Republican Senator Insists Cutting Medicaid Is a 'Scare Tactic' Meant 'To Get Able-Bodied Adults Working'
Rep. Keith Self defended Republican proposals to cut Medicaid spending, insisting the goal isn't to reduce benefits for those in need but "to get able-bodied adults working."
As part of ongoing Republican efforts to reshape federal spending, Medicaid has become a flashpoint in broader budget negotiations. GOP lawmakers have proposed tightening eligibility and work requirements for Medicaid recipients, sparking backlash from Democrats and healthcare advocates.
During a Thursday morning appearance on Fox Business' "Mornings with Maria," Self, a freshman Republican from Texas, addressed growing concerns over GOP-backed Medicaid reform.
"When they use scare tactics to say we're cutting benefits," Self said, "we're only trying to get able-bodied adults working."
Rep. Keith Self on Medicaid: "When they use scare tactics to say we're cutting benefits, we're only trying to get able-bodied adults working." pic.twitter.com/95j4Jfix4b — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 24, 2025
He emphasized that the proposed reforms are not aimed at children, seniors, or individuals with disabilities, but at non-disabled adults who, according to some conservatives, rely on public assistance instead of seeking employment.
Health policy experts warn that imposing strict work requirements could lead to significant coverage losses, particularly in states with already fragile healthcare safety nets. Meanwhile, Medicaid enrollment remains at record highs following the COVID-19 pandemic and expanded eligibility policies.
Originally published on Latin Times
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
DW
15 hours ago
- DW
EU asked to intervene as US sanctions deal fresh blow to ICC – DW – 06/06/2025
Fresh US sanctions will curb the ICC's capacity to work. With a Slovenian judge on the blacklist, calls for the EU to activate laws to block the sanctions are mounting. It was a consequential case of deja-vu in The Hague on Thursday, as the US issued fresh sanctions against judges at the International Criminal Court (ICC) over what it calls "illegitimate actions targeting the United States and Israel." The move is the latest in a series of diplomatic assaults on the ICC ostensibly aimed at curtailing the court's credibility and ability to function. The ICC has criticized the measure as "a clear attempt to undermine the indepedence of an international judicial institution." While the European Union (EU) has long defended the court as the "cornerstone of international justice," its member states' mixed response to ICC rulings in recent months has exposed cracks in the world's main mechanism for international criminal justice, and its capacity to act. Now calls for the bloc to use legal powers to counter US sanctions are mounting. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the sanctions on Thursday Image: Mehmet Eser/Zuma/Imago Why is the US targeting the ICC? The new measures target four ICC judges. Two were involved in proceeding that led to an ICC arrest warrant against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, among others, over alleged crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza. Israel denies the allegations. The other two blacklisted judges were part of proceedings that authorized probes into alleged war crimes committed by US armed forces in Afghanistan. During Republican President Donald Trump's first term, the US had already targeted Khan's predecessor over an ICC probe into suspected war crimes in Afghanistan. The subsequent administration under President Joe Biden lifted the sanctions, and the ICC then "deprioritized" alleged US violations in its Afghanistan investigation in 2021. Thursday's new sanctions come on top of measures announced against the court's top prosecutor, Karim Khan, in February. They also come amid turbulent times for the court, with Khan having stepped back last month until a probe into sexual misconduct claims is complete. US citizens and firms are banned from doing business with the sanctioned judges Image: Peter Dejong/AP/picture alliance The ICC was set up in 2002 as a court of last resort to prosecute leaders and other key figures for atrocities when justice cannot, or will not, be served in their own countries. More than 120 nations, including all EU member states, voluntarily signed up to the international treaty which established the court. But China, Russia, the US and Israel are notable non-members — and Washington claims this as the basis for its sanctions. "The ICC is politicized and falsely claims unfettered discretion to investigate, charge, and prosecute nationals of the United States and our allies. This dangerous assertion and abuse of power infringes upon the sovereignty and national security of the United States and our allies," US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement on Thursday. How will sanctions impact the court? In response, the ICC said that its work "provides justice and hope to millions of victims of unimaginable atrocities." "Targeting those working for accountability does nothing to help civilians trapped in conflict. It only emboldens those who believe they can act with impunity," the court added. Under the sanctions, US businesses and citizens are banned from providing funds, goods or services to the blacklisted judges. Any assets they hold in the US are also frozen. But the implications don't stop there. The Associated Press wrote last month that the ICC's chief prosecutor had lost access to his emails and seen his bank accounts frozen. According to the report, these businesses had discontinued their services out of fear of being targeted by US authorities for supporting blacklisted indivduals. Some non-governmental organizations also reportedly stopped working with the court. Slovania has called on the EU to activate its so-called blocking statute after the US sanctioned a Slovenian judge Image: Yves Herman/REUTERS/REUTERS EU urged to activate laws to block sanctions The European Union said on Friday that it "deeply regrets" the US move and vowed to continue backing the ICC. But some hope the EU will take tougher action. Back in the 1990s, the EU laid out laws known as its "blocking statute" aimed at cushioning the extraterritorial blow of US measures. The legislation bans EU firms from complying with US sanctions the bloc deems illegal, and was designed to prevent US restrictions on Cuba from wiping out European trade with the country. The laws were later updated to include US sanctions on Iran. Now, Slovenia and Belgium are leading a call for the bloc's executive to activate the same laws against the newest US sanctions against the ICC. Slovenian judge Beti Hohler is among those on Washington's blacklist. Asked on Friday whether the European Commission would grant Slovenia's ask, spokesperson Olof Gill told reporters: "All we can do right now is closely monitor the implications before we decide any next steps." While it's up to the European Commission to determine if, how, and when it extends the blocking statute, Brussels will likely be weighing the potential political ramifications — and whether there is enough unity among EU capitals to back the move. An existential crisis at the ICC? It's a recurring theme, as EU member states are not on the same page about the ICC. While the central executive in Brussels regularly styles the bloc as the court's biggest backer, EU countries' actions tell a more complex story — one that adds to a growing sense that the court's future is full of uncertainty. Unlike national judiciaries, the ICC has no police service. Instead, it relies on members to hand over suspects who arrive on their territory. "The ICC is famously described as a giant without arms and legs — it cannot really enforce those arrest warrants. It's up to the political will of states," international criminal law lecturer Mathjiy Holvoet told DW earlier this year. In early 2025, Italy failed to arrest a Libyan police chief wanted by the ICC for alleged war crimes. Libya is seen as a crucial partner in Italy's bid to cut down irregular migration. Earlier this month, Hungary withdrew from the court after rolling out the red carpet for Netanyahu in apparent defiance of the ICC's arrest warrant. Hungary to withdraw from International Criminal Court To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Though other EU governments have issued statements of support for the ICC, several among them have also indicated Netanyahu would not be arrested should he visit their country. France has suggested the Israeli prime minister has immunity because Israel is not an ICC member, and Germany's chancellor said in February he would "find ways" to allow Netanyahu travel to Berlin. Edited by: Maren Sass
Int'l Business Times
17 hours ago
- Int'l Business Times
Musk's Rage 'Helps Bolster' GOP Senator's Efforts Against Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill,' Lawmaker Says
Sen. Ron Johnson said Elon Musk's explosive criticism of Donald Trump's sweeping tax-and-spending plan helps reinforce Republican opposition to the bill, which some in the GOP warn will worsen the federal deficit. The latest divide within the party comes as lawmakers debate Trump's so-called "One Big Beautiful Bill," a legislative package that his allies say fulfills campaign promises but that fiscal conservatives like Johnson argue is too costly. Musk's public meltdown over the bill, paired with his threats to oust supporters and revelations that he donated over $250 million to Trump's campaign, has further complicated the politics surrounding the measure, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported. In a series of social media posts this week, Musk claimed Trump wouldn't have been reelected without him, accused the former president of ties to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation, and called for his impeachment. Trump fired back by threatening Musk's federal contracts and accusing him of trying to sabotage the legislation to protect electric vehicle tax breaks for Tesla. While Johnson welcomed Musk's support in questioning the bill's fiscal impact, other Republicans brushed off the feud. Rep. Derrick Van Orden called the dustup a "tempest in a teapot" and reiterated his loyalty to Trump. "I think it has an impact," Johnson said. "I think it helps bolster, certainly, my case that we have to address this." Rep. Tom Tiffany said Musk's input came too late to make a difference. Still, some lawmakers acknowledged that the billionaire's comments aren't helping the GOP unify behind the bill. Rep. Scott Fitzgerald said Musk's attacks weren't "helpful," and Rep. Troy Nehls accused Musk of having "lost [his] damn mind." Despite the fallout, Van Orden said the legislation will move forward and insisted Trump is still leading the GOP. Originally published on Latin Times
DW
19 hours ago
- DW
What Trump-Musk feud means for tech billionaire's businesses – DW – 06/06/2025
Tesla CEO Elon Musk spent some $300 million on Donald Trump's campaign, gaining unprecedented access to the Republican president's administration. What does their public row mean for Musk's empire? How did Musk and Trump get so close? Once a vocal critic of Donald Trump during his 2016 United States election campaign, Elon Musk, the billionaire CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, pivoted from his Democratic Party roots to embrace Trump's policies during the Republican's second term. Frustrated by Obama-era regulations stifling his ventures, Musk embraced Trump's agenda of tax cuts and deregulation. Their bond grew from mutual respect to a robust political alliance, which saw Musk last year back Trump's reelection campaign to the tune of nearly $300 billion (€263 billion). When Trump returned to the White House in January, the world's richest man took on an advisory role in the administration, leading the controversial Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Tasked with slashing public spending, Musk's role stirred controversy, impacting Tesla's stock price and auto sales. After months of pressure from investors, Musk agreed last month to scale back his work in Trump's government. Trump and Musk on the outs over Big Beautiful Bill To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video What sparked the public feud between Trump and Musk? On Thursday, wearing a T-shirt emblazoned with the "The Dogefather," Musk was given an initially cordial farewell by the president in the Oval Office. But Trump could not contain his frustration at Musk's earlier criticism of his administration's sweeping tax and spending bill, which the Tesla founder called fiscally reckless and a "disgusting abomination." After Musk then accused the US president of alleged ties to child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, the news conference ended with Trump threatening to revoke Musk's government contracts, which could cost his business empire billions of dollars. Over the next few hours, the row spilled over to social media, where both men repeated their White House remarks, prompting the SpaceX owner to announce an immediate decommissioning of its Dragon spacecraft, before appearing to back down. How did markets react to the Trump-Musk fallout? Tesla stock lost about $150 billion in market value on Thursday — the largest single-day decline in its history. The stock closed down over 14%. However, news outlet Politico reported Friday that the two men were scheduled to speak later in the day in the hope of defusing the situation, which caused a sharp reversal in the stock's fortunes. Tesla stock was up 5% in pre-market trade. However, a White House official said later Friday that Trump had no plans for any call, adding that he may get rid of his Tesla bought in March in a show of support against Musk in the face of anti-Tesla protests. Tesla shares have been on a wild rollercoaster ride this year after a strong performance around the US election. Having peaked at $428 in January, shares in the electric vehiclemaker plummeted by almost half in March as investors reacted negatively to Musk's involvement in the Trump administration. Tesla stock then rallied when Trump paused his unprecedented tariffs on the rest of the world and after US regulators eased rules on self-driving vehicles. Trump came to Musk's aid when Tesla vehicles and dealerships were attacked Image:What's at stake for Musk's empire? The public spat, as well as Trump's budget plans, have left the fortunes of Musk's companies hanging in the balance. Tesla, Musk's most profitable firm, could be severely impacted by Trump's plans to cut a subsidy on new electric vehicles that is worth up to $7,500 for buyers. Despite Musk's aggressive criticism and lobbying by Tesla, Trump plans to eliminate the credit by the end of the year, seven years before it was due to expire. News agency Bloomberg cited JP Morgan analysts as saying that the cut would reduce Tesla's full-year profit by $1.2 billion. Cuts to state-level credits could further impact the EV maker's bottom line this financial year. It could, however, encourage EV buyers to bring forward their plans and spur demand for Tesla's vehicles in the short term. Tesla is already being impacted by Trump's tariffs as the firm relies on Chinese parts for its Cybercab robotaxi and Semi electric truck. Starlink satellite system shaping modern warfare To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video However, it is unclear whether Trump can unilaterally make good on his threat to tear up federal contracts with Musk's firms like SpaceX. Since 2000, SpaceX has received more than $22 billion in contracts from the US Defense Department and space agency NASA. If Trump were to terminate the contracts, it would have a huge financial impact on SpaceX and disrupt the US government's space ambitions. SpaceX's Crew Dragon is currently the only US spacecraft certified to carry crew to the International Space Station (ISS). Any ending of Pentagon contracts involving Musk's Starlink satellite internet service would also be a lose-lose for both Musk and the government. Starlink provides broadband services to rural areas. Terminals are also deployed on US military bases, ships, aircraft, and armored vehicles. The satellite internet service is often used for disaster response. Edited by: Uwe Hessler
