Hello, Thursday! Today's newsletter is 1,127 words or a 4.5-minute read.

Abortion politics is colliding with ongoing efforts in Congress to extend enhanced subsidies for Affordable Care Act coverage.

Why it matters: Renewing the premium subsidies even for a year beyond their Dec. 31 expiration was always going to be politically tricky because of the cost. Now there's the added complication of restricting any funds from being used on abortions.

Driving the news: Anti-abortion groups and some GOP lawmakers are pushing to attach the Hyde Amendment, which bans federal funding for abortion in most instances, to any subsidy extension.

• Democrats say the ACA already has a mechanism to segregate taxpayer funds so they're not used to pay for the procedure and accuse Republicans of using the debate as a backdoor way to expand abortion restrictions.
• Without a resolution, premiums for more than 20 million ACA enrollees will increase over 75% on average if the subsidies expire, according to KFF.

What they're saying: A coalition of anti-abortion groups led by Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America urged lawmakers this week to include a "complete application" of the Hyde Amendment to any subsidy extension, dismissing the requirements already in place as an "accounting gimmick."

• "Any funding for Obamacare … is forced taxpayer funding of abortion — unless such funds are definitively limited to coverage that excludes elective abortion," the groups said in a letter.
• "Any action on ACA subsidies must include strong protections for Hyde," Gabby Wiggins, a spokesperson for Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.), told Axios. Daines is a leader on anti-abortion issues in the Senate.

The other side: "You're not going to be able to make progress on that if you start handing out right-wing trophies," Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, told Axios.

Context: Debate about the Hyde Amendment helped torpedo a bipartisan effort to shore up the ACA in 2018.

• The issue also almost stopped the ACA from becoming law in the first place, before Democrats worked out a delicate funding compromise among themselves.

Keep reading

A federal judge yesterday temporarily froze a Trump administration policy that restricted undocumented immigrants' access to community health centers, Head Start and other social services.

Why it matters: The decision means access to benefits will remain unchanged as a challenge to the new restrictions moves through the courts.

What it says: District Judge Mary McElroy wrote that if the plan takes effect, immigration verification will be necessary to access emergency services, homeless shelters, soup kitchens, mental health crisis programs and more.

New York Attorney General Letitia James, who sued the administration over the policy with 20 other Democrat state AGs, declared victory.

• The Health and Human Services Department "disagrees with the court's decisions and is evaluating next steps," HHS communications director Andrew Nixon told Axios in an email.

Catch up quick: Undocumented immigrants are already prevented from accessing most federal benefits.

• But HHS in July took the additional step of rescinding a 1998 notice that defined certain publicly funded programs like free preschool and accessible health clinics in a way that allowed undocumented immigrants to use them.
• Undocumented immigrants paid $55.8 billion in federal taxes in 2023, according to the American Immigration Council.

American kids need less therapy and mental health diagnoses and more "natural sources of mental well-being" like strong family, nutrition and fitness, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Education Secretary Linda McMahon wrote in the Washington Post.

Why it matters: The opinion piece yesterday was latest in a series of broadsides Kennedy has delivered at pediatric mental health professionals, whom he has long blamed for overprescribing psychiatric drugs.

• Kennedy claimed without evidence that antidepressants could have contributed to the mass shooting that killed two children and wounded 18 other worshippers at a Minnesota church last month.

Driving the news: The op-ed comes a day after the release of the MAHA Commission strategy report, which calls for forming an HHS working group to scrutinize overprescription of pharmaceuticals for children's mental health.

• It also came on the heels of Illinois becoming the first state requiring universal student mental-health screenings — something Kennedy and McMahon called "terribly misguided."

Instead of turning to therapists, adults should address screen and social media addiction, low-nutrition food and "regimented, indoor lifestyles that don't provide exercise and sunlight," Kennedy and McMahon wrote.

Between the lines: Concerns about students' mental health became a cultural flashpoint as some parents and activists questioned the role and influence of school-based counselors.

• Mental health advocacy groups say screenings are as important as those for vision and hearing and are done in schools because that's where kids are.
• "Parents and schools partner every day in our country to make sure children have the support they need when they're struggling. We should support that, not politicize it," said Bill Smith, CEO of Inseparable, a bipartisan group.

Go VIP at Media Trends Live and walk away with more than just a seat.

Your ticket includes Axios Media Trends Executive — the membership built for industry leaders:

• Monthly executive briefings.
• Unlocking stories from behind the paywall.
• Trusted, exclusive reporting from Sara Fischer.

👉 Act now. VIP is limited and moving fast.

The prospect of a White House clampdown on imports of Chinese experimental drugs is pitting U.S. drugmakers against a group of politically connected biotech investors and corporate executives, per the New York Times.

Why it matters: A draft executive order that's been circulated with the investors could upend the way big drug companies increasingly buy the rights to treatments developed in China for cancer, obesity, heart disease and other ailments.

• The drugmakers argue that import restrictions could deprive U.S. patients of promising cures.
• But they're up against powerful investors — including tech billionaire Peter Thiel, Google co-founder Sergey Brin and the Koch family — who have hard-to-sell stakes in fledgling U.S. companies that compete against Chinese biotechs, per the Times.

Driving the news: The draft order calls for boosting U.S. production of drugs widely made in China, including antibiotics and acetaminophen. It also envisions tax incentives for companies that bring manufacturing of those drugs back to the U.S.

• But most of the lobbying has been around language that would impose first-time national security reviews on deals in which U.S. drugmakers buy rights to experimental treatments from Chinese companies, according to the report.

The White House told the Times is is not actively considering the draft order. "Safeguarding our national and economic security is a top priority for the administration," spokesperson Kush Desai said.