As millions of Americans face skyrocketing health care premiums due to expiring federal subsidies, U.S. Sen. Bill Cassidy is jumping into the fray. Instead of using federal tax credits to keep Marketplace premiums affordable, Cassidy proposes to redirect those dollars into tax-free “Health Savings Accounts.” The Times-Picayune | Baton Rouge Advocate’s Mark Ballard reports:
This would allow individuals to choose how the money would be spent, he said. Qualified beneficiaries could decide on their own whether to purchase a less expensive policy and use the money to pay higher deductibles, copays, and out-of-pocket expenses, Cassidy said in an interview.
Nicole Rapfogel of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities explains why Health Savings Accounts would not increase access or affordability for people with low incomes:
HSAs provide the biggest benefits to people who can afford to contribute large sums into the accounts and who are in higher marginal income tax brackets. … In 2021, households filing tax returns with incomes of $1 million or more were the most likely to report individual HSA contributions. Just 4 percent of HSA contributions nationally in 2023 were made by people with incomes below $50,000. (See figure.) Meanwhile, 82 percent of marketplace enrollees had incomes below 300 percent of the federal poverty level ($46,950 for an individual).
CBPP provides an interactive map with congressional district-level data on premium spikes should Congress fail to extend the health care tax credits.
Urban hospitals at risk from Medicaid cuts
Republican legislators created a $50 billion fund for rural hospitals as part of the tax and budget megabill that became law last summer. The fund was designed to protect rural health care services from the effects of nearly $1 trillion in federal cuts to Medicaid that were also in the bill. But a new analysis from Harvard University suggests the megabill poses serious threats to urban hospitals. The New York Times’ Upshot blog reports:
The analysis deemed 109 hospitals most exposed to the coming Medicaid cuts, because they share three risk factors: They serve vulnerable communities, their finances are already fragile, and more than a quarter of their patients rely on Medicaid. Of those hospitals, 85 percent were in urban areas.
The potential closures of urban safety-net hospitals will have far-reaching consequences:
Those losses can affect whole communities, not just the particular patients who rely on Medicaid; patients with private insurance will also lose access to services that shut down. And the costs of health insurance could go up as hospitals try to squeeze more dollars from the patients who are still paying, hospital executives said.
A new issue brief from Invest in Louisiana explains how massive Medicaid cuts included in the federal megabill will impact Louisiana families.
Feds approve Louisiana’s broadband plan
Louisiana became the first state to get approval for a federal initiative aimed at expanding high-speed broadband access to rural areas. The Times-Picayune | Baton Rouge Advocate’s Jenna Ross reports:
The National Telecommunications and Information Administration announced its approval Tuesday of Louisiana’s proposal for $1.355 billion in Broadband, Equity, Access and Deployment funding, a highly debated, highly anticipated grant program. “This is a generational investment that places Louisiana at the forefront of America’s tech transformation,” said Gov. Jeff Landry in a statement. That funding could bring broadband to all businesses and households across the state by the end of 2027, said Veneeth Iyengar, executive director of the state Office of Broadband Development and Connectivity, in an interview Tuesday.
BEAD generated controversy after the Trump administration rewrote rules for the program that could result in fewer rural homes and businesses getting high-speed internet:
A few rural leaders, including those in East Carroll Parish, have previously questioned whether the new plans for their communities — which have awarded contracts to satellite companies, rather than fiber optic providers — will deliver fast and affordable service.
Dismantling of Education Department continues
The Trump administration took more steps on Tuesday to dismantle the U.S. Education Department. As the Washington Post’s Laura Meckler and Danielle Douglas-Gabriel report, the department has moved several offices to other parts of the federal government:
The department has signed interagency agreements to outsource six offices to other agencies, including those that administer $28 billion in grants to K-12 schools and $3.1 billion for programs that help students finish college. There was considerable speculation that the $15 billion program to support students with disabilities would be included in the announcement, but it was not. Other major functions of the Education Department, including its Office for Civil Rights and the federal student aid program, also were not affected by Tuesday’s changes, but a senior department official told reporters that officials are still exploring options for moving those programs elsewhere in the government.
President Donald Trump issued an executive order in March to dismantle the department, but only Congress has the authority to take such a move:
[Education Secretary Linda McMahon] has said the agency’s functions can easily be carried out elsewhere in the government, perhaps more effectively. This fall, she took a first step and moved career and technical education programs, including adult education and family literacy initiatives, to the Labor Department.
The White House’s move is aimed at reducing bureaucratic red tape and “returning education to the states.” Ironically, the outsourcing of offices to other areas of the government could have the opposite effect:
The K-12 grant programs that Labor stands to take on address a plethora of subjects not directly related to the workforce, such as support for children in poverty, after-school programs and aid for rural education. Critics noted that under this arrangement, states and school districts will be required to engage with more — not fewer — federal agencies.
Number of the Day
71% – Percentage of Americans who say raising children is too expensive, a 13-point increase from last year. (Source: American Family Survey 2025)