UP GOP lawmaker: Cash aid program is not 'just a flat out government handout'
A cash-assistance program for expectant moms and babies, which first began in Flint more than a year ago, is growing its reach to hundreds more families across Michigan.
Rx Kids, led by Flint pediatrician Dr. Mona Hanna, began taking applications in Kalamazoo last week and will kick off in the eastern Upper Peninsula next month. So far, the Flint program has distributed more than $6 million to families — no strings attached. The program is among dozens across the country experimenting with providing direct cash payments to people with the greatest need. Bipartisan lawmakers from regions where the Rx Kids is slated to expand see promise in the program but say they remain alert, watching for how families benefit from getting cash in hand, to use as they see fit.
The premise is simple but the goal is ambitious: give expectant moms cash during a financially rocky time to eliminate infant poverty and boost economic stability. The program gives families $1,500 mid-pregnancy and then $500 a month up to a year of the infant's life. Program participants in Flint reported spending the money on basics like baby supplies and food, and feeling more financially secure.
"We are improving the family's ability to keep a roof over their head, food on their table and care for their children. And Rx Kids is helping our families succeed at, really, the hardest job in the world, and that is being a parent," Hanna said during a Friday press conference announcing the expansion of the program to the eastern Upper Peninsula.
Rx Kids has so far raised about $100 million from public and private funders. Programs don't launch in communities without at least two years of funding. Last year, Rx Kids received $20 million from the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program to expand beyond Flint, from the southwest side of the state to its northernmost regions.
That's important, said Republican state Sen. John Damoose, who represents part of the UP and the northern Lower Peninsula: "A lot of times people forget the rural poor."
"There's a lot of need, certainly, in our big cities but there's also a lot of support systems that often don't exist in areas like ours and I can tell you, our people up here are suffering because of inflation, because of lack of services. They need some help," Damoose, whose district includes parts of Mackinac and Chippewa counties, said last month.
In Chippewa County — home to Michigan's oldest city, Sault Ste. Marie, and the Soo Locks — roughly 29% of children under 5 years old live below poverty. It's one of the counties in the eastern Upper Peninsula where Rx Kids is slated to expand. The other counties are Luce, Mackinac, Alger and Schoolcraft. High housing costs, a seasonal economy, a dearth of health care and miles between neighbors and services can make life in the Upper Peninsula challenging and unaffordable, Damoose said.
The UP program is estimated to cover about 600 babies a year. Pregnant moms and babies born after March 1 will be eligible for $1,500 mid-pregnancy and $500 a month for the first six months of the child's life. There are no income requirements. It's a shorter time period compared with Flint because of how much funding the program was able to raise, Hanna said.
More: Moms are getting cash each month to ease financial troubles. Does it work?
"I've had people who came up to me and said, 'Wait a second, you're a Republican and you're supporting a cash giveaway to parents.' Well, of course I am. This is a great idea," Damoose said during Friday's announcement.
Damoose has told the Free Press that he sees it as an innovative way to get help to people without bureaucratic hurdles. He's supportive of the program but will be watching for what the results bear out and how it runs.
"If we can look back and realize ... in the city of Sault Ste. Marie, we've helped out this number of mothers and children and young families, and it seems to be appropriate, then let's grow it a little bit," he said last month. "If we find that we're just pouring money down a black hole, let's pull it back or revise the program a little bit."
State Sen. Ed McBroom, R-Vulcan, said he likes the program because it supports families but thinks it should have income restrictions to "keep the costs in check" and ensure it runs for a long time. He also said support like this can encourage people to have more children and grow the state's population. Michigan's Upper Peninsula has seen population loss back-to-back in the past two decades, according to research from the Michigan Technological University.
"If a couple is considering whether or not to have children and the financial hardship is part of that calculation, this program can offset those concerns and give people hope that they can indeed afford to have more children and raise a family," McBroom said.
In Kalamazoo, where nearly a third of kids under 5 years old live below poverty, applications for Rx Kids opened Feb. 12 for expectant moms and babies born on or after Feb. 1. Just like in Flint, Kalamazoo's version of the program will offer $1,500 mid-pregnancy and then $500 the first 12 months of the infant's life. As as Friday, the Kalamazoo program had received more than 200 applications.
"There's just so many people living on the margins and Kalamazoo is resource rich, but sometimes people don't understand how to navigate all the different assistance programs," said Democratic state Rep. Julie Rogers, whose district includes the city of Kalamazoo.
More: Program providing $7,500 for Flint moms and babies expected to expand across Michigan
Rogers pointed to a significant ALICE population in Kalamazoo. The United Way's ALICE measure — which stands for asset limited, income constrained, employed — considers households earning above the federal poverty level but still struggling to afford the basics. In Kalamazoo County, 39% of households fell below the ALICE threshold.
"We are trusting mothers, we are trusting families to decide what is best for them and their family and situation," Rogers said. "So, instead of the government being prescriptive and telling people how to spend the money, we're giving them the cash assistance with pretty much a blank slate of, they can choose and decide."
To measure success, bipartisan lawmakers are watching for a range of outcomes, from increased birth rates and school enrollment to improvements in child development and health.
Rogers said she's "cautiously optimistic" about the Rx Kids program as a pilot, and wants to see the data from participating communities. Damoose, Rogers and state Sen. John Cherry, D-Flint, said they would consider more public dollars to go toward the program in the future.
Damoose said Rx Kids doesn't necessarily fit into a "Republican orthodoxy," since it involves government giving cash to people in need, but he supports the effort because he is "very pro-family."
"I can have a real role in helping to convince Republican lawmakers to at least understand the benefits and how it fits within our sort of preconceived notions, if you will. Because I've got to dispel the idea that this is just a flat out government handout," Damoose said.
McBroom said there's support from his Republican colleagues to strengthen families, but questions remain on the long term sustainability.
"Where we put our money shows some of our values as a society. It shows what things we need to incentivize. Sometimes we're incentivizing particular behaviors and actions. In this case, I see us believing that we need as a society to increase children. We need to increase population. And so, I think it's valuable for us to put our money towards that endeavor," he said.
Back in Flint where Rx Kids first began, more than 1,400 families have so far enrolled in the program. Cherry said starting in the city which he represents, Flint, was a good call because of its high concentration of poverty, but it shouldn't stop there.
"The goal is not for it to end at Flint," he said. "The goal is: we want to make sure that we're helping all these mothers and babies."
Hanna said programs in Wayne County and Oakland County communities will likely go live later this year.
City of Kalamazoo: Applications opened Feb. 12 for expectant moms and babies born on or after Feb. 1. People can sign up while pregnant or until a baby is six months old. The Kalamazoo program will offer $1,500 mid-pregnancy and then $500 the first year of the infant's life.
Eastern Upper Peninsula (Chippewa, Alger, Schoolcraft, Luce and Mackinac Counties): Expectant moms or babies born on or after March 1 are eligible. Applications will open March 3. Expectant moms can get $1,500 mid-pregnancy and $500 for the first 6 months of the infant's life.
Expectant mothers must live in the areas where the program is running. To learn more, go to rxkids.org/.
This story was produced as part of a series for the USC Annenberg Center for Health Journalism's 2024 Data Fellowship.
Contact Nushrat Rahman: nrahman@freepress.com. Follow her on X: @NushratR.
This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Michigan lawmakers see promise in aid program. Where it's expanding.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
22 minutes ago
- The Hill
Democrats are drawing closer to the crypto industry despite Trump divisions
WASHINGTON (AP) — As President Donald Trump builds a crypto empire — including hosting a private dinner with top investors at his golf club — Democrats have united in condemning what they call blatant corruption from the White House. But the Democratic Party's own relationship with the emerging crypto industry is far less cut and dried. Work in the Republican-led Senate to legitimize cryptocurrency by adding guardrails has drawn backing from some Democrats, underscoring growing support for the industry in the party. But divisions have opened over the bill, with many demanding it prevent the Republican president and his family from directly profiting from cryptocurrency. 'I'm all on board with the idea of regulating crypto,' said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn. 'But at this moment, when cryptocurrency is being so clearly used by Donald Trump to facilitate his corruption, I don't think you can close your eyes to that when you're legislating.' The legislation is moving ahead more rapidly than Congress usually acts when an industry is new. But the big money and campaign donations flowing from cryptocurrency firms have made them a new powerhouse on the political scene, one that's increasingly gaining allies and capturing the attention of lawmakers. A look at what to know about the industry's clout and the political fight over what's known as the GENIUS Act: To understand the growing clout of the crypto industry, look no further than the 2024 election. Fairshake, a crypto super political action committee, and its affiliated PACs spent more than $130 million in congressional races. Fairshake spent roughly $40 million supporting Republican Bernie Moreno in Ohio in an effort to defeat Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown. Brown, who lost to Moreno by more than 3 percentage points, was seen as a chief critic of the industry as the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. 'DC received a clear message that being anti-crypto is a good way to end your career, as it doesn't represent the will of the voters,' Brian Armstrong, the CEO of Coinbase, wrote in a social media post the day after the 2024 election. Coinbase — the largest crypto exchange in the U.S. and biggest contributor to Fairshake — does not view support for its industry as partisan, according to Kara Calvert, the company's vice president of U.S. policy. The industry also spent heavily to support Democrats Ruben Gallego and Elissa Slotkin in their races for open Senate seats in battleground states. Fairshake spent $10 million in support of Slotkin during her successful Senate run against Republican Mike Rodgers, and Slotkin, who won the Michigan race by fewer than 20,000 votes, spoke in favor of crypto on the campaign trail. Slotkin declined to be interviewed. Similar dynamics are setting up ahead of 2026 in contested House and Senate races. Fairshake said in January that it already had $116 million in cash on hand aimed at the 2026 midterm elections. 'We're not slowing down, and everything remains on the table,' Josh Vlasto, a spokesperson for Fairshake, told The Associated Press. Hours before a May 19 vote to move forward on cryptocurrency legislation in the Senate, an advocacy group tied to Coinbase sent an email to the offices of U.S. senators warning that the vote would count toward their crypto-friendliness scores. 'What the spending does is put crypto on the map. It lets members know that this is not a phase, this is real industry, with real dollars, that is developing its hold in Washington,' said Calvert. A significant number of Democrats, 16, joined Republicans in advancing the crypto legislation. The GENIUS Act would create a new regulatory structure for stablecoins, a type of cryptocurrency typically pegged to the U.S. dollar. It is viewed as a step toward consumer protections and greater legitimacy for the industry. The sticking point for many Democrats is that while the bill prohibits members of Congress and their families from profiting off stablecoins, it excludes the president from those restrictions. Trump, once a skeptic of the industry, has vowed in his second term to make the U.S. the global capital of crypto. Meanwhile, he and his family have moved aggressively into nearly every corner of the industry: mining operations, billion-dollar bitcoin purchases, a newly minted stablecoin and a Trump-branded meme coin. Days after Trump's interests in the industry became public in early May, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York urged the Democratic caucus to unite and vote against the package to have a stronger hand in negotiations, according to a person familiar with the matter who insisted on anonymity to discuss private discussions. On May 8, a bloc of Senate Democrats who had previously backed the GENIUS Act reversed course — ultimately voting to block the bill from advancing. Negotiations between Senate Democrats and Republicans followed. The White House was also involved, and in contact with senators' offices on both sides of the aisle, according to a senior official granted anonymity to discuss private conversations. The new version of the bill is now expected to pass the 100-member Senate this month. Amendments are still possible. Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore. has filed an amendment — cosponsored by Schumer — that would bar the president and his family from profiting off stablecoins, though it's unlikely to pass. 'There is room for improvements as there often is with a lot of legislation. But with this in particular, we've got issues with the president,' said Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona 'Having said that, this was negotiated with Democrats and Republicans. We got to a place. We voted on it. I expect this is the version we're going to pass.' Still, the legislation is stirring unease. Schumer, asked if he's urging members to vote against the bill, noted that he has opposed the legislation and said 'there's division in our caucus on that issue.' 'There's a gaping hole in this bill that everybody sees,' Murphy said. 'After it's passed, it will be illegal for me to issue a cryptocurrency, but it's legal for the president of the United States.' 'If this bill passes, we kind of go from a dirt road to a paved road,' he said. If the Senate approves the stablecoin legislation, the bill will still need to clear the House before reaching the president's desk. Crypto advocates say the next priority is pushing Congress for market structure legislation, a far more sweeping effort than simply regulating stablecoins. 'Stablecoin is one step of the path. Then you need market structure. We're hopeful that the Senate works together to pass something quickly,' Calvert said. Some Democrats view the legislation as a chance to impose basic guardrails on a rapidly growing industry that's particularly popular among men and younger voters, two groups that drifted from the party in 2024. ___ Associated Press writers Alan Suderman, Lisa Mascaro, Matt Brown and Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.


New York Post
27 minutes ago
- New York Post
GOP lawmakers push to jack up proposed tax on money migrants send home after threat by Mexico
GOP lawmakers are pushing to jack up a proposed new tax on money migrants earn in the US and send back home to family — after being threatened by Mexico's president. Nestled in the proposed One Big Beautiful Bill Act making its way through the Senate is a 3.5% tax on 'remittances' from noncitizens in the US, or money transferred back to relatives and family in the migrants' home country. Over the weekend, footage of Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum blasting the planned tax during a speech last month went viral. 'If necessary, we'll mobilize. We don't want taxes on remittances from our fellow countrymen. From the US to Mexico,' Sheinbaum warned in the clip. It is not entirely clear what she meant by 'mobilize.' 4 Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum is griping about the impact a new US tax on money Mexico's migrants send home would have on her country. Carlos Santiago/Eyepix Group / Shutterstock 4 GOP Sen. Eric Schmitt of Missouri proposed now imposing a tax on of 15% instead of 3.5% because of Sheinbaum's comments. Getty Images But her salvo was enough to prompt several Republican lawmakers to promptly call on the Senate to jack up the proposed tax on remittances. 'The House's Big Beautiful Bill addressed the urgent need for a remittance tax. But we can go further. I'm introducing legislation to quadruple the proposed remittance tax — from 3.5% to 15%,' Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) seethed on X. 'America is not the world's piggy bank. And we don't take kindly to threats.' The tax on remittance is estimated to haul in about $26 billion over the next decade, according to an estimate from the Joint Committee on Taxation. Remittances are generally a huge revenue stream for developing countries. Mexico is the second largest receiver of remittances in the world behind India thanks to cash flows from the US, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies. 4 Rep. Chip Roy, a Republican from Texas, backed the idea of raising the tax on remittances in response to the Mexican leader's threat. Getty Images Some estimates indicate that Mexico received about $64.7 billion in remittances last year, although transfers to Mexico have begun to wane in recent months amid President Trump's crackdown on illegal immigration. 'New reason to amend the Senate bill to tax remittances at a lot higher rate…' Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) wrote on X in response to the clip of Sheinbaum. 4 Mexico has been grappling with economic fallout from President Trump's tariffs. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) added, 'Raise the remittances!!' Mexico is the largest US trading partner, according to recent data from the US Census Bureau. Earlier this year, Trump slapped 25% tariffs on imports from both Mexico and Canada that are not subject to the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement. Trump claimed the new tariffs were necessary to leverage Canada and Mexico to crack down on the flow of fentanyl and illegal immigration into the US. The president has since fired off a flurry of tariffs on other countries as well.
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Trump-Musk divorce threatens the president and the entire Republican Party
Few expected the relationship between President Trump and Elon Musk to survive four years, but the spectacular collapse of this partnership has shocked even seasoned observers with its speed and intensity. Now, as two of the world's most powerful men openly clash, there are seismic implications for the country as a whole and the Republican Party specifically. Put another way, not only does this fissure expose cracks in the GOP and MAGA coalition, it's also a considerable threat to Republicans' midterms hopes and Trump's signature legislation. The fight, which began two weeks ago when Musk expressed 'disappointment' with Trump's 'one big, beautiful' bill had initially been confined to disagreements over the legislation, rather than personal attacks. Then, on Thursday afternoon, it escalated in unprecedented, dramatic fashion. Following Trump's recent comment that he would have won Pennsylvania without Musk's help, Musk replied 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate.' That was just Musk's opening salvo against the man he spent roughly $300 million to get elected. The tech billionaire then went on a blistering war path. He claimed Trump was on 'the Epstein list,' supported impeachment — a touchy subject for the twice-impeached Trump — and claimed that tariffs would cause a recession. Not content with attacking Trump, Musk has also threatened to fund primary challenges to Republicans who support the bill, and has criticized both Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.). With unprecedented speed, Musk went from the man who could pour hundreds of millions into Republican coffers to Republicans' enemy number one. Influential commentator Steve Bannon pushed for Musk's deportation, claiming he's an illegal alien, and Trump threatened to cancel all government contracts with Musk's multiple companies, saying Musk 'went CRAZY.' Whether or not the rumors of an impending détente between the two is enough to heal the rupture remains to be seen, but it's unlikely that all of the pieces will ever get put back together. Given Musk's deep pockets and control of social media platform X, where he has a cult-like following, Trump and the Republicans now find themselves in a treacherous spot at a precarious time. Indeed, even before the dramatic escalation, Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' was in limbo in the Senate. As Alexander Bolton noted in this publication prior to Thursday's blowup, Trump's bill is 'losing momentum in the Senate in the face of blistering attacks from Elon Musk.' To that end, Musk's criticisms of the bill and threats to primary its Republican supporters has already led two House Republicans who voted for the bill, Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and John Rose (R-Tenn.), to come out against some of it. It appears that this fight has brought some Republicans back into Trump's fold. Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), who had been opposed to the bill prior to its passage in the House, condemned Musk, saying he 'crossed the line.' And Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn), another House conservative, dismissed Musk's influence, saying he is 'just another shiny object.' For their part, Republican senators who may have had doubts about Trump's signature legislation now risk being seen as taking Musk's side and being disloyal to the president. However, it would be a mistake to overlook the implications of the breakup or the dangers for Republicans. If he wants, Musk could very easily fund primaries against vulnerable GOP House members, and his control of X gives him unprecedented influence over the media ecosystem. Further, Musk's influence among the Silicon Valley cohort that moved stridently to the right in 2024 could peel off a new group of Republican voters and donors. In that same vein, there are possible electoral consequences for Republicans, even if tempers between Trump and Musk cool down. Trump was counting on the bill's passage to be a significant political tailwind that would boost his polling numbers and Republicans' midterm hopes, particularly given the ongoing chaos over tariffs and trade policy. Now, whichever version of the bill eventually passes, Republicans look like the party of chaos. It is entirely possible that this ongoing feud dents voters' confidence in Republicans' ability to competently govern, something Democrats are clearly hoping for. As the Wall Street Journal reported, Democrats are 'reveling' about the fight, with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) reposting Musk's attacks and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) taking digs at the 'GOP civil war.' To be sure, despite Musk's efforts, it remains likely that a version of Trump's 'one, big, beautiful bill' will still pass, but Republicans now have a bigger headache. Ultimately, divorces are always messy, but the Trump-Musk divorce is unprecedented, and it could not have come at a worse time for Republicans. With razor-thin margins in the House and the absence of Trump's much-touted trade bills, it poses the most significant threat to Republicans' midterm hopes, and by extension, the rest of Trump's term. Douglas E. Schoen and Carly Cooperman are pollsters and partners with the public opinion company Schoen Cooperman Research based in New York. They are co-authors of the book, 'America: Unite or Die.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.