What is freaking me out about funding right now

 I'm at the ASBO conference this week in Fort Worth--ASBO is the Association of School Business Officials--and one of the "must attends" for me is always the federal policy update jointly done by ASBO and AASA (that would be the superintendents). This stems from that presentation yesterday.¹

Setting aside for a moment:

1. that we do not currently have an operating federal government
2. because we do not have a federal budget or continuing resolution
3. and that some of the proposals for the federal budget have been alarming

I want to talk here about something that is actually going to happen because it is actually law and appears to not be in what is being planned for, at least from what I have seen in Massachusetts.

In the (sigh) One Big Beautiful Bill--hereafter OB3²--there are substantial reductions to Medicaid and SNAP. The Republicans very carefully argue that there aren't funding reductions; that is because the reductions are through changing eligibility, verification processes, the cost sharing between state and federal government, and other provisions. 

This is bad for three different reasons:

1. It is bad for people to lose access to food and health care. I wish this were understood and accepted by all, but, as it is not, I am going to continue to note this. Nationally, 2 to 3 million CHILDREN are expected to lose SNAP benefits; 10 million people are expected to lose access to health care. That's just bad.
2. Medicaid and SNAP are among the programs that states use for direct certification for community eligibility for free lunch programs AND in Massachusetts, how we determine our low income count, as well covered by State House News Service last month. Fewer kids in those programs = fewer kids counted as low income even as their income doesn't change.
3. These changes put states in the position of both picking up more of the projected costs, even post these cuts, as well as dealing with the outfall from these cuts, that is, more people losing access to health care and food.

It is the first part of the third item here that I want to wave a big flag on. The first I saw of this was the report I shared earlier this month, in which Georgetown Law's Center on Poverty and Inequality estimates a 477% increase in costs of SNAP to Massachusetts, from $91M to $530M.
And that's just SNAP. I have not been able to find a similar report on Medicaid, but it's needed. 
Medicaid is the major revenue stream to Massachusetts from the federal government, and it's a major part of what supports our state budget: of this year's $61B state budget, $15B is federal reimbursement, much of which is Medicaid, which was $12B of that the prior year. 

THIS IS A LOT OF MONEY. 

WHERE ARE WE GOING TO GET IT FROM?

Note that part of what is included in OB3 is not only that the federal/state split changes, but the federal law also limits the ability of states to raise taxes on providers to provide their side of the revenue. Thus we're getting less from the federal government and they made new rules on where you can get new money from.

I have scoured every bit of reporting that has come across my desk on the state budget. I have yet to see this mentioned. While this phases in, work requirements for SNAP are supposed to start next month, and the revenue shifts--which again ARE ALREADY LAW--start next year.

It's disturbing to me to see the Governor, for example, blithely release the held earmarks³ of this year, as if there aren't worries here. I have not seen mention of this, though I'd absolutely welcome being very wrong, and that there is grand planning happening on this. 

There are many, many ways in which I differ with the governing of my state, but we do tend not to be complete disasters on budget management in my experience. 
What's the plan here? 
----------------------
¹in a session that opened "I hope you've had your coffee"
²credit here to Elleka Yost of ASBO, who commented that it sounds like "a reject Star Wars character"
³Yes, I know $125M isn't a lot comparatively. But earmarks are always an indulgence and hugely inequitable, and this would be a good chance to say 'this isn't the time'