The Bulletin June 4, 2025
The rundown: Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s vow to "Make America Healthy Again" could fall short when it comes to chronic disease, experts have warned. Here's how.
Why it matters: Nearly 130 million Americans are estimated to have at least one form of chronic disease, which could be heart disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity or hypertension, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The proposed cuts to Medicaid funding and work requirements for eligibility to the benefits, which are set to come as part of the broader GOP budget bill, could leave many with chronic disease without access to vital care. As many as three in four adults enrolled in Medicaid report having one or more chronic conditions, and many are unable to work the hours needed to meet the new eligibility requirements, according to nonprofit health policy research and news organization, KFF. So, while some may be medically exempt, others will lose their health coverage, meaning their conditions could worsen without access to care.
Read more in-depth coverage:
Health Experts Call Out RFK Jr. Policy Changes: 'New Inconsistency Every Day'
TL/DR: Experts told Newsweek that, while the Trump administration's ambition to "defeat" the "epidemic" is clear, whether its policies will help or hinder chronic-disease patients remains to be seen.
What happens now? Ross Brownson, director of the Prevention Research Center at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri, told Newsweek that Medicaid cuts would "likely have a detrimental effect on chronic disease risk among the most vulnerable populations," adding Medicaid-enrolled adults have significantly higher rates of chronic disease than individuals privately insured.
Deeper reading Can Trump Tackle US 'Chronic Disease Crisis'? Experts Weigh In
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Epoch Times
3 hours ago
- Epoch Times
Why Drug Price Reform Alone Won't Heal America
President Donald Trump's revived effort to reduce prescription drug prices is a long-overdue step toward affordability. For millions of Americans, the cost of staying alive has become burdensome, and any policy that eases the burden is worth celebrating. However, as a physician, I've seen what happens when medications become too cheap, plentiful, and automatic. If we don't reform how drugs are used, we risk trading financial hardship for clinical harm. Vagaries of Lower Drug Costs In today's health care system, medication is the first answer—and often the last, especially for older adults. More than 40
Forbes
3 hours ago
- Forbes
AMA: Doctors And Patients Hurt By ‘Big Beautiful Bill'
The American Medical Association says legislation wending its way through the Republican-controlled ... More Congress would 'take us backward' as a country by cutting health benefits for poor and low-income Americans, the group's president said Friday, June 6. In this photo, the US Capitol in Washington, DC, US, on Tuesday, June 3, 2025. Photographer: Eric Lee/Bloomberg The American Medical Association says legislation wending its way through the Republican-controlled Congress would 'take us backward' as a country by cutting health benefits for poor and low-income Americans. Meeting for its annual policy-making House of Delegates this weekend in Chicago, the AMA is rallying physicians to thwart the legislation now before the U.S. Senate. Legislation known as the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' that narrowly passed the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives two weeks ago 'would reduce federal Medicaid spending by $793 billion and that the Medicaid provisions would increase the number of uninsured people by 7.8 million,' a KFF analysis shows. 'We have to turn our anger into action,' AMA President Bruce A. Scott, M.D. said in a speech to AMA delegates Friday. 'I know our patience is being tested by this new administration and Congress.' The AMA said it has launched a 'grassroots campaign targeted at the Senate' in hopes of making changes to the legislation. The AMA is the nation's largest physician group with more than 200,000 members. 'The same House bill that brings us closer to finally tying future Medicare payments to the rising costs of running a practice, also takes us backwards by limiting access to care for millions of lower-income Americans,' Scott said. 'Medicare, Medicaid, and the Affordable Care Act are literal lifelines for children and families for whom subsidized health coverage is their only real option. We must do all we can to protect this safety net and continue to educate lawmakers on how best to target waste and fraud in the system without making it tougher for vulnerable populations to access care.' Scott, an otolaryngologist from Kentucky, said the Medicare physician payment system is broken and Congress hasn't addressed – as an increasing number of states have – prior authorization, the process of health insurers reviewing hospital admissions and medications. Prior authorization delays needed treatment and puts patient health in jeopardy, doctors say. 'I'm angry because the dysfunction in health care today goes hand in hand with years of dysfunction in Congress,' Scott added. 'I'm angry because physicians are bearing the brunt of a failed Medicare payment system. And while our pay has been cut by more than 33 percent in 25 years, we see hospitals and even health insurance companies receiving annual pay increases.' Meanwhile, the AMA says cuts to physician payments are pushing more physicians away from private practice and exacerbating the nation's doctor shortage. A recent analysis by AMN Healthcare shows only two in five physicians are now in doctor-owned private practices. And Americans in most U.S. cities face waits of at least one month before they can see certain specialists. 'Congress needs to know there is no 'care' in Medicare if there are no doctors," Scott said.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Opinion: A smarter, fairer way to fund Medicaid for people like me
In 2004, I broke my neck and became a quadriplegic. I was 24 years old and completely paralyzed below my shoulders. Without Medicaid, I wouldn't have survived those early years — let alone gone on to earn a law degree. But I also wouldn't have stayed poor as long as I did. That's the problem with how Medicaid currently works for people with disabilities. To keep Medicaid, you often have to stay below poverty-level income and asset thresholds. Want to work? You risk losing your coverage. Want to save for a car? Not so fast. We need a Medicaid model that guarantees coverage for vulnerable populations and recognizes both the dignity of independence and the value of work. Here's my proposal: shift the primary responsibility for funding Medicaid to the states, while the federal government reimburses the states for Medicaid spending on: • Children in low-income families • Low-income elderly adults • People with disabilities ages 16-64 who are either progressing students (full reimbursement) or working (reimbursement up to the amount of their taxable income) The states would be required to provide Medicaid coverage for all people with disabilities regardless of income, assets, and work or student status, but both the states and federal government could require people with significant income to obtain private supplemental insurance — relieving states of some Medicaid costs. This plan does three essential things. First, it aligns financial incentives. Under current rules, the states have little reason to invest in helping disabled adults live meaningful lives, including pursuing education or working. Under this model, the more someone earns or pursues valuable education, the more their state receives in federal reimbursements. Helping disabled adults enter and remain in the workforce becomes not just morally right but also financially sound. Second, this plan unleashes human potential. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the 2024 labor force participation rate for people with disabilities ages 16-64 was a tragically low 40%, compared to 78% for those without disabilities. The unemployment rate among people with disabilities was 8%, more than double the less than 4% rate of those without disabilities. These disparities aren't simply the result of individual limitations — they reflect a system that undermines work for people with disabilities, trapping them in poverty and limiting their potential. My plan removes that disincentive. Third, this plan brings fiscal discipline to Medicaid. In 2024, total Medicaid spending was over $900 billion, with about two-thirds covered by the federal government and one-third by the states, according to the National Association of State Budget Officers. We can target those funds better. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation's 2021 data, adults with disabilities ages 18-64 account for about one-third of Medicaid spending. My proposal would incentivize states to use Medicaid to help people with disabilities to pursue education, employment and independence, while encouraging state-led innovation to deliver those services more efficiently. States are better equipped to tailor care programs. They are 'laboratories of democracy.' With clearer authority and direct financial incentives rewarding their success, states will be free to pursue innovative care models: consumer-directed services, telehealth, supported employment or customized in-home care, whatever works best for the people of their state. Critically, this approach also elevates education as a path out of dependency. If a student with disabilities is making 'substantial academic progress' — a term that could be precisely defined in federal regulation — their state would qualify for full reimbursement of their Medicaid costs. This rewards long-term investment in human potential and acknowledges the added effort it takes to pursue education while managing a serious disability. For someone like me, this is more than policy — it's personal. Medicaid made my education possible. But the rules also penalized me for every financial step forward. That's not just inefficient — it's inhumane. We can do better. We can fund Medicaid in a way that values work, education and independence — while targeting federal dollars more precisely and empowering states to find better ways of delivering care. Let's stop trapping people with disabilities in poverty and start treating them as full participants in our economy. Let's build a Medicaid system that sees us not as burdens, but as investments.
