Overnight, the Senate radically altered its Big Beautiful Bill, zeroing in on one state and one Senator in an attempt to buy her vote.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) expressed several concerns about the Medicaid and SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly known as food stamps) cuts to the bill. A joint op-ed from the legislative leadership in Alaska in The New York Times explained that 40,000 residents would lose health coverage and thousands more would lose SNAP benefits. “The shift in costs from the federal government to the state will plunge our budget into a severe deficit, cripple our state economy and make it harder to provide basic services,” state House Speaker Bryce Edgmon and state Senate Majority Leader Cathy Giessel wrote.
The changes to the latest text made to attract support from moderate concerned about the deep nature of the budget cuts were largely performative. A $15 billion program to support rural hospitals was increased to just $25 billion, a joke when you consider that the Medicaid cuts in the same bill total $930 billion, according to a preliminary Congressional Budget Office estimate. The cuts to the provider tax were mostly maintained but delayed only one year, from 2027 to 2028; it remains to be seen whether the parliamentarian will even allow that. (Critically, Alaska is the only state that doesn’t use the provider tax maneuver to increase resources for its Medicaid program.)
But the gifts to Alaska, designed to sway Murkowski, came fast and furious. The federal share of payment for Medicaid would be increased for “the state with the highest separate poverty guideline.” That happens to be Alaska. Their share would increase 25 percent above that of a typical state.
https://prospect.org/politics/2025-06-28-alaska-gold-rush/
= new reply since forum marked as read