lose health-insurance coverage, and struggling hospitals across the country may have to close, lay off staff or shut down some services, they say. States will also face difficult budget choices as federal funds are reduced.
'The magnitude of these reductions—and the number of individuals who will lose health coverage—cannot be simply dismissed as waste, fraud, and abuse," Rick Pollack, president of the American Hospital Association, said after the House narrowly passed the bill. Trump signed the bill into law on Friday, Independence Day.
The act slashes over $1 trillion in healthcare spending over the next decade, mostly from Medicaid, the joint federal and state program that provides health insurance to poor Americans. It is the biggest cut to federal healthcare spending—and to Medicaid—in history.
The legislation's health provisions, including work requirements for Medicaid recipients, represent a fundamental shift in the federal government's approach to healthcare for its poorest citizens, both Republicans and Democrats have said.
'This is a much more conservative approach to healthcare," said David Mansdoerfer, a former health official in the first Trump administration. 'The big beautiful bill would represent a significant mindset change for federal safety-net programs."
There will be nearly 8.7 million fewer people covered by Medicaid over the next decade because of the bill, according to an analysis by Manatt Health, a consulting firm that advises states and healthcare providers on Medicaid policy.
Other provisions in the bill, including more-stringent requirements for people to enroll and retain health-insurance plans under the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, are projected to drive up the number of uninsured, healthcare experts said.
Many who study healthcare policy say that people who lose insurance, or people who live in rural areas where doctors and hospitals are closing up shop, often delay preventive care, sometimes costing the system more later.
Many of the Medicaid policy changes target the 40 states that expanded eligibility for Medicaid to low-income able-bodied adults. Those enrollees will now have to prove their incomes are below a certain threshold every six months to remain on Medicaid, instead of annually, as well as show that they have spent 80 hours a month working, volunteering or attending school.
People in the lowest 10% of income distribution in the U.S. stand to lose noncash government benefits such as Medicaid coverage and food stamps worth nearly $1,600 annually on average, according to an analysis of an earlier version of the bill by the Congressional Budget Office.
Hospitals say they are big losers under the new legislation. More uninsured people will mean more uncompensated healthcare costs, they say. And many hospitals now face reductions in some supplemental payments that most states have come to rely on to augment low Medicaid payment rates.
Over the next decade, Medicaid payments to hospitals will be reduced by nearly $665 billion, an 18.2% reduction, according to analysis by Manatt. Meanwhile, hospitals' uncompensated care costs are projected to increase by upward of $84 billion in 2034, according to an analysis of the bill by America's Essential Hospitals, which represents some 350 hospitals nationwide. That number takes into account lower Medicaid payments and Medicaid payment shortfalls, as well as costs from caring for the uninsured.
'It is a double-whammy. We're going to have many millions more uninsured individuals showing up needing care," said Beth Feldpush, the group's senior vice president of advocacy and policy. 'But at the same time, hospitals won't be able to backfill financial holes."
Medicaid payment rates are notoriously low compared with other types of insurance. States have increasingly boosted these rates in recent years through so-called state-directed payments, which can raise Medicaid payment rates to levels comparable with Medicare or even average commercial insurance rates.
The bill clamps down on these payments. States that have expanded their Medicaid programs under Obamacare to include more low-income adults would have state-directed payment rates capped at 100% of Medicare rates; states that haven't adopted expansion would be capped at 110% of Medicare rates. The change will reduce federal spending by $149.4 billion over a decade, according to a CBO analysis.
Hospitals in about 30 states will likely see reductions in the state-directed payments they receive once cuts go into effect, according to an analysis by KFF, a health-policy nonprofit.
State hospital associations said these payments are lifelines for hospitals, many of which operate at or near a loss. Even before the bill's passage, several hospitals across the country laid off employees, froze hiring and tightened spending, citing the impending cuts to Medicaid as a factor. Providence, one of the country's largest health systems, said last month that it had implemented a restructuring plan that would lead to 600 employees losing their jobs.
Other hospitals say they are bracing for the changes to come. Our Lady of the Angels Hospital, a safety-net hospital in Bogalusa, La., said it would have to consider closing its doors, and the University of Kentucky said it might have to pause construction on a new building dedicated to caring for cancer patients if state-directed payment cuts go into effect.
The cuts may also eat into the earnings of for-profit hospitals like HCA Healthcare and Tenet Healthcare that have enjoyed lucrative boosts to their bottom lines from state-directed payments.
The National Rural Health Association said it was worried that the bill's provisions would significantly hamper healthcare access in rural areas. Senate Republicans added a $50 billion relief fund to the bill at the last minute for rural hospitals, but Sen. Susan Collins (R., Maine), who voted against the bill, said it wouldn't be enough to offset the other changes.
For insurers, the biggest impact of the legislation is clear: fewer customers. Though Medicaid is a government program, most enrollees get their benefits through insurers that are paid with state and federal money.
'From a health insurer's perspective, that's a lot of business to lose," says Cynthia Cox, a vice president at KFF, a health-research nonprofit.
The industry impact will be heaviest among companies with a focus on Medicaid. Among the largest are Centene, which has nearly 13 million Medicaid enrollees, Elevance Health, UnitedHealth Group, Molina Healthcare and CVS Health's Aetna. 'Revenue and profits will be pressured," said Sarah James, an analyst with Cantor Fitzgerald.
A Wellcare location in New York City, part of Centene Corp., one of the largest Medicaid insurers.
The cutbacks to Medicaid will come on top of blows to another key insurance market—Obamacare marketplace plans. Federal subsidies that help people pay for Obamacare plans are set to shrink next year, and the new legislation doesn't fill the gap. Along with other Trump administration changes to the rules for Obamacare plans, the reduction in subsidies is projected to reduce the number of people with coverage by another 5.1 million if Congress doesn't extend them.
In Obamacare and Medicaid, the shrinking rolls are likely to create another headache for insurers. When people drop out of insurance markets, the healthier ones are often the first to go. That leaves a sicker, more costly pool of customers for insurers, which then seek to get paid more to cover those expenses. They demand higher premiums, either from state Medicaid agencies or from Obamacare customers.
Nationally, states will have roughly $1.3 trillion dollars less in federal and state funds to spend on Medicaid over the next decade, according to Manatt. Most of the reductions—93%—will be in states that have expanded Medicaid to cover able-bodied adults.
One of the biggest impacts will come from the bill's crackdown on so-called provider taxes, which states levy on hospitals and other healthcare providers to trigger federal matching funds. Most hospitals receive back more than they pay in taxes through higher payment rates via state-directed payments and other mechanisms.
Currently, the taxes are capped at 6% of healthcare providers' net patient revenue, but will be reduced to 3.5% in expansion states. In non-expansion states such as Florida and Texas, tax rates will be frozen in place up to the 6% maximum on the date the bill is signed into law.
Healthcare workers last month protested the Medicaid cuts proposed in the bill that President Trump signed Friday.
The taxes have been criticized as a gimmick that exploits federal taxpayers without requiring states to put any skin in the game. President Obama twice proposed clamping down on provider taxes, including in his 2013 budget, which would have reduced the maximum rate to 3.5%.
States use provider taxes to fund state-directed payments to hospitals and other providers. Some, such as North Carolina, have also designed the taxes to fund their Medicaid expansions.
On a percentage basis, red and purple expansion states will be hit hardest since many of them tend to rely heavily on provider taxes, says Avi Herring, a Manatt managing director. Montana faces a 21% reduction in state and federal funds; Arizona, Kentucky and Virginia are each looking at reductions of about 18%.
The largest blue states, which tend to have more generous Medicaid programs, face far bigger dollar cuts, though they are somewhat smaller proportionally. California is expected to see a 13% reduction. New York's spending will be reduced by nearly 9%.
Write to Dominique Mosbergen at dominique.mosbergen@wsj.com, Joseph Walker at joseph.walker@wsj.com, Liz Essley Whyte at liz.whyte@wsj.com and Josh Ulick at josh.ulick@wsj.com
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump meets European leaders, says Russia has agreed to security guarantees for Ukraine
Trump meets European leaders, says Russia has agreed to security guarantees for Ukraine

First Post

time3 minutes ago

  • First Post

Trump meets European leaders, says Russia has agreed to security guarantees for Ukraine

'In a very significant step, President Putin agreed that Russia would accept security guarantees for Ukraine and this is one of the key points that we need to consider and we're going to be considering that at the table, also who will do what essentially,' said Trump President Donald Trump, seated center, speaks during a meeting with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, seated from left, France's President Emmanuel Macron and Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz in the East Room of the White House, Monday, on Monday, in Washington. AP US President Donald Trump on Monday said his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin had at summit talks last week accepted that there would be security guarantees for Ukraine as part of any peace deal. 'In a very significant step, President Putin agreed that Russia would accept security guarantees for Ukraine and this is one of the key points that we need to consider and we're going to be considering that at the table, also who will do what essentially,' AFP quoted Trump as saying as he opened talks with European leaders and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the White House. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'I think the European nations are going to take a lot of the burden. We're going to help them and we're going to make it very secure,' he said. Trump called it a 'significant step,' signaling a shift in Moscow's position and offering new hope for a lasting settlement. He said discussions now center on who will do what regarding Ukraine's future security. The Russian leader's concession was confirmed by US envoy Steve Witkoff, who highlighted its game-changing potential — especially as it marked the first time Putin had indicated acceptance of Nato-like protections for Ukraine. Trump expressed optimism that the group of leaders meeting in Washington could reach an agreement strong enough to deter any future Russian aggression. 'We're going to help them,' said Trump. He acknowledged that the US would remain involved, though he also expects European nations to shoulder much of the responsibility in Ukraine's defence. On the matter of territorial discussions, Trump indicated that 'possible exchanges of territory' would be on the agenda — a point that remains contentious and worrisome for Kyiv, which opposes any unilateral ceding of land. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD This diplomatic development unfolds as Ukraine continues to face relentless Russian attacks on civilian areas, highlighting the urgency and complexity of achieving a sustainable peace agreement. Meanwhile, during the meeting, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, called for a ceasefire in Ukraine before a leaders' summit, contradicting President Trump's call to work for a peace deal with Russia instead. 'I can't imagine that the next meeting would take place without a ceasefire, so let's work on that and let's try to put pressure on Russia,' AFP quoted Merz as saying. During the discussions, French President Emmanuel Macron pitched a four-party meeting involving European leaders in response to US President Donald Trump's proposal to bring together the Ukrainian and Russian presidents for peace talks. 'I think as a follow-up we would need probably a quadrilateral meeting, because when we speak about security guarantees, we speak about the whole security of the European continent,' he said. European leaders — including those from the UK, Germany, France, Italy, Finland, the EU, and NATO — gathered in Washington to show unified support for Ukraine and to push for enforceable post-war security guarantees. Many of them have expressed concern that Trump may push Zelenskyy toward a ceasefire deal aligned with Moscow's interests, particularly after Trump's warm reception of Putin during their recent meeting in Alaska. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Zelenskyy has said any potential peace deal must be 'lasting' and not repeat past failures, such as Ukraine's forced concessions in Crimea and eastern Donbas or broken security guarantees. With inputs from agencies

Trilateral meeting to ‘best conversation': Trump-Zelensky hold talks at White House
Trilateral meeting to ‘best conversation': Trump-Zelensky hold talks at White House

Hindustan Times

time3 minutes ago

  • Hindustan Times

Trilateral meeting to ‘best conversation': Trump-Zelensky hold talks at White House

Trump-Zelensky talks news: As Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and US President Donald Trump returned to the White House on Monday, the former signalled his openness to a trilateral meeting with Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine. US President Donald Trump held a public and a private meeting with his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, in the Oval Office of the White House.(AP) Earlier on Sunday, the White House said that Trump is open to holding three-way talks with Putin and Zelensky in the US state of Alaska, a development that came amid the efforts to reach a truce agreement to end the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Follow Trump-Zelensky meeting LIVE updates Monday's meeting between Trump and Zelensky comes after the US President's summit with Putin in Alaska, which he described as a "very productive meeting". ALSO READ | Zelensky returns to the White House to meet Trump after horrific Oval Office spat | A recap Meanwhile, a group of European leaders, including German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, French President Emmanuel Macron, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Finnish President Alexander Stubb, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, were holding a meeting with Trump and Zelensky at the White House. Trump-Zelensky meet in White House | 6 Points Open to 'trilateral meeting': A day after US President Donald Trump's assent for a trilateral meeting with Zelensky and Putin, the Ukrainian President also expressed openness to such a meet. "We are ready for trilateral," he said. The intention behind the meeting would be to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine. Trump also said that it is "never the end of the road" after being asked if Ukraine would not get support from the US in case no deal is struck. He expressed hope and said "there is a good chance" of ending the war through these meetings. "I know the president, I know myself, and I believe Vladimir Putin wants to see it end," Trump said. ALSO READ | Putin dials PM Modi: India calls for peaceful resolution of Ukraine war as Trump meets Zelensky Zelensky's 'suit' catches the eye: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was spotted in formal attire for his meeting with Trump on Monday, taking the US President by surprise. "He's all dressed up today," Trump told reporters as he greeted Zelensky. One of the American reporters complimented the Ukrainian leader and said, "Love the suit". Another reporter who had hit out at Zelensky for not wearing a suit last time told the leader that he looked "fabulous in the suit". Trump jumped in and said, "I said the same thing", then he turned to Zelensky and added, "That's the one that attacked you last time". Zelensky responded by saying, "I remember that", sending a ripple of laughter across the room. From Ukraine's first lady to the US's first lady: Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky handed President Trump a letter from Ukraine's first lady and told him that it was for America's first lady, Melania Trump. "My wife, the first lady of Ukraine, she gave the letter. It's not to you but to your wife," Zelensky reportedly told Trump. Last week, Trump handed a letter from Melania to Russian President Vladimir Putin at their summit in Alaska. Melania had urged Putin to put an end to the war in Ukraine, saying "it is time". Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky handed President Trump a letter from Ukraine's first lady and told him that it was for America's first lady, Melania Trump. "My wife, the first lady of Ukraine, she gave the letter. It's not to you but to your wife," Zelensky reportedly told Trump. Last week, Trump handed a letter from Melania to Russian President Vladimir Putin at their summit in Alaska. Melania had urged Putin to put an end to the war in Ukraine, saying "it is time". Will Trump send US troops to Ukraine war?: On being asked whether the US President would rule out the deployment of US troops to the Ukrainian war zone, Donald Trump said, "We'll let you know that, maybe, later today," in reference to the meeting he held with the seven European leaders, including British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. "They'll all be involved. When it comes to security, there's going to be a lot of help," Trump added. On being asked whether the US President would rule out the deployment of US troops to the Ukrainian war zone, Donald Trump said, "We'll let you know that, maybe, later today," in reference to the meeting he held with the seven European leaders, including British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. "They'll all be involved. When it comes to security, there's going to be a lot of help," Trump added. Zelensky open to Ukraine elections, if 'safe': Volodymyr Zelensky said that he was open to holding an election in Ukraine if the war with Russia comes to an end and the situation becomes safe. "We need to work in parliament because during the war, you can't have elections," he said in the White House. Trump joked over the Ukrainian leader's response on elections and drew parallels with how a similar situation could allow him to stay in power in the US after his current term expired. 'So let me just say three and a half years from now — so you mean, if we happen to be in a war with somebody, no more elections, oh, I wonder what the fake news would say,' Trump said. Zelensky said that a "truce" would be needed to hold the elections safely. He added, 'We can do security. We need...a truce, yes, everywhere -- the battlefield, the sky and the sea, to make it possible for people to do democratic open legal elections.' ALSO READ | No going into NATO or Crimea hopes, Trump tells Zelensky ahead of meet Volodymyr Zelensky said that he was open to holding an election in Ukraine if the war with Russia comes to an end and the situation becomes safe. "We need to work in parliament because during the war, you can't have elections," he said in the White House. Trump joked over the Ukrainian leader's response on elections and drew parallels with how a similar situation could allow him to stay in power in the US after his current term expired. 'So let me just say three and a half years from now — so you mean, if we happen to be in a war with somebody, no more elections, oh, I wonder what the fake news would say,' Trump said. Zelensky said that a "truce" would be needed to hold the elections safely. He added, 'We can do security. We need...a truce, yes, everywhere -- the battlefield, the sky and the sea, to make it possible for people to do democratic open legal elections.' Trump-Zelensky after their meeting: Both leaders held a private meeting after making public statements at the White House. Later, at the meeting with the European leaders, Trump said he had a "very successful day so far", while Zelensky said "this has been the best conversation" with the US President so far. Trump also reinforced that he will try to work out a trilateral meeting between the US, Ukraine and Russia, noting that Moscow has agreed to accept security guarantees. Zelensky followed suit and affirmed, "All of us want to finish this war and stop Russia." (with inputs from agencies)

Is Zelensky's Leadership the Real Cause of Ukraine's War?
Is Zelensky's Leadership the Real Cause of Ukraine's War?

India Today

time3 minutes ago

  • India Today

Is Zelensky's Leadership the Real Cause of Ukraine's War?

Washington has once again become the crossroads of war and peace. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy arrived in the American capital, accompanied by Europe's most powerful leaders. Their message is one of unity, their goal clear: to prevent another humiliation like the one that unfolded in February, when Donald Trump openly challenged Ukraine's cause in the Oval Office. Yet this visit carries a darker question beneath the diplomacy and speeches: was this war avoidable? Did Ukraine, under Zelenskyy, take steps that made conflict inevitable?advertisement Trump Shifts: From Ceasefire to Permanent SettlementAfter his Alaska meeting with Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump has pivoted sharply. No longer advocating a ceasefire, he now speaks of a permanent settlement that would see Moscow annex the Donbas in full. Behind closed doors, according to officials, Trump has pressed Zelenskyy to consider Putin's demands-a proposition the Ukrainian leader has rejected. But the fact that the U.S. president is echoing Moscow's red lines cannot be ignored in Zelenskyy and his allies, the stakes are immediate. Donetsk and Luhansk, long contested and long fought over, are now openly being demanded as the price for peace. Europe stands behind Ukraine, but Washington's position has shifted dramatically, leaving Zelenskyy in a precarious NATO GambleThe question of responsibility extends deeper. For decades, Russia made it clear that NATO expansion into Ukraine would be unacceptable. Leaders from Boris Yeltsin to Vladimir Putin repeatedly warned that Ukrainian membership was a red line-a message neither subtle nor Zelenskyy, and Ukraine more broadly, continued to push for NATO membership, promising his people a future inside the alliance despite the absence of any formal guarantee. NATO leaders offered 'aspirations,' 'partnerships,' and 'eventual goals,' but no Article 5 security guarantee, no binding timetable, no treaty. Zelenskyy made this a central tenet of his presidency, signalling to Russia a direct Ukrainian voices are now asking whether Zelenskyy overplayed his hand. The war, they argue, is not merely Moscow's aggression but also Kyiv's miscalculation-a decision to promise more than his supposed allies were willing to deliver.A History of Humiliation and DistrustZelenskyy's political calculations have repeatedly collided with reality. In February 2025, his White House meeting ended in public humiliation, with Trump and Vice President JD Vance accusing him of dragging the United States toward 'World War Three.' Trump also torpedoed an energy deal Ukraine had been negotiating, leaving Zelenskyy politically weakened and deeply suspicious of has often shown that smaller nations are treated as bargaining chips in great-power politics. In 2014, a leaked phone call revealed U.S. officials dictating Ukraine's internal politics, dismissing European input with an infamous expletive. Russia exploited the episode to portray Ukraine as a puppet of the West. Today, Zelenskyy faces a similar dynamic: the struggle for agency in a game dominated by more powerful Shadow of Spheres of InfluenceUnderlying the summit is the enduring doctrine of spheres of influence. Putin has long demanded a buffer zone between Russia and NATO-a stance reminiscent of the Monroe Doctrine. Alarmingly for European leaders, Trump's rhetoric increasingly echoes Moscow's red lines, framing Ukraine's NATO aspirations as negotiable. The danger is clear: if Washington endorses a Russian sphere, Ukraine's sovereignty could be subordinated to Moscow's security priorities, and Europe's principle that small nations have the right to choose their alliances would be Credibility at StakeZelenskyy's European allies are not merely supporting Ukraine's survival; they are defending their own credibility. Years of speeches on the sanctity of borders and sovereignty are on the line. For leaders like Macron, Merz, and Starmer, being mere spectators while Trump and Putin discuss Ukraine's future would be politically and morally and ConsequencesAt the heart of this confrontation lies a difficult truth: Ukraine's leadership bears a degree of responsibility for the conflict. Zelenskyy's decision to promise NATO membership without guarantees provoked Moscow, setting the stage for the war that followed. While Russian aggression cannot be denied, Kyiv's actions-its promises, its strategic gambles, its miscalculations-played a central role in bringing catastrophe to its own Washington summit is thus not merely about weapons or aid. It is about agency, about the right of Ukraine to determine its own future without being forced into a corner by the great powers. And as Zelenskyy faces Trump and Putin, with Europe watching closely, the lesson is stark: leadership choices carry consequences-sometimes devastating ones.- Ends

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