(The Epoch Times)—In his department’s latest move related to vaccine-related reform, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Aug. 1 announced more repeals of federal policy that rewarded hospitals for reporting staff vaccination rates.
Kennedy said in a press release that the policy was coercive and denied informed consent.
“Medical decisions should be made based on one thing: the wellbeing of the person—never on a financial bonus or a government mandate,” Kennedy said. “Doctors deserve the freedom to use their training, follow the science, and speak the truth without fear of punishment.”
Created under the Biden administration’s Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) inpatient payment rule, the policy linked hospital reimbursement to staff vaccination reporting.
“Doctors and other providers should have the same autonomy to choose what’s right for their own individual health care needs as the patients for whom they care. Today’s announcement helps put that power back in their hands,” CMS Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz said in the press release.
The move represents the most recent policy repeal under CMS. These moves are “part of a broader HHS effort to restore medical autonomy in federally funded programs and root out financial and regulatory pressures that incentivize physicians towards pre-scripted medical decisions rather than individualized, evidence-based care,” according to the press release.
Since taking office as HHS secretary, Kennedy has implemented multiple changes regarding vaccines.
The Food and Drug Administration in late May said it planned to limit access to future COVID vaccines to people 65 and older and individuals with underlying health conditions.
The agency also announced it would permit vaccine manufacturers to coordinate in-depth studies to assess the efficacy and safety of COVID vaccines in children and younger, healthy adults.
In recent months, HHS has also dismissed all 17 members of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention vaccine advisory panel, ended the CDC’s COVID-19 vaccine recommendations for pregnant women and healthy children, and ordered the removal of mercury from influenza vaccines.
After it voted to advise officials to stop recommending influenza shots that have mercury, the remade Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) said it plans to look at multiple other vaccines.
Martin Kulldorff, the new chair of ACIP, said on June 26 that one proposal is to notify the CDC that young children should not receive the measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella (MMRV) combination immunization.
The agency instead would recommend that children under the age of 47 months get two separate vaccines: the measles, mumps, rubella shot, and the varicella, or chickenpox, vaccine.
Kulldorff noted that the change would reflect data that indicate the MMRV combination vaccine causes more febrile seizures. The CDC reported the same information in a background paper dated June 25.
A vote on the issue could happen as early as the next ACIP meeting, which is expected to be held in August or September.
Dr. Tina Tan, president of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, said in a statement that “re-examining the childhood vaccine schedule and the use of thimerosal are both politically motivated actions that are not based on science.”
“Raising questions without adequate data casts doubt on vaccination, which can further drive down confidence in vaccines. More than any other medications, vaccines are extensively and constantly reviewed and evaluated,” she added.
During the ACIP meeting, Kulldorff explained that Kennedy had given the committee “a clear mandate to use evidence-based medicine for making vaccine recommendations.”
“Vaccines are not all good or bad. If you think that all vaccines are safe and effective and want them all, or if you think that all vaccines are dangerous and don’t want any of them, then you don’t have much use for us—you already know what you want,” he said.
“But if you wish to know which vaccines are suitable for you and your children and at what ages, then we will provide you with evidence-based recommendations,” he added.
ACIP members who were removed by Kennedy said the panel has “lost credibility.” The former members wrote in a July 30 New England Journal of Medicine commentary that the process for recommending vaccines is “rapidly eroding.”
On Aug. 1, the CDC notified some outside groups that they can no longer participate in panels that review vaccine data and form recommendations for the ACIP.
The panels meet behind closed doors and typically include members of the ACIP, which advises the CDC on vaccines. The workgroups are also composed of experts from liaison organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics.
Groups that employ the experts have been informed that they won’t be part of the workgroups any longer, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the CDC’s parent agency, told The Epoch Times on Aug. 1.
An official said some groups are being removed from the workgroups because of concerns that they have conflicts of interest.
For instance, the American Pharmacists Association lists vaccine manufacturers such as GlaxoSmithKline and Moderna among its corporate supporters.
“Under the old ACIP, outside pressure to align with vaccine orthodoxy limited asking the hard questions. The old ACIP members were plagued by conflicts of interest, influence, and bias. We are fulfilling our promise to the American people to never again allow those conflicts to taint vaccine recommendations,” Andrew Nixon, a spokesman for the HHS, told The Epoch Times in an email.
Last month, six medical organizations—including the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the American College of Physicians (ACP) and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM)—and a pregnant woman filed a lawsuit against HHS and Kennedy in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, alleging that they intentionally removed vaccines and unjustly removed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s entire vaccine advisory panel.
The legal action seeks preliminary and permanent injunctions to stop Kennedy’s new COVID vaccine recommendations and a declaratory judgment declaring the decision unlawful.
Jack Phillips and Zachary Stieber contributed to this report.
Safeguarding Your American Dream: Discover the Power of America First Healthcare
In today’s economy, healthcare costs remain one of the biggest threats to financial stability and family security. Americans work hard to build a better life, yet rising medical expenses can quickly erode savings, force tough trade-offs, and even push families toward debt or bankruptcy. Medical bills continue to rank as the leading cause of personal bankruptcy in the United States, with millions facing underinsurance or unexpected out-of-pocket burdens that no one plans for. Many turn to government-run marketplace plans under the Affordable Care Act, hoping for relief, only to discover that what appears affordable on paper often delivers higher long-term costs, limited real protection, and coverage that may not align with personal values or family needs.
America First Healthcare stands out as a private insurance agency dedicated to helping conservatives and families secure better coverage and better rates through customized, values-aligned options. By conducting free insurance reviews, the agency uncovers hidden gaps in existing policies and connects clients with private alternatives that emphasize personal responsibility, small-government principles, and genuine affordability—often delivering up to 20% savings while providing stronger protection for the American Dream.
The allure of marketplace plans is easy to understand: open enrollment periods, premium tax credits for many households, and the promise of “comprehensive” benefits mandated by law. Yet recent data reveals a different reality, especially after the expiration of enhanced premium subsidies at the end of 2025. Enrollment for 2026 dropped by more than one million people compared to the prior year, with many shifting to lower-tier bronze plans to keep monthly premiums manageable.
These plans feature significantly higher deductibles—averaging around $7,500 nationally—and greater cost-sharing requirements. Families who once paid modest amounts after subsidies now face average premium increases of $65 or more per month, even as they accept plans that leave them responsible for thousands in upfront costs before meaningful coverage kicks in.
High deductibles create a dangerous barrier to care. Studies show that people in such plans are less likely to seek timely treatment for chronic conditions, attend preventive screenings, or fill necessary prescriptions. A seemingly minor illness or injury can balloon into major expenses when patients delay care until problems worsen. For a family of four, a single hospitalization, cancer diagnosis, or unexpected surgery can easily exceed the deductible, triggering coinsurance and out-of-pocket maximums that still leave substantial bills. One recent analysis noted that some proposed changes could push family deductibles toward $31,000 in future years, further exposing households to financial risk.
Beyond the numbers, marketplace plans often carry structural limitations. Coverage for certain critical services may include waiting periods or narrower networks that restrict access to preferred doctors and specialists. Preventive care is required to be covered without cost-sharing, but everything else—lab work, imaging, specialist visits, or ongoing treatment—typically waits until the deductible is met. This reactive model contrasts sharply with the proactive, holistic approach many families prefer, especially those focused on wellness, early intervention, and maintaining health to enjoy life rather than merely reacting to illness.
Values alignment represents another growing concern. Government-influenced plans operate within a framework shaped by federal mandates and political priorities that may not reflect conservative principles of limited government, personal freedom, and ethical stewardship. Families who want to direct their healthcare dollars toward providers and benefits that honor traditional values sometimes find marketplace options feel misaligned, forcing a compromise between affordability and conviction.
Private alternatives, by contrast, offer year-round flexibility without the restrictions of open enrollment windows. Independent agents can shop across a wider range of carriers to design plans tailored to specific family needs—whether that means lower deductibles for frequent medical users, broader provider networks, or add-ons that support wellness and preventive services from day one. Clients frequently report more stable premiums that do not automatically escalate each year, along with genuine cost savings once the full picture of deductibles, copays, and coverage depth is considered.
Take the experience of real families who made the switch. Amanda C. shared that her new plan felt “way better” than what she had through the marketplace. Johnny Y. noted his previous coverage kept increasing annually until he found a more stable private option. Sofia S. expressed delight with her plan and began recommending it to others. These stories echo a common theme: when families move beyond one-size-fits-all government marketplaces, they often discover customized protection that better safeguards both health and finances.
Founder Jordan Sarmiento’s own journey underscores the stakes. In 2021, a six-day hospitalization generated a $95,000 bill. Under a well-structured private “Conservative Care Coverage” plan, his out-of-pocket responsibility would have been just $500. That stark difference illustrates how thoughtful planning and private options can prevent a medical event from becoming a financial catastrophe.
Practical steps exist for anyone questioning their current coverage. Start with a no-obligation review of your existing policy to identify gaps—high deductibles, limited critical-care benefits, or escalating premiums. Compare total projected costs (premiums plus potential out-of-pocket expenses) rather than monthly premiums alone. Consider family health history, anticipated needs, and lifestyle priorities. Private agencies can present side-by-side options that include stronger wellness incentives, broader access, and plans built on shared values of self-reliance and freedom.
In an era when healthcare inflation continues to outpace general cost-of-living increases, relying solely on marketplace solutions carries growing risk. Families who proactively explore private alternatives frequently achieve meaningful savings while gaining peace of mind that their coverage truly works when needed most.
America First Healthcare makes this exploration straightforward through its free review process. Families and individuals receive personalized guidance to close coverage holes, reduce unnecessary expenses, and secure plans that align with conservative principles—protecting wallets, health, and the American Dream without government overreach. Many who complete a review discover they can enjoy better benefits for less, often saving up to 20% while gaining the customization and stability that marketplace plans struggle to deliver.
Ultimately, protecting your family’s future requires looking beyond the marketing of “affordable” government options. By understanding the long-term costs hidden in high deductibles, shifting coverage tiers, and values mismatches, Americans can make empowered choices. Private, values-driven insurance offers a smarter path—one that rewards diligence, supports wellness, and delivers real security. For those ready to move beyond the limitations of traditional marketplace plans, a simple review can reveal options designed to serve families, not bureaucracies. The American Dream thrives when individuals and families retain control over their healthcare decisions, and thoughtful private coverage plays a vital role in making that possible.