
Medicaid enrollees fear losing health coverage if Congress enacts work requirements
It took Crystal Strickland years to qualify for Medicaid, which she needs for a heart condition.
Strickland, who's unable to work due to her condition, chafed when she learned that the U.S. House has passed a bill that would impose a work requirement for many able-bodied people to get health insurance coverage through the low-cost, government-run plan for lower-income people.
'What sense does that make?' she asked. 'What about the people who can't work but can't afford a doctor?'
The measure is part of the version of President Donald Trump's
'Big Beautiful' bill
that cleared the House last month and is now up for consideration in the Senate. Trump is seeking to have it passed by July 4.
The bill as it stands would cut taxes and government spending — and also upend portions of the nation's
social safety net
.
For proponents, the ideas behind the work requirement are simple: Crack down on fraud and stand on the principle that taxpayer-provided health coverage isn't for those who can work but aren't. The measure includes exceptions for those who are under 19 or over 64, those with disabilities, pregnant women, main caregivers for young children, people recently released from prisons or jails — or during certain emergencies. It would apply only to adults who receive Medicaid through expansions that 40 states chose to undertake as part of the 2010 health insurance overhaul.
Many details of how the changes would work would be developed later, leaving several unknowns and causing anxiety among recipients who worry that their illnesses might not be enough to exempt them.
Advocates and sick and disabled enrollees worry — based largely on their past experience — that even those who might be exempted from work requirements under the law could still lose benefits because of increased or hard-to-meet paperwork mandates.
Benefits can be difficult to navigate even without a work requirement
Strickland, a 44-year-old former server, cook and construction worker who lives in Fairmont, North Carolina, said she could not afford to go to a doctor for years because she wasn't able to work. She finally received a letter this month saying she would receive Medicaid coverage, she said.
'It's already kind of tough to get on Medicaid,' said Strickland, who has lived in a tent and times and subsisted on nonperishable food thrown out by stores. 'If they make it harder to get on, they're not going to be helping.'
Steve Furman is concerned that his 43-year-old son, who has autism, could lose coverage.
The bill the House adopted would require Medicaid enrollees to show that they work, volunteer or go to school at least 80 hours a month to continue to qualify.
A disability exception would likely apply to Furman's son, who previously worked in an eyeglasses plant in Illinois for 15 years despite behavioral issues that may have gotten him fired elsewhere.
Furman said government bureaucracies are already impossible for his son to navigate, even with help.
It took him a year to help get his son onto Arizona's Medicaid system when they moved to Scottsdale in 2022, and it took time to set up food benefits. But he and his wife, who are retired, say they don't have the means to support his son fully.
'Should I expect the government to take care of him?' he asked. 'I don't know, but I do expect them to have humanity.'
There's broad reliance on Medicaid for health coverage
About 71 million adults are enrolled in Medicaid now. And most of them — around 92% — are working, caregiving, attending school or disabled. Earlier estimates of the budget bill from the Congressional Budget Office found that about 5 million people stand to lose coverage.
A KFF tracking poll conducted in May found that the enrollees come from across the political spectrum. About one-fourth are Republicans; roughly one-third are Democrats.
The poll found that about 7 in 10 adults are worried that federal spending reductions on Medicaid will lead to more uninsured people and would strain health care providers in their area. About half said they were worried reductions would hurt the ability of them or their family to get and pay for health care.
Amaya Diana, an analyst at KFF, points to work requirements launched in Arkansas and Georgia as keeping people off Medicaid without increasing employment.
Amber Bellazaire, a policy analyst at the Michigan League for Public Policy, said the process to verify that Medicaid enrollees meet the work requirements could be a key reason people would be denied or lose eligibility.
'Massive coverage losses just due to an administrative burden rather than ineligibility is a significant concern,' she said.
One KFF poll respondent, Virginia Bell, a retiree in Starkville, Mississippi, said she's seen sick family members struggle to get onto Medicaid, including one who died recently without coverage.
She said she doesn't mind a work requirement for those who are able — but worries about how that would be sorted out. 'It's kind of hard to determine who needs it and who doesn't need it,' she said.
Some people don't if they might lose coverage with a work requirement
Lexy Mealing, 54 of Westbury, New York, who was first diagnosed with breast cancer in 2021 and underwent a double mastectomy and reconstruction surgeries, said she fears she may lose the medical benefits she has come to rely on, though people with 'serious or complex' medical conditions could be granted exceptions.
She now works about 15 hours a week in 'gig' jobs but isn't sure she can work more as she deals with the physical and mental toll of the cancer.
Mealing, who used to work as a medical receptionist in a pediatric neurosurgeon's office before her diagnosis and now volunteers for the American Cancer Society, went on Medicaid after going on short-term disability.
'I can't even imagine going through treatments right now and surgeries and the uncertainty of just not being able to work and not have health insurance,' she said.
Felix White, who has Type I diabetes, first qualified for Medicaid after losing his job as a computer programmer several years ago.
The Oreland, Pennsylvania, man has been looking for a job, but finds that at 61, it's hard to land one.
Medicaid, meanwhile, pays for a continuous glucose monitor and insulin and funded foot surgeries last year, including one that kept him in the hospital for 12 days.
'There's no way I could have afforded that,' he said. 'I would have lost my foot and probably died.'
___
Associated Press writer Susan Haigh in Hartford, Connecticut contributed to this article.

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


Axios
25 minutes ago
- Axios
"She's missing stuff": Norton's colleagues see signs of decline
Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) has long been a formidable presence in the halls of Congress despite her non-voting status. Now at 88 years old, some of her colleagues tell Axios that presence has diminished considerably. Why it matters: Lawmakers said Norton has been much less involved recently at critical moments for the District, as President Trump and his allies in Congress threaten overturning the city's laws and squeeze its budget. One House Democrat who knows Norton's work from the Oversight Committee told Axios that during efforts to pass D.C. statehood in 2020 and 2021, she "wasn't talking to many people." The lawmaker described a similar dynamic earlier this year when Congress passed a measure that unexpectedly forced D.C. to cut $1.1 billion from its budget. "There was a time when she lobbied her colleagues to explain D.C.'s positions," they said. "She doesn't do that anymore." The big picture: While she possesses a robust staff, Norton herself keeps public appearances to a minimum. On rare occasions Norton has talked to reporters this year, her staff twice walked back her answers. Last week Norton staffers hedged after she told reporters she planned to run for a 19th term next year. Mayor Muriel Bowser has ramped up her Hill lobbying in recent years on issues like statehood and revamping RFK Stadium. Norton's floor time dropped from 44 days between 2019 to 2020 to just 18 days from 2023 to 2024. She's spoken a handful of times so far this year. What she's saying: "Last Congress I successfully blocked nearly all of the 100+ federal legislative attacks on D.C," Norton told Axios in a statement, touting getting the statehood bill passed twice in the House. Norton said her office "was on the phone with Republican leadership within minutes" about the D.C. budget issue, adding she has "publicly highlighted this injustice nearly 70 times since then ... and I have no plans to stop until the bill is passed." "D.C. residents have embraced me as their 'Warrior on the Hill,' where I've been privileged to have a long and successful tenure defending D.C. residents." What we're hearing: "She's missing stuff," a senior House Democrat said of Norton's apparent decline, telling Axios that Democratic leadership's deliberations about her potential reelection bid are "delicate." A third House Democrat said their own observation of Norton from working with her on a committee is that she essentially goes through the motions and little else: "She shows up to committee, she reads the speech." "All of that is true," said a fourth House Democrat. "She reads what her staff puts in front of her. She can't say anything she's not reading. That's a staff-driven office now, just like you saw in the Senate with Feinstein," referencing the late California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein. The other side: Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.), the acting ranking member on the House Oversight Committee, said Norton has been "more visible than I've seen most members" as the panel has considered D.C.-related bills. "From my own observation, I think she's trying to work her tail off, to be honest with you," Lynch said of Norton. "I see a very productive member." State of play: Norton publicly maintains she is still considering a reelection bid as D.C. Council members publicly express concerns about her running. "Through thoughtful discussions with my friends, family, and closest advisors, I'm still considering my options for the next election cycle," she said in her statement on Monday. Between the lines: Many House Democrats declined to weigh in on whether Norton should run — largely because they haven't spoken with her. "I don't know that I'm ready to bury [her] yet," said D.C.-area Rep. Glenn Ivey (D-Md.). "We just haven't had conversations about it one way or the other — I haven't anyway." Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told Axios: "I haven't seen her in a little bit, so I haven't had a chance to hear what she has to say."


Axios
25 minutes ago
- Axios
The GOP's come to Jesus moment on Texas Senate race
A new private GOP poll is showing Republicans facing a growing problem in the Texas Senate race, the third such survey in just a month. Why it matters: Republicans haven't lost a statewide race in Texas in more than three decades, but party officials concede they may need to spend millions to keep the seat this year. "The problem is nobody with the necessary gravitas seems to be willing to state the obvious: this is shaping up to be a f***ing disaster," a senior GOP Senate aide told Axios. Zoom in: Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) trails state Attorney General Ken Paxton by 16 percentage points in a new survey conducted by veteran Republican pollster Chris Wilson. A copy was obtained by Axios. But Paxton trails a generic Democrat by three percentage points in a general election matchup. The establishment-aligned Cornyn performs far better than Paxton in a general election, leading a Democrat by seven percentage points. The survey results are similar to recent surveys conducted by the GOP-aligned Senate Leadership Fund super PAC and the American Opportunity Alliance, a network of influential Republican donors. Between the lines: Paxton was impeached by the state House of Representatives in 2023 on bribery and corruption charges but was later acquitted by the state Senate. "If the goal is to maintain a GOP Senate majority and maximize Trump's down-ballot coattails in Texas, Paxton's nomination is a strategic liability," Wilson, who has advised Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), said in a memo accompanying the poll. "If Paxton wins the primary, the GOP is on a path to hand Democrats their best Senate opportunity in a generation," Wilson added. Yes, but: Cornyn has more than $8 million in the bank between his campaign and super PAC accounts and has yet to begin unloading on Paxton, which Cornyn aides insist will tighten the primary contest. Cornyn has also assembled a seasoned team of operatives that includes senior Trump political advisers Chris LaCivita and Tony Fabrizio. The bottom line: "The Cornyn campaign remains confident that once Texas GOP primary voters fully understand Ken Paxton's record of mismanagement, self-dealing and ethical failures, we will win the primary," said Cornyn spokesperson Matt Mackowiak.


CNN
32 minutes ago
- CNN
Medicaid cuts, other details from Senate committee's tax bill text
The GOP-led Senate Finance Committee on Monday released its proposal for President Donald Trump's agenda bill that calls for enacting sweeping cuts to Medicaid and preventing a multi-trillion dollar tax hike on Americans. The committee would maintain many of the provisions contained in the legislation that the House narrowly approved last month, including making permanent essentially all the individual income tax cuts contained in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which are set to expire at year's end, and instituting work requirements in Medicaid for the first time. But the committee is calling for some notable changes to the package, including lowering the cap on state and local tax deductions, instituting deeper cuts to Medicaid, slowing the elimination of some clean energy tax credits and making permanent several business tax breaks and a beefed-up child tax credit. Senate committees are racing to release their versions of the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' in hopes of passing their package next week so the two chambers can work out a final deal and send it to Trump by July 4. In the legislative text unveiled Monday, the Senate Finance Committee would permanently extend the current $10,000 cap on state and local tax deductions, potentially blowing up a carefully constructed deal in the House to lift the cap on state and local deductions to $40,000 for married couples. However, the committee noted in a summary of its provisions that the cap is 'the subject of continuing negotiations.' The $10,000 cap, which was instituted by the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, was a major sticking point in the House negotiations. Speaker Mike Johnson worked out an agreement with GOP lawmakers from high-tax states to raise the cap to $40,000 for those making $500,000 or less. But Senate Republicans have expressed disdain for the deal because of its price tag and because it primarily benefits taxpayers from blue states. Rep. Mike Lawler, a New York Republican, issued a stern warning to Senate Republicans earlier on Monday: Any changes to pare back the deal, he said, would cause the bill to collapse in the House. 'After engaging in good faith negotiations, we were able to increase the cap on SALT from $10,000 to $40,000,' Lawler said in a statement. 'That is the deal, and I will not accept a penny less. If the Senate reduces the SALT number, I will vote NO, and the bill will fail in the House.' Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee are also calling for making permanent several tax breaks for businesses, including allowing companies to immediately deduct the cost of equipment and research and development in the year the expense was incurred. These are designed to enhance the economic growth potential of the package but would also increase the cost. The committee would also permanently beef up the child tax credit to $2,200, in contrast to the House, which would increase the credit to $2,500 from 2025 through 2028. And while the Senate committee would keep Trump's campaign promises to eliminate taxes on tips and overtime, it would place caps on that relief –- allowing tipped workers to deduct only up to $25,000 in tip income and limiting the deduction for overtime pay to $12,500 for a single worker. Those tax breaks would only be in place from 2025 through 2028, as in the House version. But the Senate measure would provide a more generous deduction for senior citizens than the House bill: $6,000 versus $4,000. The provision would be in effect from 2025 through 2028 in both versions of the bill. In a contentious move, the committee would cap most states' ability to levy provider taxes on certain health care providers – notably, hospitals – to 3.5% by 2031, down from the current 6% limit. However, that provision would only apply to the 40 states and the District of Columbia that have expanded Medicaid to low-income adults. States that have not expanded Medicaid, which are largely GOP-led states, would be restricted from increasing the rate of their current provider taxes, which would not have as sizable an impact. The issue of provider taxes has divided GOP lawmakers, with conservatives arguing that states use these taxes to get more federal Medicaid matching funds, while more moderate members worry that limiting such taxes could hurt hospitals, particularly those in rural areas. States use the revenue they raise from taxing providers to boost provider rates and fund health-related initiatives, among other uses. Every state except one levies at least one type of provider tax. Also, the Senate would require more parents to work, volunteer, go to school or participate in job training for at least 80 hours a month to maintain their Medicaid benefits. The committee would mandate that parents of children ages 15 and older would be subject to the work requirement, while the House version exempted parents of dependent children. The Senate's changes would likely result in even more people losing their Medicaid coverage than the House provisions, which would increase the number of uninsured Americans by 7.8 million in 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The Senate Finance Committee text would kill a consumer tax credit for electric vehicles and quickly phase out tax credits helping homeowners defray the cost of energy efficient appliances and rooftop solar, ending those by next year. The Senate text differs somewhat from the House bill on energy tax credits for businesses producing electricity. Like the House bill, it hits wind and solar producers particularly hard, phasing out clean energy tax credits for those projects starting next year, with the credit ending by 2028. However, companies generating electricity with zero-emission sources like nuclear, geothermal or hydropower can claim the credit for a longer period of time. The Senate text would also terminate a tax credit for companies that make clean hydrogen, something favored by the oil and gas industry. The Senate committee would raise the debt limit by $5 trillion, compared to $4 trillion in the House version, providing more time for Trump to enact his policies without needing to negotiate a deal with Democrats to address the cap. The US hit its roughly $36 trillion debt ceiling in January. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has urged Congress to address the cap before its August recess to allow the agency to continue paying the nation's bills in full and on time, preventing a default that would likely have catastrophic global economic consequences.