On a weekday morning in a quiet Boston neighborhood, a kitchen bustled with activity. Volunteers sliced chicken breasts, stuffed bell peppers, filled trays, and carefully labeled each item. It was part of an experiment to offer nutritious and medically tailored meals to Medicaid patients who are unable to shop for groceries and cook for themselves.

“Once I started to eat these meals that were geared toward my illness, I built up my muscle mass again, built up my strength, built up my confidence in myself,” said Vanessa Georges, who is in remission from throat cancer and said she would struggle to consume enough calories without the deliveries. “These meals have given me a second chance.”

Georges said she noticed another benefit from the meals: She spends less time at the doctor’s office.

Researchers have found evidence backing her observation. About 1,900 Massachusetts residents who, like Georges, received medically tailored meals for at least three months needed less medical care, according to published in the journal Nature Medicine. They had 20% fewer emergency department visits and 31% fewer hospitalizations than similar patients who did not receive meals.

“It actually saves the healthcare system money,” said , a cardiologist and professor at Tufts University who led the study. “That’s a really big deal, because most things in healthcare don’t.”

The research from Massachusetts that medically tailored meals could save states money — in addition to improving health. Yet such programs could land on the chopping block as states look to tighten spending under Trump administration budget cuts, even as federal officials argue that food is a critical component of health.

Medicaid Budget Cuts Loom

The 2025 law known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act slashed projected Medicaid funding by more than $900 billion. Many Republicans who backed the bill believe federal health spending is too high and riddled with fraud. Sen. John Kennedy, a Louisiana Republican, for example, has accused California of “outrageous fraud” for using Medicaid dollars to fund housing and nutrition programs.

, a policy analyst at KFF, said states will have to make tough choices in the next few years as they figure out how to fill funding gaps. “If states are not able to offset the loss of federal funds with new taxes or reductions in other state spending, they may have to make program cuts,” she said. (KFF is a health information nonprofit that includes �������ýҕ�l Health News.)

Thirteen states have received federal waivers to use Medicaid dollars to pay for meals — part of an approach known as “food is medicine.” Three other programs are awaiting federal approval.

President Donald Trump’s support for social services has wavered. While the first Trump administration allowed states to pursue medically tailored meals and other social supports, the second Trump administration for Medicaid initiatives that address social needs. It hasn’t detailed a new policy. Administration officials have warned that they will be more focused on the budget impacts of such initiatives.

“They signaled they’re going to be a lot more skeptical,” said , an assistant professor at the University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School who studies nutrition programs and helped lead the Massachusetts study. “Instead of using a broad-based approach nationwide, they’re going to make decisions on a state-by-state basis.”

At the same time, health leaders in Trump’s administration have made nutrition a major focus, including by promoting . Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who leads the Department of Health and Human Services, and Mehmet Oz, administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, have to serve healthier foods to boost patient outcomes.

The healthcare system is often willing to pay for surgeries, Oz said in a social media video in June, “but not always willing to pay for the nutrition that might help prevent those outcomes in the first place. That’s bothered me my whole career.” He added that the agency is , including medically tailored meals, to prevent illness and hospitalization. CMS officials did not respond to several emailed requests for comment for this article.

, who studies social determinants of health at Harvard Law School’s Center for Health Law and Policy Innovation, said the lack of federal guidance is stirring uncertainty for states that want to pursue nutrition programs in Medicaid. “We’re still waiting to see that big step forward around ‘food is medicine’ interventions,” she said. “We need to see that step forward to resolve some of the uncertainty.”

Lawmakers have had a hard time engaging administration officials on medically tailored meals, said U.S. Rep. Jim McGovern, a Massachusetts Democrat who sponsored a bill that would pilot meal deliveries for some . The legislation has yet to come up for a vote.

“I had thought, based on some of his rhetoric before he entered the Trump administration, that RFK Jr. would be a natural ally on this,” McGovern said. “But we can’t seem to get his attention.”

The Costs of Poor Nutrition

Some companies have been accused of for meals that were neither healthy nor nutritious, raising concerns about lax regulation of these programs.

But at in Boston, the food is prepared with specific attention to sugar, salt, fat, vitamins, and minerals and is based on a person’s health needs, said , chief executive of the nonprofit. Many recipients require food that is mild or low in fiber, for example.

“What we’re able to do is to work with your healthcare provider to understand your health realities — what your diagnoses are, what your medications are, side effects, food allergies, cultural norms — and then prescribe a diet for you that is scratch-made,” Waters said.

The Massachusetts researchers found that the meals — at a cost of $125 per person per week — essentially paid for themselves. Patients with heart disease used about $10,000 less in healthcare services over six months, and patients with kidney disease used $12,000 less in healthcare. There were also savings for people with diabetes, depression, and anxiety.

“Those are pretty big numbers when you think of how expensive those diseases can be and the prevalence in the population,” Waters said.

Nationally, , 10 million Americans would benefit from medically tailored meals, though only a small fraction are enrolled.

“Poor nutrition is the top cause of poor health in this country. It’s the top cause of preventable healthcare spending,” said Mozaffarian, director of the Food is Medicine Institute at Tufts. He has estimated that medically tailored meals could help patients avoid 1.6 million hospitalizations and in healthcare costs each year.

A Weekly Delivery That Makes a Difference

Steve Honyotski receives 10 meals at his Boston home each week, cooked fresh and delivered cold or flash-frozen. They’re ready to eat after just a couple of minutes in the microwave.

“The carrot ginger soup is my favorite,” Honyotski said.

Honyotski, 71, lives with several chronic conditions, including diabetes, obesity, and high blood pressure. He said he’s noticed improvements in his health since he started eating medically tailored meals. He needs less insulin to control his diabetes, and he’s lost enough weight to delay a knee replacement surgery.

For now, those meals will keep coming. And Massachusetts’ Medicaid director, Ryan Schwarz, said the state will seek federal approval to continue medically tailored meals in the coming years. “We feel very strongly committed to continuing these services,” he said.

In North Carolina, researchers found that food and housing supports lowered Medicaid spending over time. Yet even with federal approval for medically tailored meals, and evidence that the meals — along with housing and transportation support — were helping people, North Carolina state lawmakers suspended the services in 2025 over budget worries. After budget deliberations this summer, state legislators changed course and decided to the program.

“To me, that’s a signal of what might occur in other states as these Medicaid cuts hit,” said Hager, the UMass researcher. “Even though they have the authority to run these programs, it might be a lot harder for the states to actually implement them.”

This article is from a partnership that includes , , and �������ýҕ�l Health News.

This article first appeared on �������ýҕ�l Health News and is republished here under a .

But there’s a notable exception in the state’s heat safety rules: Not covered are the nurses, guards, staff, and tens of thousands of incarcerated people who work in California’s aging correctional facilities, which are .

In 2024, California adopted landmark rules intended to protect more than 1 million workers who toil in sweltering warehouses, kitchens, factories, and other indoor workplaces. But the state Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board exempted prisons and local government detention and juvenile facilities after Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration warned the rules could cost the state billions.

Two years later, the Newsom administration has put forward weaker indoor heat standards for California’s correctional facilities, alarming worker advocates and public health experts who argue they would provide inadequate protections from extreme heat as the risks worsen due to climate change. Regulators with the state’s Division of Occupational Safety and Health, or Cal/OSHA, have proposed protections that wouldn’t kick in until temperatures reach 87 degrees — 5 degrees higher than for other indoor workplaces, according to released in May.

“It’s basically a second-class standard, and we don’t accept that correction workers get weaker protections than everybody else, with no scientific or medical basis,” said Stephen Knight, co-executive director of Worksafe, a California nonprofit that pushes for workplace health and safety protections. “The human body doesn’t handle heat differently in a prison than, you know, an Amazon warehouse.”

Extreme heat is the in the U.S., with spiking during heat waves as elevated temperatures exacerbate other health problems, including cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. Even among people without preexisting conditions, prolonged exposure to heat without the opportunity to cool off can cause , which can lead to death.

State agencies have estimated the price tag to cool California’s prisons could run from to in upfront costs, although the Newsom administration has refused to provide detailed information and declined interview requests.

“These facilities were exempted from the indoor heat standard due to the unique challenges in the correctional institutions with complying,” Eric Berg, Cal/OSHA’s deputy chief of health, research, and standards, told stakeholders at a recent meeting. He added that “we’re creating a separate standard to kind of address their unique conditions they have in those facilities.”

Heat Health Risks

California’s average temperature across an entire year is about than it was in 1895. At least nine of the 10 warmest years on record have occurred since 2014, and scientists project 2026 could be .

That warming, driven by the burning of fossil fuels, has accelerated in the decades since many of California’s 31 adult state prisons were built. Many of those facilities are located in some of the state’s hottest areas, including the Central Valley and inland areas of Southern California, where temperatures can soar into the triple digits. Fewer than a quarter of the prison system’s 791 housing units have any type of mechanical cooling such as air conditioning, according to a January released by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Instead, institutions rely on fans and swamp coolers, but the uninsulated concrete walls mean these ad hoc solutions often face a losing battle.

“The best way to describe it is like someone turned on the microwave, and then they put you in it,” said Leonard Brown, a community organizer with Worksafe who spent over 30 years incarcerated in 10 state prisons, including in Lancaster and at the now-closed Chuckawalla Valley State Prison in Blythe, communities where triple-digit outdoor temperatures are common.

The lack of insulation in buildings makes it difficult to keep temperatures below 89 degrees even in facilities with air conditioning, according to California’s corrections department. The aging institutions, which average 52 years old, were mostly built when “comfort level of the incarcerated population and staff was not a consideration or a priority,” according to a . In 2024, the department tallied 86 days when indoor temperatures reached 90 degrees or above in at least one institution, and 46 days when indoor temperatures reached 95 degrees or more.

Health experts say people are particularly vulnerable to heat while at work because they’re not in control of their surrounding environment. They can’t always leave work for a cooling center, crank up the air conditioning, or jump in the shower, and their ability to protect themselves from heat depends on their type of job, income, and an array of other factors.

“Say you’re working in a warehouse or an agricultural field. It can be really hard to walk away because you need the money for yourself or for your family. But you can, right? It’s an option,” said Bharat Venkat, director of the UCLA Heat Lab, which studies the unequal effects of extreme heat. “If you’re incarcerated, you can’t really say no.”

And because incarcerated workers often make less than 50 cents an hour, it could take weeks to make enough to purchase a personal fan or a cooling towel, a from Venkat’s lab found.

Separate Standards

Newsom, who has been exploring a presidential run, has sought to position himself as a climate leader and in August released an , which touted the state’s 2024 indoor worker heat protections and noted that rules for correctional workers were in development.

“Californians are feeling the impacts of extreme heat earlier, longer, and more intensely than ever before,” Newsom said in a statement when he released the plan. He added: “We’re setting the path for the next chapter of our hotter, drier future.”

California is among a handful of states that have sought to protect indoor and outdoor workers from extreme heat over the past two decades. After multiple farmworkers died of heat-related causes in 2005, California adopted emergency standards for outdoor workers and made them permanent the following year. In 2024, the Biden administration for indoor and outdoor workers, but the Trump administration .

Still, Newsom has faced criticism from worker advocates and public health experts for his administration’s slow embrace of indoor heat protections, which took roughly and approve. And protections for prison workers are still years away, with the timeline “still being determined,” Cal/OSHA spokesperson MariCarmen Estudillo said in an email.

The 2024 rules require employers to provide cooldown areas and take other protective steps once indoor temperatures reach 82 degrees. They also require employers to keep both the indoor temperature and heat index, which factors in humidity, below 87 degrees, or below 82 degrees when employees are wearing heat-restrictive clothing or working near a heat source like an oven.

Under the proposed rules for prisons, safety standards wouldn’t kick in until temperatures reach 87 degrees. And employers would not be required to factor in the heat index, radiant heat, and humidity — all of which can make the temperature feel even hotter.

“Temperature alone does not accurately measure how dangerous working conditions are in these facilities,” said Janice O’Malley, a legislative advocate with the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, which represents many of the medical and mental health staff within CDCR, as well as employees at local detention centers and juvenile facilities across the state.

“The heat index accounts for humidity and reflects how hot conditions actually feel to the human body, and it’s incredibly difficult to cool down through sweating in the correctional facilities where our folks work,” O’Malley said, adding that CDCR employees work in buildings with poor ventilation, often while wearing protective clothing that traps heat.

CDCR declined requests for an interview, but at a meeting in May, Alex Norring, assistant secretary for legislative affairs, said the unique staffing needs of state prisons would make it difficult to comply. For example, guards would need to be relieved by additional personnel to get their cooldown breaks.

“The biggest challenge is the direct fiscal impact because staff provide guarding for the incarcerated population, and we need to ensure that there is appropriate staffing in order to cover that and comply with providing the relief,” Norring said.

The also warned that establishing cooldown areas at some juvenile halls “may require system redesign, supplemental cooling equipment, and portable AC units which come with security risks.”

Unclear Costs

The state’s cost estimates to cool state prisons have varied widely since the worker safety board received its first assessment in 2023 and the price tag hovered at about $900,000 in the first year and less than $500,000 each year after. A year later, the sticker price skyrocketed to “billions of dollars” after the state Department of Finance said it had received revised estimates from the corrections department.

The state has provided few details and little clarity since. The Department of Finance and CDCR have denied Capital & Main’s requests for the details of the cost estimate under the California Public Records Act.

Labor unions and safety advocates, meanwhile, say workers in California prisons have waited too long for protections — while the state further defers the costs. 

“You’re leaving a very important population uncovered. That’s very unjust. There’s no argument for that,” said Laura Stock, from the Occupational Safety & Health Standards Board after she publicly criticized his administration for delaying protections to prison workers.

This article was produced in collaboration with Capital & Main, ​​an independent, California-based nonprofit investigative news publication that reports on inequality, climate change, and other issues.

This article first appeared on �������ýҕ�l Health News and is republished here under a .

“Are you the person who’s going to bring my mom back?” she asked.

Gómez struggled to find an answer. It was a December morning, and she’d brought food, diapers, baby wipes, and clothes — items she hoped would help the 6-year-old girl, her baby brother, and the neighbor who had stepped in to care for them. The children were left alone after federal immigration agents arrested their parents outside their apartment in Oxnard, a mostly Latino agricultural community on the Southern California coast. But Gómez had no power to bring the parents back.

“We’re working on that,” Gómez recalled telling the girl. In reality, she was at a loss for how to answer truthfully without upsetting her.

As a project manager for a nonprofit that provides food assistance to immigrant families affected by Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids, Gómez has witnessed the tumult and pain that have roiled the lives of since President Donald Trump returned to office, with devastating consequences for children’s health. They include an estimated with at least one parent detained by immigration authorities through April, a number that has undoubtedly climbed since. Separation from parents harms children psychologically. It destabilizes families, often leaving the remaining parent or caregiver scrambling to stay housed, buy food, and fulfill kids’ medical needs. Some kids are to care for themselves.

Many kids whose parents aren’t detained are experiencing threats to their health and well-being too. Two children in the South in February 2025 after reportedly being bullied over their family’s alleged immigration status.

Millions of children live in families losing access to , , , and other supports as roll back eligibility for immigrants with and without legal status. Fear of federal enforcement has pushed parents to avoid , going to the doctor, and . Some have disenrolled from or avoided signing kids up for health and nutrition programs.

Children from immigrant backgrounds are also . They’re experiencing more , increased , and anxiety about , even when they or their family members are citizens or legal residents.

Most of these children are American citizens. About have an immigrant parent, including around 4.6 million with a parent who lacks legal status.

“I’m really concerned about how long it’s going to take for us as a country to address all of the harm that’s happening to this generation of kids,” said Wendy Cervantes, director of immigration and immigrant families at the . “This type of stress can have long-term developmental harm and can really inhibit their ability to do well in school, to have good health outcomes, and to grow into thriving, stable adults.”

Curbing Public Benefits

Trump has made cracking down on immigrants — including the children of immigrants — a priority since his second term began last year. On Inauguration Day, he issued an purporting to end birthright citizenship for kids born to parents without legal status or in the country on temporary visas, an attempt ultimately blocked by the Supreme Court.

His administration, with the approval of Republicans in Congress, has into immigration enforcement, detaining the parents of an estimated 145,000 U.S. citizen children as of April, and, according to an analysis by nonprofit newsroom The Marshall Project, . It’s sought to rescind , or TPS, for over 1 million immigrants, tens of thousands of whom have U.S. citizen children, and in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which includes the parents of about .

White House officials say the immigration crackdown by freeing up resources such as jobs and housing, reducing pressure on public coffers, expelling criminals, and restoring integrity to the immigration system. (Studies have shown that mass deportations .) Trump and other Republican leaders have argued that birthright citizenship and “,” and that TPS has allowed immigrants from “” to remain in the United States indefinitely under what is supposed to be a temporary program.

In a statement, White House spokesperson Lauren Bis did not directly address whether the administration is concerned about long-term harm to children and increased healthcare costs because of its immigration policies. Instead, she repeated past White House criticisms that President Joe Biden’s immigration policies allowed children to be trafficked across the U.S. border.

“The real story is the psychiatric impact on the tens of thousands of children who were smuggled across the border — many by human and sex traffickers,” she wrote in an email.

Only 39% of Americans approve of Trump’s handling of immigration, according to a recent Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll.

Stephen Miller, the chief architect of Trump’s immigration policies, has accused the children of immigrants of draining public resources and perpetuating problems from their parents’ home countries. Research, however, shows that immigrants and the longer they live in the United States and that they and their children . Data also shows they than native-born Americans.

“This is the great lie of mass migration,” on the social platform X in November. “You are not just importing individuals. You are importing societies. No magic transformation occurs when failed states cross borders. At scale, migrants and their descendants recreate the conditions, and terrors, of their broken homelands.”

The Republican tax-and-spending law enacted last summer curbs immigrant eligibility for health and food assistance programs. And this July, the administration issued new “public charge” rules that give immigration officers broad discretion to deny green cards to lawfully present immigrants if they or family members have used public benefit programs, a move that could result in U.S. citizen children disenrolling from safety net healthcare programs.

Together but Afraid

Separation from parents is and can lead to , including anxiety, depression, cardiovascular disease, and learning difficulties. Children separated from their parents at the border during the first Trump administration were found to exhibit . Researchers have also tied deportations and detentions of immigrant parents — as well as the threat of them — to widespread , higher , , among both immigrant and U.S.-born children.

It’s also costly to society. A by federal researchers estimated that health conditions related to childhood trauma accounted for $292 billion in healthcare spending in 2021 alone, including by taxpayer-funded programs such as Medicaid and Medicare.

Emmanuel, a 13-year-old in Oxnard, gets anxious every time his dad goes to work as a farm laborer, his mother, Ana, said. He asks her for reassurance that his father will return, and about what would happen to him if his parents got detained. He tries to hurry Ana up when they’re out in public, worried that ICE could suddenly appear. �������ýҕ�l Health News is not using their full names because they fear deportation.

Doctors and therapists interviewed by �������ýҕ�l Health News said they have observed a notable increase in mental health problems, especially anxiety, in children from immigrant families. Kimberly McNally, a pediatrician at Venice Family Clinic’s Inglewood South La Brea Health Center, said she’s regularly referring children of all ages for mental health services related to fears that their parents will be taken away. At daycares, kids have been showing up with an extra bag in case their parents don’t pick them up, said Liza Davis, advocacy director for Children in Immigrant Families at The Children’s Partnership, which works with a coalition of early childhood educators.

Sometimes, the distress leads young people to take extreme actions. In June, 19-year-old Eliel José after his father was deported from the Atlanta area to Mexico, according to Univision.

Rosie Harrison, executive director of Grow Initiative GA, a community organization that serves low-income families, said she’s received calls over the past year from immigrant parents seeking help for suicidal and depressed kids. Their situations are often made worse because many lack health insurance and can’t afford to pay for therapy. That’s often because parents have lost jobs that came with health insurance due to worksite raids or because of eligibility changes imposed by the Trump administration.

“I’m concerned about the families that are going to be burying their child,” Harrison said. “I’m concerned that we are going to miss out on having an amazing person do amazing things for our community, for our country, because they took their life.”

Strength Under Pressure

Many children are showing resilience, though.

In a role reversal, some children have become their parents’ protectors. They go grocery shopping and take their younger siblings to school so that their parents don’t have to leave the house.

Giselle Gonzalez, a university student and volunteer with the immigrant protection network VC Defensa in Ventura County, California, said she’ll never forget the morning last summer when she woke up to the sound of kids on bicycles pedaling through her immigrant-heavy neighborhood in Thousand Oaks, yelling “La migra! La migra! Don’t come out!” They’d spotted ICE agents grabbing factory workers and gardeners on their way to work, she said.

Neighbors, community groups, health providers, and others have also in a to support children and families affected by immigration enforcement. They , provide , , and help parents create in case they get detained or deported.

Ultimately, more humane immigration policies and enforcement tactics will be required to end the harm being done to children, academic experts and advocates said.

Researchers at point to a pilot called the as a model for keeping families together while also enforcing immigration laws. Launched in January 2016 under President Barack Obama, the program allowed families seeking asylum to remain in the community while awaiting resolution of their cases. Through a case manager, they received support in meeting the obligations of their immigration cases and preparing for deportation if needed. The program, which and cost-effective, was terminated by the first Trump administration.

At Venice Family Clinic in Los Angeles, case manager Mabel Alavez sees the pressures facing families who are still together but worried they could be separated. Many of the people are parents or grandparents who have been in the U.S. for decades. Some are afraid to take their children to school, the park, or the beach. They ask whether it’s safe to enroll their U.S.-born kids in Medicaid. She helps families who are facing eviction because they’re afraid to go to work and can no longer afford rent. She often helps them create plans for who will look after their children if they get detained.

Raised in an immigrant family herself, Alavez knows how challenging it can be for kids who are first-generation Americans to navigate growing up, going to school, and finding a sense of belonging in a country their parents aren’t from.

“It’s hard for me to imagine how they could possibly do that in addition to what’s going on now,” she said. “I do feel like there will be a big impact on them. What that might look like, I’m not exactly sure.”

This article first appeared on �������ýҕ�l Health News and is republished here under a .

In , President Donald Trump’s signature One Big Beautiful Bill Act will require most adults to work, go to school or enter a training program, or volunteer for at least 80 hours a month. Native Americans and Alaska Natives are exempt from the mandates, which take effect in January.

Of the nearly in the U.S., around 47% live in Hawai‘i. Within the contiguous United States, California, Washington, Nevada, Texas, and Oregon have the largest populations of Native Hawaiians.

Hawaiʻi’s Medicaid administrator, Meredith Nichols, said the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services didn’t respond to the state’s request to include an exemption for Native Hawaiians but said she believes the decision came down to the population’s lack of recognition as a tribal nation. Hawai‘i has about , 15% of whom identify as Native Hawaiian, Nichols said.

“We know that when we’ve asked similar questions in the past, it all comes down to federal recognition,” she said.

Hawaiʻi health administrators met with Trump administration officials in June. Some unsuccessfully pushed to add an exemption to the new law, which would need congressional approval.

White House spokesperson Kush Desai did not respond to requests for comment. In a statement, CMS spokesperson Timothy Foster confirmed that the agency met with 16 health centers in Hawai‘i about Medicaid changes but didn’t respond to other questions.

Barriers to Care

Native Hawaiians face many of the same as , including higher risks during pregnancy, higher infant mortality rates, and higher rates of being uninsured than the white population. And in Hawaiʻi, Native Hawaiians have the among ethnic groups after other Pacific Islanders.

Kapono Chong-Hanssen is the medical director of Ho‘ōla Lāhui, the Native Hawaiian healthcare system on Kaua‘i that also serves the privately owned island of Ni‘ihau, whose 170 full-time residents are predominantly Native Hawaiian. Chong-Hanssen said he anticipates many of his patients will no longer receive the care they need once the new work requirements take effect.

The new requirements will erode the trust healthcare providers worked hard to build among Native Hawaiian patients, who, in response to , are more likely to disengage and “throw the whole system out” when they run into barriers, Chong-Hanssen said. “It just flies in the face of everything that we’re trying to do.”

Beyond medical services, Medicaid covers transportation expenses when patients travel between islands for care. A round-trip ticket between Kaua‘i and O‘ahu, for example, can cost hundreds of dollars.

Congress placed over 200,000 acres of land in a trust for Hawaiian homesteads in 1921 to bring Hawaiians back to their native lands after the U.S. backed the 1893 . Nearly 30,000 Native Hawaiians , while, as of the , more than 34,000 people lived on Hawaiian homelands. The homesteads are often far from Honolulu, where most health services are located.

Waianae Coast Comprehensive Health Center primarily serves the west side of O‘ahu, which is home to the island’s largest Native Hawaiian population, near four Hawaiian homesteads.

The center’s vice president, Leinaala Kanana, said that many of its patients are geographically isolated and that few jobs are available in the area. Patients also have trouble securing transportation to get to work or finding affordable childcare.

The center’s CEO, Rich Bettini, said Hawai‘i’s high living costs and depressed wages have pushed many people into homelessness, creating another barrier to complying with the new Medicaid requirements. Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders make up about 60% of O‘ahu’s . The center estimated about 2,800 of its patients may be affected by the requirements, half of whom are Native Hawaiian.

The annual “cost of living for a family of four in Hawaiʻi on O‘ahu is $100,000-plus. The average income of our patients is under $30,000 a year,” he said. “That is an enormous gap.”

‘Bigger Fish To Fry’

Native Hawaiians face obstacles to being granted the same exemptions as other Indigenous groups. While several federal laws refer to Native Hawaiians as an Indigenous group, they are not among the 575 tribes recognized by the federal government. Federal recognition can be granted either by Congress or administratively through a process established by the . Native Hawaiians about whether they would even want , with some fearing it would jeopardize their ability to restore Hawaiian independence.

Laws governing Medicaid also don’t acknowledge Native Hawaiians, aside from the 2021 , signed by former President Joe Biden. In the covid-era law, the federal government fully reimbursed Native Hawaiian health centers for Medicaid services for two years. However, all the qualifying Native Hawaiian health centers were in Hawai‘i, where in the country now live.

The federal government fully reimburses Indian Health Service and tribal facilities for healthcare services provided to Native Americans and Alaska Natives. Native Hawaiian instead receive the same reimbursement rate as in the rest of Hawaiʻi.

Keolamaikalani Dean, the CEO of the King Lunalilo Trust, which provides services for Native Hawaiian elders, pointed to the new Medicaid requirements as just one of many federal policies limiting Native Hawaiians’ healthcare.

“It’s horrible as a policy, but there are bigger fish to fry,” he said.

Dean said he’d rather advocate for giving Native Hawaiian healthcare systems the same full Medicaid reimbursement that the Indian Health Service receives. The change would have greater impact on patients seeking care, he said.

Native Hawaiian advocates said they have been overextended as they work to guard against an onslaught of threats to revoke other federal funding by the Trump administration.

In Trump’s proposed 2027 budget, cuts to Native Hawaiian programs cited the group’s lack of federal recognition as a “tribal nation.” The proposed cuts coincide with challenging education programs and that provides homestead land to some Native Hawaiians at almost no cost, alleging the programs racially discriminate against other groups.

, a nonprofit that oversees the Native Hawaiian healthcare systems in the state, declined to comment for this article. The group is involved in a lawsuit filed by a conservative group aiming to stop a university scholarship for Native Hawaiians pursuing healthcare careers.

U.S. Rep. Jill Tokuda (D-Hawaiʻi) viewed the exclusion of Native Hawaiians from the exemptions to Medicaid work requirements as an attempt to further erode Native Hawaiians’ Indigenous status, pointing to recent challenges by the Trump administration and lawsuits.

“These are not one-offs,” Tokuda said. “This is a targeted, coordinated attack to undercut the Indigenous status of Native Hawaiians.”

This article first appeared on �������ýҕ�l Health News and is republished here under a .

But U.S. District Judge John D. Bates, in a , also agreed with the administration that it was unconstitutional for the government to use race or ethnicity as the basis to award money under a program created to expand internet skills and access.

“It was definitely disappointing,” said Angela Siefer, executive director of the National Digital Inclusion Alliance, a nonprofit that filed suit last year after not receiving a award meant to bolster digital and internet skills nationwide. “With this administration it’s really worrisome.”

Congress passed the $2.75 billion Digital Equity Act in 2021 as the skill development component of a multilayered “” initiative under President Joe Biden’s signature infrastructure law, which included a bigger pot of money for expanding internet infrastructure.

A few months into his second term, Trump directly attacked the Digital Equity Act on social media, pledging “” and calling the program “illegal.” The language echoed two Trump executive orders characterizing diversity, equity, and inclusion programs .

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration, which oversees implementation of the law, responded by Digital Equity Act grant programs, leaving states and organizations like the National Digital Inclusion Alliance in limbo.

In response to Bates’ decision, federal attorneys said the government would reinstate the NDIA-related competitive grant program without racial classification. The government aims to release a new grant application in December, according to a filed in the case.

The NDIA now must reapply for the grant award, which was slated to be disbursed among more than a dozen organizations and tribes, including the Cherokee Nation in Oklahoma, El Centro Hispano in Arkansas, Portland Community College in Oregon, and Community Service Programs of West Alabama. The grants are meant to go toward digital navigator programs, in which community workers teach technology and internet skills, according to the NDIA.

In western Ohio, Jamie Huber said her organization was a subrecipient of the NDIA grant funds. Huber, director of community services at the Northwestern Ohio Community Action Commission, said that without the funding, she is left searching for money to continue navigator programs such as one she runs for people who are unemployed, homeless, or both.

“How do you find a home? Well, you got to look online. And how do you find a job? You have to look online,” Huber said.

Huber’s digital navigators also teach internet skills at 10 senior centers in rural counties stretching along the corner of Ohio bordering Michigan and Indiana. They help active older adults learn how to go online to pay bills and get healthcare, so they “continue having agency over their own life,” Huber said.

Rural residents live sicker and die younger on average than people in the rest of the country when they live in counties lacking high-speed internet access and healthcare, an analysis by �������ýҕ�l Health News found.

At Computer Reach in western Pennsylvania, Executive Director Dave Sevick said his organization has cut staff and programs. He said the nonprofit, which started in 2001, has refurbished more than 24,000 computers, giving them away to families it finds through schools and churches.

“We’re aware that affordability is the biggest issue around, and this doesn’t make it any better for folks,” Sevick said. “We’re helping a little bit by getting a free computer out to people.”

The Digital Equity Act the money should benefit, including low-income households, older people, some incarcerated people, rural Americans, veterans, and members of racial or ethnic minority groups.

According to by the Pew Research Center, people in rural communities were less likely to have internet subscriptions compared with their urban and suburban counterparts.

The Pew Research polling that home broadband use among Black and Hispanic adults lagged that of white and Asian adults. While 81% of white adults surveyed said they subscribed to broadband at home, only 71% of Black adults and 68% of Hispanic adults said the same.

In court, lead federal attorney Patrick Butler argued that Congress failed to prove a compelling government interest when including the racial or ethnic criteria. Congress did not “identify anything close to” a specific instance of discrimination in the broadband industry, Butler said, .

Butler then surprised the court, if the racial or ethnic status could be severed from the law, “we would obviously apply the grant program without considering race.”

In his opinion severing the race factor, Bates that “the President lacks the power to cancel laws passed by Congress based on his bald disagreement with Congress’s policy determinations.”

Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), a primary , said she will be “watching very carefully to ensure this administration does what Congress intended.”

“It is indisputable that these challenges are particularly pronounced in low income, rural, and Tribal communities — and there’s a reason Democrats and Republicans across the country support this program so strongly,” Murray said in a statement to �������ýҕ�l Health News. 

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) Biden’s infrastructure bill in 2021 and to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration in late 2024 asking the agency to pause the $1.25 billion competitive grants program, arguing the use of racial classifications “does not serve a compelling governmental interest.” Cruz did not respond to requests for comment.

Arielle Roth, administrator of the agency, previously worked as the telecommunications policy director for the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee’s majority staff under Cruz. She was to lead the agency.

In June, during a House committee hearing, Roth had tense exchanges with Democrats who took issue with changes to the Biden-era infrastructure law’s internet deployment program, which now allows more satellite services rather than prioritizing fiber-optic cable lines.

Lawmakers also asked about the Digital Equity Act’s grant programs.

“Communities across the country deserve a clear answer and a path forward,” Rep. Nanette Barragán (D-Calif.) said during the hearing. While the National Digital Inclusion Alliance’s lawsuit does not include the state grants, Barragán asked how those grants would be rolled out, considering the federal judge’s decision on race.

California was awarded a $70 million state capacity grant. Early this year, the Justice Department to Congress asserting that the state grant and the competitive grant program both are illegally based on race, citing the Supreme Court’s decision invalidating affirmative action in higher education admissions. Roth declined to answer Barragán’s question, noting there is active litigation.

Barragán said she was “extremely” frustrated by “some of the responses or nonresponses.”

Stephen Yusko, a spokesperson with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, declined to comment or respond to questions for this article.

The government and the National Digital Inclusion Alliance agreed to pause court proceedings to give the agency time to reinstate the competitive grant program. The NDIA has also proposed that the agency provide status reports every 30 days during the court pause “to ensure prompt attention to reinstatement,” according to the most recent .

“We need to make sure it’s all moving forward,” Siefer said.

This article first appeared on �������ýҕ�l Health News and is republished here under a .

Then, last October, Wood took a fall, broke her neck, and spent three months in rehabilitation. When she returned to the house she shares with her niece, she couldn’t walk without assistance. “I still don’t dare go up and down stairs unless someone is with me,” said Wood, 93.

That has redefined their neighborly relationship. Straight, 53, a retired chef, now visits weekly, bringing lattes and cookies, and often leftovers from dinners she has made. Her husband installed a grab bar in Wood’s bathroom, put up shelves, and changed her light bulbs and smoke detector batteries. The texts fly back and forth.

Straight calls to say I’m going to the grocery store. Do you need anything? Wood, who no longer drives, provides a shopping list.

“She is a gift from heaven,” said Wood, a retired insurance executive. “We talk and talk. Sometimes we shed a few tears, but mostly we laugh. I never thought I’d have a new best friend at this time of my life.”

Eldercare, typically considered a family obligation, is evolving to adapt to demographic shifts that make reliance on spouses and children less assured.

“The number of older adults who have never married or are divorced has been increasing, so we have more people aging alone,” said Deborah Carr, a sociologist at Boston University who has investigated these trends.

“The proportion who are childless, by choice or not, is also growing,” she added, and families with children have fewer of them than in past generations.

Geographic distances or also fuel the need for other kinds of caregivers — roles that friends or neighbors can fill.

How commonly do friends step into caregiving gaps? A recently published study in JAMA Network Open, led by researchers at the University of Michigan, looked into , usually in supplementary roles.

They used data from the National Health and Aging Trends Study, in which more than 2,600 older people with health limitations (average age: 79) identified friends and family members who provided help. Family members were most likely to care for aging relatives, but about 14% of participants identified friends (including neighbors) in that role. That represents 2.4 million caregiving friends nationally, the authors estimated.

Last year, a by AARP and the National Alliance for Caregiving put the proportion of caregivers supporting nonrelatives at 11%.

“Friends are among the auxiliary caregivers who have not been acknowledged,” said Karen Fingerman, a gerontologist at the University of Texas-Austin and co-author of a the study. “We neglect the sacrifices they make.”

The study, believed to be the first nationwide look at caregiving friends, found they functioned differently from relatives. They’re unlikely to live with the person they’re helping, for example, and rarely serve as the sole caregiver.

“They provide fewer care hours,” said Yee To Ng, a gerontologist and lead author of the study, which found that friends supplied 18 hours of help a month on average, compared with about 67 hours from family.

They assist in different ways, too. “Friends are more likely to provide transportation,” Ng said. Two-thirds of caregiving friends drive their friends around; shopping, helping people go outside, preparing meals, and accompanying patients to medical appointments round out the top five tasks.

Sometimes they do more. Czes Ferrino, 82, is widowed and lives alone in Westerly, Rhode Island. She has no disabling health problems, but when her car died recently, her next-door neighbor went with her to several Subaru dealers to find a used replacement. “He walked me through it like a son would for a mother or grandmother,” Ferrino said.

On the other hand, “there are some tasks friends might not be well equipped to provide or be comfortable with,” Ng said. Personal care, like bathing and dressing, remains largely the province of family members.

“Those can infringe on people’s self-esteem,” Ng said. “With family, we accept that when you’re really ill, they step up with intimate activities. It’s embarrassing to have your friends help you use the toilet.”

The researchers also found that respondents who named friends as caregivers were younger than those with only relatives in that role, and more apt to have college degrees. People with higher education levels have larger social networks, Fingerman said.

Those assisted by friends were also, unsurprisingly, less likely to be married and more apt to live alone — like Ann Greenwater, 84, who lives in a mobile home park in rural Humboldt County, California.

She managed independently until a few years ago, when severe back pain rendered her bedridden for nearly three months. Although she’s up and about now and can handle housekeeping, cooking, and personal care, “I’ve never really fully recovered,” Greenwater said.

She is single, with no family beyond a distant nephew she barely knows, and has stopped driving. But a cadre of friends she knows from a nearby Zen Buddhist center stepped in.

Milli Quam, 86, does her laundry and drops it off, sometimes picking up prescriptions en route. A 73-year-old helped Greenwater with her computer and, along with several others, takes her grocery shopping or shops for her. Members of a local volunteer organization drive her to medical appointments.

“I love Ann, and I’m happy there’s something concrete I can do,” Quam said. “I hope I can keep doing it for a long time.”

Friends have some advantages as caregivers. “Our friends are our own age and understand what we’re going through,” Carr said. “They may have more empathy and sometimes real knowledge they’ve acquired.” When family caregivers are on the job, friends’ efforts can reduce their burden.

But nonrelatives may also prove less stable as a source of help. Neighbors move. Strains can develop if the person needing care becomes too demanding or feels guilty about accepting help, challenging the egalitarian expectations for friendships. These in those with physical limitations, a study led by Carr found.

Nor is there much policy support for these caregiving relationships. The federal Family and Medical Leave Act, for instance, “with rare exceptions does not provide job-protected leave from work to care for a friend with a serious health condition,” Laura Lawless, a labor and employment lawyer with Squire Patton Boggs, said in an email.

“For family, ‘through thick and thin’ is the expectation,” Carr said. “There’s huge stigma to being estranged from your family, but it’s kind of normal for some friendships to just fall away.”

In Sausalito, Wood tells Straight that “she’s not allowed to move until I die.” She’s joking, sort of.

Greenwater’s friends in Humboldt County, to her gratitude, have not fallen away either. But they are aging along with her; at 86, Quam pointed out, she may stop driving before long, too.

“I’m wondering what will happen when these friends aren’t able to come to me,” Greenwater said. “I guess we’ll deal with it when it comes.”

The New Old Age is produced through a partnership with .

This article first appeared on �������ýҕ�l Health News and is republished here under a .

It’s an achievement the former congressman and former U.S. secretary of Health and Human Services as he campaigns for California governor against Republican Steve Hilton, a former Fox News commentator.

But should Becerra cruise to victory in November, as , he will face what may be the steepest decline in health insurance coverage in a generation, one that will land especially hard in his home state.

By 2030, the number of uninsured Californians under 65 is expected to from 2.4 million to 4.6 million, as recently enacted state and federal cuts to Medicaid and ACA marketplaces begin to historic gains in health coverage, according to a May analysis by the University of California-Berkeley Labor Center. The anticipated rise in the uninsured population could have broad implications for hospital systems, insurers, and the economy.

In February, Miranda Dietz, the labor center’s healthcare program director, told legislators the changes could end up costing California , mostly in the healthcare industry.

Hospital executives have begun reporting , and experts warn health plans will raise premiums further as they’re left with enrollees who are, on average, sicker and more expensive to cover.

“It’s triage,” said , executive director of Covered California, the nation’s largest state-run health insurance marketplace. “That’s what the next governor is walking into.”

California achieved one of the most in the nation, largely credited to the state’s robust adoption of the ACA. If tapped to lead the wealthy, progressive state, Becerra would wrestle with how uninsured Californians get care and who pays as the Trump administration shrinks a federal safety net he once oversaw.

Becerra has some experience pushing back against Washington, D.C. As California attorney general, he many provisions of the Affordable Care Act, including access to birth control.

Becerra said he would issue an to keep those affected by federal cuts insured. But he has not detailed how the state would backfill in federal funding California stands to lose annually.

At a policy forum hosted by Politico last month, would not lose health coverage despite federal cutbacks, saying he would push the industry to eliminate waste from “attorneys, accountants, pencil pushers” that cost consumers billions.

“I’m going to ask them to help me extract some of that waste and put it into healthcare, which helps us cover the cost of keeping Californians insured,” he said.

His opponent, Hilton, is trying to appeal to , despite receiving the president’s endorsement, and has stumped on cutting off coverage for Californians without legal status, which is paid for with state funds. Hilton has vowed to use those savings to , calling it an immediate antidote to high costs.

“We all understand that the healthcare system is a mess and needs major reform,” Hilton said in an interview. “The quickest thing we can do on healthcare costs is actually to tax people less.”

Left Behind?

In 2010, Becerra was part of U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s leadership team and helped whip up votes to pass the law. He also had a hand in crafting it, though his attempt to include a government-backed coverage option failed.

A decade later, when lawmakers considered him for the nation’s top healthcare job, Becerra said his primary mission would be to carry out President Joe Biden’s vision to expand access and cut costs under the Affordable Care Act.

Before the ACA, some — roughly 1 in 6 — were uninsured. Within a few years of the law’s , its expansion of Medicaid eligibility and financial aid to lower-income marketplace enrollees helped slash the U.S. uninsured rate by nearly half.

Millions more gained coverage during the covid-19 pandemic after Becerra implemented a and administered generous but temporary tax credits that put the cost of Obamacare plans .

As Biden’s health secretary, Becerra launched aggressive public awareness campaigns, , and distributed hundreds of millions in grants to pay consumer assistants, also , to help enrollees wade through paperwork.

“One of the common things we would hear from him as a leader was, ‘Who’s being left behind?’” said Benjamin Sommers, a Harvard health policy professor who was a under Becerra.

Under Biden and Becerra, the percentage of people with health insurance reached a historical high of 92%, or 310 million Americans having health coverage in 2024.

Republican Response

But conservatives said those policies by attracting fraudulent and wasteful coverage. In response, the second Trump administration has and toughened income reporting.

“It’s simple and easy to say, well, the numbers are up so the program must be working,” said , a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. “My argument would be that’s the wrong metric.”

Last summer, the GOP-led Congress passed Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which for those who need it most while . Altogether, the law is expected to cut Medicaid spending by over a decade.

Congress also allowed enhanced for Obamacare plans to expire last year, spiking premium payments for middle-income Americans and driving down enrollment by this year.

“We are now witnessing almost a wholesale reversal of pretty much all those policies” that helped cover millions more Americans, said Sabrina Corlette, co-director of the Center on Health Insurance Reforms at Georgetown University.

For Eric Maciel, the $800 monthly cost of a Covered California plan is too much. To avoid injury, the 28-year-old stays home more and rarely plays pickup soccer at the park — the other players, he added, can get pretty rough.

“That’s another car note,” Maciel said. “I’d be left with nothing.”

Health economists say Maciel is the type of customer insurers need to stabilize their risk pools: young, healthy, and less costly.

Hilton criticized state leaders for passing a revised provider tax he asserts will send premiums soaring and said he wants to inject more competition into California’s health insurance market — but he offered no specific ideas.

Playing Defense

Higher-than-expected state costs coupled with federal cuts have prompted California to retreat on healthcare coverage. Federal funds of the state’s budget and , the state’s Medicaid program.

Gov. Gavin Newsom has frozen enrollment for immigrants without legal status, enacted monthly premiums for some, and federal assistance for legal immigrants such as asylees and refugees.

Newsom and Democratic lawmakers agreed to until July 2027, leaving the next governor to weigh further rollbacks against increased taxes. Becerra, a California native born to Mexican immigrants, , on November’s ballot. Last month, he said he supported legislative efforts to penalize large corporations whose workers rely on Medi-Cal, arguing that taxpayers are subsidizing employers’ low wages and paltry benefits.

County governments, which are legally required to provide healthcare to uninsured residents too poor to afford care, are lobbying lawmakers for funding to treat what they describe as a fresh deluge of patients who need free care.

“It’s a pretty big cliff if all this stuff goes into effect,” said Dietz, the labor center’s healthcare program director. “And there’s a choice whether to make it less bad and maintain coverage for folks.”

This article first appeared on �������ýҕ�l Health News and is republished here under a .

Perhaps she misjudged its speed, she said, because she’d walked only partway across the street when the car, a Toyota sedan, came bearing down on her.

“She should have seen me,” Melville said of the driver. “All of a sudden she was there, and I didn’t have any way to get out of her way. I flew I don’t know how many feet.”

Passersby came to help; the police and an ambulance arrived. Soon Melville, a retired teacher, was at a hospital being treated for multiple fractures. Surgeons replaced her right hip and repaired her broken right elbow. She would probably need a knee replacement soon, too, doctors advised.

After a week’s hospitalization and a month in rehabilitation, Melville, then 73, went home in a wheelchair. Physical therapists helped her gradually progress to a walker and then a cane, but “it was a long process,” she said.

She still contends with back and knee pain and hasn’t been able to resume the hiking and backpacking she loved.

Still, when people say she’s lucky, Melville agrees. “It could have been a lot worse,” she said.

It often is.

Older pedestrians, like Melville, aren’t injured by motor vehicles at a greater rate than younger ones, according to from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. But they’re more likely to die. The death rate for pedestrians over 65 is higher than the average for all ages. Nearly 8,200 pedestrians 65 or older were injured that year — likely an undercount because not all serious crashes and injuries show up in police reports. More than 1,500 died. And the picture is not improving.

Researchers point out that older pedestrians remain more vulnerable to collisions. “They move through intersections at a slower pace,” said Andrew Rundle, an epidemiologist at Columbia University. Impaired hearing or vision can make them less apt to notice approaching vehicles or respond to traffic signals. And because reaction time slows with age, they’re less able to evade a car that’s turning, speeding, or ignoring a signal.

Physically, they “have greater frailty, loss of muscle mass and fragile bones,” Rundle said.

As a result, “the consequences of injuries are stratospherically different the older you get,” said Charles DiMaggio, an injury epidemiologist at the New York University Grossman School of Medicine. “A hip fracture in a 45-year-old is unfortunate. In a 75-year-old, it’s tragic.”

Moreover, after a marked decline in pedestrian deaths among all age groups from 1975 to the mid-2000s, progress for the older population has stalled for nearly 20 years.

shows that from about 2008 through 2024 the fatality rate for pedestrians 70 and older was not only higher than the average for all ages but “has stayed stubbornly flat,” Rundle said.

One factor could be exposure: Older adults appear increasingly likely to be outdoors on foot. The National Health and Aging Trends Study shows that the proportion who report walking for exercise climbed to 65% in 2023, from 60% in 2011. “And we encourage them to, because quality of life includes daily physical activity,” said Stephen Mooney, an injury epidemiologist at the University of Washington.

Further, the increasing popularity of large SUVs and trucks means “the vehicles on the road have become more dangerous” compared to traditional sedans, Rundle said. In June, a documented the way their taller hoods and larger blind zones contributed to rising fatalities.

The latest threat: explosive growth in the use of e-bikes. That’s a generic term often used to refer not only to motor-assisted bicycles that, with pedaling, can reach 28 mph but also to heavier, faster, and, therefore, more dangerous bikes akin to motorcycles. The industry has dubbed those e-motos.

“E-motos need to be regulated like motor vehicles,” said Noah Miterko of the trade association PeopleforBikes, noting that states and cities are . From 2019 to 2022, the rate of by nearly 300%, according to an analysis of emergency room data published in the American Journal of Public Health.

The “micromobility” phenomenon, or the uptick in the use of motorized two-wheeled vehicles, is so recent that researchers lack national data on its risks to pedestrians. In New York City, for instance, pedestrians remain far more likely to be hurt or die in encounters with cars, trucks, or vans. Last year, the of which 105 involved motor vehicles.

But “my clinical colleagues are sounding the alarm,” DiMaggio said. “Emergency departments and trauma teams are saying we need to pay more attention” to e-bike injuries.

One often overlooked . Among adult pedestrians killed in nighttime crashes, about a third had blood alcohol levels indicating intoxication; so did about 20% of those killed during the day. Public health officials have cautioned for years that , and more often.

“It’s almost a blind spot,” Rundle said. “We talk about drunk drivers a lot” but less about inebriated pedestrians.

Nevertheless, crashes that cause injury and death are preventable, said Laura Sandt, co-director of the Highway Safety Research Center at the University of North Carolina. Federal and local government policies have evolved since the era when pedestrian fatalities “seemed just part of the business of driving,” she said.

More than 200 municipalities have adopted the , for instance, a public health focus on programs and environments that increase traffic safety for all ages. Changes that can save lives involve improved street design (pedestrian islands, crosswalks, lighting, and bumped-out curbs making street-crossers more visible), safer signal timing (giving pedestrians a head start over turning cars), and lowered speed limits.

A recent found that the risk was substantially greater in places with a high density of walkable senior destinations, like hospitals and health facilities, pharmacies, and senior and community centers. That suggests the possibility of traffic strategies targeting such neighborhoods, analogous to child and their surroundings.

Traffic safety “shouldn’t rely on a pedestrian’s noticing a car coming and jumping out of the way,” said Mooney, one of the authors of the study. “Our job is to make the system safer for all ages and capacities.”

Melville, who was unable to leap out of danger, is “out and about now,” she said. “I’m not where I was, and I don’t know if I ever will be, but I can function. I’m leading a normal life.”

She still mourns her hikes in Reinhardt Redwood Regional Park and the Point Reyes National Seashore preserve, she said, but “I’m going to get there.”

The New Old Age is produced through a partnership with .

This article first appeared on �������ýҕ�l Health News and is republished here under a .

Can’t see the audio player? Visit kffhealthnews.org to listen.

---

BAKERSFIELD, Calif. — Carlos A. grew up in a family on Medicaid, which made healthcare an afterthought since the public insurance is free for low-income enrollees. But when he received a raise two years ago, he found himself earning too much to qualify for the safety net program. And when he browsed Covered California plans, he found that marketplace prices were still too steep for his comfort.

“It was a panic at first,” Carlos said.

He has a chronic immune condition that needs to be managed by regular medication. KVPR and �������ýҕ�l Health News agreed to withhold his diagnosis and last name to protect him from repercussions related to his health.

“I have to be able to afford my health insurance to go to the doctor, because if not, then there’s no peace of mind,” he added.

Now in his late 20s, he receives employer-based coverage through his job at an Amazon warehouse. In addition to adjusting to monthly premiums and copays for medical visits and prescriptions, he also learned he needs for that medication he had been on for a decade. Without it, he could get only the generic version, which he’s nervous to try. He felt his insurer failed to justify the switch.

“I felt that this was a slap in the face because I’m paying for my premiums,” he said. “It’s a contract. I’m going to pay my premiums, you cover my insurance, and if there’s a copay to my medicine, I’ll pay it. So why are you playing funny business with my medication?”

Carlos is one of many voters weighing healthcare costs in California’s 22nd Congressional District, which stretches from Bakersfield up to parts of western Fresno County. It’s to improve Democrats’ chances, but it remains among the nation’s this cycle and could determine control of the U.S. House. It’s long been held by Republican Rep. David Valadao, who’s been voted into the seat in almost every election since 2012.

Carlos was among dozens of people who attended a rally in Bakersfield this month in support of Democratic challenger Randy Villegas. Carlos said healthcare costs will be among the key considerations in his vote in this fall’s midterm election, calling it an issue that both candidates need to address.

“I do expect them to campaign on healthcare,” Carlos said. “They’d be very foolish not to.”

Democrats are calling out Valadao’s vote for , the GOP tax-and-spending law known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which cut billions in healthcare for poor people. The last time healthcare was on the ballot to this extent, Valadao lost his Central Valley seat during a “blue wave” after the Republican lawmaker voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act. He retook his seat in 2020 by just 1,522 votes.

Valadao has said he because it protected Medicaid, known as Medi-Cal in California, for the most vulnerable, including children, pregnant women, disabled people, and seniors. He supported a rural health fund for hospitals in underserved areas. At the same time, he said the legislation’s work requirements for nondisabled adults and would help maintain the program.

“Polling shows that the majority of Americans want us to have our programs to be sustainable,” Valadao in Bakersfield before the vote. “Sustainable means taking care of those who need it most, and those who should be working in part of society and being productive should be. And it’s not an unfair ask.”

The work requirement’s documentation mandate will take effect in 2027 for Medi-Cal enrollees. According to the California Health Care Foundation, an estimated people are expected to lose coverage by 2030 due to the eligibility and administrative changes.

Villegas, a and is backed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), has highlighted how Valadao’s HR 1 vote will be felt by low-income residents across the district. The Visalia school board member said he grew up as a Medi-Cal recipient. As of 2024, the current 22nd District, which has some overlap with its redistricted replacement, had the — 64% — of any Republican-held seat in the nation, according to KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes �������ýҕ�l Health News.

“David Valadao voted to cut healthcare for nearly 70,000 people in the Valley to give tax breaks to billionaires and his wealthy donors,” Villegas said in a statement. “In Congress, I’ll fight to reverse those cuts and lower healthcare costs.”

Valadao’s office didn’t return requests for comment. touts his support for quality, affordable health coverage and maintaining access for the most vulnerable. Polling also finds that the Trump administration’s recent from states is resonating with Republicans, with for candidates to discuss fraud in government health programs. Republicans in swing districts, including Valadao, have begun emphasizing reform.

But many in the electorate remain undecided in this district where nearly a quarter of voter registrations are nonpartisan. Some said they haven’t heard enough from candidates about affordability solutions, which they hope will change because healthcare costs of their economic anxieties.

Matthew Depue, who lives in Hanford and has private health insurance through his employer, said he has been fortunate to have reliable coverage. His healthcare premiums affect his monthly budget, but he said he hasn’t had to delay care or choose between paying medical bills and other necessities.

Still, Depue said, rising healthcare costs are quickly becoming harder to ignore. Last year, federal lawmakers declined to extend enhanced tax credits, which state officials say contributed to an average for Covered California plans.

He also sees how affordability is pushing people across borders to find cheaper treatments and medications.

“People go from here to Mexico to get stuff done because it’s so much cheaper,” Depue said.

Even though healthcare is important to him, it isn’t the only issue driving his vote. Depue, who doesn’t know whom he’ll vote for, said he would evaluate candidates based on everything they stand for, including their positions on things like taxes and the difficult job market. District 22’s voter registration is 42% Democratic, 26% Republican, and 24% no party preference, according to the California secretary of state’s , the latest available.

For Hanford resident Patreza Newton, affording healthcare has become deeply cumbersome. She hopes that whoever wins the election will work to prioritize healthcare, saying the current health system is unaffordable.

She used to purchase her own plan under Obamacare and is now covered by her church’s insurance. But to keep monthly premiums affordable, she chose a high-deductible plan, which means she has to pay out-of-pocket for some prescriptions and specialist visits.

Newton said she falls into what she calls “the in-between,” people who earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but still struggle to afford coverage.

Years ago, Newton was hit with a hospital bill of roughly $65,000 after surgery and had to apply for financial hardship assistance because she couldn’t afford to pay the bill.

As she considers how to vote this fall, she said she isn’t looking for overwhelming promises but rather a leader who understands what families are experiencing. She’s undecided on a candidate, saying none has shown the initiative she is looking for.

“I do think there should be a way that people can afford it,” she said, “no matter who they are.”

This article is from a partnership that includes , an NPR affiliate in central California, and �������ýҕ�l Health News.

This article first appeared on �������ýҕ�l Health News and is republished here under a .

If the state Office of Health Care Affordability adopts the fines next week, hospitals, medical groups, insurers, and others could face penalties that amount to as much as 125% of the total they spend above the state’s annual growth targets.

The penalty proposal comes after healthcare entities in California were asked to limit growth by 3.5% last year and ramp down to 3% by 2029. Seven hospitals that state officials consider particularly expensive face even smaller growth targets: 1.8% in 2026, dropping to 1.6% by 2029.

Consumer advocates argue that state financial deterrents are critical to bring relief to millions of Californians struggling with high insurance premiums and out-of-pocket expenses. Hospitals accounted for in U.S. health spending from 2022 to 2024, compared with 11% from retail prescription drugs. But adding teeth to those targets sets up a fight with the powerful hospital industry, which has a challenging the spending limits as unreasonable. Hospitals warned that they will cut back on vital services, including in emergency rooms, obstetrics, and behavioral health.

Healthcare industry representatives said the state affordability office hasn’t accounted for year-to-year volatility or other factors beyond the industry’s control, such as rising minimum wages, state earthquake retrofit requirements, and expensive new drugs.

“They’re building the plane while flying it,” said Ben Johnson, group vice president for financial policy at the California Hospital Association. “We know improvements in affordability are needed, but we have serious questions about how and about what the unintended consequences could be under OHCA’s rather stringent approaches.”

When calculating penalties, California regulators would consider various factors, including a healthcare entity’s financial situation, its market impact, and the gravity and number of offenses, according to a in June. And entities would first be given opportunities to implement performance improvement plans to bring their spending into line before penalties are imposed. For those that don’t comply, the board is considering penalties of $10,000 a day or a flat $500,000.

The penalties, which the affordability office’s eight-member board is required by to adopt, are slated for discussion, and a potential vote, at the board’s . The soonest healthcare providers would be subject to penalties is 2028, because it’s expected it will take two years to collect and publicly report spending data to measure against the 2026 targets. The state is still collecting data on how entities performed against the 2025 targets, which aren’t enforceable, according to Andrew DiLuccia, a spokesperson for the California Department of Health Care Access and Information.

States Set Targets

California is one of at least eight states that have set spending targets as part of an expanding effort to curb soaring healthcare spending across the nation. Connecticut, Massachusetts, Oregon, and Rhode Island have also authorized the use of some type of financial penalty. The specifics of each vary widely, although so far no state has applied them.

A by the California Health Care Foundation found that 4 out of 10 state residents said they had medical debt, and 6 in 10 reported that they or a family member had skipped or delayed medical care in the previous 12 months because of cost. Nationwide, about say it is difficult to afford healthcare costs.

After Rosalyn Book got stiches on her chin, the elementary school teacher received a $15,000 ER bill from a local hospital, despite having insurance. Many teachers in her district leave because they can’t afford the cost of healthcare and insurance premiums, she said.

“The healthcare charges are just insanity, and what we get as patients for the care, it’s not the best either,” said Book, president of the Monterey Bay Teachers Association. “If you’re a working, regular individual in terms of how much you make, the cost of living and especially the healthcare is just not doable.”

Meanwhile, hospitals are warning there’s a risk of more closures. According to Yale University’s , 17 hospitals have closed in the state since 2016, compared with only six openings.

Hospitals and other healthcare providers have said the proposed multimillion-dollar penalties are too steep and could destabilize their operations at a time when they’re facing funding challenges, including massive federal cuts to Medicaid, the end of enhanced federal subsidies for Affordable Care Act plans, and a sharp rise in uninsured patients. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, passed by congressional Republicans and signed by President Donald Trump last summer, is expected to reduce federal Medicaid spending by more than — including by in California — and increase the rolls of the uninsured in the U.S. by over a decade.

Johnson said hospitals raise prices on commercial payers to offset the expense of treating uninsured patients, as well as patients on Medicaid and Medicare, which can reimburse care providers at rates that fall short of treatment costs.

In addition, said Anete Millers, vice president of legal and regulatory affairs at the California Association of Health Plans, tax increases on managed-care plans recently to offset federal Medicaid cuts will force plans to increase their prices for consumers.

“Some spending pressures originate outside of the control of health plans and are the result of public policy decisions rather than underlying changes in healthcare utilization or efficiency,” she told the affordability office’s .

Kristof Stremikis, the director of market analysis and insight at the nonprofit California Health Care Foundation, acknowledged that external forces can drive costs but said that plenty of unnecessary spending is within the healthcare system’s control, such as administrative waste and duplicative tests and procedures. of U.S. healthcare spending is considered wasteful, according to .

Elizabeth Mitchell, a former Office of Health Care Affordability board member whose term ended in May, agreed.

“Every business has external challenges,” said Mitchell, who is now president and CEO of Purchaser Business Group on Health, a nonprofit coalition representing large employers. “The hospital industry has not taken accountability to actually manage costs. I have heard those excuses for decades, and at some point, they have to make changes.”

First Step To Bring Down Costs

of five states with cost growth benchmarks, published in June, found that some have succeeded in modestly slowing healthcare spending, particularly those with enforcement mechanisms. However, spending growth in most states has still set. 

Jeremy Vandehey, a consultant with the Peterson-Milbank Program for Sustainable Health Care Costs, said setting benchmarks and collecting data to analyze which entities meet them is only a first step. Armed with information about what and who is driving up costs, states are more empowered to take additional action, such as imposing penalties or regulating prices, to bring down costs, he said.

“I don’t think anybody in any state is declaring victory on healthcare costs, but I wouldn’t say that that means the programs are a failure,” Vandehey said. “In all of these states, there’s much more robust conversations happening about, OK, we haven’t solved our cost crisis, so we need additional action.”

This article first appeared on �������ýҕ�l Health News and is republished here under a .