Latest news with #Pollack
The Herald Scotland
20 hours ago
- Health
- The Herald Scotland
Millions will lose health insurance under Trump tax bill
Another 5 million could lose coverage if Congress doesn't extend the COVID-19 pandemic-era tax credits that have made Affordable Care Act plans more affordable for consumers. The legislation amounts to "the biggest rollback in health care coverage in the history of the United States," said Joan Alker, a research professor and executive director and co-founder of Georgetown University's Center for Children and Families. Vice President JD Vance, who cast the tiebreaking vote July 1 to pass the Senate bill 51-50, said in social media posts the Medicaid cuts are "immaterial" compared to savings the bill will fund through bolstered immigration enforcement. The House is scheduled to consider the legislation on July 2 in advance of Trump's self-imposed July 4th deadline for his signature domestic policy legislation. How will the legislation cut Medicaid? The legislation would require states to double eligibility checks to twice a year. And states, which administer Medicaid, would have to set up systems to verify a person's employment or exemption status. The legislation requires "able-bodied" Medicaid recipients to work 80 hours a month or qualify for an exemption, such as being a student, caregiver or having a disability. The original House version limited the work requirement to low-income adults without children, but the Senate version added the work requirement to parents of children older than 13. The legislation defines "able-bodied" people as those not medically certified as physically or mentally unfit for employment. The legislation also would strip coverage from undocumented immigrants who get Medicaid through state-funded programs. Health policy experts say more frequent eligibility checks and red tape will add administrative costs and cut off people who qualify but fall through the cracks because of administrative miscues. What do hospitals and doctors think of bill? Medicaid insures 83 million low-income children and adults, according to KFF, a health policy nonprofit. That represents more than 1 in 5 Americans. Health policy experts have warned the cuts could harm rural hospitals and doctors who serve a higher percentage of people enrolled in Medicaid. The Senate bill added a $50 billion rural health care fund, double the amount that an earlier version of the legislation proposed. Still, hospitals are "deeply disappointed" the bill cleared the Senate, said Rick Pollack, president and CEO of the American Hospital Association, a trade group. Pollack said the $1 trillion in Medicaid cuts would cause "irreparable harm to our health care system," and reduce access to care for all Americans. Hospitals are required to diagnose and stabilize anyone who visits an emergency room. Eliminating coverage of nearly 12 million Americans will "drive up uncompensated care for hospitals and health systems," Pollack said. Pollack said hospitals might be forced to cut services and staff, and patients could face longer wait times in emergency rooms. Some rural hospitals and facilities in underserved communities could close, Pollack said. Dr. Richard Besser, president and CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, said the cuts to Medicaid and a federal food assistance program "will make our country sicker, put children at risk of going hungry and make it harder for families to afford basic necessities" while delivering tax cuts. When will the Medicaid cuts take effect? Medicaid recipients won't immediately be impacted by the legislation. The bill sets a Jan. 1, 2027, deadline for states to begin twice-a-year eligibility checks and verify work or exemption status of non-disabled enrollees. However, some states already have submitted waivers to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to begin Medicaid work requirements. CMS might choose to approve the waivers and allow some states to launch Medicaid work requirements before January 2027, Alker said. A KFF survey found nearly 2 in 3 people on Medicaid are employed full or part time, and others would qualify for an exemption from the work requirement because they are caregivers or students. Just 8% were not working due to inability to find work, retirement or other reasons, KFF said. While the bill doesn't mandate work requirements before January 2027, states will likely need to plan for big changes before then, said Jennifer Tolbert, deputy director of the KFF program on Medicaid and the uninsured. States will need to prepare for smaller Medicaid payments from the federal government while adding the extra administrative duties of verifying an enrollee's work or volunteer status. "Some states are anticipating this reduced revenue," Tolbert said. "At the same time, they are also required to make pretty costly changes to their eligibility systems." 'Death by a trillion cuts': Health care workers lobby Republicans in Congress Johannah Alabi's days usually consist of feeding, bathing, and caring for residents at two nursing homes in Bloomfield, Conn. She said most of her patients depend on government health insurance programs, so she is concerned about what will happen to them and her job if Trump signs the bill into law. Medicaid is the primary payer for 63% of nursing home facility residents and an additional 13% rely on Medicare as their primary payer, according to KFF, a health policy nonprofit headquartered in San Francisco. "If some of that money is going to be taken away, something has to give," Alabi said. "It's going to come down to the resident care. It's going to come down to the food. It's going to come down to the activities." That's why she was inspired to join Service Employees International Union members to lobby lawmakers to vote against the bill last week. They arrived at the Capitol with signs reading, "Death by a trillion cuts," and wearing shirts with the message, "Republican cuts kill." Jennifer Woods, another SEIU member who works in the claims department at Kaiser Permanente, ran into Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, during her trip to Washington. She said she tried to explain how cuts could "ruin people's lives" and potentially lead to some patients' deaths as she followed him through the Capitol building. "He just shook his head and would keep going," Woods said. "He didn't really say anything. None of them did."
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Health
- Yahoo
What Brands Should Know About Forthcoming Canadian, US PFAS Regulations
About 12,000 different chemicals make up the family of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, also known as PFAS. These 'forever chemicals' have innumerable uses across product categories like footwear, apparel and accessories. They've also been linked to manifold risks to human health and the environment. Whether used as a part of a manufacturing process or as an additive in a finished product, PFAS has been found in groundwater, drinking water and different bodies of water accessible to humans. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), exposure may lead to reproductive effects and interference with hormones, developmental delays in children, certain cancers, and immune system damage. More from Sourcing Journal WTO to Intervene in Trade Disputes Between Canada and China DHL Express Canada Seeks 'Anti-Scab' Law Exemption, Citing 'Essential' Services DHL Express Canada Plans Temporary Shutdown on Stalled Labor Talks With these issues as a backdrop, the Canadian Apparel Federation and Marten Law hosted a webinar Wednesday dedicated to understanding the recent governmental intervention when it comes to companies' use of PFAS. James Pollack, who leads Marten Law's consumer products regulatory practice, laid out the legislative continuum when it comes to regulation. The first set of products that became the focus of PFAS bans were children's products, and the next tranche of prohibitions focused on cookware, with the idea that PFAS might move from cooking surfaces or packaging into food. 'What's interesting is the next set of products that became a focus for folks was textiles, including apparel and footwear. And I think part of it is this visceral sense of, 'Well, I'm putting it on my body. There must be some sort of dermal transmission,'' Pollack said. Research on this is still ongoing, with a number of universities Like Duke researching whether PFAS can be absorbed through the skin. Last year, a team of researchers at Environment International, a team of researchers released findings that PFAS can indeed permeate the skin's barrier and enter the bloodstream. 'There are a number of states that have started to regulate PFAS in apparel and textiles more broadly, and each of the states defines those subjects differently,' Pollack said. In Washington state, for example, intentionally added PFAS—which is added to a product to attain a technical effect, like waterproofing—is banned. But other states, like Vermont, have an expanded ban that covers all PFAS detectable within a product, even if it's unintentionally added as a result of a manufacturing process. Manufacturing is becoming an increasingly studied part of the PFAS journey, as the chemicals might be used on machines as a lubricant or a surfactant to help a plastic mold release, for example. According to Pollack, regulation may have outpaced science at this juncture, with a less-than-complete understanding of PFAS' risks or methods of transmission into the human body. Most believe that drinking water is the primary route of exposure, though there are studies about whether it might be inhaled as dust particles, for example. As such, clothing and products like carpets (which might release those particles) are being studied. In California, key regulations include bans on intentionally added PFAS chemicals in textiles, cosmetics and food packaging. The rollout of the PFAS textile ban will come in waves, as stipulated by AB1817. On Jan. 1, total organic fluorine levels were limited to 100 ppm, and that number will drop to 50 ppm in 2027 (though apparel made for severe outdoor conditions has until 2028 to achieve compliance). Meanwhile, Maine, Minnesota and New Mexico have also made aggressive moves to ban the use of PFAS, with the former being the first to implement a comprehensive ban on all non-essential uses (though it's considering a bill that would exempt fluoropolymer-coated cookware). Minnesota and New Mexico also have broad bans on intentionally added use of PFAS, though Minnesota is mulling exempting commercial and industrial products. The state is also implementing mandatory chemical reporting requirements for products currently offered for sale on store shelves on Jan. 1, 2026. 'Those states are implementing these broad bans, and they create limited exemptions for what are called currently 'unavoidable uses,' which you have to apply for,' Pollack said. 'You have to show that there's no viable alternative and that the use is helpful for… the functioning of society or health and wellness of people. So a relatively limited exemption possibility there.' Isabel Carey, a senior associate with the firm who heads up its Toronto office, spoke to Canada's regulatory environment. 'In March, Environment Canada and Health Canada proposed adding PFAS chemicals as a class with a major note as toxic substances under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act,' she explained, noting that fluoropolymers—a major type of PFAS used in the textile and apparel industry—are excluded because of differences in how people are exposed to them and the hazards that they pose to human health. Once the government's proposal to classify the chemicals as toxic substances is finalized, there's no immediate regulatory consequence, nor does the classification prohibit the use of PFAS in the Canadian economy. It simply authorizes the government to issue regulations targeting those substances. According to Marten Law, the agencies further proposed phasing out PFAS use 'wherever feasible'—firstly, in firefighting foams, and then across a range of industries like textiles, food packaging, cosmetics and medical devices where they believe the chemicals can be replaced. During Phase Two of regulation, Canada will evaluate prohibiting PFAS use in industries where alternatives are not available, and where the chemicals aren't being used for the protection of human health, safety or the environment. The agencies haven't proposed binding regulations to implement their plans, but have announced that implementing regulations will be developed beginning in 2027, Marten Law added.
Black America Web
17-06-2025
- Business
- Black America Web
Survey Says: Most High-Level Business Executives Believe DEI Initiatives Are Necessary To Avoid Legal Risk
Source: Jackson State University / Getty Since taking office in January, President Trump has made eliminating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in all facets of American life one of his key goals. While he's been relatively successful in getting colleges and universities to bend the knee, it's been a more complicated situation when it comes to American businesses. A recent survey has potentially revealed the reason for that, as many business leaders believe removing DEI initiatives opens them up to legal risk. According to Fortune, a joint survey of 1,000 C-suite executives revealed that 83 percent believe DEI initiatives are necessary for their company's well-being. Another 68 percent believed removing them would open them up to potential discrimination lawsuits. The survey also interviewed 2,500 employees and found that 76 percent of respondents would stay at a company that maintained its DEI initiatives, and 43 percent would leave a company if they pulled back. The survey was conducted by Catalyst, a non-profit focused on women's inclusion in the workplace, and NYU School of Law's Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging. Source: Screenshot / Pollack, A., Glasgow, D., Van Bommel, T., Joseph, C., & Yoshino, K. (2025). Risks of retreat: The enduring inclusion imperative. Catalyst & Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging. 'Opting out of DEI is not a neutral act—it's a choice with consequences,' Christina Joseph, project director of the Advancing DEI Initiative at the Meltzer Center, told Fortune. 'That's because these programs help root out harmful policies that especially affect marginalized groups. This report reminds us that without those safeguards, organizations face more, not less, legal exposure.' This survey only proves what we've already seen: the average person either supports or, at the very least, isn't actively opposed to DEI initiatives. In fact, another recent poll shows that companies that keep their DEI initiatives are viewed more favorably by the public. The only people upset about DEI are people who can't compete on an even playing field, or keeping it a buck, are just straight up racist. To some degree, it makes sense why we're seeing universities withdraw from their DEI initiatives. Many of them depend on federal funds to survive, so while they may not necessarily agree with the pullback, they don't really have a choice. Especially considering that the Department of Education (DOE) has been explicitly weaponized to go after any university it believes is trying to provide equitable opportunities for Black, brown, and LGBTQ students. Source: To be clear, I'm not advocating or being an apologist for these moves; I simply understand why they're happening. Conversely, it doesn't make much sense for businesses to engage in this pullback as they don't depend on federal funds, and it's unclear what, if any, legal action the Trump administration could take against a company for continuing DEI initiatives. Apple announced that they would continue their DEI initiatives, and all the president did was angrily post about it on Truth Social. I'm not a legal scholar, but thankfully, Catalyst's poll also included corporate lawyers. A vast majority, 88 percent to be precise, believed that DEI initiatives were essential to avoiding legal risk. So it seems like companies have more to lose by pulling back from DEI than continuing forward. We've seen the opposing approach to DEI initiatives play out in the marketplace this year. Target has been the, uh, target of several boycotts this year as a result of withdrawing from their DEI initiatives as soon as they thought it was politically expedient. This has resulted in foot traffic being down in the stores and the company reporting a drop in first-quarter sales. Target's woes are so pronounced that several companies have started listing consumer boycotts as a potential financial risk in investor reports. On the other end of the equation is Costco, which has stood firm on its commitments to DEI and actually beat its sales expectations for the first quarter. Whether it comes to employees, executives, lawyers, or consumers, it appears the majority are in agreement: DEI works for everybody. Now, if only someone could get that message through to the weirdos running the country right now. SEE ALSO: DEI's Economic Impact: What The Data Reveals Poll Shows Companies Maintaing DEI Intiatives Have Better Reputations SEE ALSO Survey Says: Most High-Level Business Executives Believe DEI Initiatives Are Necessary To Avoid Legal Risk was originally published on Black America Web Featured Video CLOSE
USA Today
06-06-2025
- Sport
- USA Today
Former SEC star thinks Oklahoma will be ready for Michigan game
Former SEC star thinks Oklahoma will be ready for Michigan game The Oklahoma Sooners face a very daunting schedule in 2025. Aside from their grueling eight-game SEC schedule, OU has one of their premier nonconference games of the entire college football season in Week 2. The Sooners will be hosting the Michigan Wolverines in a battle of blue-blood programs representing the two best conferences in the sport, the SEC and the Big Ten. That game takes place on September 6th. David Pollack, a former college football analyst for "ESPN College GameDay", believes that the Sooners, who likely won't be favored in that matchup, will be ready for the Wolverines when the time comes. "That Oklahoma game versus Michigan, if you think that's an easy game to pick, I would disagree," Pollack said. "I think it's a "pick-em" at worst and I might even lean Oklahoma because of what they have continuity-wise. I think Oklahoma is going to come in with more continuity with quarterback and play-caller. Oklahoma has the best defensive line in the SEC. Like, I know that for a fact, like I've watched those guys. Inside, if you want to run the football against those defensive tackles, they are a handful. Oklahoma, I think, is going to be one of the most improved teams in the country, period. When you get John Mateer and you get Ben Arbuckle together, Jaydn Ott at running back, if anybody watched OU's defense last year, you had a lot to like." This matchup also features two head coaches who will be looking for a signature win for their respective careers and a statement opportunity for their respective teams. Aside from Texas in 2023 and Alabama in 2024, Brent Venables is short on statement wins as the head coach of the Sooners. Two 6-7 seasons in three years have his seat hot entering 2025. Sherrone Moore is an OU alum who played for the Sooners during the Bob Stoops era. His Michigan team finished strong a year ago, but fell plenty of rungs in a Big Ten conference that they won for three straight seasons in Moore's first year. With all of the offseason changes the Sooners have made since last year ended, Oklahoma looks to be in a better position to make more statements in a positive way in 2025. Contact/Follow us @SoonersWire on X, and like our page on Facebook to follow ongoing coverage of Oklahoma news, notes, and opinions. You can also follow Aaron on X @Aaron_Gelvin.
Yahoo
05-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Investors warming up to build-to-rent
This story was originally published on Multifamily Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Multifamily Dive newsletter. Following a string of successful years, the build-to-rent sector has maintained its frenzied activity pace through 2024 and into 2025. A significant amount of new build-to-rent supply has come online in the past 12 months, according to Jordan LaMarche, vice president of Bethesda, Maryland-based real estate consultancy RCLCO — a trend likely to continue for the next six months. Still, despite 2024 representing the peak of new supply, BTR still makes up only 6%-7% of total rental deliveries. 'We … think this is still very short of the potential demand for the product type overall,' La Marche said during a recent RCLCO webinar on the current state of the BTR market. Given this increase in supply, rent growth has been stagnant in BTR year over year, according to LaMarche. However, BTR has a 0.5% higher occupancy rate than multifamily overall, and weakening starts may lead to declining vacancies over the course of the year, according to LaMarche. While build-to-rent is still a newer asset class, investors have a greater understanding of BTR and their exposure to it than they did in the past, and are trying to figure out where it fits in their portfolio, according to Rick Pollack, managing director of RCLCO Fund Advisors. 'They really want to understand the fundamentals of how it works,' Pollack said. 'How does it lease? How does it operate? How can they be smarter about their investments going forward … [and] what does the end of the investment look like?' LaMarche noted that even within the confines of a single-family rental home or townhome, developers are experimenting with product type and how different features might appeal to customers or reduce costs. For instance, even within the same submarket, two BTR properties may vary widely in terms of style, unit size and garage arrangement. 'There isn't a silver bullet yet to get the exact right renter segmentation,' LaMarche said. 'But there is plenty of room for customization to potentially meet higher price points.' Pollack believes that the sector is in 'the second to third inning' of its development, but will need more time to mature completely. Currently, there are very few transactions in the BTR sector for investors to build their predictions on; as more occur, more players may enter the space as they get a better idea of the numbers involved. 'From the institutional investor standpoint, [what] gets us further along in the game is more stabilized communities and more stabilized communities that trade,' Pollack said. 'A lot of the capital market space is based on core transactions and then folks adjust their risk and return expectations on core transactions.' Based on interactions with owners and investors, LaMarche's suggestions for the single-family rental sector include: Investing in the education and marketing processes early. Because build-to-rent is a relatively small product type, renters, investors and municipalities often need more information on what it is and how it works, especially in new markets. Know your demographics. Cottage-style homes tend to attract older residents or those without children, while townhomes appeal more to families. Be strategic about amenities. Pools, fitness centers and dog parks are very valuable to renters — 'but stop there,' LaMarche said. 'Other amenities don't drive a significant premium and smaller versions do just as well as the larger ones.' Prioritize delivering amenities with the first units, in order to attract renters. However, limit the first residents' exposure to construction as much as possible. Add fences to yards. Regardless of yard size, fenced yards drive a high rent premium as spaces for kids and pets. Size driveways and garages for larger cars. Since many single-family renters are young families, they may have larger cars than the average renter and will value easy parking.
