The article criticizes entrenched health bureaucracies, noting that CMS, along with other agencies, has been subject to significant layoffs as part of a broader reform effort aimed at replacing officials with dated practices and conflicts of interest. The criticism frames CMS as emblematic of systemic failures in public health regulation that undermine accountability and responsiveness to public health needs.

The Senate confirmed celebrity doctor Mehmet Oz as the head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services via a party-line vote of 53-45, raising concerns about the increasing politicization of essential healthcare oversight.

Amid a major restructuring driven by Trump-era executive orders, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), along with other HHS agencies, is facing significant workforce reductions. The mass layoffs, part of an initiative to cut administrative costs and DEI-related spending, are intended to save taxpayer money but pose risks to worker rights and the quality of public health services.

Investigative reporting highlighted that years ago, CMS was persuaded to release the names of doctors prescribing drugs through Medicare. This action improved transparency and aided efforts to detect fraud, waste, and abuse within the program.

Dr. Mehmet Oz, a television personality with limited health policy experience and noted financial conflicts of interest, faced Senate committee questioning during his confirmation hearing to lead the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Critics argue that his appointment signals a politically driven decision that may advance Trump administration priorities, potentially endangering vulnerable populations dependent on Medicare and Medicaid.

A Senate confirmation hearing for Dr. Mehmet Oz to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is taking place while a new research brief reveals that Medicare Advantage companies have spent over $330M on lobbying efforts. This context raises alarm over potential corporate influence on the future direction of the agency.

Trump's executive orders signal a restructuring of federal health agencies, with expected politically aligned appointments at CMS. These changes, including the anticipated installation of figures like Abe Sutton and Chris Klomp and the dismantling of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, are viewed as a rollback of progressive health policies.

On January 21, 2025, President Trump issued an executive order mandating that federal contractors certify they do not maintain DEI programs. This move could force Medicare Advantage and Prescription Drug plan providers—who contract with CMS—to eliminate their DEI initiatives, effectively positioning CMS as a conduit for enforcing these controversial requirements.

On November 26, 2024, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services issued a proposed rule outlining extensive reforms for Medicare Advantage and Part D programs. The proposals include expanding coverage for anti‐obesity medications, strengthening prior authorization practices, implementing guardrails for the use of artificial intelligence in healthcare decision-making, and enhancing transparency in provider directories and marketing practices, all aimed at improving equitable access to care.

CMS finalized a national rule setting minimum nurse staffing requirements for Medicare and Medicaid-certified nursing homes, a move praised by progressive lawmakers for improving quality of care and protecting vulnerable seniors against profit-driven industry practices.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has proposed increasing fees and enforcing use of a government-controlled computer platform for accessing Medicare and Medicaid claims data. This move raises concerns among researchers that it will restrict data access essential for independent research and public health policy evaluation.

CMS announced a revision in its telework policy aimed at reducing remote work options for employees in the Baltimore-Washington area, shifting them back to office-based roles starting this fall. This move, which reverses the remote work flexibility granted during the pandemic, has led to significant union backlash, including the filing of two unfair labor practice complaints.