Kennedy emitió una nueva norma que exigía a los estados verificar el estatus migratorio de los beneficiarios de Medicaid, lo que llevó a la controversia en varios estados.
La administración Trump ha defendido estas medidas argumentando que es necesario garantizar que los recursos federales se destinen a quienes cumplan con los requisitos legales para recibir beneficios de salud, y no a personas que no tienen derecho a ellos.
Sin embargo, los críticos de la política migratoria del presidente Trump señalan que estas acciones son parte de una estrategia más amplia para limitar el acceso de los inmigrantes a los servicios públicos y aumentar la presión sobre las comunidades migrantes en el país.
La controversia en torno a la verificación del estatus migratorio de los beneficiarios de Medicaid es solo uno de los muchos temas relacionados con la inmigración que han generado debate en la administración Trump.
La lucha por la reforma migratoria y las políticas de inmigración han sido temas centrales en la agenda del presidente desde el inicio de su mandato, y continuarán generando controversia y debate en los próximos meses.
detailing the controversy surrounding the Trump administration’s order to investigate Medicaid beneficiaries based on their immigration status.
The Trump administration has instructed states to investigate Medicaid beneficiaries – the program that covers low-income individuals or those with disabilities – to verify if they meet eligibility requirements based on their immigration status.
So far, five states have reported receiving over 170,000 names in total, an unprecedented move by the federal government, involving the state-federal health program in the president’s immigration campaign.
Immigrant rights advocates warn that this decision places an additional burden on states by requiring them to double-check verifications and could lead to some individuals losing their health coverage simply for not providing documentation on time.
However, Dr. Mehmet Oz, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), stated in a post on the social platform X on October 31 that over $1 billion “of taxpayer dollars [federal tax-paying] were being spent on funding Medicaid for illegal immigrants” in five states and Washington D.C.
Total Medicaid spending exceeded $900 billion in fiscal year 2024.
Neither Oz’s statement nor an accompanying video clarified the period during which these expenses were incurred, and CMS spokespeople did not immediately respond to inquiries.
Federal regulations limit Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) eligibility to U.S. citizens and some immigrants who legally reside in the country.
Individuals without legal immigration status cannot receive any government-funded health coverage, including Medicaid, Medicare, and plans purchased on insurance marketplaces created by the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
Several states have disagreed with Oz’s statements.
“Our payments for coverage of undocumented individuals comply with state and federal laws,” said Marc Williams, spokesperson for the Colorado Department of Health Care Policy and Financing, which administers the state’s Medicaid program. “The $1.5 million figure referenced today by federal leaders is based on an inaccurate preliminary finding and has been refuted by expert data from our department.”
He added, “It is disappointing that the administration would announce this figure as definitive when it is clearly overstated, and discussions are still in the information and debate phase.”
Illinois Medicaid officials strongly criticized CMS chief Oz’s comments.
“Once again, the Trump administration is spreading misinformation about the routine use of Medicaid funds,” said Melissa Kula, spokesperson for Illinois Medicaid.
“This is not a reality show, and there is no conspiracy to circumvent federal law and provide Medicaid coverage to individuals who do not meet requirements. Dr. Oz should stop promoting conspiracy theories and focus on improving healthcare for Americans,” Kula said.
The Washington State Health Care Authority, which administers the state’s Medicaid program, was also firm. “The figures Dr. Oz posted on social media are inaccurate,” said spokesperson Rachelle Alongi. “We were very surprised to see Dr. Oz’s post, especially considering we continue to collaborate in good faith with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to respond to their questions and clarify any confusion.”
In August, CMS began sending states the names of Medicaid enrollees suspected of being ineligible, demanding that state agencies verify their immigration status.
In October, KFF Health News contacted 10 state Medicaid agencies. Five of them provided approximate figures of names they had received from the Trump administration to date, but they anticipate more: Utah received 8,000 names; Colorado, 45,000; Pennsylvania, 34,000; Ohio, 61,000; and Texas, 28,000.
Currently, over 70 million people are enrolled in Medicaid.
Most of those states declined to comment further. Five others – California, New York, Georgia, Florida, and South Carolina – either refused to disclose how many names they were asked to review or did not respond.
Oz claimed in his X post that California had wasted $1.3 billion on healthcare for Medicaid-ineligible individuals, while Illinois spent $30 million, Oregon $5.4 million, Washington State $2.4 million, Washington D.C. $2.1 million, and Colorado $1.5 million.
“We have notified the states, and many have already started reimbursing the money,” he said. “But what if we had never asked?”
Washington D.C. Medicaid Director Melisa Byrd stated that CMS had identified administrative expenses in the district’s program, which covers individuals regardless of their immigration status, that should not have been billed to the federal government, and her agency has already corrected some of these errors.
“We manage a large and very complex program, and when mistakes occur, we correct them,” she said. The program plans to reimburse $654,014 to CMS by mid-November.
The five states, plus Washington D.C., are governed by Democrats, and President Donald Trump did not win any of them in the 2024 elections.
In recent days, Health and Human Services Deputy Secretary Jim O’Neill began posting on the X social platform photos of individuals he claims are convicted criminals living in the U.S. without authorization who have received Medicaid benefits.
O’Neill could not be reached for comment.
“We are very concerned because this frankly seems like a waste of state resources and reinforces the administration’s anti-immigrant agenda,” said Ben D’Avanzo, senior health policy strategist at the National Immigration Law Center, an immigrant rights advocacy organization. “This duplicates what states are already doing,” he added.
As part of the crackdown on individuals without legal status, the president ordered federal agencies in February to ensure that those without legal residency do not receive benefits that violate federal law.
In June, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy issued a new rule requiring states to verify the immigration status of Medicaid beneficiaries, leading to controversy in several states.
The Trump administration has defended these measures, arguing that it is necessary to ensure federal resources are allocated to those who meet legal requirements for health benefits, not to individuals who are not entitled to them.
However, critics of President Trump’s immigration policy argue that these actions are part of a broader strategy to limit immigrants’ access to public services and increase pressure on immigrant communities in the country.
The controversy surrounding the verification of Medicaid beneficiaries’ immigration status is just one of many issues related to immigration that have sparked debate in the Trump administration.
The fight for immigration reform and immigration policies have been central issues on the president’s agenda since the start of his term and will continue to generate controversy and debate in the coming months. Kennedy ordered the CMS to share information on Medicaid enrollees with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which sparked a lawsuit from several states concerned that this information would be used for deportation campaigns.
In August, a federal judge ordered HHS to stop sharing that information with immigration authorities.
State Medicaid agencies typically use databases managed by the Social Security Administration, the Department of Homeland Security, and other governmental agencies to verify the immigration status of applicants.
If states have to re-verify the immigration status or citizenship of enrollees, some individuals may unjustly lose their coverage, for example, if they do not see the letter requesting documents or do not respond in time.
“There is not enough evidence to justify this additional verification,” said Marian Jarlenski, a professor of health policy at the University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health.
Oz made it clear that the Trump administration disagrees.
In the August statement, the CMS explained that they were asking states to verify the eligibility of individuals whose immigration status could not be confirmed through federal databases. “We expect states to act promptly and will monitor progress on a monthly basis,” the agency said.
Leonardo Cuello, a research professor at the Georgetown University Center for Children and Families, called the CMS order to states “unprecedented” in the 60-year history of the Medicaid program.
He suggested that the federal government may have been unable to verify the immigration status of some individuals due to misspelled or outdated names, such as when a beneficiary is listed with their maiden name instead of their married name.
The lists may also include individuals who received assistance through Emergency Medicaid, a program that covers emergency hospital services, including childbirth and labor and delivery care, regardless of immigration status.
“The CMS is conducting unnecessary reviews of the immigration status of individuals whose hospital expenses were covered by Emergency Medicaid,” explained Cuello.
Oz noted in his post that federal law “allows states to use Medicaid funds for emergency treatments, regardless of the citizenship or immigration status of patients,” and that states can “legally create Medicaid programs for undocumented immigrants using their own state taxes, as long as federal funds are not used.”
All the states Oz mentioned administer their own programs of this kind.
These reviews represent an additional burden for state Medicaid agencies, which are already busy preparing to implement the tax and spending law that Trump signed in July.
This law, which Republicans have dubbed the “One Big and Beautiful Bill,” introduces numerous changes to Medicaid, including the imposition of work requirements in most states starting in 2027. It also requires states to review the eligibility of enrollees at least twice a year.
“I fear that states will conduct unnecessary verifications that impose a burden on certain beneficiaries, who will lose medical coverage when they shouldn’t,” Cuello said. “This will be a lot of work for the CMS and the states, with very few real results.”
Given that the new policy allows the agency to publicly disclose the data, Cuello believes the effort has more political than practical value.
Brandon Cwalina, a spokesperson for the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services, which administers Medicaid, said the state already requires all applicants to demonstrate their citizenship or, when applicable, their immigration status.
“However, the list of names and instructions issued by the CMS last month constitute a new procedure, and the department is carefully reviewing that list to take appropriate action,” he explained.
In his post, Oz did not mention Pennsylvania, a state that Trump won in 2024.
When a legal resident does not have a Social Security number, the state verifies their status using a Department of Homeland Security database, in addition to reviewing specific immigration documents, he added.
Other state Medicaid agencies said they have not yet begun contacting enrollees.
“We are developing a procedure to conduct these reviews,” said Jennifer Stroehecker, Medicaid director in Utah, during a meeting in August with a state advisory board.
Renuka Rayasam and Rae Ellen Bichell contributed to this article.
For any inquiries or story tips, please contact Phil Galewitz at pgalewitz@kff.org or @philgalewitz on Twitter. The Impact of Climate Change on Biodiversity
Climate change is a pressing issue that is having a profound impact on biodiversity around the world. As global temperatures continue to rise, ecosystems are being disrupted, species are facing extinction, and the delicate balance of nature is being thrown off kilter.
One of the most significant impacts of climate change on biodiversity is the loss of habitat. As temperatures rise, habitats are changing at a rapid pace, forcing many species to adapt or face extinction. For example, as polar ice caps melt, polar bears are losing their hunting grounds and are being forced to travel further distances to find food. This disruption in their habitat is leading to a decline in their population numbers.
In addition to habitat loss, climate change is also causing shifts in the timing of seasonal events, such as breeding and migration patterns. This can have a cascading effect on entire ecosystems, as species that rely on each other for survival may become out of sync. For example, if a plant blooms earlier than usual due to warmer temperatures, the insects that pollinate it may not be present, leading to a decline in both plant and insect populations.
Another major impact of climate change on biodiversity is the increase in extreme weather events. Hurricanes, droughts, wildfires, and floods are becoming more frequent and intense, causing widespread destruction of habitats and loss of species. For example, coral reefs are being bleached and destroyed by rising sea temperatures, leading to a loss of biodiversity in these crucial marine ecosystems.
Despite these challenges, there are steps that can be taken to mitigate the impact of climate change on biodiversity. Conservation efforts, such as creating protected areas and implementing sustainable land use practices, can help to preserve habitats and protect vulnerable species. Additionally, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and transitioning to renewable energy sources can help to slow the pace of climate change and give species a better chance of adapting to changing conditions.
In conclusion, climate change is having a significant impact on biodiversity around the world, leading to habitat loss, shifts in seasonal events, and an increase in extreme weather events. It is crucial that we take action to address this issue and protect the delicate balance of nature before it is too late. By working together to reduce our carbon footprint and preserve habitats, we can help to ensure a future where all species can thrive in a changing world.
