Science
The loss of healthcare subsidies force Californians to pay more or go without
For Mikayla Tencer, being self-employed already meant juggling higher taxes, irregular income and the constant pressure of finding her own health insurance. This year, it also meant rethinking how often she could afford to see a doctor.
The 29-year-old content creator in San Francisco paid $168 a month last year for a Blue Shield health plan through Covered California. This year — without enhanced federal subsidies that expired at the end of December — that same plan would have cost $299 a month, with higher copays.
“People assume that because I’m young, I can just pick the cheapest plan and not worry about it,” Tencer said. “But I do need regular care, especially for mental health.”
Tencer is among tens of thousands of middle-class Californians facing steep increases in health insurance costs after Congress allowed enhanced federal subsidies for Affordable Care Act plans to expire Dec. 31.
Those extra subsidies were enacted in 2021 as part of temporary, pandemic-era relief, boosting financial help for people buying coverage on state-run insurance marketplaces such as Covered California. The law also expanded eligibility to people earning more than 400% of the federal poverty level, about $62,600 for a single person and $128,600 for a family of four.
Mikayla Tencer records a TikTok video featuring eyeliners. Her blog showcases Bay Area attractions and local businesses.
(Paul Kuroda/For The Times)
With the expiration of the enhanced subsidies, people above that income threshold no longer receive federal assistance, and many who still qualify are seeing sharply higher premiums and out-of-pocket costs. On top of the loss of the extra federal benefits, the average Covered California premium this year rose by 10.3% because of fast-rising medical costs.
Jessica Altman, executive director of Covered California, said that about 160,000 Californians lost their subsidies when the enhanced federal assistance expired because their incomes were higher than 400% of the federal poverty level.
To lower her monthly bill, Tencer switched to the cheapest Covered California option, bringing her premium down to about $161 a month. But the savings came with new costs. Primary care and mental health visits now carry $60 copays, up from $35.
When she showed up for a psychiatric appointment to manage her ADHD and generalized anxiety disorder, she said, she learned her doctor was out of network.
“That visit would have been $35 before,” she said. “Now it’s $180 out of pocket.”
Because of the higher costs, Tencer said she has cut therapy from weekly to biweekly sessions.
“The subsidies made it possible for me to be self-employed in the first place,” Tencer said. “Without them, I’m seriously thinking about applying for full-time jobs, even though the market is terrible.”
For another self-employed Californian, the increase was even more dramatic.
Krista, a 42-year-old photographer and videographer in Santa Cruz County, relies on costly monthly intravenous treatments for a rare blood disorder. She asked that her full name not be used but shared her insurance and medical documents with The Times.
Last year, she paid about $285 a month for a Covered California plan. In late December, she received a notice showing her premium would rise to more than $1,200 a month. The rise was due to her loss of federal subsidies, as well as a 23% increase in the premium charged by Blue Shield.
“It terrified me. I thought, how am I ever going to retire?” she asked. “What’s the point?”
Krista ultimately enrolled in a plan costing about $522 a month, still nearly double what she had been paying, with a $5,000 deductible. She said she cannot downgrade to a cheaper plan because her clinic bills her treatment to insurance at roughly $30,000 a month, according to medical statements.
To cut costs and preserve the ability to save for retirement and eventually afford a place of her own, Krista decided to move into an RV on private land. The decision came the same week she received notices showing a rent increase and a steep jump in her health insurance premiums.
Mikayla Tencer, a marketing influencer, with her elder dog, “Lucky” at Alamo Square Park.
(Paul Kuroda/For The Times)
Krista said she had been planning for more than a year to find a long-term living situation that would enable her to live independently, rather than continue paying more for an apartment.
“Nobody asks to be sick,” Krista said. “No one should have their life ruined because they get diagnosed with a disease or break a leg.”
Although overall enrollment in Covered California this year has held steady, Altman said, she worries that more people will drop coverage as bills with the higher premiums arrive in the mail.
Those fears are already playing out.
Jayme Wernicke, a 34-year-old receptionist and single mother in Chico who earns about $49,000 a year, said she was transferred from Medi-Cal to a Covered California Anthem Blue Cross plan at the end of 2023. Her premium rose from about $30 a month to $60, then jumped to roughly $230 after the subsidies expired.
“For them to raise my health insurance almost 400% is just insane to me,” Wernicke said.
Her employer, a small family-owned business, does not offer health insurance. Her plan does not include dental or vision care and, she said, barely covers medical costs.
“At a certain point, it just feels completely counterintuitive,” she said. “Either way, I’m losing.”
Wernicke dropped her own coverage and plans to pay for care with cash, calculating that the state tax penalty is less than the cost of premiums. Her daughter remains insured.
Two other Californian residents told The Times that they also decided to go without coverage because they could no longer afford it. They declined to provide their full names, citing concerns about financial and professional consequences.
Under California law, residents without coverage face an annual penalty of at least $900 per adult and $450 per child.
One, a 29-year-old self-employed publicist in Los Angeles requires medication for epilepsy. Last year, she paid about $535 a month for a silver plan through Covered California. This year, the same plan would have cost $823.
After earning about $55,000 last year, she calculated that paying for care out of pocket would cost far less. Her epilepsy medication costs about $175 every three months without insurance, and her annual doctor visits total roughly $250.
“All of that combined is still far less than paying hundreds of dollars every month,” she said.
Another, April, a 58-year-old small-business owner in San Francisco, canceled her insurance in December after her quoted premium rose to $1,151 a month for a bronze plan and $1,723 for a silver plan, just for herself. Last year, April said she paid $566 for both her and her daughter. This year, her daughter’s premium alone jumped from $155 to $424.
The bronze plan also carried a $3,500 deductible for lab work and specialist visits, meaning she would have had to pay thousands of dollars out of pocket before coverage kicked in, on top of the higher monthly premium.
“The subsidies were absolutely what allowed me to sustain my business,” April said. “They were helping me sustain my financial world and have affordable care.”
She rushed to complete medical tests before dropping coverage and hopes to go a year uninsured.
“The scariest part is not having catastrophic coverage,” she said. “If something happens, it can be millions of dollars.”
Tencer, the content creator in San Francisco, believes that in order to make the nation healthier, affordable healthcare should be universal.
“Our government should be providing it.” she said. “People can’t go to the doctor for routine checkups, they can’t get things checked out early, and they can’t access the resources they need.”
Science
Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant gets final go-ahead to run through 2030
The federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Thursday renewed Diablo Canyon’s license to operate, ensuring that California’s last remaining nuclear facility will continue to run through at least 2030.
The plant was originally slated to close in 2025, but lawmakers extended the deadline by five years in 2022, citing ongoing need for power from a plant that provides more than 8% of the state’s electricity.
The approval from the body that regulates nuclear reactors and waste marks the final hurdle in Pacific Gas & Electric’s multiyear journey to gather the necessary state and federal permits to keep its facility online.
In December, PG&E received a key permit from the California Coastal Commission by agreeing to give up 12,000 acres of nearby land for conservation in exchange for the loss of marine life caused by the plant’s operations.
Another key step took place in February when the Central Coast Regional Water Board approved waste discharge permits for the plant and granted a certification under the Clean Water Act, the last step required before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission could issue its final approval.
The license renewal from the commission allows the plant to remain running for 20 years, although extending it past 2030 would require additional action from the California Legislature.
“Today’s milestone reminds us that when discipline, science, responsibility and vision all come together, we can build an energy future that is both sustainable and secure,” said NRC Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation acting Director Jeremy Groom at a signing ceremony.
Already this year some lawmakers and regulators have expressed interest in extending the plant’s life through 2045, citing growing electricity demand and the plant’s central role in helping the state meet its climate goals by providing carbon-free power to the grid.
Groups that oppose the plant want to make sure that doesn’t happen. Last week, the California Coastkeeper Alliance filed a petition asking the State Water Resources Control Board to throw out the facility’s water discharge permit. The group alleged that the Central Coast Regional Water Board illegally allowed the facility to continue operating without technology required under the federal Clean Water Act to protect marine life.
Other groups have petitioned the board to limit Diablo Canyon’s Clean Water Act certificate to 2030, rather than 2045.
Science
Video: How the Artemis Astronauts Plan to Live in Space for 10 Days
new video loaded: How the Artemis Astronauts Plan to Live in Space for 10 Days
transcript
transcript
How the Artemis Astronauts Plan to Live in Space for 10 Days
On the Artemis II mission, four astronauts will work, exercise and sleep in a capsule that is about the size of two minivans for 10 days. In April 2025, National Geographic worked with NASA to film the astronauts at an Orion space capsule model in Houston.
-
“Did y’all really get dibs on spots?” “She thinks.” “I know.” “Shotgun.” “Yeah, I basically called shotgun.” “We’re thinking maybe one of the sleeping bags will be kind of laid out, like, around this bend right here. So somebody’s going to have a head maybe over here, and then the feet all the way down there by the ECLSS wall.” “And Dre, don’t forget that I’ve already claimed the tunnel here. Except you’re not supposed to sleep with your head in there because of carbon dioxide. So I’m going to be hanging like a bat, is my plan. But I won’t even know it because there’s no gravity.” “Here, we’ve got both the toilet area and the exercise device on Orion. So this is the flywheel exercise device. We’ll start here. The toilet is right below it. So underneath me right now is the hygiene bay. And then it kind of looks like a rower. So you have a strap here and a hand-held bar or a harness, depending on what type of exercise you’re doing, and the way you use it is actually in this direction. So this is one of the things that we have to think in a 0g environment for, that the person who’s exercising on this will have their head coming up in the direction of the docking tunnel. And if you’re a really tall person — let’s say, the largest Canadian that we have — and you’re assigned to this mission, your head is going to extend all the way toward the docking hatch.” “That space is going to feel bigger on orbit when we’re floating. And then going up to the, again, the forward portion is what’s up now. But going forward and looking down to the deck, while this may be an awkward space to talk about here on Earth, where we have the normal pull of gravity, when we get into weightlessness, those two walls are going to be spaces that we work in, and that we use more than we do here when we’re on Earth.”

By Jamie Leventhal
April 2, 2026
Science
Federal health and environmental agencies to study microplastics and pharmaceuticals in drinking water
U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin announced new initiatives to tackle microplastics in the human body and drinking water on Thursday.
Kennedy said the government will create a $144-million program called STOMP, for the systematic targeting of microplastics.
“We are focusing on three questions, what is in the body, what’s causing harm, and how do we remove it?” Kennedy said.
Zeldin said the environmental agency will add microplastics and pharmaceuticals to its list of concerning chemicals in drinking water.
“For the first time in the program’s history, EPA is designating both microplastics and pharmaceuticals as priority contaminant groups,” he said.
The two Cabinet members sat a table before a crowded room at EPA headquarters in Washington, flanked by microplastic researchers, including Marcus Ericsson, an environmental scientist and co-founder of the antiplastic Five Gyres Institute; Matthew Campin, a biomedical scientist at the University of New Mexico; and Leo Trasande, a pediatrician and public policy expert at New York University’s Grossman School of Medicine and Wagner School of Public Service.
On either side of the table were two large posters that read “Confronting Microplastics” in capital letters.
Zeldin had been under fire by the movement known as MAHA, or Make America Health Again, in recent months over federal plans to loosen restrictions on harmful chemicals, and approve new pesticides — including two that contain what are internationally recognized as “forever chemicals,” linked to serious health risks.
Kennedy, who is the political face of the MAHA movement, has also been criticized for capitulating on issues he once embraced. In February, President Trump signed an executive order to shore up production of the herbicide glyphosate, for “national security and defense reasons.”
Kennedy publicly supported that decision and in a social media post said that while herbicides and pesticides were “toxic by design” and “put Americans at risk,” the food supply depends on them.
Glyphosate, known commercially as Roundup, has long been a target of the MAHA movement. Produced by Bayer, which acquired the original manufacturer, Monsanto, in 2018, the herbicide has been the subject of tens of thousands of lawsuits, many from users who claim to have developed non-Hodgkins lymphoma as a result of exposure.
Antiplastic advocates applauded Thursday’s announcement.
“The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has taken an important first step to regulate microplastics in drinking water,” said Judith Enck, a former regional director of the agency and the founder of Beyond Plastics, an antiplastic waste environmental group based in Bennington, Vt. She urged the regulators to “move rapidly,” not only to regulate the plastic in drinking water, but also prevent it from getting into drinking water.
So, too, did Kimberly Wise White, vice president of regulatory and scientific affairs at the American Chemistry Council, the trade group for the chemical industry.
“We support science-driven monitoring of microplastics in drinking water and research to better understand potential impacts,” White said in a statement.
Others, however, seemed dubious.
There is reason to be concerned about microplastics in drinking water, said Erik Olson, strategic director of health for the Natural Resources Defense Council, “but the EPA’s actions speak louder than its words. The Trump EPA is trying to scrap key PFAS standards and just two weeks ago said it wouldn’t issue any new protections for toxins in drinking water. So, which is it?”
In 2022, California became the first government in the world to require microplastics testing for drinking water. The state has not yet begun reporting its results.
Blair Robertson, a spokesman for the State Water Resources Control Board, said regulators are “working on it and being very deliberate as they proceed and try to quantify how microplastics are impacting drinking water.”
A report was expected in 2025, but has not yet been issued.
Micro- and nanoplastics have been found everywhere scientists have looked. They’ve been found in human organs and tissue, such as brains, livers, placentas and testicles. They’ve also been detected in blood, breast milk and even meconium — an infant’s first stool. In addition, they are prevalent throughout the environment — in alpine snow, deep sea sediment and drinking water.
On March 31, a coalition of MAHA groups associated with Kennedy sent a letter to Zeldin requesting the Trump administration halt permitting for new plastics manufacturing plants and step up monitoring of microplastics in drinking water.
In December, Zeldin told MAHA groups he would include measures on plastics as part of the agency’s agenda, after several prominent MAHA groups called for him to be fired. They said he was too close to chemical companies.
-
Culture1 week agoWil Wheaton Discusses ‘Stand By Me’ and Narrating ‘The Body’ Audiobook
-
South-Carolina5 days agoSouth Carolina vs TCU predictions for Elite Eight game in March Madness
-
Miami, FL1 week agoJannik Sinner’s Girlfriend Laila Hasanovic Stuns in Ab-Revealing Post Amid Miami Open
-
Culture1 week agoWhat Happens When We Die? This Wallace Stevens Poem Has Thoughts.
-
Minneapolis, MN1 week agoBoy who shielded classmate during school shooting receives Medal of Honor
-
Vermont5 days ago
Skier dies after fall at Sugarbush Resort
-
Education1 week agoVideo: Transgender Athletes Barred From Women’s Olympic Events
-
Politics5 days agoTrump’s Ballroom Design Has Barely Been Scrutinized