
Letters: What slashing Medicaid would do to health care in Cook County
Medicaid is a crucial public health program in the United States, providing essential health care services to millions of low-income families, children, pregnant women, elderly adults and individuals with disabilities.
As Cook County commissioner, I know the importance of prioritizing health care access, recognizing its pivotal role in public health. Cook County Health, a trailblazer in health care regardless of financial ability, has served our community for over 180 years, and a substantial portion of our patient population relies on Medicaid. I convened public hearings on maternal health and secured funding for the inaugural Cook County Health doula program, aiming to reframe the narrative on maternal health in Cook County and address disparities for our pregnant mothers.
However, the GOP's looming Medicaid cuts pose a significant threat to health care. These cuts could reduce access to medical services, strain health care providers, and burden state and county budgets. They would disproportionately affect low-income families, the elderly and individuals with disabilities, who heavily rely on Medicaid. Reduced funding could diminish Medicaid eligibility and access to essential medical services.
Furthermore, these cuts would eliminate or reduce preventive care programs, leading to long-term health complications due to delayed detection and treatment. Hospitals and clinics serving a substantial portion of Medicaid patients may face financial challenges, resulting in staff reductions, decreased services and even facility closures. I understand the concerns of Illinois patients regarding losing coverage, especially if hospitals in low-income areas are forced to close or reduce services.
Health care advocates argue that such cuts could ultimately cost everyone more in the long run. Limited resources may compromise care quality, leading to longer wait times and reduced patient satisfaction. Medicaid cuts exacerbate health outcomes, causing individuals to forgo necessary medical treatments due to cost or lack of coverage. In the long term, the absence of preventive and basic care can lead to more severe health issues and increased health care costs.
Cook County Health could potentially lose $200 million annually in reimbursements if our patient population were to lose Medicaid coverage. Medicaid cuts would have far-reaching implications for individuals, health care providers, state and county budgets, and overall public health.
Policymakers must carefully consider these consequences when making decisions about Medicaid funding. This is precisely the reason why I firmly oppose cuts to Medicaid.
— Cook County Commissioner Donna Miller, 6th District
Threat to transit is real
Regarding the editorial 'Chicago's transit agencies want you to panic. They don't explain the whole truth' (April 27): Warning riders and lawmakers about an impending fiscal cliff isn't 'panic-stoking' — it's responsible leadership. Without immediate action this spring, Chicagoland faces devastating transit cuts that would gut service, strand riders and devastate our economy.
Unfortunately, the editorial minimizes the urgent reality facing our region. Public transit in the Chicago region is at a crossroads. We are here because Illinois has undervalued and underfunded transit for decades — despite the essential role the CTA, Metra and Pace play in providing an average of 1.2 million rides a day that connect people to jobs, education and health care. Illinois contributes just 17% to transit operations, far behind peer states like New York (28%), Boston (44%) and Philadelphia (50%).
When the Regional Transportation Authority and other agencies warn of a crisis, it's because the threat is real. A 40% cut to transit service would be catastrophic. It would mean longer wait times, the loss of 24-hour service in Chicago, the elimination of weekend options for suburban riders, higher fares for working families and devastating impacts for our most vulnerable riders. This cut in service would mean $2.6 billion lost from our region's annual gross domestic product, on top of the loss of tens of thousands of jobs — all in just the first year.
Advocates, independent experts and residents across the region — who have already sent thousands of letters at SaveTransitNow.org — are united behind the call for a $1.5 billion investment to not just stabilize transit but also to strengthen it. An empowered RTA that would deliver more frequent, reliable service and reforms. Independent analysis estimates that this investment will add $2.7 billion to our region's GDP annually and 28,000 jobs in the first year.
We are advocating for a future in which the RTA would be accountable for fares, service quality and capital investment — giving riders a better system and taxpayers better results. Shorter waits, more frequent service and a more seamless experience — all backed by a stronger RTA, one empowered to intervene when needed to fix issues riders are facing whether that be ghost buses or implementing a Transit Ambassador pilot to help improve safety.
Illinois lawmakers have a clear choice: Listen to the research, to the advocates and, most importantly, to the thousands speaking out to save transit for our region and for our future.
— Kirk Dillard, chairman, Regional Transportation Authority
Culture, history at risk
Culture, heritage, identity and history — these are not luxuries. They are the foundation of our democracy. Illinois has long led the way in preserving and celebrating them, from our iconic Chicago museums to rural libraries and local historical societies across the state.
Today, those very institutions are under attack.
The federal government has moved to gut funding that supports Illinois Humanities and similar organizations nationwide. These are not bloated bureaucracies — they are community lifelines, hosting after-school programs for underserved kids, amplifying veterans' stories, and bringing artists and scholars into classrooms to spark critical thinking.
As chair of the Museums, Culture, Arts, and Entertainment Committee in the Illinois House, I find this moment alarming — not just as a policymaker but also as an Illinoisan who understands the power of public memory.
This is not simply about budgets. It is about ideology.
One of President Donald Trump's recent executive orders — cynically titled 'Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History' — threatens to erase narratives deemed 'divisive' or unpatriotic. In practice, it means silencing Black, Indigenous, immigrant, LGBTQ+ and other historically marginalized voices. It means replacing honest reckoning with historical whitewashing. It means undermining education to manipulate patriotism for political gain.
We have seen this playbook before. Authoritarian regimes have always sought to control culture — because when you silence a museum, you mute a people. When you erase a curriculum, you narrow a generation's understanding of justice. Illinois will not be complicit in that erasure.
Our libraries, historic sites and museums are not relics of the past; they are living classrooms. They teach empathy, civic responsibility and critical thought. They drive our economy, create jobs and make Illinois a destination for millions.
And they are in danger. We must act.
I urge every Illinoisan to contact their federal representatives and demand the restoration of funding to the National Endowment for the Humanities and related programs. Tell them we will not allow our stories — or our democracy — to be rewritten by fear and ideology.
This is not a red-state or blue-state issue. It is a question of whether we have the courage to confront the full truth of our shared journey — and to defend the spaces that protect and preserve it.
The stakes could not be higher. History does not erase itself. It is erased when good people stay silent.
Now is the time to raise our voices — before those who fear the truth silence them for good.
— State Rep. Kimberly Neely du Buclet, D-Chicago
Yes to upzoning plan
Op-ed writer John Holden's attack on the plan to upzone Broadway contains the misleading claim that opposing upzoning is somehow 'environmentally friendly' ('Zoning plan for Broadway a nonstarter,' April 25). This is as far from true as Chicago is from Australia.
As an environmental attorney, I know all too well the challenge we face in cutting our greenhouse gas emissions in order to avoid the worst effects of climate change. In Illinois, transportation accounts for more carbon dioxide emissions than any other sector. One of the best ways to cut per-capita emissions is to allow more people to move to transit-rich neighborhoods such as Edgewater and Uptown, where car-free and car-lite lifestyles are possible. Unfortunately, zoning rules that prohibit dense new housing across much of Chicago limit the city's growth, pushing potential Chicagoans to car-oriented Sunbelt cities such as Houston.
If Chicago is going to be the environmental leader so many of us want it to be, it needs to loosen restrictions on climate-friendly housing. The Broadway upzoning plan is a good start.

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

USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Congress introduces bill addressing national guidelines for college sports
Congress introduces bill addressing national guidelines for college sports With the settlement of three athlete-compensation antitrust cases against the NCAA and the Power Five conferences having received final approval from a federal district judge on June 6, members of the U.S. House of Representatives have moved into action with new legislative proposals regarding national rules for college sports. On Wednesday, June 10, Reps. Lisa McClain, R-Mich., and Janelle Bynum, D-Ore., introduced a bill that comes shortly after Reps. Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., and Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., circulated a discussion draft of a bill that would largely put into federal law the terms and new rules-making structure of the settlement. The discussion draft is set to be the centerpiece of a hearing June 11 by a subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Bilirakis, who has been involved in previous college-sports bill efforts, chairs the subcommittee. Guthrie chairs the full committee. The bill – in addition to being a bi-partisan presentation – continues recent work related to college sports from McClain, who is the current House Republican Conference chair. That makes her the GOP's No. 4-ranking member in the House. In April, McClain introduced a bill that would prevent college athletes from being employees of their schools, conferences or an athletic association. The discussion draft – as posted on Congress' general resource site, - includes language that specifically would allow the NCAA, and potentially the new Collegiate Sports Commission, to make rules in areas that have come into legal dispute in recent years and in areas that the NCAA wants to shield from legal dispute. The discussion draft, first reported on by The Washington Post, also includes language that would require most Division I schools to provide a series of benefits for athletes that are currently called for under NCAA and some conferences' rules but do not have the force of federal law. In addition, the discussion draft includes a 'placeholder' section for language that likely would be connected to providing antitrust or other legal protection for various provisions. According the discussion draft, an 'interstate collegiate athletic association' would be able to 'establish and enforce rules relating to … the manner in which … student athletes may be recruited' to play sports; 'the transfer of a student athlete between institutions'; and 'the number of seasons or length of time for which a student athlete is eligible to compete, academic standards, and code of conduct'. The NCAA's rules regarding when recruits can be offered money in exchange for the use of their name, image and likeness; athletes' ability to freely transfer; and the number of seasons in which they are eligible to compete all of have been – or currently are being – addressed in federal and state courts across the country. That has raised concerns for NCAA officials about the future of rules such as those concerning academic eligibility requirements The discussion draft also includes language that would require most Division I schools to provide a series of benefits for athletes that are currently called for under NCAA and some conferences' rules but do not have the force of law. These include medical coverage for athletically related injuries for at least two years after the conclusion of an athlete's career; guaranteed financial aid that would allow an athlete to complete an undergraduate degree; and 'an administrative structure that provides independent medical care and affirms the unchallengeable autonomous authority of primary athletics health care providers (team physicians and athletic trainers) to determine medical management and return-to-play decisions related to student athletes.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Congress introduces bill addressing national guidelines for college sports
With the settlement of three athlete-compensation antitrust cases against the NCAA and the Power Five conferences having received final approval from a federal district judge on June 6, members of the U.S. House of Representatives have moved into action with new legislative proposals regarding national rules for college sports. On Wednesday, June 10, Reps. Lisa McClain, R-Mich., and Janelle Bynum, D-Ore., introduced a bill that comes shortly after Reps. Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., and Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., circulated a discussion draft of a bill that would largely put into federal law the terms and new rules-making structure of the settlement. Advertisement The discussion draft is set to be the centerpiece of a hearing June 11 by a subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Bilirakis, who has been involved in previous college-sports bill efforts, chairs the subcommittee. Guthrie chairs the full committee. The bill – in addition to being a bi-partisan presentation – continues recent work related to college sports from McClain, who is the current House Republican Conference chair. That makes her the GOP's No. 4-ranking member in the House. In April, McClain introduced a bill that would prevent college athletes from being employees of their schools, conferences or an athletic association. The discussion draft – as posted on Congress' general resource site, - includes language that specifically would allow the NCAA, and potentially the new Collegiate Sports Commission, to make rules in areas that have come into legal dispute in recent years and in areas that the NCAA wants to shield from legal dispute. The discussion draft, first reported on by The Washington Post, also includes language that would require most Division I schools to provide a series of benefits for athletes that are currently called for under NCAA and some conferences' rules but do not have the force of federal law. Advertisement In addition, the discussion draft includes a 'placeholder' section for language that likely would be connected to providing antitrust or other legal protection for various provisions. According the discussion draft, an 'interstate collegiate athletic association' would be able to 'establish and enforce rules relating to … the manner in which … student athletes may be recruited' to play sports; 'the transfer of a student athlete between institutions'; and 'the number of seasons or length of time for which a student athlete is eligible to compete, academic standards, and code of conduct'. The NCAA's rules regarding when recruits can be offered money in exchange for the use of their name, image and likeness; athletes' ability to freely transfer; and the number of seasons in which they are eligible to compete all of have been – or currently are being – addressed in federal and state courts across the country. That has raised concerns for NCAA officials about the future of rules such as those concerning academic eligibility requirements The discussion draft also includes language that would require most Division I schools to provide a series of benefits for athletes that are currently called for under NCAA and some conferences' rules but do not have the force of law. Advertisement These include medical coverage for athletically related injuries for at least two years after the conclusion of an athlete's career; guaranteed financial aid that would allow an athlete to complete an undergraduate degree; and 'an administrative structure that provides independent medical care and affirms the unchallengeable autonomous authority of primary athletics health care providers (team physicians and athletic trainers) to determine medical management and return-to-play decisions related to student athletes.' This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Congress introduces college sports bill proposing national rules

Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Utah senator looks to resuscitate Nevada-Utah federal lands sale proposal
Organizations from around the country signed a letter on Monday urging U.S. senators not to include a controversial proposal to sell thousands of acres of federal land in Congress' budget bill. The letter comes in the wake of reports that Utah Sen. Mike Lee is considering reviving an amendment to the bill originally proposed by Republican U.S. Reps. Mark Amodei of Nevada and Celeste Maloy of Utah that would dispose of nearly 11,500 acres of Bureau of Land Management land in southwestern Utah, and about 450,000 acres in Nevada. Lee, when asked by a Politico reporter last week if he intended to reintroduce the disposal, responded, 'I gotta go vote, but yes.' Lee's office did not respond to a request for comment on Monday, and it's unclear whether Utah's senior GOP senator is considering bringing back an exact copy of the amendment, or something different. Amodei outrages NV congressional colleagues with 'dead of night' federal land sales amendment But more than 100 organizations and nonprofits around the country are sounding the alarm, telling Senate leaders to 'heed how dramatically unpopular this idea is and reject any misguided attempt to get public lands sales back in this bill.' 'Decisions about the future of public lands should remain in public hands. Leaders in the House and Senate, extractive industry, and private developers are using the reconciliation process to sell off federal lands to pay for billionaire tax cuts. But such moves are deeply unpopular. Polling has repeatedly shown that the public — especially westerners — strongly believes in keeping public lands in public hands and, across partisan lines, rejects any efforts that would lead to the sale of these shared and cherished lands,' reads the letter, signed by Utah groups like the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, Conserve Southwest Utah, Save Our Canyons, Great Basin Water Network and Back Country Horsemen of Utah. The letter is addressed to Lee, who chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, New Mexico Democrat Martin Heinrich, the committee's ranking member, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat. The House amendment backed by Amodei and Maloy was dropped from the budget bill after it received pushback from all sides of the aisle. That includes Montana Republican Rep. Ryan Zinke, who previously said selling public lands is a line he would not cross and rallied support from a bipartisan group of lawmakers to strip the proposal from the bill. 'The public had no opportunity to participate in the process of identifying these parcels, let alone time to understand the long-term effect of selling off these public lands,' the letter reads. This story was originally published in Utah News Dispatch.