By Daniel Chang, KFF Health News

Social media’s effects on the mental health of young people are not well understood. That hasn’t stopped Congress, state legislatures, and the U.S. surgeon general from moving ahead with age bans and warning labels for YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram.

But the emphasis on fears about social media may cause policymakers to miss the mental health benefits it provides teenagers, say researchers, pediatricians, and the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

In June, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, the nation’s top doctor, called for warning labels on social media platforms. The Senate approved the bipartisan Kids Online Safety Act and a companion bill, the Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act, on July 30. And at least 30 states have pending legislation relating to children and social media — from age bans and parental consent requirements to new digital and media literacy courses for K-12 students.

Most research suggests that some features of social media can be harmful: Algorithmically driven content can distort reality and spread misinformation; incessant notifications distract attention and disrupt sleep; and the anonymity that sites offer can embolden cyberbullies.

But social media can also be helpful for some young people, said Linda Charmaraman, a research scientist and director of the Youth, Media & Wellbeing Research Lab at Wellesley Centers for Women.

For children of color and LGBTQ+ young people — and others who may not see themselves represented broadly in society — social media can reduce isolation, according to Charmaraman’s research, which was published in the Handbook of Adolescent Digital Media Use and Mental Health. Age bans, she said, could disproportionately affect these marginalized groups, who also spend more time on the platforms.

“You think at first, ‘That’s terrible. We need to get them off it,’” she said. “But when you find out why they’re doing it, it’s because it helps bring them a sense of identity affirmation when there’s something lacking in real life.”

Arianne McCullough, 17, said she uses Instagram to connect with Black students like herself at Willamette University, where about 2% of students are Black.

Arianne McCullough, left, and her mother, Rayvn, of Sacramento, California, support social media legislation that would require platforms like YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok to be more transparent about the effects of their products on adolescent mental health. (Rayvn McCullough/KFF Health News/TNS)

“I know how isolating it can be feeling like you’re the only Black person, or any minority, in one space,” said McCullough, a freshman from Sacramento, California. “So, having someone I can text real quick and just say, ‘Let’s go hang out,’ is important.”

After about a month at Willamette, which is in Salem, Oregon, McCullough assembled a social network with other Black students. “We’re all in a little group chat,” she said. “We talk and make plans.”

Social media hasn’t always been this useful for McCullough. After California schools closed during the pandemic, McCullough said, she stopped competing in soccer and track. She gained weight, she said, and her social media feed was constantly promoting at-home workouts and fasting diets.

“That’s where the body comparisons came in,” McCullough said, noting that she felt more irritable, distracted, and sad. “I was comparing myself to other people and things that I wasn’t self-conscious of before.”

When her mother tried to take away the smartphone, McCullough responded with an emotional outburst. “It was definitely addictive,” said her mother, Rayvn McCullough, 38, of Sacramento.

Arianne said she eventually felt happier and more like herself once she cut back on her use of social media.

But the fear of missing out eventually crept back in, Arianne said. “I missed seeing what my friends were doing and having easy, fast communication with them.”

For a decade before the COVID-19 pandemic triggered what the American Academy of Pediatrics and other medical groups declared “a national emergency in child and adolescent mental health ,” greater numbers of young people had been struggling with their mental health.

More young people were reporting feelings of hopelessness and sadness, as well as suicidal thoughts and behavior, according to behavioral surveys of students in grades nine through 12 conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The greater use of immersive social media — like the never-ending scroll of videos on YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram — has been blamed for contributing to the crisis. But a committee of the national academies found that the relationship between social media and youth mental health is complex, with potential benefits as well as harms. Evidence of social media’s effect on child well-being remains limited, the committee reported this year, while calling on the National Institutes of Health and other research groups to prioritize funding such studies.

Related Articles

US drug price measure to cut costs by $7.5 billion in 2026

Vaccines for low income children lag behind, CDC study finds

Surgeon general hones dual focus on mental health, gun violence

‘I feel dismissed’: People experiencing colorism say health system fails them

Arizona and Missouri join states with abortion amendments on the ballot. What would the measures do?

In its report, the committee cited legislation in Utah last year that places age and time limits on young people’s use of social media and warned that the policy could backfire.

“The legislators’ intent to protect time for sleep and schoolwork and to prevent at least some compulsive use could just as easily have unintended consequences, perhaps isolating young people from their support systems when they need them,” the report said.

Some states have considered policies that echo the national academies’ recommendations. For instance, Virginia and Maryland have adopted legislation that prohibits social media companies from selling or disclosing children’s personal data and requires platforms to default to privacy settings. Other states, including Colorado, Georgia, and West Virginia, have created curricula about the mental health effects of using social media for students in public schools, which the national academies also recommended.

The Kids Online Safety Act, which is now before the House of Representatives, would require parental consent for social media users younger than 13 and impose on companies a “duty of care” to protect users younger than 17 from harm, including anxiety, depression, and suicidal behavior. The second bill, the Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act, would ban platforms from targeting ads toward minors and collecting personal data on young people.

Attorneys general in California, Louisiana, Minnesota, and dozens of other states have filed lawsuits in federal and state courts alleging that Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, misled the public about the dangers of social media for young people and ignored the potential damage to their mental health.

Most social media companies require users to be at least 13, and the sites often include safety features, like blocking adults from messaging minors and defaulting minors’ accounts to privacy settings.

Despite existing policies, the Department of Justice says some social media companies don’t follow their own rules. On Aug. 2, it sued the parent company of TikTok for allegedly violating child privacy laws, saying the company knowingly let children younger than 13 on the platform, and collected data on their use.

Surveys show that age restrictions and parental consent requirements have popular support among adults.

NetChoice, an industry group whose members include Meta and Alphabet, which owns Google and YouTube, has filed lawsuits against at least eight states, seeking to stop or overturn laws that impose age limits, verification requirements, and other policies aimed at protecting children.

Much of social media’s effect can depend on the content children consume and the features that keep them engaged with a platform, said Jenny Radesky, a physician and a co-director of the American Academy of Pediatrics’ Center of Excellence on Social Media and Youth Mental Health.

Age bans, parental consent requirements, and other proposals may be well-meaning, she said, but they do not address what she considers to be “the real mechanism of harm”: business models that aim to keep young people posting, scrolling, and purchasing.

“We’ve kind of created this system that’s not well designed to promote youth mental health,” Radesky said. “It’s designed to make lots of money for these platforms.”

Chaseedaw Giles, KFF Health News’ digital strategy & audience engagement editor, contributed to this report.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs of KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling and journalism.

©2024 KFF Health News. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

By FARNOUSH AMIRI and ANTHONY IZAGUIRRE Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The “Squad,” a group of progressive lawmakers in the House, is set to shrink next year after two members suffered primary defeats this election cycle following an unprecedented deluge of special interest spending.

The primary losses for Reps. Cori Bush in Missouri and Jamaal Bowman in New York came over the summer and dealt a blow to the progressive faction, which had amassed considerable clout within the Democratic Party since its initial rise in 2018.

The cohort of Black and brown lawmakers — including Reps. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez of New York and Summer Lee of Pennsylvania — became the target of pro-Israel PACs like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, late last year after members criticized Israel’s response to the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas. Eight months later, AIPAC’s super political action committee, United Democracy Project, helped unseat Bush and Bowman after pouring nearly $25 million combined into those races.

Still, there were other factors that contributed to the defeat of Bush and Bowman beyond their position Israel, raising questions as to what extent voters rejected their progressive politics.

Another member of the Squad, Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, easily won her primary Tuesday against a repeat challenger despite voting similarly to Bush and Bowman over the last two years and being a vocal critic of Israel.

Here’s how the three Democratic primary races played out:

Bowman — New York’s 16th District

Bowman was particularly vulnerable this election cycle because of redistricting.

The new map of his the district eliminated most sections of the Bronx and added more of Westchester County’s suburbs, greatly narrowing the number of Black voters who were key to Bowman’s reelection effort.

Then Bowman drew a strong challenger in well-known county executive George Latimer, a centrist with more than three decades of political experience in the Westchester area.

Latimer entered the race with the support of Jewish leaders in the district who were upset with Bowman’s critical stance on Israel. He also enjoyed hefty financial backing from AIPAC’s super PAC, which poured about $15 million in the race to support him.

The contest was largely shaped by Bowman’s position on Israel. Latimer hammered the incumbent as more focused on Israel than the needs of the district. Latimer also flexed his deep regional knowledge to make the case to voters that he could would be a more effective member of Congress.

Bowman, who was seeking a third term, also had to fend off persistent criticism over triggering a fire alarm in a House building while lawmakers were working on a funding bill. He said it was unintentional, but the incident drew waves of embarrassing coverage and he was censured by the House for his actions.

Bush — Missouri’s 1st District

The focus of campaign ads against Bush in the final weeks before her August primary against St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Wesley Bell was not her scathing criticism of Israel or its leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, but instead a vote that she and five of her Squad colleagues took in late 2021.

United Democracy Project, which spent more than $8.4 million against Bush, began airing ads in the local media market that highlighted the 48-year-old’s vote against a bipartisan infrastructure bill signed into law by President Joe Biden and supported by the majority of the Democrats in Congress.

Related Articles

‘Meet Kamala for the first time’: How this DNC could be different than past conventions

Trump promises to ‘save’ America with mix of lofty, vague, legally dubious policies

Harris faces hurdles to build on momentum at convention

Harris to propose tax cuts for newborns, funds for first-time homebuyers

Beyond ‘childless cat ladies,’ JD Vance has long been on a quest to encourage more births

“This infrastructure bill that Joe Biden passed has been so good for working people in St. Louis,” one voter said during the 30-second ad. “Cori Bush voted against it.” Another added, “She voted against our jobs.”

Bush, Bowman, Omar and other progressives defended their vote against the bill at the time, saying it was a necessary stance as they fought for passage of a separate social and environmental package. But their vote on the bill only became a campaign issue for Bush.

Allies of Bush say the campaign to defeat her wouldn’t have been possible had Bell not had the support of outside groups like UDP, which spent more than $400,000 to air the half-minute spot, according to data from the media tracking firm AdImpact.

“If you asked any any voter in any of these districts at the start of this cycle, ‘Do you know how your member of Congress voted on the infrastructure bill?’ no one would say yes,” Usamah Andrabi, a spokesman for the progressive Justice Democrats, told The Associated Press. “No one was thinking about a vote that happened three years ago for a bill that passed.”

Beyond her legislative record, Bush faced a series of public and personal scandals of her own in the last few years, including an ongoing Justice Department investigation into her campaign spending.

Omar — Minnesota’s 5th District

Omar managed to avoid the fate of her two fellow Squad members and had several things going in her favor. First, the African-born congresswoman, who has broken many firsts since being elected to the House in 2018, had the advantage during her primary Tuesday of having previously defeated her challenger.

In 2022, former Minneapolis city councilman Don Samuels came just two percentage points short of beating Omar with the help of UDP, which spent six figures in the race. This time around, the third-term lawmaker took the threat posed by Samuels and a potential influx of AIPAC money much more seriously.

“I think the congresswoman and her team understood that there needed to be a lot of work to remind people in that district about what type of leadership she brought,” Andrabi said. “And I think she exemplified that.”

Omar also raised a lot more money for the primary, with her campaign reporting that it raised around $6.2 million. Samuels, on the other hand, raised about $1.4 million.

“What I was hoping is that a strong ground game and an attention to the details of folks who felt left out would trump an overwhelming superiority in dollars,” Samuels said in a recent AP interview. “Clearly money matters a little more in politics than I had hoped.”

Omar’s substantial fundraising advantage, coupled with the endorsements of Minnesota’s Democratic Party and progressive leaders like Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, helped her win by nearly 14 points.

And possibly the most important factor in her race was that groups like AIPAC ultimately didn’t get involved despite threatening to unseat any candidate they deemed insufficiently pro-Israel.

Izaguirre reported from New York. Associated Press writers Jim Salter in St. Louis and Steve Karnowski in Minneapolis contributed to this report.

By Rachel Christian, Bankrate

The road to retirement is full of twists and turns. You might think you’re on the right path, but life can throw unexpected obstacles in your way that derail even the best laid plans.

Numerous variables are at play, from how long you might live to how much you’ll receive each month from Social Security. A few wrong calculations, and you run the risk of outliving your savings. You might envision retirement as a great escape from the daily grind, but planning it can feel daunting.

Financial advisers help you tackle the many aspects of retirement planning by offering personalized recommendations based on your situation. But is hiring one of these professionals worth the cost? After all, a 1 percent fee on your total assets under management is common, while a comprehensive financial plan can easily cost $1,000 or more.

Here’s what you should consider when weighing the financial pros and cons of hiring a financial adviser for retirement planning.

What is retirement planning?

Retirement planning is the process of preparing and organizing your finances to ensure a secure and comfortable lifestyle after you stop working.

It involves setting financial goals, estimating the amount of money needed for retirement and creating a strategy to achieve those goals. This includes saving money in retirement accounts, such as 401(k)s or Roth IRAs and investing wisely to grow your wealth over time.

Well-executed retirement planning also considers factors such as Social Security benefits, rising health care costs and tax-advantaged withdrawal strategies. Regularly reviewing and adjusting your plan is also necessary.

In short, the goal of retirement planning is to build a financial cushion that allows you to cover essential expenses and enjoy your post-working years with peace of mind.

Benefits of working with a financial adviser

Financial advisers bring a wealth of knowledge and experience to the table. Navigating the complex world of retirement involves understanding investment options, tax rules, government programs and market dynamics to name a few. Instead of spending hours researching and learning about new topics, you can turn to a professional who can answer your questions and provide clarity in a matter of minutes.

One of the biggest benefits of working with an experienced adviser is gaining insights and strategies that may not be readily apparent to someone without a financial background. A qualified adviser can help you pick the best investments for your portfolio based on your financial situation, goals and risk tolerance. Their knowledge helps optimize your investment performance, ensuring a balance between growth and risk mitigation.

Saving time is another benefit. An adviser can monitor and tweak your portfolio as needed, then meet with you once a year to review its performance and address any other financial goals or concerns. This frees you up to focus on your daily life without neglecting your retirement plan in the process.

Finally, advisers take a holistic look at your finances, which can uncover less obvious ways to save money. For example, an adviser can help you shop for long-term care insurance so you won’t risk deleting your nest egg late in life. Or if you’re inclined toward philanthropy, an adviser may suggest a donor-advised fund as a tax-advantaged way to donate to your favorite charity.

The cost of DIY retirement planning

You might feel confident mapping out your own retirement plan — after all, there are a lot of online resources at your disposal. It might also feel counterintuitive to pay for advice when your primary goal is saving money for your future.

Related Articles

FACT FOCUS: Trump blends falsehoods and exaggerations at rambling NJ press conference

Amazon to build second warehouse in Woodbury

Minnesota jobs data flat in July; unemployment at 3.2%

Independent bookstore is newest addition to Union Depot in downtown St. Paul

5 things to know about banking, from a banking writer

But the truth is, making simple mistakes when planning for retirement can cost you a small fortune down the road. Getting an unbiased outside perspective can pinpoint overlooked details or raise questions long before you exit the workforce — and when you still have time to make corrections.

Without an in-depth understanding of financial markets, tax codes and investment strategies, you may find yourself making decisions based on gut instinct or advice from family and friends.

One way financial advisers provide value is by optimizing investment returns. By using extensive market research and analysis tools, they can identify investment opportunities aligned with your goals and risk tolerance, potentially maximizing the growth of your retirement assets.

When it comes to saving money, financial advisers can also recommend cost-effective investment options and affordable retirement accounts. This can lead to significant savings over the long term, preventing high fees from eating into your investment returns.

Money can be highly emotional. A drop in the markets can feel like a punch in the stomach, especially if you’re nearing retirement. Emotions can cloud your judgment, leading to impulsive decisions about buying and selling investments. Advisers act as a rational third-party who can help prevent knee-jerk reactions that might cost you thousands of dollars in the long-term.

Is hiring an adviser for retirement a good idea?

Hiring a financial adviser is a personal decision, so you’ll want to consider your budget and goals.

You might want to consider hiring a financial adviser if:

Your financial situation is complex: You have multiple income streams, several investment portfolios, real estate holdings or own a business.
You have a high net worth: Managing significant wealth requires advanced financial planning, tax optimization and inheritance strategies — all areas where financial advisers specialize.
You received a substantial inheritance: Windfalls require careful planning to maximize benefits and manage taxes. This can be a part of your financial life where emotions run especially high so an objective third-party perspective can be valuable.
You’re going through a major life event: Life changes — such as the death of a spouse, getting divorced or getting married — impact financial priorities. Advisers can help adjust your plan to accommodate new goals and responsibilities.

While working with a financial adviser is valuable, here are a few situations when you might be able to avoid paying for professional help.

Your financial situation is simple: If you don’t own property and have minimal savings, you may be able to manage retirement planning independently without the need for specialized advice.
You’re knowledgeable about financial markets and investing: If you feel confident in your ability to make long-term financial decisions and stay current on market trends, you might opt for a do-it-yourself approach.

How to find a financial adviser

When picking a financial adviser, it’s crucial to look for a fee-only fiduciary. These professionals are ethically bound to work in your best interest — not the interests of insurance companies or financial institutions. They’ll provide unbiased advice you can trust.

You’ll also want to look for advisers with expertise in retirement planning. If your estate is particularly large and complex, you might want to work with a wealth manager, since their services cater to high-net worth clients.

You should also check an adviser’s background and credentials before trusting them with your financial information. A good place to start is BrokerCheck from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). It offers an overview of an adviser’s work history along with their firm’s history.

Once you’ve narrowed down your search, interview potential advisers to gauge their investment approach and experience. Make sure your communication styles align. Advisers can get compensated in several ways, so get clear understanding about how they’re paid and make sure the price fits your budget.

Bottom line

A financial adviser brings a lot to the table. The benefits of expertise, time savings, emotional support, goal setting and tax optimization can far outweigh the risks associated with attempting to manage retirement planning on your own. An initial investment might be well-worth the cost if it prevents you from running out of money in retirement.

©2024 Bankrate online. Visit Bankrate online at bankrate.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Niels Lesniewski | (TNS) CQ-Roll Call

Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee for president, is set to unveil a set of economic policy proposals Friday, highlighted by a new child tax credit.

The proposal, according to Harris-Walz campaign officials, would provide a $6,000 child tax credit within a newborn child’s first year. It also would bring back a child tax credit from the 2021 reconciliation law and expand earned-income tax credits for many taxpayers without children.

“It will provide up to $3,600 per child tax credit for middle-class and the most hard-pressed working families with children,” officials said.

The tax portion of the proposal also includes expended premium assistance tax credits. Harris is expected to detail the economic messaging and policy proposals as part of a campaign speech Friday afternoon in Raleigh, N.C.

She is also expected to announce proposals on housing and lowering costs, which the campaign previewed earlier this week.

The Harris proposal for assistance for first-time homebuyers goes beyond what President Joe Biden has proposed.

“The Biden-Harris administration initially proposed providing $25,000 in down payment assistance only for 400,000 first-generation home buyers — or homebuyers whose parents don’t own a home — and a $10,000 tax credit for first-time home buyers,” a campaign fact sheet said. “Vice President Harris’s plan will simplify and significantly expand that plan by providing on average $25,000 for all eligible first-time home buyers, while ensuring full participation by first-generation home buyers.”

The campaign said Harris also wants to “accelerate” the process under which the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services are negotiating the cost of prescription drugs. CMS announced the price list for the first 10 drugs, with the reduced sticker prices due to take effect on Jan. 1, 2026.

Biden and Harris appeared together Thursday in Prince George’s County, Md., to highlight the news.

Friday’s announcement of key Harris agenda items coincides with the second anniversary of the reconciliation law that provided for the Medicare price negotiations. The White House highlighted the vice president’s role in breaking the tie vote in the Senate, which cleared the way for the law’s enactment.

“While Republicans in Congress try to repeal this law — which would increase prescription drug costs and take good-paying jobs away from their constituents, all to give massive tax cuts to big corporations — Vice President Harris and I will keep fighting to move our country forward by investing in America and giving families more breathing room,” Biden said in a statement Friday.

Republicans, too, have highlighted the role of the vice president in breaking ties in support of the Biden administration’s agenda (for which she holds the record). Though GOP lawmakers like Sen. Joni Enst, R-Iowa, have a far different take on the implication of those votes.

“Kamala Harris cast the tie-breaking vote on a pair of trillion-dollar tax and spend bills that created a 20% inflation surge,” Ernst posted on X earlier this week.

The post Harris to propose tax cuts for newborns, funds for first-time homebuyers appeared first on Roll Call.

___

©2024 CQ-Roll Call, Inc., All Rights Reserved. Visit cqrollcall.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.