by Jennifer Shutt, Arkansas Advocate
July 22, 2025

WASHINGTON — The heads of several organ transplant organizations testified before Congress on Tuesday that they are working to earn back the public’s trust following the release of a scathing report.

In a rare example of bipartisanship on Capitol Hill, both Republicans and Democrats on a U.S. House Energy and Commerce subcommittee expressed concern with several cases and interest in enhanced oversight of the entities that manage organ donation. 

The central issue, according to testimony from witnesses and comments from lawmakers, is that organ donations increasingly come from people experiencing circulatory death as opposed to brain death.

Dr. Raymond Lynch, chief of the Organ Transplant Branch at the Health Resources and Services Administration within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said that “historically that was a less common pathway,” but now represents about 50% of all donations.

“This is complex care. It’s technically demanding, but it’s knowable and fixable,” Lynch said. “This is something that can be done safely.”

Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., detailed a case in his home state where a man began showing signs of “improved neurological function” after his family had agreed to let doctors remove his organs for donations.

The case later became the subject of an oversight investigation and a corrective action plan from the Health Resources and Services Administration that focused on the behavior of the Organ Procurement Organization for that region.

The HRSA reports states that the man arrived at “a hospital in northern Kentucky with cardiovascular collapse after an unintentional overdose of methamphetamine.” As part of his treatment, health care providers administered three different sedatives.

The report states that while the patient “did survive the events surrounding the attempted withdrawal of life support and organ procurement, the repeated assessment by (Kentucky Organ Donor Affiliates) that it is ‘satisfied and confident in the donation process’ is incongruous with the facts of the medical record.”

Guthrie said the report showed a “deeply concerning pattern” and that the committee wanted “to have an open and honest discussion about these failures.”

“HRSA determined that of the 351 documented cases reviewed in this investigation, 103 or nearly 30% had concerning features,” Guthrie said. “HRSA found concerning patterns that included failures to recognize increased neurological function in patients who were previously identified as candidates for organ donation, failure to work collaboratively with medical teams and failure to safeguard decision making or follow best practices.”

The United States has more than 50 different Organ Procurement Organizations responsible for different geographic areas. They determine which patients are eligible to donate organs. They are not supposed to be involved in determining when a potential donor is declared dead by a hospital’s medical team.

Guthrie said he didn’t intend to change his status as an organ donor but emphasized the need for improvement.

‘Troubling record’

Lynch declined to go into detail during the public hearing but said HRSA has several ongoing investigations into potential wrongdoing within the organ procurement system. He also said that anyone wishing to file a complaint can do so on the agency’s website. 

“There are numerous cases that have been reported to HRSA,” Lynch testified. “We have ongoing reviews and we have made referrals to partner agencies. The corrective action plan that we have for Kentucky, as we were hearing about these other cases in other areas, also includes a plan to make the (Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network) make this safe nationwide.”

New York Democratic Rep. Paul Tonko asked Lynch about a section in the HRSA report that “identified a troubling record of the Kentucky OPOs communication with patient families.”

“In one case, the OPO employees seeking consent to begin preparation for organ donation spoke with the patient’s brother, who had a cognitive impairment. This individual was described as, and I quote, childlike, in case records,” Tonko said. “In a separate case, the OPO spoke with two family members who were, quote, clearly inebriated.”

Lynch said the records HRSA reviewed during its investigation didn’t explain why that happened, but he said the inability “to consider the humanity and the autonomy of these patients and their families is troubling.”

Tonko said the HRSA report indicated that OPO staff appeared to have used “a manipulative and overly aggressive strategy” in the Kentucky case.

“The sister of the Kentucky patient has said that she was never told that her brother had started to wake up after she had given consent for donation,” Tonko said. “She says she only found out years later.”

Corrective plan for Kentucky

Lynch said the corrective action plan for the Kentucky Organ Procurement Organization, formerly known as Kentucky Organ Donor Affiliates but now called Network for Hope, requires its staff to keep families updated and ensures that “if at any point, either the health care team or the family has a concern, that there is a pause in the process to allow for adjudication of that.”

He also indicated there could be more understanding in how staff handle discussions about whether to donate a person’s organs.

“This is, as you pointed out, one of the most horrible and challenging times in a family’s life,” Lynch said. “The events that lead to somebody becoming a potential organ donor are usually sudden and tragic. Interacting with a grieving family, helping them to make educated decisions, providing compassionate and fair information and a complete sense of what the procurement process will look like, those are skills.

“They are skills that some OPOs clearly perform better than others, but they are skills for which the OPO is responsible.”

Organization welcomes oversight

Barry Massa, chief executive officer at Network for Hope — an Organ Procurement Organization that covers Kentucky as well as parts of Indiana, Ohio and West Virginia — testified before the committee that the HRSA report’s contents “are serious and alarming.”

“That case was very complex, and during a very complex time,” Massa said. “If you recall, in 2021 we were in the midst of COVID, and I think that impacted the communication that we had between our hospital and our team. And while I’m not using that as an excuse, I do think it added to the complexity of it.”

Massa testified under oath that the organization never wants to repeat what happened in that case, plans to follow the recommendations detailed in the HRSA report and welcomes more oversight from Congress.

Network for Hope, he said, had also implemented some changes of its own, including a checklist for nurses and physicians to use.

Massa later clarified that “while OPOs are the ones determining if a patient is suitable for donation, as far as determining death, that is actually done by the physician.”

Split responsibility

Other members of the panel explained that the oversight of organ procurement and donation is fragmented and needs improvement.

Maureen McBride, chief executive officer at the United Network for Organ Sharing, testified that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has oversight over hospitals and the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network “has oversight under HRSA of the transplant hospitals, the OPOs and the histocompatibility labs.”

“That split in oversight does leave room for communication gaps and opportunities for further improvement,” McBride said. “So I do think consolidation of the entire transplant ecosystem under a single government regulatory body could provide benefits to the transplant community.”

Dr. Richard Formica, former president of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network Board of Directors, said the process includes “two domains of responsibility” and suggested they be moved under one oversight agency.

Formica said lawmakers could figure out a way that after a patient is identified as a potential organ donor, there be one set of procedures to follow on both the hospital side, which is currently managed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and the organ donation system, managed by HRSA.

“We’d have one set of oversight. We’d have one set of protocols,” Formica said. “We could work on those protocols and then we can act on those protocols and refine them as they go forward, instead of refining one and having to wait for the other one, and back and forth.”

Arkansas Advocate is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arkansas Advocate maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sonny Albarado for questions: info@arkansasadvocate.com.

The post Organ donation groups seek to reassure US House panel after ‘deeply concerning’ report appeared first on arkansasadvocate.com

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Centrist

The content reports on a U.S. House subcommittee hearing about organ donation oversight, highlighting bipartisan concern and efforts for enhanced regulation. It presents factual testimony from officials and lawmakers from both parties without favoring a particular ideological stance. The tone remains neutral, focusing on transparency, accountability, and practical improvements in the organ donation system. The coverage avoids partisan framing and emphasizes collaboration across the political spectrum, reflecting a balanced, centrist approach to a complex healthcare oversight issue.

by Jennifer Shutt, Arkansas Advocate
July 21, 2025

WASHINGTON — Republicans’ “big, beautiful” law will add $3.394 trillion to deficits during the next decade and lead 10 million people to lose access to health insurance, according to an analysis released Monday by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

The updated assessment of the sweeping tax and spending cuts law came weeks after nearly every GOP lawmaker voted to approve the legislation ahead of a self-imposed Fourth of July deadline. The law made permanent the 2017 tax cuts from President Donald Trump’s first term and provided billions to carry out his plans of mass deportations, an immigration crackdown and increased defense spending.

Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, wrote in a statement that it is “still hard to believe that policymakers just added $4 trillion to” deficits after Republican lawmakers “have spent months or years appropriately fuming about our unsustainable fiscal situation.”

“This is a dangerous game we are playing,” MacGuineas wrote. “It has been going on for years, and it was brought to new levels with this bill. And it is time to stop.” 

CBO released numerous reports throughout the months-long process showing how various parts of the bill would affect federal spending and health care access, but the scorekeeper needed additional time to evaluate changes Republicans made during the last few days of debate.

The latest figures are similar to a preliminary report CBO released earlier this month projecting the final version of the package, which underwent considerable changes in the Senate, would likely lead to a $3.4 trillion increase in deficits between 2025 and 2034.

That total was significantly higher than the $2.4 trillion increase in deficits CBO expected the original House version of the bill would have had during the next decade.

Health spending to fall by more than $1 trillion

Republicans’ numerous changes to health programs, predominantly Medicaid, will reduce federal spending during the next decade by $1.058 trillion.

The law made more than a dozen changes to the state-federal health program for lower income individuals and certain people with disabilities, though some of those have larger budget impacts than others.

Language barring Medicaid spending from going to Planned Parenthood for one year would actually increase federal deficits during the 10-year window by $53 million.

The CBO score shows that policy change would decrease federal spending by $44 million this fiscal year and another $31 million during the next fiscal year, before increasing deficits by $91 million during fiscal year 2027 and continuing.

That section of the law is on hold for the moment after a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order earlier this month that required the Trump administration to continue paying Planned Parenthood for routine health care coverage for Medicaid enrollees.

Federal law for decades has barred the federal government from spending taxpayer dollars for abortion services with limited exceptions, so the one-year prohibition on Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood would have blocked patients enrolled in the program from going to their clinics for routine health appointments, like annual physicals and cancer screenings.

The CBO report didn’t include a state-by-state breakdown of the effects of the health care changes in the law, but the agency is expected to release more detailed analysis of the health impacts in the coming weeks.

Nutrition assistance cuts

Apart from Medicaid, two large projected deficit reductions in the law come in the agriculture title’s sections on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

A provision requiring states to pay for some portion of SNAP benefits starting in fiscal 2028 would save the federal government between $5.7 billion and $6 billion per year, totalling just less than $41 billion for the first seven years it will be in effect.

And new work requirements for SNAP would result in $68.6 billion less in federal spending over the 10 years starting in fiscal 2026, the CBO projected.

Federal student loan program

Republicans’ streamlining of the federal student loan program is projected to reduce federal spending in the next decade by $270.5 billion.

As part of a sweeping overhaul of higher education, the law limits repayment options for borrowers with any loans made on or after July 1, 2026, to either a standard repayment plan or an income-based repayment plan.

Extension and expansion of tax cuts

The extension of Trump’s 2017 tax law, plus new tax breaks, will cost $4.472 trillion over the next decade, according to the latest CBO score.

The United States collects the majority of its revenue from individual taxpayers, and the continuation of lowered income tax brackets, plus an increased standard deduction, will comprise the bulk of lost revenue over 10 years, adding up to $3.497 trillion.

Trump also campaigned on several other tax cut promises, including no tax on tips and overtime, as well as no tax on car loan interest. The temporary provisions come with stipulations and will end in 2029. Together they will cost $151.868 billion.

The child tax credit increases under the new law to $2,200, up from $2,000, though lawmakers did not increase the amount lower income families can receive as a tax refund. The CBO estimates the bumped-up tax credit will cost $626.345 billion over the next decade.

Lawmakers offset some costs of the bill by repealing clean energy tax credits, including ending tax credits for personal and commercial electric vehicles, nixing energy efficiency improvement credits for homeowners, and terminating clean electricity production credits. In all, Republicans saved $487.909 billion from axing the measures meant to address the effects of climate change.

Jacob Fischler, Shauneen Miranda and Ashley Murray contributed to this report.

Last updated 3:15 p.m., Jul. 21, 2025

Arkansas Advocate is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arkansas Advocate maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sonny Albarado for questions: info@arkansasadvocate.com.

The post Trump tax law runs up deficit by $3.4T, throws 10 million off health insurance, CBO says appeared first on arkansasadvocate.com

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Right

This article presents detailed coverage of a major Republican-backed tax and spending bill, emphasizing its fiscal impact and policy changes with largely factual language. The inclusion of critical analysis from nonpartisan sources like the Congressional Budget Office and fiscal watchdog groups highlights the bill’s substantial deficit increase and effects on health care and social programs, which may be viewed critically by fiscal conservatives and progressives alike. The tone is measured and focused on the legislative and budgetary consequences without overt editorializing, aligning the piece with a center-right bias that reports GOP initiatives seriously but notes associated criticisms and trade-offs.

SUMMARY: A federal judge is reviewing a lawsuit challenging Arkansas’ new law requiring the Ten Commandments to be displayed in every public school classroom. Parents from Fayetteville, Springdale, Bentonville, and Siloam Springs school districts seek to block the law before it takes effect on August 5th. Represented by the ACLU, they argue the law violates religious freedom by favoring one religion and interfering with diverse faiths. The state contends the law highlights the Ten Commandments’ historical significance, not religion. Any court ruling blocking the law would only apply to the plaintiffs’ districts. The judge plans a decision before August 5th.

Judge Reviewing Request For 10 Commandments To Not Be Displayed This School Year

Subscribe to 40/29 on YouTube now for more: http://bit.ly/PTElbK

Get more Northwest Arkansas news: http://www.4029tv.com
Like us: http://facebook.com/4029news
Follow us: http://twitter.com/4029news
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/4029news/

Source