Secretary Rollins signs waivers to amend SNAP in Indiana
HENDERSON, Ky. (WEHT) – U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke L. Rollins signed waivers to amend the statutory definition of food for purchase for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Programs (SNAP) in Indiana and Iowa, each commencing in 2026.
'Indiana is proud to be a leader in the Make America Healthy Again initiative, and today Secretary Rollins signed our waiver to return SNAP in Indiana to its intended purpose: nutrition. President Trump and Secretary Rollins are putting our farmers first and supporting American agriculture, and I was proud to join them today,' said Governor Braun.
Here's what's in the GOP's 'big, beautiful bill'
Officials say prior to these waivers, SNAP recipients could buy anything except alcohol, tobacco, hot foods and personal care products. This action expands the list of products excluded from SNAP purchases in Indiana and Iowa. Indiana's waiver excludes soft drinks and candy, and it will take effect January 1, 2026.
According to the USDA, as part of the Make America Healthy Again agenda, this action seeks to reverse disease trends across the country. Prediabetes now affects one in three children ages 12 to 19; 40% of school-aged children and adolescents have at least one chronic condition and 15% of high school students drink one or more sodas daily.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Republicans want to add work requirements to Medicaid. Even some recipients with jobs are concerned
Without Medicaid, Joanna Parker would have a much tougher time holding down a job. The Garner, North Carolina, resident works for a local home goods store up to 20 hours a week, typically. But she also suffers from degenerative disc disease in her spine and relies on Medicaid to cover her doctor's visits, physical therapy and medication that helps her manage the pain so she can get out of bed in the morning. 'If I lose my insurance, I lose my ability to work,' said Parker, 40, who was uninsured for about a decade until North Carolina expanded Medicaid to low-income adults in December 2023. That's why Parker is so worried about the sweeping Republican tax and spending cuts package that's now making its way through Congress. The bill that narrowly passed the House last week would impose the first-ever work requirement on Medicaid enrollees like her. The Senate will put its stamp on the measure, which aims to fulfill President Donald Trump's agenda, in coming weeks. Though she's employed, Parker fears she could be stripped of her health insurance if she's not able to work enough hours every month or gets tripped up in reporting her time on the job to the state – should the work mandate become law. 'I feel it will be so easy to lose your coverage if you do the reporting the wrong way and you can't fix it,' said Parker, who has applied for full-time jobs over the past 18 months but said she hasn't received responses. The House GOP's 'big, beautiful bill' would mandate that many Medicaid expansion enrollees ages 19 to 64 work, volunteer, go to school or participate in a job training program at least 80 hours a month to obtain or maintain coverage. The requirement, which would go into effect by the end of 2026, would not apply to parents, pregnant women, medically frail individuals and those with substance-abuse disorders, among others. The provision would help achieve Republicans' longstanding goal of introducing work requirements into Medicaid. It's part of an unprecedented set of cuts the House GOP would make to the nation's safety net program. Proponents say the mandate would prompt enrollees who could – and should, in supporters' view – work to get jobs and, eventually, move off of Medicaid. Also, they argue, it would preserve the program for the most vulnerable Americans and reduce spending on the low-income adults who gained coverage through the Affordable Care Act's expansion provision, a frequent target of congressional Republicans. 'If you are an able-bodied adult and there's no expectation of you to work or train or volunteer in any way, there's going to be a large number who don't,' said Jonathan Ingram, vice president of policy and research at the Foundation for Government Accountability, which promotes work requirements in government assistance programs. But many Medicaid enrollees and their advocates fear millions of people would lose their coverage under the proposed measure, including many who already work or qualify for an exemption but would get stuck in red tape. An estimated 4.8 million Medicaid recipients would be left uninsured over 10 years because of the work mandate, according to a preliminary Congressional Budget Office analysis, though that figure could grow due to last-minute changes to the House bill that accelerated the start date of the requirement. (The Senate, which will now consider the bill, is expected to also make changes to the legislation – though any adjustments to its Medicaid provisions remain to be seen.) Many adults with Medicaid coverage have jobs, though the estimates vary. Some 38% of adult enrollees had full-time jobs in 2023, most of them for the full year, according to KFF, a nonpartisan health policy research group that looked at folks ages 19 to 64 without dependent children who did not receive disability benefits or have Medicare coverage, which insures people with disabilities. Just over 20% worked part time, up to 35 hours a week. Another 31% reported that they did not work because they were caregivers or in school or had an illness or disability, all of which might qualify them for exemptions from the work requirements under the House bill. Only 12% of the enrollees said they were not working because they couldn't find jobs, had retired or reported another reason, according to the KFF analysis, which is based on US Census Bureau data. 'Most people are doing the things that they're expected to do in terms of qualifying activities or things that could qualify them for an exemption,' said Michael Karpman, principal research associate at the Urban Institute. 'But people have a lot of difficulty navigating the process for reporting their exemptions, or if they're not exempt, reporting their work activities.' He pointed to Arkansas, the first state to temporarily implement work requirements during Trump's first term before the effort was halted in federal court. More than 18,000 Medicaid enrollees lost their coverage over several months – even though the state automatically exempted about two-thirds of those subject to the mandate. Many beneficiaries in Arkansas did not understand the work requirements or did not realize it applied to them, a 2019 Urban Institute report found. Participants tend to move frequently so their contact information may have been outdated. Others had difficulty using the online reporting portal, especially if they did not have access to computers and internet service. 'That population has all kinds of challenges with interacting with a system like that,' said Bill Kopsky, executive director of the Arkansas Public Policy Panel, a social and economic justice advocacy group. He noted that many enrollees didn't receive mailed notifications from the state or didn't realize they had to take action. What's more, the mandate was not associated with an increase in employment, though the uninsured rate did rise among low-income residents in the affected age group, said Karpman, who analyzed Census data in a recent report. That finding is in line with a previous study from Harvard University researchers, which was based on telephone surveys. Ingram, however, challenges the assertion that the effort did not spur Medicaid recipients to find work. He noted in a recent report that more than 9,000 enrollees found jobs during the time the work requirement was implemented. Some 99% of them were in the age group subject to the mandate, according to a prior foundation report that cited state data. Katrina Falkner knows what it's like to be stuck in a Medicaid paperwork morass. The Chicago resident, who cares for her elderly father and other family members with disabilities, said she was disenrolled from the program in 2023 after the state Department of Human Services lost the paperwork that she had spent days organizing. The agency told her that it reinstated her, she said. But when she went to the hospital, she found out she was still uninsured. It took several visits to multiple agency offices before the issue was resolved the following year. The department told CNN that such scenarios are 'extremely rare' and it works to 'ensure timely review and enrollment' for all applicants eligible for Medicaid. Falkner, 43, volunteers with several community organizing groups at least 20 hours a week and works every other Saturday as a Head Start ambassador for the Chicago Early Learning program. She also suffers from asthma, anemia, vertigo and other conditions, which can make it hard for her to work or volunteer at times. Being able to meet the reporting requirements concerns her, especially since her electricity and internet access are sometimes cut off. 'If I lost my Medicaid, it would cause me a whole lot of struggles,' she said, noting that the program covers her nebulizer and other health care needs. 'If they don't have the right documents, I won't be able to be in existence because I can't breathe.' Although Dana Bango of Zionville, North Carolina, has dealt with state social service agencies for years, she still 'sweats it every time.' There are many strict deadlines and hoops to jump through, so she has to remain vigilant, she said. The potential work mandate fills her with 'dread' since she's worried that she could fall through the cracks and lose her Medicaid coverage – even though she works 20 hours a week at the North Carolina Christmas Tree Association and delivers for Door Dash 10 hours a week. A cancer survivor who still needs follow up care, Bango is concerned that she may not get the help she could need from state workers to log her hours if the mandate takes effect. 'I've been uninsured before. I don't want to go back there. It's a scary thing,' she said.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Joni Ernst's ‘Well, we all are going to die,' and the GOP's flippant defenses of Trump's agenda
One of the reasons politicians don't often engage in massive overhauls of the American economy is that it's very difficult to defend a massive overhaul of the American economy. However good any given plan is, it often produces losers and – even in the best of cases – some short-term pain. And repeatedly now as President Donald Trump has launched multiple massive overhauls, prominent Republicans have learned that the hard way. Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa is the most recent. Appearing at a town hall on Friday, Ernst was pressed on cuts to Medicaid – the health care program for low-income Americans – in House Republicans' budget plan. One audience member shouted that 'people will die.' The usual politician thing would have been to take issue with that premise – or to, as other Republicans have strained to do, cast the Medicaid cuts as merely cutting waste and abuse. (That's not the full story, of course; the Congressional Budget Office recently projected that House Republicans' changes to Medicaid, including work requirements for some recipients, would leave 7.6 million Americans uninsured by 2034.) But Ernst decided to go in a different direction. 'Well, we all are going to die,' said Ernst, who's facing reelection in 2026. When hostile portions of the crowd balked at the response, she said: 'For heaven's sakes, folks.' The senator and her office argued Friday that Republicans are in fact trying to 'strengthen' Medicaid. A spokesman said: 'There's only two certainties in life: death and taxes, and she's working to ease the burden of both by fighting to keep more of Iowans' hard-earned tax dollars in their own pockets and ensuring their benefits are protected from waste, fraud, and abuse.' Ernst in her remarks went on to accuse her critics of not wanting to 'listen to me when I say that we are going to focus on those that are most vulnerable. Those that meet the eligibility requirements for Medicaid, we will protect … them.' As a contrast, she cited an oft-invoked GOP claim that 1.4 million undocumented immigrants are receiving Medicaid benefits. But that's not actually what the CBO estimate says – nor does it account for the other millions of people the CBO says would lose insurance. In other words, however bad Ernst's answer was, it might just be that there's not a good answer to be given. Republicans needed to cut spending to pay for Trump's tax cuts, and it's hard to cut enough unless you cut entitlements. It's a political minefield that even some Trump allies like Steve Bannon have warned their party about. And indeed, Democrats quickly leapt to highlight Ernst as the epitome of an uncaring, Medicaid-busting Republican. But Ernst is not the first to wander into this kind of territory. Repeatedly in recent weeks, prominent Republicans who have been asked to account for the pains caused by Trump's bold plans have stumbled into similar territory. Trump himself has repeatedly talked about how the price increases created by his tariffs might mean people have to buy fewer dolls for little girls. 'You know, someone said, 'Oh, the shelves, they're going to be open,'' Trump said. 'Well, maybe the children will have two dolls instead of 30 dolls, and maybe the two dolls will cost a couple of bucks more than they would normally.' Trump said on the campaign trail that foreign countries would pay the extra cost of the tariffs, not consumers. Conservative Daily Wire founder Ben Shapiro called Trump's comments 'a tremendous commercial for Democrats' and urged Trump to avoid language that minimized the impacts of inflation. Back in March, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick addressed the administration's chaotic changes to the Social Security system by claiming that only 'fraudsters' would complain about missing a Social Security check. He pointed to his own mother-in-law. (The administration has pursued a series of sometimes halting changes to the Social Security system, including limiting claims to in-person rather than over the phone – something it later walked back – and cutting staff.) 'Let's say Social Security didn't send out their checks this month. My mother-in-law, who's 94 – she wouldn't call and complain,' Lutnick said. He added: 'She just wouldn't. She'd think something got messed up, and she'll get it next month. A fraudster always makes the loudest noise – screaming, yelling and complaining.' It's logical to assume that Lutnick's mother-in-law wouldn't complain, given her son-in-law is a billionaire. But according to the Social Security Administration, more than 1 in 10 seniors rely on the program for at least 90% of their income. Are any of these game-changing gaffes? Not necessarily. But they are certainly fodder for Democrats to argue that Trump is pursuing a rather haphazard and callous overhaul of the American economy. It's the kind of thing Bannon warns about in cautioning Republicans against Medicaid cuts. There just aren't many good ways to defend millions of poor people being projected to lose their health insurance. And if the early evidence is any indication, it's going to result in plenty of awkward defenses in the future.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Scientists make groundbreaking discovery that could solve major issue with modern agriculture: 'We've spent thousands of years breeding the animals'
The biggest source of methane, a heat-trapping gas that contributes to our warming planet, is, by and large, agriculture, which produces 3.55 billion tons of methane per year, according to Our World in Data. Methane produced by the digestive processes in the stomachs of livestock, such as cows, contributes a large part of this number. Scientists have been trying to solve this methane problem for years, and finally, a new American startup might just have an answer. Hoofprint Biome is an innovative startup created by Dr. Kathryn Polkoff, an animal scientist, and Dr. Scott Collins, a bioengineer. The startup has an almost glaringly obvious solution to reduce the methane that cows produce while improving the animals' bioavailability. When cows feed — typically on food that is hard for nonruminant animals, like humans, to digest — the food travels through the stomach's four-part compartment, first entering the largest of all, the rumen. Because of its capacity, the rumen stores ingested liquid and food for digestion, and it is also where the food becomes fermented by the microbes in the rumen. This fermentation process creates methane, along with other gaseous by-products, that becomes expelled through the cows' belching, or burping. In approaching the methane problem, the scientists studied the source of the methane production. "It's a very specific subset of microbes that are making the methane," said Polkoff, according to a TechCrunch article. These microbes steal any nutrients from the cow that have not yet been absorbed, creating methane gas. To address this, the scientists created probiotics and natural enzymes to suppress these microbes and limit methane production. These additives would help regulate the cows' microbiome while encouraging the production of beneficial bacteria in the stomach to enhance their nutrient absorption. According to TechCrunch, the startup aims to achieve a 5% feed efficiency that would help reduce the amount of heat-trapping gas emitted by the agricultural industry. Reducing planet-heating gas pollution improves air quality and human health while slowing the rise of global temperatures. The startup has garnered $15 million in investments alone in its first major round of funding. "We've spent thousands of years breeding the animals to make them as efficient as possible and to increase the yield, but there have not really been that many attempts to change a microbiome," Polk said, per TechCrunch. "That'd be like if you were engineering a car but had never changed the engine." Do you think gas stoves should be banned nationwide? No way Let each state decide I'm not sure Definitely Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Rumin8, an Australian startup, has created a similar methane-reducing supplement that also enhances milk production in dairy cows. Although limiting methane production from cow belching is progress for a cleaner and cooler planet, it is only one part of the equation. Reducing dependence on dairy can significantly cut down on the amount of methane that the agricultural industry produces. Join our free newsletter for weekly updates on the latest innovations improving our lives and shaping our future, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
