The federal government officially shut down last week, the first time since 2019. While immediate effects on colleges and universities are limited, a prolonged shutdown will significantly disrupt federally funded research, compliance activities, and key public health programs. The House has announced it will remain out of session this week, leaving the Senate to continue working on a path forward. Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Speaker Mike Johnson doubled down that Republicans will not negotiate on extending expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies until Democrats agree to reopen the government, prolonging the stalemate.

What it means for academic public health:

• National Institutes of Health (NIH): Only 25 percent of staff remain on duty. The NIH Clinical Center is open, but grant reviews, travel, and most basic research have stopped, delaying critical projects at ASPPH member institutions.
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC):  Approximately 36 percent of staff remain to handle urgent outbreak response and programs, such as Vaccines for Children, while most other activities are paused.
• Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA): Approximately 47 percent of staff are furloughed. Mandatory-funded programs, such as Community Health Centers, Ryan White HIV/AIDS programs, and the National Health Service Corps, continue, but discretionary activities in maternal health, the health workforce, and behavioral health are disrupted.
• Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS): Medicare and Medicaid payments will continue, but policymaking and oversight functions are halted.

 Why it matters:

• Federal research grants, compliance reviews, and civil rights investigations are paused. Student aid continues, but uncertainty undermines planning for universities and researchers.
• The last shutdown lasted 34 days, delaying $18 billion in federal spending. A prolonged disruption would deepen risks to public health programs, innovation, and training pipelines.
• International students could face visa delays, further straining higher education and research programs that rely on global talent. 

The Department of Education advanced its own proposal last week during the ongoing negotiated rulemaking on the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA). While negotiators and stakeholders had put forward a broader definition of “professional degrees,” including adjacent health fields, the Department of Education introduced a phased-in plan that would eventually limit recognition to just 10 programs in the current regulation. For ASPPH, securing recognition of MPH and DrPH programs remains critical to maintaining access to sufficient federal loans and sustaining the public health workforce.

 Where negotiations stand:

• Department of Education’s two-tiered framework
  • Tier 1 (Transitional Year, July 1, 2026 – June 30, 2027): Institutions may define professional programs, with students retaining access to the $50,000 annual loan cap for the duration of their program.
  • Tier 2 (Starting July 1, 2027): Only programs on the Department of Education’s narrow list (e.g., MD, JD, DDS) would qualify; all others capped at $20,500 annually.
• Stakeholder proposals for broader inclusion, including recognition of adjacent health programs, were not discussed.
• The Department of Education stressed that this compromise will only move forward if consensus is reached; otherwise, an even narrower definition could apply. The RISE committee will meet again in November to discuss these issues further. 

 ASPPH advocacy:

• ASPPH’s letter to the Department of Education, sent in August, urged recognition of MPH and DrPH as professional degrees, citing their accreditation, licensing relevance, and central role in workforce readiness.
• Last week, ASPPH, along with 13 other health professions education associations, spearheaded a Federation of Associations of Schools of the Health Professions (FASHP) sign-on letter urging the Department of Education to adopt a clear, consistent definition of “professional degrees” across health fields by using the Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP) Code 51 to ensure public health and other vital programs are not excluded from higher loan limits.
• ASPPH continues to engage directly with negotiators and Congress to underscore the risk of not defining public health degrees as “professional degrees” under the Department of Education’s regulatory framework for loan limits. 

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recently hosted patient-centered roundtables, highlighting a renewed national commitment to tackling Long COVID. Leaders emphasized the importance of collaboration with patients, providers, and researchers to better understand, prevent, and treat this condition, which continues to affect millions of Americans.

 Why it matters:

• Long COVID is a complex and often invisible illness with wide-ranging impacts on individuals, families, workplaces, and communities.
• The discussions underscored a bipartisan recognition that science-based solutions and patient-centered strategies are essential.
• Senators Roger Marshall (R-KS) and Todd Young (R-IN) joined the sessions, underscoring federal commitment to advancing both research and care.

 New national actions:

• HHS will launch a science-based public awareness campaign to provide patients, families, and employers with clear information on Long COVID symptoms and resources.
• A new open-source resource hub will allow physicians, researchers, and health systems to share clinical insights and best practices for diagnosis and treatment.
• The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) released a new analysis and report, Sources of Health Insurance among Adults with Long COVID, which offers data to inform policy and coverage solutions.

The Trump Administration has introduced a new Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education, offering preferential federal funding access for institutions that agree to sweeping changes in governance, admissions, and campus culture. Universities must now decide if the financial benefits are worth the trade-offs.

 What the Compact Requires:

• Admissions & hiring mandates: Schools would have to end consideration of race, gender identity, or other factors in admissions and faculty hiring. All applicants must take standardized tests, with results reported publicly.
• Campus culture rules: Institutions must maintain “institutional neutrality” on political issues, ensure a “broad spectrum of viewpoints,” and enforce strict free speech protections.
• Financial strings attached: The compact freezes tuition for five years, requires public reporting of graduate earnings, and caps foreign undergraduate enrollment at 15%.

 Reaction from Higher Education:

• Cautious reviews: Some higher education leaders have signaled they are reviewing the compact, while others have raised concerns about its implications for academic freedom.
• Union opposition: National faculty unions called the compact a “loyalty oath,” warning it could usher in thought policing on campuses.
• State-level pushback: Critics argue signing would jeopardize billions in state support and undermine long-standing principles of academic independence.

As part of ASPPH’s support for the Americans for Medical Research Campaign, our members who live or work in Kansas, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, or Utah, are invited to the first of two special virtual training sessions held by Research!America focused on communicating the value of medical research to the public and to policymakers. We encourage you to attend the webinar on October 28 from 12:00—1:00 PM ET.

 Sharpen your advocacy skills: 

• This webinar will cover writing and publishing a letter to the editor, crafting an effective op-ed, producing social media posts, and other best practices for sharing with the public the vital role of research and the role you play.  
• Whether you’re new to outreach or looking to sharpen your skills, this is a great chance to learn and make your voice heard.

 Future opportunities:

• Stay tuned for details on a toolkit, as well as the second round of advocacy trainings, which will focus on policymaker engagement.

While we encourage your sharing of our Policy & Advocacy newsletter by forwarding it, those interested in receiving it can also sign up via this form.