WELKER: Why would Josh Hawley introduce a bill to roll back cuts in Medicaid if there are not cuts in Medicaid? He says the people in his state are going to suffer
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) July 27, 2025
MIKE JOHNSON: I will tell you that the one big beautiful bill safeguards the program pic.twitter.com/ikT8XeVxB4
Welker led off with
Two more critical topics to get to with you, Mr. Speaker.
Let's talk about what has been called the Big Beautiful Bill. In June, you told
me the bill would not cut Medicaid. But two Republican senators ultimately
voted against it because of what they thought were cuts to Medicaid. And
Senator Josh Hawley is already out proposing legislation to actually roll back
some of the Medicaid cuts that he just voted for. Did the Medicaid cuts go too
far, Mr. Speaker?
Oh, dear Lord. Why must the mainstream media, most of whose members (Welker among them) left-of-center, consistently adopt Republican messaging? Call it President Trump's, or the Administration's, or the Republican megabill of tax-and-spending bill. "Big Beautiful Bill" is obviously Trump's branding, an effort to manipulate the media, which was eager to accommodate him.
Johnson replied
The bill does not cut Medicaid. The One Big Beautiful Bill
does not cut Medicaid. What it does is strengthen the program. And we talked
about this, Kristen, is that the problem is there's a high degree of fraud,
waste and abuse in that program. I'm talking about 10s of billions of dollars
every year. What we did is we went in to go in and fix that.
He followed with fourteen sentences, none of which answered the question. But when in doubt, simply say "fraud, waste, and abuse," even though fraudsters would be prosecuted and abuse can mean anything in the world, though its most direct and accurate application is to violence against a member of a family and/or household, as in domestic abuse.
In early July, NPR reviewed the likely impact of the cuts Johnson says will "strengthen the program" and explained
The deepest cuts to health care spending come from a
proposed Medicaid work requirement, which is expected to end coverage for
millions of enrollees who do not meet new employment or reporting standards.
In 40 states and Washington, D.C., all of which have expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, some Medicaid enrollees will have to regularly file paperwork proving that they are working, volunteering, or attending school at least 80 hours a month, or that they qualify for an exemption, such as caring for a young child. The new requirement will start as early as January 2027.
The bill's requirement doesn't apply to people in the 10 largely GOP-led states that have not expanded Medicaid to nondisabled adults.
Health researchers say the policy will have little impact on
employment. Most working-age Medicaid enrollees who don't receive disability
benefits already work or are looking for work, or are unable to do so because
they have a disability, attend school, or care for a family member, according
to KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes KFF Health News.
State experiments with work requirements have been plagued with administrative issues, such as eligible enrollees' losing coverage over paperwork problems, and budget overruns. Georgia's work requirement, which officially launched in July 2023, has cost more than $90 million, with only $26 million of that spent on health benefits, according to the Georgia Budget & Policy Institute, a nonpartisan research organization.
Briefly: Onerous reporting requirements will result in many millions of Americans losing their health coverage, in a country in which "(54%) of Americans between the ages of 16 and 74 read below the equivalent of a sixth-grade level."
Additionally, "belt-tightening that targets states could translate into fewer health services, medical professionals, and even hospitals, especially in rural communities." As in will translate. And Affordable Care Act
marketplace policyholders will be required to update
their income, immigration status, and other information each year, rather than
be allowed to automatically reenroll — something more than 10 million people
did this year. They'll also have less time to enroll; the bill shortens the
annual open enrollment period by about a month.
That is to "strengthen the program" in a country in which a majority of Americans read no better than does an 11-year old.
Co-pays will increase for many Medicaid enrollees in states which have expanded Medicaid, thus discouraging individuals from seeking primary care. More people will get sick, then get help only when their situation is dire, boosting overall health care costs.
Welker then asked
Josh Hawley says he is worried about cuts to payments and Medicaid reimbursements. Why would he be introducing a bill to roll back cuts to Medicaid if there were no cuts to Medicaid? He says the people in his state are going to suffer.
And Johnson responded
I haven't talked to my friend Josh Hawley about his
legalization. I'm not sure what that's directed to. But I will tell you that
the One Big Beautiful Bill safeguards the program. It strengthens it.
The Speaker responded with seven more sentences in which the question was not answered. However, the accurate answer would be: as he opined in The New York Times, "slashing health insurance for the working poor" would be "both morally wrong and politically suicidal." That was in May, a few week before Hawley voted for the bill
The "strengthens the program" or "safeguard the program," applied to Medicaid, is a chapter in the old GOP playbook. It is a variation- a slight variation- of the argument Republicans have invoked against Medicare and Social Security in which they promise to "preserve and protect" what they term "entitlement programs," i.e., Social Security and Medicare.
Mike Johnson once defended President Trump by rationalizing "Yeah, he may be breaking the rules but he's doing it where I can see it. So who cares?" That may be naivete about someone who is involved in a herculean effort to hide the report detailing his sexual and economic involvement with arguably the most prolific pedophiles ever. Or it may reflect on the Speaker's disdain for rules when it suits him. He's not the very worst thing the modern Republican Party is giving the country but he deserves (dis)honorable mention.
No comments:
Post a Comment