Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The State of Health in America: A Political and Scientific Crossfire

The State of Health in America: A Political and Scientific Crossfire

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. testifies before the Senate Finance Committee at the Dirksen Senate Office Building on September 04, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

At the heart of the Trump administration’s health agenda is a dramatic reorientation of public health priorities. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. declared during a Senate hearing last week:

“We at HHS are enacting a once-in-a-generation shift from a sick-care system, to a true health care system that tackles the root causes of chronic disease.”

“Make America Healthy Again” has been met with both praise and fierce resistance. Republican Senator Mike Crapo supported the initiative, saying:


“President Trump and Secretary Kennedy have made a steadfast commitment to make America healthy again”.

Kennedy’s long-standing skepticism of vaccines has become central to his tenure.

Chronic illness, environmental toxicity, and mental health neglect have long plagued our systems. But when that vision is paired with vaccine suspicion, the firing of CDC Director Susan Monarez, and a panel stacked with anti-vaccine voices, the promise begins to fracture.

Monarez, in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, accused Kennedy of pressuring her to:

“Compromise science itself” and approve recommendations from a panel “filled with people who have publicly expressed antivaccine rhetoric”.

Kennedy’s response? “The people at the CDC who oversaw [COVID-19 mitigation]... are the people who will be leaving.” That’s not reform. That’s purging.

Senator Tina Smith challenged Kennedy directly:

“When were you lying, sir – when you told this committee that you were not anti-vax? Or when you told Americans that there's no safe and effective vaccine?”



Kennedy replied: “Both things are true”.

Former CDC directors and health professionals have condemned Kennedy’s approach. In a joint op-ed, they warned:

“Public health shouldn’t be partisan. Vaccines have saved millions of lives under administrations of both parties. Parents deserve a CDC they can trust to put children above politics, evidence above ideology and facts above fear”.

Senator John Barrasso, a physician, added:

“I’m a doctor. Vaccines work”.

When trust erodes, so does the very architecture of care. The tug of war between Kennedy’s populist health reform, Trump’s political backing, and the scientific community’s alarm has left America’s health landscape deeply polarized. As Kennedy invoked his father’s legacy:

“Progress is a nice word, but change is its motivator. And change has its enemies.”

The question remains: will this change heal or harm?

Public health is not a stage for performance—it’s a covenant with the people. And right now, that covenant is being rewritten in ink that smudges truth with ideology.

While this political theater unfolds, the communities most devastated by COVID-19—Latino and Black families—remain largely unacknowledged in the administration’s rhetoric.

In Louisiana, Black residents made up 70% of COVID-19 deaths, despite being only 32% of the population. Latino patients in the West and Midwest were hospitalized at rates over nine times higher than non-Hispanic Whites during the pandemic’s peak. These aren’t just numbers. They’re testimonies of structural neglect.

The virus didn’t discriminate, but our systems did. Marginalized communities faced compounded risks: frontline jobs without protections, multigenerational housing that made isolation impossible, and limited access to care. Vaccine rollout was uneven. Trust was fractured.

The state of health in America isn’t just a tug-of-war between Kennedy, Trump, and the CDC. It’s a reckoning.

Will we build a health system rooted in dignity, science, and mutual recognition—or will we let force of personality and chaos dictate the terms of our survival?

America’s health deserves more than slogans. It deserves stewardship.

Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network.

Read More

Presidential Incapacity and the Limits of the 25th Amendment

Lynn Schmidt explains how a strong 25th Amendment would protect the presidency itself "by ensuring smooth transitions and public confidence in executive leadership..."

Getty Images, Pool

Presidential Incapacity and the Limits of the 25th Amendment

The authors of the 25th Amendment to the Constitution established and explained the complete order of presidential succession, as well as a series of contingency plans to fill any executive vacancies. It was written as a response to the weaknesses found in Article II after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and what was learned about the inadequacies related to presidential illnesses and hospitalizations.

It feels like the time is not only right but needed for another updated response.

Keep ReadingShow less
Examining Florida’s Controversial New Immigration Bills: SB 2-C and SB 4-C

On February 13, 2025, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed into law two major immigration enforcement bills: Senate Bill 2-C (SB 2-C) and Senate Bill 4-C (SB 4-C).

Metin Ozer on Unsplash

Examining Florida’s Controversial New Immigration Bills: SB 2-C and SB 4-C

On February 13, 2025, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed into law two major immigration enforcement bills: Senate Bill 2-C (SB 2-C) and Senate Bill 4-C (SB 4-C). Introduced by Senator Joe Gruters and co-sponsored by Senator Randy Fine, these bills build upon Florida’s ongoing efforts to increase state involvement in immigration enforcement. Florida’s immigration laws come amid rising state-federal tension over immigration authority, particularly in states led by Republican governors.

SB 2-C includes initiatives relating to funding, cooperation with federal immigration agencies, and law enforcement infrastructure. SB 4-C introduces provisions that criminalize entry and reentry into Florida by undocumented immigrants and create new state-level immigration-related offenses. This brief explores the major provisions of Florida’s SB 2-C and SB 4-C, analyzing the legal, political, and humanitarian arguments for and against their enforcement.

Keep ReadingShow less
When Politicians Pick Voters: Why Gerrymandering Is Undermining Democracy

An image depicting a map of a district with unusually shaped boundaries, highlighting how areas are divided in a non-compact or fragmented way.

AI generated

When Politicians Pick Voters: Why Gerrymandering Is Undermining Democracy

The partisan fight to draw maps that determine how Americans are represented has entered a dangerous spiral. Texas is racing ahead with a mid-decade congressional redraw designed to lock in additional seats after President Donald J. Trump called upon state lawmakers to find five seats. California’s leaders responded in kind to offset the Texas map, but will hold a special election in which voters must decide whether to put aside the state’s Congressional maps drawn by an independent redistricting commission for the next three election cycles. Other states are openly weighing similar moves. But this “map wars” logic is dangerous, and voters from all backgrounds stand to lose as districts harden into safe seats and politicians’ accountability to voters further withers.

Large majorities of Americans say that gerrymandering — which lets politicians pick their voters instead of the other way around — is unfair and a problem. When politicians and party insiders draw their own districts, the maps can be engineered to protect incumbents, not voters. As a result, gerrymandering contributes to the erosion of public confidence in elections. It lessens people’s sense that change can happen, and reduces the ability of voters to hold leaders accountable.

Keep ReadingShow less
Is Trump Serious About Banning Mail-In Ballots… or Is It Rage-Bait?
Photo by Tiffany Tertipes on Unsplash.

Is Trump Serious About Banning Mail-In Ballots… or Is It Rage-Bait?

Earlier this month, President Donald Trump took to Truth Social, claiming he was going to “lead a movement to get rid of mail-in ballots,” adding that he would sign an executive order ahead of the 2026 midterms. However, Trump has yet to sign such an order.

Keep ReadingShow less