Tag Archive for: Medicaid

Stricter Medicaid work requirement test catches states off guard

This article was originally published on State House News Service.

States are scrambling to overhaul their Medicaid work requirement plans in response to a new federal rule that would require stricter limitations than many policymakers and advocacy groups had anticipated.

“It will be a significant burden to implement,” said Kody Kinsley, the former secretary of the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services.

The Interim Final Rule, released by the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services on Monday…

Read the full article on State House News Service.

Medicaid at 60: Its Essential Role for Older Adults

This article was originally published on Generations: American Society on Aging.

Abstract

Medicaid has played a vital role in supporting the U.S.’s older population for more than 60 years. It funds essential health and long-term care for nearly 80 million people, including millions of older adults and caregivers. As the primary funder of home- and community-based services (HCBS), Medicaid has shifted from a focus on institutional care to promoting community living. This article highlights Medicaid’s evolving role, as well as current challenges, disparities in access, and policy recommendations to strengthen the program. Ensuring Medicaid’s sustainability is crucial to providing equitable, quality care and supporting older adults’ independence and well-being for generations to come.

Key Words

Medicaid, long-term care, home- and community-based services

Over its 60-year history, the Medicaid program has significantly expanded and adapted to meet the evolving needs of America’s aging population. Today, nearly 80 million people, including 7 million older adults and 10 million people with disabilities, rely upon Medicaid for health and long-term care. Without Medicaid, most older adults who need help with daily activities would not be able to afford home-based or nursing facility care. Beyond funding caregiving, Medicaid also serves as the only source of healthcare coverage for many paid and unpaid caregivers supporting older adults. As our population continues to age and grow increasingly diverse, it is important to understand who Medicaid serves, and who is left underserved, as we explore ways to improve and strengthen the program for future generations of elders.

Medicaid Provides Essential Coverage for Millions of Older Adults and Their Caregivers

Medicare is the primary form of health insurance coverage for most older adults, yet it has notable coverage gaps. This is where Medicaid steps in, filling these gaps for 7 million older adults with low to moderate resources, and acting as a vital safety net to ensure access to necessary health and long-term care. Medicaid also makes Medicare affordable by paying for premiums and other out-of-pocket costs like co-insurance and deductibles. Without the financial assistance Medicaid provides, many older adults, despite being covered by Medicare, could not access care.

Medicaid’s support is especially vital for older adults of color, older women, and older adults with disabilities and complex care needs. Notably, more than 1 in 4 older adults of color ages 65 and older is enrolled in Medicaid, compared to 1 in 10 older white adults (UnidosUS, 2025). Similarly, 6 in 10 women enrolled in Medicare are also enrolled in Medicaid compared to 4 in 10 men (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 2020).

Medicaid is particularly essential for older adults with the highest and most complex healthcare needs. For example, 22% of people with Alzheimer’s and related dementias are dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid, compared to 9% enrolled in just Medicare (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 2020).

The 2010 expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act further broadened access, providing coverage to adults with low incomes, including many older adults and caregivers who previously had no access to affordable healthcare. Today, Medicaid covers 9 million adults ages 50–64 who do not qualify for Medicaid based on age or disability but are not yet eligible for Medicare. Research shows that within this age group, 87% of people have at least one chronic condition, with 48% having three or more chronic conditions that impact their ability to work (Sneed et al., 2024).

The expansion of Medicaid coverage to adults also has been instrumental in supporting paid and unpaid caregivers for older adults. Nearly 1 in 3 direct care workers (31%) are enrolled in Medicaid (Angell et al., 2024). Medicaid expansion also provides healthcare coverage to unpaid family caregivers, many of whom have to reduce work hours or leave the workforce entirely to provide care. Research shows that 12% of people younger than age 65 who are not working and on Medicaid are providing caregiving (Tolbert et al., 2025). Medicaid’s role of supporting caregivers’ health and well-being also enhances their capacity to support the health and well-being of the older adults they care for.

Medicaid Is the Foundation of America’s Long-Term Care System

There is no overstating the role of Medicaid in providing long-term care for older adults. While Medicare’s coverage of long-term care is limited to short stays in nursing facilities and at-home care for people with skilled care needs through the home health benefit, Medicaid is the main source of funding for long-term care. In 2022, Medicaid paid for more than half of all long-term care nationwide, including both institutional and at-home care, known as home- and community-based services (HCBS; Chidambaram & Burns, 2024). But this has not always been the case.

Historically, Medicaid primarily paid for long-term care in institutional settings, like nursing facilities. This institutional bias is enshrined in federal law, which mandates that states pay for care in institutional settings, leaving HCBS coverage optional. Nonetheless, the availability of HCBS has significantly expanded over the past several decades thanks to concerted advocacy efforts—including the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the landmark 1999 Supreme Court ruling in Olmstead v. L.C., which affirmed the rights of individuals with disabilities to live in the community rather than be segregated in institutions. Just 1% of Medicaid’s long-term care funding was allocated to HCBS in 1982; that figure has grown to 65% in 2022, reflecting the ongoing shift toward community-based care (Murray et al., 2024).

Today, states have implemented more than 300 HCBS programs (Mohamed et al., 2025). These programs vary in the populations served—such as older adults, people with developmental disabilities, or those with Alzheimer’s—and in the number of people served, with some programs capping enrollment and employing waiting lists (Musumeci et al., 2020). The scope of benefits programs offer also varies, including coverage of personal care, case management, home modifications, support for family caregivers like respite, and more.

States also increasingly have started to cover costs for helping people transition from nursing facilities to the community through programs like Money Follows the Person. And they have begun to cover food and utility assistance, housing supports, and other services aimed at addressing health-related social needs. The role of managed care in delivering long-term care also has expanded, with more than half of states operating managed long-term services and supports programs.

Recognizing that there are few options for long-term-care coverage, states have expanded financial eligibility for Medicaid, allowing older adults and disabled people with higher incomes to access long-term care. Today, 41 states employ the special income rule that allows people with incomes up to 300% of the Supplemental Security Income threshold who need long-term care to qualify for Medicaid (KFF, 2025).

Despite substantial growth in HCBS offerings, access to these services remains uneven across states and populations, particularly for older adults. Today, just 36% of all HCBS users are people ages 65 and older, while 70% of institutional users are older adults (Chidambaram & Burns, 2024). Individuals with high needs, such as those with dementia or Alzheimer’s, are more likely to be in institutional care facilities—more than half of nursing facility residents ages 65 and older have a diagnosis of dementia (Ne’eman et al., 2022).

Access to HCBS also varies depending upon where a person lives. In Minnesota, for example, 85% of the state’s spending on long-term care went to HCBS and just 15% to nursing facilities and other institutional settings. In contrast, Mississippi allocates just 34% long-term care spending to HCBS, with the majority—66%—going to institutional care (Murray et al., 2024).

Strengthening Medicaid for the Next 60 Years

As our nation’s population ages, it is crucial that we not only strengthen and expand Medicaid, but also reimagine a program that is more accessible, fairer, and more responsive to the needs of older adults.

However, the passage of the Budget Reconciliation Act of 2025 (H.R. 1), with the largest cuts to federal Medicaid funding in history, represents a significant setback (Public Law No. 119-21). These changes threaten to strip millions of older adults and their caregivers of vital healthcare coverage and jeopardize funding for essential services like HCBS (Justice in Aging, 2025).

This moment calls for bold action. Congress must repeal H.R. 1, restore federal funding, and roll back the harmful changes in the law. And beyond repeal, we must commit to building a Medicaid program that goes beyond the status quo.

The following recommendations, while not exhaustive, outline key steps to improve access, quality, and coordination of services in Medicaid. By implementing these recommendations, we can build a more sustainable, equitable, and compassionate Medicaid program that meets the evolving needs of older adults for generations to come.

Expand Access to Medicaid

While many states have adopted higher financial eligibility limits for people who have the highest care needs (nursing facility level of care), eligibility limits for older adults who have lower levels of care remain at or below federal poverty levels. Meanwhile, across states, asset limits are very low for older adults and people with disabilities, typically $2,000 for an individual, giving people little financial cushion in the event of an emergency. Raising eligibility limits for older adults with lower levels of care would allow people to access the care they need when they need it and enable them to stay healthier longer, reducing the risk of unnecessary and more expensive institutionalization.

Medicaid eligibility policies also should not bankrupt families or act to perpetuate poverty. For this reason, Congress should make spousal impoverishment protections permanent. These protections make it possible for an individual who needs nursing home level of care to qualify for Medicaid, while allowing their spouse to retain a modest amount of income and resources. These protections are set to expire September 30, 2027, unless Congress acts (Justice in Aging, 2022).

Similarly, Congress should eliminate estate recovery or, at a minimum, make it optional. Right now, federal law requires states to collect the costs of long-term care from the property of people who enrolled in Medicaid. This policy strips families of intergenerational wealth and disproportionately impacts families with few resources. States also can enact policies that mitigate the harm of recovery through more expansive protections like hardship exemptions (Diamond, 2025).

Expand Access to HCBS

Because HCBS is an optional benefit under federal law, the availability of HCBS is uneven across states and populations. Federal lawmakers should make HCBS mandatory. Enacting legislation like the HCBS Access Act (HAA) would do just that by mandating states to cover HCBS, eradicating waiting lists and enrollment caps for HCBS programs, creating more uniform and more expansive income and functional eligibility criteria for HCBS, and investing in the direct care workforce. It would also make permanent the Money Follows the Person and Spousal Impoverishment Protections, helping individuals stay in their homes and transition from institutions to the community (Justice in Aging, 2023).

Importantly, the HAA also requires states to address disparities in HCBS access and utilization to receive enhanced federal funding. Even if Congress does not pass the HAA, states could still implement policies aligned with its goals, including employing an equity framework to ensure HCBS programs are designed and implemented in a way that ensures equal access to care (Christ & Kean, 2023).

Improve the Quality of HCBS

Much work remains for states to implement federal requirements that ensure HCBS settings are integrated in the community, programs are person-centered, Medicaid payments for direct care workers are adequate, and there is proper oversight of HCBS program quality. This includes establishing performance measures for evaluating HCBS programs, including HCBS made available by Medicaid managed care plans that focus on quality of care rather than administrative processes (Carlson, 2024).

Improve Coordination Between Medicare and Medicaid

Medicare and Medicaid often don’t work well together. As a result, older adults face barriers to accessing care. For example, when an older adult is hospitalized, it is Medicare that pays for the hospital stay. Meanwhile, when they need to transition back home, they may need HCBS, which Medicaid pays for. Yet no one is helping to coordinate this care and support a transition back to the community. Federal and state policymakers should continue to improve the coordination and integration of Medicare and Medicaid by ensuring that any integrated model includes robust consumer protections, provides person-centered care, and is subject to vigorous oversight and accountability (Justice in Aging, 2024).

Ensuring the strength and resilience of Medicaid is not only a matter of policy, but a moral imperative to support our older population. As the safety net for millions of older adults and their caregivers, Medicaid must be prioritized and protected to meet ongoing and future needs. By investing in and improving this vital program, we reaffirm our commitment to healthier, more connected, and more just communities where all individuals can age with independence and dignity.

Amber Christ is managing director of Health Advocacy at Justice in Aging, leading its team of health attorneys and policy advocates in developing and implementing initiatives to improve equitable access to healthcare and long-term care services and supports for low-income and marginalized older adults across the country.

McCaughey: No, Republicans Aren’t Gutting Medicaid

This article was originally published on the Boston Herald.

Get ready to be bombarded with ghoulish paid ads and Democratic politicians warning about grandmothers dying, children denied needed cancer treatments, and pregnant women suffering. The demagoguery is in full swing against Republicans’ efforts to control federal spending on Medicaid and stabilize the nation’s debt.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul screamed last week that “House Republicans just voted to rip health care away from up to 1.8 million New Yorkers — all to bankroll giveaways for billionaires.” Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) parroted the message (“tax breaks for their billionaire buddies”) and warned that “moms and babies will lose health care coverage.” Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) shrieked, “People will die.”

These are lies. Helpless children, the elderly, pregnant women and the disabled are not going to lose their health care. And the Medicaid changes are designed to help all Americans, not just billionaires.

The economic impact of Congress not containing Medicaid spending is what’s truly scary.

If the demagoguery succeeds and the Republican majority gives up on achieving a budget bill that curbs spending, everyone will suffer. Inflation will rise. Interest rates on car loans, credit cards and mortgages will likely go up. President Donald Trump’s tax cuts probably would not be renewed, and some companies, suddenly facing unfavorable tax rates, would leave the U.S. for lower-tax locations, possibly taking your job with them.

But first, here’s why the fearmongering filling the air waves is untrue.

Since 1965, Medicaid has provided a safety net for those in medical need, and no one is proposing “gutting” it.

A decade ago, then-President Barack Obama and Congress expanded Medicaid to cover healthy adults, whether they were willing to work or not. Rep. Nancy Pelosi boasted that everyone should have the freedom to pursue “your own happiness” of, for example, being a writer, or “whatever you want to do,” without having to hold down a job and pay for health insurance. Pelosi’s promise made working people into patsies supporting the freeloaders.

Now congressional Republicans are calling for a “work requirement” for healthy people who don’t have to care for a child or elderly dependent. “Work” overstates the toughness. Anyone who is employed for 80 hours a month, or attends school, a training program or drug recovery program, and is low-income will still be eligible for free care. Just not moochers.

House Speaker Mike Johnson tweeted last week, “Medicaid is for single mothers with small children who are just trying to make it. It’s not for 29-year-old males sitting on their couch playing video games.”

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates the “work” requirement would save $140 billion over the next decade.

Republicans are proposing another $100 billion in savings by allowing states to check eligibility for Medicaid more than once a year. The Biden administration put into effect a wacky rule in 2024 that barred states from checking eligibility more frequently, allowing some people to stay on Medicaid after their income was too high or they were no longer disabled or caring for a dependent. Let’s spend Medicaid dollars on the truly needy.

As for Hochul’s bombast that changes to Medicaid will bankroll billionaires, the truth is that current federal spending is “unsustainable,” per the nonpartisan General Accounting Office. Without changes, everyone in the U.S. will be clobbered with higher inflation and interest rates.

Take it from Javier Milei, Argentina’s president, elected in 2023. He campaigned with a chainsaw, pledging deep cuts to his government’s out-of-control spending. At that time, his country had one of the highest inflation rates in the world. A year later, inflation is coming down fast.

Congress isn’t taking a chainsaw to Medicaid, but Republicans are looking to slow spending growth. That will allow Congress to renew Trump’s 2017 tax cuts, which are about to expire.

Before 2017, the U.S. was losing 10 multinational corporate headquarters a year to countries with lower corporate taxes. After Trump’s 2017 cuts, the exodus stopped. Renewing those corporate tax cuts is essential to save American jobs. Possibly yours.

Hochul doesn’t get that. Like several Democratic governors before her, she’s oblivious to the damage done by uncontrolled spending and high taxes — a major reason swaths of upstate New York are wastelands.

When you hear the demagogues oppose Medicaid “cuts,” remember that not making these changes is what is dangerous to you — your job security and your ability to afford necessities and even to buy a home. Don’t fall for the phony sob stories.

Betsy McCaughey is a former lieutenant governor of New York State and co-founder of Save Our City at www.saveourcityny.org. Follow her on Twitter @Betsy_McCaughey.

 

‘We don’t want people to panic unnecessarily’: Massachusetts’ top health official braces for changes under Trump

This article was originally published on the Boston Globe.

In her first interview since Donald Trump took office, Massachusetts’ top health official said the state is holding firm in response to a flurry of federal activity that could affect medical and social services for millions of people but is prepared for the possibility of hard fights ahead.

Kate Walsh, secretary of the Executive Office of Health and Human Services and one of Governor Maura Healey’s most influential Cabinet members, oversees more than half the state’s budget, ranging from public health to Medicaid administration to senior affairs. She describedthe Trump administration’s executive orders to curtail funding for states, at least so far, as more bark than bite. She acknowledged concern, though, that some federal changes could hit Massachusetts hard.

Read more online…