Maryland Democratic U.S. Sens. Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks, along with Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), have taken a stand against the Trump administration’s recent decision to retract $12 billion in public health funding.
The group of bipartisan senators penned a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., calling for an immediate reversal of this decision that threatens essential public health initiatives nationwide.
The administration’s move to cancel the funds, initially designated for states, tribes, and localities to combat health crises like substance abuse and mental health disorders, has led to a lawsuit from 23 states and the District of Columbia. The states took their grievance to federal court in Rhode Island, where Judge Mary S. McElroy issued a temporary injunction against the Department of Health and Human Services.
In their letter, the senators expressed alarm over the sudden withdrawal of funds that were actively supporting critical public health endeavors.
“Last week, without any notice, the Department of Health and Human Services terminated approximately $12 billion in supplemental funding that states and communities were actively putting to use to address urgent needs and protect Americans’ health,” the senators wrote.
They warned that eliminating these resources jeopardizes the nation’s ability to manage ongoing disease outbreaks, including bird flu and measles, and exacerbates the fentanyl crisis.
The letter also declared that the cancellation of the grants risks significant job losses in the public health sector and undermines efforts to modernize health data systems, build laboratory capacity, and enhance testing capabilities for various diseases.
During Trump’s first administration, the senators said the COVID-19 pandemic killed over 500,000 Americans in 2020 alone. They said the pandemic exposed significant weaknesses in the country’s public health infrastructure and preparedness capabilities while also exacerbating mental health and substance use crises.
“Over the course of several bills, Congress appropriated supplemental funding to respond to the pandemic, support behavioral health and recovery efforts, and better prepare for future threats,” they wrote. “States and local jurisdictions across the country have been dutifully spending down funds that were obligated to them, consistent with purposes of the appropriations, the length of time they were made available in law, and the conditions of their grants.”
The senators noted that the department’s stated rationale for terminating the grants is that the pandemic is over.
“However, these funds were not appropriated to only be available or used during the pandemic or the COVID-19 public health emergency,” they argued. “Understanding various needs would go well beyond the specific period of the pandemic, Congress appropriated many of these funds without fiscal year limitation to be available until expended. Congress chose not to condition the availability of the funding on whether there was an active public health emergency or limit the period of availability of funding accordingly.”
Further, the senators argued that the reasoning provided by HHS for terminating funds contradicted the original congressional intent for these appropriations.
“The cause given by the department for terminating these funds,” they wrote, “is completely inconsistent with the purposes for which Congress appropriated these funds.”