The work written for The Washington Post by Amy Goldstein talks about the blockage of Medicaid work requirements in the states of Kentucky and Arkansas by a federal judge. The article notes that a federal judge based in Washington rejected a Kentucky program that sought to compel poor people to work for them to access healthcare benefits. The judge’s ruling suspended the permissions that the Health and Human Services Department (HHS) had granted Kentucky and Arkansas, noting the department had to reconsider the impacts of the permissions on the poor people. Goldstein says that in making the ruling, Judge James E. Boasberg noted that, by letting Kentucky proceed with the requirements, the HHS had been arbitrary and erratic. The judge also mentioned that the states could not refashion the Medicaid program away from how Congress had designed it (Goldstein). The article concludes by noting that the federal judge’s ruling could have ripple effects in other states where the HHS had authorized the states to impose similar Medicaid requirements.
This article presents an example of federalism in action; it describes an example of a federal organ interacting with the state governments. In this case, the federal judge applied the aspect of ‘preemption,’ which allows the federal law to overrule or supersede the state or local laws. The article relates to the class readings and lecture video, first, by talking about federalism, and secondly by explaining how the federal laws’ supremacy overrides the state laws. The work also presents an example of how, in federalism, the federal government interacts with the local and state governments on various aspects, such as healthcare programs, as described in the class readings.
Reference
Goldstein, Amy. “Federal Judge Blocks Medicaid Work Requirements in Kentucky and Arkansas.” The Washington Post, 2019. Web.