Democratic Mayor's Budget Would Remove 25,000 People From Medicaid
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Democratic Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser has proposed a budget that would remove 25,000 people from Medicaid.
The budget would update eligibility requirements for Medicaid in D.C. and subsequently lead to tens of thousands of people being kicked off the health coverage.
Why It Matters
Republicans have touted Medicaid cuts federally, with GOP leaders seeking changes to the program to pass a $2 trillion government spending cut.
However, Democratic cuts to the program are relatively rare. Without access to Medicaid, many low-income D.C. residents would be forced to find other insurance or go without, potentially leading to medical debt and worse health outcomes.
Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser addresses a remembrance and reopening ceremony at the Lillian and Albert Small Capital Jewish Museum on May 29, 2025, in Washington, D.C.
Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser addresses a remembrance and reopening ceremony at the Lillian and Albert Small Capital Jewish Museum on May 29, 2025, in Washington, D.C.What To Know
Bowser's fiscal 2026 budget would change eligibility to help curb the estimated $182 million increase in Medicaid costs for the city.
"We also have to deal with the fact that Medicaid is growing at a substantially faster clip than the city's revenues," said Wayne Turnage, deputy mayor for D.C. Health and Human Services, as reported by local station WTOP News.
Under the budget, childless adults and adult caregivers would be ineligible if they have an income 138 percent of the federal poverty level or above. This likely would cut off 25,575 residents from Medicaid.
"While any cut to this program is going to be difficult, one silver lining is the city has alternative health plans that could be available to some who are no longer ineligible," Alex Beene, a financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek. "Ultimately, this could be a dilemma other cities facing rising expenses have to deal with in the coming years."
Newsweek reached out to Bowser for comment via email.
"When you have such cost inflation, the most pragmatic way to control costs in an entitlement program is to slow spending by reducing the number of people in the program," Turnage said during a presentation Tuesday.
D.C. is facing a $1 billion decline in revenue over the several years, sparking the need to cut programs like Medicaid.
"We think that we will be getting into an unsustainable decision-making loop of, 'I don't want to make hard choices,'" Bowser said.
What People Are Saying
D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, during a Tuesday briefing on the budget: "We can't invest in the best schools if we don't have revenue to do that. We can't have the types of human services programs that we've invested in if we don't have revenues.
"If you don't have enough money, something has to go or you have to make more money."
Chris Fong, CEO of Smile Insurance and a Medicaid specialist, told Newsweek: "This type of limitation would eliminate a larger number of DC residents from qualifying for Medicaid. These requirements are more commonly found in Republican leaning states.
"It is surprising from a simply political position, but the current D.C. has been known to go against the more progressive democrat positions."
Alex Beene, a financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek: "D.C. is facing something than just a few years ago would have seemed highly unlikely: a severe reduction in its workforce due to recent labor cuts by the federal government and other major employers. Faced with fewer tax dollars and more expenses, this proposal would make childless adults and adult caregivers whose income is 138 percent of the federal poverty level ineligible for Medicaid."
What Happens Next
The D.C. council is set to debate the proposed changes during the budget process. Voting is expected to take place by early August.
"The options the D.C. mayor has is to either increase the burden on the citizens of the city by increasing taxes or to reduce the number of Medicaid beneficiaries," Fong said. "I think it is likely this will pass given the current state of inflation and the challenges that the average citizen is running into when paying their daily bills."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Texas' proposed congressional map dismantles districts flagged by DOJ
In early July, as President Donald Trump was pushing Texas to redraw its congressional map to better favor Republicans, the Department of Justice sent state leaders a letter. Four of Texas' congressional districts were unconstitutional, the department warned. Three, the 9th, 18th and 33rd, were unconstitutional 'coalition districts,' where Black and Hispanic voters combine to form a majority. The 29th, while majority Hispanic, was also unconstitutional, the letter said, because it was created by its two neighbors being coalition districts. 'It is well-established that so-called 'coalition districts' run afoul of the Voting Rights Act and the Fourteenth Amendment,' assistant attorney general Harmeet Dhillon wrote, threatening legal action if Texas didn't bring the districts into compliance. On Wednesday, Texas House Republicans released their first draft of a redrawn map designed to give the GOP five new seats in next year's midterms. As for the four districts that troubled Dhillon? In the Houston area, the 9th and the 18th districts, where no one race currently constitutes a majority of eligible voters, would be redrawn as just over half Hispanic and half Black, respectively. But as a result, the nearby 29th District — a fixture of east Houston's Latino community — would lose its Hispanic majority, becoming 43% Hispanic, 33% Black and 18% white. The 33rd District in North Texas, although entirely redrawn, would still have no single racial or ethnic group that constitutes a majority. Texas has long maintained that it drew these maps without an eye toward race. But tinkering with the lines now that these racial concerns have been raised risks triggering a Voting Rights Act complaint, legal experts said. States generally cannot redraw districts based on race without a compelling argument that it's necessary to protect voters' ability to elect their candidates of choice, said Justin Levitt, a redistricting expert at Loyola Law School. 'It sure seems like they have actually done what the DOJ, without any basis, accused them of,' Levitt said, noting that he had not done sufficient analysis to say for sure. Legal experts say the DOJ's interpretation of the law around coalition districts, and thus its legal threats to Texas, are based on faulty logic that could be backing the state into a discrimination lawsuit. 'Nothing in this decision suggests, much less holds, that the VRA prohibits the very existence of coalition districts,' Ellen Katz, a redistricting expert at the University of Michigan Law School, told the House redistricting committee at its first hearing last week. 'There are hundreds of these districts nationwide in which jurisdictions relying on traditional principles create these districts.' Coalition districts Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 says states cannot engage in election or voting practices that dilute the electoral power of voters of color, including by packing them into a single district or diffusing them throughout multiple. For decades, courts held that states can satisfy the requirements of Section 2 by creating districts where multiple politically cohesive racial voting groups constitute a majority. Currently, Texas has nine districts where no one racial or ethnic group has a majority; in eight of them, Black, Hispanic and Asian voters combined create a majority. In 2024, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which hears Texas-based cases, reversed a prior ruling and said coalitions of different racial or ethnic groups within one district cannot claim their rights have been violated under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Citing this ruling, Dhillon told Texas that its coalition districts were 'nothing more than vestiges of an unconstitutionally racially based gerrymandering past, which must be abandoned, and must now be corrected by Texas.' But this reflects a misunderstanding of this case, legal experts say. Under this ruling, the Voting Rights Act can't require states to create coalition districts, but that doesn't mean coalition districts are inherently unconstitutional. 'All it says is that you don't have the affirmative obligation to purposely create [a coalition district] at the outset,' said Mark Gaber, a lawyer with the Campaign Legal Center who is representing a group of plaintiffs in an ongoing lawsuit against the current maps. 'It certainly doesn't say, go through the map and eliminate all of the ones you drew.' Texas leaders have contradicted themselves and each other on the question of whether the state has coalition districts and what should be done about them. Gov. Greg Abbott, days after receiving Dhillon's letter, included redistricting on his agenda for the Legislature's special session, citing 'constitutional concerns raised by the U.S. Department of Justice.' He later told Dallas' Fox 4 News that redistricting was necessary because of the 5th Circuit's ruling. 'We want to make sure that we have maps that don't impose coalition districts while at the very same time ensuring that we will maximize the ability of Texans to be able to vote for the candidate of their choice,' he said. At a House committee hearing Friday, GOP Rep. David Spiller of Jacksboro asked Rep. Todd Hunter, who carried the 2021 maps in the lower chamber, whether Texas currently has coalition districts. Hunter said 'the law was different then.' 'You had coalition districts being interpreted differently,' he said. 'Today, you have a 2024 5th Circuit case absolutely changing the law.' But in court, Texas has long argued it has not drawn coalition districts to address racial disparities, because it draws 'race blind' maps. Attorney General Ken Paxton doubled down on this argument in response to the Dhillon letter. 'The Texas Legislature has led the Nation in rejecting race-based decision-making in its redistricting process — it has drawn its current maps in conformance with traditional, non-racial redistricting criteria to ensure Texas continues to adopt policies that will truly Make America Great Again,' Paxton wrote. At the request of Democrats, the House and Senate redistricting committees have invited Dhillon to testify on the letter and her allegations against Texas, but neither she nor any representative from the DOJ has responded to the request. The Senate panel this week voted not to subpoena her. What happened to the Houston DOJ districts Three of the districts Dhillon cited in her letter are neighbors in the Houston area. All three would be radically redrawn by the House's proposed map. The 9th Congressional District is a multiracial district made up of 45% Black voters, 25% Hispanic voters, 18% white voters and 9% Asian voters. The district, which covers parts of southwest Houston and outlying suburbs, voted for Vice President Kamala Harris in 2024 by 44 points, and has reliably reelected Democratic Rep. Al Green since 2004. Under the House's proposed map, the 9th District has been redrawn around an entirely new part of Houston, retaining just 2% of Green's current district and scooping up conservative swaths of east Harris County. The Hispanic population would climb to just over 50% and the white population would almost double to 34%. Black voters would drop to 12% and Asian voters to 2%. In 2024, this new district would have voted for Trump by 15 points. Green, who is essentially drawn out of his district, condemned the proposal as racist, saying 'the DOJ demanded that the race card be played, and the governor dealt the people of Texas a racist hand.' Republicans pointed to the changing preferences of Latino voters, who swung sharply for Trump and other GOP candidates in 2024, to defend these new lines. 'Each of these newly-drawn districts now trend Republican in political performance,' Hunter said. 'it does allow Republican candidates the opportunity to compete in these districts.' Some of Green's existing district has been pushed into the newly drawn 18th Congressional District. While this was previously a seat with no single racial majority, its electorate would become 50.8% Black, while cutting the Hispanic and white populations. It would also tilt even further to the left; Harris carried the district by 40 percentage points in 2024 and would have won it by a 54-point spread under the new lines. Next door, Rep. Sylvia Garcia's 29th Congressional District would also be reconfigured, with Hispanic residents making up 43% of its new eligible voting population — down 20 percentage points from the current makeup. The district's Black and white populations would increase to create a district without a single racial group dominating. It would become more strongly Democratic. In challenging Texas' maps, plaintiffs have contended that Houston's population justifies two majority Hispanic districts. Instead, the one strong majority Hispanic district has been eliminated, and replaced with a district that is almost exactly half Hispanic, alongside one that is almost exactly half Black. '50.5% is unlikely to perform for Latino preferred candidates, or Black preferred candidates,' Gaber said. 'And they know that. It's a mirage.' What happened to the North Texas DOJ district In her letter, Dhillon also said the 33rd Congressional District ran afoul of the Constitution through its coalition status. The district is currently anchored in Fort Worth, with an electorate that is 44% Hispanic, 25% Black, 23% white and 6% Asian. The district went for Harris by 34 percentage points and has consistently reelected Rep. Marc Veasey, a Black Democrat. A decade ago, Texas, and the federal courts, asserted that the 33rd was not a coalition district. 'District 33 is not a 'minority coalition opportunity district' in which two different minority groups 'band together' to form an electoral majority,' the state and plaintiffs said in a joint advisory to the court. A district court judge agreed, saying it was 'not intentionally drawn as a minority coalition district.' The revised 33rd Congressional District maintains about a third of Veasey's old district, moving out of his Fort Worth base. The proposed new lines would reduce the Hispanic and Black population and increase the white population, while maintaining about the same Democratic lean. Just like in the current map, the proposed 33rd district does not have a single racial group that dominates. Legal experts say that is not inherently a problem, despite what the DOJ letter alleged, as long as voters of color have sufficient power to elect their candidate of choice. At a House committee hearing last week, Nina Perales, the vice president of litigation at the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, one of the groups suing over Texas' current maps, testified that the Dallas-Fort Worth area, like Houston, should have an additional Hispanic-majority district on top of Veasey's Hispanic-plurality seat. 'In light of the growth of the population over the past two decades, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act does require the creation of additional districts,' Perales said. 'If the committee and the legislature decides to take up redistricting, it is certainly true that you cannot subtract from the current level of representation that we have.' Few districts in the Dallas-Fort Worth area went without major changes in the new draft map. In the reshaped downtown Dallas district of Rep. Jasmine Crockett, 50.2% of the voting population would be Black, not unlike the two new Houston districts to inch just past the majority threshold. If Hispanic or Black voters were electing their candidate of choice, there is no legal reason to move more voters of one group into the district to hit a perfunctory benchmark of 50%, Levitt said. 'It tells me you're trying really hard to hit a particular target, such that the target itself was the predominant reason for moving people in or out of the district,' Levitt said. 'That's exactly what the courts have said you can't do.' The lineup for The Texas Tribune Festival continues to grow! Be there when all-star leaders, innovators and newsmakers take the stage in downtown Austin, Nov. 13–15. The newest additions include comedian, actor and writer John Mulaney; Dallas mayor Eric Johnson; U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minnesota; New York Media Editor-at-Large Kara Swisher; and U.S. Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-El Paso. Get your tickets today! TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase. Solve the daily Crossword
New York Post
8 minutes ago
- New York Post
Official investigation into Trump prosecutor Jack Smith launched
The Office of Special Counsel has launched a formal investigation into Jack Smith, the first official legal probe into his conduct, The Post has learned. Smith is the justice department lawyer who oversaw two criminal investigations into President Donald Trump during the Biden administration, one into Trump's handling of classified documents, the other as to whether his actions on Jan. 6th, 2021 were an attempt to overturn the 2020 election. Both cases were dismissed. An email reviewed by The Post states The Hatch Act Unit, which enforces a law restricting government employees from engaging in political activities, has begun reviewing the former Special Counsel for the United States Department of Justice. The email was written by Senior Counsel Charles Baldis at OSC. Advertisement 4 Jack Smith was appointed by President Biden's Attorney General Merrick Garland and resigned from his post as Special Council for the Department of Justice in January, after Trump assumed power. AP 'I appreciate the Office of Special Counsel taking this seriously and launching an investigation into Jack Smith's conduct. No one is above the law. 'Jack Smith's actions were clearly driven to hurt President Trump's election, and Smith should be held fully accountable,' said Senate Intelligence Committee chair Sen Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) in a statement to The Post. Advertisement OSC opened the investigation into Smith after Cotton wrote a letter earlier this week alleging Smith took blatantly political action to undermine President Trump in his 2024 bid. Smith, who was appointed by President Biden's Attorney General Merrick Garland, resigned from his post as Special Council for the Department of Justice in January, after Trump assumed power. 4 'Jack Smith's legal actions were nothing more than a tool for the Biden and Harris campaigns. This isn't just unethical, it is very likely illegal campaign activity from a public office,' Sen, Tin Cotton wrote. Getty Images 4 Under Jack Smith's watch the FBI raided Trump's home at Mar-a-Lago to search for documents. US Justice Department/AFP via Getty Images Advertisement Smith's actions as prosecutor have been widely criticized by Republicans who saw the prosecutions as an effort to weaponize the justice system against Trump and hobble his election chances in 2024. In his letter to OSC, Cotton explains how Smith's actions undermined Trump's political efforts. 'Jack Smith's legal actions were nothing more than a tool for the Biden and Harris campaigns. This isn't just unethical, it is very likely illegal campaign activity from a public office,' Cotton said. 'Many of Smith's legal actions seem to have no rationale except for an attempt to affect the 2024 election results – actions that would violate federal law.' Advertisement 4 Jack Smith investigated President Trump's handling of the 2020 election. REUTERS Cotton accuses Smith of blatant political actions to interfere with Trump's 2024 presidential run, including speeding up his investigation to schedule trial dates that would interfere with important political moments, such as the Iowa caucuses. 'These actions were not standard, necessary, or justified,' Cotton added. 'They were the actions of a political actor masquerading as a public official.' Smith has not publicly responded to Cotton's allegations. During his tenure, Smith maintained that his investigations followed legal protocols and were independent of political influence. Smith didn't immediately respond to a request for comment from The Post.
Newsweek
9 minutes ago
- Newsweek
New Poll Shows Top 2028 Presidential Candidates in Swing State
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A new poll by Emerson College Polling released on Friday shows potential 2028 Republican and Democratic presidential contenders picked by North Carolina primary voters. Why It Matters Early polls in crucial swing states like North Carolina have gained significance as potential contenders for the 2028 presidential election begin to emerge. Even with the election still a few years away, polling can offer insight into candidate viability, voter sentiment, and evolving party dynamics, particularly after the pivotal 2024 election cycle. North Carolina, often considered determinative in recent presidential contests, could offer a bellwether for national trends as both major parties consider their direction and platform for 2028. What To Know In the Emerson College survey conducted from July 28 to 30, of 1,000 North Carolina registered voters, Vice President JD Vance is leading the Republican nomination with 53 percent among likely Republican primary voters—well ahead of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis with 7 percent and Secretary of State Marco Rubio with 5 percent. Vance jumped 7 points from a previous survey taken in June by Emerson. In the Democratic field, former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg was the top choice among likely primary voters at 17 percent, followed by former Vice President Kamala Harris at 12 percent and California Governor Gavin Newsom at 10 percent. The survey shows 24 percent are undecided. The poll has a margin of error of 3 percentage points, with separate credibility intervals for primary subgroups. Harris, meanwhile, announced this week that she is not running for California governor in the next cycle, fueling speculation she is considering another presidential run. In an interview on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert on Thursday, the former vice president said she thinks the political system is "broken" and does not want to be in it right now. She added she would always "be part of the fight" though. Friday's poll also shows that 40 percent of the swing state voters say their family's finances are worse off than one year prior, 32 percent say they are about the same and 28 percent say they are better off now. Former Vice President Kamala Harris and then Vice President-elect, JD Vance can be seen departing the White House ahead of the Inauguration of then President-elect Donald Trump on January 20 in Washington, D.C. Former Vice President Kamala Harris and then Vice President-elect, JD Vance can be seen departing the White House ahead of the Inauguration of then President-elect Donald Trump on January 20 in Washington, D.C. Photo byWhat People Are Saying Political science professor at Columbia University Robert Y. Shapiro to Newsweek via email Friday: "The Democratic primary polling is much too early and all we are seeing is name recognition for past presidential candidates and ones in the news lately in a visible way. On the Republican side, DeSantis and Rubio are damaged goods as past losers in the past Republican primaries in 2016 and 2024. Vance is on the rise by virtue of being Vice President and visible when he echoes or advocates more strongly Trump's MAGA positions and what Trump—and he—have done. He has not been defeated in any past major election so untarnished in that respect." What Happens Next Major candidates are not expected to announce their 2028 campaigns until after the 2026 midterm elections, in keeping with recent electoral cycles. However, the field of likely contenders is potentially taking shape as politicians such as Buttigieg, Newsom, and others make public appearances and pursue national media opportunities. Vance's strong polling position places him at the forefront of Republican prospects.
