 |
|
|
|||||
Republican lawmakers have been battling over a bill that includes massive tax and spending cuts. Much of their disagreement has been over provisions intended to reduce the cost of Medicaid. The popular health insurance program, which is funded by both the federal and state governments, covers about 78.5 million low-income and disabled peoplemore than 1 in 5 Americans. On May 22, 2025, the House of Representatives narrowly approved the tax, spending, and immigration bill. The legislation, which passed without any support from Democrats, is designed to reduce federal Medicaid spending by requiring anyone enrolled in the program who appears to be able to get a job to either satisfy work requirements or lose their coverage. Its still unclear, however, whether Senate Republicans would support that provision. Although there are few precedents for such a mandate for Medicaid, other safety net programs have been enforcing similar rules for nearly three decades. Im a political scientist who has extensively studied the work requirements of another safety net program: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). As I explain in my book, Living Off the Government? Race, Gender, and the Politics of Welfare, work requirements place extra burdens on low-income families but do little to lift them out of poverty. Work requirements for TANF TANF gives families with very low incomes some cash they can spend on housing, food, clothing, or whatever they need most. The Clinton administration launched it as a replacement for a similar program, Aid to Families With Dependent Children, in 1996. At the time, both political parties were eager to end a welfare system they believed was riddled with abuse. A big goal with TANF was ending the dependence of people getting cash benefits on the government by moving them from welfare to work. Many people were removed from the welfare rolls, but not because work requirements led to economic prosperity. Instead, they had trouble navigating the bureaucratic demands. TANF is administered by the states. They can set many rules of their own, but they must comply with an important federal requirement: Adult recipients have to work or engage in an authorized alternative activity for at least 30 hours per week. The number of weekly hours is only 20 if the recipient is caring for a child under the age of 6. The dozen activities or so that can count toward this quota range from participating in job training programs to engaging in community service. Some adults enrolled in TANF are exempt from work requirements, depending on their states own policies. The most common exemptions are for people who are ill, have a disability, or are over age 60. To qualify for TANF, families must have dependent children; in some states pregnant women also qualify. Income limits are set by the state and range from $307 a month for a family of three in Alabama to $2,935 a month for a family of three in Minnesota. Adult TANF recipients face a federal five-year lifetime limit on benefits. States can adopt shorter time limits; Arizonas is 12 months. !function(){"use strict";window.addEventListener("message",(function(a){if(void 0!==a.data["datawrapper-height"]){var e=document.querySelectorAll("iframe");for(var t in a.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var r,i=0;r=e[i];i++)if(r.contentWindow===a.source){var d=a.data["datawrapper-height"][t]+"px";r.style.height=d}}}))}(); An administrative burden Complying with these work requirements generally means proving that youre working or making the case that you should be exempt from this mandate. This places whats known as an administrative burden on the people who get cash assistance. It often requires lots of documentation and time. If you have an unpredictable work schedule, inconsistent access to child care, or obligations to care for an older relative, this paperwork is hard to deal with. What counts as work, how many hours must be completed, and who is exempt from these requirements often comes down to a caseworkers discretion. Social science research shows that this discretion is not equally applied and is often informed by stereotypes. The number of people getting cash assistance has fallen sharply since TANF replaced Aid to Families With Dependent Children. In some states caseloads have dropped by more than 50% despite significant population growth. Some of this decline happened because recipients got jobs that paid them too much to qualify. The Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan office that provides economic research to Congress, attributes, at least in part, an increase in employment among less-educted single mothers in the 1990s to work requirements. Not everyone who stopped getting cash benefits through TANF wound up employed, however. Other recipients who did not meet requirements fell into deep poverty. Regardless of why people leave the program, when fewer low-income Americans get TANF benefits, the government spends less money on cash assistance. Federal funding has remained flat at $16.5 billion since 1996. Taking inflation into account, the program receives half as much funding as when it was created. In addition, states have used the flexibility granted them to direct most of their TANF funds to priorities other than cash benefits, such as pre-K education. Many Americans who get help paying for groceries through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program are also subject to work requirements. People the government calls able-bodied adults without dependents can only receive SNAP benefits for three months within a three-year period if they are not employed. A failed experiment in Arkansas Lawmakers in Congress and in statehouses have debated whether to add work requirements for Medicaid before. More than a dozen states have applied for waivers that would let them give it a try. When Arkansas instituted Medicaid work requirements in 2018, during the first Trump administration, it was largely seen as a failure. Some 18,000 people lost their health care coverage, but employment rates did not increase. After a court order stopped the policy in 2019, most people regained their coverage. Georgia is currently the only state with Medicaid work requirements in effect, after implementing a waiver in July 2023. The program has experienced technical difficulties and has had trouble verifying work activities. Other states, including Idaho, Indiana, and Kentucky, are already asking the federal government to let them enforce Medicaid work requirements. What this may mean for Medicaid The multitrillion-dollar bill the House passed by a vote of 215-214 would introduce Medicaid work requirements nationwide by late 2026 for childless adults ages 19 to 64, with some exemptions. But most people covered by Medicaid in that age range are already working, and those who are not would likely be eligible for work requirement waivers. An analysis by KFFa nonprofit that informs the public about health issuesshows that in 2023, 44% of Medicaid recipients were working full time and another 20% were working part time. In 2023, that was more than 16 million Americans. About 20% of the American adults under 65 who are covered by Medicaid are not working due to illness or disability, or because of caregiving responsibilities, according to KFF. This includes both people caring for young children and those taking care of relatives with an illness or disability. In my own research, I read testimony from families seeking work exemptions because caregiving, including for children with disabilities, was a full-time job. The rest of the adults under 65 with Medicaid coverage are not working because they are in school, are retired, cannot find work, or have some other reason. Its approximately 3.9 million Americans. Depending on what counts as work, they may be meeting any requirements that could be added to the program. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that introducing Medicaid work requirements would save around $300 billion over a decade. Given past experience with work requirements, it is unlikely those savings would come from Americans finding jobs. My research suggests its more likely that the government would trim spending by taking away the health insurance of people eligible for Medicaid coverage who get tangled up in red tape. This article was updated on May 22, 2025, with details about the House of Representatives passage of the budget bill. Anne Whitesell is an assistant professor of political science at Miami University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
A computer science student is behind a new AI tool designed to track down Redditors showing signs of radicalization and deploy bots to deradicalize them through conversation. First reported by 404 Media, PrismX was built by Sairaj Balaji, a computer science student at SRMIST in Chennai, India. The tool works by analyzing posts for specific keywords and patterns associated with extreme views, giving those users a radical score. High scorers are then targeted by AI bots programmed to attempt deradicalization through engaging the user in conversation. According to the federal government, the primary terror threat to the U.S. now is individuals radicalized to violence online through social media. At the same time, fears around surveillance technology and artificial intelligence infiltrating online communities pose an ethical minefield. Responding to concerns, Balaji clarified in a Linkedin post that the conversation part of the tool has not been tested on real Reddit users without consent. Instead, the scoring and conversation elements were used in simulated environments for research-purposes only. The tool was designed to provoke discussion, not controversy, he explained in the post. Were at a point in history where rogue actors and nation-states are already deploying weaponized AI. If a college student can build something like PrismX, it raises urgent questions: Whos watching the watchers? While Balaji doesnt claim to be an expert in deradicalization, as an engineer, he is interested in the ethical implications of surveillance technology. Discomfort sparks debate. Debate leads to oversight. And oversight is how we prevent the misuse of emerging technologies, he continued. This isnt the first time Redditors have been used as guinea pigs in recent months. Just last month, researchers from the University of Zurich faced intense backlash after experimenting on an unsuspecting subreddit. The research involved deploying AI-powered bots into the r/ChangeMyView subreddit, which positions itself as a place to post an opinion you accept may be flawed, in an experiment to see if AI could be used to change peoples minds. When Redditors, and Reddit itself, found out they were being experimented on without their knowledge, they werent impressed. Reddits chief legal officer, Ben Lee, wrote in a post that neither Reddit nor the r/changemyview mods knew about the experiment ahead of time. What this University of Zurich team did is deeply wrong on both a moral and legal level, Lee wrote. It violates academic research and human rights norms, and is prohibited by Reddits user agreement and rules, in addition to the subreddit rules. While PrismX is not currently being tested on real unconsenting users, it piles on the ever-growing question of the role of artificial intelligence in human spaces.
Category:
E-Commerce
A federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administrations ban to prevent international students from enrolling at Harvard on Friday, the latest development in the White Houses escalating pressure campaign against the Ivy League university. The judge granted Harvards request for a temporary restraining order on the basis that the school would sustain immediate and irreparable injury before a hearing, which CNBC reports is set for Tuesday, could take place. On Thursday, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem ordered her agency to withdraw the schools certification for admitting foreign students, known as a Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) certification. The change would block future international students from enrolling at Harvard while also imperiling the legal status of international students currently studying there. The university filed a lawsuit on Friday morning to oppose the ban, arguing that it violates the First Amendment. Harvard has, over this time, developed programs and degrees tailored to its international students, invested millions to recruit the most talented such students, and integrated its international students into all aspects of the Harvard community, the lawsuit states, noting that the university along with 7,000 visa holders would suffer immediate and devastating effects. Homeland Security accused Harvard of permitting anti-American, pro-terrorist agitators to harass and physically assault individuals, including many Jewish students and jeopardizing safety on campus, pointing the finger at foreign students. The agency also referenced alleged connections between the university and the Chinese Communist Party. They have lost their Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification as a result of their failure to adhere to the law, Noem said. Let this serve as a warning to all universities and academic institutions across the country. The escalation against Harvard is the latest attack on high-profile universities during Trumps second term. The administration has repeatedly targeted Harvard and other academic institutions over their diversity, equity, and inclusion commitments, and claims that they foster antisemitism through student protests over Israels ongoing invasion of Gaza. However the Trump administrations attack on Harvard shakes out in court, schools that attract the best and brightest from around the globe are likely to suffer as foreign students think twice about taking the risk on elite American universities.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||