The study does not have a lot of existing evidence to examine, since it's only recently in the past year that states have begun implementing work requirements.

However, it points to projections by the Congressional Budget Office about the reduction in employment due to the Affordable Care Act (including insurance subsidies and the Medicaid expansion). Studies that have sought to examine the link between Medicaid benefits and employment have been “mixed,” the Buckeye authors conceded.

Federal law currently prohibits work requirements for Medicaid benefits, but the Trump administration has granted waivers to four states and is considering three more. Indiana, Arizona, Arkansas, Michigan and Ohio want to require enrollees to work 20 hours a week or 80 hours a month, while New Hampshire will require 100 hours of work a month.

Opponents of work requirements argue that there's little evidence that people who don't face major barriers to employment are forgoing work due to Medicaid benefits.

“Among the adult Medicaid enrollees who were not working, most report major impediments to their ability to work including illness or disability or care-giving responsibilities,” said the Kaiser Family Foundation in a recent report. “While proponents of work requirements say such provisions aim to promote work for those who are not working, these policies could have negative implications on many who are working or exempt from the requirements. For example, coverage for working or exempt enrollees may be at risk if enrollees face administrative obstacles in verifying their work status or documenting an exemption.”

Read more: 

• More skip care in states lacking Medicaid expansion
• Work requirements in other states advance despite Kentucky Medicaid ruling
• CMS releases Medicaid 'scorecards,' but what do they mean?