Think Tanks
Here's a look at documents from think tanks
Featured Stories
Material Shortages in the German Electronics Industry Worsen
MUNICH, Germany, Nov. 13 [Category: ThinkTank] -- ifo Institute posted the following news release:
* * *
Material Shortages in the German Electronics Industry Worsen
*
* Material Shortages in the German Electronics Industry Worsen
The German electronics industry is finding it increasingly difficult to stock up on intermediate products. Among manufacturers of data processing equipment and electronic and optical products, 41.5% of companies reported bottlenecks in October, up from 37.8% in September. "The supply of materials is becoming a problem in parts of the electronics industry," says Klaus ... Show Full Article MUNICH, Germany, Nov. 13 [Category: ThinkTank] -- ifo Institute posted the following news release: * * * Material Shortages in the German Electronics Industry Worsen * * Material Shortages in the German Electronics Industry Worsen The German electronics industry is finding it increasingly difficult to stock up on intermediate products. Among manufacturers of data processing equipment and electronic and optical products, 41.5% of companies reported bottlenecks in October, up from 37.8% in September. "The supply of materials is becoming a problem in parts of the electronics industry," says KlausWohlrabe, Head of Surveys at ifo. "A lack of intermediate products can slow down production particularly in an industry with strong demand."
One possible reason for the material bottlenecks is the high global demand for electronic components triggered by the expansion of AI infrastructure. According to industry reports, companies reported increasing supply problems, particularly with printed circuit boards. By contrast, the share of affected companies among manufacturers of electrical equipment fell from 27.4 to 25.3% but also remained at a high level. "The global AI boom could make it increasingly difficult to procure electronic components," says Wohlrabe. "When it comes to key components, companies are competing with major technology companies for limited production capacities."
In German industry as a whole, materials were once again in short supply in October. 15.6% of companies reported a lack of intermediate products, up from 14.6% in September. The situation worsened particularly in the automotive industry, where 24.1% of companies recently reported material bottlenecks, up from the previous 8.9%. In mechanical engineering, the figure rose to 19.6%, up from 16.3%. The situation eased in the chemical industry, where the share fell from 18.0 to 12.3%.
***
Original text here: https://www.ifo.de/en/press-release/2026-11-13/material-shortages-german-electronics-industry-worsen
* * *
Material Shortages in the German Electronics Industry Worsen
*
* Material Shortages in the German Electronics Industry Worsen
The German electronics industry is finding it increasingly difficult to stock up on intermediate products. Among manufacturers of data processing equipment and electronic and optical products, 41.5% of companies reported bottlenecks in October, up from 37.8% in September. "The supply of materials is becoming a problem in parts of the electronics industry," says Klaus ... Show Full Article MUNICH, Germany, Nov. 13 [Category: ThinkTank] -- ifo Institute posted the following news release: * * * Material Shortages in the German Electronics Industry Worsen * * Material Shortages in the German Electronics Industry Worsen The German electronics industry is finding it increasingly difficult to stock up on intermediate products. Among manufacturers of data processing equipment and electronic and optical products, 41.5% of companies reported bottlenecks in October, up from 37.8% in September. "The supply of materials is becoming a problem in parts of the electronics industry," says KlausWohlrabe, Head of Surveys at ifo. "A lack of intermediate products can slow down production particularly in an industry with strong demand."
One possible reason for the material bottlenecks is the high global demand for electronic components triggered by the expansion of AI infrastructure. According to industry reports, companies reported increasing supply problems, particularly with printed circuit boards. By contrast, the share of affected companies among manufacturers of electrical equipment fell from 27.4 to 25.3% but also remained at a high level. "The global AI boom could make it increasingly difficult to procure electronic components," says Wohlrabe. "When it comes to key components, companies are competing with major technology companies for limited production capacities."
In German industry as a whole, materials were once again in short supply in October. 15.6% of companies reported a lack of intermediate products, up from 14.6% in September. The situation worsened particularly in the automotive industry, where 24.1% of companies recently reported material bottlenecks, up from the previous 8.9%. In mechanical engineering, the figure rose to 19.6%, up from 16.3%. The situation eased in the chemical industry, where the share fell from 18.0 to 12.3%.
***
Original text here: https://www.ifo.de/en/press-release/2026-11-13/material-shortages-german-electronics-industry-worsen
The Buckeye Institute Calls on Lawmakers to Override HB96 Vetoes, Rein in Ohio's Shadow Government
COLUMBUS, Ohio, Nov. 12 [Category: Think Tank] -- The Buckeye Institute, an independent research and educational institution that says its mission is to advance free-market public policy, posted the following news release:
* * *
The Buckeye Institute Calls on Lawmakers to Override HB96 Vetoes, Rein in Ohio's Shadow Government
*
Columbus, OH - In a new policy memo, Shine a Light on Ohio's Shadow Government (see full text below or download a PDF), The Buckeye Institute urges the General Assembly to override line-item vetoes of three Buckeye Institute-championed provisions that lawmakers passed ... Show Full Article COLUMBUS, Ohio, Nov. 12 [Category: Think Tank] -- The Buckeye Institute, an independent research and educational institution that says its mission is to advance free-market public policy, posted the following news release: * * * The Buckeye Institute Calls on Lawmakers to Override HB96 Vetoes, Rein in Ohio's Shadow Government * Columbus, OH - In a new policy memo, Shine a Light on Ohio's Shadow Government (see full text below or download a PDF), The Buckeye Institute urges the General Assembly to override line-item vetoes of three Buckeye Institute-championed provisions that lawmakers passedin Ohio House Bill 96 regarding legislative oversight of agency rulemaking, Controlling Board authority, and government spending.
"The legislature has the votes to override these vetoes and restore reasonable guardrails that The Buckeye Institute has advocated for years, regardless of which party holds the executive and legislative reins," said Greg R. Lawson, a senior research fellow at The Buckeye Institute and the author of the policy memo. "Overriding House Bill 96 line-item vetoes would help restore government accountability and public confidence, regardless of which political party is in charge."
In the memo, Lawson calls on lawmakers to:
* Adopt a robust Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act to improve legislative oversight of agency rulemaking or, if necessary, override the related line-item veto and restore legislative oversight of any agency rule that would raise agency expenditures by $100,000 or more in the biennium, cost a directly affected person $100,000 or more, or affect Ohio's economy by $1 million or more per year.
* Override the line-item veto of a provision that capped the amount of funding the Controlling Board may accept on a per-purpose, per-year basis at $100 million, which will ensure that the full General Assembly decides whether Ohio should sign up for new federal programs and all their regulatory strings and obligations. The Buckeye Institute has called for this since the Kasich administration.
* Override the line-item veto of a provision that would shine a light on the state's "shadow budget" and strengthen the statutory appropriation limitation formula, which helps keep runaway government spending in check.
Lawson continued, "As early as the Kasich administration, The Buckeye Institute has supported the General Assembly's attempts to rebalance power between the legislative and executive branches. By doing little more than they did when they originally passed these provisions, lawmakers can finish the work they started last year."
***
Original text here: https://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/research/detail/the-buckeye-institute-calls-on-lawmakers-to-override-hb96-vetoes-rein-in-ohios-shadow-government
* * *
The Buckeye Institute Calls on Lawmakers to Override HB96 Vetoes, Rein in Ohio's Shadow Government
*
Columbus, OH - In a new policy memo, Shine a Light on Ohio's Shadow Government (see full text below or download a PDF), The Buckeye Institute urges the General Assembly to override line-item vetoes of three Buckeye Institute-championed provisions that lawmakers passed ... Show Full Article COLUMBUS, Ohio, Nov. 12 [Category: Think Tank] -- The Buckeye Institute, an independent research and educational institution that says its mission is to advance free-market public policy, posted the following news release: * * * The Buckeye Institute Calls on Lawmakers to Override HB96 Vetoes, Rein in Ohio's Shadow Government * Columbus, OH - In a new policy memo, Shine a Light on Ohio's Shadow Government (see full text below or download a PDF), The Buckeye Institute urges the General Assembly to override line-item vetoes of three Buckeye Institute-championed provisions that lawmakers passedin Ohio House Bill 96 regarding legislative oversight of agency rulemaking, Controlling Board authority, and government spending.
"The legislature has the votes to override these vetoes and restore reasonable guardrails that The Buckeye Institute has advocated for years, regardless of which party holds the executive and legislative reins," said Greg R. Lawson, a senior research fellow at The Buckeye Institute and the author of the policy memo. "Overriding House Bill 96 line-item vetoes would help restore government accountability and public confidence, regardless of which political party is in charge."
In the memo, Lawson calls on lawmakers to:
* Adopt a robust Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act to improve legislative oversight of agency rulemaking or, if necessary, override the related line-item veto and restore legislative oversight of any agency rule that would raise agency expenditures by $100,000 or more in the biennium, cost a directly affected person $100,000 or more, or affect Ohio's economy by $1 million or more per year.
* Override the line-item veto of a provision that capped the amount of funding the Controlling Board may accept on a per-purpose, per-year basis at $100 million, which will ensure that the full General Assembly decides whether Ohio should sign up for new federal programs and all their regulatory strings and obligations. The Buckeye Institute has called for this since the Kasich administration.
* Override the line-item veto of a provision that would shine a light on the state's "shadow budget" and strengthen the statutory appropriation limitation formula, which helps keep runaway government spending in check.
Lawson continued, "As early as the Kasich administration, The Buckeye Institute has supported the General Assembly's attempts to rebalance power between the legislative and executive branches. By doing little more than they did when they originally passed these provisions, lawmakers can finish the work they started last year."
***
Original text here: https://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/research/detail/the-buckeye-institute-calls-on-lawmakers-to-override-hb96-vetoes-rein-in-ohios-shadow-government
Foreign Names Can Make It Harder When Looking for Child Care Spots in Germany
MUNICH, Germany, Nov. 12 [Category: ThinkTank] -- ifo Institute posted the following news release:
* * *
Foreign Names Can Make It Harder When Looking for Child Care Spots in Germany
*
* Foreign Names Can Make It Harder When Looking for Child Care Spots in Germany
Child care centers in Germany respond less frequently to parents with Turkish-sounding names than to those with German-sounding names. About 71 percent of child care centers responded to requests with German-sounding names, compared with only 66 percent for those with Turkish-sounding names. This is the key finding from a joint study ... Show Full Article MUNICH, Germany, Nov. 12 [Category: ThinkTank] -- ifo Institute posted the following news release: * * * Foreign Names Can Make It Harder When Looking for Child Care Spots in Germany * * Foreign Names Can Make It Harder When Looking for Child Care Spots in Germany Child care centers in Germany respond less frequently to parents with Turkish-sounding names than to those with German-sounding names. About 71 percent of child care centers responded to requests with German-sounding names, compared with only 66 percent for those with Turkish-sounding names. This is the key finding from a joint studyby the ifo Institute, the Technical University of Munich (TUM), the Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH), and the German Center for Higher Education and Science Studies (DZHW). For the study, the researchers sent identical emails to more than 18,000 child care centers. The only difference was the name of the parents. "Many child care center managers have to allocate a limited number of spots under significant pressure in terms of staff and time," says study author Henning Hermes from the ifo Institute. "Anyone who is short on time may first respond to families where they expect less effort."
The answers also differ in terms of their content. Parents with Turkish-sounding names were around 20 percent less likely to receive an actual offer for a spot. The responses they received were also shorter and less helpful. In districts that were more disadvantaged in the experiment, the share of children with a migration background among child care children is lower. According to the German Federal Statistical Office, only 22 percent of children under the age of three with a migration background attended child care in 2023, compared with 45 percent of children without a migration background. "The legal entitlement alone does not guarantee equal access to child care," says co-author Simon Wiederhold from the IWH. "More child care staff and centralized, transparent application processes would probably make access more equitable."
In an accompanying survey of more than 400 child care center managers, around 85 percent said they made the admission decisions themselves. It is rare to have fixed requirements set by the funding body or the municipality. Almost four out of five managers handle parent requests on their own. On average, they receive 14 such requests per week, in addition to their educational work. In addition, the researchers examined whether an indication of a university degree reduces discrimination. However, even when parents listed such a level of education in their e-mail signature, they were less likely to receive a reply if they had a Turkish-sounding name. "It is striking that this disadvantage persists even when parents report having a university degree. That counters the argument that the differences can be attributed solely to assumptions about the families' level of education," says co-author Philipp Lergetporer of TUM.
Children from disadvantaged families, in particular, benefit greatly from attending a child care center at an early age. If precisely these children have a harder time finding a spot, educational disparities may begin to grow even before they start school. "The child care center is the first building block in the educational journey. Unequal opportunities that begin as early as access to a child care center can have lasting impact all the way through to university," says co-author Frauke Peter of the German Center for Higher Education and Science Research (DZHW).
For the study, the researchers sent e-mails in March 2021 from fictitious parents to more than 22,000 child care centers with slots for children under three. Whether the sender of the e-mail had a German-sounding or Turkish-sounding name was random, which means that differences in the responses can be directly attributed to the name. Trained assistants evaluated the more than 12,000 responses without knowing the name of the parents.
***
Original text here: https://www.ifo.de/en/press-release/2026-11-12/foreign-names-can-make-it-harder-when-looking-child-care-spots-germany (TNSmrp)
* * *
Foreign Names Can Make It Harder When Looking for Child Care Spots in Germany
*
* Foreign Names Can Make It Harder When Looking for Child Care Spots in Germany
Child care centers in Germany respond less frequently to parents with Turkish-sounding names than to those with German-sounding names. About 71 percent of child care centers responded to requests with German-sounding names, compared with only 66 percent for those with Turkish-sounding names. This is the key finding from a joint study ... Show Full Article MUNICH, Germany, Nov. 12 [Category: ThinkTank] -- ifo Institute posted the following news release: * * * Foreign Names Can Make It Harder When Looking for Child Care Spots in Germany * * Foreign Names Can Make It Harder When Looking for Child Care Spots in Germany Child care centers in Germany respond less frequently to parents with Turkish-sounding names than to those with German-sounding names. About 71 percent of child care centers responded to requests with German-sounding names, compared with only 66 percent for those with Turkish-sounding names. This is the key finding from a joint studyby the ifo Institute, the Technical University of Munich (TUM), the Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH), and the German Center for Higher Education and Science Studies (DZHW). For the study, the researchers sent identical emails to more than 18,000 child care centers. The only difference was the name of the parents. "Many child care center managers have to allocate a limited number of spots under significant pressure in terms of staff and time," says study author Henning Hermes from the ifo Institute. "Anyone who is short on time may first respond to families where they expect less effort."
The answers also differ in terms of their content. Parents with Turkish-sounding names were around 20 percent less likely to receive an actual offer for a spot. The responses they received were also shorter and less helpful. In districts that were more disadvantaged in the experiment, the share of children with a migration background among child care children is lower. According to the German Federal Statistical Office, only 22 percent of children under the age of three with a migration background attended child care in 2023, compared with 45 percent of children without a migration background. "The legal entitlement alone does not guarantee equal access to child care," says co-author Simon Wiederhold from the IWH. "More child care staff and centralized, transparent application processes would probably make access more equitable."
In an accompanying survey of more than 400 child care center managers, around 85 percent said they made the admission decisions themselves. It is rare to have fixed requirements set by the funding body or the municipality. Almost four out of five managers handle parent requests on their own. On average, they receive 14 such requests per week, in addition to their educational work. In addition, the researchers examined whether an indication of a university degree reduces discrimination. However, even when parents listed such a level of education in their e-mail signature, they were less likely to receive a reply if they had a Turkish-sounding name. "It is striking that this disadvantage persists even when parents report having a university degree. That counters the argument that the differences can be attributed solely to assumptions about the families' level of education," says co-author Philipp Lergetporer of TUM.
Children from disadvantaged families, in particular, benefit greatly from attending a child care center at an early age. If precisely these children have a harder time finding a spot, educational disparities may begin to grow even before they start school. "The child care center is the first building block in the educational journey. Unequal opportunities that begin as early as access to a child care center can have lasting impact all the way through to university," says co-author Frauke Peter of the German Center for Higher Education and Science Research (DZHW).
For the study, the researchers sent e-mails in March 2021 from fictitious parents to more than 22,000 child care centers with slots for children under three. Whether the sender of the e-mail had a German-sounding or Turkish-sounding name was random, which means that differences in the responses can be directly attributed to the name. Trained assistants evaluated the more than 12,000 responses without knowing the name of the parents.
***
Original text here: https://www.ifo.de/en/press-release/2026-11-12/foreign-names-can-make-it-harder-when-looking-child-care-spots-germany (TNSmrp)
FCC E-Rate Proposal Adds Red Tape, Doesn't Address Program's Real Issues
WASHINGTON, Nov. 12 [Category: ThinkTank] -- TechFreedom, a technology policy think tank, posted the following news release:
* * *
FCC E-Rate Proposal Adds Red Tape, Doesn't Address Program's Real Issues
*
Today, TechFreedom filed comments with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to the Commission's request for input on how to better administer the schools and libraries (E-Rate) program. Our comments explain why more regulations will only heighten the need for--and influence of--consultants who will raise the rates they charge beneficiaries.
"The NPRM is correct to question ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 12 [Category: ThinkTank] -- TechFreedom, a technology policy think tank, posted the following news release: * * * FCC E-Rate Proposal Adds Red Tape, Doesn't Address Program's Real Issues * Today, TechFreedom filed comments with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to the Commission's request for input on how to better administer the schools and libraries (E-Rate) program. Our comments explain why more regulations will only heighten the need for--and influence of--consultants who will raise the rates they charge beneficiaries. "The NPRM is correct to questionthe role of consultants, but must also ask why they are necessary," said TechFreedom Senior Counsel Jim Dunstan. "The NPRM spends nearly 30 paragraphs proposing 20 new rules or sub-rules aimed at curbing waste, fraud, and abuse by consultants. Yet while acknowledging that consultants have a role in the E-Rate program, it never asks the more fundamental question: Why must so many schools and libraries hire consultants just to participate? The answer is E-Rate's complexity and endless potential liability for beneficiaries."
"The Commission should lift the eternal fog of audit uncertainty," Dunstan concluded. "As our 2022 study documented, USAC's decades-long audit clawback process undermines due process by forcing beneficiaries to defend decisions long after the relevant employees have departed and required records may no longer exist, often under threat of repaying funds they received and spent in good faith. If the Commission is serious about reducing beneficiaries' reliance on consultants, it should examine the consequences of abandoning timeliness requirements for USAC audits. By allowing USAC to demand repayment decades after funds were approved and spent, the Commission effectively forces beneficiaries to hire consultants to preserve decades of records and institutional knowledge against the threat of future audits. Consultants (and their costs) become baked into the system as insurance defense."
***
Original text here: https://techfreedom.org/fcc-e-rate-proposal-adds-red-tape-doesnt-address-programs-real-issues/
* * *
FCC E-Rate Proposal Adds Red Tape, Doesn't Address Program's Real Issues
*
Today, TechFreedom filed comments with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to the Commission's request for input on how to better administer the schools and libraries (E-Rate) program. Our comments explain why more regulations will only heighten the need for--and influence of--consultants who will raise the rates they charge beneficiaries.
"The NPRM is correct to question ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 12 [Category: ThinkTank] -- TechFreedom, a technology policy think tank, posted the following news release: * * * FCC E-Rate Proposal Adds Red Tape, Doesn't Address Program's Real Issues * Today, TechFreedom filed comments with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to the Commission's request for input on how to better administer the schools and libraries (E-Rate) program. Our comments explain why more regulations will only heighten the need for--and influence of--consultants who will raise the rates they charge beneficiaries. "The NPRM is correct to questionthe role of consultants, but must also ask why they are necessary," said TechFreedom Senior Counsel Jim Dunstan. "The NPRM spends nearly 30 paragraphs proposing 20 new rules or sub-rules aimed at curbing waste, fraud, and abuse by consultants. Yet while acknowledging that consultants have a role in the E-Rate program, it never asks the more fundamental question: Why must so many schools and libraries hire consultants just to participate? The answer is E-Rate's complexity and endless potential liability for beneficiaries."
"The Commission should lift the eternal fog of audit uncertainty," Dunstan concluded. "As our 2022 study documented, USAC's decades-long audit clawback process undermines due process by forcing beneficiaries to defend decisions long after the relevant employees have departed and required records may no longer exist, often under threat of repaying funds they received and spent in good faith. If the Commission is serious about reducing beneficiaries' reliance on consultants, it should examine the consequences of abandoning timeliness requirements for USAC audits. By allowing USAC to demand repayment decades after funds were approved and spent, the Commission effectively forces beneficiaries to hire consultants to preserve decades of records and institutional knowledge against the threat of future audits. Consultants (and their costs) become baked into the system as insurance defense."
***
Original text here: https://techfreedom.org/fcc-e-rate-proposal-adds-red-tape-doesnt-address-programs-real-issues/
Center on Budget & Policy Priorities: To Mitigate Unfolding Hunger Crisis, Congress Must Delay the SNAP Cost Shift Before the End of the Year
WASHINGTON, Nov. 12 -- The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities issued the following commentary on Nov. 11, 2026, by Katie Bergh, senior policy analyst at the Food Assistance Team:
* * *
To Mitigate Unfolding Hunger Crisis, Congress Must Delay the SNAP Cost Shift Before the End of the Year
Too many low-income families are going without the help they need to afford food since the harmful 2025 Republican reconciliation law made unprecedented cuts to SNAP. Already, 5.5 million people, including an estimated 2 million children, have lost SNAP benefits since the law was enacted. This unfolding ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 12 -- The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities issued the following commentary on Nov. 11, 2026, by Katie Bergh, senior policy analyst at the Food Assistance Team: * * * To Mitigate Unfolding Hunger Crisis, Congress Must Delay the SNAP Cost Shift Before the End of the Year Too many low-income families are going without the help they need to afford food since the harmful 2025 Republican reconciliation law made unprecedented cuts to SNAP. Already, 5.5 million people, including an estimated 2 million children, have lost SNAP benefits since the law was enacted. This unfoldinghunger crisis could get imminently worse if Congress does not act before the end of the year to delay the provision of the law that requires most states to begin paying a portion of SNAP benefits starting in October 2027.
Come January 2027, most state legislatures will begin to grapple with how -- or even whether -- to fund the massive costs they now face. States that cannot fully cover these costs by raising revenue or cutting elsewhere in their budgets will be forced to further restrict access to SNAP or potentially end the program altogether.
The reconciliation law slashes federal funding for SNAP benefits and imposes those costs on state budgets for the first time. The share of benefits each state will be required to pay depends on the state's SNAP payment error rate, a measure of over and underpayments to SNAP households that largely reflects unintentional administrative mistakes.
The magnitude of this cost shift and the immense pressure to reduce error rates as quickly as possible has incentivized states to take drastic measures to reduce errors and cut costs, even if that means delaying, denying, or terminating benefits for some eligible low-income families -- actions that do not count as "errors." Efforts to rapidly reduce error rates have likely contributed to deeper than expected declines in SNAP participation across the country, with many people losing food assistance even though they're still eligible for benefits.
In the long term, Congress must repeal this untenable cost shift entirely. For more than 50 years, SNAP has ensured that children, adults, and seniors in low-income households in every state receive a food benefit that allows them to afford an adequate diet. By creating the risk that some states may end the program, the cost shift abandons this decades-long nationwide commitment to addressing hunger.
At a minimum, states need more time to thoughtfully lower their error rates, reduce their cost-sharing requirements, and ensure eligible low-income families can still access the food assistance they need to afford groceries. It is imperative that Congress delays the SNAP cost shift for all states before the end of the year without making deeper cuts to SNAP. (The Senate Republicans' farm bill delays the cost shift for one year but makes additional SNAP cuts.)
The cost shift is causing eligible low-income families to lose SNAP. The rushed implementation timeline and immense financial pressure to reduce errors has resulted in some states making it much harder for eligible families to access SNAP and keep their benefits. For example, many states are requiring households to provide substantial additional documentation beyond what is required under federal rules. In some cases, this includes paperwork that is difficult or impractical to obtain, like documentation of panhandling income or a statement from a neighbor confirming who eats in their household.
Without adequate staff to process this additional paperwork, low-income families in some states are waiting in processing backlogs, going months without the benefits they need to afford groceries. Others have been denied SNAP for failing to complete a required interview despite numerous attempts to get through on overloaded phone lines that repeatedly drop their calls.
And these backlogs and barriers could soon worsen if states don't get more time before they must pay these massive new costs for SNAP benefits. The reconciliation law already cut federal funding for SNAP administrative costs by 50 percent, effective October 1, 2026. As the cost shift for SNAP benefits hits state budgets next year, limited state resources for program administration -- necessary to get benefits to eligible families on time and in the right amount -- will increasingly be in direct competition with the far larger amount needed for the benefits themselves.
States are already preparing budgets that could drive even deeper cuts -- or end SNAP altogether. States are already deep into planning the budgets that will need to cover the first year of this new cost-sharing requirement -- and for most states, these costs will be significant.
Based on fiscal year 2025 SNAP error rates, as many as 35 states and Guam will be required to start paying a share of SNAP benefit costs next year (see chart). We estimate that these costs add up to roughly $9 billion in the first year alone, with nearly half of states facing costs of $100 million or more.
2025 Error Rates Indicate Most States Will Face SNAP Cost Shift Next Year
Because states must balance their budgets, absorbing these massive costs will force difficult tradeoffs: raising revenue or cutting spending on other priorities like education, public safety, or housing.
But several states have already acknowledged that they may be unwilling or unable to fully cover these new costs, which would force those states to further restrict access to SNAP or potentially opt out of the program entirely. In a survey conducted by the American Public Human Services Association, 11 states identified narrowing SNAP eligibility policies as a potential impact of the cost shift, and four states indicated a risk that they will pause SNAP or withdraw from the program, which would terminate food assistance for everyone in the state.
Without prompt action from Congress, states may begin enacting these cuts very soon. Most state legislatures will reconvene in January and February, and some will adopt a budget only a few weeks later -- leaving federal lawmakers only a brief window to act before states could begin locking in harmful cuts to food assistance or other vital services that families and communities in the state rely on.
The Department of Agriculture (USDA) hasn't provided key details that states need to implement the cost shift. The SNAP cost shift is a major structural change to how food benefits are funded and issued, which may require states to undertake costly and time-intensive system changes or negotiate contract modifications with their EBT (electronic benefits transfer) processor. But USDA has not yet provided states with actionable information to implement these changes and does not anticipate publishing proposed regulations until December 2026 or later. Without these details, even states that are working in good faith to fully fund and implement the cost-sharing requirement may be unable to complete the required changes before the October 1, 2027, implementation date.
* * *
Katie Bergh is a Senior Policy Analyst on the Food Assistance team. Prior to joining the Center, she worked as a Senior Policy Advisor for Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-ME), where she managed her work as a member of the House Agriculture Committee and House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and related agencies.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.cbpp.org/blog/to-mitigate-unfolding-hunger-crisis-congress-must-delay-the-snap-cost-shift-before-the-end-of
[Category: ThinkTank]
* * *
To Mitigate Unfolding Hunger Crisis, Congress Must Delay the SNAP Cost Shift Before the End of the Year
Too many low-income families are going without the help they need to afford food since the harmful 2025 Republican reconciliation law made unprecedented cuts to SNAP. Already, 5.5 million people, including an estimated 2 million children, have lost SNAP benefits since the law was enacted. This unfolding ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 12 -- The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities issued the following commentary on Nov. 11, 2026, by Katie Bergh, senior policy analyst at the Food Assistance Team: * * * To Mitigate Unfolding Hunger Crisis, Congress Must Delay the SNAP Cost Shift Before the End of the Year Too many low-income families are going without the help they need to afford food since the harmful 2025 Republican reconciliation law made unprecedented cuts to SNAP. Already, 5.5 million people, including an estimated 2 million children, have lost SNAP benefits since the law was enacted. This unfoldinghunger crisis could get imminently worse if Congress does not act before the end of the year to delay the provision of the law that requires most states to begin paying a portion of SNAP benefits starting in October 2027.
Come January 2027, most state legislatures will begin to grapple with how -- or even whether -- to fund the massive costs they now face. States that cannot fully cover these costs by raising revenue or cutting elsewhere in their budgets will be forced to further restrict access to SNAP or potentially end the program altogether.
The reconciliation law slashes federal funding for SNAP benefits and imposes those costs on state budgets for the first time. The share of benefits each state will be required to pay depends on the state's SNAP payment error rate, a measure of over and underpayments to SNAP households that largely reflects unintentional administrative mistakes.
The magnitude of this cost shift and the immense pressure to reduce error rates as quickly as possible has incentivized states to take drastic measures to reduce errors and cut costs, even if that means delaying, denying, or terminating benefits for some eligible low-income families -- actions that do not count as "errors." Efforts to rapidly reduce error rates have likely contributed to deeper than expected declines in SNAP participation across the country, with many people losing food assistance even though they're still eligible for benefits.
In the long term, Congress must repeal this untenable cost shift entirely. For more than 50 years, SNAP has ensured that children, adults, and seniors in low-income households in every state receive a food benefit that allows them to afford an adequate diet. By creating the risk that some states may end the program, the cost shift abandons this decades-long nationwide commitment to addressing hunger.
At a minimum, states need more time to thoughtfully lower their error rates, reduce their cost-sharing requirements, and ensure eligible low-income families can still access the food assistance they need to afford groceries. It is imperative that Congress delays the SNAP cost shift for all states before the end of the year without making deeper cuts to SNAP. (The Senate Republicans' farm bill delays the cost shift for one year but makes additional SNAP cuts.)
The cost shift is causing eligible low-income families to lose SNAP. The rushed implementation timeline and immense financial pressure to reduce errors has resulted in some states making it much harder for eligible families to access SNAP and keep their benefits. For example, many states are requiring households to provide substantial additional documentation beyond what is required under federal rules. In some cases, this includes paperwork that is difficult or impractical to obtain, like documentation of panhandling income or a statement from a neighbor confirming who eats in their household.
Without adequate staff to process this additional paperwork, low-income families in some states are waiting in processing backlogs, going months without the benefits they need to afford groceries. Others have been denied SNAP for failing to complete a required interview despite numerous attempts to get through on overloaded phone lines that repeatedly drop their calls.
And these backlogs and barriers could soon worsen if states don't get more time before they must pay these massive new costs for SNAP benefits. The reconciliation law already cut federal funding for SNAP administrative costs by 50 percent, effective October 1, 2026. As the cost shift for SNAP benefits hits state budgets next year, limited state resources for program administration -- necessary to get benefits to eligible families on time and in the right amount -- will increasingly be in direct competition with the far larger amount needed for the benefits themselves.
States are already preparing budgets that could drive even deeper cuts -- or end SNAP altogether. States are already deep into planning the budgets that will need to cover the first year of this new cost-sharing requirement -- and for most states, these costs will be significant.
Based on fiscal year 2025 SNAP error rates, as many as 35 states and Guam will be required to start paying a share of SNAP benefit costs next year (see chart). We estimate that these costs add up to roughly $9 billion in the first year alone, with nearly half of states facing costs of $100 million or more.
2025 Error Rates Indicate Most States Will Face SNAP Cost Shift Next Year
Because states must balance their budgets, absorbing these massive costs will force difficult tradeoffs: raising revenue or cutting spending on other priorities like education, public safety, or housing.
But several states have already acknowledged that they may be unwilling or unable to fully cover these new costs, which would force those states to further restrict access to SNAP or potentially opt out of the program entirely. In a survey conducted by the American Public Human Services Association, 11 states identified narrowing SNAP eligibility policies as a potential impact of the cost shift, and four states indicated a risk that they will pause SNAP or withdraw from the program, which would terminate food assistance for everyone in the state.
Without prompt action from Congress, states may begin enacting these cuts very soon. Most state legislatures will reconvene in January and February, and some will adopt a budget only a few weeks later -- leaving federal lawmakers only a brief window to act before states could begin locking in harmful cuts to food assistance or other vital services that families and communities in the state rely on.
The Department of Agriculture (USDA) hasn't provided key details that states need to implement the cost shift. The SNAP cost shift is a major structural change to how food benefits are funded and issued, which may require states to undertake costly and time-intensive system changes or negotiate contract modifications with their EBT (electronic benefits transfer) processor. But USDA has not yet provided states with actionable information to implement these changes and does not anticipate publishing proposed regulations until December 2026 or later. Without these details, even states that are working in good faith to fully fund and implement the cost-sharing requirement may be unable to complete the required changes before the October 1, 2027, implementation date.
* * *
Katie Bergh is a Senior Policy Analyst on the Food Assistance team. Prior to joining the Center, she worked as a Senior Policy Advisor for Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-ME), where she managed her work as a member of the House Agriculture Committee and House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and related agencies.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.cbpp.org/blog/to-mitigate-unfolding-hunger-crisis-congress-must-delay-the-snap-cost-shift-before-the-end-of
[Category: ThinkTank]
Center on Budget & Policy Priorities: Medicaid Cuts Endanger Maternal and Child Health
WASHINGTON, Nov. 12 -- The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities issued the following report:
* * *
Medicaid Cuts Endanger Maternal and Child Health
November 11, 2026
Allie Gardner
Key Findings
The impact of Medicaid cuts won't be limited to the adults who were directly targeted by the 2025 reconciliation law.
Medicaid plays a vital role in supporting maternal and child health.
The deep, damaging cuts will impact children and the many people who get Medicaid coverage for pregnancy and postpartum care.
-
The cuts to Medicaid included in the 2025 Republican reconciliation law explicitly ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 12 -- The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities issued the following report: * * * Medicaid Cuts Endanger Maternal and Child Health November 11, 2026 Allie Gardner Key Findings The impact of Medicaid cuts won't be limited to the adults who were directly targeted by the 2025 reconciliation law. Medicaid plays a vital role in supporting maternal and child health. The deep, damaging cuts will impact children and the many people who get Medicaid coverage for pregnancy and postpartum care. - The cuts to Medicaid included in the 2025 Republican reconciliation law explicitlytarget the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion, but the law's harms will extend well beyond the adults in the expansion group who lose coverage. The deep, damaging cuts to federal Medicaid funding will affect all individuals with Medicaid coverage, including children and those who get Medicaid coverage for pregnancy and postpartum-related care. Given the well-documented long-term benefits of Medicaid coverage during childhood and pregnancy,[1] the consequences of the law could have long-term adverse effects on children's health, educational attainment, and financial outcomes later in life.
Medicaid Is Critical for Children and Mothers Across the Country
Medicaid plays a vital role in supporting maternal and child health, providing affordable coverage to millions of families with low incomes that ensures they have access to appropriate care. It covers nearly 28 million children[2] and provides the pediatric-specific Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic, and Treatment (EPSDT) benefit, which ensures that children under age 21 enrolled in Medicaid receive preventive care and all medically necessary services to treat, correct, or reduce any illnesses or conditions.[3] Taken together, Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) cover almost half of children across the country.[4]
Medicaid also pays for almost 40 percent of births[5] -- with an even greater share in rural areas (45 percent) -- and coverage of comprehensive and continuous postpartum care continues during the 12 months after delivery in almost every state.[6] And almost 1 in 5 women of reproductive age have health coverage through Medicaid, which provides access to important preventive and reproductive care services that have been shown to promote healthier pregnancies and improved birth outcomes for parents and babies.[7]
Medicaid Cuts Take Away Coverage, Directly and Indirectly
Some of the adverse impacts of the 2025 reconciliation law on infants, children, and individuals who are pregnant or postpartum are direct. For example, the law rolls back the three-month retroactive eligibility period that can protect families from unexpected medical expenses including costly bills from premature births.[8] The law also takes away Medicaid and CHIP coverage from people in most lawful immigration categories, limiting enrollment to a far narrower group.[9] Although it did not end the option that allows states to provide Medicaid and/or CHIP to lawfully residing children and pregnant individuals,[10] those living in states that have not adopted this option can now only access Medicaid or CHIP if they fall into the new narrower group created by the 2025 reconciliation law (and in some cases, they also go through a five-year waiting period).[11]
* * *
Figure 1: Medicaid Supports Maternal and Child Health-Medicaid covers:
* * *
Other policies in the 2025 reconciliation law are less direct but will nevertheless threaten coverage disruptions or losses for children and parents. The red tape barriers in the law -- namely the work requirement and more frequent redeterminations -- put children and pregnant and postpartum individuals at greater risk of losing Medicaid coverage despite remaining eligible and being largely excluded from its provisions. Children and pregnant people may face delays when enrolling in Medicaid or getting the assistance they need to get or maintain coverage, as state systems come under strain. As of June 2026, many states are already seeing significant warning signs of overloaded systems such as increases in call wait times and large application and renewal backlogs.[12] The strain on state systems is likely to get worse as the 2025 law's biggest Medicaid changes take effect.
While some parents are exempt from the 2025 reconciliation law's Medicaid work requirement that takes coverage away from millions of people, they are still expected to be among those losing coverage as they get caught in the law's additional red tape. Parental coverage loss is likely to affect their child's coverage as well; research has shown children are more likely to have health coverage when their parents are insured.[13] Therefore, similar to the unwinding of the continuous enrollment condition, coverage losses among parents raise the concern that more children will become uninsured despite remaining eligible.[14] While some states had implemented policies that could help prevent children from disruptions in coverage, the Administration has indicated it will no longer permit these policies moving forward.[15]
Pregnant people are similarly excluded from the law's work requirement and more frequent eligibility determinations, but they may still fall through the cracks. More than 100,000 pregnant and postpartum individuals are estimated to be enrolled in the Medicaid expansion eligibility group.[16] This could cause them to be disenrolled or experience temporary gaps in coverage that could prevent them from getting recommended prenatal and postpartum care.[17] Coverage loss also threatens women's ability to access important pre-pregnancy care that supports healthier pregnancies and better birth outcomes.[18]
Loss of Coverage and Providers Jeopardize Access to Care and Health Outcomes
Those who are able to avoid coverage disruptions are still at risk of experiencing diminished access to care. As hospitals, physicians, and other health care providers contend with cuts to provider reimbursement -- whether directly from the restrictions on state directed payments[19] and state actions reducing payment rates or indirectly through having fewer insured patients -- there are likely to be reductions or closures of important services like obstetric services or specialty pediatric care.[20] Threats to access will be especially high in rural areas, where providers are at greater risk of closure,[21] and for maternity care services, given that over a third of U.S. counties already lack appropriate providers or birthing facilities.[22] Reduced care availability will require families to travel long distances for services or delay necessary care, which could have significant consequences for children and pregnant individuals' health. While some states have proposed using a portion of their funding from the law's Rural Health Transformation Program to promote maternal and infant health, this funding is woefully inadequate compared to the over $900 billion in federal Medicaid cuts and given CMS's cap on RHTP funds going directly to providers.[23]
The gaps in coverage and decreases in access to timely, comprehensive preconception and maternity care resulting from the 2025 reconciliation law will increase the risk of adverse health outcomes for parents and babies.[24] People of color are likely to be disproportionately affected as maternal mortality is already significantly higher among Black mothers than white mothers, and people of color experience higher shares of negative maternal and infant outcomes, such as preterm and low-weight births, than white mothers.[25] While there have been concerted efforts in recent years to address high maternal mortality,[26] particularly among Black mothers, the large-scale cuts to Medicaid and worsening shortages of appropriate providers will undermine this progress.
Children who become uninsured or experience gaps in coverage may be delayed in getting recommended doctors' visits or have trouble accessing care. Research has found that children with a gap in coverage are more likely to lack a usual source of care and are less likely to see a physician throughout the year.[27] Regular doctors' visits are very important for children to support their growth and development, receive recommended immunizations, and detect and treat conditions early as they arise. These well-visits are most frequent and particularly important for infants and toddlers given the rapid growth and development that occurs during these ages; yet, the uninsured rate for children under 3 has been growing in recent years, a trend that is at risk of getting worse as the 2025 reconciliation law's health care cuts go into effect.[28] If families delay these recommended visits due to lack of insurance, children may be at greater risk of illness, higher health care costs, or complications due to delayed interventions. Loss of Medicaid coverage, even temporarily, could also harm a child's long-term health outcomes.[29]
Cuts Undermine Household Stability and Investments in Child and Maternal Health
Parents who lose coverage due to the 2025 reconciliation law's new paperwork requirements either have to spend more on health care -- leaving less money for food, rent, and other household necessities -- or they will delay needed care, which may make it harder for them to focus on supporting their children.[30] Families may also incur increased financial burdens from the rollbacks to the retroactive coverage period, which exposes households to medical debt from a sudden illness or medical event. Recent data shows that the majority of families with incomes below $40,000 a year (around 150 percent of the federal poverty line for a family of three) would not be able to pay for an unexpected $500 medical bill or would have to go into debt to pay the bill.[31]
These additional costs come as households are currently struggling to afford basic needs; for example, almost two-thirds (62 percent) of low-income families have reported experiencing diaper insecurity, while 21 percent of households facing diaper insecurity indicated someone in their household lost Medicaid coverage in the past year.[32] Many families are already contending with losing access to food assistance, including millions of children, jeopardizing their short- and-long-term health.[33]
As states face substantial budget pressures from the 2025 reconciliation law and other fiscal factors,[34] they may be forced to consider making cuts to optional benefits like home- and community-based services as some states have already done. This may make it harder for children or their family members with special health care needs to get needed care in their homes rather than institutional settings. States could also look to cut optional eligibility groups, which cover an estimated 1 in 5 children on the program.[35]
Even if states maintain current benefits and eligibility levels, future coverage expansions or adoption of additional optional policies will be much more difficult given the new constraints on funding.[36] For example, this could stall progress made to expand school-based Medicaid programs that support children getting the physical and mental health care they need.[37] States could be unable to continue providing state-funded coverage to all children regardless of immigration status,[38] coming as the 2025 reconciliation law's restrictions have left thousands of people with lawful immigration status without coverage. Budget pressures may also cause states to scale back or forgo programs or investments aimed at improving quality of care or addressing systemic issues, such as covering doula or midwifery services to combat the maternal mortality crisis.[39]
* * *
TABLE 1: Number and Share of Child Medicaid Enrollment by State
* * *
End Notes
[1] Edwin Park, Joan Alker, and Alexandra Corcoran, "Jeopardizing a Sound Investment: Why Short-Term Cuts to Medicaid Coverage During Pregnancy and Childhood Could Result in Long-Term Harm," The Commonwealth Fund, December 8, 2020, https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2020/dec/short-term-cuts-medicaid-long-term-harm.
[2] Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), "June 2026: Medicaid and CHIP Eligibility Operations and Enrollment Snapshot," September 25, 2026, https://www.medicaid.gov/resources-for-states/downloads/eligib-oper-and-enrol-snap-jun2026.pdf.
[3] CMS, "Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic, and Treatment," https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/benefits/early-and-periodic-screening-diagnostic-and-treatment.
[4] CMS, "Children's Health Insurance Program," https://www.medicaid.gov/chip; CBPP analysis of June 2026 Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Medicaid and CHIP enrollment data and US Census Bureau 2025 national population estimates.
[5] KFF, "Births Financed by Medicaid by Metropolitan Status," https://www.kff.org/medicaid/state-indicator/births-financed-by-medicaid/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D.
[6] KFF, "Medicaid Postpartum Coverage Extension Tracker," July 15, 2026, https://www.kff.org/medicaid/medicaid-postpartum-coverage-extension-tracker/.
[7] Elizabeth Zhang, "Medicaid Plays an Important Role in Providing Health Coverage to Key Populations," CBPP, February 25, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/medicaid-plays-an-important-role-in-providing-health-coverage-to-key-populations; Maggie Clark, Ema Bargeron, and Alexandra Corcoran, "Medicaid Expansion Narrows Maternal Health Coverage Gaps, But Racial Disparities Persist," Georgetown CCF, September 2021, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/maternal-health-and-medex-final.pdf.
[8] Mary-Beth Malcarney and Christine Nguygen, "New Restrictions Limiting Access to Medicaid Retroactive Coverage," Families USA, April 2026, https://familiesusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/HR-1-Retroactive-Coverage.pdf.
[9] Margot Dankner, "Last Year's Reconciliation Law Is Even More Extreme Than the 1996 Law That Took Away Benefits From People with Lawful Immigration Status," CBPP, September 10, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/last-years-reconciliation-law-is-even-more-extreme-than-the-1996-law-that-took-away-benefits.
[10] Kelly Whitener, "HR 1 Does Not Block States From Offering Medicaid and CHIP To Lawfully Residing Children and Pregnant Women," Health Affairs, July 20, 2026, https://www.healthaffairs.org/content/forefront/hr-1-does-not-block-states-offering-medicaid-and-chip-lawfully-residing-children-and.
[11] Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Tennessee do not provide coverage for lawfully residing children or pregnant immigrants of less than five years. Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Montana, Oregon, Texas, and Utah have adopted the option for children but not pregnant women while North Dakota and Wyoming have only adopted coverage for pregnant immigrants. Data available at, https://www.kff.org/medicaid/medicaid-and-chip-eligibility-enrollment-and-renewal-policies-as-states-prepare-for-major-medicaid-policy-changes/ - Table-3.
[12] Georgetown CCF, "Tracking State Readiness to Implement HR 1," August 28, 2025https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2025/08/28/tracking-state-readiness-to-implement-hr-1/.
[13] Julie L. Hudson and Asako S. Moriya, "Medicaid Expansion For Adults Had Measurable 'Welcome Mat' Effects on Their Children," Health Affairs, Vol. 36, No. 9, September 5, 2017, https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2017.0347.
[14] Allexa Gardner, "Preventing the 'Unwelcome Mat' Effect: Ensuring Eligible Kids Remained Covered," Georgetown CCF, May 31, 2023, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2023/05/31/preventing-the-unwelcome-mat-effect-ensuring-eligible-kids-remain-covered/.
[15] Centers for Medicaid & CHIP Services, "Section 1115 Demonstration Authority for Continuous Eligibility Initiatives," July 17, 2025, https://www.medicaid.gov/resources-for-states/downloads/contin-elig-ltr-to-states.pdf.
[16] Laura Barrie Smith, et. al., "Ensuring Continuous Coverage for Pregnant and Postpartum Medicaid Enrollees Under OBBBA," Urban Institute, March 31, 2026, https://www.urban.org/research/publication/ensuring-continuous-coverage-pregnant-and-postpartum-medicaid-enrollees-under.
[17] Georgetown CCF, "How Medicaid Supports Maternal and Infant Health," 2025, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2025/02/28/how-medicaid-supports-maternal-and-infant-health/; Aubrianna Osorio, "New Report Shows Coverage Gains for New Mothers - But Progress has Stalled with New Threats on the Horizon," Georgetown CCF, July 23, 2026, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2026/07/23/new-report-shows-coverage-gains-for-new-mothers-but-progress-has-stalled-with-new-threats-on-the-horizon/.
[18] Usha Ranji, et. al., "5 Key Facts About Medicaid and Pregnancy," KFF, May 29, 2025, https://www.kff.org/medicaid/5-key-facts-about-medicaid-and-pregnancy/.
[19] Allison Orris, "CMS Proposed Rule Goes Beyond H.R. 1 Requirements and Extends Payment Caps to Additional Services," CBPP, May 20, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/executive-action-watch?item=30628.
[20] Manatt Health, "No Place to Hide: Children Will Be Hurt By Medicaid Cuts," May 2025, https://assets-us-01.kc-usercontent.com/9fd8e81d-74db-00ef-d0b1-5d17c12fdda9/361453ca-53e0-4174-ba88-31cfd7c98295/No Place to Hide %E2%80%93 Children Will Be Hurt by Medicaid Cuts %E2%80%93 Executive Summary FINAL 05 06 2025.pdf.
[21] Heather Saunders, Alice Burns, and Zachary Levinson, "How Might Federal Medicaid Cuts in the Enacted Reconciliation Package Affect Rural Areas?" KFF, July 24, 2025, https://www.kff.org/medicaid/how-might-federal-medicaid-cuts-in-the-enacted-reconciliation-package-affect-rural-areas/.
[22] March of Dimes, "Nowhere to Go: Maternity Care Deserts Across the U.S.," 2026, https://www.marchofdimes.org/sites/default/files/2026-08/MCDR_2026_Report_English.pdf.
[23] Tanesha Mondestin and Nancy Kaneb, "Maternal and Infant Health in State Rural Health Transformation Proposals Set Promising Priorities in an Uncertain Landscape," Georgetown CCF, March 20, 2026, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2026/03/20/maternal-and-infant-health-in-state-rural-health-transformation-proposals-set-promising-priorities-in-an-uncertain-landscape/.
[24] Judith Solomon, "Closing the Coverage Gap Would Improve Black Maternal Health," CBPP, July 26, 2021, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/closing-the-coverage-gap-would-improve-black-maternal-health.
[25] Latoya Hill, et. al., "Racial Disparities in Maternal and Infant Health: Current Status and Key Issues," KFF, December 3, 2025, https://www.kff.org/racial-equity-and-health-policy/racial-disparities-in-maternal-and-infant-health-current-status-and-key-issues/.
[26] Tanesha Mondestin, Elisabeth Wright Burak, and Kay Johnson, "State Momentum for Maternal Health Legislation Continues: Congressional Cuts Would Turn Back the Clock," Georgetown CCF, May 22, 2025, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2025/05/22/state-momentum-for-maternal-health-legislation-continues-congressional-cuts-would-turn-back-the-clock/.
[27] Aubrianna Osorio and Joan Alker, "Gaps in Coverage: A Look at Child Health Insurance Trends," Georgetown CCF, November 21, 2021, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2021/11/22/gaps-in-coverage-a-look-at-child-health-insurance-trends/.
[28] Elisabeth Wright Burak, "Uninsured Infants and Toddlers Now Above 5% Nationally," Georgetown CCF, August 21, 2026, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2026/08/21/uninsured-infants-and-toddlers-now-above-5-nationally/.
[29] Park, et. al., op. cit.
[30] Georgetown CCF, "How Covering Adults Through Medicaid Expansion Helps Children," November 2024, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Medicaid-expansion-v2-2.pdf.
[31] KFF, "Americans' Challenges with Health Care Costs," October 23, 2026, https://www.kff.org/health-costs/americans-challenges-with-health-care-costs/.
[32] Kelly E. C. Massengale, "The NDBN Diaper Check 2026: Diaper Insecurity Among U.S. Children and Families," National Diaper Bank Network, April 15, 2026, https://nationaldiaperbanknetwork.org/the-ndbn-diaper-check-2026/.
[33] Dottie Rosenbaum, et. al., "SNAP Tracker: People Are Losing Food Assistance as the Harmful 2025 Republican Reconciliation Law Is Implemented," CBPP, October 23, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/snap-tracker-people-are-losing-food-assistance-as-the-harmful-2025; Joseph Llobrera, "Number of Children Receiving SNAP Continues to Drop Under Harmful 2025 Republican Reconciliation Law," CBPP, July 21, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/number-of-children-receiving-snap-continues-to-drop-under-harmful-2025-republican.
[34] Wesley Tharpe, "Roundup: State Budgets Increasingly Strained as House, Senate Republican Plans Would Impose Major Costs," CBPP, June 24, 2025, https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/roundup-state-budgets-increasingly-strained-as-house-senate.
[35] Sarah Rosenbaum, et. al., "Deep Medicaid Spending Cuts Put Health Care Coverage at Risk for One of Five Enrolled Children," The Commonwealth Fund, May 5, 2025, https://www.commonwealthfund.org/blog/2025/deep-medicaid-spending-cuts-put-health-care-coverage-risk-one-five-enrolled-children.
[36] Alice Burns, et. al., "5 Questions and Answers About Medicaid Provider Taxes," KFF, August 20, 2026, https://www.kff.org/medicaid/5-questions-and-answers-about-medicaid-and-provider-taxes/#35af31e1-c6d7-432f-a313-02091c9cc8e3--h-3-what-are-new-federal-rules-related-to-provider-taxes.
[37] Healthy Schools Campaign, "School Medicaid Expansion Map," https://healthystudentspromisingfutures.org/map-school-medicaid-programs/; Jessie Mandle, et. al., "How Medicaid Cuts Will Harm Students & Schools," Healthy Schools Campaign, March 2025, https://healthyschoolscampaign.org/dev/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/How-Medicaid-Cuts-Will-Harm-Students-Schools.pdf.
[38] Tanya Broder, "Medical Assistance Programs for Immigrants in Various States," National Immigration Law Center, August 24, 2026, https://www.nilc.org/resources/medical-assistance-various-states/.
[39] "Doula Medicaid Project: Current Efforts at Expanding Access to Doula Care," National Health Law Program, https://healthlaw.org/doulamedicaidproject/#current-efforts-at-expanding-access-to-doula-care; National Academy for State Health Policy, "Medicaid Financing of Midwifery Services - A 50-State Analysis," May 2023, https://eadn-wc03-8290287.nxedge.io/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/NASHP_Medicaid-Financing-of-Midwifery-Services_Brief_FINAL_updated-06.01.2023.pdf.
* * *
Allie Gardner
Allie is a Senior Policy Analyst on the Health Policy team. She is a health policy researcher who specializes in Medicaid and other public health insurance programs.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/medicaid-cuts-endanger-maternal-and-child-health
[Category: ThinkTank]
* * *
Medicaid Cuts Endanger Maternal and Child Health
November 11, 2026
Allie Gardner
Key Findings
The impact of Medicaid cuts won't be limited to the adults who were directly targeted by the 2025 reconciliation law.
Medicaid plays a vital role in supporting maternal and child health.
The deep, damaging cuts will impact children and the many people who get Medicaid coverage for pregnancy and postpartum care.
-
The cuts to Medicaid included in the 2025 Republican reconciliation law explicitly ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 12 -- The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities issued the following report: * * * Medicaid Cuts Endanger Maternal and Child Health November 11, 2026 Allie Gardner Key Findings The impact of Medicaid cuts won't be limited to the adults who were directly targeted by the 2025 reconciliation law. Medicaid plays a vital role in supporting maternal and child health. The deep, damaging cuts will impact children and the many people who get Medicaid coverage for pregnancy and postpartum care. - The cuts to Medicaid included in the 2025 Republican reconciliation law explicitlytarget the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion, but the law's harms will extend well beyond the adults in the expansion group who lose coverage. The deep, damaging cuts to federal Medicaid funding will affect all individuals with Medicaid coverage, including children and those who get Medicaid coverage for pregnancy and postpartum-related care. Given the well-documented long-term benefits of Medicaid coverage during childhood and pregnancy,[1] the consequences of the law could have long-term adverse effects on children's health, educational attainment, and financial outcomes later in life.
Medicaid Is Critical for Children and Mothers Across the Country
Medicaid plays a vital role in supporting maternal and child health, providing affordable coverage to millions of families with low incomes that ensures they have access to appropriate care. It covers nearly 28 million children[2] and provides the pediatric-specific Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic, and Treatment (EPSDT) benefit, which ensures that children under age 21 enrolled in Medicaid receive preventive care and all medically necessary services to treat, correct, or reduce any illnesses or conditions.[3] Taken together, Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) cover almost half of children across the country.[4]
Medicaid also pays for almost 40 percent of births[5] -- with an even greater share in rural areas (45 percent) -- and coverage of comprehensive and continuous postpartum care continues during the 12 months after delivery in almost every state.[6] And almost 1 in 5 women of reproductive age have health coverage through Medicaid, which provides access to important preventive and reproductive care services that have been shown to promote healthier pregnancies and improved birth outcomes for parents and babies.[7]
Medicaid Cuts Take Away Coverage, Directly and Indirectly
Some of the adverse impacts of the 2025 reconciliation law on infants, children, and individuals who are pregnant or postpartum are direct. For example, the law rolls back the three-month retroactive eligibility period that can protect families from unexpected medical expenses including costly bills from premature births.[8] The law also takes away Medicaid and CHIP coverage from people in most lawful immigration categories, limiting enrollment to a far narrower group.[9] Although it did not end the option that allows states to provide Medicaid and/or CHIP to lawfully residing children and pregnant individuals,[10] those living in states that have not adopted this option can now only access Medicaid or CHIP if they fall into the new narrower group created by the 2025 reconciliation law (and in some cases, they also go through a five-year waiting period).[11]
* * *
Figure 1: Medicaid Supports Maternal and Child Health-Medicaid covers:
* * *
Other policies in the 2025 reconciliation law are less direct but will nevertheless threaten coverage disruptions or losses for children and parents. The red tape barriers in the law -- namely the work requirement and more frequent redeterminations -- put children and pregnant and postpartum individuals at greater risk of losing Medicaid coverage despite remaining eligible and being largely excluded from its provisions. Children and pregnant people may face delays when enrolling in Medicaid or getting the assistance they need to get or maintain coverage, as state systems come under strain. As of June 2026, many states are already seeing significant warning signs of overloaded systems such as increases in call wait times and large application and renewal backlogs.[12] The strain on state systems is likely to get worse as the 2025 law's biggest Medicaid changes take effect.
While some parents are exempt from the 2025 reconciliation law's Medicaid work requirement that takes coverage away from millions of people, they are still expected to be among those losing coverage as they get caught in the law's additional red tape. Parental coverage loss is likely to affect their child's coverage as well; research has shown children are more likely to have health coverage when their parents are insured.[13] Therefore, similar to the unwinding of the continuous enrollment condition, coverage losses among parents raise the concern that more children will become uninsured despite remaining eligible.[14] While some states had implemented policies that could help prevent children from disruptions in coverage, the Administration has indicated it will no longer permit these policies moving forward.[15]
Pregnant people are similarly excluded from the law's work requirement and more frequent eligibility determinations, but they may still fall through the cracks. More than 100,000 pregnant and postpartum individuals are estimated to be enrolled in the Medicaid expansion eligibility group.[16] This could cause them to be disenrolled or experience temporary gaps in coverage that could prevent them from getting recommended prenatal and postpartum care.[17] Coverage loss also threatens women's ability to access important pre-pregnancy care that supports healthier pregnancies and better birth outcomes.[18]
Loss of Coverage and Providers Jeopardize Access to Care and Health Outcomes
Those who are able to avoid coverage disruptions are still at risk of experiencing diminished access to care. As hospitals, physicians, and other health care providers contend with cuts to provider reimbursement -- whether directly from the restrictions on state directed payments[19] and state actions reducing payment rates or indirectly through having fewer insured patients -- there are likely to be reductions or closures of important services like obstetric services or specialty pediatric care.[20] Threats to access will be especially high in rural areas, where providers are at greater risk of closure,[21] and for maternity care services, given that over a third of U.S. counties already lack appropriate providers or birthing facilities.[22] Reduced care availability will require families to travel long distances for services or delay necessary care, which could have significant consequences for children and pregnant individuals' health. While some states have proposed using a portion of their funding from the law's Rural Health Transformation Program to promote maternal and infant health, this funding is woefully inadequate compared to the over $900 billion in federal Medicaid cuts and given CMS's cap on RHTP funds going directly to providers.[23]
The gaps in coverage and decreases in access to timely, comprehensive preconception and maternity care resulting from the 2025 reconciliation law will increase the risk of adverse health outcomes for parents and babies.[24] People of color are likely to be disproportionately affected as maternal mortality is already significantly higher among Black mothers than white mothers, and people of color experience higher shares of negative maternal and infant outcomes, such as preterm and low-weight births, than white mothers.[25] While there have been concerted efforts in recent years to address high maternal mortality,[26] particularly among Black mothers, the large-scale cuts to Medicaid and worsening shortages of appropriate providers will undermine this progress.
Children who become uninsured or experience gaps in coverage may be delayed in getting recommended doctors' visits or have trouble accessing care. Research has found that children with a gap in coverage are more likely to lack a usual source of care and are less likely to see a physician throughout the year.[27] Regular doctors' visits are very important for children to support their growth and development, receive recommended immunizations, and detect and treat conditions early as they arise. These well-visits are most frequent and particularly important for infants and toddlers given the rapid growth and development that occurs during these ages; yet, the uninsured rate for children under 3 has been growing in recent years, a trend that is at risk of getting worse as the 2025 reconciliation law's health care cuts go into effect.[28] If families delay these recommended visits due to lack of insurance, children may be at greater risk of illness, higher health care costs, or complications due to delayed interventions. Loss of Medicaid coverage, even temporarily, could also harm a child's long-term health outcomes.[29]
Cuts Undermine Household Stability and Investments in Child and Maternal Health
Parents who lose coverage due to the 2025 reconciliation law's new paperwork requirements either have to spend more on health care -- leaving less money for food, rent, and other household necessities -- or they will delay needed care, which may make it harder for them to focus on supporting their children.[30] Families may also incur increased financial burdens from the rollbacks to the retroactive coverage period, which exposes households to medical debt from a sudden illness or medical event. Recent data shows that the majority of families with incomes below $40,000 a year (around 150 percent of the federal poverty line for a family of three) would not be able to pay for an unexpected $500 medical bill or would have to go into debt to pay the bill.[31]
These additional costs come as households are currently struggling to afford basic needs; for example, almost two-thirds (62 percent) of low-income families have reported experiencing diaper insecurity, while 21 percent of households facing diaper insecurity indicated someone in their household lost Medicaid coverage in the past year.[32] Many families are already contending with losing access to food assistance, including millions of children, jeopardizing their short- and-long-term health.[33]
As states face substantial budget pressures from the 2025 reconciliation law and other fiscal factors,[34] they may be forced to consider making cuts to optional benefits like home- and community-based services as some states have already done. This may make it harder for children or their family members with special health care needs to get needed care in their homes rather than institutional settings. States could also look to cut optional eligibility groups, which cover an estimated 1 in 5 children on the program.[35]
Even if states maintain current benefits and eligibility levels, future coverage expansions or adoption of additional optional policies will be much more difficult given the new constraints on funding.[36] For example, this could stall progress made to expand school-based Medicaid programs that support children getting the physical and mental health care they need.[37] States could be unable to continue providing state-funded coverage to all children regardless of immigration status,[38] coming as the 2025 reconciliation law's restrictions have left thousands of people with lawful immigration status without coverage. Budget pressures may also cause states to scale back or forgo programs or investments aimed at improving quality of care or addressing systemic issues, such as covering doula or midwifery services to combat the maternal mortality crisis.[39]
* * *
TABLE 1: Number and Share of Child Medicaid Enrollment by State
* * *
End Notes
[1] Edwin Park, Joan Alker, and Alexandra Corcoran, "Jeopardizing a Sound Investment: Why Short-Term Cuts to Medicaid Coverage During Pregnancy and Childhood Could Result in Long-Term Harm," The Commonwealth Fund, December 8, 2020, https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2020/dec/short-term-cuts-medicaid-long-term-harm.
[2] Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), "June 2026: Medicaid and CHIP Eligibility Operations and Enrollment Snapshot," September 25, 2026, https://www.medicaid.gov/resources-for-states/downloads/eligib-oper-and-enrol-snap-jun2026.pdf.
[3] CMS, "Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic, and Treatment," https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/benefits/early-and-periodic-screening-diagnostic-and-treatment.
[4] CMS, "Children's Health Insurance Program," https://www.medicaid.gov/chip; CBPP analysis of June 2026 Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Medicaid and CHIP enrollment data and US Census Bureau 2025 national population estimates.
[5] KFF, "Births Financed by Medicaid by Metropolitan Status," https://www.kff.org/medicaid/state-indicator/births-financed-by-medicaid/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D.
[6] KFF, "Medicaid Postpartum Coverage Extension Tracker," July 15, 2026, https://www.kff.org/medicaid/medicaid-postpartum-coverage-extension-tracker/.
[7] Elizabeth Zhang, "Medicaid Plays an Important Role in Providing Health Coverage to Key Populations," CBPP, February 25, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/medicaid-plays-an-important-role-in-providing-health-coverage-to-key-populations; Maggie Clark, Ema Bargeron, and Alexandra Corcoran, "Medicaid Expansion Narrows Maternal Health Coverage Gaps, But Racial Disparities Persist," Georgetown CCF, September 2021, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/maternal-health-and-medex-final.pdf.
[8] Mary-Beth Malcarney and Christine Nguygen, "New Restrictions Limiting Access to Medicaid Retroactive Coverage," Families USA, April 2026, https://familiesusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/HR-1-Retroactive-Coverage.pdf.
[9] Margot Dankner, "Last Year's Reconciliation Law Is Even More Extreme Than the 1996 Law That Took Away Benefits From People with Lawful Immigration Status," CBPP, September 10, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/last-years-reconciliation-law-is-even-more-extreme-than-the-1996-law-that-took-away-benefits.
[10] Kelly Whitener, "HR 1 Does Not Block States From Offering Medicaid and CHIP To Lawfully Residing Children and Pregnant Women," Health Affairs, July 20, 2026, https://www.healthaffairs.org/content/forefront/hr-1-does-not-block-states-offering-medicaid-and-chip-lawfully-residing-children-and.
[11] Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Tennessee do not provide coverage for lawfully residing children or pregnant immigrants of less than five years. Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Montana, Oregon, Texas, and Utah have adopted the option for children but not pregnant women while North Dakota and Wyoming have only adopted coverage for pregnant immigrants. Data available at, https://www.kff.org/medicaid/medicaid-and-chip-eligibility-enrollment-and-renewal-policies-as-states-prepare-for-major-medicaid-policy-changes/ - Table-3.
[12] Georgetown CCF, "Tracking State Readiness to Implement HR 1," August 28, 2025https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2025/08/28/tracking-state-readiness-to-implement-hr-1/.
[13] Julie L. Hudson and Asako S. Moriya, "Medicaid Expansion For Adults Had Measurable 'Welcome Mat' Effects on Their Children," Health Affairs, Vol. 36, No. 9, September 5, 2017, https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2017.0347.
[14] Allexa Gardner, "Preventing the 'Unwelcome Mat' Effect: Ensuring Eligible Kids Remained Covered," Georgetown CCF, May 31, 2023, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2023/05/31/preventing-the-unwelcome-mat-effect-ensuring-eligible-kids-remain-covered/.
[15] Centers for Medicaid & CHIP Services, "Section 1115 Demonstration Authority for Continuous Eligibility Initiatives," July 17, 2025, https://www.medicaid.gov/resources-for-states/downloads/contin-elig-ltr-to-states.pdf.
[16] Laura Barrie Smith, et. al., "Ensuring Continuous Coverage for Pregnant and Postpartum Medicaid Enrollees Under OBBBA," Urban Institute, March 31, 2026, https://www.urban.org/research/publication/ensuring-continuous-coverage-pregnant-and-postpartum-medicaid-enrollees-under.
[17] Georgetown CCF, "How Medicaid Supports Maternal and Infant Health," 2025, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2025/02/28/how-medicaid-supports-maternal-and-infant-health/; Aubrianna Osorio, "New Report Shows Coverage Gains for New Mothers - But Progress has Stalled with New Threats on the Horizon," Georgetown CCF, July 23, 2026, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2026/07/23/new-report-shows-coverage-gains-for-new-mothers-but-progress-has-stalled-with-new-threats-on-the-horizon/.
[18] Usha Ranji, et. al., "5 Key Facts About Medicaid and Pregnancy," KFF, May 29, 2025, https://www.kff.org/medicaid/5-key-facts-about-medicaid-and-pregnancy/.
[19] Allison Orris, "CMS Proposed Rule Goes Beyond H.R. 1 Requirements and Extends Payment Caps to Additional Services," CBPP, May 20, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/executive-action-watch?item=30628.
[20] Manatt Health, "No Place to Hide: Children Will Be Hurt By Medicaid Cuts," May 2025, https://assets-us-01.kc-usercontent.com/9fd8e81d-74db-00ef-d0b1-5d17c12fdda9/361453ca-53e0-4174-ba88-31cfd7c98295/No Place to Hide %E2%80%93 Children Will Be Hurt by Medicaid Cuts %E2%80%93 Executive Summary FINAL 05 06 2025.pdf.
[21] Heather Saunders, Alice Burns, and Zachary Levinson, "How Might Federal Medicaid Cuts in the Enacted Reconciliation Package Affect Rural Areas?" KFF, July 24, 2025, https://www.kff.org/medicaid/how-might-federal-medicaid-cuts-in-the-enacted-reconciliation-package-affect-rural-areas/.
[22] March of Dimes, "Nowhere to Go: Maternity Care Deserts Across the U.S.," 2026, https://www.marchofdimes.org/sites/default/files/2026-08/MCDR_2026_Report_English.pdf.
[23] Tanesha Mondestin and Nancy Kaneb, "Maternal and Infant Health in State Rural Health Transformation Proposals Set Promising Priorities in an Uncertain Landscape," Georgetown CCF, March 20, 2026, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2026/03/20/maternal-and-infant-health-in-state-rural-health-transformation-proposals-set-promising-priorities-in-an-uncertain-landscape/.
[24] Judith Solomon, "Closing the Coverage Gap Would Improve Black Maternal Health," CBPP, July 26, 2021, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/closing-the-coverage-gap-would-improve-black-maternal-health.
[25] Latoya Hill, et. al., "Racial Disparities in Maternal and Infant Health: Current Status and Key Issues," KFF, December 3, 2025, https://www.kff.org/racial-equity-and-health-policy/racial-disparities-in-maternal-and-infant-health-current-status-and-key-issues/.
[26] Tanesha Mondestin, Elisabeth Wright Burak, and Kay Johnson, "State Momentum for Maternal Health Legislation Continues: Congressional Cuts Would Turn Back the Clock," Georgetown CCF, May 22, 2025, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2025/05/22/state-momentum-for-maternal-health-legislation-continues-congressional-cuts-would-turn-back-the-clock/.
[27] Aubrianna Osorio and Joan Alker, "Gaps in Coverage: A Look at Child Health Insurance Trends," Georgetown CCF, November 21, 2021, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2021/11/22/gaps-in-coverage-a-look-at-child-health-insurance-trends/.
[28] Elisabeth Wright Burak, "Uninsured Infants and Toddlers Now Above 5% Nationally," Georgetown CCF, August 21, 2026, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2026/08/21/uninsured-infants-and-toddlers-now-above-5-nationally/.
[29] Park, et. al., op. cit.
[30] Georgetown CCF, "How Covering Adults Through Medicaid Expansion Helps Children," November 2024, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Medicaid-expansion-v2-2.pdf.
[31] KFF, "Americans' Challenges with Health Care Costs," October 23, 2026, https://www.kff.org/health-costs/americans-challenges-with-health-care-costs/.
[32] Kelly E. C. Massengale, "The NDBN Diaper Check 2026: Diaper Insecurity Among U.S. Children and Families," National Diaper Bank Network, April 15, 2026, https://nationaldiaperbanknetwork.org/the-ndbn-diaper-check-2026/.
[33] Dottie Rosenbaum, et. al., "SNAP Tracker: People Are Losing Food Assistance as the Harmful 2025 Republican Reconciliation Law Is Implemented," CBPP, October 23, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/snap-tracker-people-are-losing-food-assistance-as-the-harmful-2025; Joseph Llobrera, "Number of Children Receiving SNAP Continues to Drop Under Harmful 2025 Republican Reconciliation Law," CBPP, July 21, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/number-of-children-receiving-snap-continues-to-drop-under-harmful-2025-republican.
[34] Wesley Tharpe, "Roundup: State Budgets Increasingly Strained as House, Senate Republican Plans Would Impose Major Costs," CBPP, June 24, 2025, https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/roundup-state-budgets-increasingly-strained-as-house-senate.
[35] Sarah Rosenbaum, et. al., "Deep Medicaid Spending Cuts Put Health Care Coverage at Risk for One of Five Enrolled Children," The Commonwealth Fund, May 5, 2025, https://www.commonwealthfund.org/blog/2025/deep-medicaid-spending-cuts-put-health-care-coverage-risk-one-five-enrolled-children.
[36] Alice Burns, et. al., "5 Questions and Answers About Medicaid Provider Taxes," KFF, August 20, 2026, https://www.kff.org/medicaid/5-questions-and-answers-about-medicaid-and-provider-taxes/#35af31e1-c6d7-432f-a313-02091c9cc8e3--h-3-what-are-new-federal-rules-related-to-provider-taxes.
[37] Healthy Schools Campaign, "School Medicaid Expansion Map," https://healthystudentspromisingfutures.org/map-school-medicaid-programs/; Jessie Mandle, et. al., "How Medicaid Cuts Will Harm Students & Schools," Healthy Schools Campaign, March 2025, https://healthyschoolscampaign.org/dev/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/How-Medicaid-Cuts-Will-Harm-Students-Schools.pdf.
[38] Tanya Broder, "Medical Assistance Programs for Immigrants in Various States," National Immigration Law Center, August 24, 2026, https://www.nilc.org/resources/medical-assistance-various-states/.
[39] "Doula Medicaid Project: Current Efforts at Expanding Access to Doula Care," National Health Law Program, https://healthlaw.org/doulamedicaidproject/#current-efforts-at-expanding-access-to-doula-care; National Academy for State Health Policy, "Medicaid Financing of Midwifery Services - A 50-State Analysis," May 2023, https://eadn-wc03-8290287.nxedge.io/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/NASHP_Medicaid-Financing-of-Midwifery-Services_Brief_FINAL_updated-06.01.2023.pdf.
* * *
Allie Gardner
Allie is a Senior Policy Analyst on the Health Policy team. She is a health policy researcher who specializes in Medicaid and other public health insurance programs.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/medicaid-cuts-endanger-maternal-and-child-health
[Category: ThinkTank]
America First Policy Institute: America First Warfighters Honor Our Veterans
WASHINGTON, Nov. 12 -- The America First Policy Institute issued the following news release:
* * *
America First Warfighters Honor Our Veterans
November 11, 2026
WASHINGTON, D.C.--The America First Policy Institute (AFPI) and the America First Warfighters Coalition released the following statement honoring the bravery and sacrifice of America's veterans this Veterans Day:
"This year, America turned 250. Every one of those years was secured by someone who took an oath and kept it, from the first militiamen to the men and women serving at this hour.
"Patriots who put America first know where ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 12 -- The America First Policy Institute issued the following news release: * * * America First Warfighters Honor Our Veterans November 11, 2026 WASHINGTON, D.C.--The America First Policy Institute (AFPI) and the America First Warfighters Coalition released the following statement honoring the bravery and sacrifice of America's veterans this Veterans Day: "This year, America turned 250. Every one of those years was secured by someone who took an oath and kept it, from the first militiamen to the men and women serving at this hour. "Patriots who put America first know wherethis country's strength comes from. It does not come from comfort or convenience. It comes from the quiet resolve of people who left their families, their hometowns, and often their own safety behind so that the rest of us could live free. Their bravery is the reason this Nation is still sovereign, still secure, and still ours.
"Honoring that bravery means more than a day on the calendar. It means a country that welcomes its veterans home with real opportunity, health care that works, and a government that treats their service as a debt owed, not a favor granted.
"To every veteran: your service preserved the America we celebrate today, and it is the reason we can look ahead to the next 250 years. We are grateful, and we will not forget."
* * *
Original text here: https://americafirstpolicy.com/issues/america-first-warfighters-honor-our-veterans/
[Category: ThinkTank]
* * *
America First Warfighters Honor Our Veterans
November 11, 2026
WASHINGTON, D.C.--The America First Policy Institute (AFPI) and the America First Warfighters Coalition released the following statement honoring the bravery and sacrifice of America's veterans this Veterans Day:
"This year, America turned 250. Every one of those years was secured by someone who took an oath and kept it, from the first militiamen to the men and women serving at this hour.
"Patriots who put America first know where ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 12 -- The America First Policy Institute issued the following news release: * * * America First Warfighters Honor Our Veterans November 11, 2026 WASHINGTON, D.C.--The America First Policy Institute (AFPI) and the America First Warfighters Coalition released the following statement honoring the bravery and sacrifice of America's veterans this Veterans Day: "This year, America turned 250. Every one of those years was secured by someone who took an oath and kept it, from the first militiamen to the men and women serving at this hour. "Patriots who put America first know wherethis country's strength comes from. It does not come from comfort or convenience. It comes from the quiet resolve of people who left their families, their hometowns, and often their own safety behind so that the rest of us could live free. Their bravery is the reason this Nation is still sovereign, still secure, and still ours.
"Honoring that bravery means more than a day on the calendar. It means a country that welcomes its veterans home with real opportunity, health care that works, and a government that treats their service as a debt owed, not a favor granted.
"To every veteran: your service preserved the America we celebrate today, and it is the reason we can look ahead to the next 250 years. We are grateful, and we will not forget."
* * *
Original text here: https://americafirstpolicy.com/issues/america-first-warfighters-honor-our-veterans/
[Category: ThinkTank]