thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-17--National Parks Are Finally Taking Coronavirus Seriously

The Washington Monument and other sites on the National Mall in Washington , D.C. , closed over the weekend , followed on Monday by the Statue of Liberty in New York City and Alcatraz Island and other sites at the Golden Gate National Recreation Area in San Francisco .
Several smaller sites , including Arizona ’ s Casa Grande Ruins National Monument and Georgia ’ s Fort Pulaski National Monument , announced full closures Tuesday .
At numerous parks and other sites that remain open , visitor centers have shuttered , and shuttles , guided tours and other often-crowded public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to prevent the spread of COVID-19 among visitors , federal employees and other park staff .
A steady stream of closures and operational changes were announced on NPS ’ s website on Tuesday .
More aggressive mitigation efforts kicked into gear after the Trump administration Department of Interior granted park superintendents the authority to manage their own response and suspend operations as they see fit .
In a Tuesday news release about modifying its operations , NPS said it is “ taking extraordinary steps ” to implement the latest guidance from health experts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health and safety of our visitors , employees , volunteers , and partners is the priority of the National Park Service , ” Interior Secretary David Bernhardt said in a statement accompanying the release .
“ Park superintendents are empowered to modify their operations , including closing facilities and cancelling programs , to address the spread of the coronavirus.
” The change of course by the Trump administration comes one day after the Coalition to Protect America ’ s National Parks , an organization representing current and former parks employees , called on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ require people to be in close proximity to one another .
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Sunday recommended gatherings of 50 people or more be postponed or canceled for the next eight weeks .
And President Donald Trump on Monday called on Americans to avoid public places and crowds of more than 10 people ― which is certainly out of step with allowing park facilities to remain open , as the NPS saw 327 million visitors last year .
As the coronavirus upended daily life and forced the closure of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in cities across the country , many wondered for how long America ’ s national parks , monuments and memorials would continue to be part of the problem .
Jon Jarvis , the former director of the National Park Service under President Barack Obama , told HuffPost he was shocked by the lack of leadership and guidance NPS received from Washington early on and said restoring park superintendent authority was the right move to protect employees , concessioners and visitors .
“ Since the arrival of this administration , they have been preaching @ @ @ @ @ @ @ makers ‘ closer to the field ’ and out of the hands of the Washington bureaucrats , ” Jarvis said by email Tuesday .
“ This is how they justified the ‘ re-organization ’ and moving employees to the west .
And yet , when the crisis of the virus hit , they pulled the decisions out of the hands of the people in the field .
Then realized , late , that this was a bad decision and restored their authority.
” “ As the CDC has stated , this virus is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ States , and most people in the United States will have little immediate risk of exposure to this virus , ” Bernhardt wrote in guidance to agency staff on March 9 .
At that point , infections had started to balloon in the U.S. , with at least 22 fatalities and over 400 confirmed cases in at least 35 states .
As of Tuesday , the outbreak has reached 49 states , the District of Columbia , Puerto Rico , Guam , and US Virgin Islands .
There have been more than 4,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. and the CDC ’ s worst-case projection indicates that 160 million to 214 million Americans ― 49 to 65 % of the U.S. population ― could ultimately be infected , as The New York Times reported last week .
By seemingly every measure , Trump has bungled the government ’ s response .
He spent weeks falsely claiming that the outbreak was under control and blaming other countries for letting the disease spread , wasting precious time to get out ahead of the outbreak .
Still , Bernhardt has showered his boss @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president took “ decisive — even unprecedented — actions to protect the American people.
” “ It ’ s a relief to see things headed in the right direction , ” Kate Kelly , public lands director at the left-leaning Center for American Progress and a former interior official in the Obama administration , said Tuesday after additional park facilities were closed .
“ Still , it ’ s shameful that it took this long for management to empower land managers to do what ’ s right for public servants and visitors @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The National Park Service has begun closing facilities and services at parks and monuments across the country after what many say was a slow, dangerous response to the deadly coronavirus pandemic.
The Washington Monument and other sites on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., closed over the weekend, followed on Monday by the Statue of Liberty in New York City and Alcatraz Island and other sites at the Golden Gate National Recreation Area in San Francisco. Several smaller sites, including Arizona’s Casa Grande Ruins National Monument and Georgia’s Fort Pulaski National Monument, announced full closures Tuesday.
Advertisement
At numerous parks and other sites that remain open, visitor centers have shuttered, and shuttles, guided tours and other often-crowded public events have been suspended in an effort to prevent the spread of COVID-19 among visitors, federal employees and other park staff. A steady stream of closures and operational changes have been announced on NPS’s website since Monday.
In St. Louis, Missouri, tram rides to the top of The Gateway Arch were suspended starting Tuesday, and the visitor center, museum and other parts of the park closed on Wednesday.
Also on Wednesday, NPS temporarily suspended entrance fees at parks that remain open nationwide ― a move it said would help support social distancing. Many were quick to question whether doing so could backfire by driving larger numbers of visitors to already crowded parks.
More aggressive mitigation efforts kicked into gear after the Trump administration Department of Interior granted park superintendents the authority to manage their own response and suspend operations as they see fit. In a Tuesday news release about modifying its operations, NPS said it is “taking extraordinary steps” to implement the latest guidance from health experts.
Advertisement
“The health and safety of our visitors, employees, volunteers, and partners is the priority of the National Park Service,” Interior Secretary David Bernhardt said in a statement accompanying the release. “Park superintendents are empowered to modify their operations, including closing facilities and cancelling programs, to address the spread of the coronavirus.”
But park officials had previously been told that “all operational changes in parks (cancellations and closures) must be made through the proper NPS leadership channels” in Washington, D.C., according to National Parks Traveler, a nonprofit media organization that covers park news.
The change of course by the Trump administration comes one day after the Coalition to Protect America’s National Parks, an organization representing current and former parks employees, called on NPS to shut down all facilities that require people to be in close proximity to one another.
“We fully recognize that calling for a nationwide closure of national park sites is unusual,” the coalition said. “But these are unprecedented times that call for unprecedented measures.”
A closure note due to coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is seen at the entrance to the Washington Monument in Washington, U.S., March 14, 2020. Yuri Gripas / Reuters
Advertisement
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Sunday recommended gatherings of 50 people or more be postponed or canceled for the next eight weeks. And President Donald Trump on Monday called on Americans to avoid public places and crowds of more than 10 people ― which is certainly out of step with allowing park facilities to remain open, as the NPS saw 327 million visitors last year.
As the coronavirus upended daily life and forced the closure of restaurants, bars and other public spaces in cities across the country, many wondered for how long America’s national parks, monuments and memorials would continue to be part of the problem.
Jon Jarvis, the former director of the National Park Service under President Barack Obama, told HuffPost he was shocked by the lack of leadership and guidance NPS received from Washington early on and said restoring park superintendent authority was the right move to protect employees, concessioners and visitors.
“Since the arrival of this administration, they have been preaching that they wanted to get the decision makers ‘closer to the field’ and out of the hands of the Washington bureaucrats,” Jarvis said by email Tuesday. “This is how they justified the ‘re-organization’ and moving employees to the west. And yet, when the crisis of the virus hit, they pulled the decisions out of the hands of the people in the field. Then realized, late, that this was a bad decision and restored their authority.”
Trump’s Interior Chief Downplayed Threat
Even as the number of confirmed COVID-19 infections and deaths in the U.S. spiked and health officials sounded the alarm that the worst is yet to come, the National Park Service maintained a surprisingly optimistic message.
Advertisement
“Visitors can be assured that facilities and service in national parks, including lodges, restaurants and shuttles, continue to monitor conditions and maintain high standards related to health and wellness of staff and visitors,” reads NPS’s website on its COVID-19 response.
Bernhardt followed Trump’s lead in downplaying the severity of the coronavirus threat.
“As the CDC has stated, this virus is NOT currently spreading widely in the United States, and most people in the United States will have little immediate risk of exposure to this virus,” Bernhardt wrote in guidance to agency staff on March 9. At that point, infections had started to balloon in the U.S., with at least 22 fatalities and over 400 confirmed cases in at least 35 states.
“Americans don’t need to change their day-to-day lives but should stay informed and practice good hygiene,” Bernhardt’s office wrote in a March 11 memo obtained by the Los Angeles Times that included talking points for Interior officials.
As of Tuesday, the outbreak has reached 49 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, and US Virgin Islands. There have been more than 4,000 confirmed cases and 75 deaths in the U.S. and the CDC’s worst-case projection indicates that 160 million to 214 million Americans ― 49 to 65% of the U.S. population ― could ultimately be infected, as The New York Times reported last week.
By seemingly every measure, Trump has bungled the government’s response. He spent weeks falsely claiming that the outbreak was under control and blaming other countries for letting the disease spread, wasting precious time to get out ahead of the outbreak. Still, Bernhardt has showered his boss with praise, tweeting March 13 that the president took “decisive — even unprecedented — actions to protect the American people.”
Advertisement
Since we became aware of the coronavirus outbreak in China, @realDonaldTrump has taken decisive - even unprecedented- actions to protect the American people. He is leading an “all-of-America” approach to address this national emergency and bring it to an end. https://t.co/KTlQLDrMXK — Secretary David Bernhardt (@SecBernhardt) March 13, 2020
What impact the administration’s sluggish response at national parks will have remains to be seen.
“It’s a relief to see things headed in the right direction,” Kate Kelly, public lands director at the left-leaning Center for American Progress and a former interior official in the Obama administration, said Tuesday after additional park facilities were closed. “Still, it’s shameful that it took this long for management to empower land managers to do what’s right for public servants and visitors alike.”
The Interior Department did not immediately respond to HuffPost’s request for comment Tuesday.
UPDATE: March 18 ― This story has been updated to note that fees have been suspended at parks that remain open.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-17--Guns, Ammo Retailers Report Sales Surge Across U.S. Amid Coronavirus Fears

“ I think a lot of people are seeing what ’ s going on in the [ grocery ] stores and want to make sure they ’ ve got what they need if they ’ re in a bind .
Who knows what people are going to do , ” she added , referring to concerns about possible looting or other lawlessness in response to the pandemic .
In New Jersey , which has some of the most restrictive firearm laws in the country , prospective first-time gun owners must apply for permits through the state police .
It can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issued , if at all .
Like Carrara ’ s Gun Shop in Vermont , Oak Ridge Firearms has seen an increase in firearm purchases , particularly shotguns , but not as much as the demand for ammunition .
The Oak Ridge employee estimated the shop has sold about three to four times the amount of ammo compared to this time last year .
But the boost in sales during the coronavirus pandemic is likely fueled in large part by concerns of social unrest , said Adam Winkler , a professor of constitutional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and an expert on gun policy .
He said he ’ s not surprised to see lines out the door at some gun stores , and he expects sales to continue to grow as long as stores remain open .
“ It shows that there is this primal need for self-defense , ” he added .
“ When you depend on the government for social [ stability ] and all of a sudden it seems like the government isn ’ t going to be able to provide that , people get scared.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many gun buyers , studies show that living in a house with a gun increases the risk of death .
Homicides and suicides are far more likely to occur when a gun is present in a household , according to a 2014 study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine .
Having a gun in the house also increases the potential for a deadly accident .
Firearms are the second leading cause of death among American children and adolescents , behind car crashes .
At least 73 children under the age of 12 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Those gun deaths were often related to a child ’ s access to a firearm , and were either self-inflicted or at the hands of another child , according to the Children ’ s Hospital of Philadelphia Research Institute .
The first confirmed case in the U.S. of COVID-19 , the disease caused by the novel coronavirus , was reported on January 21 .
As of Monday , the virus had infected nearly 3,500 people across 49 states , as well as Washington , D.C. , Puerto Rico , Guam and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people in the U.S. have died from COVID-19 .
Reports about increased firearm and ammo sales in the last month are largely anecdotal .
The FBI ’ s monthly report on firearm background checks initiated through the NICS system is often a strong indicator of whether gun sales have increased in a given period of time .
At the time of publication , the FBI had not yet posted numbers for March .
Ammo.com , an online retailer of ammunition , said it ’ s seen a surge in sales that correlates with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Delaware have grown by more than 4,500 % ― the most of any state , according to the website .
Customers in Vermont , Maryland , Mississippi and Louisiana , where confirmed cases of the virus have steadily increased , have also placed substantially more orders than normal .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Toilet paper and hand sanitizer aren’t the only items flying off store shelves as the coronavirus continues to spread across the country. Some gun and ammunition retailers say they’ve seen so much demand in recent weeks that they’re having trouble keeping their shops stocked, too.
HuffPost called dozens of brick-and-mortar gun shops around the country. The vast majority said they were too overwhelmed with customers to comment when we called.
Advertisement
Michelle Bruneau, an employee at Carrara’s Gun Shop in Shrewsbury, Vermont, said she’s seen a significant boost in sales ― mostly ammunition ― over the last few weeks.
“We’re out in the woods,” Bruneau told HuffPost. “We don’t get a ton of traffic, especially this time of year. We had like six or seven customers yesterday, that’s huge for us.”
It’s been difficult to restock the store, Bruneau said, because suppliers are struggling to manufacture enough product to meet demand. She said “tons of people” have been calling ahead to see what’s available.
“I think a lot of people are seeing what’s going on in the [grocery] stores and want to make sure they’ve got what they need if they’re in a bind. Who knows what people are going to do,” she added, referring to concerns about possible looting or other lawlessness in response to the pandemic.
Advertisement
People are also stocking up, as prices are expected to jump due to the higher demand, she said.
An employee at Oak Ridge Firearms in Oak Ridge, New Jersey, who asked not to be identified, said there’s been significantly more interest than normal from first-time buyers.
In New Jersey, which has some of the most restrictive firearm laws in the country, prospective first-time gun owners must apply for permits through the state police. It can take weeks for a permit to be issued, if at all.
“They call and have no idea what the process is,” the employee said. “They’re frustrated because they want something right now.”
David Liu, owner of a gun store, takes an order from a customer in Arcadia, California, on Sunday. ASSOCIATED PRESS
Like Carrara’s Gun Shop in Vermont, Oak Ridge Firearms has seen an increase in firearm purchases, particularly shotguns, but not as much as the demand for ammunition. The Oak Ridge employee estimated the shop has sold about three to four times the amount of ammo compared to this time last year.
Advertisement
“I can’t say I’ve ever seen something like this because of disease happening before,” he told HuffPost. “Some people are concerned there could be lawlessness.”
Firearm sales often spike after mass shootings, especially since the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, in 2012, because some people fear the government will impose tighter gun restrictions in their aftermath.
But the boost in sales during the coronavirus pandemic is likely fueled in large part by concerns of social unrest, said Adam Winkler, a professor of constitutional law at the UCLA School of Law and an expert on gun policy. He said he’s not surprised to see lines out the door at some gun stores, and he expects sales to continue to grow as long as stores remain open.
“When you depend on the government for social [stability] and all of a sudden it seems like the government isn’t going to be able to provide that, people get scared.” - Adam Winkler, gun policy expert and UCLA School of Law professor
“We have seen this before,” Winkler said. “We saw in Los Angeles when the riots occurred back in the early 1990s, a lot of people were purchasing guns. When people feel a crisis is coming and social order may be disrupted, being armed and self-defense is an age-old idea.”
Advertisement
While mass shootings mostly drive existing gun owners to add to their stockpiles, first-time buyers are likely a “large slice of the pie” of the sales amid the coronavirus spread, Winkler said.
“People do sometimes choose to buy guns when they’re facing the possibility of social breakdown ― and sometimes for good reason,” Winkler said, noting the looting and crime that occurred in New Orleans during and after Hurricane Katrina in 2005.
“It shows that there is this primal need for self-defense,” he added. “When you depend on the government for social [stability] and all of a sudden it seems like the government isn’t going to be able to provide that, people get scared.”
Though self-protection may be a motive for many gun buyers, studies show that living in a house with a gun increases the risk of death. Homicides and suicides are far more likely to occur when a gun is present in a household, according to a 2014 study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine.
Having a gun in the house also increases the potential for a deadly accident. Firearms are the second leading cause of death among American children and adolescents, behind car crashes. At least 73 children under the age of 12 were accidentally killed by guns in 2018. Those gun deaths were often related to a child’s access to a firearm, and were either self-inflicted or at the hands of another child, according to the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia Research Institute.
Advertisement
People stand in line outside the Martin B. Retting, Inc. guns store in Culver City, California, on Sunday. Mario Tama via Getty Images
The first confirmed case in the U.S. of COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus, was reported on January 21. As of Monday, the virus had infected nearly 3,500 people across 49 states, as well as Washington, D.C., Puerto Rico, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands. At least 68 people in the U.S. have died from COVID-19.
Reports about increased firearm and ammo sales in the last month are largely anecdotal. The FBI’s monthly report on firearm background checks initiated through the NICS system is often a strong indicator of whether gun sales have increased in a given period of time. At the time of publication, the FBI had not yet posted numbers for March.
Background checks are required when a person is seeking to purchase a gun from a federal firearms licensee, which includes major chains like Walmart, small independent shops, and some individual retailers.
In January, the NICS system processed 2,165,094 background checks, a nearly 25% increase from a year earlier, according to FBI data. Last month, there were 2,802,467 background checks, marking a more than 36% increase from the prior February.
Advertisement
A spokeswoman for the FBI would not speculate on the possible causes for an increase in background checks.
“There are many factors that could cause fluctuations at any time,” she said.
A gun store customer who gave his name only as John waits in line in Burbank, California, on Sunday. ASSOCIATED PRESS
Ammo.com, an online retailer of ammunition, said it’s seen a surge in sales that correlates with the spread of the coronavirus. Sales in Delaware have grown by more than 4,500% ― the most of any state, according to the website. Customers in Vermont, Maryland, Mississippi and Louisiana, where confirmed cases of the virus have steadily increased, have also placed substantially more orders than normal.
“On March 10, 2020 – the day confirmed cases in the US reached over 1,000, increasing ten-fold in a week – we noticed an unprecedented 276% sales surge that continued through the end of last week and the weekend,” Ammo.com said in a statement.
The site said it has seen increases in sales in every single state, with the exception of those to which they don’t ship: Alaska, California and Hawaii.
Advertisement
Lines have wrapped around some firearms stores in California, with customers waiting hours at times to get inside, reported The Los Angeles Times.
Ray, a medical doctor who only provided his first name to the Times, was one of several first-time buyers waiting in line last week at Martin B. Retting Gun Shop in Culver City.
“I want to buy a handgun, I think they call it a Glock, but I’m not sure,” he said. “I have a house and a family, and they’ll need protection if things get worse.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-17--Abortion Access Is Under Threat As Coronavirus Spreads

Last week , Joe Nelson , a physician who provides abortions in Texas , felt a tickle in his throat .
Then he started coughing .
His temperature soared .
On Monday , at his doctor ’ s office , he tested negative for the flu .
Unable to obtain a coronavirus test there , he is now self-quarantining for 14 days .
In a phone call with HuffPost as he left the doctor ’ s office , Nelson said he was mostly worried about how his unplanned absence might affect women ’ s ability to get abortions in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a huge impact , ” he said .
“ There are not that many doctors who provide abortion care in Texas .
A lot of the doctors that do come in from out of state .
In a situation where doctors are less likely to want to travel , if there ’ s no one to cover me , patients will have to wait.
” Reproductive rights groups warn that the spread of coronavirus could cripple abortion services , especially in places where access is already tenuous .
Six states have only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rural areas , clinics are staffed by travel doctors who fly to multiple locations to see patients .
Nelson , for example , provides abortions at three clinics across the state of Texas .
According to a Guttmacher Institute analysis released earlier this month , the outbreak may result in “ a shortage of clinicians who can provide sexual and reproductive health services , ” as well as increased wait times for patients in need .
In places with a limited number of providers , this will put “ an extreme strain ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ If a provider gets sick , that ’ s one fewer person to provide care , ” said the Very Rev .
Katherine Hancock Ragsdale , president of the National Abortion Federation .
“ One or two people unable to show up can make the difference between a clinic being able to function or not.
” Clinics across the country are preparing for the worst and taking extra steps to protect their clients from coronavirus exposure .
Clinic staff are asking women to do as much paperwork as possible online and over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spend in the office .
Some clinics have adjusted their patient schedules and are spacing appointments further apart so there is less overlap .
Ragsdale is concerned about how physicians will get to their clinics as travel becomes more fraught .
The same goes for patients , she said , who may not want to take public transportation at this time .
Patients may also struggle to come up with the money for an abortion if they are out of work due to the coronavirus , and school closures may make it harder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ We worry that all health care resources are being channeled to non-elective procedures , and abortion tends to be classified as an elective procedure , ” Ragsdale said .
“ We understand that abortion isn ’ t a stroke or a heart attack , and it can be scheduled out .
But it can ’ t be scheduled out indefinitely.
” Denying or deferring an abortion puts an immense burden on patients and their families , she said .
They need timely access to abortions ― even in the midst of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time period where we should be focusing on moving all health care to telemedicine , minimizing the number of patient contacts within a clinic , ” she said .
“ We could be moving all our patients in the first trimester to telemedicine for medication abortion so they don ’ t have to come in at all.
” Texas Gov .
Greg Abbott ( R ) has asked state agencies to take any action necessary to facilitate telemedicine during the pandemic ― but abortion services are excluded , Moayedi said .
That means @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from hundreds of miles away , must see her in person just to get a pill .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Last week, Joe Nelson, a physician who provides abortions in Texas, felt a tickle in his throat. Then he started coughing. His temperature soared. On Monday, at his doctor’s office, he tested negative for the flu. Unable to obtain a coronavirus test there, he is now self-quarantining for 14 days.
In a phone call with HuffPost as he left the doctor’s office, Nelson said he was mostly worried about how his unplanned absence might affect women’s ability to get abortions in the state.
Advertisement
“Potentially, it could have a huge impact,” he said. “There are not that many doctors who provide abortion care in Texas. A lot of the doctors that do come in from out of state. In a situation where doctors are less likely to want to travel, if there’s no one to cover me, patients will have to wait.”
Reproductive rights groups warn that the spread of coronavirus could cripple abortion services, especially in places where access is already tenuous. Six states have only one remaining clinic apiece. In many rural areas, clinics are staffed by travel doctors who fly to multiple locations to see patients. Nelson, for example, provides abortions at three clinics across the state of Texas.
According to a Guttmacher Institute analysis released earlier this month, the outbreak may result in “a shortage of clinicians who can provide sexual and reproductive health services,” as well as increased wait times for patients in need. In places with a limited number of providers, this will put “an extreme strain” on the capacity to serve patients.
“If a provider gets sick, that’s one fewer person to provide care,” said the Very Rev. Katherine Hancock Ragsdale, president of the National Abortion Federation. “One or two people unable to show up can make the difference between a clinic being able to function or not.”
Advertisement
Clinics across the country are preparing for the worst and taking extra steps to protect their clients from coronavirus exposure. Clinic staff are asking women to do as much paperwork as possible online and over the phone to reduce the time they spend in the office. Some clinics have adjusted their patient schedules and are spacing appointments further apart so there is less overlap.
Ragsdale is concerned about how physicians will get to their clinics as travel becomes more fraught. The same goes for patients, she said, who may not want to take public transportation at this time. Patients may also struggle to come up with the money for an abortion if they are out of work due to the coronavirus, and school closures may make it harder for them to secure reliable child care.
Another big concern, Ragsdale said, is a possible shortage of medical supplies like gloves and masks.
“We worry that all health care resources are being channeled to non-elective procedures, and abortion tends to be classified as an elective procedure,” Ragsdale said. “We understand that abortion isn’t a stroke or a heart attack, and it can be scheduled out. But it can’t be scheduled out indefinitely.”
Denying or deferring an abortion puts an immense burden on patients and their families, she said. They need timely access to abortions ― even in the midst of a pandemic.
Advertisement
Ghazaleh Moayedi, an abortion provider and board member with Physicians for Reproductive Health, noted that TRAP laws, which stands for “targeted regulation of abortion providers,” are actually making patients less safe during the coronavirus outbreak.
In Texas, patients are forced to make multiple trips to the clinic for unnecessary counseling and ultrasounds, she said. Every visit creates another opportunity for the virus to spread.
Medication abortion, where a patient takes pills at home to end a pregnancy, can be safely and effectively administered by telemedicine, Moayedi explained. But in Texas, patients seeking a medication abortion are required to make three in-person trips to a clinic.
“This is a time period where we should be focusing on moving all health care to telemedicine, minimizing the number of patient contacts within a clinic,” she said. “We could be moving all our patients in the first trimester to telemedicine for medication abortion so they don’t have to come in at all.”
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) has asked state agencies to take any action necessary to facilitate telemedicine during the pandemic ― but abortion services are excluded, Moayedi said. That means her patients, some of whom come from hundreds of miles away, must see her in person just to get a pill.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-17--Bernie’s Approach To Latin America’s Socialist Leaders Wouldn’t Be That Radical

Neither of their policy agendas toward Venezuela and Cuba are as radical as Trump ’ s “ maximum pressure ” strategy ― a plan , devised by hardline anti-Cuba and Venezuela advisers within the administration , that has so far involved ramping up round after round of sanctions on both countries .
That “ maximum pressure ” strategy now includes what is effectively a full embargo on Venezuela ’ s state-owned oil company and its economy .
But much like it has in Cuba , the strategy , such that it is one , has so far failed to cripple @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over a worsening economic collapse and a millions-strong refugee crisis .
Widely regarded as an overtly political ploy to drive out voters in Florida this November , the strategy has few fans or defenders in Latin American policy circles or anywhere else , except among the hardest of the hardliners .
A Different Role For The U.S.
There ’ s no question that Sanders sits to Biden ’ s left when it comes to his historical view of Latin America and the United States ’ role in it , or that he ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than the former vice president now .
And there are obvious differences between them in the region .
Sanders , for instance , was quick to suggest that the November resignation of Bolivian President Evo Morales , a socialist , was a coup , even as most Democrats , Biden included , did not .
Sanders has also come to the defense of other leftist leaders across the region more quickly and vocally than most Democrats do , a fact he has used to differentiate himself during this campaign .

With Bernie Sanders’ presidential candidacy wobbling on weary legs heading into a crucial stretch of primary contests, former Secretary of State John Kerry aimed a finishing blow at the self-described democratic socialist last Monday morning.
“Senator Sanders has never failed to be saying a nice thing about some socialist country or another dictator somewhere,” said Kerry, a top surrogate for former Vice President Joe Biden, Sanders’ chief rival for the Democratic nomination. Kerry blasted Sanders for insufficiently supporting democracy and freedom in Latin America, particularly after Sanders offered some qualified praise for certain policies of Fidel Castro, the late Cuban Communist leader, during an appearance on “60 Minutes” last month.
Advertisement
“Bernie thinks by putting the word ‘democratic’ in front of socialist, he can deal with the challenge of being socialist,” Kerry told the Miami Herald. “He wasn’t a democratic socialist most of his life. He was just a socialist. Now he’s running for president, so he tries to take the mantle of ‘democratic,’ but in my judgment socialism is socialism.”
Matt Duss, Sanders’ foreign policy adviser, shot back on Twitter, calling the comments “dishonest and disgusting red-baiting” that “should be beneath Kerry.”
“Bernie has been clear in criticisms of authoritarian regimes,” Duss tweeted. “He’s also been clear in opposition to right wing coups, such as in Bolivia, which has led to a wave of violent repression. Biden has remained silent.”
Latin America policy has simmered just beneath the surface of this Democratic primary from its beginning, thanks to the two most prominent figures in the race. Few people in American politics have so forcefully denounced U.S. interventionism in Latin America for so long as Sanders. No one in the field, meanwhile, had as much direct experience with the region as Biden, who visited Latin America more than a dozen times as vice president.
Advertisement
It was inevitable the two would clash, especially before Tuesday’s primary in Latino-heavy Florida. But the manner in which they have has also obscured a plain truth: Sanders and Biden don’t appear as far apart on how they would approach Latin America’s triumvirate of leftist authoritarian leaders ― in Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua ― as the heated rhetoric would have people believe. Although their experiences in and worldviews toward Latin America vary significantly, the primary differences between how they’d engage are strategic and nuanced.
Still, the battle is evidence of a problem that has plagued Sanders over the last two weeks, as he has plummeted from clear front-runner to beleaguered challenger. While his positions aren’t necessarily as radical as his rhetoric might make them seem, he has struggled to convince the media and many Democratic voters that’s the case.
No Regime Change In Venezuela
Take Venezuela, which has become the most notable foreign policy struggle in the region under Trump. Both Biden and Sanders have each called Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, who has become increasingly authoritarian as his country has spiraled into chaos, “a tyrant.”
And they have both said they oppose, in Sanders’ words, Maduro’s “use of violence against unarmed protesters and the suppression of dissent,” and, in Biden’s, “violent oppression” and “dismantling [of] the last vestiges of Venezuelan democracy.”
But they’ve also both said that the United States should “not be in the business of regime change,” a phrase Sanders first used in January 2019, when Trump recognized Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaidó as the country’s legitimate leader and imposed new rounds of sanctions on the country. Biden used the exact same verbiage in an Americas Quarterly survey published this week.
Advertisement
Democratic presidential hopefuls former Vice President Joe Biden (left) and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders (right) take part in the 11th Democratic Party 2020 presidential debate in a CNN Washington Bureau studio in Washington, D.C. on March 15, 2020. MANDEL NGAN via Getty Images
Neither of their policy agendas toward Venezuela and Cuba are as radical as Trump’s “maximum pressure” strategy ― a plan, devised by hardline anti-Cuba and Venezuela advisers within the administration, that has so far involved ramping up round after round of sanctions on both countries. That “maximum pressure” strategy now includes what is effectively a full embargo on Venezuela’s state-owned oil company and its economy. But much like it has in Cuba, the strategy, such that it is one, has so far failed to cripple Maduro, who has continued to preside over a worsening economic collapse and a millions-strong refugee crisis. Widely regarded as an overtly political ploy to drive out voters in Florida this November, the strategy has few fans or defenders in Latin American policy circles or anywhere else, except among the hardest of the hardliners.
Both Sanders and Biden have been critical of that strategy, and both argue that blatant contradictions in Trump’s approach ― for instance, his claims that he cares about alleviating the plight of ordinary Venezuelans even as he refuses to offer temporary protected status to its fleeing migrants ― make it clear that the president doesn’t care enough about the humanitarian aspect of the Venezuelan crisis. Both say they would support extending TPS to Venezuelan migrants, a suggestion that both see it more as a humanitarian crisis than a purely political one.
Sanders and Biden both also favor finding a negotiated solution to the ongoing struggle in Venezuela, another view that is common ― almost consensus ― among observers in Washington, especially as Trump’s more confrontational approach has turned Venezuela into an ugly stalemate.
Advertisement
“Most Latin American analysts I think favor [negotiations],” said Michael Shifter, the president of Inter-American Dialogue, a Washington-based think tank. “The question is really, what kind of negotiations under what conditions.”
A Different Role For The U.S.
That question hints at the biggest difference between the two candidates: While both see a need for a more multilateral approach to Venezuela, they have different views of the role the United States should play in fostering and participating in any new negotiations between Maduro and the opposition.
Trump’s strategy has relied almost entirely on economic sanctions against Venezuela, with virtually no support for negotiations between Maduro and the opposition.
Both Sanders and Biden agree that focusing so intently on sanctions is a strategic folly that has exacerbated the pain of ordinary Venezuelans. Biden, though, has been more vocal in his suggestion that sanctions should still play a key role in the effort to alleviate the crisis.
A key backer of the targeted sanctions Obama placed on members of the Maduro government in 2015, Biden has said in various questionnaires that he favors maintaining sanctions against Maduro and Venezuela. But he favors working alongside Latin American and European governments to increase the pressure through multilateral sanctions, rather than having the U.S. driving ahead alone.
Advertisement
“We know that unilateral sanctions don’t work,” said Juan Gonzalez, a foreign policy adviser on Biden’s campaign who also served on Obama’s National Security Council and as Biden’s special adviser in the White House.
The Trump administration has tried to ramp up pressure from other Latin American and European countries, but with only limited success ― an issue Gonzalez attributed to Trump’s lack of standing with foreign leaders. The international community, he said, has been “strong on language and weak on follow-up ... because the United States does not have credibility. They are not actually leading on this.”
“What Senator Sanders would recognize, unlike a lot of the other establishment, is that American-led intervention is going to backfire ... given our history in that region.” - Rep. Ro Khanna, co-chair on Sanders' campaign
Any existing sanctions Biden did leave in place, or new restrictions he might implement, would be part of a broader strategy to get Maduro to negotiate, much as the Obama administration wielded targeted sanctions against Iran in the hopes of paving the way for a landmark nuclear deal, and began lifting them once the agreement was reached.
Sanders also sees a mistake in the way Trump has approached Venezuela. The aggressive use of sanctions, threats of military force and campaign-style rhetoric on the subject have all given Maduro “a talking point to say, ‘Look, America is intervening again,’” said California Rep. Ro Khanna (D), a national co-chair on the Sanders campaign and fierce critic of Trump’s Venezuela policy.
Advertisement
Sanders has openly opposed the broad sanctions Trump has put in place ― including the embargo ― all of which he believes are doing more damage to ordinary Venezuelans than they are to Maduro, Khanna said last month.
But while he’d likely go farther in easing Trump’s sanctions than Biden would, Sanders might not necessarily remove all the pressure from Maduro.
Duss, Sanders’ top foreign policy adviser, told Foreign Policy magazine recently that while the U.S. has been “abusing” its use of sanctions, they remain “an important tool.”
The problem, Duss seems to believe, is similar to the one Biden’s advisers describe: Sanctions have too often been used without any broader strategy in mind.
“We need to take a hard look at where and how we use those tools and not just keep piling them on in ways that ultimately don’t advance policy goals,” Duss told Foreign Policy. Duss included Venezuela among the countries where that has been the case, suggesting that Sanders could still utilize some level of sanctions in order to punish Venezuelan officials or to incentivize negotiations.
Advertisement
The differing views of the United States’ role in Latin America also informs how both candidates might approach negotiations, if they were to take place.
Sanders, Khanna said, believes the United States needs to take a step back from the effort to end the crisis in Venezuela, and let actors like the United Nations, Mexico or The Vatican ― all of which, among others, have tried to act as neutral arbiters in Venezuela talks ― broker a solution between Maduro and the opposition for new elections. Letting countries without the baggage that comes with the United States’ long history of interventionism in the region take the lead, Khanna said, would make a positive outcome more likely.
“Senator Sanders shares the belief that the world would be better off if there were liberal democracy that supported human rights [in Venezuela],” Khanna said. ”And he shares the belief that Maduro is a bad actor who has harmed his own people with failed economic policy, with corruption, with preventing aid in some cases from getting it to his own people.”
“But the United States cannot be going it alone in these countries,” Khanna added. “What Senator Sanders would recognize, unlike a lot of the other establishment, is that American-led intervention is going to backfire ... given our history in that region.”
Advertisement
By comparison, Biden, who was part of administration that in 2009 promised its own reset of American relations with Latin America, is more likely to seek out a leading role for the U.S. in negotiations between Maduro and the opposition, under the view that the presence of the U.S. is necessary to set the table for legitimate talks.
“We understand that history,” Gonzalez said. “But I think what [Biden] also knows ― because he has governed, he’s not just opining from afar ― is that often without the United States, things do not get done.”
“That doesn’t mean that you’re telling everybody what to do,” Gonzalez said. “We are equal players at this table, and everybody has a say. But if we’re not actually at the table and putting skin in the game, things don’t happen.”
Bernie’s Problem Is Political
There’s no question that Sanders sits to Biden’s left when it comes to his historical view of Latin America and the United States’ role in it, or that he’s still more dove-ish on foreign policy than the former vice president now. And there are obvious differences between them in the region. Sanders, for instance, was quick to suggest that the November resignation of Bolivian President Evo Morales, a socialist, was a coup, even as most Democrats, Biden included, did not. Sanders has also come to the defense of other leftist leaders across the region more quickly and vocally than most Democrats do, a fact he has used to differentiate himself during this campaign.
But it also wasn’t that long ago that Obama and Biden broke with U.S. foreign policy orthodoxy in Latin America. The Obama administration took steps to recognize and apologize for the United States’ role in Argentina’s dirty wars and its backing of death squads in El Salvador, and he routinely faced accusations from the right that its efforts to normalize relations with Cuba amounted to nothing more than appeasement of an authoritarian enemy. (Obama and Biden, notably, still faced plenty of criticism around the region over how the U.S. handled a 2009 coup in Honduras, accusations of meddling in Venezuela and Bolivia, and revelations that the U.S. spied on leftist Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff.)
Advertisement
Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro gives a press conference at the Miraflores Presidential Palace in Caracas, Venezuela, Thursday, March 12, 2020. Maduro has suspended flights to Europe and Colombia for a month, citing concerns for the new coronavirus. Maduro added in a national broadcast that the illness has not yet been detected in Venezuela, despite it being confirmed in each bordering country, including Colombia, Brazil and Guyana. ASSOCIATED PRESS
So it might make more sense, given Sanders’ policy platform, to see him less as a clean break from the mainstream in Latin America and more as an evolutionary step in Obama’s proposed reset ― similar to the one other leading progressive senators and even Ben Rhodes, a top former Obama adviser, have suggested the U.S. should take, at least in Venezuela.
It’s noteworthy, too, that Sanders has faced criticism from his left on Latin America policy and Venezuela in the past, and while Sanders and his advisers have been more hesitant than Biden to recognize Guaidó as the legitimate leader of Venezuela, experts on the region are skeptical he’d alter U.S. policy toward Guaidó the way new leftist leaders in Spain and Argentina have. Even Sanders and Biden’s varying positions on Guaidó are rooted in strategic differences about how to approach potential negotiations, said Michael Paarlberg, a Virginia Commonwealth University professor who has served as the Sanders campaign’s main Latin America adviser.
“Declaring Juan Guaidó the legitimate leader of Venezuela doesn’t make it so,” said Paarlberg, a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, a progressive think tank. “We may prefer him to a corrupt kleptocrat but it doesn’t by itself do anything. Maduro is the one in power.”
But the problem Sanders has when it comes to Latin America is that no one seems to believe his condemnations of the region’s authoritarians, or his insistence that the policies he favors for dealing with them aren’t that far adrift from the Democratic mainstream.
Advertisement
He has repeatedly been pressed over his reticence to call Maduro “a dictator,” and for his allegedly soft positions on leftist autocrats, even as he has included them in his laments about the rising tide of authoritarianism in the Americas, a problem he says he wants to combat. No matter what Sanders says, an air of suspicion follows — that even if Sanders wants to negotiate with leaders in Cuba and Venezuela, he’d be too friendly in doing so.
Some of that is down to Sanders’ positioning of himself as an anti-establishment candidate, and some to his willingness to buck the status quo in a region where the U.S. position is so often treated as the only acceptable one.
Some, too, is that the media and many observers have too willingly adopted Trump’s framing of the clash with Maduro by buying into the idea that aggressive rhetoric and confrontation is the only way forward. Skepticism of leftist leaders is also baked into the American polity and media establishment in a way that it never has been for similar figures on the right, the United States’ willingness to have normal relations with them, or America’s own actions in the world and at home.
Even though they aren’t ardent leftists, that’s a phenomenon Biden and Kerry should know well. Their efforts in Cuba and Iran were often painted as attempts to cozy up to the enemy, as if diplomacy doesn’t count as foreign policy ― even, and especially, when aggressive confrontation and hardline sanctions regimes have failed. Duss, the Sanders foreign policy adviser, chastised Biden and Kerry over their attacks on Twitter, saying that “repurposing bad faith right wing attacks against opponents to his left only serves to make diplomacy with problematic regimes more politically costly.”
And Biden may find himself facing the same sort of criticism he’s leveling now in a general election or once he becomes president and tries to alter Trump’s approach to Maduro. The Trump campaign has already accused him of being too friendly to the Venezuelan leader during the Obama years, and will continue to do so whether Biden describes himself as a socialist or not.
Advertisement
But Sanders also shoulders some blame. Not all of the concerns his past stances on Latin America have generated are cynical and politically motivated, and Sanders hasn’t, at times, adequately addressed them. Part of the reason his critics don’t believe him is that his condemnations of leftist authoritarianism can feel like an obligatory step before he moves on to specific aspects he wants to praise.
“Bernie triggers the inner hardliner of Cuban Americans, even those who are moderate, like no other American politician does.” - Ricardo Herrero, Cuba Study Group
Sanders’ answer when 60 Minutes pressed him on his past praise for Cuba under Castro was a perfect example. He condemned Cuba’s authoritarian overreach before praising Castro’s literacy programs and insisted that “it’s unfair to simply say that everything was bad” there. Whether he was right on the merits about the literacy program is up for debate; regardless, it was a bad political move that provided catnip to his detractors, did nothing to ease the worries of those who do have ugly memories and legitimate fears of socialist regimes, and never advanced the conversation to what he’d do as president (The answer: Sanders has said he’d reinstate Obama’s normalization efforts, and he supports lifting the Cuba embargo, a position well within the mainstream in Democratic politics.)
At a time when Sanders was at the front of the pack and looking to consolidate support, he generated another news cycle about his supposed radicalism. And while most Americans aren’t choosing their candidate based on their policy preferences in Latin America, it’s possible that the comments damaged the perception of Sanders among voters, particularly at a time when so many Democrats are hyper-focused on “electability.”
That’s been a particular issue for Sanders in Florida, where Cuba and Venezuela are actually salient issues. Trump and the GOP have circulated Sanders’ old comments on Cuba and Nicaragua around south Florida for more than four years now, in an effort to tie the entire Democratic Party to socialism. There are some indications Trump’s nakedly political strategy toward Cuba and Venezuela has had at least some success in reigniting hardline views toward Latin America’s socialist leaders. Support for the embargo has increased among Cuban-Americans in Miami over the last four years, according to polls, and Cuban-American voters swung hard toward statewide GOP candidates in Florida last year.
Advertisement
Winning those voters will be difficult for any Democrat. It may be even harder for a democratic socialist who has appeared to embrace Castro and other leftist leaders from across the region, said Ricardo Herrero, the executive director of the Cuba Study Group, a D.C. advocacy group that supports normalization and opposes the embargo.
“Bernie, as a self-identified democratic socialist, triggers the inner hardliner of Cuban Americans, even those who are moderate, like no other American politician does,” Herrero said.
Comments like those Sanders made on “60 Minutes,” he added, “only give ammunition to those who argue that a policy of engagement toward Cuba is a policy of appeasement toward the system Castro created.”
“I’m not in the business of predicting anything, and no one is beyond redemption. But he has a lot of work to do,” Herrero said.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-17--Confusion And Delay Plague Illinois Primary As States Shutter Due To Coronavirus

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI via Getty Images An election official cleaned a voting machine in Chicago as Illinois proceeded with its presidential primary on Tuesday .
In-person voting in Illinois was marred by occasional complications and disruptions on Tuesday as the state proceeded conducted its presidential primary amid the spread of the coronavirus that has prompted shutdowns of schools , restaurants and other workplaces across the U.S .
The decision to go ahead with the long-scheduled vote posed a variety of challenges and hurdles .
Local officials moved precinct locations to public buildings and away from senior homes and community centers to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be close to a polling place .
In Chicago , that meant relocating 200 of the city ’ s roughly 2,000 precincts .
With elderly people considered especially vulnerable to contracting COVID-19 , the disease caused by the new virus , officials also were faced with a deluge of resignations by older election judges .
It didn ’ t take long for officials with the Chicago Elections Board to note that concerns about the pandemic would severely depress voter turnout .
Despite this being a presidential election cycle that typically spurs the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only about 10,000 ballots cast in the first hour of voting — typically a pre-work rush hour .
“ I would call conducting an election in the middle of a global pandemic , where people are scared to show up to a polling place , a curse , ” Jim Allen , spokesperson for the Chicago Elections Board , said on a conference call with reporters Tuesday morning .
Chicago election commissioners last week asked the office of Illinois Gov .
J.B. Pritzker ( D ) to either postpone the primary or cancel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That request was denied .
In Florida , several polling stations didn ’ t open because workers didn ’ t show up for duty and in Arizona , 80 polling stations were preemptively shuttered after polling workers canceled their shifts .
In Illinois , one poll worker at a Chicago precinct tweeted about a number of glitches at her locale .
The worker , who identified herself as Rebecca Gross , said missing items included a box containing voting machines and ballots .
Election Day so far : 5/8 election staff are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cleaning supplies , we are missing an ENTIRE blue box ( meaning anyone who comes to this precinct can not vote ) , we are missing 2 election judges & nobody is answering our calls .
pic.twitter.com/aPfmZ5McCt — rebecca 🌹🔥 ( @ rebeccapearl21 ) March 17 , 2020 She noted that this was hardly an ideal alternative .
“ There are workers who are coming to vote early in the morning who don ’ t have the time to go vote at a precinct that ’ s about a mile away , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really kind of unreasonable for many of these working voters to go vote outside of the precinct.
” Another Twitter user claiming to be a supporter of the presidential bid by Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) campaign said large crowds were gathered at a public library , waiting hours to vote .
Timna Axel , communications director for the Chicago Lawyers ’ Committee for Civil Rights , said while some confusion typically surrounds the voting process , the various measures taken and warnings issued about the coronavirus piled on additional complications on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rights hotline on election days , and Axel said “ it seems like a lot of the confusion and the delay is because of these last-minute relocations and last-minute substitutions by election judges.
” Last week , Chicago election commissioners asked the office of Illinois Gov .
J.B. Pritzker ( D ) to either postpone the primary or cancel in-person voting and move to vote-by-mail only .
That request was denied .
By contrast , Ohio ’ s Tuesday primary was canceled at the behest of Gov .
Mike DeWine ( R ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in proceeding with scheduled primaries .
In Florida , several polling stations didn ’ t open because workers didn ’ t show up for duty and in Arizona , 80 polling stations were preemptively shuttered after polling workers canceled their shifts .

An election official cleaned a voting machine in Chicago as Illinois proceeded with its presidential primary on Tuesday. KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI via Getty Images
In-person voting in Illinois was marred by occasional complications and disruptions on Tuesday as the state proceeded with its presidential primary amid the spread of the coronavirus that has prompted shutdowns of schools, restaurants and other workplaces across the U.S.
The decision to go ahead with the long-scheduled vote posed a variety of challenges and hurdles. Local officials moved precinct locations to public buildings and away from senior homes and community centers to minimize the number of people who would be close to a polling place. In Chicago, that meant relocating 200 of the city’s roughly 2,000 precincts.
Advertisement
With elderly people considered especially vulnerable to contracting COVID-19, the disease caused by the new virus, officials also were faced with a deluge of resignations by older election judges.
It didn’t take long for officials with the Chicago Elections Board to note that concerns about the pandemic would severely depress voter turnout. Despite this being a presidential election cycle that typically spurs the most enthusiasm among voters, the board reported only about 10,000 ballots cast in the first hour of voting — typically a pre-work rush hour.
“I would call conducting an election in the middle of a global pandemic, where people are scared to show up to a polling place, a curse,” Jim Allen, spokesperson for the Chicago Elections Board, said on a conference call with reporters Tuesday morning.
Chicago election commissioners last week asked the office of Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D) to either postpone the primary or cancel in-person voting and move to vote-by-mail only. That request was denied.
Advertisement
By contrast, Ohio’s Tuesday primary was canceled at the behest of Gov. Mike DeWine (R). But Florida and Arizona joined Illinois in proceeding with scheduled primaries.
In Florida, several polling stations didn’t open because workers didn’t show up for duty and in Arizona, 80 polling stations were preemptively shuttered after polling workers canceled their shifts.
In Illinois, one poll worker at a Chicago precinct tweeted about a number of glitches at her locale. The worker, who identified herself as Rebecca Gross, said missing items included a box containing voting machines and ballots.
Election Day so far: 5/8 election staff are elderly, we were provided with no cleaning supplies, we are missing an ENTIRE blue box (meaning anyone who comes to this precinct cannot vote), we are missing 2 election judges & nobody is answering our calls. pic.twitter.com/aPfmZ5McCt — rebecca 🌹🔥 (@rebeccapearl21) March 17, 2020
She told HuffPost that election officials instructed poll workers dealing with the problems to redirect voters to a police station serving as a voting precinct.
Advertisement
She noted that this was hardly an ideal alternative. “There are workers who are coming to vote early in the morning who don’t have the time to go vote at a precinct that’s about a mile away,” Gross said. “It’s really kind of unreasonable for many of these working voters to go vote outside of the precinct.”
Another Twitter user claiming to be a supporter of the presidential bid by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) campaign said large crowds were gathered at a public library, waiting hours to vote.
At the Thurgood Marshall Public Library a predominately black senior population is waiting on average 2 hrs to vote in crowded rooms. This is not safe! #COVID19 #IllinoisPrimary pic.twitter.com/q4Fav9h1nW — Abshir Omar (@AbshirDSM) March 17, 2020
Timna Axel, communications director for the Chicago Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights, said while some confusion typically surrounds the voting process, the various measures taken and warnings issued about the coronavirus piled on additional complications on Tuesday.
Her group operates a voting rights hotline on election days, and Axel said “it seems like a lot of the confusion and the delay is because of these last-minute relocations and last-minute substitutions by election judges.”
Advertisement
She added, “I don’t think we’d see anything like this in a normal election.”
Last week, Chicago election commissioners asked the office of Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D) to either postpone the primary or cancel in-person voting and move to vote-by-mail only. That request was denied.
In Florida, several polling stations didn’t open because workers didn’t show up for duty. In Arizona, 80 polling stations were preemptively shuttered after polling workers canceled their shifts.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-17--Maryland Becomes Fifth State To Delay Primary Over Coronavirus

Maryland Gov .
Larry Hogan ( R ) announced Tuesday that his state will be postponing its primaries due to the coronavirus outbreak , becoming the fifth state to do so as cases across the United States tick upward .
“ It would endanger public health to allow thousands of people to assemble , ” Hogan said Tuesday .
Experts agree that aggressive social distancing measures are essential to slowing down the spread of the virus and mitigating its strain on the nation ’ s health care system , which is struggling to provide basic testing .
On Monday , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be limited to groups of 10 or fewer people ― guidance which clearly conflicts with traditional voting setups .
Louisiana , Georgia and Kentucky all previously announced that they are pushing their primaries back .
Ohio , where a primary election was scheduled Tuesday , secured a last-minute delay from the state ’ s supreme court in the hours before voters expected to show up to the polls .
Ohio may reschedule to June 2 as well .
The three other states scheduled to hold elections Tuesday ― Arizona , Florida and Illinois @ @ @ @ @ @ @ certain locations .
In and around Chicago , reports have been emerging of sites lacking necessary equipment and staff .
Other states , including New York , are weighing whether to delay their primaries or instate protective measures for voters , such as providing ballots by mail .
Mail-in ballots will be used in the one election Maryland is still set to hold on April 28 : A special election to fill the seat vacated last year by the late Rep. Elijah Cummings ( D ) .
Hogan said it was “ imperative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ that the people of the 7th Congressional District have a voice in the House of Representatives.
” Globally , COVID-19 infections are nearing 200,000 , with approximately 5,200 cases in the U.S. , according to Johns Hopkins data as of Tuesday afternoon .
Keep up with the latest updates on the coronavirus at our live blog .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan (R) announced Tuesday that his state will be postponing its primaries due to the coronavirus outbreak, becoming the fifth state to do so as cases across the United States tick upward.
Originally scheduled April 28, the polls will not open until June 2.
“It would endanger public health to allow thousands of people to assemble,” Hogan said Tuesday. Experts agree that aggressive social distancing measures are essential to slowing down the spread of the virus and mitigating its strain on the nation’s health care system, which is struggling to provide basic testing.
Advertisement
On Monday, President Donald Trump said that gatherings should be limited to groups of 10 or fewer people ― guidance which clearly conflicts with traditional voting setups.
Louisiana, Georgia and Kentucky all previously announced that they are pushing their primaries back. Ohio, where a primary election was scheduled Tuesday, secured a last-minute delay from the state’s supreme court in the hours before voters expected to show up to the polls. Ohio may reschedule to June 2 as well.
The three other states scheduled to hold elections Tuesday ― Arizona, Florida and Illinois ― did so with some difficulty in certain locations. In and around Chicago, reports have been emerging of sites lacking necessary equipment and staff.
Other states, including New York, are weighing whether to delay their primaries or instate protective measures for voters, such as providing ballots by mail.
Advertisement
Mail-in ballots will be used in the one election Maryland is still set to hold on April 28: A special election to fill the seat vacated last year by the late Rep. Elijah Cummings (D). Hogan said it was “imperative” that the election be held so “that the people of the 7th Congressional District have a voice in the House of Representatives.”
Globally, COVID-19 infections are nearing 200,000, with approximately 5,200 cases in the U.S., according to Johns Hopkins data as of Tuesday afternoon.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-17--Poll: Americans Are Just Starting To Feel The Effect Of Coronavirus

Brendan McDermid / Reuters An MTA transit worker walks through a nearly empty Times Square - 42nd St. subway station during the morning rush in New York , U.S. , March 16 , 2020 .
REUTERS/Brendan McDermid Americans are growing more concerned by the day about the spread of the new coronavirus in the U.S. , a new HuffPost/YouGov poll finds , with the share who say they ’ ve been personally affected rising rapidly within the past week .
Attitudes toward the outbreak and to the government response , however , remain sharply divided along partisan lines .
Seventy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re at least somewhat concerned about the spread of the coronavirus in the U.S. , and 61 % are at least somewhat concerned that they or a family member will contract the virus ; 35 % are very concerned about the spread of the disease , and 28 % are very concerned their family will be affected .
The share of the public who thought it was the right decision to cancel large events like rallies and conferences rose from a 61 % majority in a poll taken last Tuesday through Thursday to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ newest poll , taken just days later , Friday through Sunday .
And the share who said they ’ d been personally affected by the virus , while still low , rose from 12 % to 22 % .
( Other polls that asked Americans about specific changes to their behavior , like stocking up on food or cancelling plans , found higher numbers affected . )
Some who said they ’ d felt an effect were worried about the disease itself : “ I have been feeling sick , but can ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Alabama woman who was surveyed .
“ I ’ m especially worried because I am over 60 and I have an autoimmune disorder―the medication I am on suppresses my immune system.
” “ I work in the entertainment industry .
All of my sources of income have been cancelled or postponed , ” wrote one Tennessee woman surveyed .
A Utah man in his 80s said that , after being furloughed from the part-time job he used to supplement his Social Security , he was starting to ponder the choice between skipping prescriptions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nevada said she was missing her only child ’ s military graduation , which had been abruptly canceled ; another , in Florida , was no longer able to visit her husband in his locked-down rehab facility .
A plumber , a food server , an airline employee , a retail worker , a nurse practitioner , a music teacher , a pastor and a firefighter all reported already feeling strain from the consequences of the pandemic .
Americans ’ level of concern about the coronavirus ― and their willingness to endure widescale @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some cases modestly divided along generational or geographic lines .
Fifty-nine percent of Americans under age 30 say they ’ re at least somewhat concerned about the outbreak ’ s spread , the survey finds , while 73 % of those 30 and up say the same .
About two-thirds of city dwellers are at least somewhat concerned they or a family member will contract the virus , compared to about half of rural Americans who say the same .
These divides make a certain amount sense : COVID-19 has proved especially deadly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s first inroads into the U.S. have been concentrated in urban centers .
But , as is often the case in recent public opinion , the most glaring divide is political .
President Donald Trump , who on Monday warned of the seriousness of the outbreak , had often downplayed the issue in previous statements , an attitude that ’ s reflected in his supporters ’ reactions .
Democrats are 35 percentage points likelier than Republicans to say they ’ re at least somewhat concerned about the spread of coronavirus in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but just 19 % of Republicans , say they ’ re very concerned .
( Previous epidemics like avian flu , H1N1 and Ebola , it ’ s worth noting , also drew polarized responses . )
Those divides aren ’ t necessarily set in stone .
Over the course of the last week ― during which Trump announced a decision to cancel campaign rallies ― the share of Republicans who supported canceling large events rose from 55 % to 70 % .
Although other metrics showed less change , Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to reduce his supporters ’ skepticism about the scale of the problem .
WHAT DO AMERICANS THINK OF THE GOVERNMENT RESPONSE ?
Americans say , 47 % to 39 % , that they approve of the government ’ s handling of issues related to the coronavirus .
They ’ re about evenly split on Trump ’ s handling of the crisis , with 45 % approving and 43 % disapproving .
Slightly under half , 46 % , are at least somewhat confident that the government ’ s statements on coronavirus are reliable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very or not at all confident .
Opinions are again polarized : Republicans are 55 points likelier than Democrats to approve of the government response , and 69 points likelier to approve of Trump specifically .
Most Americans think the government should be taking action : A 62 % majority say the federal government has a lot of responsibility to help manage the outbreak , with 60 % saying the same of their state government , and 53 % of their local government .
About half , 47 % , say regular people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ responsibility .
Just 35 % say the same of big companies like Walgreens , Target , Walmart and CVS , whose efforts Trump stressed in a recent press conference , and just 27 % say the same of local business owners .
WHO DO AMERICANS THINK SHOULD PAY FOR CORONAVIRUS TREATMENT ?
By a broad margin , 72 % to 13 % , Americans believe that the U.S. government has a responsibility to provide free coronavirus testing for any Americans who might have the virus .
The public also says , 62 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has a responsibility to provide free medical treatment for any Americans who are confirmed to have the new coronavirus .
By comparison , 57 % of the public thinks the government has a responsibility to make sure all Americans have affordable health care coverage , with 24 % saying it does not .
By a 10-point margin , 45 % to 35 % , the public supports the idea of all Americans getting their insurance from a single government plan .
( Half of those surveyed saw the coronavirus questions prior to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ half after ; the order did not appear to make a significant difference . )
WHAT DOES OTHER POLLING SHOW ?
HOW WAS THE POLL CONDUCTED ?

An MTA transit worker walks through a nearly empty Times Square - 42nd St. subway station during the morning rush in New York, U.S., March 16, 2020. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid Brendan McDermid / Reuters
Americans are growing more concerned by the day about the spread of the new coronavirus in the U.S., a new HuffPost/YouGov poll finds, with the share who say they’ve been personally affected rising rapidly within the past week. Attitudes toward the outbreak and to the government response, however, remain sharply divided along partisan lines.
Seventy percent of Americans now say they’re at least somewhat concerned about the spread of the coronavirus in the U.S., and 61% are at least somewhat concerned that they or a family member will contract the virus; 35% are very concerned about the spread of the disease, and 28% are very concerned their family will be affected.
Advertisement
The share of Americans who are very concerned about the virus has climbed in past weeks. Ariel Edwards-Levy/HuffPost
The share of the public who thought it was the right decision to cancel large events like rallies and conferences rose from a 61% majority in a poll taken last Tuesday through Thursday to an even-more commanding 72% in the newest poll, taken just days later, Friday through Sunday. And the share who said they’d been personally affected by the virus, while still low, rose from 12% to 22%. (Other polls that asked Americans about specific changes to their behavior, like stocking up on food or cancelling plans, found higher numbers affected.)
Some who said they’d felt an effect were worried about the disease itself: “I have been feeling sick, but can’t get tested,” wrote one Alabama woman who was surveyed. “I’m especially worried because I am over 60 and I have an autoimmune disorder―the medication I am on suppresses my immune system.”
Others were working from home, caring for children whose schools were shuttered, or already feeling the economic and personal consequences of daily life slowing to a standstill.
Advertisement
“I work in the entertainment industry. All of my sources of income have been cancelled or postponed,” wrote one Tennessee woman surveyed. A Utah man in his 80s said that, after being furloughed from the part-time job he used to supplement his Social Security, he was starting to ponder the choice between skipping prescriptions or eating less. One woman in Nevada said she was missing her only child’s military graduation, which had been abruptly canceled; another, in Florida, was no longer able to visit her husband in his locked-down rehab facility. A plumber, a food server, an airline employee, a retail worker, a nurse practitioner, a music teacher, a pastor and a firefighter all reported already feeling strain from the consequences of the pandemic.
Respondents across the country also noted other effects, from falling stock prices to ravaged supermarkets to NCAA cancellations. And some expressed exasperation at what they considered an exaggerated panic.
“The shortage of everyday items people are hoarding because they think the world’s ending!” one respondent griped. “We are bound to catch this no matter how safe or prepared you think you are.”
WHO’S MOST CONCERNED ABOUT CORONAVIRUS?
Americans’ level of concern about the coronavirus ― and their willingness to endure widescale preventative measures in response ― are in some cases modestly divided along generational or geographic lines. Fifty-nine percent of Americans under age 30 say they’re at least somewhat concerned about the outbreak’s spread, the survey finds, while 73% of those 30 and up say the same. About two-thirds of city dwellers are at least somewhat concerned they or a family member will contract the virus, compared to about half of rural Americans who say the same. These divides make a certain amount sense: COVID-19 has proved especially deadly to older people, and the disease’s first inroads into the U.S. have been concentrated in urban centers.
But, as is often the case in recent public opinion, the most glaring divide is political. President Donald Trump, who on Monday warned of the seriousness of the outbreak, had often downplayed the issue in previous statements, an attitude that’s reflected in his supporters’ reactions. Democrats are 35 percentage points likelier than Republicans to say they’re at least somewhat concerned about the spread of coronavirus in the U.S. A 55% majority of Democrats, but just 19% of Republicans, say they’re very concerned. (Previous epidemics like avian flu, H1N1 and Ebola, it’s worth noting, also drew polarized responses.)
Advertisement
Those divides aren’t necessarily set in stone. Over the course of the last week ― during which Trump announced a decision to cancel campaign rallies ― the share of Republicans who supported canceling large events rose from 55% to 70%. Although other metrics showed less change, Trump’s change of tone Monday might help to reduce his supporters’ skepticism about the scale of the problem.
WHAT DO AMERICANS THINK OF THE GOVERNMENT RESPONSE?
Americans say, 47% to 39%, that they approve of the government’s handling of issues related to the coronavirus. They’re about evenly split on Trump’s handling of the crisis, with 45% approving and 43% disapproving. Slightly under half, 46%, are at least somewhat confident that the government’s statements on coronavirus are reliable and accurate, with 41% not very or not at all confident. Opinions are again polarized: Republicans are 55 points likelier than Democrats to approve of the government response, and 69 points likelier to approve of Trump specifically.
Most Americans think the government should be taking action: A 62% majority say the federal government has a lot of responsibility to help manage the outbreak, with 60% saying the same of their state government, and 53% of their local government. About half, 47%, say regular people in their community bear a lot of responsibility. Just 35% say the same of big companies like Walgreens, Target, Walmart and CVS, whose efforts Trump stressed in a recent press conference, and just 27% say the same of local business owners.
Advertisement
WHO DO AMERICANS THINK SHOULD PAY FOR CORONAVIRUS TREATMENT?
By a broad margin, 72% to 13%, Americans believe that the U.S. government has a responsibility to provide free coronavirus testing for any Americans who might have the virus. The public also says, 62% to 18%, that the government has a responsibility to provide free medical treatment for any Americans who are confirmed to have the new coronavirus.
By comparison, 57% of the public thinks the government has a responsibility to make sure all Americans have affordable health care coverage, with 24% saying it does not. By a 10-point margin, 45% to 35%, the public supports the idea of all Americans getting their insurance from a single government plan. (Half of those surveyed saw the coronavirus questions prior to the other questions about health care, and half after; the order did not appear to make a significant difference.)
WHAT DOES OTHER POLLING SHOW?
-NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist: “Poll: Americans Don’t Trust What They’re Hearing From Trump On Coronavirus”
-NBC/Wall Street Journal: “Sixty percent believe worst is yet to come for the U.S. in coronavirus pandemic”
Advertisement
-Gallup: “U.S. Coronavirus Concerns Surge, Government Trust Slides”
-CNN/SSRS: “CNN Poll: Most Americans confident government can stop nationwide epidemic, but see local cases on the horizon”
-YouGov: How the virus is affecting everything, from politics to brands
-FiveThirtyEight roundup of polling: “How Concerned Are Americans About Coronavirus So Far?”
-Reuters/Ipsos: “President Trump’s overall approval rating remains stable”
HOW WAS THE POLL CONDUCTED?
The HuffPost/YouGov poll consisted of 1,000 completed interviews conducted March 13-15 among U.S. adults, using a sample selected from YouGov’s opt-in online panel to match the demographics and other characteristics of the adult U.S. population.
HuffPost has teamed up with YouGov to conduct daily opinion polls. You can learn more about this project and take part in YouGov’s nationally representative opinion polling. More details on the polls’ methodology are available here.
Most surveys report a margin of error that represents some but not all potential survey errors. YouGov’s reports include a model-based margin of error, which rests on a specific set of statistical assumptions about the selected sample rather than the standard methodology for random probability sampling. If these assumptions are wrong, the model-based margin of error may also be inaccurate. Click here for a more detailed explanation of the model-based margin of error.
Keep up with the latest updates on the coronavirus at our live blog.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-17--Read Live Updates On The March 17 Primary Elections

Three states are holding primaries Tueday , even as the Center for Disease Control and Prevention has advised social distancing @ @ @ @ @ spread of coronavirus .
The Democratic presidential race is now a two-man battle between former @ @ @ @ @ who leads in convention delegates and appears to be on a clear path to the @ @ @ @ @ Sanders ( I-Vt. ) .
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii is still technically running , @ @ @ @ @ delegates so far .
Ohio , which has 136 delegates , scrambled Monday to postpone @ @ @ @ @ .
Ohio Department of Health Director Dr. Amy Acton declared that conducting the election would @ @ @ @ @ after GOP Gov .
Mike DeWine ’ s first attempt to delay the vote was @ @ @ @ @ Here are the states are still holding their primaries : Go here to see results @ @ @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Three states held primaries Tuesday, even as the Center for Disease Control and Prevention has advised social distancing in order to stem the spread of coronavirus.
The Democratic presidential race is now a two-man battle between former Vice President Joe Biden, who leads in convention delegates and appears to be on a clear path to the nomination, and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii is still technically running, but has only won two delegates so far.
Advertisement
Ohio, which has 136 delegates, scrambled Monday to postpone its primary until June 2. Ohio Department of Health Director Dr. Amy Acton declared that conducting the election would be a public health hazard after GOP Gov. Mike DeWine’s first attempt to delay the vote was shut down in court.
Here are the states are still holding their primaries:
Arizona, 67 delegates, polls close at 10 p.m. ET
Florida, 219 delegates (Biden projected winner)
Illinois, 155 delegates (Biden projected winner)
Go here to see results as they come in.
Read live updates below:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-17--Democratic Party Grapples With States Postponing Primaries Amid Coronavirus Outbreak

As states postpone their primary dates amid the coronavirus outbreak , the Democratic Party may be forced to grapple with its own delegate rules — or risk penalizing states for trying to adhere to public safety guidelines .
Under current party rules , the Democratic primaries are supposed to be over by June 9 .
Any state that schedules their primary after that date could be stripped of half its delegates , ultimately risking its influence on the primary process .
But as states try to adapt to new public health guidelines around the novel coronavirus , which advises people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and schools to shut down , and limits the size of public gatherings to no more than 10 people , a growing number of states are delaying their in-person voting days .
A total of five states have postponed primaries .
Ohio ’ s governor pushed its March 17 primaries to June 2 .
Georgia and Maryland followed suit .
And two states , Louisiana and Kentucky , have suggested postponing their April primaries past the June 9 deadline , to June 20 and June 23 , respectively .
The party has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its first priority is ensuring the health and safety of voters .
But as of Tuesday , the party had not changed its June 9 rule , threatening delegate penalties .
The rule was reiterated to state parties in a memo sent Monday , after news of Ohio ’ s primary postponement .
“ The Delegate Selection Rules provide that each state ’ s first determining step must take place by 9 June , ” the memo from the Democratic Party ’ s Rules and Bylaws Committee , which was first reported by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a state violates the rule on timing , or any other rule , they could be subject to penalties as prescribed in Rule 21 , including at least a 50 % reduction in delegates , which will need to be reviewed by the RBC.
” “ We will continue to work with every state party as they adjust their delegate selection plans around coronavirus , ” a DNC spokesperson told HuffPost .
“ The changes in Louisiana and Kentucky violates our rule on timing which is clear that all states must hold their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of our rules could result in a penalty of a state losing at least half of its delegates .
These changes will be reviewed by the Rules and Bylaws Committee.
” Three states , Arizona , Florida and Illinois , decided to hold their primaries as scheduled Tuesday .
And already , those states have faced major obstacles in doing so ; voter turnout has been incredibly low , elderly poll workers have bowed out of the process out of fear of coming in contact with the virus and state officials have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ senior centers or community centers , and struggled to distribute appropriate sanitation supplies .
Other states , like Wyoming , have decided to do away with their in-person caucusing , and instead allow only mail-in ballots or drop-off absentee ballots .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
As states postpone their primary dates amid the coronavirus outbreak, the Democratic Party may be forced to grapple with its own delegate rules — or risk penalizing states for trying to adhere to public safety guidelines.
Under current party rules, the Democratic primaries are supposed to be over by June 9. Any state that schedules their primary after that date could be stripped of half its delegates, ultimately risking its influence on the primary process.
Advertisement
But as states try to adapt to new public health guidelines around the novel coronavirus, which advises people stay in their homes, for businesses and schools to shut down, and limits the size of public gatherings to no more than 10 people, a growing number of states are delaying their in-person voting days.
A total of five states have postponed primaries. Ohio’s governor pushed its March 17 primaries to June 2. Georgia and Maryland followed suit. And two states, Louisiana and Kentucky, have suggested postponing their April primaries past the June 9 deadline, to June 20 and June 23, respectively.
The party has been monitoring the situation closely, and says its first priority is ensuring the health and safety of voters. But as of Tuesday, the party had not changed its June 9 rule, threatening delegate penalties. The rule was reiterated to state parties in a memo sent Monday, after news of Ohio’s primary postponement.
“The Delegate Selection Rules provide that each state’s first determining step must take place by 9 June,” the memo from the Democratic Party’s Rules and Bylaws Committee, which was first reported by The Guardian, said. “If a state violates the rule on timing, or any other rule, they could be subject to penalties as prescribed in Rule 21, including at least a 50% reduction in delegates, which will need to be reviewed by the RBC.”
Advertisement
Neither Kentucky nor Louisiana have formally asked the DNC for a waiver, according to a DNC aide.
“We will continue to work with every state party as they adjust their delegate selection plans around coronavirus,” a DNC spokesperson told HuffPost. “The changes in Louisiana and Kentucky violates our rule on timing which is clear that all states must hold their contests by June 9th. Any violation of our rules could result in a penalty of a state losing at least half of its delegates. These changes will be reviewed by the Rules and Bylaws Committee.”
Three states, Arizona, Florida and Illinois, decided to hold their primaries as scheduled Tuesday. And already, those states have faced major obstacles in doing so; voter turnout has been incredibly low, elderly poll workers have bowed out of the process out of fear of coming in contact with the virus and state officials have been forced to move polling stations away from senior centers or community centers, and struggled to distribute appropriate sanitation supplies.
Other states, like Wyoming, have decided to do away with their in-person caucusing, and instead allow only mail-in ballots or drop-off absentee ballots.
Democratic presidential candidates former vice president Joe Biden and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders’ have both suspended all public campaign operations.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-18--Stunning Supercut Exposes Fox News's Dangerous Hypocrisy On Coronavirus

Many of the voices on Fox News spent more than a month minimizing the coronavirus outbreak and accusing the rest @ @ @ @ @ the threat to make President Donald Trump look bad .
Now , the network is @ @ @ @ @ the infection seriously .
A Washington Post video , above , shows how quickly the @ @ @ @ @ their tune , from downplaying the risk and blaming Democrats for using the virus to @ @ @ @ @ of the dangers .

By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you're agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-17--Mnuchin Reportedly Warned Senators Of 20% Unemployment Without Coronavirus Rescue

WASHINGTON ( Reuters ) - U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin warned Republican senators on Tuesday that the country ’ s unemployment rate could hit 20 % if they failed to act on a proposed coronavirus rescue package and there was lasting economic damage , a person familiar with the closed-door meeting said .
Mnuchin met with senators to persuade them to pass a $ 1 trillion stimulus package that would send cash to Americans within two weeks and backstop airlines and other companies .
The Senate is majority-controlled by President Donald Trump ’ s fellow Republicans .
A Treasury official @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but trying to illustrate the potential risks of inaction .
“ During the meeting with Senate Republicans today , Secretary Mnuchin used several mathematical examples for illustrative purposes , but he never implied this would be the case , ” Treasury spokeswoman Monica Crowley said in an emailed statement .
Mnuchin ’ s comments to the senators were first reported by Bloomberg .
The warning was similar to one issued to U.S. lawmakers at the depths of the 2008 financial crisis , when Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a $ 700 billion plan to buy toxic mortgage assets .
They told lawmakers here that inaction could devastate an already weak economy , sending the jobless rate soaring .
Congress ultimately passed the plan and later stimulus measures to tackle the crisis .
Unemployment peaked at 10.2 % in October 2009 .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin warned Republican senators on Tuesday that the country’s unemployment rate could hit 20% if they failed to act on a proposed coronavirus rescue package and there was lasting economic damage, a person familiar with the closed-door meeting said.
Mnuchin met with senators to persuade them to pass a $1 trillion stimulus package that would send cash to Americans within two weeks and backstop airlines and other companies. The Senate is majority-controlled by President Donald Trump’s fellow Republicans.
Advertisement
A Treasury official said Mnuchin was not providing a forecast but trying to illustrate the potential risks of inaction.
“During the meeting with Senate Republicans today, Secretary Mnuchin used several mathematical examples for illustrative purposes, but he never implied this would be the case,” Treasury spokeswoman Monica Crowley said in an emailed statement.
Mnuchin’s comments to the senators were first reported by Bloomberg.
The warning was similar to one issued to U.S. lawmakers at the depths of the 2008 financial crisis, when Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke went to Capitol Hill to urge passage of a $700 billion plan to buy toxic mortgage assets.
They told lawmakers here that inaction could devastate an already weak economy, sending the jobless rate soaring. Congress ultimately passed the plan and later stimulus measures to tackle the crisis. Unemployment peaked at 10.2% in October 2009.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-17--Conservative Site Posts Damning Supercut Of Trump's Lies About Coronavirus

The Bulwark ― a conservative news and opinion website ― released a supercut on Tuesday chronicling President Donald Trump ’ s reckless slew of misleading or false statements since the early days of the coronavirus outbreak , leading up to his recent pivot .
The video dropped the same day Trump declared at a news conference that he had “ always ” known the threat was real , and that he “ felt it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic.
” The first clip is dated Jan. 22 , when the U.S. had recorded only one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the novel coronavirus .
The president was asked during a CNBC interview if there were concerns about the novel coronavirus in China becoming a pandemic .
“ No , not at all , and we have it totally under control , ” Trump replied .
The Bulwark was created last year by several Republican opinion leaders who , though their conservative ideology remains unchanged , are staunch “ Never Trumpers.
” The outlet ’ s montage continues along the timeline for the crisis to show the president repeatedly offering misinformation about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the process , he squandered valuable time which could have been used to mitigate and prepare for the pandemic in the U.S. ― his claim on Monday that he would rate his response a “ 10 ” notwithstanding .
Clips show Trump claiming the disease ’ s spread from China had been shut down , that the virus could go away in April come rising temperatures , that the number of confirmed coronavirus cases in the U.S. was dropping and would soon reach zero , and that a vaccine might be available in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this despite consistently contradictory information from medical professionals .
Over the course of these claims , the number of U.S. cases soared from 1 to more than 4,200 on Tuesday , with a total of 75 deaths so far recorded and cases now reported in every state .
Trump declared a national emergency last Friday , allocating $ 50 billion in disaster relief funding , but as he did that shirked responsibility for the lack of testing availability and other failures .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Bulwark ― a conservative news and opinion website ― released a supercut on Tuesday chronicling President Donald Trump’s reckless slew of misleading or false statements since the early days of the coronavirus outbreak, leading up to his recent pivot.
The video dropped the same day Trump declared at a news conference that he had “always” known the threat was real, and that he “felt it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic.”
Advertisement
The first clip is dated Jan. 22, when the U.S. had recorded only one case of COVID-19, the illness caused by the novel coronavirus. The president was asked during a CNBC interview if there were concerns about the novel coronavirus in China becoming a pandemic.
“No, not at all, and we have it totally under control,” Trump replied.
We've added quotes made by the President today, as well as the numbers for the largest jump in confirmed cases to date in America. Watch and follow @barubin https://t.co/WSha8szotd pic.twitter.com/Vrt2u1WDa6 — The Bulwark (@BulwarkOnline) March 17, 2020
The Bulwark was created last year by several Republican opinion leaders who, though their conservative ideology remains unchanged, are staunch “Never Trumpers.”
The outlet’s montage continues along the timeline for the crisis to show the president repeatedly offering misinformation about the outbreak and downplaying its severity. In the process, he squandered valuable time which could have been used to mitigate and prepare for the pandemic in the U.S. ― his claim on Monday that he would rate his response a “10” notwithstanding.
Advertisement
Clips show Trump claiming the disease’s spread from China had been shut down, that the virus could go away in April come rising temperatures, that the number of confirmed coronavirus cases in the U.S. was dropping and would soon reach zero, and that a vaccine might be available in a matter of months ― all of this despite consistently contradictory information from medical professionals.