
Congressional Republicans Remain Divided on Medicaid Funding as Committee Vote Nears
WASHINGTON—House Republicans have yet to reach an agreement on Medicaid spending as a possible committee vote on the matter is less than a week away.
Medicaid has emerged as a
Republicans agree that federal spending, which is now exceeding federal revenue by more than $5 billion per day, must be reined in. Most appear to agree that
Meanwhile, some members adamantly oppose any change that would result in a loss of coverage for beneficiaries or shift additional program costs to state taxpayers.
The solution may require a combination of subtle alterations to the enormously complex Medicaid system rather than a single bold correction, according to some members. In the end, it may require intervention by the president himself to bring holdout members into agreement.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.), chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction over Medicaid, met with the president on May 1 to discuss the reconciliation bill. No resolution was announced.
Related Stories
4/16/2025
4/16/2025
Here are the primary cost reduction measures under discussion and what some Republicans are saying about them.
Reducing Payments to States
Guthrie met with some moderate Republicans on April 30 to discuss possible Medicaid changes. One of those ideas is to reduce the Federal Medicaid Assistance Percentage, or FMAP, which is the rate at which the federal government reimburses states for their Medicaid expenses.
The rate varies based on the state's income level, currently ranging from 50 percent to 83 percent.
'We've had a couple of comments from some people saying that seems to be too far for them to go,' Guthrie told reporters after the meeting, referring to a reduction in the reimbursement rate.
Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-N.Y.) told The Epoch Times on May 1: 'I don't support reducing FMAP at all.'
'We have to ultimately bend the cost curve on this program, because it's spiraling out of control,' Langworthy said, but added that the country should fulfill its duty to traditional Medicaid beneficiaries.
Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) made similar points.
'Changes to FMAP ... would have a devastating impact on New York, and I'm not doing it,' Lawler told The Epoch Times.
Yet he, like Langworthy, expressed urgency about lowering federal spending.
Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) listens during a press conference in Washington on May 23, 2023.'If anybody believes that spending should continue at the levels that it has, they're out of their minds,' Lawler said. 'You cannot run $2 trillion deficits.'
Other Republicans seemed more open to the idea of lowering federal reimbursement to the states.
Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.) noted that each state's reimbursement rate is variable to begin with, so modest changes might be possible. 'As states' economies grow at different rates, their FMAP changes,' Johnson told The Epoch Times. 'So changes to FMAP are something that states are very comfortable with.'
Johnson added that an aggressive change in the rate would likely make it difficult to gain the 218 votes needed to pass the reconciliation bill.
Slowing the Expansion
Another cost-cutting proposal involves reducing the federal reimbursement made to states for beneficiaries who were added to Medicaid through the Affordable Care Act Medicaid Expansion beginning in 2014.
Original Medicaid covers low-income people in certain categories, including children, pregnant women, parents of dependent children, the elderly, and people with disabilities.
The 2014 expansion includes most people who are under age 65 and earn at or below 133 percent of the federal poverty line.
About a quarter of the 86 million people
'The expansion population is, comparatively speaking, getting an unfair reimbursement [for their states],' Rep. Russ Fulcher (R-Idaho) told The Epoch Times. 'A big percentage of that [group] is working age, able-bodied adults, and that was never the target population for Medicaid.'
A federal cost reduction could be made either by reducing the reimbursement rate for the expansion population or by setting an overall per-capita limit on the reimbursement offered to the states for people in that group.
Either plan would place greater responsibility on states to determine the limits of Medicaid coverage.
Under the program, states have broad discretion to determine which services are covered under Medicaid and what the reimbursement rates will be.
'The per capita caps would make the states live within their means,' according to Langworthy, who said they may now see the reimbursement as 'free money from the federal government' to expand their Medicaid populations.
Rep. Buddy Carter (R-Ga.) was skeptical that either concept would be approved.
'We'll consider everything,' Carter told The Epoch Times. 'But I don't think you're going to see any FMAP changes. And the per-capita caps, evidently, are off the table now.'
Other Possibilities
The task is cutting $1.5 trillion from the federal budget over the next decade.
'That's about $150 billion on an annual basis. That's 1.7 percent of total spending,' Lawler said.
The more important number is 218, Lawler said, the number of votes needed to pass legislation in the House. 'How you get consensus, obviously, is what we're in the process of working through,' he said.
Other changes to Medicaid are possible, according to Langworthy. 'Many different components within the program that are on the table,' he said, mentioning work requirements for able-bodied Medicaid recipients.
Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.) during a hearing on Capitol Hill on Feb. 28, 2023.Indiana passed a work requirement for certain Medicaid beneficiaries in April, though it must gain federal approval before taking effect. If implemented, that move could reduce the state's Medicaid rolls by 100,000,
Fulcher said Republicans are also reexamining the Medicaid
'It's not like a binary choice, A or B. There are different components within the proposals,' Langworthy said, and the key will be finding a combination Republicans can agree on.
Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) said he is certain Republicans will reach a consensus on Medicaid and the larger reconciliation bill.
When asked what made him so sure, Norman said, 'Two words: President Trump.' Once the president weighs in and begins calling reluctant members, they'll come to an agreement, Norman said.
The House Committee on Energy and Commerce is expected to consider the reconciliation bill on May 7.
Hashtags

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


CNBC
8 minutes ago
- CNBC
Sen. Ron Johnson rips into 'immoral' GOP spending bill: 'I can't accept it'
Republican Sen. Ron Johnson on Wednesday blasted President Donald Trump's "one big, beautiful bill" as "immoral" and "grotesque," and reiterated that he will vote against it unless his GOP colleagues make major changes. "This is immoral, what us old farts doing to our young people," Johnson said on CNBC's "Squawk Box" after sounding alarms that the massive tax-and-spending-cut bill would add trillions of dollars to national deficits. "This is grotesque, what we're doing," Johnson said. "We need to own up to that. This is our moment." "I can't accept the scenario, I can't accept it, so I won't vote for it, unless we are serious about fixing it," he continued. Johnson has been among the Senate's loudest GOP critics of the budget bill that narrowly passed the House last month. Johnson and other fiscal hawks have taken aim over its impact on the nation's debt. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated later Wednesday that the bill would add $2.4 trillion to the national debt over the next decade. Johnson has proposed splitting the bill into two parts, though Trump insists on passing his agenda in a single package. "The president and Senate leadership has to understand that we're serious now," Johnson said of himself and the handful of other GOP senators whose opposition to the bill could imperil its chances. "They all say, 'Oh, we can pressure these guys.' No, you can't." Republicans hold a narrow 53-47 majority in the Senate, so they can only afford to lose a handful of votes to get the bill passed in a party-line vote. "Let's discuss the numbers, and let's focus on our children and grandchildren, whose futures are being mortgaged, their prospects are being diminished by what we are doing to them," Johnson said. Johnson's comments came one day after Elon Musk ripped into the spending bill, calling it a "disgusting abomination" that will lead to exploding deficits. The White House brushed aside Musk's comments. Johnson said that Musk's criticisms bolster the case against the bill. "He's in the inside, he showed ... President Trump how to do this, you know, contract by contract, line by line," Johnson said of Musk. "We have to do that." Johnson said that his campaign against the bill in its current form is not a "long shot," because he thinks there are "enough" Republican senators will will vote against the bill. "We want to see [Trump] succeed, but again, my loyalty is to our kids and grandkids," he said. "So there's enough of us who have that attitude that very respectfully we just have say, 'Mr. President, I'm sorry, 'one, big, beautiful bill' was not the best idea," he added.

13 minutes ago
Trump to shore up support among Senate GOP at White House meeting
Senate Republicans will try to chart a path forward for the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" during a series of meetings on Wednesday -- including one where the President Donald Trump will work to shore up support for the megabill that advances his legislative agenda Republican members of the powerful Senate Finance Committee will go to the White House to meet with Trump at 4 p.m. Wednesday, multiple White House and Hill sources confirm. The Finance Committee is responsible for writing the tax policy components of the bill, including the extension of the Trump 2017 tax cuts, a key priority for the package. The House-passed legislation also boosts spending for the military and border security -- while making some cuts to Medicaid, SNAP and other assistance programs. It could also add $2.4 trillion to the deficit over the next decade, according to a new analysis out Wednesday from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The Senate Finance Committee's Republican members are expected to attend the meeting, including Majority Leader John Thune and GOP Whip John Barrasso, who are both on the panel. Republican Sen. Ron Johnson, who is at odds with the White House and is pushing for deeper cuts than those in the bill the House sent to them, is expected to be at the meeting as a member of the committee, too. Appearing on ABC News Live Wednesday, Johnson attacked the bill, saying it "doesn't meet the moment." Senate Republicans are separately expected to meet behind closed doors as a conference on Wednesday to discuss the parameters of the bill as a group. Thune has so far not made clear what his strategy will be for moving the package through the upper chamber. As things currently stand, Thune can only afford to lose three of his GOP members to pass the package, and right now, he has more members than that expressing serious doubts about the bill. Trump's meeting with the committee is an opportunity for the president to attempt to sway those senators who have concerns about the bill. Earlier this week, Trump worked the phones and took meetings with many of those senators including Republican Sens. Rand Paul, Josh Hawley, Rick Scott and Johnson. Trump also met with Thune to talk through moving the House-backed bill through the Senate as expeditiously as possible. Lawmakers aim to send a bill to Trump by the Fourth of July. "At the end of the day, failure is not an option," Thune said at a news conference Tuesday, adding that he thinks the conference can meet the timing goal. a post on X Tuesday. Musk even chastised those who supported the bill.

Associated Press
13 minutes ago
- Associated Press
South Carolina's Republican governor keeps veto pen mostly capped for budget
COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — The invitation from South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster said he was bringing reporters together Wednesday to talk about his vetoes in the state budget. But instead, it was a victory lap for both the Republican governor and the Republican-dominated General Assembly as McMaster spent his time talking about all his priorities that the legislature kept in the spending plan — not the 10 things worth $10,000 he took out of the 2025-26 fiscal year budget. It was a stark reminder after nine years in office how much different McMaster is than his previous Republican predecessors, governors who relished in fighting the General Assembly, then often ripped into them or ignored their ideas on how to spend the state's billions of dollars. 'Back in the old days, nobody was talking to anybody,' McMaster said, repeating his favorite tagline of 'communication, collaboration and cooperation.' McMaster issued 10 vetoes from the state's $14.5 billion spending plan that starts July 1. Just one struck money from the budget — $10,000 for what McMaster said was a duplicative effort to review a state agency. Ten years ago, Gov. Nikki Haley struck 87 items from the $7 billion budget totaling more than $18 million. And in 2005, Gov. Mark Sanford vetoed 163 items worth $96 million from the $5.8 billion spending plan. A year later, an exasperated Sanford vetoed the entire budget and lawmakers quickly overrode him by wide margins. Instead of spending, McMaster's handful of vetoes were on rules like getting rid of a requirement that visitors to the new Pine Island State Park make reservations or striking out of the budget a provision allowing some school districts to use private companies for security. There are so few vetoes that lawmakers don't expect to return to the Statehouse to try to override them. McMaster kept what is effectively an $18,000 per year raise for the General Assembly in the budget. Lawmakers will see their 'in-district compensation' — money set aside for legislative duties that has few limits on how it can be spent — increase from $1,000 a month to $2,500 a month for all 46 senators and 124 House members. The monthly stipend for lawmakers has not been increased in about 30 years. Their in-district compensation would increase from $12,000 a year to $30,000. Lawmakers also get an annual salary of $10,400 that has not changed since 1990. In addition, they get money for meals, mileage to drive to Columbia and hotel rooms while in session. The rest of the spending plan was much less controversial. There are pay raises for teachers, and the state's highest income tax rate will be cut from 6.2% to 6%. There is $200 million to fix bridges, $35 million to pay for cleanup from Hurricane Helene last year and $50 million for a program to let parents use tax money to pay private school tuition that will undergo court scrutiny. About 80% of the more than $14 billion the state will spend next year is what the governor asked for back in January when he suggested a spending plan to lawmakers, a relationship he has carefully cultivated since 2017. 'Many of us are like a family. We go back a long way,' McMaster said. 'You try to understand the other fellow's point of view. sometimes he's right and I'm wrong. sometimes it's the other way. Sometimes we're talking about the same things but using different words.'