As the debate over the future direction of our health care system heats up leading into the 2020 Presidential election, several Democratic proposals to create a single, federal, universal health insurance program known as Medicare-for-all have garnered significant attention. These proposals would replace most current public and private health insurance with a new federal program that would guarantee health coverage for all or nearly all U.S. residents. However, many details about how a new public program would be implemented and financed are not yet known. While much attention has focused on the implications of ending private insurance and Medicare, the debate has largely ignored the effects on the low-income and vulnerable populations covered by Medicaid and the broader implications for states of eliminating the Medicaid program.

This Medicaid waiver tracker page aggregates tracking information on pending and approved Section 1115 Medicaid waivers. It includes resources such as an overview map and figure, detailed waiver topic tables, and explanatory briefs.

 Multiple studies over the last five years find that the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion has increased health coverage, affordability, and access to care while producing budget savings for states and reductions in uncompensated care costs for hospitals and clinics, according to a KFF review of more than 300 studies…

This issue brief summarizes findings from 324 studies of the impact of state Medicaid expansions under the ACA published between January 2014 (when the coverage provisions of the ACA went into effect) and June 2019. It includes studies, analyses, and reports published by government, research, and policy organizations using data from 2014 or later. This body of research suggests that the expansion presents an opportunity for gains in coverage, improvements in access and financial security, and economic benefits for states and providers.

Under the Trump Administration, CMS issued guidance for state Medicaid waiver proposals that would impose work requirements in Medicaid as a condition of eligibility, and several states have received approval for or are pursuing these waivers. This issue brief provides data on the work status of non-dual, non-SSI, nonelderly adults enrolled in Medicaid to understand the potential implications of work requirement proposals in Medicaid. It shows that the majority of adults in this group are already working, and those who are not report major impediments to their ability to work such as illness or caregiving responsibilities.

The outcome of the Texas v. U.S. legal challenge to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) could have far-reaching consequences for the nation’s health system, from rolling back the expansion of Medicaid to removing protections for people with pre-existing conditions and revoking the ability of adult children to stay on their…

This issue brief answers key questions about Texas v. U.S., the case challenging the Affordable Care Act, leading up to the oral argument on appeal.

This issue brief compares the demographics, health status, access to care, and coverage affordability of Medicaid/CHIP children with special health care needs to those with private insurance and those who are uninsured. Medicaid plays a key role for children with special health care needs by making coverage affordable and covering services that private coverage typically does not. Consequently, legislative proposals that would cap and reduce federal Medicaid funding may pose a particular risk to children with special health care needs and their providers. A companion brief describes Medicaid’s role for children with special health care needs.

This issue brief describes the role that Medicaid plays for children with special health care needs. It explains common eligibility pathways, covered services, and program spending for these children. The Appendix includes 50-state data on the number of children with special health care needs covered by Medicaid/CHIP. A companion brief compares key characteristics of Medicaid/CHIP children with special health care needs to those covered by private insurance.

This issue brief analyzes the impact of the four measures intended to safeguard coverage for people with disabilities and others who should not have been subject to the work and reporting requirements. It draws on data newly available from Arkansas’ 2018 annual waiver report to CMS and monthly data released by the state while the requirements were in effect. The data reveal that few people used these safeguard measures relative to the number of people who lost coverage due to the new requirements. Among those who accessed the safeguards, the vast majority did so due to disability/other health issues or technical issues such as those related to reporting.