Kaiser Health News:Health Industry

KFF Health News produces in-depth journalism on health issues and is a core operating program of KFF.

URL: https://kffhealthnews.org/topics/health-industry/

Updated: 1 hour 59 min ago

Watch: ‘Robust’ Primary Care, Transparency Top Employers’ Reform Wish List

July 17, 2026

In this “How Would You Fix It?” interview, Julie Rovner, KFF Health News’ chief Washington correspondent and host of the What the Health? podcast, sat down with Elizabeth Mitchell, the president and CEO of the Purchaser Business Group on Health, which represents many large employers and other institutional buyers of healthcare coverage.

Mitchell noted that employers, which offer coverage to more than 160 million Americans, are a big player in the nation’s healthcare system — a role they came into because of “an accident of history,” she said.

“They weren’t looking to get into the healthcare business,” she continued, but “they were looking for alternatives to wages when there were limits on what they could offer, and they started with what was a pretty inexpensive offering — helping pay for hospital care — and that has now grown to be the second-largest line item in their budgets after payroll.”

Rovner and Mitchell discussed the fact that while large employers do have market power, the rest of the healthcare system banded together in response.

“There’s been this arms race of consolidation, meaning that even the largest employers in the world are smaller and don’t have the leverage many times,” Mitchell said.

Asked to identify the systemic changes large employers would like to see, Mitchell pointed to boosting primary care and referring patients to high-quality specialists. She said changes to business policies — in particular, banning anti-competitive practices and increasing price transparency — would help, too.

“We have a very real affordability crisis,” she said.

An abbreviated version of this interview aired July 16 during Episode 455 of What the Health? From KFF Health News: “States Start Their Medicaid Cuts.”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/health-industry/employer-health-insurance-elizabeth-mitchell-interview-pbgh/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Insurers Hedge on Trump-Backed Pledge To Improve Denials Process

July 17, 2026

One year after the Trump administration announced that dozens of health insurers had signed a six-part pledge promising to reduce barriers to doctor-recommended care, some insurers now say they won’t implement all the promised initiatives.

Meanwhile, patients, their advocates, and clinicians say little has improved.

“It has never been this bad for patients,” said U.S. Rep. Greg Murphy (R-N.C.), a physician who co-chairs the GOP Doctors Caucus.

The overarching intent of the June 2025 pledge was to improve a controversial process called prior authorization, which regularly requires patients or someone on their medical team to seek approval from insurers before proceeding with treatment.

According to AHIP, the health insurance industry trade group, health plans have eliminated 6.5 million prior authorizations for patients — equal to an 11% reduction — since the announcement.

But critics remain skeptical. Sally Nix, a patient advocate who has a chronic disease, described the voluntary pledge as “performative.” And Murphy, who participated in the news conference with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announcing the pledge last year, said it has “no teeth.”

Voluntary insurer pledges rarely make things better for patients, said Sabrina Corlette, a research professor at the Center on Health Insurance Reforms at Georgetown University.

“In the absence of clear rules, policies, standards, and mandates,” she said, insurance companies are “going to do what makes sense for them to do financially.”

The Department of Health and Human Services did not respond to questions for this report. It isn’t clear how, or whether, the Trump administration is holding insurers accountable.

‘Zero Faith’

Prior authorization — sometimes called preauthorization or precertification — has been around for decades. The insurance industry has long argued that the practice, which varies by company, helps control costs, reduces waste and fraud, and prevents potential harm to patients. It’s regularly invoked for a huge swath of services, ranging from low-cost urgent care to expensive cancer treatment.

“Prior authorization is a vital patient safeguard,” said Chris Bond, a spokesperson for AHIP.

The 2024 killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson sparked a national groundswell of anger about insurance denials, with patients and doctors becoming increasingly vocal about the tactics they say insurance companies use to boost profits at the expense of care.

Prior authorization reform is one of the rare healthcare issues Democrats and Republicans tend to agree on. On July 15, the House Ways and Means Committee unanimously advanced a bill that would force Medicare Advantage plans to provide to the federal government a list of all items and services that are subject to prior authorization, and to report data about denials and grievances, among other requirements.

Last year’s industry pledge was organized as a direct response to public anger, Mehmet Oz, administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, said when it was announced. “There’s violence in the streets over these issues,” he said.

“Americans are upset about it,” Oz said, later adding, “I’m looking forward to seeing the results.”

Mike Gartner, founder of Health Access Innovation, an organization that helps patients overturn insurance denials, said he doubts that insurance companies are changing their policies in meaningful ways. The 11% reduction in prior authorization cited by AHIP “hides a lot of nuance,” Gartner said.

Patients who need the costliest services, such as cancer treatment, are still being disproportionately denied access to doctor-recommended care, he said.

AHIP said its data included reductions in prior authorization for medical services, not prescription medicines. The trade group didn’t provide details explaining which services have been dropped from prior authorization or how those reductions differ across individual insurers.

Last year, Oz said the federal government would be “evaluating progress” toward the pledge and “driving accountability,” and he foreshadowed “public dashboards.” But no such dashboards exist, and federal officials did not respond to questions about how they’re holding companies accountable.

Murphy, the North Carolina congressman, said he has “zero faith” in the industry policing itself.

He didn’t believe insurance companies then, he said, “and I don’t believe them now.”

‘At War’ With an Insurer

In February, days after Betsy Adler and Justin Young’s daughter Coco was born with a serious heart defect, the Stillwater, Minnesota, family received paperwork showing they were racking up out-of-network costs.

During Adler’s pregnancy, the family had switched insurers, moving to Medica, a for-profit company based in Minnetonka, Minnesota, and one of many insurers that initially signed the industry pledge. Adler said she’d checked with her employer’s human resources department and on Medica’s website to make sure her maternal-fetal specialists and hospital were in-network before their new health plan went into effect earlier this year.

But then, the insurance company started processing some claims as out-of-network. By mid-March, the family had accrued more than $4,000 in out-of-network charges, on top of more than $3,000 for in-network bills. And the bills kept coming.

Shortly after Betsy Adler’s daughter Coco was born with a serious heart defect, she started receiving estimates showing her family could owe thousands of dollars in out–of-network costs. (Justin Young) Adler had switched insurers to Medica during her pregnancy and said she was assured that her care would be covered at in-network rates. (Justin Young)

When Adler, a psychotherapist, called to figure out what was going on, she said, an insurance company representative said she hadn’t submitted a referral from her primary care provider beforehand. Attempts to fix the problem went nowhere. At one point, Adler said, Medica required her to visit a clinic she’d never been to before to obtain a referral. But she said a Medica representative told her the referral was never received, because the insurer’s fax machine was down.

“I have a critically ill child,” Adler remembered thinking shortly after Coco was discharged from the cardiovascular intensive care unit. “I can either spend my emotional energy at war with Medica, or I can let it go and just enjoy my time with my daughter.”

Medica spokesperson Greg Bury said he wouldn’t discuss the case, citing patient privacy rules. In an emailed statement, he wrote the company is “committed to working with her to ensure she understands what is covered under her benefits and our responsibilities.”

One of six specific promises all insurers made when they signed the pledge was to honor a 90-day grace period when patients switch insurance plans, starting Jan. 1 of this year. Often called “continuity of care,” this grace period allows patients to temporarily continue receiving services and medications that were authorized under a previous insurer.

But that applies only in some circumstances, Georgetown’s Corlette said. The wording of the pledge suggests that insurance companies aren’t obligated to honor another company’s network parameters. When Adler and Young switched insurers, for example, Medica was not obligated to cover the cost of out-of-network providers as if they were in-network, even though they were in-network under the family’s old plan.

Adler and Young switched insurance companies again when Coco was a month old, to avoid accruing more out-of-network costs.

Denial After Approval

Sally Nix with her service dog, Jon Snow, at home in Statesville, North Carolina. Nix, a patient advocate, recently had her health insurer process, then later deny, a claim for injections to relieve her chronic nerve pain. She’s skeptical about industry promises to reform the health insurance denial process. (Logan Cyrus for KFF Health News)

The percentages cited by AHIP don’t tell the whole story, said Nix, the patient advocate. Insurers are “not including the data for the loopholes they create,” she said.

For example, nothing in the pledge prevents insurance companies from retroactively denying payment, even when care is preapproved. “Patients are going to see a lot more retroactive denials,” said Nix, who recently had her insurer process, then later deny, a claim for injections to relieve her nerve pain.

Something similar recently happened to Jocelyn Austin, 49, of Amherst, New York. Over the course of nearly 20 years, she developed an addiction to sleeping and anxiety pills prescribed to her by a doctor. Last year, she spent weeks at an inpatient treatment center for substance abuse. Her insurer, Independent Health, had approved the admission. Austin said she has been substance-free since her discharge.

But the facility sent her a bill for more than $12,000 in December showing her insurer had not paid for the treatment she received, according to documents Austin shared with KFF Health News. This was in addition to the $10,000 she paid at the beginning of her treatment to satisfy her out-of-network deductible. The approval letters from Independent Health had specified that “authorization is not a guarantee of claim payment.”

Frank Sava, a spokesperson for Independent Health, said a denial was issued and upheld in this case because the services provided “were inconsistent with the care that was authorized” and “the medical record did not sufficiently support what was billed.” He said those findings were reviewed and confirmed by an outside consultant.

An explanation of benefits issued by the insurer last summer indicated the “provider,” not the patient, was responsible for the cost of her treatment. And yet the treatment facility has continued to pressure her for payment, she said.

Austin, who has not paid her outstanding bill, said insurance companies “should be held accountable.”

‘Significant Work Ahead’

Another one of the six commitments insurers made last year was to adopt new technology that would standardize the electronic submission of prior authorization requests. During the news conference announcing the pledge last summer, Chris Klomp, the director of Medicare and a deputy CMS administrator, said more than 50% of prior authorizations are still paper-based and processed by phone or fax machine.

In April, AHIP released an update related to that technology initiative, explaining that participating insurers would adopt the new standards on a rolling basis. Health insurers agreed to implement the pledge’s various commitments by predetermined deadlines, and this initiative is scheduled to be operational by Jan. 1, 2027. But eight insurers that initially signed the pledge last year didn’t sign the technology update when it was announced in April, AHIP told KFF Health News.

Those insurers are Alignment Health Plan, EmblemHealth, HealthFirst, Independent Health, Medica, MVP Health Care, Point32Health, and SummaCare. Their beneficiaries span the country, from California to New York. None of those eight insurers agreed to interviews for this report, but most sent KFF Health News emailed statements indicating that they remain committed to prior authorization reform.

AHIP’s approach to continuity of care “would have required the transfer of confidential member health information through a non-standardized process involving third-party participation,” wrote Jerry Slowey, a spokesperson for Alignment Health, which offers Medicare Advantage policies in Arizona, California, Nevada, North Carolina, and Texas. “We do not believe that level of data sharing was contemplated in the original commitment.”

Bury, the spokesperson for Medica, which covers beneficiaries in Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Wisconsin, said the company “supports the goal of these standardization efforts.” But the April update “raised a significant technical and operational hurdle that we are not able to commit to at this time,” he said.

Alex Gomez, a spokesperson for EmblemHealth, said in late June the company “will sign onto the commitment” after KFF Health News posed questions about why it had not endorsed the April update.

“We anticipate more plans will be added over the coming months,” said Bond, the AHIP spokesperson. Health plans are “working continuously to implement their commitments to simplify and improve the experience.” He acknowledged that “there is still significant work ahead.”

The original pledge also included a promise that insurance companies would enhance transparency and use “clear, easy-to-understand explanations” when communicating to patients — something they were already supposed to be doing under the Affordable Care Act.

Yet companies still regularly neglect to explain why care has been denied, and their communications often contain “inconsistent and contradictory information,” said Gartner, of Health Access Innovation. He and Murphy also said they suspect insurance companies are increasingly using artificial intelligence to generate denials.

“They craft the pathways to basically deny things immediately with the hope that people will give up,” Murphy said.

The congressman said he wishes President Donald Trump would sign executive orders addressing some of these issues. “The problem is the insurance industry is the strongest lobby in this town.”

Do you have an experience with prior authorization you’d like to share? Click here to tell KFF Health News your story.

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/insurance/prior-authorization-insurance-denials-reform-pledge-year-later/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

States Start Their Medicaid Cuts

July 16, 2026

The Host Julie Rovner KFF Health News @jrovner @julierovner.bsky.social Read Julie's stories. Julie Rovner is chief Washington correspondent and host of KFF Health News’ weekly health policy news podcast, "What the Health?" A noted expert on health policy issues, Julie is the author of the critically praised reference book "Health Care Politics and Policy A to Z," now in its third edition.

When Republicans passed their big budget bill in 2025, they scheduled many of the Medicaid reductions to take effect in 2027, after the 2026 midterm elections. But in anticipation of getting less money from Washington come January, many states are already cutting their Medicaid programs, making the issue more relevant for voters in November.

This week’s panelists are Julie Rovner of KFF Health News, Anna Edney of Bloomberg News, Alice Miranda Ollstein of Politico, and Sandhya Raman of Bloomberg Law.

Panelists Anna Edney Bloomberg News @annaedney @annaedney.bsky.social Read Anna's stories. Alice Miranda Ollstein Politico @AliceOllstein @alicemiranda.bsky.social Read Alice's stories. Sandhya Raman Bloomberg Law @SandhyaWrites @sandhyawrites.bsky.social Read Sandhya's stories.

Among the takeaways from this week’s episode:

Congress has no clear path to passing its annual spending bills, with the issue of Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood again threatening to gum up the works. Meanwhile, senators this week screened President Donald Trump’s newest health nominees: Erica Schwartz to lead the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Sean Kaufman to lead the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response. But Schwartz undermined some senators’ confidence by claiming ignorance about a number of Trump administration funding cuts, and Kaufman faced fiery questions over a deleted social media post about the hepatitis B vaccine.
The confirmation hearing for Todd Blanche as attorney general also trod into health territory, with Blanche saying he would review potentially using the 19th-century Comstock Act to block distribution of medication abortion drugs by mail. Such a move could block not only mifepristone but also misoprostol, which is the second abortion medication in the two-drug regimen — and is also used for non-abortion purposes. Trump promised on the campaign trail not to invoke the Comstock Act.
In politics, Maine Democrats are cautiously eying the abortion stances of a replacement Senate candidate, hoping to pin the rollback of abortion rights on Sen. Susan Collins, the Republican incumbent. And Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) is calling for an investigation into whether Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. violated a federal law aimed at preventing electioneering by officials when he made recent calls to persuade some candidates to drop out of congressional races.
And the gastrointestinal infection cyclosporiasis is sickening more Americans and drawing attention to the Trump administration’s actions undermining food safety surveillance programs. The cyclospora parasite was once subject to mandatory reporting but has since been made voluntary, challenging efforts to track the source and contain the outbreak.

Also this week, Rovner interviews Elizabeth Mitchell of the Purchaser Business Group on Health as part of the “How Would You Fix It?” series.

Plus, for “extra credit” the panelists this week suggest health policy stories they read (or wrote) that they think you should read, too:

Julie Rovner: Mississippi Today’s “Mississippi Is Getting Hotter. Experts Say It’s Hurting Moms and Babies,” by Sophia Paffenroth and Joanne Kenen.

Anna Edney: Bloomberg News’ “Almost $1 Billion Later, the US Still Can’t Make a Medical Glove,” by Anna Edney.

Alice Miranda Ollstein: Politico’s “Fraud Investigations Are Crumbling This State’s Medicaid System,” by Amanda Chu and Robert King.

Sandhya Raman: Bloomberg Law’s “Unverified GLP-1-Related Claims Flood Food, Supplement Markets,” by Nyah Phengsitthy and Skye Witley.

Also mentioned in this week’s podcast:

Stat’s “As States Absorb Medicaid Funding Cuts, Family Caregivers Face Financial Ruin,” by O. Rose Broderick.
NPR’s “Trump’s HHS Shelves Threat To Withhold Medicare and Medicaid Funding Over Trans Care,” by Selina Simmons-Duffin.
Stat’s “Flood of Comments on White House Grantmaking Overhaul Is Largely Negative, Analysis Shows,” by Anil Oza and J. Emory Parker.
Politico’s “Trump Admin Asks Appeals Court To Roll Back Obamacare’s Contraception Coverage,” by Alice Miranda Ollstein.

Credits Francis Ying Audio producer Emmarie Huetteman Editor

Click here to find all our podcasts.

And subscribe to “What the Health? From KFF Health News” on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, the NPR app, YouTube, Pocket Casts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/podcast/what-the-health-455-medicaid-cuts-state-budgets-confirmation-hearings-july-16-2026/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Readers Share Personal Insights on Deadly Denials and Pregnancy Centers

July 16, 2026

Letters to the Editor is a periodic feature. We welcome all comments and will publish a selection. We edit for length and clarity and require full names.

A Tragic, Deadly Denial

I read your article in The Washington Post about the woman whose Humana policy required prior authorization for a drug she’d been taking (Bill of the Month: “She Struggled To Get a Lifesaving Drug Even After Insurers Vowed To Help,” June 29).

My husband, Kenney, had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. On June 7, he fatally shot himself after a COPD exacerbation event.

His pulmonologist had prescribed two new nebulizer prescriptions on June 2. One was a specialty medication that would come directly from the drug company. A couple of days later, we called Walgreens to see why the other one hadn’t been filled. Turns out it required prior authorization.

Why the doctor who prescribed it needed to tell his health insurer that he really did think his patient needed it, I will never understand. The pharmacist said she would send the request to the doctor. And why she hadn’t already done that, again, I do not understand. By June 7, of course, it still wasn’t filled.

That day, a Sunday, Kenney experienced the flare-up when I was out mowing the yard. How terrifying it must have been for him to be unable to breathe and me not being there at least to hold his hand. That night he killed himself, leaving a note saying that he hated to leave me but that he couldn’t keep living like that — with the constant anxiety of not knowing when he wouldn’t be able to draw a breath.

Not long ago, a “welcome” packet came in the mail about the other nebulizer treatment — 25 days after it had been prescribed.

Admittedly, my husband’s health was not great. He did have COPD, but we still went out to eat once in a while, and he didn’t have to take his oxygen on those trips. He rarely used it just walking around the house.

He did make a serious suicide attempt six years ago (our daughter and granddaughter had died), but after seeing what it did to me and our son, he promised he’d never do it again. It was only when these exacerbation/flare-up events started this year that he indicated life was getting bad.

Perhaps, just perhaps, if he had received both medications in a timely manner, he would be here today, and we would have had many more years together. We met when we were 16 and had been together ever since. He was 78 when he died.

— Cindy Clements Blewett; Kyle, Texas

Navigating GLP-1 Coverage

Sydney Lupkin’s thoughtful article about the obstacles in obtaining weight loss drugs was interesting (Healthcare Helpline: “Trouble Getting Weight Loss Drugs Covered by Insurance? Here’s What To Know,” June 26). It would have been more helpful had it included a discussion of Medicare’s decision to cover these drugs as of July 1, 2026, and how to navigate the rocky shores of obtaining a prescription that won’t be denied.

— Sharie Hartman; Manteca, California

Beyond the Veil of Pregnancy Centers

I would like to address the article about a pregnancy resource center providing prenatal care in Sandpoint, Idaho (“Religious Anti-Abortion Center Finds Opportunity in Town Without OB-GYNs,” May 20). It is unfortunate that many still do not understand what pregnancy resource centers do, nor the high-quality care they provide. While there are some “crisis pregnancy centers” that provide limited offerings, most centers are aligned with a national organization like the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates, the Heartbeat Pregnancy Center, or Care Net. All these organizations require centers to have a medical director (a licensed healthcare practitioner) and require that the nurses who perform the ultrasounds have appropriate training. While I am not affiliated with 7B Care Clinic, I am concerned that the article may not have accurately reflected what is provided in such clinics. I offer my experiences to bring further clarity.

I work at a life-affirming women’s clinic. I am a board-certified family physician. I have delivered approximately 1,000 babies in my career. I have been performing ultrasounds for my patients for over a decade, and fought for this ability under the scrutiny of maternal-fetal medicine specialists, spending time alongside their registered diagnostic medical sonographer technicians, and having my scans reviewed by maternal-fetal medicine physicians. I have practiced medicine in three states over three decades.

Second, while I am life-affirming, I am not “anti-abortion.” I happen to believe that there are better choices, and I know that some women will still choose abortion, even after hearing all their options. I will gladly see those women for follow-up to answer questions and evaluate for complications — something that the abortion clinics in my area apparently will not do. I say this because that is what the women I see tell me. The clinic that performed the procedure or gave them the pills will not see a patient after the abortion for any follow-up. I have always willingly seen patients for any reason, whether I was working at a private clinic or hospital-owned clinic. That is no different now that I work for a life-affirming women’s clinic.

We provide a variety of services — free of charge. We are also stepping up to provide prenatal care up to 20 weeks because there is a shortage of obstetrical clinicians in our county. We encourage women to see a clinic where they can be followed throughout the entire pregnancy, if possible, and we are in no way marketing ourselves as competition. We are stepping in to fill the large gap that exists.

Just because the clinic in Sandpoint chooses to respect life does not make it a fake clinic. This clinic seeks to bring in physicians to provide prenatal care. They are bringing in OB-GYNs from Washington state, which has no restrictions on abortion. With this information taken into consideration, I ask you to reconsider any concerns about a clinic bringing board-certified OB-GYNs into an area where there is a shortage.

— James Heid, Vancouver, Washington

The Root of All Good

The article Claudia Boyd-Barrett wrote about how immigrant parents’ arrests are creating a mental health crisis for children was moving and brought awareness to the mental health challenges faced by them (Growing Up Scared: “Arrests of Immigrant Parents Create Mental Health Crisis for Children,” June 18). It was important to note how every story was different but focused on how much children missed and yearned for their parents to come back home. You also wrote about how it affected them by not having a parental figure in the home. That really touched me. Specifically, Jacob’s story and when he listed all the things he missed about his mom but especially being close to her.

I am currently a master’s student in social work working to become a better ally to the Hispanic immigrant community. I’ve seen how being afraid and sad over the immigration policies has affected my friends in this community. Losing a close parent and not being able to have that security with them anymore is hard to go through, and trauma affects children as they grow.

In this article, you have recognized the worth of a person, which is a core principle in social work. These children are worthy and have the right to feel taken care of and secure.

I would love to see more mental health services accessible to immigrant communities and their families. This would benefit children as they learn to cope with their feelings and how to make sense of a new world.

— Stacy Xiong, Athens, Georgia

Bagging a Bargain

Author Susan Jaffe mentioned GoodRx in the article “Thousands of Medicare Beneficiaries Thought Their Drug Plan Was Free. Then They Lost It” (July 7), but she failed to mention a much better discount drug site, Mark Cuban’s costplusdrugs.com, where a 90-day supply of 2.5 milligrams of rivaroxaban, a generic for Xarelto, is available for under $50. This could help the thousands of people who lost coverage through unpaid premiums from Wellcare Value Script obtain their medications. The problem of yearly increasing penalties for losing Part D coverage is something that has to be addressed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

Thanks to KFF Health News for the relevant coverage.

— Jackie Button; Miami

Fleshing Out the Details

Your report identifying alpha-gal syndrome as a red meat allergy is accurate in that respect but inadequate in its breadth (“Would Hunters Take a Lyme Disease Vaccine? We Asked,” June 30). Alpha-gal is an allergic reaction to virtually all mammalian products. If you explore that, you’ll find an interesting story, as mammalian products are everywhere, including in pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, and other non-meat products. Alpha-gal is growing rapidly, and too many people, including doctors, do not realize that AGS is far worse than just a red meat allergy.

I suggest you help build understanding of the threat by describing the allergy in the future as an allergy to mammalian products. If you do not think your audience will understand that term, perhaps you can explain that it includes pork and anything derived from animals with hooves. As a former and now retired reporter, I encourage you to cover this allergy because its implications are surprising and scary.

— John Varner, Surry, Virginia

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/letter-to-the-editor/reader-response-deadly-denials-pregnancy-centers-glp1-july-2026/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Facing Funding Losses, States Call Out Big Businesses With Employees on Medicaid

July 15, 2026

As the Trump administration’s January deadline looms for states to enforce new Medicaid work requirements, some state lawmakers are turning the tables by pushing to publicly name the largest companies that have employees enrolled in the government program covering low-income and disabled people.

California lawmakers seek to revive an expired law that would require the state to identify companies that employ 100 or more people and have employees enrolled in Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid program. Nevada has had a similar law in place since 2017, though a proposal for one in Oregon stalled when its legislative session ended in March.

The California bill author, Democratic state Sen. Lola Smallwood-Cuevas, said she is deeply troubled by what is going to happen when work requirements kick in. According to the state, nearly 5 million out of more than 14 million residents on Medi-Cal will be subject to the rule.

“We think this is a bill that’s about fairness,” Smallwood-Cuevas said. “It’s a basic principle that taxpayers deserve transparency about which large employers are shifting their healthcare costs onto the public.”

Large employers that regularly top Nevada’s list, such as Walmart and Amazon, have said that the state included part-time and seasonal workers in their counts and that their full-time hourly employees make too much to qualify for Medicaid.

Walmart spokesperson Katrina Proffitt said that the company offers affordable medical coverage to most employees, including eligible part-time workers, and that most of its plans include no-cost virtual care options.

“Healthcare affordability and access to quality care remain real barriers for many Americans, and Walmart continues to be committed to being part of the solution,” Proffitt said.

The push to name and shame companies reflects dueling narratives about the biggest abusers of the joint state-federal Medicaid program, which reached nearly $932 billion in government spending in 2024. The Trump administration, led by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Administrator Mehmet Oz, has called out blue states for not doing enough to fight insurer fraud and abuse. State Democratic leaders, meanwhile, are pushing back by calling attention to big employers that don’t offer affordable health benefits, which leaves taxpayers subsidizing healthcare costs for the low-wage workforce.

Some states have considered financial penalties. Democratic New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill signed a bill in June to fine businesses that have at least 50 Medicaid-enrolled employees. Companies with 50 to 249 workers on Medicaid will pay $325 a year per person, and those with at least 500 will pay $725.

Bills that would have penalized companies with workers enrolled in Medicaid failed in Washington state and Colorado this year.

In Sacramento, California, Democrats want to figure out a way to make large businesses pay for their employees’ health coverage. State lawmakers struck a deal with Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is contemplating a presidential bid as he wraps up his final year in the governor’s office, to explore tax options. Any tax hike would be up to the new governor.

States face losing billions of dollars under HR 1, the GOP tax-and-spending law known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, notably through a provision that requires nondisabled Medicaid enrollees ages 19 to 64 in most states to prove they are working, volunteering, or going to school at least 80 hours a month to keep their coverage.

Yet federal work requirements are projected to increase the number of uninsured people nationwide by more than 5 million by 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Nebraska and Montana have begun enforcing the rule.

One health policy researcher said employer Medicaid reports highlight the lack of affordable healthcare options available to low-wage workers. More than half of adults enrolled in Medicaid who don’t have dependent children already meet the 80-hour-a-month requirement or face challenges that would likely qualify them for an exemption, according to KFF.

“There’s a whole set of people who are working — they may not satisfy the work requirement provisions, they may not get the exemption that they’re qualified for, and they don’t have access to that employer-sponsored insurance either,” said Edwin Park, a research professor at the Center for Children and Families at Georgetown University.

Employers Push Back

While employer lists haven’t succeeded in bringing down Medicaid costs, supporters say measuring the burden can be the first step and help lawmakers make the case for further action.

In Nevada, Amazon has employed more Medicaid enrollees than any other company since 2020, according to the state’s report published in January. For state fiscal year 2025, Walmart, the Clark County School District, the state government, and Tesla rounded out the top five.

Employers have argued that the reports are misleading because they have included part-time and seasonal employees. The state’s latest report includes only full-time employees, plus those who could not be confirmed as either full- or part-time employees.

That came to 4,914 Amazon employees and 3,503 Walmart workers in Nevada on Medicaid in 2025.

There are no penalties for companies on the list.

Amazon said it pays its workers more than double the $7.25-an-hour federal minimum wage and noted that Medicaid eligibility is based on household income and size rather than an individual’s wage. That means two employees who earn the same pay may have different eligibility depending on whether they have children or live with parents.

“Pointing fingers at Amazon over Medicaid is a red herring,” said spokesperson Alisa Carroll. “What really needs to happen is a significant and large increase in the federal minimum wage — that would be a big boost for American families.”

Nevada Medicaid spent nearly $950 million on healthcare for more than 133,000 full-time employees and more than 140,000 of their dependents. While the total amount spent dipped in fiscal year 2025, the average cost per member per year increased by nearly 17%.

Yvanna Cancela, a former Nevada lawmaker who sponsored the legislation on Medicaid work reports, said the annual reports force an important conversation “about whether or not this is the kind of economy we want and whether or not it is right or just that people who work full-time don’t make enough to have health insurance.”

A Fraying Safety Net

Health researchers say that uninsured people delay or skip using healthcare and that their children may end up losing coverage, too.

One analysis found that more than 2 million fewer children were enrolled in Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program this April than in January 2025. California is among the states with the steepest enrollment losses among children.

The loss in healthcare coverage among residents will be compounded by the loss of public food assistance benefits, Smallwood-Cuevas said. Her bill is pending in the legislature.

She compared Medi-Cal to a trampoline that has become a “very tattered kind of fishnet” overwhelmed by people falling into it. President Donald Trump’s spending-and-tax law pulls and rips at the safety net, she said.

When people lose food assistance and health benefits, they must choose between paying for medicine and paying for rent, Smallwood-Cuevas said.

“We’re going to see more people in their cars, more people on the street, and a lot more people in the emergency room,” she said. “That is dangerous for all of California.”

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/medicaid/medicaid-work-requirement-big-business-employee-enrollees-states-name-shame/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Knee Pain? Ragged Cartilage? Research Suggests Surgery’s Not the Best Answer

July 14, 2026

Thousands of Americans who undergo a common knee surgery might be making their problems worse rather than better.

Researchers who followed patients for 10 years after they received either the actual procedure, arthroscopic knee surgery to trim degenerative cartilage tears, or merely “sham surgery” — a skin incision — for knee pain, found that the surgery provided little or no benefit and was, in fact, associated with accelerated osteoarthritis and higher rates of reoperation. That generally meant a total knee replacement.

“I don’t know how I would defend this procedure at all,” said one of the study’s authors, Teppo Järvinen, an orthopedist and the head of the Finnish Centre for Evidence-Based Orthopaedics. “What has been shown dramatically is that patients who have this procedure have more pain — they do worse. All the scores pointed in the same direction.”

Järvinen said the Finnish study, published in April in the New England Journal of Medicine, was the first to show the surgery left many patients worse off. Though the study was small, the results were compelling, he said, because his team picked the patients “most likely to benefit.”

The study does not apply to cartilage tears incurred from an acute pain-causing injury. It included subjects middle-aged or older who were experiencing knee pain and whose MRIs showed cartilage tears.

Evidence has been accumulating steadily for over a decade that arthroscopic knee surgery to shave torn, degenerative cartilage does not help more than physical therapy. Arthroscopic rates in Finland have dropped 90%, Järvinen said. They have been falling in the U.S., too, but at a far slower rate.

One study of commercial claims in the U.S., which counted over 2 million meniscus surgeries from 2010 to 2020, found the number decreased by about 4% each year. Most procedures were performed on women and patients in their 50s.

In the traditional Medicare fee-for-service program, the number of procedures has declined steadily in recent years, from about 169,000 in 2014 to 91,000 in 2024, federal data shows. These figures do not include beneficiaries in Medicare Advantage, private insurance plans that cover more than half of Medicare enrollees.

Prior studies of scans have found that such tears are common in people over 50, the result of wear and tear and often not painful.

“Nothing supports the idea that a patient’s pain comes from the meniscus,” Järvinen said.

Robert Brophy, director of the Orthopaedic Clinical Research Center at Washington University in St. Louis, said that “evidence is growing for judicious use of this surgery in this population.” But, he noted, “many patients do benefit.”

All the same, he acknowledged that current practice among his peers is “all over the map.” For example, data shows that surgery for meniscus tears in the Medicare population is far more common in the South than in the Northeast.

A massive study committee of orthopedic societies in Europe and the U.S. last June released a consensus statement noting that “degenerative meniscus lesions can be treated with comparable results with either non-operative (including physical therapy) or surgical approach.” It recommended a trial of physical therapy before surgery but still endorsed the operation.

A concerted campaign by orthopedic specialty societies called the Save the Meniscus Society has been ongoing for years. The group advocates for protecting and maintaining long-term knee health through nonsurgical treatments, surgical repair, and other therapies.

One inherent issue in all medical specialties is that appropriate treatment is often in the eye of the physician beholder, meaning that specialists create the guidelines for when a treatment is in order. And financial considerations may influence that decision, Järvinen said.

In the U.S., physician payments are decided by the Relative Value Scale Update Committee, or RUC, a committee of the American Medical Association composed largely of specialists. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his advisers have reportedly looked into wresting control of that committee from the association, though it’s not clear how that could be done, since the AMA owns the billing codes used to calculate patients’ charges.

Arthroscopic knee surgery takes 30 to 60 minutes in the operating room, and the patients spend a few hours recovering in a surgery center or in a hospital outpatient department. Medicare allots on average $2,159 to $3,875 for the procedure, depending on where it is performed; patients pay 20% of the fee as coinsurance. There may be additional costs, for example, if more than one doctor is involved in the procedure. Commercial insurers average well more than twice that, said Marcus Dorstel, a senior vice president at the data analytics firm Turquoise Health, adding that the amount providers charge for the procedure varies widely. Those charges do not include the fees of the surgeons and the anesthesiologist.

Treating chronic knee pain has a variegated history.

Fifty years ago, the treatment for cartilage tears, from acute injury or from wear and tear, was to remove the entire piece of cartilage. At that time, doctors did not consider it a shock absorber but a useless, vestigial piece of tissue like the appendix.

Today, the first-line therapy for a painful knee with degenerative tears is physical therapy and, for some people, weight loss. Then there is arthroscopic surgery, depending on the view of the surgeon about its utility.

There is also a menu of injections: Steroids have proved scientifically valuable in the short term. And injections of stem cells and plasma-rich protein are widely offered but are controversial — and not covered by most insurance — because studies have been at best inconclusive about their benefit.

And as orthopedists are backing away from shaving off meniscus tears, they are highlighting a newer procedure — sewing the torn cartilage back into a whole. But that is typically an option for patients under 50 with acute injuries and clean tears, and it is unclear exactly which patients might benefit.

When all else fails, there’s a different surgery that’s also a big moneymaker for hospitals and doctors: knee replacement.

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/health-industry/knee-surgery-arthroscopic-cartilage-meniscus-finnish-study-osteoarthritis/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

My Search for a Psychiatric Bed in an Overburdened Health System

July 09, 2026

If you or someone you know may be experiencing a mental health crisis, contact the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline by dialing or texting “988.”

Eight days before my 33rd birthday in April, a social worker at a crisis clinic near Denver determined I was an imminent danger to myself. She placed me on an involuntary 72-hour mental health hold.

What came next wasn’t treatment, but a search for a bed. Clinic staffers called area hospitals with inpatient psychiatric units, asking if they had available beds. They didn’t. So, I was told I had to spend the night at the clinic, which is open 24/7. I settled into a recliner, trying to make myself comfortable as my mind drifted in a blank, disassociated haze. Sleep came in brief bursts.

Since the 1950s, the United States has seen a dramatic decline in the number of psychiatric beds nationwide due in part to deinstitutionalization and the rise of antipsychotics. But that has created a critical shortage for those needing help. From 2011 to 2023, the number of hospitals with inpatient psychiatric units dropped significantly, according to a 2025 study. Another study from that year found that this country has 28.4 inpatient psychiatric beds per 100,000 people — not even half the 60-bed ratio researchers frequently refer to as the optimal level.

The shortage has created what the American Psychiatric Association calls a crisis: emergency rooms overwhelmed with people suffering from severe mental health illnesses, inpatient stays prematurely shortened to speed up bed turnover, and acutely ill individuals left without critical care.

(Oona Zenda/KFF Health News)

“Where are these people going?” said Zoe Lindenfeld, an assistant health policy professor at Rutgers University, who co-authored those 2025 studies. “For people who don’t receive this care, they don’t just go away. How is it affecting them? Society? Their families?”

Meanwhile, the White House shut down the part of the national suicide hotline catering to LGBTQ+ youth, President Donald Trump’s 2027 budget proposal calls for cuts to agencies engaged in mental health work, and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. recently announced a plan to reduce the “overuse of psychiatric medications.”

A Fractured System

I was already intimately familiar with the country’s fractured mental healthcare system before I was involuntarily committed. What I had yet to experience myself, I saw through my wife: waitlists, outpatient programs stretched beyond capacity, and inpatient psychiatric care so scarce that access often depends on surviving a crisis severe enough to justify it.

She died by suicide after we had separated.

As the years passed, grief and anxiety pushed me from observer to patient.

At the crisis clinic, I woke up the following morning disoriented and groggy. In the bathroom — its door deliberately unable to latch, swinging both ways so staffers could enter in case of an emergency — I stood at the sink and watched the faucet run, trying to piece together how I had ended up here.

(Oona Zenda/KFF Health News)

America’s history of treating mental illness is long and complicated.

The 19th and 20th centuries saw the removal of people with severe mental disorders from jails and poorhouses — squalid facilities designed to house the poor — to state asylums that promised “moral treatment” (though they ultimately became overcrowded hospitals for the impoverished). From the 1860s to the 1930s, the number of psychiatric hospitals increased dramatically, according to the American Psychiatric Association, and by 1955, the number of psychiatric beds in the U.S. peaked at more than half a million.

However, owing to the development of antipsychotics, the belief that psychiatric institutions were inhumane, and President John F. Kennedy’s 1963 Community Mental Health Act to free thousands of Americans from a life in institutions, many state hospitals shut down. An estimated 61,000 inpatient psychiatric beds for adults and kids are left in a country where more than 14 million experience severe mental illness each year.

Two years after JFK’s legislation passed, a new policy prohibited federal Medicaid funds from covering inpatient psychiatric care in facilities with more than 16 beds. The goal was to encourage states to move patients out of large, often substandard psychiatric institutions into community-based care settings.

The consequences of these changes, however, have been far-ranging. People with severe mental illnesses are often forced to board in emergency departments as they wait for a bed to open. The length of stay in state psychiatric hospitals is shrinking while readmission rates rise, according to research by the Treatment Advocacy Center, a national organization focused on eliminating barriers to the treatment of severe mental illness. And some people with mental illness languish for months, or even years, in jail.

From 1986 to 2014, as the behavioral health crisis intensified, mental health expenditures in the U.S. rose from $32 billion to $186 billion — though the proportion of that spending allocated to inpatient care fell from 42% to 27%.

This period also recorded major policy shifts affecting inpatient hospitalization rates, notably the 1999 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Olmstead v. L.C. The ruling shifted care away from psychiatric facilities by mandating states provide home and community-based services to people with developmental and mental disabilities.

“The road to hell is paved with good intentions,” said Leslie Carpenter, legislative advocacy manager at the Treatment Advocacy Center. “A lot of these bills, including the Community Mental Health Act, were really well intended and ended up with adverse consequences.”

For me, that next day at the clinic passed both painfully slowly and in a blur. A staff member I hadn’t met before told me they were still reaching out to hospitals across the region. The search for a bed continued.

(Oona Zenda/KFF Health News)

‘No One Wants To Pay for Any of This Care’

Last year, members of Congress introduced two bills to change the 16-bed Medicaid funding cap at inpatient psychiatric facilities, the Repealing the Institution for Mental Diseases Exclusion Act and the Michelle Alyssa Go Act, which would increase the cap to 36 beds. Both have stalled in the House.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, a federal agency that analyzes budgetary and economic issues, eliminating the 16-bed limit would increase Medicaid expenditures by $33.5 billion from 2024 to 2033.

“No one wants to pay for any of this care that people need,” said Colorado state Sen. Judy Amabile, a Democrat who has witnessed limitations to Colorado’s mental healthcare system firsthand because her son has schizoaffective disorder.

In lieu of federal action, states are stepping up to bridge the gaps.

Colorado, 15 other states, and Washington, D.C., now operate under waivers allowing Medicaid to fund inpatient facilities with more than 16 beds for mental health treatment, according to KFF data. Seven additional states have waivers pending. One 2025 study found that these waivers may be tied to fewer hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and incarcerations among adults with serious mental illness.

Yet even local efforts to improve mental healthcare face resistance. In California, Colorado, Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska, and New York, locals have pushed back against proposed psychiatric facilities for minors, claiming such facilities will worsen safety and lower property values. Behavioral health advocates have disputed these claims and argued they are rooted in stigma.

That psychiatric facility in Colorado was ultimately greenlit. The state has nearly 20 inpatient beds per 100,000 people, ranking 24th nationwide, according to 2022 data across all 50 states plus Washington, D.C., collected by the Treatment Advocacy Center. Wyoming ranked first with 47.3 beds per 100,000 residents, although, as the least populous state, it has only 275 total inpatient beds compared with California’s 5,703. Minnesota ranked last, with only 4.3 inpatient beds per 100,000 residents.

While increasing the number of inpatient psychiatric beds is vital, mental health advocates are also calling for more community-based supports, such as peer support specialists and clubhouses, where people with serious mental illnesses can learn life skills and find community.

(Oona Zenda/KFF Health News)

When it came time for me to use our mental health safety net, I was among the fortunate ones: At noon the day after my hold began, a bed opened at a hospital in Denver — a rare stroke of luck in a system in which many people wait days or weeks for the care they need. An ambulance transferred me to the hospital at 3 p.m., marking 21 hours into my 72-hour hold.

Two days later, on my last day at the psychiatric hospital, I stood outside the nurse’s station awaiting discharge papers.

A man I had not seen before looked at me and asked, “Are you leaving?”

“Yes,” I said. “Are you being admitted?”

“Yeah,” he responded. “This is my third time being hospitalized in a year.”

I shook his hand. “Good luck,” I said, and I walked out the door.

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/health-industry/psychiatric-bed-shortage-overburdened-health-system/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Affordable Care Act Insurers Want More Premium Increases as Enrollment Sags

July 08, 2026

For the second year in a row, many Affordable Care Act insurers are proposing double-digit premium increases, driven by rising medical costs as well as policy changes by Congress and the Trump administration.

In preliminary filings with state regulators, insurers are seeking a median rate increase of 14% for 2027, according to an analysis of filings in 16 states and the District of Columbia by the Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker.

If those rates are ultimately approved, it would be the second-highest increase since 2018.

That would be a “triple whammy“ for consumers, said Cynthia Cox, a senior vice president and the director of the Program on the ACA at KFF, because they have already had to pay higher premiums in 2026 and saw the expiration of more generous tax credits to offset their premiums at the end of last year.

President Joe Biden sought to bolster the program known as Obamacare by enacting more generous tax subsidies, driving down out-of-pocket costs for consumers and increasing enrollment to more than 20 million Americans. But under President Donald Trump, Republicans have sought to scale back taxpayer support for ACA coverage, allowing the Biden-era enhanced subsidies to expire.

As of February, ACA enrollment had fallen by about 3 million people compared with the same time last year. While Cox and other policy experts say that’s because increased costs for the plans drove out people who feel they can get by without insurance, the Trump administration asserts that much of the enrollment growth under Biden was fraudulent.

The main factor driving proposed premium increases for 2027, as in most years, is the rising cost and use of medical care.

There’s growing demand for costly specialty medications and for the weight loss drugs known as GLP-1s, the Peterson-KFF report notes.

But the report also said that about 4 percentage points’ worth of the premium increases insurers proposed are due to lasting effects of the expiration of enhanced subsidies. Insurers expect that with young and healthy people leaving the program rather than paying higher premiums, their remaining customers will be older, sicker, and therefore costlier on average.

“It’s likely that the people who dropped their coverage were also the healthier people, because sicker people were probably going to try to make it work however they could, to stretch their budget to keep their health insurance,” said Cox, of KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes KFF Health News.

In their rate filings, some insurers also said they had to raise premiums in part because of policy changes by the Trump administration that are expected to make it harder for some people to enroll.

Together with the expiration of the larger subsidies, the new rules “account for 12.7% of the requested rate change,” the insurer UnitedHealthcare wrote in its rate filing with New York state, according to the Peterson-KFF report.

“It is not surprising insurance conglomerates that profited massively off of Biden-era fraud are complaining about efforts to clean up the program,” White House spokesman Kush Desai said in a statement. He added that the administration “has made it clear that it will not follow its predecessors in giving out taxpayer funded subsidies to big insurance companies through the form of fraudulent and corrupt polices” and that it would “hold big insurance companies accountable.”

Another driver of higher premiums cited by several insurers is that claims submitted on behalf of patients have tended to be for more intense — and costly — levels of care than in the past. Such increased severity may be because patients are actually sicker, or it may reflect that hospitals or doctors are using artificial intelligence to find billing codes that can maximize their payments, the report noted.

The use of AI to maximize bills is also a factor driving up the cost of health coverage offered by employers, according to the consulting firm PwC, which forecast that the cost of caring for people with job-based coverage will rise by 9% in 2027.

In the ACA, premium increases will primarily affect enrollees with incomes just above 400% of the federal poverty level, amounting to about $62,600 this year for an individual. That’s because they’re no longer eligible for subsidies following the expiration of the enhanced tax credits.

People below that level get tax credits to help pay their monthly premium, based on how much they earn and the cost of a “benchmark” ACA plan where they live. As a result, as premiums rise, so do subsidies, shielding many consumers from rising prices but also raising costs for the federal government.

They may have to shop around when enrollment opens for 2027 coverage in October, however. Depending on their particular plan’s premium, they may need to switch plans to keep premiums fixed, said Matthew Fiedler, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.

KFF Health News senior correspondent Julie Appleby contributed to this report.

Are you struggling to afford your health insurance? Have you decided to forgo coverage? Click here to contact KFF Health News and share your story.

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/insurance/priced-out-obamacare-affordable-care-act-aca-premium-increases-peterson-kff/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Copay Assistance Is Meant To Defray Patient Drug Costs. Some Insurers Keep It Instead.

July 07, 2026

For 16 years, Larry Gruber, a fitness coach from Wilton Manors, Florida, received a coupon card to help him pay for a psoriatic arthritis medication he needs that costs more than $7,700 a month.

Each year, Amgen, which makes the drug, called Enbrel, sent the coupon card worth thousands of dollars, and that counted toward Gruber’s health insurance deductible and out-of-pocket maximum.

Using the card, Gruber usually met that maximum by February, leaving his health insurance to fully cover his in-network medical costs and reducing his cost for the drug to $0 for the rest of the year.

But this year, his new health insurer, Oscar HMO of Florida, pocketed the coupon card and required Gruber to pay for the drug until he satisfied the cost-sharing requirements on his own.

If Oscar Health had applied Amgen’s coupon toward Gruber’s cost sharing, he would have been on the hook for about $3,000 in covered services. Without it, he had to use his savings to meet the plan’s $10,600 out-of-pocket maximum.

“The real insult here is that they’re taking the money that’s intended to help you,” said Gruber, who had planned to buy a home next year with his savings. “I feel desperate, pressed against the wall, and squeezed.”

Oscar Health is one of many commercial health insurers that use what are often called copay accumulator programs to keep funds that are meant to defray patients’ out-of-pocket costs for expensive specialty drugs. Over the past decade, more insurers have adopted such strategies to reduce their prescription drug costs, according to Avalere Health, a consulting company.

Patients who rely on copay assistance from drugmakers are typically heavy users of healthcare for whom delays in treatment or worsening conditions can lead to higher costs, according to patient advocates.

Matt Choffin, Florida market president for Oscar Health, did not comment on the specifics of Gruber’s case. He said the company uses copay accumulators to manage rising medical and prescription costs and “to keep monthly premiums as low as possible.”

Drugmakers argue that insurers and pharmacy benefit managers use copay accumulators and other strategies to delay or deny care and steer patients toward medicines that insurers prefer instead. Insurers counter that coupon cards and other patient financial assistance from drug manufacturers drive up premiums and encourage patients to use higher-priced, brand-name drugs instead of less-expensive generics.

Meanwhile, patient advocates say it’s difficult for consumers to find out if their plan uses a copay accumulator or to understand how they work. Not only do the programs make medications unaffordable for consumers, critics argue, but they allow insurers to double-dip.

“They’re collecting the money twice and they’re hurting patients,” said Carl Schmid, executive director of the HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute, a patient advocacy group.

“Why does it make a difference to Oscar if they get the money from a drug company or, you know, his mother or him?” he said of Gruber’s experience. “They’re still getting the money.”

Gruber teaches a fitness class. (Scott McIntyre for KFF Health News)

Controlling Costs or Harming Patients?

Not all insurance types use copay accumulators. Medicare and Medicaid prohibit copay assistance because federal anti-kickback laws forbid drug manufacturers from offering financial incentives to influence patients’ choices. And the Internal Revenue Service prohibits such help for high-deductible plans with health savings accounts. But individual and commercial group plans can use them.

Regulation of copay accumulator programs has fallen largely to states, which oversee individual and small-group plans sold on the Affordable Care Act marketplace.

For 2026, nearly 40% of ACA marketplace plans have such a program, according to a review from The AIDS Institute, a nonprofit group that opposes the programs. Of the 16 insurers that sell plans on the marketplace in Florida, 10 use copay accumulator programs, the review found.

Patients who take brand-name specialty drugs for conditions such as autoimmune disorders, multiple sclerosis, diabetes, HIV, and cancer are most likely to encounter these programs. Health insurers say that making patients share the costs for specialty drugs encourages them to choose value over brand.

But Gruber doesn’t have a choice because there is no medically equivalent generic for Enbrel. Gruber’s livelihood as a trainer depends on his athleticism. The weekly injections, which he has to take for the rest of his life, prevent his joints from getting stiff. When he was diagnosed in 2010, Gruber said, he couldn’t shake hands or lift his knee to get into bed. Without treatment, he said, “I ache from my neck down to my toes.”

Gruber’s new health insurer won’t apply a coupon card for Enbrel, making him spend $10,600 to meet the cost-sharing requirement. (Scott McIntyre for KFF Health News)

If manufacturers priced their drugs affordably, patients like Gruber wouldn’t need financial assistance, said Sean Dickson, a senior vice president for AHIP, a trade association representing insurers.

“Drugmakers offer short-term ‘discounts’ to justify overcharging Americans in the long term, driving up healthcare costs for everyone,” he said in a statement. “Research shows limiting copay coupons can reduce premiums and lower consumers’ out-of-pocket costs.”

Sarah Ryan, a spokesperson for Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, a trade association for the pharmaceutical industry, said copay assistance helps patients access medications free of charge or at reduced cost.

“Health insurance is supposed to protect patients,” Ryan said, adding that insurers and pharmacy benefit managers that refuse to count copay assistance toward cost sharing are “leaving patients facing unexpected costs and disrupting their care.”

Insurance companies already have tools to control costs without keeping financial assistance intended for patients, said Rachel Klein, deputy executive director for The AIDS Institute.

Insurers choose what drugs to cover, whether they are medically necessary, and if a patient must try a cheaper alternative first.

“They are the ones making the decisions,” Klein said. “Now the individual is left trying to figure out how they’re going to pay for it.”

Consumers Stuck in the Middle

Weekly injections of Enbrel prevent Larry Gruber’s joints from getting stiff, which is vital for his work as a fitness coach. The drug costs more than $7,700 a month, and he has to take it for the rest of his life. (Scott McIntyre for KFF Health News)

Before moving to Florida in 2024, Gruber said, he had bought coverage on the ACA marketplaces in Illinois and Louisiana, which prohibit copay accumulators. Gruber said he hadn’t encountered one until his experience with Oscar Health.

He complained to the office of Florida’s insurance consumer advocate, which informed him that the practice is legal in the state and that Oscar Health had disclosed its use of a copay accumulator program. Page 127 of his 168-page evidence of coverage states, “Third party assistance will not count towards your out-of-pocket maximum or deductible.”

Gruber said he selected his coverage using a tool on healthcare.gov that listed all the Florida ACA plans that cover Enbrel. “I always choose the one with the highest deductible to get the lowest premium,” he said, “because I know I’m going to meet it.” His monthly premium is about $315 after subsidies.

Adding to Gruber’s confusion, he said, was that his patient portal with Oscar Health was counting his coupon card at first. He said he met his out-of-pocket maximum in February, and in March Oscar covered all the cost for the medication.

But when he ordered his refill for April, the pharmacy told him that Oscar would cover only $1,000 of the medication’s cost for that month. He would have to pay the remaining $6,700.

Gruber then received a letter from Oscar Health, telling him that an incorrect amount had been applied to his deductible.

“They sent me a letter that basically stated they made a mistake,” he said. “The fact that they’re allowed to sort of change things midstream is also, I think, a little galling.”

He began rationing the injections, taking them every other week instead of weekly. By May, he had dipped into his savings to pay for the drug.

States Step Up While Federal Oversight Stalls

The first state laws banning copay accumulators were adopted in 2019, and since then more states have moved to regulate the programs, said Gavin Clingham, public policy director for the Alliance for Patient Access, an advocacy group.

“The goal is to build upon that progress at the federal level and to continue to drive this momentum forward,” he said.

Twenty-six states, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico have adopted laws banning copay accumulators or prohibiting them for drugs that do not have a generic equivalent. Colorado also prohibits copay accumulators for drugs without a biosimilar. In states that have not banned or restricted the programs, insurance companies decide whether to use them.

But federal regulation of the programs, which would apply to all states, remains at a standstill.

A federal court in 2023 struck down a policy enacted during President Donald Trump’s first term that had permitted insurers to use copay accumulator programs. As a result, the Department of Health and Human Services reverted to an earlier rule that restricts their use to brand-name drugs with a medically appropriate generic equivalent.

After the court ruling, the Biden administration pledged to address copay accumulators in future rulemaking. But HHS has yet to do so, said Schmid, whose group, the HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute, led a coalition of patient advocacy groups that sued to overturn the rule.

“The Trump administration can stop this once and for all at the national level,” Schmid said. “If they really care about patient affordability, this is something they can do.”

Bipartisan legislation in Congress called the HELP Copays Act would require financial assistance to count toward deductibles and other out-of-pocket costs on plans regulated by the federal government, including much employer-sponsored coverage.

Schmid said the bill has not gotten “enough traction on the Hill yet.”

Other ways to obtain medication don’t help patients facing copay accumulators either. The president’s TrumpRx initiative, an online platform through which consumers can buy prescription drugs at a discount, requires patients to pay out-of-pocket, and the cost does not count toward their plan’s cost-sharing requirements.

Christopher Krepich, a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services spokesperson, said that HHS, along with the departments of Labor and the Treasury, intend to address the issue of whether copay assistance must apply toward health plan cost sharing.

Until then, he wrote, “the Departments do not intend to take any enforcement action against health insurance issuers or group health plans based on their treatment of such manufacturer assistance.”

Outside of government regulation, consumers have few protections or alternatives.

Patients who rely on expensive medications — and who have a choice in their health insurance plan — should research their coverage options and choose wisely so they’re not caught by surprise, Clingham said.

That may mean reading plan benefit explanation packages, contacting their state’s insurance regulator, or calling an insurance company to ask if their plans use copay accumulator programs.

For Gruber, the extra expense means he won’t take a vacation this year. He’s also concerned that the money he was saving for a home will now go to his medication costs instead.

“It’s the first thing I think of when I wake up in the morning,” he said. “If this happens every year, it would be financially devastating.”

(Scott McIntyre for KFF Health News)

Are you struggling to afford your health insurance? Have you decided to forgo coverage? Click here to contact KFF Health News and share your story.

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/health-care-costs/copay-accumulator-adjustment-programs-patient-assistance-insurance-pharma-drugs/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Thousands of Medicare Beneficiaries Thought Their Drug Plan Was Free. Then They Lost It.

July 07, 2026

Jude Pare and his partner, Diane Tix, live in rural Minnesota until temperatures dip below freezing, when they take refuge in Arizona for the winter. While away, their mail is forwarded. But Pare, 77, said he didn’t receive any warning from his Medicare prescription drug plan that his $0 monthly premium was about to increase.

So he didn’t know he had a bill to pay. After he and Tix returned home to Minnesota in April, they got a letter from Wellcare, the insurer that provided his drug plan, saying his coverage had been terminated after three months of unpaid premiums totaling $28.80. Under Medicare’s rules, he can’t enroll in a plan again until the fall, for coverage beginning in 2027.

Pare takes Xarelto, a blood thinner that reduces his risk of strokes, blood clots, and pulmonary embolism. “He could bleed to death without it,” Tix said. A 90-day supply of the drug costs about $1,800 using a coupon from GoodRx, a discount drug website, she said.

Pare is among tens of thousands of Medicare beneficiaries who were on Wellcare’s Value Script drug plan who will likely go without prescription drug coverage for the rest of the year because they didn’t pay premiums for three months.

Next year, thousands more people in 32 states and Washington, D.C., who are enrolled in zero-premium drug plans from Wellcare and other insurance companies may find themselves in the same situation if their premiums go up and they don’t realize it, according to a KFF Health News analysis of drug plan data. Premiums and other changes for 2027 will be unveiled in September.

Going without medication can be life-threatening, especially for Medicare beneficiaries. Nearly 90% take one or more prescription drugs, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Almost half live with four or more chronic health conditions that can cause functional or cognitive impairments.

By the time Jude Pare and his partner, Diane Tix, found out he owed $28.80 for three months of drug plan premiums, his coverage had been canceled. He is among tens of thousands of Medicare beneficiaries who will likely go without prescription drug coverage for the rest of the year after their drug plans were canceled. (Diane Tix)

Congress added prescription drug coverage to Medicare in 2003. But the coverage is administered by commercial insurance companies, which compete fiercely with one another for the business of about 56 million Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in drug plans.

Zero-dollar or very low monthly premiums have helped make Wellcare’s Value Script the bestselling stand-alone prescription drug plan in Medicare, with nearly 6 million customers across the U.S., according to government data. But in 26 states and Washington, D.C., some Value Script members who didn’t have to pay a premium last year were caught off guard by increases in 2026.

After a two-month grace period — which Wellcare extended to three — Medicare drug plans can drop customers who don’t pay their premiums, no matter how small the amount. Some members who lost their coverage in Nevada, for example, owed as little as $8.10 for three months, according to a KFF Health News analysis of Medicare drug plan data.

Wellcare terminated coverage for about 140,000 Value Script beneficiaries in April, according to a person with knowledge of the matter who was not authorized to speak publicly about it and feared reprisals at work for doing so. About 40,000 of the people who were dropped may be able to enroll in new coverage immediately because they have low incomes and receive financial assistance through a program Medicare calls “Extra Help.”

Multiple state officials said they had heard the same disenrollment figures, including Nevada’s insurance commissioner, Ned Gaines, who chairs the National Association of Insurance Commissioners’ senior issues task force; Rebecca Gouty, director of the State Health Insurance Assistance Program in West Virginia; and Tim Smolen, director of Washington state’s Statewide Health Insurance Benefits Advisors. The West Virginia and Washington initiatives are part of the federally funded State Health Insurance Assistance Program, or SHIP, which provides free, unbiased help navigating Medicare.

Surprise Bills

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, which oversees Medicare drug plans, declined to provide the number of Value Script members who lost coverage due to unpaid premiums. “The agency does not publicly provide plan-specific disenrollment figures or state-level breakdowns related to the non-payment of premiums,” Christopher Krepich, a spokesperson, said in a written statement to KFF Health News.

Centene Corp., Wellcare’s parent company, also declined to provide disenrollment numbers.

“We recognize how disruptive a loss of coverage can be and are committed to helping members understand their options,” said Sarah Baiocchi, senior vice president for specialty and prescription drug plans at Centene. She acknowledged that “some members in our Value Script plan experienced a premium for the first time, or for the first time in several years.”

Baiocchi said all Value Script members received a CMS-required annual notice of changes in September, before the premium increases took effect.

A version of the booklet sent to members in two states and Washington, D.C., is 21 pages long. The new premium is mentioned on pages 3 and 8, along with changes to out-of-pocket costs and how to find updates on covered drugs and network pharmacies.

The company also informed members about 2026 premium changes through phone calls, text messages, regular mail, or email, Baiocchi said.

People who are dropped are not able to reenroll or join another drug plan until the start of the open enrollment period this fall for coverage beginning Jan. 1, unless they qualify for an exception, Krepich said. And because they will have gone without coverage for at least 63 days, they could be hit with a permanent late-enrollment penalty that increases every year for the rest of their lives.

“Medicare should be doing something about this so that we can go ahead and get coverage now,” said Wayne Bennett, 74, who lives in Durham, North Carolina.

In May, he found out that Wellcare had canceled his Value Script plan because he hadn’t paid his $3.60 monthly premiums. He takes nine prescription drugs to treat his blood pressure, glaucoma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and other health problems. He filled most of his prescriptions — including several at no cost — before he lost coverage. He doesn’t know what he’ll have to pay when his supply runs out.

Gouty, the West Virginia program head, said many Medicare beneficiaries arrange for their monthly drug plan premium to be automatically deducted from their Social Security benefits, and that many likely thought that choice remained in place until they changed it.

“They didn’t realize that when the plan was a zero premium in 2025, that stopped the Social Security premium deduction and they would have had to reelect it for 2026,” Gouty said.

In other words, even if they mistakenly thought the premium was still zero, Medicare beneficiaries would have needed to somehow allow Social Security to make deductions — something the agency doesn’t do — or set up a payment plan through their bank or credit card in case payment was necessary.

“That sounds goofy,” Tix said.

Centene’s Baiocchi blamed the Social Security Administration for the problem: “We believe this was a key driver of non-payment disenrollments and subsequent complaints.”

Spokespeople for the agency referred questions about the matter to CMS.

Krepich said legal requirements for drug plan enrollment and disenrollment limit what CMS can do to help beneficiaries who lose coverage for not paying their premiums.

‘Pretty Upset’

Now that Pare has no prescription drug coverage, his doctor replaced his blood thinner medication with a much less expensive drug that should be just as effective. Pare paid $111 for four other medications that used to be free under his Value Script plan. He hasn’t had to refill four more prescriptions yet and doesn’t know what they will cost, Tix said.

If Wellcare members knew about the premium increases, they could have set up direct billing or an automatic payment plan early this year before the payment grace period ended April 1. But they would have been able to fill prescriptions during the grace period, so if they didn’t see Wellcare’s notices, they likely assumed there was no problem with their coverage.

Bennett, the North Carolina man, said Wellcare used to send him text messages with health tips and reminders when it was time to pick up a prescription. He didn’t know his premium had increased from $0 to $3.60 until it was too late.

Wayne Bennett lost his Medicare drug coverage because he didn’t pay the premium, which was free last year but — without his knowing — went up this year. “Medicare should be doing something about this so that we can go ahead and get coverage now,” he says. (Wayne Bennett)

“I was pretty upset,” he said, when he called the company. “The premium wasn’t that much, and I was ready to pay it right off the bat. I had my credit card out ready to make the payment.”

The customer service representative wouldn’t let him pay because his coverage had been canceled, Bennett said.

Hoping to restore it, Bennett called Senior PharmAssist, a Durham nonprofit that advises Medicare beneficiaries and is one of more than 2,200 SHIP sites across the country. He was told he must wait until January to restart his drug coverage, said the group’s executive director, Gina Upchurch.

He doesn’t qualify for the “Extra Help” low-income subsidy or meet other CMS criteria for a special enrollment period, which would allow him to change drug plans during the year. CMS typically allows midyear switches for beneficiaries who, for example, move out of their plan’s service area, experience a natural disaster, or get help paying for drugs from a state program.

Senior PharmAssist was able to help one of its participants join another drug plan after she lost Value Script coverage because she is in North Carolina’s pharmacy assistance program for people with HIV/AIDS and has limited income, Upchurch said.

A further exception allows any Medicare beneficiary to enroll at any time in a drug plan that has earned five stars, the top grade in Medicare’s performance ratings. However, there are no five-star Medicare drug plans available to the general public. Only two insurers offer five-star plans, and only for retirees from certain employers. Their combined enrollment is about 8,700 as of June 1, according to the insurers.

But Upchurch, with more than two decades of Medicare expertise, doesn’t blame beneficiaries for not paying attention or for assuming Wellcare’s messages were bogus. Older adults are particularly vulnerable to identity theft and other scams and are often advised to ignore junk mail and calls from telemarketers.

Since Value Script members such as Bennett continued to get their prescriptions filled during the payment grace period, “why wouldn’t they think this was a scam?” Upchurch asked. “They are constantly bombarded by people selling them something that’s illegitimate or trying to scam them.”

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/medicare/medicare-drug-plans-part-d-small-premium-increases-disenrollments-wellcare/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

In California Governor’s Race, Voters Face Stark Choice on Immigrant Healthcare

July 06, 2026

For decades, Californians have generally said that immigrants, who make up more than a quarter of the state’s population and a third of its labor force, are beneficial to the state and its economy. But budget instability and concerns about rising costs are spilling into a debate over the controversial and expensive policy of allowing low-income immigrants without legal status to receive state-funded health coverage.

Now, Democrat Xavier Becerra and Republican Steve Hilton present a stark choice to voters in the race to be the next governor at a moment when public support for the state’s generous safety net is starting to fray.

Both frame the choice as an economic one.

Becerra, former secretary of Health and Human Services under President Joe Biden, has said it would be “foolish” to exclude the poorest immigrants from routine care and push them into expensive emergency rooms on the taxpayer’s dime. Hilton, a conservative commentator backed by President Donald Trump, has promised to eliminate their coverage and has echoed national Republicans who have skewered California’s expansions to bolster their claims of fraud and abuse in the Medicaid program.

With voters nationwide worried about inflation and the rising cost of living, some Californians might feel less inclined to provide full healthcare coverage to those lacking legal status. What the state does next could have profound implications for its healthcare system and sprawling economy.

Over the past decade, California lawmakers used state dollars to expand Medi-Cal, offering all low-income residents comprehensive coverage regardless of immigration status. But enrollment surpassed initial projections, as did the cost. Medi-Cal coverage of immigrants without legal status costs the state roughly $10 billion a year, according to California’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office, more than double the initial estimates.

California lawmakers and Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who championed the program, have approved major rollbacks of benefits for those residents. They said the state can’t afford ballooning healthcare costs amid massive federal cuts from the GOP tax-and-spending law known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act; the California Health and Human Services Agency projected up to 3.4 million Medi-Cal enrollees could lose coverage and the state could lose more than $30 billion a year in federal funding under the law, causing major disruptions in the safety net health program.

Medi-Cal’s budget for the 2026-27 fiscal year is $217 billion, and the program serves more than 14 million Californians.

Meanwhile, many legal U.S. residents and citizens have seen their health premium payments skyrocket this year after Congress let enhanced federal Affordable Care Act subsidies expire at the end of December.

As the state grappled with a deficit last year, a majority of likely voters in California said — for the first time in nearly a decade — that they opposed providing health insurance to immigrants without legal status, according to a poll by the Public Policy Institute of California.

“The state faces major challenges, and healthcare is one of the major expenditures,” said Mark Baldassare, PPIC survey director. “People have become more selective about how they want to see those limited healthcare dollars spent.”

Hilton, running on a platform of affordability and lowering taxes, has seized on the sentiment, casting health coverage for immigrants without legal status as deeply unfair and a direct threat to the state’s ability to help citizens.

“Stop taking money from California taxpayers who can barely afford their healthcare to give free healthcare to citizens of other countries who shouldn’t even be here,” Hilton said in a Facebook video the morning of the June 2 primary.

In campaign stump speeches, Hilton promised to use the savings to lower healthcare costs for other Californians without detailing how. Hilton did not respond to requests from KFF Health News for comment.

“Their messaging is very, very simple: It’s an us vs. them,” said Roger Salazar, a Democratic political consultant who represents a coalition of healthcare advocates who argue providing coverage to people who can’t afford it strengthens the workforce and, as a result, the economy. “It’s just a question of convincing the average voter that it’s much better economically.”

A son of immigrants, Becerra for decades pushed to extend safety net benefits in Congress and has made a similar pitch in his campaign for governor. He did not respond to requests for comment.

“Immigrants, whether documented or not, work hard. They pay taxes, and sometimes they get injured on the job or their children get sick,” Becerra said during a debate in May. “It would be foolish to tell a family that they don’t have access to the pediatrician or the family doc.”

Becerra, who could become California’s first elected Latino governor, objected last year when Newsom and legislative leaders decided to freeze Medi-Cal enrollment for adults without legal status, cut benefits, and impose monthly premiums.

“Stop treating coverage as a budget variable that expands in good years and contracts when revenue dips,” Becerra wrote in May in response to an Orange County Register candidate questionnaire. He has vowed to pursue new, steady revenue to fund basic services, such as by upping taxes on corporations and the wealthiest Californians.

In 2023, California was home to about 2.3 million people without legal status, representing roughly 8% of the state’s labor force, according to the Pew Research Center. And 1 in 5 California children live in a family that includes at least one member without legal status, according to the California Department of Education. Healthcare economists say giving people access to preventive healthcare saves taxpayers money in the long run by keeping the workforce healthy and relieving pressure on an overburdened system.

That, Baldassare said, wasn’t a hard argument to make during the covid pandemic, when immigrants were celebrated as essential workers and the link between individual well-being and public health was more obvious.

But Medi-Cal costs to cover roughly 1.4 million immigrants have ballooned, according to the latest estimates from the Department of Health Care Services. Because only some lawfully present immigrants are eligible for federal Medicaid benefits, states like California that cover other populations must do so exclusively with state funding.

California’s budget experts have warned that maintaining full Medi-Cal coverage for immigrants without seeking additional revenue would destabilize the state’s long-term fiscal outlook.

In a legislative hearing last year, Republican Assembly member Carl DeMaio questioned whether California taxpayers would prioritize the expansions, saying he doubted “illegal immigrant healthcare in the general fund would be at the top of their list.”

After lawmakers approved the spending reductions, support for immigrant health coverage dropped, Baldassare said. Democratic lawmakers and Newsom agreed to delay several Medi-Cal cuts until July 2027, leaving decisions for the next governor.

David Hayes-Bautista, who has spent his career studying the economic contributions of Latinos and immigrants, said Californians without legal status have higher labor force participation and tend to work in industries and occupations that don’t offer employer-based health insurance. As a result, many resort to Medi-Cal, saddling the state with the healthcare costs instead of employers.

“California, as a state, has the world’s fourth-largest GDP, which is true thanks to Latinos,” said Hayes-Bautista, director of the Center for the Study of Latino Health and Culture at UCLA. Without contributions from Latinos, many without legal status, it drops to eighth place, about the size of Italy’s economy, he added.

Immigrant advocates hope to have a more vocal champion in Becerra, the favorite to become governor in a state where Democrats outnumber Republicans nearly 2-to-1.

“He will fight, he will push back, he will do all that he can,” said state Sen. María Elena Durazo, a former labor leader who has championed the immigrant healthcare expansions. “That’s the most we could expect.”

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/elections/california-governor-becerra-hilton-immigrant-healthcare-medicaid-medi-cal/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

A Mom Said Infant Formula Killed Her Baby. The Manufacturer Didn’t Tell the FDA.

July 02, 2026

In September 2016, a distraught mother sent infant formula maker Mead Johnson a message:

“REMOVE ME FROM YOUR LIST!!!! DO NOT EMAIL OR MAIL ME ANY MORE!

“It is because of your animal based pre-term artificial baby food crap that you peddle to hospital NICU’s that my son is dead from NEC.”

The mother was referring to neonatal intensive care units and necrotizing enterocolitis, an often fatal condition in which intestinal tissue can die and allow infection to spread through the body of an infant born prematurely.

In an internal memo, Mead Johnson cited its “extensive quality and safety checks” and concluded there was “not a reasonable possibility” that the formula caused the baby’s death. “No further investigation is needed. This file can be closed,” the memo said.

And with that decision, the company narrowed the chance that the mother’s anguish could draw attention to any danger the formula might pose to other infants.

The mother’s email and the company’s memo assessing it were used as evidence in the court cases Watson v. Mead Johnson and Whitfield v. St. Louis Children’s Hospital, et al.

When doctors, hospitals, parents, or others alert manufacturers that babies got sick or died while receiving infant formula, what happens next is left largely to manufacturers such as Abbott Laboratories and Mead Johnson Nutrition, giants of the industry.

Mead Johnson’s handling of the mother’s email showed how that can play out.

Under federal rules, if a complaint about an infant formula — such as a report of an adverse event — shows a possible health hazard, the company must investigate.

But it doesn’t always have to inform the government agency that oversees the safety of infant formula.

A company must complete an investigation and notify the Food and Drug Administration within 15 days only if it finds “a reasonable possibility of a causal relationship between the consumption of an infant formula and an infant’s death.”

If that happened even once over more than a quarter century, the FDA could find no record of it, according to information obtained through public records requests.

‘Never Reported’

Under the Freedom of Information Act, KFF Health News asked the FDA for all notifications that manufacturers of infant formula sent the agency per the regulatory requirement since Jan. 1, 2020. The agency’s Human Foods Program “did not receive any,” Kimberly Jones, a government information specialist at the FDA, responded in March.

KFF Health News then asked the FDA to go back decades further — to Jan. 1, 2000. “After a diligent search of our files, we did not locate any responsive records,” Jones wrote on May 5.

The FDA’s search results were consistent with court testimony.

John Wallingford, a paid expert witness for Abbott, testified in a Missouri court in October 2024 that Abbott had never reported a single death under any regulation for preterm infant formula.

Wallingford clarified that he was not referring to adverse events in clinical trials, which are studies used for research and development and are subject to different procedures. Abbott informed the FDA about adverse events that occurred during a clinical trial, Wallingford testified.

John Wallingford, an expert witness for Abbott Laboratories, testified in 2024 that, outside of clinical trials, the company had never reported to the FDA that there was a reasonable possibility a death was caused by an Abbott preterm formula, according to a transcript posted by the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District in an appeal of the Whitfield v. St. Louis Children’s Hospital case.

Christina Valentine testified in a 2024 deposition that she never sent the FDA a report of death from NEC during her seven years as Mead Johnson’s medical director for North America. In the deposition, used in the Whitfield case, she said she never concluded there was a reasonable possibility that an infant’s death from NEC might have been related to a Mead Johnson product.

As medical director for North America, she was responsible for signing off on those determinations, she testified in the Watson trial.

In the deposition, Valentine said she wasn’t sure whether anyone else at the company sent a death report to the FDA.

In late May and mid-June, Mead Johnson spokesperson Jen O’Neill added to the picture.

“Where there is a physician report that includes an opinion that one of our products caused NEC in a preterm infant, we have treated that as a ‘reasonable possibility of a causal relationship,’ and we submitted an adverse event report to the FDA,” she wrote.

“These physician reports were generally made by plaintiffs’ paid experts, with which we disagree,” she wrote.

O’Neill left unclear whether events Mead Johnson reported to the FDA were raised in lawsuits and, if so, whether the company reported them to the FDA before they surfaced in litigation.

Asked repeatedly when Mead Johnson filed the reports, O’Neill didn’t say.

It’s unclear why the FDA found no record of them.

Nor would O’Neill say whether the company submitted one related to the distraught mother’s September 2016 complaint.

That mother’s name wasn’t publicly disclosed in the court record containing her complaint.

“[P]rior to the current litigation, we received very few reports relating to our products and NEC and even fewer for which our investigation uncovered any evidence supporting a reasonable possibility of a causal relationship,” O’Neill wrote.

Industry personnel have reacted to some complaints with circular reasoning, as shown by court records from the Watson, Whitfield, and Gill v. Abbott Laboratories cases. Company personnel didn’t think their products caused harm, and they didn’t view new cases as evidence of harm, records show.

‘Reprehensible’ Conduct

About 2,300 newborns died of necrotizing enterocolitis in the United States from 2017 through 2023, the equivalent of almost one per day, according to a KFF Health News analysis of a government data set for those years. The database doesn’t attempt to explain what caused those babies to develop NEC, and it doesn’t count babies who survived NEC.

A wave of lawsuits has alleged that infant formula made by Abbott or Mead Johnson harmed or killed preterm babies by causing or contributing to cases of NEC. As of late January, 1,760 NEC lawsuits were pending against Abbott, company spokesperson Scott Stoffel said, clarifying a disclosure in a regulatory filing.

This article is based largely on transcripts, deposition videos, and exhibits from three court cases that went to trial in 2024. The lawsuits were filed by parents of babies who suffered or died from NEC.

Abbott and Mead Johnson have denied fault. They, along with various medical authorities including federal regulatory agencies and the American Academy of Pediatrics, have said that, when nutritional needs can’t be met with human milk, formula is vital.

One of the cases, Watson v. Mead Johnson, led to a $60 million judgment against Mead Johnson. Another, Gill v. Abbott, led to a $495 million judgment against Abbott. The third, Whitfield v. St. Louis Children’s Hospital, et al., led to a jury verdict in favor of Abbott and Mead Johnson, but the judge found errors and misconduct on the part of defense counsel, faulted his own performance, and ruled the plaintiff was entitled to a new trial.

The judge’s ruling in the Whitfield case is on appeal.

On May 5, a Missouri appeals court upheld the $495 million judgment against Abbott, saying “we find Abbott’s conduct significantly reprehensible.”

“Throughout the trial, the jury heard evidence that Abbott knew its formula posed significant risks to preterm infants weighing under 1500g yet made little effort to mitigate that risk,” the court wrote.

On June 12, an Illinois appeals court reversed the $60 million judgment against Mead Johnson and sent the case back for a new trial. The trial court risked prejudicing the jury by improperly admitting evidence about Mead Johnson’s finances, including its revenues, profits, and executive compensation, the appeals court said.

In addition, the trial judge gave the jury erroneous instructions, the appeals court ruled. Any negligence on Mead Johnson’s part hinged on a failure to warn, and the company’s duty was not to warn the mother in that case of any danger, as she had claimed, but rather to warn doctors, the appeals court ruled.

In April, after another trial, a jury in Chicago ordered Abbott to pay four plaintiffs a total of $70 million. Abbott is contesting that verdict and the Missouri appeals court’s decision.

In at least four cases, judges have granted summary judgment in favor of Abbott — ruling for the company before the lawsuits reached trial.

‘Branding NICU Babies’

Abbott makes Similac products, and Mead Johnson makes the Enfamil line.

The two companies have vied to place their products in neonatal intensive care units, which serve as entry points to hospital contracts and the retail market, KFF Health News reported in a March article based largely on records from court cases.

For instance, a Mead Johnson slide deck for a 2020 national sales meeting — later used in the Whitfield trial — outlined a plan for “Branding NICU Babies.”

A Mead Johnson slide for a 2020 national sales meeting outlined a plan for “Branding NICU Babies.” The slide featured a product for babies born prematurely transitioning to home. The slide deck was used in the Whitfield v. St. Louis Children’s Hospital lawsuit.

The litigation opened a wider window into the business and regulation of infant formula, including adverse event reports.

“Abbott complies with all applicable FDA regulations on adverse event reporting, including by keeping detailed records of every single complaint/adverse event report Abbott receives and investigating NEC complaints,” Stoffel said in November. “FDA routinely conducts audits that include Abbott’s adverse event investigations and reporting as part of its active regulation of infant nutrition.”

Mead Johnson’s O’Neill echoed that.

“Our adverse event reporting complies with all applicable regulatory requirements,” O’Neill said in a November statement to KFF Health News. “The FDA audits Mead Johnson on an annual basis and has never identified any issue about our approach to reporting.”

The reports the company filed with the FDA were submitted through the agency’s regional office in Detroit, she said.

It’s unclear whether the FDA looked in Detroit.

FDA rules require manufacturers to send written confirmations to a central office in the Washington area that oversees infant formula and other foods.

Asked if the company sent them to that office, O’Neill did not answer.

KFF Health News requested an interview with Mead Johnson to clarify its statements about how it handled adverse event reports. The company did not grant one.

Plaintiffs have used internal documents from the companies to allege that, in house, people have long recognized a correlation between NEC and the use of preterm formulas made from cow’s milk.

For example, in a 2010 research proposal shown in a deposition used in the Gill case, Abbott scientists wrote that NEC “is the most severe GI complication of prematurity and the use of bovine milk-based fortifiers and formulas are believed to be the primary risk factor.”

An Abbott document from 2010 said necrotizing enterocolitis “is the most severe GI complication of prematurity and the use of bovine milk-based fortifiers and formulas are believed to be the primary risk factor.” The document was displayed in deposition video clips KFF Health News obtained from the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District. The video was filed with the court in an appeal of the Gill v. Abbott lawsuit.

A Mead Johnson document used in the Whitfield lawsuit cited “80% necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) risk reduction when human milk is used in place of formula.”

Abbott has argued that correlation does not equal causation.

“Numerous studies and NEC authorities have made clear that preterm infant formula does not cause NEC; it’s the absence of human milk that increases NEC risk rather than anything harmful in formula,” Abbott spokesperson Stoffel said.

The FDA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the National Institutes of Health weighed in with a joint statement in October 2024, saying, “There is no conclusive evidence that preterm infant formula causes NEC” and “there is strong evidence that human milk is protective against NEC.”

Mead Johnson’s O’Neill said the scientific consensus is that there is no established causal link between the use of specialized preterm hospital nutrition products and NEC.

O’Neill cited a statement by the American Academy of Pediatrics saying the causes of NEC “are multifaceted and not completely understood.”

In a legal brief filed with an Illinois appeals court in the Watson case, the company said “the NEC related risks” of a formula for preterm infants “are the subject of medical debate.”

Managing Potential Warnings

Court records from lawsuits shed light on how the manufacturers have managed potential warnings from the field.

Fabrizis Suarez, who was director of medical safety and surveillance at Abbott from 2006 to 2023, said in a January 2024 deposition used in the Gill and Whitfield cases that he knew of no instance in which Abbott notified the FDA that a baby had died of NEC that could have been caused by Abbott’s formula for preterm infants.

There were numerous cases in which healthcare providers told Abbott they believed the formula caused the NEC, but Abbott disagreed every time, Suarez testified.

Abbott tracks and reviews every NEC report it receives and looks for patterns, Suarez testified.

Fabrizis Suarez, identifying himself as director of medical safety and surveillance at Abbott from 2006 to 2023, testified in a January 2024 deposition about Abbott’s handling of adverse event reports. KFF Health News obtained deposition video clips from the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District. The video was filed with the court in an appeal of the Gill v. Abbott lawsuit.

Courtney Colombo, who identified herself in a March 2024 deposition used in the Gill and Whitfield cases as director of postmarketing medical safety and surveillance at Abbott, likewise testified that she knew of no instance in which Abbott reported to any regulatory authority anywhere in the world that one of its preterm infant formulas was possibly related to a death caused by NEC.

Abbott wasn’t hiding complaints from the FDA, according to testimony from Wallingford, a paid expert witness on regulatory matters who spent 10 years at the FDA. The complaints were in company files FDA inspectors reviewed during annual inspections, he said in the Whitfield case.

Wallingford also testified that inspections are not a replacement for reporting infant deaths.

Questioning Wallingford in court, plaintiff’s lawyer Kevin Carnie Jr. invoked the cliché about the fox guarding the henhouse.

Wallingford declined to comment for this article. Valentine and Colombo did not respond to messages sent via LinkedIn. Valentine and Suarez did not respond to letters mailed to addresses that appeared to be associated with them. A letter to Colombo with signature required, sent to an address apparently associated with her, was returned unopened.

Not Publicly Reported

Adverse event reports can prompt the FDA to take action to protect the public.

For example, in 2011, the FDA warned parents, caregivers, and healthcare providers not to feed SimplyThick, a thickening gel, to premature infants fitting a particular profile. The product, used to manage swallowing difficulties, might cause NEC, the FDA said.

The FDA first learned about possible problems with SimplyThick from physicians, according to an FDA document that an attorney for Abbott, Sierra Elizabeth, read from during the Whitfield trial.

The stakes for companies and consumers are high.

A finding under the “reasonable possibility” standard could trigger a product recall, said Martin Hahn, a regulatory attorney for Mead Johnson.

The FDA’s handling of adverse event reports for infant formulas — and fortifiers, which are used to nutritionally supplement a mother’s milk when babies are born prematurely — contrasts with its handling of reports about drugs and medical devices.

The FDA posts manufacturers’ adverse event reports on drugs and medical devices online in databases available to the public.

But the notifications manufacturers are required to submit about formulas and fortifiers are not publicly reported, said Emily Hilliard, a spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services, which includes the FDA.

In addition, the FDA’s reporting requirements for drugs and medical devices are, in key ways, more demanding than those for infant formula.

Device makers must report not just deaths but also “serious injuries” that the product “may have caused or contributed to.”

Drugmakers are required to report any “serious and unexpected” adverse event, “whether or not considered drug related.” That goes beyond fatal or life-threatening events.

The FDA also maintains a public database about dietary supplements, foods, and infant formulas, among other products, that includes voluntary reports from consumers and healthcare practitioners.

KFF Health News searched that database and found one death report that mentioned NEC and a formula made for premature or low-birth-weight babies.

The search turned up seven other reports of infant deaths that mentioned NEC and fortifiers designed for premature or low-birth-weight babies. One of those reports, obtained by KFF Health News through the Freedom of Information Act, said three preterm babies at the same hospital had NEC and died within a month of one another in 2024.

The FDA cautions that reports are not verified and do not prove causation.

A former attorney for Abbott now leads the FDA.

Before becoming the FDA’s deputy commissioner for food last year and being named acting head of the agency in May, Kyle Diamantas represented Abbott in the Gill and Whitfield lawsuits, court records show.

Diamantas “complies with all applicable ethics laws and regulations,” said Hilliard, the HHS spokesperson. “That included a specific recusal related to Abbott Laboratories, which concluded in January 2026.”

“During that period, Mr. Diamantas voluntarily recused himself from all matters involving infant formula to avoid any appearance of partiality,” Hilliard said.

‘No Health Hazard’

KFF Health News asked the FDA a series of questions for this article. The agency left many unanswered.

“Infant formula safety is a top priority of the FDA given the vulnerability of the intended population,” Hilliard said.

KFF Health News asked Abbott and Mead Johnson for data on all infant death reports the companies received and those they forwarded to the FDA. Neither company provided that information.

Court records provide fragmentary data.

Abbott lawyer Elizabeth said in court that, before Wallingford took the stand as an expert witness, the company gave him 789 complaint files from 2005 through 2022 that contained the search term “NEC.”

When Wallingford went through the files, he found about 130 that mentioned death and NEC, he testified.

If Similac Special Care products for preterm infants were a problem, and if only 1% of adverse events led to a report, “you would expect to see tens of thousands of complaints,” Wallingford testified.

In 2010, a registered dietitian at a Cincinnati hospital notified Abbott that three babies had died of NEC shortly after starting on an Abbott formula. The dietitian thought there might be a correlation, according to an internal Abbott summary of the complaint shown during Colombo’s deposition. The babies, who were about 17 days old, had no complications other than prematurity, the summary said.

After reviewing the complaint, Abbott’s Colombo wrote, as shown in a deposition video, that she found “NO OTHER REPORTS OF DEATH AND NO TRENDS FOR NEC REPORTED BY OTHER FACILITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THIS STOCK CODE.”

“PREVIOUS COMPLAINT HISTORY INDICATES NO HEALTH HAZARD,” she concluded.

Courtney Colombo, who identified herself in a March 2024 deposition as director of postmarketing medical safety and surveillance at Abbott, testified about Abbott’s response to a report that three babies had died of NEC shortly after starting on an Abbott formula. KFF Health News obtained deposition video clips from the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District. The video was filed with the court in an appeal of the Gill v. Abbott lawsuit.

As for Mead Johnson, Valentine “testified that NEC was not one of the top adverse event complaints for Enfamil premature formulas of the 68 received between 2015-2019,” O’Neill, the company spokesperson, told KFF Health News.

Valentine — who was Mead Johnson Nutrition’s medical director for North America from 2014 to 2021 and parent company Reckitt’s chief medical officer from 2022 to 2023, according to a LinkedIn profile — signed off on the decision to close the 2016 file on the distraught mother’s complaint, according to an exhibit and her deposition testimony played in the Whitfield trial.

When she signed off, Mead Johnson didn’t know which of its products the complaint involved, Valentine said in the deposition.

Asked about it during the Watson trial in February 2024, Valentine testified that, in light of the mother’s request never to contact her again, it wouldn’t have been appropriate to call her back for more information.

Valentine “testified that she believes that the Mead Johnson complaint team appropriately investigated reports of death from NEC based on the information provided,” Mead Johnson’s O’Neill said.

Valentine also testified that the FDA encourages infant formula companies to send in all adverse event reports and that nothing prevented Mead Johnson from doing so.

As reflected in an email thread used in the Watson case, Valentine reacted skeptically in 2019 when a colleague told her a particular hospital wanted to exit its contract with Mead Johnson.

“They had 3 cases of NEC since they started using our formulas. They had 0 cases when they were with Abbott,” the colleague reported.

Valentine agreed to follow up but added: “Sad but please reassure them we are not seeing this with our formula … so no science basis for sure.”

Christina Valentine, who was Mead Johnson Nutrition’s director of medical affairs for North America, testified that she approved the decision to close the company’s file on a 2016 complaint about a baby’s death. (CVN courtroom video from the Whitfield v. St. Louis Children's Hospital, et al., trial.)

Share your story with us: Do you have experience with necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) or infant formula that you’d like to share? We’d like to hear from you. Click here to contact the KFF Health News reporting team.

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/health-industry/infant-formula-adverse-events-nec-baby-deaths-fda-reporting/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Supreme Court Makes Health Policy

July 01, 2026

The Supreme Court wrapped up its 2025-26 session this week with a spate of decisions, including several affecting health policy. The most significant: an immigration case that could exacerbate a shortage of workers in nursing homes and other long-term care facilities.

Meanwhile, two separate investigations paint in vivid detail how some doctors and hospitals are pocketing huge profits as a result of a federal law intended to shield patients from surprise medical bills.

This week’s panelists are Julie Rovner of KFF Health News, Lizzy Lawrence of Stat, Alice Miranda Ollstein of Politico, and Amanda Seitz of KFF Health News.

Panelists Lizzy Lawrence Stat @LizzyLaw_ @lizzylawrence.bsky.social Ready Lizzy's stories. Alice Miranda Ollstein Politico @AliceOllstein @alicemiranda.bsky.social Read Alice's stories. Amanda Seitz KFF Health News @AmandaSeitz aseitz@kff.org Read Amanda's stories.

Among the takeaways from this week’s episode:

The Supreme Court ended its term this week by issuing several decisions with major implications for American health. They included one ruling allowing more leeway for the president to fire members of independent federal agencies, as well as a ruling blocking lawsuits under state laws from those who claim they were harmed by the weedkiller glyphosate. In particular, the court’s decision enabling the president to end temporary protected status for certain immigrants is expected to have serious consequences for the long-term and elder care industries, both of which rely heavily on Haitian migrants and are already experiencing staffing shortages.
The Department of Health and Human Services reissued the charter for the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, upending the precedent that members must have professional expertise in vaccines. The change is expected to allow the panel — which has been tied up in litigation — to move forward with members appointed by HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, the Republican chairman of the Senate’s primary health committee, finally broke his silence about Kennedy’s confirmation promises. The senator, who lost his bid for reelection to a primary challenger endorsed by President Donald Trump, said he believes Kennedy violated the agreements he made to not disrupt vaccine policy in exchange for Cassidy’s vote. Kennedy again denied that charge.

Plus, for “extra credit” the panelists suggest health policy stories they read this week that they think you should read, too:

Julie Rovner: Modern Healthcare’s “Carbon Health Settles ‘Corporate Practice of Medicine’ Case,” by Michael McAuliff.

Alice Miranda Ollstein: Stateline’s “Federal Health Agency Cancels Most of its Teen Pregnancy Prevention Grants,” by Kelcie Moseley-Morris.

Lizzy Lawrence: The Wall Street Journal’s “The Baby Formula Probe Produced a Pile of Evidence. Then the DOJ Dropped the Case,” by Dave Michaels, Sadie Gurman, and Liz Essley Whyte.

Amanda Seitz: ProPublica’s “‘Digital Colonialism’: U.S. Demands to Access Africans’ Data Raise Privacy, Sovereignty Concerns,” by Sharon Lerner and Anna Maria Barry-Jester.

Also mentioned in this week’s podcast:

The New York Times’ “$22,000 Per Hour: Assistants Use a Legislative Loophole to Outearn Surgeons,” by Margot Sanger-Katz and Sarah Kliff.
Stat’s “The ERs That Can Turn Patients Away — And Are Reaping Millions,” by Tara Bannow.
The Washington Post’s “White House, RFK Jr. Tried To Push Third-Party Candidates Out of Tight House Races,” by Dan Diamond and Isaac Arnsdorf.
Stat’s “Longevity, Wellness Physicians Named to Panel Advising FDA on Peptides,” by Lizzy Lawrence and Sarah Todd.

Credits Francis Ying Audio producer Emmarie Huetteman Editor

Click here to find all our podcasts.

And subscribe to “What the Health? From KFF Health News” on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, the NPR app, YouTube, Pocket Casts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/podcast/what-the-health-453-supreme-court-immigration-ruling-tps-july-1-2026/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

He Dreamed of Becoming a Physician Assistant. New Loan Rules May Thwart Him.

June 30, 2026

Benjamin Pinckney, 46, has dreamed of becoming a physician assistant since just after his 20th birthday.

He had been targeted by a drive-by shooter in Jacksonville, Florida, and hospitalized with two gunshot wounds. During his weeklong hospitalization, he said, a physician assistant changed the course of his life by visiting his hospital bed each day and warning him that Black men with gunshot wounds often end up paralyzed — or worse.

“I used to run the streets, you know, on the wrong sides of the track,” Pinckney said. “He made me promise that I would never come into his ER that way again. That was the last conversation we had, right before I was discharged.”

His goal since then has been to become a physician assistant. Pinckney, who spent most of his career working for New York City’s Department of Sanitation and as an Army Reserve medic, recently took a step toward achieving it. In May, he graduated with departmental honors from Lehman College with a Bachelor of Science degree.

After moving from New York to Prince George’s County, Maryland, he’d planned on applying for physician assistant school this year. But now, he’s worried his dream may be thwarted by new student loan rules.

Starting July 1, the amount of money graduate students will be allowed to borrow from the federal government will be capped. The new student loan limits are part of the GOP’s tax-and-spending legislation known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which President Donald Trump signed into law last year.

The caps are intended to curb the cost of higher education and student loan debt, according to the Trump administration.

But critics widely agree the new limits are too low, especially for students allowed to borrow only $20,500 a year in federal loans due to the law’s controversial definition of a “professional degree.” On June 24, a federal judge temporarily blocked the Department of Education from enforcing that definition. Still, for many students, the new caps won’t cover the combined cost of tuition, housing, and living expenses.

This could leave hundreds of thousands of students who borrow money for graduate school each year at the mercy of private lenders with higher interest rates and fewer repayment options.

Pinckney wants to go to graduate school to become a physician assistant but doesn’t know how he will finance his education as new student loan limits go into effect. (Erica S. Lee for KFF Health News) Pinckney earned his Bachelor of Science degree from Lehman College this spring. (Erica S. Lee for KFF Health News) Pinckney estimates he paid at least 90% of his undergraduate tuition out-of-pocket. (Erica S. Lee for KFF Health News)

Some experts and students also worry that the limits will threaten efforts to diversify the healthcare workforce by deterring minorities and people from low-income households from applying to graduate programs. A drop in incoming students could worsen existing rural and primary care shortages, they argue.

Many politicians and loan experts have acknowledged that the cost of higher education needs to be addressed. But the new federal loan limits are “just not going to achieve that goal,” said Todd Pickard, president of the American Academy of Physician Associates, one of several organizations that have sued the Department of Education over the rules.

“It’d be like if you had a hangnail and I cut your whole arm off instead of just taking care of your hangnail,” Pickard said. “The treatment doesn’t match the problem.”

‘A Rock and a Hard Place’

Students working toward what the law describes as “professional degrees” — including trainee doctors, dentists, pharmacists, and chiropractors — will be allowed to borrow up to $200,000 total, and no more than $50,000 a year.

Meanwhile, the median cost of attending a public medical school is nearly $300,000 over four years, while the median cost of a private medical school education exceeds $400,000, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges.

The caps were set even lower for those pursuing other “graduate” degrees, who face a $100,000 borrowing limit for federal loans over the course of their degree programs. The annual limit for this category of students is only $20,500. Students pursuing physical therapy, physician assistant, and nursing degrees were originally included in this group. But according to new guidance issued by the Department of Education on Monday, some of these students will at least temporarily be able to borrow up to the higher limit, according to The Associated Press.

The Department of Education, which has been sued by clinician trade groups and about two dozen states over the new rules, did not respond to questions for this article.

As the law was written, a physician assistant student who completed their degree within the average two to three years would not have been eligible to borrow the full $100,000. Meanwhile, physician assistants typically start their careers with an average debt of $112,000, meaning some could be forced to finance their education with higher-interest private loans.

“I feel like I’m between a rock and a hard place,” said Olivia Trull, 24, who is scheduled to begin the physician assistant program at Northwest University in Kirkland, Washington, this summer. The 28-month program costs $137,000, with about $62,000 in tuition and fees estimated for the first year, she said. That doesn’t include living expenses.

Before the court order, Trull said she qualified for the maximum annual allotment under the new rules of $20,500 in federal loans during her first year of graduate school. The balance would need to be financed through a private lender.

She anticipated she would need up to $100,000 in private loans to finance her graduate degree and would face loan payments of more than $3,000 a month when she was done.

“I have to actually sit down and have a conversation with myself,” Trull said, to consider “if I want to be drowning in debt for the next 10 years of my life.” One private bank offered her a loan with an interest rate of nearly 14%, she said.

Pinckney, who said he finished his undergraduate degree with about $10,000 in federal student loan debt, said some of his friends who have already applied for private student loans have been quoted interest rates as high as 13%. Meanwhile, interest rates for federal loans for graduate students, which are set annually, are currently about 8-9%. Federal loans also offer more flexible repayment options than private loans typically do.

In May, 25 states and the District of Columbia filed a federal lawsuit against the Department of Education over the new rules. The complaint described the law’s “professional degree” definition as “arbitrary and capricious.”

In a separate federal lawsuit filed in June, the American Academy of Physician Associates and the PA Education Association alleged that the new rules deny students the loan amounts needed to attend physician assistant schools. They argue that PA students should be able to access the higher loan limits available to students in medical school and other professional degree programs. (While “physician assistant” and “physician associate” typically refer to the same role, the AAPA adopted the title “physician associate” in 2021 because of “concern that ‘assistant’ does not reflect the important role of PAs in delivering high-quality healthcare to patients.”)

Meanwhile, Trump administration officials have contended the cost of graduate school is too high across the board. Education Secretary Linda McMahon, speaking before a House committee in May about the new limits, said, “It is our overall goal to bring down the cost of college and education.”

Indeed, some experts acknowledge that the new limits may be helpful in bringing down costs. The federal Grad PLUS loan program, established by Congress 20 years ago, did not cap the amount graduate students could borrow in federal loans. That program was eliminated in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

“There is considerable evidence that people borrowed more than they really needed to go to school,” said Sandy Baum, a higher education economist and a senior fellow at the Urban Institute.

Already, some graduate programs have lowered tuition prices, Baum said. In May, for example, the University of California-Irvine announced it would lower the cost of its MBA programs by tens of thousands of dollars to fall below the new federal lending thresholds.

And yet Baum doesn’t anticipate many other schools will follow suit.

“I don’t think we’re going to see some dramatic decline in prices,” she said. “I think some programs could close down because they can’t manage.”

‘Tears Have Been Shed’

The new lending limits will also disproportionately affect Black students, Baum said, because they have historically borrowed more than white and Hispanic students.

For some students who borrowed money to finance their undergraduate degrees, the new limits will hit especially hard. Under the new rules, they will be subject to a lifetime limit of $257,000 in federal student loans.

“There will be students who can’t enroll,” Baum said.

Andrei Robu, 26, a medical student at the Medical University of South Carolina, leads the Financial Literacy Interest Group on the Charleston campus. He said many of his peers are worried that the lending limits will make the student body less diverse.

He is also concerned that, because the demand for acceptance into medical school is already so high, schools could prioritize entrance for students from wealthy backgrounds and “still fill up their classes.”

“That’s just not what we want in our physician workforce,” said Robu, who isn’t subject to the new rules as a current student. “We want to represent the population of the country at large.”

Jasmine Vasquez, 26, who has been accepted into the physician assistant program at South College in Atlanta, decided to defer her enrollment until 2027, partly to see if her financing options change. She is worried about taking on too much debt from a private bank.

“Tears have been shed multiple times,” said Vasquez, who is due to give birth in September. “It’s nothing that’s within my control.”

Betsy Mayotte, president of the Institute for Student Loan Advisors, expects the new rules will force some graduates into bankruptcy when they can’t afford to repay private loans.

First, though, she expects enrollment numbers to drop and some graduate programs to close because they can’t recruit enough students. Completion rates will also drop, she expects, as students run into federal loan limits partway through their degree programs.

Beyond that, she predicts healthcare graduates will seek jobs in high-paying specialties, exacerbating shortages in rural and underserved communities.

“They’re going to go where they can make the most money,” Mayotte said.

Pinckney has spent most of his career working for New York City’s Department of Sanitation. But he has dreamed of becoming a physician assistant since he was treated for gunshot wounds at a Jacksonville, Florida, hospital in 1999. (Erica S. Lee for KFF Health News)

Pinckney said he is “not really sure” what the future holds. He paid for most of his undergraduate education by working while he was in school, but that’s typically not possible for full-time physician assistant students.

He has considered applying to a biomedical science graduate program instead, which he estimated would cost about $30,000 — an amount that’s “a lot more doable,” he said. It would allow him to potentially work in a lab or in pharmaceuticals, he said. It’s still aligned with medicine, he said, but it wouldn’t help him realize his goal of working with patients.

“Maybe this thing will blow over,” he said of the new federal loan limits. In the meantime, he’s holding out hope.

“If I can influence one person’s life, that would be my way of paying him forward for what he did,” he said, referring to the physician assistant who inspired him back in 1999. “It’s very hard to pivot from that dream.”

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/health-industry/physician-assistant-professional-graduate-degrees-student-loan-limits/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Florida Hospitals Act Fast To Discharge Gun Victims — Especially if They’re Not Insured

June 29, 2026

Alea Bates wasn’t ready to leave Tallahassee Memorial HealthCare’s main hospital four days after a stranger shot her seven times at close range. Miraculously, hospital records show, none of the bullets damaged her internal organs.

But after surgery, Bates said, she couldn’t get out of bed or walk to the bathroom without help. She complained of intense pain radiating down her left leg, weakness in her knee, and a numbing sensation below it, according to hospital records. Bates, who worked as an Uber Eats driver, didn’t have the strength to drive a car.

Still, Bates said, the hospital told her it was time to go.

“They didn’t do any further X-rays or CTs or MRIs to figure out why my knee was numb,” she said. “And they were just like, you know, ‘It’ll go away.’”

Doctors said she was medically stable, Bates said, and because she had no health insurance, they could not send her to a rehabilitation hospital or a skilled nursing facility, which can charge thousands of dollars a day for such care.

“They were just like, We need the bed for somebody who has insurance,” she said. “That’s of course, you know, what they say without saying it.”

At least one firearm injury is treated in an American emergency room every 30 minutes. Tens of thousands die from their injuries every year. Many more, like Bates, are left to face long recoveries, steep medical debt, and enduring trauma.

How insurance affects the care of gunshot wound victims has remained shrouded in mystery — until now, due to a new analysis by The Trace and KFF Health News of data that Florida hospitals compile to collect payments from insurance companies and file with the state.

When uninsured patients arrive at hospitals in Florida with gunshot wounds, on average they spend significantly fewer days in the hospital — in some cases half the time — than those with health insurance, according to the data analysis.

Among the most severely injured patients, the uninsured stayed three fewer days in the hospital on average than their counterparts with insurance.

The data was obtained exclusively for this reporting on gun violence hospitalizations in the state, aided by Florida state law.

The newsrooms spent more than a year analyzing the records, which did not identify patients. The data contained patients’ insurance status, their residential ZIP code, their race, and other demographic info. Reporters reviewed academic studies and government documents and interviewed health policy experts, doctors, activists, and victims of gun violence or their relatives.

The results are a first-of-its-kind look at what happens to the insured and the uninsured who are shot and admitted to the hospital for treatment.

Across Florida, the analysis of hospital billing data from 2018 to 2024 obtained from the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration shows:

Uninsured patients make up a quarter of the more than 20,000 gunshot wound hospitalizations identified, making them the largest single group treated for firearm injuries.
Uninsured gunshot victims had hospital stays of about six days on average, only three-quarters of the time spent by patients with private insurance and less than half the average stay for patients on traditional Medicaid, the public health insurance program for poor and disabled people.
The gap in hospital care persisted regardless of hospital size, location, or ownership type, including at facilities that receive taxpayer money with a mandate to treat all patients regardless of their ability to pay.
Of the gunshot wound patients, nearly half were Black, making the group highly overrepresented. About a quarter of nonwhite patients were uninsured, versus fewer than a fifth of white patients.

The inequality echoes a long history of discrimination in U.S. healthcare against Black and Latino patients, groups that suffer disproportionately from firearm violence and a lack of health insurance.

The U.S. has more gun violence deaths than other wealthy nations, and no group suffers more than Black Americans like Bates. Black people are far more likely to become victims of a firearm homicide than white people, according to the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Handguns for sale at a gun shop in Delray Beach, Florida. Florida law allows eligible residents to carry a concealed firearm and to openly carry a firearm without a state-issued license. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

Patient outreach workers say hospital personnel might perceive gunshot victims as gang members or troublemakers who deserve blame for getting shot. One study found rehab centers refuse to admit gunshot victims more often than other patients, and some medical records from hospitals were littered with racist or insensitive descriptions of patients and their behavior.

The damage can be lasting: Patients who leave the hospital too soon after a traumatic injury have a higher risk of serious complications, including infection, hemorrhage, nerve damage, and death, especially if wounds — and mental health concerns — are left untreated.

Arch Mainous, a University of Florida professor and vice chair for research in community health and family medicine, said there’s evidence that financial incentives drive care — for patients and for hospitals.

Regardless of how often the care team is told to follow quality protocols, Mainous said, “ultimately there’s a business aspect to it, whether the physician is thinking about it or not, whether the nurses think about it or not. But somebody is.”

The Florida data findings come at a time when Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis and state lawmakers have pushed to make guns cheaper and more widely available, despite a 19% increase in gun deaths in the state from 2014 to 2023, and when President Donald Trump’s administration has rolled back legislation from the Joe Biden presidency to curb gun violence and pushed millions of Americans off health insurance.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis at a Hooksett, New Hampshire, gun shop in 2023. DeSantis has pushed to make guns cheaper and more widely available, despite a 19% increase in gun deaths in Florida from 2014 to 2023. (Sophie Park/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Florida law allows eligible residents to carry a concealed firearm and to openly carry a firearm without a state-issued license. State law also prevents cities and counties from enacting stricter gun control measures.

In early June, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier asked a federal judge to strike down the state’s three-day waiting period for receiving a purchased gun, arguing it is unconstitutional. Uthmeier’s request is part of a proposed settlement of a lawsuit brought by the National Rifle Association.

KFF Health News and The Trace requested to speak with administrators at nine of Florida’s large hospital systems to ask why the disparities exist. None agreed to an interview.

Sarah Cannon, communications director at Tallahassee Memorial HealthCare, would not agree to an interview or address Bates’ account of her care for gunshot injuries.

“Clinical decisions, including acute medical intervention, readiness for discharge, and post-acute care needs, are guided by the patient’s condition and response to treatment,” she said in an email.

Cannon said the hospital offers support to patients after discharge, including from social workers who coordinate care and access to services including post-acute care placement, home healthcare, and primary care or specialty follow-up.

Bates said she had to coordinate her own care after being released from the hospital. She said nobody called to schedule a follow-up test of her leg’s muscle function, and her medical records show she did not receive one.

“If I had had insurance,” she said, “they would have definitely kept me there for at least another week to work with me on my standing and walking.”

Tallahassee Memorial Hospital, where Bates was admitted after being shot seven times in 2019. She was discharged after four days. (Miguel J. Rodríguez Carrillo/Getty Images)

‘It’s a Business’

Some of Florida’s largest hospitals showed huge differences in length of stay for gun injuries, the KFF Health News-Trace analysis showed. In Miami at Jackson Memorial, the average number of days in the hospital for uninsured patients was 6.6; for those with private insurance, it was 10.7; and for those on traditional Medicaid, it was 15.4. Jackson Memorial did not respond to requests for comment.

Tampa General Hospital reported 4.9 days for uninsured patients, 8 days for those with private insurance, and 13.6 days for Medicaid patients. “To suggest that care decisions for trauma-related patients, and in this case, gun shot victims, are influenced by insurance status is not only absurd, it’s inaccurate,” Amanda Bevis, a hospital spokesperson, said in a written statement. “At Tampa General, every patient is treated equally, based on clinical need and urgency, not insurance coverage.”

And at UF Health Jacksonville, it was 7.2 days for the uninsured, 8.5 days for the privately insured, and 13.8 days for patients on traditional Medicaid. UF Health declined to comment.

Broward Health in Fort Lauderdale reported 7.5 days for uninsured patients, 10.5 days for privately insured patients, and 12.2 days for those on traditional Medicaid. “Insurance status does not impact treatment plans for patients,” Jennifer Smith, a Broward Health spokesperson, said in an email. “Our physicians always proceed in the best interest of the patient regardless of reimbursement or what length of stay may be required.”

Memorial Regional Hospital in Hollywood reported 6.7 days for uninsured patients, 8.8 days for privately insured patients, and 9.5 days for those on traditional Medicaid. Tania Ordaz, a hospital spokesperson, said in an email that she disagreed with the findings: “Treatment decisions are based on the patient’s clinical condition and what is necessary to ensure a safe and appropriate transition of care, not on the patient’s insurance status.”

Trauma surgeons and academics said the Florida data aligns with research nationwide on where gun violence occurs and who’s most affected. Some said they fear the differences contribute to long-standing disparities in America’s healthcare system along the lines of race and class.

The Florida hospital data showed gunshot injuries are concentrated in a handful of ZIP codes marked by poverty, disinvestment, redlining, and other injustices stemming from racial discrimination.

“Why would people without insurance be discharged earlier?” Mainous said. “Because they’re in better health? I think we’ve got a lot of data that would suggest that’s not true.”

Once they leave the hospital, people with commercial insurance or traditional Medicaid are more than twice as likely to receive follow-up care from another provider — such as a rehab center or home health service — as uninsured patients.

Those patients are staying longer, in part, because hospital case managers coordinate their transfers to other facilities, which can be time-consuming and take days.

“You have to go through insurance authorization and approval,” said Rishi Rattan, a trauma surgeon formerly at Jackson Memorial in Miami who now practices in Oregon. He said patients with private insurance might have access to rehab, preventive care, and training for both the patient and their caregiver to “help them transition to a completely new phase of life.”

For patients without insurance, he said, “sometimes our hands are a little bit tied.”

“The hospital is telling us that this patient has to leave the hospital because they’re medically ready,” he said, “and so I guess we’re discharging them to their car or to their tent, and it doesn’t feel right, but I think that would probably explain some of the differences” in length of stay.

Julie Valenzuela, a trauma surgeon at Jackson Memorial, said hospital staff work to ensure that uninsured patients with long recoveries learn to care for wounds and to enlist family help at home.

Valenzuela said the county-owned hospital does not send uninsured patients home to fend for themselves. She goes into neighborhoods and follows up with patients as part of a Miami-Dade County violence intervention program, whose social workers help them access food, employment, and more to heal and feel safe.

“We know that full recovery is beyond just the hospital and even the rehab centers, even the best ones,” Valenzuela said, pointing to housing and navigating the healthcare system as factors.

Wayne Rawlins runs the Miami-Dade program, which connects victims of gun violence with social workers who visit bedside at the hospital and an intensive care unit-trained nurse who visits at home to provide wound care and other services.

Rawlins said young, Black gunshot patients without health insurance are often at a loss when they leave the hospital about how to schedule a follow-up appointment or manage their mental health.

“After they have been shot and they’re getting out of the hospital and they’re still in crisis,” he said, “their concern is more: How am I going to now pay the rent? How am I going to live? Who’s going to take care of me?”

Often, he said, his uninsured clients leave the hospital before they are ready.

“That’s the reality of it: It’s a business,” he said. “It’s like a hotel. You know, checkout time: You got to go. We got to make room for someone, for a next customer.”

How Long Is Long Enough?

Alea Bates said the hospital discharged her with crutches and one prescription: a seven-day supply of the painkiller Percocet.

A family member drove Bates home. She wore a leg brace, with bandages on her back, stomach, hand, forearm, and feet. When she tried to get out of the car, Bates said, her knee gave and she fell.

Surgeons, health policy experts, and researchers say physicians follow evidence-based best practices for treating gunshot wounds and that a shorter hospital stay does not necessarily reflect a lower-level of care.

Elinore Kaufman, an assistant professor of surgery at the University of Pennsylvania who conducts research on violence reduction, offered one explanation.

In a study published in The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, Kaufman and colleagues found that patients who were admitted while uninsured but then enrolled in Medicaid during their hospitalization — and who needed ongoing rehabilitative care after discharge — spent more time in the hospital and had higher costs.

“I have personally been in situations where I felt like I did the best I could for a patient, but they would say, ‘You’re kicking me out,’” she said. “Sometimes, what the doctor is telling you doesn’t match what you are feeling in your body.”

But Kaufman said: “I’m not going to tell you hospitals never discriminate. That would not be realistic. I would say it is more indirect.”

Kaufman said she couldn’t judge whether Bates stayed in the hospital long enough because she was not her doctor. Still, she said, Bates “didn’t get what she needed from our healthcare system.”

Unlike many states, Florida excludes most single adults without children, like Bates, from Medicaid eligibility, making it exceedingly uncommon for a Medicaid patient to have been admitted as an uninsured adult.

Gunshot survivors endure bleeding and oozing flesh wounds and pain, and they experience depression and post-traumatic stress disorder. “These experiences are common, but they are not talked about,” Kaufman said. “Mental health is part of the recovery process.”

Recovering the ability to walk or use an arm or a leg after a gunshot wound requires rehab and physical therapy that can be out of financial reach for uninsured patients, said Brian Englum, a pediatric surgeon and an associate professor at the University of Maryland who has found that uninsured patients hospitalized for traumatic injuries have shorter stays than insured patients.

Bates was shot seven times at close range — twice in the back and once each in the pelvis, stomach, left forearm, right thumb, and right foot. (Alea Bates) Bates took this photo of her left forearm after surgery. (Alea Bates)

A shorter stay, he said, “suggests that these patients are not getting the same level of care, and that’s going to put them at risk for functional deficits down the road.”

He said it is impossible to arrive at a set number of days that any patient should remain in a hospital. Factors include the severity of their injury, their age, and any other illnesses they have.

“We’re looking for that Goldilocks length of stay,” Englum said, “and unfortunately, it is not perfectly defined for any specific admission, and it’s not perfectly defined for any specific patient.”

‘Oh, Shit. He Shot Me.’

Police found Bates lying on the ground in the breezeway of an apartment building the night she was shot seven times after making a food delivery in December 2019. Crime scene photos documented blood and bullet casings from the assault. (Tallahassee Police Department)

Bates had delivered her last order for the night when she was shot. It was December 2019: As she was walking back to her car, she heard two loud bangs. Just kids playing pranks, she thought to herself. Then she turned toward the sound and saw a gun pointed at her.

“In that split second it registered in my mind, like, ‘Oh, shit. He shot me,’” Bates said. “I had some brief, like, burning, but it wasn’t registering in my brain right away what it was.”

Within seconds, Bates said, the stranger emptied the clip of his handgun into her body, even after she fell to the ground. He shot her seven times — twice in the back and once each in the pelvis, stomach, left forearm, right thumb, and right foot.

Bates screamed. She reached for her cellphone to call 911. She said residents came out of their apartments. Someone took her phone to tell the emergency dispatcher the address. Another person pressed towels on her wounds to slow the bleeding. An ambulance rushed her to Tallahassee Memorial.

Bates had descended the stairs of an apartment complex and was walking back to her car when a stranger opened fire. (Tallahassee Police Department) A bullet hole in the bedroom window of an apartment near the breezeway where Bates was shot in 2019. (Tallahassee Police Department)

Bates said she did not believe race was a factor in the care she received. But she believed that the circumstances surrounding her shooting — that it happened while she was working, and that she did not know the shooter — affected the way doctors and nurses viewed her.

Language in medical records can sometimes signal a bias in clinicians and perpetuate differences in care that patients receive, said Jonathan Jay, an associate professor at the Boston University School of Public Health who conducts research on exposure to gun violence.

Jay said bias based on patients’ race, income, or insurance status can deny some people necessary treatment once they leave the hospital.

He said his research suggests the healthcare system treats gunshot survivors and motor vehicle accident victims differently based on perceptions of “whether the victim was in no way at fault. They made assumptions when a person was violently shot.”

“The results are consistent with what we hear so much from hospital outreach workers for gunshot victims,” he said. “They say there is substantial bias. There is an assumption that they contributed to their condition with risky behavior.”

The preoperative notes in Bates’ medical records describe her as “a pleasant 39-year-old female who sustained multiple gunshot wounds to her abdomen, pelvis and extremities last night after performing Uber Eats delivery.”

Bates said it mattered to her caregivers what she was doing when she was shot.

“The nurses and doctors, they all talk about that stuff,” she said. “They were like, ‘Oh, my God, you were ambushed. That’s so scary.’

“I was working. Like, I don’t know these people. And the fact that they were teenagers, I think that that is what maybe changed the narrative,” she said. “Because I feel a lot of times people blame you for what happened.

“But when I was asked and I told them what happened and my story and how I got there,” she said, “I think just the shock in people’s eyes of like, ‘Oh, my God. So you really were, like, you know, minding your business.’”

She added: “And it also wasn’t in a sketchy part of town, if I can just say that. I was in a predominantly white complex. So I think that’s what saved me.”

Bates was uninsured when surgeons removed bullets and fragments from her body after a stranger shot her seven times. She went home from the hospital after four days with about $60,000 in bills. (Alicia Devine for KFF Health News)

‘Less Than a Human Being’

Bates had received care at the hospital before as an insured patient.

She had lost her job in the legal department of a state agency — along with her insurance — two months before she was shot.

As an uninsured patient, Bates said, “they kind of just dismiss you. It makes you feel like less than a human being.”

She said she felt ignored when she told doctors she didn’t feel safe going home after four days. She said the physical therapist working with her at the hospital had persuaded the facility to let her stay an extra day.

“We would like, as a medical community, I think as a society, to see everybody get the same care,” said Englum, the University of Maryland trauma surgeon. “Regardless of what color their skin is, what insurance status they have — we want them to get appropriate care.”

The reason for racial or ethnic differences in care is hard to tease out, Englum said. Is it that there’s mistrust of the medical system in some Black and Latino communities, leading people to avoid going to rehab because they don’t want to be there? Is it an income issue? Is it that medical providers see some patients and, due to implicit or explicit bias, think, “That’s as good as they’re going to get?”

“Getting that care is what you need to get your full functional outcome back. And if you’re not getting it,” he said, “patients are suffering that didn’t have to.”

At home, Bates said, she depended on family members to help her out of bed, drive her places, even help her feel safe out in public.

“I really didn’t know how to stand or move or walk around,” she said. “I had to figure it out.”

She still fears loud noises, which remind her of being shot. Bates said she and her dog stay indoors on July Fourth and New Year’s Eve.

“The fireworks were going off, and I was paralyzed,” Bates said of her first New Year’s Eve after being shot. “I was literally sitting there crying. My cousin actually came outside and put my noise-canceling headphones on and turned the music on so that I couldn’t hear anymore. That’s the only way that I could move from outside to inside.”

Bates didn’t have the strength to walk after being hospitalized for seven gunshot wounds. Still, after four days, the hospital told Bates it was time to go. (Alicia Devine for KFF Health News)

Bates said her follow-up care included getting her stitches removed at an orthopedic clinic that has physicians who work at the hospital and had performed the initial surgery.

During the visit, Bates said, the orthopedic clinic’s staff reminded her of the unpaid balance from her surgery, which was about $1,200 for physician services. She still owed the hospital $52,000 for treatment, according to her medical bills, and an additional $5,300 for the anesthesiologist. Bates was not working at the time.

Bates said a community outpatient clinic provided physical therapy at a reduced cost and that the victim advocate unit at the Tallahassee Police Department helped find her mental health counseling and get her financial aid from Florida’s compensation fund for crime victims.

By 2021, Bates developed a cyst on the gunshot wound to her right thumb, which required surgery. But, she said, the clinic would not perform the surgery until she paid her $1,200 balance. She said friends paid the bill so she could have the surgery.

Bates’ knee bothered her. “Even with going through physical therapy,” she said, “it was still like I couldn’t feel it.”

Bates said she now has private health insurance that pays for her mental health therapy. She pays for physical therapy out-of-pocket.

“It’s crazy that in this country somebody else can hurt you,” Bates said, and “you have to pay for what they did to you.”

“So it’s like you’re triple-paying: You’re paying every day mentally, you’re paying with the bills, and you’re paying by them saying, We know that this is not your fault, but we still have to make our money.”

KFF Health News data editor Holly K. Hacker contributed to this report.

This article was produced in partnership with The Trace, a nonprofit newsroom covering gun violence in America. Sign up for its newsletters here.

Methodology

The Trace and KFF Health News examined more than 20 million inpatient hospitalizations in Florida from 2018 to 2024, using data obtained from the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration. We identified 20,255 gunshot wound-related visits using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s injury surveillance case definition, which relies on ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes. We limited the analysis to initial encounters and excluded patients who died in the hospital or left against medical advice. We excluded cases in the top 1% for hospital length of stay (68 days or more) to prevent these outliers from disproportionately influencing results.

Our primary finding compares the average length of stay of uninsured patients with that of privately insured patients. We chose privately insured patients as the reference group because many researchers believe their care on average is long enough to be effective but not longer than medically necessary. Overall, uninsured patients had hospital stays that were about 25% shorter on average than privately insured patients’ and 50% shorter than those of patients on traditional Medicaid. In most cases we also found that, within the same hospital, uninsured patients had shorter stays than privately insured ones.

To assess whether age or injury severity explained the shorter lengths of stay for uninsured patients, we calculated injury severity scores and fit regression models for Florida’s highest-volume gunshot wound hospitals. We found that, in nearly all cases, the gap narrowed slightly but did not disappear.

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/public-health/florida-hospitals-guns-gunshot-firearm-wounds-uninsured-discharge-data-analysis/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Trouble Getting Weight Loss Drugs Covered by Insurance? Here’s What To Know

June 26, 2026

(Oona Zenda/KFF Health News)

A professional in-home caregiver lost her coverage for Zepbound. She soon realized getting it back was not straightforward.

“I was like: ‘What am I going to do? Hopefully I can just continue keeping this weight off.’”

— Deborah Finley, 50, of Lodi, California

Deborah Finley, 50, of Lodi, California, said her weight started to worry her during the early days of covid. That’s when she noticed a lot of the people who were on ventilators or dying had something in common: obesity.

“It was a scary time,” she said. As a single mom, she was afraid “that I wouldn’t be here for my daughter.”

Finley had been diagnosed with sleep apnea and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, and she was prediabetic. Her pulmonologist suggested bariatric surgery but couldn’t get Finley’s insurer to cover it.

She exercised and watched what she ate, but she wasn’t losing weight and her mental health suffered.

She remembers telling her doctor: “Look, I’m at 223 pounds. I feel like I’m hitting this wall. I don’t know what else I can do.” That’s when he suggested Zepbound, a GLP-1 drug for obesity.

Finley said she still had to put in a lot of work to get healthy. But the drug helped. Her sleep apnea improved dramatically. She lost weight.

Then her insurance plan stopped covering Zepbound for weight loss at the end of last year. That’s become common because GLP-1 drugs are expensive for health plans and the employers that pay for them.

“They started sending out notices to all the patients,” Finley said. “And they said: ‘Look, we’re pulling this medication. We’re giving you 90 days’ notice to figure out what you want to do.”

From 2025 to 2026, 12 million people were on plans that dropped coverage for Zepbound and 12 million had plans that dropped Wegovy, another GLP-1, according to research by GoodRx, a website that helps patients find discounts on prescription drugs.

If you find yourself in this situation, these tips can help.

1. Read the fine print on coverage.

While many plans don’t cover GLP-1 drugs for weight loss alone, they may make exceptions if you have other conditions.

That was Finley’s situation. She learned that her insurer would cover Zepbound if it was used to treat obstructive sleep apnea, or MASH, a fatty liver disease. GLP-1s are also covered for people with Type 2 diabetes.

You can work with your doctors to screen for qualifying conditions, said Caleb Alexander, a professor of epidemiology and medicine at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Undiagnosed diabetes, he said, is “the most likely scenario that would allow for someone to go from not being qualified to being qualified.”

Since Finley had sleep apnea and testing showing that the drug helped, she learned it could still be covered with a prior authorization — that’s when you have to get approval from your health insurance before it will cover a medical cost.

Finley said her physician told her a prior authorization was on file, but when she tried to refill her prescription, the pharmacist told her Zepbound was denied.

2. File an appeal — and get some help from your doctor.

Don’t give up if your medication is denied, said Catherine Varney, the obesity medicine director for UVA Health, the health system affiliated with the University of Virginia in Charlottesville. Sometimes your insurer will relent on appeal, if you make a good case.

Finley made several frustrating phone calls and eventually went digging through her online medical records.

“I had to do my own investigative work,” she said.

Those records showed that Zepbound was indeed denied. Her doctor had applied for prior authorization, but it did not go through, because her insurer said there was not sufficient data to back up the request. Somehow, her health information, including the sleep apnea testing results, hadn’t made it to the right people.

Finley eventually got her hands on the 17-page report and got a little help from ChatGPT to write an appeal, showing that the drug was necessary for her based on her diagnosis and covered under her policy.

This kind of appeal can be a lot of work. Luckily, many doctors’ offices will help and know how the system works, Alexander said.

“I don’t think that patients should be expected to navigate these waters on their own,” he said.

3. Carefully document your care.

Sometimes you may have to file multiple appeals if the first one is unsuccessful, said Tracy Zvenyach, the vice president for advocacy and research at the nonprofit Obesity Action Coalition, which receives financial support from drugmakers including Zepbound maker Eli Lilly and Wegovy producer Novo Nordisk.

Zvenyach also recommends keeping meticulous records. Some plans require something called step therapy, meaning patients have to try and fail on other drugs or treatments before getting covered for the one their doctor wants them to take.

“Keep a history of other meds you’ve taken so you can provide documentation for step therapy requirements,” she said. “Document dates of participation in any nutrition and physical activity program or membership.”

Finley filed an appeal on Feb. 4, and although she expected a hearing within 90 days, it hadn’t been scheduled yet as of mid-June.

She said it’s been stressful because she hasn’t been able to get new injections of Zepbound since mid-January.

4. Look for discounts if you pay out-of-pocket.

The drugmakers that make Zepbound and Wegovy sell the medicines at a discount to people who pay out-of-pocket instead of using insurance. (Try discount sites like TrumpRx or GoodRx.)

Even with discounts, the drugs are not affordable for everyone. If you have a health savings account or a flexible spending account, you can use it to pay for them with pretax dollars.

5. If you’re considering compounded GLP-1s online, watch for red flags.

You might have seen ads for affordable off-brand obesity drugs prescribed by online providers. These are compounded products — that is, made by specialized pharmacists instead of a drug company.

Compounded medicines are prepared using the same active ingredient as the brand-name drugs. But they aren’t approved by the Food and Drug Administration.

Look out for quality and safety issue s. Check the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy’s online pharmacy verification tool. Make sure the pharmacy preparing your drug is licensed in your state. If it’s not, it may not be undergoing inspections or complying with other laws.

After stretching out her remaining supply of Zepbound as long as she could, Finley is taking a compounded version of the drug while she continues the insurance appeals process.

6. Be persistent. And remember to breathe.

Being told no by an insurer is maddening. But Alexander said you often have other options.

“If any appeal that we make is unsuccessful, there are other treatments that we can use,” he said — for example drugs like Contrave, or a cheaper combination of generic naltrexone and bupropion.

UVA Health’s Varney, who has consulted for Eli Lilly, said not to give up on trying to get GLP-1s covered. “Take a breath, but go right back to it,” she said, adding that GLP-1s are superior to the older drugs on the market.

Alexander said he thinks obesity drugs will eventually become affordable — cheap even. Statins, which are used to treat high cholesterol, were once expensive and hard to get covered. Now, Alexander notes, they’re generic and often cost just a few bucks.

“I know it’s hard to imagine,” he said. “But there will come a day when we no longer see these access barriers for GLP-1s.”

Healthcare Helpline helps you navigate the health system hurdles between you and good care. Send us your tricky question and we may tap a policy sleuth to puzzle it out. Share your story. The crowdsourced project is a joint production of NPR and KFF Health News.

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/health-industry/health-care-helpline-glp-1-zepbound-weight-loss-insurance-coverage/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Efforts To End School Vaccine Mandates Hit a Wall in Florida

June 26, 2026

Every state, along with Washington, D.C., requires children to obtain certain vaccinations before they can attend school or childcare. These mandates date back decades, and many public health experts consider them a foundational defense against infectious disease.

Since the summer of 2025, Florida leaders have aimed to make the state the first to drop some of those vaccine mandates. The anti-vaccine rhetoric has often been positioned as a push for “medical freedom.” Related efforts to revise laws and regulations rumbled along at the state health department and in the legislature for months.

But by the end of April, the fight seemed to have stalled out.

In the opening minutes of a special session on April 28, the Republican speaker of the Florida House, Daniel Perez, refused to bring the vaccine issue to the floor.

“There is some concern here, on my behalf, about children being in school without measles, mumps, polio, and chickenpox vaccines that have been working for decades,” Perez told reporters afterward.

For now, at least, the push to end childhood vaccine mandates has failed in Florida, and that outcome could offer insights into such efforts’ chances in other states. An Associated Press analysis found that at least 350 anti-vaccine bills were introduced in state legislatures last year. Many focused on relaxing requirements for vaccines in schools.

Ladapo: Mandates Are Bodily ‘Slavery’

Last September, Gov. Ron DeSantis and Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo set the stage for the anti-vaccine campaign. They held a news conference at a private Christian school east of Tampa, where Ladapo said the state would work to end all vaccine mandates in Florida law.

“Every last one of them is wrong and drips with disdain and slavery,” he said.

“Who am I, as a government or anyone else,” Ladapo said, “or who am I as a man standing here now, to tell you what you should put in your body?”

Political analysts say that the prospects for efforts to cut back on vaccine mandates are closely tied to the political prospects of Republicans trying to maintain their majorities at the state and federal levels. DeSantis is term-limited, and his governorship ends in January. And the congressional midterms are in November.

“For Republicans, they’re a little bit leery,” said Aubrey Jewett, an associate professor of political science at the University of Central Florida. “They know we’re in an election cycle. They know political history. And it’s pretty clear that the president’s party tends to lose seats in the midterm election.”

Although hundreds of anti-vaccine bills have been introduced in state legislatures, the noisy rhetoric and splashy headlines don’t guarantee passage, said Kelly Whitener, an associate professor of health policy at Georgetown University.

In many states, including Florida, “there’s a disconnect between what we hear a lot from a potentially vocal minority about how they feel about vaccines compared to where the majority of people really are,” Whitener said.

“For most people,” she said, ”they still support the idea of near-universal vaccination, still understand the importance of vaccinating children to protect people who can’t be vaccinated.”

A national poll last year by KFF and The Washington Post showed 81% of parents supported school vaccine requirements.

“They support these vaccines,” said Jen Kates, a senior vice president at KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes KFF Health News. “They support protecting their kids through these mandates. And that includes Florida parents.”

Unwinding Mandates by Law, and by Regulation

To undo some of the vaccine mandates, Florida’s legislature would have to pass new bills. Others could be changed by a rulemaking process at the state Department of Health, including for chickenpox, hepatitis B, pneumococcal conjugate, and Haemophilus influenzae type B.

At a Dec. 12 forum in Panama City hosted by the health department, public comment went on for hours, with those who wanted to keep the mandates slightly outnumbering those who opposed them.

“This is about freedom,” said one speaker, Larry Downs Jr. “The default setting should be freedom, not these corporate chemical vaccine injections.”

Florida schoolteacher Marion Fesmire has worked overseas. She defended vaccine requirements in part because of some of the suffering she has seen.

“I’ve seen kids with polio. I’ve seen blind kids. I’ve seen kids die before they’re even 10 years old. It’s heartbreaking,” Fesmire said.

The health department hasn’t held any more public forums on vaccines since then.

Nor has the department filed the paperwork needed to change the vaccination rules, including a statement of regulatory costs. In that, the department must estimate whether changing the rules could affect personal income, the number of visitors to the state, or the size of the Florida workforce.

In an April 13 email, the health department said that it is “currently in the rulemaking process” and that any updates would be posted in the Florida Administrative Registrar.

Pushing for a New Exemption

During the winter legislative session, a vaccine-related bill, SB 1756, didn’t include removing mandates but did feature a new kind of exemption. In addition to a religious or medical exemption, a parent could exempt a child for reasons of personal conscience. This type of exemption is available in 17 states.

Democrats, the minority in the Florida Legislature, came out against it.

“It’s currently very easy to opt out for religious reasons from school immunizations,” state Sen. Carlos Guillermo Smith (D) said while speaking from the chamber floor. “Why is this bill necessary? Given that context, is your bill just about giving people more options to ignore school immunizations, or is it intended to solve a public health problem?”

A few Republicans also opposed the bill. State Sen. Gayle Harrell (R) brought up the measles outbreak. Florida is the state with the fourth-highest number of measles cases this year, with 155 as of June 6.

“I truly believe that this is a dangerous bill, and I cannot vote for it,” Harrell said.

The bill also included a permanent ban on mandates for any mRNA-based vaccines and would have allowed nonprescription sales of ivermectin. That anti-parasite medication rose to popularity as an alternative treatment for covid, although the Food and Drug Administration determined that the available clinical trial data does not demonstrate effectiveness against covid in humans.

Florida’s previous surgeon general, Scott Rivkees, condemned the ivermectin proposal, calling it “the equivalent of walking into a pharmacy and requesting amoxicillin for a self-diagnosed infection.”

In the end, the “medical freedom” measure died when the House version of the bill failed to make it to committee.

Yet, people on both sides say the Florida fight is far from over, especially given the lingering mistrust of the medical establishment after the covid pandemic.

“There are many more people now who have skepticism about the wisdom of public health policy and law,” said Barbara Loe Fisher, an anti-vaccine activist who has been working to end mandates since the early 1980s.

“I don’t think that that’s going to disappear,” she said. “I think it’s going to grow.”

This article is from a partnership that includes WUSF, NPR, and KFF Health News.

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/health-industry/ending-vaccine-mandates-schools-florida-joseph-ladapo-measles/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Medicare Advantage Company Pays $342M to Government in Midst of Billing Probe

June 26, 2026

A major Medicare Advantage company has paid the government more than $342 million to help settle allegations that it overcharged the federal healthcare program for years.

Elevance Health, which covers about 2 million people on Medicare, sent the money to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services via wire transfer on May 27, court records show. Government lawyers disclosed the payment in a June 22 court filing.

In an email to CMS staff, Elevance described the money as a “remittance of the total overpayment amount” estimated by government audits, court records show. Company spokesperson Leslie Porras told KFF Health News in a statement that Elevance Health “continues to engage in constructive dialogue” with CMS. “We remain optimistic that a resolution can be reached and value our longstanding relationship with CMS,” she said.

The payment was made in response to a CMS enforcement action in February, in which the agency threatened to halt enrollments in Elevance Medicare Advantage plans unless the company corrected what CMS called “substantial and persistent noncompliance” with federal regulations that require health plans to submit accurate billing data and return any overpayments when they are discovered.

It appears to be the first time CMS has successfully pressured a Medicare Advantage health plan to pay back tens of millions of dollars in alleged overpayments — even though agency officials have known for years that many health plans have overbilled the program, according to audits by government staff.

“I’ve never heard of something like this before,” said David Lipschutz, an attorney with the Center for Medicare Advocacy, a nonprofit public interest law firm. “Usually plans seem to tie everything up and try to delay any repayment of anything for years.”

David Meyers, an associate professor at the Brown University School of Public Health, called the payment “substantial” and “a step in the right direction” toward holding the industry accountable.

“It’s a big win for CMS to get that much,” he said.

More than 35 million Americans, about 55% of people on Medicare, have signed up for the private Advantage health insurance plans, which offer extra benefits, such as hearing aids and dental coverage, that traditional Medicare doesn’t cover.

Joining the plans may also prove cheaper for patients than purchasing a supplemental insurance policy that covers gaps in traditional Medicare.

Whether Medicare Advantage is a good deal for taxpayers is hotly debated, however.

The health plans have been the target of dozens of whistleblower lawsuits and government investigations alleging they often exaggerate how sick patients are to improperly boost their payments, claims the industry disputes. Medicare pays health plans higher rates for sicker patients but requires that the plans bill only for conditions that are properly documented in a patient’s medical records.

Researchers also have concluded that Medicare overpays the health plans by billions of dollars every year because of medical coding flaws that generate higher bills than are justified.

The whistleblower suits, mostly filed by former employees of healthcare companies, have long served as the primary tool for clawing back alleged overpayments. In January, Kaiser Permanente agreed to pay $556 million to settle Justice Department allegations that it billed the government for medical conditions patients didn’t have, the largest such penalty to date. In a statement posted on its website, the company said it settled the case “to avoid the delay, uncertainty, and cost of prolonged litigation.”

By contrast, CMS’ efforts to prevent Medicare Advantage plans from overcharging have largely foundered.

In 2014, for instance, CMS backed off a proposed regulation that would have cracked down on overbilling amid an “uproar” of opposition from the industry. And even when CMS audits uncovered tens of millions of dollars in overpayments, agency officials collected only a tiny fraction of that amount.

The CMS threat to bar Elevance from enrolling new members may open a new approach.

“The payment Elevance is making here is not trivial,” said Matthew Fiedler, a health policy researcher at the Brookings Institution.

But he noted that it represents a very small fraction of the total the company receives from Medicare. He said that making a big dent in the overpayment problem would require CMS to collect “many similar payments” — from “every” Medicare Advantage insurer.

“I don’t think there’s a clear reason to believe that at this stage,” Fiedler said.

Richard Kronick, a former federal health policy official and a professor at the University of California-San Diego, agreed that the payment reflects a small portion of the company’s revenue. But he said it was “still a sizable check to write.”

Kronick said the action reflects “perhaps a bit of muscle flexing” by CMS to tighten up enforcement.

CMS did not immediately respond to a request for comment. It’s not clear from court records whether the payment will end the CMS threat to ban Elevance from signing up new members.

If so, it might prove to be a relative bargain. In an April filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the company noted that its “current best estimate” of the “potential exposure” in the case was approximately $935 million.

Elevance has been at odds with the federal government over its billing practices since 2020, when the Justice Department filed a False Claims Act lawsuit against the company, then known as Anthem. That case is pending.

Court filings in that case disclosed the company’s payment to CMS. In an email made part of the court file, a company official confirmed it had sent the wire transfer in the amount of $342,209,085.30 on May 27 and said the payment was related to the threatened enrollment ban. The company also stated that it was challenging the CMS enforcement action and called it “unprecedented.”

In defending against the Justice Department suit, Elevance has denied wrongdoing and argued that CMS knew about its billing practices for years and took no action.

Meyers, the Brown University professor, said CMS’ success in collecting payment from Elevance may encourage more enforcement.

“It remains to be seen whether this is a sea change,” he said.

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/medicare/medicare-advantage-cms-elevance-crackdown-overcharging-payment/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Trump Officials Still Delaying Funds

June 25, 2026

For the second year in a row, Trump administration officials are delaying the distribution of hundreds of millions of dollars in health-related grant funding as political appointees seek to ensure the funding adheres to the administration’s priorities — despite promises to Congress that the money would be spent as directed.

Meanwhile, four years after the Supreme Court overturned the federal right to abortion, nearly half the states have banned or substantially restricted the procedure. But while most voters say they support abortion rights — and majorities in several states have approved ballot measures to enshrine them — that sentiment has not translated into major gains for Democrats running for office.

This week’s panelists are Julie Rovner of KFF Health News, Maya Goldman of Axios, Joanne Kenen of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Politico Magazine, and Rachana Pradhan of KFF Health News.

Panelists Maya Goldman Axios @mayagoldman_ @maya-goldman.bsky.social Read Maya's stories. Joanne Kenen Johns Hopkins University and Politico @JoanneKenen @joannekenen.bsky.social Read Joanne's bio. Rachana Pradhan KFF Health News @rachanadpradhan Read Rachana's stories.

Among the takeaways from this week’s episode:

Federal funding for health grants and international humanitarian aid is not reaching its recipients, demonstrating that congressionally authorized and appropriated funding is still encountering roadblocks under the Trump administration. At least some of the money is being tied up in review, with political appointees requiring personal signoff on any and all disbursements. While many lawmakers have made their frustrations known, Congress has few levers to ensure the money goes where lawmakers say it should.
This week marked the fourth anniversary of the Supreme Court case that overturned the constitutional right to an abortion. Yet research shows there were more abortions performed in the U.S. last year than there were in the year before the court’s decision. Access to medication abortion and telehealth prescribing are credited for that increase — two methods that activists who oppose abortion have targeted in their continuing efforts to eliminate it.
In vaccine policy news, a study showing the effectiveness of the covid vaccine that was spiked by Trump administration officials was recently published in a peer-reviewed medical journal. And Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reinstated a flu vaccine mandate for the military after a significant flu outbreak at Lackland Air Force Base in Texas.
Amid concerns over healthcare affordability, two states are taking measures to address prices. A new Indiana law imposes price controls on hospitals, and Colorado has received federal approval to import drugs from Canada — though Canadian distributors have shown no interest in working with American states.

Plus, for “extra credit” the panelists suggest health policy stories they read this week that they think you should read, too:

Julie Rovner: The Washington Post’s “Tennessee To Restrict Medical Aid for Critically Ill Undocumented Children,” by Silvia Foster-Frau.

Maya Goldman: Stat’s “Trump Administration Targets Disability Integration Mandate in DOJ Memo,” by O. Rose Broderick.

Rachana Pradhan: KFF Health News’ “Arrests of Immigrant Parents Create Mental Health Crisis for Children,” by Claudia Boyd-Barrett.

Joanne Kenen: The Washington Post’s “Why Trump’s Algae Problem Is Much Bigger Than the Reflecting Pool,” by Sarah Kaplan.

Also mentioned in this week’s podcast:

NOTUS’ “The Trump Administration Is Holding Up Billions in HHS Funding,” by Eric Katz and Paige Winfield Cunningham.
Stat’s “Federal Grant Delays Could Jeopardize Essential Disability Services, Research,” by Lauren Chan and O. Rose Broderick.
ProPublica’s “‘A Huge Grab of Power’: Trump Is Defying Congress on Foreign Aid,” by Anna Maria Barry-Jester.
KFF Health News’ “A Ban Won’t Stop Abortion Pill Access, Telehealth Providers Say,” by Kate Wells.
Politico’s “Republicans Don’t Want To Talk About Abortion. In These States, They May Have To,” by Alice Miranda Ollstein.
KFF Health News’ “Indiana Takes On Powerful Hospitals by Capping Prices They Charge Employers,” by Phil Galewitz and Samantha Liss.
Stat’s “Eli Lilly Gave Extraordinary Obesity Drug Access to a 79-Year-Old Patient. Who Was It?” by Lizzy Lawrence.

Credits Francis Ying Audio producer Emmarie Huetteman Editor

Click here to find all our podcasts.

And subscribe to “What the Health? From KFF Health News” on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, the NPR app, YouTube, Pocket Casts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/podcast/what-the-health-452-trump-grant-delays-abortion-dobbs-june-25-2026/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Opioid Settlement Money Pays for Services To Battle Addiction in Rural Kentucky

June 25, 2026

WHITESBURG, Ky. — Drugs and the consequences of addiction are woven into the fabric of Jamie Madden’s life.

Her earliest memory is of standing on the passenger seat of her dad’s car as a toddler, wearing a peach-colored blouse, while he drove from their Kentucky home to Florida to pick up drugs. On a stop for a burger, she met Ronald McDonald.

“I grew up with the impression that that’s how you paid your bills,” Madden said. “That’s how your kids got things.”

By 16, she was addicted to pain pills. By 30, methamphetamine. She lost custody of two children and gave up two more for adoption at birth. She served time in the county jail and state prison.

Pregnant again at 40, Madden resolved to stop using. It was then that she learned of The Hub in Whitesburg, a town of 1,575 residents, her hometown.

Over the past two years, the state of Kentucky has sent hundreds of thousands of opioid settlement dollars to the rural eastern region of the state to help minimize the ramifications of drug misuse. The Hub, a program that oversees a network of community centers offering a range of services from recovery peer support to canned food to sterile syringes, is part of that effort.

In April, Kentucky Attorney General Russell Coleman announced $320,000 would be awarded to the Kentucky River District Health Department’s Hub initiative. There are now Hubs in four rural eastern Kentucky counties — Knott, Lee, Letcher, and Owsley, all of which are among the nation’s most impoverished — addressing substance use disorders, housing, hunger, employment, and other challenges. The program also operates The Hub on Wheels, which provides services throughout the district.

In 2025, The Hub received $545,000 from the same source, facilitating expansion from two to five counties. (The fifth Hub will be in Perry County.) The new $320,000 is a two-year grant to develop a program to help women who’ve been incarcerated reintegrate into society.

Both grants are from Kentucky’s approximately $1 billion share of the $57.8 billion for state and local governments from the settlement reached with pharmaceutical companies to resolve litigation for their role in fueling the opioid overdose crisis.

Madden believes investment in harm reduction services is money well spent. She’s witnessed them work in her own life. She’s found solid footing for recovery at The Hub.

The Hub is founded on the principles of harm reduction. Support includes housing, food, healthcare, and overdose prevention tools. (Taylor Sisk for KFF Health News)

But the Trump administration is cutting federal funding for such efforts, disputing their benefits. A July 24 executive order told programs across the country that they could no longer expect federal funding. The order stipulated that discretionary grants issued by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration should not be spent on “so-called ‘harm reduction’” efforts, claiming they “only facilitate illegal drug use and its attendant harm.”

Advocates for these services in this rural region, which cast its ballots for President Donald Trump in all three elections, beg to differ.

Meeting Folks Where They Live

Whitesburg — home to a lively cultural scene, including Appalshop, a media, arts, and education center — is a town residents are fiercely proud to call home. The Hub is housed in a storefront on Main Street, neighboring City Hall, Hazard Coffee Company, Cut-Away Barber & Beauty Shop, and the fire station. Like the other Hubs, it provides a range of services targeted to the needs of the community.

The inaugural Hub, launched in 2022 in Beattyville, the Lee County seat, two hours northwest of Whitesburg, offers breakfast and lunch, a food pantry, a clothing closet, a laundry room, and a computer lab. Also: naloxone, a medication that can quickly reverse an opioid overdose; drug test strips; hepatitis C treatment; sterile syringes; and wound care.

The program’s motto is “Meeting you where you are but not leaving you there!” It’s founded on the principles of harm reduction. Harm reduction services are designed to minimize the effects of drug use, keep people safe, and treat them with respect, until they might be ready to enter recovery. The support includes housing, food, healthcare, and overdose prevention tools.

JoAnn Fraley is Kentucky River’s harm reduction program coordinator and its Hub initiative director. “In order for anybody to sustain recovery, they have to have financial stability, they have to have transportation, and they have to have a home,” she said. “We try to fill those gaps.”

While critics suggest that exchanging clean syringes for used ones abets drug use, research published in the Journal of Substance Use and Addiction Treatment indicates that people who participate in syringe services programs are more likely than those who don’t to reduce their injection-drug use or stop using drugs altogether, and that they are more likely to enter and remain in treatment. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, syringe services programs also reduce the spread of HIV and hepatitis C by about half.

In 2025, Kentucky River’s Hub model was named one of 19 public health best practices award winners by the National Association of County and City Health Officials.

“What jazzes me about it is it’s a community approach to harm reduction,” said Lauren Carr, who advises the Kentucky Association of Counties on how best to utilize opioid settlement funds. “Whether that’s feeding a hungry stomach, or putting clothes on somebody’s back, or giving them clean [syringes], you’re meeting that person’s needs.”

“It can be that lifeline,” Carr said.

Paying Back for Good

Becky Todd, who leads the Beattyville Hub’s team, is a community health worker and peer support specialist. In April 2024, she was released from jail, having served multiple sentences on drug-related charges. She walked 3 miles from jail to The Hub with nowhere else to go. She’s working toward her bachelor’s degree in social work at Eastern Kentucky University.

“I could not have done it without this place,” Todd said. “It’s my saving grace.”

Amber McDaniel recalls the first time she entered The Hub, after more than a decade of addiction, having lost her home, her kids, and her family’s support. “I didn’t know where to turn, didn’t know what to do,” she said. “I mean, I was about to lose my mind.” She’s now a Hub staff member through AmeriCorps.

Hannah Stamper was placed in foster care and began using meth at 14. She was drawn to dealing drugs because “I loved for people to need me.” She’s now on staff as a member of Recovery Corps, a program that trains AmeriCorps members to work in the recovery field. “People today need me in a good way, and I love that.”

Hannah Stamper is a staff member of The Hub in Beattyville, Kentucky, through Recovery Corps, a program that trains AmeriCorps members to work in the recovery field. (Taylor Sisk for KFF Health News)

Fraley has witnessed a transition in Lee County. A half-dozen years ago, conversations in public meetings about addiction and homelessness were strained “because nobody wanted to talk about it or acknowledge it.”

The community sees The Hub’s impact, she said, “and now they’re, like, ‘Whoa. We love you.’”

Scott Lockard, the district’s public health director, said a combination of data and anecdotal observations substantiates the initiative’s success, including an increase in the number of people entering treatment and a decline in reported communicable diseases.

“I’ve been in public health for 36 years, and it’s one of the most effective interventions I’ve seen,” Lockard said.

The Kentucky River team worked to educate the community about the potential outcomes of the Hub model, and Fraley said there was little resistance, just concern that the money be well spent. She said the planning has always included people who have lived with addiction.

“Their voice needs to be at every table,” she said.

Jannie Gatlin, who’s in recovery, comes to The Hub in Whitesburg, Kentucky, almost every day with her son, Hunter. (Taylor Sisk for KFF Health News)

Lockard agrees. To ensure the community is investing this money wisely, he said, “we’ll talk to those people who are experiencing the problem, find out what they think would help them best, and then look for those evidence-based interventions.”

Jannie Gatlin and Mandy Parker, who both are in recovery, attended a recent crafting class at the Whitesburg Hub. Gatlin, who started taking fentanyl in Colorado after her first son died at 2 months old of a digestive disorder, comes almost every day with her toddler, Hunter.

Parker was prescribed opioids for pain from a kidney disorder. When those pills became less available, she turned to street drugs. “That’s just the nature of the beast,” she said.

She believes The Hub is helping break the stigma of substance use disorder in her community. When people see “real change happening,” she said, there’s a ripple effect. “It makes a difference.”

She appreciates that The Hub is here on Main Street — right, she firmly believes, where it should be.

This <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org/health-industry/opioid-settlement-money-harm-reduction-services-rural-kentucky/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://kffhealthnews.org">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="https://kffhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Seeking to Grow Market Share?

Watch: ‘Robust’ Primary Care, Transparency Top Employers’ Reform Wish List

Insurers Hedge on Trump-Backed Pledge To Improve Denials Process

States Start Their Medicaid Cuts

Readers Share Personal Insights on Deadly Denials and Pregnancy Centers

Facing Funding Losses, States Call Out Big Businesses With Employees on Medicaid

Knee Pain? Ragged Cartilage? Research Suggests Surgery’s Not the Best Answer

My Search for a Psychiatric Bed in an Overburdened Health System

Affordable Care Act Insurers Want More Premium Increases as Enrollment Sags

Copay Assistance Is Meant To Defray Patient Drug Costs. Some Insurers Keep It Instead.

Thousands of Medicare Beneficiaries Thought Their Drug Plan Was Free. Then They Lost It.

In California Governor’s Race, Voters Face Stark Choice on Immigrant Healthcare

A Mom Said Infant Formula Killed Her Baby. The Manufacturer Didn’t Tell the FDA.

Supreme Court Makes Health Policy

He Dreamed of Becoming a Physician Assistant. New Loan Rules May Thwart Him.

Florida Hospitals Act Fast To Discharge Gun Victims — Especially if They’re Not Insured

Trouble Getting Weight Loss Drugs Covered by Insurance? Here’s What To Know

Efforts To End School Vaccine Mandates Hit a Wall in Florida

Medicare Advantage Company Pays $342M to Government in Midst of Billing Probe

Trump Officials Still Delaying Funds

Opioid Settlement Money Pays for Services To Battle Addiction in Rural Kentucky

Pages