About 8 in 10 rural voters — an important voting bloc for Trump and fellow Republicans in recent elections — said the Trump administration’s policies have had a negative effect or no impact on the health of people where they live. Most MAHA supporters, 68%, also feel this way, according to the national survey of more than 2,000 rural registered voters.

The findings signal an apparent disconnect between the Trump administration’s MAHA-branded policy priorities and rural America’s perception of their reach and effectiveness.

Iowa pastor Mike Jager, 58, is a registered Republican and considers himself part of the MAHA movement. The Trump administration’s health policies have had “minimal” impact on the health of his community, Jager said, but he added that Trump’s health secretary, , is moving the needle “in the right direction.”

“It’s a beginning,” Jager said. “It’s a big ship to try and turn around and course-correct.”

Kennedy has used the MAHA label to support various agendas, including , , and investing in regenerative agriculture.

Jager lives in Sumner, Iowa, “less than a quarter mile from where the corn ends and the city begins.” He’s seen family members and neighbors develop diseases that he believes resulted in part from exposure to agricultural chemicals and consumption of unhealthy, processed foods.

In the June Republican primary for governor, Jager voted for Zach Lahn, a businessman and farmer, who ran on a MAHA platform and beat out Trump-backed U.S. Rep. Randy Feenstra. He plans to vote for him again in November.

Many Rural Voters Are Prioritizing Health Issues

About two-thirds of rural voters who support MAHA said it’s “extremely” or “very” important to them to vote for a candidate who does, too, while only 4 in 10 rural voters overall said the same.

Trump sought to seize on MAHA support during his campaign for another term two years ago. Now, amid tight midterm races, Kennedy has campaigned to galvanize the movement’s support. In May, he attended a MAHA bill signing with Iowa Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds, and in August, he went fishing with Lahn, posting about it on social media.

Yet the survey indicates voters are noticing “this weird split in the Trump administration” between what Kennedy messages and what Trump says and does, said David Peterson, a political science professor at Iowa State University.

“It’s this mix of things coming out of D.C., out of different pieces of the administration, that’s confusing people,” Peterson said.

In Iowa, concerns about what’s causing are “a big deal,” he said. For many people who identify with MAHA, being healthy includes taking on corporate agriculture and pharmaceutical companies that they think cause cancer, he added.

“The sort of populist messaging around that is appealing right now,” Peterson said.

In the poll, views on healthcare access and costs largely diverged along party lines. Most Democratic and independent voters said the Trump administration’s healthcare policies have had a negative impact on their healthcare costs and the health and well-being of people in their communities. Republicans were likelier to say there hasn’t been an impact.

Talking on the phone from her 200-acre farm in Carroll County, Iowa, 71-year-old Donna Klocke said that her husband had died from cancer and that she has neighbors who also have cancer.

“It’s just very prevalent,” Klocke said. “We’re in a farming community. We use chemicals and pesticides and all kinds of things that aren’t necessarily good for us.”

Klocke, a Democrat, said the MAHA movement is a good idea because she cares about being healthy, but she does not consider herself part of it and will not be voting for a candidate who represents the movement.

Kennedy, who was an anti-vaccine activist before entering politics and has sent to Americans about , scares her.

“Measles are coming back and polio,” Klocke said. “It’s the measles that really gets me. It’s like, do you not understand how dangerous it is?”

Survey Reflects Angst Over Healthcare

About half of rural voters said their communities don’t have enough doctors or other healthcare providers, and even more said there aren’t enough mental health workers specifically. The share of rural voters who said their community does not have enough hospitals increased to 35% from 21% in a similar question asked in a 51ÊÓƵ-Washington Post survey in 2017.

And as with the general population, healthcare, gas, and grocery costs are top pain points. More than 6 in 10 rural voters said they were worried about healthcare costs.

The level of worry varied based on coverage, with rural voters enrolled in employer plans or Medicare less likely to be worried. The survey found that 80% of working-age rural voters on Medicaid were very or somewhat worried about healthcare costs. Last year, Republicans passed that cut over $900 billion in projected Medicaid spending over a decade and mandated new eligibility requirements.

Among rural voters who purchase their own insurance, such as the individual coverage plans available on Affordable Care Act marketplaces, 77% said they were worried.

In the tiny community of Lipan, Texas, west of Dallas, Kim Solis and her husband have a handyman-and-home-remodel business and get their insurance on the marketplace. Since Trump was elected again, their premium payment jumped from zero to $166 a month. Their copays went up, and their deductibles each increased by $2,000.

Solis, 62, said she worries what will happen if they get a big medical bill.

“Certainly, we’d be in a world of hurt trying to take money out of savings or getting it out of our 401(k) just to be able to do something about it,” she said.

Most MAHA Voters Are Also MAGA — But Not All

Like the general population, rural voters said they trust their own doctors and healthcare providers for health information over government agencies or officials, according to the poll.

Trust in Kennedy and Trump fell largely along partisan lines. About 10% of rural Democratic voters reported having a “great deal” or “fair amount” of trust in Kennedy, compared with 74% of rural Republican voters. About 5% of rural Democrats and 69% of rural Republicans said they trust Trump a “great deal” or “fair amount” for reliable health information.

While Make America Great Again and MAHA identities are “linked in a lot of ways,” the rising costs of healthcare and groceries pose a challenge for those committed to the MAHA principles that Kennedy promotes, said Peterson, the Iowa State professor.

Buying healthy food “becomes, ‘I can’t afford to do that because of Trump’s policies,’” he said.

In Stamping Ground, Kentucky, Alma Johnson, 65, works as night security at a horse farm. Johnson said gas had gone up but her overall cost of living had decreased since Trump took office.

Johnson voted for Trump in 2016, 2020, and 2024 and said she “pretty much” likes how Trump is running the country. But she said she is not a MAGA devotee, preferring to “think for myself.”

MAHA, however, is an easy sell for Johnson because, she said, she doesn’t think people should be able to buy junk food through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

Still, she said she hasn’t seen much impact from the Trump administration’s healthcare policies, including the .

“It takes a long time to change people, their habits, their thoughts, or the things they do,” Johnson said.

This article first appeared on 51ÊÓƵ Health News and is republished here under a .

Inside the New Richland Care Center, staff members rushed to move 36 residents out of the building on Sept. 19 while they still could. They pushed elderly residents in wheelchairs through 4-inch-deep water to buses waiting in the parking lot, said nursing home administrator Robert Johannsen.

Inches turned to feet as the last three residents were wheeled out on hospital beds, lifted “as high as they can go” to escape the rising water, Johannsen said. Firefighters and volunteers from a high school football team pushed the beds to safety across the street, he said.

“It’s pretty devastating,” Johannsen said of the now-shuttered nursing home. “There was at least 2½ feet of water flowing down the hallways.”

The small-town, government-run nursing home is about 100 yards from a drainage ditch in southern Minnesota. It has flooded three times in 16 years, including during the September storm that was large but far from historic, according to the National Weather Service.

New Richland is one of 100 U.S. nursing homes that face some of the nation’s worst flood risk — where at least 2 feet of water during a big storm could endanger residents — according to a 51ÊÓƵ Health News analysis of peer-reviewed flood hazard mapping provided by Fathom, a United Kingdom-based company considered a leader in flood simulation.

The 51ÊÓƵ Health News analysis builds upon a 2025 investigation that used Fathom’s mapping to identify at least 170 U.S. hospitals at risk of significant flooding. Fathom’s estimates are generally seen as more modern than official flood maps released by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which are often out of date and don’t account for the changing climate.

“Every community across the United States carries some level of flood risk,” said Oliver Wing, the chief scientific officer at Fathom. “There is this idea that unless you can either see the ocean or the Mississippi from your front room, then you’re not at risk of flooding — when the reality is that anywhere rain can fall, it can flood.”

100 Nursing Homes at Risk of Dangerous Flooding

This map shows nursing homes located where severe weather is predicted to cause at least 2 feet of flooding — and, in some cases, far more — according to a 51ÊÓƵ Health News analysis of proprietary flood hazard data.

Source: 51ÊÓƵ Health News analysis of 100-year flood risk data from <a href="; style="color:#0071ce;">Fathom</a>; Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services <br> Credit: Holly K. Hacker, Brett Kelman, Daniel Chang, and Lydia Zuraw/51ÊÓƵ Health News

The U.S. has nearly 15,000 nursing homes housing more than 1.2 million people. In floods and other disasters, the residents are especially vulnerable because many are medically frail, cognitively impaired, or immobile. Some require daily care that can’t be reliably provided during a disaster, yet they are also so fragile that relocation could send them to the emergency room.

Additionally, many nursing homes were built near coastlines or waterways in the 1970s, before widespread concern about climate change, to keep residents cool and content, said David Dosa, the head of geriatrics at the UMass Chan Medical School.

“It’s a lot more comfortable than being in an urban jungle,” Dosa said. “Obviously, now you’re in places that are a little more at risk.”

Dosa has studied nursing home evacuations since Hurricane Katrina flooded the New Orleans area in 2005. Dozens of people were killed in facilities that tried to ride out the storm and flooded after the levees broke.

After Katrina, the nursing home industry pivoted toward evacuations, although some of those decisions also led to deaths, Dosa said.

In preparation for the next three Gulf hurricanes, more than 270 nursing home evacuations were recorded, according to a Dosa co-wrote in 2011. Within the 30 days that followed each storm, the regions hit saw a cumulative total of 277 more nursing home resident deaths than expected, suggesting a “significant increase in mortality and morbidity associated with evacuation,” according to the study.

“It’s Russian roulette. You’re damned if you do. You are damned if you don’t,” Dosa said of evacuations. “Older adults and disasters don’t mix.”

A similar found a 16% greater chance of ER visits among residents of Florida assisted living facilities who were evacuated before Hurricane Irma in 2017. People in assisted living facilities generally need less care than those in nursing homes.

“Assisted living residents are quite frail in their own right,” said Cassandra Hua, an assistant professor at UMass Lowell, who led that study. “But nursing home residents are usually at higher risk. So anything you see in assisted living might be multiplied in a nursing home setting.”

Even a few inches of flooding can interrupt nursing home care and force an evacuation. For each of the 100 nursing homes identified by the 51ÊÓƵ Health News analysis, Fathom’s data predicted a 100-year flood event could bring at least 2 feet of water to the buildings.

A 100-year flood is an intense weather event with a 1% chance of occurring in any given year, but it can happen more often. Climate scientists largely agree that extreme weather is worsening as the planet warms, which allows the atmosphere to hold more moisture and causes sea levels to rise.

And storms are drenching regions once considered at lower risk for flooding, where essential facilities and entire communities might be less prepared, said Drew Gronewold, a University of Michigan climate scientist. In other regions, storms are now less frequent but becoming “off-the-charts” powerful, he said.

“Storm tracks are changing their trajectory,” Gronewold said. “These types of, in air quotes, ‘unanticipated events’ are going to be part of our future.”

Some of the nursing homes 51ÊÓƵ Health News has identified as at risk have flooded in the past five years, including facilities in Florida, Kentucky, Texas, and Washington.

Five of the facilities flooded in 2012 as Superstorm Sandy clobbered New York, according to a report from the , while a sixth, the elevated Seagate Rehabilitation and Nursing Center, narrowly . In Indiana, more than 150 people from the five-story Munster Med Inn during Hurricane Ike in 2008. Members of the National Guard carried some residents down flights of stairs in the dark.

Then there is the New Richland Care Center. Local media reports show it was evacuated due to flooding in 2010 and 2016, then partially surrounded by floodwater in 2023, before the Sept. 19 evacuation.

Storms dropped 4 to 8 inches of rain on much of southeastern Minnesota the day before, setting off widespread flooding, said National Weather Service meteorologist Brennan Dettmann. The rainfall was heavy for September but would not have been out of place in July, he said.

It was too much for New Richland. Storm runoff from nearby farms pooled in a low-lying baseball diamond at the edge of town before swamping nearby streets. Johannsen, the nursing home administrator, said maintenance workers who were trying to fix sewer drains called him in the middle of the night to warn about flooding in the park across the street.

“They said, ‘You need to come in. The water is rising,’” Johannsen said. “At that point, I think the water was a good 30 feet away from the building. I wasn’t really concerned.”

Wing, the Fathom scientist, said the danger should have been obvious. Although Minnesota’s natural landscape once would have absorbed heavy rains, the farmland around New Richland funnels runoff into creeks and ditches that lead to a low-lying bowl near the nursing home. It’s almost as if the location is designed to flood, Wing said.

“The choice has been made that we don’t want water in our crop fields. We want it in the nursing homes of vulnerable people,” Wing said. “That’s the choice that has been made, politically, in that part of Minnesota.”

Inside the ruined nursing home, receding floodwaters left behind knee-high watermarks, mud-smeared floors, and a lingering smell that Johannsen said reminded him of growing up on a farm. Water destroyed treasured photo albums left behind in a low cabinet, he said.

Johannsen said the nursing home — which, with 85 employees, is one of the largest employers in town — will be closed for five months to a year for repairs. He said all its residents were moved into a school gymnasium and have been resettled across about nine area nursing homes.

“It was an awful experience that I hope nobody ever has to go through. Because these people lost homes,” Johannsen said. “My staff is losing their jobs. And I don’t know what to do.”

Methodology

For this analysis, we used data from Fathom, a United Kingdom-based company that specializes in flood-risk modeling worldwide. To assess the United States’ vulnerability, Fathom uses sophisticated computer simulations and detailed terrain data covering the country. It accounts for environmental factors such as climate change, soil conditions, and many rivers and creeks not mapped by other sources. Fathom’s modeling has been peer-reviewed and used by insurance companies, the World Bank Group, the Nature Conservancy, and government agencies in Florida, Texas, and elsewhere. The Iowa Flood Center has validated Fathom’s U.S. data.

Through a data use agreement, Fathom shared U.S. mapping data that predicts areas with at least a 1% chance of flooding in any given year. Fathom’s data estimates the effects of coastal, fluvial, and pluvial flooding and accounts for dams, reservoirs, and other structures that defend against floods.

To identify at-risk nursing homes, we used a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services database to map more than 14,000 nursing homes. With GPS coordinates as the center point, we created a circle with a 100-yard radius around each nursing home, which in most cases captured the building and nearby grounds. We then mapped Fathom’s flood-risk data to see where it overlapped with these circles. We started by looking for nursing homes where at least 20% of the circle’s area had a predicted flood depth of at least 1 foot. That gave us an initial list of more than 750 nursing homes.

Then we visually inspected those facilities using mapping software and Google Maps to confirm that floodwaters were predicted to reach or surround the buildings. We trimmed our list to the 100 nursing homes where the most flooding was predicted, with additional weight given to deeper water.

Our analysis does not account for how flooding beyond a nursing home’s footprint could still affect employees or patients. And it does not assess what steps facilities may have already taken to prepare for severe weather events.

Fathom provided guidance and feedback as we developed our analysis.

This article first appeared on 51ÊÓƵ Health News and is republished here under a .

Years ago, she taught English as a second language overseas and loved it.

“It’s so exciting to me to watch someone learn a new word or have that spark of understanding,” she said.

Zulick knew she could earn enough money as a substitute teacher to make going back to school financially viable — except for the cost of health insurance. She didn’t want to risk being unable to see her doctor for her allergies, or for preventative care.

The offered through Montana State University was too expensive, Zulick said, almost as much as her tuition. But then she found a solution that allowed her to make the leap: Medicaid. She wouldn’t have to pay any monthly premiums.

It worked well for a few months, as Zulick taught by day and took online classes at night.

But in June, the state sent a letter that she said left her “completely confused.” She knew Montana was rolling out a system for work requirements over the summer, but she thought she wouldn’t have to prove she met the requirements until next year, when her Medicaid enrollment came up for renewal.

Yet the letter from the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services outlining the new requirements gave conflicting information on when Zulick would have to prove she was meeting them. First it said at her next renewal, which would be sometime next spring. Lower down it told her she would have to submit paperwork to prove compliance much earlier — “within 30 days” of the date on the letter, June 26. She wondered: Was it a boilerplate mass-mailing letter she could ignore, or was her insurance on the line?

the new work requirements by Jan. 1, but three states — Montana, , and — have already gotten started. Medicaid advocates worry that the expedited timeline in those states will lead to thousands of people losing coverage because they’re confused about the new rules, even if they are eligible for the program — and that Montana may offer a troubling preview of what will happen nationwide next year.

State health department officials maintain they are well prepared and told state lawmakers they plan to process roughly 5,000 enrollees monthly.

Growing Confusion, Dwindling Help

Rep. of the Montana House has gotten dozens of calls from confused constituents, specifically about letters like the one Zulick received.

“The notices coming from the department are very, very confusing, and it’s very hard to find help figuring out what’s going on,” said the Democratic legislator, who asked health department leaders about those letters at a hearing in early September. Letters being sent to enrollees have been updated to be clearer, state health officials told lawmakers at the hearing.

In Montana, nearly are subject to the new rules. Medicaid costs are split between the federal and state governments, and states are responsible for administering the program, which provides health insurance for people with low incomes or disabilities.

Under the new work requirements, enrollees must document that they’re working, volunteering, or studying 80 hours per month — or they must show that they qualify for one of a range of exemptions, such as being “medically frail” or being the primary caretaker for a family member.

Montana began with a soft launch of the work requirements in July and gave enrollees until Oct. 1 to comply.

Critics contend that isn’t enough time, because the state hasn’t finished setting up new computer systems or hiring the staff it said it would need. Of the 59 positions, only about 20 were filled, state health department officials told state lawmakers during the Sept. 9 hearing, adding that numbers had fluctuated amid staff turnover.

State health officials have said they’ll eventually be able to automatically verify that students are enrolled in public universities. However, that computer system isn’t expected to be up and running until next year, leaving students like Zulick to track down and submit the correct paperwork to prove their college enrollment.

However, there are fewer outside resources to help residents with these bureaucratic tasks.

For example, , a nonprofit that helps Montanans fill out such paperwork, lost federal funding last year, going from a staff of 18 to two part-time employees working a phone line.

The state does operate a helpline, but that Montanans stay on hold much longer than the national average and that many callers hang up before they connect with a state employee.

“We were worried about chaos that could be generated by the state rushing,” said , CEO of the Montana Healthcare Foundation, a nonprofit aimed at improving health in the state. “Given how little information the state has provided about what they are doing, I’m much more worried about chaos.”

Wernham pointed to a similar upheaval in 2023, when states undertook a massive process to redetermine the eligibility of all Medicaid enrollees, after regular eligibility checks were paused during the pandemic.

Many Montanans who were financially eligible lost Medicaid coverage for technical reasons, such as incorrectly filling out paperwork — roughly 87,000, according to state data from two years ago.

Even vulnerable Montanans who didn’t need to file paperwork, because their coverage should have been automatically renewed, were dropped from the Medicaid rolls, including people who were homeless.

Long-Sought Requirements in State

The Montana Legislature passed a measure expressing its desire to add work requirements to Medicaid, but the state didn’t have permission from the federal government to move forward until now.

Having work requirements creates accountability for people who rely on the social safety net, said Montana Senate President , a Republican.

“In an economy like this, if you’re an able-bodied adult that’s able to work, you really do need to step up,” he said.

Asked about confusion among enrollees about the rules, Regier responded that the Oct. 1 deadline offered more than enough time to work out the kinks in the new system.

In the end, Zulick learned she didn’t need to worry about that deadline, because she got married in July and no longer qualified for Medicaid, although she didn’t know that would be the case when she got the June letter.

But others remain scared about losing coverage, including Heather Reel, who attended a rally at the state capitol in July to push back against Montana’s early rollout.

Reel relies on Medicaid for its mental health coverage. Without it, she said, she would struggle to care for her teenage son, who has autism and is nonverbal. Between her shifts at a fast food restaurant and caring for her son, she’s scared she’ll be too busy to figure out how to report her work hours.

Montana’s Rollout a Potential Preview

The handful of states that are implementing the Medicaid work requirements early are building the plane as they’re taking off, said , who provides Medicaid analysis for The Commonwealth Fund, a nonprofit focused on making healthcare more equitable.

“Montana is going to be an example for what we might see nationally as things roll out,” she said.

Although most other states are sticking to the Jan. 1 deadline to build and test their Medicaid systems, they still might not have all the components in place, she said.

If states can’t automatically renew or deny coverage based on the new rules, state workers will have to do so manually, on a case-by-case basis. That could create backlogs and more disruption, leading more people to lose coverage, Coleman said.

Jon Ebelt, a spokesperson for the state’s health department, said in a statement that Montana’s Medicaid office is ready for the change on Oct. 1.

“We are committed to ensuring eligible Montanans maintain coverage while meeting requirements, and we will continue to monitor implementation closely,” Ebelt said.

Democratic state lawmakers have repeatedly asked state health officials to extend the Oct. 1 deadline for enrollees to comply with the new rules, but they’ve said they have no plans to do so.

This article is from a partnership that includes , , and 51ÊÓƵ Health News.

This article first appeared on 51ÊÓƵ Health News and is republished here under a .

Julie Rovner 51ÊÓƵ Health News Read Julie's stories. Julie Rovner is chief Washington correspondent and host of 51ÊÓƵ Health News’ weekly health policy news podcast, "What the Health?" A noted expert on health policy issues, Julie is the author of the critically praised reference book "Health Care Politics and Policy A to Z," now in its third edition.

Healthcare, in particular its rising costs, is a key issue for voters in both parties this fall. But lawmakers are offering a variety of remedies on the campaign trail, suggesting that neither party has an agreed-upon approach.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration has apparently backed off a plan — for now — to create a political board to review scientific grant awards from the National Institutes of Health. The pause came after public complaints from Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins of Maine, who is fighting to retain her seat and, possibly, maintain the GOP majority in the upper chamber.

This week’s panelists are Julie Rovner of 51ÊÓƵ Health News, Tami Luhby of CNN, Joanne Kenen of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Politico Magazine, and Sarah Jane Tribble of 51ÊÓƵ Health News.

Panelists

Tami Luhby CNN

Joanne Kenen Johns Hopkins University and Politico

Sarah Jane Tribble 51ÊÓƵ Health News Read Sarah's stories.

Among the takeaways from this week’s episode:

• A new 51ÊÓƵ-AP rural-voter polling project found that affordability issues are central concerns in rural America. Overall, 48% of rural voters say the economy is worse off than it was at the start of President Donald Trump’s term, and healthcare is one of the key pain points. Findings also indicate that among rural voters — historically a strong Trump constituency — about half still approve of the president’s job performance. Some of these voters, though, said they may sit this election out. That’s notable because the midterms are often determined by who shows up.
• The Trump administration is pushing its anti-fraud agenda as an election issue, using it as a counternarrative to Democrats’ complaints that Republicans’ refusal to extend covid-era Affordable Care Act subsidies led to a large drop in ACA enrollment this year. This week, Vice President JD Vance announced that the administration was cutting 750,000 more enrollees from Obamacare, alleging they are fraudulently enrolled.
• Despite early suggestions that the administration would back away from the anti-vaccine views pushed by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., both he and Trump this past week continued to push anti-vaccine efforts. Kennedy was the keynote speaker at the conference of the anti-vaccine organization he helped found, while Trump in an Oval Office event suggested that currently administered childhood vaccines be divided into five separate doses.

Plus, for “extra credit” the panelists suggest health policy stories they read this week that they think you should read, too:

Julie Rovner: 51ÊÓƵ Health News’ “The Drugs and Devices Have Been on the Market for Years. But FDA-Ordered Studies Still Aren’t Done,” by David Hilzenrath.

Tami Luhby: The Wall Street Journal’s “,” by Liz Essley Whyte.

Joanne Kenen: Slate’s “,” by Molly Olmstead.

Sarah Jane Tribble: Stat’s “,” by John Wilkerson.

Also mentioned in this week’s podcast:

• 51ÊÓƵ Health News and The Associated Press’ “Economic Frustration Tests Trump’s Standing With Rural Voters, New 51ÊÓƵ-AP Poll Finds,” by Sarah Jane Tribble, Ali Swenson, and Linley Sanders.
• Axios’ “,” by Caitlin Owens and Adriel Bettelheim.
• The Washington Post’s “,” by Dan Diamond and Riley Beggin.
• The Washington Post’s “,” by Dan Diamond and Riley Beggin.
• 51ÊÓƵ’s “,” by Matt McGough, Lynne Cotter, Justin Lo, Imani Telesford, Ashley Ferguson, Avni Gupta, and Juliette Cubanski.

Credits

Click here to find all our podcasts.

And subscribe to “What the Health? From 51ÊÓƵ Health News” on , , , , , or wherever you listen to podcasts.

This article first appeared on 51ÊÓƵ Health News and is republished here under a .

Emery is director of New River’s Breathing Center and chair of the .

The disaster she’s reminded of started in 1930, when on a 3-mile tunnel through Gauley Mountain in West Virginia. Over the course of 18 months, some 3,000 miners, most of them Black, spent long hours drilling through sandstone, engulfed in a cloud of its toxic byproduct, silica dust. More than 750 men died from that exposure.

The risk still exists, and advocates for workers say the government should do more to rein it in.

In April of last year, the Trump administration paused the enforcement of a rule designed to help protect coal miners from an aggressive form of coal workers’ pneumoconiosis, commonly known as black lung disease, the primary cause of which is exposure to silica dust.

(Other occupations at high risk of include construction, countertop fabrication, and oil and gas work. The new rule would reduce the permissible limit of exposure in coal mining to the existing level in other industries.)

This April, the Labor Department’s Mine Safety and Health Administration announced an indefinite delay in enforcement of the rule.

Gary Hairston sits on New River Health’s board. For decades, Hairston, a retired coal miner and president of the national , has been an advocate for miners struggling with the debilitating effects of black lung, including extreme fatigue, an incessant cough, and a sensation of drowning. He regularly lobbies legislators for improved working conditions and black lung benefits. His entreaties, he said, seem to fall on deaf ears. He rarely gets an audience with the legislators themselves.

“I’d just like them to look me in the face,” Hairston said.

Evidence from just-released research underscores the urgency of his appeals for a safer work environment.

In August, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, an agency within the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, on the results of testing conducted over the past five years on miners in central Appalachia — eastern Kentucky, southwestern Virginia, and West Virginia — with 25 or more years underground. Almost 1 in 3 tested positive for black lung disease, the highest rate in nearly 50 years.

The rate in 2018, the last time the agency reported results, was 1 in 5. The lowest reported rate, in 1999, was less than 1 in 10.

“We knew this would happen,” said Sam Petsonk, a West Virginia attorney who has represented thousands of miners in the region. “It’s surprising to me that they only found one in three.”

Silica Dangers

Exposure to silica has increased as more-accessible coal seams are depleted, requiring mining operations to probe deeper, often through sandstone. The stone breaks into sharp particles that are than a grain of sand and, according to National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health research, are than coal dust. Trapped in lung tissue, those particles can cause a debilitating, sometimes fatal condition.

Kenny Thompson, a retired West Virginia miner who now lives in Richmond, Kentucky, was employed in the mines for 22 years. He would sometimes cut into four feet of sandstone to reach a coal seam.

“You ate a lot of dust,” Thompson recalled. It induced nausea. It took a toll.

In October 2025, he had his left lung removed. Post-surgery, he was in a coma for three months; he flatlined three times, he said. “They were about to really give up on me.”

He had to relearn to walk and to talk. Trekking to the mailbox still leaves him winded, lightheaded, and blurry-eyed.

The new silica rule would cut the allowable level of silica dust in half, thereby meeting the standard of other industries. Miner advocates laud the fact that it would require operators to deploy engineering controls, such as improved ventilation systems and water sprays.

But the National Mining Association and other industry trade groups argue that reaching and maintaining compliance would also require supplementing those controls with workforce measures, such as requiring personal protection equipment and rotating miners from particularly dusty areas. Many miners, and their advocates, say such measures are impractical — because respirators can impede breathing, can limit vision, and often malfunction, and because smaller mines don’t have enough workers to support rotating schedules.

In April 2025, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted an emergency stay of the rule to give operators more time to comply.

In May of this year, the Labor Department sent the White House Office of Management and Budget a on the proposed rule. And in July, the department’s regulatory agenda included a new , indicating its intent to amend the rule.

The department’s Mine Safety and Health Administration “recognizes it has a clear duty under the law to impose stricter silica standards,” said Petsonk, the attorney representing coal miners. “They’re failing to provide that measure of protection to American coal miners, so they’re going through bureaucratic motions to make it seem like they’re doing something, when, in fact, they’re just perpetuating an illegal and lethal status quo.”

The Labor Department declined to comment on ongoing rulemaking or litigation.

‘It’s On the Books’

The rule is, in fact, in effect, said Chris Williamson, head of the Mine Safety and Health Administration in the Biden administration — it’s just not being enforced. He and his team filed a legal brief in the closing days of the administration defending the rule.

“It’s on the books,” Williamson said, adding that the prohibits weakening existing protections for miners. “I’m just genuinely curious,” he said. “I want to know how they can address the issues that the industry’s raised without weakening protections for miners.”

Meanwhile, younger miners, with a decade or less in the mines, are being diagnosed with advanced stages of black lung. New River Health’s Emery said the youngest person her clinic had diagnosed with was 30. He’d worked underground for 10 years.

This is no longer just your “papaw’s disease,” she said. “It’s your husband’s disease. It’s your son’s disease.” (More than 90% of coal miners are men.)

With families to support, Emery said, “what do these guys do when they’re disabled in their 30s?”

She told of a man who sat in her office with his wife, describing his symptoms. As he spoke, he began to cry. His wife was taken aback. “‘I didn’t know it was that bad,’” Emery recalled her saying. “And he said: ‘That’s why I haven’t fixed the deck. I haven’t fixed the deck because I can’t breathe, and I’m just so tired.’”

Thompson can relate. “For 22 years, you’re used to getting up, putting your boots on every day, and going to work,” he said. “I’d been in great health shape and 160 pounds. And here I am now, I don’t work at all and I’m 115 pounds.”

Still, he recognizes what the job afforded.

“You know, it put my girls through college,” he said. “And to me, as a dad, that was the best reward that I can give them, to move forward in life, to be successful at what they chose to be and not work like a dog like I had to.”

President Donald Trump said in an : “Our Nation’s beautiful clean coal resources will be critical to meeting the rise in electricity demand due to the resurgence of domestic manufacturing and the construction of artificial intelligence data processing centers.”

Six months later, the Energy Department announced a to “expand and reinvigorate America’s coal industry.”

Should the administration announce a weaker rule, it would be “an unconscionable crime against American coal miners,” Petsonk said. “But I fear that’s going to happen.”

In June, Hairston spoke at a reception for a photo exhibit titled “.”

“It seems like coal miners, we’re just a number,” he said. “Just a number.”

This article first appeared on 51ÊÓƵ Health News and is republished here under a .

The poll of more than 2,000 rural registered voters by The Associated Press in partnership with 51ÊÓƵ found broadly negative views on the national and local economies, including from many Republicans. The costs of groceries, gas, and healthcare rank as top pain points for the rural voters, who were surveyed over two weeks starting in mid-August. And a larger share than among voters overall say they are worried about being able to afford groceries or gas.

At the same time, about half of rural voters approve of Trump’s job performance, more than among U.S. adults overall in separate AP-NORC polling.

The findings suggest that many rural voters haven’t turned on Trump but that they also largely don’t think he has delivered the economic renaissance he promised on the campaign trail.

Ed Westrick, a registered Republican and veteran, rates Trump’s job performance as “mediocre, middle-of-the-road.” Westrick, who lives in rural Texas, isn’t sure he will cast a midterm ballot, a troubling sign for Republicans in a key state in their fight to keep control of Congress.

Rural Americans skew Republican and historically have been an instrumental group of voters for Trump. The survey reveals that while rural voters seem unlikely to support Democrats on a large scale, Trump and the Republican Party could face challenges with them in November.

Deep Unhappiness About the Economy

As the election approaches, only about 4 in 10 rural voters approve of Trump’s performance on the economy. They rate him similarly on his handling of the Iran war, an entanglement that has proved expensive for the U.S. and increased oil and gas prices. And rural voters rank pocketbook concerns and fraud in government programs higher among the things they want to hear about from politicians than other perennial issues, such as gun policy and abortion.

Westrick, 59, is a technical trainer in the electronics industry and has seen an increase in business in part because he works with defense contractors, but he said he’s concerned about the cost of living.

“I hear the politicians talk about making groceries more affordable and making healthcare more affordable but yet none of them are addressing the issues,” Westrick said.

In the poll, about three-quarters of rural voters rated the cost of living in their communities as “only fair” or “poor” — up from about half in a 51ÊÓƵ-Washington Post survey in 2017. Rural Americans, who have consistently lower wages than those who live in suburban and metro areas, have been hurting economically for decades, according to Tim Slack, a professor of sociology at Louisiana State University and co-author of the book Rural and Small-Town America.

“Many folks are connecting the cost-of-living crisis to many of the Trump administration’s policy choices: the war in Iran, tariffs, trade wars,” Slack said. “None of those things are going to bring down prices at the pump or the local Walmart.”

“Trump promised to lower prices on Day 1, and instead the cost of living’s continued to climb. And that’s especially painful in rural America,” Slack said, adding that he expects many working-class Republicans to skip voting in November.

Rural Republicans do have a brighter economic perspective than rural Democrats or independents, particularly about the U.S. as a whole, according to the survey. About 6 in 10 rural Republican voters say Trump has improved the national economy, compared with only about 2 in 10 independents and fewer than 1 in 10 Democrats.

But only 45% of rural Republican voters say Trump has made their local economies better off. About 1 in 4 said there are fewer good-paying jobs where they live than five years ago.

In Michigan, 37-year-old independent voter Brittainy Sosebee said she isn’t sure if she will vote in the state’s midterm election, which includes a tight Senate race seen as crucial to the Democratic Party’s push to win back a majority. Sosebee voted for Trump in 2016 and Democratic candidate Joe Biden in 2020; she didn’t vote in 2024.

Sosebee, who lives in St. Johns, a small town just north of Lansing, said she used to have extra money to take a vacation or buy a new pair of jeans without worrying. Now, she scrutinizes every expense, cringing at the rising cost of fresh produce when she shops for her three children.

“We hunt, so we have a lot of venison and things like that, so we don’t have to buy meat from the grocery store, but it’s still crippling,” she said.

Healthcare Policies Go Unnoticed

The 51ÊÓƵ-AP poll found that rural voters overall don’t perceive much positive impact from the Trump administration’s healthcare policies even as they have been a top priority for Republican leaders, who have promoted efforts to lower drug costs and touted a $50 billion rural health program.

Only 17% of the voters said the Trump administration’s healthcare policies have had a “positive impact” on their healthcare costs, while 41% said they’ve had “no impact” and another 41% said they’ve had a “negative impact.”

Sitting on her front porch in Woolwich, Maine, 71-year-old Democrat Kathleen Hanning sipped a chai tea latte in the sun and recalled how she stopped voting for Republican Sen. Susan Collins in 2020.

Collins and Trump are “intertwined,” Hanning said. “She is not independently voting on what’s best for Maine.”

Hanning, a retired federal worker, said she hadn’t paid much attention to the health policies in Trump’s signature tax-break-and-spending-cut bill passed last year. The law reduces federal Medicaid spending by roughly $900 billion over a decade but also includes the billions of dollars for the Rural Health Transformation Program, which it created.

A year after the law’s passage, more than 8 in 10 rural voters said they’d heard either “a little” or “nothing at all” about the health fund. About 60% said they had heard nothing, according to the survey.

Rather than transforming, Hanning said, “hospitals up here in Maine are consolidating.” She travels an hour to see a specialist and noted that mothers will now have to drive farther for care because the hospital in nearby Damariscotta announced it would soon close its labor and delivery center.

Nine in 10 rural voters said it was “extremely” or “very” important for candidates to talk about healthcare costs, with more than half saying it’s “extremely important.” Mirroring the general population, rural voters ranked healthcare costs and gas prices as top economic worries.

Rural Republican Voters Still Trust GOP More

When asked which political party they trusted to do a better job handling issues such as the cost of healthcare or the cost of living, rural voters tended to side with their own party. The finding signals that Democratic candidates are more likely to benefit from rural Republicans’ staying home this November than from their voting across party lines in large numbers.

Republicans are more ambivalent about their party’s ability to handle key healthcare issues, compared with Democrats. About 8 in 10 Democratic voters say they trust the Democrats to address healthcare costs, while closer to 6 in 10 Republican voters say the same of the Republicans.

In Manassas, Georgia, a tiny town about an hour’s drive inland from Savannah, Republican voter Wanda Rogers feels the Trump administration is doing the best it can to clean up what she sees as an economic mess that Democrats left behind when they lost power.

“I kind of think people think like I do, that he knows what needs to be done,” she said. “It’s just taking them a while to get it there.”

Still, the 66-year-old said, “gas prices, they’re eating me alive right now.” She said she has stopped traveling to the beach because it has become too expensive.

Pamela Shaw, an independent voter who lives in a rural area near Asheville, North Carolina, said she sees the impact of rising costs in her community.

“When hamburger is over $7 a pound and steak is $15 or more a pound, a lot of people are not able to buy some of the things that they are used to buying,” the 59-year-old said in an interview.

Trump’s Rural Standing Has Slipped

Trump remains relatively popular among rural voters in the 51ÊÓƵ-AP poll, with 48% approval — substantially higher than in a July AP-NORC poll of U.S. adults overall, in which only a third approved of his performance. But he’s also down slightly, from 56% approval, among rural voters, based on a similar question asked in the earlier 51ÊÓƵ-Washington Post survey.

Asunta Washington, 38, is a truck driver who lives in South Texas. He said he is not against voting for Republican candidates if he wholeheartedly agrees with what they stand for, but he has not seen that. Instead, he has seen a lot of flip-flopping, he said.

“Like, a lot of people that are giving us promises and the moment they get elected, all that’s out the window,” Washington said.

This year’s competitive elections feature key Senate races in states including Ohio, Michigan, and Maine, all of which have large rural populations. In close races, Democrats may have a chance to “show up and give a message that rural people might find appealing,” said Nicholas Jacobs, a political scientist at Colby College and co-author of the book The Rural Voter.

“But it’s nothing more and it’s nothing less than that — an opportunity,” Jacobs said. “And time and time again, Democrats have shown a certain proclivity for not seizing that opportunity.”

Many rural voters don’t think the major parties or the president respect people like them. About half, 48%, of rural voters say the GOP respects people like them “a lot” or “some,” while 45% of rural voters say this about Trump and 37% say this about the Democratic Party.

On a recent Thursday, registered Republican Nate Lawrence answered his phone after paying $57 to fill up his Chevy Equinox in New Concord, Ohio, a village of fewer than 3,000 people about an hour’s drive east of Columbus.

Lawrence, a middle school English teacher, said the candidates should be talking about spending power: “I need to be able to go to the store and feed my family on what I make as a teacher,” Lawrence said. “I should be able to pay for a house on a teacher’s salary.”

Lawrence has voted for Trump in the past but didn’t in 2024. For Ohio’s Senate race, Lawrence said he is torn and not sure whether to pick Democrat Sherrod Brown or Republican Jon Husted.

Still, even if the politicians say they will lower prices, Lawrence said, he won’t believe them.

“Trump said that, and it didn’t happen,” he said.

This article first appeared on 51ÊÓƵ Health News and is republished here under a .

Another ArchCare nursing home, on Staten Island, has shut down a full floor. North of the city, in Dutchess County, its Ferncliff Nursing Home has contracted from 309 available beds to 196.

The eight nursing homes owned by ArchCare, a nonprofit that provides eldercare through the Archdiocese of New York, have 269 fewer usable beds than they did 18 months ago, a nearly 12% decline, creating waiting lists for patients seeking long-term care.

Across New York state, 24 nursing homes have closed since 2020, resulting in a loss of more than 3,000 licensed beds, according to LeadingAge New York, which represents nonprofit senior living organizations.

That mirrors . In 2015, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services certified 15,648 nursing facilities. A decade later, that number had fallen by more than 900.

With the oldest baby boomers turning 80 this year, an age when the need for long-term care climbs sharply, researchers are sounding alarms. Will there be enough nursing home beds for a rapidly graying nation?

“We’re seeing a serious problem and it’s heading in the wrong direction,” said David Grabowski, a health policy researcher at Harvard Medical School. He is an author of a study in JAMA Internal Medicine that in national nursing home capacity from 2019 to 2024. “As you look at the demographics, this is only going to get worse, maybe a lot worse,” he said, especially given looming Trump administration policies on immigration and Medicaid financing.

The reasons for the shrinkage?

ArchCare blames inadequate state reimbursement for Medicaid, a perennial industry complaint. The primary payer for nursing home care, Medicaid provides less than the daily cost of care, said Clif Porter, chief executive of the American Health Care Association, an industry trade group.

“Before the pandemic and inflation, the losses were sustainable,” said Jason Hutchens, ArchCare’s chief operating officer. More recently, he said, “we were running at an unsustainable loss — we had no choice.”

Nursing homes, , try to compensate by attracting short-stay patients covered by Medicare, which pays higher rates than Medicaid. When they can’t, “unless you’re extremely rapacious or extremely efficient, you’re not going to make it,” said Vincent Mor, a health services researcher at the Brown University School of Public Health who is an author of an article, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, about reduced capacity. “The numbers don’t add up.”

Staff shortages, which have plagued nursing homes for decades, have also caused contractions and closures. Nursing home aides work stressful, low-paying jobs with historically high turnover rates. Their median hourly wage last year was $20.67, according to , a research and advocacy group for direct care workers. Although pay has risen over the past decade, about 40% of nursing home aides rely on some form of public assistance, such as Medicaid or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, PHI reported.

The number of nursing home aides has rebounded from the covid pandemic, according to PHI, but fewer are working than in 2015. And while hiring and retention have improved, Porter said, “there’s still a significant gap between demand, especially future demand, and where the workforce currently is.”

National occupancy rates, which fell sharply during the pandemic, have returned to a more typical 80%.

That figure can be misleading; it doesn’t mean 1 bed in 5 sit empty, awaiting a patient. Occupancy counts state-licensed beds, but the more meaningful number is operating beds — how many are actually available depending on a facility’s staffing and other factors.

That number is usually lower and, in many cases, sinking. The American Health Care Association reported in 2024 that almost half of nursing homes were and 57% had waiting lists for new residents.

It’s possible, of course, that they also face financial losses because of lower demand. “Nursing homes close because people don’t want to go to nursing homes,” said Sam Brooks, director of public policy for the National Consumer Voice for Quality Long-Term Care, an advocacy group. “The quality is so low that people avoid them like the plague.”

Last year, Medicare inspectors found at least one quality violation serious enough to harm or jeopardize residents in 27% of nursing homes, according to an analysis by 51ÊÓƵ, a health information nonprofit.

In recent decades alternatives emerged that diverted patients from nursing homes. About a million older adults currently live in assisted living facilities. And among Medicaid recipients, the ongoing policy shift called “rebalancing” has enabled more people to receive services at home () rather than in nursing homes.

In 1988, only 10% of Medicaid expenditures for long-term services went to home- or community-based services; the rest paid for institutional care. By 2020, more than 60% of expenditures funded home and community care, said Priya Chidambaram, a 51ÊÓƵ senior policy manager specializing in Medicaid, citing a staff analysis.

How big a problem these trends pose depends partly on geography. The decline in the number of nursing homes in rural locations — about 10% from 2015 to 2025 — than the national drop of about 6%.

“It’s more difficult to staff a rural nursing home,” Chidambaram said. “Labor pools are smaller, and it’s hard to get people to take lower-paid or part-time jobs if they have to travel long distances.”

Bed shortages are also creating bottlenecks at hospitals. Where nursing home capacity declined, Grabowski’s team found, patients stayed in hospitals longer because they couldn’t locate posthospital care. They often had to travel farther to find facilities. “It gums up the entire system,” Grabowski said.

On two fronts, Trump administration policies could make matters worse, experts said. Revoking legal status for certain immigrant groups .

So far, “we’re not seeing significant impact across the country,” Porter said. But the effects are being felt in specific locations, including Florida, New York, and Massachusetts, he confirmed. With further revocations and deportations, “a lot fewer older adults are going to have caregivers,” Grabowski said.

The administration’s more than $900 billion in cuts to Medicaid over a decade are also expected to exact a toll. As states grapple with reduced funding, analysts expect home and community services to take a greater initial hit than institutional care. But that could increase pressure on nursing homes if patients who lose home care turn to institutions instead.

Less of these services “means more nursing home entry,” Grabowski said.

As policy ideas circulate — with calls for better data tracking, special visas for immigrant health workers, and targeted grants for nursing homes serving high-cost populations — researchers, advocates, and families are waiting to see what unfolds.

“So much of this is speculative,” Chidambaram said. “We don’t know what states will decide. We don’t know how the market will react. We’re in new territory here.”

The New Old Age is produced through a partnership with .

This article first appeared on 51ÊÓƵ Health News and is republished here under a .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Heat Health Risks

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Separate Standards

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Unclear Costs

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

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

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

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

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

This article first appeared on 51ÊÓƵ Health News and is republished here under a .

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

When Josh Fleig, Louisiana’s chief innovation officer, learned his state had set aside $20 million a year, for five years, to invest in startup rural health companies, his reaction was not surprising: “Wow!”

In rural America, where people are often reported to be sicker with poor access to healthcare, the cash influx is a relief. In the economic development space where Fleig operates, it’s an opportunity.

“Look, that’s a lot of money for what we do,” said Fleig, whose state-funded economic development office invests in corporate launches, ranging from software startups to shipbuilders.

Louisiana and a handful of other states set aside money from their share of the $50 billion federal Rural Health Transformation Program to quickly invest in new technologies, mirroring private industry moves. Lawmakers added the rural health program to offset more than $900 billion in reduced Medicaid spending expected over 10 years from Republicans’ sweeping 2025 tax and spending law.

But rather than filling the budget hole, the rural program’s assignment is to find new approaches for revitalizing rural communities where doctors are in short supply and hospitals have been downsizing and closing for decades. The federal government doled out the first-year rural health program awards to states this year, with pots ranging from $147 million in New Jersey to $281 million in Texas.

Modernizing technology infrastructure is a key pillar of the federal rural health program, and the catalyst money epitomizes the administration’s strategy to move fast and experiment with untested technology — much like the “move fast and break things” mantra during the heyday of Silicon Valley.

Instead of breaking things, though, the goal is to “move fast, fast-fail, innovate quickly, and move to sustainability,” said Aaron Bujnowski, a managing director with the healthcare industry group at the consultancy Alvarez & Marsal. “This is a transformation that is still meant to serve the people.”

Rigorous Rules and Tight Deadlines

Beyond Louisiana, Timothy Foster, a spokesperson for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, confirmed that Delaware, Georgia, Massachusetts, Nebraska, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia are also creating rural health tech catalyst funds.

Every year, states must compete for rural funding in the five-year federal program. Federal regulators will take money away from states that do not meet the goals promised in their applications, including whether they designated money to companies for tech innovations.

CMS, which is overseeing the program, released a seven-step for states to follow when creating the tech catalyst operations. No more than 10% of each state’s award can be spent on a rural tech catalyst fund.

States’ initial annual progress reports for the rural fund were due at the end of August. CMS has declined to publicly post those reports; it plans to publish an annual report on state progress. States must show that first-year funds will be obligated — but not necessarily spent — by Oct. 30, according to the CMS guidance document.

Daniel X. O’Neil, a technology consultant who advocates for open data and open government, created a and parsed the original state applications to find dozens that mention catalyst awards and technology funds.

O’Neil said he is “looking forward to the clawbacks and the craziness of October because, you know, that’s serious stuff.”

For the rural health catalyst funds, CMS requires states to submit the list of finalists “at least 15 business days” before announcing winners, along with “sufficient information” for the agency to “assess each proposed project,” according to the guidance document.

The document outlines intellectual property and federal rights but does not provide guidance or standards for patient rights or protections. CMS spokesperson Foster stated in an email that the technology investments must comply with federal “privacy, security, interoperability, and patient safety” requirements.

Protecting Patients

Maya Sandalow, director of the health program at the Bipartisan Policy Center and one of the leading analysts watching the rural fund, said the catalyst funds are “public dollars” and has called for more transparency in the overall rural health program. The center is a nonprofit think tank in Washington, D.C.

Accurate and timely reporting must be done to ensure “the necessary guardrails are in place” to protect patients, she said, adding that the innovation needs to be “tested in a way that’s safe for the patients that they are going to be used on.”

To apply, startups must be less than 10 years old and have raised less than $50 million in early funding. Companies that win a portion of state catalyst funds must meet predetermined milestones before being paid — and federal officials will make “targeted reviews as needed,” according to the guidance document.

Louisiana officials announced the state’s tech catalyst fund with an event in rural Natchitoches, known as the filming location of the 1989 film Steel Magnolias. The fund quickly drew more than 200 companies competing for between $250,000 and $3 million in seed money.

Tiny startup Greens Health was invited to the event. The 2-year-old company analyzes Medicare claims to identify patients with chronic diseases, such as diabetes, and works with local home health nurses and senior facilities to improve care.

“We’ve been looking for a way to launch in Louisiana,” said Kehlin Swain, co-founder and chief executive of Greens Health. The company serves about 100 patients across Texas, Alabama, and Florida and hopes to get a $250,000 investment from Louisiana.

Louisiana’s Fleig said his state is “at a really interesting turning point.” The state secured $208.4 million for the first year of the rural health program and quickly created its catalyst fund using the state’s already established innovation department.

At the same time, nearly 1.1 million people live in Louisiana’s rural parishes and the state ranks as the “least healthy” in the nation, according to its own application. State rates of diabetes, obesity, and cardiovascular disease are among the highest in the nation.

Fleig believes Louisiana is an ideal place to test technology solutions. So, while Silicon Valley has “not needed much of what Louisiana has had to offer” for much of its existence, it does now, he said.

Caret Health is one of those companies. Co-founders Riya Pulicharam, who is a physician-researcher, and Kevin Zhao, an engineer, met in Silicon Valley. Together, they created a technology platform that identifies patients who need help getting to their appointments, having scans done, or picking up prescriptions. That technology flags a human, who then contacts the patient with a call or text.

Zhao said Caret had successful pilots at large health systems, but those places also had other vendors and “it was a pretty big uphill battle” to get in and scale. Then, in 2024, the company began paying attention to rural places.

“There wasn’t a lot of existing infrastructure. And that was really good for us because we were able to come in very quickly,” Zhao said. “A lot of the hospitals really needed this kind of service.”

Fast-forward to 2026: Caret Health is about 4 years old and has contracted with about 60 hospitals in 16 states. Pulicharam and Zhao hope to win $3 million to expand into Louisiana.

Louisiana’s Fleig said the state will take an equity stake in each company it invests in. “The dream” is that selected startup companies will also help the state make money to reinvest. If some companies fail — or fail fast — that’s to be expected, but the state should still make money because of “the law of averages,” he said.

“If we are good, we’ll make more money than we spent,” Fleig said. “Either way, it’s going to go back into improving healthcare outcomes.”

This article first appeared on 51ÊÓƵ Health News and is republished here under a .

She and her husband have not had health coverage for the past two years, Bates said, because their employment is unsteady and they earn too much to qualify for Medicaid, the public health insurance for those with disabilities or low incomes.

When the GOP-led Congress allowed enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies — which helped lower the cost of plans sold on the marketplace — to expire at the end of last year, Bates’ mother-in-law dropped her plan, too.

Bates and her husband have a 2-year-old son. The mother-in-law also cares for a son who has autism. They all live together in a trailer home, spending about a third of their family income on prescription medications and opting for trips to the emergency room — often their main destination for medical care, since they aren’t billed up front.

It’s stressful, Bates said. Yet despite their situation, she said she remains “all in” for President Donald Trump. But she also said she’s recognizing flaws in his leadership.

“He’s trying,” Bates said. “It’s just a lot more other things have his attention.”

Georgia’s 14th District is the . It’s the district Marjorie Taylor Greene, who rose to prominence as one of Trump’s most vocal and loyal supporters, represented from 2021 to January 2026.

Greene made a notable pivot from the president last year when she publicly bashed Republicans’ handling of the enhanced ACA subsidies, which helped — along with her own adult children, she said — afford healthcare.

The following month, after Greene Trump of focusing too much on “foreign wars” and ignoring Americans’ economic struggles, the president attacked Greene and said he would no longer support her. Soon after, she announced that from Congress.

Still, many others in this semirural, exurban district, like Bates, remain loyal to Trump, even as more people go uninsured and face rising costs as a result.

Bates isn’t alone in feeling the pinch of healthcare costs this year. Nationally, 37% of Republican voters surveyed in June for said healthcare costs were “extremely important.” More than half of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who support the Make America Great Again movement said that Congress did the wrong thing by letting the enhanced subsidies expire, according to released in March. And 62% of ACA marketplace enrollees put the most blame for the expiration on Republicans (30%) or Trump (32%).

But, as the November midterm elections approach, policy experts don’t anticipate the issue of healthcare costs will lead to a major shift in how people vote in deeply conservative areas like Georgia’s 14th District, even as policies that once benefited them are rolled back.

“They’re willing to stick with the party line,” said , a professor of political science at the University of Georgia. “As long as Donald Trump and other Republicans are saying Obamacare is bad, they’re going to continue to buy into that idea,” Bullock said, “even when it’s against their economic self-interest.”

Obamacare Still a ‘Dirty Word’

When the ACA was passed in 2010, voted for it. Now, 16 years later, Obamacare is still a “dirty word” for many conservatives, said , a professor of social medicine at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill.

While previously the GOP’s goal was to “repeal and replace” the ACA, the current political strategy is “effectively rolling back some of the coverage gains,” he said.

According to a dashboard from NYU Langone Health’s Department of Population Health, of people younger than 65 living in Georgia’s 14th District were uninsured in 2024, which is higher than the . And in 2023, relied on Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, known as CHIP, according to Georgetown University’s Center for Children and Families.

Last summer, Congress passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which restricted ACA enrollment periods, added monthly fees, and imposed new documentation requirements for enrollees. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the number of uninsured people in the U.S. would increase by about 15 million people over 10 years as a result of the new law, the expiration of the ACA subsidies, and other ACA changes. With the enhanced subsidies expiring at the end of 2025, ACA enrollment fell by this year. In Georgia, enrollment dropped by .

Greene’s not a fan of the ACA. She said her family’s health insurance premiums skyrocketed after it became law in 2010. But last year she surprised those on both sides of the aisle when she openly criticized her Republican colleagues over the subsidies.

“I’m going to go against everyone on this issue,” she wrote in an , “because when the tax credits expire this year my own adult children’s insurance premiums for 2026 are going to DOUBLE, along with all the wonderful families and hard-working people in my district.”

In a June interview with 51ÊÓƵ Health News in Cumming, Georgia, Greene described the end of the subsidies as “catastrophic.”

“All over the country, people are constantly outraged over the cost of health insurance,” she said.

Like Greene, Bates has also wavered in her support for Trump. In addition to her frustration about the ACA subsidies expiring, she said the Iran war and inflation have also hit her wallet.

“I just don’t feel like he’s doing the best he could,” she said. “He did great his first term. But this term, it’s just not OK.”

While Republicans’ policies have made it more difficult for people to qualify for Medicaid and led to the end of the subsidies that made ACA marketplace plans more affordable, a clear plan to improve the U.S. healthcare system hasn’t emerged, Greene and policy experts say.

In December, House Speaker the Lower Health Care Premiums for All Americans Act. Touted as an alternative to extending ACA subsidies, was intended to lower premiums and increase healthcare access.

But the Congressional Budget Office found the bill would people by 100,000 a year from 2027 to 2035. While the House passed the measure in December, nearly nine months later the Senate hasn’t voted on it.

“It’s a Republican-controlled House, Republican-controlled Senate, Republican-controlled White House,” Greene said. “If Republicans had a plan, this was the perfect scenario to get it passed. You should have all the votes — get it done. And they’re not doing anything.”

Sticking to the Party Line

Despite such criticisms of Republicans for lacking a healthcare plan, voters in deeply conservative areas such as Georgia’s 14th District are sticking with Trump and his allies.

In April, the district elected Trump-backed Clay Fuller to replace Greene, though he won with than she had. He’s up for election again in November for a full congressional term. The University of Georgia’s Bullock said flipping the district from red to blue is unlikely.

Fuller’s office did not respond to interview requests for this report. But in a Q&A with the ahead of his April runoff with Democrat Shawn Harris, Fuller said that the expanded ACA subsidies, introduced under the Biden administration during the covid pandemic, were not a “a long-term solution.” Lowering healthcare costs would come from increasing competition and reducing federal overreach, he said.

Harris, who’s facing off with Fuller again in November, told 51ÊÓƵ Health News that the GOP strategy for the midterms is to continue to play off Republicans’ long-standing negative perceptions about Obamacare.

When people in the community are asked whether they support Obamacare, “they’re probably going to say no,” Harris said. But when asked about the Affordable Care Act, people tend to say, “‘Oh, yes, I need to have that,’” he said.

“They don’t realize it’s one in the same,” Harris said, adding that Republicans “sold everybody a bill of goods.”

As candidates campaign, they need to be in tune with their constituents, Greene said.

“That’s where I think they’re completely missing the mark,” she said. “They’re totally tone deaf to what Americans’ needs really are. And we need a serious solution.”

Bates considers healthcare among her top concerns. She said she doesn’t think anybody, including Trump, can make healthcare more affordable. But she hopes politicians will talk with people like her to better understand the burdens that consumers face.

“I honestly wish Congress would actually spend time in the life that we live,” she said. “They just sit behind their desks, and they don’t know what’s really going on in life, because they make so much money.”

Are you struggling to afford your health insurance? Have you decided to forgo coverage? Click here to contact 51ÊÓƵ Health News and share your story.

This article first appeared on 51ÊÓƵ Health News and is republished here under a .