Maria Bartiromo with a Fox Business logo

Molly Butler / Media Matters

Research/Study Research/Study

Fox’s Maria Bartiromo whips Republican support for devastating Medicaid cuts

Republicans plan to slash Medicaid to fund Trump’s next tax giveaway to the rich

Written by Zachary Pleat

Published

House Republicans are working on legislation dubbed “One, Big, Beautiful Bill” to finance a permanent extension of President Donald Trump’s 2017 tax giveaway to the rich by slashing Medicaid, which will result in millions of Americans losing their health insurance. Supporters of the legislation have also singled out Medicare and the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program for additional cuts. Analyses show that the vast majority of the tax cuts will go to the rich, while lower-income Americans stand to lose money due to the massive cuts to health care coverage and other benefits.

Fox Business anchor Maria Bartiromo, an obsequious booster and right-wing media ally of Trump, has used her Mornings with Maria program to whip Republican lawmakers for support of the bill and especially to shore up its Medicaid cuts. During these frequent Fox Business appearances, Bartiromo, her guests, and even her guest host have advocated for useless work requirements and spread false claims that federal Medicaid funds are paying for coverage of undocumented immigrants or that the cuts are targeting supposedly massive “waste, fraud, and abuse” in the program. After more than a week of Bartiromo's effort to manufacture consent for these Medicaid cuts, Trump reportedly told Republicans “don't fuck around with Medicaid.”

Select a section

  • Republican lawmakers frequented Mornings with Maria to promote Medicaid cuts for their tax legislation

    • Bartiromo urged Sen. Jim Justice (R-WV) to get Republicans to “unify on Medicaid reform” by Memorial Day weekend. [Fox Business, Mornings with Maria, 5/16/25]
    • Bartiromo to Rep. Jason Smith (R-MO): “Where are practical areas to cut Medicaid and Medicare, but not the benefits and muscle of the programs?” [Fox Business, Mornings with Maria, 5/16/25]
    • Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) to Bartiromo: “We're being yelled at about taking away people's Medicaid. That's not really true.” Later, Crenshaw admitted to Bartiromo: “The person we’re taking it away from is the able-bodied adult with no children who refuses to work.” He added: “If they would just get a job, they could keep their Medicaid.” During the interview, Bartiromo complained that Democrats weren’t assisting Republicans in cutting Medicaid. [Fox Business, Mornings with Maria, 5/16/25]
    • Bartiromo to Rep. Earl Carter (R-GA): “Thank you for your work on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Everybody was rooting you on, you advanced the biggest Medicaid rewrite in the program’s 60-year history.” Bartiromo then invited Carter to defend Republicans from Democrats’ statements that the legislation will kick people off Medicaid. [Fox Business, Mornings with Maria, 5/15/25]
    • Bartiromo to Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS): “That sounds great, and I love the idea that you can identify $2 trillion in cuts,” including from Medicaid. [Fox Business, Mornings with Maria, 5/14/25]
    • Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD) on Medicaid cuts: “I do hope that we find more reductions.” [Fox Business, Mornings with Maria, 5/12/25]
    • Rep. Russell Fry (R-SC) falsely claimed California’s coverage of undocumented immigrants in its state Medicaid program “is a tremendous cost to the federal taxpayer because we are subsidizing this in these states.” In fact, California was covering those costs with state funds. [Fox Business, Mornings with Maria, 5/12/25; The Associated Press, 5/14/25]
    • Rep. Riley Moore (R-WV) touted “over $900 billion savings coming out of” Medicaid and other programs overseen by the House Energy and Commerce Committee. [Fox Business, Mornings with Maria, 5/12/25]
    • Discussing the tax cut bill on Mornings with Maria, Rep. Carlos Gimenez (R-FL) said states that didn’t expand Medicaid were “fiscally responsible” because “they knew what was coming.” [Fox Business, Mornings with Maria, 5/9/25]
    • Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) encouraged Republicans to “take the entitlements away — Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps” — to reduce the national debt. [Fox Business, Mornings with Maria, 5/8/25]
    • Bartiromo interviewed Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN) about his effort to pass work requirements for Medicaid recipients. During the interview, Ogles likened this effort to “rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse.” [Fox Business, Mornings with Maria, 5/8/25]
    • Bartiromo encouraged Rep. Lance Gooden (R-TX) to explain how Republicans will cut “Medicaid or Medicare” to “get around paying for the Trump agenda.” During the interview, Gooden said: “I think we’re all in agreement that work requirements should be increased” adding, “We all agree that able-bodied men in their 20s should be working and not getting paid to sit on the couch.” [Fox Business, Mornings with Maria, 5/7/25]

  • The Republican bill slashes benefits from the poor to fund tax cuts for the rich

  • Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: Republicans’ tax bill would cut $1.1 trillion from Medicaid, the Affordable Care Act, and SNAP to fund tax cuts for people earning more than $500,000 annually. [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 5/16/25]

    A CBPP graphic showing GOP plans to cut $1.1 trillion from Medicaid and SNAP to fund tax cuts for people with incomes above $500,000

    • CBPP director of federal tax policy Kris Cox: House Republican bill gives $500 more per child to wealthy families but leaves the low-income families of 17 million children out of the maximum Child Tax Credit. According to the CBPP, this affects “roughly 1 in 4 children … who currently receive less than the full credit or no credit at all because their families’ incomes are too low.” [Bluesky, 5/12/25, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2/5/25]
    • Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy: “Two-thirds of the tax cuts offered in 2027 would go to the top 20 percent of families, and 41 percent would flow to just the top 5 percent of families.” ITEP further explained how regressive the GOP tax bill is: “While working-class families (defined here loosely as the bottom 40 percent of earners) could expect an average tax cut of $361 in 2027, the nation’s highest-income families (defined as the top 0.1 percent) would receive an average tax cut of at least $255,670 in that year.” [Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, 5/16/25]
    • The New York Times: “Economists found that many Americans who make less than $51,000 a year would see their after-tax income fall as a result of the Republican proposal beginning in 2026.” The New York Times reported on an analysis of the GOP tax bill from the Penn Wharton Budget Model, which found that “computing the effects of the tax cuts as well as the plan to pay for them by slashing federal spending on other programs, including Medicaid and food stamps” results in lower-income Americans losing money from the tax cuts. Specifically, “people making between about $51,000 and $17,000 could lose about $700 on average in after-tax income beginning in 2026. … People reporting less than $17,000 in income would see a reduction closer to $1,000, on average, also increasing over time, a shortfall that underscores their reliance on federal benefits.” [The New York Times, 5/16/25]
    • CBPP senior director for federal fiscal policy Brendan Duke: “The House GOP tax bill gives large tax cuts to millionaires and paltry tax cuts to the working-class--tax cuts that will be wiped away by the cuts to health care and nutrition in the same freaking bill.” [Twitter/X, 5/14/25]
    • Yale’s Budget Lab: “Changes proposed by the House budget resolution would result in a decline of almost 4 percent (over $800) to income for the bottom quintile, but an increase of over 4 percent (nearly $70,000) for the top 1 percent.” The Budget Lab analysis added: “Even assuming that states make up some of the cuts, the bottom quintile would see an income loss of about 2 percent ($345 dollars).” [The Budget Lab, 5/19/25]

  • The GOP bill would kick millions off Medicaid while adding trillions to the national debt

    • Politico: The Congressional Budget Office estimated that “the Medicaid portions of the GOP megabill would lead to 10.3 million people losing coverage under the health safety net program and 7.6 million people going uninsured.” According to Politico, this was a partial estimate released by Republicans. [Politico, 5/13/25]
    • KFF: Forty states and the District of Columbia could see at least 13% of their Medicaid recipients kicked off their insurance, with rates of loss as high as 32%. This is a high-end estimate of state-by-state Medicaid coverage losses from KFF. [KFF, 5/16/25]
    • Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget: The House GOP bill would “increase debt by $3.3 trillion, or $5.2 trillion if made permanent.” According to the CRFB, it would also “increase annual deficits to $2.9 trillion (6.9 percent of Gross Domestic Product), or $3.3 trillion (7.8 percent of GDP)”; “Increase yearly interest costs to $1.8 trillion (4.2 percent of GDP), or $1.9 trillion (4.4 percent of GDP)”; and “increase debt to 125 percent of GDP, or 129 percent of GDP if made permanent.” [Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, 5/14/25]
    • Tax Foundation: The House GOP’s “One, Big, Beautiful Bill” will reduce federal tax revenue by $3.3-4.1 trillion in return for miniscule economic benefits spread over a decade. The Tax Foundation estimated that GDP growth would be boosted by a mere 0.6% over 10 years and only 794,000 additional jobs would be created, averaging out to less than 8,000 additional jobs per year. [Tax Foundation, 5/13/25]

  • The GOP's Medicaid work requirements would likely kick millions off Medicaid without increasing employment

    • Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: New work requirements alone could put “9.7 million to 14.4 million people at risk of losing Medicaid coverage in 2034.” CBPP explained, “Evidence shows that much of the coverage loss due to work requirements would occur among people who work or should qualify for an exemption but nevertheless would lose coverage due to red tape.” [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 5/13/25]
    • KFF: As of 2023, nearly two-thirds of non-disabled and non-elderly adults on Medicaid were already working. Analysis from KFF of current population survey data showed that in 2023, “Among adults under age 65 with Medicaid who do not receive benefits from the Social Security disability programs, Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI), and who are not also covered by Medicare (referred to hereafter as “Medicaid adults”), 92% were working full or part-time (64%), or not working due to caregiving responsibilities, illness or disability, or school attendance. The remaining 8% of Medicaid adults reported that they are retired, unable to find work, or were not working for another reason.” [KFF, 2/4/25]

    A KFF chart showing the work status and barriers for Medicaid recipients

    • KFF: Most Medicaid enrollees who work are working full-time. KFF’s analysis showed that “among Medicaid adults who work, nearly seven in ten (69%) worked full-time and half worked full-time for the entire year (at least 50 weeks) (Appendix Table 2). Many Medicaid adults who work part-time (31% of all workers) cited that reasons for working part-time include work limits like shorter work weeks (less than 35 hours per week) (16%), slack work/business conditions (12%), or inability to find full-time work (7%) (Figure 4). Part-time workers also pointed to childcare problems (9%) and other family or personal obligations (22%).” [KFF, 2/4/25]
    • Economic Policy Institute: “Work requirements effectively function like a cut to programs.” EPI explained that “while work requirements do not reliably increase employment, they do significantly increase the administrative burden and costs of applying for safety net programs. This increased administrative burden, in turn, reduces access and take-up.” EPI further explained, “In many cases, the sheer amount of additional administrative burdens levied on adults seeking benefits, and on case workers screening to ensure that work requirements are met, is a major driver in the decline in participation.” [Economic Policy Institute, 1/24/25]
    • A Congressional Budget Office estimate of a 2023 GOP bill that would have instituted Medicaid work requirements stated, “The agency concludes that the amendment would have a negligible effect on employment status or hours worked by people who would be subject to the work requirements.” [Congressional Budget Office, 4/26/23]
    • People’s Policy Project founder Matt Bruenig in The New York Times: “There is not an epidemic of non-working able-bodied adults living high on Medicaid, despite such claims from the Trump administration. Medicaid work requirements are a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.” After accounting for Medicaid enrollees who work, are retired, are children, or are disabled, Bruenig explained in his op-ed: “Only 6 percent of working-age enrollees are not engaged in work long term, which is just 3 percent of the entire Medicaid population.” [The New York Times, 5/16/25]
    • CBPP: Arkansas’ Medicaid work requirements resulted in 25% of enrollees losing insurance. From a February CBPP report: “In Arkansas, about 1 in 4 enrollees subject to the requirements — some 18,000 people — lost coverage in only seven months in 2018 before a federal court halted the program. A large share of the enrollees who lost coverage in 2018 should have been eligible to retain coverage but did not reapply, according to data as of early March 2019, shortly before the program was halted.” [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2/5/25]
    • A study published in The New England Journal of Medicine found that Arkansas’ work requirements were “associated with significant losses in health insurance coverage in the policy’s initial six months but no significant change in employment.” The study continued: “Lack of awareness and confusion about the reporting requirements were common, which may explain why thousands of individuals lost coverage even though more than 95% of the target population appeared to meet the requirements or qualify for an exemption.” [Vox, 6/19/19]
    • An analysis from The Commonwealth Fund found that Arkansas’s Medicaid work requirements “did not increase employment among 30-to-49-year-old Arkansans (the age group targeted by the policy) and did result in significant coverage losses while the requirements were in effect in 2018.” [The Commonwealth Fund, 9/15/20]
    • CBPP: New Hampshire’s Medicaid work requirements were halted in just two months, after they risked disenrolling two-thirds of people subject to the requirements. CBPP noted that this occurred even “with the express intention of avoiding Arkansas’ failures by allowing more flexibility in reporting requirements and pursuing broader, more robust outreach efforts.” [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2/5/25]
    • CBPP: Georgia’s attempt to apply work requirements to new Medicaid enrollees resulted in just a fraction of the eligible population getting coverage and wasted two-thirds of its spending on administrative costs. CBPP explained that “18 months after the program began, only about 6,500 people were covered, far below the 240,000 uninsured people estimated to be potentially eligible. Meanwhile, the program cost about $13,360 per enrollee through the end of the first year, with only about one-third of the spending on health care and the rest on systems modifications to implement work reporting, additional staff, and other administrative expenses. That’s far more than the roughly $2,490 per enrollee the program was initially estimated to cost in the first year.” [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2/5/25]