Show Notes
Medicaid, which is jointly funded by states and the federal government, has always operated under pressure, but this moment feels different. The program is facing a unique period of change, defined by factors that are significant on their own but far more consequential together. Centrally, the 2025 health care cuts to Medicaid and beyond, to the tune of $1 trillion over the next decade, will add nearly 10 million people to the uninsured ranks. These cuts will also trigger state budget holes and new funding gaps for the nation’s health care safety net.
The funding cuts are compounded by new administrative burdens for consumers because of new Medicaid work reporting requirements and other red-tape hoops people will need to jump through to get and keep coverage. Paperwork is a tried-and-true method for reducing enrollment, undermining decades of bipartisan efforts to streamline enrollment while ensuring program integrity through data-driven verification of eligibility. State Medicaid agencies will also feel the pinch as they operate with steep new administrative costs and fewer resources, and health providers who continue to serve low-income populations will be faced with patients churning in and out of coverage and a rise in uncompensated care.
The “old Medicaid rubric” doesn’t make sense anymore. It’s one that we’ve moved beyond for good reason through the Affordable Care Act expansion. The vast majority of Americans support and value their Medicaid coverage, including their expansion coverage, as vital to keeping their families safe, healthy and financially secure.
This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit 80million.substack.com
More from The 80 Million Podcast
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) fundamentally changed American health care — expanding coverage, establishing consumer protections that are now broadly expected, and helping cement the idea that access to health care is a basic human need rather than a privilege tied to health status, gender or income.
High-cost therapies like cell and gene therapies could transform care for Medicaid beneficiaries with serious conditions, but their upfront prices — often $500,000 to $5 million per patient — do not fit a financing system built around predictable, chronic-care spending.
Americans are rapidly aging, which is accelerating the demand for the long-term services and supports (LTSS) necessary to their care, as well as the care of a diverse range of children and adults with disabilities. Medicaid is the primary payer for LTSS. Since the early 1980s, that coverage has included home and community-based services (HCBS), which have proven better for health, less expensive and what most people prefer over institutional care. HCBS now make up almost two-thirds of long-term services and support spending, double the rate in 2001.
The scale of federal retrenchment is no longer theoretical. In Massachusetts alone, the state is bracing for an estimated $3.5 billion annual loss in federal Medicaid funding once H.R. 1 is fully implemented, against a total Medicaid budget of over $20 billion. Even with aggressive mitigation, the state could still see about 300,000 residents lose coverage.
The evidence that addressing social needs like food and transportation improves health outcomes and reduces Medicaid costs is no longer theoretical. We’ve seen recent data from two efforts: North Carolina’s Healthy Opportunities Pilots (HOP) generated $164 in savings per member per month, according to a new, multiyear evaluation of 31,000 Medicaid enrollees by the Sheps Center at University of North Carolina. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Accountable Health Communities model showed 3%–4% reductions in total cost of care through screening and navigation alone.