He failed to qualify for matching state campaign funds and fell short of the threshold to participate in two upcoming debates as he runs for governor of New Jersey. His spokesman works for a consulting firm in Washington, D.C., and he has no paid campaign manager. But Sean Spiller has something the other five Democrats running for governor don’t: a $35 million blank check from a group with close ties to the labor union he leads, the New Jersey Education Association. For more than six months, Mr. Spiller’s image has been plastered on billboards, campaign mailers and front-door hangers throughout New Jersey. He has been featured in commercials, digital posts and, more than a year before November’s election, a full-page ad in The New York Times. The publicity has been paid for by Working New Jersey, a super PAC funded largely with public schoolteachers’ union dues, according to a review of Internal Revenue Service records. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT Since July, I.R.S. records show that a political arm of the teachers’ union has sent at least $17.25 million to Working New Jersey. The super PAC, in turn, has reported that it was prepared to spend as much as $35 million on behalf of Mr. Spiller, a science teacher by trade who draws a roughly $370,000 salary as president of the N.J.E.A. Working New Jersey has already spent $8.3 million on television, digital and streaming ads, according to AdImpact, which tracks political spending.The union’s unconventional strategy appears to have helped boost Mr. Spiller’s standing in the hypercompetitive race. Early surveys indicated that Mr. Spiller, a little-known former mayor of Montclair, N.J., had limited political support. But recent polls have suggested that he is now tied for second place. Representative Mikie Sherrill has consistently been at the front of the pack, with Mr. Spiller and the mayor of Newark, Ras J. Baraka, and the mayor of Jersey City, Steve Fulop, close behind her. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT But nothing about the race to replace the state’s term-limited governor, Philip D. Murphy, is certain with such a large and accomplished field of candidates. Fundamental changes to the rules that govern primaries have made it the state’s most volatile contest in recent history. A poll conducted in January by Emerson College found that 56 percent of Democrats remain undecided.The N.J.E.A. has long been among the state’s most powerful unions, with nearly 200,000 members and a willingness to take on political foes. Its involvement with the Working New Jersey PAC is among its most overt efforts to sway voters in a state election. Mr. Spiller, who emigrated from Jamaica as a child, has said that as governor he would focus on expanding affordable housing, strengthening schools and defending New Jersey against President Trump’s policies. Most of the Democratic and Republican candidates for governor are benefiting from spending by outside interest groups. But Mr. Spiller is the only candidate to have also raised so little on his own to directly fund his campaign. As of the most recent state filing, Mr. Spiller’s campaign had raised $183,000 in a race where every other prominent candidate collected more than $1 million — and several have taken in close to $3 million each. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT In an interview, Mr. Spiller, 49, said there were metrics beyond fund-raising and the size of a campaign staff that were more indicative of support for his candidacy. He noted that he had submitted more signatures to get on the ballot than all but one other Democratic candidate. He refused to directly address questions about whether he considered it a conflict of interest that he was benefiting so significantly from dues contributed by members of a union that employs him as president. He noted that other candidates had turned to real estate developers and Wall Street bankers for contributions, and that by sidestepping that funding stream he had avoided being beholden to their interests, if elected.“Our campaign is based on fighting for working class folks,” he said. He also dismissed the significance of falling short of the $580,000 campaign fund-raising threshold that would have qualified him for 2-to-1 matching funds for the June 10 primary. “If I called millionaires and very wealthy folks, I could meet goals,” he said. By law, super PACs may raise and spend unlimited sums but are barred from explicitly coordinating with candidates’ campaigns. Officials with the N.J.E.A. and Working New Jersey said that Mr. Spiller had not been involved in allocating union funding or in any promotional efforts on his behalf. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT “We recognized the need to put guardrails and protections in place to ensure that there was not a conflict of interest,” said Steven Baker, the union’s spokesman. “The candidate does not get to decide what is spent or how it is spent.” Mr. Baker said Mr. Spiller also had no role in the union’s decision to set aside money for political advocacy or for its political arm to send millions to Working New Jersey. A spokesman for Working New Jersey, Eddie Vale, said the same thing. “As an independent expenditure campaign, we cannot, and do not, coordinate with or talk to the Spiller campaign in any way,” Mr. Vale said. To voters, however, the Spiller promotional material piling up in mailboxes may be largely indistinguishable from the types of ads paid for directly by his opponents’ campaigns. Each carries a tiny disclaimer: “not made with the cooperation or prior consent of, or in consultation with or at the request or suggestion of, any candidate, or any person or committee acting on behalf of any candidate.” Editors’ Picks What a New American Citizen Learned on Route 66 Simple Sandals Are Always a Good Investment Is ‘Reef Safe’ Sunscreen Really Better? Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT Specialists in campaign finance law say that Working New Jersey’s support for Mr. Spiller is part of a growing trend of outsourcing to special interest groups work traditionally done by campaigns.Daniel Weiner, an election law expert at New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice, noted that Mr. Trump also relied heavily on super PACs for core campaign responsibilities. “Every election cycle people push the envelope even further,” Mr. Weiner said. The trend can be traced to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United campaign finance decision in 2010, which freed political action committees run by corporations and unions to spend unlimited sums on behalf of candidates. “The theory was that these groups would not be interchangeable with candidates’ campaigns,” Mr. Weiner said. “Instead, the way they often work is they’re just sort of the alter ego of the campaign.” Only New Jersey and Virginia hold governor’s races the year after a presidential election, and their results are likely to offer some of the nation’s earliest insights into voter attitudes toward Mr. Trump ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. It is perhaps no surprise that New Jersey’s contest is on track to hit campaign spending levels that one top state elections official called “stratospheric.” That’s true of super PACs, too. In 2021, super PACs spent a record $13.4 million in support of all primary candidates for New Jersey governor. That record has already been dwarfed by the $35 million in anticipated spending by a single super PAC on behalf of Mr. Spiller. In the days leading up to the March 24 deadline to qualify for matching funds, Mr. Spiller’s appeals to potential donors took on an urgent tone. “I need you to donate $20 or more,” one email stated. “I’ll be honest with you,” another read, “we’re not yet where we need to be.” But his shortage of funds appears to have had no effect on Working New Jersey’s ability to spread his message. Officials running the super PAC said that they had conducted 13 internal polls to measure Mr. Spiller’s standing in the race and are prepared to continue targeting Democratic primary voters on television, social media, billboards and at their homes. Last Friday, people affiliated with Working New Jersey hung fliers on doors in Cranford, N.J. — an effort that the officials said was part of a statewide canvassing blitz that had already reached 661,000 homes. At one house, after leaving a door hanger, the representative sent a text message to the registered Democrat in the household with a link to the super PAC’s website: “New Jersey needs fighters like Sean to stand up to the Trump administration’s radical agenda and do something about rising costs.” Should he lose, Mr. Spiller is likely to face questions about the wisdom of investing teacher dues so heavily in a single political campaign.“He’s going to have to face his members” and explain spending millions of dollars, said Matthew Frankel of the Sunlight Policy Center, a nonprofit advocacy group critical of N.J.E.A. leadership. “On that,” Mr. Frankel added, “I think he’s in a world of hurt.” Mr. Baker, the union spokesman, said that the N.J.E.A.’s endorsement of Mr. Spiller and financial support for his candidacy were based on a conviction that he could “most forcefully and effectively advance” members’ priorities. Those priorities, he said, are multifaceted and include improving pension allocations, fully funding schools and defending freedom to read initiatives. “When you look at the national landscape, voters are very aware of what’s at stake in a state like New Jersey,” Mr. Baker said.

Over the last few years, there has been increasing pressure on the U.S. health care system: this includes issues related to hospital staffing, as well as financial and operational challenges that have led to many health care facilities closing and reducing vital services like emergency and obstetric care. On a daily basis, many of the nation’s largest health systems have either announced major deficits or are cutting costs. For instance, one of the nation’s premier health systems, Mass General Brigham (MGB), recently reported a 72-million-dollar operating loss in fiscal 2024 despite an intensive focus on cost management. (The response has included layoffs of approximately 1,500 employees or roughly 2% of its workforce.) Other large healthcare systems such as Vanderbilt, Yale New Haven Health, the University of Pennsylvania Health System, Orlando Health, and many others have been affected by similar cost issues and have had to lay off people or downsize services. The most fragile level of health delivery encompasses our rural facilities. A February Chartis review reported that 432 rural hospitals are at risk of closing in 2025. Advertisement Now, health care is facing yet another obstacle: tariffs. President Trump’s announcement of an increase in tariffs on imports into the U.S. only stands to hurt our already fragile health care system. Many of the supplies that our patients and hospitals depend upon to safely operate are imported, including basic and necessary supplies such as medicines, gloves, gowns, and IV supplies. Tariffs will not only lead to higher prices for those goods but will astronomically add costs for the patients we care for.

Commenting on someone else’s hygiene is one of the more delicate conversation topics. You are, after all, critiquing a person’s body and health habits. But it’s a thorny road to go down: Hygiene issues can stem from medical or even financial issues. “Someone with bad breath could have something going on with their dental work—maybe they can't afford to go to the dentist, so they're stuck with something in their mouth that's making it not smell so good,” says Katie Moore, a clinical psychologist in Irvine, Calif. Advertisement Is it worth risking the potential awkwardness and saying something? Context matters, Moore says: If you’re never going to see the person again, she recommends staying mum. But if it’s a close friend or partner, and a recurrent problem? You’re probably not the first to notice, so you could be doing them a favor by bringing it up. The key is proceeding with tact—sometimes humor, sometimes concern. Talk to them face-to-face and privately, don’t approach the conversation with disgust, and use a line that meshes with how you typically interact with that person. We asked experts exactly what to say when you feel compelled to bring up someone’s hygiene but want to avoid offending them forever.

The Trump Administration’s wide-reaching tariffs, announced on April 2, introduced 10% tariffs on all imported goods and additional import taxes for many countries. The tariffs sent global markets plunging and is expected to have a drastic impact on U.S. consumers and industries. Despite President Donald Trump’s claim that tariffs will boost domestic production, experts say that when it comes to clean energy, the tariffs stand to drive up costs for U.S. companies that receive supplies from abroad—and throw the global supply chain into disarray. “For just the batteries and the solar panels and the wind turbines that we want to build in the United States, we're going to need international parts and components and materials for those,” says Bentley Allan, associate professor at Johns Hopkins University and co-director of the Net Zero Industrial Policy Lab. “These are not materials or components that we can just start producing ourselves on the time scales that we need in order to achieve climate goals.” Here are some of the biggest impacts the tariffs stand to have on clean energy industries. Batteries Grid batteries are facing a roughly 65% tariff that could rise to more than 80% by next year—just as the U.S. was expected to see record expansion in adoption in battery storage. In February, the U.S. Energy Information Administration projected that 18.2 GW of utility-scale battery storage would be added to the United State’s energy grid in 2025. Most lithium-ion batteries required for this, however, are imported from China; Chinese lithium-ion battery exports to the U.S. reached an all-time high of $1.9 billion in December 2024. And while battery prices are shifting downwards worldwide due to an oversupply, tariffs are expected to increase the cost in the U.S. Electric Vehicle Manufacturing In recent years, many American car manufacturers have attempted to boost their electric vehicle production after the Biden Administration set a mandate that 50% of all new car sales should be electric by 2030, and many states set their own zero-emission mandates. Trump’s tariffs, on top of other anti-EV moves by the current administration, stand to slow down this progress. The Trump Administration has kept a Biden-era policy that imposed a 100% tariff on Chinese-made EVs—all but banning their sale in the U.S. as they grow in popularity abroad. Even if a car is American made, many of the parts needed are imported from abroad. “Even though we're building our domestic manufacturing capacities as fast as we possibly can, we still are going to need to be importing, especially upstream materials,” says Allan. “Critical minerals, cathode, ingots and wafers, poly silicon, we're going to need to import those supplies, and they all just got more expensive.” Advertisement Solar Power The majority of the U.S.’s solar equipment is shipped from Southeast Asia, a region that has seen among the highest tariff rates imposed. Many U.S. developers have been stockpiling solar panels in anticipation of the tariffs, with Bloomberg reporting that the excess inventory might prevent the industry from feeling the full shock of the tariffs. But still, experts warn that domestic supply might not be able to keep up with demand—especially given that the U.S. supply chain has not been built up to meet it. “Even if we wanted to build an all in United States battery or solar supply chain, it's going to take us a long time to accumulate the expertise and the knowledge necessary in order to do that,” says Allan. “By basically creating a shock in the middle of that process, we're slowing that process down and making it more difficult to complete.” But just as the price of clean energy adoption might be on the rise, so too will the cost of fossil fuels, experts say. “To the extent that we have tariffs from countries from which we depend on for energy inputs, even if we shift towards fossil fuels, we're still going to pay the price of the tariffs through those fossil fuels,” says Antonio Bento, professor of public policy and economics at University of Southern California. Michigan, Minnesota, and New York in particular rely on Canadian energy—now expected to see a price hike with a 10% tariff. Advertisement The tariffs also stand to increase the cost of drilling—despite Trump’s “drill baby drill” mandate. “Just think of steel, aluminum, and other materials that these fossil fuel companies need in large quantities when they're drilling and transporting fuels and processing fuels,” says Michael Mehling, deputy director at MIT Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research. “The inflationary effect of tariffs is far more than just an additional cost stacked on imports. It has spillover effects.”

President Donald Trump on Monday doubled down on his trade war and threatened to levy even higher tariffs on China this week, as markets endured a third day of intense volatility. “We've been ripped off and taken advantage of by many countries over the years, and can't do it anymore,” Trump told reporters during a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office on Monday. “We have many, ma Trump’s commitment to his tariffs comes amid mounting pressure from economists, investors, and even Republicans in Congress for the White House to pause a trade strategy many fear could drive a global recession. Last week, Trump imposed a 10% across-the-board tariff on imports, as well as additional tariffs on some 90 countries. On Sunday, Goldman Sachs said the probability of a recession in the next 12 months had jumped to 45%. “We have $36 trillion in debt. I want to get rid of it, and we can do it quickly with proper deals,” Trump said Monday. “Countries don't allow us to sell our product, but we allow them to sell their product…They charge us massive amounts of money for the privilege of going into their country. Those days are over.” The meeting marked the first time Trump met in-person with a foreign leader since he unveiled the sweeping new tariffs last week in a rambling and unclear announcement in which he described an opaque formula used to calculate higher tariff rates on adversaries and allies alike. The strategy drew puzzlement from economists, who quickly found errors and inconsistencies in how the administration calculated the new tariff rates. Some countries have attempted to quickly show they can address Trump’s unhappiness with the current trade status quo. During Monday’s press meeting, Netanyahu claimed he would work hard to “quickly” eliminate the trade deficit with the U.S.—though President Trump did not respond with a commitment to reduce the new 17% tariff on the country. “Don’t forget, we help Israel a lot,” Trump said in reference to the billions of aid the U.S. sends their closest Middle Eastern ally. Others have responded more firmly. China retaliated with a 34% tariff against American imports, which the President criticized during the press conference and on his social media platform. “If China does not withdraw its 34% increase above their already long term trading abuses by tomorrow, April 8th, 2025, the United States will impose ADDITIONAL Tariffs on China of 50%, effective April 9th,” Trump threatened on Truth Social Monday morning. Several business leaders have called on Trump to pause the implementation of his tariffs and impose a more predictable strategy to pressure more manufacturers to produce goods inside the U.S. Bill Ackman, a hedge fund manager who has supported Trump, warned of a “self-induced, economic nuclear winter” if Trump doesn’t change course. “By placing massive and disproportionate tariffs on our friends and our enemies alike and thereby launching a global economic war against the whole world at once, we are in the process of destroying confidence in our country as a trading partner, as a place to do business, and as a market to invest capital,” Ackman wrote Sunday on X. Trump said he wasn't worried about driving trading partners to China, claiming that many countries have already approached him about negotiations. To some extent, Trump recognized that building up domestic manufacturing and bringing back jobs would take time.

Protesters across the U.S. came together on Saturday, April 5, for the nationwide “Hands Off!” protests, demonstrating resistance against the actions of President Donald Trump and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) lead, Tesla CEO Elon Musk. The Trump Administration and Musk have notably spent the first few weeks of Trump’s presidency working to “reduce waste” through mass government layoffs and the termination of contracts. There has even been an attempt to dismantle the Department of Education. A child attending a protest in Atlanta was pictured holding a banner that read "Hands off my education."

The U.S. and global stock markets have been hit hard since President Donald Trump announced his latest tariffs on April 2. The so-called “Liberation Day” saw the introduction of blanket 10% tariffs on all imported goods, and additional import taxes placed on 60 other countries. In the worst week for U.S. stocks since the markets crashed in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic, Dow Jones closed on Friday 2,000 points down, the S&P Index plunged 6%, and Nasdaq dipped almost 6%. A 401(k) is an employer-sponsored retirement plan where a person has the option to make contributions that are deducted from their paycheck. In some cases, the company will match your contributions up to a certain percentage of your salary. The value of 401(k) accounts is closely tied to fluctuations in the stock markets, as the portfolio allows you to invest in assets which are directly tied to the market’s performance. As such, when the stock market fluctuates, so too does a 401(k). With a 401(k), you carry all the risk because the investment decisions are yours. With such extreme dips in the stock market, some Americans are seeing their retirement savings take an intense hit. During an appearance on NBC's Meet the Press on Sunday, April 6, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent was asked about the market turmoil and the concerns regarding retirement savings. Host Kristen Welker said: “More than 160 million Americans are invested in the market. Many of them have spent their lives saving for their retirement. What is your message to Americans who want to retire right now and who've just seen their lifetime savings drop significantly?” Responding to the question, Bessent remarked that he thinks it's a “false narrative,” and suggested that people maintain a “long-term view.” “Americans who want to retire right now, Americans who have put away for years in their savings accounts, I think they don't look at the day-to-day fluctuations of what's happening. And you know, in fact, most Americans don't have everything in the market,” said Bessent. “Most Americans in a 401(k) have what's called a '60/40 account.' 60/40 accounts are down 5 or 6% on the year. People have a long-term view. They have a program that the reason the stock market is considered a good investment is because it's a long-term investment. If you look day-to-day, week-to-week, it's very risky. Over the long term, it's a good investment.” Bessent's remarks mirror those made by Trump. On April 3, when aboard Air Force One, Trump was asked by a reporter about the rising concerns among Americans and whether he has checked his own 401(k) since his tariff announcements stunned the stock market. Trump said: “I haven’t checked my 401(k).” The President also doubled down on his belief that though the markets look bad now, his tariffs will ultimately be a good thing for the economy. “I think our markets are going to boom; we’ve got to give it a little chance,” he said. The President once again shared his optimism about the economy in an update he posted on his social media platform, Truth Social, on Saturday, April 5. “This is an economic revolution, and we will win. Hang tough, it won't be easy, but the end result will be historic. We will Make America Great Again,” he said. What do experts advise you should do about your 401(k)? Brad Clark, founder and CEO of Solomon Financial, says that this is not the time to panic and take your money out of savings. “It’s scary,” he admits, but the response to fear, in his professional opinion, is to stay the course—especially if you are a younger investor preparing for future retirement. “When you're flying somewhere and you're in the worst turbulence you've ever been in, all you can think is, ‘I've just got to get off this plane,’” says Clark. “But the plane was built to handle this. That's kind of like your portfolio.” For people two or three years from retirement, Clark says their portfolios should already be less risky, and they should not have full market exposure to their investments. However, for those who are still 10 or more years away from retirement, there could be positives to note. “What a great buying opportunity,” Clark argues. “This is how the Warren Buffetts of the world make money. Greedy when everyone else is fearful, and fearful when everyone else is greedy.” Clark’s advice to those people—who are a decade or more away from retirement— is to “continue to invest like you’ve always invested,” and he is confident that this will pay off in the long run. In a column for the Washington Post, personal finance columnist and author Michelle Singletary echoed this sentiment. “If you’re in your 20s, 30s, or early 40s, don’t let what’s happening now scare you away from the stock market. Keep investing,” she said. Laurence Kotlikoff, professor of economics at Boston University, takes a more cautious approach for people of all ages. He recommends not investing in anything risky now, instead starting back from a safe investment position and eventually building your investment portfolio back into something more risky. By starting conservatively and building up, Kotlikoff says that investors can save themselves from pain later on. “There’s no reason to believe that the market will reverse itself,” he says. “Leave only in the market what you can afford to lose and don’t spend outside of it.” He also recommends people consider doing what he and his wife did soon after Trump’s Inauguration Day. In preparation of potential market fluctuations, they built a TIPS ladder, which is a portfolio of Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities. TIPS are U.S. government bonds that adjust for inflation, ensuring that the bond’s principal increases with inflation and decreases with deflation. “It's a combination of spending and investing behavior that is called ‘upside investing’ that leads you just to have upside risks,” Kotlikoff says. “You're losing that downside because you're never spending out of anything that's risky, you’re just spending out of this TIPS ladder.” Fort echoes Kotlikoff’s caution, noting that while some economists are saying to stay the course as usual, these are not usual times, and she thinks that it is likely that the markets are only going to dip further. For her own mother, who relies on her 401k, Fort has reduced her exposure to the market as much as possible. “This is a fundamental shift in the world order,” Fort emphasizes once more. “If you are close to retirement age, you’ll want to look for the safest assets if you cannot afford another 20% to 30% decline in the market.” Overall, it's worth noting that expert advice varies depending on the age of the person with the 401(k) and what stage they're at in their working lives. For example, Fort did not take the same measures for her own financial portfolio as she did for her mother's, since she is younger and has more time until retirement. Across the board, expert guidance tells us not to panic and not to make any rash financial decisions.

The severe storm system that has inundated the central and southeastern United States with heavy rain and high winds for days fits into a broader pattern in recent decades of increasing rainfall across the eastern half of the United States. Data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for 1991 through 2020 show that the Eastern part of the country received more rain, on average, over those years than it did during the 20th century. At the same time, precipitation decreased across the West. The sharp east-west divide is consistent with predictions from climate scientists, who expect wet places to get wetter, and dry areas to get drier, as the world warms. While no individual storm can be tied to climate change without further analysis, warming air can result in heavier rainfall. That’s because warm air has the ability to hold more moisture than cooler air, fueling conditions for more average precipitation overall, and the potential for storms that come through to be more intense. Global temperatures have been increasing year after year, driven by the burning of fossil fuels, which pumps planet-warming greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The past 10 years have been the 10 hottest in nearly 200 years of record-keeping, according to a recent report from the World Meteorological Organization. “When we have these very heavy rain events, the trends have been pointing toward those heavy events getting heavier,” said Deanna Hence, an associate professor of climate meteorology and atmospheric sciences at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. Severe floods can be an indirect effect of the warming air and increased moisture, said Jerald Brotzge, the state climatologist for Kentucky and director of the Kentucky Climate Center. When conditions cause a storm system to stall, it can drop large amounts of rain over the same area, increasing the risk of flooding. That’s what happened as this storm stalled in the region in recent days. “I would say it’s a once-in-a-generation event, based on the amounts and the area covered,” Dr. Brotzge said. Mark Jarvis, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service office in Louisville, Ky., described the storm as two-pronged. It brought tornadoes, high winds and hail at the front end, before stalling and dropping historic amounts of rainfall. Western Kentucky, which saw some of the storm’s most severe effects, was “in the bull's-eye of it,” he said. While heavy rains and floods are common in the Ohio Valley in late winter and early spring, for a system to drop as much rain as this one is “exceedingly rare,” he said. “That’s something that you usually see with hurricanes and tropical systems,” he said. While damaging storms have always happened, the possibility that climate change is amping them up is corroborated in the weather trends that have been observed, Dr. Hence said. She said that even in the Western half of the U.S., which has become drier overall, the precipitation that does come has had a tendency to fall at more extreme levels. She called it “very eye-popping,” and added, “To think that we’re in for more of this is not a particularly pleasant feeling to have.”

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services recently announced—without explanation—that it would not proceed with a proposal initiated by the Biden Administration to cover weight-loss drugs like Wegovy and Zepbound for its beneficiaries. Medicare and Medicaid recipients can be reimbursed for the medications to treat diabetes, but currently the anti-obesity versions of these drugs will not be covered. As an obesity treatment, Wegovy, made by Novo Nordisk, comes with a slightly higher dose for treating obesity than doses for diabetes; the medication is otherwise the same. For Zepbound, developed by Lilly, it's the same drug and administered in the same dose as Mounjaro, which is used to treat diabetes. Advertisement The Biden proposal would have included coverage of Wegovy and Zepbound to treat obesity under Medicare Part D for Medicare Advantage. “While today’s announcement was limited, we hope that with the confirmation of the new CMS director, the Trump Administration will move forward to finalize the definition of obesity. It is essential that CMS regulations are aligned with current medical science—and that means recognizing obesity as a serious chronic disease,” a spokesperson from Novo Nordisk said in a statement to TIME. A Lilly spokesperson said in a statement to TIME that the company “is disappointed in the MA-Part D rule because it is not the best reading of the statute and impacts patient access to obesity treatments,” referring to the program that allows enrollees to receive coverage of prescription drugs, including through private plans and through Medicare Advantage. “We will continue to work with the Trump Administration and Congressional leaders to ensure people living with obesity are covered by Medicare and Medicaid and are no longer left behind.”

Even before the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) eliminated 10,000 jobs on April 1, people who watched the agency closely were concerned about food safety. Under a Biden-era reorganization, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cut millions of dollars for state-level food inspections, effective this year. Inspections of facilities were not keeping up with Congressional directives; the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report in Jan. 2025 urging the FDA to “strengthen inspection efforts to protect the U.S. food supply.” And advocates were concerned because major parts of the landmark 2011 Food Safety Modernization Act—including rules that farmers must monitor the water they spray on vegetables for manure—were being delayed or rolled back. Advertisement “We have always had a problem with having adequate funding and staffing for the level of complication that is food safety in the U.S.,” says Darin Detwiler, a food safety advocate whose toddler son died of E. coli poisoning in 1993 during an outbreak at Jack in the Box restaurants. This lack of funding has coincided with a number of food illness outbreaks in the U.S. in recent years—including, in 2024 alone, an E. coli outbreak linked to slivered onions at McDonald’s that killed one person, an E. coli outbreak linked to organic carrots sold in grocery stores (which also caused a fatality), and a listeria outbreak linked to Boar’s Head deli meat that resulted in 10 deaths. Then came the job cuts. At the FDA, 2,500 people were laid off, including workers in the Human Foods Program, who are tasked with ensuring food safety, and scientists at a product safety lab in San Francisco that tests foods for bacteria. Also gutted were communications staff at both FDA and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), who helped coordinate response to outbreaks and informed both consumers and businesses about recalled food. And hundreds of workers at CDC’s Division of Environmental Health Science and Practice lost their jobs; the organization coordinated government response to an outbreak of lead poisoning in 2023 linked to cinnamon applesauce pouches.