Latest news with #LisaMurkowski
Newsweek
2 hours ago
- Business
- Newsweek
Map Shows States Paying Most—and Least—for SNAP Under Trump Bill
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. The majority of U.S. states will be required to pay a portion of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits in the coming years. Under current federal rules, SNAP benefits, which help some 42 million Americans across the country, are paid by the federal government but administered at the state level. All states pay half of the cost of this administration. But the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is set to change things. Beginning in 2028, the bill will require states to cover a portion of SNAP benefits if error payments are above 6 percent, and all must pay for an additional share of program administration costs. Why It Matters This will be the first time that states have had to shoulder the responsibility of paying SNAP benefits, and numerous lawmakers, poverty experts and advocacy groups have warned against the policy. How Does The Cost Share Work? Erroneous payments are when too much or too little is paid to a SNAP recipient. States will have to pay a certain percentage based on thresholds set by the bill: Error rate below 6 percent: No cost-sharing required 6 to 8 percent error rate: 5 percent cost-sharing 8 to 10 percent error rate: 10 percent cost-sharing Over 10 percent error rate: 15 percent cost-sharing Which States Will Pay The Most? Based on fiscal year 2024 data, 43 states will be expected to pay up for a portion of SNAP benefits when the new rules begin in 2028, according to data compiled by the Food Action Research Center (FRAC). California is poised to pay the most of all 50 states if its error rate doesn't come down. With a 15 percent requirement based on an error rate of 11 percent, the Golden State will be expected to pay an estimated $1.9 billion in benefit costs and $661 million in administrative costs, bringing its total to just shy of $2.6 billion if its error rate does not drop. Other top payers will be New York ($1.9 billion), Florida ($1.3 billion), Texas ($1 billion) and Pennsylvania ($982 million), according to FRAC's analysis. Which States Will Pay The Least? Based on 2024 error rates, only Idaho, Nebraska, Nevada, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin, and Wyoming will not have to cough up for a share of the benefits, though they will still be required to bear more of the administrative costs. Some Exceptions Senate Republicans added a carve-out to address concerns from Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski, letting her state delay cost-sharing due to its high SNAP error rates. To follow reconciliation rules, the delay option was extended to any state with a SNAP error rate — when multiplied by 1.5 — that hits 20 percent or more. If a state meets that threshold in FY 2025, it can delay cost-sharing until FY 2029; if it qualifies in FY 2026, it can delay until FY 2030. But states can only use this delay once, based on either year, not both. Based on FY 2024 data, likely beneficiaries include Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, and Washington, D.C, according to FRAC. What People Are Saying FRAC in its analysis: "Taken together, these provisions represent an unprecedented cost-shift from the federal government to the states, one that forces local leaders to make painful tradeoffs between essential services and rising administrative demands. As states grapple with tighter budgets, reduced federal support, and growing caseload complexity, the core promise of SNAP — as a reliable safeguard against hunger and hardship — is at risk. The Trump- and Republican-passed budget reconciliation bill, OBBBA, not only weakens a cornerstone anti-poverty program; it reshapes the relationship between federal and state governments in ways that could prove devastating for millions of families, workers, and communities across the country." Jennifer Greenfield, associate professor at the University of Denver who specializes in the intersection of health and wealth disparities, told Newsweek: "The proposed federal 'savings' are not savings at all—it's a shift of the costs to our already cash-strapped states and families. The net result will be to increase hunger and financial instability among households with children, older adults, people with disabilities, and veterans—while also sending tens of thousands of people into unemployment." House Speaker Mike Johnson told CBS News Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan in May: "The states are not properly administering this because they don't have enough skin in the game. So what we've done in the bill is add some- just a modest state sharing component, so that they'll pay attention to that, so that we can reduce fraud. Why? Again, so that it is preserved for the people that need it the most." What Happens Next Cost-sharing requirements will begin in 2028. How much each state will have to pay will depend on its future error rates.
The Australian
2 days ago
- Business
- The Australian
NVA gets critical show of support for Estelle
The Nova Board of Directors has met with Alaskan lawmakers, tribal representatives and advocacy groups, who all offered strong support for the company's Estelle gold and critical minerals project. Estelle's potential aligns with Executive Order 14153 which directs immediate measures to increase American mineral production. Nova has placed itself on a trajectory mirroring that of MP Materials and Perpetua Resources, both of which have secured major US Department of Defense grants to fast-track the production of critical minerals. Special Report: Nova Minerals has strengthened ties with key Alaskan lawmakers and stakeholders in the past week during a board of directors visit to its Estelle gold and critical minerals project. The company has been drilling around the clock during the Alaskan summer to push Estelle's mineral resource estimate past 9.9Moz and define a resource of critical mineral antimony. Also during the almost 24 hour sunlight the Nova (ASX:NVA) board has been warmly received by federal representatives, state and local leaders, tribal organisations and advocacy groups who expressed unified support for advancing Estelle. VIP visits During their visit board members met representatives of Alaska's Congressional Delegation, including the offices of US Senators Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan, and US representative for Alaska Nick Begich, who expressed ongoing backing for Nova's efforts to fast-track Estelle's development. Nova additionally received a strong show of local support during an event at Port MacKenzie attended by more than 25 Alaskan leaders including Borough Mayor Edna DeVries, leaders from the Knik Tribe, state legislators and representatives from the Alaska Miners Association and Friends of West Susitna. The Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority also provided project updates on the West Susitna Access Road during the board visit. This new road will provide critical infrastructure that will support Estelle and regional development. Nova is increasingly aligned with US Executive Order 14153, 'Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary Resource Potential', which outlines actions to bolster American mineral production. This positions Nova to follow the path of MP Materials (market cap ~A$16 billion) and Perpetua Resources (market cap ~A$2.4 billion), which have both secured significant US Department of Defense (DoD) grants for critical mineral supply chain initiatives. Following a positive technical site assessment by the DoD's critical materials team, Nova is continuing engagement with the DoD as Estelle moves toward becoming a near-term producer of gold and antimony. Nova CEO Chris Gerteisen said: 'We're starting to see the kind of momentum that propelled companies like MP Materials and Perpetua Resources to secure major federal support. 'With our recent positive assessment from the (US) Department of Defense - and with gold and antimony prices near record highs - we're optimistic that Nova is well-positioned to be a key part of building a secure, domestic supply chain. 'We remain deeply grateful for the support we've received at every level and are committed to advancing this project responsibly and swiftly. Our team is humbled by the opportunity and focused on delivering long-term value for Alaska, the United States and our allies.' Critical hub During the Port MacKenzie event, Nova presented its long-term vision for a potential processing hub in Alaska and highlighted the significance of recent discoveries. Congressional representative Nick Begich expressed strong support, which was echoed by other leaders who met the board: 'Partnerships like these are crucial for responsible resource development in Alaska and advancing plans for a Nova Minerals processing hub at Port MacKenzie will deliver important economic benefits for Alaska and support our long-term workforce development for Alaska's hardworking families,' Begich said. On road to growth Out in the field at Estelle exploration is continuing at the Stibium antimony-gold prospect, the high-grade RPM North deposit. Drilling in the Korbel starter pit area has already been completed, with samples to be sent to the laboratory for analysis shortly. Also underway are other exploration mapping and sampling, environmental baseline studies, access road projects and various technical studies, all of which will go towards completing the pre-feasibility study. Nova's board has since departed Alaska for further stakeholder engagement in New York City and Florida. This article was developed in collaboration with Nova Minerals, a Stockhead advertiser at the time of publishing. This article does not constitute financial product advice. You should consider obtaining independent advice before making any financial decisions.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Murkowski: Trump administration funding freeze could result in ‘closing schools'
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) fears the Trump administration's multibillion-dollar education funding freeze could cause schools in her state to close as districts struggle to keep employees without the money. The administration originally froze a total of $6 billion in funding to schools, affecting after-school and summer programs, along with classes for adult and English learners. Last week, the president released about $1 billion that was aimed at after-school programs, but $5 billion is still held up. 'Many of our school districts have already made really hard decisions about closing schools,' Murkowski told ABC News. 'Both in Fairbanks and Anchorage, we've seen layoffs,' she continued. 'If your literacy skills are weak, if you're working on your English skills, I mean, these are all things that are keeping people out of the workforce at a time when we're trying to get people into it,' Murkowski added. 'So I am very worried.' She was one of nine Republicans to sign a letter to the Office of Management and Budget last week demanding the funding be released and rejecting the administration's claim the money is going toward 'woke' programs. The letter prompted the office to release the about $1 billion in funding for after-school and summer programming, prompting a sigh of relief for parents. But the rest of the money is still in limbo, with no timeline on when it will be given to schools. 'I'd like to see some of the other programs released, but, you know, we haven't heard one way or the other,' Sen. Shelley Moore Capito ( who led the Republican letter, told ABC. While Murkowski is hesitant to say the money is cut, she stresses the funding needs to be released before the school year begins. 'I don't want to call it cuts yet, because my hope is that they're just unpaused and that they are going to materialize,' Murkowski told ABC News. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
An Expensive Health Care Cliff Is Coming Unless Republicans Stop It
WASHINGTON — Top Senate Republicans indicated this week they'd be open to extending one of former President Joe Biden's signature health care policies to avoid a politically poisonous spike in insurance costs ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. The enhanced premium tax credits, which Democrats included in President Joe Biden's American Rescue Plan Act, reduced the cost of health insurance for many middle-class people enrolled in Obamacare exchanges. The average person who buys insurance through the exchanges is expected to pay 75% more for their premium if the tax credits expire, according to an analysis from KFF, a nonpartisan health policy research group. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has also projected that letting the subsidies lapse would lead to about 5 million Americans losing their insurance over the next 10 years. 'I am part of a small group that is looking to try to find a path forward to extend those,' said Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska). 'I think it is recognized that our failure to do that could result in some pretty precipitous increases in costs for Americans for their health insurance, and that's not where we want to end up at the end of this year.' 'It's not these people's fault that they're forced onto Obamacare in the first place and then to take away what the government promised them in terms of this credit, seems to me to be not exactly the most desirable outcome,' added Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.). The looming expiration of the tax credits was put on the back burner by Republicans during the first six months of President Donald Trump's term as the party focused on passing his agenda of tax cuts and historic cuts to Medicaid, as well as slashing foreign aid and public broadcasting funding. Discussions are now underway in the Senate for a bipartisan solution to a problem that could have serious ramifications for the GOP in next year's elections, with high prices and inflation still on top of voters' minds. They are being led by Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), the chair of the Senate health committee, who has previously criticized the credits, but who is also facing voters at the ballot box next year. Passing a bipartisan fix is easier said than done, however. For one, it'll be costly. An estimate from CBO said it would cost $380 billion over a decade to make the subsidies permanent. Senate Republicans are eyeing a smaller fix of about $125 billion with a lower income threshold to qualify for the credit, as well as an offset to pay for it. 'I think we'll be able to offer an appropriate offset, and I think it would be very difficult for Democrats to be able to say no to that,' Rounds said. Many conservatives are flat-out opposed to extending the tax credits, however. Some are pushing for rolling back Obamacare more broadly, including by winding down its Medicaid expansion, in future reconciliation bills. 'Nobody's losing coverage, that's what's important to me,' Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) said when asked what Congress ought to do when the tax credits expire. Even if the Senate can agree on a fix — something that would require 60 votes — passage could be more complicated in the GOP-controlled House, where there's no guarantee that leadership would even take it up. Lawmakers could potentially tuck it into an end-of-the-year government funding bill, but that could also risk a government shutdown. 'I think that goes to the end of the calendar year, so we'll have discussion about the issue later. But it hasn't come up yet. But it's on the radar,' House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) told reporters this week when asked about the ACA credits. Waiting until the end of the year to address the issue may be too late, however. While the tax credits technically expire on Dec. 31, insurers must file their final rates for health plans offered on ACA exchanges for next year by Aug. 13, according to the centrist think tank Third Way. That's smack-dab in the middle of Congress' annual recess. It's not clear where the White House stands on the issue. Getting Trump on board with extending the subsidies could help move Republican votes on Capitol Hill. A memo from a conservative advocacy organization, for example, warned this week that the benefits of the president's tax cut law will be nullified if the subsidies are not extended and people's health care costs go up. Not extending the subsidies will also hand Democrats — who are already eager to run against Trump's cuts to Medicaid — a further advantage on health care issues, particularly in purple battleground states that could determine the control of the House and Senate next year. The issue, for now, remains a bit of a sleeper: A KFF poll conducted last month found just 28% of Americans had heard 'a lot' or 'some' about the credits' potential expiration. But a full 77% of Americans, including 56% of self-identified MAGA supporters, back their extension. 'For some people, their premiums will as much as double, and people don't have the resources in their household income in order to be able to absorb that,' Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) told HuffPost. 'Donald Trump and the Republicans are doing the opposite of what he said he was going to do. He said he was going to drive costs down. He's driving them up every single day. So I think they've got a decision to make about whether they're OK with that.'
Boston Globe
5 days ago
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Trump signs bill to cancel $9 billion in foreign aid, public broadcasting funding
The White House had billed the legislation as a test case for Congress and said more such rescission packages would be on the way. Some Republicans were uncomfortable with the cuts, yet supported them anyway, wary of crossing Trump or upsetting his agenda. Democrats unanimously rejected the cuts but were powerless to stop them. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The White House says the public media system is politically biased and an unnecessary expense. Conservatives particularly directed their ire at NPR and PBS. Lawmakers with large rural constituencies voiced grave concern about what the cuts to public broadcasting could mean for some local public stations in their state. Some stations will have to close, they warned. Advertisement Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said the stations are 'not just your news — it is your tsunami alert, it is your landslide alert, it is your volcano alert.' On the foreign aid cuts, the White House argued that they would incentivize other nations to step up and do more to respond to humanitarian crises and that the rescissions best served the American taxpayer. Advertisement Democrats argued that the Republican administration's animus toward foreign aid programs would hurt America's standing in the world and create a vacuum for China to fill. They also expressed concerns that the cuts would have deadly consequences for many of the world's most impoverished people. 'With these cuts, we will cause death, spread disease and deepen starvation across the planet,' said Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii.
