Anti-Worker Budget Cuts: A Disaster for America
Thursday, May 15, 2025 11:40 am ET
8min read Anti-worker extremists in Congress have shamefully voted to strip 13.7 million people of their health insurance and take food off the tables of families all to fund tax breaks for billionaires. These extreme cuts will impact everyone — not just those who receive health insurance through Medicaid or food through SNAP. Hospitals, nursing homes and clinics — particularly in rural areas — will be forced to close. More people going to the doctor without insurance means health care costs will go up for everyone, and emergency departments will be overwhelmed as people only go to the doctor when in crisis.
These examples merely scratch the surface of the harm our communities will face. As costs continue to rise, working people will have even less to spend, hurting small businesses, resulting in layoffs and devastating Main Streets across the country. From child and home care providers to sanitation workers and corrections officers, AFSCME members are essential in providing the public services that keep our nation safe and healthy. Without federal funding, our jobs are at risk as states, cities and towns struggle to afford these lifesaving services. Clearly, the intention of those voting for this budget package isn’t to put people to work and stimulate our economy; it’s to give the wealthiest among us a handout at the expense of working people.
As this bill heads to the House floor, AFSCME members will continue to speak out to protect our communities. Tens of thousands of us have called, written and even traveled to D.C. from across the country to ensure that elected officials know how cuts will hurt our families, communities and jobs. Now, we’ll be even louder as we fight this cruel, anti-worker budget tooth and nail.
The proposed budget cuts to Medicaid and SNAP will significantly impact the financial stability of hospitals, nursing homes, and clinics, particularly in rural areas. Medicaid, which covers 1 in 5 people in the U.S. and 4 in 10 children, is a critical source of funding for these institutions. The proposed cuts of $600–$800 billion over the next 10 years would force states to either increase their contributions or reduce services, leading to potential cuts in eligibility or benefits. This would directly affect the financial stability of hospitals and clinics, as they rely heavily on Medicaid reimbursements. For instance, "In order to continue offering the same levels of coverage they have now, states would have to put up a lot more money, which most states don’t have. Otherwise, they have to either cut out a lot of existing enrollees [through eligibility changes] or offer those people a lot fewer services." This reduction in services and eligibility would lead to a decrease in patient volume and revenue for these institutions.
SNAP, which helps more than 41 million people purchase groceries each month, is also under threat. The proposed cuts to SNAP could slash the program by more than 20 percent, exacerbating food insecurity and potentially increasing the healthcare costs for low-income individuals who rely on these institutions for care. The financial strain on these institutions would be compounded by the increased healthcare needs of a population facing food insecurity.
To mitigate these effects, hospitals, nursing homes, and clinics can take several measures:
1. Advocacy and Lobbying: Engage with local, state, and federal representatives to advocate for the importance of Medicaid and SNAP funding. Highlight the impact of these programs on the financial stability of healthcare institutions and the communities they serve.
2. Diversify Revenue Streams: Explore alternative funding sources, such as grants, partnerships with private organizations, and community fundraising efforts. This can help offset the loss of revenue from reduced Medicaid reimbursements.
3. Efficiency Improvements: Implement cost-saving measures and operational efficiencies to reduce overhead costs. This could include streamlining administrative processes, investing in technology to improve patient care, and reducing waste.
4. Community Engagement: Strengthen ties with the community by offering preventive care services, health education programs, and outreach initiatives. This can help improve overall health outcomes and reduce the need for more expensive acute care services.
5. Collaboration with Other Providers: Form partnerships with other healthcare providers and organizations to share resources and expertise. This can help reduce costs and improve the quality of care provided to patients.
6. Telehealth Services: Expand telehealth services to reach patients in rural areas who may have limited access to healthcare facilities. This can help reduce travel time and costs for patients while also improving access to care.
By taking these proactive measures, hospitals, nursing homes, and clinics can better navigate the financial challenges posed by the proposed budget cuts and continue to provide essential healthcare services to their communities.
Reducing federal funding for essential public services can have significant long-term economic consequences. One of the most immediate impacts is on the workforce and the economy. For instance, the proposed budget cuts for the 2026 fiscal year include a 22.6% reduction in domestic discretionary spending, which would deeply impact public services and nonprofit organizations. This reduction could lead to mass firings and job losses across various sectors, including education, housing, environmental protection, and public health. As stated in the materials, "The budget of the Food and Drug Administration would be cut by nearly half a billion dollars, to $6.5 billion, in part by eliminating some longtime agency responsibilities and shifting them to states." This shift could lead to a reduction in the quality of services provided, as states may not have the resources to adequately fill the gaps left by federal cuts.
The economic impact on small businesses and local economies could be severe. For example, the proposed cuts to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) could lead to a reduction in public health initiatives and medical research. This could result in increased healthcare costs for individuals and businesses, as well as a potential decrease in innovation and job creation in the healthcare sector. As the materials note, "The proposal slashes funding for both public health agencies by more than 40 percent." This reduction in funding could lead to a decrease in the number of healthcare professionals and researchers, which could have a ripple effect on local economies that rely on these industries for employment and economic activity.
Additionally, cuts to programs like the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) could lead to increased poverty and economic hardship for low-income families. As the materials state, "Some of the nation’s lowest-income families may lose cash assistance needed for necessities such as rent, utilities, and school supplies, as well as access to important services and supports such as child care, if Congress cuts funding for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program." This could lead to a decrease in consumer spending and a potential increase in demand for social services, further straining local economies and small businesses that rely on consumer spending for revenue.
In summary, reducing federal funding for essential public services could have long-term economic consequences, including job losses, increased healthcare costs, and decreased consumer spending. These cuts could also have a ripple effect on small businesses and local economies, leading to decreased economic activity and potential increases in poverty and economic hardship.
These examples merely scratch the surface of the harm our communities will face. As costs continue to rise, working people will have even less to spend, hurting small businesses, resulting in layoffs and devastating Main Streets across the country. From child and home care providers to sanitation workers and corrections officers, AFSCME members are essential in providing the public services that keep our nation safe and healthy. Without federal funding, our jobs are at risk as states, cities and towns struggle to afford these lifesaving services. Clearly, the intention of those voting for this budget package isn’t to put people to work and stimulate our economy; it’s to give the wealthiest among us a handout at the expense of working people.
As this bill heads to the House floor, AFSCME members will continue to speak out to protect our communities. Tens of thousands of us have called, written and even traveled to D.C. from across the country to ensure that elected officials know how cuts will hurt our families, communities and jobs. Now, we’ll be even louder as we fight this cruel, anti-worker budget tooth and nail.
The proposed budget cuts to Medicaid and SNAP will significantly impact the financial stability of hospitals, nursing homes, and clinics, particularly in rural areas. Medicaid, which covers 1 in 5 people in the U.S. and 4 in 10 children, is a critical source of funding for these institutions. The proposed cuts of $600–$800 billion over the next 10 years would force states to either increase their contributions or reduce services, leading to potential cuts in eligibility or benefits. This would directly affect the financial stability of hospitals and clinics, as they rely heavily on Medicaid reimbursements. For instance, "In order to continue offering the same levels of coverage they have now, states would have to put up a lot more money, which most states don’t have. Otherwise, they have to either cut out a lot of existing enrollees [through eligibility changes] or offer those people a lot fewer services." This reduction in services and eligibility would lead to a decrease in patient volume and revenue for these institutions.
SNAP, which helps more than 41 million people purchase groceries each month, is also under threat. The proposed cuts to SNAP could slash the program by more than 20 percent, exacerbating food insecurity and potentially increasing the healthcare costs for low-income individuals who rely on these institutions for care. The financial strain on these institutions would be compounded by the increased healthcare needs of a population facing food insecurity.
To mitigate these effects, hospitals, nursing homes, and clinics can take several measures:
1. Advocacy and Lobbying: Engage with local, state, and federal representatives to advocate for the importance of Medicaid and SNAP funding. Highlight the impact of these programs on the financial stability of healthcare institutions and the communities they serve.
2. Diversify Revenue Streams: Explore alternative funding sources, such as grants, partnerships with private organizations, and community fundraising efforts. This can help offset the loss of revenue from reduced Medicaid reimbursements.
3. Efficiency Improvements: Implement cost-saving measures and operational efficiencies to reduce overhead costs. This could include streamlining administrative processes, investing in technology to improve patient care, and reducing waste.
4. Community Engagement: Strengthen ties with the community by offering preventive care services, health education programs, and outreach initiatives. This can help improve overall health outcomes and reduce the need for more expensive acute care services.
5. Collaboration with Other Providers: Form partnerships with other healthcare providers and organizations to share resources and expertise. This can help reduce costs and improve the quality of care provided to patients.
6. Telehealth Services: Expand telehealth services to reach patients in rural areas who may have limited access to healthcare facilities. This can help reduce travel time and costs for patients while also improving access to care.
By taking these proactive measures, hospitals, nursing homes, and clinics can better navigate the financial challenges posed by the proposed budget cuts and continue to provide essential healthcare services to their communities.
Reducing federal funding for essential public services can have significant long-term economic consequences. One of the most immediate impacts is on the workforce and the economy. For instance, the proposed budget cuts for the 2026 fiscal year include a 22.6% reduction in domestic discretionary spending, which would deeply impact public services and nonprofit organizations. This reduction could lead to mass firings and job losses across various sectors, including education, housing, environmental protection, and public health. As stated in the materials, "The budget of the Food and Drug Administration would be cut by nearly half a billion dollars, to $6.5 billion, in part by eliminating some longtime agency responsibilities and shifting them to states." This shift could lead to a reduction in the quality of services provided, as states may not have the resources to adequately fill the gaps left by federal cuts.
The economic impact on small businesses and local economies could be severe. For example, the proposed cuts to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) could lead to a reduction in public health initiatives and medical research. This could result in increased healthcare costs for individuals and businesses, as well as a potential decrease in innovation and job creation in the healthcare sector. As the materials note, "The proposal slashes funding for both public health agencies by more than 40 percent." This reduction in funding could lead to a decrease in the number of healthcare professionals and researchers, which could have a ripple effect on local economies that rely on these industries for employment and economic activity.
Additionally, cuts to programs like the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) could lead to increased poverty and economic hardship for low-income families. As the materials state, "Some of the nation’s lowest-income families may lose cash assistance needed for necessities such as rent, utilities, and school supplies, as well as access to important services and supports such as child care, if Congress cuts funding for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program." This could lead to a decrease in consumer spending and a potential increase in demand for social services, further straining local economies and small businesses that rely on consumer spending for revenue.
In summary, reducing federal funding for essential public services could have long-term economic consequences, including job losses, increased healthcare costs, and decreased consumer spending. These cuts could also have a ripple effect on small businesses and local economies, leading to decreased economic activity and potential increases in poverty and economic hardship.
Disclaimer: The news articles available on this platform are generated in whole or in part by artificial intelligence and may not have been reviewed or fact checked by human editors. While we make reasonable efforts to ensure the quality and accuracy of the content, we make no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to the truthfulness, reliability, completeness, or timeliness of any information provided. It is your sole responsibility to independently verify any facts, statements, or claims prior to acting upon them. Ainvest Fintech Inc expressly disclaims all liability for any loss, damage, or harm arising from the use of or reliance on AI-generated content, including but not limited to direct, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages.
_219eac971750077834984.jpeg)
