Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Federal Medicaid Cuts Will Harm Americans with Disabilities

Opinion

An occupational therapist sits with a young boy at a table as they work on some of his motor skills.​

The Massachusetts Developmental Disabilities Council is amplifying the voices of people with IDD and autism, sharing powerful stories of how Medicaid makes their lives in the community possible—and what’s at stake if it's cut.

Getty Images, FatCamera

My brother Todd, a diehard Red Sox fan with a massive sweet tooth, was an incredibly social person. This was especially notable because he did not speak, used a wheelchair, and needed constant support throughout his day due to his cerebral palsy. Growing up with Todd taught me early on that people should get what they need to live meaningful and self-determined lives. Thanks to Medicaid, Todd received personal care assistance, in-home therapies, and employment services. These supports enabled him to graduate from his local public high school, work part-time as an adult, and live a full and social life. Those same Medicaid services also allowed our mother, who was a single parent for over three years, to work full-time to provide for her six children.

Unfortunately, those services are now under direct threat. In late May, the House of Representatives passed the Trump administration’s reconciliation bill in a narrow, partisan vote (215-214). The bill is now being debated in the Senate and could be passed and signed into law before the July 4th holiday. Among many other measures, if enacted, the bill would implement the largest cut to Medicaid in its history, totaling over $800 billion. Cuts of this magnitude could strip 10 to 13 million people nationwide of longstanding and essential healthcare services they depend on, threatening their health, independence, and quality of life.


In my state of Massachusetts, we would see immediate issues. That’s because the bill includes cutting $1.75 billion of federal funding for MassHealth, the state’s Medicaid program—and the largest program in the state’s annual budget. As a result, the entire healthcare system in our state would be affected: healthcare professionals would be laid off, prices for essential medications and services would rise, and more than 250,000 Massachusetts residents would experience a loss of access to vital medical support.

Among those most impacted would be people like my brother Todd—people with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities (IDD) who rely on Medicaid to help them live fulfilling lives. To understand the devastating impact of these Medicaid cuts on people with IDD, including those with autism, it’s crucial to recognize the distinction between mandatory and non-mandatory Medicaid services.

Mandatory services, which are required by law, consist of healthcare services like doctor visits, medical care in hospitals, and long-term services and supports that are provided in nursing homes or institutions. Non-mandatory services, which are optional and vary by state, consist of dental care, some therapies, and most home- and community-based services (HCBS) provided through Medicaid waiver programs.

Many non-mandatory services are lifelines to individuals with IDD and autism to remain in their communities, allowing them to live safely and with dignity in their own homes and to engage meaningfully in lives of their choosing. Although they are labeled “non-mandatory,” these supports are absolutely critical for people with IDD and their families. Yet, because they are optional, non-mandatory services are most likely to be affected by any cuts to Medicaid. Mandatory services, meanwhile, are required by law and thus less likely to be affected by cuts to Medicaid. As a result, families may have no other options besides institutional care.

Additionally, many individuals with IDD and autism gained access to healthcare through the Affordable Care Act’s option for states to expand Medicaid coverage. But proposed cuts to Medicaid in the reconciliation bill would be more likely to affect those with Medicaid expansion coverage because the federal government covers 90% of costs for Medicaid expansion compared to 50% for traditional Medicaid. This would hit especially hard in states like Massachusetts where long waitlists already limit access to home- and community-based care.

Nationally, the best available data indicate over 700,000 people across 38 states are on waiting lists for home- and community-based care. Any cuts to Medicaid would mean that even fewer people with IDD and autism receive the services they need.

The Massachusetts Developmental Disabilities Council is amplifying the voices of people with IDD and autism, sharing powerful stories of how Medicaid makes their lives in the community possible—and what’s at stake if it's cut. Amber Petell, for example, lives with quadriplegic cerebral palsy. She shared, “I'm able to work a job that I love and support others with disabilities because I have the support I need to stay healthy and do the things I want and need to do…I need a caregiver to get out of bed, get ready for the day, get to work, and use the bathroom. If Medicaid is cut, I will not have basic support to meet any of my basic physical needs.”

Or take it from Cynthia Laine, a mother with two teenage autistic sons. She said, “Because of Medicaid, my sons have made incredible progress. Every small step, whether it's expressing emotions through gestures or making connections with peers, represents hours of therapy and support. These gains are fragile, and cutting Medicaid would disrupt the very foundation that allows them to grow and thrive.”

If Medicaid cuts are passed and signed into law, the support that Amber, Cynthia, and so many others rely on to complete basic everyday necessities will be lost. Eliminating funding for these services would be a devastating step backwards—and could force people back into institutions, undoing decades of progress in providing services in the most integrated settings possible and increasing school and community inclusion.

Instead, efforts to expand HCBS waivers should continue. This would increase community-based care in integrated settings and decrease the number of people with IDD in institutions and on waitlists. States also should be compelled to accurately and consistently (i.e., across states) report their HCBS waiting list data, including how many people with IDD are on the waiting list, whether people are screened for eligibility, what the average wait time is, and whether any services are provided while on the waitlist.


Dr. Zachary Rossetti is an associate professor of special education at BU Wheelock College of Education & Human Development.


Read More

The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

jimfeng/Getty Images

Pennsylvania’s Bipartisan Exchange Is Rebuilding Trust in Governance

The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics has nearly 40 years of experience working with legislators from different political parties, and it is building on this history by drawing on lessons from the successful American Congressional Exchange model, begun in 2018 at the Bipartisan Policy Center, and from state exchanges now underway in Minnesota and Michigan. The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics, in collaboration with the Bridge Alliance, has launched the Pennsylvania Legislative Exchange.

This state-based, systematic approach is designed to foster better relationships and build trust across the political aisle with the following guiding principles:

Keep ReadingShow less
An empty grocery cart in a market.

NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani proposes five city-run grocery stores. See the arguments for and against, from food deserts to bodega concerns and the $70M cost.

Getty Images, Kwangmoozaa

Government-Owned Grocery Stores: Accessible Nutrition or Government Overreach?

Issue Introduction

Over the past few years, affordability has become the most central issue affecting Americans and the quality of life in the United States. The prices of groceries and basic necessities have risen 25-30% since the COVID-19 pandemic and are projected to rise another 3.2% in 2026. At the same time, the exodus of grocery chains from rural and low-income areas has scattered food deserts throughout individual states. Recent mass closures include Grocery Outlet’s shuttering of 36 stores and continued shut-downs of many Albertsons locations. These factors have led politicians to make affordability a major campaign issue.

During his progressive campaign for mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdani raised the idea of opening grocery stores owned and operated by the city government to provide New Yorkers with affordable groceries. In his April 2026 public address that marked his first 100 days in office, Mayor Mamdani announced plans for the first of five city-run grocery stores. Mamdani’s proposed initiative will use $70 million in capital funding to build five city-owned municipal stores–one in each borough–and place them under control of the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC). NYCEDC will then select third-party operating staff in accordance with city standards for affordability and proper labor practices. Public opinion following the announcement continues to be divided between uproar and support.

Keep ReadingShow less
Five men sitting on one side of a table, as a panel at an event.

Harvard's Guy-Uriel Charles (left) listens to David Walker, Chair of the Federal Fiscal Sustainability Foundation. Fellow panelists (L-R) are Michael Farris, Convention of States Project; Samuel Fieldman, Wolf Pack; and Jim Rubens, FFSA and American Promise.

Photo by Martha Stewart

Congressional Inaction Raises Constitutional Change Alternative

Voting is the anchor of democracy, as we are reminded every two years. But this anchor rests on unstable ground today, signaling that our political roots need examining too.

In the United States, the Constitution itself becomes the focus when serious problems prompt such foundational civic dives. Our current challenges may not be as severe as the Civil War or the excesses of the Gilded Age, which produced waves of amendments, but today’s erosion of our system of checks and balances requires us to revisit our constitutional underpinnings.

Keep ReadingShow less
​U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth testifies during a Senate Committee on Appropriations hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on July 21, 2026. Hegseth is crafting a strong and masculine identity for his audience as he reportedly contemplates a presidential run.

(Alex Wroblewski/AFP/Getty Images/TNS)

Politicians Can’t Just ’Give the People What They Want’

For reasons that will baffle my many detractors, I am often asked for advice about being an opinion journalist. One of my standard responses is: You have to be willing to disappoint your biggest fans.

What I mean is that if you start to see your job as telling fans what they want to hear, you risk becoming an entertainer rather than a thinker, and eventually you become a caricature. I’ve seen it happen numerous times. Patrick Buchanan was a brilliant columnist and a serious person. But over the course of his career, he listened too much to the people who said, “Go Pat, go!” and too little to friends who said, “I think that’s taking it too far.”

Keep ReadingShow less