thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-03--COVID-19 Threatens A New Eviction Crisis

Illustration : Damon Dahlen/HuffPost ; Photo : Frederic J. Brown/AFP via Getty Images Tents housing the homeless line a street in downtown Los Angeles last month .
Los Angeles , which has one of the largest homeless populations in the country , is trying to move 15,000 homeless individuals to hotels or emergency shelters in an effort to prevent the spread of COVID-19 .
A wave of evictions post-quarantine will mean many cities will see a significant increase in homelessness .
In Seattle , a 2017 survey found that the majority of evicted renters ended up homeless .
In New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tenants who had experienced an eviction were more likely to move into a homeless shelter — and stay there longer — than tenants who had never been evicted .
“ Some people are going to be able to pay their rent with their savings for a few months , ” Hatch said .
“ But if their savings run out and their job still hasn ’ t come back , a lot of those people are going to end up on the street or scrambling for a new place to live.
” If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ across the city , landlords may reduce rents to attract new tenants .
But , Manville noted , even if the landlord lowered the rent on that apartment to $ 600 , it would be too late for the previous tenant .
She wouldn ’ t have the first month ’ s rent and deposit needed for a new place and would now have an eviction on her record to deter other landlords from renting to her .
Meanwhile , her landlord may not find a new tenant for the apartment for months @ @ @ @ @ @ @ action problem , ” Manville said .
“ Individual landlords may be confident that if they evict tenants , they ’ ll be able to fill the vacant unit quickly .
If a large number of landlords evict their tenants at the same time , however , there ’ s going to be too many empty apartments and not enough people with the savings to move into them .
All these problems can be avoided by just letting people stay in their homes.
” The social effects , too , may be long-lasting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more likely to lose their jobs , if they ’ re still employed in the first place .
Their children show worse academic performance .
They are more likely to move into lower-quality and overcrowded housing , affecting both their short- and long-term health .
Even if cities don ’ t see a significant rise in homelessness , low-income populations may move en masse to cheaper suburbs .
At the federal level , the National Low Income Housing Coalition is asking Congress to include $ 100 billion in emergency rental assistance in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cover back-rent for tenants so they aren ’ t evicted as soon as local governments lift the temporary bans .
The nonprofit organization is also asking for $ 70 billion in infrastructure spending to retrofit public housing to help reduce health conditions that make residents more susceptible to COVID-19 .
States and cities could also do their part .
Gary Painter , the director of the University of Southern California ’ s Sol Price Center for Social Innovation , said lawmakers could ban rent increases during the pandemic and its economic aftermath .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ loans for renters and landlords to cover costs and help renegotiate lease terms , a process that is relatively routine in other parts of the housing market .
The most important factor in all of these efforts will be keeping Americans in their homes as long as possible .
A rise in homelessness is not only a moral catastrophe for cities but also a fiscal one .
Nearly every study on the costs of homelessness finds that it is cheaper to prevent evictions than to mitigate their fallout .
A 2018 study found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ roughly $ 8,000 in medical care , homeless services and lost wages .
More Affordable Homes For More People The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit , the federal government ’ s primary vehicle for encouraging affordable housing production , mostly goes to renters who earn around 60 % of the local median income .
In some cities , households earning as much as $ 117,400 are eligible for subsidized housing .
Attacking the roots of the country ’ s eviction and homeless crises , Saadian said , will require targeting low-income renters and addressing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of affordable housing .

Tents housing the homeless line a street in downtown Los Angeles last month. Los Angeles, which has one of the largest homeless populations in the country, is trying to move 15,000 homeless individuals to hotels or emergency shelters in an effort to prevent the spread of COVID-19. Illustration: Damon Dahlen/HuffPost; Photo: Frederic J. Brown/AFP via Getty Images
The coronavirus has put America’s housing market on hold. As residents shelter in place, real estate listings have slowed to a trickle. State and federal policymakers, facing an unprecedented spike in unemployment and a pandemic simultaneously, have banned evictions to ease economic hardship during the crisis.
But eventually all of this will have to end. When the eviction bans expire, millions of Americans will find themselves on the hook for months of back rent. Thirty million Americans — overwhelmingly the poor and renters — are newly jobless as unemployment hits previously unthinkable levels.
Advertisement
“Eviction moratoriums are a great first step, but there’s a lot of evidence that landlords are still filing for eviction,” said Megan Hatch, a professor at Cleveland State University who studies urban policy. “When these restrictions are lifted, a huge number of people could be evicted right away.”
May 1 is the second rental due date since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Millions of renters will have to choose between paying their rent and buying essentials. Some have already reached the bottom of their savings.
Even before the pandemic, a significant percentage of Americans were struggling to pay rent. In a 2018 Pew Charitable Trusts survey, nearly 1 in 6 households reported spending more than half of their income on rent. Of the roughly 19 million American families who are eligible for rental assistance, only 4 million receive it.
In April, almost one-third of households said they couldn’t pay the rent. May is not looking any better.
Advertisement
“We know millions of households were one financial accident away from eviction,” said Sarah Saadian, the vice president of public policy for the National Low Income Housing Coalition. “This pandemic may be the breaking point.”
A wave of evictions post-quarantine will mean many cities will see a significant increase in homelessness. In Seattle, a 2017 survey found that the majority of evicted renters ended up homeless. In New York, a 2018 study found that tenants who had experienced an eviction were more likely to move into a homeless shelter — and stay there longer — than tenants who had never been evicted.
“Some people are going to be able to pay their rent with their savings for a few months,” Hatch said. “But if their savings run out and their job still hasn’t come back, a lot of those people are going to end up on the street or scrambling for a new place to live.”
The economic hardships brought on by the coronavirus pandemic have led some housing activists to call for rent strikes. VALERIE MACON via Getty Images
A No-Win Situation
Thousands of newly homeless people and thousands of empty apartments will create a situation that benefits neither renters, landlords nor cities.
Advertisement
Michael Manville, a UCLA professor who studies urban planning, described a scenario in which a renter paying $800 a month loses her job. She can’t pay her rent, gets evicted and ends up moving in with a friend.
If this happens to thousands of other people across the city, landlords may reduce rents to attract new tenants. But, Manville noted, even if the landlord lowered the rent on that apartment to $600, it would be too late for the previous tenant. She wouldn’t have the first month’s rent and deposit needed for a new place and would now have an eviction on her record to deter other landlords from renting to her. Meanwhile, her landlord may not find a new tenant for the apartment for months.
“It’s a collective action problem,” Manville said. “Individual landlords may be confident that if they evict tenants, they’ll be able to fill the vacant unit quickly. If a large number of landlords evict their tenants at the same time, however, there’s going to be too many empty apartments and not enough people with the savings to move into them. All these problems can be avoided by just letting people stay in their homes.”
“Only the federal government has the power to keep this problem from spiraling.” - Michael Manville, UCLA professor
This scenario would have wide-ranging effects for cities themselves. High vacancy rates make it harder for developers to build new homes because banks won’t want to finance construction in places tenants aren’t paying rent.
Advertisement
The social effects, too, may be long-lasting. Hatch noted that evicted tenants are more likely to lose their jobs, if they’re still employed in the first place. Their children show worse academic performance. They are more likely to move into lower-quality and overcrowded housing, affecting both their short- and long-term health. Even if cities don’t see a significant rise in homelessness, low-income populations may move en masse to cheaper suburbs.
“Renters are being hit hardest and first,” said Jenny Schuetz, a fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Metropolitan Policy Program. “These are people without a lot of resources or choices. It’s not clear that when this is over they can move someplace else. They’re going to live wherever they can afford to.”
Seattle has already converted an event space into a temporary men's shelter for the homeless during the coronavirus pandemic. Karen Ducey via Getty Images
A Federal Challenge
The severity of the coronavirus-driven housing shock will depend on the steps policymakers take to prevent it.
At the federal level, the National Low Income Housing Coalition is asking Congress to include $100 billion in emergency rental assistance in the next economic stimulus package. This would cover back-rent for tenants so they aren’t evicted as soon as local governments lift the temporary bans. The nonprofit organization is also asking for $70 billion in infrastructure spending to retrofit public housing to help reduce health conditions that make residents more susceptible to COVID-19.
Advertisement
States and cities could also do their part. Gary Painter, the director of the University of Southern California’s Sol Price Center for Social Innovation, said lawmakers could ban rent increases during the pandemic and its economic aftermath. They could also provide low-interest, long-term loans for renters and landlords to cover costs and help renegotiate lease terms, a process that is relatively routine in other parts of the housing market.
“If you own a strip mall and all of a sudden you lose two tenants, it’s not unusual to renegotiate new terms with your financial backers,” Painter said. Cities could extend the same principle to their residential housing by expanding their legal-assistance programs or initiating large-scale negotiations between landlord and renter representatives.
The most important factor in all of these efforts will be keeping Americans in their homes as long as possible. A rise in homelessness is not only a moral catastrophe for cities but also a fiscal one. Nearly every study on the costs of homelessness finds that it is cheaper to prevent evictions than to mitigate their fallout. A 2018 study found that every eviction cost New York City roughly $8,000 in medical care, homeless services and lost wages.
“It makes a lot of sense for the Congress to beef up the money flowing to the typical American, especially lower-income Americans,” Manville said. “Only the federal government has the power to keep this problem from spiraling.”
Failure to build public and low-income housing has contributed to a nationwide affordability crisis. Spencer Platt via Getty Images
Advertisement
More Affordable Homes For More People
Saadian noted that the coronavirus should also be a call to reform the policies that made renters so vulnerable to homelessness in the first place.
The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, the federal government’s primary vehicle for encouraging affordable housing production, mostly goes to renters who earn around 60% of the local median income. In some cities, households earning as much as $117,400 are eligible for subsidized housing. Attacking the roots of the country’s eviction and homeless crises, Saadian said, will require targeting low-income renters and addressing the federal government’s decades-long underfunding of affordable housing.
“The housing shortage is almost entirely at the low end of the income spectrum,” Saadian said. “If there isn’t sufficient housing at the low end, the problem ends up affecting people higher up the income spectrum.”
The coronavirus may also provide an opportunity for cities to solve the other driver of the housing crisis: the near-impossibility of building more homes in overgrown cities.
“We basically stopped building housing in 2008,” said Jeff Tucker, an economist for real estate listing site Zillow. “We have this huge housing deficit at the same time we have several million extra people in their 30s who are disproportionately renting right now and trying to transition to homeownership.”
Advertisement
If cities don’t address this mismatch, the country could return to its trajectory of soaring home prices relatively quickly after the pandemic is over — or maybe even before. Tucker said that Zillow’s web traffic fell roughly 20% at the start of the pandemic but is now 20% higher than it was last year. “Virtual tours” of homes have increased sevenfold.
Some of this increase is due to Americans having more time to browse real estate listings, but it may also indicate that some potential home buyers, especially affluent ones, plan to use the drop in demand to climb onto the housing ladder. If rents and prices continue to climb as they did before the pandemic, they will only increase the displacement and homelessness risks.
The pandemic should be a call for cities to rethink their economic structures, Schuetz said.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-03--Biden Marks World Press Freedom Day By Calling Out Trump’s Attacks On Media

“ A free press is essential to a free society .
Tyrants know this all too well .
That is why attacking the press and attempting to intimidate independent media is a standard part of the authoritarian playbook , ” Biden said .
“ And , it ’ s why Donald Trump ’ s repeated efforts to demonize the media put us on such a dangerous path.
” Attacking the press has been one of Trump ’ s most frequent pastimes since his campaign for the 2016 presidential election .
The president has long fostered distrust of journalists and mainstream @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rallies , during press gaggles and on Twitter , all while spreading lies and misinformation .
The tactic has prompted many of his supporters to stop listening to those whose job is to tell the truth and , in some instances , threaten journalists with harassment and violence .
“ Trump deflects legitimate questions with attacks .
He bullies and berates individual members of the press , rather than take responsibility for his failures of leadership .
His efforts to undermine public confidence in the integrity of fact-based reporting violate our core American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Biden said .
“ And , it is particularly offensive to see the White House seek to spread misinformation and bully reporters in the midst of a global pandemic.
” Trump has increased his attacks on the media as the nation struggles to combat the coronavirus pandemic .
His daily press briefings with the White House ’ s coronavirus task force started out with reporters seeking science-based updates on the virus — and quickly devolved into something akin to a Trump campaign rally .
When reporters try to address the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conflicting information , Trump calls journalists “ dishonest , ” their questions “ nasty , ” their employer “ fake news , ” and the general media “ angry.
” Leaders must approach a crisis by presenting information in a way that is clear , consistent and credible , Frank Sesno , a former CNN journalist who now serves as director of the School of Media and Public Affairs at The George Washington University , previously told HuffPost .
“ So to present information in a divisive way … or to attack messengers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seeing ― this is a damaging thing , ” Sesno said .
“ And while the president may feel that he is taking a shot at the media and the media deserve it ― and fair enough , some of them may ― what he ’ s really doing is he ’ s further reinforcing his own role as a divisive person who criticizes and attacks .
Now is not the time to criticize and attack.
” In his statement , Biden said that , as president , he would bring back a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ press “ that is grounded in mutual respect , even ― and especially when ― they critique policies or positions of my administration.
” In 2019 , at least 25 journalists died while doing their job — at least 10 of whom were murdered for their work , according to the Committee to Protect Journalists .
“ Journalists in the U.S. have been largely undeterred by the daily barrage of pressure , insults , and abuse emanating from President Trump , ” CPJ Executive Director Joel Simon said in a statement when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president ’ s attacks on the media have had an impact .
They have undermined public trust in journalism as an institution , a dangerous place to find ourselves in the midst of a public health emergency .
And they have empowered autocrats around the world who are cracking down on press freedom with unbridled ferocity at a time when truthful information is more than ever a precious commodity .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Former Vice President Joe Biden talked about the importance of World Press Freedom Day on Sunday by highlighting President Donald Trump’s repeated attacks against journalists and news organizations.
The presumptive 2020 Democratic presidential nominee tweeted an extensive statement marking the day, which is meant to acknowledge the importance of journalists in upholding democracy around the world.
Advertisement
“A free press is essential to a free society. Tyrants know this all too well. That is why attacking the press and attempting to intimidate independent media is a standard part of the authoritarian playbook,” Biden said. “And, it’s why Donald Trump’s repeated efforts to demonize the media put us on such a dangerous path.”
A free press is essential to a free society. That's why attacking the press and attempting to intimidate independent media is a standard part of the authoritarian playbook around the world. And it’s why Donald Trump’s efforts to demonize the media put us on such a dangerous path. — Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) May 3, 2020
Attacking the press has been one of Trump’s most frequent pastimes since his campaign for the 2016 presidential election. The president has long fostered distrust of journalists and mainstream news outlets by attacking reporters at his rallies, during press gaggles and on Twitter, all while spreading lies and misinformation. The tactic has prompted many of his supporters to stop listening to those whose job is to tell the truth and, in some instances, threaten journalists with harassment and violence.
“Trump deflects legitimate questions with attacks. He bullies and berates individual members of the press, rather than take responsibility for his failures of leadership. His efforts to undermine public confidence in the integrity of fact-based reporting violate our core American values and threaten our very system government,” Biden said. “And, it is particularly offensive to see the White House seek to spread misinformation and bully reporters in the midst of a global pandemic.”
Advertisement
Trump has increased his attacks on the media as the nation struggles to combat the coronavirus pandemic. His daily press briefings with the White House’s coronavirus task force started out with reporters seeking science-based updates on the virus — and quickly devolved into something akin to a Trump campaign rally. When reporters try to address the president’s lies or seek clarification on conflicting information, Trump calls journalists “dishonest,” their questions “nasty,” their employer “fake news,” and the general media “angry.”
President Donald Trump at his daily coronavirus briefing at the White House on April 9. JIM WATSON/AFP
Leaders must approach a crisis by presenting information in a way that is clear, consistent and credible, Frank Sesno, a former CNN journalist who now serves as director of the School of Media and Public Affairs at The George Washington University, previously told HuffPost.
“So to present information in a divisive way … or to attack messengers so that people doubt what they are seeing ― this is a damaging thing,” Sesno said. “And while the president may feel that he is taking a shot at the media and the media deserve it ― and fair enough, some of them may ― what he’s really doing is he’s further reinforcing his own role as a divisive person who criticizes and attacks. Now is not the time to criticize and attack.”
In his statement, Biden said that, as president, he would bring back a relationship between the White House and the press “that is grounded in mutual respect, even ― and especially when ― they critique policies or positions of my administration.”
Advertisement
In 2019, at least 25 journalists died while doing their job — at least 10 of whom were murdered for their work, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists.
The committee released a report in April detailing how the Trump administration’s attacks on press credibility endanger the nation’s democracy and global press freedom.
“Journalists in the U.S. have been largely undeterred by the daily barrage of pressure, insults, and abuse emanating from President Trump,” CPJ Executive Director Joel Simon said in a statement when the report was released. “But the president’s attacks on the media have had an impact. They have undermined public trust in journalism as an institution, a dangerous place to find ourselves in the midst of a public health emergency. And they have empowered autocrats around the world who are cracking down on press freedom with unbridled ferocity at a time when truthful information is more than ever a precious commodity.”
Here’s how Trump commended journalists on World Press Freedom Day:
The Fake News doesn’t show real polls. Lamestream Media is totally CORRUPT, the Enemy of the People! https://t.co/Agwb3u5QFd — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 3, 2020
Advertisement
Going well despite the Fake News! https://t.co/WXqcomjahx — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 3, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-03--The Critical Cases The Supreme Court Will Hear In First-Ever Remote Arguments

Booking.com is challenging the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ’ s decision not to issue the travel website a corporate trademark for its name .
The agency rejected the company ’ s request because its name simply combines a generic word ― in this case , “ booking , ” as in reserving a hotel room ― with the top-level domain , “ .com.
” The denial of trademark rights for generic words goes back to an 1888 Supreme Court ruling that allowing generic word trademarks would enable firms to monopolize a market through ownership of the rights to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ firms .
The ruling could impact other companies with similar names like Cars.com , Dictionary.com , Wine.com and Newspapers.com .
In 2013 , the Supreme Court ruled that a requirement that non-governmental organizations receiving federal funds to help fight HIV/AIDS “ have a policy explicitly opposing prostitution and sex trafficking ” infringed on the First Amendment rights of those organizations .
Despite this decision , the federal government continues to insist that foreign affiliates of U.S.-based organizations that receive HIV/AIDS funds maintain a policy against prostitution and sex trafficking .
The Alliance for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ led to the 2013 ruling and is challenging the government again here .
The government argues that since foreign affiliates are separate entities incorporated in foreign nations , they do not receive protection under the U.S. Constitution .
The alliance argues that it and its foreign subsidiaries “ share a common mission and speak with a single voice.
” Forcing them to take divergent public policy positions would undermine their work and infringe on the U.S. parent organization ’ s First Amendment rights .
An association of political consultants who would like to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a 1991 law banning robocalls to cellphones and a 2015 amendment to that law allowing an exception for robocalls to collect debts owed to the federal government .
The consultants argue that the law and the government debt collection exception infringe on First Amendment speech rights .
If the court rules in favor of the consultants , its decision may come down to whether it must strike the entire law or can merely sever the government debt collection exception .
This case asks the court to deal with questions stemming from one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government , the ethnic cleansing of Native American tribes in the 19th century .
At issue is whether Jimcy McGirt , a Seminole man convicted of sexual assault under Oklahoma state law , was within the boundaries of the Creek Nation reservation in eastern Oklahoma when he committed his crime .
Major crimes , like murder or sexual assault , committed by Native Americans on reservation land are supposed to be prosecuted by the federal government , not the states .
In this case , McGirt ’ s lawyers argue that the legal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ based on the lines drawn in 1866 .
The reservation was created several decades after the Creeks ’ forcible removal from Southeastern states , along with the four other Civilized Tribes , as part of the ethnic cleansing effort known as the Trail of Tears .
That reservation was then eviscerated by the government-backed theft of land by white settlers in the late 19th century before Oklahoma was admitted as a state in 1906 .
In the consolidated Mazars and Deutsche Bank cases , Trump is challenging the power of the House committees @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Intelligence to subpoena his accounting firm , Mazars , and his lenders , Deutsche Bank and Capital One , to obtain his personal financial records .
The committees subpoenaed the records both as part of their oversight of the executive branch and the ethics laws governing it and as part of their effort to craft legislation amending those ethics laws .
On April 27 , the Supreme Court asked the parties to submit supplemental briefings by May 8 on whether the court should refuse to hear both cases on the grounds that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the federal government .
This would give the justices a chance to effectively punt on the cases .
Whether the congressional subpoenas would be honored would then be left up to the companies on the receiving end .
The court is asked to decide whether the state laws mandating that electors vote for their states ’ popular-vote winner are unconstitutional under the First , 12th and 14th amendments .
Harvard professor Lawrence Lessig , the lawyer for the plaintiffs in both cases , wants the Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will not determine the outcome of a presidential election , rather than amid the uproar of a future election decided by one or two faithless votes .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON ― For the first time in history, millions of Americans will be able to listen live as the U.S. Supreme Court hears oral arguments this week. In a few months, the coronavirus pandemic has brought about what open-government advocates have wanted for decades: more transparency from the highest court in the land.
Starting on Monday at 10 a.m., the Supreme Court justices will listen, separately and remotely, as lawyers argue their cases by phone conference. Audio of these arguments will be livestreamed on C-SPAN.
Advertisement
The court will hear a total of 10 cases on six days, spread out over the course of the next two weeks.
A phone conference is a major break from the typical pomp and circumstance of this traditional institution, which has long resisted making any concessions to 21st-century technology (or, in the case of the telephone, 19th-century technology).
C-SPAN made its first formal request for camera access to the Supreme Court 32 years ago, in 1988. While lower federal appeals courts allowed for camera access, the Supreme Court never budged. In recent years, the court released same-day audio in certain high-profile cases but still resisted livestreaming its proceedings.
The U.S. Supreme Court on April 15, 2020, amid a stay-at-home order in Washington, D.C. DANIEL SLIM/AFP via Getty Images
Advertisement
This month’s break with centuries-old practice will require some changes. Justices typically can ask questions of the lawyers whenever they want. But remote conferences, as anyone who has ever tried to Zoom with more than a dozen people can attest, need some order. So the justices will ask their questions in order of seniority.
Most of the lawyers will argue from their home or office, while government attorneys will argue from the solicitor general’s conference room at Justice Department headquarters. The court has reportedly urged lawyers to use landlines to avoid connectivity problems.
Transparency advocates who have pushed the justices to give the public greater access to their proceedings say it’s about time the Supreme Court let a little light in, even if it came about in a way they never imagined.
“It’s exciting, albeit overdue, that the Supreme Court give the public real-time access to its hearings ― and not just to the 50 or so members of the public who wait between five hours and five days in line to get in during a normal argument day,” Gabe Roth of the group Fix the Court told HuffPost.
Roth said he’s anticipating the court will run into technical issues and is pleased that a high-profile dispute involving President Donald Trump’s financial records isn’t up until next week. But he said he thinks the public will be “heartened to hear that at least some of their public servants have a serious, intellectually rigorous approach” to their jobs.
Advertisement
“The court will come out looking good, and the public will come out smarter about the third branch,” Roth said. “A win-win.”
Here’s a look at the cases that the Supreme Court will hear remotely in this unprecedented time:
May 4
United States Patent and Trademark Office v. Booking.com B.V.
Booking.com is challenging the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s decision not to issue the travel website a corporate trademark for its name. The agency rejected the company’s request because its name simply combines a generic word ― in this case, “booking,” as in reserving a hotel room ― with the top-level domain, “.com.” The denial of trademark rights for generic words goes back to an 1888 Supreme Court ruling that allowing generic word trademarks would enable firms to monopolize a market through ownership of the rights to the word describing the goods sold by other firms. The ruling could impact other companies with similar names like Cars.com, Dictionary.com, Wine.com and Newspapers.com.
May 5
United States Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International Inc.
In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that a requirement that non-governmental organizations receiving federal funds to help fight HIV/AIDS “have a policy explicitly opposing prostitution and sex trafficking” infringed on the First Amendment rights of those organizations. Despite this decision, the federal government continues to insist that foreign affiliates of U.S.-based organizations that receive HIV/AIDS funds maintain a policy against prostitution and sex trafficking. The Alliance for Open Society International brought the lawsuit that led to the 2013 ruling and is challenging the government again here. The government argues that since foreign affiliates are separate entities incorporated in foreign nations, they do not receive protection under the U.S. Constitution. The alliance argues that it and its foreign subsidiaries “share a common mission and speak with a single voice.” Forcing them to take divergent public policy positions would undermine their work and infringe on the U.S. parent organization’s First Amendment rights.
May 6
Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania
The consolidated cases brought by the Little Sisters of the Poor, an order of Catholic nuns, and the Trump administration seek to uphold new rules greatly expanding religious exemptions from covering birth control and other women’s health care under the Affordable Care Act. This is a follow-up to the 2014 Hobby Lobby case where five conservative justices created a religious liberty exemption for closely held corporations from providing birth control coverage under the ACA.
Advertisement
After the passage of that law, the Obama administration had issued a rule requiring employer-provided health plans to cover birth control at no cost for women. The Supreme Court created a limited religious liberty exemption in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby. Petitioners sought to expand that exemption in the 2016 case of Zubik v. Burwell, but Justice Antonin Scalia’s death left a 4-4 tie.
In 2017, the Trump administration issued new rules expanding the religious liberty exemption by amending the Obama administration regulations. The questions now before the Supreme Court focus on the Trump administration regulations.
Pennsylvania argues that the promulgation of those rules violated the Administrative Procedure Act by not following laws requiring a notice of rulemaking and an open comment period. The order of nuns and the Trump administration want the court to expand on its Hobby Lobby ruling as the Zubik petitioners sought in 2016.
Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants Inc.
An association of political consultants who would like to make robocalls soliciting campaign donations is challenging a 1991 law banning robocalls to cellphones and a 2015 amendment to that law allowing an exception for robocalls to collect debts owed to the federal government. The consultants argue that the law and the government debt collection exception infringe on First Amendment speech rights. If the court rules in favor of the consultants, its decision may come down to whether it must strike the entire law or can merely sever the government debt collection exception.
May 11
McGirt v. Oklahoma
This case asks the court to deal with questions stemming from one of the most shameful acts of the U.S. government, the ethnic cleansing of Native American tribes in the 19th century. At issue is whether Jimcy McGirt, a Seminole man convicted of sexual assault under Oklahoma state law, was within the boundaries of the Creek Nation reservation in eastern Oklahoma when he committed his crime. Major crimes, like murder or sexual assault, committed by Native Americans on reservation land are supposed to be prosecuted by the federal government, not the states.
Advertisement
In this case, McGirt’s lawyers argue that the legal boundaries of the Creek reservation should be based on the lines drawn in 1866. The reservation was created several decades after the Creeks’ forcible removal from Southeastern states, along with the four other Civilized Tribes, as part of the ethnic cleansing effort known as the Trail of Tears. That reservation was then eviscerated by the government-backed theft of land by white settlers in the late 19th century before Oklahoma was admitted as a state in 1906.
In prior cases, the court has been deferential to claims of Indian reservation boundaries. What the justices may find problematic in this case is that the 1866 Creek reservation boundaries were vast and would now include the entire city of Tulsa. Recognizing them in McGirt’s case would have sweeping ramifications for numerous major crime cases in Oklahoma.
The court heard a similar case in 2019, Sharp v. Murphy, but never issued a ruling before replacing it with the McGirt case on the spring docket. One potential reason for this switch is that Justice Neil Gorsuch recused himself from Sharp v. Murphy, which may have left a 4-4 tie. He did not recuse himself from the McGirt case.
Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru
St. James School v. Biel
When is an employee of a religious organization considered a minister of that religion under the law? That’s the question before the Supreme Court in these consolidated cases.
In 2015, Agnes Morrissey-Berru was fired from her position as a teacher at Our Lady of Guadalupe School, a Catholic parish school. She filed a claim in court charging age discrimination. In 2014, Kristen Biel, a teacher at St. James School, also a Catholic school, was fired after announcing she had breast cancer. She filed a complaint charging discrimination based on her illness. Biel died in 2019.
Advertisement
The schools argue that the teachers were covered by the “ministerial exception” to employment discrimination laws created by the Supreme Court in 2012, which lets religious organizations decide who can or cannot be ministers. They state that even though Morrissey-Berru and Biel were teachers, their work was essential in promoting the Catholic religion and its values. The Trump administration filed a friend-of-the-court brief backing the two schools.
May 12
The most closely watched cases of the Supreme Court’s spring docket are the three brought by President Trump to stop Congress and Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. from obtaining his personal financial records.
Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP
Trump v. Deutsche Bank
In the consolidated Mazars and Deutsche Bank cases, Trump is challenging the power of the House committees on Oversight and Reform, Financial Services and Intelligence to subpoena his accounting firm, Mazars, and his lenders, Deutsche Bank and Capital One, to obtain his personal financial records. The committees subpoenaed the records both as part of their oversight of the executive branch and the ethics laws governing it and as part of their effort to craft legislation amending those ethics laws.
Trump argues that Congress has no legitimate purpose in pursuing his financial records. In doing so, he makes sweeping claims that would eviscerate Congress’ oversight function and subpoena power. He also argues that the ethics laws that Congress seeks to amend are unconstitutional and therefore any attempt to perform oversight or legislate in that area is preemptively forbidden. Congress disputes Trump’s arguments. The district court and appeals court judges who heard these cases sided with Congress.
On April 27, the Supreme Court asked the parties to submit supplemental briefings by May 8 on whether the court should refuse to hear both cases on the grounds that they are political disputes between branches of the federal government. This would give the justices a chance to effectively punt on the cases. Whether the congressional subpoenas would be honored would then be left up to the companies on the receiving end.
Advertisement
Trump v. Vance
The third case comes out of a grand jury investigation into potential lawbreaking by Trump and the Trump Organization that was launched by DA Vance based on information provided by Trump’s former fixer Michael Cohen. Vance’s grand jury subpoena seeks the financial records and tax returns of the president.
Trump argues that so long as he occupies the Office of the President of the United States, he is immune from criminal investigation and prosecution according to the Constitution. The principle of presidential immunity is based on opinions issued by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel in 1973 and 2000.
Vance argues that OLC opinions are not binding law and that the alleged crimes he seeks to investigate both predate and do not relate to Trump’s presidency.
A district court dismissed Trump’s challenge to the subpoena. An appeals court ruled that the doctrine of presidential immunity would not cover private actions taken by the president prior to assuming the office.
May 13
Chiafalo v. Washington
Colorado Department of State v. Baca
These two cases ― which are being argued separately ― both ask the court to determine whether state laws requiring Electoral College members to cast their votes for the winner of the popular vote for president in their state are unconstitutional. In 2016, seven electors violated state laws by voting for someone other than the popular-vote winner of their states. It was the highest number of “faithless electors” in any presidential election.
Advertisement
The first case was brought by three Washington state electors ― Peter Chiafalo, Levi Guerra and Esther John ― who were fined $1,000 each for casting their Electoral College votes for former Secretary of State Colin Powell. The second case was brought by Colorado elector Michael Baca, who was replaced by the Colorado secretary of state as an elector after he attempted to cast a ballot for then-Ohio Gov. John Kasich.
Baca, Chiafalo, Guerra and John were among the first faithless electors to be penalized for casting an Electoral College vote for someone other than the popular-vote winner. (Washington state elector Robert Satiacum Jr. was also fined for casting his ballot for Native American activist Faith Spotted Eagle, but is not part of the Washington case.) The four who brought the dispute to the Supreme Court were part of the failed “Hamilton electors” effort to deny Trump an Electoral College majority and throw the election to the House of Representatives.
The court is asked to decide whether the state laws mandating that electors vote for their states’ popular-vote winner are unconstitutional under the First, 12th and 14th amendments. Harvard professor Lawrence Lessig, the lawyer for the plaintiffs in both cases, wants the Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality of faithless electors at a moment when it will not determine the outcome of a presidential election, rather than amid the uproar of a future election decided by one or two faithless votes.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-03--Trump Supporter Puts Him On The Spot With Question About His 'Bullying' Language

When asked by a supporter on Sunday about his divisive language and evasive behavior towards the press , President Donald Trump dodged the question .
Instead , he complained he ’ s been treated worse by the media than Abraham Lincoln .
The president made the claim during the Fox News virtual town hall , which was shot in the shadow of the Lincoln Memorial .
Carolyn Perkins , an elementary school guidance counselor , said she and her husband thanked Trump for his work and prayed for him daily , but she questioned his combative tone at press briefings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ descriptive words that could be classified as bullying , ” avoids giving direct answers to questions from the media , and opts instead to “ speak of past successes and generally ramble.
” She called on him to let go of these negative attributes and embrace the positives .
The president ’ s press briefings are characterized by frequent clashes with reporters that asked unfavorable questions about his administration ’ s handling of the pandemic , and often stretch on for well beyond an hour .
The White House reportedly moved to scale @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that they were hurting him at the polls .
Asked ( by a fan of his ! )
why he uses the language of bullies and does n't directly answer questions , Trump does n't answer the question but says `` I am greeted with a hostile press the likes of which no president has ever seen , '' then claims `` I am treated worse '' than Abraham Lincoln .
pic.twitter.com/yuIsmo5JFt — Aaron Rupar ( @ atrupar ) May 4 , 2020 The president said he appreciated the question , but did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ points noted .
He complained instead about the “ hostile press , ” which he claimed treated him worse than any other president .
“ The closest would be that gentleman right up there , ” Trump said , gesturing at the memorial of Lincoln , who was assassinated in 1865 .
“ They always said Lincoln , nobody got treated worse than Lincoln .
I believe I am treated worse.
” An elementary school teacher who tells him that she really supports him and prays for him asks him to stop being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ let go of his negative behaviors .
Trump replies by saying he ’ s been treated worse than Abraham Lincoln .
I am not making this up .
— Tom Nichols ( @ RadioFreeTom ) May 4 , 2020 Trump : “ They always said Lincoln .
Nobody got treated worse than Lincoln .
I believe I am treated worse.
” Lincoln was assassinated , but that ’ s nothing compared to Trump having to answer questions from reporters .
- # TrumpTownHall at the Lincoln Memorial pic.twitter.com/UFq0SNX1zq — Keith Boykin ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case anyone ’ s wondering , the President just said he ’ s been treated worse than Lincoln while sitting at the Lincoln memorial .
This was in response to a questioner who pleaded with him to be less divisive .
— Jon Favreau ( @ jonfavs ) May 4 , 2020 Q : Should you change your tone at the WH briefings ?
President Trump , sitting at the feet of the Lincoln Memorial : I ’ m greeted with a “ very hostile press.
” I believe I am treated worse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ever seen anything like this .
— Yamiche Alcindor ( @ Yamiche ) May 4 , 2020 Nothing speaks to Fox News ' failure to even pretend to be a credible `` news source '' more than hearing to Donald Trump claim he 's been treated worse than Lincoln and not asking a follow-up on that one .
— Brian Tyler Cohen ( @ briantylercohen ) May 4 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
When asked by a supporter on Sunday about his divisive language and evasive behavior toward the press, President Donald Trump dodged the question. Instead, he complained he’s been treated worse by the media than Abraham Lincoln.
The president made the claim during the Fox News virtual town hall, which took place in the shadow of the Lincoln Memorial. Carolyn Perkins, an elementary school guidance counselor, said she and her husband thanked Trump for his work and prayed for him daily, but she questioned his combative tone at press briefings.
Advertisement
She asked why he uses “descriptive words that could be classified as bullying,” avoids giving direct answers to questions from the media, and opts instead to “speak of past successes and generally ramble.” She called on him to let go of these negative attributes and embrace the positives.
The president’s press briefings are characterized by frequent clashes with reporters who ask questions about his administration’s handling of the pandemic, and often stretch on for well beyond an hour. The White House reportedly moved to scale back these briefings following concerns from advisers that they were hurting him at the polls.
Asked (by a fan of his!) why he uses the language of bullies and doesn't directly answer questions, Trump doesn't answer the question but says "I am greeted with a hostile press the likes of which no president has ever seen," then claims "I am treated worse" than Abraham Lincoln. pic.twitter.com/yuIsmo5JFt — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 4, 2020
The president said he appreciated the question, but did not provide a direct response. He complained instead about the “hostile press,” which he claimed treated him worse than any other president.
Advertisement
“The closest would be that gentleman right up there,” Trump said, gesturing at the memorial of Lincoln, who was assassinated in 1865. “They always said Lincoln, nobody got treated worse than Lincoln. I believe I am treated worse.”
Trump faced harsh criticism on Twitter for his response to the question.
An elementary school teacher who tells him that she really supports him and prays for him asks him to stop being a bully and stop rambling and to let go of his negative behaviors.
Trump replies by saying he’s been treated worse than Abraham Lincoln.
I am not making this up. — Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) May 4, 2020
Trump: “They always said Lincoln. Nobody got treated worse than Lincoln. I believe I am treated worse.”
Lincoln was assassinated, but that’s nothing compared to Trump having to answer questions from reporters.
- #TrumpTownHall at the Lincoln Memorial
pic.twitter.com/UFq0SNX1zq — Keith Boykin (@keithboykin) May 4, 2020
In case anyone’s wondering, the President just said he’s been treated worse than Lincoln while sitting at the Lincoln memorial.
This was in response to a questioner who pleaded with him to be less divisive. — Jon Favreau (@jonfavs) May 4, 2020
At the Lincoln Memorial, Trump says he's being treated worse than Lincoln. pic.twitter.com/psZwWRE6WD — Oliver Darcy (@oliverdarcy) May 4, 2020
Advertisement
Q: Should you change your tone at the WH briefings?
President Trump, sitting at the feet of the Lincoln Memorial: I’m greeted with a “very hostile press.” I believe I am treated worse than President Lincoln. No body has ever seen anything like this. — Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) May 4, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-03--Trump Changes Estimates Again, Says Coronavirus Death Toll Could Hit 100,000

President Donald Trump dramatically raised his predictions for the eventual death toll from the coronavirus pandemic within the United States , saying up to 100,000 people could die from the disease .
That figure is a sharp uptick from the president ’ s comments just last month when he said he believed around 60,000 people would die from the virus .
Despite the shift , Trump said his response to the outbreak in the United States — where more than 1.1 million people have been infected — had been “ successful ” and said without his intervention more than a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : `` In terms of death , Bret , we 're at the lower level -- the lowest level predicted .
And we might not even hit that .
It might be lower that .
And ... sadly that 's all we can do . ''
( Trump suggested in late Feb. that coronavirus would go away on its own with 0 Americans dying . )
pic.twitter.com/JzMhQmIrjp — Aaron Rupar ( @ atrupar ) May 4 , 2020 “ We ’ re going to lose anywhere from 75 , 80 to 100,000 people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hall event with Fox News on Sunday .
“ That ’ s a horrible thing .
We shouldn ’ t lose one person over this.
” “ I used to say 65,000 and now I ’ m saying 80 or 90 , and it goes up and it goes up rapidly , ’ Trump said .
“ But it ’ s still going to be , no matter how you look at it , at the very lower end of the plane.
” He continued : “ In terms of death … we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the lowest level predicted .
And we might not even hit that .
It might be lower .
And ... sadly that ’ s all we can do.
” Trump touted his own work to shutter travel from China in the early days of the outbreak but rejected assertions he had acted too slowly and had been informed by intelligence officials weeks before he first took action .
“ If we didn ’ t do it , the minimum we would have lost was a million two , a million four , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ minimum .
We would have lost probably higher , it ’ s possible higher than 2.2 , ” Trump said .
“ That ’ s one of the reasons we ’ re successful , if you call losing 80 or 90,000 people successful.
” More than 67,000 people have died in the United States from the coronavirus so far and cases continue to spread throughout the country .
But the White House has been pushing for some states to begin to reopen their economies .
Trump ’ s own medical advisors have cautioned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ soon .
Dr. Deborah Birx , an official on the White House coronavirus task force , said Sunday the administration had always been warning the death toll could exceed 100,000 as cases began to spread rapidly throughout the country .
“ Our projections have always been between 100-240,000 American lives lost and that ’ s with full mitigation and us learning from each other of how to social distance , ” she told “ Fox News Sunday .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
President Donald Trump dramatically raised his prediction for the eventual death toll from the coronavirus pandemic within the United States, saying up to 100,000 people could die.
That figure is a sharp increase from the president’s comments just last month when he said he believed around 60,000 people would die from the virus. Despite the shift, Trump said his response to the outbreak in the United States — where more than 1.1 million people have been infected — had been “successful” and said without his intervention more than a million people could have died.
Advertisement
TRUMP: "In terms of death, Bret, we're at the lower level -- the lowest level predicted. And we might not even hit that. It might be lower that. And ... sadly that's all we can do." (Trump suggested in late Feb. that coronavirus would go away on its own with 0 Americans dying.) pic.twitter.com/JzMhQmIrjp — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 4, 2020
“We’re going to lose anywhere from 75, 80 to 100,000 people,” Trump said during a town hall event with Fox News on Sunday. “That’s a horrible thing. We shouldn’t lose one person over this.”
The president did acknowledge that he had previously predicted a lower number, saying the estimates had “gone up.”
“I used to say 65,000 and now I’m saying 80 or 90, and it goes up and it goes up rapidly,’ Trump said. “But it’s still going to be, no matter how you look at it, at the very lower end of the plane.”
Advertisement
He continued: “In terms of death … we’re at the lower level, the lowest level predicted. And we might not even hit that. It might be lower. And ... sadly that’s all we can do.”
Trump touted his own work to halt travel from China in the early days of the outbreak, but rejected assertions he had acted too slowly and had been informed by intelligence officials weeks before he first took action.
“If we didn’t do it, the minimum we would have lost was a million two, a million four, a million five, that’s the minimum. We would have lost probably higher, it’s possible higher than 2.2,” Trump said. “That’s one of the reasons we’re successful, if you call losing 80 or 90,000 people successful.”
More than 67,000 people have died in the U.S. so far and the virus continues to spread. But the White House has been pushing for some states to begin to reopen their economies.
Trump’s own medical advisers have cautioned against returning to normal too soon. Dr. Deborah Birx, an official on the White House coronavirus task force, said Sunday the administration had always been warning the death toll could exceed 100,000 as cases began to spread rapidly.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-03--Trump Bashes George W. Bush's Call For Unity During COVID-19 Crisis

Donald Trump failed Sunday to get into the spirit of former president George W. Bush ’ s call for national unity during the COVID-19 crisis .
Instead , Trump lashed out , criticizing Bush for failing to back him during his impeachment fight in December .
A video message from Bush released Saturday ( see it above ) appealed to Americans ’ better natures , encouraging citizens to help one another and put aside their differences during these extraordinary times .
“ We rise or fall together , ” Bush said .
“ In the final analysis , we are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beings , equally vulnerable and equally wonderful in the sight of God.
” In response , Trump quoted “ Fox & Friends ” co-host Pete Hegseth , who had criticized Bush for not backing Trump when he was impeached on charges of obstruction of Congress and abused of power late last year .
Trump also did some editorializing , calling his impeachment the “ greatest hoax in American history !
” .
@ PeteHegseth “ Oh bye the way , I appreciate the message from former President Bush , but where was he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” @ foxandfriends He was nowhere to be found in speaking up against the greatest Hoax in American history !
— Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) May 3 , 2020 Bush has never commented publicly on Trump ’ s impeachment and trial , and he and other members of his family have criticized policies backed by the president .
Bush ’ s message didn ’ t mention Trump by name , but it seemed to have been tailor-made for the president , and protestors backed by him who have demanded that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of COVID-19 be lifted .
Trump has called on his supporters to “ liberate ” Democratic states — and threatened not to help financially struggling blue states unless they “ give us a lot.
” Trump and Bush have never been friends .
“ I ’ m a Republican but not a fan of the last George Bush — he also was a lousy President ( Iraq etc . )
, ” Trump tweeted back in 2013 .
“ In fact , he was so bad he gave us Obama !
” Several @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president ’ s obsession with his own grudges as America ’ s COVID-19 death toll continues to climb .
Trump makes a deadly pandemic that has taken the lives of over 67,000 Americans all about him ... again .
Who wants four more years of this bullshit ?
!
— ( ( ( DeanObeidallah ) ) ) ( @ DeanObeidallah ) May 3 , 2020

Donald Trump failed Sunday to get into the spirit of former president George W. Bush’s call for national unity during the COVID-19 crisis. Instead, Trump lashed out, criticizing Bush for failing to back him during his impeachment fight in December.
A video message from Bush released Saturday (see it above) appealed to Americans’ better natures, encouraging citizens to help one another and put aside their differences during these extraordinary times.
Advertisement
“We rise or fall together,” Bush said. “In the final analysis, we are not partisan combatants. We are human beings, equally vulnerable and equally wonderful in the sight of God.”
In response, Trump quoted “Fox & Friends” co-host Pete Hegseth, who had criticized Bush for not backing Trump when he was impeached on charges of obstruction of Congress and abused of power late last year. Trump also did some editorializing, calling his impeachment the “greatest hoax in American history!”
.@PeteHegseth “Oh bye the way, I appreciate the message from former President Bush, but where was he during Impeachment calling for putting partisanship aside.” @foxandfriends He was nowhere to be found in speaking up against the greatest Hoax in American history! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 3, 2020
Bush has never commented publicly on Trump’s impeachment and trial, and he and other members of his family have criticized policies backed by the president.
Advertisement
Bush’s message didn’t mention Trump by name, but it seemed to have been tailor-made for the president, and protestors backed by him who have demanded that safety measures designed to prevent the spread of COVID-19 be lifted. Trump has called on his supporters to “liberate” Democratic states — and threatened not to help financially struggling blue states unless they “give us a lot.”
Trump and Bush have never been friends. “I’m a Republican but not a fan of the last George Bush — he also was a lousy President (Iraq etc.),” Trump tweeted back in 2013. “In fact, he was so bad he gave us Obama!”
Several responses to Trump on Twitter noted the president’s obsession with his own grudges as America’s COVID-19 death toll continues to climb.
Trump makes a deadly pandemic that has taken the lives of over 67,000 Americans all about him...again.
Who wants four more years of this bullshit?! — (((DeanObeidallah))) (@DeanObeidallah) May 3, 2020
67,000 AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE DEAD. pic.twitter.com/nRonppUfFX — Pam Brophy (@pam_brophy) May 3, 2020
Advertisement
Meanwhile Trump's daily routine
Watch Fox news
Blame CNN
Use Twitter
Blame Democrats
Blame WHO
Give press conference
Blame Governors
Watch Fox news again
Tweets about his achievements
Sleep
Repeat
Today again he will follow his work. — Pantomath (@pantomath__) May 3, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-03--Trump Pushes For Economic Reopening In Televised Town Hall

The president , fielding questions from Americans in a virtual town hall from the Lincoln Memorial , acknowledged valid fears on both sides of the issue .
Some people are worried about getting sick ; others are reeling from lost jobs and livelihoods .
But while Trump increased his projection for the total U.S. death total to 80,000 or 90,000 — up by more than 20,000 fatalities from what he had suggested just a few weeks ago — he struck a note of urgency to restart the nation ’ s economy , declaring “ we have to reopen our country.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a vaccine is probably a year to 18 months away .
But Dr. Anthony Fauci said in late April that it is conceivable , if a vaccine is soon developed , that it could be in wide distribution as early as January .
Though the administration ’ s handling of the pandemic , particularly its ability to conduct widespread testing , has come under fierce scrutiny , the president defended the response and said the nation was ready to begin reopening .
“ I ’ ll tell you one thing .
We did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we saved a million and a half lives , ” the president said .
But he also broke with the assessment of his senior adviser and son-in-law , Jared Kushner , saying it was “ too soon to say ” the federal government had overseen a “ success story.
” Trump ’ s impatience also flashed .
While noting that states would go at their own pace in returning to normal , with ones harder hit by the coronavirus going slower , he said that “ some states , frankly , I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He singled out Virginia , which has a Democratic governor and legislature .
And he urged the nation ’ s schools and universities to return to classes this fall .
Debate continued over moves by governors to start reopening state economies that tanked after shopping malls , salons and other nonessential businesses were ordered closed in attempt to slow a virus that has killed more than 66,000 Americans , according to a tally of reported deaths by Johns Hopkins University .
The president ’ s advisers have nervously watched Trump ’ s support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and he was presented with polls late last month that , if the election were held that day , had him losing to Democrat Joe Biden .
The president ’ s aides believe restarting the economy , even with its health risks , is essential to a victory in November and are pushing for him to pivot away from discussions about the pandemic and onto an American comeback story .
Larry Kudlow , Trump ’ s top economic adviser , said on CNN ’ s “ State of the Union ” that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the effectiveness of trillions in economic relief spending before making any decision on whether additional aid is needed .
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , D-Calif. , said Thursday that state and local governments are seeking up to $ 1 trillion for coronavirus costs , The Senate planned to reopen Monday , despite the Washington area ’ s continued status as a virus hot spot and with the region still under stay-at-home orders .
The House remains shuttered .
The pandemic is forcing big changes at the tradition-bound Supreme Court : The justices will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ telephone for the first time since Alexander Graham Bell patented his invention in 1876 .
Despite the opposition of Michigan ’ s Republican-controlled Legislature , Whitmer has extended a state of emergency declaration and directed most businesses statewide to remain closed .
Trump on Sunday night singled out her and Washington Gov .
Jay Inslee , also a Democrat , for criticism even as he praised the federal coordination with most governors .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (AP) — Anxious to spur an economic recovery without risking lives, President Donald Trump on Sunday insisted that “you can satisfy both” — see some states gradually lift lockdowns while also protecting people from the coronavirus pandemic that has killed more than 60,000 Americans.
The president, fielding questions from Americans in a virtual town hall from the Lincoln Memorial, acknowledged valid fears on both sides of the issue. Some people are worried about getting sick; others are reeling from lost jobs and livelihoods.
Advertisement
But while Trump increased his projection for the total U.S. death total to 80,000 or 90,000 — up by more than 20,000 fatalities from what he had suggested just a few weeks ago — he struck a note of urgency to restart the nation’s economy, declaring “we have to reopen our country.”
“We have to get it back open safely but as quickly as possible,” Trump said.
After more than a month of being cooped up at the White House, Trump returned from a weekend at the Camp David presidential retreat in Maryland for the virtual town hall hosted by Fox News Channel.
The president said of his backdrop: “We never had a more beautiful set than this.”
As concerns mount about his reelection bid, Trump stuck to his relentlessly optimistic view of the nation’s ability to rebound soon.
“It is all working out,” Trump said. “It is horrible to go through, but it is working out.”
Many public health experts believe the nation cannot safely reopen fully until a vaccine is developed. Trump declared Sunday that he believed one could be available by year’s end.
Advertisement
U.S. public health officials have said a vaccine is probably a year to 18 months away. But Dr. Anthony Fauci said in late April that it is conceivable, if a vaccine is soon developed, that it could be in wide distribution as early as January.
Though the administration’s handling of the pandemic, particularly its ability to conduct widespread testing, has come under fierce scrutiny, the president defended the response and said the nation was ready to begin reopening.
“I’ll tell you one thing. We did the right thing and I really believe we saved a million and a half lives,” the president said. But he also broke with the assessment of his senior adviser and son-in-law, Jared Kushner, saying it was “too soon to say” the federal government had overseen a “success story.”
Trump’s impatience also flashed. While noting that states would go at their own pace in returning to normal, with ones harder hit by the coronavirus going slower, he said that “some states, frankly, I think aren’t going fast enough.” He singled out Virginia, which has a Democratic governor and legislature. And he urged the nation’s schools and universities to return to classes this fall.
Federal guidelines that encouraged people to stay at home and practice social distancing expired late last week.
Advertisement
Debate continued over moves by governors to start reopening state economies that tanked after shopping malls, salons and other nonessential businesses were ordered closed in attempt to slow a virus that has killed more than 66,000 Americans, according to a tally of reported deaths by Johns Hopkins University.
The U.S. economy has suffered, shrinking at a 4.8% annual rate from January through March, the government estimated last week. It was the sharpest quarterly drop since the 2008 financial crisis.
Roughly 30.3 million people have filed for unemployment aid in the six weeks since the outbreak forced employers to shut down and slash their workforces. It was the worst string of layoffs on record.
The president’s advisers have nervously watched Trump’s support slip in a number of battleground states and he was presented with polls late last month that, if the election were held that day, had him losing to Democrat Joe Biden. The president’s aides believe restarting the economy, even with its health risks, is essential to a victory in November and are pushing for him to pivot away from discussions about the pandemic and onto an American comeback story.
To that, he will begin traveling again, with a trip to a mask factory in Arizona planned for Tuesday. And the grand setting of Sunday night’s town hall was meant to evoke patriotism and overcoming national adversity.
Advertisement
Larry Kudlow, Trump’s top economic adviser, said on CNN’s “State of the Union” that the administration would “pause” to review the effectiveness of trillions in economic relief spending before making any decision on whether additional aid is needed. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said Thursday that state and local governments are seeking up to $1 trillion for coronavirus costs,
The Senate planned to reopen Monday, despite the Washington area’s continued status as a virus hot spot and with the region still under stay-at-home orders. The House remains shuttered. The pandemic is forcing big changes at the tradition-bound Supreme Court: The justices will hear arguments, beginning Monday, by telephone for the first time since Alexander Graham Bell patented his invention in 1876.
The leaders of California and Michigan are among governors under public pressure over lockdowns still in effect while states such as Florida, Georgia and Ohio are reopening.
Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat, said Sunday that the armed protesters who demonstrated inside her state’s Capitol “depicted some of the worst racism” and “awful parts” of U.S. history by showing up with Confederate flags, nooses and swastikas.
Despite the opposition of Michigan’s Republican-controlled Legislature, Whitmer has extended a state of emergency declaration and directed most businesses statewide to remain closed. Trump on Sunday night singled out her and Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, also a Democrat, for criticism even as he praised the federal coordination with most governors.
Advertisement
Some people participating in other public protests across the U.S. have not kept their distance from one another and have rallied without masks, not heeding public health recommendations.
Dr. Deborah Birx, coordinator of the White House coronavirus task force, called that behavior “devastatingly worrisome.” She said people will feel guilty for the rest of their lives if they end up infected and unwittingly spread the virus to vulnerable family members.
___


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-03--Trump: Dems Would Rather Let Coronavirus Patients Stay Sick Than Give Credit For Unproven Drug

President Donald Trump said without evidence on Sunday that his political opponents would rather see coronavirus patients not improve to avoid giving him credit for touting an unproven anti-malarial drug as a treatment option .
Trump participated in a virtual town hall hosted by Fox News ’ Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington , D.C .
The president was asked about hydroxychloroquine , the anti-malarial drug he ’ s repeatedly pushed as a coronavirus treatment despite it not yet having been proven safe or effective for use on patients with COVID-19 , the disease caused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think the Democrats , the radical left , would rather see people ― I ’ m gon na be very nice , I ’ m not going to say ‘ die ’ ― I ’ m gon na say ‘ would rather see people not get well , ’ because they think I ’ m going to get credit if hydroxychloroquine works , ” the president said .
TRUMP on hydroxychloroquine : `` The Democrats , the radical left , would rather see people -- I 'm gon na be very nice , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ' -- I 'm gon na say 'not get well , ' b/c they think I 'm going to get credit . ''
( Trump 's own FDA has warned that hydroxychloroquine is dangerous . )
pic.twitter.com/Qz1godE7fG — Aaron Rupar ( @ atrupar ) May 3 , 2020 Spokespersons for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ( D-N.Y. ) did not immediately respond to HuffPost ’ s request for comment in response to Trump ’ s remarks on Sunday .
Many opponents and health professionals have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hydroxychloroquine is effective for treating COVID-19 .
Dr. Anthony Fauci , the nation ’ s leading infectious disease expert and a member of the White House coronavirus task force , has tried to push back on Trump ’ s repeated promotion of the drug during daily news briefings on the pandemic .
Fauci has said that experts can ’ t “ definitively say it works , ” and that the U.S. must be “ careful that we don ’ t make that majestic leap to assume that this is a knockout drug.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Administration has warned that the anti-malarial drug is dangerous in context of using it as a COVID-19 treatment .
“ The FDA is aware of reports of serious heart rhythm problems in patients with COVID-19 treated with hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine , often in combination with azithromycin and other QT prolonging medicines , ” the FDA ’ s website says .
“ We are also aware of increased use of these medicines through outpatient prescriptions .
Therefore , we would like to remind health care professionals and patients of the known risks associated with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will continue to investigate risks associated with the use of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for COVID-19 and communicate publicly when we have more information , ” the agency continued .
“ Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have not been shown to be safe and effective for treating or preventing COVID-19.
” In a large analysis of hydroxychloroquine use in U.S. veterans hospitals , researchers reported last month that there were more deaths among those given the drug than those who received standard care .
The nationwide study was not a rigorous one with 368 patients , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of hydroxychloroquine with or without the antibiotic azithromycin for COVID-19 .
According to The New York Times , the president owns a stake in a company that produces hydroxychloroquine .
Financial news site MarketWatch and The Washington Post later estimated Trump ’ s stake in French drugmaker Sanofi to be worth between $ 100 and $ 1,500 .
However , the Post noted his trusts may have amassed other investments since his latest disclosure .
On Friday , Trump and the FDA announced they have approved the experimental drug remdesivir for treating coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administered intravenously once a day for up to 10 days and is believed to help patients recover faster .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
President Donald Trump said without evidence on Sunday that his political opponents would rather see coronavirus patients not improve to avoid giving him credit for touting an unproven anti-malarial drug as a treatment option.
Trump participated in a virtual town hall hosted by Fox News’ Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington. The president was asked about hydroxychloroquine, the anti-malarial drug he’s repeatedly pushed as a coronavirus treatment without proof it’s safe or effective against COVID-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus.
Advertisement
“I think the Democrats, the radical left, would rather see people ― I’m gonna be very nice, I’m not going to say ‘die’ ― I’m gonna say ‘would rather see people not get well,’ because they think I’m going to get credit if hydroxychloroquine works,” the president said.
TRUMP on hydroxychloroquine: "The Democrats, the radical left, would rather see people -- I'm gonna be very nice, I'm not gonna say 'die' -- I'm gonna say 'not get well,' b/c they think I'm going to get credit." (Trump's own FDA has warned that hydroxychloroquine is dangerous.) pic.twitter.com/Qz1godE7fG — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 3, 2020
Spokespeople for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) did not immediately respond to HuffPost’s request for comment.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s leading infectious disease expert and a member of the White House coronavirus task force, has tried to push back on Trump’s repeated promotion of the drug during daily news briefings on the pandemic. Fauci has said that experts can’t “definitively say it works,” and that the U.S. must be “careful that we don’t make that majestic leap to assume that this is a knockout drug.”
Advertisement
Trump’s own Food and Drug Administration has warned that the anti-malarial drug is dangerous as a COVID-19 treatment.
“The FDA is aware of reports of serious heart rhythm problems in patients with COVID-19 treated with hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, often in combination with azithromycin and other QT prolonging medicines,” the FDA’s website says. “We are also aware of increased use of these medicines through outpatient prescriptions. Therefore, we would like to remind health care professionals and patients of the known risks associated with both hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine.”
Trump again suggested that we know hydroxychloroquine is safe because it's been around for years for other purposes. Here's the FDA warning about its use for this purpose. https://t.co/2EAQLiwAUe pic.twitter.com/eqPE9gCdzf — Daniel Dale (@ddale8) May 3, 2020
“We will continue to investigate risks associated with the use of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for COVID-19 and communicate publicly when we have more information,” the agency continued. “Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have not been shown to be safe and effective for treating or preventing COVID-19.”
In a large analysis of hydroxychloroquine use in U.S. veterans hospitals, researchers reported last month that there were more deaths among those given the drug than those who received standard care. The nationwide study was not a rigorous one with 368 patients, but it is the largest look yet of hydroxychloroquine with or without the antibiotic azithromycin for COVID-19.
Advertisement
According to The New York Times, the president owns a stake in a company that produces hydroxychloroquine. Financial news site MarketWatch and The Washington Post later estimated Trump’s stake in French drugmaker Sanofi to be worth between $100 and $1,500. However, the Post noted his trusts may have amassed other investments since his latest disclosure.
As of Sunday evening, the U.S. has confirmed more than 1.1 million cases of COVID-19 and 67,674 deaths, according to Johns Hopkins University.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-04--Mike Pence Admits He Messed Up During His Visit With Mayo Clinic Coronavirus Team

Vice President Mike Pence says he made a mistake last week when he visited the Mayo Clinic and didn ’ t wear a mask amid the ongoing coronavirus pandemic .
“ I didn ’ t think it was necessary , but I should have worn a mask , ” Pence said during a Fox News virtual town hall on Sunday .
Vice President Mike Pence did not wear a face mask last week while visiting the molecular testing lab at Mayo Clinic .
Although the Mayo Clinic requires everyone to wear a mask , and facial coverings are recommended by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pence leads , he chose not to wear one .
In images from his visit , Pence was the only one shown not wearing some form of facial covering .
At the time , Pence said it was because he ’ s frequently tested and knows he doesn ’ t have the virus .
Pence also said he wanted to look researchers “ in the eye ” to thank them for their efforts , even though the masks don ’ t cover the eyes .
Pence did wear a face mask later in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Motors plant that ’ s making ventilators .
“ I think it ’ s really a statement about the American people , the way they have been willing to step forward , practice social distancing , wear masks in settings where they can ’ t do that , ” Pence said on Fox News on Sunday .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Vice President Mike Pence says he made a mistake last week when he visited the Mayo Clinic and didn’t wear a mask amid the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.
“I didn’t think it was necessary, but I should have worn a mask,” Pence said during a Fox News virtual town hall on Sunday.
Advertisement
Vice President Mike Pence did not wear a face mask last week while visiting the molecular testing lab at Mayo Clinic. ASSOCIATED PRESS
Although the Mayo Clinic requires everyone to wear a mask, and facial coverings are recommended by the White House coronavirus task force that Pence leads, he chose not to wear one. In images from his visit, Pence was the only one shown not wearing some form of facial covering.
At the time, Pence said it was because he’s frequently tested and knows he doesn’t have the virus. Pence also said he wanted to look researchers “in the eye” to thank them for their efforts, even though the masks don’t cover the eyes.
Pence did wear a face mask later in the week when he visited a General Motors plant that’s making ventilators.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-04--Don Lemon Hits Trump Where It Hurts With Seething Obama Comparisons

“ What is it about President Obama that really gets under your skin ?
Is it because he ’ s @ @ @ @ @ ?
Made it on his own , didn ’ t need daddy ’ s help @ @ @ @ @ ?
Better looking ?
I don ’ t know , what is it , what @ @ @ @ @ That he ’ s a black man that ’ s accomplished being president ?
That @ @ @ @ @ whole birth certificate thing ?
What is it about him ?
Just wondering .
”

What is it about President Obama that really gets under your skin? Is it because he’s smarter than you? Better-educated? Made it on his own, didn’t need daddy’s help? Wife is more accomplished? Better looking? I don’t know, what is it, what is it about him? That he’s a Black man that’s accomplished being president? That he punked you on the whole birth certificate thing? What is it about him? Just wondering.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-04--You Can't Reopen The Economy Without Child Care

“ I get the emails to see if I ’ m available .
I told them , if I had child care , I ’ d be there , ” Carberry told HuffPost .
Before COVID-19 , in a pinch , Carberry could find someone in the neighborhood to watch Robbie .
Now , with social distancing , that ’ s just not possible .
“ It ’ s not like I can reach out to the church and find some ladies to fill in , ” she said .
“ Nobody wants to get their family infected.
” I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m available .
I told them , if I had child care , I ’ d be there Catherine Carberry , a Pennsylvania mom who is ready to go back to work No one is arguing that it ’ s actually safe to open the schools back up .
In most states getting ready to relax restrictions , schools are closed for the rest of the academic year .
It ’ s not clear whether summer camps will open .
About half of child care centers around the country are closed .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ off the exhausting — and , let ’ s face it , pretty unsustainable — juggle of working at home and parenting at the same time , plenty of others must work outside the home .
Where Do The Children Go ?
Carberry , the eager-to-work single mom in Pennsylvania , is relying on food stamps and the goodwill of her landlord to get by .
Her mother , who lives in Texas , recently sent her $ 50 to help her do laundry .
Her stimulus check arrived this week and immediately @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rent .
She worries that they ’ ll soon be homeless .

Catherine Carberry would love to go back to work. The staffing agency she works for in Easton, Pennsylvania, regularly offers her temporary gigs at nearby factories and warehouses. The jobs even pay a few dollars more an hour than she’s used to making.
But Carberry, 40, can’t work. It’s not because she’s at high risk of contracting COVID-19 or flush with unemployment benefits, as some conservatives would have you believe.
Advertisement
Carberry can’t work because there’s no one to watch her 4-year-old son, Robbie. Robbie’s child care center is closed because of the coronavirus pandemic, and Carberry’s family lives far away. Carberry is a single mother with less than a dollar in the bank.
“I get the emails to see if I’m available. I told them, if I had child care, I’d be there,” Carberry told HuffPost. Before COVID-19, in a pinch, Carberry could find someone in the neighborhood to watch Robbie. Now, with social distancing, that’s just not possible. “It’s not like I can reach out to the church and find some ladies to fill in,” she said. “Nobody wants to get their family infected.”
“I get the emails to see if I’m available. I told them, if I had child care, I’d be there” - Catherine Carberry, a Pennsylvania mom who is ready to go back to work
More than half the states in the U.S. are tentatively opening back up, easing restrictions on retail stores and other businesses shuttered to stop the spread of coronavirus. Most day cares and schools, however, are not reopening, and millions of Americans can’t get back to business as usual. They have children at home.
Advertisement
No one is arguing that it’s actually safe to open the schools back up. In most states getting ready to relax restrictions, schools are closed for the rest of the academic year. It’s not clear whether summer camps will open. About half of child care centers around the country are closed. And while some higher-income workers can pull off the exhausting — and, let’s face it, pretty unsustainable — juggle of working at home and parenting at the same time, plenty of others must work outside the home.
Just like Carberry, these people are stuck. Policymakers throughout this crisis have continually failed to grapple with the reality parents are facing. And as the pandemic drags on the consequences only get worse.
Where Do The Children Go?
Iowa’s Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds this week said that if workers in her state didn’t return to their jobs without a good reason, they could lose their unemployment benefits. An exception would be if they were actually sick with COVID-19 or living with an infected family member.
But Iowa’s schools are closed for the rest of the academic year. About half of all child care centers around the country are closed because of the pandemic. Reynolds’ office did not respond to a request for comment.
In Texas, Republican Gov. Greg Abbott’s plans reaffirmed that schools will stay closed for the rest of the academic year, even as businesses in his state open back up.
Advertisement
Schools in Georgia, where GOP Gov. Brian Kemp is also pushing people back to work, are closed through the end of the academic year, too.
Neither Abbott’s nor Kemp’s office responded to requests for comment on this story.
There’s this notion now, popular among many Republicans and some business owners, that workers are opting to stay home and collect unemployment because the benefits are better than what some companies can pay.
But child care seems to be the real hold up. Some 14% of women workers are considering quitting their jobs because of this dual burden, according to a recent survey reported in Fortune. Plenty of other workers have cut back hours.
Business owners know this. In fact, employees’ child care issues were named the second-most common concern among small business owners right now, after bringing in money, according to a survey conducted jointly by the Bipartisan Policy Center and Morning Consult.
“Obviously business owners find the loss in revenue is the number one challenge they are facing, but a close second is the challenges their workers are facing with caregiving responsibilities,” said Adrienne Schweer, a fellow at the Bipartisan Policy Center, who worked on the survey.
Advertisement
“Obviously business owners find the loss in revenue is the number one challenge they are facing, but a close second is the challenges their workers are facing with caregiving responsibilities.” - Adrienne Schweer, a fellow at the Bipartisan Policy Center
Eventually, this is going to set up a divide between workers with kids and those without.
“As time wanes on, and a lot of these people are in this situation for months and months, I think we’ll see two classes of workers: those who can go back and those who have caregiving responsibilities, and that’s a huge portion of our economy,” Schweer said.
In 2018, about 41% of workers between the ages of 20 and 54 had a child at home, according to an analysis of Census Bureau and Department of Labor data by The Washington Post.
Some policymakers are hip to this situation. House Democrats tried, and failed, to pass a robust paid leave policy that would allow caregivers to stay home from work and still get paid. Other lawmakers are still pressing for bailouts to child care providers to keep the system working.
California’s Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom is considering reopening schools this summer and is prioritizing getting child care centers up and running as part of any reopening plan.
Advertisement
“Child care is foundational to getting people back to work,” Newsom said at a recent briefing. “If they cannot get the kind of quality child care that they deserve, they are less likely to get back to work and jump-start this economy.”
But generally, policymakers are not thinking about this enough, Schweer said. “My concern is that policymakers aren’t looking at these two things in tandem.”
A Crisis In Lack Of Paid Leave
If you want to get people back to work, you have to make sure there’s infrastructure in place, such as schools and child care that supports those workers, Schweer added. If not, a lot of workers are going to lose out ― particularly women, who disproportionately carry caregiving responsibilities.
There are some child care centers open now around the country, mainly taking in the young children of essential workers.
That would be of no use to Cleta Kramer, who has a job at a factory in Ohio that’s actually still open right now. Kramer hasn’t made it to work since March 7, when her 12-year-old son Jeremiah’s school closed.
Advertisement
Jeremiah is severely autistic and requires constant attention and care. He doesn’t read. He can’t be left alone with a Chromebook to get his distance learning done, Kramer said. When Kramer spoke to HuffPost, Jeremiah was playing with sand close to his mother.
Before the pandemic, Kramer relied on a trained in-home babysitter to help care for Jeremiah a bit before and after school while she worked. But the babysitter is now home with her own children because of school closures.
“You just hope things get better. Or that there’d be an answer. Or a babysitter just dropped down out of the sky. You gotta keep it light. If you don’t, you drive yourself crazy,” said Kramer, who is a member of the advocacy group MomsRising.
Kramer’s own mother used to help out with Jeremiah. But she was recently hospitalized with pneumonia and influenza. “I’m taking care of them both,” Kramer said.
“You just hope things get better. Or that there’d be an answer. Or a babysitter just dropped down out of the sky.” - Cleta Cramer, who is staying home with her 12-year-old son
Advertisement
In an ideal world ― or in many other developed countries ― someone like Cramer could get paid time off to deal with her caregiving responsibilities.
When the pandemic crisis really escalated in March, there was hope that Congress would pass a robust paid leave policy to help those workers who would have to juggle new caregiving responsibilities with their jobs.
That’s not quite what happened. A paid family leave policy did make it into the Families First Coronavirus Response Act ― or the second stimulus bill ― but the White House and Senate Republicans blasted giant holes in the legislation. Companies with more than 500 employees don’t have to offer paid family leave under the new law. Cramer’s employer is Jeld-Wen, a multinational window manufacturer with thousands of workers.
And those robust jobless benefits?
Cramer’s had a hard time getting through to the state office to get them. Right now, the family is getting by on her mother’s disability payments.
Carberry, the eager-to-work single mom in Pennsylvania, is relying on food stamps and the goodwill of her landlord to get by. Her mother, who lives in Texas, recently sent her $50 to help her do laundry. Her stimulus check arrived this week and immediately went to pay two months of back rent. She worries that they’ll soon be homeless.
Advertisement
“I’m hoping the day care will open again,” Carberry said. “I just don’t know how this is going to end.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-04--Trump Claims COVID-19 Vaccine Could Be Available By Year’s End

As the number of COVID-19 cases in the U.S. surpassed 1.1 million over the weekend , President Donald Trump revealed that a vaccine for coronavirus could be available as soon as “ the end of the year.
” “ I think we ’ re going to have a vaccine much sooner rather than later , ” he said during a virtual Fox News town hall on Sunday evening .
Trump conceded , however , that medical experts would likely dissuade him from making such claims .
“ The doctors would say , ‘ Well , you shouldn ’ t say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I think , ” Trump said .
`` The doctors would say well you should n't say that .
I 'll say what I think . ''
- Pres .
Trump after he says he believes we will have a vaccine by the end of the year .
pic.twitter.com/9iciqClBiW — Haleigh Hoffman ( @ HaleighHoffman ) May 3 , 2020 Medical professionals ― including Dr. Anthony Fauci , the country ’ s leading expert on infectious diseases ― have said that it could take at least a year to 18 months for a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ timeline would be considered breakneck speed .
Last week , Fauci told the “ Today ” show that he thought it was “ in the realm of possibility ” that a vaccine could be ready by January 2021 .
Fauci ’ s remarks followed news that the Trump administration had launched a project to spur the vaccine development process dubbed “ Operation Warp Speed.
” The initiative ’ s goal is to have 300 million doses of a vaccine available by January , Bloomberg reported .
The Trump administration isn ’ t the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ready .
Governments the world over have made vaccine development a priority , and pharmaceutical companies and research labs are racing against the clock in an effort to fulfill this need .
A COVID-19 vaccine will need to be developed before the world can return to some semblance of pre-pandemic normalcy , medical experts say .
Concerns , however , have been raised about whether efficacy and safety will be compromised in the desperate rush to hit this target .
“ A vaccine has never gone like it ’ s gone now , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ town hall .
“ We ’ re so far ahead of any vaccine , ever , in history .
These things would take two , four , five , six years , 10 years.
” The mumps vaccine is considered the fastest vaccine ever to be approved .
That vaccine took four years to develop .
“ I think we ’ re going to have a vaccine , I ’ m telling you , by the end of the year ...
I think we ’ re going to have a vaccine , ” @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
As the number of COVID-19 cases in the U.S. surpassed 1.1 million over the weekend, President Donald Trump revealed that a vaccine for coronavirus could be available as soon as “the end of the year.”
“I think we’re going to have a vaccine much sooner rather than later,” he said during a virtual Fox News town hall on Sunday evening.
Advertisement
Trump conceded, however, that medical experts would likely discourage him from making such claims.
“The doctors would say, ‘Well, you shouldn’t say that.’ I’ll say what I think,” Trump said.
"The doctors would say well you shouldn't say that. I'll say what I think." - Pres. Trump after he says he believes we will have a vaccine by the end of the year. pic.twitter.com/9iciqClBiW — Haleigh Hoffman (@HaleighHoffman) May 3, 2020
Medical professionals ― including Dr. Anthony Fauci, the country’s leading expert on infectious diseases ― have said that it could take at least a year to 18 months for a vaccine to be developed. Even that timeline would be considered breakneck speed.
Last week, Fauci told the “Today” show that he thought it was “in the realm of possibility” that a vaccine could be ready by January 2021. Fauci’s remarks followed news that the Trump administration had launched a project to spur the vaccine development process, dubbed “Operation Warp Speed.” The initiative’s goal is to have 300 million doses of a vaccine available by January, Bloomberg reported.
The Trump administration isn’t the only player keen to have a vaccine ready. Governments the world over have made vaccine development a priority, and pharmaceutical companies and research labs are racing against the clock in an effort to fulfill this need.
Advertisement
A COVID-19 vaccine will need to be developed before the world can return to some semblance of pre-pandemic normalcy, medical experts say. Concerns, however, have been raised about whether efficacy and safety will be compromised in the desperate rush.
“A vaccine has never gone like it’s gone now,” Trump claimed during Sunday’s town hall. “We’re so far ahead of any vaccine, ever, in history. These things would take two, four, five, six years, 10 years.”
The mumps vaccine is considered the fastest vaccine ever to be approved. That vaccine took four years to develop.
Still, Trump insisted that a COVID-19 vaccine would be ready in record time.