Annoying People to Death - Why the Medicaid work requirement is a terrible idea

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Article / Archive

According to the White House, the One Big Beautiful Bill, the president’s signature second-term domestic legislation, does not cut Medicaid. According to any number of budget analysts, including Congress’s own, it guts the health program, bleeding it of $1 trillion in financing and eliminating coverage for 10 million people.

The White House has found a simple way to square this technocratic circle: lie. A trillion dollars in cuts is not a cut; stripping 10 million people of health insurance does not constitute shrinking the program; the president never said “lock her up”; Joe Biden did not win the 2020 election; up is down and down is up.
Other Republicans are adopting a more complicated form of explanatory geometry. The law implements a nationwide work requirement for Medicaid.

Able-bodied adults will have to prove that they are employed, volunteering, or in school in exchange for coverage. “If you are able to work and you refuse to do so, you are defrauding the system,” Speaker Mike Johnson explained on CBS. “You’re cheating the system, and no one in the country believes that that’s right. So there’s a moral component to what we’re doing.” The law does not cut Medicaid, in this telling. It protects the program from abuse.

Johnson’s explanation is no less galling than Donald Trump’s lies. The Medicaid work requirement will not strengthen the program, improve the labor market, or kick lazy cheaters off government benefits. Rather, it will saddle taxpayers with billions of dollars of new costs and low-income Americans with hundreds of millions of hours of busywork. Red tape will cause millions of people to lose health coverage, some of whom will perish because they cannot access care. Republicans are not protecting Medicaid. They are voting to annoy their own constituents to death.

Why does Medicaid need a work requirement in the first place? To prevent the safety net from becoming a hammock, Republicans love to say. But most people on Medicaid are already working if they can work. And Medicaid doesn’t provide its enrollees with cash or a cash-like payment, as the country’s unemployment-insurance, welfare, Social Security, and SNAP programs do. You can’t eat an insurance card. You can’t pay your rent with the guarantee of low co-pays for ambulatory care. Because insurance does not help recipients make ends meet, it does not shrink the labor market, as proved by a randomized controlled trial.

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, 64 percent of nondisabled adults on Medicaid have a job. Most of the others are not working because they have medical problems or significant caretaking responsibilities, or because they are attending school. Just 8 percent of nondisabled adults seem to be in the category of folks Johnson hopes will be spurred to work by the threat of losing their health coverage. They aren’t 28-year-old guys signing up for public insurance so they can play video games all day. They are retirees and people who can’t find work in their community.

Thus, the work requirement should really be understood as a work-reporting requirement. Starting in 2027, nondisabled adults will have to log in and tell Uncle Sam what they do with their time in order to afford cancer screenings and bloodwork. Each state with an expanded Medicaid program will have to pay a contractor to create, test, and launch a complex intake-and-verification system in 18 months—six, really, because the Department of Health and Human Services is not expected to release detailed rules on the new requirement until midway through next year. In 2019, the Government Accountability Office found that states had spent as much as $463 per beneficiary setting up such systems in the past. Georgia, the only state that currently has a Medicaid work requirement, spends $9 on overhead for every $1 it spends on medical care through the initiative.

More than 20 million Americans will have to set up accounts to let the state know that they are in compliance with the work requirement, out of compliance, or not subject to it. This likely means collecting documents, uploading them, waiting for verifications, submitting sensitive personal data, and appealing incorrect determinations, all on what, history shows, will surely be a clunky, faulty system backed by a too-small cadre of overworked and underpaid civil servants. A broken laptop or a faulty internet connection might cause an individual to get rejected; a missed phone call from a caseworker might lead to a person missing out on care. Washington is shifting the burden of public administration onto individuals, and counting on people to fail.

In general, work requirements are far better at weeding out worthy participants than they are at motivating noncompliant ones. Roughly 240,000 Georgians are eligible for the state’s work-for-Medicaid initiative, which covers very poor nondisabled adults. Only 5,500 are actually enrolled, thanks to the complexity of the program’s rules and the impossibility of its portal. Arkansas kicked nearly 20,000 people off Medicaid when it required applicants to prove that they were working in 2018 and 2019; the change had no effect on employment. One analysis of the One Big Beautiful Bill suggests that each “appropriate” disenrollment from Medicaid will cost taxpayers $5,000 in bureaucratic overhead—not far off from how much Medicaid spends per person to begin with.

Trump’s law doesn’t protect Medicaid. It requires Americans to spend hundreds of millions of hours a year filling out tedious, unnecessary paperwork. It will cause millions of Americans to lose their health coverage, limiting their access to care and forcing them into debt. An estimated 50,000 people will die each year—many thanks to red tape.
 
TL;DR summary:

"Stop making me do work, just give me free shit."
307363e6-1731-4bd3-8f99-3bbcc0d96c40_text.gif
 
Joe Biden did not win the 2020 election; up is down and down is up.
I stop reading Atlantic articles when I get to the shitlib propagandizing, which usually takes about a paragraph, as it did here. I don't care what this person has to say about Medicaid when they open the discussion by lying about a totally unrelated issue. I'm not reading the rest of this brainrot trash. It's an infohazard.
 
--OR Monthly income of minimum wage x 80 hours.

"For Medicaid eligibility purposes, income generally includes any form of compensation or benefit, whether earned or unearned, or even in-kind, that a person receives. This includes wages, self-employment income, Social Security benefits, pensions, unemployment benefits, rental income, investment income, and more."

You're not shoving me into the wage cage, so suck it.
 
In 2019, the Government Accountability Office found that states had spent as much as $463 per beneficiary setting up such systems in the past.
bleeding it of $1 trillion in financing and eliminating coverage for 10 million people.
$1 trillion per 10 million people is $100k per person, surely they can spend an extra $500 for each of the rest.

So there’s a moral component to what we’re doing.”
Yes. Humans are moral. There's a famous experiment in which two people are offered $1000 (or whatever) to split between themselves: the first guy decides how to split the money and the second decides whether to accept or not, if not neither gets anything. It is "rational" within the scope of the experiment for the second guy to accept even $1, but in reality people don't agree to that, because the benefit of enforcing long-term fairness is worth more than that.
 
Johnson's a cockholster supreme, but is some Atlantic writer seriously trying to make me believe he/she/it opposes making Americans fill out tons of useless, onerous paperwork??? buddy 99 percent of what you advocate involves creating new bureaucracies to shove forms and permits onto people.
 
The work requirement is pretty dumb yeah, I honestly don't know what they're thinking even bothering with it.
 
It would make much more sense to implement a BMI requirement than a work requirement. I shouldn't have to pay for Lateesha's sixth heart attack when she weighs 400 pounds and walks waddles around with a sippy cup of gravy. Work requirement how about a work out requirement?
 
Last edited:
Just 8 percent of nondisabled adults seem to be in the category of folks Johnson hopes will be spurred to work by the threat of losing their health coverage.
8% of the nondisabled adults who are on Medicaid is 1.87 million people. States that took the Obamacare Medicaid expansion spend an average of $8,100 a year per enrollee. Non-expansion states spend an average of $6,000. Split the difference, if all that 8% people fail to do meet the requirements, that's $13.2 billion dollars a year saved. Of course we have to suspect the 8% number is a lie and the real percentage is higher. A drop in the bucket of total federal spending, but the administration is doing its damnedest to create a lot of drops. They add up. There's no reason not to try to lower spending in small as well as large ways
 
I've never qualified for Medicaid or even Food Stamps, even at my poorest paying jobs in my early twenties. Does this "work or volunteer for 80 hours" thing actually work in my benefit? Might I finally qualify for Medicaid, now that I'm essentially retired, and spend a lot of time volunteering in the community?
 
It would make much more sense to implement a BMI requirement than a work requirement. I shouldn't have to pay for Lateesha's sixth heart attack when she weighs 400 pounds and walks waddles around with a sippy cup of gravy. Work requirement how about a work out requirement?
This is a pretty good idea actually, quite a lot of the money spent on healthcare in this country is related to problems caused by obesity. The only problem is that I'm not sure how you'd enforce this effectively.
 
Story time: A couple of years ago I left my job in January when they started to require the coof jab. I had previously been on the market place, picked out my private insurance, and even paid my first premium. They AUTOMATICALLY took me off of that insurance and put me into the Medicaid system because my expected reported income was going to be 0. The whole system is a nonsensical fucking mess.
 
Story time: A couple of years ago I left my job in January when they started to require the coof jab. I had previously been on the market place, picked out my private insurance, and even paid my first premium. They AUTOMATICALLY took me off of that insurance and put me into the Medicaid system because my expected reported income was going to be 0. The whole system is a nonsensical fucking mess.
Yeah same exact thing happened to an acquaintance who was working for cash under the table. They wouldn't let them pay for health insurance, the Medicaid was obligatory. This ended up becoming a huge redpill because they were PISSED at how much better Medicaid was than the insurance they had been paying for their whole life.
 
The work requirement is pretty dumb yeah, I honestly don't know what they're thinking even bothering with it.

First it keeps people from becoming completely worthless lumps. A person that's doing some job, however small, is at least providing some value to society and even if it's a crap part time job just to hit the minimums it's more than nothing. It may lead to opportunities for career advancement or additional hours in the future and that person becoming more self-sufficient.

Second, it makes it harder for cheats that are working under the table while claiming benefits. Once you expose your income at all, it's much more difficult to hide all of it or if you do makes it a lot easier for anyone investigating to uncover.
 
Story time: A couple of years ago I left my job in January when they started to require the coof jab. I had previously been on the market place, picked out my private insurance, and even paid my first premium. They AUTOMATICALLY took me off of that insurance and put me into the Medicaid system because my expected reported income was going to be 0. The whole system is a nonsensical fucking mess.
Yeah same exact thing happened to an acquaintance who was working for cash under the table. They wouldn't let them pay for health insurance, the Medicaid was obligatory. This ended up becoming a huge redpill because they were PISSED at how much better Medicaid was than the insurance they had been paying for their whole life.
The US healthcare system is either be rich or poor enough to afford health care. If you work for a living you are fucked.
 
Arkansas kicked nearly 20,000 people off Medicaid when it required applicants to prove that they were working in 2018 and 2019; the change had no effect on employment
You mean the people who already weren't working made no dent in employment numbers because they weren't working? And likely weren't going to start working once they lost coverage?

How insightful! What a well written article that does not seem like it was typed out by somebody with a <90 IQ!
 
First it keeps people from becoming completely worthless lumps. A person that's doing some job, however small, is at least providing some value to society and even if it's a crap part time job just to hit the minimums it's more than nothing. It may lead to opportunities for career advancement or additional hours in the future and that person becoming more self-sufficient.
Nah, what it will lead to in almost all cases is people either finding a way around the requirement in some way; or just not having health insurance, which will in turn lead to increased ER visits and thus higher health care costs than if they had just been left alone.
Second, it makes it harder for cheats that are working under the table while claiming benefits. Once you expose your income at all, it's much more difficult to hide all of it or if you do makes it a lot easier for anyone investigating to uncover.
Meh, maybe, but I'd rather just (hypothetically, assuming you could actually enforce it effectively) tie in Medicaid benefits to an exercise requirement as was mentioned up thread. That would do a lot more to reduce health care costs than anything else will.
 
Back
Top Bottom