Then Medicare launched an 18-month pilot program that offers GLP-1 medications to some enrollees for only $50 a month. La Marca thought he might finally be able to afford the drug.

“I thought, ‘Thank God, there’s a path,’” said La Marca, who lives in Basking Ridge, New Jersey, and has tried numerous diets and exercise regimes.

But the 68-year-old’s celebration was short-lived.

His application to the pilot program was denied.

La Marca has severe obstructive sleep apnea, one of several diagnoses that exclude patients from the Bridge program’s $50 monthly price. The notification didn’t say why he was rejected. He thinks that if he didn’t have that diagnosis, he would qualify due to his weight.

“I’m obese, morbidly obese, BMI 42. I had quadruple heart bypass surgery. I’m at risk for stroke. I’m prediabetic. And yet I can’t get it. I’m livid,” he said.

A Temporary Patch for a Long-Standing Gap

About 1 in 5 American adults have taken a GLP-1 medication, and most of them, including those with health insurance, say the drugs are . Federal law has long barred Medicare from covering drugs prescribed solely for weight loss, which is why the Medicare GLP-1 Bridge program made a big splash when it launched in July.

It’s a short-term pilot program in which Medicare is offering coverage of three GLP-1s for weight loss and management, to see if that would save Medicare money later. Eligible patients must be enrolled in Medicare Part D, a prescription drug coverage add-on to Medicare. Even though people must have Part D insurance to qualify, the preauthorization request doesn’t go through the insurer; it’s instead submitted to a separate system run by a contractor for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

The pilot includes Wegovy, the KwikPen formulation of Zepbound, and the oral medication Foundayo.

Under the pilot, many Medicare beneficiaries with a body mass index of 35 or higher — the — qualify for coverage of one of those drugs, if prescribed. Those otherwise eligible who have a BMI of 27 to 34 can qualify if they also have certain health conditions, such as prediabetes or cardiovascular disease.

But buried in the fine print is a distinction that’s tripping up patients like La Marca: The $50 price under Bridge applies only to people using the drug solely for weight loss. Anyone who has a qualifying medical condition that the Food and Drug Administration has approved GLP-1s to treat, such as Type 2 diabetes or moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea, is instead routed back to their Medicare Part D prescription drug plan, which can require copays of hundreds of dollars a month for GLP-1s.

“The Bridge program was designed to target those people who can’t get GLP-1 coverage through Part D but would benefit from taking one for weight loss,” said Juliette Cubanski, who directs the Program on Medicare Policy at KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ.

The cost to Medicare of subsidizing the drugs will depend largely on how many people use the program, and the federal government hasn’t released an estimate.

Cubanski that 3.8 million people qualify and that, if a quarter of them enroll in Bridge and remain on treatment for the program’s full 18 months, it will cost Medicare about $3.3 billion. If three-quarters enroll, costs could rise to $10 billion.

If the government expanded the program to include the additional 5.9 million people who are overweight and already eligible for GLP-1 coverage through Medicare Part D, it would add billions more to the program’s cost.

The demonstration’s initial weeks have been positive, and most prior authorization requests have been completed in under 12 hours, CMS spokesperson Timothy Foster said.

“This has allowed thousands of eligible beneficiaries to access GLP-1 medications for weight loss at pharmacies nationwide,” Foster said.

GLP-1s Aren’t Covered

Patients like La Marca are left in a tough spot, qualifying for Part D coverage of a GLP-1 but facing much higher cost sharing.

“‘Coverage’ doesn’t always mean ‘affordable,’” said primary care physician , who describes herself as a “big proponent” of GLP-1s and practices at Sunflower Medical Group in Roeland Park, Kansas.

The Bridge program is leaving behind patients with the greatest medical need, she said. She noted that many Medicare patients already must navigate prior authorization and spend months trying alternate, often cheaper treatments, a process known as step therapy, before finally getting approval — only to arrive at the pharmacy counter and discover that their GLP-1 copays will run them $200 to $600 a month, if not more.

Researchers studying how Medicare insurers cover GLP-1s that recipients have faced increases in out-of-pocket costs and that almost all plans now require prior authorization, which can make getting the drugs more difficult.

Chris Bond, a spokesperson for insurance industry trade group AHIP, blamed drugmakers’ prices, “which they alone set and they alone can lower.”

La Marca’s insurer declined to answer specific questions about La Marca’s case.

Left Waiting

For now, La Marca’s GLP-1 prescription remains unfilled. The severe sleep apnea diagnosis that helps establish his medical need is also what excludes him from the discount program that would bring the cost within his reach.

As he reflected on his appeals and the dead ends, La Marca paused, his eyes filling with tears of frustration.

“This is now my quest, because it’s my only chance to improve my health,” he said. “It’s the only thing left. I’ve tried everything.”

This article first appeared on ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ and is republished here under a .

Although she hasn’t dispensed any, On plans to keep them on hand. “It’s good to have if a patient comes in and doesn’t have health insurance,” she said. “Or just in case of emergencies.”

Seven months after the launch of its own low-cost insulin brand, state health officials said California has distributed more than 120,000 five-pen packs of insulin glargine priced at $55 each, significantly less than the $89 to $411 that the state says most popular brand names charge before any retail markups or consumer discounts.

While it represents a tiny amount of the state’s insulin pipeline, it marks the first time a state is competing against the insulin drugmakers — Eli Lilly, Sanofi, and Novo Nordisk — under its own prescription drug label. CalRx, Gov. Gavin Newsom’s experimental initiative, has dual aims: to act as an emergency supplier for people who are uninsured or can’t afford their prescriptions, and to disrupt the nation’s deep-pocketed pharmaceutical industry, which cost the U.S. in 2024, the federal government reported in June.

Newsom, a Democrat considering a presidential run in 2028, is expected to make healthcare a central pillar of his national platform as he concludes his second and final term as governor. To create the state brand of generic drugs, California inked a $50 million contract with , a Utah-based nonprofit drugmaker, to develop the CalRx insulin, known as a biosimilar. Though major distributors make the drug available in pharmacies around the state, uptake has been limited.

Newsom’s goal is to saturate the insulin market and offer generic versions of drugs either high in cost or low in supply, or that can improve public health. The state is also distributing free naloxone, used in a nasal spray to reverse opioid overdoses, and trying to bring albuterol inhalers to public schools for students with asthma emergencies. In the next two years, the state plans to launch epinephrine injectables, commonly known by the brand name EpiPen, which are used to treat severe allergic reactions, as well as a state-branded medication to treat tuberculosis.

Before he leaves office in January, Newsom said, he wants to add generic GLP-1 medications to compete with brand-name drugs such as Ozempic and Wegovy. The drugs have , but employers have about their cost.

Taking on drug costs is a winning political issue for both Democrats and Republicans, who have for years tried to rein in as Americans feel the pinch of high prices at pharmacy counters, in doctors’ offices, and from health insurance premiums. The U.S. spends roughly on prescription drugs as other industrialized countries. Six in 10 adults in the U.S. say they’re worried about being able to afford their prescription drug costs, according to a , and 4 in 10 say they’ve tried to save money such as by skipping doses and not filling prescriptions.

, President Donald Trump launched to potentially lower out-of-pocket costs for consumers. But TrumpRx doesn’t produce drugs; rather, it directs consumers to find more affordable medications with coupons or on drugmakers’ websites. Newsom, in contrast, is trying to drive down the underlying price of medicines by increasing the manufacturing and availability of generic drugs.

While some people with diabetes may benefit from CalRx insulin, California’s generic drug effort is largely symbolic at this time, said Geoffrey Joyce, director of health policy at the Schaeffer Center at the University of Southern California. “There is some value, but it’s for a very limited number of drugs for just a fraction of the population,” Joyce said.

And TrumpRx isn’t helping at a large scale either, Joyce added, because many medications it advertises have cheaper generic versions available elsewhere. It would be better, he said, to develop large-scale initiatives that tackle key drivers of the high cost of drugs, for rare cancers for instance, and produce safer and higher-quality medicines.

“What you really need is a national effort that focuses on vulnerabilities like supply shortages and increasing the supply of generic products for higher-priced drugs,” Joyce said.

Market Disruptor

CalRx aims to make insulin more affordable and accessible for the California adults diagnosed with diabetes. Newsom last year singled out the three major drugmakers that control more than 90% of the global insulin market, while also targeting intermediaries known as pharmacy benefit managers for promoting higher-priced drugs over cheaper generic alternatives.

Patients with health insurance often receive discounts at the pharmacy counter and do not pay sticker prices, yet those discount programs can be hard to navigate and patients can face restrictions. While drugmakers and pharmacy benefit managers said they’ve already initiated on out-of-pocket costs and pass price discounts on to consumers, Newsom argues that consumers still struggle to afford their medications.

He has criticized pharmaceutical companies for gouging Californians and contended that the industry’s discounting schemes don’t adequately address inflated prescription drug spending, which in the U.S. rose 7.9% in the most recent reporting year.

In his announcement last year that CalRx insulin would go on sale in January 2026, Newsom said the industry had been using discounts to distract consumers from solutions that could bring overall prices own. “One of the things that all of us should be increasingly concerned about is announcements around caps, announcements around discounts,” he said.

In January, California joined in setting . It also passed attempting to ban by pharmacy benefit managers.

Representatives for drug companies and pharmacy benefit managers said insulin is largely an affordable medicine in the U.S., arguing that consumers have benefited from discounts.

“While insulin prices, set solely by pharma companies, may be high in some instances, the amount patients are paying out of pocket has declined significantly,” said Christine Rex, senior director of state public affairs for the Pharmaceutical Care Management Association, which represents pharmacy benefit managers.

Reid Porter, a spokesperson for Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, which represents brand-name drugmakers, said PBMs have driven up costs for consumers by excluding lower-cost medicines from their lists of covered drugs. “Too often, patients face a system in which insurers and PBMs exclude coverage of those medicines on formularies because of supply-chain incentives,” he said.

Where To Find CalRx Insulin

CalRx insulin has been slow to reach pharmacies around the state, and in interviews, patient advocates said many people with diabetes aren’t aware it’s an option.

In Sacramento, pharmacist Sharon Ngo, who works at a Safeway pharmacy, was surprised to learn that California had a long-acting insulin product on the market. She didn’t know that CalRx insulin was interchangeable with Lantus, which was on back order for roughly two weeks.

“I had no idea this was available,” she said as she took notes on a pad of paper. “We’re going to give this a try.”

CalRx insulin has a suggested retail price of $55 a pack and is available with or without insurance. California has inked deals with four health insurers to cover CalRx insulin on their health plan formularies, potentially making it cheaper, depending on copays. They include Anthem Blue Cross, Blue Shield of California, the Valley Health Plan for Santa Clara County employees, and the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, according to the state Department of Health Care Access and Information.

Elizabeth Landsberg, the department’s director, said the state is working to get more insurers to cover CalRx insulin and to provide it at more pharmacies. The state doesn’t know how many boxes have been dispensed. However, Landsberg said it was more meaningful that the state had reached agreements with to distribute its product in California. Currently, CalRx insulin is available on Amazon and at Costco, as well as at some retail and grocery store pharmacies including CVS, Walgreens, and Walmart.

“What we’re really trying to do is change market behavior and offer both affordable and transparent pricing,” Landsberg said. “The rebates and discounts are hard for consumers to understand and can change at any time, so we are trying to be straightforward and say, ‘Let’s not play this shell game anymore.’”

Allan Coukell, chief government affairs and public policy officer at Civica, said the company first partnered with the state on long-acting insulin that helps patients keep blood sugar steady for 24 hours or more. Next, it plans to help California develop rapid-acting insulin, which is used to pull elevated glucose down within minutes, to compete with brand names such as Humalog and NovoLog.

Health insurance companies welcomed the state’s efforts, in part because they could help save money they pay out on prescriptions.

“Making this drug available is really about helping people improve their health,” said Paul Markovich, CEO of Blue Shield of California’s parent company. “And the more supply we can get on the market, the more we can get rid of the profit motives in the pharmaceutical industry.”

One July afternoon in the Southern California city of Corona, Chris Noble went to a CVS pharmacy to get a box of CalRx insulin. The pharmacist didn’t have any on hand, but Noble, a healthcare organizer with Type 1 diabetes, was told he could get a prescription filled in 24 hours.

“I have insurance, but I see myself using this if I’m traveling and something happens like my insulin pump malfunctions,” he said. “Now I know I can go to a CVS and get insulin within a day.”

This article first appeared on ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ and is republished here under a .

As night falls and temperatures drop, he erects a tent and builds a fire beneath a canopy of pine, hemlock, and cedar trees.

He evades authorities by rotating use of three tents of different colors at three campsites. As day breaks, he dismantles his shelter, rolls up his belongings, and hides them for the next night. “They don’t see you if you’re in the woods,” the 32-year-old said. “But make sure it’s broken down by morning or they’ll find you.”

During the day, he wanders, stopping at a public library to warm up or a soup kitchen to eat. What’s important is to not draw attention to himself for being homeless.

“Police want us out of the way,” he said, dressed in a gray jacket and carrying none of his possessions. “Out of sight, out of mind.”

Ibrahim has been deliberate about blending in since August, when President Donald Trump placed the district’s police under and ordered National Guard soldiers to patrol its streets. The president homeless people to leave immediately. “There will be no ‘MR. NICE GUY,’” .

The Trump administration says encampment sweeps have reduced the visibility of homelessness, thereby enhancing the city. “There is no disputing that Washington, DC is a safer, cleaner, and more beautiful city thanks to President Trump’s historic actions to restore the nation’s capital,” White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers said.

While there may appear to be fewer homeless people in the nation’s capital now, they have not disappeared.

In interviews, homeless people said they are in a constant shuffle, hiding in plain sight. During the day, they stay on the move, grabbing meals at soup kitchens and resting on occasion in public libraries, on park benches, or at bus stops. At night, many unsheltered people bed down in business doorways, on park sidewalks, and on church stoops. Some ride the bus all night, while a few shelter in emergency rooms. Others find respite in the woods or flee to suburbs in Virginia or Maryland.

There are about 5,100 homeless people in Washington, D.C., including in temporary shelters, according to an . After Trump ordered the crackdown on public homelessness, people living in makeshift communities scattered and are now living in the shadows. City officials estimated in August that nearly 700 homeless people were living outdoors without tents or other shelter.

As winter draws near, they are exposed to the elements and grow sicker as chronic ailments such as diabetes and heart disease go untreated. Street medicine providers say that, since the National Guard was deployed, they have faced enormous difficulty finding patients. Many caught up in sweeps have had their lifesaving medications thrown away, and they are more likely to miss medical appointments because they are constantly on the move. Street medicine providers say they can’t find their patients to deliver medication or transport them to medical appointments. The constant chaos can suck patients with mental illness and substance use deeper into drug and alcohol addiction, raising the risk of overdose.

Caseworkers report similar disruptions, saying as clients get lost, they break connections essential for obtaining housing documents, particularly IDs and Social Security cards.

District officials and health providers say this cascade will make homelessness worse, threatening public health and public safety and racking up enormous costs for the health care system.

“It was already hard locating people, but the federal presence just made it worse,” said Tobie Smith, a street medicine doctor and the executive director of Street Health D.C.

The Homeless Shuffle

Chris Jones was born and raised in Washington, D.C., but now is homeless, having been pushed out of his tent near the White House in the initial days of the federal homelessness crackdown. He said two of his tents were taken during sweeps. Now, sleeping on a sidewalk outside a church, he doesn’t bother trying to get another one. “Why? What’s the point? It’ll just get thrown away again.”

Jones, 57, has a severe knee injury that prevents him from walking some days and said he was scheduled for a knee replacement in December. He said it’s important to stay where he is — he relies on a nearby drugstore to refill his medications for bipolar disorder, diabetes, and high blood pressure. When he’s hungry, he goes to a soup kitchen for a meal or tries to get a cheeseburger and a soda from a fast-food joint across the street.

It’s important for him to stay outside the church, he said, so his case manager can find him when a permanent housing slot opens up. If it gets too cold, he said, he will cross the street and sleep in the doorway of a business, which can provide a bit more shelter. He wants to get indoors, but for now, he waits.

Since taking control of Washington’s police force, the Trump administration has on cities and counties across the nation to clear homeless encampments under threat of arrest, citation, or detention. It has ordered or threatened similar National Guard deployments in Los Angeles; ; and other cities with large homeless populations.

Rogers, the White House spokesperson, said the president is maintaining National Guard and federal law enforcement presence in the nation’s capital “to ensure the long-term success of the federal operation.” Since March, city and federal officials have removed more than 130 homeless encampments, she said, though some local homelessness experts say that number could be inflated.

The Supreme Court last year made it easier for elected officials and law enforcement to fine or arrest homeless people for living outside. Then, in July of this year, the president issued an executive order calling for a nationwide crackdown on urban camping, including a massive removal of people living outdoors and forced mental health or substance use treatment.

Trump is also spearheading an overhaul of homelessness policy, moving to and services for homeless people. The move would limit the use of a long-standing federal policy known as “Housing First” that offers housing without mandating mental health or addiction treatment. The National Alliance to End Homelessness warns the move risks displacing in permanent supportive housing. The Department of Housing and Urban Development paused the plan on Dec. 8 to make revisions, which it “intends” to do, .

City officials say they are complying with the Trump administration’s forceful campaign against homeless people sheltering outside. Pressured by the White House, local officials said they’ve gotten more aggressive in breaking up camps. Advocates for homeless people say some of the sweeps have been conducted at night and others with little or no notice to move. City leaders believe they could be done more compassionately by offering services and shelter.

“We’ve pivoted from the notion of allowing encampments if they didn’t violate public health or safety to a position of, ‘We don’t want you in the streets,’” said Wayne Turnage, deputy mayor for District of Columbia Health and Human Services, who oversees encampment cleanups. “It’s unsafe, it’s unhealthy, and it’s dangerous.” Yet he acknowledges the encampment sweeps can waste city resources as caseworkers and street medicine providers scramble to find their clients and patients.

Advocates say the Trump administration is inciting fear and mistrust between homeless people and those working to help them while wasting taxpayer dollars used to provide care and place people into housing. There are, however, far fewer tents and large-scale encampments visible to tourists and residents.

“People found safety in those communities and service providers could find them. Now there are people with guns and flashing lights dislocating folks experiencing homelessness without notice and just throwing stuff away,” said Jesse Rabinowitz, campaign and communications director for the National Homelessness Law Center.

District officials say some people have accepted emergency shelter. But even as the city works to connect people with services and expand shelter capacity, officials acknowledge there isn’t enough permanent housing or temporary beds for everyone.

And there will be fewer places for people living outside to go.

The city, in its fiscal year 2026 budget, concentrated its homelessness funding on families, funding 336 new permanent supportive housing vouchers. Yet it cut funding for temporary housing for both families and individuals and provided no new permanent supportive housing vouchers for individuals. That means fewer housing slots for single adults, who make up most of those wandering the streets. City officials said, however, that they have slotted 260 more permanent housing units for homeless individuals or families into their construction pipeline.

Worsening Health Care

The fallout is inundating local soup kitchens with demand, including Miriam’s Kitchen in Foggy Bottom. The local institution provides hot meals, housing assistance, and warm blankets to people in need.

Caseworkers say it’s becoming increasingly difficult to help clients secure IDs and other documents needed for housing and other social services.

“I’m looking everywhere, but I can’t find people,” said Cyria Knight, a caseworker at Miriam’s Kitchen. “Most of my clients went to Virginia.”

It’s unclear how much of the district’s homeless population has fanned out to neighboring Virginia and Maryland communities. There were an estimated in the region in January, months before Trump’s crackdown. Four of six counties around Washington saw homelessness rise from 2024, while it .

“I’m not seeing my patients for a month or more, and then when I do, their chronic conditions are uncontrolled. They’ve been in and out of the ER, and they’re more likely to be hospitalized,” said Anna Graham, a street medicine nurse practitioner for , a network of clinics in Washington. “It’s just setting us back.”

Graham’s team stations its mobile medical van outside Miriam’s Kitchen at dinnertime to better find patients.

Willie Taylor, 63, was figuring out where to sleep for the night after grabbing dinner from Miriam’s. He saw Graham to receive his medications for advanced lung disease, seizures, chronic pain, and other health disorders.

He has difficulty walking and needs a wheelchair, which is complicated because he doesn’t have a permanent address. Taylor and his medical providers say his previous wheelchairs have been stolen while he slept outdoors at night. He uses a shopping cart to keep him steady, walking around all day, until nightfall.

On a cold November night, Graham helped Taylor figure out his daily medications and checked his vitals. The team handed him a warm coat and hand warmers before sending him back outside.

After walking for about 45 minutes, he found a piece of park pavement where he could build a bed out of tarps and sleeping bags.

“My body can’t take this,” Taylor said, preparing to sleep. “There’s ice on the concrete. I’m in so much pain; it hurts so much worse when it’s cold.”

Homeless people and cost the health care system more than housed people, largely because conditions go untreated on the streets, and when they do seek care, many go to the ER. Among Medicaid enrollees, homeless people have been estimated to incur $18,764 a year in spending, compared with $7,561 for other enrollees.

Over at the So Others Might Eat soup kitchen earlier that day, Tyree Kelley was finishing his breakfast of a sausage sandwich and hard-boiled eggs. He was considering going into a shelter. The streets were becoming too dangerous for someone like him, he said, referring to the police and National Guard presence. He was feeling the loss of an encampment community that would watch his back.

He’s been to the ER at least seven times this year to get care for a broken ankle he sustained falling off an electric scooter. The accident caused him to lose his job and health insurance as a garbageman, he said. His situation has caused him to sink deeper into a depression that began three years ago after his mother died, he said.

Then his father and sister died this year. He began to numb his pain with beer.

“You get so depressed, being out here,” said Kelley, 42. “It gets addictive. You start to not care about even changing your clothes.”

His depression also led him to seek out marijuana. Then he smoked a joint laced with fentanyl. The overdose sent him to the hospital for days.

“I actually died and came back,” he said, crediting other homeless people with administering naloxone and saving his life. “I need to get out of this, but I feel so stuck.”

A few blocks west of the White House sits a vacant plot of land that earlier this year held more than a dozen tents. Workers in the area sense what they don’t always see.

“I was here when this was all cleared. A bulldozer came in, and all their stuff was thrown in a garbage truck,” said Ray Szemborski, who works across the street from the now-empty lot. “People are still homeless. I still see them around underneath the bridge. Sometimes they’re at bus stops, sometimes just walking around. Their tents are gone but they’re still here.”

This article first appeared on ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ and is republished here under a .

Permanent changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program are coming regardless of the outcome of at least two federal lawsuits that seek to prevent the government from cutting off November SNAP benefits. The lawsuits challenge the Trump administration’s refusal to release emergency funds to keep the program operating during the government shutdown.

A federal judge in Rhode Island ordered the government to use those funds to keep SNAP going. A Massachusetts judge in a separate lawsuit also said the government must use its food aid contingency funds to pay for SNAP, but gave the Trump administration until Nov. 3 to come up with a plan.

Amid that uncertainty, food banks across the U.S. braced for a surge in demand, with the possibility that millions of people will be cut off from the food program that helps them buy groceries.

On Oct. 28, a vanload of SpaghettiOs, tuna, and other groceries arrived at Gateway Food Pantry in Arnold, Missouri. It may be Gateway’s last shipment for a while. The food pantry south of St. Louis largely serves families with school-age children, but it has already exhausted its yearly food budget because of the surge in demand, said Executive Director Patrick McKelvey.

New Disabled South, a Georgia-based nonprofit that advocates for people with disabilities, announced that it was offering one-time payments of $100 to $250 to individuals and families who were expected to lose SNAP benefits in the 14 states it serves.

Less than 48 hours later, the nonprofit had received more than 16,000 requests totaling $3.6 million, largely from families, far more than the organization had funding for.

“It’s unreal,” co-founder Dom Kelly said.

The threat of a SNAP funding lapse is a preview of what’s to come when changes to the program that were included in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that President Donald Trump signed in July take effect.

The domestic tax-and-spending law cuts $187 billion within the next decade from SNAP. That’s a nearly 20% decrease from current funding levels, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

The new rules shift many food and administrative costs to states, which may lead some to consider withdrawing from the program, which helped about 42 million people buy groceries last year. Separate from the new law, the administration is also pushing states to limit SNAP purchases by barring such things as candy and soda.

All that “puts us in uncharted territory for SNAP,” said Cindy Long, a former deputy undersecretary at the Department of Agriculture who is now a national adviser at the law firm Manatt, Phelps & Phillips.

The country’s first food stamps were issued at the end of the Great Depression, when the poverty-stricken population couldn’t afford farmers’ products. Today, instead of stamps, recipients use debit cards. But the program still buoys farmers and food retailers and prevents hunger during economic downturns.

The CBO estimates that will lose food assistance as a result of in the budget law, including applying work requirements to more people and shifting more costs to states. Trump administration leaders have backed the changes as a way to limit waste, to , and to .

This is the biggest cut to SNAP in its history, and it is coming against the backdrop of rising food prices and a fragile labor market.

The exact toll of the cuts will be difficult to measure, because the Trump administration that measures food insecurity.

Here are five big changes that are coming to SNAP and what they mean for Americans’ health:

1. Want food benefits? They will be harder to get.

Under the new law, people will have to file more paperwork to access SNAP benefits.

Many recipients are already required to work, volunteer, or participate in other eligible activities for 80 hours a month to get money on their benefit cards. The new law to previously exempted groups, including homeless people, veterans, and young people who were in foster care when they turned 18. The expanded work requirements also apply to parents with children 14 or older and adults ages 55 to 64.

, if recipients fail to document each month that they meet the requirements, they will be limited to three months of SNAP benefits in a .

“That is draconian,” said Elaine Waxman, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute, a nonprofit research group. About 1 in 8 adults reported having lost SNAP benefits because they had problems filing their paperwork, according to .

Certain refugees, asylum-seekers, and other lawful immigrants are cut out of SNAP entirely under the new law.

2. States will have to chip in more money and resources.

The federal law drastically increases what each state will have to pay to keep the program.

Until now, states have needed to pay for only half the administrative costs and none of the food costs, with the rest covered by the federal government.

Under the new law, states are on the hook for 75% of the administrative costs and must cover a portion of the food costs. That amounts to an estimated median cost increase for states of more than 200%, according to by the Georgetown Center on Poverty and Inequality.

A ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ analysis shows that a single funding shift related to the cost of food could put states on the hook for an additional $11 billion.

All states participate in the SNAP program, but they could opt out. In June, nearly wrote to congressional leaders warning that some states wouldn’t be able to come up with the money to continue the program.

“If states are forced to end their SNAP programs, hunger and poverty will increase, children and adults will get sicker, grocery stores in rural areas will struggle to stay open, people in agriculture and the food industry will lose jobs, and state and local economies will suffer,” the governors wrote.

3. Will the changes lead to more healthy eating?

The Trump administration, through its “Make America Healthy Again” platform, has made healthy eating a priority.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has championed the restrictions on soda and candy purchases within the food aid program. To date, to limit what people can buy with SNAP dollars.

Federal officials previously blocked such restrictions, because they were difficult for states and stores to implement and they boost stigma around SNAP, according to . In 2018, the first Trump administration to ban sugar-sweetened drinks and candy.

A store may decide that hassle isn’t worth participating in the program and drop out of it, leaving SNAP recipients fewer places to shop.

People who receive SNAP are no more likely to buy sweets or salty snacks than people who shop without the benefits, . Research shows that encouraging healthy food choices is than regulating purchases.

When people have less money to spend on food, they often resort to cheaper, unhealthier alternatives that keep them sated longer rather than paying for more expensive food that is healthy and fresh but quick to perish.

4. How will SNAP cuts affect health?

Advocacy organizations working to end hunger in the nation say the cuts will have long-term health effects.

Research has found that kids in households with limited access to food to have a mental disorder. Similarly, food insecurity is linked to .

Working-age people with food insecurity to experience chronic disease. That high blood pressure, arthritis, diabetes, asthma, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Those health issues come with costs for individuals. Low-income adults who aren’t on SNAP more a year on health care than those who are.

lived in households with limited or uncertain access to food in 2023.

5. What does this mean for the nation’s food supply chain?

SNAP spending directly boosts grocery stores, their suppliers, and the transportation and farming industries. Additionally, when low-income households have help accessing food, they’re more likely to spend money on other needs, such as prescriptions or car repairs. All that means that every dollar spent through SNAP generates at least $1.50 in economic activity, .

A report by associations representing convenience stores, grocers, and the food industry estimated it to comply with the new SNAP restrictions.

Advocates warn stores may pass the costs on to shoppers, or they may close.

This article first appeared on ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ and is republished here under a .

Next to the router sat medications, vitamin D pills, and Williams’ blood glucose monitor kit.

“I haven’t used that thing in a month or so,” said Williams, 72, waving toward the kit. Diagnosed with diabetes more than six years ago, she has developed nerve pain from neuropathy in both legs.

Williams is one of nearly 3 million Americans who live in mostly rural counties that lack both health care and reliable high-speed internet, according to an analysis by ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ, which showed that these people tend to live sicker and die younger than others in America.

Compared with those in other regions, patients across the rural South, Appalachia, and remote West are most often unable to make a video call to their doctor or log into their patient portals. Both are essential ways to participate in the U.S. medical system. And Williams is among those who can do neither.

This year, more than $42 billion allocated in the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act is expected to begin flowing to states as part of a national “” initiative launched by the Biden administration. But the program faces uncertainty after Commerce Department Secretary Howard Lutnick a “rigorous review” asserting that the previous administration’s approach was full of “woke mandates.”

High rates of chronic illness and historical inequities are hallmarks of many of the more than 200 U.S. counties with poor services that ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ identified. Dozens of doctors, academics, and advocates interviewed for this article unanimously agreed that limited internet service hinders medical care and access.

Where Health Care Shortages and Broadband Deserts Intersect

Nearly 3 million people live sicker and die earlier on average in more than 200 counties nationwide, according to a ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ analysis. These “dead zone” counties have three things in common: They lack access to high-speed and reliable internet, primary care providers, and behavioral health specialists. Hover over counties to explore local data.

Note: Primary care deserts have 281 or more Medicaid enrollees per provider, while the national median is 218. Behavioral health deserts have 1,680 or more residents per provider, while the national median is 1,119. Medicaid data as of 2020, except for Texas’, which is as of 2019. For five states, Medicaid data had quality issues, so counties were not categorized. Behavioral health data as of 2021. FCC data as of June 2024. • <a href=”/news/article/dead-zone-sickest-counties-slow-internet-broadband-desert-health-care-provider-shortage/#methodology&#8221; target=”_blank”>Read our full methodology</a> • <a href=”/download-the-data-dead-zone/&#8221; target=”_blank” >Download the data</a> Sources: FCC National Broadband Map, George Washington University’s Fitzhugh Mullan Institute for Health Workforce Equity, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, U.S. Census Bureau, County Health Rankings & Roadmaps Credit: Holly K. Hacker and Lydia Zuraw/³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ

Without fast, reliable broadband, “all we’re going to do is widen health care disparities within telemedicine,” said Rashmi Mullur, an endocrinologist and chief of telehealth at VA Greater Los Angeles. Patients with diabetes who also use telemedicine are more likely to get care and control their blood sugar, .

Diabetes requires constant management. Left untreated, uncontrolled blood sugar can cause blindness, kidney failure, nerve damage, and eventually death.

Williams, who sees a nurse practitioner at the county hospital in the next town, said she is not interested in using remote patient monitoring or video calls.

“I know how my sugar affects me,” Williams said. “I get a headache if it’s too high.” She gets weaker when it’s down, she said, and always carries snacks like crackers or peppermints.

Williams said she could even drink a soda pop — orange, grape — when her sugar is low but would not drink one when she felt it was high because she would get “kind of goozie-woozy.”

‘This Is America’

Connectivity dead zones persist in American life despite at least $115 billion lawmakers have thrown toward fixing the inequities. Federal broadband efforts are fragmented and overlapping, with more than 133 funding programs administered by 15 agencies, according to a .

“This is America. It’s not supposed to be this way,” said Karthik Ganesh, chief executive of Tampa, Florida-based OnMed, a telehealth company that in September installed a walk-in booth at the Boligee Community Center about 10 minutes from Williams’ home. Residents can call up free life-size video consultations with an OnMed health care provider and use equipment to check their weight and blood pressure.

OnMed, which partnered with local universities and the Alabama Cooperative Extension System, relies on SpaceX’s Starlink to provide a high-speed connection in lieu of other options.

A short drive from the community center, beyond Boligee’s Main Street with its deserted buildings and an empty railroad depot and down a long gravel drive, is the 22-acre property where Williams lives.

Last fall, Williams washed a dish in her kitchen, with its unforgiving linoleum-topped concrete floors. A few months earlier, she said, a man at the community center signed her up for “diabetic shoes” to help with her sore feet. They never arrived.

As Williams spoke, steam rose from a pot of boiling potatoes on the stove. Another pan sizzled with hamburger steak. And on a back burner simmered a mix of Velveeta cheese, diced tomatoes, and peppers.

She spent years on her feet as head cook at a diner in Cleveland, Ohio. The oldest of nine, Williams returned to her family home in Greene County more than 20 years ago to care for her mother and a sister, who both died from cancer in the back bedroom where she now sleeps.

Williams looked out a window and recalled when the landscape was covered in cotton that she once helped pick. Now three houses stand in a carefully tended clearing surrounded by tall trees. One belongs to a brother and the other to a sister who drives with her daily to the community center for exercise, prayers, and friendship with other seniors.

All the surviving siblings, Williams said, have diabetes. “I don’t know how we became diabetic,” she said. Neither of their parents had been diagnosed with the illness.

In Greene County, an estimated quarter of adults have diabetes — twice the national average. The county, which has about 7,600 residents, also has among the nation’s highest rates for several chronic diseases such as high blood pressure, stroke, and obesity, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data shows.

Least-Served Counties Have Higher Rates of Diabetes Than Most-Served Counties

Below is a look at two extremes. Counties in the U.S. with the most connectivity and health care access are profoundly different from those that lack services.

Note: Diabetes rates are crude (unadjusted) <br> Sources: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, FCC National Broadband Map, George Washington University’s Fitzhugh Mullan Institute for Health Workforce Equity • <a href=”/news/article/dead-zone-sickest-counties-slow-internet-broadband-desert-health-care-provider-shortage/#methodology&#8221; target=”_blank”>Read our full methodology.</a> <br> Credit: Holly K. Hacker and Lydia Zuraw/³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ

The county’s population is predominately Black. The federal CDC reports that Black Americans are to be diagnosed with diabetes and are 40% more likely than their white counterparts to die from the condition. And in the South, rural Black residents are more likely , according to the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, a Washington-based think tank.

To identify counties most lacking in reliable broadband and health care providers, ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ used data from the Federal Communications Commission and George Washington University’s Mullan Institute for Health Workforce Equity. Reporters also analyzed U.S. Census Bureau, CDC, and other data to understand the health status and demographics of those counties.

The analysis confirms that internet and care gaps are “hitting areas of extreme poverty and high social vulnerability,” said Clese Erikson, deputy director of the health workforce research center at the Mullan Institute.

Digital Haves vs. Have-Nots

Just over half of homes in Greene County have access to reliable high-speed internet — among the lowest rates in the nation. Greene County also has some of the country’s poorest residents, with a median household income of about $31,500. Average life expectancy is less than 72 years, below the national average.

The ‘Dead Zones’ of Alabama

In 19 Alabama counties, high-speed internet deserts overlap with health care provider shortages. Adult diabetes rates in these counties all exceed the national average of 12%.

Note: Primary care deserts have 281 or more Medicaid enrollees per provider, while the national median is 218. Behavioral health deserts have 1,680 or more residents per provider, while the national median is 1,119. Medicaid data as of 2020. Behavioral health data as of 2021. FCC data as of June 2024. Diabetes rates are crude (unadjusted) • <a href=”/news/article/dead-zone-sickest-counties-slow-internet-broadband-desert-health-care-provider-shortage/#methodology&#8221; target=”_blank” >Read our full methodology.</a>

Sources: FCC National Broadband Map, George Washington University’s Fitzhugh Mullan Institute for Health Workforce Equity, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, U.S. Census Bureau, County Health Rankings & Roadmaps

By contrast, the ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ analysis found that counties with the highest rates of internet access and health care providers correlated with higher life expectancy, less chronic disease, and key lifestyle factors such as higher incomes and education levels.

One of those is Howard County, Maryland, between Baltimore and Washington, D.C., where nearly all homes can connect to fast, reliable internet. The median household income is about $147,000 and average life expectancy is more than 82 years — a decade longer than in Greene County. A much smaller share of residents live with chronic conditions such as diabetes.

One is 78-year-old Sam Wilderson, a retired electrical engineer who has managed his Type 2 diabetes for more than a decade. He has fiber-optic internet at his home, which is a few miles from a cafe he dines at every week after Bible study. On a recent day, the cafe had a guest Wi-Fi download speed of 104 megabits per second and a 148 Mbps upload speed. The speeds are fast enough for remote workers to reliably take video calls.

Americans are demanding more speed than ever before. Most households have multiple devices — televisions, computers, gaming systems, doorbells — in addition to phones that can take up bandwidth. The more devices connected, the higher minimum speeds are needed to keep everything running smoothly.

To meet increasing needs, federal regulators updated the , establishing standard speeds of 100/20 Mbps. Those speeds are typically enough for several users to stream, browse, download, and play games at the same time.

Christopher Ali, professor of telecommunications at Penn State, recommends minimum standard speeds of 100/100 Mbps. While download speeds enable consumption, such as streaming or shopping, fast upload speeds are necessary to participate in video calls, say, for work or telehealth.

At the cafe in Howard County, on a chilly morning last fall, Wilderson ordered a glass of white wine and his usual: three-seeded bread with spinach, goat cheese, smoked salmon, and over-easy eggs. After eating, Wilderson held up his wrist: “This watch allows me to track my diabetes without pricking my finger.”

Wilderson said he works with his doctors, feels young, and expects to live well into his 90s, just as his father and grandfather did.

Telehealth is crucial for people in areas with few or no medical providers, said Ry Marcattilio, an associate director of research at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance. The national research and advocacy group works with communities on broadband access and reviewed ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ’ findings.

High-speed internet makes it easier to use video visits for medical checkups, which most patients with diabetes need every three months.

Being connected “can make a huge difference in diabetes outcomes,” said Nestoras Mathioudakis, an endocrinologist and the co-medical director of Johns Hopkins Medicine Diabetes & Education Program, who treats patients in Howard County.

What Speeds Are Needed for Telehealth?

“One of the most challenging and critical tasks in telemedicine research is to define broadband access,” wrote Amy O’Shea, assistant research professor at the University of Iowa, in a 2024 paper for the Journal of Medical Internet Research. O’Shea reviewed the records of nearly 7 million veterans for a 2022 JAMA Network Open paper. She compared veterans who had access to optimal high-speed internet with those where only suboptimal service was available. She found that veterans living in places with faster broadband speeds had more primary care video visits after the onset of the covid-19 pandemic. O’Shea classified speeds as follows, in megabits per second (Mbps):

Note: The study states that depending on the number of devices simultaneously streaming content, latency, and other factors, higher download and upload speeds may be needed. The Federal Communications Commission updated its minimum standard speed in March 2024 to 100/20 Mbps.

Sources: <a href=”; target=”_blank”> O’Shea, et al., Journal of Medical Internet Research </a>; <a href=”; target=”_blank”>O’Shea, et al., JAMA Network Open</a>; <a href=”; target=”_blank”>Federal Communications Commission</a>

Paying More for Less

At Williams’ home in Alabama, pictures of her siblings and their kids cover the walls of the hallway and living room. A large, wood-framed image of Jesus at the Last Supper with his disciples hangs over her kitchen table.

Williams sat down as her pots simmered and sizzled. She wasn’t feeling quite right. “I had a glass of orange juice and a bag of potato chips, and I knew that wasn’t enough for breakfast, but I was cooking,” Williams said.

Every night Williams takes a pill to control her diabetes. In the morning, if she feels as if her sugar is dropping, she knows she needs to eat. So, that morning, she left the room to grab a peppermint, walking by the flickering wireless router.

The router’s download and upload speeds were 0.03/0.05 Mbps, nearly unusable by modern standards. Williams’ connection on her house phone can sound scratchy, and when she connects her cellphone to the router, it does not always work. Most days it’s just good enough for her to read a daily devotional website and check Facebook, though the stories don’t always load.

Rural residents like Williams on average in late 2020 for slow internet connections than those in urban areas, according to Brian Whitacre, an agricultural economics professor at Oklahoma State University.

“You’re more likely to have competition in an urban area,” Whitacre said.

In rural Alabama, cellphone and internet options are limited. Williams pays $51.28 a month to her wireless provider, Ring Planet, which did not respond to calls and emails.

In Howard County, Maryland, national fiber-optic broadband provider Verizon Communications faces competition from Comcast, a hybrid fiber-optic and cable provider. Verizon advertises a home internet plan promising speeds of 300/300 Mbps starting at $35 a month for its existing mobile customers. The company also offers a discounted price as low as $20 a month for customers who participate in certain federal assistance programs.

“Internet service providers look at the economics of going into some of these communities and there just isn’t enough purchasing power in their minds to warrant the investment,” said Ross DeVol, chief executive of Heartland Forward, a nonpartisan think tank based in Bentonville, Arkansas, that specializes in state and local economic development.

Conexon, a fiber-optic cable construction company, estimates it costs $25,000 per mile to build above-ground fiber lines on poles and $60,000 to $70,000 per mile to build underground.

Former President Joe Biden’s 2021 infrastructure law earmarked $65 billion with a goal of Money was designated to establish digital equity programs and to help low-income customers pay their internet bills. The law also set aside tens of billions through the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment Program, known as BEAD, to connect homes and businesses.

That effort prioritizes fiber-optic connections, but federal regulators recently outlined , including low Earth orbit satellites like SpaceX’s Starlink service.

Funding the use of satellites in federal broadband programs has been controversial inside federal agencies. It has also been a sore point for Elon Musk, who is chief executive of SpaceX, which runs Starlink, and is a lead adviser to President Donald Trump.

After preliminary approval, a federal commission ruled that Starlink’s satellite system was “” of offering reliable high speeds. Musk tweeted last year that the commission had “” money awarded under the agency’s Trump-era Rural Digital Opportunity Fund.

In February, Trump nominated Arielle Roth to lead the federal agency overseeing the infrastructure act’s BEAD program. Roth is telecommunications policy director for the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Last year, ’s emphasis on fiber and said it was beleaguered by a “woke social agenda” with too many regulations.

Commerce Secretary Lutnick he will get rid of “burdensome regulations” and revamp the program to “take a tech-neutral approach.” Republicans echoed his positions during a U.S. House subcommittee hearing the same day.

When asked about potentially weakening the program’s required low-cost internet option, former National Telecommunications and Information Administration official Sarah Morris said such a change would build internet connections that people can’t afford. Essentially, she said, they would be “building bridges to nowhere, building networks to no one.”

‘That Hurt’

Over a lunch of tortilla chips with the savory sauce that had been simmering on the stove, Williams said she hadn’t been getting regular checkups before her diabetes diagnosis.

“To tell you the truth, if I can get up and move and nothing is bothering me, I don’t go to the doctor,” Williams said. “I’m just being honest.”

Years ago, Williams recalled, “my head was hurting me so bad I had to just lay down. I couldn’t stand up, walk, or nothing. I’d get so dizzy.”

Williams thought it was her blood pressure, but the doctor checked for diabetes. “How did they know? I don’t know,” Williams said.

As lunch ended, she pulled out her glucose monitor. Williams connected the needle and wiped her finger with an alcohol pad. Then she pricked her finger.

“Oh,” Williams said, sucking air through her teeth. “That hurt.”

She placed the sample in the machine, and it quickly displayed a reading of 145 — a number, Williams said, that meant she needed to stop eating.

Click to open the Methodology Methodology

Here’s how ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ did its analysis for the “Dead Zone” series, which pinpointed counties that lag behind the rest of the United States in access to broadband service and health care providers.

To identify “dead zones,” ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ consulted two main data sources.

• The Federal Communications Commission was used to identify broadband deserts as of June 2024. We used the FCC’s minimum speed standard of 100 Mbps download and 20 Mbps upload, and followed its definition of reliable broadband: service accessible via wired (fiber optics, cable, DSL) or licensed fixed wireless technology. It’s the standard for grants awarded through the federal Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment Program, . The FCC data shows whether such service is available, and not necessarily whether households subscribe to it.
• Data from George Washington University’s Fitzhugh Mullan Institute for Health Workforce Equity was used to determine counties with health provider shortages. GWU’s (family and internal medicine doctors, pediatricians, obstetricians and gynecologists, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners) reflects providers who serve at least one person enrolled in Medicaid. We used the most recent years available: 2020 for 44 states, and 2019 data for Texas. Five states — Delaware, Florida, Maine, Minnesota, and New Hampshire — were excluded from analysis because they lacked reliable data for either year.

GWU’s reflects psychiatrists, psychologists, counselors, therapists, and addiction medicine specialists, regardless of whether their patients receive Medicaid. We used data from 2021, the most recent year available.

We classified counties as “dead zones” if they met these criteria:

• Fewer than 70% of homes had access to fast, reliable broadband.
• They ranked in the bottom third of Medicaid primary care providers, defined as the number of Medicaid enrollees per provider.
• They ranked in the bottom third of behavioral health providers, defined as the number of residents per provider.

A total of 210 counties met those criteria. At the other extreme, we defined 203 counties as “most served” if they had the most residences with broadband access (at least 96.7%) and ranked in the top third of Medicaid primary care and behavioral health provider ratios.

We also compared the health outcomes and demographics of dead zone counties relative to others using several data sources:

• , for data on household income, education levels, and other demographics.
• , part of the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute, for data on life expectancy and the percentage of residents living in rural areas.
• , for data on diabetes, high blood pressure, and other chronic health conditions.

This project was produced in partnership with . InvestigateTV is Gray Television’s national investigative team and provides innovative, original journalism from a dedicated investigative team and partners, as well as weekday and weekend shows. Gray is the nation’s second-largest television broadcaster, with television stations serving 113 markets. 

This article first appeared on ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ and is republished here under a .

The introduction of the continuous glucose monitor (CGM) made that unnecessary. The small device, typically attached to the arm, has a sensor under the skin that sends readings to an app on a phone or other wireless device. The app shows blood sugar levels at a glance and sounds an alarm when they move out of a normal range.

Blood sugar that’s too high could call for a dose of insulin — delivered by injection or the touch of a button on an insulin pump — to stave off potentially life-threatening complications including loss of consciousness, while a sip of juice could remedy blood sugar that’s too low, preventing problems such as dizziness and seizures.

Schools around the country say teachers listen for CGM alarms from students’ phones in the classroom. Yet many parents say that there’s no guarantee a teacher will hear an alarm in a busy classroom and that it falls to them to ensure their child is safe when out of a teacher’s earshot by monitoring the app themselves, though they may not be able to quickly contact their child.

Parents say school nurses or administrative staff should remotely monitor CGM apps, making sure someone is paying attention even when a student is outside the classroom — such as at recess, in a noisy lunchroom, or on a field trip.

But many schools have resisted, citing staff shortages and concerns about internet reliability and technical problems with the devices. About one-third of schools do not have a full-time nurse, according to a 2021 survey by the National Association of School Nurses, though other staffers can be trained to monitor CGMs.

Caring for children with Type 1 diabetes is nothing new for schools. Before CGMs, there was no alarm that signaled a problem; instead, it was caught with a time-consuming finger-prick test, or when the problem had progressed and the child showed symptoms of complications.

With the proliferation of insulin pumps, many kids can respond to problems themselves, reducing the need for schools to provide injections as well.

Parents say they are not asking schools to continuously monitor their child’s readings, but rather to ensure that an adult at the school checks that the child responds appropriately.

“People at the [school] district don’t understand the illness, and they don’t understand the urgency,” said Julie Calidonio of Lutz, Florida.

Calidonio’s son Luke, 12, uses a CGM but has received little support from his school, she said. Relying on school staff to hear the alarms led to instances in which no one was nearby to intervene if his blood sugar dropped to critical levels.

“Why have this technology that is meant to prevent harms, and we are not acting on it,” she said.

Corey Dierdorff, a spokesperson for the Pasco County School District, where Luke attends school, said in a statement to ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ that staff members react when they hear a student’s CGM sound an alert. Asked why the district won’t agree to have staff remotely monitor the alarms, he noted concerns about internet reliability.

In September, Calidonio filed a complaint with the U.S. Justice Department against the district, saying its inability to monitor the devices violates the Americans with Disabilities Act, which requires schools to make accommodations for students with diabetes, among other conditions. She is still awaiting a decision.

The complaint comes about four years after the Connecticut U.S. attorney’s office determined that having school staffers monitor a student’s CGM was a “reasonable accommodation” under the ADA. That determination was made after four students filed complaints against four Connecticut school districts.

“We fought this fight and won this fight,” said Jonathan Chappell, one of two attorneys who filed the complaints in Connecticut. But the decision has yet to affect students outside the state, he said.

Chappell and Bonnie Roswig, an attorney and director of the nonprofit Center for Children’s Advocacy Disability Rights Project, both said they have heard from parents in 40 states having trouble getting their children’s CGMs remotely monitored in school. Parents in 10 states have filed similar complaints, they said.

CGMs today are used by most of the estimated 300,000 people in the U.S. with Type 1 diabetes under age 20, health experts say. Also known as juvenile diabetes, it is an autoimmune disease typically diagnosed in early childhood and treated with daily insulin to help regulate blood sugar. It affects under 20, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics.

(CGMs are also used by those with Type 2 diabetes, a different disease tied to risk factors such as diet and exercise that affects tens of millions of people — including a growing number of children, though it is usually not diagnosed until the early teens. Most people with Type 2 diabetes do not take insulin.)

Students with diabetes or another disease or disability typically have a health care plan, developed by their doctor, that works with a school-approved plan to get the support they need. It details necessary accommodations to attend school, such as allowing a child to eat in class or ensuring staff members are trained to check blood glucose or give a shot of insulin.

For children with Type 1 diabetes, the plan usually includes monitoring CGMs several times a day and responding to alarms, Roswig said.

Lynn Nelson, president-elect of the National Association of School Nurses, said when doctors and parents deem a student needs their CGM remotely monitored, the school is obligated under the ADA to meet that need. “It is legally required and the right thing to do.”

Nelson, who also manages school nurse programs in Washington state, said schools often must balance the students’ needs with having enough administrative staff.

“There are real workforce challenges, but that means schools have to go above and beyond for an individual student,” she said.

Henry Rodriguez, a pediatric endocrinologist at the University of South Florida and a spokesperson for the American Diabetes Association, said remote monitoring can be challenging for schools. While they advocate for giving every child what they need to manage their diabetes at school, he said, schools can be limited by a lack of support staff, including nurses.

The association last year updated its policy around CGMs, stating: “School districts should remove barriers to remote monitoring by school nurses or trained school staff if this is medically necessary for the student.”

In San Diego, Taylor Inman, a pediatric pulmonologist, said her daughter, Ruby, 8, received little help from her public school after being diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes and starting to use a CGM.

She said alerts from Ruby’s phone often went unheard outside the classroom, and she could not always reach someone at the school to make sure Ruby was reacting when her blood sugar levels moved into the abnormal range.

“We kept asking for the school to follow my daughter’s CGM and were told they were not allowed to,” she said.

In a 2020 memo to school nurses that remains in effect, Howard Taras, the San Diego Unified School District’s medical adviser, said if a student’s doctor recommends remote monitoring, it should be done by their parents or doctor’s office staff.

CGM alarms can be “disruptive to the student’s education, to classmates and to staff members with other responsibilities,” Taras wrote.

“Alarms are closely monitored, even those that occur outside of the classroom,” Susan Barndollar, the district’s executive director of nursing and wellness, said in a statement. Trained adults, including teachers and aides, listen for the alarms when in class, at recess, at gym class, or during a field trip, she said.

She said the problem with remote monitoring is that staff in the school office doing the monitoring may not know where the student is to tend to them quickly.

Inman said last year they paid $20,000 for a diabetes support dog trained to detect high or low blood sugar and later transferred Ruby to a private school that remotely tracks her CGM.

“Her blood sugar is better controlled, and she is not scared and stressed anymore and can focus on learning,” she said. “She is happy to go to school and is thriving.”

Some schools have changed their policies. For more than a year, several parents lobbied Loudoun County Public Schools in Northern Virginia to have school nurses follow CGM alerts from their own wireless devices.

The district board approved the change, which took effect in August and affects about 100 of the district’s more than 80,000 students.

Before, Lauren Valentine would get alerts from 8-year-old son Leo’s CGM and call the school he attends in Loudoun County, not knowing if anyone was taking action. Valentine said the school nurse now tracks Leo’s blood sugar from an iPad in the clinic.

“It takes the responsibility off my son and the pressure off the teacher,” she said. “And it gives us peace of mind that the school clinic nurses know what is happening.”

This article first appeared on ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ and is republished here under a .

So when the University of North Carolina-Charlotte professor learned that Ozempic — developed to treat Type 2 diabetes — helped people lose weight and keep it off, Blanchard was determined to try it.

The state employee’s health insurance initially covered the prescription with Blanchard kicking in a $25 copayment. Over the next seven months, she said, she lost 45 pounds and lowered her blood pressure and cholesterol. The most significant benefits, though, were psychological.

“It stopped the food noise in my head, relieved my anxiety, and I was no longer drinking like a fish,” said Blanchard, now 60. “I’d have a glass of wine, and then that’s it.”

But North Carolina suffered from sticker shock as Blanchard shed pounds and thousands of others on the state insurance program — which covers more than 76,000 employees across 178 agencies, plus their dependents — tried to do the same. Ozempic and other glucagon-like peptide-1 (GPL-1) agonist medications accounted for 10% of the state employee health plan’s annual prescription drug spending, according to a North Carolina State Health Plan fact sheet. The state treasurer projected the class of drugs would cost the state this year, with costs jumping to more than $1 billion over the next six years.

“This exceeds the amount the State Health Plan spends on cancer, rheumatoid arthritis, and chemotherapy medications,” the said in a March statement.

The health plan’s board of trustees eliminated coverage of this class of medications for weight loss starting in April. The plan continues to cover the drug for Type 2 diabetes management.

But in a twist this August, a separate part of North Carolina’s government allowed the Medicaid program to start covering the drugs for weight loss — not just diabetes — for the state’s poorest residents, who are disproportionately affected by obesity and related diseases. The state’s Medicaid program covers more than 2 million people.

And now the outgoing Biden administration wants to follow suit, proposing on Nov. 26 for the federal government to cover the medications to treat obesity for Medicaid patients nationwide, in addition to Medicare patients.

Still, the North Carolina coverage change left state employees like Blanchard facing a stark choice — stop taking what she views as a miracle drug or pay as much as $1,200 out-of-pocket each month.

“They know diets don’t work long-term for weight loss, yet they are denying coverage for a medication that has been effective,” Blanchard said. “It’s indicative of a profit-driven mindset that is more about cost savings than prioritizing patients’ health.”

The coverage switch highlights concerns about the cost of these medications and ongoing questions about who should get to have such drugs covered by insurance.

Several other states are also trying to reel in the expense of the medications. West Virginia to cover the drugs for its state employees. Connecticut state employees who are prescribed the drugs must .

The high prices have also raised concerns about the cost for taxpayer-funded health care programs, such as Medicare. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services estimated that coverage under the Biden proposal would cost about $40 billion over 10 years, including an extra $3.8 billion for states. But the requirement wouldn’t take effect until after President-elect Donald Trump takes office Jan. 20, giving his administration a chance to change it.

GLP-1 agonist medications, known by the brand names Ozempic, Trulicity, and Wegovy, have proved to be effective for weight loss as well as managing Type 2 diabetes. They work by triggering the pancreas to release insulin, slowing the rate at which the stomach empties, increasing satiety, and regulating appetite by sending signals to the brain to tell the body it is satisfied. But patients typically need to stay on the medications to maintain their weight loss, meaning they face long-term costs.

In clinical trials, patients taking Ozempic also showed significant reductions in cardiovascular problems such as heart attacks and strokes, even those without diabetes, or before weight loss started, said Duke University cardiologist and researcher .

Making these drugs available through Medicaid is in the state’s long-term financial interest, said Kody Kinsley, secretary of the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, which doesn’t oversee the state employee health plan. Unlike private or employer insurance plans, the Medicaid program receives generous rebates on these types of drugs, significantly reducing the cost, he said.

Calling North Carolina the buckle of the “Barbecue Belt,” Kinsley noted that state’s obesity rate exceeds the national average. The latest analysis from at the University of Chicago showed that 45% of adults in the state had a body mass index above 30, the threshold for clinical obesity, compared with 42% nationwide. That number was 55% for non-Hispanic Black adults in the state.

In addition, Kinsley said, with Medicaid the primary payer for long-term care, covering the drugs helps Medicaid’s bottom line by reducing the need for nursing home care often driven by unmanaged chronic diseases.

“We’re trying to put our dollars where they will lower costs in the long run,” he said. “I spend almost a billion dollars a year on obesity-related diseases. If I can reduce that spend by even 1%, then these drugs are a no-brainer.”

But what about people who aren’t on Medicaid? Duke’s Shah said the U.S. health care system needs to eliminate hurdles that make it difficult to obtain the drugs. Besides making the medication more affordable, he said, it should encourage the use of weight loss drugs and treatment of obesity as a chronic disease instead of stigmatizing it as a moral failing.

“Whether it is drug cost, conditions that require the payer to approve them, the patient’s health insurance plan, or the unaffordability of a plan that would cover weight loss, there are real-world barriers in our health care system,” Shah said.

Family medicine physician Melissa Jones of Charlotte said she has often seen a bias against people in her weight management practice when they try to get these medications covered by private insurance.

“There’s no shame in saying ‘I have high blood pressure’ or ‘I inherited this condition from my family,’” Jones said. “But for some reason, there’s shame associated with saying, ‘I struggle with my weight.’”

Although Blanchard can’t get her Ozempic covered anymore as a state employee, a concierge doctor gave her a prescription for a nonbrand version of the anti-obesity medications from a compounding pharmacy, available for now because of shortages of the brand-name versions. Though she believes it is less effective, she pays $225 a month for it.

“I can handle that,” she said.

This article first appeared on ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ and is republished here under a .

Greenseid’s daughter has Type 1 diabetes, which means she requires daily injections of manufactured insulin to stay alive. The price of a single vial of insulin between 1996 and 2018, and the gold vial was a reminder, Greenseid said, that this lifesaving pharmaceutical shouldn’t be as expensive as precious metal.

“What I heard is that that gold vial remained on his desk at the governor’s office, and he brought it up throughout that summer and fall when he was trying to talk to legislators to get them moving,” Greenseid said.

Ten months later, in April 2020, Walz signed the . The law was named after the 26-year-old Minnesotan whose from rationing insulin for the patient the high cost of insulin in the U.S. into a national political priority.

Now it’s an issue in the presidential campaign. Both former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate, Walz, have sought to appeal to the nation’s 8.4 million insulin users and their families by touting policies that make insulin cheaper for some patients.

But advocates for diabetes patients fret that neither presidential candidate would go as far as Walz’s Minnesota law, which helps patients even if they are uninsured, despite the law being under legal attack by the drug industry.

The landscape on insulin pricing has already changed significantly in the past five years. One month after Walz signed the Minnesota law, the Trump administration announced a voluntary program for Medicare prescription drug plans to cap copayments for some insulin products at $35. Two years later, President Joe Biden signed a law to cap copayments for insulin at $35 a month.

Now, amid the current presidential campaign, Harris has proposed extending that $35 cap on insulin copayments to Americans with commercial health insurance.

The Trump campaign’s national press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, touted his efforts on prescription drug prices when he was in the White House, including approval of a pathway for prescription drugs to be imported from Canada as well as the voluntary $35 insulin Medicare copayment cap. But she did not offer new insulin-specific initiatives for his possible second stint as president.

“President Trump will finish what he started in his first term,” Leavitt wrote in a statement.

Copayment caps, which , are popular policies because they provide an immediate financial benefit that many patients see at the pharmacy, according to University of Southern California economist . They’re also relatively easy to implement.

But copayment caps don’t address the high list price of insulin itself, so uninsured patients don’t benefit from such rules. About 1 in 12 Americans lacked health insurance last year.

That’s what makes Minnesota’s insulin safety net different. The system has two parts: an that allows individuals to get a one-time, 30-day supply of insulin for $35, and a that provides insulin to eligible patients for a year at no more than $50 for a 90-day supply.

By contrast, list prices for a 30-day supply of insulin can easily top $215, depending on the insulin.

The bill that created Minnesota’s program was bipartisan out of necessity. Republicans controlled the state Senate at the time, while the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party held the House and governor’s office.

Nicole Smith-Holt, whose son the bill was named after, as it finally passed the state legislature in 2020.

“I was happy. I was relieved,” Smith-Holt said. “I was sad that it took Alec dying to get to the point where people could walk into the pharmacy and pick up their prescription for an affordable price.”

But because Minnesota’s program requires insulin manufacturers to provide the insulin, it has prompted a backlash from manufacturers. Pharmaceutical industry lobbying group PhRMA filed a , arguing it violates the “” of the U.S. Constitution, which says private property can’t be taken for public use “without just compensation.”

That suit is ongoing, yet the state program is up and running and by the end of 2023 it had been .

PhRMA spokesperson Reid Porter said his group is committed to helping patients afford medicines. Insulin makers voluntarily dropped list prices last year and now offer patient assistance programs for affording the drugs. And the the voluntary Medicare copay cap Trump announced in 2020.

Porter said insulin costs have been driven up by insurance companies and pharmacy benefit managers, also — the middlemen between insurance plans or employers and drug manufacturers — when they pocket the discounts from the list price of drugs that they negotiate with manufacturers.

“Minnesota’s insulin program does not solve this problem and is unconstitutional,” Porter said. “This is not how the system should work, and why it’s critical that policymakers should prioritize reforming the PBM system, a solution that puts patient health over politics.”

In 2021, Sood that found that, despite insulin list prices rising between 2014 and 2018, income received by drugmakers decreased while increasing for intermediaries like PBMs and pharmacies.

In September, the Federal Trade Commission against the nation’s three biggest PBMs, alleging they created a system that inflated insulin prices. The .

, a physician at the University of Pittsburgh, said that regardless of who wins in November he doesn’t expect existing insulin policies like Medicare’s to be rolled back, due in part to the advocacy of people like Smith-Holt and Greenseid.

“They’ve been really effective at tying high insulin prices with really bad, morally repugnant outcomes,” Luo said.

The key in Minnesota was including real stories, Greenseid said.

“We had enough real people who reached out and had conversations and helped to show politicians the extent of the problem,” Greenseid said, “and they listened.”

This article first appeared on ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ and is republished here under a .

Now, as Democrats rebuild their presidential ticket just a few months before Election Day, Harris would widely be expected to take an aggressive stance in support of abortion access if she became the party’s new presumptive nominee — hitting former President Donald Trump on an issue that could undermine his chances of victory. Biden endorsed Harris on Sunday when he announced his decision to leave the race.

While Biden sought to keep abortion center stage in his reelection bid, abortion advocates had harbored doubts that the president — a practicing Catholic who has said he is — could be an effective standard-bearer as Republican efforts erode access to abortion and other women’s health care around the country.

Harris, on the other hand, became the first vice president to visit a clinic run by the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. She undertook a nationwide tour focused on reproductive rights. And when Sen. JD Vance of Ohio was named Trump’s running mate, Harris used her next campaign appearance to criticize him for blocking protections for in vitro fertilization.

“Most significantly, Harris would be the face of the drive to protect abortion rights,” Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ, said in an interview before Biden stepped aside. “Abortion access would likely be front and center in her campaign.”

A strong stance on abortion is not the only major contrast to the GOP that Harris offers: She is well versed in health policy. As a child, Harris often accompanied her mother to work on the weekends, visiting the lab where she was studying breast cancer.

While running for president in 2019, she backed “Medicare for All,” a single-payer insurance proposal that established her bona fides as a more progressive voice on health policy. And as California’s attorney general, she fought against consolidation in the health industry over concerns it would drive up prices. 

She stumped for a Biden administration rule setting minimum staffing levels at federally funded nursing homes in April.

“She deserves credit, she’s talked about them on the campaign trail. I don’t see any change there in the priorities on what Democrats want to do on health care if she becomes the nominee,” said , vice president at McDermott + Consulting. 

An intensified focus on women’s health and abortion could help galvanize Democratic voters in the final sprint to the election. Since the three Supreme Court justices named by Trump helped overturn Roe v. Wade in 2022, public opinion has turned against Republicans on abortion, even contributing to in the 2022 midterm elections.

Thirty-two percent of voters said they would vote only for a candidate for a major office who shares their views on abortion, . That’s a record high since Gallup first asked the question in 1992. Nearly twice as many voters who support abortion, compared with those who oppose abortion, hold that view. 

Sixty-three percent of adults said abortion should be legal in all or most cases, based on a poll conducted in April by . Thirty-six percent said it should be illegal in all or most cases.

Republicans, in turn, have been eager to distance themselves from their own victory on the issue. Trump angered some members of his base by saying he would leave decisions on abortion to the states.

Regardless, advocates caution that the GOP’s new moderation-by-omission on the issue masks their actual, more extreme stance. Vance has been clear in the past about . And while the GOP platform adopted during the party’s convention last week may not explicitly call for a nationwide ban on abortion, ,” the idea that as soon as an egg is fertilized it becomes a person with full legal rights, would create such a ban automatically if the Supreme Court found it constitutional.

Those views stand in contrast to those of many Republicans, especially women. About half of Republican women voters think abortion should be legal in all or most cases, according to . And majorities of women who vote Republican believe abortion should be legal in cases of rape, incest, or a pregnancy emergency.

If Harris heads the ticket, she would be expected to hammer on those issues in the coming months. 

“It’s been one of if not the main issue she’s emphasized in the last year or two,” said Matthew Baum, Marvin Kalb professor of global communications at Harvard University. “Clearly the Republicans are trying to defang the issue. It’s been a disaster for them.”

It is likely, though, that Republicans would paint Harris’ views on abortion as extremist. During the presidential debate against Biden, Trump Democrats support abortions late in pregnancy, “even after birth.”

Shortly after news broke that Biden had endorsed Harris, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America issued a statement calling out Harris’ record and offering evidence of what is to come. “While Joe Biden has trouble saying the word abortion, Kamala Harris shouts it,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, the group’s president.

Some pollsters have said Harris would have to do more than just campaign against Republican efforts to roll back abortion access to truly motivate voters because so many issues, such as inflation, the economy, and immigration, are competing for attention.

“She has to say she is running for a federal law that will bring back Roe v. Wade,” said Robert Blendon, an emeritus public health professor at Harvard University. “She needs something very specific and clear.”

Harris’ elevation to the top of the ticket would come at a critical juncture in the fight over reproductive rights.

The Supreme Court heard two abortion cases in the term that ended this month. But the justices did not address the merits of the issues in either case, ruling instead on technicalities. Both are expected to return to the high court as soon as next year.

In one case, , the justices ruled that the group of anti-abortion medical professionals who challenged the drug lacked standing to sue because they failed to show they were personally injured by its availability. 

But the Supreme Court returned the case to the district court in Texas where it was filed, and the GOP attorneys general of three states — Idaho, Kansas, and Missouri — have joined the case as plaintiffs. Whether the courts accept the states as viable challengers remains to be seen, but if they do, the justices could soon be asked again to determine the fate of the abortion pill.  

The pitted a federal law requiring hospitals to provide emergency care against Idaho’s strict ban, which allows abortions when a pregnant patient’s life is in danger — but not in cases in which it is necessary to protect her health, including future fertility.

In that case, the justices apparently failed to reach any majority agreement, declaring instead that they were premature in accepting the case and sending it back to the lower court for further consideration. That case, too, could return in relatively short order.

Harris would also have substantial leeway to talk about what are considered to be the Biden administration’s core health policy accomplishments. These include aimed at helping consumers get health insurance coverage, which were extended through the Inflation Reduction Act into 2025, some patients pay for insulin, and

“I think she is well positioned. She is core to the administration and will be able to take credit for those things,” said Dan Mendelson, CEO of , a subsidiary of J.P. Morgan Chase.

That said, it may be hard for any candidate to get voters to focus on some of those accomplishments, especially drug price efforts.

While the administration has taken some important steps, “new expensive drugs keep coming out,” Mendelson said. “So if you look at the perception of consumers, they do not believe the cost of drugs is going down.”

Joseph Antos, of the American Enterprise Institute, said Harris would likely say the Biden-Harris administration “is already saving people money” on insulin. But she will have to go beyond these accomplishments and double down on drug pricing and other cost issues — not talk solely about reproductive rights.

“She’s got to concentrate, if she wants to win, on issues that have a broad appeal,” Antos said. “Cost is one and access to treatments is another big issue.”

Samantha Young of ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ contributed to this report.

This article first appeared on ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ and is republished here under a .

Biden, who spoke in a raspy voice and often struggled to articulate his arguments, said at one point that his administration “finally beat Medicare.” Trump, meanwhile, repeated numerous falsehoods, including that Democrats want doctors to be able to abort babies after birth.

Trump took credit for the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision that upended Roe v. Wade and returned abortion policy to states. “This is what everybody wanted,” he said, adding “it’s been a great thing.” Biden’s response: “It’s been a terrible thing.”

In one notable moment, Trump said he would not repeal FDA approval for medication abortion, used last year in of U.S. abortions. Some conservatives have targeted the FDA’s more than 20-year-old approval of the drug mifepristone to further restrict access to abortion nationwide.

“The Supreme Court just approved the abortion pill. And I agree with their decision to have done that, and I will not block it,” Trump said. The Supreme Court ruled this month that an alliance of anti-abortion medical groups and doctors lacked standing to challenge the FDA’s approval of the drug. The court’s ruling, however, did not amount to an approval of the drug.

CNN hosted the debate, which had no audience, at its Atlanta headquarters. CNN anchors Jake Tapper and Dana Bash moderated. The debate format allowed CNN to mute candidates’ microphones when it wasn’t their turn to speak.

Our fact-checked the debate in real time as Biden and Trump clashed on the economy, immigration, and abortion, and revisited discussion of their ages. Biden, 81, has become the oldest sitting U.S. president; if Trump defeats him, he would end his second term at age 82. You can read the and excerpts detailing specific health-related claims follow:

Biden: “We brought down the price [of] prescription drug[s], which is a major issue for many people, to $15 for an insulin shot, as opposed to $400.”

. Biden touted his efforts to reduce prescription drug costs by referring to the $35 monthly insulin price cap his administration put in place as part of the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. But he initially flubbed the number during the debate, saying it was lowered to $15. In his closing statement, Biden corrected the amount to $35.

The price of insulin for Medicare enrollees, starting in 2023, dropped to $35 a month, not $15. Drug pricing experts told PolitiFact when it rated a similar claim that most Medicare enrollees were likely not paying a monthly average of $400 before the changes, although because costs vary depending on coverage phases and dosages, some might have paid that much in a given month.

Trump: “I’m the one that got the insulin down for the seniors.”

Mostly False. When he was president, Trump instituted the , a program that capped insulin costs at $35 a month for some older Americans in participating drug plans.

But because it was voluntary, , including Medicare Advantage plans, participated in 2022, according to KFF. Trump’s plan also covered only one form of each dosage and insulin type.

Biden points to the Inflation Reduction Act’s mandatory $35 monthly insulin cap as a major achievement. This cap applies to all Medicare prescription plans and expanded to all covered insulin types and dosages. Although Trump’s model was a start, it did not have the sweeping reach that Biden’s mandatory cap achieved.

Biden: Trump “wants to get rid of the ACA again.”

. In 2016, Trump campaigned on a promise to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, or ACA. In the White House, Trump supported a failed effort to do just that. He repeatedly said he would dismantle the health care law in campaign stops and social media posts throughout 2023. In March, however, Trump walked back this stance, writing on his Truth Social platform that he “isn’t running to terminate” the ACA but to make it “better” and “less expensive.” Trump hasn’t said how he would do this. He has often promised Obamacare replacement plans without ever producing one.

Trump: “The problem [Democrats] have is they’re radical, because they will take the life of a child in the eighth month, the ninth month, and even after birth.”

False. Willfully terminating a newborn’s life is infanticide and illegal in every U.S. state. 

Most elected Democrats who have spoken publicly about this have said they support abortion under Roe v. Wade’s standard, which allowed access up to fetal viability — typically around 24 weeks of pregnancy, when the fetus can survive outside the womb. Many Democrats have also said they support abortions past this point if the treating physician deems it necessary.

Medical experts say situations resulting in fetal death in the third trimester are rare — fewer than 1% of abortions in the U.S. occur after 21 weeks — and typically involve fatal fetal anomalies or life-threatening emergencies affecting the pregnant person. For fetuses with very short life expectancies, doctors may induce labor and offer palliative care. Some families choose this option when facing diagnoses that limit their babies’ survival to minutes or days after delivery.

Some Republicans who have made claims similar to Trump’s point to Democratic support of the , which would have prohibited many state government restrictions on access to abortion, citing the bill’s provisions that say providers and patients have the right to perform and receive abortion services without certain limitations or requirements that would impede access. Anti-abortion advocates say the bill, which failed in the Senate by a 49-51 vote, would have created a loophole that eliminated any limits on abortions later in pregnancy.

Alina Salganicoff, director of KFF’s Women’s Health Policy program, said the legislation would have allowed health providers to perform abortions without obstacles such as waiting periods, medically unnecessary tests and in-person visits, or other restrictions. The bill would have allowed an abortion after viability when, according to the bill, “in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to the pregnant patient’s life or health.”

Trump: “Social Security, he’s destroying it, because millions of people are pouring into our country, and they’re putting them onto Social Security. They’re putting them onto Medicare, Medicaid.”

False. It’s that immigration will destroy Social Security. Social Security’s fiscal challenges stem from a shortage of workers compared with beneficiaries.

Immigration is far from a fiscal fix-all for Social Security’s challenges. But having more immigrants in the United States would likely increase the worker-to-beneficiary ratio, potentially for decades, thus extending the program’s solvency.

Most immigrants in the U.S. without legal permission are also . However, people who entered the U.S. without authorization and were granted humanitarian parole — temporary permission to stay in the country — for more than one year are eligible for benefits from the program.

Immigrants lacking legal residency in the U.S. are generally in federally funded health care coverage such as Medicare and Medicaid. (Some Medicaid coverage under regardless of immigration status. Immigrants are eligible for regardless of their legal status.)

This article first appeared on ³Ô¹Ï²»´òìÈ and is republished here under a .