

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"The Constitution clearly gives Congress the power to spend taxpayer funds, and no law allows the president to halt if he feels some US states aren’t being 'good stewards' of the money," said one critic.
US Vice President JD Vance said Wednesday that the Trump administration will pause some Medicaid funding for Minnesota over fraud concerns—without offering any guarantees that the suspension will not adversely impact the more than 1 million Minnesotans who depend upon the key healthcare program.
"We're announcing today that we have decided to temporarily halt certain amounts of Medicaid funding that is going to the state of Minnesota in order to ensure that the state of Minnesota takes its obligations seriously to be good stewards of the American people's tax money," Vance said at a White House press conference with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Mehmet Oz.
"Now what is this gonna mean?" Vance continued. "What this means is that, first of all, the providers on the ground in Minnesota have actually already been paid... What we're doing is we are stopping the federal payments that will go to the state government until the state government takes it obligations seriously to stop the fraud that's being perpetrated."
They already targeted SNAP in Minnesota. They’ve killed two Minnesotans and injured or kidnapped hundreds more. Now they’re stealing their Medicaid. They’re going to deny people healthcare because of a YouTube video about a Somali daycare scam that wasn’t even true.
[image or embed]
— Kelly (@broadwaybabyto.bsky.social) February 25, 2026 at 3:05 PM
Oz demanded that Democratic Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz determine "who these providers are; make sure they're not already in trouble for doing bad stuff, and then reevaluate all the current providers to make sure they're supposed to be able to provide these services."
Responding to Oz's remarks, Gaia Leadership Project founder Elizabeth Cronise McLaughlin said on Bluesky, "So Minnesota is supposed to review every appointment by a Medicaid recipient with every doctor to get funds already lawfully allocated to the state?"
Asked by a reporter how he intends to ensure that the funding pause "doesn't impact the people who are enrolled in Medicaid," Vance said he is "worried about the justice of it all."
"I think it's offensive that American taxpayers pay into these programs and they're defrauded... and it's really sad that American children who need these services are unable to get them, because they're going to fraudsters," Vance replied.
"Look, we're certainly gonna make sure that our anti-fraud efforts go after the fraudsters and not after anybody who actually benefits from these services," he continued. "But I actually think the question is a little off, in a way, because the problem is not going after the fraud, the problem is that these programs are being defrauded to begin with."
"Our social safety net will disappear unless we take fraud more seriously," added the vice president, whose boss, President Donald Trump, last year signed into law the biggest cuts to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, in the nation's history as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
Medicaid is the primary healthcare safety net for lower-income Americans, with nearly 70 million people enrolled nationwide at the end of last year.
While federal prosecutors are investigating Minnesota’s Medicaid system—specifically, 14 high-risk service programs such as housing support and personal-care services—on suspicion of billions of dollars in fraudulent billings since 2018, and dozens of people have been convicted of stealing public money through the state’s social services system, critics noted that Congress, not the president, has the power of the purse.
Some observers noted that Trump has already targeted Minnesota—which voted against him all three times he ran for president—with his deadly crackdown on undocumented immigrants and their defenders and racist attacks on Somali immigrants, including Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.).
The Medicaid freeze follows the Trump administration's $10 billion cut in federal childcare funding to five Democrat-led states, including Minnesota, last month—a move that opponents argue punishes working families who committed no fraud.
University of Illinois professor Nicholas Grossman called the Medicaid pause "taxation without representation."
"The Constitution clearly gives Congress the power to spend taxpayer funds, and no law allows the president to halt if he feels some US states aren’t being 'good stewards' of the money," he said on Bluesky. "In case there’s any confusion on this, the Impoundment Control Act forbids it."
"The people of Minnesota vote for representatives to Congress," Grossman added. "Minnesota representatives and senators were in DC, representing their constituents, when Congress passed laws using proper procedure that allocated Medicaid funding. The president breaking those laws violates the fundamental compact of the republic."
Oz on Wednesday also announced "a six-month national moratorium blocking all new enrollments for durable medical equipment—prosthesis, orthotics—supplies across the board" in the name of fighting fraud. The move targets suppliers, not individual Medicaid beneficiaries.
This from Oz, a promoter of privatized Medicare Advantage programs, which are notorious for overcharging taxpayers and denying patients necessary care. The CMS under Oz increased federal funding for Medicare Advantage plans by more than $25 billion for 2026.
As Common Dreams recently reported, United Health Group (UHG), one of the country's largest for-profit health insurance companies, has been the leading beneficiary of a long-running Medicare Advantage fraud scheme that the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission—an independent, nonpartisan legislative branch agency—warned could cost US taxpayers $1.2 trillion over the next decade.
Some critics said that if Trump really cared about fraud, he'd go after companies like UHG—and stop pardoning so many convicted criminals who committed billions of dollars worth of fraud.
"These guys are despicable," Michigan State University professor Brendan Cantwell said Wednesday in response to Vance and Oz's announcement.
Robert Weissman, co-president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said in a statement Wednesday that “Medicaid fraud is a serious problem that requires cracking down on fraudsters—not patients."
Weissman continued:
This administration’s anti-fraud rhetoric is itself a fraud. In fact, the administration has gutted anti-fraud government agencies and programs and let fraudsters off the hook. It has issued record-breaking pardons to fraudsters; sought to eliminate the most important anti-consumer fraud agency, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau; eviscerated the corps of inspectors general whose job is to root out waste, fraud, and abuses; and dropped dozens of fraud and fraud-related investigations against large corporations.
“The Trump administration suspension of Medicaid funding in Minnesota is a bad-faith, punitive, and shameful measure that will punish people in Minnesota as part of the same deceptive story that the Trump administration has told to justify the outrageous [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] invasion of the state," Weissman added.
The Trump administration’s rural hospital fund, meant to soften the impact of the brutal Medicaid cuts in HR1, will require a murky submission process and will not come close to closing the gap for rural communities.
Amid furious efforts to cover their tracks, Republicans included $50 billion in new funding to offset the disastrous cuts that rural hospitals will face as a result of President Donald Trump’s House Resolution 1. Trump’s new Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Director, Dr. Mehmet Oz, gave an explanation which would be laughable if this weren’t so serious. He stated that the Rural Health Fund “is part of a broader effort to modernize rural healthcare… [and that] innovation is the reigning theme” citing growing opportunities for rural providers to become more engaged in the healthcare system.
The “Rural Health Fund” was established by HR1 to soften the impact of the legislation, which cuts $911 billion in federal Medicaid spending over 10 years, due to start after 2030. The good news is that the distribution of the $50 billion will begin before the Medicaid cuts take effect (conveniently before the midterms). The bad news is that the temporary $50 billion in new funding will offset a little over one-third (37%) of the estimated $137 billion in permanent cuts to federal Medicaid spending in rural areas. People everywhere can do the math. Fifty is a whole lot less than 137.
On September 15, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released a Notice of Funding Opportunity for states to apply for the funds. Half of the funds, $25 billion, will be distributed by CMS equally across all states with approved applications, and the other half distributed based on four factors identified by CMS, including priorities that align with the Make America Healthy Again agenda. While some of the goals are welcome, such as expanding access to opioid-use and substance-use disorder treatment and mental healthcare and recruiting and retraining clinicians in rural areas, other priorities, such as supporting value-based care, alternative payment models, and other innovative delivery arrangements that shift risk to practitioners away from insurance companies and that have been demonstrated to increase costs in Medicare, are worrisome. Predictably, no funds can be used to pay for abortions for women living in rural areas.
Each state, regardless of the size of their rural population and needs, will receive the same amount from the first $25 billion tranche. States with few rural hospitals, such as Delaware, with three rural hospitals, will receive equal funding as California, with 66 rural hospitals, some of which have closed and many which are at risk of closing, and that assumes that both states are approved for funding.
We urge residents of rural communities to stand together and demand the right to excellent healthcare that our wealthy nation can and must provide.
Disbursement of the funds promises to be a cronyism gravy train requiring applications, murky decision criteria, no administrative or judicial review, and nonexistent information as to the amount a state will receive, how the funds will be distributed, or even if the funds will go only to rural hospitals. A merit review panel will review the state applications with final award decisions made by CMS. The program runs for five years, but because CMS will reevaluate state initiatives every year, CMS could withhold, reduce, or even recover funding from the state depending on a state’s progress or if continued funding is “in the government’s best interests.” The only thing that is clear is that hospitals and their administrators will spend countless hours and resources on evaluation, reports, and contractors hired to write these reports.
The stakes for rural hospitals couldn’t be higher. As a result of the Medicaid cuts, hundreds of rural hospitals are at risk of closing. But even before cuts, rural hospitals have been shuttering: From 2005 to 2024, 193 rural hospitals closed. In the wake of HR1Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and others asked the Sheps Center to identify rural hospitals at risk of closing because of the Medicaid cuts. The Sheps Center identified 338 hospitals which either experienced three consecutive years of negative total margins, serve the highest share of Medicaid patients, or both. These are the hospitals that, because of their heavy reliance on Medicaid funds, will likely shutter.
What will happen to the millions of people who live in these rural communities when these hospitals close? The median travel distance to the next hospital, emergency room, substance-use, or heart specialty care center will jump seven- to eightfold. This translates to higher mortality from many common conditions: heart disease, cancer, stroke, and unintentional injury.
In "The False Promises of VA Privatization", author Suzanne Gordon highlights the plight of healthcare access for veterans and Americans who live in rural communities, the majority of whom already live in so-called medical and mental health deserts. For example, 81% of rural communities do not have even one psychiatric nurse practitioner and 65% do not have a single psychiatrist. The shuttering of rural hospitals will also mean the loss of thousands of healthcare worker jobs and the ensuing negative economic impact on those communities.
The $50 billion rural health fund earmarked by the Trump administration will not transform these rural medical deserts, will not protect the livelihood of workers and their families, nor will it safeguard their communities. The piddly funds will not staunch the bleeding the brutal cuts to Medicaid will cause.
National Single Payer has launched a “Save Our Rural Hospitals with National Single Payer” campaign. We believe that a national, improved Medicare for All, free from profit in the financing and the delivery of care, would provide the reliable, equitable funding needed to help hospitals and physicians not only survive, but thrive in rural areas. The funding from global budgets would be based on community healthcare needs and not on industry interests.
We urge individuals who live in districts where the at-risk hospitals are located to contact their representatives and ask them to cosponsor HR3069, the Medicare for All Act. If your representative is already a cosponsor, tell them to do more to put national single payer on the nation’s agenda.
People can also pass a resolution in their local organization or city council going on record in favor of saving and sustaining their rural hospitals by calling on Congress to pass national, improved Medicare for All, free from profit.
We urge residents of rural communities to stand together and demand the right to excellent healthcare that our wealthy nation can and must provide. The 46 million people living in America’s rural communities don’t need a temporary Band-Aid—they deserve what everyone deserves, no matter where they live—healthcare as a human right, free from profit.
"Millions of Americans who buy their own insurance on Healthcare.gov are unaware of the catastrophic premium hikes barreling towards them," the senators warned.
More than half of the Democratic Party caucus in the US Senate on Monday accused the Trump administration of covering up massive planned premium increases that are going to hit Americans who buy their health insurance through Affordable Care Act exchanges.
In a letter to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) administrator Mehmet Oz, the senators charged that his agency has "failed to open early window-shopping" the week before the start of open enrollment, which they said has left "millions of Americans who buy their own insurance on Healthcare.gov... unaware of the catastrophic premium hikes barreling towards them."
The senators emphasized that the early window-shopping period is crucial because "the 24 million people who buy insurance on the ACA Marketplace need as much time and information as possible to understand and prepare for these significant premium increases."
The letter also argued that CMS has reduced enrollees' ability to access this crucial information by issuing guidance last summer that "allowed insurance companies to omit premium numbers and tax credit information from the notices they are required to send to enrollees ahead of open enrollment," while also "allowing insurance plans to delay sending information to their enrollees."
As a result of this, the letter continued, "millions of Americans have still not received any information from their insurance plan, or from CMS, about the biggest premium hike in history."
The senators' letter concluded with a demand for CMS to "launch window-shopping immediately and deliver the transparency American families deserve ahead of open enrollment on November 1."
The fight over health insurance premiums is at the heart of the current shutdown of the federal government, as Democrats say they will not vote to fund the government without an extension of enhanced ACA tax credits that were first passed into law under the American Rescue Plan in 2021.
The Washington Post last week reported on leaked documents showing that the most popular healthcare plans purchased on the ACA exchanges are expected to see a 30% hike next year, which would mark the "largest annual premium increases by far in recent years."
Were the enhanced tax credits for these plans allowed to expire, the Post added, this would likely result in millions of Americans seeing their insurance premiums double or triple next year.
The expiring subsidies aren’t the only threat to Americans’ healthcare, as Republicans over the summer passed a massive budget law that cut spending on Medicaid by nearly $1 trillion over the next decade, which the Congressional Budget Office estimated would result in more than 10 million people, among the nation’s poorest, losing their coverage. Congressional Democrats have also demanded undoing some Medicaid cuts in government shutdown negotiations.