
'No basis in reality': Expert turns tables on key Democrat claim against Trump's 'big, beautiful bill'
Democrats in Washington, D.C., are misrepresenting major criticisms of President Trump's "big beautiful bill" with incorrect facts, according to an expert who spoke to Fox News Digital this week as Trump's budget reconciliation package is debated in Congress.
"The bill doesn't cut benefits for anyone who has income below the poverty line, anyone who is working at least 20 hours a week and not caring for a child, and people who are Americans," Jim Agresti, president and cofounder of Just Facts, told Fox News Digital in response to criticisms from Democrats and a handful of Republicans, including Sen. Josh Hawley, that Trump's bill will cut Medicaid and disproportionately hurt the poor.
"In other words, it cuts out illegal immigrants who are not Americans and fraudsters. So that narrative has no basis in reality. See, what's been going on since the Medicaid program was started? Is that it's been expanded and expanded and extended. You know, it got its start in 1966. And since that time, the poverty rate has stayed roughly level around 11% to 15%. While the portion of people in the United States on Medicaid has skyrocketed from 3% to 29%. Right now, 2.5 times more people are on Medicaid than are in poverty."
Medicaid cuts and reform have been a major sticking point with Democrats, who have merged data from two new reports from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to back up claims that nearly 14 million would lose coverage. The White House and Republicans have objected, as not all the policy proposals evaluated were actually included in Republicans' legislation, and far fewer people would actually face insurance loss.
Instead, Republicans argue that their proposed reforms to implement work requirements, strengthen eligibility checks and crack down on Medicaid for illegal immigrants preserve the program for those who really need it.
"I agree," Dem. Rep. Jasmine Crockett said in response to a claim on CNN that Republicans "want poor people to die" with Medicaid cuts.
Agresti told Fox News Digital that the Medicaid cuts are aimed at bringing people out of poverty and waste.
"It's putting some criteria down to say, 'Hey, if you want this, and you're not in poverty, you need to work,'" Agresti said. "You need to do something to better your situation, which is what these programs are supposed to be, lifting people out of poverty, not sticking them there for eternity. So the whole idea is to get people working, give them an incentive. Hey, if you want to do better in life, and you want this Medicaid coverage, then you have to earn it."
Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders has claimed the bill is a "death sentence for the working class," because it raises health insurance "copayments for poor people."
Agresti called that claim "outlandish."
"First of all, the Big Beautiful Bill does not raise copayments on anyone who's below the poverty line," he explained. "Now, for people who are above the poverty line, it requires states to at least charge some sort of copayment, and it also reduces, actually, the max copayment from $100 per visit to $35 per visit."
Agresti went on to explain that under the current system, "people have basically free rein to just go to a doctor or an emergency room or any other place without any co-payment, and they're not in poverty."
"What ends up happening is they waste a ton of money," Agresti said. "This has been proven through randomized control trials, which are the gold standard for social science analysis, where you have people in a lottery system, some people get the benefit, and some people don't, and what you end up seeing is that people who don't have to have skin in the game, abuse emergency rooms, they go there for a stuffy nose, rack up all this money, and it does nothing to improve their health. It's just wasteful."
In a statement to Fox News Digital, Sanders Communications Director Anna Bahr said, "Mr. Agresti's facts here are simply incorrect."
Sanders' office added that "nearly half of all enrollees on the ACA exchanges are Republicans" and pointed to the House-passed reconciliation bill that Sanders' office argues "says that if a worker can't navigate the maze of paperwork that the bill creates for Medicaid enrollees, they are barred from receiving ACA tax credits as well."
"But workers must earn at least $15,650 per year to qualify for tax credits on the ACA marketplaces – approximately equal to the annual income for a full-time worker earning the federal minimum wage."
Sanders' office also pointed to "CBO estimates that 16 million people will lose insurance as a result of the House-passed bill and the Republicans ending the ACA's enhanced premium tax credits."
Sanders' office also reiterated that the House-passed bill makes a "fundamental change" to copay for Medicaid beneficiaries, shifting from optional to mandatory.
"While claiming that I'm 'incorrect,' Sanders' staff fails to provide a single fact that shows the BBB cuts health care for poor working Americans," Agresti responded.
"It's especially laughable that they cite expanded Obamacare subsidies in this context, because people in poverty aren't even eligible for them," Agresti continued. "After this 'temporary' Covid-era handout expires, people with incomes up to 400% of the federal poverty level — or $150,600 for a family of five — will still be eligible for this welfare program, although they will receive less."
Agresti argued that the claim a "max $35 copay (for people who are not poor) 'hurts working families'" is not supported by research "which makes generalizations and merely cites 'associations.'"
"As commonly taught in high school math, association doesn't prove causation," Agresti said.
Sanders' office told Fox News Digital, "Mr. Agresti seems to believe that a working family of four earning only $32,150 per year doesn't deserve help affording their health care. Health care in the United States is more expensive than anywhere in the world. Terminating health care coverage for 16 million Americans and increasing health care costs for millions will make it harder for working people to afford the health care they need, even if Mr. Agresti doesn't agree."
Agresti also took issue with the narrative that cuts cannot be made to Medicaid without cutting benefits to people who are entitled to them.
"The Government Accountability Office has put out figures that are astonishing, hundreds of billions of dollars a year are going to waste," Agresti said. "So, yeah, some criteria to make sure that doesn't happen is a wise idea. Unfortunately, there is a ton of white-collar crime in this country, and this kind of crime is a white-collar crime. It's not committed with a gun, or by robbing or punching someone, it's committed by fraud, and there's an enormous amount of it.
"And the big, beautiful bill, again, seeks to rein that in by putting a criteria to make sure we're checking people's income, we're checking their assets. A lot of these federal programs, government health care programs, they've stopped checking assets. So you could be a lottery winner sitting on $3 million in cash and have very little income. And still get children's health insurance program benefits for your kids."
Hawley said on Monday that he did not have a problem with some of the marquee changes to Medicaid that his House Republican counterparts wanted, including stricter work requirements, booting illegal immigrants from benefit rolls and rooting out waste, fraud and abuse in the program that serves tens of millions of Americans.
However, he noted that about 1.3 million Missourians rely on Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and contended that most were working.
"These are not people who are sitting around, these are people who are working," he said. "They're on Medicaid because they cannot afford private health insurance, and they don't get it on the job."
"And I just think it's wrong to go to those people and say, 'Well, you know, we know you're doing the best, we know that you're working hard, but we're going to take away your health care access,'" he continued.
Hashtags

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


CBS News
22 minutes ago
- CBS News
When will we know the NYC mayoral primary election winner?
New York City voters are casting their ballots in the primary election for a Democratic mayoral nominee, and many are wondering when we will know who won -- and how ranked choice voting will impact the results, and their timing. Early voting wraps up this weekend, and Election Day is next Tuesday, June 24. Are we going to get results on primary night? We will see unofficial first choice results after polls close at 9 p.m., but that's not the end of the story, considering ranked choice voting. Those unofficial first choice results will include those marked as first choice from early voting, Election Day, and valid mail-in ballots. If, however, no candidate goes over 50% of the vote - and considering the large number of candidates running in this race, that seems very likely - we will then move into ranked choice elimination rounds. Under the system, the candidate who got the fewest first-round votes will then be eliminated, and voters who ranked that candidate first on their ballots will then have their second choice candidate counted. That process will then repeat until one candidate exceeds 50% of the vote. So when will we get a clear picture of the winner? We will likely start to get a clearer picture of the winner before official results are certified. Preliminary, non-certified results will come out a week after the election. We can then expect weekly reports, as elimination rounds are conducted. The entire process could take up to several weeks. In the last mayoral primary -- the first citywide election with ranked choice voting -- the final results were certified nearly a month after the election.. At a certain point, a presumed winner may start to emerge. For example, if a candidate is approaching 50% of the vote, and the gap between that candidate's unofficial numbers and their nearest competitor is greater than the number of ballots still needing to be counted, then that person will almost certainly become the winner. The final, certified results still won't come out until all ballots are counted, including early voting, mail-in, absentee, military, affidavit and emergency ballots.


San Francisco Chronicle
26 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Former Tennessee state Sen. Frank Niceley dies of suspected heart attack
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Former state Sen. Frank Niceley, a farmer and longtime conservative lawmaker known for his colorful comments on Tennessee's Capitol Hill, died Thursday. He was 78. Jefferson County Sheriff Jeff Coffey confirmed that Niceley was found on a tractor on his family farm in Strawberry Plains on Thursday and later died at the hospital. Coffey said the cause of death is a suspected heart attack. The Republican was first elected to a state House seat in 1988. He served two, two-year terms, then was out of the Legislature until he won a return to the House in 2004. In 2012, Niceley won a seat in the Senate, where he remained until he lost a Republican primary election in 2024 to now-Sen. Jessie Seal. The most recent boundaries of Niceley's district covered Claiborne, Grainger, Hancock, Jefferson, Sevier and Union counties. Niceley spoke 'in a way that makes you laugh, learn, and then Google a few things afterward,' as a resolution passed this year described it. Republican Senate Speaker Randy McNally said on social media that Niceley was the 'unofficial historian' of the Senate and a 'Tennessee original in every possible sense.' 'Fiercely independent, deeply rooted in his community, and unwavering in his convictions, he brought a farmer's wisdom and a statesman's heart to public service,' McNally said. Niceley's meandering stories and commentary sometimes created controversy. He sparked national criticism in 2022 after seemingly praising Adolf Hitler on the Senate floor as an example for people who are homeless while discussing a bill that toughened penalties for camping on public property. The year before, Niceley commented that with the movement of companies from northern cities to the South, 'I think I can tell my grandson the war between the states is still going on and we're winning.' Niceley was in tune with fellow Republicans on many major topics, but he also had an independent streak and his own priorities. He successfully pushed legislation to allow industrial hemp growing. He opposed making cockfighting a felony offense. He criticized the addition of toll lanes on highways through public-private partnerships. And he was against the statewide expansion of a school voucher program.
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Layoff notices delivered to hundreds of Voice of America employees
Layoff notices were sent Friday to 639 employees of Voice of America and the U.S. agency that oversees it, effectively shutting down the outlet that has provided news to countries around the world since World War II. They included employees at VOA's Persian-language service who were suddenly called off administrative leave last week to broadcast reports to Iran following Israel's attack. Three journalists working for the Persian service on Friday, who left their office for a cigarette break, had their badges confiscated and weren't allowed back in, according to one fired employee. In total, some 1,400 people at Voice of America and the U.S. Agency for Global Media, or 85% of its workforce, have lost their jobs since March, said Kari Lake, Trump's senior advisor to the agency. She said it was part of a 'long overdue effort to dismantle a bloated, unaccountable bureaucracy.' 'For decades, American taxpayers have been forced to bankroll an agency that's been riddled with dysfunction, bias and waste,' Lake said in a news release. 'That ends now.' VOA began by broadcasting stories about American democracy to residents of Nazi Germany, and grew to deliver news around the world in dozens of languages, often in countries without a tradition of free press. But President Donald Trump has fought against the news media on several fronts, with the complaint that much of what they produce is biased against conservatives. That includes a proposal to shut off federal funding to PBS and NPR, which is currently before Congress. Most VOA employees have been on administrative leave since March 15, their broadcasts and social media posts mostly silenced. Three VOA employees who are fighting the administration's dismantling of VOA in court were among those receiving layoff notices on Friday. 'It spells the death of 83 years of independent journalism that upholds U.S. ideals of democracy and freedom around the world,' plaintiffs Jessica Jerreat, Kate Neeper and Patsy Widakuswara said in a statement. The Persian-language employee, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing legal case, was in the office Friday when colleagues were barred from reentry. The person was afraid to leave for the same reason — even though authorities said their work had been halted — until receiving a layoff notice. Steve Herman, VOA's chief national correspondent who was in the process of retiring to take a job at the University of Mississippi, called the layoffs an 'historic act of self-sabotage with the U.S. government completing the silencing of its most effective soft-power weapon.' It's not clear what, if anything, will replace Voice of America programming worldwide. The Trump-supporting One American News Network has offered to allow its signal to be used. Although plaintiffs in the lawsuit called on Congress to continue supporting Voice of America, Herman said that he is not optimistic that it will survive, even if a Democratic president and Congress take over. For one thing, every day it is off the air is another day for viewers and readers to get into another habit for obtaining news. 'I believe that the destruction is permanent,' Herman said, 'because we see no indication in the next fiscal year that Congress will rally to fund VOA.' By the time another administration takes power that is more sympathetic to the outlet, 'I fear that VOA will have become forgotten,' he said. ___ David Bauder writes about the intersection of media and entertainment for the AP. Follow him at and