“Work requirements” won’t work for Oklahoma

Few policy ideas have proven as persistent — or misleading — as the notion that forcing people to work will lift them out of poverty. The Big Beautiful Bill, or House Resolution 1 (H.R. 1), revives that same flawed logic: the so-called “work requirements” in it are another misguided attempt to legislate personal responsibility. Framed as a way to encourage work and independence, these policies are not about responsibility at all — they’re about paperwork. Instead of helping families find stability, they create systems that judge worthiness through forms and reporting, not effort or need.

The bill requires Oklahomans receiving Medicaid (aka SoonerCare) or SNAP (aka food stamps) to prove each month that they’re working, job-hunting, or volunteering. In theory, that sounds simple. In practice, it’s an administrative maze designed to reduce participation in these programs — one that ultimately strips away care, food, and stability from people who already have jobs, care for family members, or are just between shifts.

This isn’t about motivating people — it’s about systems built to fail the very people who rely on them most. Most Oklahomans who receive Medicaid or SNAP already work or care for dependents. The real barrier isn’t laziness; it’s instability: unpredictable hours, transportation problems, gaps in child care access, or simply the grind of low-wage work that doesn’t come with steady schedules, healthcare, or paid leave.

The reality of low-wage work in Oklahoma

For low-income adults, the main barriers to work are economic conditions beyond their control — factors such as low job availability and the volatility of hourly work. Based on Oklahoma Policy Institute’s analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics data, over half of working Oklahomans are paid hourly, and more than one million hold jobs without guaranteed 40-hour schedules. Work requirements don’t account for that instability. They assume a predictable 9-to-5 world that simply doesn’t exist for most working families.

Based on OK Policy analysis of U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey (CPS)

Nationwide, about 20 percent of adults enrolled in Medicaid worked part-time in 2023. Among those part-time workers, many cited shorter workweeks (less than 35 hours per week, 16 percent), “slack work or business conditions” (12 percent — meaning slow business periods or reduced demand that limit available hours), or inability to find full-time work (7 percent). These are economic realities, not personal choices. People can’t “willpower” their way into a 40-hour job when their employer can’t offer it.

We’ve seen this before — and it doesn’t work

If there were truly large numbers of people who could work but simply choose not to, we’d expect to see employment spike once work requirements take effect — people would rush to find jobs to keep their benefits. 

We’ve seen work requirements play out poorly before, and history doesn’t lie. In Arkansas’s 2018 Medicaid work-reporting rule, more than 18,000 people lost coverage within months — not because they refused to work, but because they missed a form or didn’t have internet access. No surge in employment followed. In Georgia, the Pathways to Coverage program was meant to show how work requirements could expand coverage while encouraging employment. Instead, the program enrolled only a tiny fraction of eligible people. More telling is the story of Luke Seaborn, a small-business mechanic who was tapped to be the face of that program — shown in a promotional video saying, “Pathways is a great program.” But within months, his benefits were cancelled — twice — because of state-added forms and system glitches.

The problem isn’t willingness — it’s opportunity. There’s no surge in employment because many companies aren’t offering wages or positions that allow people to survive. The vast majority of people receiving these benefits who can work already do, or they’re actively searching and facing barriers beyond their control.

The real cost for Oklahoma

The result isn’t greater accountability — it’s bureaucratic punishment. When Oklahomans lose SNAP or SoonerCare because of missed paperwork or online reporting errors, they don’t just lose benefits. They lose stability. Families see worse health outcomes, hospitals absorb the costs of unpaid medical bills, and households have less to spend — potentially triggering a $3.8 billion nationwide reduction in economic activity.

Rural hospitals are especially vulnerable — and Oklahoma illustrates that crisis clearly. Nearly two-thirds of the state’s rural hospitals (46 total) are at risk of closure, and 24 (31 percent) are at immediate risk, some of the highest numbers in the country. As more uninsured patients show up in emergency rooms, uncompensated care costs rise — threatening already financially fragile hospitals and shrinking access to care in communities that can least afford it.

Children, veterans, rural residents, and older adults are often caught in the fallout. Meanwhile, the state spends more money chasing paperwork than helping people find work or stay healthy. The result is predictable: no increase in employment, just more people uninsured and more families pushed deeper into poverty.

Work can open doors — but punishing people for poverty doesn’t make anyone more employable. Oklahoma deserves policies that work for our communities and build opportunity, not bureaucracy.