Kennedy Jr.'s statements before the Senate Finance Committee on Wednesday revealed a concerning lack of knowledge about the major health programs he'd oversee, should he be confirmed as HHS secretary.

Adam Colborn, JD, of AMCP, discussed how President Trump's rescission of several Biden-era executive orders may impact Medicaid and Medicare initiatives.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. incorrectly said that Medicaid was fully funded by the federal government and that Medicare is a fee-for-service program during a hearing in front of the Senate Finance Committee on Wednesday.

In a confirmation hearing for his nomination to head the $1.7 trillion Department of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. confused two of the massive healthcare programs he would be overseeing as secretary — Medicare and Medicaid — and insisted he was not anti-vaccine.

Funding cuts and regulatory changes could radically reduce Medicaid, the largest program providing medical and health-related services to low-income people, as well as Medicare, federal health insurance for people 65 or older, and some under 65 with certain disabilities or conditions.

If approved, Kennedy will control a $1.7 trillion agency that oversees food and hospital inspections, hundreds of health clinics, vaccine recommendations and health insurance for roughly half the country.

Today is Robert F. Kennedy Jr.‘s confirmation hearing for Secretary of Health and Human Services. NBC News’ Vaughn Hillyard reports and Andrea Mitchell speaks with Dr. Kavita Patel about her concerns about his nomination.

Medicare and Medicaid are major sources of government spending, yet Democrats and Republicans alike support funding the programs.

A new study finds differences in spending on long-term services and supports (LTSS) between people with dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid who are enrolled in Dual-Eligible Special Needs Plans (D-SNPs) compared to other Medicare Advantage (MA) plans.

More dramatic questioning on vaccines in RFK Jr's second confirmation hearing. Bond/Simmons-Duffin/Stone/Webber

The order, widely expected to be challenged in court, could block recipients from being able to receive the treatments and have a chilling effect on providers willing to offer care.