Cross-Cutting Themes
Administrative Burdens Could Become Barriers to Access: Provisions related to work requirements, benefit eligibility, and program compliance introduce new administrative hurdles. Without built-in supports or streamlined processes, these requirements risk creating barriers for people with disabilities—particularly those who struggle with documentation, transportation, or access to legal/medical verification.
Disability Protections Are Inconsistent or Unclear: While some sections of the bill include language about exemptions or accommodations, the details are vague or absent. This inconsistency makes it difficult to assess how people with disabilities will be protected or supported and may lead to uneven implementation across states.
Potential Rollbacks to Critical Programs: Proposed changes to SNAP and Medicaid could reduce access or create harmful gaps in services, especially for individuals with non-apparent disabilities, those with undiagnosed conditions, or those living in poverty who rely on these supports to live independently.
Lack of Disability-Focused Data or Oversight Mechanisms: The bill does not appear to include strong measures for collecting or analyzing disaggregated disability data. Without targeted oversight or enforcement mechanisms, it may be difficult to identify whether reforms are helping or harming disabled people, or to course-correct if unintended consequences arise.
Disability Documentation Impacts: Policies relying on medical verification, for example, unfit-for-work certifications under the SNAP food assistance program, fail to recognize systemic barriers to obtaining documentation. Many people with disabilities lack healthcare access, while others have conditions that fluctuate or don’t fit binary disability classifications. The Death Master File checks risk erroneous disenrollments due to database errors. Our recommendations emphasize secondary verification.
These cross-cutting themes underscore the need for a disability equity lens to be applied throughout the legislative process. Strengthening language around exemptions, streamlining administrative processes, and centering lived experience in implementation will be critical to ensuring this bill does not deepen systemic inequities.
Overall Impact on Disability Community
The bill presents a harmful impact on people with disabilities. Most of the provisions that will affect people with disabilities threaten access to essential services, increase financial instability, and deepen systemic inequities.
Key concerns include:
1) Loss of Critical Benefits: Stricter SNAP work requirements, Medicaid eligibility checks, and FMAP cuts will likely lead to wrongful terminations, particularly for disabled individuals who struggle with documentation or fluctuating conditions. Reduced federal support for state programs like Home and Community-Based Services may force rationing of care and increased institutionalization of people with disabilities and older adults.
2) Increased Financial Hardship: The combination of pre-existing asset tests imposed on disabled people and the cost-sharing shifts in this bill could force them to impoverish themselves to qualify for care.
3) Administrative Burdens: Frequent redeterminations, complex verification rules, and a lack of disability accommodations in administrative processes create insurmountable barriers for many individuals with disabilities.
4) Discriminatory Design Flaws: Policies often ignore episodic disabilities, housing instability, and caregiving needs, favoring rigid, one-size-fits-all approaches that disparately impact the disability community.
5) Erosion of Community Living: Cuts to SNAP and Medicaid, including its effects on Home and Community-Based Services, undermines the protections in the Olmstead v. L.C. Supreme Court decision, risking a return to institutionalization for many individuals with disabilities.
Additional Recommendations
1) Protect and Expand Disability-Specific Safeguards: Exempt disabled people from harmful work requirements and frequent redetermination.
2) Fix Flawed Verification Systems: Automate approvals for SSI/SSDI recipients in Medicaid and SNAP. Ban punitive address checks and allow alternative documentation options.
3) Invest in Community-Based Care: Reject FMAP cuts and increase HCBS funding to prevent institutional bias. Require states to report on how cuts impact disabled people.
4) Monitor and Repair Harm: Mandate disability impact assessments for all future legislation. Fund independent oversight of enrollment/disenrollment trends.
What’s Next in the Legislative Process
The Budget Reconciliation Bill has been passed in the House (H.R.1) and a separate version of the bill is being considered in the Senate. Here’s what to expect in the coming weeks:
Senate Floor Debate and Vote: The bill will soon head to the Senate floor for debate and a vote. Because reconciliation bills require only a simple majority, the process will likely move quickly once it reaches this stage.
House Consideration: If the Senate passes the bill, the House will review it. The House may accept the Senate version or propose changes, which could require further reconciliation between the chambers.
Final Passage and Enactment: After both chambers pass the same version of the bill, it goes to the President for signature or veto.
This process may evolve rapidly, so staying prepared is essential. Disability Belongs™ will continue to monitor the bill’s progress, engage with key stakeholders, and advocate for changes that uphold the rights and access of people with disabilities.
