Medicaid work rules exempt the ‘medically frail.’ Deciding who qualifies is tricky

posted in: All news | 0

By Samantha Liss and Sam Whitehead, KFF Health News

Eliza Brader worries she soon will need to prove she’s working to continue receiving Medicaid health coverage. She doesn’t think she should have to.

Related Articles


Affordable Care Act enrollment is slightly ahead of last year so far, despite expiring subsidies


AI vs. AI: Patients deploy bots to battle health insurers that deny care


New Oakdale group home will support youth impacted by sexual exploitation, human trafficking


Keith Ellison announces restitution process for victims of bankrupt Woodbury dentist


After series of denials, his insurer approved doctor-recommended cancer care. It was too late

The 27-year-old resident of Bloomington, Indiana, has a pacemaker and a painful joint disease. She also has fused vertebrae in her neck from a spinal injury, preventing her from turning her head.

Indiana’s Medicaid agency currently considers Brader “medically frail,” giving her access to an expanded set of benefits, such as physical therapy.

New federal rules will require more than 18 million Medicaid enrollees nationwide to show they’re working, volunteering, or going to school for 80 hours a month starting in 2027 to keep their coverage. Brader is exempt as long as she’s deemed medically frail.

But lacking sufficient federal guidance, states are wrestling with how to define medical frailty — a consequential decision that could cut Medicaid coverage for many people, said state officials, consumer advocates, and health policy researchers.

“It’s terrifying,” Brader said. “I already have fought so hard to get my health care.”

‘Incredibly High’ Stakes

President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act slashes nearly $1 trillion from Medicaid over the next decade, with much of the savings projected to come from no longer covering those who don’t qualify under the new work rules. Those spending cuts help offset the costs of GOP priorities, such as extra border security and tax cuts that mainly benefit the wealthy.

Conservative lawmakers have argued that Medicaid, the government health insurance program for people with low incomes or with disabilities, has grown too large and expensive, especially in the wake of its expansion to more low-income adults under the Affordable Care Act. They also say that requiring participants to work is common sense.

The work rules in Trump’s tax-and-spending law offer exemptions for several groups who might struggle to meet them, including people deemed “medically frail.” The law spells out certain “medically frail” conditions such as blindness, disability, and substance use disorder. But it does not list many others.

Instead, the law exempts those with a “serious or complex medical condition,” a term whose interpretation could vary by state.

State officials say they need more clarity to ensure that people who cannot work for health reasons retain rightful access to Medicaid. They also worry that, even with a clear definition, people will face the onerous task of having to regularly vouch for being medically frail, which is a challenge without reliable access to medical care.

“The stakes are incredibly high,” said Kinda Serafi, a partner at consulting firm Manatt Health.

The new work requirements will affect Medicaid recipients in 42 states and Washington, D.C. Eight states — Alabama, Florida, Kansas, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wyoming — did not expand their Medicaid programs to cover additional low-income adults, so they won’t have to implement the work rules.

The Medicaid work rules are expected to be the largest driver of health insurance coverage losses over the next decade, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

Forty-four percent of all adults covered by states’ expanded Medicaid programs have at least one chronic health condition, according to KFF.

A Challenge for States

State Medicaid agencies are scrambling to implement the rules with little direction from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which has yet to issue specific guidance. Federal officials will clarify the “medically frail” definition next year, said Andrew Nixon, an agency spokesperson.

Ultimately, states will have to decide who is unhealthy enough to be exempt from work rules. And it won’t be easy for state workers and their computer systems to track.

Every year, state eligibility systems screen millions of applicants to check if they qualify for Medicaid and other government programs. Now, these same systems must screen applicants and existing enrollees to determine whether they meet the new work rules.

Jessica Kahn, a partner at consulting firm McKinsey & Co., has urged states to start planning how to adapt eligibility systems to verify work status. States can do a “tremendous amount” of work without direction from the federal government, said Kahn, a former federal Medicaid systems official, who spoke during a recent Medicaid advisory panel hearing. “Time is a-wasting already.”

State Medicaid directors are pondering the challenge.

“Medical frailty gets so complex,” Emma Sandoe, Oregon’s Medicaid director, said during a recent panel discussion. Conditions that can keep people from working, such as mental health disorders, can be hard to prove, she said.

A state might try to use data pulled from a person’s health records, for instance, to determine medical frailty. But information from a patient’s chart may not paint a clear picture of someone’s health, especially if they lack regular access to medical care.

It’s a tall order for eligibility systems that historically have not had to scrape medical records to screen applicants, said Serafi of Manatt Health.

“That is an incredibly new thing that eligibility enrollment systems are just not fluent in at all,” Serafi said.

Lobbying groups for the private health insurance companies that help run Medicaid in many states also have urged federal regulators to clearly define medical frailty so it can be applied uniformly.

In a Nov. 3 letter to federal officials, the Medicaid Health Plans of America and the Association for Community Affiliated Plans advocated for allowing enrollees to qualify for the exemption by saying on their applications that they have conditions that make them medically frail. Successfully implementing exemptions for the medically frail will be “crucial” given the “severe health risks of coverage loss for these populations,” the groups said.

Some state officials worry about unintended consequences of the work rules for people with chronic conditions.

Jennifer Strohecker, who recently resigned as Utah’s Medicaid director, reiterated the high stakes, especially for those with diabetes on Medicaid. They may be very healthy and functional with insulin, but if they fail to complete the work requirements, that may change, Strohecker said during a recent Medicaid advisory hearing.

Whether someone is deemed medically frail already depends heavily on where they live.

For example, in Arkansas, people indicate on their Medicaid applications that they’re disabled, blind, or need help with daily living activities.

Approximately 6% of the roughly 221,000 people enrolled in Arkansas’ Medicaid expansion program are deemed medically frail, according to Gavin Lesnick, a spokesperson for the Arkansas Department of Human Services.

In West Virginia, the state accepts a medical frailty designation when an applicant self-reports it.

The burden of proof is higher in North Dakota. Applicants there must answer a questionnaire about their health and submit additional documentation, which may include medical chart notes and treatment plans. More than half of applicants were denied last year, according to Health and Human Services Department spokesperson Mindy Michaels.

Indiana’s Family and Social Services Administration, which runs its Medicaid program, declined an interview and said it could not comment on individual cases, like Brader’s.

Brader worries the additional red tape will cause her to lose Medicaid again. She said she was temporarily kicked off the program in 2019 for failing to meet the state’s work rules when Indiana said her work-study job didn’t count as employment.

“Anytime I have tried to receive help from the state of Indiana, it has been a bureaucratic nightmare,” she said.

As states await federal guidance, Kristi Putnam, a senior fellow at the conservative Cicero Institute and former secretary of the Arkansas Department of Human Services, which oversees the state Medicaid program, said even if a state creates an extensive list of qualifying “medically frail” conditions, the line must be drawn somewhere.

“You can’t possibly create a policy for exemptions that will catch everything,” she said.

©2025 KFF Health News. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Man fatally shot in St. Paul’s Payne-Phalen ID’d as 49-year-old

posted in: All news | 0

A man who was fatally shot in St. Paul’s Payne-Phalen neighborhood last week has been identified as a 49-year-old.

Police said Tuesday they continue to investigate the homicide of Michael D. Tucker, of St. Paul, and no one has been arrested.

Officers responded to a report of shots fired in the 900 block of Edgerton Street just before 9:15 p.m. Thursday and found Tucker with a gunshot injury to the upper torso. St. Paul Fire Department medics were taking him to the hospital when he was pronounced dead.

Investigators are looking into the circumstances of Tucker’s shooting. Police have asked anyone with information to call the homicide unit at 651-266-5650.

Related Articles


Fire guts Prior Lake mosque; cause remains under investigation


‘They had just gone out for a bit,’ daughter of New Brighton couple killed by drunk driver says at his sentencing


Trump’s attacks on Minnesota’s Somali community cast a spotlight on fraud cases


Pregnant immigrants held for months in detention despite rules against it


Bullets in Luigi Mangione’s bag convinced police that he was UnitedHealthcare CEO killing suspect

Wall Street treads water ahead of the Federal Reserve’s coming decision

posted in: All news | 0

By STAN CHOE, Associated Press Business Writer

NEW YORK (AP) — U.S. stocks are holding relatively steady on Tuesday as Wall Street waits to hear what the Federal Reserve will say on Wednesday about where interest rates are heading.

Related Articles


Federal Reserve set to cut rate but may signal a pause to come


More people crowdfunded for essential needs in 2025, according to GoFundMe’s year-end report


Trump approves sale of more advanced Nvidia computer chips used in AI to China


Boeing finalizes $4.7B acquisition of key 737 Max supplier Spirit AeroSystems


2026 Housing market: Stable rates, rising costs ahead

The S&P 500 was virtually unchanged in early trading, coming off just its second loss in the last 11 days. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was up 145 points, or 0.3%, as of 9:35 a.m. Eastern time, and the Nasdaq composite was 0.2% lower.

CVS Health jumped to one of the market’s bigger gains after unveiling new financial projections, including annual compounded growth in earnings per share at a “mid-teens” percentage over the next three years.

“We are committed to doing what we say,” said Chief Financial Officer Brian Newman, who also said CVS Health is closing out 2025 with strong momentum. Its stock rose 5%.

That helped work against a 4.6% drop for homebuilder Toll Brothers and a 4.4% fall for AutoZone, which both reported weaker results for the latest quarter than analysts expected.

Toll Brothers CEO Douglas Yearley Jr. said demand for new homes remains soft across many markets. But he pointed to how his company’s luxury homes aim more at affluent customers, who may be less hurt by “affordability pressures” than other potential homebuyers.

One big factor in that affordability question is mortgage rates. They’re lower than they were at the start of the year, but they perked up a bit after October. That’s largely because of questions in the bond market about how much more the Federal Reserve will cut its main interest rate.

The widespread expectation is that the Fed will cut interest rates on Wednesday afternoon, which would be its third such easing of the year. Lower interest rates can give the economy and prices for investments a boost, though the downside is that they can worsen inflation.

The U.S. stock market has run to the edge of its records in part because of growing expectations that the Fed will cut rates again on Wednesday.

The big question is what kind of hints the Fed will offer about where interest rates will go after that. Many on Wall Street are bracing for talk aimed at tamping down expectations for more cuts in 2026.

Inflation has stubbornly remained above the Fed’s 2% target, and Fed officials are notably split in their opinions about whether high inflation or the slowing job market is the bigger threat to the economy.

Elsewhere on Wall Street, Ares Management climbed 6% after S&P Dow Jones Indices said the investment company will join its widely followed S&P 500 index. It will replace Kellanova, the maker of Pringles and Pop-Tarts, which is being bought by Mars, the company behind Snickers and M&Ms.

The market’s most influential stock, Nvidia, slipped 0.8% after President Donald Trump allowed it to sell an advanced chip used in artificial-intelligence technology to “approved customers” in China. The H200 is not Nvidia’s top product.

In stock markets abroad, indexes were mixed across Europe and Asia.

Indexes fell 1.3% in Hong Kong and 0.5% in Paris for two of the world’s bigger moves.

In the bond market, Treasury yields eased a touch ahead of the Fed’s announcement. The yield on the 10-year Treasury slipped to 4.15% from 4.17% late Monday.

AP Business Writers Matt Ott and Elaine Kurtenbach contributed.

Supreme Court weighs Republican appeal to end limits on party spending in federal elections

posted in: All news | 0

By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is considering a Republican-led drive, backed by President Donald Trump’s administration, to overturn a quarter-century-old decision and erase limits on how much political parties can spend in coordination with candidates for Congress and president.

Related Articles


Fire guts Prior Lake mosque; cause remains under investigation


Federal judge throws out Trump order blocking development of wind energy


Trump says survivors of scrutinized US strike were trying to right boat before 2nd missile was fired


Judge wants whistleblower to testify in contempt probe of Trump official over planes to El Salvador


Former Colorado clerk will remain in state prison after a federal judge rejects her bid for freedom

A day after the justices indicated they would overturn a 90-year-old decision limiting the president’s power to fire independent agency heads, the court on Tuesday is revisiting a 2001 decision that upheld a provision of federal election law that is more than 50 years old.

Democrats are calling on the court to uphold the law.

The limits stem from a desire to prevent large donors from skirting caps on individual contributions to a candidate by directing unlimited sums to the party, with the understanding that the money will be spent on behalf of the candidate.

The Federal Election Commission and the GOP argue that the court should cast a skeptical eye on the limits, in line with recent high court decisions. Led by Chief Justice John Roberts, a conservative majority has upended a variety of congressionally enacted limits on raising and spending money to influence elections. The court’s 2010 Citizens United decision opened the door to unlimited independent spending in federal elections.

After the Trump administration joined with Republicans to ask the court to strike down the campaign finance law, the justices appointed a lawyer to defend it.

Roman Martinez, an experienced Supreme Court advocate, is offering the justices a way out of the case without deciding anything. Instead, they should hold the case is moot now that the FEC agrees with Republicans that the law is unconstitutional and there is “no credible risk” the agency will try to enforce it, Martinez wrote.

The Republican committees for House and Senate candidates filed the lawsuit in Ohio in 2022, joined by two Ohio Republicans in Congress, then-Sen. JD Vance, now vice president, and then-Rep. Steve Chabot.

In 2025, the coordinated party spending for Senate races ranges from $127,200 in several states with small populations to nearly $4 million in California. For House races, the limits are $127,200 in states with only one representative and $63,600 everywhere else.