‘Very chaotic': Local health officials in ‘turmoil' after $117M in funding cuts
PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) — Local public health authorities are still figuring out the next steps in the wake of federal health cuts from the Department of Health and Human Services. in COVID-era grants and funding are set to go away. But these are grants that departments were expecting to have for at least another year, and they were practically given no notice. The Oregon Health Authority has already warned the 988 Crisis Line and some immunization grants could be impacted. Sarah Lochner, the executive director of the Coalition of Local Health Officials said the lack of notice and details have been extra challenging.
'It has thrown everyone into turmoil just trying to figure out one, scrambling for the funds, scrambling to understand the impacts, and then the next step is, 'What do we do now?'' she said. 'So, it's been very chaotic and a roller coaster of emotions for sure.' Lochner said it is high stakes and feels like they have been thrown into a tornado. And counties and public health departments are in a punch because they are losing money they were still supposed to have.
Wyden, Merkley urge Trump to rescind 'anti-voter' election executive order
'They either have to scramble to find the money in a cut budget cycle, to keep these positions whole and to keep doing the work, or they have to discontinue the work and potentially lay people off or cut people's hours,' she said. Lochner said a lot of the work public health departments do is invisible to the average person. But the cuts can have an impact on people's lives one way or another. 'What you are going to see is your kids perhaps getting more cases of the flu or, you know, coming home from school sick more often,' she said. And it's really not what they won't see, it's the impacts that they will feel and they won't really necessarily understand that they are.' As for what is next, public health departments do not even have all the answers yet. 'We're still sorting through the impacts of these cuts, to be honest, because the directives that came down from the federal government were very confusing and really unclear,' Lochner said. 'So every county is sort of sorting through what this means for them. And I am collecting that information.' Lochner said CLHO is hoping the Oregon legislature will be even more compelled to invest in public health. She also encourages anyone who is concerned about what the cuts could mean for them to reach out to their state lawmakers and ask for increased public health funding.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Vox
29 minutes ago
- Vox
RFK Jr.‘s mass firing of the government's vaccine experts, explained
covers health for Vox, guiding readers through the emerging opportunities and challenges in improving our health. He has reported on health policy for more than 10 years, writing for Governing magazine, Talking Points Memo, and STAT before joining Vox in 2017. For the past 60 years, a committee of independent experts has advised the federal government on vaccine policy, providing guidance on which shots people should get and when. Government public health officials have almost always followed the panel's recommendations, all but making it the final word on public health policy in the US for most of its existence. And over those decades, the United States has made tremendous health gains over that time through mass vaccination campaigns. But on Monday, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fired every sitting member of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), a move that stunned doctors and scientists across the country. And it means that the CDC's days as the clear and unchallenged authority on US vaccine policy appear numbered. 'Up until today, ACIP recommendations were the gold standard for what insurers should pay for, what providers should recommend, and what the public should look to,' Noel Brewer, a health behavior professor at the University of North Carolina, who was a member of the panel until this week, told the Associated Press. 'It's unclear what the future holds.' Today, Explained Understand the world with a daily explainer plus the most compelling stories of the day, compiled by news editor Sean Collins. Email (required) Sign Up By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. New committee members will be announced at some point, but as of Tuesday morning, even top US senators did not know who the replacements would be. The panel is supposed to hold one of its periodic public meetings in late June to discuss the Covid-19 vaccine, as well as shots for RSV and HPV, among others. This is a watershed moment in US public health, one that seems sure to sow confusion among patients and health care providers. The deepening divide between Kennedy's Make American Healthy Again (MAHA) movement and mainstream medicine could make it harder for people who want vaccines to get them, while encouraging more doubt about the value and safety of shots among the general public. Here's what you need to know. Why is Kennedy doing this? The vaccine advisory committee was first convened by the surgeon general in 1964, but it is not enshrined in federal law. That means that Kennedy — as the top official at the US Department of Health and Human Services, which contains the CDC — can change its membership or dissolve the panel entirely if he so desires. Kennedy framed his decision to clear out the members as necessary to restore public trust in the government's vaccine recommendations. In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, Kennedy asserted the committee 'has been plagued with persistent conflicts of interest and has become little more than a rubber stamp for any vaccine.' As health secretary, he has made overhauling vaccine policy a centerpiece of his agenda, both through his rhetoric and policy. Over the past few months, while the worst measles outbreak in 30 years has spread through the US, Kennedy has equivocated in public comments on the value of the measles vaccine, which doctors say is far and away the best tool to combat the disease. He directed an anti-vaccine researcher to scour federal data for evidence of a vaccine-autism link. His department's recent MAHA report on childhood chronic disease named vaccines as one example of how the US overmedicalizes its children and exposes them to artificial agents that could do harm to their body. Then in late May, Kennedy oversaw a revision of the federal government's Covid-19 vaccine guidance, limiting the shots to elderly people and those who are immunocompromised. He ended the recommendation that pregnant women and kids get a Covid vaccine shot, even though studies have shown they help confer immunity to infants, who are at a higher risk from the virus and cannot be vaccinated until they are 6 months old. The move plainly circumvented ACIP's accepted role in setting vaccine policy, presaging this week's mass firing. Whatever his intentions, Kennedy's gutting of the federal vaccine committee seems likely to sow even more distrust — and certainly more confusion. People are reasonably left to wonder whether they can trust forthcoming CDC guidance on vaccines, and just what vaccines they'll be able to get. How will I know which vaccines to get? In the past, ACIP would typically meet a few times a year to discuss any additions or changes to the country's vaccine schedule. Their recommendations have usually been adopted without alterations by the CDC director, and then became the standard for state and local health departments across the country. Importantly, most health plans are required to cover any shots that the committee recommends. Now there is far more uncertainty. Will doctors follow the CDC guidance, even if it changes under a new advisory panel staffed by Kennedy loyalists, or will they stick with the earlier vaccine schedule? Will health insurance plans cover the cost of a vaccine that professional medical organizations support but the CDC does not? Once-unthinkable questions could soon be something doctors and patients must deal with every day. Some doctors already believed, before the firings at ACIP, that the CDC was no longer trustworthy under Kennedy's leadership; his unilateral change to the Covid vaccine guidance in May was enough to convince them. In a media call last week, experts from the Infectious Disease Society of America urged patients and providers in the short term to consult with professional medical societies — not the CDC — on vaccine recommendations. They considered those groups, as well as guidance from European health authorities, the best substitutes we currently have for information on vaccines if the CDC's recommendations can no longer be taken at face value. 'It's been a confusing several days, confusing last two weeks, and I'm not sure that confusion is going to be abated in the near future,' John Lynch, an infectious disease doctor at the University of Washington, said on the call. 'These are evidence-based guidelines developed by experts in the field using transparent methods and published publicly,' Lynch said. Kennedy, in explaining his change to the Covid vaccine guidelines, said he wanted to encourage shared decision-making between providers and their patients. The CDC guidance would be only one consideration in the decision whether to vaccinate, rather than a firm recommendation. The doctors from the IDSA said that such conversations are already to be considered best practice among physicians — and noted Kennedy's undermining of trust in the federal vaccine policy would now make them more important. 'I would just emphasize the need to have a good source of information when this situation occurs. If indeed shared decision making is going to occur, we always do our research,' Dr. Flor Muñoz-Rivas at Baylor College of Medicine said. 'But go to the proper sources.' What are the long-term risks? There is a lot we don't know right now: Who will be named to the new panel? Will they change existing vaccine recommendations? Will they approve new ones? But the experts warned that Kennedy's rhetoric alone risks undermining people's confidence in vaccinations. 'All health care decisions are shared decision-making; this is not a special concept that's only rolled out for conversations like vaccination,' Lynch said on the IDSA call. 'As an infectious disease doctor, when I talk to a patient about treatment or diagnostics, it is a conversation. It is shared decision-making.' Kennedy has quickly disrupted decades of public health consensus. Anyone who watched the sometimes contentious ACIP meetings during the pandemic saw the members grappling with genuinely vexing questions about who should be prioritized for vaccination in a public health emergency. The pandemic featured rare examples of Biden CDC director Rochelle Walensky overruling the panel in certain cases in which the experts actually recommended against more vaccinations. (Walensky said she overrode the guidance to align the CDC with a separate recommendation from the FDA's advisory committee, and cited the narrow 9-6 vote against the recommendation.) Those scenes should have helped dispel the notion that they were acting as a rubber-stamp for any new shot Big Pharma produced. But the nation's top health official is now telling Americans that they should never have trusted the ACIP, which risks pushing more people to skip routine immunization. Shortly after the country declared measles eradicated in 2000, 94 percent of adults said childhood immunizations were extremely or very important. But that consensus has since weakened: 69 percent of Americans said the same in 2024. If changing opinion leads to declining vaccination rates, diseases that we successfully stamped out through vaccines to rebound — which is exactly what we are seeing now with measles. The US is experiencing its highest number of measles cases since the 1990s, nearing 1,200 as of this writing. One outbreak that accounts for most of those cases took off in a small Texas community where vaccination rates had fallen far below the 95-percent threshold that is considered necessary to stop the virus's spread. Other knock on effects could hurt Americans who still want to get vaccinated. Pharma companies, the target of so much of Kennedy's criticism, could decide to stop pursuing new vaccines if they believe the federal government will limit access as much as possible, shrinking the world's biggest pharmaceutical market. Vaccines are not big moneymakers for drug companies, and they have often relied on the US government's support to develop new ones. Kennedy, however, has canceled major vaccine development contracts during his first few months as health secretary, including a $700 million contract with Moderna, one of two companies that produced the mRNA Covid vaccines, to work on a universal flu shot. Kennedy has quickly disrupted decades of public health consensus. For now, the best reaction is, oddly enough, for patients and providers to take him at his word when he says people should not take medical advice from him — and make their own decisions in collaboration with their doctors.
Newsweek
29 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Nearly 700,000 Americans Lose Health Care Coverage in 2025
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Almost 700,000 Americans lost Medicaid coverage in one month at the start of this year, according to new enrollment data compiled by KFF. The significant drop in Medicaid enrollment in January from December 2024 is part of a long-term trend amid the continuation of the federal program's "unwinding" process, which began after pandemic-era protections ended. Enrollment was still higher in January than it was in February 2020. Why It Matters The data highlights the continued ripple effects of the Medicaid policy shift, with millions more likely to be affected in the months ahead—particularly low-income families, children, and older adults who rely on Medicaid for basic care access. Health care experts and advocates warn that the unwinding process is opening large gaps in the U.S. health care system, with many falling through the cracks due to administrative barriers or lack of communication, not because they no longer qualify. File photo: people block a street during a protest over proposed cuts to Medicaid funding. File photo: people block a street during a protest over proposed cuts to Medicaid funding. Rick Bowmer/AP What to Know Data collected by KFF shows that from December 2024 to January 2025, Medicaid enrollment dropped by 669,938, bringing the total number of Americans enrolled in Medicaid to around 71.2 million. While this number remains high, it reflects a steady monthly decline that began in 2023 when states resumed redeterminations, where they checked whether enrollees were still eligible for benefits. The process had been paused during the COVID-19 public health emergency alongside an expansion to the federal protection available for vulnerable Americans with limited income and resources. When those protections were lifted following the pandemic, millions faced the risk of being disenrolled—not just due to income changes, but because of paperwork errors, missed deadlines, or outdated contact information. According to KFF's data, more than 16 million people have been disenrolled from Medicaid since the unwinding began in the spring of 2023. An April 2024 survey by KFF of 1,227 U.S. adults who had Medicaid coverage in prior to April 1, 2023, found that 28 percent of former enrolees found other forms of health coverage, while 47 percent were eventually re-enrolled to Medicaid. Around a quarter of enrolees reported as remaining uninsured. States like Montana, Tennessee and Colorado have seen some of the largest decreases in enrollment, with levels in January 2025 dropping below pre-pandemic levels. What People Are Saying William Schpero, assistant professor of population health sciences at Weill Cornell Medicine, told Newsweek: "This is evidence that we are likely still seeing the effects of the end of the continuous coverage provisions in place during the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency that paused redeterminations of Medicaid eligibility. During the 'unwinding' of continuous coverage through September 2024, close to 70 percent of those who lost coverage were disenrolled for purely procedural reasons—for example, they missed a required renewal form because of a change in address. Many of these people likely remained eligible for Medicaid." He added: "It would be particularly concerning if procedural terminations continue to underlie the latest reported decreases in Medicaid enrollment. It suggests that states can be doing more to prevent avoidable losses of coverage. Research has estimated that a large portion of individuals who have lost Medicaid in recent months have become uninsured or experienced gaps in coverage. We have consistent evidence that loss of Medicaid coverage interrupts access to care — without coverage, people forgo visiting the doctor or taking their prescribed medications due to cost. Ultimately this will hurt health outcomes." Kathleen Adams, professor of health policy and management at Emory University's Rollins School of Public Health, Georgia, told Newsweek: "We are always concerned with the loss of insurance coverage, especially among the lower income and vulnerable groups traditionally served by Medicaid. If these individuals are not able to find a source of other coverage such as Employer Sponsored Insurance (ESI) or through the subsidized exchanges, they will have lower access to needed health care, face higher costs if they obtain care and could impose costs on the health care system as they are forced to seek care in ERs or other publicly subsidized sources of care." She added: "The unwinding has taken place over a year and as the report notes, Medicaid enrollment is still higher now than in the pre-pandemic period. It is also important to note the differences seen across states. Some states that had not expanded Medicaid under the ACA did so recently and many of them show the largest increases in enrollment from their pre-pandemic levels. Currently, the concerns with Medicaid enrollment are with the administration's proposed changes to Medicaid eligibility which some states are already seeking to implement." What's Next Unless policies change, experts project that millions more Americans may lose health coverage through 2025, not just due to changes in eligibility requirements, but also because of bureaucratic hurdles.
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
Vaccine board purge stokes talk of CDC alternatives
By gutting the expert panel that's advised the government on vaccine policy for more than 60 years, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. earned the condemnation of virtually every medical society, as well as former public health officials and local practitioners. What became immediately clear is that no outside group can immediately step in and fill the vacuum if the public won't trust the reconstituted Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. The big picture: The distress and lack of organization apparent in health circles on Tuesday was a sign that a new independent body that could act as a "shadow CDC" to truth-squad the Trump administration isn't close to materializing. "We are clearly working on it and we think it's very important, but I don't think anyone has an answer yet," said Michael Osterholm, director of the University of Minnesota's Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy, who's behind one ad hoc effort. "Right now, we're in such uncharted territory." The medical establishment has floated ideas such as state-appointed boards or medical specialty associations serving as clearinghouses for information on vaccine safety and efficacy for clinicians. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) during the pandemic created a state entity to review the safety of federally approved COVID-19 vaccines before distributing them to the public. But it would be difficult to replicate the professional clout of ACIP, whose recommendations can influence whether insurers cover vaccines. That would leave Kennedy's handpicked successors controlling the narrative — a prospect many researchers and physicians think will bring a radical departure from ACIP's evidence-based deliberations on safety and efficacy. Friction point: Kennedy and other Trump health officials' assertions that ACIP has been a rubber stamp for vaccines have infuriated public health officials, who say the physicians, infectious disease experts and researchers constituted a vital body of nongovernmental health leaders who took their jobs seriously. Panel members were carefully vetted for conflicts and had their professional credentials scrutinized. Discussions took place in a high-profile public forum that would be difficult, if not impossible, to replicate. "Many of us can provide a read of the science, and we can convene formally or informally to create consensus around vaccine recommendations," said Megan Ranney, dean of the Yale School of Public Health. "But I suspect that it won't be sufficient for insurers, for Medicaid, for the Vaccines for Children program, and it's unclear how pediatricians and primary care physicians and pharmacies across the country are going to be able to respond," she said. The other side: Kennedy wrote on X Tuesday night that he would announce new ACIP members in the coming days. "None of these individuals will be ideological anti-vaxxers. They will be highly credentialed physicians and scientists," Kennedy wrote. He added he would detail instances of "historical corruption at ACIP to help the public understand why this clean sweep was necessary. "Kennedy cited the panel's "stubborn unwillingness to demand adequate safety trials before recommending new vaccines for our children" as the most "outrageous example." What to watch: All eyes are on the new appointees for the board, including their scientific backgrounds, track records when it comes to defending vaccines and any potential conflicts of interest. HHS has indicated it has every intention of moving forward with ACIP's next meeting, scheduled for June 25-27. The agenda includes recommendation votes for COVID–19, HPV, influenza, meningococcal and RSV vaccines. "If nothing else, I think [the committee] may have trouble functioning because you've just lost a whole lot of institutional memory," said Adam Ratner, a member of the American Academy of Pediatrics' Committee on Infectious Diseases. "That agenda has the committee voting on real things that matter to real people, and I don't know how they're possibly going to do that in any kind of way that is based on science or evidence," he said.
