This isn't definitive, but my guess would be that surveys have just gotten worse at measuring this, and the trends are ~flat

Funny that this is discussed largely as an aside in a paper about migration responses to Medicaid expansion—pinning down this descriptive fact is arguably more important than the underlying causal question

Again, this is a defensible choice but a new one for the CBO (they previously assumed 100% of the cost of Medicaid accrued on recipients) and one that makes OBBB look significantly less bad for low income households

Here's the footnote with the details www.cbo.gov/system/files...

And finally the paper they cite for allocating 60% of the cost of Medicaid to providers (I'm assuming it's 60%---they don't give a number but that's the number in the paper) www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/...

Links to distributional analysis
www.cbo.gov/publication/...
Links to CBO previously saying they allocated full cost of Medicaid to beneficiaries
www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=...
www.cbo.gov/system/files...

Important context here is the CBO is currently being baselessly attacked by the right as biased towards Democrats, while this analytical choice is important to making OBBB look way less bad.

I think this is the first time CBO didn’t allocate the cost of providing Medicaid to Medicaid recipients in its distributional analysis—as late as 2024 their methodology allocated the full cost of Medicaid to beneficiaries.

I think this is a defensible choice but one that makes OBBB look a lot less bad for the poor, given the bulk of the cuts are to Medicaid. If CBO is using the figures in the paper they cite, $480 of the $800 billion in cuts to Medicaid are allocated to higher income groups

H/t @danielkayhertz.bsky.social for pointing to the new cook county policy.

Even though HACC are trying not to evict people currently getting vouchers by stopping subsidies, forcing people to move to cheaper places will have the same effect.

39% of people issued vouchers do not find a landlord willing to lease to them. So when people are forced to move, there’s a big risk that they will lose their voucher all-together.  www.huduser.gov/portal//port...

Other changes are to virtually stop all rent increases (another thing that will force people to move), and not let a family move into places that cost more than where they currently live, even if the new place is under the new subsidy standard.

Some families might have cheaper units and can keep their “extra” bedroom under the new rules, and others may be allowed to pay above the standard 30% for rent, but some families will certainly be forced to move due to this change.

Under the old rules, a single parent with one kid would get two bedrooms, and two parents with opposite sex teenagers would get three bedrooms.
thehacc.org/app/uploads/...

In my reading, the biggest move is to set payment standards to two people per bedroom. A single parent with one kid now needs to make do with a one bedroom unit, or two parents with opposite sex teenagers will have to make-do with two bedrooms.

Link to new policy here: thehacc.org/app/uploads/...

I do feel a bit trepidatious drawing attention to it, as Republicans don’t like to hear their ideas might be wrong www.nytimes.com/2012/11/02/b...