GOP wants people up to age 64 to work for food stamps and Medicaid. Some experts say it won’t work.

The Republican Party’s proposed budget package includes new work requirements for Americans who rely on Medicaid and food stamps. House Speaker Mike Johnson believes that tying federal aid to work is a common-sense approach that will encourage people to seek employment.

Under the GOP bill, there will be stricter regulations for those receiving food stamps, particularly for “able-bodied adults without dependents” aged up to 64. These individuals will need to prove that they are working, volunteering, or enrolled in an educational program to qualify for assistance. The goal is to prevent abuse of the system and motivate individuals to become self-sufficient.

Research on work requirements in programs like SNAP and Medicaid has shown mixed results. While some believe that these requirements can lead to increased employment, others argue that they can cause recipients to lose benefits due to administrative challenges or other issues like disability. For example, a study on Virginia’s reinstated work requirements for food stamp recipients found a significant drop in enrollment without a meaningful increase in employment.

The Senate Finance Committee has introduced its version of the budget bill, which includes the Medicaid work requirement for adults aged 19 to 64 who are not disabled and do not have children. The bill also maintains the higher age threshold for food stamp recipients.

Critics of the proposed work requirements are concerned about the potential negative impact on older Americans, who may face greater challenges in finding employment. Advocacy groups argue that raising the age limit for SNAP’s work requirements to 64 could harm older adults who already face age discrimination, health issues, and caregiving responsibilities.

As the debate over work requirements in federal assistance programs continues, it is essential to consider the potential consequences for vulnerable populations. Advocates are urging lawmakers to reassess these requirements and ensure that they do not inadvertently harm those who rely on these vital safety nets.