SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
work requirements
'What Don't They Want You to Know?' GOP Sets 1 AM Hearing to Advance Disastrous Medicaid Cuts
"They have such contempt for the American people," said Democratic Rep. Jim McGovern.
May 20, 2025
House Republicans are set to take the next step toward passage of their sprawling reconciliation bill at a Wednesday hearing scheduled to begin while most Americans are fast asleep.
The GOP-controlled House Rules Committee will convene at 1 am ET Wednesday morning to consider the legislation and recent changes pushed by Republican hardliners, who are demanding even more aggressive cuts to Medicaid and green energy programs.
Specifically, a faction of far-right Republicans led by Rep. Chip Roy of Texas wants the bill's proposed work requirements for Medicaid recipients to take effect earlier than the originally proposed 2029 start date. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) said Tuesday that Republicans had settled on "early 2027" as a new start date.
While the House Rules Committee has not responded to reporters' questions about the timing of Wednesday's hearing, critics said it appears to be an attempt to avoid the kinds of protests and public scrutiny that daytime meetings have attracted.
Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), the ranking member of the rules panel, blasted his Republican colleagues over the dead-of-night hearing time, writing on social media that "they have such contempt for the American people."
"If Donald Trump's big beautiful tax break for billionaires is so great... why not pass it in primetime?" McGovern asked. "Why jam it through in the middle of the night? What don't they want you to know?"
Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) added that "if you think you are doing what is right for the American people, you don't consider it in the dead of night."
"This bill doesn't just cut Medicaid, it guts Medicaid, and it will cause millions of eligible people in House districts across the country to lose access to the Medicaid benefits they need."
The GOP reconciliation package, a centerpiece of President Donald Trump's legislative agenda, would slash Medicaid and federal nutrition assistance by more than a trillion dollars combined over the next decade—cuts that would help offset the cost of massive tax breaks for rich Americans.
The spending cuts, which would be achieved in part through draconian and ineffective work requirements, would strip healthcare coverage and food aid from millions of Americans and potentially devastate rural hospitals, farmers, and local economies.
"Instead of listening to the millions of Americans clogging their phone lines and showing up at townhalls, or even those in their own party warning against severe cuts to Medicaid, House Republicans are making bigger cuts and terminating people's healthcare coverage even faster," said Anthony Wright, executive director of Families USA.
"This bill doesn't just cut Medicaid, it guts Medicaid, and it will cause millions of eligible people in House districts across the country to lose access to the Medicaid benefits they need," Wright said. "When will we hear from those members?"
Later Wednesday morning, Medicaid recipients from across the country—including districts represented by House Republicans—are set to gather on Capitol Hill to protest the GOP legislation.
"Upon arrival on May 21, they will hold a press conference, demand face-to-face meetings, deliver petitions signed by thousands of constituents urging GOP decisionmakers to change course, and take direct action in order to be heard," the People's Action Institute and Popular Democracy said Tuesday.
"The plan to eviscerate Medicaid and other programs in order to siphon public dollars into the pockets of billionaires who already pay less in taxes than working families is universally unpopular," they added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Policy Expert Details Cruelty and Pointlessness of GOP's Medicaid Work Requirements
"Our society could decide that police and fire departments will not respond to calls made by individuals who worked less than 80 hours in the prior month, but most would find this repugnant," wrote Matt Bruenig of the People's Policy Project.
May 16, 2025
Days after Trump Cabinet officials championed work requirements in the pages of The New York Times, a progressive policy expert wrote in that same newspaper on Friday that such mandates—particularly for Medicaid recipients—are "cruel and pointless," potentially stripping critical benefits from millions of people through no fault of their own.
The GOP proposal, which advanced out of the House Energy and Commerce Committee earlier this week, would require many Medicaid recipients to prove that they worked or did some related activity for at least 80 hours per month. Republicans are also seeking to dramatically expand work requirements for recipients of federal nutrition assistance.
Matt Bruenig, founder of the People's Policy Project, a left-wing think tank, argued in his Times op-ed that "imposing work requirements on Medicaid is a fundamentally misguided policy," particularly given that "it is employers, not workers, who make hiring, firing, and scheduling decisions."
"Last year, over 20 million workers were laid off or fired at some point from their jobs," Bruenig observed. "Many of those workers ended up losing not just all of their income but also their employer-sponsored health care. Medicaid is supposed to provide a backstop for these workers, but if we tie eligibility to work, they will find themselves locked out of the healthcare system because of decisions their employers made, often for reasons beyond their control."
To underscore the absurdity of forcing vulnerable people to document adequate work hours in order to receive public benefits, Bruenig wrote that "our society could decide that police and fire departments will not respond to calls made by individuals who worked less than 80 hours in the prior month, but most would find this repugnant and contrary to the purpose of these services."
"Refusing medical care to people in their time of need based on how much they happened to work the month before is a cruel and pointless policy," he added.
"For those fundamentally opposed to Medicaid and the welfare state more generally, the fact that these new requirements would create administrative barriers that disenroll eligible recipients may be seen as a feature, not a bug."
Like other policy experts and healthcare advocates, Bruenig argued that Medicaid work requirements are a solution in search of a problem.
According to Bruenig's calculations, just 5% of Medicaid recipients are able-bodied adults without dependents who work fewer than 80 hours per month—a figure that undercuts the Republican narrative of a crisis-level refusal to work among single, adult Medicaid enrollees with no children.
Bruenig also notes the immense administrative burden that work requirements inevitably bring. "Requiring proof of monthly work hours will cause some people to lose coverage simply because they struggle to keep up with the paperwork, not just because they’re unemployed," he warned, echoing concerns expressed by other analysts.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that the GOP's proposed Medicaid work requirements would imperil benefits for more than 14 million people.
"For those fundamentally opposed to Medicaid and the welfare state more generally, the fact that these new requirements would create administrative barriers that disenroll eligible recipients may be seen as a feature, not a bug," Bruenig wrote. "I suspect that for many of the Republican policymakers who endorsed work requirements, the goal of such a policy isn't genuinely to increase employment or remove support from only those who refuse to work. Rather, it is to redirect resources from lower-income Americans toward those at the top. And for that purpose, it is indeed well designed."
Opponents of Medicaid work requirements typically point to Arkansas and Georgia as evidence that the mandates do little to boost employment while depriving many of health coverage.
The Washington Postreported Friday that in Georgia, "just12,000 of the nearly 250,000 newly eligible Georgians ultimately received Medicaid" under the state's Pathways to Coverage program, which requires enrollees to submit monthly paperwork demonstrating that they worked, volunteered, or participated in job training for at least 80 hours.
"Somewho do work had a tough time proving it to state officials—or their work, such as caring for ailing relatives, didn't qualify," the Post noted. "Georgia's experiences portend what's to come if work requirements are imposed nationally."
The work requirements that Republicans are pushing would produce roughly $300 billion in federal Medicaid spending cuts over the next decade—reductions that would be achieved by either removing people from the program or preventing people from enrolling.
U.S. Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) said Friday that he helped sink a vote to advance the GOP reconciliation package out of the House Budget Committee on Friday partly because the proposed Medicaid work requirements would begin in 2029, rather than immediately.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Cabinet Members Regurgitate Lies About Work Requirements
"Washington politicians are ignoring clear data and forcing reporting requirements on working Americans as a cynical ploy to kick working people off their healthcare."
May 14, 2025
Top Trump administration officials took to the pages of The New York Times on Wednesday to champion the idea of work requirements as Republican lawmakers attempt to impose such mandates on recipients of Medicaid and federal nutrition assistance—an effort that could result in millions losing benefits.
The new op-ed was authored by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Mehmet Oz, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, and Housing and Urban Development Secretary Scott Turner.
The Cabinet members endorsed "efforts to require able-bodied adults (defined as adults who have not been certified as physically or mentally unfit to work), with some exceptions, to get jobs" and urged Congress to "enact common-sense reforms into law."
Alarmingly, the Trump administration officials pointed to Clinton-era welfare reform as a model for "successful" policy change. They neglect to mention that extreme poverty more than doubled in the wake of the 1996 overhaul.
"The good news is that history shows us that work requirements work," the officials wrote.
Research and state-level experiments with work requirements belie that claim. Journalist Bryce Covert noted in response to the administration officials' op-ed that "there have been many, many studies on the impacts of work requirements—both in the 90s and today—and the clear consensus is that they deprive people of benefits without increasing employment."
Kennedy's net worth: $15 million. Oz's net worth: $315 million. Telling the poor they have to work harder for food, housing, and healthcare. www.nytimes.com/2025/05/14/o...
[image or embed]
— Bryce Covert (@brycecovert.bsky.social) May 14, 2025 at 8:45 AM
One study of Arkansas' brief implementation of Medicaid work requirements during the first Trump administration found "no evidence that the policy succeeded in its stated goal of promoting work and instead found substantial evidence of harm to healthcare coverage and access."
A recent review of the literature on Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) work requirements similarly concluded that "the best evidence shows they do not increase employment."
That didn't stop congressional Republicans from making work requirements a centerpiece of their proposed cuts to Medicaid and SNAP. The GOP's proposed work requirements for Medicaid recipients—most of whom already work if they are able to—account for over $300 billion of the bill's projected spending cuts to the program over the next decade.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) said Tuesday that the Republican plans for SNAP and Medicaid would put millions of people at risk of losing benefits, in large part due to the administrative red tape that work requirements and reporting mandates inevitably bring.
The group cited research showing that "many people who lose SNAP are working or should have qualified for an exemption, but the bureaucratic red tape made documenting their employment or proving their exemption too difficult."
On Wednesday, Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) released a report examining the impacts of Medicaid work requirements in Arkansas and Georgia.
"These two case studies are a cautionary tale," the report found. "They show that work reporting requirements are not effective. Instead of getting more people working, they simply kick people off their healthcare, many of whom were already working full-time."
In a statement, Warnock said research "shows that the best way to create jobs and grow the economy is to remove bureaucratic red tape that keeps working people from accessing healthcare."
"Instead, Washington politicians are ignoring clear data and forcing reporting requirements on working Americans as a cynical ploy to kick working people off their healthcare," said Warnock. "All of this so they can fund a tax cut for the ultra-wealthy."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular