RFK Jr Confirmation Hearing Was Crazier Than You Think & Confusing Trump Spending Freeze Updates
PDS Published 01/29/2025
-
RFK Jr. had his first confirmation hearing today — let’s talk about it.
Right, Trump’s nominee for health secretary has easily been one of the most controversial because of his long record of pushing vaccine skepticism and other debunked, unscientific claims.
Which is also why we’ve seen countless medical professionals, groups, and other experts vocally opposing his confirmation.
And so his first hearing — before the Senate Finance Committee — has been highly anticipated, with the topic trending at the number one spot on X all morning. (broll : 5:20)
But the tone for this hearing was really set the day before in an absolutely scathing letter from his cousin, former ambassador Caroline Kennedy.
And there, she described RFK Jr. as a “predator” who “is addicted to attention and power.” (broll)
With her accusing him of leading his other family members “down the path of drug addiction” while going on to “misrepresent, lie, and cheat his way through life,” and adding:
“Bobby preys on the desperation of parents of sick children - vaccinating his own children while building a following by hypocritically discouraging other parents from vaccinating theirs.” (2:58-3:08)
And going on to say:
“His constant denigration of our health care system and the conspiratorial half-truths he has told about vaccines, including in connection with Samoa's deadly 2019 measles outbreak, have cost lives.” (3:13-3:28)
Right, and that last bit is in reference to the fact that Kennedy traveled to Samoa to spread vaccine skepticism and misinformation —
A campaign that many experts, top health officials, and Democrats have blamed for the deadly measles outbreak that eventually struck the country, infecting more than 5,700 and killing 83, many of whom were young children.
With Caroline Kennedy also going on to allege that her cousin’s “crusade against vaccination” has benefited him financially.
Specifically pointing to a New York Times report that RFK Jr. has refused to drop his financial stake in a lawsuit against the manufacturer of a vaccine that protects against HPV and can prevent cervical cancer, saying:
“Bobby is willing to enrich himself by denying access to a vaccine that can prevent almost all forms of cervical cancer and which has been safely administered to millions of boys and girls.” (3:43-3:58)
Right, and I mention all this because many of the points made in Caroline Kennedy’s letter were brought up by Democrats during the hearing today.
And there, we saw the committee’s ranking member, Sen. Ron Wyden, kicking things off in his opening statement by absolutely ripping into RFK Jr.:
“The receipts show that Mr. Kennedy has embraced conspiracy theories, quacks, charlatans, especially when it comes to the safety and efficacy of vaccines. He has made it his life's work to sow doubt and to discourage parents from getting their kids lifesaving vaccines. It has been lucrative for him and put him on the verge of immense power. This is the profile of someone who chases money and influence wherever they lead, even if that may mean the tragic deaths of children and other vulnerable people.” 00:01 - 00:48
Now Kennedy, for his part, spent much of the hearing hitting back against the various allegations he has faced.
Arguing repeatedly that he isn’t anti-vaccine, he just wants people to know what he says are “the facts” about immunization.
With him first asserting that claim in his opening statements, prompting a protestor to start yelling before getting dragged out of the room:
“News reports have claimed that I am anti-vaccine or anti-industry. I am neither. I am pro-safety–”
“We’ll have order.” 00:01 - 00:20
With him then continuing:
“ I believe that vaccines play a critical role in health care. All of my kids are vaccinated. I have written many books on vaccines. My first book in 2014, the first line of it is ‘I and not anti-vaccine.’ And the last line is ‘I am not anti-vaccine.” 00:41 - 1:01
But with that, we saw Wyden pushing back against that assertion with a very important caveat:
Wyden: “In your testimony today, you denied that you were anti-vaccine but during a podcast interview in July of 2023, you said, quote, “No vaccine is safe and effective.” In your testimony today, in order to prove you’re not anti-vaxx, you note that all your kids are vaccinated. But in a podcast in 2020, you said, and I quote, you ‘would do anything, pay anything to go back in time and not vaccinate your kids.’ Mr. Kennedy, all of these things cannot be true. So are you lying to Congress today when you say you are pro-vaccine, or did you lie on all those podcasts? We have all of this on tape, by the way.”
RFK Jr: “Senator, as you know, because it's been repeatedly debunked that statement that I made on the Lex Fridman podcast was a fragment of the statement. He asked me, and anybody who actually goes and looks at that podcast, well see this, he asked me, are there vaccines that are safe
and effective, and I said to him, under the live virus vaccine, there are no vaccines that are safe and effective, and I was going to continue for every person. Every medicine has people who are sensitive to them. Including vaccines. He interrupted me at that point. I've corrected it many times, including on national TV.” (0:25-1:59)
Now, a few things to note here — first of all, RFK Jr. never disputed Wyden’s claim that he later said he regretted vaccinating his children.
And second of all, I want to show the full clip Kennedy is talking about:
Lex Fridman: “Difficult question, can you name any vaccines that you think are good?”
RFK Jr: “I think some of the live-virus vaccines are probably sort of earning more problems than they’re causing. There’s no vaccine that is, you know, safe and effective.” 00:15 - 00:33
So I’ll let you use your judgement there, but even if you buy his argument, there are countless other times on the public record that RFK Jr. has expressed anti-vaccine sentiments.
In fact, a new analysis by The Washington Post found that Kennedy has, quote:
“criticized vaccines more broadly in at least 114 appearances, calling them dangerous, saying the risks outweigh the benefits and making misleading claims about vaccine safety testing or discrediting vaccine efficacy.”
Beyond that, Wyden also noted the actions that Kennedy has taken to undermine essential vaccines, with Kennedy’s response once again being interrupted by a protestor:
Now, with that, it’s important to point out that his claim there about 6-year-olds not being at risk for COVID is false.
According to the CDC, 81 kids between 5 and 19 died of COVID — that’s higher than the annual death tolls for other childhood diseases like hepatitis A and rubella before widespread vaccination.[]
Additionally, even though he claims to be concerned about children, the petition Kennedy filed reportedly tried to block the COVID vaccine for ALL Americans, not just those under 6.
But, of course, Wyden was just one of the many Democratic senators who questioned RFK Jr. on his questionable past claims — including this viral moment with Sen. Bernie Sanders:
We also saw this exchange between Kennedy and Sen. Michael Bennet:
5:27 - 5:44
Now, again, I want to show some of the clips Bennet is referencing here.
Right, the first one he flags about RFK Jr. saying that the COVID vaccines are “ethnically targeted” was published last year by The New York Post, and here’s what he said:
1:01 - 1:17
Now, of course, RFK’s claims here have been dismissed by scientists, and the main study he has repeatedly referenced to back his claims did not say the virus targets racial or ethnic groups.[]
And as for Bennet’s question about whether Kennedy said pesticides causes children to become transgender, here’s the clip he’s referring to:
00:50 - 00:57
Another topic that was hit a lot was RFK Jr.’s stance on abortion which he has flip-flopped on repeatedly.
Right, in the past — and as recently as a few years ago when he was running for president as a Democrat — Kennedy has voiced support for abortion.
A fact that was flagged by many Democrats — including in this interaction with Sen. Maggie Hasan:
4:35 - 5:10
Right, and with that, Kennedy didn’t really respond to her question about whether he would just blindly follow Trump’s orders.
And he continued to evade similar questioning from other Democrats who pressed him on his inconsistent views, saying he agrees with Trump and repeating this one refrain over and over:
“Senator, I believe that every abortion is a tragedy.” 00:18 - 00:21
Beyond that, there were also some notable one-off moments from the hearing.
Like when Sen. Elizabeth Warren questioned him about his financial entanglements, asking if he will agree not to take money from the pharmaceutical industry during the four years he’s in office if confirmed and four years after, to which he says yes.
And she goes on to note his refusal to give up his financial stake in his lawsuit against the maker of an HPV vaccine — which Caroline Kennedy also flagged in her letter.
With Warren asking RFK Jr. about his affiliation with the law firm that is brining that suit:
2:16 - 2:30
3:14 - 3:38
5:31 - 6:05
Now, one thing you may have noticed is that all the clips we’ve been playing have been from Democrats.
But that’s because Republicans largely just praised him and asked soft-ball questions that allowed Kennedy to queue up his comfortable talking points about chronic disease and how food impacts health.
But there were some notable exceptions — like Sen. Bill Cassidy, who had a tense exchange with Kennedy over Medicaid and Medicare.
Right, Cassidy asked Kennedy some pretty straightforward questions about these two incredibly important programs that you would expect the health secretary to be able to answer.
With the former president of Doctors for America, who was at the hearing, telling reporters afterwards that it was clear RFK Jr. didn’t know basic facts about these enormous health programs he would be supervising.[]
Right, and that interaction with Cassidy is super important for a few reasons.
First of all, Cassidy is one of the Republicans who could vote against Kennedy’s nomination.
What’s more, he will also lead Kennedy’s second confirmation hearing tomorrow before the Senate health committee, where the nominee is expected to be pressed even more extensively on his knowledge of Medicaid, Medicare, and other key health programs.
Right, the hearing today was with the finance committee — those members aren’t going to be as focused on the nitty-gritty technical details that the health committee will want to dive into.
So tomorrow is going to be a whole different ball game.
And, on that note, that’s where I’m gonna end this one.
And, of course, with a huge, hours-long hearing like this, I can’t hit on every highlight, so I’ll link to the full coverage down below.
But with that, I’d love to know your thoughts on all this.
-
And then, in a big about face, Trump just rescinded his order freezing trillions of dollars in federal spending. []
And this after, yesterday, a judge temporarily blocked the plan following mass confusion around Medicaid’s online portals going dark.
Right, as we talked about, the vague memo coming from the White House Office of Budget and Management ordered a pause to ALL federal grants and loans.
With the memo ordering all agencies to “complete a comprehensive analysis” to “identify programs, projects, and activities” that could go against Trump’s executive orders –
Specifically highlighting "financial assistance for foreign aid, nongovernmental organizations, DEI, woke gender ideology, and the green new deal.”[]
And with that, the lack of clarity in the directive meant there was just panic, chaos, and uncertainty yesterday as everyone tried to figure out what the memo meant.
With some of the impact seemingly being immediate, with Medicaid portals going down in all fifty states.
And Trump's press secretary unable to answer a question about whether the program would be funded.[]
Though, notably, the OMB then issuing another memo claiming programs like Medicaid would continue without pause.
But in any case, the judge’s decision gave it a little breathing room, keeping the new restrictions from taking effect until at least February 3rd.
Though, notably, she didn’t take a position on the legality of the freeze.
Right, instead, she just gave time to hear more fleshed-out arguments about why she should issue a temporary restraining order that would have only blocked the freeze for an additional two weeks.[]
But even with the White House now rescinding the freeze, there’s just been more and more conversation about its impact, especially in terms of funding for US programs abroad.
Right, because even before the OMB memo this week, Secretary of State Marco Rubio's ordered an immediate halt on virtually all U.S. foreign aid programs.
And with that, approximately 60 senior staff within the U.S. Agency for International Development have reportedly been suspended –
Leaving the agency without clear leadership. []
And on top of that, several hundred contractors at USAID have reportedly been furloughed or laid off –
Some being fired immediately without severance pay and with their benefits expiring within days. []
Dozens of senior staff inside the U.S. Agency for International Development were placed on administrative leave.
With hundreds of contractors furloughed or terminated. []
And now, since then, Rubio has issued a waiver to his own foreign assistance pause.
Right, with a memo saying “life-saving humanitarian assistance” wouldn’t be frozen.
Defining that as “life-saving medicine, medical services, food, shelter, and subsistence assistance, as well as supplies and reasonable administrative costs as necessary to deliver such assistance." []
But as of recording, it still isn’t clear what exactly that will mean in terms of what programs stay funded, or whether it will impact those whose employment has already been terminated.
And notably, as on the domestic side, we’re already seeing the impact internationally.
Right, with one of the biggest concerns, that this could have a massive impact on efforts to fight HIV and Aids around the world.
And that’s because clinics all over the place rely on US support to provide treatments to those battling the disease.
And specifically, something known as The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief ?
It’s a global health program started by George W. Bush that is credited with saving more than 25 million lives worldwide.[]
But notably, some Republican senators have campaigned against the program for years, claiming it promoted abortions.[]
And now, just like that, it’s funding has been paused, halting the distribution of H.I.V. medications purchased with U.S. aid money even if the drugs were already in clinics.
And with that, on Monday, officials worldwide were told that the program’s data systems would shut down only three three hours later — immediately closing off access to all data sets, reports and analytical tools.[]
And now, appointments are reportedly being canceled, and patients are being turned away.[]
And as far as the ultimate impact of this?
One study estimated that if the program were to end, as many as 600,000 lives would be lost over the next decade in South Africa alone.
And big thing, South Africa relies on it for only 20 percent of its H.I.V. budget.
But poorer countries are almost entirely dependent on it.[]
With the served as chief of staff for the program during the Biden administration saying:
“This is another domino in the devastating impact of the harmful freeze to programs, leaving lives hanging in the balance.” []
And so with all that, we’re only beginning to see what other kinds of big changes may be coming as a result of Donald Trump being in office, in the US and everywhere else.
I’d love to know your thoughts on this specific aspect of this as far as HIV and AIDS treatment or anything else we talked about.
But then, all of a sudden today, the Acting Director of the OMB issued another memo simply stating that the previous memo had been rescinded. It went on to say:
“If you have questions about implementing the President’s executive orders, please contact your agency general counsel.”
With that, Trump’s press secretary released a statement:
“OMB has rescinded the memo to end any confusion on federal policy created by the court ruling and the dishonest media coverage.”
However, the statement continued:
“The executive orders issued by the president on funding reviews remain in full force and effect and will be rigorously implemented by all agencies and departments.”
Finally, the statement concluded:
“This action should effectively end the court case and allow the government to focus on enforcing the president’s orders on controlling federal spending.”
The press secretary then reinforced this point on X, prompting responses from figures like Chris Murphy, the Democratic Senator from Connecticut, who stated:
“The funding shutdown is still in place. They are just doing it without the piece of paper.”
Similarly, AOC responded:
“To end any confusion, we are going to say one thing and do another. This is why you should not trust a word this White House says.”
So, as far as anyone can tell, the administration plans to move forward as intended—but without a memo, they can’t be sued? As of now, everyone is just more confused than they were before.
This is why AOC has also argued that the Senate should not confirm Trump’s pick to lead the OMB, writing:
“The utter fiasco of the last 48 hours is just a taste of the chaos Russ Vought would unleash.”
In any case, as we wait to see where the dust settles with the funding freeze, conversations about its impact continue to grow.
Links:
OMB Memo: https://x.com/NACHC/status/1884672260138549610Trump press secretary statement: https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/01/29/us/trump-federal-freeze-funding-news
Chris Murphy Tweet: https://x.com/ChrisMurphyCT/status/1884676891057041904
AOC Tweet 1: https://x.com/AOC/status/1884683913395630290
AOC Tweet 2: https://x.com/AOC/status/1884683339438739839
-
A Florida teacher and principal are in serious trouble after they allegedly threw a massive rager and had like 100 local high school kids show up.
According to police, paramedics had to be called, fights broke out, DUIs were had, and even a gun was pulled out for a video.[]
Literally so much crazy shit happened that it took our team a few pitches to even believe the story was true this morning.
At the center of all of this are Elizabeth Hill-Brodigan and Karly Anderson, both of whom are facing child neglect charges.
Hill-Brodigan is a principal at a nearby elementary school while Anderson seems to be a teacher.[]
Police claim that the party was hosted on January 19th at Hill-Brogidan’s place and was a so-called “Open house party.”[]
That’s an actual thing under Florida law and pretty much means anyone was able to go in and out.
The party was easily accessible to minors and there was alcohol… lots.
It was also super annoying to neighbors with police being called MULTIPLE times throughout the night.[]
And at least one host -- Anderson -- was clearly inebriated according to officers.
So much so that she tried to stop paramedics from helping a girl who was throwing up a ton.[]
Hill-Brogidan also spoke with officers that night and promised around 8:40 pm that things would quiet down,
But at 11 pm when officers returned the party was still ongoing.
HOWEVER, police think that someone used a prank call to get the officers to go away and let the partygoers escape.
Right, because just as they were ready to shut it down, officers were told that a call reported shots fired at a nearby skate park.
On top of that, there was also a “satanic ritual” occurring that led to someone being at gunpoint.
(None of that seems to be true).[]
When officers went back to Hill-Brogidan’s place everyone was gone.
Okay so that’s all really bad but it gets worse.
Two days later investigators started talking to students that were at the party and found out that these were normal things that happened once or twice a month at the house.
They are usually advertised on Snapchat and Hill-Brogidan even had some of them come early for “preparations.”[]
Since then both were arrested and booked before posting bond and have since pleaded not guilty but are otherwise remaining silent.
If found guilty of the child neglect charges -- which are by far the worst they’re facing -- it’s up to five years in prison and a $5,000 fine.
But this probably isn’t good for their careers either way.
The school district they worked for said "We are extremely troubled by these accusations and are fully cooperating with the Cocoa Beach Police Department.”
While the superintendent added that IF the allegations are true they’re “a complete failure in leadership and violation of our trust."
We’ll have to keep an eye on this for any updates,
But in the meantime if you’re wondering why your Florida neighbor is the way they are, it’s because they’re just built different down there.
Head over to Lumen for 20% off your purchase.
-
Who else is sick of lazy kids just sponging off the government by eating school lunches when they could be picking berries on a farm or picking up shifts at McDonald’s?
No, you think kids should be able to eat? And learn? Well Rich McCormick, a Republican congressman from Georgia, might not be on the same page as you.
Because while discussing the federal grants freeze on CNN yesterday, which we will talk more about later, host Pamela Brown asked if he would support getting rid of school lunches and programs that provide food assistance to low-income families.
And there, he said:
“When you talk about school lunches, I worked my way through high school. I don’t know about you, but I worked before I was even 13 years old. I was picking berries in the field before child labor laws that precluded that. I was a paper boy. When I was in high school, I worked my entire way through. You’re telling me that kids who stay at home instead of going to work at Burger King, McDonald’s, during the summer, should stay at home and get their free lunch instead of going to work? I think we need to have a top-down review….I think you’re painting a lot of kids with a broad brush.” (0:50-1:16)
Right, and so Brown did push back, following up to say:
“That’s not necessarily a fair assessment [exactly, exactly] of the kids. So you would say the kids in your district who use free lunch are all just sitting at home?...of course not.” (1:18-1:29)
“This gives us a chance to see, where is the money really being spent? Who can actually go and produce their own income?” (1:34-1:40)
Then saying that a ton of people got their start working in fast food and high school kids are capable of getting jobs and learning life skills, and they should be:
“Thinking about their future instead of thinking about how they are going to sponge off the government when they don’t need to.” (1:59-2:03)
Right, then suggesting that having them work is more productive to ending poverty than welfare programs.
And as you can imagine, this prompted a lot of outrage, people saying it is wrong to suggest children are freeloaders for needing to eat. [][][]
Arguing children should not need to work to be of value to the country.[][]
New York Governor Kathy Hochul even tweeting:
“Anyone who wants to force a 14-year-old kid to work as a fry cook to pay for their lunch should try going without food for a day.”[]
Others just seeing this and talking about how serious an issue food insecurity is for children in the U.S.
Statistics from Feeding America showing that in 2023, 14 million kids faced hunger and one in five is unaware where their next meal will come from.[]
And children in single-parent families are even more likely to face these issues.
And this can have serious effects, with Krystal Hodge, an assistant professor in food science and human nutrition at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, previously saying:
“Research has shown that students at nutritional risk are more likely to skip breakfast, and have poor attendance, to be late [and] to show behavioral problems in school.”[]
There are also negative health outcomes, like increases in anemia, asthma, tooth decay, and stunted growth.
So I would love to know your thoughts on this one, on what Rep. McCormick said, the backlash, school lunches in general, anything here.
-
Get out and get paid.
That’s the tempting offer being made to almost every federal employee in the country right now.
Right, with Donald Trump offering buyouts to millions of civil servants as part of an apparent effort to reduce the size of the federal work force and push out those who aren’t loyal to him.
With this all coming in an emailed memo from the Office of Personnel Management.
Notably, sent using the Trump administration’s new mass email system, which is actually already the subject of a lawsuit filed by two federal employees.
With them alleging that the OPM failed to do an assessment required by law to understand and mitigate potential privacy risks..
But in any case, the subject line of the email reads “Fork in the Road.”
Notably, it’s the same subject line in the email Elon Musk sent to Twitter employees in 2022 asking them to commit to “extremely hardcore” work or else leave the company with three months pay.
And with that, Musk reportedly played an integral part in the rollout of this buyout.
In fact, he previewed the move at a rally in Philly last October:
“We will reduce a lot of government headcount, but we’re going to give I think very long severances. Like two years, or something like that. Look, just go do something else is what we’re gonna say.” (BYTE: 0:00-0:13)
But with that, the offer now being extended to federal employees? It’s not quite so generous as he claimed.
Right, those who resign would receive about eight months pay rather than two years.
And they only have until February 6th to decide. []
Though, notably, according to the email, employees who do not take a buyout cannot be given “full assurance regarding the certainty” of their position or agency.[]
With the email saying that the majority of federal agencies would probably be downsized and that a substantial number of employees would be furloughed or reclassified to “at-will status” — essentially making them easier to fire.[]
And on top of that, the email reiterated what’s been ordered in one of Trump’s day one executive actions – a return to in-person work.
With the email saying most people who have been working remotely will be required to work from an office five days a week –
And adding that some physical offices will be consolidated, meaning some people may be relocated.[]
And finally, what’s been seen as one of the most troubling aspects of this email?
It talks about “enhanced standards of conduct” and says ”the federal workforce should be comprised of employees who are reliable, LOYAL, trustworthy, and who strive for excellence in their daily work.” []
WIth critics saying “loyal” is the key word here.
And with all that, you had the American Federation of Government Employees, which is the largest federal workers union, pushing back.
With the organization’s president saying in a statement:
“Purging the federal government of dedicated career civil servants will have vast, unintended consequences that will cause chaos for the Americans who depend on a functioning federal government.”
“This offer should not be viewed as voluntary. Between the flurry of anti-worker executive orders and policies, it is clear that the Trump administration's goal is to turn the federal government into a toxic environment where workers cannot stay even if they want to.” []
And with that, we need to talk about exactly who received this email and what it will mean if people take the offer.
Right, first thing, the federal government? It reportedly employed around 3 million people last year.
With that number making up nearly 1.9 percent of the nation’s entire civilian workforce. []
And of course, not every one of them is being offered the buyout.
Right postal workers, members of the military, immigration officials, certain unspecified national security roles, and any other role that agencies deem as being necessary reportedly won’t be able to opt in. []
But according to Katie Miller, who serves on an advisory board to Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency?
That still leaves more than TWO MILLION federal employees who are being sent the email. []
And according to the Associated Press, for example, even a fraction of them taking the offer could send shockwaves through the economy and spark major disruptions across the country..
Leading to wide-ranging but as of now unknown consequences for the delivery, timeliness, and effectiveness of federal services. []
For example, the New York Times reporting regular activities like traveling, renewing passports or filing a tax return could be delayed or disrupted.
Also, everything from national parks and museums to the administration of benefits like Social Security, Medicare, veterans’ aid, and food stamps could also be affected.
While regulators and inspectors for food, water, drugs and workplace safety might end up leaving the government. []
And beyond that, we could see an exodus of skilled researchers and scientists from doctors to meteorologists.
And then, depending on how the Trump administration defines “national security,” officers at law enforcement agencies like the F.B.I. and Drug Enforcement Administration may also resign. []
Now all that said, we still don’t know who and how many will leave.
With one Trump administration official saying they expect 5 to 10 percent of federal employees to quit and claiming it could lead to $100 billion annually in savings for federal taxpayers. []
But also, we also don’t even know if this is legal.
Right, according to OPM guidance, employees who accept "deferred resignation” should be placed on paid administrative leave. []
But it’s not really clear that Trump has the power to offer administrative leave to basically the entire federal civilian work force.
And even if he does, under the law, no employee can be on administrative leave for more than 10 days in a year — let alone almost eight months.[]
And alternatively, there is something under the Homeland Security Act that allows agencies to offer federal workers $25,000 in exchange for their resignation.
But for a lot of these workers, eight months' pay is more than 25,000. []
And so, with that, you have people like Democratic Senator Tim Kaine saying”
"He doesn't have any authority to do this. Do not be fooled by this guy."
And adding: "If you accept that offer and resign, he'll stiff you just like he stiffed contractors.”[]
And there, you have people pointing to not only Trump’s history of allegedly not paying his bills, but also again drawing the comparison to the buyout offer Musk offered Twitter employees.
Right, that led to the company being accused of refusing to pay at least $500 million in promised severance to thousands of employees.
And as far as the Twitter parallels?
Another one worth noting is that Musk later said some Twitter employees who were let go “probably shouldn’t have been” and scrambled to rehire them.
Right, so ultimately, we’ll have to wait and see what happens with this.
But like a lot of what we’ve been talking about with Trump lately, the impact of this? It could be absolutely massive.
And if any one you are personally affected by this, or maybe got this email, I’d love to hear your thoughts below.
-
We need to talk about how, one, childhood vaccination rates are plummeting at an alarming rate.
Two, experts are now saying that it is a matter of when, not if, there will be deadly outbreaks of preventable diseases that not only threaten the lives of hundreds of thousands of children but adults as well, even those of us who have been vaccinated against these illnesses.
And I say that knowing that it is not new information, that childhood immunization rates have continued to fall since the pandemic.
Now we have this wild new analysis by The New York Times of recent CDC data for the 2023–2024 school year to provide some crucial context that's been lacking from the conversation and really shows just how dire the situation could get.
Here, where I'll start specifically, is that the data shows that nationally, the rate of kindergartners with complete records of the measles shot dropped from around 95% before the pandemic to just under 93%, with notable rates for polio, whooping cough, and chickenpox vaccines similarly falling.
With that, you might think,
"Hey, well, 93% is still pretty good."
And when we're talking about national averages, you'd be right.
That still gives the population significant herd immunity, meaning their immunization rates are high enough to stop an outbreak.
But this is a key thing here.
Just looking at the national average in a vacuum can be deceiving.
Because, as The Times explains, those national figures mask far more precipitous drops in some states, counties, and school districts.
They add that in those areas, falling vaccination rates are creating new pockets of students no longer protected by herd immunity.
That’s all well and good, but it does not help places that no longer meet the herd immunity threshold.
In fact, we've already seen evidence of this in recent outbreaks of preventable childhood diseases, with, for example, cases of both whooping cough and measles increasing over the last year.
And when it comes to measles, epidemiologists say that outbreaks become significantly harder to contain when immunizations fall under 90%.
At some point below that threshold, the spread of measles becomes essentially inevitable if the disease is introduced in the community.
Part of the reason I'm flagging measles specifically is because The Times found that there are thousands more schools where the vaccination rates have now fallen below 90% compared to just five years ago.
Which means that it is now estimated that there are 280,000 kindergartners without documented protection against measles, an increase of roughly 100,000 kids since the pandemic.
Now, with all that, as far as why we're seeing these trends, one of the main factors appears to be an increase in vaccine exemptions.
You see, normally, families need to show that their kids have received the normal schedule of childhood immunizations before they can attend school.
But families who opt out of those shots can receive exemptions from schools for medical, religious, or other reasons, depending on state and local laws.
And according to CDC data, during the 2023–2024 school year, the number of kindergartners who had exemptions for one or more vaccines rose 3.3%.
I mean, that is literally the highest that's ever been reported.
Very notably here, the analysis from The Times found that, quote,
"The shifts in exemptions mostly fall along political lines."
The Times found that the number of students with exemptions increased on average in states that went for Trump back in November, growing everywhere except West Virginia.
As exemptions rose in only a few of the states that went for Harris, they largely stayed flat or even fell in most others.
That makes sense because polls have largely shown a new growing partisan divide on vaccines since the pandemic.
For example, a Gallup survey back in 2019 found that 67% of Democrats and Democrat-leaning voters said childhood immunizations were extremely important, compared to 52% of Republicans and Republican-leaning voters.
Five years later, while enthusiasm only fell 5% among Democrats, it absolutely plummeted for Republicans, dropping to just 26%.
So now, according to polling, one in every three Republicans actively believes that vaccines are more dangerous than the diseases they were designed to protect against.
Beyond that, we've also seen an increased effort among Republican politicians to roll back vaccine mandates in recent years.
And those policy changes have had a direct, traceable impact on childhood immunization rates.
For example, we can look to Mississippi.
You might not know this, but they've actually long had the highest kindergarten measles vaccination rate in the country for the last four decades.
The reason for that is that, during that time, the state had one of the strictest requirements on the books, only allowing kids to opt out for medical reasons and with a doctor's approval.
Then, in July of 2023, a federal judge ordered the state to allow religious exemptions.
In the first school year that this policy was in effect, the state's vaccination rates took a notable dip.
Additionally, Idaho passed a law that allowed 18-year-old students to exempt themselves.
Now, the state has the single highest exemption rate, which is concerning because Idaho also had the lowest kindergarten vaccination rates in the nation for almost every single major childhood shot, thanks to lax policies that were already in place.
Then, with all that, we have The Times analysis really illustrating how concerning this is.
Idaho already had one of the lowest measles immunization rates in the country.
Then, during the 2023–2024 school year, it plummeted even more, marking the largest decrease in the entire country by far and making Idaho the only state to fall below 80%.
Again, it's not just one or two states.
Other states that have lax policies have also seen sharp declines, like Florida and Georgia, which have some of the lowest reported minimum immunization rates for kindergartners, thanks to policies allowing parents to get exemptions by simply submitting forms with their kid's school.
Meanwhile, other states have strengthened their vaccine requirements, and we've seen the exact opposite happen.
Rates have risen in Maine and Connecticut, which both got rid of nonmedical exemptions during the pandemic.
So, with all of that said, experts are saying that a new Trump administration would likely continue the worrisome national trend of falling childhood vaccinations.
Like we talked about earlier, RFK Jr., Trump's pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, has been described by many as a vocal anti-vaxxer.
Many are saying that if he is confirmed, America would be installing someone who backs unscientific and disproven claims about immunizations to lead key health agencies, including those that govern and regulate national vaccine policy.
Now, very notably, experts say that RFK Jr. likely wouldn't have the power to take extreme actions, like banning certain shots or taking them off the market entirely.
RFK Jr. has also claimed that he has no intention of doing that.
He also can't abolish vaccine mandates, since those are actually set by state and local governments.
But people are saying there are still a number of ways he could do serious damage.
For example, he could influence the CDC’s guidance on vaccine schedules, which states and insurance companies rely on.
He could also stack the external advisory committee with anti-vax allies, potentially altering the childhood immunization schedule.
Additionally, because Kennedy would oversee the FDA, he could request reviews of vaccines and subject them to new requirements.
Because many shots are federally funded, he could even direct Congress to pull those funds, cutting off access to essential shots for at-risk children.
And beyond that, there's concern about the symbolic impact of putting RFK Jr. in such a high-profile role.
Experts warn that having a top federal official who is skeptical or outright hostile toward vaccines could give opposition more credibility.
One former CDC director put it bluntly,
"The Secretary of Health has a life-or-death responsibility. If unscientific statements and decisions are made, if agencies are damaged, if public confidence is undermined, then you can get the spread of disease."
For now, that is where we are–we'll have to wait and see what happens next.
And of course, in the meantime, I'd love to know your thoughts in the comments down below.
Get an exclusive deal at NordVPN. It's risk-free with Nord's 30-day money-back guarantee!
