CLASP

The Center for Law and Social Policy

Search

By Ashley Burnside 

July is an important month for the disability community, especially this year. Commonly referred to as Disability Pride Month, July commemorates the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in 1990, a hard-fought legislative achievement that provides the disability community with comprehensive civil rights protections. This year marks the 35th anniversary of the ADA’s passage. 2025 also represents the 60th anniversary of the Medicaid program, which provides life-saving health care for millions of people. People with disabilities have fought for decades to achieve basic civil rights protections, including access to public spaces, public education, adequate health care, and more. 

Amid these celebrations, this month also marks the passage of a law that will cause great harm for people with disabilities: President Trump’s budget reconciliation law. This new law will result in disabled people losing health care and nutrition assistance. 

During Disability Pride Month, lawmakers should be investing in and celebrating the disability community, not stripping away public benefits that help people afford food, remain healthy, and live in their homes and communities. The reconciliation law will restrict access to health care and food for the disability community, despite false claims from lawmakers to the contrary.  

The Reconciliation Law Will Cut Medicaid Access   

Medicaid provides life-saving services and care for people with disabilities throughout the nation. Fifteen million people with disabilities use Medicaid, representing 1 in 3 disabled people. Unfortunately, the reconciliation law will make devastating cuts to Medicaid, ultimately leaving just over 10 million people uninsured, including people with disabilities.  

One of the changes the law will make is adding work reporting requirements to Medicaid for the expansion population of at least 80 hours per month, which will create red tape for millions of people trying to enroll in Medicaid and for Medicaid recipients. Research has repeatedly found that while work reporting requirements do nothing to improve employment, they do create bureaucratic complexity for recipients and state agencies. 

Lawmakers have claimed that people with disabilities will be exempt from the work reporting requirements. But unfortunately, disabled people will inevitably be included in these mandates, and will lose their health insurance unless they can meet the paperwork requirements. Some disabled people qualify for Medicaid due to their disability status, typically having severe health conditions that meet a strict definition of being disabled. People in this category should be exempt from work reporting requirements, but in reality, that will depend on how well states implement the policy.  

There are also many people with disabilities who qualify for Medicaid through other pathways because their disability is not deemed ‘severe enough’ to qualify them through the disability eligibility criteria. Most people in this category will qualify for Medicaid through Medicaid expansion. In the ten states that have not expanded Medicaid, people may qualify if they have dependent children at home and extremely low incomes, but are likely to not be insured. 

People with disabilities who qualify for Medicaid through their state’s Medicaid expansion but are unable to work 80 hours per month due to their disability will need to prove their disability makes them exempt from the work reporting requirement, a process that requires time, money, appointments, and paperwork. They will likely have to reprove their disability every six months.    

Disabled people who can work and qualify for Medicaid through their state’s Medicaid expansion could face further problems if they have a chronic disability that makes it harder for them to work continuously, or during medical episodes. For example, a cashier may be able to work 80 hours one month but then be unable to work that many hours the following month if they have a chronic pain flare-up that prevents standing for longer shifts. This person might lose their Medicaid eligibility because they were unable to meet the 80-hour requirement every single month. And because recipients can’t average the number of hours worked across multiple months, someone who could only work 70 hours one month can’t ensure they remain eligible by working 90 hours the next. The ways that disabilities impact people are often not “one size fits all,” and that will make meeting such an inflexible work reporting requirement impossible for some people.  

The indirect results of the Medicaid cuts will also harm members of the disability community who rely on medical care from hospitals and clinics. If hospitals lose federal funding and are forced to close, this will disproportionately affect those who may be unable to drive further distances to get the care they need, especially if they live somewhere without public transportation.  

Home and Community Based Services (HCBS) are a crucial Medicaid service for disabled people but are not required by federal statute. One area that states may explore is cutting these services, including reducing payments to care providers or not enrolling people who are stuck on waiting lists.    

Disabled immigrants will also be cut off from health care due to the reconciliation law. Previously, lawfully present immigrants who were ineligible for Medicaid due to their immigration status could enroll in marketplace coverage if they earned under 100 percent of the Federal Poverty Level. The new law terminates this coverage, as well as other opportunities for Medicaid, Medicare, and Children’s Health Insurance Program access for certain populations of immigrants. 

Collectively, all the Medicaid cuts—including key financing changes—will leave states with fewer federal Medicaid dollars and force states to cut their Medicaid programs.  

The Reconciliation Law Will Strip Access to Food 

The reconciliation law will also make devastating cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), ending nutrition assistance for an estimated 5 million people. Disabled people are likelier to face food insecurity than people without disabilities, and about 4 million SNAP non-elderly recipients identified as being disabled in 2023. People with disabilities will be cut off SNAP due to the stricter work reporting requirements unless they prove they can meet an exemption, which can be burdensome and time-consuming.   

The new law will also require states to spend more of their own revenue to fund the SNAP program, meaning states will either need to make cuts to the program, remove recipients, eliminate SNAP altogether, or make other cuts in their state budget to critical programs, such as child care or education. Some disabilities require specialty diets that are more expensive, meaning disabled people could be especially harmed if states implement such cost-saving measures. 

We Must Commit to Advocating for Policies that Allow Disabled People to Thrive 

During Disability Pride Month and every month of the year, we must celebrate our progress toward access, equity, and justice for the disability community while also acknowledging areas where improvements are needed. People with disabilities deserve health care, food, and housing and the chance to thrive in their communities with their loved ones, just like everyone else. The recent reconciliation law will be a major setback for the disability community. Lawmakers at the state and federal level should invest in people with disabilities through fully funding HBCS, removing work reporting requirements in the Medicaid and SNAP programs, and ensuring that all people have access to adequate health care and nutrition, regardless of their income or ability status.  

By Ashley Burnside

On July 4, President Trump signed his reconciliation law that will make changes to the Child Tax Credit (CTC). The reconciliation law provides tax breaks for the wealthiest people by slashing Medicaid and food assistance funding, and will make changes to how states earn revenue.  

The CTC is a tax credit available to eligible families with children. In 2017, lawmakers temporarily doubled the maximum credit; restricted children without Social Security numbers from being eligible; and made the credit available to families with higher incomes, among other changes. In 2021, lawmakers temporarily expanded the CTC, which helped to decrease child poverty by nearly half. These changes expired after one year. Now, President Trump’s new reconciliation bill will change how big the CTC will be and will cut some families off from accessing it. 

---

Here are ten things you should know about the CTC:  

1. Most families receive the CTC.

Families who file their taxes, have an eligible child, and have incomes within the allowable limits are generally eligible to claim the CTC each year. The program is far-reaching, doesn’t require additional paperwork beyond filing taxes, and lifts millions of people out of poverty each year.

2. The maximum CTC available to families will be $2,200 per child beginning in tax year 2025.

Under prior law, the maximum CTC was $2,000 per child. Beginning in 2026, the maximum credit amount will be adjusted annually for inflation.

3. The CTC helps families afford essentials and invest in their kids.

The CTC allows parents to afford investments for their family, like summer camp, new toys, or a musical instrument. CLASP survey research concluded that in 2021 parents spent their expanded CTC monthly payments on both essentials (groceries, bills, and rent/mortgage payments) and enrichment activities for their children

4. The income limits for the CTC are the same, and families with the lowest incomes will continue to be left out.

Married couples making up to $400,000 per year are eligible for the maximum CTC. But because of the way the credit is structured, families with lower earnings are not eligible for the full credit. The credit phases in at 15 cents per dollar earned above $2,500 per year, and is only partially refundable. A married couple with two children needs to make at least $41,500 per year to get the full CTC, for example. An estimated 19 million children are in families who will continue to not get the full credit because their parents don’t earn enough.

5. Black and Latino children are disproportionately left out from getting the maximum CTC due to the way the credit is structured.

An estimated 39 percent of Black children and 36 percent of Latino children didn’t get the full credit in 2023 because their parents did not earn enough. This is due to the structural and historical racism within our laws and labor market that have left communities of color with deep inequities, resulting in workers of color receiving lower wages and fewer opportunities for economic prosperity.

6. Families are eligible for the CTC if their children are under age 17 at the end of the tax year.

The 2021 law temporarily extended the age of eligibility for the credit to include seventeen-year-olds, but this provision expired after one year.

7. Children must have a Social Security number (SSN) to be eligible for the CTC.

The reconciliation bill has permanently excluded children from the CTC who don’t have an SSN. This will make an estimated 1 million children ineligible for the credit, a misguided exclusion that will hurt children’s outcomes and force children and families further into poverty.

8. At least one parent must have an SSN to be eligible for the CTC.

Under prior law, parents could claim the CTC for their child if they have an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN), but the reconciliation law changed this policy. Now, at least one parent must have an SSN to claim the credit. (A married couple where one spouse has an SSN and one spouse has an ITIN would be eligible.) This will exclude an estimated 2.6 million U.S. citizen children from getting the CTC because their parents don’t have SSNs.

9. The CTC is not available monthly to families.

Under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, the CTC was distributed monthly to families from July through December 2021. Since that law has expired, families can now only get the credit annually when they file their tax return.

10. Lawmakers should permanently expand the CTC.

Permanently making the credit fully available to families with lower incomes; permanently increasing the size of the credit to at least the levels provided in 2021 (up to $3,600 for children ages zero through five); permanently making the credit available monthly; and permanently extending credit eligibility to seventeen-year-olds would deliver an income boost from the CTC to more than 60 million children and help families afford essentials. 

---

The changes to the CTC passed under President Trump’s reconciliation law will cut off some immigrant families from accessing the CTC and will continue to leave families with the lowest incomes out of the full credit, disproportionately excluding Black and Latino families. The CTC doesn’t reach the families who would benefit the most from receiving it. Lawmakers should fix this backwards structure by making the credit fully available to families with low earnings and by ending the ITIN restrictions. 

Requirements

By Juan Carlos Gomez

Families are already struggling with higher costs of living, and the Senate’s budget reconciliation bill will only increase the costs of health care, food, and everyday necessities. The bill’s text affirms that at its core, this is legislation that will drain money from the families with the lowest incomes in order to benefit the wealthy. 

Millions Could Lose Health Care, Food Assistance, and Economic Stability

The bill would make the largest cuts to Medicaid and SNAP in history, dismantling the provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplace that make it effective in providing affordable health coverage and many free health care services to millions. The proposed language in the Senate makes even deeper cuts to Medicaid and, in total, could cause up to 16 million people to become uninsured. These cuts will cause widespread harm and impact essential workers, like child care providers, who rely on Medicaid due to a lack of access to benefits and low-paying jobs. When Congress tried to repeal the ACA in 2017, they failed because it was deeply unpopular and people understood that weakening the Marketplace would leave millions without affordable health coverage.

Burdensome Work Requirements Are Cuts by Another Name

Additionally, the drastic cuts to SNAP could leave over 8 million people with little to no food assistance, harming our economy. Every dollar that goes to SNAP results in up to $1.80 in economic ripple effects that benefit farmers, grocery stores, truck drivers, payment processors, food manufacturers, and others as the funds circulate in the local economy. Less funding for SNAP means families are spending less, impacting more than 250,000 SNAP-authorized retailers nationwide.

The House-passed bill and Senate proposal would create the first mandate for states to implement work requirements in Medicaid programs and make existing SNAP work requirements even more burdensome. Decades of research show that work requirements don’t increase stable employment or economic security. Instead, they lead to large drops in program participation by creating complex, burdensome paperwork that eligible people often can’t navigate. This causes people to lose benefits not because they’re ineligible, but because the system becomes too difficult to access. These policies are especially harmful to people in low-wage jobs, caregivers, and those with health conditions, many of whom already face systemic barriers like discrimination, lack of child care, or unreliable transportation. Work requirements are simply cuts to life-saving programs under a different name.

Millions of Children and Families Will be Barred From Economic Supports

While the Senate bill increases the maximum Child Tax Credit (CTC) to $2,200 per child, it does not make the credit fully available to families with little to no earnings. Under the Senate bill, 17 million children will continue to be left out of receiving the full CTC. Additionally, families that do not have at least one parent with a Social Security number would be barred from accessing the CTC under the Senate bill. This would restrict access to the CTC for 2.6 million citizen children. 

The bill would make the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) more difficult to claim for 17 million families with low to moderate incomes by adding a burdensome pre-certification requirement. This would create needless red tape and stress for families with children as they file to claim the EITC. Lawmakers have decreased funding and staffing for the IRS, meaning the agency will have less capacity to provide adequate customer support to parents as they navigate this new policy.

Attacks on Immigrant Communities Will Have Ripple Effects for All Families

Undocumented immigrants are already ineligible for the CTC, Medicaid, Medicare, Affordable Care Act coverage, and SNAP. This legislation bars immigrants who are primarily authorized for humanitarian reasons to be in the United States, like refugees, asylees, and domestic violence survivors, from accessing these programs; in some cases, even green card holders could be blocked. These policies will impact both adults and children: approximately 40 percent of individuals granted refugee status and asylum in FY23 were children.

On top of further limiting immigrant access to essential benefits, this legislation increases funding for mass deportation. Immigrants–including those with authorization–and U.S. citizens alike have been subject to immigration enforcement actions without due process. Over 5 million children have at least one undocumented parent they are at risk of being separated from, and 2.6 million citizen children in the U.S. have only an undocumented parent(s) and are at risk of being left with no one to care for them due to their parent’s detention or deportation. As the Trump Administration continues to strip immigrants of their legal statuses and eligibility for support, the number of children who are harmed by immigration enforcement will grow, the vast majority of whom are U.S. citizens. Fears of immigration enforcement will also cause a chilling effect even among immigrants who qualify for food and health insurance assistance. They will disenroll or not enroll in these lifesaving programs, impacting access for their children and their well-being.

Tax Breaks for the Wealthy Reduce Funding That Supports Children and Families

This bill centers wealthy families by offering tax breaks for the rich while cutting and eliminating essential programs that meet the needs of families. These significant tax breaks mean less revenue to support programs that families rely on and undermine their basic needs. Decisions about investments in programs will come with challenging tradeoffs and will, without a doubt, leave families and children, especially those with the lowest incomes, out to dry. Programs like child care, Head Start, and services for people with disabilities will suffer, and positive progress will be lost. 

States and Our Health Care System Will Bear the Burden as Federal Government Withdraws Support

Children and families’ needs for health care and food do not go away just because the federal government chooses not to fund them. Instead, states and local governments–which already have strained budgets–will have to figure out how to implement new, burdensome provisions of the bill and deal with cuts to funding in order to support their residents by shifting costs from other important needs or forcing families off of Medicaid, SNAP, and other essential programs. This bill creates impossible situations for states, forcing them to make decisions about which basic needs they are able to support for the very same families. 

As millions of people lose health insurance, the cost of uncompensated care skyrocket, causing tremendous strain on our health care system. This, in turn, could cause hospitals and health care centers to shutter services or close altogether. This will be especially devastating for rural communities where children and families already face barriers to accessible health care, and over 4 in 10 hospitals are already losing money. 

The Budget Reconciliation Bill Sets Students, Workers, Children, and Families Up to Fail

Students Will Likely Experience Increased Financial Pressure 

Education-related cuts include severe restrictions on federal student aid for students with low incomes at a time when many students already struggle with the increasing cost of pursuing a college degree. Nearly 4.4 million Pell Grant recipients would see their award amounts reduced, and new student loan borrowers would be forced to make larger payments even if they are unemployed or struggling to pay bills. These provisions will drive more borrowers into defaulting on their loans and, as a result, have their CTC and EITC refunds seized. For universities, these restrictions would compound through states being potentially forced to cut education spending to make up for the loss of federal funding for health care and other social services. Institutions would also be forced to no longer offer access to federal student loans, close certain academic programs, or shutter their campuses due to the bill requiring colleges to pay a percentage of unpaid debt.

Workers Face Pay Cuts, Weakened Unions, and Job Insecurity

Workers will see lower wages with rising costs, including for utilities, food, and other necessities in the household. With the continued attacks on unions, all workers face an increase in job security and risk their health and safety at the workplace. And while civil servants have already faced numerous challenges this year due to rounds of layoffs, this bill would cut take-home pay for new civil servants while undermining their workplace rights and limiting federal labor unions’ ability to protect their members. 

On top of reducing take-home pay for civil workers, this bill also places a 10 percent tax on labor unions for solely existing in the workplace. Under this bill, it will be increasingly challenging for employees to contest unlawful dismissals or discrimination, and the financial repercussions will be considerably greater for workers aiming to maintain their rights. These changes will affect federal agencies’ ability to retain and recruit workers while placing additional financial burdens on federal workers, their families, and their children.

Young Children and Families Will Not Have Access to Necessary Child Care and Early Education Support

While a child care crisis persists in our country, this bill does nothing to support access to affordable and accessible child care for children and families. While the bill includes a number of tax incentives and credits related to child care, it does not address the true needs of children and families. In fact, even these tax provisions would not benefit families with low incomes, as they are targeted at employers, higher-income jobs, and families with tax liability. It puts no effort into making child care more affordable for the children and families who need it most or supporting the undervalued and underpaid child care workforce. 

Resources on budget reconciliation:

• CLASP’s Defending Public Benefits: A Playbook for Policymakers
• Children Thrive Action Network’s Budget Reconciliation Brief
• CLASP’s Infographic: It’s a Cut to Medicaid No Matter What You Call It

By Christian Collins and Sarah Erdreich 

As Congress works to advance the proposed budget reconciliation bill of 2025, CLASP’s series “The 2025 Budget Reconciliation’s Impact on People with Low Incomes” will examine the policies put forward that have particular resonance for the children, families, and communities with low incomes. This is the second blog in the series.  

On April 29, the House Education & Workforce committee marked up its portion of the House’s reconciliation bill. The committee voted to advance the legislation, which makes drastic changes to Department of Education programs and initiatives, by a party-line vote of 21-14. 

Republicans claim that their legislation will save over $330 billion and make federal education policy more effective. But the details of this plan make it clear that the GOP is sacrificing the future of the country for working people to fund planned tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy. Below, we examine some of the most concerning proposals. 

Pell Grants
The committee’s bill would increase funding for the Pell Grants program by $10.5 billion from fiscal year (FY) 2026 to FY2028. However, students would need to take at least 15 credit hours each semester to maintain eligibility, up from the current requirement of at least 12 credit hours per semester. This change would place an unnecessary burden on students who also work, parent, or have other time-consuming responsibilities in addition to pursuing a degree in higher education. As a result, fewer students would be eligible for Pell grants. 

Student Loans and Financial Aid
The bill also changes how student loan programs would operate, including ending subsidized loans altogether and causing loan interest to accumulate immediately. In addition, schools would be required to repay a portion of their students’ loans if the students miss payments. Moreover, federal aid would be eliminated if the number of students who miss payments is considered too high. According to the committee’s own data, 98 percent of institutions would have to make these payments, and 75 percent would experience a net loss of federal funding, even factoring in the performance-based incentives and grants included in this bill.

Republicans claim that this will impel schools to put more effort into ensuring their graduates find high-quality jobs. This assertion ignores the fact that schools with higher populations of students having low incomes are more likely to need student loans in the first place, will be disproportionately at risk of losing federal funding, and may be reluctant to even consider accepting students who need aid.  

It is also notable that this Republican proposal would change the way that financial aid eligibility is determined. Currently, the amount of federal aid a student receives is based on the cost of attending the school in which they plan to enroll. This new proposal would base the amount on the median cost of attending a similar program nationally. However, no clarity was offered as to how the Department of Education will determine median costs; if they have the workforce to do this, given widespread cuts at the department; and how this would be enforced if the GOP makes good on Donald Trump’s oft-stated vow to dismantle the department altogether. 

Loan Forgiveness
Access to all existing income-based plans would be eliminated and replaced with a new “Repayment Assistance Plan,” which could cause borrowers to see a disproportionate spike in their monthly payment whenever they move across the proposal’s arbitrary income thresholds. The bill also proposes collapsing the current standard, graduated, and extended repayment plans into a single “standard” plan with varying repayment lengths based on a borrower’s loan balance. These changes would leave borrowers paying more per month, becoming more likely to land in defaults, and ultimately affect the economic security of millions of borrowers.  

The Republican proposal on behalf of the House Education & Workforce Committee is nothing more than a brazen sacrifice of our higher education system to further enrich the wealthy through tax cuts. These measures do not increase educational access for students, make investments into institutions that reflect their role as a public good, or adequately address the growing national concern around student debt. Republicans claim that American higher education needs fiscal reform to maintain future sustainability, but they have only presented policies meant to decimate the system and ensure that only students who are already wealthy can earn degrees. 

By Juan Carlos Gomez and Sarah Erdreich

As Congress works to advance the proposed budget reconciliation bill of 2025, CLASP’s series “The 2025 Budget Reconciliation’s Impact on People with Low Incomes” will examine the policies put forward that have particular resonance for children, families, and communities with low incomes. This is the first blog in the series. 

On April 30, the House Judiciary Committee met to mark up its portion of the GOP’s proposed reconciliation bill. During the nine-hour session, Democrats offered amendments to, among other things, prevent the deportation of U.S. citizen children, ensure that children have access to counsel, and prevent funds from being used for immigration enforcement activities in elementary schools—while Republicans remained largely silent. All of these amendments failed, and the committee voted 23-17 along party lines to advance the legislation. 

As it stands now, this legislation will significantly increase the authority of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); expand detention facilities, including family detention facilities; and impose exorbitant fees for immigrants who are trying to stay in or adjust their status in the United States. All of these policies are harmful not just for immigrants and their families, but to the country as a whole. 

CLASP research from the first Trump Administration showed how deeply enforcement activities negatively impacted children. Educators and parents observed high rates of depression, anxiety, and fear among children and increased housing instability and economic hardship among families. This, in turn, affected the communities in which immigrant families lived and worked. Allowing ICE to conduct enforcement activities in spaces where young children are present will only destabilize families and communities that are already reeling from the administration’s relentless and indiscriminate assault on immigrants, mixed-status families, and U.S. citizen children.  

Likewise, the expansion of family detention means that children could be indefinitely detained, and unaccompanied children could be detained for long periods of time. No amount of detention is appropriate for children, and this expansion does not comply with decades of policy to ensure protections for children in federal custody. The expansion also shows no consideration for victims of trafficking, who would not be screened and given appropriate services. 

The legislation’s inclusion of steep fees also represents a wealth test for immigrants, their families, and their communities. These fees will be a barrier to reuniting unaccompanied children with their families, and will also make it difficult for eligible immigrants to apply for asylum, adjust their status, and keep their work permits, ultimately denying people peace of mind and the ability to provide for their families.  

We are only at the beginning of the markup period, and any reconciliation bill that passes the House will still have to make it through the Senate. But it is worth noting that the GOP is intent on increasing funding for immigration enforcement and included $51.6 billion for a border wall and other resources for Customs and Border Protection in the House Homeland Security markup. This increased funding comes at the cost of cutting programs U.S. citizens benefit from, such as Medicaid and SNAP, and leaving millions of children, families, senior citizens, and disabled individuals without health insurance and access to food.

By Jeff Brumley  

(Excerpt)

“Another alarming aspect of the text is its proposal to significantly increase the capacity of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to apprehend and deport immigrants, said Rricha deCant, director of legislative affairs at the Center for Law and Social Policy.”

>> Read the full article here

By Suzanne Wikle

After months of rumors and speculation about how Republicans in Congress will meet their goal of cutting upwards of $880 billion from Medicaid in the next ten years, more specifics about the cuts are coming into focus. Reporting on April 29 indicates the following cuts are likely in the Republican plan:

“Work requirements”

Implementing so-called “work requirements” would change eligibility for certain adults, requiring them to prove employment or other criteria before enrolling. This change in eligibility grows government and red tape, causing a significant increase in paperwork being turned in by applicants and processed by the state; it’s also worth noting that when this has been tried in other programs, the primary results are disenrollment among people who are likely still eligible and no increase in employment.

Adding “work requirements” is one of the most inefficient changes that can be made to Medicaid. The end result will be the risk of lost coverage for up to 36 million people and an increase in both the government’s workload and the cost to process eligibility and applications, while providing no meaningful uptick in employment. If the goal is to strip people of their health insurance by overwhelming them with paperwork requirements, then this will “succeed.” I suspect that is the goal, because the evidence is clear that eligible people will lose their health insurance.

Eliminating eligibility for legal immigrants

Let’s be clear: undocumented immigrants are not eligible for Medicaid that draws down federal funds. Full stop. Not eligible.

A limited group of immigrants in the country legally are eligible. Legal permanent residents eligible for Medicaid usually must wait five years before they can enroll for coverage. Revoking eligibility for green card holders will immediately leave families without access to health coverage, including pregnant women and children.

There is no sugarcoating this—if this eligibility change happens, people will immediately lose their health insurance. This likely includes people working in the care economy, including home health care and child care, and other low-income sectors that support our communities.

Per capita caps 

Enacting a per capita cap model would be a drastic financing change to Medicaid. States currently know that the federal government will pay a certain share of Medicaid costs. This model has worked well for 60 years. A per capita cap model would instead give states a set dollar amount per enrollee, and then the states would be responsible for all other costs.

Per capita caps have not been tried in any human service programs.

Creating a radically different financing model for a program the size of Medicaid is incredibly risky. It’s too much, too fast.

About 20 percent of Americans are insured by Medicaid, making it a central part of our entire health care system. Reducing federal dollars to states through per capita caps will shift costs to states, which will be unable to backfill the entire loss of federal funds. States will be left with impossible decisions and are likely to reduce eligibility, cut provider payments, and decrease benefits. The net result is people losing their health care and our entire health care system losing a significant amount of funding, which means hospitals and health care facilities will close, providers will be overburdened, and more people will get sick.

Mandating more frequent eligibility checks

This is another red tape and bureaucratic option. Federal rules already require people to report changes in eligibility such as income or family size, and many states do data checks behind the scenes to monitor eligibility. Mandating more frequent eligibility checks will clog eligibility systems, increase paperwork for state eligibility workers and people insured by Medicaid, and make it more difficult for eligible people to stay enrolled. The data is clear that increasing administrative burdens like this decreases access to programs and disproportionately hurts Black and Hispanic enrollees who are more likely to hold multiple jobs or work in the gig economy, making it even more burdensome to turn in all the right paperwork.

Collectively, these proposed cuts to Medicaid end up “saving” federal dollars because they cut people’s eligibility, increase red tape so it’s too difficult for eligible people to enroll, and shift costs to states. If enacted, the outcome is predictable. People will lose their health insurance, doctors and other providers will see reduced payments, and our entire health care system will suffer.

Share with your network:

April 11, 2025 – Washington, D.C. – The Board of Trustees of the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP) announced today that it has chosen Wendy Chun-Hoon as the organization’s next president and executive director. She will assume leadership of the national anti-poverty and racial justice organization on May 15, 2025, succeeding Cemeré James who has served as the interim executive director of CLASP since January 2025.

“Wendy brings decades of leadership and experience across the range of issues that CLASP addresses,” said David Hansell, chair of CLASP’s Board of Trustees. “All of us on the Board are delighted to welcome Wendy, who brings enormous skills as an advocate and leader, a demonstrated commitment to our mission and values, and the enthusiasm and passion needed to meet this critical moment. Under Wendy’s leadership, CLASP will continue playing a vital role in addressing the unprecedented assaults on the public policies that support economic security for all people who are marginalized in this country.”

Chun-Hoon most recently served in the Biden Administration as Director of the U.S. Department of Labor’s Women’s Bureau from 2021-25. Prior to that, she was executive director of Family Values@Work, a national network of grassroots coalitions in 27 states fighting for care policies and workplace rights such as paid sick and safe days, family medical leave insurance, and child care. Her experience also includes working in state government as chief of staff to the Maryland Secretary of Human Services; in the philanthropic sector at the Open Society Foundations, where she worked on poverty alleviation; and at the Annie E. Casey Foundation, where her portfolio included public benefit programs.

Beyond her work experience, Chun-Hoon’s values align closely with CLASP’s mission to advance racial and economic justice, as she has spent her career fighting to end the marginalization of women and communities of color and to ensure economic security for all. Her deep commitment to equity, inclusion, and social justice makes her an ideal leader to continue CLASP’s work of dismantling systemic barriers and advancing meaningful change.

“CLASP has long been a leader in shaping policies that create pathways to economic security,” said Wendy Chun-Hoon. “I am deeply honored to join this remarkable organization and its dedicated team. As we face increasing challenges, my focus will be on expanding our advocacy efforts, building strategic alliances, and ensuring that CLASP’s work is guided by the diverse needs and voices of the people we serve. Together, we will continue to advance a bold, inclusive vision for racial, gender, and economic justice.”

“This moment calls for a clear-eyed view of the barriers to economic and racial justice and solutions at the scale of the problem,” said Julie Su, former U.S. Secretary of Labor. “There is no one more effective to lead that work than Wendy Chun-Hoon. Wendy is that rare person who combines great vision with concrete strategies and the ability to inspire bold action. I have seen this up close as I got to work side by side with her at the Department of Labor to invest in Black women-led organizations, produce research on the need for child care and drivers of pay inequity, and give women all across the country a real shot at economic security. Wendy’s leadership will be transformative for CLASP and the people and communities CLASP serves.”

“In uncertain times, we turn to values-driven leaders to create critical pathways forward that respect and recognize the power of lived experience and policy solutions that will advance equitable opportunity for all and ensure no person, family, or community is left behind or excluded. Wendy Chun-Hoon brings a proven track record of leadership, that spans the public, social, and philanthropic sectors, to CLASP, one of our country’s most essential policy anchor organizations,” said Anne Mosle, Vice President at the Aspen Institute and Founder & Executive Director of Ascend at the Aspen Institute. “With Wendy at the helm, the next chapter of CLASP’s mission-driven work will build bridges and accelerate policy innovation from the federal to state and local level. CLASP and Ascend at the Aspen Institute share the North Star of creating a more equitable future for families with low incomes, and I look forward to our organizations expanding our collaboration under Wendy’s leadership.”

“The CLASP team and Board of Trustees also extend our deepest gratitude to Cemeré James for her leadership as interim executive director. Under her guidance, CLASP has navigated a transition period with resilience and a continued commitment to our mission,” said Hansell.

CLASP is a 55-year-old national, nonpartisan nonprofit that focuses on economic, social, and racial justice. We work with federal, state, and local policymakers, advocates, and partners to advance policies that reduce poverty, improve the lives of people with low income, and create pathways to economic security for everyone. Our work is rooted in a belief that poverty in America is inextricably tied to systemic racism. The organization has been on the front lines of fighting back against harmful administrative and legislative proposals—particularly those from the current and prior Trump administrations—and advancing a bold and practical vision.

###

This statement can be attributed to Rricha deCant, director of legislative affairs at the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP)

April 10, 2025, Washington, D.C. – Today, the U.S. House of Representatives approved a budget resolution bill by a vote of 216-214 that was passed by the Senate last week. Its passage highlights the willingness of Congressional leaders to fund tax breaks for the rich and corporations and drive up the deficit through massive Medicaid cuts of $880 billion and SNAP cuts of $230 billion.

The proposal would also slash other public benefit programs that people with low incomes rely on. Instead of passing a budget resolution that would help families grapple with rising costs in an already chaotic economy, Congressional leaders are making it more difficult for families, children, and workers to have access to health care, food, and other essentials.

This measure now opens the door for Congress to write a budget reconciliation bill that could have far-reaching impacts on the lives of millions of Americans for decades to come.