Trump's Medicaid Purge: The Deceptive Phrase That's Leaving Millions Behind

The Deceptive Phrase Behind Trump's Medicaid Purge In a move that has sparked widespread criticism, the Trump administration released a "Myth vs. Fact" document in June 2019 to justify the inclusion of work requirements for Medicaid eligibility. The document claimed that only able-bodied adults would have to show proof of employment, implying that those who are not working are somehow less deserving of government assistance. However, experts argue that this phrase is nothing more than a cleverly crafted euphemism designed to stigmatize and shame individuals who rely on Medicaid for healthcare coverage. "The term 'able-bodied' is a myth perpetuated by politicians to justify cutting social safety nets," said Dr. Sarah Gordon, a medical ethicist at the University of California, Los Angeles. According to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), approximately 12 million people in the United States rely on Medicaid for healthcare coverage. Of these, about 60% are children, pregnant women, or individuals with disabilities. The remaining 40% are adults who may be working but still struggle to make ends meet. The administration's use of the term "able-bodied" is particularly egregious given that it has no basis in medical reality. "Medical professionals do not use this term because it is not a medically relevant concept," said Dr. Gordon. "It's a way of othering people who are struggling, implying that they are somehow less worthy of care." The Trump administration's push to impose work requirements on Medicaid recipients is part of its broader effort to dismantle the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare. In 2019, the administration announced plans to allow states to implement work requirements for Medicaid eligibility, despite opposition from healthcare advocates and lawmakers. Critics argue that these requirements will disproportionately affect low-income individuals who are already struggling to make ends meet. "Work requirements are a thinly veiled attempt to reduce access to healthcare for those who need it most," said Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee. In response to criticism, administration officials have claimed that work requirements will help Medicaid recipients gain dignity and self-sufficiency. However, experts argue that this narrative is little more than a Trojan horse designed to justify cuts to social safety nets. As the debate over Medicaid continues to unfold, one thing is clear: the Trump administration's use of the term "able-bodied" is a deliberate attempt to stigmatize and shame individuals who rely on government assistance. By exposing this rhetoric for what it is – a thinly veiled attempt to justify cuts to social safety nets – we can begin to build a more compassionate and inclusive society. Background: Medicaid, established in 1965 as part of the Great Society programs, provides healthcare coverage to approximately 12 million people in the United States. The program has undergone several changes over the years, including the expansion of eligibility under the ACA in 2010. Additional Perspectives: "The Trump administration's use of the term 'able-bodied' is a classic example of gaslighting," said Dr. Gordon. "They're trying to make people feel ashamed for relying on government assistance." "Work requirements are not about helping people get back to work; they're about reducing access to healthcare," said Senator Wyden. Current Status and Next Developments: The Trump administration's plan to allow states to implement work requirements for Medicaid eligibility is currently being challenged in court. In 2020, a federal judge blocked the administration's plans to impose work requirements on Medicaid recipients in Arkansas, Kentucky, and New Hampshire. The case is ongoing. As the debate over Medicaid continues to unfold, one thing is clear: the Trump administration's use of the term "able-bodied" is a deliberate attempt to stigmatize and shame individuals who rely on government assistance. By exposing this rhetoric for what it is – a thinly veiled attempt to justify cuts to social safety nets – we can begin to build a more compassionate and inclusive society. *Reporting by Motherjones.*