logo
Bookman: There's no way to cut $800 billion from Medicaid without hitting bone

Bookman: There's no way to cut $800 billion from Medicaid without hitting bone

Yahoo05-06-2025
Opinion writer Jay Bookman argues that Trump administration officials are being dishonest when they say cuts to Medicaid won't lead to people losing benefits. the_burtons/Getty Images
After repeatedly promising on the campaign trail that he would never cut Medicaid benefits, Donald Trump is pushing a 'big, beautiful' spending bill that would slash Medicaid and other health care spending by $800 billion over the next decade.
And if you still believe the administration, they're going to make those cuts without anyone losing benefits. As White House official Russell Vought put in last week, 'This bill will preserve and protect the programs, the social safety net, but it will make it much more common sense. No one will lose coverage as a result.'
If your BS detector isn't ringing by now, you need to take it in for repair.
Confronted with the absurdity of claiming that you can cut $800 billion without canceling health care coverage, Trump officials retreat to their fallback position. Yes, they admit, they'll be cutting benefits, but only for those who don't deserve 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,' another White House official told Politico. 'So no one is getting cut.'
Once again, though, your BS detector ought to be blaring. Under existing federal law, undocumented immigrants are already barred from getting Medicaid. They're promising to cut benefits to people who are already not getting those benefits. So no savings there.
And the truth is, most of the able-bodied men who are too lazy to work are also too lazy to worry about jumping through the hoops needed to get Medicaid health-care coverage. Such men do exist, no doubt, but in numbers far too small to generate $800 billion in savings.
To get savings on that scale, you have to look elsewhere. And the truth is that millions of lower-income Americans, many of them working people, would be stripped of their health insurance if the bill becomes law. In Georgia alone, the projections are that as many as 200,000 people would lose coverage. And because Medicaid plays a larger health care role in rural communities, where the population is older and private sector jobs less likely to offer health insurance, the impact would be greater in those areas, putting additional financial strain on rural hospitals and health-care providers already struggling to stay open.
(If Congress also refuses to extend subsidies for the Affordable Care Act later this year, as seems likely, the total number of Georgians who lose health insurance could top 700,000.)
And no, the money saved by such measures would not be used to reduce the nation's deficit. It would instead be used to finance tax cuts, the overwhelming majority of which would benefit the wealthy.
A big chunk of the projected savings, an estimated $280 billion, would come from instituting work requirements for Medicaid recipients. The model for that nationwide requirement is supposedly the Pathways program instituted here in Georgia in 2020 by Gov. Brian Kemp.
By most measures, however, that program has proved a massive disappointment. According to the original projections by the Kemp administration, some 25,000 low-wage Georgians should have been enrolled in Medicaid through the program in its first year of operation.
The actual number was 4,300.
By the end of its second year of operation, which comes next month, total enrollment was projected to be almost 50,000. As of April 25, it was 7,400, according to reporting by ProPublica and The Current. The monthly reporting requirements, record-keeping and bureaucratic red tape proved so discouraging that many Georgia applicants gave up in frustration, choosing instead to take the risk that they would not need coverage.
If it seems odd that such a program would be embraced as a model by the GOP, it might be a matter of perspective. It might be that your idea of a failure is somebody else's idea of a success, because the two of you have different goals in mind.
In this case, if your goal is to provide at least a bare-bones health insurance plan to lower-income Americans, then Georgia's Pathways program has failed. However, if your goal is to discourage and obstruct as many Americans as possible from participating in that coverage, because you want to generate $800 billion in savings so the rich can get more tax cuts, then it starts to look a whole lot better.
Those yachts aren't going to buy themselves.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Oil slips as Russia supply concerns ease after Trump-Putin meet
Oil slips as Russia supply concerns ease after Trump-Putin meet

Yahoo

time5 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Oil slips as Russia supply concerns ease after Trump-Putin meet

By Florence Tan SINGAPORE (Reuters) -Oil prices slipped in early Asian trade on Monday as the United States did not exert more pressure on Russia to end the Ukraine war by implementing further measures to disrupt Moscow's oil exports after presidents from both countries met on Friday. Brent crude futures dropped 32 cents, or 0.49%, to $65.53 a barrel by 2213 GMT while U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude was at $62.57 a barrel, down 23 cents. U.S. President Donald Trump met Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday and emerged more aligned with Moscow on seeking a peace deal instead of a ceasefire first. Trump will meet Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and European leaders on Monday to strike a quick peace deal to end Europe's deadliest war in 80 years. "What was primarily in play were the secondary tariffs targeting the key importers of Russian energy, and President Trump has indeed indicated that he will pause pursuing incremental action on this front, at least for China," RBC Capital analyst Helima Croft said in a note. "The status quo remains largely intact for now," she said, adding that Moscow will not walk back on territorial demands while Ukraine and some European leaders will balk at the land-for-peace deal. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Ukrainians in Boston not optimistic about President Trump's meeting with Zelenskyy; "It makes me mad"
Ukrainians in Boston not optimistic about President Trump's meeting with Zelenskyy; "It makes me mad"

CBS News

time6 minutes ago

  • CBS News

Ukrainians in Boston not optimistic about President Trump's meeting with Zelenskyy; "It makes me mad"

As President Donald Trump prepares for the high stakes meeting on Monday with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, back home in Boston, Ukrainians don't feel optimistic. Since the war started three years ago, Yelena Cannata has been volunteering and employing every resource she has for the children of Ukraine to be introduced to early intervention services. "It makes me mad. I have zero trust in President Trump in regulating this war," said Cannata. She hopes Zelenskyy avoids a repeat of that infamous February meeting he had with the president in the Oval Office. "I do hope that out of tomorrow's meeting that lots of the European leaders will come in, there won't be that bullying like the last meeting in the Oval Office and there will be no nonsense about the suit. It should be concrete, normal adult conversation." On Friday, President Trump met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska. The summit ended early and with the two leaders making remarks without taking any questions. Vsevolod Petriv is head of the Boston chapter of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America, an organization that looks out for the interest of Ukrainians in America, providing assistance as it relates to community service and politics. He said the president's recent meeting with Putin was disappointing and a peace deal would come at too much of a cost. "I don't see anything good coming out of it, given the current announcements. And it sounds like he's trading what they are saying is land," said Petriv. "The people in the area of Donbas that they haven't been able to take, they've been fighting hard for at least three years and so you are going to say to all those people we are going to give you to the aggressor that you've been fighting for peace that we know is meaningless because Putin will be back." Both Cannata and Petriv said they'll be looking to see what the next steps will be. "If you are going to give up the lands, which were just occupied without any rights, any rights, how would you consider this peace deal?" said Cannata.

Ukrainians fleeing Russia's attacks say the Alaska summit was an insult
Ukrainians fleeing Russia's attacks say the Alaska summit was an insult

Boston Globe

time7 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

Ukrainians fleeing Russia's attacks say the Alaska summit was an insult

'This is insane,' she said. 'Here there is war, rivers of blood, and they are making some kind of deal.' Advertisement While the much-ballyhooed summit appeared to be more a show of amiable backslapping than tough negotiating, by Saturday it had become clear that Putin and Trump had discussed proposals that would be very hard for Ukraine to swallow. In a post on social media, Trump reversed his support of Ukraine's position that a cease-fire must precede any peace negotiations. And in an interview with Fox News host Sean Hannity, he said that he and Putin had largely agreed to a territorial swap and security guarantees to end the war. European officials said that Putin was demanding all of the eastern Donbas region of Ukraine, including land still held by Ukrainian forces. Half a world away, people who had recently fled the fighting in that region for a shelter near the city of Pavlohrad said the whole summit felt like an insult. The fact that President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine was not invited. That Trump had treated Putin like a friend instead of a man under US sanctions, who is a wanted war criminal in Europe. That the world was now talking about Ukraine permanently giving up land to Russia for peace. Advertisement It was all too much. 'I hate Putin,' said Kateryna Chernenko, 65, who has been bedridden since a stroke about four years ago paralyzed her left side. She had been rescued Thursday, carried down from her second-floor apartment in the city of Dobropillia, which had been battered by the new Russian offensive, and brought to the shelter with her son and family friends. 'How can he do this for so long?' she said. 'Killing civilians while they sleep. This isn't war — it's murder. Trump doesn't understand — it hasn't touched him. If he had lived through this, he wouldn't say what he says.' Any land swap could involve the homes of both Chernenko and Shevchenko, who, like most people at the shelter, had fled from the Donetsk region, which makes up a large part of the Donbas. Russia now occupies almost 20 percent of Ukraine, including about three-quarters of Donetsk, almost all of the adjacent Luhansk region, and the entire Crimean Peninsula. Chernenko moved to Dobropillia when she was about 22. She was given an apartment there under the Soviet regime because of her work at a sparkling-water factory. She learned to do basic home repairs and repeatedly revamped her apartment, which stands in the shadow of a large walnut tree, most recently putting up pink wallpaper dotted with blue flowers. Advertisement She raised three sons there. Her oldest died of a brain tumor. She rarely talks to her youngest son, who moved to Russia to be near her former husband. Her middle son, Serhii Khalturin, 40, came home to care for his mother after her stroke. He bought her a modern stove, a washing machine, a TV, and a refrigerator as tall as the ceiling. Both said they would never give up their land. When asked how it felt to leave home, Khalturin gestured as if tears were rolling down his face. 'That's where my childhood was, that's where my school is. I don't want to leave,' he said. 'Everything's still there — my mother's photos, my brother's photos — old ones from the 1980s, with my mother young and beautiful.' Shevchenko had seen her life whittled away. She used to be an accountant, before moving to a village called Oleksandrivka in Donetsk. She lived in the servants' quarters of a rich professor's weekend home, taking care of the garden and the house and writing children's books. Her boyfriend — he refused to marry her, because he said she was too troublesome — owned his own ramshackle house nearby. Often, they stayed together. The professor died of natural causes. His family moved to France. The main house was bombed. Her boyfriend's house was split in two. The servants' house was destroyed. The couple moved into the summer terrace of the ruined main house, basically a covered porch, patching up holes from shrapnel. A missile hit nearby last fall, setting the forest and a nearby village aflame. The village once had 300 people. After she and her boyfriend fled, Shevchenko said, nine people remained. Advertisement If Putin wanted this land so much, and other regions such as Kharkiv and Zaporizhzhia, why did he destroy everything in his path, Shevchenko wondered. Maybe for mineral resources. Maybe to prove a point. Regardless, she said, Putin did not want peace. 'This is our land,' Shevchenko said. 'Not an inch of it can be given away. Give him just a slice and he'll say, 'I want Kharkiv, I'll take the Zaporizhzhia region.' He wants all of Ukraine and won't stop. We must not agree. We will fight to the end, because we are Ukrainians. That's the only way. We have no other choice.' This article originally appeared in

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store