
Medicaid enrollees fear losing health coverage if Congress enacts work requirements
It took Crystal Strickland years to qualify for Medicaid, which she needs for a heart condition.
Strickland, who's unable to work due to her condition, chafed when she learned that the U.S. House had passed a bill that would impose a work requirement for many able-bodied people to get health insurance coverage through the low-cost, government-run plan for lower-income people.
"What sense does that make?" she asked. "What about the people who can't work but can't afford a doctor?"
The measure is part of the version of President Donald Trump's "Big Beautiful" bill that cleared the House last month and is now up for consideration in the Senate. Trump is seeking to have it passed by July 4.
The bill, as it stands, would cut taxes and government spending — and also upend portions of the nation's social safety net.
For proponents, the ideas behind the work requirement are simple: Crack down on fraud and stand on the principle that taxpayer-provided health coverage isn't for those who can work but aren't. The measure includes exceptions for those who are under 19 or over 64, those with disabilities, pregnant women, main caregivers for young children, people recently released from prisons or jails, or during certain emergencies. It would apply only to adults who receive Medicaid through expansions that 40 states chose to undertake as part of the 2010 health insurance overhaul.
Many details of how the changes would work would be developed later, leaving several unknowns and causing anxiety among recipients who worry that their illnesses might not be enough to exempt them.
Advocates and sick and disabled enrollees worry, based largely on their experience, that even those who might be exempted from work requirements under the law could still lose benefits because of increased or hard-to-meet paperwork mandates.
Strickland, a 44-year-old former server, cook, and construction worker who lives in Fairmont, North Carolina, said she could not afford to go to a doctor for years because she wasn't able to work. She finally received a letter this month saying she would receive Medicaid coverage, she said.
"It's already kind of tough to get on Medicaid," said Strickland, who has lived in a tent and times and subsisted on nonperishable food thrown out by stores. "If they make it harder to get on, they're not going to be helping."
Steve Furman is concerned that his 43-year-old son, who has autism, could lose coverage.
The bill the House adopted would require Medicaid enrollees to show that they work, volunteer or go to school at least 80 hours a month to continue to qualify.
A disability exception would likely apply to Furman's son, who previously worked in an eyeglasses plant in Illinois for 15 years despite behavioral issues that may have gotten him fired elsewhere.
Furman said government bureaucracies are already impossible for his son to navigate, even with help.
It took him a year to help get his son onto Arizona's Medicaid system when they moved to Scottsdale in 2022, and it took time to set up food benefits. But he and his wife, who are retired, say they don't have the means to support his son fully.
"Should I expect the government to take care of him?" he asked. "I don't know, but I do expect them to have humanity."
About 71 million adults are enrolled in Medicaid now. And most of them — around 92% — are working, caregiving, attending school or disabled. Earlier estimates of the budget bill from the Congressional Budget Office found that about 5 million people stand to lose coverage.
A KFF tracking poll conducted in May found that the enrollees come from across the political spectrum. About one-fourth are Republicans; roughly one-third are Democrats.
The poll found that about 7 in 10 adults are worried that federal spending reductions on Medicaid will lead to more uninsured people and would strain health care providers in their area. About half said they were worried reductions would hurt their ability or their family to get and pay for health care.
Amaya Diana, an analyst at KFF, points to work requirements launched in Arkansas and Georgia as keeping people off Medicaid without increasing employment.
Amber Bellazaire, a policy analyst at the Michigan League for Public Policy, said the process to verify that Medicaid enrollees meet the work requirements could be a key reason people would be denied or lose eligibility.
"Massive coverage losses just due to an administrative burden rather than ineligibility is a significant concern," she said.
One KFF poll respondent, Virginia Bell, a retiree in Starkville, Mississippi, said she's seen sick family members struggle to get onto Medicaid, including one who died recently without coverage.
She said she doesn't mind a work requirement for those who are able, but worries about how that would be sorted out. "It's kind of hard to determine who needs it and who doesn't need it," she said.
Lexy Mealing, 54 of Westbury, New York, who was first diagnosed with breast cancer in 2021 and underwent a double mastectomy and reconstruction surgeries, said she fears she may lose the medical benefits she has come to rely on, though people with "serious or complex" medical conditions could be granted exceptions.
She now works about 15 hours a week in "gig" jobs but isn't sure she can work more as she deals with the physical and mental toll of the cancer.
Mealing, who used to work as a medical receptionist in a pediatric neurosurgeon's office before her diagnosis and now volunteers for the American Cancer Society, went on Medicaid after going on short-term disability.
"I can't even imagine going through treatments right now and surgeries and the uncertainty of just not being able to work and not having health insurance," she said.
Felix White, who has Type I diabetes, first qualified for Medicaid after losing his job as a computer programmer several years ago.
The Oreland, Pennsylvania, man has been looking for a job, but finds that at 61, it's hard to land one.
Medicaid, meanwhile, pays for a continuous glucose monitor and insulin and funded foot surgeries last year, including one that kept him in the hospital for 12 days.
"There's no way I could have afforded that," he said. "I would have lost my foot and probably died."
___
Associated Press writer Susan Haigh in Hartford, Connecticut, contributed to this article.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Bloomberg
11 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Indian Negotiators Extend US Stay as Trade Talks Gather Pace
India's trade team has extended its stay in Washington to iron out differences as the two sides look to clinch a deal before a July 9 deadline when higher US tariffs are set to kick in, people familiar with the matter said. The in-person negotiations were initially supposed to run through June 27 but were extended by a day, raising hopes of an interim trade deal, said the people, who asked not to be identified as the discussions are private.
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Is America's billionaire boom good for government, democracy? Tell us.
Billionaires are having a day. The White House is a good example of this happy time for the wealthiest among us, since it is the residence (once more) of our first billionaire president, Donald Trump. It was there that he was joined briefly by the richest man in the world, Elon Musk, who slashed his way through much of the federal government, then exited to go tend to rockets, electric cars and other ventures. But not to worry. Left behind are five billionaires brought into office by Trump, the most of any administration. Those magnates spent hundreds of millions of dollars to reelect Trump and to throw him an inaugural party. Opinion: What's an oligarchy? With Trump's 'Big, Beautiful' bill, we're living in one. As a national phenomenon, the number of billionaires has grown from one in the 1920s (industrialist Henry Ford) to more than 900. Since the start of the 21st century, that group's wealth has expanded nine times, aided by Trump's 2017 tax cuts. For the country's lower half of earners, the expansion was double, mostly due to stimulus checks. I say all this to set up the question for you: What do we think of this conspicuous power of America's billionaires? Is it something to fear, as President Joe Biden warned on his way out the door, saying there is a growing oligarchy that "threatens our entire democracy, our basic rights and freedoms, and a fair shot for everyone to get ahead"? Or are these exceptional people whom we should celebrate? They are, after all, the group that brought us Starlink, a satellite system that kept Ukraine afloat in its war against Russia. And Amazon. (Boy, I like not going to the store to buy that thingy to fix my dryer. And I get it the next day!) Opinion: You're not really mad at the Bezos, Sánchez luxury Venice wedding. You're just poor. We want to know what you think. Take our poll below, or send us an email with the subject line "Forum billionaires" to forum@ We'll publish a collection of responses from all sides of the conversation in our next installment of the Opinion Forum. Do you want to take part in our next Forum? Join the conversation by emailing forum@ can also follow us on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and sign up for our Opinion newsletter to stay updated on future Forum posts. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Should billionaires be running the country? Tell us | Opinion


Washington Post
34 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Tim Walz bids farewell to slain Minnesota lawmaker
National Tim Walz bids farewell to slain Minnesota lawmaker June 29, 2025 | 10:16 AM GMT Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) delivered the eulogy at the funeral of slain Minnesota lawmaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, on June 28.