logo
Republican cuts to food and health benefits ‘will kill', advocacy groups warn

Republican cuts to food and health benefits ‘will kill', advocacy groups warn

The Guardian23-05-2025

Advocacy groups associated with the left are urging some Republicans not to go along with a plan to cut health and food benefits to the poor.
The lobbying campaign comes as Democrats are nearly powerless to stop the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' act – a 1,100-page package of Donald Trump's legislative priorities, from deporting migrants to building a border wall. Republicans hold majorities in both the House and Senate.
'Pediatricians are losing sleep at night over this program,' said Dr Sue Kressly, the president of American Academy of Pediatrics, in a press call on Tuesday.
'There are going to be short-term impacts where we really see hungry kids and the impact on their growth trajectory,' she continued, 'and then medium-term impacts, in which you stress the entire family and the family has to make decisions about – 'Do I pay for food? Do I pay for safe housing? Do I pay for visits to the doctors?''
Some of the most controversial provisions in the bill, and which have drawn scrutiny even from Republicans, include cutting billions of dollars in food and health benefits to the poor to offset the new Trump programs and an extension of tax cuts to well-off Americans.
Although the 'beautiful bill' left the most controversial cuts on the table, it would still make major changes to federal health and food assistance programs called Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Snap), known colloquially as 'food stamps'.
Medicaid is a public health insurance program for the low-income, disabled and elderly that insures roughly 71 million Americans. In just one example of its impact, the program pays for nearly half of all births in the US. Snap or 'food stamps' provides extra cash for groceries to 42 million low-income Americans, and is a lifeline for many to purchase nutritious foods, which tend to be more expensive.
On Tuesday, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released its latest 'score' of the bill, finding that it would cut $698bn from Medicaid and $267bn from food assistance. At the same time, tax cuts would add $3.8tn to the national debt.
The CBO also found that the changes would reduce resources to the poorest 10% of Americans by 4%, and increase household resources to the richest 10% of Americans by a roughly equivalent amount, though the changes would differ slightly in timing because cuts take full effect in 2033.
An analysis from the non-partisan group the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget found similar results, and described the Republican bill as moving 'in the wrong fiscal direction' in a statement.
For Medicaid, cuts would be made by adding work requirements to the program, including a requirement that some beneficiaries prove they are working at the time they apply – a hurdle many groups argue would be difficult for sick Americans.
Multiple studies have shown that adding work requirements to Medicaid forces beneficiaries off the program, while doing little to push people into the workforce, the provision's stated goal.
On Snap, Republicans would cut the program by requiring states to pay between 5% and 25% of the benefits of the program. Such a change would represent the biggest cut in the program's six-decade history. Although states split the cost of administering the program with the federal government, the feds have always paid for the entire cost of benefits.
With Republicans holding both chambers, left-leaning groups are now seeking to exploit cracks in Republican unity, particularly targeting those in moderate districts.
On Wednesday, Reproductive Freedom for All announced it would buy ads attacking Republicans in Arizona, Colorado, New York and Virginia for their support of the bill.
'As a nurse living in rural south-eastern Ohio, I see friends, neighbors and family members who rely on Medicaid for everything from cancer treatment to lifesaving medications,' said Rick Lucas, president and executive director of the Ohio Nurses Association, in a statement. 'These cuts won't just hurt – they will kill.'
Although unrelated to the bill in timing, the proposed cuts have come at the same time as a large new study, which found that Obama-era expansions of Medicaid have probably saved 27,000 lives since 2010.
Republicans are aiming to pass the bill out of the chamber by Memorial Day – the upcoming Monday holiday. Members have pushed to do so, scheduling a rule committee meeting at 1am on Wednesday, a move Democrats criticized as hearing the bill under cover of darkness.
'When I was a teen, my late mother would often say nothing good happens after midnight,' the ranking rules committee Democrat, Brendan Boyle of Pennsylvania, said. 'Now I know what she meant.'
However, the rift within the party cuts both ways. Some Republican deficit hawks are arguing cuts to social programs don't go far or fast enough. The divisions led Trump to visit Capitol Hill on Tuesday to urge Republican House members to 'land the plane', in the words of House Republican Dusty Johnson, of South Dakota.
Trump administration officials also continue to zealously defend the bill. The health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, argued on Tuesday that: 'There's only 8.5 million people affected by this … The remaining are able-bodied male workers who refuse to get a job, who refuse to even meet the minimal thresholds.'
The secretary has repeatedly stated the cuts are to stop 'waste, fraud and abuse'. The CBO that found more than 13 million people would probably lose insurance in coming years because of the changes, including coverage losses from Obamacare.
Sharon Parrot, president of the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities said in a press call that Republicans had 'done all they can to portray the people hurt as anything but what they are – people in our communities'.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Democratic governors embrace border security, reject Trump immigrant 'abuses'
Democratic governors embrace border security, reject Trump immigrant 'abuses'

Reuters

time40 minutes ago

  • Reuters

Democratic governors embrace border security, reject Trump immigrant 'abuses'

WASHINGTON, June 12 (Reuters) - Three prominent Democratic U.S. governors face a grilling on Thursday from a Republican-led U.S. House of Representatives panel over immigration policy, as President Donald Trump steps up a crackdown on people living in the country illegally. The governors of New York, Illinois and Minnesota are due to testify to the House Oversight Committee following days of protests in downtown Los Angeles over the Trump administration's aggressive ramping up of arrests of migrants. Tensions escalated as Trump ordered the National Guard and Marines into California to provide additional security. Trump's immigration crackdown has become a major political flashpoint between the White House and national Democrats. California's Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom, seen as a contender for the party's presidential nomination in 2028, in a Tuesday night video speech accused Trump of choosing "theatrics over public safety." Minnesota's Tim Walz, who ran unsuccessfully for vice president last year; Illinois' JB Pritzker, also seen a 2028 hopeful, and New York's Kathy Hochul, walked a careful line in their prepared testimony for Thursday's hearing, voicing support for immigration enforcement, if not Trump's tactics. "If they are undocumented, we want them out of Illinois and out of our country," Pritzker said. At the same time, Pritzker lashed out against "any violations of the law or abuses of power" and said, "Law-abiding, hardworking, tax-paying people who have been in this country for years should have a path to citizenship." Reuters/Ipsos polls show Trump getting more support for his handling of immigration than any other policy area. "Minnesota is not a sanctuary state," Walz proclaimed, adding that state officials cooperate with federal immigration authorities, while noting that it offers "respect" to cities and counties that choose to give no more than the legal minimum support to the Department of Homeland Security.

Arnold Schwarzenegger ‘cries' as he admits Trump doesn't like him during Kimmel interview
Arnold Schwarzenegger ‘cries' as he admits Trump doesn't like him during Kimmel interview

The Independent

time40 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Arnold Schwarzenegger ‘cries' as he admits Trump doesn't like him during Kimmel interview

Former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger jokingly cried after he was quizzed on whether the president liked him during an interview on Jimmy Kimmel Live. Schwarzenegger, a Republican who backed Kamala Harris for the presidency in November's election, was asked by Kimmel Wednesday night whether Donald Trump likes him, as well as what he thought about the Los Angeles riots. 'I think that you're a person who is trusted on both sides and that's very rare nowadays,' Kimmel said. 'I think probably Donald Trump doesn't want you to be trusted because I don't think Donald Trump likes you very much, to be honest.' 'True?' Kimmel jibed while the 77-year-old began to crumple up his face as if he were crying. Schwarzenegger has said in the past that he 'will always be an American before I am a Republican', citing it as a reason for his Harris and Tim Walz vote in November 2024. When asked for his thoughts on the LA anti-ICE protests, he told Kimmel, 'This wouldn't happen if the politicians would do their work. Think about it.' 'The Democrats and the Republican 's have no interest in solving this problem [ immigration ] because they use that to raise money and so what they do is they just keep pointing the finger at each other and then they're surpised if all of a sudden we are using our 'middle finger' on them.' 'It's all bogus because I think we can do better than that,' he added. He added later on, 'The whole thing is to do with deportation. 'Of course, this is a very sensitive subject for me because when I came over to this country, I was living in fear of being deported,' before joking that he was scared he was going to be deported for 'creative reasons.' Having grown up in Austria, Schwarzenegger idolised the United States and the American way of life. 'Everything that I have ever accomplished in my life is because of America – that's the bottom line,' he told Kimmel. Schwarzenegger moved to California in 1968, when he was just 21, despite not being fluent in English, and 'it was a disaster,' he says, because of the political uproar at the time. Yet, he began to pave the way for his career, starting as an established bodybuilder, where he won several world titles after his move. By the 1980s, Schwarzenegger had achieved Hollywood stardom, starring in numerous action movies of the era. He became a US citizen in 1983. A decade later, the star had become increasingly politically active as a Republican, running for the California governorship, where he won, and was sworn in as the 38th Governor of California on November 17, 2003. He was the first foreign-born governor of California since Irish-born Gov. John G. Downey in 1862. During his tenure from 2003 to 2011, Schwarzenegger focused his efforts on reducing California's greenhouse gas emissions, increasing the minimum wage, and updating the state's workers' compensation system. Naturally, physical education and after-school programs were also a core focus of his. He endorsed the After-School Education & Safety Act, which passed in 2002.

New GOP bill would protect AI companies from lawsuits if they offer transparency
New GOP bill would protect AI companies from lawsuits if they offer transparency

NBC News

time44 minutes ago

  • NBC News

New GOP bill would protect AI companies from lawsuits if they offer transparency

Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., is introducing legislation Thursday that would shield artificial intelligence developers from an array of civil liability lawsuits provided they meet certain disclosure requirements. Lummis' bill, the Responsible Innovation and Safe Expertise Act, seeks to clarify that doctors, lawyers, financial advisers, engineers and other professionals who use AI programs in their decision-making retain legal liability for any errors they make — so long as AI developers publicly disclose how their systems work. 'This legislation doesn't create blanket immunity for AI — in fact, it requires AI developers to publicly disclose model specifications so professionals can make informed decisions about the AI tools they choose to utilize,' Lummis, a member of the Commerce Committee, said in a statement first shared with NBC News. 'It also means that licensed professionals are ultimately responsible for the advice and decisions they make. This is smart policy for the digital age that protects innovation, demands transparency, and puts professionals and their clients first.' Lummis' office touted the bill as the first piece of federal legislation that offers clear guidelines for AI liability in a professional context. The measure would not govern liability for other AI elements, such as self-driving vehicles, and it would not provide immunity when AI developers act recklessly or willfully engage in misconduct. 'AI is transforming industries — medicine, law, engineering, finance — and becoming embedded in professional tools that shape critical decisions,' her office said in a release. 'But outdated liability rules discourage innovation, exposing developers to unbounded legal risk even when trained professionals are using these tools.' Exactly who is liable when AI is used in sensitive medical, legal or financial situations is a bit of a gray area, with some states seeking to enact their own standards. The House-passed 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' which is advancing through Congress and supported by President Donald Trump, includes a provision that would ban states from enacting any AI regulations for 10 years. Senate Republicans last week proposed changing the provision to instead block federal funding for broadband projects to states that regulate AI. Both Democratic and Republican state officials have criticized the effort to prohibit state-level regulations over the next decade, while AI executives have argued that varying state laws would stifle industry growth when the United States is in stiff competition with countries like China.

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