Connect with us

Published

on

About This Podcast

Health care and how much it costs is scary. But youre not alone with this stuff, and knowledge is power. An Arm and a Leg is a podcast about these issues, and is co-produced by KFF Health News.VISIT ARMANDALEGSHOW.COM

Federal law requires that all nonprofit hospitals have financial assistance policies also known as charity care to reduce or expunge peoples medical bills. New research from Dollar For, an organization dedicated to helping people get access to charity care, suggests that fewer than one-third of people who qualify for charity care actually receive it. 

An Arm and a Leg host Dan Weissmann talks with Dollar For founder Jared Walker about its recent work, and how new state programs targeting medical debt in places like North Carolina may change the way hospitals approach charity care. 

Plus, a listener from New York shares a helpful resource for navigating charity care appeals. Dan Weissmann @danweissmann Host and producer of "An Arm and a Leg." Previously, Dan was a staff reporter for Marketplace and Chicago's WBEZ. His work also appears on All Things Considered, Marketplace, the BBC, 99 Percent Invisible, and Reveal, from the Center for Investigative Reporting. Credits Emily Pisacreta Producer Claire Davenport Producer Adam Raymonda Audio wizard Ellen Weiss Editor Click to open the Transcript Transcript: New Lessons in the Fight for Charity Care Note: An Arm and a Leg uses speech-recognition software to generate transcripts, which may contain errors. Please use the transcript as a tool but check the corresponding audio before quoting the podcast.

Dan: Hey there–

Clara lives in New York City with her husband Remy and their family. And, recently, over the course of a year, they had some … medical encounters. At hospitals.

Nothing super-dramatic: Remy broke his ankle in August of last year. Hello, emergency room. Hello, ER bill.

They had a second baby in November 2023 a boy! who ended up needing to spend a day in neonatal intensive care. He’s fine. They named him Isaac.

And one night early this year, Isaac just… wasn’t looking good. Lethargic. Had a fever.

Clara: We decided to give him Tylenol. Um, and he spit it all back out.

Dan: They took his temp again. A hundred and three point five.

Clara: We started Googling, um, what is like dangerously high fever for a baby

Dan: And yep. For a baby that little, a hundred three point five is starting to get iffy. Like possible risk of seizure. But it was late at night. No pediatrician, no urgent care. Hello new, unwelcome questions.

Clara: The last thing you want to be thinking about is, Oh shit, this is going to be really expensive. You want to be thinking about, let’s go to the ER right now, make sure he doesn’t have a seizure.

Dan: So they went. And the folks at the ER gave Isaac more tylenol, he didn’t spit it out, his fever went down. They went home, relieved about Isaac and a little anxious about the bills.

After insurance, they were looking at more than eight thousand dollars. Clara didn’t think her family could afford anything like that.

And the billing office didn’t offer super-encouraging advice.

Clara: basically every time I’ve called, they said, why don’t you start making small payments now so it doesn’t go into collections.

Dan: However. Clara listens to An Arm and a Leg. Where we’ve been talking about something called charity care for years. This summer, we asked listeners to send us their bills and tell us about their experience with charity care. Clara was one of the folks who responded.

Just to recap: Federal law requires all nonprofit hospitals to have charity care policies, also called financial assistance.

To reduce people’s bills, or even forgive them entirely, if their income falls below a level the hospital sets.

We’ve been super-interested in charity care here for almost four years, ever since a guy named Jared Walker blew up on TikTok spreading the word and offering to help people apply, through the nonprofit he runs, Dollar For.

Since then, we’ve learned a LOT about charity care. Dollar For has grown from an infinitesimally tiny organization — basically Jared, not getting paid much -to a small one, with 15 people on staff.

Jared says they’ve helped people with thousands of applications and helped to clear millions of dollars in hospital bills.

And in the past year, they’ve been up to a LOT and theyve been learning alot. Before we pick up Clara’s story which ends with her offering a new resource we can share let’s get a big download from Jared.

This is An Arm and a Leg, a show about why health care costs so freaking much, and what we can maybe do about it. I’m Dan Weissmann. I’m a reporter, and I like a challenge. So the job we’ve chosen on this show is to take one of the most enraging, terrifying, depressing parts of American life- and bring you a show that’s entertaining, empowering and useful.

In early 2024, Dollar For put out a couple of big research reports documenting how much charity care doesn’t get awarded. And why people don’t receive it.

Jared: I feel like for a long time we have been looking around at the experts, right? Who are the experts? And where can we find them and what can we ask them?

Dan: Finally, they undertook a major research project of their own. They analyzed thousands of IRS filings from nonprofit hospitals, and compared what they found to a study from the state of Maryland based on even more precise data.

And they hired a firm to survey a sample of more than 11 hundred people. Then ran focus groups to dig in for more detail.

Jared: I think that what these reports have just revealed is like, we are the experts like dollar for actually knows more than everyone else about this.

Dan: The amount of charity care that hospitals do not give to people who qualify for it?

The data analysis produced a number: 14 billion dollars. Which Jared and his colleagues say is a conservative estimate.

The survey showed that more than half of people who qualify for charity care do not get it. About two thirds of those folks do not know that it exists. Some people who know about it just don’t apply. And some who do get rejected, even though they qualify.

Their conclusion: We found that only 29% of patients with hospital bills they cannot afford are able to learn about, apply for, and receive charity care. None of which surprised Jared.

Jared: It’s like, Oh, like our assumptions have been correct on this. Like people don’t know about charity care. The process sucks. Um, a lot of people that should get it, don’t get it. Um, and hospitals have put all the pain and all of the responsibility on the patient

Dan: Those topline findings put Dollar For’s accomplishments in context.

Jared: Like we have submitted over 20, 000 of these financial assistance applications.

Dan: 20, 000 people. That’s spectacular. That’s I know you’re counting the money. How much money is it that you’re talking about so far?

Jared: I think we’re closing in on 70 million, 70 million in medical debt relief. So

Dan: Right. It’s a start.

Jared: there you go.

Dan: Its a start.

Jared: It sounds great, and then you see the 14 billion number and you’re like, oh, shoot. What are we doing? What are we doing?

Dan: laugh crying emoji.

Jared: Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Dan: And so, for most of the year, Jared and his team have been testing a strategy to take on a 14 billion dollar problem.

Jared: We have spent the year trying to work with hospitals. We came at this how do we put a dent in the 14 billion? If it’s not going to be through TikTok, and it’s not going to be through individual patint advocacy, then what if we moved further upstream, and instead of patients finding out about us one to three months after they get a bill, what if they heard about us at the hospital?

Dan: Jared envisioned patients getting evaluated for charity care, and getting referred to Dollar For for help applying, before they check out. He thought

Jared: Maybe we could make a bigger dent into that 14 billion. And, I think that that was wishful thinking.

Dan: Wishful thinking. That’s how Jared now describes his hopes that hospitals would see that they could do better by patients, with his help, and sign right up to work with him.

Jared: Um, well they haven’t, Dan. So, we don’t have, uh, you know, we’ve got one hospital.

We’ve got one hospital. I don’t know if there’s a smaller hospital in the United States. It is Catalina Island Health. It is a small hospital on an island off the coast of California

And when patients go in there, they tell them about Dollar For, and they send them over. Um, that was what we were hoping to do with these larger systems.

Dan: Jared talked to a lot of hospitals. He went to conferences for hospital revenue-department administrators. He didn’t get a lot of traction

Jared: You know, this is one thing where I’m like, I don’t want to be totally unfair to the hospitals.

They’re huge entities that you can’t just move quickly like that.

it is going to take a lot more on their end than it would on our end, we could spin up one of these partnerships in a week.

And. They’re going to need a lot of time and it’s going to, you know, how do we implement this? Um, you know, with a small Catalina Island hospital it was easy, but if you’re talking to Ascension

Dan: Ascension Healthcare– a big Catholic hospital system. A hundred thirty-six hospitals. More than a hundred thirty thousand employees. Across 18 states, plus DC. Jared says they might get thousands of charity care applications a month. A deal to steer folks to Jared isnt a simple handshake arrangement.

Jared: How do you, how do you do that? You know, how do you implement that? I mean, it’s a pain in the ass. And these hospitals, and more so, hospitals are not motivated to figure this out.

Dan: Yeah. Right.

Jared: Unless you’re in North Carolina,

Dan: North Carolina. In 2023, North Carolina expanded Medicaid. In July 2024, Governor Roy Cooper announced a program that would use Medicaid money to reward hospitals for forgiving Medical debt.

Gov. Roy Cooper: under this program. Hospitals can earn more by forgiving medical debt than trying to collect it. This is a win win win.

Dan: Under the program, hospitals can get more Medicaid dollars if they meet certain conditions. One, forgive a bunch of existing medical debts. Another: Make sure their charity care policies protect patients who meet income threhholds set by the state.

A third: they have to pro-actively identify patients who are eligible for charity care — and notify those patients before sending a bill, maybe even before they leave the hospital.

Jared: I’m very excited to see how that looks in the future. Because if you remember, the big four, like our shit list, is Texas, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina.

Dan: Jared’s shit list. The states where, over the years, he has heard from the greatest number of people who have difficulty getting hospital charity care. Where he often has to fight hardest to help them get it.

Jareds shit list, the big four, were the four biggest states (by population) that had rejected the expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act.

Because of how the ACA was written, no Medicaid expansion means a lot more people who don’t have a lot of money and just don’t have ANY insurance at all.

It’s a giant problem. And North Carolina was one of those states where it was toughest.

Jared: And in, you know, the span of a year, North Carolina has expanded Medicaid, and created one of the best medical debt charity care policies in the country.

This law essentially says that they have to identify them early. So that’s like on paper, you know, it sounds amazing.

Dan: Onpaper it sounds amazing. We’ll come back to that. But first, let’s make clear: This wasn’t a sudden transformation. The governor, Roy Cooper, who we heard in that clip? He spent like seven years pushing the state to expand Medicaid.

The legislature finally agreed in 2023. And then Cooper and his team spent months this year figuring out how to bake medical-debt relief into the plan. It took a ton of maneuvering.

Our pals at KFF Health News covered the process. Here’s Ames Alexander, who reported that story with Noam Levy, describing the process on a public radio show called “Due South.”

Coopers team started out by trying to quietly bounce their ideas off a few hospitals..

Ames Alexander KFF Health News: But then word got back to the hospital industry’s powerful lobbying group. That’s the North Carolina Healthcare Association. And the Association was not at all happy about it. .

Dan: They raised a stink. And claimed the whole thing would be illegal, the feds shouldn’t approve it.

Cooper and his health secretary Cody Kinsley got kept going– and they did get the feds to sign off on the plan. So it was legal.

But it wasn’t mandatory. They were offering hospitals money, but those hospitals needed to say yes. And that didn’t happen right away.

Ames Alexander KFF Health News: When Cooper and Kinsley unveiled this plan on July 1st, there wasn’t a single hospital official who would join them there for the press conference. Ultimately, though, all 99 of the state’s hospitals signed on. And it’s not, it’s not really hard to understand why they stood to lose a lot of federal money.

Dan: Lose OUT on a ton of NEW federal money. A ton. According to KFF’s reporting, a single hospital system stands to gain like 800 million dollars a year for participating.

And you know, thinking about that — how much money hospitals were considering turning down — kind of puts into perspective Jared’s experience trying to get them to work with him. He wasn’t offering anybody 800 million dollars a year.I said to Jared: Seems like this would be hard to replicate elsewhere. Other states aren’t going to be able to put that kind of new federal money on the table. And Jared said:

Jared: I think before like, Oh, can we replicate it? I’m just like, how do we make it? How do we make it work in North Carolina?

Dan: That is: How to make sure when it gets implemented, that it really works? Remember, Jared said before: This all sounds amazing ON PAPER. We’ll have some of his caveats after the break. Plus the rest of Clara’s story.

An Arm and a Leg is a co-production of Public Road Productions and KFF Health News — that’s a nonprofit newsroom covering health issues in America. KFF’s reporters do amazing work — you just heard one of them breaking down how North Carolina put that deal together. I’m honored to work with them.

Jared loves the idea behind North Carolina’s initiative on charity care: Hospitals have to screen people while they’re on site, and let them know before they leave the hospital what kind of help they may be eligible for.

Jared: Making sure that a patient knows what is available to them before they leave is very powerful. , like, that’s where the responsibility should be. Um, but how do you do it? And what happens if you don’t? Right?

Dan: In other words, Jared says, the devil is in implementation, and in systems of accountability. He’s seen what happens when those systems are pourous.

Jared: In Oregon, they had that law that was like, Oh, you can’t sue patients without first checking to see if they’re eligible for charity care. . And then you find all these people that are being sued that were never screened.

Dan: Yeah, Oregonpassed a law in 2019 that required hospitals to evaluate patients for charity care before they could be sued over a bill. Jared’s colleague Eli Rushbanks analyzed a sample of hospital-bill lawsuits in one county. He could only see patients income in a few of them– but in almost half of those, that income was definitely low enough that the debt shouldve been forgiven.

He also took a big-picture look: In the years after the law took effect, two thirds of hospitals gave out LESS charity care than they had given before. Probably not what lawmakers had hoped for.

Hospitals in North Carolina will have two years to fully implement the screening requirement, called “presumptive eligibility.”

Some hospitals around the country already use automated systems for this: They check your credit, pull other data. Some of them use AI.

Jared says he’s seen some hospitals over-rely on the tech.

Jared: Some hospitals that are using presumptive eligibility tools will use that as a way to say, Oh, we already screened you. You can’t apply, but the patient is sitting there going, well, I’m eligible.

Your tool must have got it wrong. Cause these things are not a hundred percent accurate, or think of something like this, you lose your job, or maybe you’re at the hospital because you just gave birth to another human. So now you’re a household of four. It’s a four instead of three.

And obviously the presumptive eligibility tool isn’t going to be able to know that and calculate that. So if you go to the hospital and say, now I want to apply and they say, well, you don’t get to apply because we already screened you and you’re not eligible. That’s bullshit.

Dan: So, as North Carolina hospitals bring their systems online, Jared wants to push for a process where patients can appeal a machine-made decision. Jared: I’d love to be able to test that

how does that impact how many people are getting charity care and that 14 billion?

Dan: What do you think is your best shot for the next year of kind of moving towards 14 billion?

Jared: We are trying to figure that out. Um, obviously the election will play into that, but I think that if I had to guess where we would land, um, I think that we will double down on our patient advocacy work.

Dan: Jared says theyll definitely also continue to work with advocates and officials on policy proposals. But

Jared: The only reason anyone cares about what we have to say about policy is because we know what the patient experiences. So I think that if the, the more people we help, the more opportunity we will have to push policies forward that we want to see happen

Dan: So, this is a good place to note: If you or anybody you know has a hospital bill thats scaring you, Dollar For is a great first stop. Well have a link to their site wherever youre listening to this. Theyve got a tool that can help you quickly figure out if you might qualify for charity care from your hospital. Plus tons of how-tos. And theyve got dedicated staff to help you if you get stuck.

And we just heard Jared say theyre not backing away from that work, even as they aim to influence policy.

About policy Jared does have one other thought about their work in that area

Jared: We think that we’re going to get a little bit more feisty, uh, moving forward. So I’m, I’m excited about that.

Dan: I talked with Jared less than a week after the election. We didn’t know yet which party would take the House of Representatives, and of course there’s still a LOT we don’t know about what things look like from here. Jared had just one prediction.

Jared: I think we’re going to be needed, you know, that much more.

Dan: I think we’re all gonna need each other more than ever. Which is why I’m pleased to bring us back to Clara’s story from New York.

You might remember: Her family had three hospital adventures in the space of a year.

The first one, where her husband broke his ankle, got her started. The bill was eighteen hundred dollars, after insurance. A LOT for their family. But she had a few things going for her.

One, she knew charity care existed. Not because the hospital mentioned it.

Clara: No, I know about it from an arm and a leg,

Dan: And two, she had the skills. Because by training, she’s a librarian. And you may already know this but people come to libraries looking for a lot more than just books.

Clara: People all the time, will come in and bring in a form or need help navigating different systems and, and even just looking and trying to see where to start.

Dan: So, she went and found her hospital’s financial assistance policy online. Saw that her family met their income requirements. Found the form. Submitted it. Got offered a discount… that still left her family on the hook for more than they could comfortably pay.

And decided to see if she could ask for more. Was there an appeals process? There was.

But she didn’t find all of the information she needed online. The process wasn’t quick.

Clara: A lot of phone tag. And I don’t know if the bill pay phone lines are staffed better than the financial aid phone lines. But, you know, you get an answering machine a lot. You have to call back. The person doesn’t remember you. They’re not able to link your account.

All the things that I just feel like they’re really greasing the wheels of the paying for the bill option, but actually not making it especially accessible to do the financial aid and appeal process.

Dan: Clara hung in there. Heres what she told my colleague Claire Davenport.

Clara: Being a listener of the podcast, I feel like I’m part of a community of people who are sort of maneuvering through the crazy healthcare system. And I do kind of have Dan’s voice in my head, like, this is nuts. This is not your fault. This is crazy and not right.

Dan: Also, when she was angling for more help on her husband’s ER bill, she knew anything she learned could come in handy: She was due to give birth at the same hospital pretty soon.

Her persistence paid off. In the end, the hospital reduced that 1800 dollar bill to just 500 dollars.

Two weeks later, Isaac was born. And spent an extra day in the NICU. That, plus the late-night fever that sent them to the ER left Clara’s family on the hook for about 6500 dollars.

Clara used what she’d learned the first time through as a playbook. Apply, then appeal to ask for more help. She says that made it a little simpler. But not simple, and not quick.

Isaac was born in November 2023. His ER visit was in April 2024. When Clara talked with our producer in early August 2024, she was still waiting to hear the hospital’s decision about her appeal. Was it gonna be approved?

Clara: In the event that it’s not, I think we just put it on like the longest payment plan we can. Maybe we would ask family for help.

Dan: Update: A few days after that conversation, the hospital said yes to Clara’s appeal. Her new total, 650 dollars. About a tenth of that initial amount.

Which, yes, is a nice story for Clara and her family. But the reason I’m so pleased to share her story is this:

Clara: Actually, I made a template that you can let your listeners use for making an appeal letter. I’ll share it with you.

Dan: Clara thought it might be useful because part of the application and appeal process — not all of it was just facts and figures and pay stubs. There was also an opportunity to write a letter. Which opened up questions.

Clara: I feel like It’s not totally clear what you’re supposed to put in the letter and who you’re appealing to and how emotional you’re supposed to make it versus how technical

Dan: Here’s how she approached it.

Clara: I was trying to think about if I was reading the letter, what would help paint the picture of this bill in context of everything else. trying to put myself in their shoes, reading it, what would be useful t kind of add more depth to our story than just the bill. And then also I just tried to be really grateful and express authentic gratitude for the great care we received.

Dan: She also included a realistic estimate of what her family could actually pay. Which the hospital ended up agreeing with.

And yes, Clara shared that template with us. We’ll post a link to it wherever you’re listening to this. Please copy and paste, and fill in the blanks, and please-tell us if it works for you.

A big lesson here is, don’t take no for a final answer. Don’t take “We’ll help you this much” for a final answer. Clara discovered one other thing: Don’t give up if it looks like you may have missed a deadline. She missed one.

Clara: So I called them and said, I’m really worried. ” I didn’t send it in time. It might be off by a couple days. Is this going to be a huge problem? And they said, No, don’t worry about it.

It’s totally fine. Just send it. So I’m thinking, Okay, wait. There are so many people who are going to get cut off or get their bill and realize, Oh, well, I totally missed the window. So let’s go for the payment plan option. When actually,

Dan: If you’ve got the chutzpah, and the time, and the patience to make the next call and ask… you may get a different answer.

It sucks that it’s this hard. But I appreciate every clue that it’s not impossible. And I appreciate Clara sharing her story — and her template with us.

I told Jared about it.

Jared: Yeah, that’s amazing. I mean, I love, uh, it’s so funny. it’s just the idea of you have this patient that is going through all of this stuff and is so busy trying to focus on their own health, do their own thing, and they’re out here making templates so that other people can , you know, jump through the same hoops because we know We’re all going to have to jump through the hoops, uh, is just, man, how frustrating is that?

But how amazing is it that you have, you have built a community of people that are, you know, willing to, uh, take those kind of crappy, not kind of, very terrible experiences and, um, and turn it into something that is helpful for other people. I think that’s amazing.

Dan: Me too! So this is where I ask you to help keep a good thing going. We’ve got so much to do in 2025, and your donations have always been our biggest source of support. After the credits of this episode, youll hear the names of some folks who have pitched in just in the last few weeks.

And this is The Time to help us build. The place to go is arm and a leg show dot com, slash, support.

That’s arm and a leg show dot com, slash, support .

We’ll have a link wherever you’re listening.

Thank you so much for pitching in if you can.

We’ll be back with a brand new episode in a few weeks.

Till then, take care of yourself.

This episode of An Arm and a Leg was produced by Claire Davenport and me, Dan Weissmann, with help from Emily Pisacreta — and edited by Ellen Weiss.

Adam Raymonda is our audio wizard. Our music is by Dave Weiner and Blue Dot Sessions. Gabrielle Healy is our managing editor for audience. Bea Bosco is our consulting director of operations.

Lynne Johnson is our operations manager.

An Arm and a Leg is produced in partnership with KFF Health News. That’s a national newsroom producing in-depth journalism about health issues in America and a core program at KFF, an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism.

Zach Dyer is senior audio producer at KFF Health News. He’s editorial liaison to this show.

And thanks to the Institute for Nonprofit News for serving as our fiscal sponsor. They allow us to accept tax-exempt donations. You can learn more about INN at INN.org.

Finally, thank you to everybody who supports this show financially.

An Arm and a Leg is a co-production of KFF Health News and Public Road Productions.

To keep in touch with An Arm and a Leg, subscribe to its newsletters. You can also follow the show on Facebook and the social platform X. And if youve got stories to tell about the health care system, the producers would love to hear from you.

To hear all KFF Health News podcasts, click here.

And subscribe to “An Arm and a Leg” on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Pocket Casts, or wherever you listen to podcasts. Twitter Facebook LinkedIn Email Print Related Topics Health Care Costs Multimedia An Arm and a Leg Podcasts Contact Us Submit a Story Tip

Continue Reading

Sports

Cal Raleigh, Aaron Judge and the best power half-seasons in MLB history

Published

on

By

Cal Raleigh, Aaron Judge and the best power half-seasons in MLB history

In a season when offense has often been hard to find — when 20 qualified pitchers have an ERA under 3.00 and 27 relievers with at least 20 innings have an ERA under 2.00 — New York Yankees slugger Aaron Judge and Seattle Mariners catcher Cal Raleigh have produced history-crunching numbers that would stand out in any era, but especially in 2025.

Judge’s season isn’t unexpected. He hit 62 home runs in 2022 and 58 in 2024, when he became the first player to slug .700 since Barry Bonds, but he is putting up numbers that exceed the lofty totals of those seasons. He’s hitting .364/.464/.724 with 28 home runs and is on pace for 11.9 bWAR — a figure only five position players have achieved or surpassed. And he has done all this despite a six-game slump in mid-June when he went 2-for-22.

Raleigh’s season, on the other hand, is one of the most unexpected MVP-level campaigns in recent memory. The 28-year-old is hitting .275/.380/.651 and leads all of MLB with 69 RBIs and 32 home runs, just the 24th time a player has at least 30 homers through 81 team games. And though he has hit 30 home runs before — he’s just the fourth catcher with at least three 30-homer seasons — he’s already two from his career high … and we’re still in June. It, of course, feels impossible that he’ll continue his current 65-home run pace, but he’s in a position to finish with one of the greatest offensive seasons by a catcher. His 4.3 bWAR puts him on pace for 8.9, which would top Mike Piazza’s 8.7 in 1997 as the highest for a catcher.

With the Yankees and Mariners playing their 81st games Friday — the halfway point of the season — let’s dig into some of the greatest power seasons from past first halves to put into perspective what Judge and Raleigh are doing.

Note: All stats will be through 81 team games rather than the more traditional first-half totals listed on Baseball-Reference, which vary in terms of games played based on when the All-Star Game took place.


Greatest power half-seasons ever

Most home runs through 81 games

Here are the top six sluggers on the list — and the number of home runs they finished with:

  1. Barry Bonds, 2001 Giants: 39 (73)

  2. Mark McGwire, 1998 Cardinals: 37 (70)

  3. Babe Ruth, 1921 Yankees: 35 (59)

  4. Reggie Jackson, 1969 A’s: 34 (47)

  5. Babe Ruth, 1928 Yankees: 33 (54)

  6. Jimmie Foxx, 1932 A’s: 33 (58)

Ruth and Foxx played when the schedule was 154 games, so they didn’t have those eight extra games the others did. A 23-year-old Jackson, in just his second full season in the majors, was on pace to break Roger Maris’ then-record of 61, but he tired down the stretch, hitting just five home runs in August and two in September.

Raleigh is part of a group that includes five others with 32 home runs — Ruth (1930), Maris (1961), Ken Griffey Jr. (1994), Sammy Sosa (1998 and 1999) and Luis Gonzalez (2001). Ruth tailed off and finished with 49 home runs, and the strike interrupted Griffey’s season in August, leaving him with 40 home runs with 50 games to go (a 58-homer pace).

The last player with at least 30 home runs through 81 games: Shohei Ohtani … but in 2021, not 2024. That was the season he had that amazing stretch of 16 home runs in 21 games before the All-Star break, but he tailed off in the second half and finished with 46.

Can Raleigh avoid the fate so many others with high early home run totals have met? As you would expect, that group of players who hit at least 30 home runs in the first half tailed off, averaging 32 home runs in their first 81 games but 19 the rest of the way, for a season average of 51. But four of those 23 seasons came in the 154-game era, three others came in the strike-shortened 1994 season (Griffey, Frank Thomas and Matt Williams) and two came from players who suffered injuries that limited their playing time in the second half (Jose Canseco in 1999 and McGwire in 2000).

None of them were catchers, though.

Best power/average totals through 81 games

Let’s start by looking at a list of the highest OPS figures through 81 games:

  1. Barry Bonds, 2004 Giants: 1.414

  2. Babe Ruth, 1921 Yankees: 1.374

  3. Barry Bonds, 2001 Giants: 1.357

  4. Barry Bonds, 2002 Giants: 1.342

  5. Babe Ruth, 1930 Yankees: 1.338

OK, you get the idea. In terms of raw OPS, Ruth also owns three of the next five spots. He and Bonds dominate all these leaderboards, whether it’s over half a season or a full season. Judge ranks 25th with his 1.202 OPS.

However, Judge is doing this in a lower-scoring era — that’s why his adjusted stats such as wRC+ or OPS+ rank among the best ever. His wRC+ of 221 would rank seventh all time — behind three Bonds seasons, two Ruth seasons and one from Ted Williams, and just ahead of Judge’s 2024 season. His OPS+ of 226 ranks 10th, behind seasons from those same three players, who are widely considered the greatest hitters.

Still, Judge’s combination of power with a high batting average is unique for any era. He is one of just nine players hitting .360 or higher with at least 28 home runs through 81 team games (assuming he remains above .360 after the Yankees play on Friday night):

  • Babe Ruth, 1921 Yankees: .372, 35 HRs

  • Jimmie Foxx, 1932 A’s: .383, 33 HRs

  • Babe Ruth, 1930 Yankees: .374, 32 HRs

  • Mickey Mantle, 1956 Yankees: .371, 30 HRs

  • Frank Thomas, 1994 White Sox: .373, 30 HRs

  • Babe Ruth, 1927 Yankees: .366, 29 HRs

  • Lou Gehrig, 1927 Yankees: .397, 28 HRs

  • Tony Perez, 1970 Reds: .363, 28 HRs

  • Aaron Judge, 2025 Yankees: .364, 28 HRs

These are some of the greatest hitting seasons of all time. Ruth set the record for total bases in 1921. Foxx hit .364 with 58 home runs and 169 RBIs in 1932. Mantle won the Triple Crown in 1956 when he hit .353 with 52 home runs and 130 RBIs. Yes, that’s Ruth and Gehrig from the same season when Ruth blasted 60 home runs and Gehrig hit 47, with Ruth’s total topping every other American League team … You get the gist.

Judge’s average is remarkable given the overall AL average is just .243. When Ruth and Gehrig tore apart the AL in 1927, for example, the league average was .286. The lowest average from this list was Mantle’s 1956 season, when the non-pitcher average was still .264. Looking at Judge’s season from this perspective makes his power/average combo one of the most impressive 81-game first halves we’ve seen, even aside from the era-adjusted analytics.


What it means for Judge and Raleigh

Is this the greatest season from a catcher we’ve seen?

Raleigh has hit 29 of his 32 home runs as a catcher (he has a 1.116 OPS while catching compared with .659 in 17 games as a DH). There are a couple of ways to look at the single-season home run record for catchers. The list for primary catchers — at least 50% of their games behind the plate — looks like this:

  1. Salvador Perez, 2021 Royals: 48

  2. Johnny Bench, 1970 Reds: 45

  3. Javy Lopez, 2003 Braves: 43

  4. Roy Campanella, 1953 Dodgers: 41

  5. Todd Hundley, 1996 Mets: 41

Bench added another 40-homer season in 1972 while Piazza had two 40-homer seasons. Perez hit just 33 as a catcher in 2021, with his other 15 coming as a DH. Lopez is the leader for home runs hit while playing the catcher position with 42.

Raleigh has been a low-average power hitter in his first three-plus seasons in the majors — he hit .220 with 34 home runs last year — but now he’s hitting for more power and a higher average. Sifting through his Statcast metrics, there aren’t obvious changes in his approach or swing patterns. Like Bryce Harper, he has always combined an above-average walk rate with a below-average chase rate, although he hasn’t been as extreme in his chase rate as Harper (although he has had higher strikeout rates than Harper).

There have been a few slight improvements across the board from 2024: His chase rate has improved 3 percentage points; his strikeout rate is down 3 percentage points; his fly ball rate is up about 4 percentage points; but his pulled fly ball rate, however, is up over 11 percentage points.

That last one is the big number. That has helped Raleigh to a few more wall scrapers. He is tied with Michael Busch and Paul Goldschmidt with 12 “doubters” — home runs that would be out of just one to seven parks based on distance.

But there’s another reason for Raleigh’s improvement: As a switch-hitter, he has always been much better from the left side, but this season, he’s mashing from the right side, hitting .319 with 11 home runs against left-handers after hitting .183 with 13 home runs against them last season. His “fast swing” percentage (swings of 75-plus mph) from the right side has gone way up, from 39.3% to 48.5%.

Raleigh is also not missing mistakes. Check his results on middle-middle pitches (ones thrown over the center of the plate, both horizontally and vertically) that he puts in play:

2024: .315 average, .795 slugging, 11 HR in 73 AB
2025: .515 average, 1.576 slugging, 11 HR in 33 AB

Can he keep it going? The big question might be how he’ll hold up in the long run. Raleigh has started 78 of Seattle’s first 80 games and pinch hit one other time (he hit a game-tying, two-run single in the ninth inning). He played 153 games last season and has the luxury of some DH games, but this is still a huge workload for a catcher. Last Saturday, he caught all nine innings of a three-hour game in 94-degree heat at Wrigley Field. He was in the lineup Sunday as the DH and back behind the plate the next two nights.

He’s obviously vital to the Mariners — although Seattle’s often maligned lineup is second in the majors in road OPS (but 25th at home). For now, with the Mariners fighting for a wild-card spot after being overtaken by the Houston Astros atop the AL West, manager Dan Wilson has to ride his hot hand; given the Mariners’ unexpected rotation issues, they need all the runs they can get.

Can Judge stay this dominant?

In one sense, we already know the answer to this: No. When Judge was hitting .432 on May 3, his BABIP was .512. Since then, it’s a still-lofty .383, but that is more in line with the .367 mark he had last season, when he finished with a .322 average. He has also avoided prolonged droughts; even when he homered just once in a 20-game stretch in April, he still hit .425. Indeed, it feels about time for Judge to launch into another of his patented home run tears. Yankees manager Aaron Boone, like Wilson with Raleigh, is riding the momentum of his star player: Judge hasn’t missed a game, although Boone has started him 18 times at DH.

As for the MVP race between these two AL sluggers, we’ll leave that for deeper into the season. Both players have a higher WAR figure on FanGraphs — where it looks like a tighter race: 6.1 for Judge, 5.6 for Raleigh — than Baseball-Reference. (FanGraphs incorporates catcher framing into its evaluation, a plus for Raleigh, who won the AL’s Platinum Glove last season as best overall defender.) It would be quite the debate: an all-time great season for a hitter against maybe the greatest power season from a catcher (and a good defensive one at that).

For now, sit back and enjoy the slugging.

Continue Reading

Technology

Quantum computing is having a moment. But the technology remains futuristic

Published

on

By

Quantum computing is having a moment. But the technology remains futuristic

Microsoft’s Majorana 1 quantum computing chip

Microsoft

It doesn’t quite have the buzz of artificial intelligence, but quantum computing is having a moment of its own.

Some of the most powerful institutions in the world, including Google, Microsoft, Amazon, IBM and the U.S. government, are spending many millions of dollars in a race to develop and build the first practical quantum computer.

Startups focused on quantum technology attracted about $2 billion last year, according to a McKinsey & Co. report, as investors pile into an industry that could have nearly $100 billion in revenue within a decade.

There isn’t much business today, though. In total, quantum computing companies generated under $750 million in revenue in 2024, according to the same report.

But more and more, we’re hearing about a big breakthrough.

In the past year, Microsoft unveiled its first quantum chip, Google executives said the technology may only be five years away, Amazon showcased its error-correcting quantum processor and IBM outlined its plan to build a meaningful quantum computer by 2029.

Joining them are scores of smaller companies and universities working on the underlying mathematics, software or potential business model. Some of the companies are even publicly traded, and can see their stocks soar or collapse based on a kernel of news.

In January, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang sent quantum computing stocks reeling when he said 15 years was “on the early side” in considering how long it would be before quantum computing would be useful. He said at the time that 20 years was a time frame that “a whole bunch of us would believe.”

Two months later, he walked back the comments, but also expressed surprise that they moved markets, or that there were even markets to be moved.

“How could a quantum computer company be public?” Huang said in March.

New defense companies shaping the future of modern warfare: Quantum Systems Co-CEO

Right now, there isn’t anything useful that quantum computers can do. They’re purely for research.

But the promise is clear. If the technology works, it can crunch certain kinds of numbers and do some tasks that are currently impossible on a traditional computer, or that would require so much time that the universe would end before they were completed.

To imagine a quantum computer, you have to fundamentally change how you consider what it means to compute.

A traditional computer works because there are billions of transistors on every chip. Those transistors can be ones or zeros — on or off. In large numbers, transistors can represent nearly every number, refer to parts of the system’s memory, and do arithmetic. That’s how every computer in the world works today.

In a quantum computer, the system uses qubits instead of transistors. It’s far more complicated than ones and zeros. Whether qubits are on or off is determined by quantum mechanics, and all of the qubits are “entangled,” which means a change in one will affect the probability of the others.

Making qubits work can require significant infrastructure. For example, some quantum computers have to be operated at very cold temperatures, near absolute zero.

So far, a lot of the applications for quantum have to do with simulating chemistry and physics.

“Quantum computers will not be the compute of choice for every application, and that’s OK,” said Krysta Svore, Microsoft’s vice president of advanced quantum development. “Even if we just use quantum computers for material science and chemistry, 96% of the world’s manufactured goods rely on chemistry and material science.”

Encryption

There’s one well-understood use for quantum computing today: encryption. That’s why the U.S. government and others around the world are closely tracking the technology’s development. It matters for national defense.

“The fear is that quantum computers will be able to crack our digital secrets,” said John Young, operating chief at the Americas division of Quantum eMotion, a quantum security company.

Currently, most passwords, WhatsApp texts, financial transactions and other important messages are encrypted, which means they’re scrambled and can’t be read if the data is stolen or observed. But quantum computers will be able to factor numbers quickly, which could allow hackers or other attackers to efficiently find the codes needed to decrypt important secrets.

Security researchers worry about what they call Q-Day, or the day when an effective quantum computer is created. They predict chaos when passwords and encryption start to mysteriously fail.

“Alongside its potential benefits, quantum computing also poses significant risks to the economic and national security of the United States,” the Biden White House said in 2022, in a national security memo. A cryptographically relevant quantum computer “could jeopardize civilian and military communications, undermine supervisory and control systems for critical infrastructure, and defeat security protocols for most Internet-based financial transactions,” the memo said.

An exclusive first look inside Amazon’s quantum computer lab

There’s no practical application or algorithm that can be run on a quantum computer that can’t today be accomplished on a normal silicon-based, digital computer.

However, several groups say they’ve proven “quantum supremacy,” indicating that they’ve run a problem on a quantum computer that would’ve taken far longer with a traditional computer. The actions were all abstract.

Google was the first to declare quantum supremacy in 2019, describing its quantum computer’s accomplishment as a “benchmark.” The task it performed is called random circuit sampling, which is basically only used to test quantum computers.

Google says that researchers gave a computer random instructions to make a problem as complex under quantum mechanics as possible. Its researchers were then able to show that a quantum computer is faster at deciphering the quantum problem. Last year, Google said that its new, faster quantum computer Sycamore had expanded the performance gap.

In terms of future real-world applications, most of the potential for quantum computers is in the realms of medicine, chemistry and materials research.

Google points to drug discovery, or finding molecules that could be useful medicines. It also says that quantum computers will be able to do the science needed to commercialize fusion energy.

When Microsoft announced its first quantum chip in February, the company highlighted chemistry and materials science problems, like why some materials corrode, or how to compost plastic.

There is also some optimism that quantum computers will be well suited for generating training data for AI applications, especially for situations or problems with a huge number of potential solutions.

A general view of the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., U.S., March 21, 2025.

Kent Nishimura | Reuters

A Google researcher maintains a webpage that catalogs many of the most prominent quantum algorithms.

The most famous is Shor’s algorithm, which showed that a quantum computer would be able to find prime factors of a large number far faster than is currently possible on a digital computer.

When the algorithm was discovered in 1994, it ignited some concern from militaries around the world. Many of them use an encryption method called RSA, which needs the process of factoring large numbers to be difficult in order to keep data secret.

Worry about China

The fear is that a quantum computer would allow an adversary like China to quickly decode U.S. military messages or consumer banking transactions.

“Without effective mitigation, the impact of adversarial use of a quantum computer could be devastating to [national security systems] and our nation,” the Pentagon said in 2021.

Microsoft has acknowledged the national security factor, and has even framed quantum security as a race against China.

“While most believe that the United States still holds the lead position, we cannot afford to rule out the possibility of a strategic surprise or that China may already be at parity with the United States,” Microsoft President Brad Smith wrote in a blog post in April.

The government has led an effort to move encryption to so-called post-quantum methods, which can’t be broken by a quantum computer. Companies such as Apple have already started to integrate post-quantum encryption into its services like iMessage.

But past communications can still contain secrets. Intelligence agencies and other hackers often collect encrypted data in the expectation that one day it can be decrypted.

For now, much of the work in quantum is still fairly academic.

Most of the advanced hardware companies today are working on “error correction,” or a variety of methods meant to reduce the number of errors, and make them less harmful when they happen.

In present-day quantum computers, the qubits fail as often as 1 out of 1,000 times they are used, according to Microsoft researchers. Microsoft said last week that it was able to reduce the error rate by 1,000-fold thanks to a new approach.

Several improvements in error correction have been announced over the past year, which is one reason why researchers and engineers are increasingly confident that they’ll be able to build a quantum computer.

The next issue to address is scaling up the computers.

Google’s new Willow chip has 105 qubits. Microsoft’s Majorana chip has eight. IBM’s Starling plans to have 200 qubits. Amazon’s Ocelot chip has 14 qubits. In the coming years, these numbers have to go way up. Google and Microsoft say a truly useful quantum computer will need 1 million qubits.

WATCH: Quantum computing is reaching an inflection point

Nvidia CEO: Quantum computing is reaching an inflection point

Continue Reading

Politics

Welfare bill a humiliating blow for Starmer, and the fallout will be felt way beyond this week

Published

on

By

Welfare bill a humiliating blow for Starmer, and the fallout will be felt way beyond this week

First there was stonewalling, then the private complaints from MPs before a very public outburst that saw an eye-watering 127 MPs tell their prime minister they were going to defy him on a welfare vote.

Now, the inevitable climbdown has arrived, with Downing Street making a significant offer to rebels last night on their planned cuts to disability benefits.

A government with a massive 165-strong working majority had an awakening on Thursday to the importance of parliament as it embarked on a humiliating climbdown after the private warnings of MPs to Downing Street fell on deaf ears.

It’s worth taking a beat to reflect on the enormity of this moment. Less than a year ago, the prime minister was walking into Number 10 having won a landslide, with a Labour majority not seen since the Blair era.

That he has been forced to retreat by angry foot soldiers so early in this premiership, despite having such a big majority, is simply unprecedented. No government has lost a vote at second reading – this basically the general principles of a bill – since 1986 (Thatcher’s shops bill) and that was the only occasion a government with a working majority lost a bill at the second reading in the entire 20th century.

It is obviously a humiliating blow to the authority of the prime minister from a parliamentary party that has felt ignored by Downing Street. And while Number 10 has finally moved – and quickly – to try to shut down the rebellion, the fallout is going to be felt long beyond this week.

Before we get into the problems for Starmer, I would like to acknowledge the predicament he’s in.

More on Sir Keir Starmer

Over the past 10 days, I have followed him to the G7 in Canada, where the Iran-Israel crisis, US-UK trade deal and Ukraine war were on the agenda, to Chequers at the weekend as he tried to deal with the US attack on Iran and all the risk it carried, and to the NATO summit this week in the Netherlands.

He could be forgiven for being furious with his operation for failing to contain the crisis when all his attention was on grave international matters.

He landed back in Westminster from the NATO summit on Wednesday night into a domestic battle that he really didn’t need but moved quickly to contain, signing off a plan that had been worked up this week in Downing Street to try to see off this rebellion.

👉 Click here to listen to Electoral Dysfunction on your podcast app 👈

What will the changes be?

The government has offered significant concessions to Labour rebels.

People who currently receive the personal independence payment (PIP) will continue to do so, as will recipients of the health element of universal credit.

Planned cuts will only hit future claimants.

The change in PIP payments will protect 370,000 existing recipients who were expected to lose out following reassessment.

One senior parliamentary source told me on Thursday night they thought it was a “good package” with “generous concessions”, but said it was up to individual MPs to decide whether to withdraw their names from the amendment that would have torpedoed the welfare bill.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Govt makes offer to rebels on welfare reforms

In the coming days, Number 10 will have to make the case to backbenchers and whittle down the rebellion in order to get the welfare bill passed on Tuesday. But it’s clear Number 10 has given MPs a ladder to climb down.

But the bigger question is, where does it leave the government and its party?

There is quiet fury from many MPs I have spoken to, angry at the Number 10 operation and critical of what they see as a “boy’s club”.

There has been criticism levelled at the PM’s chief of staff Morgan McSweeney, with MPs in seats facing challenge from the left rather than the right frustrated that the whole Number 10 strategy seems to be seeing off Reform, rather than look to the broader Labour base and threats from the Lib Dems or the Greens.

There is also much ire reserved for Rachel Reeves – interestingly Liz Kendall is escaping the criticism despite being the architect of the reforms – with MPs, already angry over winter fuel debacle, now in open revolt over the chancellor’s decision to force through these cuts ahead of the Spring Statement in March in order to help fill her fiscal black hole.

MPs felt talked down to

One Labour figure told me on Thursday the growing drumbeat in the party is that Reeves must go.

Another MP told me colleagues hated the cabinet ring around to try to persuade them to back down over welfare, saying more MPs ended up adding their names to the list because they felt talked down to.

Read more:
Rayner refuses to repeat chancellor’s tax hikes pledge
New plans to deport foreign prisoners earlier

All of this needs work if the PM has any hope of rebuilding trust between his party and his operation.

There is also the problem of what flows from the concessions.

The chancellor will have to fund these concessions, and that could mean hard choices elsewhere. Will this mean that the government ends up doing less on reforming the two-child cap, or will it have to find welfare cuts elsewhere?

That flows into the third problem. In seeing off this rebellion, Number 10 has contained MPs rather than converting them.

What the parliamentary party has seen is a government that, when pressed, be it on winter fuel or benefit cuts, will fold.

That will only serve to embolden MPs to fight again. In the immediate term, the government will hope it has seen off a potentially catastrophic defeat.

But seeing off the growing malaise around the Starmer administration just got a bit harder after this.

Continue Reading

Trending