The Senator Who Failed America on Vaccines
It's easy to forget that Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s assault on vaccines—including, most recently, his gutting of the expert committee that guides American vaccine policy—might have been avoided. Four months ago, his nomination for health secretary was in serious jeopardy. The deciding vote seemed to be in the hands of one Republican senator: Bill Cassidy of Louisiana. A physician who gained prominence by vaccinating low-income kids in his home state, Cassidy was wary of the longtime vaccine conspiracist. 'I have been struggling with your nomination,' he told Kennedy during his confirmation hearings in January.
Then Cassidy caved.
In the speech he gave on the Senate floor explaining his decision, Cassidy said that he'd vote to confirm Kennedy only because he had extracted a number of concessions from the nominee—chief among them that he would preserve, 'without changes,' the very CDC committee Kennedy overhauled this week. Since then, Cassidy has continued to give Kennedy the benefit of the doubt. On Monday, after Kennedy dismissed all 17 members of the vaccine advisory committee, Cassidy posted on X that he was working with Kennedy to prevent the open roles from being filled with 'people who know nothing about vaccines except suspicion.'
The senator has failed, undeniably and spectacularly. One new appointee, Robert Malone, has repeatedly spread misinformation (or what he prefers to call 'scientific dissent') about vaccines. Another appointee, Vicky Pebsworth, is on the board of an anti-vax nonprofit, the National Vaccine Information Center. Cassidy may keep insisting that he is doing all he can to stand up for vaccines. But he already had his big chance to do so, and he blew it. Now, with the rest of America, he's watching the nation's vaccine future take a nosedive.
So far, the senator hasn't appeared interested in any kind of mea culpa for his faith in Kennedy's promises. On Thursday, I caught Cassidy as he hurried out of a congressional hearing room. He was still reviewing the appointees, he told me and several other reporters who gathered around him. When I chased after him down the hallway to ask more questions, he told me, 'I'll be putting out statements, and I'll let those statements stand for themselves.' A member of his staff dismissed me with a curt 'Thank you, sir.' Cassidy's staff has declined repeated requests for an interview with the senator since the confirmation vote in January.
With the exception of Mitch McConnell, every GOP senator voted to confirm Kennedy. They all have to own the health secretary's actions. But Cassidy seemed to be the Republican most concerned about Kennedy's nomination, and there was a good reason to think that the doctor would vote his conscience. In 2021, Cassidy was one of seven Senate Republicans who voted to convict Donald Trump on an impeachment charge after the insurrection at the Capitol. But this time, the senator—who is up for reelection next year, facing a more MAGA-friendly challenger—ultimately fell in line.
Cassidy tried to have it both ways: elevating Kennedy to his job while also vowing to constrain him. In casting his confirmation vote, Cassidy implied that the two would be in close communication, and that Kennedy had asked for his input on hiring decisions. The two reportedly had breakfast in March to discuss the health secretary's plan to dramatically reshape the department. 'Senator Cassidy speaks regularly with secretary Kennedy and believes those conversations are much more productive when they're held in private, not through press headlines,' a spokesperson for Cassidy wrote in an email. (A spokesperson for HHS did not immediately respond to a request for comment.)
At times, it has appeared as though Cassidy's approach has had some effect on the health secretary. Amid the measles outbreak in Texas earlier this year, Kennedy baselessly questioned the safety of the MMR vaccine. In April, after two unvaccinated children died, Cassidy posted on X: 'Everyone should be vaccinated! There is no treatment for measles. No benefit to getting measles. Top health officials should say so unequivocally b/4 another child dies.' Cassidy didn't call out Kennedy by name, but the health secretary appeared to get the message. Later that day, Kennedy posted that the measles vaccine was the most effective way to stave off illness. ('Completely agree,' Cassidy responded.)
All things considered, that's a small victory. Despite Kennedy's claims that he is not an anti-vaxxer, he has enacted a plainly anti-vaccine agenda. Since being confirmed, he has pushed out the FDA's top vaccine regulator, hired a fellow vaccine skeptic to investigate the purported link between autism and shots, and questioned the safety of childhood vaccinations currently recommended by the CDC. As my colleague Katherine J. Wu wrote this week, 'Whether he will admit to it or not, he is serving the most core goal of the anti-vaccine movement—eroding access to, and trust in, immunization.'
The reality is that back channels can be only so effective. Cassidy's main power is to call Kennedy before the Senate health committee, which he chairs, and demand an explanation for Kennedy's new appointees to the CDC's vaccine-advisory committee. Cassidy might very well do that. In February, he said that Kennedy would 'come before the committee on a quarterly basis, if requested.' Kennedy did appear before Cassidy's committee last month to answer questions about his efforts to institute mass layoffs at his agency. Some Republicans (and many Democrats) pressed the secretary on those efforts, while others praised them. Cassidy, for his part, expressed concerns about Kennedy's indiscriminate cutting of research programs, but still, he was largely deferential. 'I agree with Secretary Kennedy that HHS needs reform,' Cassidy said.
Even if he had disagreed, an angry exchange between a health secretary and a Senate committee doesn't guarantee any policy changes. Lawmakers may try to act like government bureaucrats report to them, but they have limited power once a nominee is already in their job. Technically, lawmakers can impeach Cabinet members, but in American history, a sitting Cabinet member has never been impeached and subsequently removed from office. The long and arduous confirmation process is supposed to be the bulwark against potentially dangerous nominees being put in positions of power. Cassidy and most of his Republican colleagues have already decided not to stop Kennedy from overseeing the largest department in the federal government by budget. Now Kennedy is free to do whatever he wants—senators be damned.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
20 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Gov. JB Pritzker says he wasn't among Midwest officials on alleged Minnesota shooter's lists
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker said Monday his name was not among those of Midwestern officials kept on lists by the 57-year-old man charged with assassinating the Democratic leader of the Minnesota House and her husband. Pritzker, who was in Minnesota on Friday for a state Democratic Party fundraiser, made the comments about 12 hours after Minnesota law enforcement officials confirmed late Sunday the alleged shooter, Vance Boelter, had information that featured public officials in other states, including Wisconsin, Michigan and Illinois. 'There is not a hit list that has Illinois politicians on it,' said Pritzker, who told reporters he'd been in touch with the head of the FBI's Chicago office as well as Illinois State Police Director Brendan Kelly and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz. In addition to a list of about 70 names found in Boelter's vehicle before he was apprehended on Sunday night, there was 'a hodgepodge of names that were put together, but not, as I have been told, a hit list of any sort,' Pritzker said. 'As I understand, I was not on that list,' the governor said. Pritzker said there were 'Illinois folks' listed but the governor did not provide any names of who those Illinois politicians were. 'The FBI specifically said to me that these people are not targets, and they certainly, now that he has been apprehended … they're not concerned about those people being targeted in any way whatsoever,' Pritzker said. A spokesman for Illinois Senate President Don Harmon had no immediate comment on whether the Oak Park Democrat's name or those of any state Senate Democrats appeared on any such list. A spokesman for Illinois House Speaker Emanuel 'Chris' Welch said there was no indication the Hillside Democrat was among those named. But Welch spokesman Jon Maxson said he understood some House Democrats' names were found on some documents among Boelter's possessions. Maxson said there will be a more formal briefing from the Illinois State Police for any lawmakers concerned about their security. A spokeswoman for the Illinois State Police said the agency 'is communicating with individuals in Illinois whose names were on one of the lists found' among Boelter's possessions. 'The information the shooter had accumulated, potentially in paper and electronic form, was filled with inaccuracies and needs to be put into the appropriate context before being shared with the individuals being referenced, and has been in the process of being vetted overnight by ISP special agent,' Illinois State Police spokeswoman Melaney Arnold said Monday morning in an emailed response to questions. She said she had no other information to provide at that time. At a separate news conference Monday after federal charges were filed against Boelter, Joseph Thompson, the acting U.S. attorney for Minnesota, said it was 'clear from the evidence that he's been planning these attacks for quite some time.' 'There's voluminous writings, as you've seen in the reporting, that were found both in his car and his house, about his planning, lists of names and individuals,' Thompson said. 'In terms of the why, it's unclear.' In addition to being charged in the deaths of state House Democratic leader Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, Boelter allegedly also shot and injured Democratic Minnesota state Sen. John Hoffman and his wife, Yvette, in the early morning hours Saturday.
Los Angeles Times
23 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Medicaid enrollees fear losing health coverage if Congress enacts work requirements
It took Crystal Strickland years to qualify for Medicaid, which she needs for a heart condition. Strickland, who's unable to work due to her condition, chafed when she learned that the U.S. House has passed a bill that would impose a work requirement for many able-bodied people to get health insurance coverage through the low-cost, government-run plan for lower-income people. 'What sense does that make?' she asked. 'What about the people who can't work but can't afford a doctor?' The measure is part of the version of President Trump's 'Big Beautiful' bill that cleared the House last month and is now up for consideration in the Senate. Trump is seeking to have it passed by July 4. The bill as it stands would cut taxes and government spending — and also upend portions of the nation's social safety net. For proponents, the ideas behind the work requirement are simple: Crack down on fraud and stand on the principle that taxpayer-provided health coverage isn't for those who can work but aren't. The measure includes exceptions for those who are under 19 or over 64, those with disabilities, pregnant women, main caregivers for young children, people recently released from prisons or jails — or during certain emergencies. It would apply only to adults who receive Medicaid through expansions that 40 states chose to undertake as part of the 2010 health insurance overhaul. Many details of how the changes would work would be developed later, leaving several unknowns and causing anxiety among recipients who worry that their illnesses might not be enough to exempt them. Advocates and sick and disabled enrollees worry — based largely on their past experience — that even those who might be exempted from work requirements under the law could still lose benefits because of increased or hard-to-meet paperwork mandates. Strickland, a 44-year-old former server, cook and construction worker who lives in Fairmont, North Carolina, said she could not afford to go to a doctor for years because she wasn't able to work. She finally received a letter this month saying she would receive Medicaid coverage, she said. 'It's already kind of tough to get on Medicaid,' said Strickland, who has lived in a tent and times and subsisted on nonperishable food thrown out by stores. 'If they make it harder to get on, they're not going to be helping.' Steve Furman is concerned that his 43-year-old son, who has autism, could lose coverage. The bill the House adopted would require Medicaid enrollees to show that they work, volunteer or go to school at least 80 hours a month to continue to qualify. A disability exception would likely apply to Furman's son, who previously worked in an eyeglasses plant in Illinois for 15 years despite behavioral issues that may have gotten him fired elsewhere. Furman said government bureaucracies are already impossible for his son to navigate, even with help. It took him a year to help get his son onto Arizona's Medicaid system when they moved to Scottsdale in 2022, and it took time to set up food benefits. But he and his wife, who are retired, say they don't have the means to support his son fully. 'Should I expect the government to take care of him?' he asked. 'I don't know, but I do expect them to have humanity.' About 71 million adults are enrolled in Medicaid now. And most of them — around 92% — are working, caregiving, attending school or disabled. Earlier estimates of the budget bill from the Congressional Budget Office found that about 5 million people stand to lose coverage. A KFF tracking poll conducted in May found that the enrollees come from across the political spectrum. About one-fourth are Republicans; roughly one-third are Democrats. The poll found that about 7 in 10 adults are worried that federal spending reductions on Medicaid will lead to more uninsured people and would strain health care providers in their area. About half said they were worried reductions would hurt the ability of them or their family to get and pay for health care. Amaya Diana, an analyst at KFF, points to work requirements launched in Arkansas and Georgia as keeping people off Medicaid without increasing employment. Amber Bellazaire, a policy analyst at the Michigan League for Public Policy, said the process to verify that Medicaid enrollees meet the work requirements could be a key reason people would be denied or lose eligibility. 'Massive coverage losses just due to an administrative burden rather than ineligibility is a significant concern,' she said. One KFF poll respondent, Virginia Bell, a retiree in Starkville, Mississippi, said she's seen sick family members struggle to get onto Medicaid, including one who died recently without coverage. She said she doesn't mind a work requirement for those who are able — but worries about how that would be sorted out. 'It's kind of hard to determine who needs it and who doesn't need it,' she said. Lexy Mealing, 54 of Westbury, New York, who was first diagnosed with breast cancer in 2021 and underwent a double mastectomy and reconstruction surgeries, said she fears she may lose the medical benefits she has come to rely on, though people with 'serious or complex' medical conditions could be granted exceptions. She now works about 15 hours a week in 'gig' jobs but isn't sure she can work more as she deals with the physical and mental toll of the cancer. Mealing, who used to work as a medical receptionist in a pediatric neurosurgeon's office before her diagnosis and now volunteers for the American Cancer Society, went on Medicaid after going on short-term disability. 'I can't even imagine going through treatments right now and surgeries and the uncertainty of just not being able to work and not have health insurance,' she said. Felix White, who has Type I diabetes, first qualified for Medicaid after losing his job as a computer programmer several years ago. The Oreland, Pennsylvania, man has been looking for a job, but finds that at 61, it's hard to land one. Medicaid, meanwhile, pays for a continuous glucose monitor and insulin and funded foot surgeries last year, including one that kept him in the hospital for 12 days. 'There's no way I could have afforded that,' he said. 'I would have lost my foot and probably died.' Mulvihill writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Susan Haigh in Hartford, Conn., contributed to this report.
Business Insider
28 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Trump's family has a new business venture: a gold-colored $499 smartphone
The Trump family is getting into the mobile phone business. On the 10th anniversary of President Donald Trump 's formal unveiling of his 2016 presidential campaign, his eldest sons made another announcement in Trump Tower: a Trump-branded mobile phone service, including a gold-colored smartphone that is set to be available later this fall. "We've partnered with some of the greatest people in the industry to make sure real Americans can get true value from their mobile carriers," Donald Trump Jr. said Monday morning at the press conference. The new venture is the latest example of how Trump and his family are finding new ways to cash in while Trump serves his second term. The Trump Organization touted Monday's unveiling as a "major announcement." Like many of the Trump-related business ventures, Trump Mobile has a licensing agreement that allows it to use the president's name. According to its website, Trump Mobile will offer a "47 plan," which includes unlimited talk, texting, and data for $47.45 a month. The first 20GB of data will be at high speed. Trump, of course, is the 47th president and also served as the 45th. Most interestingly, Donald Trump Jr. said that the company would manufacture its smartphone in the United States. Apple and other major tech companies have manufactured their phones outside the US due to labor costs. Trump and the White House have threatened to impose tariffs on those companies if they don't bring back more manufacturing to the US. The T1 Phone, according to the site, will cost $499. Interested consumers can preorder the phone now. The website shows that the phone is gold colored throughout and has "T1" and an American stamp on the back. The promotional image says, "Make America Great Again," Trump's trademarked political slogan.
