Michigan the latest to roll out Medicaid work rules. Can it avoid pitfalls?

Attorney Krista Nordberg, Washtenaw Health Plan’s director of enrollment and advocacy services, worries that thousands of vulnerable Michiganders won’t know they could lose health coverage if they don’t submit work documents. (Bridge photo by Robin Erb)

Michigan Health Watch is made possible by generous financial support from the Michigan Health Endowment Fund, the Michigan Association of Health Plans, and the Michigan Health and Hospital Association. The monthly mental health special report is made possible by generous financial support of the Ethel & James Flinn Foundation. Please visit the Michigan Health Watch 'About' page for more information.

Dreaded by some as a red-tape attack on the poor and lauded by others as a road to self-sufficiency, Michigan’s Medicaid work requirements are now in force.

Since Jan. 1, more than 238,000 Michiganders ages 19 to 62 have been required to work at least 80 hours a month or produce a documentable reason why they are not working, such as being pregnant or enrolled in school. And starting Jan. 25, they will have to file monthly reports with the state documenting their status.  

If they fail to do so, they can lose their health coverage under Healthy Michigan, the state’s expanded Medicaid program, starting May 1.

After more than a year of preparation — catchy and colorful letters to recipients and trainings with consumer advocates — some fear that thousands of Michiganders remain unaware of their state reporting obligations, even among those that received letters.

Some may have been confused by the notices. Some letters may have been lost, or discarded as junk mail.

“People don't realize that they're subject to the requirements until they get cut off” from health coverage, said Lisa Ruby, an attorney with the Michigan Poverty Law Program, which asked a federal court in November to stop the program, saying the work law threatens “irreparable harm to the health and welfare of the poorest and most vulnerable in our country.”

But supporters of the work requirement argue there has been plenty of time to reach those who are affected. The program, they say, will boost Michigan’s economy and help guide able-bodied participants in the Medicaid expansion program on a path to economic self-sufficiency.

The Michigan Chamber of Commerce cites a state “workforce shortage and talent gap” that leaves as many as 100,000 jobs currently unfilled.

Work requirements and “could help employers with their labor shortages and create a pathway for independence for enrollees,” Wendy Block, the chamber’s vice president of business advocacy, told Bridge Magazine.

Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey, a Clarklake Republican who sponsored the 2018 work rule law and co-sponsored a 2019 law to ease compliance reporting rules, said implementation “can’t happen fast enough.”


Republican Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey of Clarklake said state health officials have had enough time to give residents adequate notice of impending work rules. He says the rules promote self-sufficiency among Michigan’s poor. (Bridge photo by Dale Young)

“They need time to do their job, and I’m not going to stand on the sideline and throw darts at them until they’ve had time to do that,” Shirkey said of the state Department of Health and Human Services, which is responsible for outreach and will administer the program.

“But they know that we’re going to have a conversation — maybe even an oversight hearing — pretty soon on how that rollout’s going,” Shirkey said.

For now, Michigan has the nation’s only active program requiring those protected under state Medicaid expansion to work for coverage, with programs in several other states blocked by court orders.

The Trump administration opened the door to work rules in early 2018 when it issued guidelines that allowed states to compel working age, able-bodied Medicaid recipients to work or meet other requirements to receive benefits. 

The federal government has since approved Medicaid work rules in 10 states, including South Carolina last month. Some states, like Ohio, are hammering out details of the program before launch.

Five states trying to implement work rules have seen their programs blocked in court or voluntarily suspended by the state.

The first attempt unfolded in a high-profile debacle in Arkansas in 2018, where more than 18,000 people lost Medicaid benefits under rules similar to those in Michigan. A report in the New England Journal of Medicine concluded that half of Arkansas’s Medicaid recipients were confused, incorrectly believing they did not meet the work requirements. Others didn’t have Internet access to meet that state’s reporting requirements. (Arkansas, unlike Michigan, only allowed online filing of work documentation.)

U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg blocked the Arkansas program, as well as programs in Kentucky and New Hampshire, finding the federal government had failed to show how setting employment conditions met the basic mission of Medicaid to provide health coverage. In December, Kentucky’s new governor, Democrat Andy Beshear, signed an order to end the program installed by his Republican predecessor.

Indiana, which had begun to require work, pulled back its program in the face of court challenges and uncertainty, and Arizona announced in October that it was postponing its program because of the “evolving national landscape concerning Medicaid community engagement programs and ongoing litigation.”

Though Whitmer and Gordon oppose work rules, Michigan’s GOP-led Legislature left them little choice. State lawmakers passed a 2018 law, later signed by then-Gov. Rick Snyder, to require the implementation of work rules  — leaving Whitmer no choice but to enforce them, said University of Michigan law professor Nicholas Bagley, who has written about the legal twists of the federal Affordable Care Act and its programs and problems since it was passed in 2010.

Robert Gordon

Robert Gordon, director of the Michigan Department of Health & Human Services, will oversee the state’s new Medicaid work rules under Democrat Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, despite legal uncertainty and his and Whitmer’s criticism that the program could cost thousands of residents essential health coverage. (Courtesy photo)

Still, plenty of uncertainty lingers — what MDHHS director Gordon has called “a dark legal cloud” in a recent written statement.

His department has estimated the work requirement “will strip away health insurance from more than 100,000 Michiganders.” 

But with a legislative mandate to move forward, Gordon and his department last year overhauled its communication strategy as it tried to avoid the confusion that marred rollout of the Arkansas law. 

In contrast to its first mailing last year that was criticized as bureaucratic and largely ignored, a second mailing to Healthy Michigan recipients was brightly colored, with simple language and bright blue and yellow caution triangles with large print that read “Don’t lose your coverage.”

The most immediate and direct legal threat to the Michigan work law was filed in November in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.— just as Michigan readied its third and final letters to beneficiaries alerting them to the pending requirements.

The case against work rules

In Young v. Azar, four women argue that Medicaid work requirements are politically motivated and run counter to the mission of Medicaid and the 2010 Affordable Care Act. Between 61,000 and 183,000 individuals will lose health coverage as a result of the work requirements, according to the suit, echoing a report released earlier in 2019 by the national law firm Manatt, Phelps & Phillips LLP.

The plaintiffs are described as people stitching together odd jobs, working part-time or are disabled, though they don’t have an official designation as disabled. Some are helping with grandchildren and extended families, said Ruby, the attorney representing the four women.

“Most people believe that health leads to working,” said Ruby, noting that the legal arguments mark an ideological divide. “I believe everyone should have health insurance.”

Meanwhile, the Trump administration has appealed Boasberg’s decision in the Kentucky and Arkansas programs to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. That court’s decision could have implications for Michigan’s work rules, said Robin Rudowitz, vice president of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonprofit that focuses on health care and tracks legislation related to health reform.

Michigan’s work rules could also be knocked sideways by another legal challenge, one that could take years to sort out.

As the last wave of third-round letters hit Michigan mailboxes in December, a federal court in Texas ruled the Affordable Care Act (ACA) invalid in a 2-1 decision. The court reasoned that the congressional decision in 2017 to eliminate tax penalties associated with the law’s individual mandate renders the mandate, and therefore the entire ACA, invalid. 

If the 10-year-old ACA topples, so too, will Medicaid expansion and the work requirements that are part of it.

Said U-M”s Bagley: “If the entire ACA goes away, there’s no reason to continue fighting over work requirements.”

Moving ahead

For now, Michigan moves ahead with its work rules, spending at least $28 million so far getting ready, with another $40 million in costs expected this fiscal year, Gov. Whitmer argued to the Legislature in December in another plea to stall the program.

All the while, consumer advocates say they worry about 238,000 people who in less than two weeks must begin documenting where they work or study, or why they should be exempt from the law. 

“Some people are still in the dark, and that might be because they’re not checking their mail or they haven’t been in contact with MDHHS,” said Stephine Deeren, who helps people obtain and keep health coverage at the Traverse Health Clinic in Traverse City.

Others are “frustrated and worried they could lose health coverage. Some people are in that panic survival mode. ‘Do I qualify? Don’t I qualify?’”

work rules

As a top state health official, MDHHS Director Robert Gordon has tried to simplify paperwork for Medicaid beneficiaries including what once was a 18,409-word application for public assistance. Gordon now oversees outreach to more than 238,000 low-income adults who —  if not engaged — could lose health coverage under new work requirements. (Bridge photo by Robin Erb)

“There’s still this confusion, and we’re expecting people — people who are trying to pay their rent or keep their utilities on — to log on to some website they may or may not be able to navigate or to make a phone call and be put on hold for God-knows-how-long, just to make sure they’re working?” said Krista Nordberg, who is Washtenaw Health Plan’s director of enrollment and advocacy services in Ypsilanti. “It just doesn’t make sense.”

But at some point, the state must move forward, said Jarrett Skorup, spokesman for the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a free-market think tank. The group supports work requirements as a way to incentivize people to work and reduce the state’s budget burden.

Other benefits programs — food assistance, for example — require beneficiaries to work. “This shouldn’t be overly difficult to do,” he said.

“We certainly don’t want people to be kicked off [health coverage] that shouldn’t be kicked off,” Skorup said. “On the other hand, we don’t want a situation where the [state health] department stalls just because they don’t want to implement it.”

Bridge reporter Jonathan Oosting contributed to this report.

Facts matter. Trust matters. Journalism matters.

If you learned something from the story you're reading please consider supporting our work. Your donation allows us to keep our Michigan-focused reporting and analysis free and accessible to all. All donations are voluntary, but for as little as $1 you can become a member of Bridge Club and support freedom of the press in Michigan during a crucial election year.

Pay with VISA Pay with MasterCard Pay with American Express Donate now

Comment Form

Add new comment

Dear Reader: We value your thoughts and criticism on the articles, but insist on civility. Criticizing comments or ideas is welcome, but Bridge won’t tolerate comments that are false or defamatory or that demean, personally attack, spread hate or harmful stereotypes. Violating these standards could result in a ban.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.


Tue, 01/14/2020 - 7:49am

I expect this will be just as messed up and disorganized as other states, does Michigan have a smooth roll out to any new program? I would not want to be one of the state employees having to deal with the angry and confused people who don't understand what is going on.

Tue, 01/14/2020 - 8:32am

So my 95 year old mother who is on Medicaid now has to find a job!!!!

Health writer R...
Tue, 01/14/2020 - 9:33am

Hi Don. The program is limited to those men and women who are 19 to 62 years old, and there are several exemptions. You can find out more about the exemptions, limits and requirements at my companion piece "Five things to know about Michigan's Medicaid work rules. Thanks for reading and reaching out. - Robin

Tue, 01/14/2020 - 10:28am

If you read, you would find that this only applies to 19 to 62 year old people, with a ton of other exceptions, such as pregnant or were pregnant in the previous two months, medically frail due to physical, mental, or emotional conditions that limits a daily activity, like bathing; have a physical, intellectual, or developmental disability, a chronic substance use disorder (SUD),in a nursing home, hospice, receive home help services, homeless, or a survivor of domestic violence, the main caretaker for a family member under 6, full-time students
under age 21, and in Michigan foster care, prison or jail in the last 6 months, receive State of Michigan unemployment benefits.

So most receiving Medicaid are exempt from the work rule requirements. Those that should be working are only required to work part time, and other things count as work.

No, I don't think your 95 year old mother will have to look for a job.

Tue, 01/14/2020 - 10:42am

The other article"Five things to Know About Michigan Medicaid Work Rules" says " The work rules apply only to a portion of Michigan’s 662,000 people who secured health insurance under Healthy Michigan. These are the roughly 238,000 people ages 19 to 62 who the state concludes are able-bodied adults receiving benefits through the state’s expanded Medicaid program made possible by the 2010 Affordable Care Act." The article says there are also exemptions for:
"pregnant or were pregnant in the previous two months,
medically frail due to physical, mental, or emotional conditions that limits a daily activity, like bathing; have a physical, intellectual, or developmental disability
a chronic substance use disorder (SUD),
in a nursing home, hospice, receive home help services
homeless, or a survivor of domestic violence,
the main caretaker for a family member under 6,
full-time students
under age 21 and in Michigan foster care, prison or jail in the last 6 months,
receive State of Michigan unemployment benefits"

They also list 3 months a calendar year can be volunteer work. I wonder if working for political campaigns will count.

Tue, 01/14/2020 - 9:02am

People don’t seem to have any trouble getting on free programs. Why should we expect that there will be problems with them staying on programs?

Tue, 01/14/2020 - 9:22am

Like the BIG corporations that get Billions in welfare!!!!

Tue, 01/14/2020 - 9:21am

It is costing more to rum the program then to pay for their medicaid!!!
For now, Michigan moves ahead with its work rules, spending at least $28 million so far getting ready, with another $40 million in costs expected this fiscal year, Gov. Whitmer argued to the Legislature in December in another plea to stall the program.

Tue, 01/14/2020 - 9:28am

Of course the state government will mismanage this requirement. Government is not a management organization. Then you couple the oversight with employees who’s job is directly dependent on having a market of dependent consumers, in this case people on Medicaid.
The facts are clear on that and on we are only hurting people by creating a dependency and by spending other people’s hard earned money. We should always keep that in mind. It is vitally important to be prudent with other people’s earnings.

Kellie F.
Tue, 01/14/2020 - 1:20pm

Brilliant! I disagree that this ruling will cause issues to the "poor" who aren't currently working but who ARE able to work. If you're working at all, then you are improving your situation as well as your self-esteem. In addition, you're lessening the burden on those who work and give tax dollars to support the non-working. In the opinion of those of us who are forced to work 160+ hours a month just to afford insurance, 80 hours a month is NOT too much to ask. Bravo, Michigan!

Allan Blackburn
Tue, 01/14/2020 - 3:12pm

It will cost a lot to administer this program, it is burdensome to require a monthly reporting requirement and it is designed to throw vulnerable people off of assistance. It's the cruelty that counts. It was never put in place during an all Republican government and Rick Snyder believed that Medicaid expansion was good for our state. It has been. It has created many middle class jobs with clinic creation and expansions, brought federal match monies in to the state and has helped keep a part of our population healthy and more likely to remain in the workforce. When you talk about such a low employment rate in this country these policies are designed for one purpose, to destroy social safety nets. If this was administered fairly you would make the ultra wealthy jump though numerous hoops to get those enormous tax give aways which cause the deficit to expand to epic proportions with none of the acrimony the Tea Party created over them during the last administration. Now deficits no longer matter. The give away is over a trillion dollars per year and you are looking at a potential saving of a billion dollars. The ignorant people commenting here are usually the lucky ones who have a decent job, with employer sponsored healthcare and are supposedly Christians who believe in Jesus yet display cruelty towards their fellow person because they cannot walk a mile in someone else's shoes. Try being a part of the working poor where you have stitched a few poor paying jobs just to make ends meet and then try to jump through these pathetic hoops just to keep the healthcare that is keeping yourself and your family held together. I detest the attitudes that make you think that your taxpayer dollars are more special than the poor who also pay taxes. Like I said; it's the cruelty that counts.

Wed, 01/15/2020 - 5:27am

I absolutely agree with everything you have said. I cannot fathom the level of outright cruelty that seems to have increased in this country over the last few years. "Let's deny people health care; let's deny people food assistance. Isn't that wonderful? Hooray for us! We have ours. Who cares about anyone in need?" The selfishness and lack of empathy is incredible. What the "we have ours" folks do not realize is that anyone can become poor and/or need help. A health issue, bankruptcy due to medical bills, a downturn in the market, a lost job -- no one is immune from poverty. I am sickened by what the supposedly "greatest country in the world" has become. Yes, cruelty is the point, https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/the-cruelty-is-the-poi...

Wed, 01/15/2020 - 7:25am

Who cares about people who do not work? I am sure most of them have legitimate reasons for not working. There is not enough money in any kind of state aid for a person to live high on the hog regardless of what republicans say about lazy people and living on the dole.

Tue, 02/04/2020 - 9:40am

Did the program in the 90’s called Work First last long in Michigan? No. Our unemployment rate is high if u look at per county or per city instead of as the whole state as a whole. Working to receive food assistance didn’t last back then and working to receive Medicaid won’t work either.