Telehealth Ends for Most Medicare Members

Telehealth has been an efficient way to provide certain kinds of health care services for many people on Medicare – providing easier access to healthcare for patients and better use of time for providers ever since the pandemic.

That’s now changed, and Medicare has largely ended telehealth in certain areas, with new geographic restrictions that affect how and where (and sometimes whether) Medicare members get their care via telehealth.

The expansion of telehealth during the pandemic showed remarkable improvements in access to care as documented in a Kaiser Family Foundation report. Before the pandemic, Medicare’s telehealth coverage was limited. Only patients in rural areas or specific settings had access, and visits had to be conducted via real-time audiovisual technology.

The public health emergency lifted those barriers, letting Medicare members use telehealth for a broad range of services, including behavioral health, chronic disease management, and primary care visits. 

A study published in Health Affairs highlighted how these changes improved care access for members who had struggled to see their doctors regularly. Older adults, those living in rural & underserved areas, and patients managing multiple chronic conditions helped the most.

Geographic Restrictions & Behavioral Health Services

On October 1 the geographic and other limitations on Medicare telehealth came back. Telehealth services (for Medicare members) are now limited to rural areas unless members receive specific services, like monthly visits for home dialysis or certain mental health treatments.

This means that telehealth services will generally be limited to rural areas, and patients will need to receive services at specific originating sites, such as medical facilities, rather than from their homes.

Medicare Telehealth Flexibilities and CMS Operations During Government Shutdown – ASCO

Note: there are still some exceptions to the geography rules for behavioral and mental health services. These services can still be provided via telehealth to Medicare beneficiaries in both rural and urban areas and patients can receive these services in their homes 

Traditional Medicare will still cover telehealth services for some mental and behavioral health care, some substance use disorder treatment, end stage kidney disease assessments and emergency stroke care even in urban areas.

Traditional Medicare will no longer cover telehealth services for routine primary care visits, chronic disease management (e.g. diabetes care, heart disease, arthritis etc.), or follow up visits.

So, if you’re a traditional Medicare member in the Phoenix or Tucson metro areas and require telehealth for general care, chronic disease management, specialist consultations or most follow-up services, you’ll likely need to visit a healthcare facility in person now. Don’t blame your doctor, their staff or your health insurance. You can blame congress and the president. 

Medicare Advantage Plans May Offer More Flexibility

Medicare Advantage plans sometimes offer more flexibility when it comes to telehealth. These private plans sometimes have broader coverage options and may not be as restricted by geographic limitations. If you’re enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan, check with your plan provider to understand the specific telehealth benefits and flexibility.

What Could Have Been

It didn’t have to be this way. The bipartisan CONNECT for Health Act offered a comprehensive and efficient solution. This bill proposed permanent expansions of telehealth in Medicare (including the removal of geographic site requirements that restrict telehealth to rural areas) and drops in-person visit rules for behavioral health.

Importantly, it also included measures to reduce potential fraud and abuse, something sorely needed to prevent fraud and make telehealth services sustainable over time. Those measures include setting stricter guidelines for billing and ensuring better auditing of services.

The CONNECT Act also addresses concerns about overuse of telehealth by focusing on finding high-value services that are proper for virtual care.

Sadly, it appears that Congress will wait until they hear from mad constituents before they take up the CONNECT Act – or when Congress finally makes a budget deal, maybe they’ll extend the added telehealth flexibility that proved so useful during the pandemic.

France: Their Public Health & Health Care Systems

From Croatia, our travels take us to France, famous for their food, wine, culture and health care system. France often ranks among the healthiest places in the world. I’ll take a crack at explaining why.

Health Care: Universal Insurance with Personal Freedom

France’s health care system is built on national health insurance. Everyone is covered, with funding coming from payroll and general taxes. Patients can choose their own doctors, and fees are regulated to keep care affordable. Most people buy supplemental coverage (mutuelles) to cover co-pays, but the baseline system guarantees care for all.

Hospitals are a mix of public and private, all working under national price controls and quality standards. Unlike the U.S., there’s nobody uninsured.

Public Health Framework

The Ministry of Health provides national policy leadership, while the Agences Régionales de Santé run programs locally. This ensures that immunization campaigns, infectious disease surveillance, and hospital inspections are standardized but responsive to local needs, much like in the US. Santé publique France, the national public health institute, tracks health outcomes, runs surveillance systems, and offers scientific guidance.

Oversight of Facilities

Hospitals, nursing homes, and child care facilities are licensed and regularly inspected by the regional Agences Régionales de Santé using national standards. These inspections cover hygiene, staffing, patient safety, and quality of care. Child care facilities also fall under the Ministry of Education, but health and safety oversight is coordinated through regional Agences Régionales de Santé ARS inspectors.

Food Safety and Restaurant Oversight

France has rigorous food safety rules shaped heavily by the EU. The Ministry of Agriculture and Food Sovereignty manages national policy, while local health authorities inspect restaurants, markets, and producers.

EU rules limit additives, require detailed labeling, and ensure traceability from farm to fork. Restaurant inspections check for hygiene, safe storage, and compliance with these EU standards.

Emergency Services

France’s emergency medical service is unique: ambulances are staffed with physicians or advanced nurses, not EMTs and paramedics like here.

This means hospital-level care often begins at the patient’s doorstep. Epidemiology and outbreak response are centralized through Santé publique France, with regional ARS coordinating local action.

Clinical Workforce

Like in the US, France also suffers from a shortage of physicians. Until 2020, acceptance to France’s medical schools was regulated by the “numerus closus” which set strict limits on how many students could enter the schools annually.

While the annual acceptance number was supposed to account for population growth, the process was highly influenced by the Ordre des Médecins, France’s powerful physicians accreditation board (like the AMA kinda), which wanted to keep access to the profession exclusive.

The 2020 pandemic brought to light the severe shortage of physicians and the numerus closus were eliminated. Today, each medical school works collaboratively with their Agence Régionales de Santé to set their own admission limits, which considers regional population growth and medical desert.

Training physicians takes time and the first cohort of non-numerus closus physicians won’t be ready to practice until 2029 at the earliest  (9 years post highschool). France has been working to create a new level of nurses, similar to the US Nurse Practitioner model, which has been receiving lots of resistance from the Ordre des Médecins.

Nutrition, Physical Activity and Urban Planning

France is designed for walking, even here in Paris. Cities have dense cores with wide sidewalks, bike lanes, and pedestrian-only areas. Public transport systems are robust, reducing reliance on cars. Cycling is encouraged through dedicated bike infrastructure, and Paris in particular has expanded bike lanes dramatically in recent years.

The result is purposeful physical activity, walking to the store, biking to work, and using stairs instead of cars. Walking is a normal part of daily life, one of the reasons why they have way lower obesity rates compared with the U.S.

Farmers Markets are an integral part of a city’s urban planning and French’s way of life. Visit any town in France and you will see a “Place du Marché” where open-air farmers markets still take place to this day (beware of where you park your car the eve of a market-day!). Farmers Markets (open-air or covered) are part of Parisian’s weekly (and in some cases, daily) activities. There is a farmers’ market every day of the week and the Ville de Paris maintains a calendar of events.

There, Parisians access fresh and locally sourced produce, meats and fish that support a healthy diet. Farmers’ markets also support a strong local economy; with the high fixed costs of brick and mortar stores (and uncertainty around folks passing by your location to purchase your goods), many small businesses choose the itinerant modalities of the farmers market and bring their goods directly to their customers around the city.

Mental Health and Substance Use

Mental health services are fully integrated into the national system. Psychiatric hospitals and clinics provide inpatient and outpatient care, while community-based mental health centers are expanding. Treatment for serious mental illness is covered under insurance, ensuring access regardless of income.

Substance abuse services like alcohol and opioid treatment are provided through hospitals and specialized clinics, often with strong links to social services. France has pioneered harm reduction policies, including safe injection sites in major cities.

Alcohol Consumption and Health

Alcohol plays a large cultural role in France, especially wine, but binge drinking is rare even though the drinking age is 18 rather than 21. Per capita consumption is higher than in the U.S., though it has declined in recent decades due to public health campaigns and taxation policies, although I have to say a nice bottle of Burgundy is only like 10 euro.

Reproductive Health

Shortly after the US Supreme Court Dobbs decision, France’s Assemblé National (legislative body) was swift in identifying the need to guarantee women access to their full suite of health care and reproductive health services. The agreement was widely accepted across all political parties (a rarity) and France started the process to amend their constitution.

On March 8, 2024, the following statement was included in Article 34 of the Constitution “ The law determines the conditions under which Women have the guaranteed freedom to access a “Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy” and France became the first country in the world to guarantee access to abortion services in their constitution.

The Role of the European Union

EU membership shapes much of France’s public health policy. Food ingredient rules are stricter than in the U.S., banning many additives and requiring clear labeling. EU environmental and occupational health directives influence air quality standards and workplace safety. The EU also coordinates cross-border infectious disease surveillance, ensuring France has early warning for outbreaks.

Localities can’t set their own health policies like restricting universal access to care, changing to rules around immunizations requirement to start school or altering a pandemic response set by the central government

Health Outcomes Compared to the U.S.

● Obesity: 17% of adults, compared to over 40% in the U.S.

● Smoking: Higher than the U.S. but declining due to tobacco control.

● Alcohol: Higher than the U.S. but falling steadily.

● Life Expectancy: Around 82 years, several years higher than in the U.S.

Supplemental Material:  Differential Diagnoses | A comparative History of Health Care Problems and Solutions in the United States and France by Paul V. Dutton (brief book review here). Differential Diagnoses: A Comparative History of Health Care Problems and Solutions in the United States and France (The Culture and Politics of Health Care Work): 9780801445125: Medicine & Health Science Books @ Amazon.com

Federal Government Shuts Down: A Public Health Summary

I’m on the road on vacation so I don’t have the ability to really dive into the public health and healthcare implications of the federal government shutdown – but fortunately the Association of State and Territorial Health Officers (ASTHO) has a decent summary of the implications.

The executive branch posted a shutdown contingency plan document this week outlining the HHS and USDA plans. In short, HHS plans on  retaining approximately 47,257 (59%) of its staff and furloughing 32,460 (41%).

The Office of Management and Budget sent out a memo to federal agencies with directives related to a potential shutdown open_in_new. The memo requested that agencies submit RIF (firing) notices in addition to any furlough notices, which are traditionally issued as part of a shutdown.

Additionally, there is a request that agencies revise their RIF plans when a resolution on continued appropriations is reached to retain the minimum number of employees necessary to carry out statutory functions. It is unclear how this memo intersects with the HHS contingency plans delineated below.

HHS

HHS “will cease all non-exempt and non-excepted activities” like oversight of extramural research contracts and grants, processing FOIA requests and public inquiries, data collection, validation, and analysis.

HHS’s Program Support Center, Financial Management Portfolio, Payment Management Services, and Division of Payment Management will be operational and retain the necessary staffing in an excepted status to ensure delivery of grant payments for excepted programs.

The PMS and DPM will follow specific processes to ensure payment of permissible disbursements. HHS says they’ll maintain the Grants.gov system in an operational status, but with reduced federal support. The Grants.gov Contact Center will remain available and assist callers. HHS will provide the federal grantor community with guidance and updates in the event of a government shutdown.

CDC

CDC will continue to respond to urgent disease outbreaks and continue efforts. CDC and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) will not be available to provide guidance to state and local health departments implementing programs to protect the public’s health, nor will they provide communication to the American public about important health-related information.

Grant funding announcements will not be prepared, resulting in compressed timelines for applicants, such as state and local health departments and universities, to apply for funding.

CMS

CMS Medicare program will continue. CMS has enough Medicaid funding for the first quarter of FY26. CMS will continue Federal Marketplace activities, such as eligibility verification, using Federal Marketplace user fee carryover.

FDA

FDA activities funded through carryover user fee funding and other un-lapsed funding will continue. This includes certain activities related to the regulation of human and animal drugs, biosimilar biological products, and medical devices, and all FDA activities related to the regulation of tobacco products.

FDA activities related to imminent threats to the safety of human life or protection of property would continue. This includes detecting and responding to public health emergencies and continuing to address existing critical public health challenges by managing recalls, mitigating drug shortages, and responding to outbreaks related to foodborne illness and infectious diseases.

The FDA will also reduce food safety efforts within the FDA’s Human Foods Program. Longer-term food safety initiatives, including policy work aimed at preventing foodborne illnesses and diet-related diseases, would be halted, jeopardizing public health.

HRSA

HRSA will continue to oversee activities through mandatory funding, advance appropriations, prior year carry-over funds, and user fees. HRSA will continue to oversee certain direct health services and other activities with carryover balances, such as:

  • Health Centers
  • Ryan White HIV/AIDS program — Parts A and B
  • Ending the HIV Epidemic
  • Teaching Health Center Graduate Medical Education
  • Family to Family Health Information Systems
  • National Health Service Corps

Indian Health Service

IHS received advance appropriations for FY26. The majority of IHS-funded programs will remain funded and operational in the event of a lapse of funding. Advance appropriations, third-party collections, and carryover balances will continue to fund the provision of care by the Indian Health Service, Tribal Health Programs, and Urban Indian Organizations. Facilities construction projects supported with previously appropriated funds will also continue.

SAMHSA

SAMHSA will continue substance use and mental health programs vital to safety and protection. This includes programs that provide critical behavioral health resources in the event of a natural or human-caused disaster, like Disaster Behavioral Health response teams, the 24/7 365-day-a-year Disaster Distress Helpline that provides crisis counseling to people experiencing emotional distress after a disaster, and the 988/Suicide Lifeline to connect people in crisis with life-saving resources.

SAMHSA will continue previously funded operations and utilize available balances to provide essential resources to those seeking help for behavioral health concerns through the Treatment Services Locator program, the Treatment Referral Line, and the Suicide and Crisis Line.

Most SAMHSA grants awarded in the prior year will have funds that remain available to be spent by the grantee, including, for example, the 988 and Behavioral Health Crisis Services program, the State Opioid Response Grant program, and the Mental Health and Substance Use Block Grants.

USDA

As of publication, USDA has not released an updated FY26 contingency plan. Therefore, we do not have official information about the WIC program.

Note: Some of the budget negotiations hinge on whether to extend the enhanced advance premium tax credits for Marketplace plans. For more on that visit:  ACA Premiums Set to Increase in 2026 as Enhanced Marketplace Premium Tax Credits Expire – AZ Public Health Association

AZPHA Member Breakfast & Learn Arizona Literacy Plan 2030: Building Student Success and a Stronger Future

Friday, October 10, 2025

9-10am


Literacy is the key to student achievement, a strong workforce, and Arizona’s future. 

Arizona Literacy Plan 2030 is the product of over a yearlong process of gathering input from partners and stakeholders from across the state and is endorsed with their commitments to take meaningful steps in support of it.

Learn more about the plan and how it outlines the key drivers, proven strategies, and actions required to improve school readiness and third-grade reading outcomes.  


Our Speaker: Lori Masseur,

Early Learning Director at Read On Arizona

Lori’s Bio: As director of early learning, Lori Masseur guides Read On Arizona’s collaborative work on several strategic priorities related to improving school readiness, early literacy, and systems-building efforts in our state, including data integration, expanding effective literacy practices, and building educator capacity for early learning professionals.

Lori has more than 20 years of experience in early childhood education, most recently as part of the Arizona Department of Education’s early childhood education team, supporting the work of teachers and administrators in providing high-quality educational opportunities for children from birth to age 8. She served in various capacities over her eight years at ADE, including deputy associate superintendent of early childhood education and director of the Arizona Head Start State Collaboration Office.

Her experience includes overseeing the revision of Arizona’s Infant Toddler Developmental Guidelines as well as Arizona’s Early Learning Standards and early childhood funding manual. Lori also helped develop Arizona’s successful Comprehensive Literacy State Development Grant application and served on the advisory committee for Child Care in 35 States: What We Know and Don’t Know from the Bipartisan Policy Center.

Lori has a bachelor’s degree in elementary education from the University of Arizona and a master’s in reading and curriculum instruction from Grand Canyon University.

Register Here – Free for AZPHA Members

Career Note from the Field: Kelli Donley Williams Reflects on Public Health’s Big Picture

In 2003, I was just a public health baby intern at the state health department in the office of HIV/AIDS. Cathy Eden was the director. I would linger in the halls to try catch glimpses of her or Susan Gerard. Will Humble was working at ADHS, but we wouldn’t become friend until years later.

I was assigned to an HIV epidemiology project about an issue in Pima County. Basically — I was told to spend the summer hunched over a spreadsheet or occasionally to sit through heated community meetings in Tucson libraries. It was a weird time, but one I wouldn’t forget. I was working and going to school full-time and living off school loans and Lean Cuisines. There was little glamour, lots of late nights, and plenty of sweat and tears.

I also vividly remember this period of working in public health because much like today, it was strange politically. George W. Bush was President, and the health department was given a list of words that were no longer acceptable in Federal grants. (Sound familiar?) The rollercoaster of public health funding headed downward, and those on the ride buckled up.

I had no idea we’d all be thrown for another loop more than 20 years later.

If you’re new to public health or mid-career, you may have only known the joyful, happy, times ––­­or as I like to call them: the Promotional Products Days (PPD).

If you own a notebook, pen, or water bottle emblazoned with your employer’s name, you’ve lived through good days. While considered cheap giveaways elsewhere, in our industry they’re a sign that we’re living as my mama would say, high on the hog.

In the days of DOGE, the PPD have vamoosed.

It makes sense if you’re feeling scared about what’s next, or whether you should be looking for a different career path all together. We see colleagues on the national stage being pushed out of their long, respected careers and others resigning in protest. We have long-standing programs losing funding and coworkers suddenly out of work. The once firm ground of science is beginning to shake.

Before you leave public health, please consider this: you’ve never been more needed. Public health needs workers in all phases of career. Public health needs those willing to do the very hard work to show science works. Public health needs our collective voices to continue to advocate for our field. Public health has never been more punk.

We are in this together, and we need you.

Croatia: Public Health and Health Care

For the next couple of weeks, I’m traveling in Europe with my family. Since I’m unwilling to keep up with AZ & US public health policy stuff, I thought I’d share some insights from the public health and health care systems in the countries I’m visiting. First up: Croatia.

Croatia’s Universal Health Care System

Croatia provides universal health care coverage via the Croatian Health Insurance Fund. The system is primarily funded through payroll contributions. Patients choose a primary care doctor who acts as a gatekeeper for specialty care.

Hospitals are public and private, but reimbursement comes mainly through the Croatian Health Insurance Fund. Many Croatians buy supplemental insurance to cover co-pays or get faster access to certain services, but no one is uninsured. 

A Hybrid National – Regional Approach

The Croatia Ministry of Health sets the country’s public health policy. The Croatian Institute of Public Health runs national-level programs like vaccination, disease surveillance, and chronic disease monitoring. Each county also has its own public health institute, which oversees day-to-day work like restaurant inspections, environmental health, and school health. 

Infectious disease outbreaks are tracked nationally by the national Institute of Public Health, which works with county institutes to implement testing, tracing, and vaccination campaigns.

Hospitals, Nursing Homes, & Child Care

Hospitals are licensed and regulated nationally through the Ministry of Health. Inspectors check for compliance with staffing requirements, infection control, and patient safety standards.

Nursing homes are regulated jointly by health and social welfare authorities, blending medical oversight with social service support. Childcare centers must meet standards set by the Ministries of Health and Education, with public health inspectors ensuring safe sanitation, food, and building conditions.

Food Safety and Restaurant Inspections

Croatia’s counties do restaurant inspections under national rules that are in sync with EU food safety standards (Croatia is in the EU). This includes monitoring kitchens, storage, and preparation areas. Restaurants must also follow the EU’s “farm to fork” policy, which requires traceability of ingredients from producers to plates.

Compared with the U.S., there’s less variation between regions since EU rules apply equally across member states.

Emergency Medical Services

Emergency medical services are run by counties but coordinated nationally. Ambulance networks extend to rural and island areas, which is important in a country with a long coastline. 

EMS centers in Zagreb, Rijeka, Split, Osijek provide 24 h service as does more decentralized service at their 54 county health districts – with at least one to two EMS teams. In areas with 30,000 inhabitants, ambulance services are staffed by “on call” or “on duty” family physicians.

Physical Activity & Urban Planning

One striking difference between Croatia and the U.S. is the role of daily physical activity built into life. Croatian cities are far more walkable, with compact town centers, car-free pedestrian zones, and extensive bike paths.

Public policies at both the national and city level support walkability and cycling, from investing in sidewalks to expanding protected bike lanes. In smaller towns, the layout still reflects centuries-old planning—markets and schools are often within walking distance.

This urban design naturally builds in more purposeful physical activity. Where in the US driving is the default, in Croatia walking or biking is often the easiest way to get around. That has a measurable effect on obesity rates, which are much lower than in the U.S. Of course, the better food standards in the EU when compared to the US also plays a role.

Mental Health & Substance Use

Care for serious mental illness and behavioral health is integrated into the health system, though resources are more limited than in much of the EU.

Specialized psychiatric hospitals exist, and outpatient mental health services are covered. Substance use treatment, including programs for alcohol and opioids, is available through both hospitals and community clinics, with public health institutes playing a role in prevention.

Still, stigma is still a big barrier I’m told. Croatia is investing in community-based mental health care to reduce reliance on institutional treatment, following EU recommendations.

Alcohol consumption in Croatia is higher than in the U.S. Wine and beer are part of daily culture, and per capita alcohol intake is above the EU average. Public health campaigns have targeted youth drinking and binge drinking, but alcohol is still a significant health challenge.

Firearm Violence

When it comes to firearm violence, the gap between Croatia and the United States is striking. In the U.S., gun deaths remain a leading cause of premature mortality, with firearm homicide rates hovering around 5 to 6 per 100,000 people in recent years. Croatia, by contrast, reports only about 0.1 to 0.3 firearm homicides per 100,000 — an order of magnitude lower.

The reasons are fairly straightforward: America has far more guns (roughly one per person) while Croatia has far fewer (around 14 per 100 people). Add in tighter licensing and storage rules across the EU & you have a recipe for far fewer violent incidents involving firearms. In Croatia, homicides and suicides are far less likely to involve a gun at all, while in the U.S. firearms are central to both.

Incarceration Rates

The same kind of disparity shows up in incarceration. The US imprisons 541 people per 100,000 residents (one of the highest rates in the world) while Croatia incarcerates around 115 per 100,000.

The US locks up about five times as many people per capita as Croatia does. These differences reflect not just policy choices around criminal justice but also the underlying social drivers of violence. Inequality, community disinvestment, and easy access to firearms amplify violent crime in the U.S.

Health Outcomes Compared to the U.S.

  • Obesity: About 25% of adults, compared to more than 40% in the U.S.
  • Smoking: Around 25% of adults, much higher than in the U.S.
  • Alcohol: Higher per capita intake than both France and the U.S.
  • Life Expectancy: About 78 years, lower than Western Europe and slightly below the U.S.

The Role of the European Union

EU membership has had a good influence on Croatia’s public health. Food safety, chemical safety, and consumer protections are governed by EU-wide rules.

Additives and preservatives that are common in the U.S. are banned or restricted. The EU also sets reporting standards for infectious disease, requiring Croatia to share surveillance data with European networks.

Next week I’ll cover France’s health care and public health environment.

ACA Premiums Set to Increase in 2026 as Enhanced Marketplace Premium Tax Credits Expire

Arizona residents who purchase health insurance through the ACA marketplace are facing significant premium increases in 2026 unless congress acts to extend enhanced premium tax credits by September 30.

The enhanced tax credits expanded eligibility and increased subsidies for individuals and families purchasing insurance through the ACA marketplace. These enhancements were extended through 2025 but expire at the end of this year. Without these credits, many enrollees will see their premiums rise substantially.

Az’s healthcare premiums set to soar on 2026 online marketplace

If Congress doesn’t extend the expanded tax credits Marketplace insurance rate increases will range from 2.5% to over 55%. The increase isn’t all due to the end of the enhanced tax credit – but most of it is.

For example, a 60-year-old couple earning $80,000 annually (approximately 405% of the federal poverty level) currently pays $567 per month for their health insurance. If the enhanced credits expire, their monthly premium could more than triple to $2,026, an annual increase of $17,500. Approximately 300,000 Arizonans rely on the ACA marketplace for their health insurance coverage.

Summary of the History of Marketplace Tax Credits

2010–2013: From Law to Implementation

  • March 23, 2010: When the Affordable Care Act (ACA) was signed into law, it established the framework for advanceable, refundable premium tax credits for individuals and families purchasing insurance through the Marketplace.
  • 2013: The Federally Facilitated Marketplace opened to enroll individuals in Marketplace plans eligible for APTC.
  • 2014: APTCs became available. IRS made them advanceable and refundable, meaning enrollees received payments throughout the year.
  • March 2015: Enrollment rose to 10.2 million, with 85% receiving APTC. Cost-sharing subsidies also aided affordability. Among HealthCare.gov users, over 8 in 10 new or renewed enrollees received an average APTC of $268/month, reducing premiums by roughly 72%. Many had net premiums under $100.

2021–2022: American Rescue Plan Act Expansion

  • March 11, 2021: President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act:
    • Eliminated the 400% FPL “subsidy cliff”, making higher-income households eligible for APTC.
    • Capped contributions so that no household paid more than 8.5% of income toward premiums.

2023–2025: Extended Subsidy Enhancements (IRA)

  • The Inflation Reduction Act (2022) extended the ARPA enhancements through December 31, 2025.
  • These enhancements enabled:
    • A dramatic increase in marketplace enrollment from 11.2 million in 2021 to 20.8 million in 2024.
    • Sustained population eligibility across income levels thanks to the phased-out subsidies rather than an abrupt cutoff.

Summary

Starting in 2026, the rules will revert to the pre-pandemic structure that was in place in 2020 unless Congress acts to extend the IRA and ARPA enhancements :

  • Eligibility capped at 400% of the federal poverty level (FPL) If your income is just above that threshold, youll no longer qualify for any premium help.
  • Smaller subsidies within the 100–400% FPL band Credits wont be as generous, so even people who still qualify will see higher premiums.
  • “Subsidy cliff” returns A family just over 400% of FPL will lose thousands of dollars in annual subsidies, even if their premiums are a large share of income.
  • Higher net premiums for lower-income enrollees Because the ARPA/IRA boosted subsidies most strongly for people below 250% of FPL, their share of income required for coverage will jump back up.
  • The 8.5% of Income Premium Cap ends
Premium Payments Would Increase for Subsidized Marketplace Enrollees Without Enhanced Premium Tax Credits

Annual Premium Payments for an ACA Marketplace Benchmark Plan, With and Without ePTC

Table with 4 columns and 3 rows. (column headers with buttons are sortable)
A 27-year old individual making $35,000 (224% FPL) $1,033 $2,615 $1,582 (153%)
A 35-year old couple making $30,000 (142% FPL) $0 $1,107 $1,107
A 49-year old couple with a 19-year old child making $90,000 (338% FPL) $6,246 $8,964 $2,718 (44%)
Premium Payments if Enhanced Premium Tax Credits Expire | KFF

Without renewal, the system resets to the original ACA design, which was still helpful for many, but left a lot more people facing unaffordable premiums, especially middle-income households just over the 400% FPL threshold who will stand to pay more than 8.5% of income for premiums.

Scenario Note: With the enhanced tax credits in place, Marketplace enrollees making between 100%-150% of the federal poverty level are eligible for a fully subsidized benchmark plan. Prior to the availability of the ePTCs, enrollees making just above the poverty level were expected to contribute about 2% of their household income towards a benchmark plan. If the enhanced tax credits expire, low-income enrollees (currently paying $0 for a benchmark plan) will have to start paying for coverage again. For example, a 35-year-old couple earning $30,000 can expect to start paying $1,107 annually for a Marketplace benchmark plan.

Register Today: 2025 AzPHA Public Health Awards

Thursday, October 23, 2025

5:30 – 8:30pm

435 Collective

435 S 3rd Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85003

Each year AzPHA recognizes public health professionals, health professionals and community members across Arizona who are performing extraordinary services to our community at our annual awards event. Many of our awards go back decades.

Policymaker of the Year Award

Kris Mayes, Arizona Attorney General

Senator Andy Nichols Honor Award

Karen Woodhouse

Pete Wertheim Public Health Leadership Award 

Barbara Lang & Jeanne Nizigiymana 

Public Health Research Award

Megan Jehn & Kristen Pogreba Brown

Alida Montiel Indigenous Health & Advocacy Award

Francis Villescaz 

Rising Public Health Champion

Jeffrey Hanna 

Special Event Guest


Nandi Marshall, DrPH, MPH, CHES

APHA President Elect

Register Today: Only $45

Includes complimentary beer, wine and soft drinks & taco bar!

ACIP Pulls Their Punch

The CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices met Thursday and Friday to revise the nation’s child and adult vaccine schedules. Normally these meetings are careful, evidence-based discussions among experts.

This time, the tone was different with performative statements, repeated mistakes, and ideological posturing in contrast with the usually academic atmosphere. CDC staff presentations remained clear and grounded, laying out the risks, benefits, and data with precision. Despite the wacky language the panelists used at the meeting, their decisions were surprisingly modest. Let’s start with what they did on the COVID booster.

COVID Vaccine

ACIP thankfully voted down a motion to require prescriptions for all adults (the chair broke the 6-6 tie). However, they dropped the earlier broad, universal recommendations. The COVID booster now falls on what’s called “shared clinical decision-making” for everybody 6 months old and up.

From CDC:

Shared clinical decision-making recommendations are intended to be flexible. The decision to vaccinate may be based on the individual’s characteristics, values, and preferences; the provider’s clinical discretion; and the characteristics of the vaccine. There is no default assumption that the vaccine should be administered to all persons in a particular age group or risk group.”

Here are the exact motions that the committee voted on for COVID. Pay particular attention to votes 2 and 4:

Vote 1. It is the sense of the committee that the CDC engages in an effort to promote more consistent and comprehensive informed consent processes, and as part of that considers adding language accessible to patients and medical providers to describe at least the six risks and uncertainties included in the Work Group Chair presentation. Passed (Yes 11, NO 1)

Vote 2. It is the sense of the committee that state and jurisdictions should require a prescription for the administration of COVID-19 vaccination.  Failed to Pass (Yes – 6, No – 6) – the chair broke the tie by voting NO.

Vote 3. It is the sense of the committee that in conversations with patients before COVID-19 vaccination, authorized healthcare providers discuss the risks and benefits of the vaccination for the individual patient.  The discussion should consider known risk factors for severe outcomes from COVID-19, such as age, prior infections, immunosuppression, and certain comorbidities identified by the CDC, and include a discussion of the potential benefits and risks of vaccination and related uncertainties especially those outlined in the vaccine information statement, as part of informed consent. Passed  (Yes – 12, NO – 0)

Vote 4. The pediatric and adult immunization schedules for administration of FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccines should be updated as follows:

  • Adults 65 and older: Vaccination based on individual-based decision making – also known as shared clinical decision making.
  • Individuals 6 months to 64 years: Vaccination based on individual-based decision-making – with an emphasis that the benefit of vaccination is most favorable for individuals who are at an increased risk, according to the CDC list of COVID-19 risk factors.  Passed (Yes -12, No – 0)

I think this means that people 65 and over should be able to get the vaccine in pharmacies relatively easy. They won’t need a prescription. The ‘shared clinical decision-making’ criteria doesn’t mean there needs to be a doctor actually advising the patient – although some pharmacies may choose to require that – but it’s not something that’s required to meet the recommendation standard.

I think this also means people under 65 are still eligible, but the emphasis is on weighing individual risk factors with a healthcare provider. However, there’s no prescription needed, and there’s nothing in the language of shared clinical decision-making standard to suggest the person needs a doctor’s note or assessment. The ACIP was silent regarding pregnancy, but I think pregnant women can get it as a regular adult with ‘shared clinical decision-making’.

As for coverage by health plans – I think today’s decision means health plans should generally cover the vaccine and there is no prescription needed.

Now, that doesn’t mean that pharmacies and health plans won’t take a restrictive view of the ACIP recommendations and voluntarily limit who they vaccinate. With ACIP no longer urging universal use, insurers may be less likely to cover shots for healthy younger adults, and some pharmacies might hesitate to offer them without clear state guidance.

Also, last week Governor Hobbs issued an Executive Order to clear up the confusion and smooth the vaccination road. A key element of that EO was the directive for the ADHS to issue a Standing Order authorizing the vaccine – essentially a blanket prescription, allowing pharmacies to vaccinate anyone who wants the shot.

That Standing Order, which has been issued by former US Surgeon General Richard Carmona, should go a long way toward giving pharmacies comfort about administering the vaccine. Here’s a link to Dr Carmona’s Standing Order

MMRV Vaccine

ACIP voted to withdraw its recommendation for use of the combined MMRV vaccine in children under 4. Research has shown that this shot slightly increases the risk of febrile seizures compared with giving the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and varicella (chickenpox) vaccines separately. While the combined shot is still a choice if parents prefer, ACIP now recommends separate administration.

This decision will also affect reimbursement. Some health insurers, like Blue Cross Blue Shield of Arizona, had been pushing pediatricians to use the combined MMRV to avoid paying separately for two shots. With the new guidance, insurers will likely need to cover the MMR and varicella vaccines individually. Families who previously opted for the convenience of the MMRV may see reduced or ended coverage for that choice – but families should still be able to get their kids vaccinated with no co-pay or deductible.

Hepatitis B Vaccine Recommendation

The committee ultimately decided not to delay the Hep B vaccine birth dose until one month of age if the mother tests negative for the virus. The committee discussed the post market surveillance that showed that the vaccine has a very low (about one severe allergic reaction per 2–3 million doses),

Had they made the change, the decision would have put infants at risk, especially if a mother’s Hep B status is unknown or if she is positive. The stakes are high: nine in ten babies who contract Hep B develop lifelong chronic infection, compared with only one in ten adults. It also may have caused health systems to interpret it as permission to drop the Hep B birth dose from standard newborn care meaning babies of unscreened or even positive moms might not get the vaccine at birth.

The birth dose of Hep B will be on a future agenda – as many members were ‘concerned’ about the Hep B vaccine’s safety based on anecdotal evidence of higher rates of irritability and fussiness in babies, despite CDC studies showing no increased risk of neurological issues.

Hobbs Moves to Protect Households from the Increasing Costs of Electricity

Arizona Governor Hobbs’ Executive Order (2025-13) with a goal of shortening bureaucratic delays related to infrastructure generation and transmission, promote energy infrastructure development, and by doing so, mitigate energy costs for residential ratepayers.

It sets up the Arizona Energy Promise Taskforce, directs state agencies to study affordability, and sets clear expectations that energy growth must not lead to rising costs for families.

For many Arizona families, electricity is already the second-biggest household expense—only rent exceeds it. Food often ends up taking a back seat. Rising electricity costs are not just an issue of comfort or budget; they impose real health risks.

As Arizona plans for more capacity to meet a projected ~40% increase in peak electricity demand over the next 15 years, there is intense interest in new generation sources, including those fueled by methane (natural gas) or similar fossil fuels.

Beyond making climate change worse focusing on methane burning rather than renewables, methane-based generation infrastructure requires large capital investment. When these costs are built into utility rates, residential customers, especially those least able to pay, end up footing the bill.

Public policy must prevent this kind of cost shift. When governments or utilities subsidize capital costs for fossil fuel infrastructure to pay for generation for data centers through ratepayer bills, it makes everyday households subsidize large data center users – the very entities that are making the new generation facilities necessary.

We already know that the Arizona Corporation Commission doesn’t care about ordinary residential ratepayers, which is why it was important for the Governor to step in to the extent that she can.

  • The Order calls for energy affordability studies to find opportunities to reduce costs for consumers.
  • The Taskforce must plan to enable energy infrastructure growth without pushing up energy costs.
  • Streamlining siting and development on state land could lower the non-fuel costs of projects—those are often shareable savings that can help avoid rate increases.  
Executive Order Core Principles
  1. No hidden subsidies: Capital, maintenance, and fuel costs of new generation should not be shifted to households unless there’s a clear benefit and fair allocation.
  2. Favor clean or renewable sources: Where possible, invest in renewables whose fuel cost is zero and whose environmental cost is lower—both for health and future rate stability.
  3. Transparency and accountability: Let families see what they’re being charged for—and whether rate increases are driven by necessary costs or by poor planning.

Governor Hobbs’ action is a promising step. But ensuring that ratepayers, especially low-income families, don’t end up subsidizing costly, polluting methane plants for data centers is essential for an energy future that is both affordable and fair.