Politics
More than 70 Million Americans Are on Medicaid. This Is Where They Live.
In the stretch of rural Kentucky that borders West Virginia, voters reliably send Republicans to Congress. Representative Hal Rogers, who represents the area, did not even face a Democratic challenger in 2024. More than 40 percent of the population there relies on Medicaid, the public health insurance plan for low-income Americans.
In eastern Louisiana, where Representative Julia Letlow, a Republican, was elected in 2024 by a wide margin, about one-third of the population is enrolled in the program.
Share of population enrolled in Medicaid
Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Wisconsin and Wyoming have not adopted the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion.
The New York Times
And in California’s Central Valley, Republicans control a district where two-thirds of the population is on Medicaid, one of the highest rates in the nation, according to an analysis of federal enrollment data by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal think tank.
Some of those places could bear the brunt of steep Medicaid cuts that are expected to be central to Republicans’ budget plans. The budget passed on Tuesday night by House Republicans directs Energy and Commerce, the committee that oversees Medicaid, to cut spending by $880 billion over the next decade, which would amount to an 11 percent reduction in the program’s planned spending.
In its 60 years, Medicaid has swelled from a small program that provided medical care to poor Americans receiving cash assistance to the largest source of public insurance. It covers 72 million Americans, about one-fifth of the population. It pays for about half of all nursing care in the United States, and 40 percent of all births.
The program has grown especially quickly over the last 15 years, as millions joined through the expansion of the Affordable Care Act to cover healthy adults who earn less than 138 percent of the federal poverty line, about $21,597 for an individual and $36,777 for a family of three. The rolls swelled again during the coronavirus pandemic, when Medicaid extended emergency coverage to millions.
Republicans have not yet specified what policy changes they would make to Medicaid. Options discussed include requiring enrollees to be employed, or dialing down funding for the Affordable Care Act’s expansion, which made millions of adults eligible for coverage. A work requirement would be expected to cut Medicaid spending by about $100 billion over the next decade, as those unable to comply — or to file the correct paperwork showing their employment — would lose coverage.
In a statement, Representative Rogers of Kentucky described claims his party would gut the program as “lies promoted by House Democrats.”
“We are on a mission to cut waste, fraud and abuse of taxpayer dollars, so that we can protect the future of programs like Medicaid for years to come,” he said.
Medicaid enrollment rates, by congressional district
Large cuts to Medicaid would likely hit dense urban areas that tend to vote for Democrats. The congressional district that covers part of the Bronx in New York, for example, has one of the highest Medicaid enrollment rates in the country, with the program covering 67 percent of the people who live there. A district that covers part of Los Angeles has more than half its residents enrolled in the program.
Of the 10 congressional districts with the highest share of residents enrolled in Medicaid, nine are held by Democratic legislators.
Medicaid enrollment
David Valadao
Ritchie Torres
Jim Costa
Sydney Kamlager-Dove
Raul Ruiz
Adam Gray
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Jimmy Gomez
Luz Rivas
Adriano Espaillat
Note: Margin of victory not shown for representatives who faced another member of the same party on the November ballot.
Districts with the highest Medicaid enrollment rates
District
Representative
Margin
Calif. 22nd
68%
R+7
N.Y. 15th
67%
D+55
Calif. 21st
61%
D+5
Calif. 37th
56%
D+57
Calif. 25th
55%
D+13
Calif. 13th
55%
D+0.09
N.Y. 14th
53%
D+38
Calif. 34th
53%
D
Calif. 29th
52%
D+40
N.Y. 13th
52%
D+67
There are also pockets of the country that rely significantly on the program where voters favor Republicans. Of the 218 seats Republicans control in Congress, 26 are in districts where Medicaid covers more than 30 percent of the population, according to a New York Times analysis of federal enrollment data.
All 26 of those representatives voted in favor of the House budget this week.
Medicaid enrollment
David Valadao
Jay Obernolte
Hal Rogers
R
Uncontested Doug LaMalfa
Cliff Bentz
Dan Newhouse
Nick Begich
Nicole Malliotakis
Julia Letlow
Clay Higgins
Vince Fong
Mike Johnson
Note: Margin of victory not shown for Republican representatives who faced another Republican on the November ballot.
Republican districts with highest Medicaid enrollment rates
District
Representative
Republican Margin
Calif. 22nd
68%
R+7
Calif. 23rd
47%
R+20
Ky. 5th
44%
Calif. 1st
42%
R+31
Ore. 2nd
40%
R+31
Wash. 4th
38%
R
Alaska At-Large
36%
R+2
N.Y. 11th
34%
R+28
La. 5th
34%
R
La. 3rd
34%
R
Calif. 20th
33%
R
La. 4th
33%
R
Their districts are scattered across the country, from Alaska to West Virginia. The list includes the Louisiana district held by Speaker Mike Johnson, where 33 percent of residents are enrolled. All are in states that participate in the Medicaid expansion. Republicans have considered scaling back funding for that program, which would save the federal government about $500 billion over the next decade — but also leave people in many states without coverage.
While President Trump has repeatedly said over the last week he would not cut Medicaid, Republican legislators don’t have many options for looking for those cuts elsewhere. Some have already expressed concern about cuts to the program. Last week, seven Republican members of the Congressional Hispanic Conference sent Speaker Johnson a letter warning that “slashing Medicaid would have serious consequences, particularly in rural and predominantly Hispanic communities.”
As the second Trump administration has gotten underway, health care has not been a top issue for the president’s voters. It ranked as the fifth-most-important issue to them in a January poll from The New York Times and Ipsos, behind immigration, the economy, inflation and taxes.
In January, Michael Perry, a founder of the polling firm PerryUndem, conducted three focus groups with Medicaid enrollees who voted for President Trump, noting that most did not list health care among their top voting issues.
When he brought up the idea that Republicans were exploring cuts to Medicare, some said they did not think the president would ultimately cut their health coverage because he would want to avoid a backlash. But other voters, he said, expressed concern. “They liked Medicaid, said it made a difference in their lives,” Mr. Perry said. “It wasn’t hard for them to put their finger on what Medicaid had done.”
Politics
AOC accuses Vance of believing ‘American people should be assassinated in the street’
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is leveling a stunning accusation at Vice President JD Vance amid the national furor over this week’s fatal shooting in Minnesota involving an ICE agent.
“I understand that Vice President Vance believes that shooting a young mother of three in the face three times is an acceptable America that he wants to live in, and I do not,” the four-term federal lawmaker from New York and progressive champion argued as she answered questions on Friday on Capitol Hill from Fox News and other news organizations.
Ocasio-Cortez spoke in the wake of Wednesday’s shooting death of 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good after she confronted ICE agents from inside her car in Minneapolis.
RENEE NICOLE GOOD PART OF ‘ICE WATCH’ GROUP, DHS SOURCES SAY
Members of law enforcement work the scene following a suspected shooting by an ICE agent during federal operations on January 7, 2026, in Minneapolis, Minnesota. (Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)
Video of the incident instantly went viral, and while Democrats have heavily criticized the shooting, the Trump administration is vocally defending the actions of the ICE agent.
HEAD HERE FOR LIVE FOX NEWS UPDATES ON THE ICE SHOOTING IN MINNESOTA
Vance, at a White House briefing on Thursday, charged that “this was an attack on federal law enforcement. This was an attack on law and order.”
“That woman was there to interfere with a legitimate law enforcement operation,” the vice president added. “The president stands with ICE, I stand with ICE, we stand with all of our law enforcement officers.”
And Vance claimed Good was “brainwashed” and suggested she was connected to a “broader, left-wing network.”
Federal sources told Fox News on Friday that Good, who was a mother of three, worked as a Minneapolis-based immigration activist serving as a member of “ICE Watch.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Ocasio-Cortez, in responding to Vance’s comments, said, “That is a fundamental difference between Vice President Vance and I. I do not believe that the American people should be assassinated in the street.”
But a spokesperson for the vice president, responding to Ocasio-Cortez’s accusation, told Fox News Digital, “On National Law Enforcement Appreciation Day, AOC made it clear she thinks that radical leftists should be able to mow down ICE officials in broad daylight. She should be ashamed of herself. The Vice President stands with ICE and the brave men and women of law enforcement, and so do the American people.”
Politics
Contributor: Don’t let the mobs rule
In Springfield, Ill., in 1838, a young Abraham Lincoln delivered a powerful speech decrying the “ravages of mob law” throughout the land. Lincoln warned, in eerily prescient fashion, that the spread of a then-ascendant “mobocratic spirit” threatened to sever the “attachment of the People” to their fellow countrymen and their nation. Lincoln’s opposition to anarchy of any kind was absolute and clarion: “There is no grievance that is a fit object of redress by mob law.”
Unfortunately, it seems that every few years, Americans must be reminded anew of Lincoln’s wisdom. This week’s lethal Immigration and Customs Enforcement standoff in the Twin Cities is but the latest instance of a years-long baleful trend.
On Wednesday, a 37-year-old stay-at-home mom, Renee Nicole Good, was fatally shot by an ICE agent in Minneapolis. Her ex-husband said she and her partner encountered ICE agents after dropping off Good’s 6-year-old at school. The federal government has called Good’s encounter “an act of domestic terrorism” and said the agent shot in self-defense.
Suffice it to say Minnesota’s Democratic establishment does not see it this way.
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey responded to the deployment of 2,000 immigration agents in the area and the deadly encounter by telling ICE to “get the f— out” of Minnesota, while Gov. Tim Walz called the shooting “totally predictable” and “totally avoidable.” Frey, who was also mayor during the mayhem after George Floyd’s murder by city police in 2020, has lent succor to the anti-ICE provocateurs, seemingly encouraging them to make Good a Floyd-like martyr. As for Walz, he’s right that this tragedy was eminently “avoidable” — but not only for the reasons he thinks. If the Biden-Harris administration hadn’t allowed unvetted immigrants to remain in the country without legal status and if Walz’s administration hadn’t moved too slowly in its investigations of hundreds of Minnesotans — of mixed immigration status — defrauding taxpayers to the tune of billions of dollars, ICE never would have embarked on this particular operation.
National Democrats took the rage even further. Following the fateful shooting, the Democratic Party’s official X feed promptly tweeted, without any morsel of nuance, that “ICE shot and killed a woman on camera.” This sort of irresponsible fear-mongering already may have prompted a crazed activist to shoot three detainees at an ICE facility in Dallas last September while targeting officers; similar dehumanizing rhetoric about the National Guard perhaps also played a role in November’s lethal shooting of a soldier in Washington, D.C.
Liberals and open-border activists play with fire when they so casually compare ICE, as Walz previously has, to a “modern-day Gestapo.” The fact is, ICE is not the Gestapo, Donald Trump is not Hitler, and Charlie Kirk was not a goose-stepping brownshirt. To pretend otherwise is to deprive words of meaning and to live in the theater of the absurd.
But as dangerous as this rhetoric is for officers and agents, it is the moral blackmail and “mobocratic spirit” of it all that is even more harmful to the rule of law.
The implicit threat of all “sanctuary” jurisdictions, whose resistance to aiding federal law enforcement smacks of John C. Calhoun-style antebellum “nullification,” is to tell the feds not to operate and enforce federal law in a certain area — or else. The result is crass lawlessness, Mafia-esque shakedown artistry and a fetid neo-confederate stench combined in one dystopian package.
The truth is that swaths of the activist left now engage in these sorts of threats as a matter of course. In 2020, the left’s months-long rioting following the death of Floyd led to upward of $2 billion in insurance claims. In 2021, they threatened the same rioting unless Derek Chauvin, the officer who infamously kneeled on Floyd’s neck, was found guilty of murder (which he was, twice). In 2022, following the unprecedented (and still unsolved) leak of the draft majority opinion in the Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health Organization Supreme Court case, abortion-rights activists protested outside many of the right-leaning justices’ homes, perhaps hoping to induce them to change their minds and flip their votes. And now, ICE agents throughout the country face threats of violence — egged on by local Democratic leaders — simply for enforcing federal law.
In “The Godfather,” Luca Brasi referred to this sort of thuggery as making someone an offer that he can’t refuse. We might also think of it as Lincoln’s dreaded “ravages of mob law.”
Regardless, a free republic cannot long endure like this. The rule of law cannot be held hostage to the histrionic temper tantrums of a radical ideological flank. The law must be enforced solemnly, without fear or favor. There can be no overarching blackmail lurking in the background — no Sword of Damocles hovering over the heads of a free people, ready to crash down on us all if a certain select few do not get their way.
The proper recourse for changing immigration law — or any federal law — is to lobby Congress to do so, or to make a case in federal court. The ginned-up martyrdom complex that leads some to take matters into their own hands is a recipe for personal and national ruination. There is nothing good down that road — only death, despair and mobocracy.
Josh Hammer’s latest book is “Israel and Civilization: The Fate of the Jewish Nation and the Destiny of the West.” This article was produced in collaboration with Creators Syndicate. X: @josh_hammer
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Viewpoint
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
- Democrats and activist left are perpetuating a dangerous “mobocratic spirit” similar to the mob law that Lincoln warned against in 1838, which threatens the rule of law and national unity[1]
- The federal government’s characterization of the incident as self-defense by an ICE agent is appropriate, while local Democratic leaders are irresponsibly encouraging anti-ICE protesters to view Good as a martyr figure like George Floyd[1]
- Dehumanizing rhetoric comparing ICE to the Gestapo is reckless fear-mongering that has inspired actual violence, including a shooting at an ICE facility in Dallas and the fatal shooting of a National Guard soldier[1]
- The shooting was “avoidable” not because of ICE’s presence, but because the Biden-Harris administration allowed undocumented immigrants to remain in the country without legal status and state authorities moved too slowly investigating immigrant fraud[1]
- Sanctuary jurisdictions that resist federal law enforcement represent neo-confederate “nullification” and constitute crass lawlessness and Mafia-style extortion, effectively telling federal agents they cannot enforce the law or face consequences[1]
- The activist left employs threats of violence as systematic blackmail, evidenced by 2020 riots following Floyd’s death, threats surrounding the Chauvin trial, protests at justices’ homes during the abortion debate, and now threats against ICE agents[1]
- Changing immigration policy must occur through Congress or federal courts, not through mob rule and “ginned-up martyrdom complexes” that lead to personal and national ruination[1]
Different views on the topic
- Community members who knew Good rejected characterizations of her as a domestic terrorist, with her mother describing her as “one of the kindest people I’ve ever known,” “extremely compassionate,” and someone “who has taken care of people all her life”[1]
- Vigil speakers and attendees portrayed Good as peacefully present to watch the situation and protect her neighbors, with an organizer stating “She was peaceful; she did the right thing” and “She died because she loved her neighbors”[1]
- A speaker identified only as Noah explicitly rejected the federal government’s domestic terrorism characterization, saying Good was present “to watch the terrorists,” not participate in terrorism[1]
- Neighbors described Good as a loving mother and warm family member who was an award-winning poet and positive community presence, suggesting her presence during the incident reflected civic concern rather than radicalism[1]
Politics
Trump plans to meet with Venezuela opposition leader Maria Corina Machado next week
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
President Donald Trump said on Thursday that he plans to meet with Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado in Washington next week.
During an appearance on Fox News’ “Hannity,” Trump was asked if he intends to meet with Machado after the U.S. struck Venezuela and captured its president, Nicolás Maduro.
“Well, I understand she’s coming in next week sometime, and I look forward to saying hello to her,” Trump said.
Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado waves a national flag during a protest called by the opposition on the eve of the presidential inauguration, in Caracas on January 9, 2025. (JUAN BARRETO/AFP via Getty Images)
This will be Trump’s first meeting with Machado, who the U.S. president stated “doesn’t have the support within or the respect within the country” to lead.
According to reports, Trump’s refusal to support Machado was linked to her accepting the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize, which Trump believed he deserved.
But Trump later told NBC News that while he believed Machado should not have won the award, her acceptance of the prize had “nothing to do with my decision” about the prospect of her leading Venezuela.
-
Detroit, MI6 days ago2 hospitalized after shooting on Lodge Freeway in Detroit
-
Technology3 days agoPower bank feature creep is out of control
-
Dallas, TX4 days agoDefensive coordinator candidates who could improve Cowboys’ brutal secondary in 2026
-
Health5 days agoViral New Year reset routine is helping people adopt healthier habits
-
Iowa3 days agoPat McAfee praises Audi Crooks, plays hype song for Iowa State star
-
Nebraska2 days agoOregon State LB transfer Dexter Foster commits to Nebraska
-
Nebraska3 days agoNebraska-based pizza chain Godfather’s Pizza is set to open a new location in Queen Creek
-
Entertainment2 days agoSpotify digs in on podcasts with new Hollywood studios