Why Medicaid Work Requirements Are A Bad Idea

Summary

Podcast Summary: What A Day – "Why Medicaid Work Requirements Are A Bad Idea"

Release Date: May 21, 2025
Host: Jane Coaston
Produced by: Crooked Media

---

Introduction

In the May 21, 2025 episode of "What A Day", host Jane Coaston delves into the contentious debate surrounding Medicaid work requirements. The episode, aptly titled "Why Medicaid Work Requirements Are A Bad Idea", provides listeners with an in-depth analysis of the proposed legislative changes that threaten to overhaul the Medicaid program—a critical healthcare safety net for over 70 million Americans.

Overview of Medicaid and Proposed Cuts

Jane begins by outlining the fundamental role of Medicaid, emphasizing its importance in covering low-income Americans and its joint administration by federal and state governments. She highlights the current political climate where Congressional Republicans are targeting Medicaid for significant budget cuts, eyeing up to $800 billion over the next decade.

[00:02] Jane Coaston: "Medicaid is the healthcare safety net program that primarily covers low-income Americans and it's jointly run by the federal government and states."

The proposed strategy to achieve these cuts involves imposing new work and eligibility requirements. Jane juxtaposes this with President Donald Trump's public stance, which appears supportive of Medicaid, noting conflicting messages within the GOP.

[01:45] Jane Coaston: "Despite Trump's efforts to use the power of positive thinking and mob boss threats to change the minds of the GOP, Republicans are in fact fucking around with Medicaid."

Republican Misconceptions and Public Perception

Jane underscores a significant disconnect between Republican rhetoric and the reality of Medicaid recipients. She cites remarks from key Republican figures like Senator Rick Scott and Representative Steve Scalise, who inaccurately characterize Medicaid beneficiaries as individuals unwilling to work.

[02:09] Matt Brunig:
[02:15] Jane Coaston: "If you're just listening to Trump talk, you'd honestly never know it because the president seems to be very into Medicaid."

These misconceptions contribute to widespread public support for work requirements, with a KFF poll indicating that nearly two-thirds of Americans back such measures—even nearly half of Democrats.

[05:09] Jane Coaston: "Close to two-thirds of Americans back work requirements, including nearly half of Democrats."

Interview with Matt Brunig: The People's Policy Project

To unpack the implications of these proposed work requirements, Jane converses with Matt Brunig, founder of the People's Policy Project and author of the New York Times op-ed titled "Medicaid Work Requirements are Cruel and Pointless." Their discussion provides both moral and practical arguments against the implementation of work requirements.

How Work Requirements Would Function

Matt explains the mechanics of the proposed work requirements:

[04:00] Matt Brunig: "Every month you're going to tell the state Medicaid agency how many hours you worked. And if you're above 80, then you can continue to receive benefits. If you're below 80, you will be cut off."

He clarifies that these requirements would primarily affect a small subset of the Medicaid population—approximately 20% of working-age beneficiaries—but warns of unintended consequences affecting many more.

[04:37] Matt Brunig: "About half our children are elderly... the main population is going to be somewhere around maybe about 20% of the working-age population who are on Medicaid could end up getting dinged one way or another by it."

Public Support Based on Misconceptions

Matt highlights that the substantial public support for work requirements stems from a misunderstanding of who Medicaid recipients truly are. Contrary to popular belief, nearly two-thirds of Medicaid adults are employed.

[03:46] Matt Brunig: "Nearly 2/3 of adults covered by the program were working in 2023."

When informed of the actual low percentage of truly unemployed Medicaid recipients, public support for work requirements significantly diminishes, revealing that many support such measures based on false premises.

[05:23] Matt Brunig: "A lot of people just think that the Medicaid rules are just full of unemployed people who just persistently don't work."

Practical Challenges of Implementing Work Requirements

Matt argues that enforcing work requirements would lead to administrative burdens and unintended exclusions:

[06:30] Matt Brunig: "Increasing administrative burdens in this way is just going to create a sort of random assortment of people who mostly just can't report their hours accurately is not a good way to go."

He cites the problematic case of Arkansas, where implementing work requirements led to the removal of 18,000 adults in just four months, subsequently halted by a judge. Comparative studies showed no significant impact on overall employment, undermining claims that work requirements effectively bolster the workforce.

[11:03] Matt Brunig: "States that implemented work requirements found no impact on employment."

Moral and Humanitarian Concerns

Beyond logistical issues, Matt emphasizes the human cost of such policies. Removing Medicaid coverage from individuals who may already be vulnerable—such as those managing chronic illnesses or caregiving—could lead to severe health repercussions and even fatalities.

[11:49] Matt Brunig: "People will die. Honestly. That's the bottom line here."

Implications of the Proposed Legislation

If President Trump signs the bill, the ramifications for Medicaid are profound:

• Administrative Hassles: Many beneficiaries would face increased bureaucracy to maintain their coverage.
• Loss of Coverage: An estimated 10 million Americans could lose their healthcare coverage.
• Health Outcomes: Reduced access to healthcare could result in worsened health conditions and preventable deaths.

Conclusion

The episode "Why Medicaid Work Requirements Are A Bad Idea" offers a compelling critique of the proposed Medicaid work requirements. Through detailed analysis and expert insights from Matt Brunig, listeners gain a comprehensive understanding of both the practical limitations and ethical dilemmas posed by such policies. Jane Coaston's thorough exploration underscores the disconnect between political rhetoric and the lived realities of Medicaid recipients, advocating for informed and compassionate policy-making.

---

Notable Quotes:

• Jane Coaston [00:02]: "Medicaid is the healthcare safety net program that primarily covers low-income Americans."
• Jane Coaston [01:45]: "Republicans are in fact fucking around with Medicaid."
• Matt Brunig [04:00]: "If you're below 80 hours, you will be cut off of benefits."
• Matt Brunig [03:46]: "Nearly 2/3 of adults covered by the program were working in 2023."
• Matt Brunig [05:23]: "A lot of people just think that the Medicaid rules are just full of unemployed people who just persistently don't work."
• Matt Brunig [06:30]: "Increasing administrative burdens in this way is just going to create a sort of random assortment of people who mostly just can't report their hours accurately is not a good way to go."
• Matt Brunig [11:49]: "People will die. Honestly. That's the bottom line here."

---

About "What A Day":

"What A Day" by Crooked Media aims to deliver substantive analysis and in-depth reporting on the major stories and emerging trends shaping today's world. Hosted by Jane Coaston, the show provides listeners with critical insights without the noise of hype and groupthink, all within a concise 20-minute format available every weekday.

---

Subscribe to "What A Day" on your favorite podcast platform or watch on YouTube to stay informed effortlessly.

Transcript

[Jane Coston]

It's Wednesday, May 21st. I'm Jane Coston. This is what a day. A show that recalls a time when congressional hearings for members of a presidential administration involved way less screaming. It's crazy, but it's true. On today's show, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem gets her constitutional rights all mixed up during a Senate hearing. And Trump's FDA looks to limit access to Covid booster shots. But let's start with Medicaid. We've been talking about Medicaid a lot on this show. As a refresher, it's the health care safety net program that primarily covers low income Americans and it's jointly run by the federal government and states. It's also in the crosshairs of Congressional Republicans as they try to move President Donald Trump's big beautiful bill slowly, painfully, through the House and Senate and onto his desk. They're eyeing upwards of $800 billion in cuts to Medicaid over the next decade. And one of the ways they want to do that is by imposing new work and eligibility requirements. But if you're just listening to Trump talk, you'd honestly never know it because the president seems to be very into Medicaid. Here he is Monday at the tail end of an unrelated press conference in the Oval Office. Thank you, press. No cuts, no cuts to Medicare. And earlier in the day, Trump went to Capitol Hill to strong arm Republicans into passing his big legislative agenda. And he reportedly told lawmakers, quote, don't fuck around with Medicaid. But despite Trump's efforts to use the power of positive thinking and mob boss threats to change the minds of the gop, inspirational to me, really. Republicans are in fact fucking around with Medicaid. All that money for tax cuts has to come from somewhere. Why not poor people's health care coverage, Am I right? And I've been noticing something. Despite the fact that Medicaid covers more than 70 million Americans, it appears many people, including a ton of Republicans, don't seem to know much of anything about the people on it. For example, here's Florida Republican Senator Rick Scott on Fox News. If you don't want to work, you're the one that decided you don't want health care, right? That's number one.

[Matt Brunig]

Number two, Medicaid is supposed to be for children that don't have health care.

[Jane Coston]

And people with chronic illness. Also for eligible low income adults. To quote Medicaid's own website, if we're picking nits here. And here's Louisiana Republican Representative Steve Scalise on cnbc. If Somebody's able bodied and they can go get a job and they're living.

[Matt Brunig]

In their mom's basement playing video games.

[Jane Coston]

I'm sorry, you gotta go get a job.

[Matt Brunig]

This program was designed for the truly.

[Jane Coston]

Needy, the disabled people, pregnant women, seniors and eligible low income adults. Why do they keep forgetting that part? Anyway, based on how those two titans of Congress talk about Medicaid, it's not surprising that many Americans support work requirements for the people on it. But here's the most working age adults on Medicaid work. According to data from the non partisan health research firm KFF, nearly 2/3 of adults covered by the program were working in 2023. And most of those who weren't were caregiving, managing illness or disability, or were in school. Perhaps Senator Scott and Representative Scalise aren't being intellectually honest with the American people about their plans that could cost an estimated 10 million Americans their health care coverage according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. No. What? No. So to learn more about work requirements for Medicaid and why they are a not very good idea, I spoke with Matt Brunig. He's the founder of the People's Policy Project, a think tank focused on social and political equity issues. And he wrote a recent New York Times op ed titled Medicaid Work Requirements are Cruel and Pointless. Matt, welcome to what a day.

[Matt Brunig]

Oh, thanks for having me.

[Jane Coston]

Okay, so before we get into the moral and practical reasons you oppose work requirements for Medicaid, can you explain how they would work in theory as laid out in this Republican spending plan that's being debated right now?

[Matt Brunig]

In theory, every month you're going to tell the state Medicaid agency how many hours you worked. And if you're above 80, then you can continue to receive benefits. And if you're below 80, you will be cut off of benefits. That is, if you're otherwise non disabled, not a child, not old, you know, after you clear those bars, you have to clear 80 hours a month of work.

[Jane Coston]

Right. So who would this apply to? Because there are a lot of people who obviously are receiving Medicaid who are taking care of a sick parent or might be in school. So it wouldn't apply to those people. Correct?

[Matt Brunig]

It could apply to someone in school, but yeah, when you think about the entire Medicaid population, about half our children are elderly, so they're not going to be affected by it. Then of the remaining half, about half of those are working and then another quarter are disabled and so on and so forth. But you know, you know, the main population is going to be somewhere around maybe about 20% of the working age population who are on Medicaid could end up getting dinged one way or another by it.

[Jane Coston]

Broadly speaking, work requirements for government aid are popular. A recent poll from the nonpartisan research firm KFF found that close to two thirds of Americans back them, including nearly half of Democrats. So why is it broadly popular?

[Matt Brunig]

Yeah, so that poll actually asked a second question where they confronted people with the low amount of people who are on these benefits who are out of work on a long term basis. And when you tell people, oh, actually there really aren't that many people who are just persistently out of work on Medicaid or food stamps or whatever, then the support for the work requirements goes down actually below 50%. So what that seems to suggest is a lot of people just think that the Medicaid rules are just full of unemployed people who just persistently don't work. And this has kind of been a trope in welfare policy forever and ever and ever.

[Jane Coston]

Right, right. I think that Reagan's welfare queen is probably the most famous example of that. But you're hearing that a lot right now this week of Republicans talking about how there are all these unemployed dudes living in their basements who are not working and don't want to work. And that's why we have to have work requirements. But given the level of federal spending on Medicaid, more than $600 billion in fiscal year 2023, are work requirements not a better middle ground than, say, finding savings by cutting parts of the program which voters do not want?

[Matt Brunig]

Yeah, I mean, I don't know when you start deciding what you want to cut from it. I'm not sure. It's all very important. I think one of the issues with work requirements is that it's going to ding a lot of people that you don't expect to ding. So even if you want to say, well, there's got to be at least some people on the rolls, who are these basement dwelling video gamers who just refuse to work. There's 330 million people in the country. There's got to be some. There just have to be your ability to locate those people in a systematic way and call them from the roles is very, very limited. And what you'll end up doing is you're going to end up hitting a lot who you don't expect to hit. In fact, probably far more people that you don't expect to hit than the people who you're trying to get off the roll. So to me, increasing administrative burdens in this way, that's just going to kind of create a sort of random assortment of people who mostly just can't report their hours accurately is not a good way to go.

[Jane Coston]

Yeah, I think that that gets us into the moral and practical reasons why you say work requirements for Medicaid don't work. And the main argument you lay out in your New York Times op ed is that Medicaid was designed to be a backstop for people who are out. Can you explain that a little bit more?

[Matt Brunig]

Yeah, I mean, when you think about in the post Obamacare healthcare system that we have, if you're employed, you typically get employer sponsored insurance or maybe not. You can get an Obamacare exchange plan. And if you lose your job, well, now you don't have income, the only place for you to go is Medicaid. And so there's something a little contradictory about saying, well, we want to get all these people who aren't working off of Medicaid. That's where you go when you aren't working. You know, I've lost a job before and I was unemployed for two or three months. There's nowhere else to go. You can't buy an exchange plan, you can't get Medicare, you're not old enough. I'm not a veteran, I can't get Tricare. That's the only place in the system to go. So unless you're basically saying, hey, when people lose their jobs, we just don't want them to have health insurance, this kind of plan doesn't make sense.

[Jane Coston]

And as you mentioned too, it's also true that a lot of people who rely on Medicaid do have jobs. Their employers may just not provide health insurance or they don't work enough hours every week to qualify for it. So even though they're not nominally affected by these work requirements, what would imposing them mean for their ability to maintain them?

[Matt Brunig]

Yeah, now they have to now start reporting their hours. And that's not a thing you do already in the system. You, you do have to kind of report your earnings periodically to make sure that you're still below the income cutoff. But you don't report hours. And there's really no other place that we report hours except employers will report your hours either quarterly or annually to the state unemployment office. But the idea of reporting it every month or having to separately report it to the Medicaid office, which is going to be your obligation, not the obligation of your employers, that's not something that exists. So you may not even be able to get it. I think about someone who's an Uber driver, for instance. I know Uber drivers who are on Medicaid. How many hours do they work? I don't know. I mean, their rides are timed, but obviously they spend a lot of time.

[Jane Coston]

Dispatching, driving in between rides or something like that. Yeah.

[Matt Brunig]

So what's an hour for an independent contractor? What's an hour for a handyman? For someone who mows lawns, for someone who paints houses, for someone who cleans? These things are. How do you prove these things?

[Jane Coston]

Yeah, and it just goes to. Republicans argue these requirements will push more people into the workforce. But as we've been talking about, a lot of these people are already in the workforce. And you say, quote, work requirements are a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Can you explain what you mean there?

[Matt Brunig]

I mean, the supposed problem is that there's a lot of people who just persistently sit on Medicaid who are able bodied adults who don't have dependence. And, and that just isn't true. The numbers that I came up with with the Current Population Survey is that about that. That describes about 3% of all Medicaid recipients, and that's without even looking into those recipients. Some of those are college students. They might have some extenuating circumstances. Who knows? It's just not a huge issue. The only way it's gonna save benefits is by hitting other people who you don't intend to actually kick off the program. People who will fail to report their hours correctly.

[Jane Coston]

Now, a handful of states have tried to impose these work requirements. Arkansas, Georgia. What did they find? Did they find all these savings that Republicans are now promising? Because it sounds like.

[Matt Brunig]

No, no. I mean, in. Trump won. They put out a rule saying that states would be given waivers to implement work requirements. Arkansas took advantage of that waiver, implemented it and kicked off 18,000 adults in four months. Subsequently, a judge halted it and said they couldn't do it. But during that period, they removed those adults and that created a obviously very fertile environment for researchers to go in and say, well, what happened to those adults? What happened to employment in Arkansas? We can compare it to all these other states that didn't impose it and they find no impact on employment.

[Jane Coston]

So if this bill makes it to President Trump's desk, and that is a giant if, what would it mean for the more than 70 million Americans who are enrolled in Medicaid?

[Matt Brunig]

I mean, for most of them, it's going to just be a huge hassle. A lot of people will be cut off the roles and then they'll have to turn around and fight to try to get back on them. And now you're in a situation where if a medical emergency hits you or some kind of or if you're dealing with some kind of chronic illness, which is probably the worst case scenario, you're just going to be out of luck. You're not going to be able to afford health care. And I mean, people will die. Honestly. I mean, that's the bottom line here. People will die and others will suffer.

[Jane Coston]

Matt, thank you so much for your time.

[Matt Brunig]

Thank you.

[Jane Coston]

That was my conversation with Matt Brunig, founder of the People's Policy Project. We'll link to his op ed in the Times in our show notes. We'll get to more of the news in a moment, but if you like the show, make sure to subscribe. Leave a five star review on Apple Podcasts, watch us on YouTube and share with your friends. More to come after some ads what a day is brought to you by Zebiotics Pre Alcohol let's face it, after a night with drinks, I don't bounce back the next day like I used to. I have to make a choice. I can either have a super fun night or a great next day. That is, until I found Pre alcohol. Zebiotic's Pre Alcohol Probiotic drink is the world's first genetically engineered probiotic. It was invented by PhD scientists to tackle rough mornings after drinking. Here's how it when you drink, alcohol gets converted into a toxic byproduct in the gut. It's a buildup of this byproduct, not dehydration, that's to blame for rough days after drinking. Pre alcohol produces an enzyme to break this byproduct down. Just remember to make pre alcohol your first drink of the night. Drink responsibly and you'll feel your best tomorrow. Every time I have pre alcohol before drinks, I notice a difference the next day. Even after a night out, I can confidently plan on working out or going for a run without worry. Spring is here, which means more opportunities to celebrate warmer weather before drinks on the patio, the tropical vacation, or your best friend's wedding. Don't forget Zebiotics Pre alcohol Drink one before drinking and wake up feeling great the next day. Go to zbiotics.com wad to learn more and get 15% off your first order when you use code wad at checkout. Zebiotics is backed with a 100% money back guarantee, so if you're unsatisfied for any reason, they'll refund your money, no questions asked. Remember to head to zebiotics.com wad and use the code WAD at checkout for 15% off.

[Matt Brunig]

NetCredit is here to say yes to a personal loan or line of credit when other lenders say no. Apply in minutes and get a decision as soon as the same day. Loans offered by NetCredit or lending partner banks and serviced by NetCredit application subject to review and approval. Learn more at netcredit.com partner NetCredit credit.

[Jane Coston]

To the people at Carl's Jr late birds get the bag Build your own bag after 8pm For 5.99 get a Cali classic single fries plus chicken stars.

[Matt Brunig]

Or get a spicy chicken sandwich onion rings plus chicken stars. This deal is stacked.

[Jane Coston]

Don't hit the sack, hit the drive thru. Build your own bag.

[Matt Brunig]

Just 5.99 only at Garl's Jr. You build it, you eat it. Order your bag on the app and unlock even more burgers and sleep. Available for a limited time at participating restaurants. Tax not included. Price may vary. Not valid within the offer, discount or combo. See up for details.

[Jane Coston]

Here's what else we're following today.

[Matt Brunig]

Head of Lines Secretary Noem, please stand and raise your right hand. Do you swear the testimony you will give before this committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

[Jane Coston]

Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem testified before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental affairs on Tuesday. She was there to discuss her department's 2026 budget. Noem also performed a masterclass in attempting to fake it till you make it when she was asked by Senator Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire to define habeas corpus. Secretary Noem, what is habeas corpus? Well, habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country. No, no. Unfortunately for Secretary Noem, Senator Hassan appears to actually know the definition of the term habeas corpus.

[Matt Brunig]

Excuse me?

[Jane Coston]

That's incorrect. President Habeas corpus. Excuse me? Habeas corpus is the legal principle that requires that the government provide a public.

[Matt Brunig]

Reason for detaining and imprisoning people. If not for that protection, the government.

[Jane Coston]

Could simply arrest people, including American citizens.

[Matt Brunig]

And hold them indefinite for no reason.

[Jane Coston]

You know that's the constitutional right your department is accused of violating in its draconian immigration crackdown. Madam Secretary, Senator Hassan's question to Noem came in response to remarks made earlier this month by White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, who said that the White House was actively looking at suspending habeas corpus as part of the Trump administration's mass deportation efforts. Noem did talk some business at the hearing. She was questioned by multiple senators about the Trump administration's nearly $500 million in proposed cuts to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, or cisa. Noem remained vague on how exactly the cuts would be achieved, instead echoing comments she's made previously insinuating that CISA is responsible for political censorship and that the agency needs to get, quote, back on mission. We were third in space, and now we're number one in space by a lot. It's not even close. During a Tuesday afternoon press conference in the Oval Office, President Donald Trump announced a major defense project that is intended to protect the US from missiles launched from all over the globe and even space. Trump, famously a lover of gold, is calling it the Golden Dome. And of course, it will be, quote, the best system ever built. The president estimated that the total cost of the project will come to $175 billion, $25 billion of which would be set aside in his one big, beautiful bill. Trump also announced that Space Force General Michael Guttlein would head up the project. Last month, it was reported that Elon Musk's SpaceX is among the frontrunners to win a lucrative contract in the construction of the Golden Dome. This is very important for the success and even survival of our country. It's a pretty evil world out there. Now, it's worth noting that, according to reporting from the New York Post, SpaceX would want the Golden Dome to operate as a subscription service that the government would pay for access to, like Netflix, but for missile defense. Sure, we've seen this administration come after and attack, you know, leaders for doing their jobs. It's political intimidation, and I will not be intimidated.

[Matt Brunig]

I expect to continue to do my job.

[Jane Coston]

Democratic Representative Lamonica McIver of New Jersey is facing charges for allegedly assaulting two federal agents outside a migrant detention facility while trying to block the mayor of Newark from being arrested. McIver was part of a congressional delegation visiting the Delaney hall facility in Newark, where Immigration and Customs Enforcement had begun holding detainees. In a complaint made public Tuesday, the government alleges McIver assaulted Homeland Security and ICE agents while protesting the arrest of Mayor Ross Baraka, interim U.S. attorney for the District of New Jersey. Alina Haba announced the charges in a statement shared on Twitter. She said Baraka's misdemeanor trespassing charge was dismissed for, quote, the sake of moving forward. But Haba said McIver's conduct can't be overlooked. In a statement, McIver said, quote, the charges against me are purely political. They mischaracterize and distort my actions and are meant to criminalize and deter legislative oversight. The truth is that for many Americans, we simply do not know the answer to whether or not they should be getting the 7th or 8th or 9th or 10th COVID 19 booster. FDA vaccine chief Dr. Vinay Prasad announced on Tuesday that the agency will no longer provide universal access to annual COVID 19 boosters. In a major policy shift, the FDA is raising the standard of proof required to approve the shot for healthy Americans between 6 months and 64 years of age. Until now, new Covid boosters were approved annually by the FDA when manufacturers could show that the latest version provided as much immune protection as the previous year's version. Now the FDA is trying something new with your health. It's requiring new randomized control trials to prove that the COVID vaccines are still safe and effective before approving them. For most Americans, Dr. Prasad said that vaccine approval for older adults and those with high risk factors would remain streamlined. Dr. Prasad has been an outspoken critic of the FDA's response to the COVID 19 pandemic. In a 2021 blog post, he suggested that the federal government could use the pandemic as an excuse to end democracy and stand up a totalitarian regime in the US and that's the news. One more thing. What exactly does Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Do all day? Swim in jeans? Swim in jeans in a creek of human sewage? Eat french fries cooked in tallow? Because whatever it is he does, it definitely doesn't seem to be managing the day to day operations of the Department of Health and Human Services. Case in point, on Tuesday, Kennedy appeared before the Senate Appropriations subcommittee to discuss Trump's 2026 budget request for the agency he allegedly runs. I say allegedly because when questioned by Illinois Democratic Senator Dick Durbin about cuts to ALS research and the effects those cuts would have on one of his constituents who's been diagnosed with the disease, Kennedy appeared to have absolutely no idea what the hell was going on in his own damn department. How can we possibly address his concerns and give hope to people across the country who are suffering for so many diseases when our government is cutting back on that research? As I said, Senator, I do not know about any cuts to ALS research and I'm happy to. I just read them to you. I will have to go and talk with Jay Bhattachara and find out what the rationale was for those cuts. I just don't know about them until you told me about them. At this moment. Yes, do that, please. Here's why this drew my attention. A month ago, my mom died. You may have known that. You may not have known that. She died of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, also known as als, sometimes called Lou Gehrig's disease. Here's what ALS did to my mother. It stole her ability to speak, first slurring her speech and then making it impossible for her to talk altogether, which was hard because my mom loved to talk to anyone and everyone. ALS then made it so she couldn't swallow easily, making it difficult and very embarrassing for her to try to eat in front of other people. And then ALS made eating impossible. And my mom loved food, both cooking and eating. I used to tell her it was too bad the Third Amendment existed because she would have really enjoyed cooking for an entire army garrison stationed in her house. She got a feeding tube installed in November. She hated it. My mom loved to swim. She could spend hours in the pool my dad built for her the summer I was born. But because of als, she lost so much weight and so much muscle that she couldn't swim anymore. She started falling, stopped being able to walk. She developed frontotemporal dementia, which impacts about half of ALS patients and took away her ability to control her facial expressions. And ultimately, ALS took my mom's life. She died at home in her own bed, as she demanded, because though she couldn't speak, she could give a thumbs down to the hospice nurse who asked her if she wanted a hospital bed instead. According to the ALS association, every 90 minutes, someone is diagnosed with ALS and someone dies of the disease. Because ALS is always fatal. And I don't wish that on anyone. Anyone. There are researchers who have been working on ways to slow down the progression of ALS and someday, maybe even create a cure. But the Department of Health and Human Services has proposed eliminating the government's centralized database that tracks ALS cases. It wants to cut funding for the researchers who could save someone else's mom's life. And RFK Jr. Whose job it is to run this department, doesn't know anything about it, or I'd argue, doesn't care. I think Maryland Democratic Senator Angela also Brooks put it correctly last week. You've been unable to answer specific questions. Sir, you are the wrong person for this job. I'd only add one more thing. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Go fuck yourself. That's all for today. If you like the show, make sure you subscribe Leave a Review Think of the man who paid more than $600 for a rump watch and tell your friends to listen. And if you're into reading, and not just about how a Pennsylvania couple paid actually $640 for a Trump watch, but got a watch that said rump like me, what a Day is also a nightly newsletter. Check it out and [e-mail] subscribe I'm Jane Coasten and honestly, what's the difference? What a Day is a production of Crooked Media. It's recorded and mixed by Desmond Taylor. Our associate producers are Raven Yamamoto and Emily Foer. Our producer is Michelle Aloy. We had production help today from Johanna Case, Joseph Dutra, Greg Walters, and Julia Claire. Our senior producer is Erika Morrison and our executive producer is Adrienne Hill. Our theme music is by Colin Gilliard and Kashaka. Our production staff is proudly unionized with the Writers Guild of America east do.

[Matt Brunig]

You know how long the average professional spends making slide decks every week? Five hours. That's almost an entire workday resizing text boxes and moving around bullet points. Well, Gamma is here to rescue you from presentation purgatory. Just drop in your notes and Gamma magically turns them into polished presentations, websites, social posts, you name it. No design or coding skills required. Start for free at Gamma App and get a month of Gamma Pro for free with promo code Podcast if you're frustrated with low sex drive, Vileesi can help. Vylease or Bremelanotide treats low sex drive.

[Jane Coston]

In women with no daily medication, no.

[Matt Brunig]

Alcohol restrictions and no hormones. Vileesi is clinically proven to increase your interest in sex. Take control of your sex life on your terms and visit vyleesi.com to schedule a telemedicine appointment. That's V Y L E-E-S I.com Vileci.

[Jane Coston]

Is a prescription medicine used to treat.

[Matt Brunig]

Hypoactive sexual desire disorder in premenopausal women.

[Jane Coston]

Who have not had problems with low.

[Matt Brunig]

Sexual desire in the past and have low sexual desire. No matter the type of sexual activity, situation or partner, the low sexual desire is troubling to them and is not.

[Jane Coston]

Due to medical, mental health or relationship.

[Matt Brunig]

Problems or medicine or other drug use. Do not use Vilice if you have uncontrolled hypertension or known heart disease.

[Jane Coston]

The most common side effects include nausea, flushing, injection site reactions, headache and vomiting.

[Matt Brunig]

Consult your healthcare professional for more information and see full [e-mail] or call 800-922-1038.

[Jane Coston]

Go to vilisi.com for a telemedicine appointment.

[Matt Brunig]

To find out if Violisi is right for you. That's V y l e e S I.