logo
Illinois lawmakers pass budget with tax hikes on tobacco, gambling — but adjourn without transit, Bears stadium

Illinois lawmakers pass budget with tax hikes on tobacco, gambling — but adjourn without transit, Bears stadium

Chicago Tribune2 days ago

SPRINGFIELD — Democratic state lawmakers voted late Saturday, just minutes before their midnight deadline, to send Gov. JB Pritzker the final piece of a $55 billion budget balanced with a combination of spending cuts and an estimated $800 million plus in tax increases, including hikes on tobacco products, vaping and online sportsbooks.
The governor's office touted the spending plan as Pritzker's 'seventh consecutive balanced budget that continues to get the state's finances back on track.'
The General Assembly adjourned its spring session without passing legislation to address the $771 million fiscal shortfall faced by Chicago-area mass transit, and also took no action on proposals to help the Bears relocate to a new stadium in the northwest suburbs.
The session's final hours were marked by a rush to pass the budget and revenue package before June 1, when the required vote threshold rose to a three-fifths majority. Ultimately, House Democrats approved the three main components of the plan by that margin or greater.
The $55.2 billion spending portion of the budget passed the House by a 75-41 margin, with two Democrats — Reps. Larry Walsh of Elwood and Stephanie Kifowit of Aurora — joining Republicans in opposition.
A short time later, the Senate approved the measure on a 34-23 vote, two votes shy of what would have been needed after midnight. Four downstate and suburban Senate Democrats voted against the spending plan: Sens. Christopher Belt of Swansea, Suzy Glowiak Hilton of Western Springs, Mike Halpin of Rock Island and Doris Turner of Springfield.
During the House debate, Rep. Dagmara Avelar, a Democrat from Bolingbrook and member of the legislative Latino Caucus, said she was supporting the plan even though it was 'not a perfect budget,' noting her opposition to the elimination of funding for a Medicaid-style program for noncitizens aged 42 through 64.
'In fact, it's painful. It eliminates a program that has been a lifeline for many, including people that I have fought alongside for years,' she said. 'But I'm voting 'yes' because leadership requires hard choices. And this budget protects more than it cuts.'
Majority Leader Robyn Gabel of Evanston, the chief budget negotiator in the House, said the budget made $400 million in spending cuts, including $193 million in operational cuts across state agencies. A big reason for those reductions, she said, was the uncertainty over whether Republican President Donald Trump's administration would deprive Illinois of critical federal funding for Medicaid and in other areas.
'I want to emphasize that these were not decisions made lightly or made hastily. These are strategic efficiencies so we can invest in the needs of our working families and seniors on fixed incomes,' Gabel said. 'Of course, we do not know the full extent of the cuts Washington is preparing. But we do anticipate that health care access and infrastructure will be most directly impacted.'
Pritzker also took shot at Trump in his post-budget statement.
'Even in the face of Trump and Congressional Republicans stalling the national economy, our state budget delivers for working families without raising their taxes while protecting the progress we are making for our long-term fiscal health,' Pritzker said in a statement.
Illinois House passes bill allowing terminally ill people to end their lives with physician's helpRepublicans criticized what they called a bloated budget and said the Democrats' attempts to lay blame on Trump Republicans in Washington are misguided.
'The tax-and-spend Democrats … are so unfamiliar with cost-cutting, they call it chaos,' said GOP Rep. William Hauter of Morton. 'They wasted billions. And they are prepared to waste billions more. Wake up, Illinois. Vote 'no.''
Pointing to the $40 billion budget approved after Pritzker first took office in 2019 and last year's roughly $53 billion plan, Sen. Chapin Rose of Mahomet, a GOP budget negotiator, said Democrats must shoulder the blame for the state's fiscal issues.
'Let's be clear: $15 billion over six years, that's on you,' Rose said. '$2 billion increase over last year, that's on you. Billions of dollars in tax increases that are driving working families out of Illinois, that's on you.'
Senate Republican leader John Curran of Downers Grove faulted Democrats for once again pushing their budget package through in the final hours of the legislature's spring session without sufficient time for review, particularly on the tax side of the ledger.
Democrats 'introduced a bill, $880 million in tax increases, we were told — nearly $1 billion — and six short hours from introduction of what it was to passing in both the House and the Senate,' Curran said. 'That's not transparent. That's not being upfront with the people of Illinois.'
Sen. Elgie Sims, Democrats' budget point person in the Senate, said, however, that the plan largely reflected what lawmakers had been discussing since Pritzker laid out his proposal in February.
'If there's one thing I do agree about with the other side of the aisle, it is that a budget is a statement of our priorities,' Sims said. 'And our priorities are being fiscally responsible, preparing for the future and facing the challenges that are coming our way head on.'
Heeding Pritzker's warning that he would veto a plan that relied on increases to the state's sales or income taxes, legislators approved a package that would employ one-time tactics, such as an amnesty for delinquent tax filers.
The revenue package also included increased taxes on tobacco products to 45% of the wholesale price. Starting in July, that higher tax will also apply to nicotine pouches, which have exploded in popularity in recent years, and e-cigarettes would be taxed at the same rate as other tobacco products for the first time. The revenue would go to tobacco health initiatives and the state's Medicaid program.
Democrats also approved a new per-wager tax on online sportsbooks, which would generate an estimated $36 million.
Overall, the spending and tax package would result in a slight surplus, Democrats said. Amid the late push to approve a tax-and-spending plan, the Senate also narrowly approved a proposal to overhaul governance and increase funding for Chicago-area mass transit. The plan included a $1.50 fee on retail deliveries, which replaced an earlier proposal to increase tolls on Chicago-area toll roads.
But the House adjourned without taking up the measure, meaning the transit issue remains unresolved.
A late push for legislation to aid the Chicago Bears with the team's proposed move to a new stadium in Arlington Heights failed to come to a vote in either chamber.
The spending package Democrats approved stuck closely to the broad outlines Pritzker presented to lawmakers in February. However, with revenue projections for the budget year that begins July 1 dimming in the months since the governor made his proposal, legislators approved some new ideas to bring in more money, including changes that would allow Illinois to tax offshore and out-of-state corporate profits.
One new funding stream would come from taxing 'large transnational corporations' that store assets overseas, Democratic Rep. Will Guzzardi of Chicago said.
'Those are the revenue sources we're contemplating to balance a budget that supports investments in children and families and seniors and people with disabilities,' he said.
The budget package included a tax amnesty program aimed at boosting revenue that was part of Pritzker's proposal. The program is expected to bring in $228 million, Guzzardi said, which is $30 million above Pritzker's initial estimate.
The spending proposal lawmakers approved, negotiated among the Democratic House and Senate leaders and the governor's office, deviates from Pritzker's original plan in certain areas, including funding for elementary and secondary education.
Pritzker proposed a $350 million increase as required under a 2017 school funding overhaul. But the final plan would boost funding by only $307 million over the current year, cutting $43 million that normally would go to a grant program designed to help school districts with high property tax rates and low real estate values.
The grant program was paused to provide 'the ability for us to have a study that talks about the efficacy of that program, making sure it is having the desired impact and reducing property taxes for hardworking homeowners across the state,' Sims said.
Democrats managed to gather enough support for their plan despite ongoing tension over the elimination of funding for the health insurance program covering noncitizens ages 42 to 64. When Pritzker proposed the cut in February, his office estimated it would save the state about $330 million from its general fund. The approved budget would preserve the portion of the program for those 65 and older, allocating $110 million for their coverage.
Eliminating funding for the younger group, which would end coverage for more than 30,000 residents, was unpopular among Latino lawmakers and progressives, but those blocs didn't end up withholding their votes from the final budget package.
Democratic Rep. Lilian Jiménez, one of the champions of the program, stressed the importance of making sure the health care networks in low-income communities that are often used by immigrants are adequately funded in the face of the cut.
'What we're trying to do is make sure that those communities have the resources they need to brace for the impact of having 30,000 uninsured throughout the state of Illinois,' said Jiménez, whose district includes heavily Latino portions of Chicago.
While many immigrants living in Illinois without authorization pay state and federal taxes that support the program and other services for which they are ineligible because of their citizenship status, a state audit released in February found that over three years the insurance program for older immigrants cost nearly double what was expected.
The budget would eliminate funding for a relatively new state program providing free test preparation to students at public universities and some community colleges, launched in late February after receiving $10 million in the current state budget.
Supporters said in early May that the program had already saved more than 200,000 students a total of roughly $8 million in just two months. When Illinois launched the program, it became the first state to offer free comprehensive test preparation for college students.
Democrats also followed Pritzker's recommendation to pause one of his key priorities: a $75 million annual increase to boost the number of seats in state-funded preschool programs. The budget would keep that spending level with the current year.The overall plan also would cut back on another Pritzker priority, suspending monthly contributions to the state's 'rainy day' fund for a year. Instead, about $45 million would be held in the general fund.
At the same time, some lawmakers pushed to boost funding for health facilities that serve low-income patients and communities, asking for $160 million for safety-net hospitals, though settling in the end for $118 million.
'There are significant increases, investments in our hospital systems. Our safety-net hospitals are on the front lines,' Sims said. 'They are caring for our most vulnerable. And we are making sure that we made investments in those safety-net hospitals because they carry a large volume of Medicaid clients. So, we want to make sure they have the resources necessary to be successful.'
The Democratic plan also included an 80-cent-per-hour wage increase for direct support professionals who work with people with developmental disabilities, but reduces the hours the state would pay for by 35%, which Gabel, the House majority leader, characterized as 'rightsizing.' Advocates and unions have said wages needed to be raised by $2 an hour to meet recommendations that those workers be paid 150% of minimum wage.
At a Senate committee hearing on the plan Saturday afternoon, Rose, the Mahomet Republican, said the reduction in hours was a 'cynical sleight of hand.'
Republicans also criticized the use of one-time revenue streams to fill shortfalls, including the diversion of money from road projects by again delaying a shift of revenue from the sales tax on gasoline from the state's general fund to the road fund, freeing up $171 million to spend on operations.
'Last year … we described that as a one-time, special occurrence. Now, we're doing it again,' Republican Rep. Ryan Spain of Peoria said during a Friday night House committee hearing. 'What happened to the one time occurrence?'
'We're in difficult times,' Gabel said. 'This is a hard budget. We felt like we needed to do it one more time.'
Both Republicans and Democrats pointed to the uncertain federal funding picture, with Republicans questioning spending in a 'doomsday budget' and Democrats blaming Trump for creating confusion for states.
Gabel said 'this budget is based on the information we have at this time.'
Despite the fiscal challenges the state faces, the Democratic plan included $8.2 billion in new spending on infrastructure projects, which are separate from the operating budget and funded by dedicated taxes and borrowing.
Republicans accused the majority party of once again hoarding that money for projects in their own districts.'Let's hide this stuff. Let's hide it so that the public doesn't see it until it's too late. Let's blame everybody but ourselves. The Trump administration did this. The Trump administration did that. I call B.S.,' GOP Rep. John Cabello of Machesney Park, who was a Trump delegate during last year's Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, said during the House debate late Saturday.
'Start looking at these pages, people. There is so much pork in here,' C, lamenting that Republicans weren't given a chance to fund projects on behalf of taxpayers in their districts.
While House and Senate Democrats dodged Republican questions about the so-called pork-barrel spending, their legislation included funding for a number of large projects in Democratic districts.
For instance, Proviso Township High School District 209, which is in House Speaker Emanuel 'Chris' Welch's district and where he previously was school board president, would receive $40 million for 'costs associated with capital improvements and an outdoor sports complex at Proviso West High School.'
Members of the GOP also criticized proposed pay raises of about 5% — to a base salary of $98,304 — for lawmakers, though in the past they've largely accepted the pay increases even when voting against the budget.
The raises are cost-of-living adjustments included in state law, though past legislatures have voted to freeze their own pay — a move that has drawn legal challenges.
The plan includes similar increases for the governor, other statewide elected officials and the heads of state agencies. Pritzker, a billionaire Hyatt Hotels heir, does not take a state salary.
The Senate-approved plan to address a looming $771 million fiscal cliff for the Chicago area's mass transit system and to overhaul the system's disjointed board structure moved away from a proposed increase on Chicago-area toll roads in favor of a new $1.50 fee on retail deliveries. That came after labor groups and suburban officials criticized the proposed toll increase.
The so-called 'climate impact fee,' which also was introduced late Saturday just hours before winning approval in the Senate, would kick in on Jan. 1 and could increase with inflation in future years. It would be imposed for each order, regardless of the number of items, but would not apply 'to the delivery of groceries and prescription and non-prescription drugs and medications.' Retailers with total sales of $500,000 or less in the preceding calendar year would also be exempt.
Even before the proposal was officially filed, the fee had drawn opposition from business groups, including the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce, Illinois Chamber of Commerce, the manufacturers', restaurant and retail associations, and the big-tech interest group TechNet.
'This new, regressive tax will undermine consumer savings from the recent elimination of the grocery tax and would disproportionately impact communities that rely on delivery services to receive vital items,' the groups said in a statement.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

‘Page not found': List of Va.'s so-called sanctuary cities disappear from DHS website
‘Page not found': List of Va.'s so-called sanctuary cities disappear from DHS website

Yahoo

time37 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

‘Page not found': List of Va.'s so-called sanctuary cities disappear from DHS website

NORFOLK, Va. (WAVY) — The Department of Homeland Security issued a statement Thursday saying the cities of Virginia Beach, Hampton and Newport News, along with 30 other localities in the Commonwealth were obstructing federal immigration laws, but Sunday, the list of so-called sanctuary jurisdictions in Virginia disappeared from the DHS website. DHS refuses to say why they deleted flawed sanctuary jurisdiction list Homeland Security has provided no information to prove the resort city of Virginia Beach, Hampton, Newport News, Gloucester, are 'deliberately obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws.' At a Democratic campaign event in Norfolk Monday, Norfolk Del. Bonita Anthony called the on, and now off, list of so-called sanctuary cities a case of performative politics. City of Hampton rejects designation as 'sanctuary jurisdiction' by DHS 'I think it is a dog whistle,' Anthony said. 'But at some point, we've got to get to a place where we're talking not left versus right. Del. Cliff Hayes represents voters in Chesapeake, which was not on the list. 'It's amazing to me to think that we will label areas and cities as though there's some problem,' Hayes said. The resort city had a public relations problem in April 2007, when Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly called Virginia Beach a sanctuary city after a drunk illegal immigrant plowed into the rear of a car and killed two teen girls. O'Reilly called for the resignations of the mayor and police chief while co-host Geraldo Rivera called out O'Reilly for allegedly using a tragedy to promote an agenda. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

The other climate rule Trump's attacks are boosting
The other climate rule Trump's attacks are boosting

Politico

time37 minutes ago

  • Politico

The other climate rule Trump's attacks are boosting

Presented by the Stop the Oil Shakedown Coalition. With help from Camille von Kaenel, Marie J. French and Caitlin Oprysko THE OTHER CLEAN-CAR LAW: New York lawmakers reeling from Congress' vote to kill California's electric vehicle mandate are eyeballing another Golden State rule to pick up the slack: the low-carbon fuel standard. Fair warning to Democrats considering this route: Things could get bumpy. A yearslong push in Albany to establish New York's version of the controversial program that sets emissions limits for transportation fuels is regaining steam in the wake of Senate votes last month to revoke a trio of EPA waivers that let California — and a dozen states that follow its lead — enforce stricter vehicle emissions standards. We're still waiting for President Donald Trump to sign the resolutions and kick off a court battle that Attorney General Rob Bonta has promised to wage, but New York enviros are already using the moment to lobby for LCFS standards, as POLITICO's Marie J. French reports. 'New York has to lead,' said Julie Tighe, president of the New York League of Conservation Voters, at a press conference last week. 'We cannot let four years go by without taking real action to transition away from fossil fuels, and Washington, D.C., is not going to help.' New York lawmakers don't need to look particularly hard to find out what sort of headaches they could be in store for if a bill from state Sen. Kevin Parker that would establish the state's clean fuel standard crosses the finish line. (That proposal is awaiting a hearing in New York's Senate Finance Committee and still faces an uphill battle to reach Gov. Kathy Hochul's desk.) Case in point: the bare-knuckled sparring on Friday between moderate Assemblymember Jasmeet Bains, a Bakersfield Democrat and potential 2026 challenger to Republican Rep. David Valadao, and the California Air Resources Board, which approved amendments last year (still pending approval by the state's Office of Administrative Law) to tighten the stringency of the program — and potentially raise gas prices. Bains called on CARB Chair Liane Randolph to resign after she said at a hearing last week on transportation fuels that the agency doesn't extrapolate on how much consumers pay at the pump because 'in many instances, that would be speculative.' 'It is outrageous the director would pursue such policies without even trying to analyze the impact on prices,' Bains said. The incident is part of the continued fallout from last year's messy reauthorization of the nearly 15-year-old program. The heated debate largely centered on concerns about the rule's potential to raise gas prices, and CARB did itself no favors by initially estimating a 47-cent per gallon hike, before walking that figure back. The backlash against Bains was swift, as Gov. Gavin Newsom and environmental groups rushed to Randolph's defense. 'What's outrageous is the Assemblymember's stunt as she gears up to run for Congress,' Newsom spokesperson Daniel Villaseñor said in a statement. Equally important, though, is who was missing from the defense. Business groups that oppose LCFS over affordability concerns, and environmental justice advocates who argue the state should focus on electrification rather than alternative fuels, were nowhere to be found. Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas — who established an oversight committee last month, headed by Assembly Transportation Chair Lori Wilson and Assemblymember David Alvarez, to study the LCFS' impact on prices — also stayed out of the squabble, and his spokespeople didn't respond to requests for comment. Those political dynamics are already shaping up in New York, where the state Senate passed an LCFS bill in 2022 that couldn't clear the Assembly. EJ groups came out against the bill last week, writing in a letter that New York can't 'invest in half-measures and failed solutions that burden environmental justice communities.' But New York businesses are backing Parker's bill. The Business Council of New York State, an Albany-based chamber of commerce with over 3,000 members, announced its support in April, arguing that an LCFS rule would allow the state to 'keep open all fuel and technology options' as it attempts to slash greenhouse gas emissions 85 percent from 1990 levels by 2050. — AN Did someone forward you this newsletter? Sign up here! SPEAKING OF GAS PRICES: Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton unveiled a plan Monday to lower energy and fuel prices based on dismantling California's climate programs. Hilton, a GOP television personality, released his energy platform the day before he's hosting a forum on fuel prices with former Democratic Majority Leader Gloria Romero, who registered as a Republican last year over issues like gas stove bans. Hilton's to-do list includes his party's top asks: ending the state's 2045 net-zero emissions goal, repealing LCFS and lowering the state gas tax. He's also advocating for nixing the cap-and-trade program Newsom and lawmakers are currently negotiating an extension of. — AN WATER TRUCE: San Diego and Los Angeles are ending 15 years of courtroom fights over the cost of water transfers, citing the need for greater flexibility and collaboration to handle unpredictable supplies caused by climate change. Under a settlement agreement announced Monday, the San Diego County Water Authority will pay the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California a fixed price for water transfers instead of a fluctuating one, which San Diego had repeatedly sued over. The settlement ends an acrimonious chapter in Southern California's water wars that had cost the two agencies tens of millions of dollars in legal fees and driven political battles across regional water boards. It also frees the San Diego County Water Authority — which is currently facing an existential threat because of lower-than-expected water sales — to cut deals with other water agencies to offload some of its unneeded water. San Diego has spent heavily in the past two decades on both importing and desalinating water. Other Southern California communities don't have that same luxury of abundant supplies, with both the Sierra Nevada snowpack and the Colorado River under strain. MWD Board chair Adán Ortega said at a press conference Monday that the settlement agreement would usher in 'a new era of regionalism' that the entire Southwest should recognize. — CvK EAST COAST FOIL: Florida's longtime cautionary tale on property insurance is changing — maybe. After years of massive losses, Florida insurers made a $207 million profit in 2024, Thomas Frank of POLITICO's E&E News reports. Private Florida-based insurers are returning, and the state-run insurer of last-resort, Citizens Property Insurance Corp., is shrinking. The AM Best credit ratings firm credits the turn-around to rate hikes that doubled the average premium between 2021 and 2023 and legal reforms that limited lawsuits by policyholders. California, meanwhile, still hasn't shrunk its own insurer of last-resort or brought back private insurers in any big way, despite setting the stage for increased rate hikes. A STEP TOO FAR: Senate Majority Leader John Thune sidestepped Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough to revoke California's vehicle emissions waivers, but he's not willing to do the same for Republicans' budget 'megabill.' 'We're not going there,' Thune said Monday when asked by reporters if overruling MacDonough is under consideration as the Senate crafts its own budget proposal. MacDonough will play the crucial role of deciding what polices can stay in the bill. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer predicted that House GOP proposals, like a plan to place limits on the ability of federal judges to enforce contempt citations, will be booted. The parliamentarian question is going to follow Thune, who gave the thumbs-up for the unprecedented move to ignore MacDonough's opinion that Congress can't overturn EPA's waivers empowering California to enforce nation-leading emissions standards. — AN ON HIS OWN: Former Interior Secretary David Bernhardt is launching his own firm, he told POLITICO's Caitlin Oprysko. Bernhardt was also a longtime Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck lobbyist, including for Westlands Water District. The new Bernhardt Group will primarily provide strategic advice, but may do some lobbying work on an as-needed basis. Bernhardt declined to name any of the new firm's clients. But he said its work won't be limited to natural resources policy and could encompass a number of issues the firm's staff have been involved in, from telecom and privacy to financial services and appropriations. Read more from the interview as well as the full list of people joining him in POLITICO Influence. — The Trump administration is reversing course and keeping eight of the nine USDA field offices it planned to close in California open instead. — Analytics firm First Street forecasts Sacramento will experience some of the country's largest out-migration because of climate risks. — California Democrats want the Trump administration to restaff National Weather Service offices in Sacramento and Hanford that lost the ability to operate 24 hours a day.

White House insists Medicaid policy won't cut people who deserve it
White House insists Medicaid policy won't cut people who deserve it

Yahoo

time37 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

White House insists Medicaid policy won't cut people who deserve it

The White House plans to confront resistance to Medicaid cuts from Senate Republicans by arguing that any reductions in coverage would only affect people who didn't deserve it in the first place. A strong bloc of Republicans in the Senate has signaled that they are uncomfortable with Medicaid reductions in the sweeping tax-and-spending bill enacted last month by the House. President Donald Trump's advisers are determined to confront those concerns by claiming that cuts would chiefly target undocumented immigrants and able-bodied people who should not be on Medicaid, according to four administration officials and outside allies granted anonymity to discuss strategy. 'This bill will preserve and protect the programs, the social safety net, but it will make it much more common sense,' Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought said Sunday. 'That's what this bill does. No one will lose coverage as a result.' The megabill would add work requirements to the program and bar undocumented immigrants from getting coverage, among other attempts to tighten eligibility. Those provisions are projected to leave roughly 7.6 million low-income people without health care over the next decade — losses that would amount to hundreds of billions of dollars in cost savings for the program. Contrary to Trump officials' claims, such cuts are widely anticipated to go beyond immigrants and the narrow slice of able-bodied unemployed, according to health experts. The provisions would likely add new layers of paperwork for low-income enrollees, making it more difficult for qualified recipients to stay on the program and pushing otherwise-eligible Americans suddenly out of health coverage. In a POLITICO interview published Sunday, Trump Medicaid chief Mehmet Oz argued the changes would 'future proof' the program, also insisting that "we're not cutting Medicaid." 'There's a lot of sensitivity about being accused, accused of not taking care of people who have disabilities or seniors without money or children,' Oz said. Trump officials have aggressively pushed that stance in public and private in recent days, insisting that the administration's plan will shield 'deserving' Medicaid recipients like the elderly and disabled, while targeting those who officials have cast as a drain on the nation's safety net. Many of those people gained coverage over the last decade through Obamacare's expansion of Medicaid. Republicans have been stung before by their efforts to enact health care cuts, most notably facing massive voter blowback in 2017 that cratered Trump's bid to repeal Obamacare and contributed to widespread losses in the following midterms. But Trump officials and allies argue that voters will support these changes to Medicaid, seeing them less as cuts than tweaks meant to ensure resources go to those who truly need it. 'Medicaid does not belong to people who are here illegally, and it does not belong to capable and able-bodied men who refuse to work,' said one of the White House officials. 'So no one is getting cut.' In a statement, White House spokesman Kush Desai said Trump would "protect and preserve Medicaid" by "kicking illegal immigrants off of the program and implementing commonsense work requirements," adding that Americans voted for such policies. The strategy represents a stark messaging shift for a GOP that has long found itself on the defensive in debates over health coverage. And it's an attempt by the White House to mirror the approach Trump has taken on other issues like immigration and trade, casting aside political complexities in favor of portraying them as a simple choice between 'us' and 'them.' Trump has framed his mass deportation campaign as an effort to rid the country of millions of immigrants deemed undeserving of staying in the U.S. He's justified his tariffs as a counter to other countries 'ripping us off' on trade. 'Before, they were taking things away from people,' Thomas Miller, a senior fellow at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute, said of the health messaging shift. 'Now, they're saying they're not deserving.' In the Senate, Vought and White House legislative affairs chief James Braid have taken the lead in talks with Republican lawmakers, the White House official said. Trump has also dialed up a handful of senators over the last week, said another White House official granted anonymity to discuss internal strategy, ahead of a sprint in the Senate to pass its version of the megabill in a matter of weeks. The success of that effort could hinge on a handful of GOP senators who are skeptical of any Medicaid policies that could be interpreted as cuts, especially after the House added last-minute health care provisions into its bill that ballooned the predicted coverage losses. Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine have expressed reservations about Medicaid work requirements, while some others have warned more generally about the prospect of cutting the program. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), perhaps the most outspoken Republican on the issue, said Monday in a post on X that Trump had assured him 'NO MEDICAID BENEFIT CUTS' will be in the bill. But rather than change course on policy, Trump officials and other Hill Republicans have instead signaled a preference for winning votes by redefining what qualifies as a cut. In a midday missive on Monday, the White House touted its push to remove roughly 1.4 million undocumented immigrants as key to strengthening Medicaid benefits 'for whom the program was designed — pregnant women, children, people with disabilities, low-income seniors, and other vulnerable low-income families.' That strident approach has prompted blowback from patient advocates and health industry groups across the spectrum, and even bewildered some Republicans who questioned the wisdom of making any changes to a program as politically delicate as Medicaid, especially in the red states of Trump's base. 'The fact remains that a great many Trump voters are on Medicaid, particularly in rural areas,' said GOP pollster Whit Ayres, adding it's unclear whether voters will buy Republicans' assertion that some cuts shouldn't qualify as actual cuts.'If no one loses coverage, how are you going to cut $500 billion?' Still, Trump aides remain confident they can bring both the Senate and the broader public around to their view. Much of the Medicaid-cautious contingent in the Senate — including Hawley — have already said they're okay with work requirements, drawing the line instead at broader funding cuts that might directly impact health providers and state budgets. The White House in the meantime has salivated over a fight with Democrats over coverage for undocumented immigrants, viewing it as another politically advantageous front in its immigration offensive. As for work requirements, Republicans pointed to polling that has consistently shown most Americans support them in theory — even despite the warnings about how it's likely to play out. 'It's a simple, clear message to say we're only taking away coverage from people who are not working,' said Miller. 'You don't get down to the granular details of, what does that actually mean in practice?' Megan Messerly and Ben Leonard contributed to this report.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store