logo
As states mull Medicaid work requirements, two scale theirs back

As states mull Medicaid work requirements, two scale theirs back

Yahoo14-02-2025

Stock photo from Getty Images.
President Donald Trump's return to the White House sent a clear signal about Medicaid to Republicans across the country: Requiring enrollees to prove they are working, volunteering, or going to school is back on the table.
The day after Trump's inauguration, South Carolina GOP Gov. Henry McMaster asked federal officials to approve a work requirement plan. Ohio Republican Gov. Mike DeWine plans to soon follow suit. Republicans in Congress are eyeing Medicaid work requirements as they seek to slash billions from the federal budget.
But, just as a second Trump administration reignites interest in work requirements, Georgia is proposing to scale back key parts of the nation's only active program. And Arkansas announced an effort to revive — with fundamental changes — a program that ended after a legal judgment in 2019.
The Georgia and Arkansas proposals, from the only two states to have implemented Medicaid work requirements, reveal the disconnect between rhetoric behind such programs and the realities of running them, said consumer advocates and health policy researchers.
'They recognize that what they did the first time didn't work,' said Ben Sommers, a Harvard professor and a former health official in the Biden and Obama administrations. 'It should be a signal to federal policymakers: Don't point to Georgia and Arkansas and say, 'Let's do that.''
More than a dozen states had Medicaid work requirement programs approved during Trump's first administration.
After an expensive and bumpy rollout, Georgia in January posted a draft renewal plan for its Georgia Pathways to Coverage program. The plan removes the requirement to document work every month and to pay premiums. Those key elements — which supporters have argued promote employment and personal responsibility — were never implemented, the state said.
Enrollees would still have to meet the work requirement when they first apply and when they renew each year. The draft plan also expands the group of people who can opt out of work reporting to include parents of children under age 6. A public comment period on the plan is open through Feb. 20.
Arkansas' latest request to federal officials doesn't require enrollees to report their work hours. Instead, it proposes checking whether people are working, caregiving, or fulfilling other qualifying activities by using data, which could include income, job history, educational status, whether a child lives at home, and other criteria, said Gavin Lesnick, a spokesperson for the state's Medicaid agency.
People deemed 'not on track towards meeting their personal health and economic goals' won't be disenrolled but can participate in a 'success coaching' program to maintain coverage, according to the state's proposal. A public comment period on Arkansas' program runs through March 3.
More than 90% of U.S. adults eligible for Medicaid expansion are already working or could be exempt from requirements, according to KFF. Still, several states are quickly moving to restart Medicaid work requirements.
Besides the three states of Arkansas, Ohio, and South Carolina, Iowa and South Dakota are considering similar proposals. Lawmakers in Montana are weighing them as they debate renewing the state's Medicaid expansion.
This week, House Republicans floated a budget proposal to cut $880 billion from the Energy and Commerce Committee, which oversees Medicaid, the state-federal health insurance program for people with low incomes or disabilities. Before the release of that plan, Speaker Mike Johnson said Republicans were discussing changes to Medicaid that include imposing work requirements.
Supporters of such requirements say Medicaid should be reserved for people who are working.
Right now, it 'disincentivizes many low-income families from earning additional income' because they would lose health coverage if they make too much money, said South Carolina Gov. McMaster in his January letter to federal officials. He has argued that a work-reporting requirement is 'fiscally responsible' and 'will incentivize employment.'
There is no evidence showing such programs improve economic outcomes for people; the requirements don't help people find jobs, but not having health insurance can keep them from working, health policy researchers say.
The goal of Ohio's plan is to focus 'resources and efforts on those who are engaged with their health choices and independence,' said the state. The plan doesn't require most individuals to regularly 'report activities, fill out forms, or take any action' beyond what is generally required for Medicaid enrollment. Ohio estimates that more than 61,000 people, or 8% of enrollees subject to its measure, would lose Medicaid eligibility in the first year.
Consumer advocates, health policy analysts, and researchers said the scaling back seen in recent work requirement proposals speaks to the challenges of mandating them for public benefits — and could serve as a cautionary tale for Republicans in Washington, D.C., and across the country. The programs can eliminate people from the Medicaid rolls or suppress enrollment, while adding costly layers of bureaucracy, they said.
'As a matter of health policy, work-reporting requirements in Medicaid are fundamentally flawed,' said Leo Cuello, a researcher at the Georgetown Center for Children and Families.
Arkansas got its initial program off the ground in 2018 before a federal judge said it was illegal. Unlike Georgia, the state had already expanded Medicaid. That work-reporting requirement led to more than 18,000 people losing coverage, in part because enrollees were unaware or confused about how to report they were working.
In his ruling that ended the program, Judge James Boasberg said its approval was 'arbitrary and capricious' because it failed to address a core goal of Medicaid: 'the provision of medical coverage to the needy.'
Arkansas' latest proposal tries to address a potential legal challenge by suspending, rather than terminating, health coverage through the end of the calendar year for people who don't meet requirements.
'We have worked to design this amendment taking into account lessons learned from previous work requirements,' said Arkansas Medicaid Director Janet Mann at a press conference in late January announcing the new proposal.
But the requirements are 'subjective,' and the difference between suspension and termination isn't meaningful, said Camille Richoux, health policy director of Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families.
'The impact is the same: You can't go to the doctor,' she said. 'You can't get your prescriptions filled.'
In Georgia, the Pathways program, launched in 2023, has offered coverage to a small portion of those who would qualify for Medicaid if the state had fully expanded it to all low-income adults, as 40 others have done. With the proposed changes, the state estimates enrollment in Pathways would grow to as many as 30,000 people in the final year of the pilot. The state currently estimates at least 246,000 would become eligible for Medicaid under a full expansion.
About 6,500 people were enrolled in Pathways as of late January, said Grant Thomas, the state's deputy Medicaid commissioner, in a legislative hearing. According to state officials, the program has cost more than $57 million in state and federal funds through December, with most of that money going toward program administration, not benefits.
'Pathways is doing what it is designed to do: increase access to affordable health care coverage while lowering the uninsured rate across Georgia,' said Russel Carlson, the state's Medicaid director. The changes to Pathways are an attempt to 'improve the member experience' while finding ways 'to make government more efficient and accessible,' he added.
Pathways requires that enrollees regularly submit documentation to prove they are working, but the program doesn't include meaningful measures to help people find work, critics said. People who could be eligible for Pathways have said the whole process is time-consuming due to lengthy questionnaires, a glitchy system for uploading documents, and confusing technical language on the website, according to those working with potential enrollees.
'There's stuff that sounds good on paper, but when you go to implement it in real life, it's costly and burdensome,' said Leah Chan, director of health justice at the Georgia Budget and Policy Institute.
So far, Pathways has cost state and federal taxpayers nearly $9,000 per enrollee, largely back-end costs to run the program. States that have expanded Medicaid spent about $6,500 per enrollee in that group in 2021, according to KFF researchers.
Georgia GOP Gov. Brian Kemp has said he's committed to his signature health program, but some Republican state lawmakers have shown an openness to consider full expansion.
A group of Democratic senators cited KFF Health News' reporting last year when they asked the federal government's top watchdog to investigate Pathways spending.
Even with the proposed changes, some people, including those who work in the informal or gig economy, may not have official records and may be locked out of health coverage, said Laura Colbert, executive director of Georgians for a Healthy Future, a nonprofit consumer health advocacy organization. People caring for older children or aging relatives, older adults who struggle to find work, and those with medical conditions that prevent them from working still wouldn't qualify for health coverage, she said.
'The Pathways program just doesn't reflect the reality of how people are working,' Colbert said. 'Pathways is a program that has clearly been developed by people who have had salaried jobs with predictable incomes.'
KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Is a $5,000 DOGE stimulus check a real thing? What we know
Is a $5,000 DOGE stimulus check a real thing? What we know

Yahoo

time18 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Is a $5,000 DOGE stimulus check a real thing? What we know

In February, President Donald Trump said he was considering a plan to pay out $5,000 stimulus checks to American taxpayers from the savings identified by billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Are they happening? No official plan or schedule for such a payout has been released, and a decision on the checks would have to come from Congress, which has so far been cool to the idea. And there have been questions as to how much DOGE has actually saved. The idea was floated by Azoria investment firm CEO James Fishback, who suggested on Musk's social media platform X that Trump and Musk should "should announce a 'DOGE Dividend'" from the money saved from reductions in government waste and workforce since it was American taxpayer money in the first place. He even submitted a proposal for how it would work, with a timeline for after the expiration of DOGE in July 2026. "At $2 trillion in DOGE savings and 78 million tax-paying households, this is a $5,000 refund per household, with the remaining used to pay down the national debt," he said in a separate post. Musk replied, "Will check with the President." "We're considering giving 20% of the DOGE savings to American citizens and 20% to paying down the debt," Trump said in a during the Saudi-sponsored FII PRIORITY Summit in Miami Beach the same month. DOGE has dismantled entire federal agencies, wiped out government contracts and led the firings of tens of thousands of federal workers, leaving many agencies struggling to continue operations. DOGE checks? Elon Musk dodges DOGE stimulus check question during Wisconsin rally: Here's what he said. Fishbeck suggested that the potential refund go only to households that are net-income taxpayers, or households that pay more in taxes than they get back. The Pew Research Center said that most Americans with an adjusted gross income of under $40,000 effectively pay no federal income tax. They would not be eligible. If DOGE achieves Musk's initial goal of stripping $2 trillion from U.S. government spending by 2026, Fishback's plan was for $5,000 per household, or 20% of the savings divided by the number of eligible households. If DOGE doesn't hit the goal, Fishback said the amount should be adjusted accordingly. 'So again, if the savings are only $1 trillion, which I think is awfully low, the check goes from $5,000 to $2,500,' Fishback said during a podcast appearance. 'If the savings are only $500 billion, which, again, is really, really low, then the [checks] are only $1,250.' However, while Musk talked about saving $2 trillion in federal spending during Trump's campaign, he lowered the goal to $1 trillion after Trump assumed office and said in March he was on pace to hit that goal by the end of May. At a Cabinet meeting in April, Musk lowered the projected savings further to $150 billion in fiscal year 2026. Musk left the White House at the end of May when his designation as a "special government employee" ended. DOGE, the advisory group he created, is expected to continue without him. That depends on who you ask. On its website, DOGE claims to have saved an estimated $175 billion as of May 30, "a combination of asset sales, contract and lease cancellations and renegotiations, fraud and improper payment deletions, grant cancellations, interest savings, programmatic changes, regulatory savings, and workforce reductions." The site says that works out to $1,086.96 saved per taxpayer. However, many of DOGE's claims have been exaggerated and several of the initiatives to slash agency workforces have been challenged in court. DOGE has been accused of taking credit for contracts that were canceled before DOGE was created, failing to factor in funds the government is required to pay even if a contract is canceled, and tallying every contract by the most that could possibly be spent on it even when nothing near that amount had been obligated. The website list has been changed as the media pointed out errors, such as a claim that an $8 million savings was actually $8 billion. On May 30, CNN reported that one of its reporters found that less than half the $175 billion figure was backed up with even basic documentation, making verification difficult if not impossible. Some of the changes may also end up costing taxpayers more, such as proposed slashes to the Internal Revenue Service that experts say would mean less tax revenue generated, resulting in a net cost of about $6.8 billion. Over the next 10 years, if IRS staffing stays low, the cumulative cost in uncollected taxes would hit $159 billion, according to the nonpartisan Budget Lab at Yale University. The per-taxpayer claim on the website is also inflated, CNN said, as it's based on '161 million individual federal taxpayers' and doesn't seem to include married people filing jointly. This article originally appeared on Florida Times-Union: DOGE dividends: Will American taxpayers get a $5,000 check?

Primary election 2025: Berks officials certify election results
Primary election 2025: Berks officials certify election results

Yahoo

time18 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Primary election 2025: Berks officials certify election results

Berks County election officials have finalized the tally of results from the primary election. During a special meeting Friday, the elections board voted unanimously to certify the vote totals and authorize the submission of the results to the secretary of the commonwealth. There is now a clear picture of which Democratic and Republican candidates will be on the November ballot for municipal, school, county and judicial races. In addition to those candidates who appeared on the primary ballot, nearly 100 candidates were added to the fall election through successful write-in campaigns. Independent and third-party candidates still have a chance to petition to be on the ballot before the lineup is finalized. Elections Director Anne Norton told the elections board that her term performed the required reviews and audits of the May 20 primary, finding no variations or discrepancies with the official tally. The official results of the election will be posted on the county elections website. Overall, just over 21% of registered Democrats and Republicans voted. Voter turnout was slightly lower than recent, similar elections. In the 2023 municipal primary, for example, turnout was about 24%. The elections board thanked the election services team as well as those who worked the polls and handled mail ballots for the hard work and long hours they put into making sure every vote was counted. 'A huge thank you to everyone involved,' Commissioner Michael Rivera said. Commissioner Dante Santoni Jr. also commended those who ran to represent their fellow residents in local positions. 'When you run for office it takes time away from other things,' he said. 'You stick your neck out for your community at all levels of government and I give kudos to everyone who participated in the democratic process.'

Berks officials send 2 alleged election violations to DA to investigate
Berks officials send 2 alleged election violations to DA to investigate

Yahoo

time18 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Berks officials send 2 alleged election violations to DA to investigate

Two allegations of potential campaign law violations in Berks County have been forwarded to law enforcement for investigation. At a special meeting of the board of elections Friday, members of the county legal team presented two complaints stemming from the May 20 primary election. One involved a candidate who failed to indicate who paid for campaign materials and the other involved a text message from an unknown sender. The first complaint involved Matthew McCluskey, a Republican candidate running to represent Washington Township on the board of supervisors, who failed to include a disclaimer on campaign material sent to voters about who paid for its distribution. While the board decided last month that they would not be sending the complaint to authorities for further review because they believed the candidate had taken the necessary action to fix the situation, Assistant County Solicitor Alexa Antanavage told the board Friday that the issue is still unresolved. They said upon closer examination of financial campaign documents filed by McCluskey and a committee acting on his behalf, the source of the money used to send mailers to Republican voters in the township ahead of the primary remains unclear. 'Given the totality of everything that's going on here and the discrepancies that we have seen, along with the failure to include disclaimers, I think it's appropriate to recommend referral to the district attorney's office for further investigation,' Antanavage said. The board agreed, voting unanimously to forward the issue to law enforcement. Contacted by the Reading Eagle, McCluskey said Friday afternoon that he believes further investigation of the latest campaign finance documents he filed will accurately show who was responsible for funding his materials. 'I made a mistake filling out the paperwork,' he said. 'There's not even a question about that because I misunderstood the instructions. Listen, I'm a rookie and I've never done this before.' McCluskey said he recently met with an attorney and financial adviser familiar with campaign finance filings to fix the mistakes that were made. 'I truly believe that everything is as it should be now,' he said. The second complaint involved an anonymous text message sent a day before the primary to Republican voters in the Oley Valley School District advocating for the election of several candidates. First Assistant County Solicitor Cody Kauffman said the message may have violated the silence period that prohibits candidates, committees and parties acting on their behalf from placing an advertisement in the 120 hours before an election without giving sufficient notice to opposing candidates. He noted the message is also problematic because it did not state who paid for its distribution to voters. Kauffman recommended the matter be sent to law enforcement for further review. The board voted unanimously to forward the issue to the district attorney. The two referrals to the district attorney's office bring to five the total number of potential violations regarding the handling of campaign material that the county has handed over for investigation this election season. Commissioner Michael Rivera, chairman of the elections board, said it appears this is a growing issue that needs to be addressed. He suggested the board put in place guidelines about how candidates should respond to complaints when they are brought to their attention. 'The remedy has to be equal to or greater than the infraction,' he said. 'So, in the case of the mailer sent out without a disclaimer, the candidate must send another mailer to the same people with the disclaimer. If you are sending a text message without a disclaimer, then another text message should be sent to the same people with the disclaimer.' Rivera said adopting that guideline would help the elections team more easily determine if the candidate has taken the appropriate action to address the complaint. His fellow board members agreed that adopting guidelines would be beneficial for the elections team and candidates who may be unfamiliar with the requirements. They asked Kauffman to work with Elections Director Anne Norton to craft guidelines for the board to approve.

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