After Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fired Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Susan Monarez for refusing what her lawyers called “,” Newsom to help modernize California’s public health system. He also gave a job to Debra Houry, the agency’s former chief science and medical officer, who had resigned in protest hours after Monarez’s firing.

Newsom also teamed up with fellow Democratic governors Tina Kotek of Oregon, Bob Ferguson of Washington, and Josh Green of Hawaii to form the , a regional public health agency, whose guidance would “uphold scientific integrity in public health as Trump destroys” the CDC’s credibility. Newsom argued establishing the independent alliance was vital as Kennedy leads the Trump administration’s rollback of national vaccine recommendations.

More recently, California became the a global outbreak response network coordinated by the World Health Organization, followed by Illinois and New York. Colorado and Wisconsin signaled they plan to join. They did so after President Donald Trump officially from the agency on the grounds that it had “strayed from its core mission and has acted contrary to the U.S. interests in protecting the U.S. public on multiple occasions.” Newsom said joining the WHO-led consortium would enable California to respond faster to communicable disease outbreaks and other public health threats.

Although other Democratic governors and public health leaders have openly criticized the federal government, few have been as outspoken as Newsom, who is considering a run for president in 2028 and is in his second and final term as governor. Members of the scientific community have praised his effort to build a public health bulwark against the Trump administration’s slashing of funding and scaling back of vaccine recommendations.

What Newsom is doing “is a great idea,” said Paul Offit, an outspoken critic of Kennedy and a vaccine expert who formerly served on the Food and Drug Administration’s vaccine advisory committee but was removed under Trump in 2025.

“Public health has been turned on its head,” Offit said. “We have an anti-vaccine activist and science denialist as the head of U.S. Health and Human Services. It’s dangerous.”

The White House did not respond to questions about Newsom’s stance and HHS declined requests to interview Kennedy. Instead, federal health officials criticized Democrats broadly, arguing that blue states are participating in fraud and mismanagement of federal funds in public health programs.

HHS spokesperson Emily Hilliard said the administration is going after “Democrat-run states that pushed unscientific lockdowns, toddler mask mandates, and draconian vaccine passports during the covid era.” She said those moves have “completely eroded the American people’s trust in public health agencies.”

Public Health Guided by Science

Since Trump returned to office, Newsom has criticized the president and his administration for engineering policies that he sees as an affront to public health and safety, labeling federal leaders as “extremists” trying to “weaponize the CDC and spread misinformation.” He has for erroneously linking vaccines to autism, the administration is endangering the lives of infants and young children in scaling back childhood vaccine recommendations. And he argued that the White House is unleashing “chaos” on America’s public health system in backing out of the WHO.

The governor declined an interview request. Newsom spokesperson Marissa Saldivar said it’s a priority of the governor “to protect public health and provide communities with guidance rooted in science and evidence, not politics and conspiracies.”

The Trump administration’s moves have triggered financial uncertainty that local officials said has reduced morale within public health departments and left states unprepared for disease outbreaks and . The White House last year proposed cutting HHS spending , including . Congress largely rejected those cuts last month, although funding for programs focusing on social drivers of health, such as access to food, housing, and education, .

The Trump administration announced that it would claw back in public health funds from California, Colorado, Illinois, and Minnesota, arguing that the Democratic-led states were funding “woke” initiatives that didn’t reflect White House priorities. Within days, and a judge the cut.

“They keep suddenly canceling grants and then it gets overturned in court,” said Kat DeBurgh, executive director of the Health Officers Association of California. “A lot of the damage is already done because counties already stopped doing the work.”

Federal funding has accounted for of state and local health department budgets nationwide, with money going toward fighting HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, preventing chronic diseases, and boosting public health preparedness and communicable disease response, according to a 2025 analysis by 麻豆女优, a health information nonprofit that includes 麻豆女优 Health News.

Federal funds account for $2.4 billion of California’s $5.3 billion public health budget, making it difficult for Newsom and state lawmakers to backfill potential cuts. That money helps fund state operations and is vital for local health departments.

Funding Cuts Hurt All

Los Angeles County public health director Barbara Ferrer said if the federal government is allowed to cut that $600 million, the county of nearly 10 million residents would lose an estimated $84 million over the next two years, in addition to other grants for prevention of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections. Ferrer said the county depends on nearly $1 billion in federal funding annually to track and prevent communicable diseases and combat chronic health conditions, including diabetes and high blood pressure. Already, the the closure of that provided vaccinations and disease testing, largely because of funding losses tied to federal grant cuts.

“It’s an ill-informed strategy,” Ferrer said. “Public health doesn’t care whether your political affiliation is Republican or Democrat. It doesn’t care about your immigration status or sexual orientation. Public health has to be available for everyone.”

A single case of measles requires public health workers to track down 200 potential contacts, Ferrer said.

The U.S. but is close to losing that status as a result of vaccine skepticism and misinformation spread by vaccine critics. The U.S. had , the most since 1991, with 93% in people who were unvaccinated or whose vaccination status was unknown. This year, the highly contagious disease has been reported at , , and .

Public health officials hope the West Coast Health Alliance can help counteract Trump by building trust through evidence-based public health guidance.

“What we’re seeing from the federal government is partisan politics at its worst and retaliation for policy differences, and it puts at extraordinary risk the health and well-being of the American people,” said Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association, a coalition of public health professionals.

Robust Vaccine Schedule

Erica Pan, California’s top public health officer and director of the state Department of Public Health, said the West Coast Health Alliance is defending science by recommending a vaccine schedule than the federal government. California is part of a coalition over its decision to rescind recommendations for seven childhood vaccines, including for hepatitis A, hepatitis B, influenza, and covid-19.

Pan expressed deep concern about the state of public health, particularly the uptick in measles. “We’re sliding backwards,” Pan said of immunizations.

Sarah Kemble, Hawaii’s state epidemiologist, said Hawaii joined the alliance after hearing from pro-vaccine residents who wanted assurance that they would have access to vaccines.

“We were getting a lot of questions and anxiety from people who did understand science-based recommendations but were wondering, 鈥楢m I still going to be able to go get my shot?’” Kemble said.

Other states led mostly by Democrats have also formed alliances, with Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and several other East Coast states banding together to create the .

HHS’ Hilliard said that even as Democratic governors establish vaccine advisory coalitions, the federal “remains the scientific body guiding immunization recommendations in this country, and HHS will ensure policy is based on rigorous evidence and gold standard science, not the failed politics of the pandemic.”

Influencing Red States

Newsom, for his part, has approved a recurring annual infusion of nearly $300 million to support the state Department of Public Health, as well as the 61 local public health agencies across California, and last year authorizing the state to issue its own immunization guidance. It requires health insurers in California to provide patient coverage for vaccinations the state recommends even if the federal government doesn’t.

Jeffrey Singer, a doctor and senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute, said decentralization can be beneficial. That’s because local media campaigns that reflect different political ideologies and community priorities may have a better chance of influencing the public.

A 麻豆女优 analysis found some red states are joining blue states in decoupling their vaccine recommendations from the federal government’s. Singer said some doctors in his home state of Arizona are looking to more liberal California for vaccine recommendations.

“Science is never settled, and there are a lot of areas of this country where there are differences of opinion,” Singer said. “This can help us challenge our assumptions and learn.”

This <a target="_blank" href="/public-health/gavin-newsom-california-public-health-fight-west-coast-alliance-trump-hhs-rfk/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

The legislation introduced in , , , , , , , and builds on efforts made in other states in past years. This latest push for patient protections comes as the Trump administration has backed away from federal debt protections, health care has become , and more people are expected to go without medical coverage or but riskier high-deductible insurance plans that could lead them into debt.

“In the wealthiest country on Earth, people are going bankrupt, suffering wage garnishment, just because they get sick,” said Colorado state Rep. , a Democrat who introduced legislation on Feb. 19 that would, among other measures, ban wage garnishment for medical debt.

That legislation is under consideration after a 麻豆女优 Health News investigation found that courts approved wage garnishment requests in an estimated 14,000 medical debt cases a year in Colorado. The investigation also showed that it isn’t just urban hospitals or big health care chains allowing their patients’ wages to be garnished. It’s also small rural hospitals, physician groups, and public ambulance services, among other medical care providers. And the reporting showed that wage garnishment can erroneously target patients. For example, one family lost wages 鈥� and subsequently power to their home, because they couldn’t pay their electric bill 鈥� after an ambulance company incorrectly billed the family instead of Medicaid.

Wage garnishment is one tool creditors can use in most states to recoup money from people with unpaid bills. In many states, they can garnish someone’s bank account or put a lien on their home, too. To garnish a person’s wages, a creditor must typically get permission from a court to make the person’s employer hand over a piece of the debtor’s earnings.

“The creditor is taking the money directly out of somebody’s paycheck, and so it doesn’t leave people with any choice to say, 鈥業 need to prioritize food for my children,’” said , legal and policy director for the National Center for Access to Justice. The center, based at Fordham Law School, and the District of Columbia on how fair their laws are to consumers who get sued over debt.

It is legal to garnish patients’ wages for medical debt in all but a , according to the Commonwealth Fund, a nonprofit foundation based in New York focused on health care.

Now, lawmakers in additional states seek to ban the practice entirely. Others want to limit it by exempting debtors whose household income falls under a certain threshold or by upping the amount of earnings immune from garnishment.

Such policies on wage garnishment fit into a larger push around the country to address the effect of medical debt on people’s lives and finances. Those efforts include barring medical debt from credit reports, prohibiting liens on people’s homes, capping interest rates, and limiting the ability to file lawsuits against people with low incomes over unpaid medical bills.

Debt collectors have fought against such measures, arguing they don’t solve the problem of health care affordability and hurt the ability of medical providers to continue to provide care.

“The wage garnishment process is already highly regulated at the federal and state level and includes many consumer protection measures,” said Scott Purcell, chief executive of , an association of credit and collection professionals.

Even before the Colorado legislation was introduced, BC Services warning its clients that the legislation “poses an existential threat,” especially to rural health providers. And Bridget Frazier, a spokesperson for the , said Feb. 20 that the bill “could drive up costs and financial risk for health care providers, making it harder to keep hospitals sustainable and ensuring Coloradans have access to care when they need it most.”

The pending Colorado measure would ban wage garnishment for all patients. It also would limit bank garnishments, in which a patient’s financial institution must hand over a chunk of the money in the person’s account. Additionally, among other things, it would prevent payment plans from exceeding 4% of weekly net income, require creditors to check whether uninsured patients are eligible for public health insurance before collecting, bar creditors from collecting on bills that are more than three years old, and leave medical care providers liable to the patient for at least $3,000 if collectors don’t comply.

“No one is saying, 鈥楧on’t get paid for your services.’ We’re saying getting health care should not lead to financial ruin for people,” said Dana Kennedy, co-executive director at the Denver-based , a health advocacy group that has been working with lawmakers on the Colorado measure.

Kennedy said that 麻豆女优 Health News’ investigation drove home how many kinds of Colorado health care facilities are willing to let this collection practice happen to their patients, and that the people whose wages are being garnished are often working at Family Dollar, Walmart, Amazon, or gas stations and restaurants.

“Medical debt is typically different from other forms of indebtedness,” said Colorado state Sen. , a Democrat co-sponsoring the legislation. “You could choose to keep driving your old car or buy a new one and take on debt for that. You could upgrade your home. You could buy consumer appliances. There’s not usually that voluntary element in a health care context.”

, a senior attorney with the National Consumer Law Center, said broad laws that don’t require patients to jump through hoops to access protections are the most likely to be effective. Because of that, she and other consumer advocates prefer state policies that get rid of wage garnishment for all debtors and all types of debt.

“It can be hard to identify medical debt as medical debt,” Carter said. “For example, if you have a medical debt and you put it on your credit card, it’s not going to be easy for a court system to identify that debt as medical debt.”

She said another reason is that complexity is the enemy of effectiveness. Carter pointed to a showing that even though people in the state can keep $10,000 in their bank accounts safe from garnishment, few consumers take advantage of the protection. They must know the protection exists, know where to find the relevant form, get the form notarized, file it, and mail copies to creditors. The same report found that garnishments can also be burdensome for employers, who must process garnishments and can find themselves in court if they make an error.

Jones, at the National Center for Access to Justice, said outlawing wage garnishment fully, rather than limiting it, has other benefits. “It’s also to protect people’s jobs, because in most states, if somebody has two or more orders of garnishment, they can lose their job for it,” she said.

Still, some lawmakers are pushing for the intermediate route. In Washington state, Democratic state Sen. is spearheading legislation to rope off a larger portion of low-wage earnings from garnishment. So, for example, a person making $1,000 a week would be able to keep their whole paycheck, as opposed to the $800 that the law would currently protect.

Mindy Chumbley, owner of a Washington-based collections company and an ACA International board member, testified against the bill on Feb. 2. “Washington has made sweeping changes to medical debt policy year after year without pausing to study the cumulative impact,” she told lawmakers. “Our clients are reporting clinic closures, urgent care centers shutting down, staffing shortages, and rural facilities struggling to stay open.”

The Washington State Hospital Association said it is neutral on the legislation. The American Hospital Association said it does not take positions on state policies.

Liias told 麻豆女优 Health News that lawmakers need to ensure health care providers can recoup their costs while also protecting patients. “We don’t want families either to be driven into bankruptcy or to be driven into under-the-table work to avoid these garnishment thresholds,” he said.

Liias said his measure follows the lead of Arizona, which passed similar consumer protections in 2022. “Obviously, the health care system is still functioning in Arizona, and folks are able to make it work.”

This <a target="_blank" href="/health-care-costs/medical-debt-wage-garnishment-state-legislation-patient-protection/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

But there are strings attached.

In late December, President Donald Trump’s administration announced how much all 50 states would get under its new Rural Health Transformation Program, assigning them to use the money to fix systemic problems that leave rural Americans without access to good health care. Now, the clock is ticking.

Within eight months, states must submit revised budgets, begin spending, and show the money is going to good use. Federal officials will begin reviewing state progress in late summer and announce 2027 funding levels by the end of October.

The money — divided into unique allocations for each state, ranging from $147 million for New Jersey to $281 million for Texas — represents the first $10 billion installment from the five-year, $50 billion program. Congress created the fund as a last-minute sweetener in Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act last summer to offset the anticipated in rural communities from the statute’s nearly $1 trillion in Medicaid spending cuts over the next decade.

Federal officials crafted the fund to give states “space to be creative,” Mehmet Oz, administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, said on a call with reporters after announcing the funding Dec. 29. “Some states will fail, and we will learn from that.”

The money was divided according to a complicated formula.

In 2026, each state will receive an equal $100 million share for the first half of the money, plus additional funding from the second half. Oz’s staff steered payouts from the second portion based on each state’s rural score, as well as results from a “technical” scoring system for project proposals.

Within hours of the announcement, academics and researchers began to parse the awards to better understand why some states received more than others, including whether the awards reflected any partisanship or political favoritism.

At first glance, total awards do not appear to favor states governed by either Republicans or Democrats. But teased out the amount awarded for each state’s technical score, which is the part determined by the discretion of agency officials.

The analysis was performed at the University of North Carolina’s Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, which specializes in rural health. A 麻豆女优 Health News review of the Sheps Center data found that states with Republican governors tended to receive more money for the parts of their application based on the technical score. Democratic-controlled states crowded the bottom quarter of those technical score awards.

Overall, though, the state awards reveal wild variation in how much money each state will get per rural resident, almost a hundredfold difference between the top and bottom.

In an emailed statement to , a spokesperson for Arizona’s Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs accused the administration of shortchanging rural residents in the state, which was awarded $167 million this year from the program.

CMS spokesperson Chris Krepich said in an emailed statement to 麻豆女优 Health News that “politics played no role in funding decisions.”

On the December call, Oz pushed states to start working on policy actions championed by the administration — such as approving presidential fitness tests and restricting food benefits — that could require legislative approval.

Half of states promised to mandate the presidential fitness test, Oz said. Many states also proposed food waivers under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, which would limit low-nutrition items such as soda. He also said some states promised to teach health care professionals about nutrition. And others confirmed they will repeal certificate-of-need laws, which require companies to prove that new health facilities they want to open are necessary.

Krepich said CMS’ new Office of Rural Health Transformation is hiring program officers to serve as point people for three or four states. Many states are setting up their own offices to oversee the new funding.

Oz highlighted Alabama’s “big maternity initiative with robotics doing ultrasounds” and said states are tackling issues ranging from behavioral health to obesity.

A 麻豆女优 Health News review of state “” and “” released by CMS shows that many states plan to address the workforce challenges in rural areas. Delaware, for example, plans to use its funding to create the state’s first four-year medical school with a rural primary care track.

A third of states said they want to improve electronic health records, and every state mentioned telehealth.

Many state legislatures to distribute the funding to their state offices. Meanwhile, state officials are hiring staff, , and .

“I’m excited about what’s next,” said Terry Scoggin, former interim chief executive of the Texas Organization of Rural & Community Hospitals, or TORCH. Texas was awarded the biggest allocation. The money will bolster a rural hospital funding bill Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed last year, Scoggin said.

More than two dozen cash-strapped rural hospitals in Texas to clinics since 2005, a nationwide trend that hit the Lone Star State particularly hard. The state has the largest rural population in the United States. Texas’ allocation amounts to about $66 per rural resident, . By contrast, Rhode Island was granted about $6,300 per rural resident.

Scoggin said he has “a ton of concerns” about companies taking the money instead of it helping rural hospitals and residents. “I was blown away about how many for-profit companies reached out.” The companies have also called rural hospitals and asked to work with them to apply for state money, he said.

The awards should be judged on how they benefit rural residents because “the stated goal of the program is to improve rural health,” said Paula Chatterjee, an assistant professor of medicine at the University of Pennsylvania who co-authored on the transformation fund.

Researchers at the Sheps Center conducted the analysis to estimate how much money states received from the technical score, which is the portion of funding based on the quality of their proposals and state policy actions that align with “Make America Healthy Again” priorities.

New Mexico won the least amount of technical funding, with less than 10% of its award based on the discretionary metrics. Alaska won the largest technical award, according to the Sheps Center data.

Texas, Nebraska, New Hampshire, and Hawaii rounded out the top five recipients of technical funding. In addition to New Mexico, the other lowest technical awards went to Michigan, New Jersey, Arizona, and California.

Mark Holmes, director of the Sheps Center, declined to comment on whether he saw any political bias in the awards but said the nuance in the final portion of discretionary awards based on technical scores is important because those dollars can be redistributed and potentially clawed back in future years.

“We can be fairly certain that every state will get at least a slightly, if not a vastly, different amount next year based on this re-pooling and reallocation piece,” Holmes said.

States now have a limited time to show they’re using the money effectively to secure future funding.

But they can’t start spending yet. CMS followed standard grant procedures and is requiring each state to submit revised budgets before they can draw down money, Krepich said.

States have until Jan. 30 to resubmit their budgets, and CMS then has 30 days to respond, according to the standard . Under that timing, some states may not have cash in hand until March.

“CMS is working closely with states to complete this process as efficiently as possible,” Krepich said.

This <a target="_blank" href="/rural-health/rural-health-transformation-state-distribution-technical-scores-variation-deadlines/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

They grabbed canned food, fruit and vegetables, and a grocery store gift card. And then Basu spotted a row of tables in the parking lot staffed by county social service workers helping people apply for food assistance and health coverage. Her mother-in-law, also a Medicaid recipient, might qualify for food assistance, she was told.

“It would be less money for me that I would have to put aside,” said Basu, who has been the sole breadwinner for the family from Anaheim since her husband suffered a stroke. “Maybe I can use that extra money to cover other expenses.”

Basu was among the more than 3,000 people who turned up at a November CalOptima event in one of California’s most affluent counties. It marked the start of a $20 million campaign by the Medicaid health insurer to help low-income residents get and maintain health coverage and food benefits as federal restrictions under President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act take effect.

The law cuts more than for Medicaid, known in California as Medi-Cal. It also slashes around $187 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, known as CalFresh in California. That’s about 20% of the program’s budget over the next 10 years. As a result, up to 3.4 million Medi-Cal recipients and almost 400,000 CalFresh beneficiaries could lose benefits. (Most CalFresh beneficiaries .)

Republican representatives say the changes, some of which have already taken effect, will prevent waste, fraud, and abuse through expanded eligibility checks and work requirements. Yet, Medicaid health plans across the nation are bolstering outreach to low-income households in a bid to not lose enrollees, many of whom are already struggling with high grocery and medical costs.

In Los Angeles County, L.A. Care Health Plan launched community information sessions this month to educate the public about upcoming changes to Medi-Cal. Hawaii’s AlohaCare is mobilizing a to help mitigate the impact of Medicaid coverage losses. And Community Behavioral Health, a Medicaid managed-care plan for behavioral health in Philadelphia, plans to host a series of summits starting next year to get the word out about the changes.

“We know that these changes will affect a lot of our members,” said Michael Hunn, CEO of CalOptima, one of about two dozen Medi-Cal managed-care plans paid monthly based on their number of enrollees. “We have a great responsibility to make sure that they understand and can navigate these changes as they are implemented.”

CalOptima, a public entity whose board is appointed by county supervisors, has allocated up to $2 million through the end of 2028 to pay for county eligibility workers at events like the food giveaway to provide on-the-spot assistance. It’s funding that An Tran, head of Orange County’s Social Services Agency, said can help pay for critical outreach the county otherwise wouldn’t be able to afford.

Orange County has about 1,500 eligibility workers to handle reenrollments and verification checks for around 850,000 Medi-Cal members and over 300,000 CalFresh recipients.

“We are talking about families who desperately need help especially at a time when food costs and inflation is high and they’re barely able to make it,” Tran said.

In addition to funding county workers, CalOptima intends to provide grants to community organizations to conduct Medi-Cal outreach and run a public awareness campaign in multiple languages to make enrollees aware of new requirements, Hunn said.

U.S. Rep. Young Kim, a Republican who represents part of Orange County, did not respond to a request seeking comment but has said Trump’s signature budget law, which she voted for, “takes important steps to ensure federal dollars are used as effectively as possible and to strengthen Medicaid and SNAP for our most vulnerable citizens who truly need it.” She and other Republicans have said it will provide tax relief for working Americans.

After nearly an hour with an eligibility worker, Basu learned she earned too much for her mother-in-law, who lives with the family, to qualify for CalFresh. Now, Basu said, she’s worried about Medi-Cal eligibility changes for immigrants, which she fears could affect her mother-in-law, who obtained lawful permanent residency about a year and a half ago.

“Before having that, we were paying cash for cardiology, for labs, everything. It was very pricey,” Basu said. “I’m thinking I will have to, in a few months, pay again out-of-pocket. It’s a lot on me. It’s a burden.”

In most of the nation, people who’ve had a green card for less than five years generally for federally funded Medicaid. However, California has provided state-funded Medi-Cal coverage for them and low-income immigrants without legal status.

But even those benefits are being rolled back amid state budget pressures. In July, the state will eliminate full-scope dental benefits for some enrollees who have had a green card for less than five years, as well as certain other immigrant enrollees. A year later, this group will start being charged monthly premiums.

And starting in January, California will freeze enrollment for people 19 or over without legal status, as well as some lawfully present immigrants. It will also reinstate an asset limit for all older enrollees.

Meanwhile, the state is drafting guidance for counties on how to implement the federal Medicaid eligibility changes, said Tony Cava, a spokesperson for California’s Department of Health Care Services. The federal work rules and twice-yearly eligibility checks are slated to take effect by the start of 2027, applying to enrollees under the Affordable Care Act coverage expansion.

The California Department of Social Services, which manages CalFresh, has already changed how home utility costs are calculated and imposed a cap on benefits for very large households. It is still developing guidance for the federal work requirements and changes that disqualify some noncitizens, agency Chief Deputy Director David Swanson Hollinger said at a recent hearing.

The Department of Health Care Services has developed a “” webpage about the state and federal Medicaid changes. It’s also leveraging a network of Medi-Cal “” to provide information and updates in communities across the state in multiple languages. And it’s collaborating with counties and Medi-Cal managed-care plans to support community-based enrollment assistance, including at local events, Cava said.

Aquilino and Fidelia Salazar, a husband and wife getting help with a CalFresh application, said they didn’t expect to be affected by the work requirements and Medi-Cal eligibility changes. That’s because they are both permanent U.S. residents who have chronic health conditions and can’t work, they said. People considered physically or mentally unable to work can be exempted from work requirements. But the couple are concerned other immigrants in their community could lose care.

“It’s not fair because a lot of people really need it,” Fidelia Salazar said in Spanish. “People earn so little and then medicines and going to the doctor is extremely expensive.”

This <a target="_blank" href="/insurance/one-big-beautiful-bill-medicaid-snap-food-benefits-orange-county-california/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

The Trump administration, which has promised “radical transparency,” that it plans to publish the “project summary” for states that win awards. Following the lead of federal regulators, many states are withholding their complete applications, and some have refused to release any details.

“Let’s be clear,” said Alan Morgan, chief executive of the National Rural Health Association. “The hospital CEOs, the clinic administrators, the community leaders: They’re going to want to know what their states are doing.” The NRHA’s members include struggling rural hospitals and clinics, which would benefit from the Trump administration’s Rural Health Transformation Program.

Morgan said his members are interested in what states propose, which of their ideas are approved or rejected, and their budget narratives, which detail how the money could be spent.

Improving rural health care is an “insanely complicated and difficult task,” Morgan said.

The five-year Rural Health Transformation Program was approved by Congress in a law — the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — that also drastically cuts Medicaid spending, on which rural providers heavily depend. It’s being watched closely because it’s a much-needed influx of funds — with a caveat from the Trump administration that the money be spent on transformational ideas, not just to prop up ailing rural hospitals.

The law says half of the $50 billion will be divided equally among all states with an approved application. The rest will be distributed through a points-based system. Of , $12.5 billion will be allotted based on each state’s rurality. The remaining $12.5 billion will go to states that on initiatives and policies that, in part, mirror the Trump administration’s “” objectives.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has repeatedly promised to open the government to the American people. His agency has devoted to “radical transparency.”

“We’re working to make this the most transparent HHS in its 70-year history,” in written testimony to lawmakers in September.

Lawrence Gostin, a professor of public health law at Georgetown University, said HHS is “acting in a way that utterly lacks transparency” and that the public has the right to demand “greater openness and clarity.” Without transparency, the public cannot hold HHS accountable, he said.

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services spokesperson Catherine Howden said the agency will follow the federal regulations when releasing information about the rural health program.

Grant applications are “not released to the public during the merit review process,” Howden said, adding, “The purpose of this policy is to protect the integrity of evaluations, applicant confidentiality, and the competitive nature of the process.”

Democrats and many health care advocates are concerned politics will affect how much money states get.

“I am very concerned about retaliation,” said Rep. Nikki Budzinski (D-Ill.). Because Democrats control her state’s politics, “our application might not be as seriously considered as other states that have Republican leadership,” she added.

Illinois’ Democratic members of the U.S. House to CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz in November asking for “full and fair consideration” of their state application. Illinois officials have not yet released their state’s proposal to 麻豆女优 Health News, which has a pending public records request.

Heather Howard, a professor of the practice at Princeton University, said she is “pleasantly surprised at how transparent the states have been.”

Howard directs the university’s State Health and Value Strategies program, which the rural health fund, and praised most states for publicly posting their project summaries.

“To me, it speaks to the intense interest in this program,” Howard said. Her team, reviewing about two dozen state summaries, found themes including expansion of home-based and mobile services, increased use of technology, and workforce development initiatives like scholarships, signing bonuses, and child care assistance for high-demand positions.

“I think it’s exciting,” Howard said. “What’s great here is the experimentation we’re going to learn from.”

Telerobotics appeared in Georgia’s and Alabama’s applications, she said, including a proposal to use robotic equipment for remote ultrasounds.

Another theme that “warms my heart,” Howard said, was the effort among states to create advisory groups or committees, including in Idaho, where work groups are expected to focus on technology, workforce development, tribal collaboration, and behavioral health.

All 50 states submitted applications to federal regulators by the Nov. 5 deadline and awards will be announced by the end of the year, according to CMS.

As of late November, nearly 40 states had released their project narrative, the main part of the application, which describes proposed initiatives, according to 麻豆女优 Health News tracking. More than a dozen states have also released their budget narratives.

Also as of late November, only a handful of states — Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Carolina, and Wyoming — had released all parts of the application.

麻豆女优 Health News filed public records requests for states’ complete applications. Some states have refused to release any of their application materials.

Nebraska, for example, rejected a public records request, saying its application materials are “proprietary or commercial information” that “would give advantage to business competitors.”

Kentucky shared its application summary but said the remainder of the application is a “preliminary draft” not subject to release under state laws.

Erika Engle, a spokesperson for Hawaii Gov. Josh Green, said the governor “is committed to transparency” but declined to share any of the state’s proposal.

Hawaii and other states are still processing formal public records requests.

The rural health program is part of the July law projected to reduce federal Medicaid spending in rural areas by 10 years.

Those cuts are expected to affect rural health facilities’ bottom lines, threatening their ability to stay open. A recent Commonwealth Fund report found that rural areas continue to to primary care. But the guidelines for the rural health program say states can use only 15% of their new funding to pay providers for patient care.

Between the Medicaid cuts and funding boost from the new program, “there’s real opportunity for national policy to impact rural, both in the negative and the positive potentially,” said Celli Horstman, a senior research associate at the New York-based policy think tank who co-authored the report.

Among the publicly available rural health transformation proposals, Democratic-leaning states show support, or are willing to adopt, some of the administration’s goals but will lose out on points from eschewing others.

For example, New Mexico said it would introduce legislation requiring students to take the Presidential Fitness Test and physicians to complete continuing education courses on nutrition. But it won’t prevent people from using their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits to buy “non-nutritious” foods such as soda and candy.

Many states want to invest in technology, including telehealth, cybersecurity, and remote patient monitoring equipment. Other themes include increasing access to healthy food, improving emergency services, preventing and managing chronic illnesses, and enlisting community health workers and paramedics for home visits.

Specific proposals include:

• Arkansas wants to spend $5 million through its “FAITH” program — Faith-based Access, Interventions, Transportation, & Health — to enlist rural religious institutions to host education and preventive screening events. Congregations could also install walking circuits and fitness equipment.
• Alaska, which historically relied on dogsled teams to bring medication to remote areas, is looking to test the use of “unmanned aerial systems” to speed up pharmacy deliveries to such communities.
• Tennessee wants to increase access to healthy activities by spending money on parks, trails, and farmers markets.
• Maryland wants to start mobile markets and install refrigerators and freezers to improve access to fresh, healthy food that often spoils in rural areas with few grocery stores.

State Sen. Stephen Meredith, a Republican who represents part of western Kentucky, said he still expects rural hospitals to close despite his state’s rural health transformation program.

“I think we’re treating symptoms without curing the disease,” he said after listening to a presentation on Kentucky’s proposal at .

Morgan, whose organization represents rural hospitals likely to close, said the state’s ideas may sound good.

“You can craft a narrative that sounds wonderful,” he said. “But then translating the aspirational goals to a functioning program? That’s difficult.”

麻豆女优 Health News staffers Phil Galewitz, Katheryn Houghton, Tony Leys, Jazmin Orozco Rodriguez, Maia Rosenfeld, Bram Sable-Smith, and Lauren Sausser contributed to this report.

This <a target="_blank" href="/rural-health/rural-health-transformation-program-cms-state-applications-transparency/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Bre Dolan, a 35-year-old resident of Hardy County, West Virginia, understands why. Throughout her childhood, when her dad had addiction and mental health crises, police officers were often the first ones to respond. Dolan calls them “good men and women” who “care about seeing their community recover.”

But she’s skeptical that they can mitigate the root causes of an addiction epidemic that has racked her home state for decades.

“Most of the busts that go down are addicts,” she said 鈥� people who need treatment, not prison.

Dolan’s father was one of them. And so was she.

Now 14 years into recovery, she’s been surprised to see many local officials spending opioid settlement money 鈥� an influx of cash from companies accused of fueling the overdose crisis 鈥� on police Tasers, cruisers, night vision gear, and more.

“How is that really tackling an issue?” Dolan said. “How will it help families battling addiction?”

Nationwide, more than $61 million in opioid settlement funds were spent on law enforcement-related efforts in 2024, according to a yearlong investigation by 麻豆女优 Health News and researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Shatterproof, a national nonprofit focused on addiction. That included initiatives that public health experts largely support, such as hiring social workers to accompany officers on overdose calls, as well as actions they’re more skeptical of, such as beefing up police arsenals.

Over nearly two decades, state and local governments are set to receive in opioid settlement money, which is intended to be used to fight addiction. The settlement agreements even and established other guardrails to limit unrelated uses of the funds 鈥� as the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement of the 1990s.

But there’s still significant flexibility with these dollars, and what constitutes a good use to one person can be deemed waste by another.

To , an addiction medicine doctor who was once addicted to opioids and has served as an expert in several opioid lawsuits, some law enforcement expenses fall into that second category.

and are not “in the spirit of what we wanted to use the money for when we were fighting for it,” Loyd said.

“People died for this money. Families were torn apart for this money. And to not spend it to try to make our system better, so that people don’t have to experience those losses going forward, to me, is unconscionable,” he said.

As part of this investigation, 麻豆女优 Health News and its partners compiled the most comprehensive national database of opioid settlement spending to date, featuring more than 10,500 examples of how the money was used (or not) last year. The team filed public records requests, scoured government websites, and extracted expenditures, which were then , such as treatment or prevention. The findings include:

• Nearly $2.7 billion 鈥� that’s the amount states and localities spent or committed in 2024, according to public records. The lion’s share went to investments addiction experts consider crucial, including about $615 million to treatment, $279 million to overdose reversal medications and related training, and $227 million to housing-related programs for people with substance use disorders.
• Smaller, though notable, amounts funded law enforcement initiatives 鈥� such as creating a shooting range and tinting patrol car windows 鈥� and prevention programs that experts called questionable, such as putting on a fishing tournament.
• Some jurisdictions paid for basic government services, such as firefighter salaries.
• The money is controlled by different entities in each state, and about 20% of it is untrackable through public records.

This year’s database, including the expenditures and untrackable percentages, should not be compared with the one 麻豆女优 Health News and its partners , due to and state budget quirks. The database cannot present a full picture because some jurisdictions don’t publish reports or delineate spending by year. What’s shown is a snapshot of 2024 and does not account for decisions in 2025.

Still, the database helps counteract the in charge of settlement money among those .

鈥楬ow My Population Would Like Me To Vote’

Dolan has seen intergenerational addiction up close. When her father was high, he sometimes kicked teenage Dolan out of the house with her toddler siblings. She started drinking early and progressed to other drugs, eventually landing in prison.

Although she managed to find recovery on her own, even landing a job as an EMT, she wants to make the path easier for others.

If settlement money were used to hire social workers or build family recovery programs, it could change the course of a kid’s life, she said.

“Maybe people could have helped my dad get into recovery and gave him therapy,” she said. “Anything could have happened.”

But many local officials say law enforcement is one of the few tools they have, especially in rural areas. And their constituents believe it’s effective.

“If the goal was treatment and prevention, it would have been better to throw [the money] into a big grant system and give it to treatment centers,” said , city manager of Oak Hill, West Virginia, which for a drone and surveillance cameras for its police department. “Unfortunately, local governments are really not set up to do that.”

Clarkdale, Arizona, Town Manager said her town bought because they help with enforcement 鈥� such as recording crime scenes and conducting search-and-rescue operations 鈥� as well as education, when officers interact with kids at community events.

Similar perspectives nationwide have led to spending that includes:

• About (also known as silencers) in Alexandria, Indiana.
• About in Mooresville, Indiana.
• About and Tasers in Hardy County, West Virginia.
• Nearly , to add a police officer to the county’s drug task force, replace that officer locally, buy guns and vehicles, and tint car windows.

Several elected officials said their choices reflect local politics.

That’s “how my population would like me to vote,” Hardy County Commissioner said of his commission’s goal to spend about a quarter of its settlement money on law enforcement.

Mooresville Town Council President told 麻豆女优 Health News, “People have petitioned our government for less taxes but have never petitioned for less services” from the local police force. With federal and state budget cuts looming, the town must be resourceful, he said, adding that the Tasers were bought with a portion of settlement funds that have no restrictions.

After these purchases, an Indiana commission of law enforcement equipment that it cautioned against buying with restricted settlement dollars. , , and have released similar lists.

Research backs those restrictions. Studies have shown that drug busts and arrests can . Officers often , making people who use drugs or through police.

In contrast, equipping police officers with overdose reversal medications has been . That’s a key component of in Texas, the state with the highest percentage of reported law enforcement spending.

Police and Firefighter Salaries

Some places used settlement funds to maintain basic first responder services.

For example, Mantua Township, New Jersey, to “offset police salary and wages” and, according to its public spending report, . Township officials did not respond to requests for comment.

Los Angeles County to cover a portion of firefighter salaries and benefits last year and estimates it will use another $1 million this year.

County fire department spokesperson Heidi Oliva said opioid funds were used to fill a budget gap until revenue kicked in from a last November.

The use of funds was “appropriate,” she said in an email, because “the opioid crisis presents a significant burden to EMS response, from dispatch through arrival at hospitals, clinician mental health/burnout, and a variety of other factors.”

Using opioid money to replace other revenue is . But it’s .

“I don’t want to see this money used to make up for stuff that would be paid for anyway,” said , chair of the FED UP! Coalition, a national advocacy organization representing many parents who’ve lost children to addiction.

Settlement dollars are “the only financial representation from the governments and from the drug companies” of families’ losses, Busch said. To see that money used to maintain the status quo is “painful” and “distressing.”

Busch fears this practice will as states grapple with federal budget cuts.

Already in New Jersey, lawmakers in settlement funds to health systems to cushion against anticipated Medicaid losses 鈥� a move opposed by the state’s , , and .

However, some states are taking proactive steps.

Colorado this year against such actions.

“These dollars can’t be part of budget games where we simply backfill existing programs,” state Attorney General Phil Weiser told 麻豆女优 Health News. “We have to build on whatever we’re doing because it hasn’t been enough.”

Other states, such as , , and , are newly requiring local governments to report how they spend the money, which may make it easier to spot disputed practices. Officials in Delaware, Hawaii, Massachusetts, and Missouri said they expect to revamp their public reporting systems to increase transparency by early 2026.

In Mississippi, which produced no substantive public reports last year, the attorney general’s office has that will host spending information after Dec. 1.

Jennifer Twyman is anxious to see some positive changes.

“We have people literally dying on our sidewalks,” said the Louisville, Kentucky, advocate.

Twyman struggled with opioid misuse for 20 years and now works with to end homelessness and the war on drugs. To her, any spending that doesn’t directly help people with addiction betrays the settlement’s purpose.

“It is the blood from many of my friends, people that I care deeply about,” she said. “That money could have been me, could have been my life.”

Read behind this project.

麻豆女优 Health News’ Henry Larweh; Shatterproof’s Kristen Pendergrass and Lillian Williams; and the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health’s Abigail Winiker, Samantha Harris, Isha Desai, Katibeth Blalock, Erin Wang, Olivia Allran, Connor Gunn, Justin Xu, Ruhao Pang, Jirka Taylor, and Valerie Ganetsky contributed to the database featured in this article.

The has taken a leading role in providing guidance to state and local governments on the use of opioid settlement funds. Faculty from the school collaborated with other experts in the field to create , which have been endorsed by over 60 organizations.

is a national nonprofit that addresses substance use disorder through distinct initiatives, including advocating for state and federal policies, ending addiction stigma, and educating communities about the treatment system.

Shatterproof is partnering with some states on projects funded by opioid settlements. 麻豆女优 Health News, the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and the Shatterproof team that worked on this report are not involved in those efforts.

This <a target="_blank" href="/public-health/opioid-settlements-law-enforcement-spending-states-towns-guns-narcan/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Four western states 鈥� California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington 鈥� have created a collaborative to . Several northeastern states have done the same.

New York’s governor declared a “” that allows pharmacists to give covid-19 vaccines without a separate prescription. Minnesota made a similar change, and Massachusetts is to pay for vaccines recommended by its health department, not only those recommended by the CDC.

The changes represent a significant shift in public health authority from the federal government to the states. Traditionally, states have looked to the CDC for expertise and guidance on public health issues 鈥� including, in addition to vaccines, workplace safety, water fluoridation, vaping, and sexually transmitted infections.

Now, amid concerns that Kennedy is in vaccines and public health science, some states are charting new paths, seeking out new sources of scientific consensus and changing how they regulate insurance companies, prescribers, and pharmacists.

Colorado has been at the front of this wave. On Sept. 3, state officials issued a to let pharmacists provide covid shots .

“I will not allow ridiculous and costly red tape or decisions made far away in Washington to keep Coloradans from accessing vaccines,” said .

But Colorado’s leadership had already been clearing the way for more autonomy on vaccine policy for months.

In March, the state legislature voted to so the state could consider scientific sources other than the federal government when setting school vaccine requirements.

“You could see the writing on the wall that it was just becoming overly politicized rather than relying on actual science with this new HHS director,” said .

Mullica, who co-sponsored the new law, is a Democrat and works as an emergency room nurse in the Denver area.

Colorado is among the first states to change its laws to allow it to recommend vaccines based on sources other than the CDC. The state health board can now also consult leading medical groups, like the , , and .

“We decided to protect Colorado,” Mullica said, so it “wouldn’t be as vulnerable to political upheaval that we’re seeing right now.”

The Democratic-led legislature passed the bill in a near-party-line vote. Polis signed it into law in April, despite Kennedy’s selection last fall.

“Colorado I think is really leading the way on this,” said , a pediatrician at the University of Colorado who was part of a stakeholder group that helped craft the bill.

Higgins pointed to a , signed in May, that he said makes Colorado’s push even stronger. It deals with insurance coverage for preventive health care services, aiming to ensure state-regulated insurance plans cover the cost of some vaccines, regardless of future moves by the CDC.

“Effectively, it’s meant to help ensure that Coloradans will still have access to vaccines,” he said.

The Colorado chapter of Children’s Health Defense, the anti-vaccine advocacy group that Kennedy led before taking over HHS, did not respond to a request for comment.

Another co-sponsor of the first bill, Democratic state , said the circulation of so much false information about vaccines, including for covid, makes it important to hear from a range of trusted medical experts.

Colorado had previously looked to the CDC for scientific guidance on vaccines, particularly for children entering school. Like other states, it had tracked the recommendations of a CDC panel known as Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.

all 17 members in June and replaced them with 12 new appointees, some of whom critics warn are vaccine skeptics and aren’t qualified to provide critical guidance for Americans.

“I think where the confusion will lie is the difference in the recommendations between the ACIP, who we traditionally defer to, and then everyone else,” said Ned Calonge, Colorado’s chief medical officer.

He expects that the national professional physician groups that Colorado is now empowered to consult will likely be aligned in their overall guidance and will “look at the last evidence-based recommendations that were provided by the ACIP” before Kennedy replaced its members.

In May, the federal government had removed covid vaccines from the list of shots recommended for healthy pregnant women and children.

But Colorado is still recommending a covid vaccine during pregnancy, Calonge said.

“There’s been no new evidence of issues of safety in that population,” . “So, we’re telling providers that our recommendation is to continue to follow the recommendation as it was in place in January of 2025.”

In on its website, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists strongly recommended pregnant individuals get vaccinated against covid. “ACOG continues to recommend that all pregnant and lactating individuals receive an updated COVID-19 vaccine or ‘booster,'” it said.

Likewise, the American Academy of Pediatrics that all children from 6 to 23 months old get vaccinated against covid, as well as older children in certain risk groups.

For now, Colorado is following the same immunization recommendations it used last year.

The most recent ACIP meeting, on Sept. 18 and 19, was chaotic, with members admitting they did not understand what they were voting on and even opting to redo a vote on pediatric MMRV vaccine access. The next ACIP meeting is scheduled to take place Oct. 22 and 23 and could result in additional changes to vaccine recommendations.

Doctors and vaccine scientists have expressed alarm at the splintering national consensus on vaccines.

“There’s now going to be much more confusion and distrust of vaccines among the public,” said , a professor of pediatrics at the University of Colorado School of Medicine, who served on ACIP from 2013 to 2018.

Still, she said she’s glad Colorado is forging ahead with its own recommendations.

This article is from a partnership that includes , , and 麻豆女优 Health News.

This <a target="_blank" href="/public-health/colorado-states-vaccine-recommendations-cdc-acip-rfk-pharmacists-insurance/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Members admitted they didn’t know what they were voting on, first rejecting a combined measles-mumps-rubella-chickenpox vaccine for young toddlers, then voting to keep it funded minutes later. The next day, they reversed themselves on the funding.

Now Jim O’Neill, the deputy health and human services secretary and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s acting director (a lawyer, not a doctor), must sign off. The panel’s recommendations matter, because insurers and federal programs rely on them, but they are not binding. States can follow the recommendations, or not.

In the West, California, Oregon, Washington, and Hawaii in the . Their first move was to issue joint recommendations on covid, flu, and RSV vaccines, going further than ACIP.

“Public health should never be a patchwork of politics,” said Sejal Hathi, Oregon’s state health director.

California’s health director, Erica Pan, described the goal as “demonstrating unity around science and values” while reducing public confusion.

The bloc is also exploring coordinated lab testing, data sharing, and even group purchasing. “Our intent is to restore trust in science and safeguard people’s freedom to protect themselves and their families without endless barriers,” Hathi said.

In the Northeast, New York and its neighbors created the . Democratic called it a rebuke to Washington, D.C.’s retreat from science.

“Every resident will have access to the COVID vaccine, no exceptions,” she said in .

The group has already gone beyond vaccines. After the CDC disbanded its infection-control advisory body, the Northeast states created their own return-to-work rules. Work groups now span vaccines, labs, emergency preparedness, and surveillance.

“Infectious diseases don’t respect borders,” said Connecticut’s health commissioner, Manisha Juthani. “We had to move in the same direction to protect our residents.”

The two blocs are in regular contact. “We communicate every day,” Hathi said.

“We can’t just sit by while federal agencies are hollowed out,” said acting New York City health commissioner Michelle Morse. “Public health is local, and we have to act like it.”

State leaders describe their coalitions as filling a vacuum left by Washington, D.C.

“You would think emerging from a pandemic, we would be embracing public health, but the federal government was heading in the opposite direction,” said James McDonald, New York state health commissioner.

Massachusetts commissioner Robbie Goldstein added: “The federal government has historically been the entity that held us all together. In January of this year, that tradition seemed to be going away.”

Boston University law professor Matt Motta summarized the dilemma: “States are taking matters into their own hands, sometimes to expand access to vaccines, sometimes to roll it back. That’s technically how the system works, but it risks inefficiency and confusion.”

Public health law has long tilted toward the states.

“If there was a public health issue, we’d say it’s for the states,” said Wendy Parmet of the Northeastern University School of Law.

States have mandated vaccines since the 1800s. Federal agencies can approve vaccines and fund programs, but they cannot force mandates except in very specific circumstances (e.g., federal employees).

UC Law-San Francisco’s Dorit Reiss agreed with Parmet: “Public health authority resides primarily with the states. Recommendations are recommendations.”

ACIP’s votes matter for coverage rules and insurance mandates, but states are free to diverge.

That divergence is already widening. Florida, led by Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo, childhood vaccine requirements altogether 鈥� a first-in-the-nation step. Georgetown Law’s Larry Gostin warned this could reopen century-old battles dating to Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905), when the Supreme Court upheld state vaccine mandates for public safety.

Health leaders warn that competing systems risk causing confusion and costing lives. “Federal silence creates a vacuum, and states either step up together or splinter apart,” Hathi said.

Pan added that “without federal credibility, we’re left improvising.”

McDonald cautioned that partisan divides could grow sharper.

And Morse said that “blue and red states could each go their own way, leaving the public even more divided.”

Gostin put it bluntly: “That risks confusion, inefficiency, and ultimately lives.”

This state-by-state tug-of-war is not new. In the 1800s, local boards of health fought cholera with sewers and sanitation when federal authority was absent. In the 1950s, states organized mass polio clinics, with uneven uptake until federal funding smoothed disparities.

During the covid pandemic, Trump White House response coordinator Deborah Birx saw firsthand the limits of federal power. She visited 44 states, urging governors to adopt masks, closures, and vaccines.

“I was trying to get them to tailor responses to their populations, not just follow generic federal guidance,” she later recalled.

Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once said that states are “laboratories of democracy,” where leaders could test out new ideas without putting the whole country at risk. But diseases don’t follow state lines. A virus that starts in Tallahassee could spread to Times Square by the next morning.

Today, states have become laboratories of public health. Each state is experimenting 鈥� some expanding protections, others cutting them back. And those choices could, for better or worse, affect us all.

This <a target="_blank" href="/public-health/vaccines-states-hhs-cdc-acip-recommendations-rfk/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

The leadership upheavals, which he says will restore trust in federal health agencies, have shaken the confidence many states have in the CDC and led to the fracturing of a national, cohesive immunization policy that’s endured for .

States and medical societies that long worked in concert with the CDC are breaking with federal recommendations, saying they no longer have faith in them amid the turmoil and Kennedy’s criticism of vaccines. Roughly seven months after Kennedy’s nomination was confirmed, they’re rushing to draft or release their own vaccine recommendations, while new groups are forming to issue immunization guidance and advice.

How the new system will work is still being hammered out. Vaccine recommendations from states, medical societies, and other groups are likely to diverge, creating dueling guidance and requirements. Schoolchildren in New York may still generally need immunizations, for example, while others in places such as Florida may not need many vaccines.

There are potential financial ramifications too, because historically, private insurers, Medicaid, and Medicare have generally covered only vaccines recommended by the federal government. If the CDC and its advisory group, which began Sept. 18 in Atlanta, stop recommending certain vaccines, hundreds of millions of people could wind up paying for shots that previously cost them nothing. Some states are already taking steps to prevent that from happening, which means where people live could determine if they will face costs.

“You’re seeing a proliferation of recommendations, and the recommendations by everybody are different from the CDC,” said , a University of Minnesota epidemiologist who launched an ad hoc group that provides vaccine guidance. “States and medical societies are basing their recommendations on science. The recommendations out of CDC are magic, smoke, and mirrors.”

Kennedy has defended changes at the CDC and the revamping of the vaccine committee as necessary, saying previous advisory panel members had and agency leadership botched its pandemic response.

The CDC is “the most corrupt agency at HHS, and maybe the government,” Kennedy said at a . Susan Monarez, the ousted CDC director, testified Sept. 17 at another Senate hearing about how Kennedy told her to preapprove vaccine recommendations from the advisory panel or be fired.

Kennedy has said HHS also plans to investigate vaccine injuries he says are . The CDC investigates injuries that are reported by providers or patients, but Kennedy has said he wants to recast the entire program. The Food and Drug Administration is already who died following covid-19 vaccination.

HHS didn’t return an email seeking comment.

The actions by states, medical societies, and other groups reflect a mounting lack of confidence in federal leadership, public health leaders say, and the break from the CDC is happening at a rapid clip.

The Democratic governors of California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington 鈥� fashioning themselves as the West Coast Health Alliance 鈥� are coordinating to develop vaccine recommendations that won’t necessarily follow those from the CDC. The governors said in a that the CDC shake-up has “impaired the agency’s capacity to prepare the nation for respiratory virus season and other public health challenges” and this week for vaccination against viruses such as covid, influenza, and respiratory syncytial virus.

A group of northeastern states are exploring a similar collaborative.

“The worst thing that could happen is that we have 50 different recommendations for the covid vaccine. That will destroy public health,” said Massachusetts Public Health Commissioner Robbie Goldstein, who has been involved with the effort. He’s also spoken with leaders of the West Coast alliance. “I’m really hopeful that we do come together in larger and larger collaboratives with the same recommendations or very similar recommendations,” he said while speaking to a group of reporters this month.

And medical societies such as the American Academy of Pediatrics are releasing covid vaccine recommendations for the first time from the CDC’s guidance.

Some states are seizing on the split to ensure access to shots. Massachusetts is to cover vaccines recommended by the state health department rather than paying only for those suggested by the CDC, making it the first state to guarantee such continued coverage. AHIP, a trade group representing insurers, that health plans will cover immunizations, including updated formulations of covid and flu vaccines, that were recommended by the CDC panel as of Sept. 1 with no cost sharing through the end of 2026.

Pennsylvania is to give covid vaccines even if they’re not recommended by the federal agency. Instead, they can follow recommendations from the pediatric academy and other medical groups.

Florida, meanwhile, plans to for schoolchildren to get immunizations against chickenpox, meningitis, hepatitis B, and some other diseases. State lawmakers would need to take action to end mandates for all vaccines.

Joseph Ladapo, the state’s surgeon general, said in a that any vaccine requirement is wrong and “drips with disdain and slavery.”

Some doctors criticize the decision as a dangerous step backward.

“This is a terrifying decision that puts our children’s lives at risk,” said , former acting director of the CDC, in an emailed statement.

The first school vaccine mandate was rolled out in the , for smallpox. While all states have vaccine requirements for schoolchildren, immunization rates for kindergarten students declined while cases of vaccine-preventable in 2024 and 2025.

Rochelle Walensky, the Biden administration’s first CDC director, warned of the “polarization” of state-by-state approaches. “It’s like your head is in the oven and your feet are in the freezer and, on average, we’re at 95% vaccination. That doesn’t work in measles 鈥� every place has to be at 95% vaccination.” She was referring to the proportion of a population that needs to be vaccinated to provide herd immunity.

Kennedy’s actions have thrust vaccines center stage and made him fodder for comedy. The Marsh Family, a British musical group, on Sept. 7 of Paul Simon’s “Me and Julio Down by the Schoolyard,” with the chorus, “We’ll see measles and polio down in the schoolyard.”

HBO comedian said the CDC could be known by the title “Disease” during a recent episode of his show. And Stephen Colbert used his monologue on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” to weigh in on the revamped vaccine advisory group, calling its new members the “.”

President Donald Trump has defended Kennedy, telling reporters “he means very well,” even as Trump said on Sept. 5 that “you have some vaccines that are so amazing.” Trump has repeatedly expressed pride in Operation Warp Speed, a government initiative during Trump’s previous administration that rapidly developed covid vaccines. But he’s also promoted a discredited theory linking vaccines and autism.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

The Trump administration already narrowed recommendations for the covid vaccine despite no new safety risks with the shots, although medical societies are continuing to recommend them for most people. The gulf is expected to widen as the agency’s advisory group reviews on a number of pediatric vaccines.

Other groups are also trying to provide vaccine and public health guidance, driven in part by concerns that Kennedy and other federal health leaders will make policy decisions and statements not grounded in science. Kennedy has promoted claims that aluminum, used in many vaccines, is , despite a lack of evidence for the claims. A , in fact, found aluminum was not linked to chronic disease, but Kennedy said the study’s supplemental data indicated it caused harm. The journal that published the study .

Current and former CDC and HHS staffers, along with public health academics and retired health officials, have formed the National Public Health Coalition, a nonprofit to endorse recommendations and provide guidance on policy issues. They plan to partner with state and local health departments.

“A real benefit of the National Public Health Coalition is we are made up of current and former CDC and HHS folks, people who have deep knowledge of what government programs for public health look like, and what improvements are needed,” said Abigail Tighe, the group’s executive director.

Another new group is , which bills itself as a volunteer-led effort to raise awareness about vaccines. And the was launched in April by the University of Minnesota’s infectious disease center, to review evidence for medical societies on the safety and effectiveness of vaccines.

“We’re going to continue to help wherever we can to address misinformation,” said Osterholm, the center’s leader.

This <a target="_blank" href="/public-health/cdc-acip-vaccine-recommendations-states-medical-societies-insurance-patchwork/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Their victory in , later upheld by the state Supreme Court, resounded across the country, showing that young people have a stake in the issue of climate change, advocates say. Yet, state policies to address the causes of climate change in Montana 鈥� home to large coal, oil, and natural gas deposits 鈥� haven’t changed in the wake of the case.

On Sept. 17, some of those plaintiffs are scheduled to appear in federal court to request that U.S. District Judge Dana Christensen block a series of President Donald Trump’s executive orders on energy issues. They argue the orders violate their Fifth Amendment rights and will cause nearly 200,000 additional deaths over the next 25 years and lead to more heart, respiratory, and other health problems. They are joined by other plaintiffs ages 7 to 24 from California, Florida, Hawaii, and Oregon, and are backed by the climate-focused nonprofit Our Children’s Trust.

“Trump’s fossil fuel orders are a death sentence for my generation,” Eva Lighthiser, a 19-year-old resident of Livingston, Montana, wrote in the complaint filed on May 29. “I am not suing because I want to, I am suing because I have to. My health, my future and my right to speak the truth are all on the line.”

She added that a warming climate has led to an increase in summer wildfire smoke and contributed to the flooding of the Yellowstone River (a warmer atmosphere holds more precipitation). At the heart of the case, , is the claim that young people are being denied their Fifth Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution 鈥� life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness 鈥� because of the health effects of fossil fuel development and climate change. And they say the Montana Supreme Court’s decision in December to uphold their right to a clean and healthful environment buttresses their claim.

Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, a Republican, along with 18 other states and Guam, a U.S. territory, have sided with the Trump administration, filing a motion supporting the government’s request to dismiss the case. They argue the plaintiffs do not have standing to file the lawsuit, and that there is no constitutional right to a specific energy policy. “The state of Montana has an interest in this case because it will directly impact the business done in the energy sector within its borders,” Knudsen argued in his motion.

A hearing on the motion to dismiss, as well as the plaintiffs’ call for a stay of the executive orders, is scheduled for next week in federal court in Missoula.

Olivia Vesovich, 21, one of the plaintiffs, who is in her senior year at the University of Montana in Missoula, told 麻豆女优 Health News she struggles with severe spring pollen allergies, which are exacerbated by climate warming and will likely worsen.

“My eyes were swollen shut every single day, every single night,” Vesovich said. “When I wake up in the morning, I couldn’t open my eyes for 10 minutes. It’s not fun at all, and it’s exacerbated by climate change and by the fossil fuel industry.”

She also has exercise-induced asthma as well as feelings of suffocation from the smoke-filled skies during wildfire season 鈥� of which are magnified by climate change. And Trump’s executive orders are already being implemented and causing harm, Vesovich said.

“We are making an argument that Olivia’s state constitutional right to a safe climate system should also be protected under the federal Fifth Amendment as part of her liberty right,” said Andrea Rodgers, a senior attorney for Our Children’s Trust.

Our Children’s Trust was also behind the climate change case Juliana v. the United States, filed in 2015 by 21 young plaintiffs who argued their rights had been violated. In 2024, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to dismiss the case, ruling that the courts were not the appropriate venue for climate policy.

They believe the victory in Held v. Montana gives American youth more standing this time. If they prevail, the result would be more far-reaching than the Montana case, creating a national precedent.

The plaintiffs are asking the court to declare Trump’s three related executive orders 鈥� “,” “,” and “” 鈥� unconstitutional and to block their implementation. They also claim that Trump has overstepped his authority by attempting to undo laws such as the Clean Air Act. A coalition of 14 states’ attorneys general has also filed a lawsuit against the order that declares an energy emergency.

Trump came into office in January sources and to back off efforts to usher in an era of renewable energy, which he claims are not viable. He has also rolling back environmental regulations. “We are driving a dagger into the heart of the climate change religion to drive down the cost of living for American families, unleash American energy, bring auto jobs back to the U.S., and more,” Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin said in a March news release.

In July, the EPA proposed repealing its 2009 “” that concluded climate-warming gases “endanger both the public health and the public welfare of current and future generations.”

The finding established that greenhouse gases are a pollutant and create adverse effects, such as extreme weather and risks to human health and ecosystems. And it created a foundation to regulate automobiles and the energy sector to address climate change.

Zeldin said that eliminating the rule

Unleashing fossil fuels will come with costs, as well. The health effects of a warming world are thoroughly established , said Kristie Ebi, a University of Washington professor of global health and an expert in the health risks of climate variability. Mosquito-borne diseases such as dengue, chikungunya, and malaria are spreading, and flooding, droughts, and wildfire, exacerbated by climate change, pose threats. And research has shown an increase in deaths.

“There’s a long list of adverse health outcomes” from a warming world, she said. “The data are clear.”

This <a target="_blank" href="/courts/climate-activists-lawsuits-trump-energy-policies-fossil-fuels-violate-rights/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

After Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fired Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Susan Monarez for refusing what her lawyers called “,” Newsom to help modernize California’s public health system. He also gave a job to Debra Houry, the agency’s former chief science and medical officer, who had resigned in protest hours after Monarez’s firing.

Newsom also teamed up with fellow Democratic governors Tina Kotek of Oregon, Bob Ferguson of Washington, and Josh Green of Hawaii to form the , a regional public health agency, whose guidance would “uphold scientific integrity in public health as Trump destroys” the CDC’s credibility. Newsom argued establishing the independent alliance was vital as Kennedy leads the Trump administration’s rollback of national vaccine recommendations.

More recently, California became the a global outbreak response network coordinated by the World Health Organization, followed by Illinois and New York. Colorado and Wisconsin signaled they plan to join. They did so after President Donald Trump officially from the agency on the grounds that it had “strayed from its core mission and has acted contrary to the U.S. interests in protecting the U.S. public on multiple occasions.” Newsom said joining the WHO-led consortium would enable California to respond faster to communicable disease outbreaks and other public health threats.

Although other Democratic governors and public health leaders have openly criticized the federal government, few have been as outspoken as Newsom, who is considering a run for president in 2028 and is in his second and final term as governor. Members of the scientific community have praised his effort to build a public health bulwark against the Trump administration’s slashing of funding and scaling back of vaccine recommendations.

What Newsom is doing “is a great idea,” said Paul Offit, an outspoken critic of Kennedy and a vaccine expert who formerly served on the Food and Drug Administration’s vaccine advisory committee but was removed under Trump in 2025.

“Public health has been turned on its head,” Offit said. “We have an anti-vaccine activist and science denialist as the head of U.S. Health and Human Services. It’s dangerous.”

The White House did not respond to questions about Newsom’s stance and HHS declined requests to interview Kennedy. Instead, federal health officials criticized Democrats broadly, arguing that blue states are participating in fraud and mismanagement of federal funds in public health programs.

HHS spokesperson Emily Hilliard said the administration is going after “Democrat-run states that pushed unscientific lockdowns, toddler mask mandates, and draconian vaccine passports during the covid era.” She said those moves have “completely eroded the American people’s trust in public health agencies.”

Public Health Guided by Science

Since Trump returned to office, Newsom has criticized the president and his administration for engineering policies that he sees as an affront to public health and safety, labeling federal leaders as “extremists” trying to “weaponize the CDC and spread misinformation.” He has for erroneously linking vaccines to autism, the administration is endangering the lives of infants and young children in scaling back childhood vaccine recommendations. And he argued that the White House is unleashing “chaos” on America’s public health system in backing out of the WHO.

The governor declined an interview request. Newsom spokesperson Marissa Saldivar said it’s a priority of the governor “to protect public health and provide communities with guidance rooted in science and evidence, not politics and conspiracies.”

The Trump administration’s moves have triggered financial uncertainty that local officials said has reduced morale within public health departments and left states unprepared for disease outbreaks and . The White House last year proposed cutting HHS spending , including . Congress largely rejected those cuts last month, although funding for programs focusing on social drivers of health, such as access to food, housing, and education, .

The Trump administration announced that it would claw back in public health funds from California, Colorado, Illinois, and Minnesota, arguing that the Democratic-led states were funding “woke” initiatives that didn’t reflect White House priorities. Within days, and a judge the cut.

“They keep suddenly canceling grants and then it gets overturned in court,” said Kat DeBurgh, executive director of the Health Officers Association of California. “A lot of the damage is already done because counties already stopped doing the work.”

Federal funding has accounted for of state and local health department budgets nationwide, with money going toward fighting HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, preventing chronic diseases, and boosting public health preparedness and communicable disease response, according to a 2025 analysis by 麻豆女优, a health information nonprofit that includes 麻豆女优 Health News.

Federal funds account for $2.4 billion of California’s $5.3 billion public health budget, making it difficult for Newsom and state lawmakers to backfill potential cuts. That money helps fund state operations and is vital for local health departments.

Funding Cuts Hurt All

Los Angeles County public health director Barbara Ferrer said if the federal government is allowed to cut that $600 million, the county of nearly 10 million residents would lose an estimated $84 million over the next two years, in addition to other grants for prevention of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections. Ferrer said the county depends on nearly $1 billion in federal funding annually to track and prevent communicable diseases and combat chronic health conditions, including diabetes and high blood pressure. Already, the the closure of that provided vaccinations and disease testing, largely because of funding losses tied to federal grant cuts.

“It’s an ill-informed strategy,” Ferrer said. “Public health doesn’t care whether your political affiliation is Republican or Democrat. It doesn’t care about your immigration status or sexual orientation. Public health has to be available for everyone.”

A single case of measles requires public health workers to track down 200 potential contacts, Ferrer said.

The U.S. but is close to losing that status as a result of vaccine skepticism and misinformation spread by vaccine critics. The U.S. had , the most since 1991, with 93% in people who were unvaccinated or whose vaccination status was unknown. This year, the highly contagious disease has been reported at , , and .

Public health officials hope the West Coast Health Alliance can help counteract Trump by building trust through evidence-based public health guidance.

“What we’re seeing from the federal government is partisan politics at its worst and retaliation for policy differences, and it puts at extraordinary risk the health and well-being of the American people,” said Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association, a coalition of public health professionals.

Robust Vaccine Schedule

Erica Pan, California’s top public health officer and director of the state Department of Public Health, said the West Coast Health Alliance is defending science by recommending a vaccine schedule than the federal government. California is part of a coalition over its decision to rescind recommendations for seven childhood vaccines, including for hepatitis A, hepatitis B, influenza, and covid-19.

Pan expressed deep concern about the state of public health, particularly the uptick in measles. “We’re sliding backwards,” Pan said of immunizations.

Sarah Kemble, Hawaii’s state epidemiologist, said Hawaii joined the alliance after hearing from pro-vaccine residents who wanted assurance that they would have access to vaccines.

“We were getting a lot of questions and anxiety from people who did understand science-based recommendations but were wondering, 鈥楢m I still going to be able to go get my shot?’” Kemble said.

Other states led mostly by Democrats have also formed alliances, with Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and several other East Coast states banding together to create the .

HHS’ Hilliard said that even as Democratic governors establish vaccine advisory coalitions, the federal “remains the scientific body guiding immunization recommendations in this country, and HHS will ensure policy is based on rigorous evidence and gold standard science, not the failed politics of the pandemic.”

Influencing Red States

Newsom, for his part, has approved a recurring annual infusion of nearly $300 million to support the state Department of Public Health, as well as the 61 local public health agencies across California, and last year authorizing the state to issue its own immunization guidance. It requires health insurers in California to provide patient coverage for vaccinations the state recommends even if the federal government doesn’t.

Jeffrey Singer, a doctor and senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute, said decentralization can be beneficial. That’s because local media campaigns that reflect different political ideologies and community priorities may have a better chance of influencing the public.

A 麻豆女优 analysis found some red states are joining blue states in decoupling their vaccine recommendations from the federal government’s. Singer said some doctors in his home state of Arizona are looking to more liberal California for vaccine recommendations.

“Science is never settled, and there are a lot of areas of this country where there are differences of opinion,” Singer said. “This can help us challenge our assumptions and learn.”

This <a target="_blank" href="/public-health/gavin-newsom-california-public-health-fight-west-coast-alliance-trump-hhs-rfk/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

The legislation introduced in , , , , , , , and builds on efforts made in other states in past years. This latest push for patient protections comes as the Trump administration has backed away from federal debt protections, health care has become , and more people are expected to go without medical coverage or but riskier high-deductible insurance plans that could lead them into debt.

“In the wealthiest country on Earth, people are going bankrupt, suffering wage garnishment, just because they get sick,” said Colorado state Rep. , a Democrat who introduced legislation on Feb. 19 that would, among other measures, ban wage garnishment for medical debt.

That legislation is under consideration after a 麻豆女优 Health News investigation found that courts approved wage garnishment requests in an estimated 14,000 medical debt cases a year in Colorado. The investigation also showed that it isn’t just urban hospitals or big health care chains allowing their patients’ wages to be garnished. It’s also small rural hospitals, physician groups, and public ambulance services, among other medical care providers. And the reporting showed that wage garnishment can erroneously target patients. For example, one family lost wages 鈥� and subsequently power to their home, because they couldn’t pay their electric bill 鈥� after an ambulance company incorrectly billed the family instead of Medicaid.

Wage garnishment is one tool creditors can use in most states to recoup money from people with unpaid bills. In many states, they can garnish someone’s bank account or put a lien on their home, too. To garnish a person’s wages, a creditor must typically get permission from a court to make the person’s employer hand over a piece of the debtor’s earnings.

“The creditor is taking the money directly out of somebody’s paycheck, and so it doesn’t leave people with any choice to say, 鈥業 need to prioritize food for my children,’” said , legal and policy director for the National Center for Access to Justice. The center, based at Fordham Law School, and the District of Columbia on how fair their laws are to consumers who get sued over debt.

It is legal to garnish patients’ wages for medical debt in all but a , according to the Commonwealth Fund, a nonprofit foundation based in New York focused on health care.

Now, lawmakers in additional states seek to ban the practice entirely. Others want to limit it by exempting debtors whose household income falls under a certain threshold or by upping the amount of earnings immune from garnishment.

Such policies on wage garnishment fit into a larger push around the country to address the effect of medical debt on people’s lives and finances. Those efforts include barring medical debt from credit reports, prohibiting liens on people’s homes, capping interest rates, and limiting the ability to file lawsuits against people with low incomes over unpaid medical bills.

Debt collectors have fought against such measures, arguing they don’t solve the problem of health care affordability and hurt the ability of medical providers to continue to provide care.

“The wage garnishment process is already highly regulated at the federal and state level and includes many consumer protection measures,” said Scott Purcell, chief executive of , an association of credit and collection professionals.

Even before the Colorado legislation was introduced, BC Services warning its clients that the legislation “poses an existential threat,” especially to rural health providers. And Bridget Frazier, a spokesperson for the , said Feb. 20 that the bill “could drive up costs and financial risk for health care providers, making it harder to keep hospitals sustainable and ensuring Coloradans have access to care when they need it most.”

The pending Colorado measure would ban wage garnishment for all patients. It also would limit bank garnishments, in which a patient’s financial institution must hand over a chunk of the money in the person’s account. Additionally, among other things, it would prevent payment plans from exceeding 4% of weekly net income, require creditors to check whether uninsured patients are eligible for public health insurance before collecting, bar creditors from collecting on bills that are more than three years old, and leave medical care providers liable to the patient for at least $3,000 if collectors don’t comply.

“No one is saying, 鈥楧on’t get paid for your services.’ We’re saying getting health care should not lead to financial ruin for people,” said Dana Kennedy, co-executive director at the Denver-based , a health advocacy group that has been working with lawmakers on the Colorado measure.

Kennedy said that 麻豆女优 Health News’ investigation drove home how many kinds of Colorado health care facilities are willing to let this collection practice happen to their patients, and that the people whose wages are being garnished are often working at Family Dollar, Walmart, Amazon, or gas stations and restaurants.

“Medical debt is typically different from other forms of indebtedness,” said Colorado state Sen. , a Democrat co-sponsoring the legislation. “You could choose to keep driving your old car or buy a new one and take on debt for that. You could upgrade your home. You could buy consumer appliances. There’s not usually that voluntary element in a health care context.”

, a senior attorney with the National Consumer Law Center, said broad laws that don’t require patients to jump through hoops to access protections are the most likely to be effective. Because of that, she and other consumer advocates prefer state policies that get rid of wage garnishment for all debtors and all types of debt.

“It can be hard to identify medical debt as medical debt,” Carter said. “For example, if you have a medical debt and you put it on your credit card, it’s not going to be easy for a court system to identify that debt as medical debt.”

She said another reason is that complexity is the enemy of effectiveness. Carter pointed to a showing that even though people in the state can keep $10,000 in their bank accounts safe from garnishment, few consumers take advantage of the protection. They must know the protection exists, know where to find the relevant form, get the form notarized, file it, and mail copies to creditors. The same report found that garnishments can also be burdensome for employers, who must process garnishments and can find themselves in court if they make an error.

Jones, at the National Center for Access to Justice, said outlawing wage garnishment fully, rather than limiting it, has other benefits. “It’s also to protect people’s jobs, because in most states, if somebody has two or more orders of garnishment, they can lose their job for it,” she said.

Still, some lawmakers are pushing for the intermediate route. In Washington state, Democratic state Sen. is spearheading legislation to rope off a larger portion of low-wage earnings from garnishment. So, for example, a person making $1,000 a week would be able to keep their whole paycheck, as opposed to the $800 that the law would currently protect.

Mindy Chumbley, owner of a Washington-based collections company and an ACA International board member, testified against the bill on Feb. 2. “Washington has made sweeping changes to medical debt policy year after year without pausing to study the cumulative impact,” she told lawmakers. “Our clients are reporting clinic closures, urgent care centers shutting down, staffing shortages, and rural facilities struggling to stay open.”

The Washington State Hospital Association said it is neutral on the legislation. The American Hospital Association said it does not take positions on state policies.

Liias told 麻豆女优 Health News that lawmakers need to ensure health care providers can recoup their costs while also protecting patients. “We don’t want families either to be driven into bankruptcy or to be driven into under-the-table work to avoid these garnishment thresholds,” he said.

Liias said his measure follows the lead of Arizona, which passed similar consumer protections in 2022. “Obviously, the health care system is still functioning in Arizona, and folks are able to make it work.”

This <a target="_blank" href="/health-care-costs/medical-debt-wage-garnishment-state-legislation-patient-protection/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

But there are strings attached.

In late December, President Donald Trump’s administration announced how much all 50 states would get under its new Rural Health Transformation Program, assigning them to use the money to fix systemic problems that leave rural Americans without access to good health care. Now, the clock is ticking.

Within eight months, states must submit revised budgets, begin spending, and show the money is going to good use. Federal officials will begin reviewing state progress in late summer and announce 2027 funding levels by the end of October.

The money — divided into unique allocations for each state, ranging from $147 million for New Jersey to $281 million for Texas — represents the first $10 billion installment from the five-year, $50 billion program. Congress created the fund as a last-minute sweetener in Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act last summer to offset the anticipated in rural communities from the statute’s nearly $1 trillion in Medicaid spending cuts over the next decade.

Federal officials crafted the fund to give states “space to be creative,” Mehmet Oz, administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, said on a call with reporters after announcing the funding Dec. 29. “Some states will fail, and we will learn from that.”

The money was divided according to a complicated formula.

In 2026, each state will receive an equal $100 million share for the first half of the money, plus additional funding from the second half. Oz’s staff steered payouts from the second portion based on each state’s rural score, as well as results from a “technical” scoring system for project proposals.

Within hours of the announcement, academics and researchers began to parse the awards to better understand why some states received more than others, including whether the awards reflected any partisanship or political favoritism.

At first glance, total awards do not appear to favor states governed by either Republicans or Democrats. But teased out the amount awarded for each state’s technical score, which is the part determined by the discretion of agency officials.

The analysis was performed at the University of North Carolina’s Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, which specializes in rural health. A 麻豆女优 Health News review of the Sheps Center data found that states with Republican governors tended to receive more money for the parts of their application based on the technical score. Democratic-controlled states crowded the bottom quarter of those technical score awards.

Overall, though, the state awards reveal wild variation in how much money each state will get per rural resident, almost a hundredfold difference between the top and bottom.

In an emailed statement to , a spokesperson for Arizona’s Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs accused the administration of shortchanging rural residents in the state, which was awarded $167 million this year from the program.

CMS spokesperson Chris Krepich said in an emailed statement to 麻豆女优 Health News that “politics played no role in funding decisions.”

On the December call, Oz pushed states to start working on policy actions championed by the administration — such as approving presidential fitness tests and restricting food benefits — that could require legislative approval.

Half of states promised to mandate the presidential fitness test, Oz said. Many states also proposed food waivers under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, which would limit low-nutrition items such as soda. He also said some states promised to teach health care professionals about nutrition. And others confirmed they will repeal certificate-of-need laws, which require companies to prove that new health facilities they want to open are necessary.

Krepich said CMS’ new Office of Rural Health Transformation is hiring program officers to serve as point people for three or four states. Many states are setting up their own offices to oversee the new funding.

Oz highlighted Alabama’s “big maternity initiative with robotics doing ultrasounds” and said states are tackling issues ranging from behavioral health to obesity.

A 麻豆女优 Health News review of state “” and “” released by CMS shows that many states plan to address the workforce challenges in rural areas. Delaware, for example, plans to use its funding to create the state’s first four-year medical school with a rural primary care track.

A third of states said they want to improve electronic health records, and every state mentioned telehealth.

Many state legislatures to distribute the funding to their state offices. Meanwhile, state officials are hiring staff, , and .

“I’m excited about what’s next,” said Terry Scoggin, former interim chief executive of the Texas Organization of Rural & Community Hospitals, or TORCH. Texas was awarded the biggest allocation. The money will bolster a rural hospital funding bill Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed last year, Scoggin said.

More than two dozen cash-strapped rural hospitals in Texas to clinics since 2005, a nationwide trend that hit the Lone Star State particularly hard. The state has the largest rural population in the United States. Texas’ allocation amounts to about $66 per rural resident, . By contrast, Rhode Island was granted about $6,300 per rural resident.

Scoggin said he has “a ton of concerns” about companies taking the money instead of it helping rural hospitals and residents. “I was blown away about how many for-profit companies reached out.” The companies have also called rural hospitals and asked to work with them to apply for state money, he said.

The awards should be judged on how they benefit rural residents because “the stated goal of the program is to improve rural health,” said Paula Chatterjee, an assistant professor of medicine at the University of Pennsylvania who co-authored on the transformation fund.

Researchers at the Sheps Center conducted the analysis to estimate how much money states received from the technical score, which is the portion of funding based on the quality of their proposals and state policy actions that align with “Make America Healthy Again” priorities.

New Mexico won the least amount of technical funding, with less than 10% of its award based on the discretionary metrics. Alaska won the largest technical award, according to the Sheps Center data.

Texas, Nebraska, New Hampshire, and Hawaii rounded out the top five recipients of technical funding. In addition to New Mexico, the other lowest technical awards went to Michigan, New Jersey, Arizona, and California.

Mark Holmes, director of the Sheps Center, declined to comment on whether he saw any political bias in the awards but said the nuance in the final portion of discretionary awards based on technical scores is important because those dollars can be redistributed and potentially clawed back in future years.

“We can be fairly certain that every state will get at least a slightly, if not a vastly, different amount next year based on this re-pooling and reallocation piece,” Holmes said.

States now have a limited time to show they’re using the money effectively to secure future funding.

But they can’t start spending yet. CMS followed standard grant procedures and is requiring each state to submit revised budgets before they can draw down money, Krepich said.

States have until Jan. 30 to resubmit their budgets, and CMS then has 30 days to respond, according to the standard . Under that timing, some states may not have cash in hand until March.

“CMS is working closely with states to complete this process as efficiently as possible,” Krepich said.

This <a target="_blank" href="/rural-health/rural-health-transformation-state-distribution-technical-scores-variation-deadlines/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

They grabbed canned food, fruit and vegetables, and a grocery store gift card. And then Basu spotted a row of tables in the parking lot staffed by county social service workers helping people apply for food assistance and health coverage. Her mother-in-law, also a Medicaid recipient, might qualify for food assistance, she was told.

“It would be less money for me that I would have to put aside,” said Basu, who has been the sole breadwinner for the family from Anaheim since her husband suffered a stroke. “Maybe I can use that extra money to cover other expenses.”

Basu was among the more than 3,000 people who turned up at a November CalOptima event in one of California’s most affluent counties. It marked the start of a $20 million campaign by the Medicaid health insurer to help low-income residents get and maintain health coverage and food benefits as federal restrictions under President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act take effect.

The law cuts more than for Medicaid, known in California as Medi-Cal. It also slashes around $187 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, known as CalFresh in California. That’s about 20% of the program’s budget over the next 10 years. As a result, up to 3.4 million Medi-Cal recipients and almost 400,000 CalFresh beneficiaries could lose benefits. (Most CalFresh beneficiaries .)

Republican representatives say the changes, some of which have already taken effect, will prevent waste, fraud, and abuse through expanded eligibility checks and work requirements. Yet, Medicaid health plans across the nation are bolstering outreach to low-income households in a bid to not lose enrollees, many of whom are already struggling with high grocery and medical costs.

In Los Angeles County, L.A. Care Health Plan launched community information sessions this month to educate the public about upcoming changes to Medi-Cal. Hawaii’s AlohaCare is mobilizing a to help mitigate the impact of Medicaid coverage losses. And Community Behavioral Health, a Medicaid managed-care plan for behavioral health in Philadelphia, plans to host a series of summits starting next year to get the word out about the changes.

“We know that these changes will affect a lot of our members,” said Michael Hunn, CEO of CalOptima, one of about two dozen Medi-Cal managed-care plans paid monthly based on their number of enrollees. “We have a great responsibility to make sure that they understand and can navigate these changes as they are implemented.”

CalOptima, a public entity whose board is appointed by county supervisors, has allocated up to $2 million through the end of 2028 to pay for county eligibility workers at events like the food giveaway to provide on-the-spot assistance. It’s funding that An Tran, head of Orange County’s Social Services Agency, said can help pay for critical outreach the county otherwise wouldn’t be able to afford.

Orange County has about 1,500 eligibility workers to handle reenrollments and verification checks for around 850,000 Medi-Cal members and over 300,000 CalFresh recipients.

“We are talking about families who desperately need help especially at a time when food costs and inflation is high and they’re barely able to make it,” Tran said.

In addition to funding county workers, CalOptima intends to provide grants to community organizations to conduct Medi-Cal outreach and run a public awareness campaign in multiple languages to make enrollees aware of new requirements, Hunn said.

U.S. Rep. Young Kim, a Republican who represents part of Orange County, did not respond to a request seeking comment but has said Trump’s signature budget law, which she voted for, “takes important steps to ensure federal dollars are used as effectively as possible and to strengthen Medicaid and SNAP for our most vulnerable citizens who truly need it.” She and other Republicans have said it will provide tax relief for working Americans.

After nearly an hour with an eligibility worker, Basu learned she earned too much for her mother-in-law, who lives with the family, to qualify for CalFresh. Now, Basu said, she’s worried about Medi-Cal eligibility changes for immigrants, which she fears could affect her mother-in-law, who obtained lawful permanent residency about a year and a half ago.

“Before having that, we were paying cash for cardiology, for labs, everything. It was very pricey,” Basu said. “I’m thinking I will have to, in a few months, pay again out-of-pocket. It’s a lot on me. It’s a burden.”

In most of the nation, people who’ve had a green card for less than five years generally for federally funded Medicaid. However, California has provided state-funded Medi-Cal coverage for them and low-income immigrants without legal status.

But even those benefits are being rolled back amid state budget pressures. In July, the state will eliminate full-scope dental benefits for some enrollees who have had a green card for less than five years, as well as certain other immigrant enrollees. A year later, this group will start being charged monthly premiums.

And starting in January, California will freeze enrollment for people 19 or over without legal status, as well as some lawfully present immigrants. It will also reinstate an asset limit for all older enrollees.

Meanwhile, the state is drafting guidance for counties on how to implement the federal Medicaid eligibility changes, said Tony Cava, a spokesperson for California’s Department of Health Care Services. The federal work rules and twice-yearly eligibility checks are slated to take effect by the start of 2027, applying to enrollees under the Affordable Care Act coverage expansion.

The California Department of Social Services, which manages CalFresh, has already changed how home utility costs are calculated and imposed a cap on benefits for very large households. It is still developing guidance for the federal work requirements and changes that disqualify some noncitizens, agency Chief Deputy Director David Swanson Hollinger said at a recent hearing.

The Department of Health Care Services has developed a “” webpage about the state and federal Medicaid changes. It’s also leveraging a network of Medi-Cal “” to provide information and updates in communities across the state in multiple languages. And it’s collaborating with counties and Medi-Cal managed-care plans to support community-based enrollment assistance, including at local events, Cava said.

Aquilino and Fidelia Salazar, a husband and wife getting help with a CalFresh application, said they didn’t expect to be affected by the work requirements and Medi-Cal eligibility changes. That’s because they are both permanent U.S. residents who have chronic health conditions and can’t work, they said. People considered physically or mentally unable to work can be exempted from work requirements. But the couple are concerned other immigrants in their community could lose care.

“It’s not fair because a lot of people really need it,” Fidelia Salazar said in Spanish. “People earn so little and then medicines and going to the doctor is extremely expensive.”

This <a target="_blank" href="/insurance/one-big-beautiful-bill-medicaid-snap-food-benefits-orange-county-california/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

The Trump administration, which has promised “radical transparency,” that it plans to publish the “project summary” for states that win awards. Following the lead of federal regulators, many states are withholding their complete applications, and some have refused to release any details.

“Let’s be clear,” said Alan Morgan, chief executive of the National Rural Health Association. “The hospital CEOs, the clinic administrators, the community leaders: They’re going to want to know what their states are doing.” The NRHA’s members include struggling rural hospitals and clinics, which would benefit from the Trump administration’s Rural Health Transformation Program.

Morgan said his members are interested in what states propose, which of their ideas are approved or rejected, and their budget narratives, which detail how the money could be spent.

Improving rural health care is an “insanely complicated and difficult task,” Morgan said.

The five-year Rural Health Transformation Program was approved by Congress in a law — the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — that also drastically cuts Medicaid spending, on which rural providers heavily depend. It’s being watched closely because it’s a much-needed influx of funds — with a caveat from the Trump administration that the money be spent on transformational ideas, not just to prop up ailing rural hospitals.

The law says half of the $50 billion will be divided equally among all states with an approved application. The rest will be distributed through a points-based system. Of , $12.5 billion will be allotted based on each state’s rurality. The remaining $12.5 billion will go to states that on initiatives and policies that, in part, mirror the Trump administration’s “” objectives.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has repeatedly promised to open the government to the American people. His agency has devoted to “radical transparency.”

“We’re working to make this the most transparent HHS in its 70-year history,” in written testimony to lawmakers in September.

Lawrence Gostin, a professor of public health law at Georgetown University, said HHS is “acting in a way that utterly lacks transparency” and that the public has the right to demand “greater openness and clarity.” Without transparency, the public cannot hold HHS accountable, he said.

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services spokesperson Catherine Howden said the agency will follow the federal regulations when releasing information about the rural health program.

Grant applications are “not released to the public during the merit review process,” Howden said, adding, “The purpose of this policy is to protect the integrity of evaluations, applicant confidentiality, and the competitive nature of the process.”

Democrats and many health care advocates are concerned politics will affect how much money states get.

“I am very concerned about retaliation,” said Rep. Nikki Budzinski (D-Ill.). Because Democrats control her state’s politics, “our application might not be as seriously considered as other states that have Republican leadership,” she added.

Illinois’ Democratic members of the U.S. House to CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz in November asking for “full and fair consideration” of their state application. Illinois officials have not yet released their state’s proposal to 麻豆女优 Health News, which has a pending public records request.

Heather Howard, a professor of the practice at Princeton University, said she is “pleasantly surprised at how transparent the states have been.”

Howard directs the university’s State Health and Value Strategies program, which the rural health fund, and praised most states for publicly posting their project summaries.

“To me, it speaks to the intense interest in this program,” Howard said. Her team, reviewing about two dozen state summaries, found themes including expansion of home-based and mobile services, increased use of technology, and workforce development initiatives like scholarships, signing bonuses, and child care assistance for high-demand positions.

“I think it’s exciting,” Howard said. “What’s great here is the experimentation we’re going to learn from.”

Telerobotics appeared in Georgia’s and Alabama’s applications, she said, including a proposal to use robotic equipment for remote ultrasounds.

Another theme that “warms my heart,” Howard said, was the effort among states to create advisory groups or committees, including in Idaho, where work groups are expected to focus on technology, workforce development, tribal collaboration, and behavioral health.

All 50 states submitted applications to federal regulators by the Nov. 5 deadline and awards will be announced by the end of the year, according to CMS.

As of late November, nearly 40 states had released their project narrative, the main part of the application, which describes proposed initiatives, according to 麻豆女优 Health News tracking. More than a dozen states have also released their budget narratives.

Also as of late November, only a handful of states — Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Carolina, and Wyoming — had released all parts of the application.

麻豆女优 Health News filed public records requests for states’ complete applications. Some states have refused to release any of their application materials.

Nebraska, for example, rejected a public records request, saying its application materials are “proprietary or commercial information” that “would give advantage to business competitors.”

Kentucky shared its application summary but said the remainder of the application is a “preliminary draft” not subject to release under state laws.

Erika Engle, a spokesperson for Hawaii Gov. Josh Green, said the governor “is committed to transparency” but declined to share any of the state’s proposal.

Hawaii and other states are still processing formal public records requests.

The rural health program is part of the July law projected to reduce federal Medicaid spending in rural areas by 10 years.

Those cuts are expected to affect rural health facilities’ bottom lines, threatening their ability to stay open. A recent Commonwealth Fund report found that rural areas continue to to primary care. But the guidelines for the rural health program say states can use only 15% of their new funding to pay providers for patient care.

Between the Medicaid cuts and funding boost from the new program, “there’s real opportunity for national policy to impact rural, both in the negative and the positive potentially,” said Celli Horstman, a senior research associate at the New York-based policy think tank who co-authored the report.

Among the publicly available rural health transformation proposals, Democratic-leaning states show support, or are willing to adopt, some of the administration’s goals but will lose out on points from eschewing others.

For example, New Mexico said it would introduce legislation requiring students to take the Presidential Fitness Test and physicians to complete continuing education courses on nutrition. But it won’t prevent people from using their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits to buy “non-nutritious” foods such as soda and candy.

Many states want to invest in technology, including telehealth, cybersecurity, and remote patient monitoring equipment. Other themes include increasing access to healthy food, improving emergency services, preventing and managing chronic illnesses, and enlisting community health workers and paramedics for home visits.

Specific proposals include:

• Arkansas wants to spend $5 million through its “FAITH” program — Faith-based Access, Interventions, Transportation, & Health — to enlist rural religious institutions to host education and preventive screening events. Congregations could also install walking circuits and fitness equipment.
• Alaska, which historically relied on dogsled teams to bring medication to remote areas, is looking to test the use of “unmanned aerial systems” to speed up pharmacy deliveries to such communities.
• Tennessee wants to increase access to healthy activities by spending money on parks, trails, and farmers markets.
• Maryland wants to start mobile markets and install refrigerators and freezers to improve access to fresh, healthy food that often spoils in rural areas with few grocery stores.

State Sen. Stephen Meredith, a Republican who represents part of western Kentucky, said he still expects rural hospitals to close despite his state’s rural health transformation program.

“I think we’re treating symptoms without curing the disease,” he said after listening to a presentation on Kentucky’s proposal at .

Morgan, whose organization represents rural hospitals likely to close, said the state’s ideas may sound good.

“You can craft a narrative that sounds wonderful,” he said. “But then translating the aspirational goals to a functioning program? That’s difficult.”

麻豆女优 Health News staffers Phil Galewitz, Katheryn Houghton, Tony Leys, Jazmin Orozco Rodriguez, Maia Rosenfeld, Bram Sable-Smith, and Lauren Sausser contributed to this report.

This <a target="_blank" href="/rural-health/rural-health-transformation-program-cms-state-applications-transparency/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Bre Dolan, a 35-year-old resident of Hardy County, West Virginia, understands why. Throughout her childhood, when her dad had addiction and mental health crises, police officers were often the first ones to respond. Dolan calls them “good men and women” who “care about seeing their community recover.”

But she’s skeptical that they can mitigate the root causes of an addiction epidemic that has racked her home state for decades.

“Most of the busts that go down are addicts,” she said 鈥� people who need treatment, not prison.

Dolan’s father was one of them. And so was she.

Now 14 years into recovery, she’s been surprised to see many local officials spending opioid settlement money 鈥� an influx of cash from companies accused of fueling the overdose crisis 鈥� on police Tasers, cruisers, night vision gear, and more.

“How is that really tackling an issue?” Dolan said. “How will it help families battling addiction?”

Nationwide, more than $61 million in opioid settlement funds were spent on law enforcement-related efforts in 2024, according to a yearlong investigation by 麻豆女优 Health News and researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Shatterproof, a national nonprofit focused on addiction. That included initiatives that public health experts largely support, such as hiring social workers to accompany officers on overdose calls, as well as actions they’re more skeptical of, such as beefing up police arsenals.

Over nearly two decades, state and local governments are set to receive in opioid settlement money, which is intended to be used to fight addiction. The settlement agreements even and established other guardrails to limit unrelated uses of the funds 鈥� as the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement of the 1990s.

But there’s still significant flexibility with these dollars, and what constitutes a good use to one person can be deemed waste by another.

To , an addiction medicine doctor who was once addicted to opioids and has served as an expert in several opioid lawsuits, some law enforcement expenses fall into that second category.

and are not “in the spirit of what we wanted to use the money for when we were fighting for it,” Loyd said.

“People died for this money. Families were torn apart for this money. And to not spend it to try to make our system better, so that people don’t have to experience those losses going forward, to me, is unconscionable,” he said.

As part of this investigation, 麻豆女优 Health News and its partners compiled the most comprehensive national database of opioid settlement spending to date, featuring more than 10,500 examples of how the money was used (or not) last year. The team filed public records requests, scoured government websites, and extracted expenditures, which were then , such as treatment or prevention. The findings include:

• Nearly $2.7 billion 鈥� that’s the amount states and localities spent or committed in 2024, according to public records. The lion’s share went to investments addiction experts consider crucial, including about $615 million to treatment, $279 million to overdose reversal medications and related training, and $227 million to housing-related programs for people with substance use disorders.
• Smaller, though notable, amounts funded law enforcement initiatives 鈥� such as creating a shooting range and tinting patrol car windows 鈥� and prevention programs that experts called questionable, such as putting on a fishing tournament.
• Some jurisdictions paid for basic government services, such as firefighter salaries.
• The money is controlled by different entities in each state, and about 20% of it is untrackable through public records.

This year’s database, including the expenditures and untrackable percentages, should not be compared with the one 麻豆女优 Health News and its partners , due to and state budget quirks. The database cannot present a full picture because some jurisdictions don’t publish reports or delineate spending by year. What’s shown is a snapshot of 2024 and does not account for decisions in 2025.

Still, the database helps counteract the in charge of settlement money among those .

鈥楬ow My Population Would Like Me To Vote’

Dolan has seen intergenerational addiction up close. When her father was high, he sometimes kicked teenage Dolan out of the house with her toddler siblings. She started drinking early and progressed to other drugs, eventually landing in prison.

Although she managed to find recovery on her own, even landing a job as an EMT, she wants to make the path easier for others.

If settlement money were used to hire social workers or build family recovery programs, it could change the course of a kid’s life, she said.

“Maybe people could have helped my dad get into recovery and gave him therapy,” she said. “Anything could have happened.”

But many local officials say law enforcement is one of the few tools they have, especially in rural areas. And their constituents believe it’s effective.

“If the goal was treatment and prevention, it would have been better to throw [the money] into a big grant system and give it to treatment centers,” said , city manager of Oak Hill, West Virginia, which for a drone and surveillance cameras for its police department. “Unfortunately, local governments are really not set up to do that.”

Clarkdale, Arizona, Town Manager said her town bought because they help with enforcement 鈥� such as recording crime scenes and conducting search-and-rescue operations 鈥� as well as education, when officers interact with kids at community events.

Similar perspectives nationwide have led to spending that includes:

• About (also known as silencers) in Alexandria, Indiana.
• About in Mooresville, Indiana.
• About and Tasers in Hardy County, West Virginia.
• Nearly , to add a police officer to the county’s drug task force, replace that officer locally, buy guns and vehicles, and tint car windows.

Several elected officials said their choices reflect local politics.

That’s “how my population would like me to vote,” Hardy County Commissioner said of his commission’s goal to spend about a quarter of its settlement money on law enforcement.

Mooresville Town Council President told 麻豆女优 Health News, “People have petitioned our government for less taxes but have never petitioned for less services” from the local police force. With federal and state budget cuts looming, the town must be resourceful, he said, adding that the Tasers were bought with a portion of settlement funds that have no restrictions.

After these purchases, an Indiana commission of law enforcement equipment that it cautioned against buying with restricted settlement dollars. , , and have released similar lists.

Research backs those restrictions. Studies have shown that drug busts and arrests can . Officers often , making people who use drugs or through police.

In contrast, equipping police officers with overdose reversal medications has been . That’s a key component of in Texas, the state with the highest percentage of reported law enforcement spending.

Police and Firefighter Salaries

Some places used settlement funds to maintain basic first responder services.

For example, Mantua Township, New Jersey, to “offset police salary and wages” and, according to its public spending report, . Township officials did not respond to requests for comment.

Los Angeles County to cover a portion of firefighter salaries and benefits last year and estimates it will use another $1 million this year.

County fire department spokesperson Heidi Oliva said opioid funds were used to fill a budget gap until revenue kicked in from a last November.

The use of funds was “appropriate,” she said in an email, because “the opioid crisis presents a significant burden to EMS response, from dispatch through arrival at hospitals, clinician mental health/burnout, and a variety of other factors.”

Using opioid money to replace other revenue is . But it’s .

“I don’t want to see this money used to make up for stuff that would be paid for anyway,” said , chair of the FED UP! Coalition, a national advocacy organization representing many parents who’ve lost children to addiction.

Settlement dollars are “the only financial representation from the governments and from the drug companies” of families’ losses, Busch said. To see that money used to maintain the status quo is “painful” and “distressing.”

Busch fears this practice will as states grapple with federal budget cuts.

Already in New Jersey, lawmakers in settlement funds to health systems to cushion against anticipated Medicaid losses 鈥� a move opposed by the state’s , , and .

However, some states are taking proactive steps.

Colorado this year against such actions.

“These dollars can’t be part of budget games where we simply backfill existing programs,” state Attorney General Phil Weiser told 麻豆女优 Health News. “We have to build on whatever we’re doing because it hasn’t been enough.”

Other states, such as , , and , are newly requiring local governments to report how they spend the money, which may make it easier to spot disputed practices. Officials in Delaware, Hawaii, Massachusetts, and Missouri said they expect to revamp their public reporting systems to increase transparency by early 2026.

In Mississippi, which produced no substantive public reports last year, the attorney general’s office has that will host spending information after Dec. 1.

Jennifer Twyman is anxious to see some positive changes.

“We have people literally dying on our sidewalks,” said the Louisville, Kentucky, advocate.

Twyman struggled with opioid misuse for 20 years and now works with to end homelessness and the war on drugs. To her, any spending that doesn’t directly help people with addiction betrays the settlement’s purpose.

“It is the blood from many of my friends, people that I care deeply about,” she said. “That money could have been me, could have been my life.”

Read behind this project.

麻豆女优 Health News’ Henry Larweh; Shatterproof’s Kristen Pendergrass and Lillian Williams; and the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health’s Abigail Winiker, Samantha Harris, Isha Desai, Katibeth Blalock, Erin Wang, Olivia Allran, Connor Gunn, Justin Xu, Ruhao Pang, Jirka Taylor, and Valerie Ganetsky contributed to the database featured in this article.

The has taken a leading role in providing guidance to state and local governments on the use of opioid settlement funds. Faculty from the school collaborated with other experts in the field to create , which have been endorsed by over 60 organizations.

is a national nonprofit that addresses substance use disorder through distinct initiatives, including advocating for state and federal policies, ending addiction stigma, and educating communities about the treatment system.

Shatterproof is partnering with some states on projects funded by opioid settlements. 麻豆女优 Health News, the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and the Shatterproof team that worked on this report are not involved in those efforts.

This <a target="_blank" href="/public-health/opioid-settlements-law-enforcement-spending-states-towns-guns-narcan/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Four western states 鈥� California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington 鈥� have created a collaborative to . Several northeastern states have done the same.

New York’s governor declared a “” that allows pharmacists to give covid-19 vaccines without a separate prescription. Minnesota made a similar change, and Massachusetts is to pay for vaccines recommended by its health department, not only those recommended by the CDC.

The changes represent a significant shift in public health authority from the federal government to the states. Traditionally, states have looked to the CDC for expertise and guidance on public health issues 鈥� including, in addition to vaccines, workplace safety, water fluoridation, vaping, and sexually transmitted infections.

Now, amid concerns that Kennedy is in vaccines and public health science, some states are charting new paths, seeking out new sources of scientific consensus and changing how they regulate insurance companies, prescribers, and pharmacists.

Colorado has been at the front of this wave. On Sept. 3, state officials issued a to let pharmacists provide covid shots .

“I will not allow ridiculous and costly red tape or decisions made far away in Washington to keep Coloradans from accessing vaccines,” said .

But Colorado’s leadership had already been clearing the way for more autonomy on vaccine policy for months.

In March, the state legislature voted to so the state could consider scientific sources other than the federal government when setting school vaccine requirements.

“You could see the writing on the wall that it was just becoming overly politicized rather than relying on actual science with this new HHS director,” said .

Mullica, who co-sponsored the new law, is a Democrat and works as an emergency room nurse in the Denver area.

Colorado is among the first states to change its laws to allow it to recommend vaccines based on sources other than the CDC. The state health board can now also consult leading medical groups, like the , , and .

“We decided to protect Colorado,” Mullica said, so it “wouldn’t be as vulnerable to political upheaval that we’re seeing right now.”

The Democratic-led legislature passed the bill in a near-party-line vote. Polis signed it into law in April, despite Kennedy’s selection last fall.

“Colorado I think is really leading the way on this,” said , a pediatrician at the University of Colorado who was part of a stakeholder group that helped craft the bill.

Higgins pointed to a , signed in May, that he said makes Colorado’s push even stronger. It deals with insurance coverage for preventive health care services, aiming to ensure state-regulated insurance plans cover the cost of some vaccines, regardless of future moves by the CDC.

“Effectively, it’s meant to help ensure that Coloradans will still have access to vaccines,” he said.

The Colorado chapter of Children’s Health Defense, the anti-vaccine advocacy group that Kennedy led before taking over HHS, did not respond to a request for comment.

Another co-sponsor of the first bill, Democratic state , said the circulation of so much false information about vaccines, including for covid, makes it important to hear from a range of trusted medical experts.

Colorado had previously looked to the CDC for scientific guidance on vaccines, particularly for children entering school. Like other states, it had tracked the recommendations of a CDC panel known as Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.

all 17 members in June and replaced them with 12 new appointees, some of whom critics warn are vaccine skeptics and aren’t qualified to provide critical guidance for Americans.

“I think where the confusion will lie is the difference in the recommendations between the ACIP, who we traditionally defer to, and then everyone else,” said Ned Calonge, Colorado’s chief medical officer.

He expects that the national professional physician groups that Colorado is now empowered to consult will likely be aligned in their overall guidance and will “look at the last evidence-based recommendations that were provided by the ACIP” before Kennedy replaced its members.

In May, the federal government had removed covid vaccines from the list of shots recommended for healthy pregnant women and children.

But Colorado is still recommending a covid vaccine during pregnancy, Calonge said.

“There’s been no new evidence of issues of safety in that population,” . “So, we’re telling providers that our recommendation is to continue to follow the recommendation as it was in place in January of 2025.”

In on its website, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists strongly recommended pregnant individuals get vaccinated against covid. “ACOG continues to recommend that all pregnant and lactating individuals receive an updated COVID-19 vaccine or ‘booster,'” it said.

Likewise, the American Academy of Pediatrics that all children from 6 to 23 months old get vaccinated against covid, as well as older children in certain risk groups.

For now, Colorado is following the same immunization recommendations it used last year.

The most recent ACIP meeting, on Sept. 18 and 19, was chaotic, with members admitting they did not understand what they were voting on and even opting to redo a vote on pediatric MMRV vaccine access. The next ACIP meeting is scheduled to take place Oct. 22 and 23 and could result in additional changes to vaccine recommendations.

Doctors and vaccine scientists have expressed alarm at the splintering national consensus on vaccines.

“There’s now going to be much more confusion and distrust of vaccines among the public,” said , a professor of pediatrics at the University of Colorado School of Medicine, who served on ACIP from 2013 to 2018.

Still, she said she’s glad Colorado is forging ahead with its own recommendations.

This article is from a partnership that includes , , and 麻豆女优 Health News.

This <a target="_blank" href="/public-health/colorado-states-vaccine-recommendations-cdc-acip-rfk-pharmacists-insurance/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Members admitted they didn’t know what they were voting on, first rejecting a combined measles-mumps-rubella-chickenpox vaccine for young toddlers, then voting to keep it funded minutes later. The next day, they reversed themselves on the funding.

Now Jim O’Neill, the deputy health and human services secretary and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s acting director (a lawyer, not a doctor), must sign off. The panel’s recommendations matter, because insurers and federal programs rely on them, but they are not binding. States can follow the recommendations, or not.

In the West, California, Oregon, Washington, and Hawaii in the . Their first move was to issue joint recommendations on covid, flu, and RSV vaccines, going further than ACIP.

“Public health should never be a patchwork of politics,” said Sejal Hathi, Oregon’s state health director.

California’s health director, Erica Pan, described the goal as “demonstrating unity around science and values” while reducing public confusion.

The bloc is also exploring coordinated lab testing, data sharing, and even group purchasing. “Our intent is to restore trust in science and safeguard people’s freedom to protect themselves and their families without endless barriers,” Hathi said.

In the Northeast, New York and its neighbors created the . Democratic called it a rebuke to Washington, D.C.’s retreat from science.

“Every resident will have access to the COVID vaccine, no exceptions,” she said in .

The group has already gone beyond vaccines. After the CDC disbanded its infection-control advisory body, the Northeast states created their own return-to-work rules. Work groups now span vaccines, labs, emergency preparedness, and surveillance.

“Infectious diseases don’t respect borders,” said Connecticut’s health commissioner, Manisha Juthani. “We had to move in the same direction to protect our residents.”

The two blocs are in regular contact. “We communicate every day,” Hathi said.

“We can’t just sit by while federal agencies are hollowed out,” said acting New York City health commissioner Michelle Morse. “Public health is local, and we have to act like it.”

State leaders describe their coalitions as filling a vacuum left by Washington, D.C.

“You would think emerging from a pandemic, we would be embracing public health, but the federal government was heading in the opposite direction,” said James McDonald, New York state health commissioner.

Massachusetts commissioner Robbie Goldstein added: “The federal government has historically been the entity that held us all together. In January of this year, that tradition seemed to be going away.”

Boston University law professor Matt Motta summarized the dilemma: “States are taking matters into their own hands, sometimes to expand access to vaccines, sometimes to roll it back. That’s technically how the system works, but it risks inefficiency and confusion.”

Public health law has long tilted toward the states.

“If there was a public health issue, we’d say it’s for the states,” said Wendy Parmet of the Northeastern University School of Law.

States have mandated vaccines since the 1800s. Federal agencies can approve vaccines and fund programs, but they cannot force mandates except in very specific circumstances (e.g., federal employees).

UC Law-San Francisco’s Dorit Reiss agreed with Parmet: “Public health authority resides primarily with the states. Recommendations are recommendations.”

ACIP’s votes matter for coverage rules and insurance mandates, but states are free to diverge.

That divergence is already widening. Florida, led by Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo, childhood vaccine requirements altogether 鈥� a first-in-the-nation step. Georgetown Law’s Larry Gostin warned this could reopen century-old battles dating to Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905), when the Supreme Court upheld state vaccine mandates for public safety.

Health leaders warn that competing systems risk causing confusion and costing lives. “Federal silence creates a vacuum, and states either step up together or splinter apart,” Hathi said.

Pan added that “without federal credibility, we’re left improvising.”

McDonald cautioned that partisan divides could grow sharper.

And Morse said that “blue and red states could each go their own way, leaving the public even more divided.”

Gostin put it bluntly: “That risks confusion, inefficiency, and ultimately lives.”

This state-by-state tug-of-war is not new. In the 1800s, local boards of health fought cholera with sewers and sanitation when federal authority was absent. In the 1950s, states organized mass polio clinics, with uneven uptake until federal funding smoothed disparities.

During the covid pandemic, Trump White House response coordinator Deborah Birx saw firsthand the limits of federal power. She visited 44 states, urging governors to adopt masks, closures, and vaccines.

“I was trying to get them to tailor responses to their populations, not just follow generic federal guidance,” she later recalled.

Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once said that states are “laboratories of democracy,” where leaders could test out new ideas without putting the whole country at risk. But diseases don’t follow state lines. A virus that starts in Tallahassee could spread to Times Square by the next morning.

Today, states have become laboratories of public health. Each state is experimenting 鈥� some expanding protections, others cutting them back. And those choices could, for better or worse, affect us all.

This <a target="_blank" href="/public-health/vaccines-states-hhs-cdc-acip-recommendations-rfk/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

The leadership upheavals, which he says will restore trust in federal health agencies, have shaken the confidence many states have in the CDC and led to the fracturing of a national, cohesive immunization policy that’s endured for .

States and medical societies that long worked in concert with the CDC are breaking with federal recommendations, saying they no longer have faith in them amid the turmoil and Kennedy’s criticism of vaccines. Roughly seven months after Kennedy’s nomination was confirmed, they’re rushing to draft or release their own vaccine recommendations, while new groups are forming to issue immunization guidance and advice.

How the new system will work is still being hammered out. Vaccine recommendations from states, medical societies, and other groups are likely to diverge, creating dueling guidance and requirements. Schoolchildren in New York may still generally need immunizations, for example, while others in places such as Florida may not need many vaccines.

There are potential financial ramifications too, because historically, private insurers, Medicaid, and Medicare have generally covered only vaccines recommended by the federal government. If the CDC and its advisory group, which began Sept. 18 in Atlanta, stop recommending certain vaccines, hundreds of millions of people could wind up paying for shots that previously cost them nothing. Some states are already taking steps to prevent that from happening, which means where people live could determine if they will face costs.

“You’re seeing a proliferation of recommendations, and the recommendations by everybody are different from the CDC,” said , a University of Minnesota epidemiologist who launched an ad hoc group that provides vaccine guidance. “States and medical societies are basing their recommendations on science. The recommendations out of CDC are magic, smoke, and mirrors.”

Kennedy has defended changes at the CDC and the revamping of the vaccine committee as necessary, saying previous advisory panel members had and agency leadership botched its pandemic response.

The CDC is “the most corrupt agency at HHS, and maybe the government,” Kennedy said at a . Susan Monarez, the ousted CDC director, testified Sept. 17 at another Senate hearing about how Kennedy told her to preapprove vaccine recommendations from the advisory panel or be fired.

Kennedy has said HHS also plans to investigate vaccine injuries he says are . The CDC investigates injuries that are reported by providers or patients, but Kennedy has said he wants to recast the entire program. The Food and Drug Administration is already who died following covid-19 vaccination.

HHS didn’t return an email seeking comment.

The actions by states, medical societies, and other groups reflect a mounting lack of confidence in federal leadership, public health leaders say, and the break from the CDC is happening at a rapid clip.

The Democratic governors of California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington 鈥� fashioning themselves as the West Coast Health Alliance 鈥� are coordinating to develop vaccine recommendations that won’t necessarily follow those from the CDC. The governors said in a that the CDC shake-up has “impaired the agency’s capacity to prepare the nation for respiratory virus season and other public health challenges” and this week for vaccination against viruses such as covid, influenza, and respiratory syncytial virus.

A group of northeastern states are exploring a similar collaborative.

“The worst thing that could happen is that we have 50 different recommendations for the covid vaccine. That will destroy public health,” said Massachusetts Public Health Commissioner Robbie Goldstein, who has been involved with the effort. He’s also spoken with leaders of the West Coast alliance. “I’m really hopeful that we do come together in larger and larger collaboratives with the same recommendations or very similar recommendations,” he said while speaking to a group of reporters this month.

And medical societies such as the American Academy of Pediatrics are releasing covid vaccine recommendations for the first time from the CDC’s guidance.

Some states are seizing on the split to ensure access to shots. Massachusetts is to cover vaccines recommended by the state health department rather than paying only for those suggested by the CDC, making it the first state to guarantee such continued coverage. AHIP, a trade group representing insurers, that health plans will cover immunizations, including updated formulations of covid and flu vaccines, that were recommended by the CDC panel as of Sept. 1 with no cost sharing through the end of 2026.

Pennsylvania is to give covid vaccines even if they’re not recommended by the federal agency. Instead, they can follow recommendations from the pediatric academy and other medical groups.

Florida, meanwhile, plans to for schoolchildren to get immunizations against chickenpox, meningitis, hepatitis B, and some other diseases. State lawmakers would need to take action to end mandates for all vaccines.

Joseph Ladapo, the state’s surgeon general, said in a that any vaccine requirement is wrong and “drips with disdain and slavery.”

Some doctors criticize the decision as a dangerous step backward.

“This is a terrifying decision that puts our children’s lives at risk,” said , former acting director of the CDC, in an emailed statement.

The first school vaccine mandate was rolled out in the , for smallpox. While all states have vaccine requirements for schoolchildren, immunization rates for kindergarten students declined while cases of vaccine-preventable in 2024 and 2025.

Rochelle Walensky, the Biden administration’s first CDC director, warned of the “polarization” of state-by-state approaches. “It’s like your head is in the oven and your feet are in the freezer and, on average, we’re at 95% vaccination. That doesn’t work in measles 鈥� every place has to be at 95% vaccination.” She was referring to the proportion of a population that needs to be vaccinated to provide herd immunity.

Kennedy’s actions have thrust vaccines center stage and made him fodder for comedy. The Marsh Family, a British musical group, on Sept. 7 of Paul Simon’s “Me and Julio Down by the Schoolyard,” with the chorus, “We’ll see measles and polio down in the schoolyard.”

HBO comedian said the CDC could be known by the title “Disease” during a recent episode of his show. And Stephen Colbert used his monologue on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” to weigh in on the revamped vaccine advisory group, calling its new members the “.”

President Donald Trump has defended Kennedy, telling reporters “he means very well,” even as Trump said on Sept. 5 that “you have some vaccines that are so amazing.” Trump has repeatedly expressed pride in Operation Warp Speed, a government initiative during Trump’s previous administration that rapidly developed covid vaccines. But he’s also promoted a discredited theory linking vaccines and autism.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

The Trump administration already narrowed recommendations for the covid vaccine despite no new safety risks with the shots, although medical societies are continuing to recommend them for most people. The gulf is expected to widen as the agency’s advisory group reviews on a number of pediatric vaccines.

Other groups are also trying to provide vaccine and public health guidance, driven in part by concerns that Kennedy and other federal health leaders will make policy decisions and statements not grounded in science. Kennedy has promoted claims that aluminum, used in many vaccines, is , despite a lack of evidence for the claims. A , in fact, found aluminum was not linked to chronic disease, but Kennedy said the study’s supplemental data indicated it caused harm. The journal that published the study .

Current and former CDC and HHS staffers, along with public health academics and retired health officials, have formed the National Public Health Coalition, a nonprofit to endorse recommendations and provide guidance on policy issues. They plan to partner with state and local health departments.

“A real benefit of the National Public Health Coalition is we are made up of current and former CDC and HHS folks, people who have deep knowledge of what government programs for public health look like, and what improvements are needed,” said Abigail Tighe, the group’s executive director.

Another new group is , which bills itself as a volunteer-led effort to raise awareness about vaccines. And the was launched in April by the University of Minnesota’s infectious disease center, to review evidence for medical societies on the safety and effectiveness of vaccines.

“We’re going to continue to help wherever we can to address misinformation,” said Osterholm, the center’s leader.

This <a target="_blank" href="/public-health/cdc-acip-vaccine-recommendations-states-medical-societies-insurance-patchwork/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Their victory in , later upheld by the state Supreme Court, resounded across the country, showing that young people have a stake in the issue of climate change, advocates say. Yet, state policies to address the causes of climate change in Montana 鈥� home to large coal, oil, and natural gas deposits 鈥� haven’t changed in the wake of the case.

On Sept. 17, some of those plaintiffs are scheduled to appear in federal court to request that U.S. District Judge Dana Christensen block a series of President Donald Trump’s executive orders on energy issues. They argue the orders violate their Fifth Amendment rights and will cause nearly 200,000 additional deaths over the next 25 years and lead to more heart, respiratory, and other health problems. They are joined by other plaintiffs ages 7 to 24 from California, Florida, Hawaii, and Oregon, and are backed by the climate-focused nonprofit Our Children’s Trust.

“Trump’s fossil fuel orders are a death sentence for my generation,” Eva Lighthiser, a 19-year-old resident of Livingston, Montana, wrote in the complaint filed on May 29. “I am not suing because I want to, I am suing because I have to. My health, my future and my right to speak the truth are all on the line.”

She added that a warming climate has led to an increase in summer wildfire smoke and contributed to the flooding of the Yellowstone River (a warmer atmosphere holds more precipitation). At the heart of the case, , is the claim that young people are being denied their Fifth Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution 鈥� life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness 鈥� because of the health effects of fossil fuel development and climate change. And they say the Montana Supreme Court’s decision in December to uphold their right to a clean and healthful environment buttresses their claim.

Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, a Republican, along with 18 other states and Guam, a U.S. territory, have sided with the Trump administration, filing a motion supporting the government’s request to dismiss the case. They argue the plaintiffs do not have standing to file the lawsuit, and that there is no constitutional right to a specific energy policy. “The state of Montana has an interest in this case because it will directly impact the business done in the energy sector within its borders,” Knudsen argued in his motion.

A hearing on the motion to dismiss, as well as the plaintiffs’ call for a stay of the executive orders, is scheduled for next week in federal court in Missoula.

Olivia Vesovich, 21, one of the plaintiffs, who is in her senior year at the University of Montana in Missoula, told 麻豆女优 Health News she struggles with severe spring pollen allergies, which are exacerbated by climate warming and will likely worsen.

“My eyes were swollen shut every single day, every single night,” Vesovich said. “When I wake up in the morning, I couldn’t open my eyes for 10 minutes. It’s not fun at all, and it’s exacerbated by climate change and by the fossil fuel industry.”

She also has exercise-induced asthma as well as feelings of suffocation from the smoke-filled skies during wildfire season 鈥� of which are magnified by climate change. And Trump’s executive orders are already being implemented and causing harm, Vesovich said.

“We are making an argument that Olivia’s state constitutional right to a safe climate system should also be protected under the federal Fifth Amendment as part of her liberty right,” said Andrea Rodgers, a senior attorney for Our Children’s Trust.

Our Children’s Trust was also behind the climate change case Juliana v. the United States, filed in 2015 by 21 young plaintiffs who argued their rights had been violated. In 2024, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to dismiss the case, ruling that the courts were not the appropriate venue for climate policy.

They believe the victory in Held v. Montana gives American youth more standing this time. If they prevail, the result would be more far-reaching than the Montana case, creating a national precedent.

The plaintiffs are asking the court to declare Trump’s three related executive orders 鈥� “,” “,” and “” 鈥� unconstitutional and to block their implementation. They also claim that Trump has overstepped his authority by attempting to undo laws such as the Clean Air Act. A coalition of 14 states’ attorneys general has also filed a lawsuit against the order that declares an energy emergency.

Trump came into office in January sources and to back off efforts to usher in an era of renewable energy, which he claims are not viable. He has also rolling back environmental regulations. “We are driving a dagger into the heart of the climate change religion to drive down the cost of living for American families, unleash American energy, bring auto jobs back to the U.S., and more,” Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin said in a March news release.

In July, the EPA proposed repealing its 2009 “” that concluded climate-warming gases “endanger both the public health and the public welfare of current and future generations.”

The finding established that greenhouse gases are a pollutant and create adverse effects, such as extreme weather and risks to human health and ecosystems. And it created a foundation to regulate automobiles and the energy sector to address climate change.

Zeldin said that eliminating the rule

Unleashing fossil fuels will come with costs, as well. The health effects of a warming world are thoroughly established , said Kristie Ebi, a University of Washington professor of global health and an expert in the health risks of climate variability. Mosquito-borne diseases such as dengue, chikungunya, and malaria are spreading, and flooding, droughts, and wildfire, exacerbated by climate change, pose threats. And research has shown an increase in deaths.

“There’s a long list of adverse health outcomes” from a warming world, she said. “The data are clear.”

This <a target="_blank" href="/courts/climate-activists-lawsuits-trump-energy-policies-fossil-fuels-violate-rights/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">