Latest news with #HealthandHumanServices
New York Post
an hour ago
- Politics
- New York Post
George Santos: supporting ‘Eric Adams is the only viable path'
It's an endorsement no one wants. Convicted ex-Long Island Rep. George Santos is calling on fellow Republicans to cross party lines and back NYC Mayor Eric Adams' re-election bid. The disgraced ex-congressman fired off a slew of social media posts this week begging GOP mayoral candidate Curtis Sliwa to drop his campaign — and for fellow GOPers to coalesce behind Adams, saying he believes the mayor is best suited to beat socialist Queens Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani in November's general election. Advertisement 'New Yorkers are at a crossroads, and the stakes couldn't be higher,' Santos said on X shortly after ex-Gov. Andrew Cuomo conceded to Mamdani in the Democratic mayoral primary. 3 Convicted ex-Long Island Rep. George Santos is calling on fellow Republicans to cross party lines and back the re-election bid of Democratic NYC Mayor Eric Adams (pictured) Brian Zak/NY Post 'The choice is clear: Eric Adams is the only viable path forward. Republicans, conservatives, and common-sense voters must recognize reality—Curtis Sliwa cannot win this race,' added Santos, who is headed to federal prison for seven years on July 25 after copping to plea fraud and identity theft charges. Advertisement 'Clinging to fantasy only helps the opposition.' Santos on Wednesday suggested Adams and the Guardian Angels founder iron out a similar 'coalition' to one Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. cut before dropping out of last year's president race to back future victor Donald Trump. 3 Republican mayoral nominee Curtis Sliwa told The Post there's no way he's dropping out of the race. 3 Santos is set to begin a seven-year prison sentence next month Brigitte Stelzer Advertisement 'Hey @NYCMayor,' Santos posted on X. 'Call Curtis Sliwa and appoint him Deputy Mayor of public safety today and get a coalition going to save NYC!' Adams, a Democrat, is running as an independent. Despite losing the primary, Cuomo is still on the November ballot as an independent. Sliwa insisted he's staying in the race, adding Santos is a fraudster with 'no credibility.' Advertisement Adams campaign spokesman Todd Shapiro dismissed Santos' support, saying Adams is 'focused on building a broad, credible coalition rooted in integrity and results — not circus sideshows.'
The Herald Scotland
8 hours ago
- Health
- The Herald Scotland
Obamacare Supreme Court decision: What it means for RFK Jr.
The suit started in Texas where two Christian owned business and individuals argued that health insurance plans they buy shouldn't have to cover medical tests and drugs they object to on religious grounds, such as the HIV-prevention drug PrEP. But the legal issue at the heart of the Supreme Court case was whether USPSTF is so powerful that, under the Constitution, its members must be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote for the 6-3 majority that Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. can remove task force members at will and can review their recommendations before they take effect. "The Task Force members are removable at will by the Secretary of HHS, and their recommendations are reviewable by the Secretary before they take effect," he wrote. "So Task Force members are supervised and directed by the Secretary, who in turn answers to the President preserving the chain of command." The Health and Human Services Secretary has always appointed USPSTF members and ratified their recommendations, said MaryBeth Musumeci, teaching associate professor of health policy and management at George Washington University's Milken Institute School of Public Health. But the ruling expanded on that authority by clarifying that the secretary could also remove members and block recommendations, she said. Given that Kennedy had recently fired all 17 original members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, another expert panel that issues health recommendations, Musumeci said "there is reason to be worried." The secretary has never removed access to preventive services that have been proven to help people stay healthy nor have they "sought to shape the membership of our expert panel in any way," USPSTF chair Dr. Michael Silverstein said in a statement emailed to USA TODAY. "While the HHS Secretary has long had authority over the USPSTF, historically they have only acted to increase access to preventive care, occasionally going beyond the evidence to secure enhanced coverage for preventive services," he said. "Given our shared focus on preventing cancer and chronic disease, we certainly hope that the Secretary will allow our current work to continue unimpeded, as it has thus far." Surprise move? RFK Jr.'s vaccine committee votes to recommend RSV shot for infants Katherine Hempstead, senior policy officer at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, a health nonprofit, praised the SCOTUS decision because it meant that millions of Americans still have access to preventive care such as mental health screenings, cancer screenings, STI testing and important medications. But she also called the ruling both an "ending and a beginning." "It's the ending of the challenge but now it's the beginning of something that's going to unfold where we're going to see someone exercise control over this expert panel that has very strong opinions about... many aspects of medical care," she said. More details: Supreme Court rejects conservative challenge to Obamacare health coverage If Kennedy plans to target USPSTF, it's unclear what preventive services could be at risk, Musumeci said. But insurance companies ultimately have the final decision. Even if the secretary vetoes a new recommendation or revokes an existing one, insurance companies can still decide to cover the preventive service. America's Health Insurance Plans, a trade association representing health insurance companies, plans to closely monitor the ongoing legal process but affirms that the SCOTUS ruling will not impact any existing coverage, according to an emailed statement sent to USA TODAY. Contributing: Maureen Groppe and Bart Jansen, USA TODAY; Reuters. Adrianna Rodriguez can be reached at adrodriguez@
Yahoo
17 hours ago
- Health
- Yahoo
Supreme Court rejects conservative challenge to Obamacare health coverage
WASHINGTON − The Supreme Court on June 27 rejected the latest conservative challenge to the 2010 Affordable Care Act, an attack on free access to cancer screenings, drugs that prevent HIV, cholesterol-lowering medication and other preventive health care services. Two Christian-owned businesses and some people in Texas argued that the experts recommending some of the services health insurance must cover are so powerful that they must be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court disagreed, meaning a task force proposing these Obamacare services can continue to do so. But their ruling could give more power to Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to decide which services must be available without copays or deductibles. "While today's ruling allows many Americans to breathe a sigh of relief, coverage for this vital care remains at risk," Zachary Baron and Andrew Twinamatsiko, directors of the Center for Health Policy and the Law, said in a statement. "All eyes will turn to the Trump administration to see if Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. directs the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force to revisit or issue new recommendations that could erode access to preventive care.' The benefit is one of the most popular provisions of the Affordable Care Act − commonly referred to as Obamacare − which has largely survived more than 2,000 lawsuits and multiple trips to the Supreme Court. The latest challenge came from Texans who objected to the requirement that insurers cover the HIV-prevention drug PrEP. They raised religious objections to the drug, saying it encourages same-sex relationships. A federal judge ruled the Christian businesses do not have to include PrEP in their insurance plans. But the judge also said the makeup of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, which recommended coverage of PrEP and other preventive services, violates the Constitution's appointments clause. The clause requires presidential appointment and Senate confirmation for officials in significant positions of authority – such as cabinet secretaries and other top agency officials. The Justice Department – both under the Biden and Trump administrations – fought back. The government argued it's the Health and Human Services secretary, and not the task force, that has the 'ultimate responsibility' for whether the experts' recommendations become final. The secretary can fire task force members, review their recommendations and prevent recommendations from taking effect, the Justice Department said during April's oral arguments. The attorney for the Christian businesses said the secretary doesn't have complete control over the task force. Under the law, he noted, tasks force members are supposed to be 'independent and, to the extent practicable, not subject to political pressure.' The government said that independence requirement merely means the task force is supposed to make recommendations based on their impartial medical and public-health judgments. The task force typically updates its recommendations every five years to account for medical advances or reflect new evidence of risk. For example, in 2021, the task force extended recommendations for colon cancer screening to people 45 and older, instead of 50 and up, because of increased diagnoses in younger people. Other services recommended since the ACA was passed include medications like statins to prevent heart disease, lung cancer screenings for certain adults, physical therapy for older people at risk of falling, and testing for hepatitis. Before Obamacare, Americans used preventive services at only about half the recommended rate, according to the federal government. Other services, such as vaccines, that are recommended by different experts, are in dispute under another aspect of the case that is still in the lower courts. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Supreme Court rejects conservative challenge to Obamacare
Yahoo
17 hours ago
- Health
- Yahoo
What the Supreme Court Obamacare decision means for RFK Jr.
The U.S. Supreme Court preserved a key element of the Affordable Care Act that helps guarantee that health insurers cover preventive care at no cost to patients. The justices reversed a lower court's ruling that the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, which under the 2010 law has a major role in choosing what services will be covered, is composed of members who were not validly appointed. The suit started in Texas, where two Christian-owned businesses and individuals argued that health insurance plans they buy shouldn't have to cover medical tests and drugs they object to on religious grounds, such as the HIV-prevention drug PrEP. But the legal question at the heart of the Supreme Court case was whether the task force is so powerful that, under the Constitution, its members must be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote for the 6-3 majority that Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. can remove task force members at will and can review their recommendations before they take effect. 'The Task Force members are removable at will by the Secretary of HHS, and their recommendations are reviewable by the Secretary before they take effect,' he wrote. 'So Task Force members are supervised and directed by the Secretary, who in turn answers to the President preserving the chain of command.' The Health and Human Services secretary has always appointed task force members and ratified their recommendations, said MaryBeth Musumeci, teaching associate professor of health policy and management at George Washington University's Milken Institute School of Public Health. But the ruling expanded on that authority by clarifying that the secretary also could remove members and block recommendations, she said. Given that Kennedy had recently fired all 17 original members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, another expert panel that issues health recommendations, Musumeci said 'there is reason to be worried.' The secretary has never removed access to preventive services that have been proven to help people stay healthy, nor has the secretary "sought to shape the membership of our expert panel in any way," task force chair Dr. Michael Silverstein said in a statement emailed to USA TODAY. 'While the HHS Secretary has long had authority over the USPSTF, historically they have only acted to increase access to preventive care, occasionally going beyond the evidence to secure enhanced coverage for preventive services," he said. "Given our shared focus on preventing cancer and chronic disease, we certainly hope that the Secretary will allow our current work to continue unimpeded, as it has thus far.' Surprise move? RFK Jr.'s vaccine committee votes to recommend RSV shot for infants Katherine Hempstead, senior policy officer at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, a health nonprofit, praised the high court's decision because it meant that millions of Americans still have access to preventive care such as mental health screenings, cancer screenings, STI testing and important medications. But she also called the ruling both an 'ending and a beginning.' 'It's the ending of the challenge, but now it's the beginning of something that's going to unfold where we're going to see someone exercise control over this expert panel that has very strong opinions about … many aspects of medical care,' she said. More details: Supreme Court rejects conservative challenge to Obamacare health coverage If Kennedy plans to target the preventive services task force, it's unclear what preventive services could be at risk, Musumeci said. But insurance companies ultimately have the final decision. Even if the secretary vetoes a new recommendation or revokes an existing one, insurance companies can still decide to cover the preventive service. America's Health Insurance Plans, a trade association representing health insurance companies, plans to closely monitor the legal process but affirms that the court's ruling will not affect any existing coverage, according to an emailed statement sent to USA TODAY. Contributing: Maureen Groppe and Bart Jansen, USA TODAY; Reuters. Adrianna Rodriguez can be reached at adrodriguez@ This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Obamacare Supreme Court decision: What it means for RFK Jr.
Yahoo
18 hours ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Vance is clear front-runner for GOP nod in 2028: Poll
Vice President Vance is the clear front-runner for the 2028 Republican presidential nomination, well ahead of other possible candidates, according to a new poll. The Emerson College Polling survey released on Friday showed Vance receiving 46 percent support, with his closest competitors being Secretary of State Marco Rubio with 12 percent and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) with 9 percent. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is an independent, followed with 5 percent, then Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley with 2 percent each. The other six listed names received 1 percent or less, while 17 percent said they were undecided and 4 percent said they prefer someone else not listed. This marks an improvement for Vance from Emerson's November poll exploring a hypothetical 2028 Republican primary. Vance led in that poll by a smaller amount, with 30 percent compared to 5 percent for DeSantis and 3 percent for 2024 GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy. Half of all respondents said at the time that they were undecided. Emerson College Polling Executive Director Spencer Kimball said in a release that Vance has 'solidified' himself as the frontrunner, noting he had support from 52 percent of male Republican voters and voters over 60 years old. President Trump has weighed in somewhat on who could be his successor as Republican nominee in 2028 but has avoided declaring support for one candidate. He told Fox News in February that 'it's too early' to declare Vance as his successor but said he and others are 'very capable.' In an interview on NBC's 'Meet the Press' from last month, he mentioned Vance and Rubio as possible future leaders of his 'Make America Great Again,' or MAGA, movement. 'I think [Vance is] a fantastic, brilliant guy,' he said. 'Marco is great. There's a lot of them that are great.' The poll was conducted from June 24 to 25 among 1,000 registered voters, including 416 Republican primary voters. The margin of error among Republican respondents was 4.8 points. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
