

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.
"They didn’t cheat their way in. They simply can’t afford to stay in the program."
President Donald Trump's administration has tried spinning government data showing millions of people have dropped their health insurance coverage under the Affordable Care Act by claiming these people were defrauding the program.
However, an analysis published Tuesday by Public Citizen refutes this claim, finding that most people who lost their ACA coverage did so because they could not afford to keep it after congressional Republicans let enhanced health insurance subsidies expire last year.
Data released last month showed that nationwide ACA enrollment fell from 22.3 million people in 2025 to just 17.5 million in 2026, a drop of nearly five million people over the span of just a year.
US Health and Human Services Director Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Mehmet Oz have both said this drop is due to the administration's efforts to root out fraud, with Oz even saying that current enrollment in the program is at "too high of a number."
The Public Citizen report, however, finds that "the decline in... enrollment this year has nothing to do with removing deceitful enrollees," as what "the numbers show is that American families are being priced out of coverage."
According to Public Citizen's analysis, the best way for a fraudster to game the system created by the ACA would be to falsely claim to have an income right around the poverty line, which would ensure the fraudulent enrollee would get a higher subsidy to purchase coverage.
In other words, if the administration were really pursuing fraud on a mass scale, it would likely mean a drop in enrollees who are claiming incomes near the poverty line.
"But that’s not what is happening," the report explains. "The people losing coverage are concentrated at incomes well above the poverty line. They are low- and middle-income families whose premiums doubled after subsidies were cut. They didn’t cheat their way in. They simply can’t afford to stay in the program."
In fact, the report finds that enrollment is actually growing among people who claim income right at the poverty line, which could suggest there is more prospective fraud in the program than before.
However, the report authors do not think that this increase is due to fraud, but rather to "people living just below the poverty line in states that refused to expand Medicaid" and whose income is not low enough to qualify for Medicaid, but too high to qualify for ACA subsidies.
"To escape the coverage gap, some have reported incomes just above the poverty line," states the report, "enough to be eligible for the ACA marketplace."
The ACA isn't the only federal healthcare program under pressure from Trump administration and GOP policies, as cuts to Medicaid included in Republicans' 2025 budget law are projected by the Congressional Budget Office to leave more than 10 million fewer people enrolled in the program by 2034.
A new report argues it is "impossible to reconcile" the Trump administration's Make America Healthy Again rhetoric with unprecedented cuts to federal nutrition assistance.
The unprecedented cuts to federal nutrition assistance that President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans enacted nearly a year ago directly undermine the administration's "Make America Healthy Again" initiative, argues a new report by a pair of food policy experts.
The so-called MAHA project, spearheaded by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., emphasizes the importance of a healthy diet to childhood development. But the new white paper, published Wednesday and authored by Joelle Johnson of the Center for Science in the Public Interest and Priya Fielding-Singh of George Washington University's Global Food Institute, notes that research shows the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) "reduces food insecurity—which is itself linked to increased risk of poorer diets among children—and may improve health outcomes among households with low incomes."
"How the administration’s health objectives can be achieved alongside policies that reduce both food access and nutrition education is a question these dual agendas do not resolve," the report states. "Understanding this tension also helps explain why the administration’s MAHA messaging has at times appeared disconnected from the SNAP policies it has simultaneously pursued."
The GOP's One Big Beautiful Bill Act (HR 1) will inflict nearly $190 billion in cuts to SNAP over the next decade—the largest in the program's history—and expand work reporting requirements, despite evidence showing that such mandates do virtually nothing to boost employment or reduce poverty. According to one estimate, the expanded SNAP work reporting requirements could cause nearly 70,000 avoidable deaths by 2040.
The Republican law also forces states to pay a portion of SNAP benefits for the first time, straining budgets and potentially forcing deeper food aid cuts.
Millions of people across the US—including more than 800,000 children—have lost SNAP benefits since Trump signed the Republican budget package into law on July 4, 2025. It is well established that food insecurity, which is on the rise across the US, is associated with chronic disease.
“It is impossible to reconcile the administration’s MAHA rhetoric on reducing chronic disease in childhood with the cruel cutbacks to SNAP brought about by HR 1,” Johnson, who serves as deputy director for healthy food access at the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), said in a statement. “Whatever MAHA initiatives CSPI might have otherwise supported are completely subsumed by the biggest cut to SNAP in the program’s history.”
"Cutting off food assistance for millions of families undermines MAHA's stated goals of improving diet quality and preventing chronic disease."
The new report stresses the "ripple effects" of the Trump-GOP SNAP cuts across the food safety net, pointing to negative impacts on kids' eligibility for school meals and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC).
"Approximately 16 million children live in households that rely on SNAP to meet their basic food needs, and many will face cascading losses of access to other nutrition programs as a result of HR 1's cuts," the report warns. "Children who lose SNAP also risk losing automatic enrollment in WIC and free school meals, forcing families already stretched thin to navigate multiple re-enrollment processes with no guarantee of restored access."
Trump and the GOP are not finished attacking nutrition assistance for low-income families. Last month, House Republicans approved legislation that would slash fruit and vegetable benefits for millions of young children and pregnant and postpartum women—a cut consistent with the White House's budget proposal for the coming fiscal year.
"If we are serious about improving Americans' health, we need policies that make healthy food more accessible, not less," said Fielding-Singh, director of policy and programs at the Global Food Institute. "Cutting off food assistance for millions of families undermines MAHA's stated goals of improving diet quality and preventing chronic disease. Food security and public health go hand in hand."
"Moms.gov is not about promoting women’s health. It is an attempt to use HHS resources to further strip women of their rights and privacy.”
Eleven members of the Senate Democratic Caucus on Wednesday urged US President Donald Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to “cease using federal resources to direct people to anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers" via a government website.
Last month, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) launched Moms.gov, which claims to offer "resources, information, and help for new and expecting mothers" by "addressing the needs of mothers and fathers who face difficult or unexpected pregnancies and ensuring the well-being of mothers and the health of American families."
The site has two main options: so-called "crisis pregnancy centers" (CPCs)—which present themselves as reproductive health clinics but often provide misleading information and counseling aimed at discouraging abortion—and "federally qualified health centers," which, presented alongside anti-abortion services on Moms.gov, can blur the distinction between evidence-based healthcare providers and ideologically driven groups.
"This raises profound concerns about the health, safety, and privacy of people who access this government website at a time when women’s health and reproductive rights face increasing attacks,” the 11 senators said in a letter to Trump and Kennedy and shared with HuffPost. “Instead of offering concrete resources to protect the health and safety of pregnant women and their families, the Trump administration is using this website to highlight anti-abortion CPCs."
The letter—led by Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and signed by Democratic Sens. Ron Wyden (Ore.), Tammy Duckworth (Ill.), Ed Markey (Mass.), Tina Smith (Minn.), John Hickenlooper (Colo.), Cory Booker (NJ), and Michael Bennett (Colo.)—was sent on the four-year anniversary of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a ruling by the right-wing US Supreme Court that canceled half a century of abortion rights formerly enshrined in Roe v. Wade.
“Since the US Supreme Court took away the fundamental right to abortion care... 21 states have banned or severely restricted access to abortion, decimating access to care for tens of millions of people,” the senators wrote.
The lawmakers said that the direct link to Option Line, an anti-abortion hotline, "on a government website is also troubling from a data privacy perspective," as the site collects and shares user data with "affiliates, partners, vendors, or contract organizations" and has been beset by breaches.
“Moms.gov is not about promoting women’s health—it is an attempt to use HHS resources to further strip women of their rights and privacy," the letter asserts. “In order to protect the health and data privacy of millions of women, HHS should remove the pregnancy center link from Moms.gov and cease using federal resources to direct people to anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers.”
In a Wednesday interview with HuffPost, Warren said, "It's horrific that the Trump administration is using taxpayer dollars to prop up a website that pushes pregnant women towards nonmedical anti-abortion centers."
"The Republican plan is to sneak through anti-abortion resources and backdoor abortion bans because they know Americans don’t support their extreme agenda," she added. "Democrats are fighting back.”