Sponsored message
Logged in as
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • DHHS seeks access for clues on autism and vaccines
    A man wearing a dark suit and eyeglasses, stands at a podium, speaking into a microphone. Behind him are fround flags including an American flag. To his right is a television screen displaying a graph with blue and purple bars.
    Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speaks during a news conference on April 16, 2025, to discuss the rise of autism diagnoses.

    Topline:

    U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is pursuing federal government access to most Americans’ medical records, in a quest to research a link between vaccines and autism — a connection the medical establishment studied for decades and flatly rejects.

    Collecting personal data: The Department of Health and Human Services is seeking data from little-known state systems that allow hospitals and clinics to exchange detailed, identifiable patient information, KFF Health News has learned. Kennedy told KFF Health News that medical records are key to investigating the cause of autism, vaccine safety, and chronic diseases. Kennedy faced blowback last year when he proposed compiling the medical records of people with autism to create a federal disease registry — which health department officials later disputed was underway.

    Why it maters: In private meetings, some public health leaders have objected to giving Kennedy’s team access to such data, raising doubts that it’s legal or that the information would even be useful. They have also expressed concerns about allowing the federal government to peer into the minutiae of Americans’ medical records, which could mean viewing anything from doctors’ notes to prescription history. HHS has offered no insight into how it will protect or handle the personal health information it obtains.

    U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is pursuing federal government access to most Americans’ medical records, in a quest to research a link between vaccines and autism — a connection the medical establishment studied for decades and flatly rejects.

    The Department of Health and Human Services is seeking data from little-known state systems that allow hospitals and clinics to exchange detailed, identifiable patient information, KFF Health News has learned.

    In private meetings, some public health leaders have objected to giving Kennedy’s team access to such data, raising doubts that it’s legal or that the information would even be useful.

    They have also expressed concerns about allowing the federal government to peer into the minutiae of Americans’ medical records, which could mean viewing anything from doctors’ notes to prescription history. HHS has offered no insight into how it will protect or handle the personal health information it obtains.

    But Kennedy told KFF Health News that medical records are key to investigating the cause of autism, vaccine safety, and chronic diseases. And millions of dollars in grant money has poured into a Nebraska nonprofit that has assisted Kennedy’s effort, according to state records.

    He and his advisers have been frustrated that federal access to Americans’ medical records has been limited.

    “We need a good health record system, and one of the things that really surprised me most when I came into office is that there is — that the systems are broken,” Kennedy said in a May interview. “We’ve had to go to the states and, luckily, we’ve got a lot of cooperation from the states, but we now have databases together that we can actually do the studies on. Those studies are in motion.”

    HHS has not publicly announced any new projects involving medical records and autism or vaccine research. Kennedy faced blowback last year when he proposed compiling the medical records of people with autism to create a federal disease registry — which health department officials later disputed was underway.

    But Kennedy said in May, “We have a whole pipeline of studies that will be done over the next year.”

    Though the White House has steered Kennedy away from further changes to U.S. vaccine policy ahead of November’s crucial midterm elections, President Donald Trump has regularly echoed Kennedy’s doubts about vaccine safety and last week signed an executive order calling for the U.S. to reduce the number of vaccines recommended for children.

    Kennedy’s political appointees and allies — including William “Reyn” Archer III, a former Texas health official and vaccine critic whom Kennedy hired as a senior adviser — have led the initiative for the health department to collect and examine medical records.

    Federal officials met with leaders of the state-run health information exchange systems several times over the past year and asked how the personal medical records they maintain could be used for vaccine research, according to seven people who participated in the discussions or were familiar with them.

    Craig Behm, who runs the Maryland health information exchange, said Kennedy’s team asked about how the vast trove of medical records they store from hospitals and health systems could be used to study vaccines.

    “If this administration wants to conduct research on the effectiveness of vaccines, are you saying you all can help us conduct that research?” Behm recalled being asked by a top official at HHS’ health information technology office.

    Last June, Behm and leaders of other state exchanges met with Kennedy’s top advisers to discuss sharing more medical data with federal agencies. The state organizations followed up with a pitch in October for a new surveillance system that would give the federal health department “real-time, 24-hour data feeds on opioid and chronic disease trends” within a year, according to a presentation reviewed by KFF Health News. Under the proposal, HHS would get data from 90% of the population’s medical records by 2028.

    Administration officials regularly asked during the meetings how the records could be used to monitor vaccine safety. Kennedy has rejected the federal government’s current vaccine-monitoring systems; decades of research has shown immunizations are safe and effective for most people.

    “Vaccine safety, or whatever words you want to use, has come up pretty consistently in those conversations,” said John Kansky, CEO of the Indiana Health Information Exchange.

    Kansky sees the potential value of sharing information from the exchanges for public health but is worried about the focus on vaccines: “It’s like, oh man, I wish you would have picked something that pushed fewer buttons for people.”

    A system to monitor chronic disease

    Nearly every state has at least one health information exchange — often regulated by state laws and run by private companies or nonprofits — that enables hospitals and health systems to immediately share patients’ medical records with one another. The systems allow doctors and nurses to quickly pull up nearly anyone’s medical history and records at emergency rooms or share after-visit summaries and notes with patients’ primary care providers, for example.

    In certain circumstances — most often dealing with cases of infectious diseases such as measles or flu — the exchanges notify public health authorities, like the state health department or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Using the exchanges for broader public health purposes is not an unusual idea in itself. But it can present privacy, legal, and ethical complications, health officials say.

    In the end, Behm said his organization in Maryland declined to share more data with the federal government for vaccine research, noting that sharing medical records for that purpose would require a rash of approvals from hospitals, state political leaders, and research boards. Any new data-sharing agreement should also have a clear, detailed framework outlining what would be shared and with whom, he added.

    “A number of us said, ‘We can’t do anything our agreements don’t allow us to do, so no,’” Behm said. Indeed, most health information exchanges have contractual restrictions on who can access clinical data.

    Kansky said Indiana is still weighing whether to provide additional data for Kennedy’s project, and that nothing has yet been shared.

    HHS spokesperson Emily Hilliard did not answer questions about how many states are participating in Kennedy’s project, what new data the agency is collecting, how much the federal government is spending on the initiative, how it is protecting patient privacy, or who has access to the data.

    “HHS is strengthening public health surveillance and modernizing data systems to better understand and combat the childhood chronic disease epidemic as part of Secretary Kennedy’s Make America Healthy Again agenda,” Hilliard said in an emailed statement. “Americans deserve robust systems to monitor the drivers of chronic illness.”

    Kennedy has asserted, without evidence, that vaccines can cause chronic illness.

    A Kennedy partner in Nebraska

    At least one state has been cooperative.

    The former leader of Nebraska’s state health information exchange has led the effort to share data from medical records with the federal government.

    Jaime Bland, former CEO of CyncHealth — the Nebraska health information exchange used by most hospitals and health systems in the state — said several states are looking to “open up channels” to provide more analysis to Kennedy’s team.

    “They’re looking at the data differently and providing some insights back to the CDC,” Bland told KFF Health News.

    Bland was among a group who proposed that CyncHealth would help kick off the initiative, according to a 43-slide PowerPoint presented to federal officials during an October meeting.

    CyncHealth and other state health information exchanges would “ingest data from hospitals, clinics, laboratories, pharmacies, payers, and social services agencies,” then “link claims and clinical records through a master patient index.”

    Data from the exchanges “will be deidentified where appropriate,” according to one slide.

    The federal government would pay the exchanges for furnishing the records, according to the proposal: $3 a person, annually.

    Officials would “frame publicly that this is not a new database, but a federated trust model that delivers real-time data for all HHS missions,” the presentation reads.

    After the meeting, Nebraska’s health department was awarded a large grant from the CDC, and CyncHealth in turn got millions of dollars from the state.

    On Dec. 19, the CDC announced new funding under its Epidemiology and Laboratory Capacity program, which sends money to state and local health departments for lab work, health information enhancements, and solutions for outbreaks.

    Nebraska’s state health department was awarded $18.7 million — the most of any state last year, though Nebraska is the 38th most populous state. By comparison, Texas received $9.2 million, and California got $10.8 million.

    CyncHealth was then awarded three contracts totaling $13.6 million from the state health department just weeks later, on Jan. 9 and Jan. 16, according to a publicly accessible database of state contracts.

    Grace McNamara, a spokesperson for CyncHealth, said it retained $2.4 million of the funding for Kennedy’s project; the remaining money was distributed to “other participating states and various vendor organizations for implementation support.”

    A former CDC official who was aware of the transaction, but not authorized to speak publicly about it, confirmed the money was intended for CyncHealth to supply data for Kennedy’s initiative to look at vaccines and autism. McNamara said that the “work is focused on improving outcomes related to acute and chronic illnesses.”

    “The referenced project is not research, but rather a proof-of-concept project on how health information exchange and public health can work together to improve health outcomes and is not specific to autism,” she said in an emailed statement.

    McNamara did not answer questions about what type of medical data is being provided to the federal health department or whether patients’ identifying information is removed.

    Bland left her post at CyncHealth — where she was paid nearly $420,000 a year — in December. She was named in April as the chief data strategist for the MAHA Institute — a think tank founded by allies of Kennedy and Trump to advance their Make America Healthy Again movement.

    Bland agreed with Kennedy that data from state health information exchanges could provide more insight into autism’s causes or vaccine injuries.

    "The data is so fragmented, so modeled when it comes to population health and public health, that we lose sight of the individual stories,” Bland said. She told a story she had heard about a woman who had a seizure after receiving the HPV vaccine.

    “You know, the vaccine is safe — it absolutely is — but it wasn’t safe for her,” Bland said. “As public health officials, we say the vaccine is safe. But there are cases where it is not.”

    Daniel Jernigan, a former top CDC official who left the agency last summer, said he tried to point Kennedy to data that would help the health secretary study vaccine safety and autism.

    After 31 years at the CDC overseeing public health surveillance, emerging infectious diseases, and the influenza divisions, Jernigan thought the solution was simple. The secretary could work with researchers to obtain huge databases pulled from health systems nationwide and maintained by major electronic health records companies.

    Those databases are deidentified, meaning they don’t include patient names or other information that can identify individuals. Jernigan said Kennedy didn’t seem interested.

    Instead, as The New York Times first reported, the health secretary dispatched two top advisers — Archer and Hannah Anderson, his former deputy chief of staff — to the CDC’s headquarters in Atlanta last July to download millions of identifiable patient records directly from the Vaccine Safety Datalink, the system the health agency uses to investigate complications from vaccines. The records, though, were decades old.

    Jernigan said the federal government has limited legal authority to access medical records from state health information exchanges. In any case, examining those records may provide a view of a person’s medical history that will not necessarily produce answers to Kennedy’s questions about vaccines and autism.

    “If they’re just using the electronic health record data, there are limits to that,” Jernigan said. “If they’re only looking at electronic health record data, all you’re going to get is what was captured in the encounter. It’s not going to be very satisfying.”

    KFF Health News data reporter Maia Rosenfeld contributed to this article.

    KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

    This article first appeared on KFF Health News and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

    KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

  • Proponents say it's a hollow victory
    A man with swept-back gray hair, wearing a dark suit, white shirt and dark tie, looks toward the camera with a serious expression. He stands in front of a dark blue backdrop and an American flag, with other people partially visible behind him and a dark silhouette in the foreground.
    Gov. Gavin Newsom in Sacramento on Feb. 11, 2026.

    Topline:

    California’s district attorneys and the state attorney general will now have the ability to sue individual businesses that they believe are engaging in anticompetitive conduct. But for some of its biggest proponents, it’s a hollow victory.

    Why now: Gov. Gavin Newsom on Wednesday signed Assembly Bill 1776, known as the Compete Act, bringing an end to one of the most hard-fought political battles of the year. Unions and consumer rights groups supported the bill, but the state’s influential Chamber of Commerce fiercely opposed it and won several concessions to water it down.

    The backstory: The bill grew out of a three-year review by the California Law Revision Commission, which the Legislature had asked to study changes to the 1907 Cartwright Act. The private right of action was one of the biggest sticking points for CalChamber, which argued it would “expose businesses of all sizes to a wave of frivolous lawsuits.” The group launched a multimillion-dollar ad campaign over the summer to push to weaken the proposed law. Tech companies such as Meta and Google also spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to lobby legislators on AB 1776 and other issues.

    California’s district attorneys and the state attorney general will now have the ability to sue individual businesses that they believe are engaging in anticompetitive conduct.

    But for some of its biggest proponents, it’s a hollow victory.

    Gov. Gavin Newsom on Wednesday signed Assembly Bill 1776, known as the Compete Act, bringing an end to one of the most hard-fought political battles of the year. Unions and consumer rights groups supported the bill, but the state’s influential Chamber of Commerce fiercely opposed it and won several concessions to water it down.

    Assemblymember Cecilia-Aguiar Curry, a powerful Davis Democrat, introduced the bill to modernize the century-old Cartwright Act, which regulates only anticompetitive conduct by two or more businesses. Many progressive Democrats, concerned about corporate consolidation of business in industries such as healthcare, ticket sales and retail, signed on as co-authors.

    Newsom signed the bill along with six other small business-friendly bills on the constitutional deadline for signing legislation.

    “We’re taking on predatory practices that drive up costs and shut entrepreneurs out — making sure California’s economy works for everyone, not just the biggest and best-connected,” he wrote in a release announcing his approval.

    However, his signing message on AB 1776 was more circumspect.

    “While I align myself with a stated goal of targeting anti-competitive conduct that harms consumers, workers, and businesses alike, we must be careful not to set the bar too low — dragging legitimate, superior business practices and products into the ambit of anti-competitive behavior,” he wrote.

    He added that he expects judges and prosecutors to interpret and apply the law “in ways that penalize clear wrongdoing, without creating needless uncertainty.”

    Lee Hepner, senior legal counsel at the American Economic Liberties Project, a former sponsor of the bill, wrote in a post on X that Newsom’s signing message made Hepner pessimistic that the law would be effective.

    “I foresee politicized antitrust litigation budgets, partisan allegations of weaponized enforcement, novel legal defenses that find new basis in the legislative history of this bill, and public officials caving to the concentrated private power that antitrust laws are supposed to put in check,” he wrote.

    The group had helped craft the legislation for years, but changed its position when Aguiar-Curry removed a “private right of action” provision that would have allowed any individual or business to sue a company they allege is harming them through anticompetitive tactics.

    Other supporters included the California Federation of Labor Unions and TechEquity Action, a progressive advocacy group that lobbies for regulation of the tech industry.

    Labor Federation President Lorena Gonzalez said in a statement that the new law “gets us one step closer to building a more affordable economy for working people.”

    The bill grew out of a three-year review by the California Law Revision Commission, which the Legislature had asked to study changes to the 1907 Cartwright Act.

    The private right of action was one of the biggest sticking points for CalChamber, which argued it would “expose businesses of all sizes to a wave of frivolous lawsuits.” The group launched a multimillion-dollar ad campaign over the summer to push to weaken the proposed law. Tech companies such as Meta and Google also spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to lobby legislators on AB 1776 and other issues.

    Although Aguiar-Curry said she was disappointed the private right of action was gutted in the last weeks of the legislative session, she pressed on, and lawmakers passed the bill in the last days.

    “California now has stronger tools to protect our small businesses, workers, and consumers and to make sure our markets work for everyone,” she said in Wednesday’s release.

    This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

  • Sponsored message
  • New law aims to help hire and retain journalists
    A huge sign reading "Los Angeles Times" sits on top of a building against a gray sky.
    The Los Angeles Times newspaper headquarters in El Segundo, California on January 18, 2024. The LA Times Guild is walking out on Friday, January 19, to protest newsroom layoffs.

    Topline:

    Governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill Wednesday that aims to throw a lifeline to struggling California newsrooms.

    What it does: The bill creates "job retention credits" to incentivize newsrooms — including ours — to hire and retain local journalists. Credits start at $20,000 a year for the first five positions, with additional money for other positions and new hires.

    Why it matters: Local newsrooms have struggled to keep journalists employed over the last two decades as media companies consolidate, and media consumption habits and advertising models have changed. In his signing message, Newsom said that in the past 20 years, 12,000 newsroom jobs have been eliminated in California.

    What's next: The credits will be available to newsrooms starting in 2027.

  • Newsom signs a new law on housing funding
    A person in a blue baseball cap and dark jacket sits on a curb between parked vehicles on a sunlit city street, looking down at their hands, while the blurred, shadowed foreground frames the scene.
    A man lights a pipe in front of a city worker during an encampment sweep in the Tenderloin in San Francisco on Aug. 8, 2024.

    Topline:

    Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed a bill intended to free up state funds for homeless housing that requires sobriety after vetoing a similar effort last year.

    Why it matters: For years, California has followed “housing first” principles when it comes to homelessness, which means funding low-barrier programs that don’t require people to jump through extra hoops — such as getting sober — before they are allowed a place to live. But while that works for many people who aren’t ready to kick addictions, it leaves behind people who want to be sober and are struggling to stay that way, said Assemblymember Matt Haney, a Democrat from San Francisco. For them, the only option often is to live in housing surrounded by neighbors who use substances, he said.

    The backstory: Previously, another bill, AB 255, made it all the way to Newsom’s desk before the governor vetoed it for a surprising reason: According to the governor, Haney’s bill was unnecessary because recent guidelines from the state already allowed state funds to pay for sober housing.

    Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed a bill intended to free up state funds for homeless housing that requires sobriety after vetoing a similar effort last year.

    For years, California has followed “housing first” principles when it comes to homelessness, which means funding low-barrier programs that don’t require people to jump through extra hoops — such as getting sober — before they are allowed a place to live. But while that works for many people who aren’t ready to kick addictions, it leaves behind people who want to be sober and are struggling to stay that way, said Assemblymember Matt Haney, a Democrat from San Francisco. For them, the only option often is to live in housing surrounded by neighbors who use substances, he said.

    Haney’s legislation, Assembly Bill 1556, clarifies that sober housing providers can qualify for state funds, as long as they follow certain rules.

    “People working hard to stay sober deserve the choice to live in a home that supports their recovery,” Haney said in a news release. “I’m incredibly grateful to Governor Newsom for signing AB 1556 and for working with us to get this right. This law will finally give Californians in recovery access to safe, stable, drug-free housing while making sure that if someone relapses, they are supported and stay connected to housing and services.”

    Under the new law, sober residences that get state funds must have a written policy dictating what to do if someone relapses. The housing provider must give them the option to move into low-barrier housing. If they decline, they can be evicted.

    It’s Haney’s third attempt to get state money for sober housing. His first, AB 2479, died in 2024.

    His second, AB 255, made it all the way to Newsom’s desk before the governor vetoed it for a surprising reason: According to the governor, Haney’s bill was unnecessary because recent guidelines from the state already allowed state funds to pay for sober housing.

    That was a big surprise to Haney, who had never seen those guidelines before. When CalMatters asked the governor’s office for a copy, we received a link to a 20-page document that was dated July 2025, but wasn’t published online until the day after Newsom’s veto.

    After reviewing those guidelines, Haney spent a year working more closely with the governor’s office on a new bill. It’s still important, Haney said, because the existing guidelines are unclear: Housing providers still believe state funds are off-limits for sober housing. The proof, he said, is that housing providers still aren’t using them to fund sober-living projects.

    There are several differences between the new sober housing law and last year’s failed bill, cost chief among them. Last year’s bill would have set up a new system for the state’s housing department to regulate sober housing, costing millions of dollars in the first year, according to the Senate Appropriations Committee’s analysis. By contrast, the new sober housing law comes with an expected price tag of about $200,000 per year to fund one staff position, according to the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

    Even so, some housing organizations opposed the new legislation, arguing it will divert scarce housing funds away from the low-barrier models that are proven to work.

    This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

  • Second in nation to Louisiana
    Two people in dark hooded sweatshirts stand on a sidewalk under a freeway overpass, near tents and an empty wheelchair.
    People at a homeless encampment along the sidewalk on X Street under State Route 99 in Sacramento, on Oct. 25, 2024

    Topline:

    Taking into account each state’s housing costs, the percentage of Californians living in poverty rockets up to 17.8% — the second-highest rate in the country after Louisiana.

    Why it matters: California’s official poverty rate, which currently matches the national average of 10.7%, has always been a misleading stat. Using another official measure that takes into account each state’s housing costs, the percentage of Californians living in poverty rockets up to 17.8% — the second-highest rate in the country after Louisiana.

    The backstory: That makes bringing down rents an especially effective anti-poverty program. If the state’s rents fell by 20%, child poverty would decline by roughly a quarter, the report found. Twenty percent may seem impossibly ambitious in a state where rents often only seem to go in one direction (with some noteworthy exceptions), but that’s roughly how much typical rents declined in Austin and Minneapolis between 2021 and 2025. Pew researchers attribute that feat of affordability to local policy changes that have allowed for more housing construction.

    The rent, as we all know, is too damn high.

    So is California’s poverty rate.

    The two things are related.

    That’s the not-so-surprising finding of a new analysis published by the Pew Charitable Trusts: If California’s rents dropped to the national average, the state would slash its poverty rate by 30%. The child poverty rate would decline by 36%.

    The report is meant to highlight an important, if sometimes overlooked, aspect of poverty: It isn’t just about how much a person makes.

    “Anti-poverty programs will be much more effective if we address people’s expenses, and rent is the number-one line item for most Americans,” said Pew researcher Alex Horowitz.

    Case in point: CalFresh, the state’s food stamp program, saw an increase of $13.1 billion in benefits between 1989 and 2023. Over that same period, rising rents ate away 78% of that increase, according to the analysis.

    California’s official poverty rate, which currently matches the national average of 10.7%, has always been a misleading stat. Using another official measure that takes into account each state’s housing costs, the percentage of Californians living in poverty rockets up to 17.8% — the second highest rate in the country after Louisiana.

    That makes bringing down rents an especially effective anti-poverty program. If the state’s rents fell by 20%, child poverty would decline by roughly a quarter, the report found.

    Twenty percent may seem impossibly ambitious in a state where rents often only seem to go in one direction (with some noteworthy exceptions), but that’s roughly how much typical rents declined in Austin and Minneapolis between 2021 and 2025. Pew researchers attribute that feat of affordability to local policy changes that have allowed for more housing construction.

    Those policies — allowing for denser housing in cities, reducing parking requirements for new developments, encouraging the construction of ADUs — mirror many of the laws adopted at the state level in California. Those laws have yet to result in a major increasein new housing, but proponents are optimistic that a building boom is on the horizon.

    This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.