thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-15--Seattle's Nursing Home Nightmare Could Be A Preview Of Things To Come

Long-term care was supposed to be part of the Affordable Care Act , too , but its proposal , to @ @ @ @ @ , had no funding beyond the first few years and was canceled because of that @ @ @ @ @ always been an obstacle to paying for long-term care , because it ’ s labor @ @ @ @ @ expensive , especially if the idea is to hire more people and pay them better @ @ @ @ @ .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The stories about the Kirkland Life Care Center are harrowing ― and, in the worst-case scenarios, a preview of things to come.
As of late last week, 26 residents of the Seattle-area nursing home had died because of the coronavirus. Twenty-one current residents had tested positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by the virus that first showed up in China late last year, with test results for another dozen pending.
Advertisement
Dozens of staff were home, away from work, in many cases because they had tested positive. That created severe shortages. At one point last week, administrators said they had just three full-time workers to care for the facility, which has more than 100 beds.
As the cases and fatalities mounted, the nursing home started restricting access, even to family members, as an emergency precaution to stop the transmission of germs into and out of the facility. That forced family members to communicate with residents through windows, or not at all.
“I just feel ill that my mom could be dying alone,” a relative of one resident told The New York Times. “It’s pure panic and I can do nothing. I have no control.”
“I don’t want to alarm people, but I am really worried. I’ve never felt as unnerved as I do now.” - Richard Mollot, executive director of the Long-Term Care Community Coalition
Advertisement
The federal government has dispatched teams of personnel to Kirkland, both to provide caregiving staff and to investigate why the infection spread as quickly as it did. Meanwhile, the Trump administration, working with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has issued nationwide guidelines for nursing homes and other long-term care facilities.
These guidelines call for the kinds of practices Kirkland eventually adopted, including expert-recommended, if difficult, restrictions on visitors and a new emphasis on infection control. The American Health Care Association, the trade group that represents nursing homes, has issued its own, similar set of guidelines and said it supports the government efforts.
“The most important thing right now is getting the message to all providers, by any means, about what they can do to prepare and respond,” the AHCA told HuffPost in an official statement.
The hope is that these measures will prevent more outbreaks like the one at Kirkland ― or, at least, contain outbreaks if they happen.
But it will not be easy.
Infection control is a long-standing, well-documented problem in nursing homes and similar facilities. They are chronically understaffed, even though they generate significant profits for some private-equity firms. Government oversight has always been lax ― although, notably, the Trump administration has for the last few years been taking steps to weaken it even more.
Advertisement
Truly fixing these problems will take time, because they were literally decades in the making. Long-term care is yet another example of the U.S. failing some of its most vulnerable citizens, and the issue is only now starting to get the attention it deserves in American politics.
In the meantime, the well-being of the people in long-term care facilities, along with the people who care for them, depends heavily on efforts to mitigate the pandemic’s spread across the U.S. And nobody yet knows how well that effort will go.
“I don’t want to alarm people, but I am really worried,” Richard Mollot, executive director of the Long-Term Care Community Coalition, told HuffPost. “I’ve never felt as unnerved as I do now.”
High-Risk Patients In High-Risk Settings
Residents of long-term care facilities are elderly or have serious health problems, or both, which means they are the groups most at risk of severe complications from COVID-19. They usually have cognitive or physical limitations, as well, and in some cases those limitations are severe.
Many cannot feed or dress themselves, or suffer from incontinence and are unable to handle their own hygiene. They depend on caregivers — sometimes around-the-clock — and, especially if they suffer from dementia, they may resist or actively fight as those caregivers try to help them.
Advertisement
A patient is transferred to an ambulance at the Life Care Center in Kirkland, Washington. As of late last week, 26 residents there had died from COVID-19. Karen Ducey via Getty Images
In recent years, the emphasis for long-term care has been to have the elderly and medically frail stay at home whenever possible. But people still end up in long-term care facilities, frequently because hiring enough qualified home aides would be too expensive, and in many cases they or family members must shop around for the cheapest options because those are all they can afford.
Long-term care comes in many varieties ― big and small, part of corporate chains or independently owned and operated. There’s assisted living, which is under state regulation and is mainly for people who need some help but can still do many daily tasks on their own. Then there are nursing homes, which are subject to federal oversight and are for people who need more attention because they have fewer capabilities.
At its best, the care in these facilities is loving, attentive and thorough. At its worst, it’s lackadaisical, impersonal and outright hazardous.
Nursing homes, in particular, have a reputation for poor care. In 1987, in response to stories of neglect and abuse, Congress passed the Nursing Home Reform Act, which established uniform quality standards, regular inspections and fines for noncompliance.
Advertisement
But 30 years later, problems remain widespread, especially when it comes to stopping the spread of communicable diseases like influenza, norovirus and, yes, coronavirus.
More than 60% of nursing homes had at least one citation for lapses in infection control since 2017, Kaiser Health News reporter Jordan Rau found after reviewing federal inspection records. Even among the top-rated facilities, the ones earning a coveted “five-star” rating, 40% had infection control lapses, Rau found.
Not every lapse is a serious one and only a tiny fraction of the citations, less than 1%, were the kind that would trigger financial sanctions because they caused patient harm. But estimates suggest that 380,000 people in long-term care facilities die from infections each year and, advocates say, there’s reason to think state inspectors simply under-estimate the severity of problems they find.
“Many more than 1% of infection control deficiencies reflect serious failures of care,” Toby Edelman, senior attorney at the Center for Medicare Advocacy, told HuffPost. “Problems in infection control cause, literally, millions of infections in nursing homes and other care settings each year, with hundreds of thousands hospitalized and many deaths. To call these problems ‘no harm’ is just not true.”
A Problem With Hand-Washing — And Staff Levels
Experts say the single biggest infection hazard in long-term care facilities is also the most obvious one and, in theory, simplest to fix: lack of adequate hand-washing. But there’s reason to think hand-washing might not be such an issue if these establishments had more people working at them, people with better training or both.
Advertisement
Citations for poor hand-washing are more common in facilities with fewer staff, researchers have found, and it’s not difficult to imagine why. The more that care workers are rushing to handle their high-needs patients, the less likely they are to wash their hands thoroughly or, in some cases, to wash them at all.
“The biggest problem in nursing homes is not enough staff, not enough people to get done what needs to be done,” Edelman said. “And there’s certainly not enough professional nurses. … They can be really decent, caring, doing the best they can, but with so much to do. It’s not their fault.”
Industry officials say they have enough workers to do their work adequately. “Facilities are staffed for what they need to do,” said David Gifford, chief medical officer for the American Health Care Association. But individual facilities frequently have trouble filling slots, he added, which has become a particular problem in this outbreak because so many workers are on self-quarantine.
The industry has long blamed these shortages on a combination of factors, including a strong economy, which they say makes working at their facilities less attractive, and low payments from government programs, especially Medicaid, which is the single biggest financier of nursing home care in the U.S.
If they had more revenue, industry officials say, they could pay higher wages, attracting more ― and more highly trained ― workers.
Advertisement
Patient advocates like Edelman and Mollot are skeptical of such arguments, pointing to the industry’s traditionally high profits and the number of private-equity companies that have been investing heavily in the field. And they have research to back them up.
A 2016 report from the Government Accountability Office found that, on the whole, independent and nonprofit facilities ran at lower margins but also had higher ratios of caregivers to patients. Other studies have linked private equity specifically to “lower-quality care, declines in patient health outcomes and weaker performance on inspections,” as a recent review by Eleanor Laise of MarketWatch noted.
If owners weren’t so determined to extract so much money for themselves and their investors, advocates say, they could hire more staffers, pay more salaries and offer better benefits ― including not just health insurance but paid sick leave.
“They’re always saying the same thing: There isn’t enough money and there’s too much regulation,” Edelman said. “But this is a profitable industry.”
Obama’s Regulations And Trump’s Rollback
As part of its COVID-19 response, Trump administration officials have issued more detailed guidelines on how nursing homes can avoid infections. They’ve also said they are going to make sure inspectors focus on infection control more specifically.
Advertisement
But this comes after a year of trying to roll back one of the few existing protections: an Obama-era regulation that required all nursing homes to put infection control experts on staff, at least in a part-time capacity.
The Trump administration has been trying to change that rule, so that the facilities could rely on outside consultants, with a vague requirement that consultants spend “sufficient time at the facility.”
Seema Verma, chief administrator for Medicare and Medicaid, announced new nursing home guidelines designed to reduce the risk of infections in response to COVID-19. Previously, she and the Trump administration rolled back Obama-era changes to safety regulations, saying that the guidelines were getting in the way of patient care. JIM WATSON via Getty Images
That regulatory change is not yet final. But the Trump administration has already rolled back another Obama rule, one that prohibited nursing home contracts that required arbitration, rather than lawsuits, to settle disputes.
And while the Obama administration had ramped up fines for infractions, the Trump administration has dialed them back down, by changing regulations to favor one-time penalties rather than penalties that accumulate for each day a nursing home is in violation of a standard.
Advertisement
That change is the likely reason that average fines, which had reached $41,260 in the final year of the Obama administration, fell to $28,405 under Trump, according to another Kaiser Health News investigation by Rau.
Industry lobbyists had asked for this change, saying it created wasteful, ultimately counterproductive paperwork. The Trump administration agreed. “Rather than spending quality time with their patients, the providers are spending time complying with regulations that get in the way of caring for their patients and doesn’t increase the quality of care they provide,” one official said after the regulatory change.
But the new fines offer far less incentive to change conduct, especially for the larger organizations. “For a small nursing home, it could be real money, but for bigger ones, it’s more likely a rounding error,” Ashish Jha, a professor from Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health, told Kaiser Health News.
On Capitol Hill, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.) have called for tighter standards and, more recently, for an investigation into whether lax regulation has left nursing home residents more vulnerable to the coronavirus.
“Kirkland should be a wake-up call for all of us,” Wyden, who has been among the most persistent advocates for seniors in Congress, told The Oregonian this week. “I have long been fearful about whether there are adequate protections for the elderly in a health care emergency or heaven forbid, a pandemic.”
Advertisement
A Long-Term Agenda For Long-Term Care
Those efforts have enthusiastic support from advocates like Edelman and Mollot. They would also like to see similar regulations apply to assisted living facilities, which are under state oversight.
And to make sure these long-term care providers are actually spending money on their residents, many senior groups have called for creating a “medical-loss ratio” for providers ― that is, a minimum standard for how much revenue must go to patients, rather than administration or profits ― and penalizing those who violate it.
A similar standard exists for insurance companies, thanks to the Affordable Care Act.
But guaranteeing access to high-quality long-term care, whatever its form, might ultimately require spending more money on it too, because the kind of care that lives up to higher standards inevitably costs more than most Americans pay on their own. Existing government programs, like Medicare and Medicaid, pay for these services only under certain circumstances and for certain groups of people.
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) has been warning about safety problems in nursing homes for years. Sarah Silbiger via Getty Images
The topic has come up in the presidential race, with the most ambitious proposal from the remaining candidates coming from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who included a long-term care benefit as part of his “Medicare for All” proposal. Vice President Joe Biden has not offered anything promising similar reach, though he has proposed new tax breaks to offset some long-term care costs.
Advertisement
On Capitol Hill, a comprehensive long-term benefit is part of the Medicare for America legislation from Reps. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.).
Long-term care was supposed to be part of the Affordable Care Act, too, but its proposal, to create a voluntary insurance program, had no funding beyond the first few years and was canceled because of that. Lack of funding has always been an obstacle to paying for long-term care, because it’s labor intensive and that makes it expensive, especially if the idea is to hire more people and pay them better than they are paid today.
The debate over whether and how to finance long-term care will come eventually. For now, there are more than a million people in nursing homes and assisted living facilities. And they are vulnerable.
”I think the staffing problem is going to be extremely hard to address in the short term,” said Mollot. “That is one of the reasons why I am so deeply concerned.”
It is also why the safety of residents, and the safety of the people who care for them, depends so heavily on what happens outside the facilities ― specifically, on whether the rest of society can slow the pandemic’s spread.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-14--Lying, Tweeting And Wishing A Pandemic Away Doesn’t Work, It Turns Out

On Feb. 26 , the day after a top official at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warned that life in the United States was likely to change very quickly , Trump claimed that there were only 15 cases here , and that number would soon fall to zero .
Two days later , he called the virus the latest “ hoax ” that Democrats and the media were using to hurt the economy and , in turn , his chances for reelection .
Indeed , over the course of February , he spoke and posted on Twitter repeatedly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disease it causes , had not killed as many as the seasonal flu and suggested that Americans should buy stocks .
It was not until Friday that Trump declared a national emergency , sending the official signal that local governments and hospitals around the country should take the problem seriously and ensuring that federal money would help reimburse their costs .
In the meantime , only a tiny fraction of Americans have been tested for the disease , meaning officials do not have enough data to allocate resources most efficiently .
Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Konyndyk said , should have been alarmed on Jan. 23 upon hearing of the mass quarantine in Hubei Province .
“ That right there should have been a huge warning sign , ” he said .
“ And there was no good reason to think if that could happen in China , it couldn ’ t happen somewhere else.
” That was the date the CDC should have started a crash program to develop and widely disseminate a test for the virus , the genetic code of which had been published by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hospitals should have been alerted to prepare for a crush of intensive care patients suffering from the disease , and first responders should have been notified and equipped with enough supplies to handle sick patients safely .
From the onset of the crisis , Trump has boasted about having imposed restrictions on foreigners — but not Americans — from entering the country from China back on Jan. 31 .
“ This is urgent for me right from the beginning .
You know that because I closed up our country to China , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the White House .
But just two weeks earlier , Trump had defended the action , saying he did not like having people on staff if they weren ’ t needed at that moment : “ Some of the people we cut , they haven ’ t been used for many , many years .
And if ― if we have a need , we can get them very quickly.
” “ Someone should have been looking at the big picture , and that someone should have been at the White House .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Konyndyk said , adding that instead of preparing to deal with the pandemic here , Trump and his top officials fixated on the idea they could keep it from entering the country , despite knowing how contagious it was and how long an incubation period it had .
“ There was no reason to think we could keep this out.
” Trump ’ s own behavior , meanwhile , continued to undermine the warnings and advice put out by experts in his own administration .
At Friday ’ s news conference , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nose , and then shook hands with other participants and adjusted the microphone at the lectern even though he has come into contact with individuals who have subsequently tested positive for the virus .
And while members of Congress have self-quarantined after being exposed to people who have tested positive , Trump refused to do so .
For days , he also declined to be tested .
When asked about being tested on Friday , Trump said all he did was shake hands and have a photograph taken with an infected person and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even know the individual .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Keep up with the latest updates on the coronavirus at our live blog.
WASHINGTON ― What happens when the president of the United States tries to lie, wish and tweet a pandemic away?
As it turns out, it puts a government response four to six weeks behind schedule, possibly resulting in thousands — or even tens or hundreds of thousands — more Americans getting seriously ill and dying.
Advertisement
“They underprepared, and now we have to catch up,” said Jeremy Konyndyk, who worked on the widely praised 2014 Ebola outbreak response under former President Barack Obama. “We could have been in a dramatically different place at this point.”
On Jan. 22, the day before China imposed a draconian quarantine on the province where the virus originated, Donald Trump claimed the disease was “totally under control,” that it was just in a single patient who had come from China. “It’s going to be just fine.”
On Feb. 10, as the virus was starting to spread in Italy and Iran, Trump told a meeting of the nation’s governors at the White House: “A lot of people think that goes away in April with the heat.”
On Feb. 26, the day after a top official at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warned that life in the United States was likely to change very quickly, Trump claimed that there were only 15 cases here, and that number would soon fall to zero.
Advertisement
Two days later, he called the virus the latest “hoax” that Democrats and the media were using to hurt the economy and, in turn, his chances for reelection. Indeed, over the course of February, he spoke and posted on Twitter repeatedly that the coronavirus and COVID-19, the disease it causes, had not killed as many as the seasonal flu and suggested that Americans should buy stocks.
It was not until Friday that Trump declared a national emergency, sending the official signal that local governments and hospitals around the country should take the problem seriously and ensuring that federal money would help reimburse their costs. In the meantime, only a tiny fraction of Americans have been tested for the disease, meaning officials do not have enough data to allocate resources most efficiently.
“He’s just failing miserably,” said Juliette Kayyam, who helped handle the 2009 H1N1 flu outbreak and the British Petroleum oil spill for Obama’s Department of Homeland Security and now lectures on emergency management at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. “It’s about a president who saw a category five hurricane coming ashore, and just let it come.”
President Donald Trump speaks in the press briefing room at the White House on Saturday. Tasos Katopodis via Getty Images
Trump’s comments set the tone
Although Trump may not specifically have told administration officials to focus on travel bans and downplay the coronavirus threat to avoid spooking the financial markets, he did not need to, disaster response experts said. His public statements and tweets made clear what he wanted.
Advertisement
“It’s hard to go against the president,” Konyndyk said. “People in government are very attuned to what the president does and does not want to hear.”
Trump’s top national security and health officials, Konyndyk said, should have been alarmed on Jan. 23 upon hearing of the mass quarantine in Hubei Province. “That right there should have been a huge warning sign,” he said. “And there was no good reason to think if that could happen in China, it couldn’t happen somewhere else.”
That was the date the CDC should have started a crash program to develop and widely disseminate a test for the virus, the genetic code of which had been published by Chinese scientists nearly two weeks earlier. Hospitals should have been alerted to prepare for a crush of intensive care patients suffering from the disease, and first responders should have been notified and equipped with enough supplies to handle sick patients safely.
“That’s like basic crisis management 101,” Kayyam said. “The federal apparatus is just not ready.”
On Friday, though, Trump refused to accept any blame for his administration’s response: “I don’t take responsibility at all.” He then added, evidence notwithstanding, that his own performance has been superb. “We’re doing a great job.”
From the onset of the crisis, Trump has boasted about having imposed restrictions on foreigners — but not Americans — from entering the country from China back on Jan. 31. “This is urgent for me right from the beginning. You know that because I closed up our country to China,” he told reporters again on Saturday at the White House.
Advertisement
In fact, by that point, as later evidence would show, the virus had already entered the United States, and “community spread” — which expands the circle of infection far more rapidly than entry of foreigners — had already begun.
“We don’t have a travel ban. We have a travel Band-Aid right now,” Ron Klain, who led Obama’s Ebola response, told lawmakers on Feb. 5. “First, before it was imposed, 300,000 people came here from China in the previous month. So, the horse is out of the barn.”
Undoing Obama at all costs
While Trump’s shaky effort with coronavirus began in January, its seeds were sewn nearly two years earlier, when his administration dismantled the pandemic response team that Obama created following the Ebola outbreak.
It was designed to streamline the federal government’s ability to deal with subsequent epidemics and was led by a member of the National Security Council, with direct access to the national security adviser.
Trump, who has made it a top priority to undo all of Obama’s accomplishments, claimed Friday that he didn’t have anything to do with eliminating the office and knew nothing about it.
Advertisement
But just two weeks earlier, Trump had defended the action, saying he did not like having people on staff if they weren’t needed at that moment: “Some of the people we cut, they haven’t been used for many, many years. And if ― if we have a need, we can get them very quickly.”
Konyndyk said that in doing so, Trump had lost a lot of expertise from government. More important, it meant no one was in place at the NSC to see what was happening in China and immediately set a coordinated response in motion here.
“Someone should have been looking at the big picture, and that someone should have been at the White House. But they dissolved the directorate,” Konyndyk said, adding that instead of preparing to deal with the pandemic here, Trump and his top officials fixated on the idea they could keep it from entering the country, despite knowing how contagious it was and how long an incubation period it had. “There was no reason to think we could keep this out.”
Trump’s own behavior, meanwhile, continued to undermine the warnings and advice put out by experts in his own administration. At Friday’s news conference, he repeatedly touched his face, including his nose, and then shook hands with other participants and adjusted the microphone at the lectern even though he has come into contact with individuals who have subsequently tested positive for the virus.
And while members of Congress have self-quarantined after being exposed to people who have tested positive, Trump refused to do so. For days, he also declined to be tested. When asked about being tested on Friday, Trump said all he did was shake hands and have a photograph taken with an infected person and that, besides, he did not even know the individual.
Advertisement
“I have no idea who he is, but I take pictures and it lasts for, literally, seconds,” Trump said. “I don’t know the gentleman that we’re talking about. I have no idea who he is.”
Friday night, just before midnight, White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham released a letter from Trump’s White House doctor claiming that the president’s situation did not warrant getting a coronavirus test. But during a Saturday news briefing, Trump claimed he had, in fact, been tested the previous night, but the results weren’t yet available.
“I decided I should, based on the press conference yesterday. People were asking that I take the test,” Trump said Saturday. “Only because the press is going crazy.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-15--Joe Biden Says He Will Select A Woman As Vice President During D.C. Debate

Former Vice President Joe Biden said he plans to pick a woman as his running mate if he secures the Democratic nomination to challenge President Donald Trump .
“ I would pick a woman to be my vice president , ” Biden said during Sunday night ’ s debate against Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) .
“ There are a number of women who are qualified to be president tomorrow.
” Biden leads Sanders in both the delegate count and public polling , and is heavily favored to secure the nomination .
Sanders suggested he was inclined to pick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but did not make the same commitment .
“ In all likelihood , I would , ” he said .
“ For me , it ’ s not just nominating a woman .
It is making sure that we have a progressive woman , and there are progressive women out there .
So my very strong tendency is to move in that direction.
” Both men have made similar suggestions in the past , but Biden ’ s pledge goes further than either candidate has gone before .
A number of women have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden , including California Sen. Kamala Harris , Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar , Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren , Nevada Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto , Florida Rep. Val Demings , Michigan Gov .
Gretchen Whitmer and former Georgia gubernatorial nominee Stacey Abrams .
Biden ’ s and Sanders ’ pronouncements , however , will likely be disappointing to a number of men who were considered potential vice presidential picks , including New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker and former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg .
Both men have endorsed Biden .
No @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vice president .
Only two women , New York Rep. Geraldine Ferraro and Alaska Gov .
Sarah Palin , have ever been a major party nominee for vice president .
Ferraro was the Democratic vice presidential nominee in 1984 and Palin was the GOP vice presidential nominee in 2008 .
CORRECTION : A previous version of this story said only one woman had been a major party nominee for vice president .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Former Vice President Joe Biden said he plans to pick a woman as his running mate if he secures the Democratic nomination to challenge President Donald Trump.
“I would pick a woman to be my vice president,” Biden said during Sunday night’s debate against Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). “There are a number of women who are qualified to be president tomorrow.”
Advertisement
Biden leads Sanders in both the delegate count and public polling, and is heavily favored to secure the nomination.
Sanders suggested he was inclined to pick a woman as his running mate, but did not make the same commitment.
“In all likelihood, I would,” he said. “For me, it’s not just nominating a woman. It is making sure that we have a progressive woman, and there are progressive women out there. So my very strong tendency is to move in that direction.”
Both men have made similar suggestions in the past, but Biden’s pledge goes further than either candidate has gone before.
Advertisement
A number of women have been floated as potential running mates for Biden, including California Sen. Kamala Harris, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Nevada Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, Florida Rep. Val Demings, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and former Georgia gubernatorial nominee Stacey Abrams.
Biden’s and Sanders’ pronouncements, however, will likely be disappointing to a number of men who were considered potential vice presidential picks, including New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg. Both men have endorsed Biden.
No woman has ever served as president or vice president. Only two women, New York Rep. Geraldine Ferraro and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, have ever been a major party nominee for vice president. Ferraro was the Democratic vice presidential nominee in 1984 and Palin was the GOP vice presidential nominee in 2008.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-15--Illinois Governor Says Trump Aide 'Yelled' At Him For Complaint On Airport Chaos

Illinois Gov .
J.B. Pritzker ( D ) was looking for help from the Trump administration to deal with Chicago ’ s dangerously crowded O ’ Hare Airport amid stepped-up screening for the coronavirus ― crowds that made impossible the social distancing urged by health officials .
Instead , Pritzker said an aide to President Donald Trump “ yelled at me about the tweet ” the governor had posted complaining about the situation .
“ Here ’ s what I got .
I got a call at about 11:00 last night after that tweet from a White House staffer who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That is what I got , ” Pritzker said when asked on NBC ’ s “ Meet The Press ” about any “ reassurance ” he received from the Trump administration .
Pritzker said that to avoid “ exactly what you don ’ t want during this pandemic.
” the administration should have provided more federal workers at airports this weekend because of the expected delays stemming from Americans returning to the U.S. because of Trump ’ s European travel ban .
The administration seemed “ completely unprepared ” as the situation grew @ @ @ @ @ @ @ O ’ Hare was among a number of airports mobbed with the kind of crowds that health experts warn can spread coronavirus as Americans returning home from abroad waited on lines for as long as seven hours .
U.S. passengers returning from overseas were funneled through 13 airports where operations were clearly not set up to handle them efficiently .
Pritzker said that U.S. governors are “ on our own ” concerning what actions to take to battle the spread of the coronavirus because the federal government has “ fallen down ” on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had leadership from Washington ; we ’ re not getting it , ” he added .
Chicago has shut schools and canceled this year ’ s St. Patrick Day Parade .
Pritzker on Sunday announced that all bars and restaurants in Illinois would close through March 30 , beginning at the end of Monday ’ s business day .
Pritzker fired off an angry tweet on Saturday directed at Trump on Twitter “ since this is the only communication medium you pay attention to — you need to do something NOW.
” He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ needs to get its s @ # t together .
NOW.
” The crowds & lines O ’ Hare are unacceptable & need to be addressed immediately .
@ realDonaldTrump @ VP since this is the only communication medium you pay attention to—you need to do something NOW .
These crowds are waiting to get through customs which is under federal jurisdiction — Governor JB Pritzker ( @ GovPritzker ) March 15 , 2020 Pritzker said on NBC that “ we ’ ve been talking to Customs and Border Patrol officials directly on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ ve been working with the mayor and our senators to make sure we ’ re getting the federal government to pay attention to this problem.
” Under new regulations that went into effect Friday at midnight , Americans flying in from most of Europe , China and Iran now face “ enhanced entry screening.
” They must answer questions about their medical history and current condition , and must provide contact information for local health authorities , according to a Department of Homeland Security statement .
They are then being urged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Trump on Sunday in a tweet asked the public to “ pardon the interruptions and delays.
” Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf tweeted earlier that DHS was “ aware ” of “ long lines , ” and claimed that screenings took only some “ 60 seconds.
” 2/2 I understand this is very stressful .
In these unprecedented times , we ask for your patience .
It currently takes ~60 seconds for medical professionals to screen each passenger .
We will be increasing capacity but the health and safety of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — Acting Secretary Chad Wolf ( @ DHS_Wolf ) March 15 , 2020

Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D) was looking for help from the Trump administration to deal with Chicago’s dangerously crowded O’Hare Airport amid stepped-up screening for the coronavirus ― crowds that made impossible the social distancing urged by health officials.
Instead, Pritzker said an aide to President Donald Trump “yelled at me about the tweet” the governor had posted complaining about the situation.
Advertisement
“Here’s what I got. I got a call at about 11:00 last night after that tweet from a White House staffer who yelled at me about the tweet. That is what I got,” Pritzker said when asked on NBC’s “Meet The Press” about any “reassurance” he received from the Trump administration.
An unnamed White House source insisted to the Washington Examiner: “There was no yelling.”
Pritzker said that to avoid “exactly what you don’t want during this pandemic.” the administration should have provided more federal workers at airports this weekend because of the expected delays stemming from Americans returning to the U.S. because of Trump’s European travel ban. The administration seemed “completely unprepared” as the situation grew worse on Sunday, Pritzker said.
O’Hare was among a number of airports mobbed with the kind of crowds that health experts warn can spread coronavirus as Americans returning home from abroad waited on lines for as long as seven hours. U.S. passengers returning from overseas were funneled through 13 airports where operations were clearly not set up to handle them efficiently.
This is what travel restrictions can do: create situations perfect for super-spreading events. https://t.co/ROwzfsCpoj — Dr. Seema Yasmin (@DoctorYasmin) March 15, 2020
Advertisement
Pritzker said that U.S. governors are “on our own” concerning what actions to take to battle the spread of the coronavirus because the federal government has “fallen down” on the job. “I wish we had leadership from Washington; we’re not getting it,” he added.
Chicago has shut schools and canceled this year’s St. Patrick Day Parade. Pritzker on Sunday announced that all bars and restaurants in Illinois would close through March 30, beginning at the end of Monday’s business day.
Pritzker fired off an angry tweet on Saturday directed at Trump on Twitter “since this is the only communication medium you pay attention to — you need to do something NOW.” He also tweeted: “The federal government needs to get its s@#t together. NOW.”
The crowds & lines O’Hare are unacceptable & need to be addressed immediately.@realDonaldTrump @VP since this is the only communication medium you pay attention to—you need to do something NOW.
These crowds are waiting to get through customs which is under federal jurisdiction — Governor JB Pritzker (@GovPritzker) March 15, 2020
Pritzker said on NBC that “we’ve been talking to Customs and Border Patrol officials directly on the ground at O’Hare. I’ve been working with the mayor and our senators to make sure we’re getting the federal government to pay attention to this problem.”
Advertisement
Under new regulations that went into effect Friday at midnight, Americans flying in from most of Europe, China and Iran now face “enhanced entry screening.” They must answer questions about their medical history and current condition, and must provide contact information for local health authorities, according to a Department of Homeland Security statement. They are then being urged to self-quarantine at home for 14 days.
Trump on Sunday in a tweet asked the public to “pardon the interruptions and delays.” Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf tweeted earlier that DHS was “aware” of “long lines,” and claimed that screenings took only some “60 seconds.”
DHS is aware of the long lines for passengers who are undergoing increased medical screening requirements. Right now we are working to add additional screening capacity and working with the airlines to expedite the process. 1(/2) — Acting Secretary Chad Wolf (@DHS_Wolf) March 15, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-16--4 Takeaways From Bernie Sanders And Joe Biden’s Head-To-Head Debate

Sanders and Biden largely agree on how to address the coronavirus pandemic in the short-term .
They don ’ t agree on whether it ’ s time to talk about the long-term .
“ People are looking for results , not a revolution .
They want to deal with the results they need right now , ” Biden said .
“ That has nothing to do with the legitimate concern about income inequality in America .
That ’ s real .
That ’ s real .
But that does not affect the need for us to act swiftly and very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the forces that we need to bring to bear to deal with the crisis now so no one is thrown out of their home .
No one loses their mortgage .
No one is kicked out of their house .
No one loses their paycheck .
No one is in a position where they have a significant financial disability as a consequence of this.
” “ Well , I think it goes without saying that as a nation we have to respond as forcefully as we can to the current crisis , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be understanding how we got here and where we want to go into the future , ” Sanders said .
“ So how does it happen that today in the wealthiest country in the history of the world , half of our people are scared to death ?
” Sanders finally got the Social Security debate he had been hoping for .
Biden outright denied doing a lot of things that he has done ― and the moderators did not correct him .
If a Democrat wins the presidential election , the vice @ @ @ @ @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) stood behind lecterns 6 feet apart in CNN’s Washington, D.C., studio. Instead of shaking hands as they walked on stage, the two Democratic presidential candidates bumped elbows. There was no audience to cheer them on.
In the middle of the coronavirus pandemic, Biden and Sanders participated in a somewhat surreal 11th presidential primary debate — and the first in which the two Democratic front-runners were able to go head-to-head.
Advertisement
The COVID-19 outbreak, which has the potential to infect millions of Americans, has completely upended presidential politics; both campaigns have told staff to work from home and have canceled all public appearances, opting to do virtual rallies and town halls instead.
But despite this national emergency, voters in Florida, Ohio, Illinois and Arizona are scheduled to go to the polls on Tuesday, the day that will in all likelihood determine the outcome of the presidential primary.
Everything is looking in Biden’s favor. Sanders has had a series of bad election nights, starting with the South Carolina primary, and Tuesday looks like it could be another sweep for the former vice president. Sanders won California, the state with the primary’s biggest delegate haul, but still lags behind Biden in the tally by more than 150 delegates.
The Sanders team was hoping a spectacularly good debate performance on the senator’s part ― or a disastrous one on Biden’s ― could potentially turn the tides. But Sunday night didn’t deliver on either front, and the debate was completely overshadowed by a global public health crisis. Here are four takeaways.
Advertisement
Former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) stood 6 feet apart to limit spread of the coronavirus in a head-to-head debate in Washington on Sunday. MANDEL NGAN/Getty Images
Sanders and Biden largely agree on how to address the coronavirus pandemic in the short-term. They don’t agree on whether it’s time to talk about the long-term.
Rightly so, the first half hour of the debate was spent on the coronavirus outbreak. Although the candidates were addressing the same topic, it was like watching two separate conversations in tandem.
Biden and Sanders have each laid out plans to address the pandemic, and they look very similar: Both are calling for free medical testing and treatment, establishing mobile testing sites, expanding hospital capacity, ensuring paid time off and expanded benefits.
During the debate, Biden was focused on the short-term. Sanders wanted to talk more about the future. Specifically, he wanted to make the case for his signature “Medicare for All” health insurance system, which would guarantee government-sponsored health insurance for all Americans.
Advertisement
So over and over again, the two candidates essentially debated what they should be debating.
“People are looking for results, not a revolution. They want to deal with the results they need right now,” Biden said. “That has nothing to do with the legitimate concern about income inequality in America. That’s real. That’s real. But that does not affect the need for us to act swiftly and very thoroughly and in concert with all of the forces that we need to bring to bear to deal with the crisis now so no one is thrown out of their home. No one loses their mortgage. No one is kicked out of their house. No one loses their paycheck. No one is in a position where they have a significant financial disability as a consequence of this.”
Sanders didn’t necessarily disagree. But he was also trying to make a different point.
“Well, I think it goes without saying that as a nation we have to respond as forcefully as we can to the current crisis, but it is not good enough not to be understanding how we got here and where we want to go into the future,” Sanders said. “So how does it happen that today in the wealthiest country in the history of the world, half of our people are scared to death?”
Sanders said during the debate that the national crisis over a pandemic is an appropriate time to discuss long-term reforms to the U.S. health care system. MANDEL NGAN/Getty Images
Sanders finally got the Social Security debate he had been hoping for.
A highlight of the debate for Sanders was a prolonged exchange with Biden over the former vice president’s history of supporting Social Security cuts. It’s a vulnerability that Sanders has sought to expose for some time, but he previously hadn’t had the chance to have an uninterrupted back-and-forth with Biden on the subject.
Biden actually brought up the topic while claiming that one of Sanders’ television advertisements, which blasts Biden for previously supporting Social Security cuts, is inaccurate.
Advertisement
But in the conversation that followed, Sanders managed to catch Biden flat-footed. Even as he denied calling for the cuts, Biden admitted that “everything was on the table” ― including Social Security cuts ― when he participated in bipartisan budget talks as part of the Obama administration.
Biden tried to claim that the talks did not constitute support for Social Security cuts because he and the Obama administration discussed them “in order to get the kinds of changes we need on other things.”
But Sanders argued the reason didn’t matter ― the conversation had still occurred. “Maybe it’s a good reason, maybe it’s not,” he said. “All that I am saying is you were prepared to cut and advocated for the cuts.”
Biden outright denied doing a lot of things that he has done ― and the moderators did not correct him.
Sanders wanted to get Biden to address his record, repeatedly asking him about his history with welfare reform, consumer finance and environmental policy. But instead of admitting past errors in judgment, Biden gave blanket denials about his past record.
Advertisement
At multiple junctures during the debate, Biden either misrepresented or outright lied about his record without any objection from the moderators.
Biden denied calling for Social Security cuts on the floor of the Senate. But in a Senate floor speech in January 1995, Biden boasted about a vote to freeze federal spending that would have effectively cut Social Security and other social programs. Later that year, he voted for a narrowly defeated constitutional amendment that would have jeopardized Social Security benefits with automatic cuts in the event that Congress did not offset budget deficits.
Sanders pressed Biden about helping craft the 2005 Republican bankruptcy bill, a piece of legislation that made it harder for individuals to file for bankruptcy. Biden denied having a major role in the bill’s development, claiming the bill’s passage was inevitable and that he had sought to lessen its negative impact by, among other things, protecting women and children in need of alimony money.
In fact, Biden was a proponent of making it harder for households declare bankruptcy throughout the 1990s. He promoted it even when Elizabeth Warren, a bankruptcy law professor at the time, pushed then-first lady Hillary Clinton to convince President Bill Clinton to veto it. When the bill passed under President George W. Bush in 2005, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) singled out Biden, praising him and Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) for “doing their best” over the years to get the bill passed.
President Barack Obama and Biden even disagreed on the issue. Obama, who voted against the law in 2005, attacked then-Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on the presidential campaign trail in 2008 for supporting the legislation and “siding with banking industry lobbyists.”
Advertisement
And in an exchange on environmental policy Sunday night, Biden, under pressure from Sanders to adopt a bigger climate plan, appeared to say he supported a ban on fracking — even though his own campaign’s platform does not support such a policy.
Sanders pointed out the discrepancy, but there was little followup.
After the debate, the Biden campaign clarified that Biden was referring to his proposal to forbid new oil and gas fracking on public lands, rather than in the country at large.
Debate moderators didn't step in when Biden made some inaccurate claims about his record. MANDEL NGAN/Getty Images
If a Democrat wins the presidential election, the vice president will likely be a woman.
Biden made a commitment on stage Sunday night: If he is made the nominee, his pick for vice president will be a woman.
Sanders said that “in all likelihood” he would pick a woman to join him on the ticket.
“To me, it’s not just nominating a woman,” Sanders said. “It is making sure that we have a progressive woman, and there are progressive women out there.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-15--Americans Just Got A Glimpse Of Presidential Crisis Management

At Sunday night ’ s CNN/Univision debate , the two front-runners for the Democratic presidential nomination , former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) , got a chance to talk about the pandemic that has already killed several dozen Americans and could kill hundreds of thousands , maybe even more , before it has run its course .
But Biden and Sanders also agreed on a lot .
And in sketching out their responses to the crisis , they managed to do what President Donald Trump has very conspicuously not yet done : They showed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. and had a sense of how to overcome them .
Biden went first , identifying three critical needs : rapidly expanding testing , increasing the capacity of the health care system to deal with the coming surge of patients , and addressing the economic downturn sure to happen as nearly all activity in the U.S. grounds to a halt .
Sanders also honed in on three urgent tasks .
Like Biden , he identified the need to ramp up health care system capacity and to save the economy .
But where Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about making sure people didn ’ t have to worry about paying for any medical treatment related to the pandemic .
It made sense that Sanders would talk about health care , because “ Medicare for All ” has been such a signature cause for him .
He has said repeatedly that the coronavirus exposes the flaws in the U.S. health care system : It ’ s making clear how the lack of affordable health care makes it hard for people to get tests or treatment when they need it ― which , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ puts everybody at risk .
As usual , Medicare for All became a source of conflict between the two candidates at the debate .
Early on , Biden , who does not support the policy , took a jab at Sanders by saying Italy ’ s struggles with coronavirus prove such a system “ doesn ’ t work.
” That ’ s not really a defensible claim .
Italy ’ s health system is overrun because the pandemic got so out of control , by all accounts , not because of the system @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a single-payer system , though not identical to what Sanders has in mind , and has won international praise for its reaction to the pandemic .
But Biden followed up quickly with what sounded like a clarification ― that Medicare for All , per se , wasn ’ t an answer to coronavirus .
“ That would not solve the problem at all , ” Biden said .
He went on to explain that the crisis called for an immediate response , like the one he outlined in his Thursday speech .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plan Biden released on Thursday didn ’ t merely propose to increase the health system ’ s capacity .
It offered concrete ideas for how to accomplish that ― like deploying mobile medical units from an emergency federal stockpile , setting up real-time dashboards to track patient admissions and the availability of key supplies , and creating a national telephone hotline available to all Americans with questions .
The plan closely aligned with what public health experts have been recommending and even included a few ideas ( like the mobile medical clinics ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That ’ s not surprising , because managing an interagency response to a crisis is something Biden has done before , and done well ― specifically , with implementation of the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act , which was the emergency legislation designed to stop the economy from falling apart and , then , to get it moving again .
In a sense , Sanders and Biden weren ’ t so much disagreeing as focusing on different things .
Sanders was talking about what the U.S. needs to do in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public health crisis , while Biden was talking about how to act in the short-term to solve the current public health crisis .
Democratic voters will have to decide which approach makes sense , and which candidate they trust more .
But the contrast between the two of them on the one hand , and Trump on the other , could not be more stark .
Trump made two major public appearances this week : an Oval Office speech and an event with CEOs in the Rose Garden .
In each case , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president managed to make inaccurate statements ― like claiming that Google was about to set up an interactive testing site ― that the White House had to correct later .
Meanwhile , testing in the U.S. continues to lag behind other countries , with widespread stories of people who likely need but can not get tests ― even though Trump keeps boasting that they are available everywhere .
And while pretty much everybody watching the news now understands that the limited hospital capacity is about to become a crisis , Trump said nothing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration ’ s officials also have provided no answers when asked , in public or private , what they intend to do about it .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
America finally got to see what presidential leadership on the coronavirus outbreak looks like. But it didn’t come from the president.
At Sunday night’s CNN/Univision debate, the two front-runners for the Democratic presidential nomination, former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), got a chance to talk about the pandemic that has already killed several dozen Americans and could kill hundreds of thousands, maybe even more, before it has run its course.
Advertisement
They took slightly different tacks ― consistent with their different philosophies and approaches to the presidency ― and largely reiterated the points they each made Thursday during speeches addressing the crisis.
But Biden and Sanders also agreed on a lot. And in sketching out their responses to the crisis, they managed to do what President Donald Trump has very conspicuously not yet done: They showed they understood the immediate challenges facing the U.S. and had a sense of how to overcome them.
Biden went first, identifying three critical needs: rapidly expanding testing, increasing the capacity of the health care system to deal with the coming surge of patients, and addressing the economic downturn sure to happen as nearly all activity in the U.S. grounds to a halt.
Sanders also honed in on three urgent tasks. Like Biden, he identified the need to ramp up health care system capacity and to save the economy. But where Biden had talked about testing, Sanders talked about making sure people didn’t have to worry about paying for any medical treatment related to the pandemic.
Advertisement
It made sense that Sanders would talk about health care, because “Medicare for All” has been such a signature cause for him. He has said repeatedly that the coronavirus exposes the flaws in the U.S. health care system: It’s making clear how the lack of affordable health care makes it hard for people to get tests or treatment when they need it ― which, in the case of a pandemic, puts everybody at risk.
“If this isn’t a red flag for the current dysfunctional and wasteful health care system, frankly I don’t know what is,” Sanders said in his Thursday speech. “We are only as safe as the least insured person in America.”
Former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on stage at the Democratic primary debate on Sunday. During the debate, the each laid out what they would do to address the coronavirus outbreak in the U.S. AP Photo/Evan Vucci
As usual, Medicare for All became a source of conflict between the two candidates at the debate. Early on, Biden, who does not support the policy, took a jab at Sanders by saying Italy’s struggles with coronavirus prove such a system “doesn’t work.”
That’s not really a defensible claim. Italy’s health system is overrun because the pandemic got so out of control, by all accounts, not because of the system’s design. South Korea has a single-payer system, though not identical to what Sanders has in mind, and has won international praise for its reaction to the pandemic.
Advertisement
But Biden followed up quickly with what sounded like a clarification ― that Medicare for All, per se, wasn’t an answer to coronavirus. “That would not solve the problem at all,” Biden said. He went on to explain that the crisis called for an immediate response, like the one he outlined in his Thursday speech.
It was not an empty boast. The plan Biden released on Thursday didn’t merely propose to increase the health system’s capacity. It offered concrete ideas for how to accomplish that ― like deploying mobile medical units from an emergency federal stockpile, setting up real-time dashboards to track patient admissions and the availability of key supplies, and creating a national telephone hotline available to all Americans with questions.
The plan closely aligned with what public health experts have been recommending and even included a few ideas (like the mobile medical clinics) that haven’t gotten much attention. That’s not surprising, because managing an interagency response to a crisis is something Biden has done before, and done well ― specifically, with implementation of the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which was the emergency legislation designed to stop the economy from falling apart and, then, to get it moving again.
In a sense, Sanders and Biden weren’t so much disagreeing as focusing on different things. Sanders was talking about what the U.S. needs to do in the long-term to better prepare for the next public health crisis, while Biden was talking about how to act in the short-term to solve the current public health crisis.
Democratic voters will have to decide which approach makes sense, and which candidate they trust more. But the contrast between the two of them on the one hand, and Trump on the other, could not be more stark.
Advertisement
Trump made two major public appearances this week: an Oval Office speech and an event with CEOs in the Rose Garden. In each case, despite reading from prepared text, the president managed to make inaccurate statements ― like claiming that Google was about to set up an interactive testing site ― that the White House had to correct later.
During these appearances, Trump also modeled exactly the kind of behavior that public health experts have been begging Americans to avoid: hand-shaking and standing in close proximity to other people.
Meanwhile, testing in the U.S. continues to lag behind other countries, with widespread stories of people who likely need but cannot get tests ― even though Trump keeps boasting that they are available everywhere.
And while pretty much everybody watching the news now understands that the limited hospital capacity is about to become a crisis, Trump said nothing about it in his speeches. His administration’s officials also have provided no answers when asked, in public or private, what they intend to do about it.
Sanders or Biden may not have all the solutions. But on Sunday night, they at least showed that they understood what the problems are.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-16--Ted Cruz Praises Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's 'Good Advice' On Coronavirus Conduct

There are not many issues that those on opposite ends of the political spectrum can agree on , but how Americans should behave during the coronavirus pandemic may be one of them .
On Saturday , Sen. Ted Cruz ( R-Texas ) , a steadfast conservative , shared coronavirus precautions that were tweeted by progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( D-N.Y. ) and applauded her “ good advice ” : Good advice — not just for NYC , but everywhere .
If you can stay home , stay home .
And wash your hands .
https : //t.co/WOcTclI7Ki — Ted Cruz @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2020 Ocasio-Cortez ’ s warning was posted as governors in several states shuttered restaurants , bars and movie theaters to encourage social distancing .
Los Angeles and New York City followed suit Sunday but allowed restaurants to offer take-out and delivery orders .
New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo ( D ) and Mayor Bill de Blasio ( D ) also announced that New York City schools would close on Monday until at least April 20 , and possibly for the rest of the year .
Last Friday , Cruz also announced that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 17 after “ a second interaction ” with an individual who tested positive for coronavirus .
Cruz and Ocasio-Cortez ’ s words align with advice from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , which has recommended that all gatherings of 50 people or more be canceled or postponed for the next eight weeks in a bid to slow community spread of COVID-19 .
Although Cruz and Ocasio-Cortez have previously butted heads online , they ’ ve also publicly aligned on a handful of issues .
Bipartisanship in a crisis also allowed the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last week that includes provisions for free coronavirus testing and paid sick leave .
The Senate will take up the bill this week .
Twitter commentators noted the significance of the lawmakers ’ message in light of their differences : Ted Cruz and AOC are agreeing with each other and teaming up with a great message to help all Americans .
Maybe there is hope for us after all .
— Eugene Gu , MD ( @ eugenegu ) March 14 , 2020 Ted Cruz agreeing with AOC .
If that does n't @ @ @ @ @ @ @ n't know what will pic.twitter.com/bqoJkzZBoW — supernintendo chalmers ( @ helmerroids ) March 15 , 2020 This is where we 're at .
Ted Cruz is saying AOC is giving good advice .
This is how serious this is .
https : //t.co/nB4YYqZFGl — Dan Slott ( @ DanSlott ) March 15 , 2020 Ted Cruz and AOC agree on something .
They both think you should stay home whenever possible .
If you are encouraging people to do the opposite , you are outside of the Cruz to AOC continuum on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extremist .
Do the right thing .
Stay home .
https : //t.co/tLuBB56EnB — Matt Lane ( @ MattLaneWrites ) March 14 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Looks like progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and hard-right Sen. Ted Cruz just found something else to agree on: advice for avoiding the spread of the coronavirus.
Cruz (R-Texas) on Saturday shared coronavirus precautions that were tweeted by Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and applauded her “good advice”:
Advertisement
Good advice — not just for NYC, but everywhere.
If you can stay home, stay home.
And wash your hands. https://t.co/WOcTclI7Ki — Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) March 14, 2020
Ocasio-Cortez’s warning was posted as governors in several states shuttered restaurants, bars and movie theaters to encourage social distancing. Los Angeles and New York City followed suit Sunday, but allowed restaurants to offer take-out and delivery orders.
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) and Mayor Bill de Blasio (D) also announced that New York City schools would close on Monday until at least April 20, and possibly for the rest of the year.
Cruz announced on Friday that he will extend his self-quarantine until March 17 after “a second interaction” with an individual who tested positive for coronavirus.
Advertisement
Cruz and Ocasio-Cortez’s words align with advice from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which has recommended that all gatherings of 50 people or more be canceled or postponed for the next eight weeks in a bid to slow community spread of COVID-19.
Although Cruz and Ocasio-Cortez have previously butted heads online, they’ve also exchanged some friendly tweets. Last year they seemed to agree on the need to block former members of Congress from becoming lobbyists.
Bipartisanship in the coronavirus crisis allowed the House to pass an economic relief package last week that includes provisions for free coronavirus testing and paid sick leave. The Senate will take up the bill this week.
Twitter commentators noted the significance of Cruz’s embrace of Ocasio-Cortez’s advice in light of their differences:
When you see Brian Schatz retweeting Ted Cruz quote-tweeting AOC in agreement you know these are extraordinary times: pic.twitter.com/rZIfH23p04 — Esther Choo (@choo_ek) March 14, 2020
Advertisement
If Ted Cruz and AOC are both telling you to stay home, PLEASE JUST STAY HOME! https://t.co/yli9KrYc8y — Michael Tracey (@mtracey) March 14, 2020
Ted Cruz retweeting AOC with positive reinforcement.
Things just got real. https://t.co/i8Sg26FUWx — Karl Bélanger (@KarlBelanger) March 15, 2020
Ted Cruz and AOC are agreeing with each other and teaming up with a great message to help all Americans.
Maybe there is hope for us after all. — Eugene Gu, MD (@eugenegu) March 14, 2020
Sign of the end times. Ted Cruz retweeting AOC. https://t.co/IY8x4ttfS6 — Stephen Maher (@stphnmaher) March 15, 2020
We now reached the “Ted Cruz just retweeted AOC and said ‘Good advice’” level of seriousness. 😳 https://t.co/XG8sy71ha9 — Jenny Mae (@redheadjennKC) March 15, 2020
Advertisement
Ted Cruz agreeing with AOC. If that doesn't have you taking this seriously I don't know what will pic.twitter.com/bqoJkzZBoW — supernintendo chalmers (@helmerroids) March 15, 2020
This is where we're at. Ted Cruz is saying AOC is giving good advice. This is how serious this is. https://t.co/nB4YYqZFGl — Dan Slott (@DanSlott) March 15, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-15--Coronavirus Looms Large In Feisty Debate Between Joe Biden And Bernie Sanders

But the event felt more than a little surreal as the two candidates went through the motions in a race that is effectively over , sparring over bread-and-butter issues ― even as the national conversation has been consumed by talk of a global recession and rising mortality rates due to the coronavirus pandemic .
Apart from the first 30 minutes , during which both candidates spelled out what they would do to address the virus and took shots at how President Donald Trump is handling the crisis , the debate sounded a lot like those that preceded it .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do , whether or not I ’ m president , is to shut this president up right now , ” Sanders said , accusing Trump of “ undermining the doctors and the scientists trying to help the American people.
” U.S. officials on Sunday announced the closures of many schools , bars and restaurants across the country , as well as severe limitations on public gatherings .
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended that no gatherings with 50 people or more take place for the next eight weeks .
The agency @ @ @ @ @ @ @ total coronavirus cases in the U.S. , with at least 65 deaths attributed to the illness .
The outbreak forced organizers to move Sunday ’ s debate from a university campus in Arizona to a CNN studio in Washington , where it was held without a live audience .
The Democratic presidential contenders emerged on stage and greeted each other by touching elbows ― one of the methods public health officials have advised to curb the spread of the virus .
“ I wash my hands God knows how many times a day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden said when moderators asked how the candidates were managing their personal hygiene and routines in the wake of the outbreak .
Their answers about how the U.S. should proceed with dealing with the coronavirus outbreak also put on display how the two septuagenarians would govern .
Sanders , for example , argued the crisis revealed the deep systemic flaws that exist in American society , especially when it comes to the nation ’ s health care and financial systems .
He said his proposals like “ Medicare for All ” and free @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to address them .
“ In the midst of this crisis , if you ’ re a multimillionaire , you ’ re going to get through it .
You ’ re not worried about income or health care , ” Sanders said .
“ We ’ ve got to move aggressively right now to address economic crisis .
... What we have got to do also is understand the fragility of the economy and how unjust and unfair it is and so many have so little.
” “ People are looking for solution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
“ They want to deal with what we can do right now .
We can do that .
We can make them whole ― now .
That has nothing to do with a legitimate concern about income inequality in this country.
” But the debate quickly shifted to other topics as Sanders repeatedly pressed Biden on his past stances over Social Security funding , the Iraq War and bankruptcy laws , attempting to force the former vice president to adopt a more progressive agenda before he clinches the Democratic nomination .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the race will be unifying the party against Trump .
To that end , prior to the debate , his campaign announced that he was endorsing two ideas offered by Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts , the other progressive in the race who dropped out earlier this month .
The proposals , which he previously opposed , would make it easier for some to afford college and would make key changes to the nation ’ s bankruptcy laws .
“ He ’ s making it hard for me right now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when a moderator asked how he planned to appeal to Sanders ’ supporters .
“ I ’ ve been trying to give him credit for things and he won ’ t even take the credit !
” Nevertheless , the former vice president tried to bridge their divides later in the night .
“ We disagree on the detail of how we do it , but we don ’ t disagree on the principle , ” he said .
“ We fundamentally disagree with this president .
This is much bigger whether I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s the nominee .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON ― Former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) squared off in a one-on-one presidential primary debate in the nation’s capital Sunday night, trading jabs for two hours over their records on health care, the economy, immigration and climate change.
But the event felt more than a little surreal as the two candidates went through the motions in a race that is effectively over, sparring over bread-and-butter issues ― even as the national conversation has been consumed by talk of a global recession and rising mortality rates due to the coronavirus pandemic.
Advertisement
Apart from the first 30 minutes, during which both candidates spelled out what they would do to address the virus and took shots at how President Donald Trump is handling the crisis, the debate sounded a lot like those that preceded it.
“The first thing we have got to do, whether or not I’m president, is to shut this president up right now,” Sanders said, accusing Trump of “undermining the doctors and the scientists trying to help the American people.”
U.S. officials on Sunday announced the closures of many schools, bars and restaurants across the country, as well as severe limitations on public gatherings. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended that no gatherings with 50 people or more take place for the next eight weeks. The agency also announced there were at least 3,482 total coronavirus cases in the U.S., with at least 65 deaths attributed to the illness.
The outbreak forced organizers to move Sunday’s debate from a university campus in Arizona to a CNN studio in Washington, where it was held without a live audience. The Democratic presidential contenders emerged on stage and greeted each other by touching elbows ― one of the methods public health officials have advised to curb the spread of the virus.
Advertisement
“I wash my hands God knows how many times a day with hot water and soap,” Biden said when moderators asked how the candidates were managing their personal hygiene and routines in the wake of the outbreak.
“Joe and I did not shake hands,” Sanders noted. “I am very careful about the people I’m interacting with.”
Democratic presidential hopefuls former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) greet each other with an elbow bump as they arrive for the Democratic primary debate on Sunday. MANDEL NGAN via Getty Images
Their answers about how the U.S. should proceed with dealing with the coronavirus outbreak also put on display how the two septuagenarians would govern. Sanders, for example, argued the crisis revealed the deep systemic flaws that exist in American society, especially when it comes to the nation’s health care and financial systems. He said his proposals like “Medicare for All” and free college were needed now more than ever to address them.
“In the midst of this crisis, if you’re a multimillionaire, you’re going to get through it. You’re not worried about income or health care,” Sanders said. “We’ve got to move aggressively right now to address economic crisis. ... What we have got to do also is understand the fragility of the economy and how unjust and unfair it is and so many have so little.”
Advertisement
Biden, meanwhile, focused more on responding to this specific outbreak, calling for free testing and for using the military to expand availability of beds in the nation’s hospitals.
“People are looking for solution, not a revolution,” Biden said. “They want to deal with what we can do right now. We can do that. We can make them whole ― now. That has nothing to do with a legitimate concern about income inequality in this country.”
But the debate quickly shifted to other topics as Sanders repeatedly pressed Biden on his past stances over Social Security funding, the Iraq War and bankruptcy laws, attempting to force the former vice president to adopt a more progressive agenda before he clinches the Democratic nomination.
Biden’s biggest challenge going forward in the race will be unifying the party against Trump. To that end, prior to the debate, his campaign announced that he was endorsing two ideas offered by Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the other progressive in the race who dropped out earlier this month. The proposals, which he previously opposed, would make it easier for some to afford college and would make key changes to the nation’s bankruptcy laws.
But it won’t be easy, as Biden acknowledged during a debate that featured several sharp exchanges that were likely welcomed by Trump’s campaign.
Advertisement
“He’s making it hard for me right now,” Biden said at one point when a moderator asked how he planned to appeal to Sanders’ supporters. “I’ve been trying to give him credit for things and he won’t even take the credit!”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-15--Read Live Updates From The Democratic Debate In Washington, D.C.

Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) will face off in a presidential debate Sunday evening @ @ @ @ @ field narrowed significantly following Super Tuesday .
The debate , initially set to be held @ @ @ @ @ to Washington , D.C. , due to concerns over the coronavirus pandemic .
The Democratic @ @ @ @ @ forgo on audience and bar reporters from attending .
Both Biden and Sanders have largely @ @ @ @ @ the number of COVID-19 cases increases across the nation .
Sunday ’ s debate , @ @ @ @ @ , will begin at 8 p.m .
ET and be moderated by CNN ’ s @ @ @ @ @ , as well as Univision ’ s Ilia Calderón .
Read live updates from the @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) will face off in a presidential debate Sunday evening, the first since the field narrowed significantly following Super Tuesday.
The debate, initially set to be held in Arizona, was relocated to Washington, D.C., due to concerns over the coronavirus pandemic. The Democratic National Committee also decided to forgo an audience and bar reporters from attending.
Advertisement
Both Biden and Sanders have largely moved their campaigns online as the number of COVID-19 cases increases across the nation.
Sunday’s debate, airing on CNN and Univision, will begin at 8 p.m. ET and be moderated by CNN’s Dana Bash and Jake Tapper, as well as Univision’s Ilia Calderón.
Read live updates from the debate below:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-15--Joe Biden Admits He Was Willing To Cut Social Security As Part Of Budget Talks

But he also conceded that “ everything was on the table ” during deficit-reduction talks he had taken part in , an apparent reference to negotiations with Congress when he was second-in-command in the Obama administration .
“ What is true is in terms of the negotiations that were taking place , how to deal with the deficit , everything was on the table , ” Biden said .
“ I did not support any of those cuts in Social Security or in veterans [ benefits ] .
” “ I know , because people like me helped stopped that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just contradicted yourself… One minute you said , ‘ I was not on the floor [ calling for cuts ] , ’ the next minute you say , ‘ Well , yes , there was a reason why I was worried about the deficit.
’ Maybe it ’ s a good reason , maybe it ’ s not .
All that I am saying is you were prepared to cut and advocated for the cuts.
” The negotiations Biden mentioned presumably referred to his role in 2011 debt-reduction talks with congressional Republicans in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a list of changes Democrats were considering in exchange for potential concessions from GOP lawmakers on Democratic priorities like new revenue .
Those talks fell apart , but they stand as a testament to Biden ’ s prominent role in the Obama administration ’ s ultimately unsuccessful , multi-year quest to strike a fiscal “ grand bargain ” with Republicans .
In particular , then-President Barack Obama , with Biden at his side , dangled the prospect of a more modest cost-of-living adjustment for Social Security , veterans benefits and other programs in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on other items .
The resistance of ultra-conservative Republicans helped spike those talks , but Sanders is correct in noting that progressive protests he helped lead generated pressure from the left as well .
Meanwhile , Biden ’ s contention that he has never voted to cut Social Security is simply not true .
Throughout the 1980s , 90s and 2000s , Biden , then a senator from Delaware , was part of a prominent faction of Democrats who saw embracing cuts to Social Security as a mark of fiscal seriousness .
For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a narrowly defeated constitutional amendment that would have required a balanced federal budget every year .
At the time , liberal policy experts warned that by subjecting Social Security to automatic , across-the-board caps absent budgetary offsets , such an amendment would have risked cutting the benefits issued by the self-funded program .
In the exchange with Sanders on Sunday , Biden also denied that he had ever been supportive of the Bowles-Simpson fiscal commission that the Obama administration convened in 2010 for the express purpose of recommending major cuts to Social Security @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was individually a “ fan , ” he was part of an administration that convened the bipartisan commission and subsequently set out to fulfill its mandate of scaling back the country ’ s major social insurance programs in the name of debt reduction .
Shortly after the commission completed its business , Biden hired the panel ’ s staff director , Bruce Reed , as his chief of staff .
Some politics watchers interpreted the hiring as a sign that the administration took the commission ’ s mandate seriously .
Reed , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Democratic Party ’ s business-friendly policy initiatives over the years , is now a top policy adviser to Biden ’ s presidential campaign and often travels with him .
In a follow-up question , CNN ’ s Dana Bash did ask Sanders to explain whether he could credibly criticize Biden , since he wrote in a 1996 op-ed that he supported “ adjustments ” to Social Security .
“ It is clear we will have to make incremental adjustments in Social Security taxes and benefits , ” Sanders wrote at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a strong moment for Sanders in a debate where Biden ’ s experience in the Obama White House appeared to give him the upper hand .
Sanders had been hoping to make an issue of Biden ’ s history of interest in Social Security cuts for some time , but previous debates that included several other candidates who have since exited the presidential race did not allow for such an extended back-and-forth .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Former Vice President Joe Biden admitted on Sunday night that “everything was on the table,” including Social Security cuts, during bipartisan budget talks in which he participated.
In a one-on-one Democratic presidential debate in Washington, Biden accused Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) of airing TV ads that inaccurately claimed Biden had supported cuts to Social Security benefits.
Advertisement
It sparked a prolonged exchange between the two in which Sanders pointed to times that Biden had either voted for or voiced support for cuts to the program.
“You were in the Senate for a few years, time and time again, talking about the necessity ― with pride ― about cutting Social Security, cutting Medicare, cutting veterans programs,” Sanders said.
Biden inaccurately argued that he had never cast votes for legislation that would have cut Social Security.
But he also conceded that “everything was on the table” during deficit-reduction talks he had taken part in, an apparent reference to negotiations with Congress when he was second-in-command in the Obama administration.
Advertisement
“What is true is in terms of the negotiations that were taking place, how to deal with the deficit, everything was on the table,” Biden said. “I did not support any of those cuts in Social Security or in veterans [benefits].”
Sanders, sensing a vulnerable moment, interjected.
“Whoa, whoa, whoa ― ‘everything was on the table’: All right, you’re right, you just said it ― including cuts to Social Security and veterans,” Sanders said.
Even as he confessed to his role in discussions of Social Security cuts, former Vice President Joe Biden inaccurately denied other elements of his record. MANDEL NGAN/Getty Images
Rather than walk back the admission, Biden said it was done in the context of seeking concessions on other Democratic priorities.
“In order to get the kinds of changes we need on other things related,” Biden replied. “But we did not cut it.”
Advertisement
“I know, because people like me helped stopped that,” Sanders answered. “You just contradicted yourself… One minute you said, ‘I was not on the floor [calling for cuts],’ the next minute you say, ‘Well, yes, there was a reason why I was worried about the deficit.’ Maybe it’s a good reason, maybe it’s not. All that I am saying is you were prepared to cut and advocated for the cuts.”
“I did not ― I never voted to cut Social Security,” Biden responded
“Not talking about voting, Joe ― that’s not what I said,” Sanders concluded.
The negotiations Biden mentioned presumably referred to his role in 2011 debt-reduction talks with congressional Republicans in which Social Security cuts were part of a list of changes Democrats were considering in exchange for potential concessions from GOP lawmakers on Democratic priorities like new revenue. Those talks fell apart, but they stand as a testament to Biden’s prominent role in the Obama administration’s ultimately unsuccessful, multi-year quest to strike a fiscal “grand bargain” with Republicans.
In particular, then-President Barack Obama, with Biden at his side, dangled the prospect of a more modest cost-of-living adjustment for Social Security, veterans benefits and other programs in exchange for potential new revenue and cooperation on other items. The resistance of ultra-conservative Republicans helped spike those talks, but Sanders is correct in noting that progressive protests he helped lead generated pressure from the left as well.
Biden speaks as then-House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) looks on during a meeting discussing plans to reduce the debt in May 2011. The negotiations never bore fruit. SAUL LOEB/Getty Images
Meanwhile, Biden’s contention that he has never voted to cut Social Security is simply not true. Throughout the 1980s, 90s and 2000s, Biden, then a senator from Delaware, was part of a prominent faction of Democrats who saw embracing cuts to Social Security as a mark of fiscal seriousness. For example, in 1995 he voted for a narrowly defeated constitutional amendment that would have required a balanced federal budget every year. At the time, liberal policy experts warned that by subjecting Social Security to automatic, across-the-board caps absent budgetary offsets, such an amendment would have risked cutting the benefits issued by the self-funded program.
Advertisement
As a presidential candidate in 2007, Biden said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that he would “absolutely” consider raising the eligibility age for Social Security or cutting the cost-of-living adjustment.
In the exchange with Sanders on Sunday, Biden also denied that he had ever been supportive of the Bowles-Simpson fiscal commission that the Obama administration convened in 2010 for the express purpose of recommending major cuts to Social Security and Medicare.
“I was not a fan of Bowles-Simpson,” Biden said.
Whether or not Biden was individually a “fan,” he was part of an administration that convened the bipartisan commission and subsequently set out to fulfill its mandate of scaling back the country’s major social insurance programs in the name of debt reduction.
Shortly after the commission completed its business, Biden hired the panel’s staff director, Bruce Reed, as his chief of staff. Some politics watchers interpreted the hiring as a sign that the administration took the commission’s mandate seriously. Reed, who has been at the heart of many of the Democratic Party’s business-friendly policy initiatives over the years, is now a top policy adviser to Biden’s presidential campaign and often travels with him.
As has been the case during so many of the Democratic presidential debates, CNN and Univision’s debate moderators did not step in at any point to note that Biden had spoken inaccurately.
Advertisement
In a follow-up question, CNN’s Dana Bash did ask Sanders to explain whether he could credibly criticize Biden, since he wrote in a 1996 op-ed that he supported “adjustments” to Social Security. “It is clear we will have to make incremental adjustments in Social Security taxes and benefits,” Sanders wrote at the time.
Sanders replied that he was calling for higher, rather than lower, benefits. “Adjustments that I advocated and have advocated for years, is among other things, increasing the cost of living assistance,” he said.
CNN’s Andrew Kaczynski backed Sanders up on Twitter, noting that he had found a Sanders op-ed on Roll Call from 1997 in which Sanders explicitly called for lifting the cap on income taxed for Social Security.
Overall, the exchange was a strong moment for Sanders in a debate where Biden’s experience in the Obama White House appeared to give him the upper hand. Sanders had been hoping to make an issue of Biden’s history of interest in Social Security cuts for some time, but previous debates that included several other candidates who have since exited the presidential race did not allow for such an extended back-and-forth.
In addition to inaccurately denying elements of his record on Social Security, Biden has defended himself by pointing to his current plans to expand Social Security benefits and shore up the program’s finances by lifting the cap on earnings subject to the Social Security tax.
Advertisement
He reiterated that commitment on Sunday. “I have laid out how I will increase Social Security benefits,” he said.