New Spanish-language ad in GOP districts sounds alarm on Medicaid cuts
A new ad campaign seeks to alert Spanish-speaking voters in Republican-led swing districts on what is at risk for their health after Congress voted to advance spending plans including more than $800 billion in proposed cuts to Medicaid.
Protect Our Care, which lobbies for the preservation of the Affordable Care Act, launched the six-figure radio campaign on Tuesday. The ad, which was provided in advance exclusively to The Hill, features two women discussing the impact Medicaid cuts will have on their families.
'With everything we are facing every day, can you imagine if my kids' health care coverage got taken away?' a woman asks in the ad.
'If Republicans in Congress are able to pass their plan to cut Medicaid, more than half of our kids could lose their health care,' she continues.
The woman adds that she would be unable to afford her children's insurance the next time they got sick.
'Cuts to Medicaid also mean that our elders in long-term care could lose health care too,' a second woman points out.
The first woman responds, 'One out of three Hispanics rely on Medicaid, so cutting it would be a direct attack against us.'
More than 70 million Americans rely on Medicaid for health coverage, more than half of those are people of color, according to reporting from UnidosUS. More than 20 million Latinos and 13.3 million African Americans are on Medicaid, according to the report.
Latino Americans overwhelmingly support Medicaid, polling from Protect Our Care and Hart Research found, and would disapprove of cuts to Medicaid funding.
But the recent proposed budget cuts — including $880 billion to Medicaid over the next decade — have raised concerns about the racial disparities in health care coverage.
Advocates including Protect Our Care have argued the cuts will exacerbate these health inequities, including driving up medical debt in communities of color, worsening health outcomes and leaving families without access to critical care.
'The Republican effort to gut a program that one in three Latinos rely on for health care will have devastating impacts on Hispanic communities nationwide,' Leslie Dach, chair of Protect Our Care, said in a statement.
'These ads expose Republicans for turning their backs on their Latino constituents just to give tax cuts to billionaires and big companies.'
Some Republicans have also spoken out against the proposed cuts.
Last month, members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus sent Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) a letter expressing their own concerns about the cuts.
'While we fully support efforts to rein in wasteful spending and deliver on President Trump's agenda, it is imperative that we do not slash programs that support American communities across our nation, nor underfund critical programs necessary to secure the border and keep our communities safe,' the letter said.
The lawmakers added, 'Slashing Medicaid would have serious consequences, particularly in rural and predominantly Hispanic communities where hospitals and nursing homes are already struggling to keep their doors open.'
Protect Our Care's ad campaign is part of an ongoing 10-million-dollar 'Hands Off Medicaid' campaign, which also includes TV and digital ads. The organization also plans to launch a direct mail campaign in 10 Republican swing districts.
The new radio campaign will run in seven GOP-held districts, those of Reps. David Schweikert (Ariz.), David Valadao (Calif.), Young Kim (Calif.), Ken Calvert (Calif.), Andrew Garbarino (N.Y.), Rob Bresnahan (Penn.), and Dan Newhouse (Wash.).
'Latinos across the country are counting on Republicans to do the right thing and abandon these cuts to Medicaid,' said Dach.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
House to vote on repealing DC local laws on noncitizen voting, policing, immigration enforcement
The Brief House Republicans are voting on three bills that would override D.C. laws on noncitizen voting rights, limiting police powers, and restricting immigration enforcement cooperation. One bill, HR 884, repeals D.C.'s 2022 law allowing noncitizens to vote in local elections. HR 2056 would dismantle D.C.'s sanctuary city protections by mandating cooperation with federal immigration authorities. WASHINGTON - The House of Representatives are voting Tuesday on three Republican-backed bills that would override several local D.C. laws. The bills would roll back D.C. efforts expand voting rights for non-citizens, restrict police and force the District to work with immigration enforcement efforts on a federal level. D.C. passed the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act in 2022, granting noncitizens in D.C. the right to vote in local elections. That includes mayoral races, D.C. Council positions, attorney general, ANC members, attorney general and D.C. ballot measures. Noncitizens can also run for elected office in the D.C. government. HR 884 would repeal the act, removing voting powers from noncitizens. Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton released a statement, pushing back at Congress' power of local D.C. matters. "Last Congress, Republicans introduced 14 bills or amendments to prohibit noncitizens from voting in D.C. or to repeal, nullify or prohibit the carrying out of D.C.'s law that permits noncitizens to vote," said Norton. "Yet, Republicans refuse to make the only election law change D.C. residents have asked Congress to make, which is the right to hold elections for voting members of the House and Senate." The Protecting Our Nation's Capital Emergency Act, would dismantle parts of D.C.'s Comprehensive Policing and Justice Reform Amendment Act of 2022. HR 2096 would allow D.C. police officers to negotiate disciplinary matters through collective bargaining. It would also restore a statute of limitation for claims against the Metropolitan Police Department. "This bill was introduced three days after House Republicans passed a continuing resolution that cut D.C.'s local budget by one billion dollars. That act of fiscal sabotage, which did not save the federal government any money, has led to a freeze on overtime, hiring and pay raises, and furloughs or layoffs may be next," said Norton. "Nine weeks ago today, the Senate passed the D.C. Local Funds Act to reverse the cut. The D.C. Local Funds Act is just sitting in the House. Like President Trump and the National Fraternal Order of Police, I call on the House to pass immediately the D.C. Local Funds Act." READ MORE: Congress' spending bill error leaves DC scrambling to cut $400M from budget HR 2056 would strike down D.C. policies that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. It would prohibit DC officials from "sending, receiving, maintaining, or exchanging with any Federal, State, or local government entity information regarding the citizenship or immigration status (lawful or unlawful) of any individual." The bill would effectively dismantle D.C.'s sanctuary city policies. D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser made moves to quietly overturn a law that prevents local police from cooperating with ICE, including it in a provision of her 2026 budget proposal. Big picture view The D.C. Home Rule Act of 1973 allows the city to elect its own mayor and council. It's also allowed for D.C. to choose Advisory Neighborhood Commissioners to handle community concerns. Congress still maintains control over D.C., including the ability to review all local legislation and appoint the city's judges. D.C. has no voting member in Congress, though it has a nonvoting Delegate. In February, legislators from Utah and Tennessee introduced a bill to strip D.C. of its ability to govern itself. The bill is named after D.C.'s Mayor Muriel Bowser – the "Bringing Oversight to Washington and Safety to Every Resident (BOWSER) Act." The bill would eliminate D.C. Home Rule Act of 1973 and would place D.C. under the full control of Congress. The Source This story includes information from the US House of Representatives, Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, and previous FOX 5 DC reporting.
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Legislature tweaks paid family leave and sick time in minor concessions to businesses
Supporters of paid family and medical leave rally in front of the House Chamber on May 2, 2023. Photo by Andrew VonBank/Minnesota House Info. The narrowly divided Minnesota Legislature passed the smallest of changes to the state's paid family leave program and paid sick leave mandate, rejecting more significant reversals sought by Republicans and some moderate Democrats. House Speaker Lisa Demuth, R-Cold Spring, said failing to make larger changes to the two laws was one of her party's most significant disappointments of the session. 'Those are things that we really wanted to get done … We couldn't find bipartisan agreement,' Demuth said following a marathon one-day special session on Monday. Democrats were largely able to protect their progressive agenda from 2023 even while passing a smaller budget in the face of a gloomy economic forecast. The notable exception is repealing MinnesotaCare for undocumented adults at the end of the year, a key priority for Republicans. Employers and workers may never even notice the change passed to the paid family leave program, which reduces the maximum payroll tax from 1.2% to 1.1%. The program is slated to start next year with a payroll tax of .88%, with employers paying at least half of the cost, and may never rise to meet the cap, depending on demand. The program is slated to start on Jan. 1 with workers eligible to take up to 12 weeks of family leave and 12 weeks of medical leave — or 20 weeks total in a single year. To qualify, workers must have earned at least $3,700 in the past year, with benefits based on a workers' wages up to about $1,400 a week. The changes to the earned sick and safe time law may similarly go unnoticed by the vast majority of workers. The law, which took effect in 2024, will continue to require employers to provide one hour of paid sick leave for every 30 hours worked up to 48 hours a year — i.e., six paid sick days a year for full-time employees. Under the bill, an employer may require an employee to provide documentation — such as a doctor's note — that their earned sick or safe leave is covered after two days, down from three days in current law. The bill adds that a worker may voluntarily find a replacement for a missed shift, but the law will continue to bar employers from requiring workers to find a replacement. The bill also explicitly authorizes a practice that was already permitted but caused some confusion, allowing employers to advance earned sick and safe time to an employee based on the number of hours an employee is expected to work, providing additional time if that estimate falls short. The laws made it through the legislative session mostly unchanged despite a push by moderate Democrats in the Senate to reduce the total number of paid family leave weeks to 14 in a year and carve-out small employers. Moderate Senate Democrats also supported carving out small businesses and farms from the sick time mandate. House Democrats were unified in their opposition to those changes. Rep. Dave Pinto, DFL-St. Paul, said the small changes go further than most Democrats wanted but still maintain the integrity of paid family leave and sick time. 'These are programs that make Minnesotans stronger,' Pinto, co-chair of the House labor committee, said on the floor before passage of the omnibus jobs and workforce bill, which the governor is expected to sign.
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's aggressive moves on immigration protests put Democrats in a political bind
President Donald Trump's deployment of military troops to California is forcing Democrats back onto politically perilous turf, as they look for ways to condemn his actions without being drawn into a broad debate over immigration or tying themselves to the chaotic scenes emerging from Los Angeles. Republicans are relishing a fight that directs attention away from their monthslong, intraparty debate over tax and spending legislation, and the messy political breakup of Trump and Elon Musk, and toward what they view as Democrats' biggest vulnerabilities: immigration, law enforcement and public disorder. Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman warned his fellow Democrats about the images emerging from California, where protests erupted Friday after Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids and escalated into outbreaks of violence. Some protesters have thrown objects at law enforcement, looted businesses, blocked a major freeway and set self-driving cars ablaze — while police in riot gear fired rubber bullets to disperse crowds. While much of the protest activity has been peaceful, images of burning cars and chaos have been widespread across social media and traditional news coverage. 'You can't defend when people start setting things on fire or they start damaging buildings or going after members of law enforcement. That's not free speech. That is not peaceful protest,' Fetterman said Tuesday. Fetterman, who was lieutenant governor of Pennsylvania during racial justice protests around the country in 2020, said Democrats 'should have learned the lesson back in 2020. Absolutely, there was righteous outrage over what happened to George Floyd, but that never means that you can support or be quiet if there's destruction or rioting and destroying and looting and those kinds of things.' He said he was 'not judging any of my other colleagues in my party,' but warned: 'You can't be quiet on those things. You have to just call it really what it is.' Some Democrats privately agree with Fetterman, saying their party's leaders must be more forceful in condemning the rioters' behavior. Lawmakers in competitive swing districts also worry about the political ramifications down the road, particularly if party activists resurrect a years-old battle cry for abolishing ICE. And in the meantime, they believe Democrats will be forced to grapple with an existential question: Do they support federal law enforcement officials actually enforcing federal immigration law? In a clear sign of the fraught political moment, lawmakers from across the Democratic Party's ideological spectrum issued warnings Tuesday against violence. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, a progressive independent who caucuses with Democrats, urged protesters to exhibit the same 'disciplined non-violent resistance' to Trump that civil rights leaders used to end segregation. 'Violent protests are counterproductive and play right into Trump's playbook,' he said on X. Texas Rep. Henry Cuellar, a conservative Democrat who has long represented a Rio Grande Valley district, said in a statement that 'when people start throwing bricks and hammers at law enforcement, that's no longer protest — that's criminal.' 'We can debate policy without attacking the people who wear the badge and work to keep us safe,' Cuellar said. Trump, for his part, has blamed Democrats broadly and California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Karen Bass specifically for mishandling the situation, saying on Truth Social the city 'would be burning to the ground right now' had he not deployed troops there. And Republicans have delighted in pitting Trump against Newsom. House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters Tuesday that Newsom — who has aggressively criticized the Trump administration's moves — 'ought to be tarred and feathered.' 'He's standing in the way of the administration carrying out the federal law. He is applauding the bad guys and standing in the way of good guys,' Johnson said. Trump's actions have put Democrats in a complicated political spot. The party has struggled to navigate the issue of immigration since the president's victory in November — split between the moral outrage of the Democratic base over Trump's unprecedented deportation efforts, and polls that have largely reflected public support for the president on the issue overall. In particular, surveys have shown that most voters want tougher border security than the Biden administration put in place for much of the previous four years. But the politics get murkier when Americans are asked about the details of how Trump is carrying out his campaign promise to conduct the largest deportation effort in the nation's history. In the past — particularly when federal law enforcement cleared Lafayette Square, near the White House, amid 2020 protests — polls found that Americans opposed the use of rubber bullets and tear gas, and opposed deploying the US military in response to protests within the country. A CBS News/YouGov survey conducted before the protests in Los Angeles broke out found somewhat contradictory results: Fifty-four percent of Americans support Trump's deportation program, and 55% like its 'goals.' However, 56% said they dislike 'the way you think [Trump] is going about' the deportations. unknown content item - Democrats this week argued that Trump's actions have only worsened tensions in California. Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly said the president's deployment of the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles is 'like throwing the match onto the kindling.' 'He took some actions that escalated an issue — a problem, but it was under control. And now the problem is bigger because of the actions he took,' Kelly told CNN. Democrats also accused Trump of hypocrisy, pointing out that he was slow to deploy the National Guard on January 6, 2021, when his supporters were rioting and attacking police officers at the US Capitol. 'We begged the president of the United States to send in the National Guard. He would not do it,' California Rep. Nancy Pelosi, who was the House speaker at the time, said Tuesday. California Rep. Ro Khanna told CNN outside the Capitol on Monday that Democrats 'need to continue to unequivocally condemn the violence, the threats or attacks on law enforcement agents — I mean, that has no place.' But, the progressive congressman added, Trump's actions are unconstitutional. 'One can hold two thoughts — that political violence should be absolutely condemned, vandalism needs to be condemned, but that the appropriate remedy are state and local police — that you can't deploy the military against our own people, unless there's a real crisis,' Khanna said. Massachusetts Rep. Seth Moulton similarly said that 'there's no excuse for violence.' 'If you're protesting the fact that ICE officers are sometimes too violent, doing that with violence doesn't make the point,' he said. However, Moulton also said Trump is using the US military to achieve political aims at home. 'This is not an opportunity to turn active-duty Marines against the American people. And that's what Trump is doing,' Moulton said. Trump has used Newsom as a foil as he deploys troops to the Los Angeles area — even suggesting Monday that border czar Tom Homan should arrest the governor. Newsom, a potential 2028 presidential contender, has embraced the clash and publicly dared Homan to arrest him. Newsom himself has been in regular touch with lawmakers on the Hill, and held a briefing with his state's delegation and the leader of the California National Guard on Monday to update them on Trump's actions, according to two people familiar with the call. Newsom's office has also been distributing copies of some of attacks on him, including Trump's calls to arrest him, to House Democrats' offices, those people said. The scenes unfolding in California are also leading Democrats elsewhere to grapple with what they would do if Trump took similar actions in their states. And they fear they'd be powerless to stop it. Rep. Mikie Sherrill, one of the Democratic candidates in Tuesday's New Jersey gubernatorial primary, said Trump's move 'shows the further incompetence coming from Washington and the constant level of chaos that is almost intentionally generated there.' Sherrill also warned that military missions are much different from those of law enforcement in the United States. Another New Jersey gubernatorial candidate, Rep. Josh Gottheimer, highlighted Trump's actions in a speech. He said the scenes in California make clear 'just what's on the line in this election and why it's so important that we have a governor who's willing to stand up and fight.' The Democratic Governors Association, in a statement signed by 22 governors, called Trump's deployment of troops to California 'an alarming abuse of power.' But the statement did not address the president's handling of his deportation program. 'It's important we respect the executive authority of our country's governors to manage their National Guards — and we stand with Governor Newsom who has made it clear that violence is unacceptable and that local authorities should be able to do their jobs without the chaos of this federal interference and intimidation,' the Democratic governors' statement said. CNN's Arlette Saenz, Ted Barrett, David Wright and Manu Raju contributed to this report.
