Podcasts about work requirements

We've been talking about RFK Jr for years, and even dedicated an entire chapter to him in our 2023 book—and we're going to keep covering him. Since his power and influence has only grown, and since he's now in charge of America's entire health apparatus, there's no way to avoid it. This week we catch up on the last few months of MAHA. Derek looks into why he believes Kennedy's apparatus, despite claims of being about health, is really a cover for Project 2025's deregulatory agenda. Julian discusses a recent paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine by Covid contrarians Marty Makary and Vinay Prasad, who now both work under Kennedy. Finally, Matthew will contemplate Kennedy's crude remarks on autism through the lens of disability politics. Show Notes What Has All This Restaurant Food Done to My Gut? Function Health is Another Theranosesque Scam MAHA's Goal Is Not Health: Robert Kennedy's movement promises more privatization RFK Jr. meets with health tech startups, most backed by Andreessen Horowitz COVID infection no longer gives lasting immunity Hybrid Immunity May Be the Key to Developing Better Vaccines Makary, Bhattacharya in New England Journal of Medicine Consequences of Work Requirements in Arkansas: Two-Year Impacts on Coverage, Employment, and Affordability of Care  Concerns About ABA-Based Intervention: An Evaluation and Recommendations - PMC  Adler-Bolton, Beatrice, and Artie Vierkant. 2022. Health Communism: A Surplus Manifesto. Verso Books. SURPLUS. Adler-Bolton, The New Inquiry. October 18, 2022.  Extractive Abandonment - Stimpunks Foundation  Social and medical models of disability and mental health: evolution and renewal - PMC Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week on CounterSpin: On a Sunday night, not when officials do things they're most proud of, House Republicans passed a plan to give more money to rich people by taking it from the non-rich. Call it what you will, that's what's ultimately happening with the plan to cut more than $700 billion from Medicaid in order to “offset,” as elite media have it, the expense of relieving millionaires from contributing to public coffers. Even the feint they're using — we're not cutting aid, just forcing recipients to work, like they should — is obvious, age-old and long-disproven, if evidence is what you care about. Thing is, of the millions of people at the sharp end of the plan, most are children, who have no voice corporate media feel obliged to listen to. We'll nevertheless talk about them with independent journalist Bryce Covert. You may have seen an editorial in the Washington Post indicating that, despite what you have heard for years, from trans people and from doctors and medical associations that work with trans people, maybe it's okay for you to still entertain the notion that it's not science but talk show hosts who have it right, and trans kids are just actually mentally ill. We'll talk about that with journalist and trans rights activist Erin Reed, of Erin in the Morning.   The post Bryce Covert on Work Requirements / Erin Reed on Trans Care “Questions” appeared first on KPFA.

The feint Congress is using to cut Medicare—we're just forcing recipients to work, like they should—is obvious, age-old and long-disproven.

In this episode of the Happy Hour, Michael sits down with Congresswoman Maxine Dexter, a Democrat from Oregon, who comes armed with facts and a can of Deschutes IPA from her home district to discuss her journey from doctor to a member of Congress. And who better qualified to discuss the proposed cuts to Medicaid, the challenges faced by rural healthcare, and the implications of work requirements for Medicaid eligibility. Dexter emphasizes the importance ofbipartisanship, listening to constituents, and the current concerns surrounding democracy. The conversation highlights the interconnectedness of healthcare, economic stability, and the need for public engagement in political processes. [00:00] Introduction to Political Playlist and CongresswomanDexter[02:46] Congresswoman Dexter's Journey from Medicine toPolitics[06:04] The Impact of Proposed Medicaid Cuts[08:52] Challenges Faced by Rural Healthcare[12:13] Work Requirements and Their Implications[15:06] Bipartisanship and the Role of Public Opinion[18:05] Listening to Constituents and Addressing TheirConcerns[20:53] The Importance of Democracy and Future Outlook[23:57] Closing Thoughts and Future

In this episode of Good Morning Liberty, Nate and Charles dive deep into the controversial 'One Big Beautiful Bill.' They critique the bill's components, including the potential effects of making the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act permanent, Medicaid cuts, and increased spending on Border Patrol and Defense. They also address Moody's downgrade of the US credit rating and discuss the long-term impact of the bill relative to current and future government spending and taxation. Beyond these specifics, the hosts emphasize the need for fiscal responsibility and the challenges politicians face in implementing spending cuts. (00:00) Introduction (01:50) Discussion on the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' (02:43) Moody's Credit Rating Downgrade (04:35) Tax Cuts and Jobs Act Debate (07:03) Projections and Realities of the Bill (18:37) Work Requirements and Social Programs (20:04) Immigration and Border Security Funding (21:24) Defense Spending and Military Quality of Life (22:12) Student Loans and University Endowments (24:18) Fiscal Responsibility and Tax Cuts (25:21) The True Cost of Government Spending (26:08) Interest on Debt and Deficit Projections (29:29) Historical Spending and Taxation Trends (33:13) Political Promises and Fiscal Reality (34:13) Debunking Misconceptions About Tax Increases (35:08) The Need for Spending Cuts and Fiscal Reform (44:12) Proposals for Limiting Government Spending (46:43) The Role of Public Awareness and Action (48:41) Conclusion and Call to Action   Links:   https://gml.bio.link/   YOUTUBE:   https://bit.ly/3UwsRiv   RUMBLE:   https://rumble.com/c/GML   Check out Martens Minute!   https://martensminute.podbean.com/   Follow Josh Martens on X:   https://twitter.com/joshmartens13   Join the private discord & chat during the show!   joingml.com   Bank on Yourself bankonyourself.com/gml   Get FACTOR Today! FACTORMEALS.com/factorpodcast     Good Morning Liberty is sponsored by BetterHelp! Rediscover your curiosity today by visiting Betterhelp.com/GML (Get 10% off your first month)     Protect your privacy and unlock the full potential of your streaming services with ExpressVPN. Get 3 more months absolutely FREE by using our link EXPRESSVPN.com/GML  

In this fiery commentary, critics take aim at Democratic claims that Republican-led Medicaid cuts are cruel, exposing what they describe as misleading narratives and lack of detail. The discussion highlights alleged Medicaid abuse by illegal immigrants and fraudsters, argues for work requirements for able-bodied recipients, and warns of the economic dangers of unchecked federal spending. Featuring RFK Jr.'s testimony and Rep. Ralph Norman's insights, the segment underscores the tension between fiscal responsibility and political posturing in Washington.

Starting Monday, New Yorkers receiving cash assistance must once again meet work requirements or risk losing benefits. Meanwhile, Senator Cory Booker and Representative Hakeem Jeffries held an hours-long sit-in on the Capitol steps to protest looming cuts to social services. Plus, NYPD data show thousands of homeless encampment sweeps last year, but only about a hundred people wound up in shelter. WNYC's Karen Yi has more.

Scared? Got Questions about the continued assault on your reproductive rights? THE FBK LINES ARE OPEN! Just call or text (201) 574-7402, leave your questions or concerns, and Lizz and Moji will pick a few to address on the pod! Your fav Buzzkills are talking about the trend of reclassifying things like abortion meds and birth control, and then outlawing them in the process! You know, the ol' “make them sound terrible then use it to strip away your rights” trick. We've also got lots to say about the Catholic Papi's passing and what he DIDN'T do for abortion, shenanigans that are popping up out of Louisiana and which other states are hopping on the bandwagon, PLUS all of the other abobo-related news your earholes need to hear this week.  WHO ARE OUR GUESTS THIS WEEK? WE'RE STACKED.We're yapping with Medicaid and repro care expert, Dr. Cat Duffy of the National Health Law Program (NHeLP), about the harsh realities of what the proposed trash Medicaid cuts could mean for reproductive rights, how YOU can fight back, and how not allowing abortion in the Medicaid system is racist as hell.  PLUS, musician and comedian Shonali joins the pod to remind us that reproductive rights and abortion are PUNK AS FUCK, and gabs with us on art and disco as revolution, the power in being yourself, how she's channeling her rage, on being detained at the border, and her incredible new album, One Machine at a Time.  Times are heavy, but knowledge is power, y'all. We gotchu.  OPERATION SAVE ABORTION: You can still join the 10,000+ womb warriors fighting the patriarchy by listening to our OpSave pod series and Mifepristone Panel by clicking HERE for episodes, your toolkit, marching orders, and more. HOSTS:Lizz Winstead IG: @LizzWinstead Bluesky: @LizzWinstead.bsky.socialMoji Alawode-El IG: @Mojilocks Bluesky: @Mojilocks.bsky.social SPECIAL GUESTS:Dr. Cat Duffy Bluesky: @nhelp.bsky.social Shonali IG/TikTok: @shonaliofficial GUEST LINKS:National Health Law Program (NHeLP)DONATE: National Health Law ProgramMedicaid Defense – Resources and AnalysisShonali WebsiteBUY: Shonali's Album on Vinyl + CDShonali Tour Dates NEWS DUMP:Indiana's Consent Requirement Stripped From Sex Ed BillMontana: ‘Personhood' for Embryos Fails, Other Abortion Bills Head to Governor's DeskA Trump Baby Boom? A Baby Bust Is More Likely.Proposed Louisiana Law Would Expand Definition of ‘Coerced Abortion'Louisiana's New House BillTrump's Budget: Gutting Medicaid to Pass Tax Cuts? EPISODE LINKS:Here's What the Late Pope Francis Said About LGBTQ+ People, Abortion and Other Key IssuesADOPT-A-CLINIC: Midwest Reproductive Health 6 DEGREES: Sources Describe How Homeland Secretary Kristi Noem's Gucci Bag Was Stolen From Under Her Chair Winnie Harlow in Gucci's Uterus DressBUY AAF MERCH!Operation Save AbortionSIGN: Repeal the Comstock ActEMAIL your abobo questions to The Feminist BuzzkillsAAF's Abortion-Themed Rage Playlist SHOULD I BE SCARED?Text or call us with the abortion news that is scaring you: (201) 574-7402 FOLLOW US:Listen to us ~ FBK Podcast Instagram ~ @AbortionFrontBluesky ~ @AbortionFrontTikTok ~ @AbortionFrontFacebook ~ @AbortionFrontYouTube ~ @AbortionAccessFrontTALK TO THE CHARLEY BOT FOR ABOBO OPTIONS & RESOURCES HERE!PATREON HERE! Support our work, get exclusive merch and more! DONATE TO AAF HERE!ACTIVIST CALENDAR HERE!VOLUNTEER WITH US HERE!ADOPT-A-CLINIC HERE!EXPOSE FAKE CLINICS HERE!GET ABOBO PILLS FROM PLAN C PILLS HERE!When BS is poppin', we pop off!

00000196-3ed7-deb9-a1d7-3fdf896a0000https://www.wvik.org/podcast/good-morning-from-wvik-news/2025-04-16/iowa-governor-requests-imposing-work-requirements-for-medicaid-recipientsIowa's governor requests imposing work requirements for Medicaid recipient

With Montana's Medicaid expansion program renewed, the conversation in the Legislature has shifted to work requirements. A bill would expand the number of people subject to those rules.

On this West Virginia Morning, the possible impacts of a proposed bill that would expand work requirements for SNAP food benefits, and our Song of the Week from The Headhunters. The post Proposed SNAP Work Requirements And Our Song Of The Week, This West Virginia Morning appeared first on West Virginia Public Broadcasting.

Thousands of able-bodied Iowans could be required to report work hours to maintain their Medicaid eligibility under bills advancing in the Iowa legislature.

AP Washington correspondent Sagar Meghani reports the GOP-led Congress is looking at big cuts to Medicaid.

In the second hour of "Connections with Evan Dawson" on Jan. 27, 2025, community advocates discuss programs designed to aid childhood poverty and food insecurity.

On this week's Tipping Point conversation Paul and Wally discuss President-elect Trump's cabinet choices and their special importance to New Mexico. Interior, Energy, HHS, and "border czar" are among the most impactful. How will they impact our State?  Speaking of RFK, Paul's tweet about RFK taking MLG's "dream job" recently went viral. Paul was in Lake Tahoe last week with Grover Norquist and members of the center-right coalition. What was he there for and what did he learn? Newly imposed food stamp work requirements took effect in a few counties around New Mexico recently. Some liberals are freaking out.  New Mexico House Speaker Javier Martinez says NM is "Trump Proof." Paul and Wally believe differently.  California recently enhanced its "clean fuel standard" like the one New Mexico has in place. It will cost California motorists 67 cents/gallon as a starting point.  It will be a challenging legislative session for freedom lovers in New Mexico in 2025, but RGF has outlined its goals for 2025. 12 women volleyball players in the Mountain West are suing the conference on First Amendment grounds over the transgender player for San Jose State University.  A former Democrat State Senator recently took Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller to task over crime. 

We take a deep dive into why Medicaid enrollment is lower than expected and the impacts of a possible work requirement amendment. Plus, we journey into travel writing.

On this episode:  Many public assistance programs in the United States have long required some form of work requirement in order to access benefits – and legislators across the country are pursuing new strategies and policies for both loosening and tightening restrictions.  More on Medicaid: https://ballotpedia.org/Georgia_sues_the_Biden_administration_over_rejection_of_Medicaid_work_requirements_program_extension_(2024)  Arguments for and against work requirements: https://ballotpedia.org/Areas_of_inquiry_and_disagreement_related_to_work_requirements_for_public_assistance_programs  Donate to BP: donate.ballotpedia.org/ontheballot2024 Sign up for our Newsletters: https://ballotpedia.org/Ballotpedia_Email_Updates  Stream "On the Ballot" on Spotify or wherever you listen to podcasts. If you have questions, comments, or love for BP, feel free to reach out at ontheballot@ballotpedia.org or on X (formerly Twitter) @Ballotpedia. *On The Ballot is a conversational podcast featuring interviews with guests across the political spectrum. The views and opinions expressed by them are solely their own and are not representative of the views of the host or Ballotpedia as a whole.

"In the Moment Statehouse" brings you a full episode with the latest news from Pierre. We talk with journalists, lawmakers and political analysts.

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program is one of the largest poverty alleviation programs in the United States and provides help to around 14% of the US population. Since 1996, the program has required able-bodied adults without dependents to work in order to receive food assistance. Proponents of work requirements say it prevents government dependency. Critics, however, argue work requirements push out the people who need food assistance the most. Today we'll talk with two economists about the impact of SNAP work requirements: University of Rochester's Elena Prager. and Adam Leive at the University of California, Berkeley. Interview Summary   You two were part of a research team that also included economists from MIT, Harvard, and the University of Maryland and recently published an analysis of the effects of SNAP work requirements in the American Economic Journal: Economic Policy. Adam, before we jump into the study, would you tell our listeners what SNAP work requirements are and how proponents and critics see them?   Adam -  Sure. So, SNAP's work requirements dictate that some recipients must be working, training, or volunteering to receive benefits for more than a few months. So the policy is historically applied to childless adults who are younger than 50 and don't have a disability, and as you mentioned, this group is often referred to as able-bodied adults without dependents and called by their acronym ABAWDs.   So, the work requirement stipulates that ABAWDs must be working 80 hours per month, participating in a qualifying training program or volunteering. If they don't satisfy that requirement, then they're only entitled to three months of SNAP benefits within a three-year period. Counties with high rates of unemployment may temporarily be granted exemptions from the policy by USDA's Food and Nutrition Services as well. So in terms of kind of the proponents and opponents of the policy, those in favor of work requirements are concerned that providing government benefits discourages work. These people generally believe that those recipients of government assistance should work as a condition for that help. Their argument for the policy is that by incentivizing work, people will develop a stronger attachment to the labor market. Eventually they become self-sufficient, and they can earn enough to get by without the government assistance.   By contrast, the critics see work requirements as a policy that prevents people who are economically vulnerable from receiving food assistance, and it prevents them from accessing assistance in times when they need it the most. So, the opponents argue that if the reason people are not working is something other than the economic incentives of the policy, then the work requirements are really just going to cut people's benefits without getting more people to work. It's worth noting that work requirements have long been contentious and most recently were the main issue in the debt ceiling debate. So as part of that compromise, the SNAP work requirements will gradually be applied to ABAWDs up to age 55, but additional groups will now be exempt from the requirement, including veterans, the homeless, and those who are 18 to 24 who were previously in foster care.   I really appreciate how you've brought in the changes to the rules around work requirements under the Inflation Reduction Act. This is going to be an important policy discussion as we move forward. It's interesting, particularly the exemption for individuals who are unhoused because of the work that shows up in the paper that you all have. So Elena, let's now turn to you. How did you study the effect of work requirements in this paper?   Elena - As you might imagine, studying the effect of work requirements on SNAP recipients and potential recipients is actually a little bit tricky. You have to be able to find comparable groups of people, some of whom face work requirements in SNAP and some of whom don't, but are otherwise similar enough to one another that it would make sense to compare their employment trajectories and their use of SNAP. Generally speaking, you don't just directly want to make that comparison across people to whom work requirements apply versus people to whom work requirements don't apply in SNAP because they're pretty different groups. The ones who face work requirements tend to be younger, tend to not have disabilities, and tend to not have dependents like children, especially, in the household. As you can imagine, if you look at the folks who are exempted from work requirements under typical SNAP rules, there are lots of reasons why they may be less likely to hold a job than the ones who do face work requirements. They may be older, or they may be disabled. So, you can't just attribute that difference to the work requirements themselves, which means in order to study the effect of the work requirements, you have to go looking for a context where the people who face them and don't face them are much more similar to one another than that.   What we ended up doing is looking at essentially the same set of people as work requirements policies changed over time. In fact, what you end up doing is comparing the same person before work requirements exist to the same person after work requirements exist. Now, you might say, "Okay, but work requirements have been part of SNAP for decades. Where did you find a time when they didn't exist?" The answer is that temporarily, many states suspended work requirements for a few years starting in the Great Recession when the job market was very weak and it was just considered too hard for people to find jobs even if they were trying. States were attempting not to be punitive during a very difficult job market. One of those states was Virginia, and so we got very detailed data on both SNAP use and employment and earnings from employment from the State of Virginia. Then we were able to trace what happened to SNAP recipients when that work requirements suspension expired in the fall of 2013. Virginia then put work requirements back into SNAP, which meant suddenly the same people who could use SNAP without work requirements just a month before were facing work requirements newly. We could compare how their employment responses changed to the changes of the employment responses of other groups who continued to be exempt from work requirements, for example, because they were just a little bit older than 50 when work requirements came back. We followed both of those age groups, comparing whether they were working and whether they were getting SNAP for several months and years after work requirements were reintroduced by the State of Virginia. That allowed us to both solve this problem that it's generally very hard to make comparisons across groups. In this way we were comparing sort of across groups but also within the same person.   In addition, the nice thing about designing the study this way is that we got to study not just those people who got on SNAP knowing that they would face work requirements and so thinking it was worth all the administrative hassle to get on SNAP in the first place because they expected to be able to meet the work requirements and continue to receive SNAP. But we were also able to study those people who knew at the time that they got on SNAP that they probably wouldn't be able to meet work requirements if those work requirements existed. But because work requirements were suspended at the time, that actually didn't discourage them from signing up in the first place because they knew that they were going to be able to stay on SNAP for a longer time while work requirements continued to be suspended.   Great, thank you. I realize this is a critical part of your study to be able to find the exact cohort and the fact that you were able to follow those individuals over a period of time compared to what some other studies have done, where they look at the sort of a sample of people that changes on an annual basis or that's more cross-sectional. I really appreciate the great care that you all put in to discerning who that sample should be, and that offers up really clean ways of understanding the effect of a ABAWD work requirements, so thank you for that. Adam, what did your research show about who's right about the effect of work requirements? Can you help us understand that debate a little bit more carefully given the findings of your results.   Adam - Let me begin by kind of summarizing our main results. So, we found no evidence that work requirements led more people to work. The same number of SNAP recipients worked whether work requirements were in effect or whether they were not, and the large size of the administrative data that we had access to allowed us to be very confident from a statistical perspective that any effect on employment that's positive is likely to be extremely small.   We also didn't find that earnings increased on average either. However, what we did see was a substantial drop in the number of ABAWDs enrolled in SNAP. We found that work requirements cut enrollment by more than half among ABAWDs, and this is a dramatic reduction in food assistance. This drop in SNAP enrollment was largely driven by people who were already on the program when the work requirements turned back on in 2013, as Elena was just describing, but we also found that many people who were newly enrolled exited the program sooner, and then some potential SNAP recipients did not enroll at all compared to what we would've expected in a world without work requirements. So, putting all of that evidence together, overall we found no evidence in support of the arguments that are made by those who favor work requirements.   Great, thank you. Elena, do work requirements have any other effects on potential SNAP recipients?   Elena - Well, Adam already covered the two primary study outcomes that we looked at and that policymakers usually refer to, which is are people staying on SNAP and continuing to receive benefits and are people working? But in principle separate from just getting a larger number or a larger fraction of people working, economic theory might predict that work requirements could increase income, either through the amount of work or the hourly wages among the SNAP recipients who were going to be working anyway, right? We find no effect on who's working, in other words, how many people are working. But in principle you might say, "Okay, maybe those who were going to be working anyway are now more attached to the labor force. They're working more hours or more weeks out of the year than they would've been absent the work requirements." As Adam said, we actually on average did not find evidence that work requirements increased incomes, and so we can't really say that work requirements improved labor force attachment on this dimension. We ran this analysis lots of different ways, and in the vast majority of our analysis versions, we found just no change in income. But if you were very motivated to cherry pick a couple of analyses in support of work requirements and ignore the totality of the evidence in the paper, then you can find a couple of versions where there's sort of suggestive evidence that a small fraction of potential SNAP recipients, maybe something like 10 to 15%, might have had some income increases that could be attributable to work requirements.   Now, I say that you would have to ignore the totality of evidence in the rest of the paper if you wanted to run with those results because it really only was a couple out of very many analyses, and the results even there were quite weak, especially compared to the very stark findings of no effect on whether people are working and very large negative effects on people's continued SNAP receipt.   Elena, thank you for that. Do you see any differences by subgroups? I realize that's not maybe a part of the paper as it's written, but knowing that different subgroups have greater unemployment, do you see any differences, say among racial or ethnic lines or along gender lines?   Elena - Well, we essentially couldn't find effects on whether people were working as a result of work requirements for any subgroup. We are somewhat limited in our ability to do subgroup analyses because of issues like sample size and statistical power, but to the extent that we were able to cut the data, we didn't see impacts on whether people were working for any of these subgroups, which is actually very different from what we see with people losing access to SNAP. So, we saw quite a large disproportionate impact on use of SNAP, meaning people's ability to stay on the program and continue to receive food assistance for individuals with a history of homelessness. Further, here was some suggestive evidence of disparate impacts along racial lines, but that wasn't statistically strong enough for me to feel comfortable claiming anything about it.   Adam, why do you think work requirements do not have much of an impact on work?   Adam - Our results suggest that the SNAP recipients that we studied likely face other barriers that are more important for employment than the work requirements policy itself. As Elena just mentioned, we found this disproportionate effect in terms of people who lack stable housing, and that can make it really difficult to hold down a job, and to be able to apply for jobs. People may also not have reliable or affordable transportation. So, without those things, you can see how it'd be very difficult for people to maintain gainful employment. Another possibility is that people's hours may fluctuate in ways that make them ineligible in terms of meeting the requirements of 80 hours a month, and so several of those explanations come from other studies of enrollees in different safety net programs in various states. One great thing about the data we had is that we could track people's earnings and participation in SNAP over a long period of time, but we don't see information on how many hours they worked, for example, or what their transportation options were. Those are issues, though, that many others have noted as being important in different contexts, both using quantitative studies as well as more qualitative studies. We think this is something that future research should really focus much more on - how to quantify the importance of those different barriers that ABAWDs likely face, and then trying to figure out how to best design solutions that address them.   This does make me think about another potential issue, and that's the benefits cliff. So, if someone is working and there is an increase in their wages, there actually could be a drop in their benefits that they receive from SNAP, and that could make this story a lot more complicated. Elena, I do have this question for you. How did you handle individuals who dropped out of having the ABAWD status, say if they had children or if a disability came up? Was this an important factor in evaluating that subpopulation?   Elena - For the validity of the study results, it was very important for us to keep a consistent sample throughout the time period that we were evaluating these outcomes over. This meant that if people were eligible for our sample definition at the beginning, then we kept them in the sample for the rest of the time period. That means that there were some people who dropped out of ABAWD status for various reasons, and actually, if I recall correctly, and Adam can jump in if this is not right, the most common way that people in the sample dropped out of ABAWD status is by having a newly documented disability. Our understanding is that what's happening with those folks is that many of them might have been eligible for a disability documentation that would've made them exempt from work requirements even during the time that Virginia had suspended work requirements. But there was essentially no point in their going through the hassle and their caseworkers going through the hassle of getting that documentation because the work requirements didn't apply to them anyway. So, when the work requirements came back, some at least of those folks got their disabilities officially documented so that they were, again, exempted from work requirements. This illustrates why it's important for us to keep a consistent sample before and after the work requirements come back, because we want to make sure that we're not sort of changing who's in the comparison group, right? You don't want apples to suddenly turn into oranges halfway through your study period.   Adam - Elena's description was exactly right, and in terms of the magnitudes of that response - in terms of people who were exempt for a reason other than their age - it basically doubled the proportion of people who dropped out of ABAWD status. On average, about 10% of people had some exemption besides age from ABAWD status, and then we saw that the policy increased that by 5.6 percentage points, so a pretty large relative change.   Bios   Elena Prager is an assistant professor at the University of Rochester's Simon Business School. She is an empirical economist whose research is in the industrial organization of health care markets and labor markets. Prior to joining the Simon School, Prager was at Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management. She earned a Ph.D. in managerial sciences and applied economics from the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School, and an international Bachelor of Business Administration-Economics from the Schulich School of Business at York University.   Adam Leive is an assistant professor health economist at the University of California-Berkeley who uses large administrative datasets to study policy-relevant questions about health insurance and safety net programs. His research seeks to understand consumer behavior in complicated life-cycle decisions that impact economic security, such as health insurance and retirement saving. He has also recently studied the effects of employment incentives in safety net programs on labor market outcomes and program participation. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School and his B.A. from Princeton University's School of Public and International Affairs. Prior to his doctoral studies, Leive worked at the World Bank and the IMF. 

The recent influx of migrants into New York City has highlighted the barriers that these new arrivals face, including the limitations on their ability to work. In a new episode of Policy Outsider, Rockefeller Institute Nathan Fellow Sarah Rogerson, an expert in immigration law and director of the Immigration Law Clinic and Edward P. Swire Justice Center at Albany Law School, discusses the legal and logistical hurdles migrants face as they seek to enter the workforce, including federal restrictions that prohibit migrants from working for at least six months, the time, money, and effort work authorization applications require, and the systemic constraints that can delay work authorization and legal residency status. Guest: Sarah Rogerson, Nathan fellow, Rockefeller Institute & director of the Immigration Law Clinic and Edward P. Swire Justice Center

Chip and Dr. Lynn Blewett put a spotlight on Medicaid, which is now the largest government-funded health program in the nation – covering more people than even Medicare. Crucial topics they discuss include: The current state of the Medicaid program and where it is headed in the future. Medicaid redetermination has led to more than a million people being disenrolled from the program. What is the redetermination process and why has it risen to such importance this year? Significance of health plans' role in Medicaid redetermination and the effects it will have on hospitals, as well as patients' access to care. Implications of work requirements for Medicaid coverage and discussion of results from states where it has been used.  Importance of Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital Payments (DSH Payments) for patients and providers. Guest:Dr. Lynn Blewett, founding Director of State Health Access Data Assistance Center (SHADAC), Professor at the University of Minnesota, School of Public HealthMore:In this episode, we will look at the Medicaid program, which now covers over 86 million of the most vulnerable Americans - ranging from young mothers and babies to seniors in nursing home care.Currently the largest government-funded health program in the nation, Medicaid has been in the headlines consistently this year as policy makers on state and federal levels debate ways to manage enrollment and bring spending under control.

In the first hour of "Connections with Evan Dawson" on Friday, June 9, 2023, our guests debate whether there should be work requirements for people receiving cash welfare or SNAP benefits.

Last week, Congress finally passed a debt ceiling deal. Part of that deal included expanding the work requirements for government assistance programs like SNAP, specifically for people ages 50 to 54.   Where did the idea of work requirements come from? And do work requirements actually help keep people in the workforce?  Guest: Pamela Herd, professor of public policy at Georgetown University and co-author of Administrative Burden: Policymaking by Other Means. If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get benefits like zero ads on any Slate podcast, bonus episodes of shows like Slow Burn and Dear Prudence—and you'll be supporting the work we do here on What Next. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to help support our work. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Last week, Congress finally passed a debt ceiling deal. Part of that deal included expanding the work requirements for government assistance programs like SNAP, specifically for people ages 50 to 54.   Where did the idea of work requirements come from? And do work requirements actually help keep people in the workforce?  Guest: Pamela Herd, professor of public policy at Georgetown University and co-author of Administrative Burden: Policymaking by Other Means. If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get benefits like zero ads on any Slate podcast, bonus episodes of shows like Slow Burn and Dear Prudence—and you'll be supporting the work we do here on What Next. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to help support our work. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Last week, Congress finally passed a debt ceiling deal. Part of that deal included expanding the work requirements for government assistance programs like SNAP, specifically for people ages 50 to 54.   Where did the idea of work requirements come from? And do work requirements actually help keep people in the workforce?  Guest: Pamela Herd, professor of public policy at Georgetown University and co-author of Administrative Burden: Policymaking by Other Means. If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get benefits like zero ads on any Slate podcast, bonus episodes of shows like Slow Burn and Dear Prudence—and you'll be supporting the work we do here on What Next. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to help support our work. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week your hosts Chip Flory and Jim Wiesemeyer discuss how the outlook for the nutrition title in the 2023 farm bill remains “complicated.” Jim also has a list of what he hopes the National Pork Producers Council has to say about Prop 12 at this week's World Pork Expo.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this week's episode, the team is tackling the debt ceiling deal, the issues with "work requirements" for welfare, the migrant crisis in Chicago and more.This show is part of the Spreaker Prime Network, if you are interested in advertising on this podcast, contact us at https://www.spreaker.com/show/1570677/advertisement

As part of the debt ceiling deal, Republicans managed to get something they really wanted: stronger work requirements for people receiving federal aid. For years, the two sides have disagreed about work requirements. NTD Good Morning takes a closer look. The head of U.S. Border Patrol, Raul Ortiz, is retiring. Find out when he plans to depart after over three decades of service. Russia says Ukraine intentionally hit a residential area of Moscow in a drone strike. Officials are now responding to the alleged attack. ⭕️ Watch in-depth videos based on Truth & Tradition at Epoch TV

The Origins of Memorial Day, African Unity In the Age of Multipolarity, Nonprofit Helpline Replaces Workers With AI.

Many in Congress aren't happy with the expansion of work requirements in the debt ceiling deal.  For a while, this issue was a red line for the White House in negotiations. But for decades, President Biden was actually a supporter of work requirements. Angela Rachidi from the American Enterprise Institute says this an opportunity for the President to lead when it comes to welfare reform and upward mobility and breaks down what's actually in the bill.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

NTD Good Morning—5/31/20231. Debt Deal Moves Forward2. GOP Wins on Work Requirements for Welfare3. Gov. DeSantis Kicks Off Campaign in Iowa4. Trump Vows End to Birthright Citizenship5. US Border Patrol Chief Retiring6. Russia: Ukraine Targeted Civilians in Drone Strike7. Chinese Jet Flies 'Aggressively' Near US Plane8. North Korean Satellite Launch Fails9. Musk's Second Day in China10. PWC Australia's Tax Lead Scandal11. A Change of Heart, and a Saved Life12. New York City is Sinking, Research Says13. NTD's First Global Chinese Beauty Pageant

David explains why work requirements for Food Stamps and Medicaid DON'T WORK, it's just cruelty that satisfies the GOP base who are lying sadistic butchers. Guest: Antony Loewenstein author of "The Palestine Laboratory: How Israel Exports the Technology of Occupation Around the World" published by Verso Books.  Purchase "The Palestine Laboratory" here: Chapters: 00:00 David does The News 04:00 Why Democrats want the GOP to put work requirements on the table 06:24 Antony Loewenstein author of "The Palestine Laboratory: How Israel Exports the Technology of Occupation Around the World" published by Verso Books.   

If the US government defaults, the world's financial system would be affected, but some experts say that would actually increase demand for US government debt. An obstacle in the debt ceiling negotiations is tougher work requirements for social safety-net programs. New data shows the US is doing well in preventing new HIV infections, but the gains are happening unevenly across racial and ethnic groups.

AP correspondent Shelley Adler reports on the debt limit

Guests: Dr. Philip Herschenfeld, Freudian psychoanalyst and Comic Ethan Herschenfeld author of "Today Is Now" Ron DeSantis kicked his presidential campaign off on Twitter and straight into the dustheap of history.  Chapters: 00:00 Introduction 00:12 Ron DeSantis has NOT dropped out yet 00:38 Remember Jeb Bush? 02:06 Speaker Kevin McCarthy is lying about the debt ceiling 02:50 Why the Limit Save Grow Act is a phony bill 03:20 Work Requirements for Food Stamps and Medicaid doesn't lower the debt, it's just cruel 03:36 Republicans want to defund the IRS 04:08 No talk of reversing Trump Tax Cuts 06:50 Republicans pass bills that will never become law in order to satisfy their base 07:22 Republicans are not serious about tackling debt 07:36 Congresswoman Ilhan Omar shreds Limit Save Grow Act 10:14 The working poor are already working for Food Stamps and Medicaid  13:29 Do Republicans want the government to default? 15:43 Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib calls out GOP hypocrisy on student loan forgiveness 22:30 Congresswoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove on PPP loans 24:31 Republicans vote to block Biden's student loan forgiveness 25:32 Marjorie Taylor Greene laughed at in the house 28:05 The woman who celebrates January 6th calls for decorum in the house 30:00 Once again Democrat Jared Goldin betrays his party 31:01 Ron DeSantis' Twitter bomb 32:29 DeSantis and Musk do NOT support free speech 34:56 Florida bans Amanda Gorman's poetry 35:48 "The Hill We Climb" now banned in Florida! 37:58 Target caves into pressure from hateful bigots 39:26 DeSantis is a Fascist 40:24 DeSantis is a failure 44:42 The Herschenfelds

The clock is ticking on the nation's ability to pay its debts, as U.S. House Republicans refuse to raise the debt ceiling unless Democrats and the White House agree to steep budget cuts. While much of the attention has been on the economic crisis that could follow a default by the U.S. on its debt obligations, that's not the only risk facing the nation and our state.In this special episode of Policy for the People, we examine what's at stake for Oregonians in the debt ceiling negotiations.OCPP executive director Alejandro Queral spoke with Whitney Tucker, Director of State Fiscal Policy Research at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, about the economic hardship that would fall on Oregonians from the budget cuts sought by House Republicans.

Joe Biden couldn't have made his stance on work requirements for welfare recipients more clear.

Alec Baldwin scolded a report at a gala, and thinks she and probably most of use are peasants. Then Democrats are fighting work requirements tooth and nail.

The scramble to raise the nation’s debt ceiling has featured prominent calls by Republicans to impose stricter work requirements for recipients of welfare. But today’s debate on Capitol Hill stems from a much older fight over how the poor qualify for benefits. We spoke with Krissy Clark, host of Marketplace’s investigative podcast The Uncertain Hour, about how racial bias played into the formation and early implementation of the rules we know today. And, this summer travel season may be record-setting, according to experts, as the pandemic emergency officially comes to an end worldwide.

The scramble to raise the nation’s debt ceiling has featured prominent calls by Republicans to impose stricter work requirements for recipients of welfare. But today’s debate on Capitol Hill stems from a much older fight over how the poor qualify for benefits. We spoke with Krissy Clark, host of Marketplace’s investigative podcast The Uncertain Hour, about how racial bias played into the formation and early implementation of the rules we know today. And, this summer travel season may be record-setting, according to experts, as the pandemic emergency officially comes to an end worldwide.

Debt Optimism. Work Requirements on the Table. GOP 2024 Gets Crowded. Abortion: GOP Poison. MTG in Charge? With Shirish Date, Senior White House Correspondent HuffPost, Maya King, Politics reporter for The New York Times covering the South and David Jackson, National Political Correspondent for USA TODAY.Today's Bill Press Pod is supported by The International Association of Fire Fighters, More information at IAFF.org.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Ed Markey did not let the Right Wing narrative prevail. He made it clear that Biden must use the 14th Amendment to eliminate the debt ceiling farce. It should be easy for constitutionalists to understand. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/politicsdoneright/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/politicsdoneright/support

Latest from President Biden and Speaker McCarthy on debt ceiling talks, interview with The Hill's Zach Schonfeld on federal appeals court hearing abortion pill access case (30), House votes on resolution related to expelling Rep. Santos. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today on Facepalm News: Egg Prices, Free Tax Filing, Work Requirements For BankersThis show is part of the Spreaker Prime Network, if you are interested in advertising on this podcast, contact us at https://www.spreaker.com/show/5189985/advertisement

Hugh covers the news of the morning with news clips and talks with Salena Zito, Jake Sherman, Josh Kraushaar, and Robert C. O'Brien.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

20230504 - Leslie Ford On Why Work Requirements Are Less About Welfare Than About Human Well - Being by Kevin McCullough Radio

Do work requirements actually work? The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, will soon require some benefit recipients to work in order to receive government aid. New economic research looks at whether that approach is effective in getting participants into the workforce and earning more.For sponsor-free episodes of The Indicator from Planet Money, subscribe to Planet Money+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution released polling numbers this week around popularity of politicians and issues of interest to Georgians. Our politics team of Rahul Bali, Sam Gringlas and Susanna Capelouto talk about the results. They are also joined by WABE health reporter Jess Mador who takes a look at Governor Kemp's Pathway program, which would extend Medicaid to the poor if they work or volunteer 80 hours a week. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.