Latest news with #cuts
CBS News
28-05-2025
- Business
- CBS News
Philadelphia protesters urge Sen. McCormick to vote against Medicaid cutting legislation
A rally in Philadelphia Wednesday drew dozens of people to fight against proposed cuts to Medicaid. It's legislation that Republicans say will only go after wasteful spending and fraud. That legislation is now headed for the Senate. Wednesday's message was focused on the Republican senator from Pennsylvania, Dave McCormick, urging him to vote against legislation passed by the House that would cut an estimated $800 billion from Medicaid, which provides health care coverage for low-income Americans. The reductions would come from work requirements and other provisions. "Cutting hundreds of billions from Medicaid will rip health care away from those who can least afford it," said Dr. Walter Tsou from the Philadelphia County Medical Society. Michael Anderson, who has cerebral palsy, depends on Medicaid for disability services and medical care. He's worried about losing what he calls his lifeline. "It would be a disaster for me. I don't know what I would do without the services," Anderson said. President Trump insists Medicaid will largely stay intact. "The only thing we're cutting is waste, fraud and abuse," Mr. Trump said on May 20 ahead of a meeting with House Republicans on Capitol Hill. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, under the proposed legislation, about 7 million people would lose Medicaid coverage. "The so-called savings will be paid for on the back of the most vulnerable among us," said Donna Greco from the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network. Alisha Gillespie is a breast cancer survivor who depends on Medicaid. "Its a major thing for me and my family," Gillespie said. McCormick has said Medicaid spending is "out of control" but that benefits should be preserved for the vulnerable. Dr. Walter Tsou, with the Philadelphia County Medical Society says Medicaid cuts would not only impact patients, but also the health care system overall, as it's the largest payer of hospitals in Philadelphia. It makes up 39% of local hospitals' budgets. We reached out to McCormick's office for reaction to the rally and have not heard back. A vote on the Medicaid legislation is expected this summer.
CNN
28-05-2025
- Business
- CNN
Tapper presses Speaker Johnson about who would lose Medicaid under 'big, beautiful bill'
CNN's Jake Tapper asks Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) about who will lose Medicaid under President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill'. Johnson defends the proposed cuts and argues the changes target "waste, fraud and abuse."
CNN
25-05-2025
- Politics
- CNN
Speaker Johnson argues Medicaid cuts will only impact those abusing coverage
CNN's Jake Tapper asks Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) about who will lose Medicaid under President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill'. Johnson defends the proposed cuts and argues the changes target "waste, fraud and abuse."
Daily Mail
23-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Humiliated Lorraine's absences have 'become a joke': Insiders reveal savage story of ITV bloodbath to KATIE HIND, truth about 'awful' show and why final blow was so 'mortifying for Lorraine'
The moment ITV bosses concluded their emergency summit with staff this week – during which they told them of an impending bloodbath of cuts – they called on just one of those present for an individual meeting. That person, of course, was Lorraine Kelly.
The Guardian
21-05-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
‘It's all people wanted to talk about': How Labour U-turned on winter fuel payment cut
Rarely are British voters united by one issue, but Labour MPs returning to Westminster after the local election campaign this month all reported a single policy dominating all others: cuts to the winter fuel allowance. 'It is all people wanted to talk about on the doorstep,' said one. 'Some were upset about the coming cuts to disability benefits, some were exercised by immigration. But everyone was angry about winter fuel payments.' And so when Keir Starmer confirmed on Wednesday his government would change the threshold at which the cuts bite, it should not have come as a surprise. The U-turn, however, came after repeated claims by cabinet ministers that such a move would be unaffordable, and flat-out denials by Downing Street that it was on the cards – even after the Guardian revealed it was. Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, announced the cuts last summer as a solution to what she said was a £22bn hole in the government's finances left by the last government. Supporters say she had no option but to cut winter fuel payments because she needed savings that would be realised in that financial year, drastically limiting her options. Critics, however, say she too quickly accepted the Treasury argument that winter fuel payments were unsustainable – an argument that previous chancellors, including George Osborne, the architect of austerity, have dismissed. 'The decision was taken by the Treasury,' said one former government aide. 'By the time Downing Street saw it, it had already been factored into the forecasts and it was too late to change it.' For the best part of the next 12 months, ministers continued to insist they had no choice but to leave the cuts in place, even amid warnings they would lead to increased numbers of pensioners dying over the winter. Senior Labour ministers warned No 10 privately that the policy was an electoral disaster. 'It comes up on the doorstep all the time. Winter fuel will lose us the next election, it was a terrible mistake. But it's probably too late for a U-turn now,' one cabinet minister lamented. Other Labour figures were more direct. Eluned Morgan, the Welsh first minister, said she was 'losing patience' with UK Labour as she urged the government to think again. A group of MPs from 'red wall' constituencies issued a joint statement. 'Responding to the issues raised by our constituents, including on winter fuel, isn't weak – it takes us to a position of strength,' it said. With Labour's poll rating tumbling, and backbenchers furious not only about the winter fuel cuts but also planned cuts to disability benefits, Downing Street felt it had to move. Not only were reports coming back from the local election campaign about anger on the doorstep, but Labour whips also wanted to offer backbenchers something before of a vote next month to approve the wider package of benefit cuts. Officials commissioned polls and conducted focus groups on how a U-turn would be received by voters. Cabinet ministers such as the health secretary, Wes Streeting, admitted the government would have to find a way to respond to voters' anger. The Guardian revealed more than two weeks ago that No 10 had begun discussing a reversal, and later that it was conducting research on how that might go down with the public, but Downing Street mounted an operation to shut down speculation. The prime minister's official spokesperson continued to deny that it was being planned or would ever happen, telling reporters there would be 'no change' despite political and public pressure to do so. Some officials now say they felt they had to deny the reports until a decision was made in order to protect the chancellor's authority. Others suggest that while there had been political discussions, the policy machine had not yet got up and running, and the denials softened once it was. Eventually, Starmer accepted a change would have to be made, even if it damaged his chancellor and opened the door to further U-turns. But his announcement in the Commons on Wednesday left many details unclear. The government will not say where the threshold might now be set, nor how much the policy might cost or where the money will be found. They will not say for certain whether they could eventually make a similar move on the two-child benefit cap – though officials point out that policy is much more popular with the public. The biggest uncertainty is timing. Starmer said on Wednesday the full policy would be announced at this autumn's budget, but officials would not say whether it would be implemented in time for this winter. Pensioners earning slightly over £11,500 a year therefore face an anxious wait until the budget – and ministers face a barrage of further questions in the months to come.
