Nebraska and other states are hoarding more than $5 billion intended for struggling families, according to
new analysis.

In 2019, for every 100 Nebraska families living in poverty, only 17 were getting cash assistance through the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, program. Ashley Burnside, a policy analyst with the Center for Law and Social Policy, explained that states gradually have been closing the door to federal funds, even during the pandemic.

"States have changed the eligibility requirements for the program," she said, "and it's become harder and harder for parents to access the program - despite there being a high level of financial need in the state."

According to federal data, Nebraska - along with Arkansas, Mississippi and Texas - denied nearly 90% of applications from families seeking emergency relief. The Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services, the agency charged with distributing TANF funds, has not yet responded to a request for comments.

Welfare reforms passed under the Clinton administration gave broad leeway to states for how TANF funds should be distributed, and a provision meant to prevent hoarding was left out of the final legislation. Some officials have warned that welfare discourages work and creates dependency, but Burnside noted that most families living in poverty already are working, and government assistance has been readily available to banks and industry.

"Just because families are poor, that doesn't mean that the government shouldn't be there to support them when they're having a financial emergency," she said, "and it's not a child's fault if their parents cannot secure a job."

Burnside said she believes keeping money intended for families with children is short-sighted, because investing in children's well-being pays off down the road. When kids have stable housing and nutrition, they do better in school, earn better wages as adults and become financially independent.

"When you're hoarding the money and not providing it to families as they're facing poverty, that doesn't do anything to help the child," she said. "States shouldn't be sitting on money that they have when they could be providing emergency financial support to families that are just barely making it month to month."

Today is National Caregivers Day, recognizing those who help friends or family members who are living with an illness, injury or disability.

A 2024 report painted a picture of Montanans who rely on public assistance, a picture largely populated by caregivers.

The report, commissioned by the Headwaters Foundation, found about one in four Montana families, or 120,000, received income-based public assistance in a given year after Medicaid expansion. It noted most are working families with children, or family members who are older or disabled.

Bryce Ward, founder of ABMJ Consulting, compiled the report.

"It's not hard to imagine how they got into this situation," Ward pointed out. "They're just low-income workers or the people for whom it's hard to work. They're old or disabled, or they have kids or other caregiving responsibilities."

Medicaid expansion is getting a lot of attention in the current Montana Legislature. House Bill 245, which would continue the program beyond its original June sunset date, was referred to the Senate Committee on Finance and Claims yesterday after passing the House earlier this month.

A big takeaway from the report is there is no "typical" participant in public assistance and many who need it use it for brief time periods. Ward cautioned conversations in the policy and media spaces can have what he called a "dehumanizing element." He hopes the report will change it.

"These populations include all the different types of people in Montana," Ward stressed. "You probably know lots of people who have, or are on, income-based public assistance."

The median family of three with income around the poverty line receives about $400 a month in benefits, according to the report.


get more stories like this via email

South Dakotans passed Amendment F on Election Day, opening the door to impose work requirements on people who qualify for expanded Medicaid benefits.

Opponents said it could interrupt health treatment for those fighting cancer and other diseases. Any bill outlining work requirements for Medicaid would still need state passage and federal approval.

A report from the Congressional Budget Office on the effects of a similar rule finds it would reduce federal spending, decrease the number of people with health insurance and would not increase employment.

Ben Hanson, South Dakota government relations director for the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, said it would also cost the state.

"For the most part, state health departments will tell you, you're not going to save money by doing this," Hanson asserted. "You're going to wind up spending more to create a bureaucracy to oversee this new set of forms and paperwork they have to fill out, for an already qualifying population."

President-elect Donald Trump approved work requirements in 13 states during his last term, all of which were rescinded or withdrawn under President Joe Biden. South Dakota is one of nine states with pending programs or legislation to allow them.

Most adults with Medicaid benefits who are able to work are doing so. According to the health research organization KFF, of those under age 65 who do not have other state-sponsored care, 91% are either working, or not working because they are students, caregivers or are ill themselves. Hanson said, for instance, many people who go through cancer treatment miss work for several months because of its physical toll.

"This could take away your coverage for getting that treatment while you're trying to get better so you can go be an employee again," Hanson noted. "And more importantly, so you can survive your cancer diagnosis."

Hanson added work requirements might also prevent early cancer detection, which leads to more expensive treatment and worse outcomes.


get more stories like this via email

A new report from the Headwaters Foundation in Montana showed at least half the people who receive public assistance are only enrolled for one year, dispelling a myth recipients are getting long-term government aid.

Nearly two-thirds of people only receive one form of assistance. More than 120,000 Montana families receive government aid every year, based on their income.

Erin Switalski, program director for the foundation, said they wanted to know who the recipients are, why they are enrolled in public assistance programs and for how long.

"People are really receiving public assistance for short periods of time," Switalski reported. "We found that folks primarily are caregivers in the family. So, they might be caring for children; they might be caring for parents or an older adult."

The report found Montana's public assistance programs lift 69% of older adults and 44% of children out of poverty, and the numbers could be higher. The report estimated 40% of Montana families who are eligible for help do not get it because a variety of barriers prevent them from enrolling.

Bryce Ward, founder of ABMJ Consulting, was commissioned by the foundation to do the study, called "Supporting Our Neighbors." Ward said the variety of people on public assistance was surprising and well over half don't receive these benefits for more than a year.

"Those that are in for the longer periods of time are probably those you might imagine, right?" Ward observed. "They's the people who report more disabilities, families with young kids, and single parents."

The report also found 97% of families with children who receive public assistance but have no aging or disabled members in the household have at least one person who works full-time.