npr--2020-12-21--Travel From U.K. Shut Down As Nations Assess Threat Of New Coronavirus Strain

Travel From U.K .
Shut Down As Nations Assess Threat Of New Coronavirus Strain British Prime Minister Boris Johnson Monday attempted to reassure skittish European neighbors that his government had the threat of a new strain of the coronavirus under control .
In a press conference at No .
10 Downing St. , Johnson also said he was in talks with France , one of several nations that have banned entry from the U.K. since the weekend , causing chaos for travelers and cargo shipments .
Johnson said he and French President Emmanuel Macron had `` a very good call @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leaders want to find a way to resume freight traffic between the two nations .
`` It was an excellent conversation with the French president , '' Johnson said .
`` He stressed he was keen ... to sort it out in the next few hours if we can . ''
His comments come as a growing number of countries are barring travelers from the United Kingdom as a way to block preemptively the spread of a new strain of the coronavirus sweeping through southeast England .
U.K. officials warn the new variant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as 70 % more contagious than the various strains already circulating .
However , there 's no evidence so far suggesting the new variant is more deadly .
France announced it was suspending all travel from that country for 48 hours beginning at midnight Sunday .
The new restrictions on U.K. travel have crippled freight transport across the English Channel .
Trucks loaded with cargo were backed up for miles trying to get into and out of Britain , while many travelers have been left stranded at airports and train stations across Europe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Bulgaria , Germany , Italy and the Netherlands , announced bans on travelers from the United Kingdom .
Canada also said it was suspending flights from the U.K. for a 72-hour period , while Israel announced the entry of non-Israeli citizens from the U.K. has been prohibited `` including those who have already been issued permits . ''
`` We in the U.K. fully understand the anxieties of our friends about COVID , their anxieties about the new variant , '' Johnson said .
`` But it 's also true that we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solitary driver , sitting alone ... are really very low . ''
NPR 's Frank Langfitt , reporting from London on Monday , explained the island nation 's predicament on NPR 's Morning Edition this way : `` It feels much more isolated than it did just a few days ago here on the island of Great Britain . ''
He also noted that the Brexit transition period , which ends Dec. 31 , only complicates matters .
`` The Eurotunnel , which also runs under the channel , is also closed .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ for about 48 hours , '' Langfitt said .
`` There 's a lot of concern around the Christmas season .
We 've already seen backups at the Port of Dover 20 miles long .
And what 's been happening is people are trying to get freight across the channel before the deadline of the Brexit transition period , which is going to end on New Year 's Eve . ''
The Associated Press reported there are fears the travel restrictions could result in food shortages if they are not eased in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tried to quell those worries .
He pointed out that the travel ban at the Port of Dover only applied to people driving freight trucks and not to shipping containers , which Johnson said accounted for roughly 20 % of the volume of goods at the port .
`` Which means the vast majority of food , medicines and other supplies are coming and going as normal , '' Johnson said .
All of this comes on the same day the European Medicines Agency , followed within hours by the European Commission , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jointly developed by BioNTech and Pfizer .
The U.K. has already approved the vaccine 's use .
Earlier on Monday , Jean-Baptiste Djebbari , France 's minister delegate for transport , said in a tweet it was his hope `` a solid health protocol '' could be established so movement could recommence .
`` In the next few hours , at European level , we 're going to establish a solid health protocol to ensure that movement from the U.K. can resume .
Our priority : to protect our nationals and our fellow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ BBC , which reported more than 40 nations have imposed some sort of restriction on the U.K. , added there 's also a push in Brussels , where the European Union is headquartered , for a more coordinated response to the new variant of the virus and how many of the nations respond to it .
The British broadcaster noted that when the coronavirus first began to spread earlier this year , a number of EU member states enacted an `` every-country-for-itself '' model , which it said put strains on the entire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nations consider how to respond to the latest crisis in the coronavirus pandemic , the British government placed many parts of the country into what is known as a `` Tier 4 '' lockdown over the weekend .
Under those restrictions , British officials urge that those under Tier 4 should refrain from interacting with anyone outside their immediate household during the Christmas holiday .
In a bit of good news on the vaccine front , Johnson said more than half a million U.K. citizens had received their first dosage of the COVID-19 @ @

Travel From U.K. Shut Down As Nations Assess Threat Of New Coronavirus Strain
Enlarge this image toggle caption Lewis Joly/AP Lewis Joly/AP
Updated 2:30 p.m. ET
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson Monday attempted to reassure skittish European neighbors that his government had the threat of a new strain of the coronavirus under control.
In a press conference at No. 10 Downing St., Johnson also said he was in talks with France, one of several nations that have banned entry from the U.K. since the weekend, causing chaos for travelers and cargo shipments.
Johnson said he and French President Emmanuel Macron had "a very good call" earlier Monday, adding that both leaders want to find a way to resume freight traffic between the two nations.
"It was an excellent conversation with the French president," Johnson said. "He stressed he was keen ... to sort it out in the next few hours if we can."
His comments come as a growing number of countries are barring travelers from the United Kingdom as a way to block preemptively the spread of a new strain of the coronavirus sweeping through southeast England.
U.K. officials warn the new variant of the virus could be as high as 70% more contagious than the various strains already circulating. However, there's no evidence so far suggesting the new variant is more deadly.
France announced it was suspending all travel from that country for 48 hours beginning at midnight Sunday.
The new restrictions on U.K. travel have crippled freight transport across the English Channel. Trucks loaded with cargo were backed up for miles trying to get into and out of Britain, while many travelers have been left stranded at airports and train stations across Europe.
Countries in Europe, including Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands, announced bans on travelers from the United Kingdom.
Canada also said it was suspending flights from the U.K. for a 72-hour period, while Israel announced the entry of non-Israeli citizens from the U.K. has been prohibited "including those who have already been issued permits."
"We in the U.K. fully understand the anxieties of our friends about COVID, their anxieties about the new variant," Johnson said. "But it's also true that we believe the risks of transmission by a solitary driver, sitting alone ... are really very low."
NPR's Frank Langfitt, reporting from London on Monday, explained the island nation's predicament on NPR's Morning Edition this way: "It feels much more isolated than it did just a few days ago here on the island of Great Britain."
He also noted that the Brexit transition period, which ends Dec. 31, only complicates matters.
"The Eurotunnel, which also runs under the channel, is also closed. It seems to be a precautionary measure for about 48 hours," Langfitt said. "There's a lot of concern around the Christmas season. We've already seen backups at the Port of Dover 20 miles long. And what's been happening is people are trying to get freight across the channel before the deadline of the Brexit transition period, which is going to end on New Year's Eve."
Enlarge this image toggle caption Steve Parsons/Press Association via AP Steve Parsons/Press Association via AP
The Associated Press reported there are fears the travel restrictions could result in food shortages if they are not eased in the near future.
For his part Johnson tried to quell those worries. He pointed out that the travel ban at the Port of Dover only applied to people driving freight trucks and not to shipping containers, which Johnson said accounted for roughly 20% of the volume of goods at the port.
"Which means the vast majority of food, medicines and other supplies are coming and going as normal," Johnson said.
All of this comes on the same day the European Medicines Agency, followed within hours by the European Commission, authorized the use of the COVID-19 vaccine jointly developed by BioNTech and Pfizer. The U.K. has already approved the vaccine's use.
Earlier on Monday, Jean-Baptiste Djebbari, France's minister delegate for transport, said in a tweet it was his hope "a solid health protocol" could be established so movement could recommence.
"In the next few hours, at European level, we're going to establish a solid health protocol to ensure that movement from the U.K. can resume. Our priority: to protect our nationals and our fellow citizens," Djebbari said.
The BBC, which reported more than 40 nations have imposed some sort of restriction on the U.K., added there's also a push in Brussels, where the European Union is headquartered, for a more coordinated response to the new variant of the virus and how many of the nations respond to it.
The British broadcaster noted that when the coronavirus first began to spread earlier this year, a number of EU member states enacted an "every-country-for-itself" model, which it said put strains on the entire concept of European cooperation.
While EU nations consider how to respond to the latest crisis in the coronavirus pandemic, the British government placed many parts of the country into what is known as a "Tier 4" lockdown over the weekend.
Under those restrictions, British officials urge that those under Tier 4 should refrain from interacting with anyone outside their immediate household during the Christmas holiday.
In a bit of good news on the vaccine front, Johnson said more than half a million U.K. citizens had received their first dosage of the COVID-19 vaccine.


npr--2020-12-21--Federal Data Reveal Which Hospitals Are Dangerously Full This Week. Is Yours?

Federal Data Reveal Which Hospitals Are Dangerously Full This Week .
Is Yours ?
The federal government on Monday released an updated set of detailed hospital-level data showing the toll COVID-19 is taking on health care facilities , including how many inpatient and ICU beds are available on a weekly basis .
Using an analysis from the University of Minnesota 's COVID-19 Hospitalization Tracking Project , NPR has created a tool that allows you to see how your local hospital and your county overall are faring .
( Jump to look-up tool . )
It focuses on one important metric @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 patients — and shows this for each hospital and on average for each county .
The ratio of COVID-19 hospitalizations to total beds gives a picture of how much strain a hospital is under .
Though there 's not a clear threshold , it 's concerning when that rate rises above 10 % , hospital capacity experts told NPR .
Anything above 20 % represents `` extreme stress '' for the hospital , according to a framework developed by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ % or above , the stress on staff is immense .
`` It means the hospital is overloaded .
It means other services in that hospital are being delayed .
The hospital becomes a nightmare , '' IHME 's Ali Mokdad told NPR .
Use the look-up tool below the map to find details about hospitals in your county .
Thomas Wilburn contributed to this report .
This story was originally published on Dec. 9 , 2020 .

Are COVID hospitalizations high where you live? Look up your hospital
Editor's note: The final update to this page was on August 22, 2022.
Loading...
With COVID cases still high in the U.S., many hospitals across the country remain under strain. The federal government regularly releases detailed hospital-level data which show how many inpatient and ICU beds are in use on a weekly basis — and what portion of them are occupied by COVID-19 patients.
Using an analysis from the University of Minnesota's COVID-19 Hospitalization Tracking Project, NPR has created a tool that allows you to see how your local hospital and your county overall are faring.
Look up the hospitals where you live to find out how many beds are filled with COVID-19 patients, and the average for hospitals in your county.
Loading...
The ratio of COVID-19 hospitalizations to total beds gives a picture of how much strain a hospital is under.
That ratio is concerning when it rises above 10%, hospital capacity experts told NPR. Anything above 20% represents "extreme stress" for the hospital, according to a framework developed by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington.
ICU capacity is another important indicator of hospital strain. Those thresholds are higher: When 30% or more of ICU beds are filled by COVID-19 patients, it suggests a hospital is operating under "high stress." When 60% or more are full, it's considered at "extreme stress," according to IHME.
This federal hospitalization data, which is available going back to August 2020, also provides a historical perspective on the stress level over time in each state. See how your state is faring now:
Loading...
All of these indicators vary depending on the size of a given hospital and its resources. The number of hospitals reporting their data also varies each week, though more have started reporting since the federal government started collecting this data.
Methodology
Data used for this story come from the Department of Health and Human Services and University of Minnesota COVID-19 Hospitalization Tracking Project.
Hospital stress levels reflect the percent of inpatient beds occupied by COVID-19 patients at reporting hospitals. Stress levels are based on a framework developed by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington.
Averages calculated by summing the seven-day average for each individual hospital, then dividing by the number of hospitals reporting data in a county. "No data" may indicate a sample size of fewer than four patients or hospitals that did not report statistics to the Department of Health and Human Services.
Hospitals in Louisiana are not included in the data for the week of Aug. 27-Sept. 2, 2021 due to possible reporting anomalies related to Hurricane Ida.


npr--2020-12-21--Here Is What's In Congress' COVID-19 Relief Package

Here Is What 's In Congress ' COVID-19 Relief Package Congress plans to pass on Monday a bipartisan $ 900 billion COVID-19 relief bill after intense negotiations over its final details .
Leaders of both parties are lauding the agreement , claiming victory for provisions they were able to get in — and keep out .
The measure includes up to a $ 600 relief check for many Americans as well as an assortment of aid for small businesses and money to purchase and distribute vaccines .
The pandemic relief is being passed as part of a bill to fund @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the current fiscal year on Sept. 30 , 2021 .
Here 's a look at some of the details announced by congressional leaders from both parties : • $ 600 direct payment checks for every adult and child earning up to $ 75,000 .
Individuals earning between $ 75,000 and $ 99,000 would get smaller checks , and the benefit cuts out entirely for individuals earning over $ 99,000 .
• Unemployment benefits : Lawmakers agreed to extend enhanced unemployment benefits for jobless workers , who will receive up to $ 300 per @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gig workers will also receive extended assistance .
• Rental assistance : The measure includes $ 25 billion to help families pay their rent , and it extends the eviction moratorium now in effect until Jan. 31 .
• SNAP assistance : Democrats say the measure includes an additional $ 13 billion for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program .
• PPP loans : The agreement includes some $ 284 billion for Paycheck Protection Program loans .
Democrats say they expanded eligibility for the loans to include nonprofits and local newspapers , along with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 15 billion would be reserved for live venues , independent movie theaters and cultural institutions , which have been struggling due to pandemic-forced closures .
• Child care centers : According to a Republican summary of the plan , the measure includes $ 10 billion for child care centers to help providers safely reopen .
• The agreement includes some $ 68 billion to purchase and distribute COVID-19 vaccines and help states conduct testing .
According to the Republican summary , $ 20 billion of that funding will make the vaccine available @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
• The measure contains $ 7 billion to increase access to broadband Internet , including a new Emergency Broadband Benefit that Democrats say will help millions of students ' families and unemployed workers afford the broadband they need during the pandemic .
Lawmakers also agreed to provide $ 45 billion in transportation-related assistance , including : • $ 16 billion for airlines to pay the salaries of workers and contractors .
• The measure contains $ 82 billion in funding for schools and universities to assist with reopening , including , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ billion for private K-12 education .
• There is some $ 13 billion in the measure for farmers and agriculture , including money under the Coronavirus Food Assistance Program for growers and livestock , dairy and poultry producers .
• The measure also includes a provision ending surprise medical billing .
Republicans say patients would be required to receive a `` true and honest cost estimate '' three days before any scheduled procedure and that billing disputes would be subject to arbitration .
• Lawmakers also included a provision sought by President Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deductible business expense .

Here Is What's In The COVID-19 Relief Package
Enlarge this image toggle caption Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images
Updated on Dec. 30 at 11:15 a.m. ET
President Trump has signed a major legislative package that includes coronavirus relief and government spending for the next fiscal year.
Just after Congress passed the bill last week — and shortly before Christmas — the president called the measure a "disgrace," in part for not having high enough direct payments to Americans, a move his own party had been against.
Nevertheless, Trump signed the package on Sunday, urging Congress to do more separately.
Here are the highlights of what is in COVID-19 relief package that is now law, including $600 relief checks for many Americans, an assortment of aid for small businesses and money to purchase and distribute vaccines:
Individual benefits
$600 direct payment checks for every adult and child earning up to $75,000. Individuals earning between $75,000 and $87,000 would get smaller checks, and the benefit cuts out entirely for individuals earning over $87,000.
Unemployment benefits: Lawmakers agreed to extend enhanced unemployment benefits for jobless workers, who will receive up to $300 per week through mid-March. Self-employed people and gig workers will also receive extended assistance.
Rental assistance: The measure includes $25 billion to help families pay their rent, and it extends the eviction moratorium now in effect until Jan. 31.
SNAP assistance: The measure includes an additional $13 billion for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
Small-business help
PPP loans: The agreement includes some $284 billion for Paycheck Protection Program loans. Democrats say they expanded eligibility for the loans to include nonprofits and local newspapers, along with TV and radio stations. Also, $15 billion would be reserved for live venues, independent movie theaters and cultural institutions, which have been struggling due to pandemic-forced closures.
Child care centers: The measure includes $10 billion for child care centers to help providers safely reopen.
Vaccines
The agreement includes some $68 billion to purchase and distribute COVID-19 vaccines and help states conduct testing — $20 billion of that funding will make the vaccine available at no cost for anybody needing it.
Broadband access
The measure contains $7 billion to increase access to broadband Internet, including a new Emergency Broadband Benefit that Democrats say will help millions of students' families and unemployed workers afford the broadband they need during the pandemic.
Transportation aid
Lawmakers also agreed to provide $45 billion in transportation-related assistance, including:
$16 billion for airlines to pay the salaries of workers and contractors.
$14 billion for mass transit agencies.
$10 billion for highways.
$1 billion for Amtrak.
Education
The measure contains $82 billion in funding for schools and universities to assist with reopening, including, $2.75 billion for private K-12 education.
Agriculture
There is some $13 billion in the measure for farmers and agriculture, including money under the Coronavirus Food Assistance Program for growers and livestock, dairy and poultry producers.
Medical bills
The measure also includes a provision ending surprise medical billing. Republicans say patients would be required to receive a "true and honest cost estimate" three days before any scheduled procedure and that billing disputes would be subject to arbitration.
Tax-deductible meals
Lawmakers also included a provision sought by Trump, making the cost of meals a deductible business expense.
Read the bill in full.
This story was originally published on Dec. 21.


npr--2020-12-22--Air Force Investigation Finds Black Members Face Racial Disparity In Service

Black members of the U.S. Air Force are treated differently than their white counterparts in a wide range of areas , including promotions and military justice , a new internal investigation reveals .
The 150-page report by the Air Force inspector general confirmed racial disparities exist for Black members in law-enforcement apprehensions , criminal investigations , military justice , administrative separations , placement into occupational career fields , certain promotion rates , professional military educational development , and leadership opportunities .
For example , Black Air Force service members were 72 % more likely to receive Article 15 non-judicial punishment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than white service members .
Black , Hispanic , and male service members were also more likely than white and female members to be subjects of an investigation and tried in general and special courts-martial , the report found .
`` We 're analyzing root causes and taking appropriate actions to address these challenges , '' Gen. Charles Q .
Brown Jr. , the branch 's top officer , said in a statement .
`` Now we must all move forward with meaningful , lasting , and sustainable change . ''
The inspector @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Air Force , who voiced a consistent lack of confidence in the branch 's discipline processes and developmental opportunities for them .
Two out of every five black members of the service do n't trust their chain of command to address racism , bias , and unequal opportunities , the report said .
And three out of every five black members believe they do not and will not receive the same benefit of the doubt as their white peers if they get into trouble .
As part of the report 's recommendations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ develop action plans to address the disparities and schedule follow-up reviews to ensure changes are made .
Leaders of the Air and Space Forces ordered the review on June 2 , following a nationwide reckoning with racial justice prompted in part by the death of George Floyd at the hands of police .
The Air Force was also facing external pressure .
The nonprofit Protect Our Defenders released a report in May detailing how the service dropped the ball on earlier promises to address racial disparities back in 2016 .
Last week , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ several areas where the Department of Defense must improve in order to the level the playing field for service members of all races .

Air Force Investigation Finds Black Members Face Racial Disparity In Service
Enlarge this image toggle caption Michael Sohn/AP Michael Sohn/AP
Black members of the U.S. Air Force are treated differently than their white counterparts in a wide range of areas, including promotions and military justice, a new internal investigation reveals.
The 150-page report by the Air Force inspector general confirmed racial disparities exist for Black members in law enforcement apprehensions, criminal investigations, military justice, administrative separations, placement into occupational career fields, certain promotion rates, professional military educational development and leadership opportunities.
For example, Black Air Force service members were 72% more likely to receive Article 15 nonjudicial punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice than white service members. Black, Hispanic and male service members were also more likely than white and female members to be subjects of an investigation and tried in general and special courts-martial, the report found.
"We're analyzing root causes and taking appropriate actions to address these challenges," Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., the branch's top officer, said in a statement. "Now we must all move forward with meaningful, lasting, and sustainable change."
The inspector general spoke directly with Black members of the Air Force, who voiced a consistent lack of confidence in the branch's discipline processes and developmental opportunities for them.
Two out of every five black members of the service don't trust their chain of command to address racism, bias and unequal opportunities, the report said. And three out of every five black members believe they do not and will not receive the same benefit of the doubt as their white peers if they get into trouble.
As part of the report's recommendations, the Air Force's leadership must develop action plans to address the disparities and schedule follow-up reviews to ensure changes are made.
Leaders of the Air and Space Forces ordered the review on June 2 following a nationwide reckoning with racial justice prompted in part by the death of George Floyd at the hands of police.
The Air Force was also facing external pressure. The nonprofit Protect Our Defenders released a report in May detailing how the service dropped the ball on earlier promises to address racial disparities in 2016.
Last week, the Pentagon published a report that detailed several areas where the Department of Defense must improve to level the playing field for service members of all races.


npr--2020-12-22--Low Demand For Antibody Drugs Against COVID-19

Federal officials are disappointed to find that the monoclonal antibody drugs they 've shipped across the country are n't being used rapidly .
These drugs are designed to prevent people recently diagnosed with COVID-19 from ending up in the hospital .
But hospitals are finding it cumbersome to use these medicines , which must be given by IV infusion .
And some patients and doctors are lukewarm about drugs that have an uncertain benefit .
The Food and Drug Administration granted emergency authorization in November to two monoclonal antibody products – one produced by Eli Lilly , the other by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Regeneron product on an emergency basis before the FDA authorized it for widespread use .
These drugs mimic natural antibodies .
They target the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 and are designed to block it from entering cells .
The drugs are not effective in treating people sick enough to be hospitalized , but the companies ' studies suggested that the drugs can help hold a new infection in check .
Charles Barnes , a 72-year-old Vietnam veteran from Upper Marlboro , Md.
, gave one a try .
Before Thanksgiving , he came @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stubborn cough and some chills .
`` It got pretty bad one day , '' Barnes says , `` but other than that I just had mild symptoms . ''
He and his wife got tested for the coronavirus .
He came back positive .
As it happens , the MedStar Health system where he got diagnosed had just started offering patients treatment with monoclonal antibodies .
`` They kind of explained the science behind it a little bit , so I went for it , '' he says .
MedStar had set @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Washington Hospital Center , an easy drive from Barnes ' home .
Since patients like him are infectious , the hospital set up a system to escort patients to and from the infusion center to limit exposure to others in the hospital .
The treatment took an hour , he says , and nurses kept an eye on him for another hour to make sure there were no problems .
`` And there were no side effects , so I got into my car and drove home . ''
Barnes is one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Medstar Health system in the Washington , D.C. , region as of mid-December .
Dr. Princy Kumar , who is helping coordinate that effort , says the system could handle more cases .
The biggest barrier is getting people to the hospital to get the infusion .
`` As they are infectious , they ca n't just hail a ride-sharing app and show up at the infusion center , '' Kumar says .
`` And many of them are reluctant to put a family member , who has to ride with them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So that 's what we 've identified to be our main challenge . ''
Kumar says , ideally , nurses would be sent to people 's homes for treatment , `` but that itself is a challenge because we are so constrained right now with the number of nurses and other nursing personnel we have right now because our hospitals are brimming with [ COVID-19 ] patients . ''
As of last week , about 3 % of patients who received the treatment ended up in the hospital anyway , Kumar says .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the emergency room .
Kumar figures that patients with similar preexisting conditions would end up in the hospital 10 % to 15 % of the time – so it appears the medicines are allowing some people to recuperate at home and reducing the burden on hospitals .
The buildup for these drugs – including Trump 's glowing appraisal after he received one of them – led many to expect that the nation would be facing a dire shortage .
That 's not how it 's playing out in many places .
The federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these drugs and allocated more than 300,000 of those doses to states and territories .
But Dr. Moncef Slaoui , chief adviser to the federal government 's Operation Warp Speed , says initial surveys suggest only 5 % to 20 % of the drug that has been delivered has actually been used .
People over 65 or those with preexisting conditions such as obesity are eligible for the drugs , which means hundreds of thousands of people could potentially be in line to get them every week .
`` We really hope to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of usage , '' Slaoui said at a news briefing on Wednesday .
`` Really , this not acceptable . ''
`` I 'd say right now we 're well below where we could be — if need be , '' says Dr. Peter Newcomer , chief clinical officer at University of Wisconsin Health in Madison .
His hospital has been treating about five patients a day , and they have enough drug to treat a lot more than that .
`` The good news is we can give this infusion to anyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , '' Newcomer says .
`` The bad news is we would like more people to call . ''
But the hotline to find out about treatment has been relatively quiet .
The health system tried to bolster interest in early December through a blast of local TV stories , but Newcomer acknowledges that did n't move the needle .
The story is n't much different in western Pennsylvania .
The University of Pittsburgh Medical Center has equipped 10 infusion centers in the region .
Dr. Ryan Bariola says staffing was one big @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for inpatients .
Another is that people have to be treated within 10 days of their first symptoms .
Often many days elapse between symptoms and a positive test , which is necessary for treatment .
Some patients just give up .
`` Twenty [ percent ] to 25 % of our patients are declining '' to take the drug , Bariola says , even after they 've been deemed eligible , talked to their primary provider and been offered an appointment .
That 's `` either because they now feel better or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' And some of the doctors in the system are n't so enthusiastic about it either .
That may in part be because treatment guidelines issued by the National Institutes of Health say there is n't enough evidence to show whether the drugs actually work .
Among providers in his health care system , `` of course everybody 's focused , rightly so , on the vaccine right now , '' Bariola says .
`` So , we 're trying to get their attention . ''
Doctors hope that as word gets out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these drugs .
They are provided to health systems free by the federal government , but it costs money to administer the medication .
At first , Medicare set a price that would require many patients to pay a $ 60 copay , but the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services later found a way to waive that fee .
`` Some of the private payers have not yet said if they are going to charge copays or not , '' Bariola says .
Stories such as Barnes ' could make a difference @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 10-piece musical ensemble called the C. Barnes Project and , having recovered from COVID-19 , is back to playing the trombone .
`` As a matter of fact , a couple of days ago I did take it out of the case to see how my wind was , and it was the same .
No difference , '' Barnes says .
And he says he 's also back to his regular exercise regime .
His case of COVID-19 is now just another story for him to tell .
You can contact NPR @ @ @ @ @ @ @ npr.org .

Low Demand For Antibody Drugs Against COVID-19
Enlarge this image toggle caption Alex Brandon/AP Alex Brandon/AP
Federal officials are disappointed to find that the monoclonal antibody drugs they've shipped across the country aren't being used rapidly.
These drugs are designed to prevent people recently diagnosed with COVID-19 from ending up in the hospital. But hospitals are finding it cumbersome to use these medicines, which must be given by IV infusion. And some patients and doctors are lukewarm about drugs that have an uncertain benefit.
The Food and Drug Administration granted emergency authorization in November to two monoclonal antibody products — one produced by Eli Lilly, the other by Regeneron. President Trump was given the Regeneron product on an emergency basis before the FDA authorized it for widespread use.
These drugs mimic natural antibodies. They target the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 and are designed to block it from entering cells. The drugs are not effective in treating people sick enough to be hospitalized, but the companies' studies suggested that the drugs can help hold a new infection in check.
Charles Barnes, a 72-year-old Vietnam veteran from Upper Marlboro, Md., gave one a try. Before Thanksgiving, he came down with symptoms of COVID-19 – a stubborn cough and some chills.
"It got pretty bad one day," Barnes says, "but other than that I just had mild symptoms."
He and his wife got tested for the coronavirus. He came back positive. As it happens, the MedStar Health system where he got diagnosed had just started offering patients treatment with monoclonal antibodies.
"They kind of explained the science behind it a little bit, so I went for it," he says.
MedStar had set up a dedicated infusion center at its Washington Hospital Center, an easy drive from Barnes' home. Since patients like him are infectious, the hospital set up a system to escort patients to and from the infusion center to limit exposure to others in the hospital.
The treatment took an hour, he says, and nurses kept an eye on him for another hour to make sure there were no problems. "And there were no side effects, so I got into my car and drove home."
Barnes is one of 96 patients who had been treated by the Medstar Health system in the Washington, D.C., region as of mid-December. Dr. Princy Kumar, who is helping coordinate that effort, says the system could handle more cases. The biggest barrier is getting people to the hospital to get the infusion.
"As they are infectious, they can't just hail a ride-sharing app and show up at the infusion center," Kumar says. "And many of them are reluctant to put a family member, who has to ride with them in the car, at risk. So that's what we've identified to be our main challenge."
Kumar says, ideally, nurses would be sent to people's homes for treatment, "but that itself is a challenge because we are so constrained right now with the number of nurses and other nursing personnel we have right now because our hospitals are brimming with [COVID-19] patients."
As of last week, about 3% of patients who received the treatment ended up in the hospital anyway, Kumar says. Another 4% made a trip to the emergency room. Kumar figures that patients with similar preexisting conditions would end up in the hospital 10% to 15% of the time — so it appears the medicines are allowing some people to recuperate at home and reducing the burden on hospitals.
The buildup for these drugs — including Trump's glowing appraisal after he received one of them — led many to expect that the nation would be facing a dire shortage.
That's not how it's playing out in many places.
The federal government has purchased 1.2 million doses of these drugs and allocated more than 300,000 of those doses to states and territories. But Dr. Moncef Slaoui, chief adviser to the federal government's Operation Warp Speed, says initial surveys suggest only 5% to 20% of the drug that has been delivered has actually been used.
People over 65 or those with preexisting conditions such as obesity are eligible for the drugs, which means hundreds of thousands of people could potentially be in line to get them every week.
"We really hope to see a much, much higher level of usage," Slaoui said at a news briefing on Wednesday. "Really, this not acceptable."
"I'd say right now we're well below where we could be — if need be," says Dr. Peter Newcomer, chief clinical officer at University of Wisconsin Health in Madison. His hospital has been treating about five patients a day, and they have enough drug to treat a lot more than that. "The good news is we can give this infusion to anyone who qualifies and who asks for it," Newcomer says. "The bad news is we would like more people to call."
But the hotline to find out about treatment has been relatively quiet. The health system tried to bolster interest in early December through a blast of local TV stories, but Newcomer acknowledges that didn't move the needle.
The story isn't much different in western Pennsylvania. The University of Pittsburgh Medical Center has equipped 10 infusion centers in the region. Dr. Ryan Bariola says staffing was one big challenge since nurses are in high demand for inpatients. Another is that people have to be treated within 10 days of their first symptoms. Often many days elapse between symptoms and a positive test, which is necessary for treatment.
Some patients just give up. "Twenty [percent] to 25% of our patients are declining" to take the drug, Bariola says, even after they've been deemed eligible, talked to their primary provider and been offered an appointment. That's "either because they now feel better or they've thought about it further."
And some of the doctors in the system aren't so enthusiastic about it either. That may in part be because treatment guidelines issued by the National Institutes of Health say there isn't enough evidence to show whether the drugs actually work.
Among providers in his health care system, "of course everybody's focused, rightly so, on the vaccine right now," Bariola says. "So, we're trying to get their attention."
Doctors hope that as word gets out, more people will end up trying these drugs. They are provided to health systems free by the federal government, but it costs money to administer the medication. At first, Medicare set a price that would require many patients to pay a $60 copay, but the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services later found a way to waive that fee.
"Some of the private payers have not yet said if they are going to charge copays or not," Bariola says.
Stories such as Barnes' could make a difference, too. He heads up a 10-piece musical ensemble called the C. Barnes Project and, having recovered from COVID-19, is back to playing the trombone.
"As a matter of fact, a couple of days ago I did take it out of the case to see how my wind was, and it was the same. No difference," Barnes says.
And he says he's also back to his regular exercise regime. His case of COVID-19 is now just another story for him to tell.
You can contact NPR science correspondent Richard Harris at rharris@npr.org.


npr--2020-12-22--Congress Acts To Spare Consumers From Costly Surprise Medical Bills

Most Americans tell pollsters they 're worried about being able to afford an unexpected medical bill .
Late Sunday , Congress passed a bill to allay some of those fears .
The measure is included in a nearly 5,600-page package providing coronavirus economic relief and government funding for the rest of the fiscal year .
Specifically , the legislation addresses those charges that result from a long-running practice in which out-of-network medical providers — from doctors to air ambulance companies — send insured Americans `` surprise bills , '' sometimes for tens of thousands of dollars .
The legislation itself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coming after two years of debate that featured high-stakes lobbying by all who stood to gain or lose : hospitals , insurers , patient advocacy groups , physicians , air ambulance companies and private equity firms , which own a growing number of doctor practices .
A similar effort failed at the last minute a year ago after intense pressure from a range of interests , including those private equity groups .
This time around , no group got everything it wanted .
Lawmakers compromised — mainly over how to determine how much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ services .
`` No law is perfect , '' says Zack Cooper , an associate professor of public health and economics at Yale who studies health care pricing .
`` But it fundamentally protects patients from being balance-billed .
That 's a remarkable achievement , '' he says .
( Balance billing is when out-of-network medical providers bill patients for amounts their insurer did not cover . )
The bottom line : Patients may still be surprised by the high cost of health care overall .
But they will now be protected against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's a rundown on what this legislation means for consumers : Starting in 2022 , when the law goes into effect , consumers wo n't get balance bills when they seek emergency care , when they are transported by an air ambulance , or when they receive non-emergency care at an in-network hospital but are unknowingly treated by an out-of-network physician or laboratory .
Patients will pay only the deductibles and copayment amounts that they would under the in-network terms of their insurance plans .
Medical providers wo n't be allowed to hold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ amounts and the higher fees they might like to charge .
Instead , those providers will have to work out with insurers acceptable payments .
For the uninsured , for whom everything is out of network , the bill requires the secretary of the department of Health and Human Services to create a provider-patient bill dispute resolution process .
The measure takes aim at situations in which patients have little choice about whether they are in network , including emergencies .
A recent survey found 18 % of emergency room visits , on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surprise bill .
( A growing number of emergency rooms are staffed by private equity-owned agencies that sign few in-network agreements . )
The legislative agreement also applies to non-emergency care provided at in-network facilities , where patients receive care and services from out-of-network providers , such as anesthesiologists and laboratories .
Also included in the bar on balance billing is air ambulance transportation , which is among the most expensive medical services , often costing tens of thousands of dollars .
Still , the bill does not extend its consumer protections to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ services .
But it does call for an advisory committee to recommend how to take this step .
An Option for Consumers to Agree to Balance Billing In some cases , physicians can balance-bill their patients , but they must get consent in advance .
This part of the bill is aimed at patients who want to see an out-of-network physician , perhaps a surgeon or obstetrician recommended by a friend .
In those cases , physicians must provide a cost estimate and get patient consent at least 72 hours before treatment .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that patients receive the consent information the day the appointment is made .
In a sense , though , this provision allows consumers to forfeit protection .
Health providers `` have to give you a good-faith cost estimate .
If you sign that , then you can be billed whatever that physician wants to bill you , '' says Jack Hoadley , research professor emeritus in the Health Policy Institute at Georgetown University .
The legislation allows this only in non-emergency circumstances and bars many types of physicians from the practice .
Anesthesiologists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consent to balance-bill for their services , nor can radiologists , pathologists , neonatologists , assistant surgeons or laboratories .
Payment Will Be Sorted Out in Negotiations While lawmakers agreed that patients will be held harmless , the real fight was over how to decide what amounts providers would be paid by insurers .
Some groups — including hospitals and physicians — opposed any kind of benchmark or standard to which all bills would be held .
On the other side , insurers , employers and consumer groups argued for a benchmark , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would angle for much higher payments .
The legislation carves out some middle ground .
It gives insurers and providers 30 days to try to negotiate payment of out-of-network bills .
If that fails , the claims would go through an independent dispute resolution process with an arbitrator , who would have the final say .
The bill does not specify a benchmark , but it bars physicians and hospitals from using their `` billed charges '' during arbitration .
Such charges are generally far higher than negotiated rates and bear little or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ providing the care .
That was considered a win for insurers , employers and consumer advocates , who argued that allowing billed charges would mean higher prices — potentially driving up premiums — in cases sent to arbitration .
Billed charges `` are totally made up '' by providers , says Cooper , at Yale .
`` So , the big deal is that arbitrators are not considering charges . ''
But hospitals and doctors won a limit they sought , too .
In last-minute changes over the weekend , they succeeded in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during arbitration .
Those government payments are often far lower than the negotiated rates paid by insurers and self-insured employers .
Instead , the bill says negotiators can consider the median in-network prices paid by each insurer for the services in dispute .
Other factors , too , can come into play , including whether the medical provider tried to join the insurers ' network , and how sick the patient was compared with others .
It also allows consideration of network rates a provider may have agreed to during the previous four @ @ @ @ @ @ @ services , such as air ambulances , remain costly even in arbitration .
Overall , the legislation `` did include some wins for provider groups , '' says Loren Adler , associate director at the USC-Brookings Schaeffer Initiative for Health Policy .
Even so , he expects the legislation will help insurers contain some prices and provide `` some downward pressure on premiums , even if relatively minor at the end of the day . ''
More than 30 states have enacted some type of surprise billing protections , but only 17 are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fund .
Comprehensive states — California , New York and New Mexico , for example — extend protections to cover non-emergency situations at in-network hospitals , but that is n't the case in less comprehensive states , the fund noted .
And state laws have another limitation : They apply only to certain types of insurance , and often do not cover Americans who get their health insurance through self-insured employers , which tend to be midsize to large companies because they fall under federal rules .
But the new federal rules will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including those offered by self-insured employers .
`` States ca n't fully deal with these situations , but this covers it , '' says Hoadley , at Georgetown .
Still , some provisions in state law , such as how to determine a payment , differ from the federal law .
In such cases , the federal law defers to states .
Statehouse lawmakers may eventually alter their legislation or adopt new proposals to avoid confusion , said policy experts .
If they do n't , they could be left with rules that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ insurance comes through a large self-insured employer or directly from an insurance plan subject to state law .
`` I would be surprised if , over time , states do n't just glom onto the federal law , '' says Adler .
KHN ( Kaiser Health News ) is a nonprofit news service covering health issues .
It is an editorially independent program of KFF ( Kaiser Family Foundation ) that is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente .

Congress Acts To Spare Consumers From Costly Surprise Medical Bills
Enlarge this image toggle caption Oliver Contreras/Bloomberg via Getty Images Oliver Contreras/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Most Americans tell pollsters they're worried about being able to afford an unexpected medical bill.
Late Monday, Congress passed a bill to allay some of those fears. The measure is included in a nearly 5,600-page package providing coronavirus economic relief and government funding for the rest of the fiscal year.
Specifically, the legislation addresses those charges that result from a long-running practice in which out-of-network medical providers — from doctors to air ambulance companies — send insured Americans "surprise bills," sometimes for tens of thousands of dollars.
The legislation itself was a bit of a surprise, coming after two years of debate that featured high-stakes lobbying by all who stood to gain or lose: hospitals, insurers, patient advocacy groups, physicians, air ambulance companies and private equity firms, which own a growing number of doctor practices. A similar effort failed at the last minute a year ago after intense pressure from a range of interests, including those private equity groups.
This time around, no group got everything it wanted. Lawmakers compromised — mainly over how to determine how much providers will ultimately be paid for their services.
"No law is perfect," says Zack Cooper, an associate professor of public health and economics at Yale who studies health care pricing. "But it fundamentally protects patients from being balance-billed. That's a remarkable achievement." (Balance billing is when out-of-network medical providers bill patients for amounts their insurer did not cover.)
The bottom line: Patients may still be surprised by the high cost of health care overall. But they will now be protected against unexpected bills from out-of-network providers.
Here's a rundown on what this legislation means for consumers:
Fewer surprise bills
Starting in 2022, when the law goes into effect, consumers won't get balance bills when they seek emergency care, when they are transported by an air ambulance, or when they receive nonemergency care at an in-network hospital but are unknowingly treated by an out-of-network physician or laboratory.
Patients will pay only the deductibles and copayment amounts that they would under the in-network terms of their insurance plans.
Medical providers won't be allowed to hold patients responsible for the difference between those amounts and the higher fees they might like to charge. Instead, those providers will have to work out acceptable payments with insurers. For the uninsured, for whom everything is out of network, the bill requires the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to create a provider-patient bill dispute resolution process.
The measure takes aim at situations in which patients have little choice about whether they are in network, including emergencies. A recent survey found 18% of emergency room visits, on average, resulted in at least one surprise bill. (A growing number of emergency rooms are staffed by private equity-owned agencies that sign few in-network agreements.)
The legislative agreement also applies to nonemergency care provided at in-network facilities, where patients receive care and services from out-of-network providers, such as anesthesiologists and laboratories.
Also included in the bar on balance billing is air ambulance transportation, which is among the most expensive medical services, often costing tens of thousands of dollars.
Still, the bill does not extend its consumer protections to the far more commonly used ground ambulance services. But it does call for an advisory committee to recommend how to take this step.
An option for consumers to agree to balance billing
In some cases, physicians can balance-bill their patients, but they must get consent in advance.
This part of the bill is aimed at patients who want to see an out-of-network physician, perhaps a surgeon or obstetrician recommended by a friend.
In those cases, physicians must provide a cost estimate and get patient consent at least 72 hours before treatment. For shorter-turnaround situations, the bill requires that patients receive the consent information the day the appointment is made.
In a sense, though, this provision allows consumers to forfeit protection.
Health providers "have to give you a good-faith cost estimate. If you sign that, then you can be billed whatever that physician wants to bill you," says Jack Hoadley, research professor emeritus in the Health Policy Institute at Georgetown University.
The legislation allows this only in nonemergency circumstances and bars many types of physicians from the practice. Anesthesiologists, for example, can't seek consent to balance-bill for their services, nor can radiologists, pathologists, neonatologists, assistant surgeons or laboratories.
Payment will be sorted out in negotiations
While lawmakers agreed that patients will be held harmless, the real fight was over how to decide what amounts providers would be paid by insurers.
Some groups — including hospitals and physicians — opposed any kind of benchmark or standard to which all bills would be held. On the other side, insurers, employers and consumer groups argued for a benchmark, warning that, without one, providers would angle for much higher payments.
The legislation carves out some middle ground.
It gives insurers and providers 30 days to try to negotiate payment of out-of-network bills. If that fails, the claims would go through an independent dispute resolution process with an arbitrator, who would have the final say.
The bill does not specify a benchmark, but it bars physicians and hospitals from using their "billed charges" during arbitration. Such charges are generally far higher than negotiated rates and bear little or no relation to the actual cost of providing the care.
That was considered a win for insurers, employers and consumer advocates, who argued that allowing billed charges would mean higher prices — potentially driving up premiums — in cases sent to arbitration.
Billed charges "are totally made up" by providers, says Cooper, at Yale. "So, the big deal is that arbitrators are not considering charges."
But hospitals and doctors won a limit they sought, too.
In last-minute changes over the weekend, they succeeded in barring consideration of Medicare or Medicaid prices during arbitration. Those government payments are often far lower than the negotiated rates paid by insurers and self-insured employers.
Instead, the bill says negotiators can consider the median in-network prices paid by each insurer for the services in dispute. Other factors, too, can come into play, including whether the medical provider tried to join the insurers' network, and how sick the patient was compared with others.
It also allows consideration of network rates a provider may have agreed to during the previous four years, which might help some high-priced services, such as air ambulances, remain costly even in arbitration.
Overall, the legislation "did include some wins for provider groups," says Loren Adler, associate director at the USC-Brookings Schaeffer Initiative for Health Policy.
Even so, he expects the legislation will help insurers contain some prices and provide "some downward pressure on premiums, even if relatively minor at the end of the day."
State laws may change
More than 30 states have enacted some type of surprise billing protections, but only 17 are considered comprehensive, according to the Commonwealth Fund.
Comprehensive states — California, New York and New Mexico, for example — extend protections to cover nonemergency situations at in-network hospitals, but that isn't the case in less comprehensive states, the fund noted.
And state laws have another limitation: They apply only to certain types of insurance, and often do not cover Americans who get their health insurance through self-insured employers, which tend to be midsize to large companies because they fall under federal rules.
But the new federal rules will cover most types of insurance plans, including those offered by self-insured employers.
"States can't fully deal with these situations, but this covers it," says Hoadley, at Georgetown.
Still, some provisions in state law, such as how to determine a payment, differ from the federal law. In such cases, the federal law defers to states.
Statehouse lawmakers may eventually alter their legislation or adopt new proposals to avoid confusion, said policy experts. If they don't, they could be left with rules that affect people differently depending on whether their insurance comes through a large self-insured employer or directly from an insurance plan subject to state law.
"I would be surprised if, over time, states don't just glom onto the federal law," says Adler.
KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a nonprofit news service covering health issues. It is an editorially independent program of KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation) that is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.


npr--2020-12-22--Hawaii Reboots Depression-Era Conservation Corps Using Pandemic Assistance Funds

The whine of chainsaws and rumble of wood chippers are echoing around the shores of Pearl Harbor .
Work crews are clearing an invasive species of mangrove from the shoreline and coastal streams that empty into Hawaii 's most famous body of water .
`` Pearl Harbor is being choked out by red mangrove , '' says Amanda Millin , a field crew manager overseeing a team of five .
Millin notes that in most tropical ecosystems , mangroves provide a variety of environmental benefits , including sequestering carbon , controlling erosion control and fostering biodiversity .
`` But here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ takes over , '' she says .
Millin and her crew are among the 350 people in Hawaii currently being paid to do this type of conservation work by a CARES Act-funded grant .
Across the country , states and cities are racing to spend billions of dollars in federal CARES Act money before the deadline at the end of this month .
In Hawaii , the state government has used some of the assistance funds to bring back an idea for creating jobs from the era of the Great Depression .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Delano Roosevelt highlighted the need to reduce unemployment , which peaked at almost 25 % nationally .
He described masses of unemployed citizens facing `` the grim problem of existence and an equal great number [ who ] toil with little return . ''
As part of his New Deal , FDR created the Civilian Conservation Corps as an attempt to provide work for the unemployed .
The program gave jobs building trails and planting trees to some 3 million Americans during the Great Depression .
Hawaii , which currently has one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , has created a modern-day version of the Civilian Conservation Corps called the Aina Corps .
Aina is the word for land in the Hawaiian language .
The idea for the Aina Corps was created by Honolulu-based non-profit Kupu , which administers youth-focused environmental programs .
Kawika Riley , Kupu 's Director of Strategic Partnerships , said Aina Corps workers primarily focus on two areas : conservation and agriculture .
`` The goal is to find displaced workers and recent graduates who 've been affected by the COVID downturn and then match them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as long as the CARES funding allows , '' Riley explained .
Kupu Aina Corps employees are all paid at least $ 15 dollars an hour plus healthcare .
Just like FDR 's conservation corps , Riley says the program is providing both ecological and economic benefits to the community .
However , that appears poised to change .
Congress mandated that all CARES funds must be spent by the end of the year , which means the several hundred Aina Corps workers will likely be out of a job soon .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in January , '' said Sandy Ward , executive director of Malama Pu'uloa .
The group , whose name means Care for Pearl Harbor in Hawaiian , is overseeing the mangrove removal effort .
Before the COVID-19 pandemic , all of Malama Pu'uloa 's work was done by volunteers .
With Hawaii residents reluctant or legally barred from gathering for most of 2020 , those volunteers disappeared until the Aina Corps launched .
`` We all needed people -- people needed jobs .
CARES money did that , '' said Ward .
Ward @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Corps job means the difference between missing meals or not being able to pay rent .
`` This particular crew is younger , '' she said of the team doing mangrove removal .
`` Some of them are only a little over a year out of high school .
Their job prospects completely dried up . ''
The various non-profits involved in the program are looking for alternate sources of money to preserve as many jobs as they can after CARES funding expires .
Crew leader Amanda Millin is optimistic about the possibility @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believes uncertainty over the future is taking its toll on everyone .
`` It 's definitely unsettling , and it 's a huge risk , '' she said .
`` I 'm constantly reminding myself that I think it will pan out and it 's worth the risk .
I 'm 35 years old and I have two degrees . ''
Without new funding , the 350 Aina Corps workers will be thrust into the worst job market in decades .

Hawaii Reboots Depression-Era Conservation Corps Using Pandemic Assistance Funds
toggle caption Courtesy Malama Pu'uloa
The whine of chainsaws and rumble of wood chippers are echoing around the shores of Pearl Harbor.
Work crews are clearing an invasive species of mangrove from the shoreline and coastal streams that empty into Hawaii's most famous body of water.
"Pearl Harbor is being choked out by red mangrove," says Amanda Millin, a field crew manager overseeing a team of five.
Millin notes that in most tropical ecosystems, mangroves provide a variety of environmental benefits, including sequestering carbon, controlling erosion control and fostering biodiversity.
"But here in Hawaii mangrove is invasive and it takes over," she says.
Millin and her crew are among the 350 people in Hawaii currently being paid to do this type of conservation work by a CARES Act-funded grant.
Across the country, states and cities are racing to spend billions of dollars in federal CARES Act money before the deadline at the end of this month.
An old idea
In Hawaii, the state government has used some of the assistance funds to bring back an idea for creating jobs from the era of the Great Depression.
In his 1933 inaugural address, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt highlighted the need to reduce unemployment, which peaked at almost 25% nationally. He described masses of unemployed citizens facing "the grim problem of existence and an equal great number [who] toil with little return."
As part of his New Deal, FDR created the Civilian Conservation Corps as an attempt to provide work for the unemployed. The program gave jobs building trails and planting trees to some 3 million Americans during the Great Depression.
Hawaii, which currently has one of the highest unemployment rate of any state, has created a modern-day version of the Civilian Conservation Corps called the Aina Corps. Aina is the word for land in the Hawaiian language.
The idea for the Aina Corps was created by Honolulu-based non-profit Kupu, which administers youth-focused environmental programs.
Enlarge this image toggle caption Courtesy Malama Pu'uloa Courtesy Malama Pu'uloa
Kawika Riley, Kupu's Director of Strategic Partnerships, said Aina Corps workers primarily focus on two areas: conservation and agriculture.
"The goal is to find displaced workers and recent graduates who've been affected by the COVID downturn and then match them with green economy jobs and training for as long as the CARES funding allows," Riley explained.
Kupu Aina Corps employees are all paid at least $15 dollars an hour plus healthcare. Just like FDR's conservation corps, Riley says the program is providing both ecological and economic benefits to the community.
However, that appears poised to change. Congress mandated that all CARES funds must be spent by the end of the year, which means the several hundred Aina Corps workers will likely be out of a job soon.
"There's no money to pay people in January," said Sandy Ward, executive director of Malama Pu'uloa. The group, whose name means Care for Pearl Harbor in Hawaiian, is overseeing the mangrove removal effort.
Before the COVID-19 pandemic, all of Malama Pu'uloa's work was done by volunteers. With Hawaii residents reluctant or legally barred from gathering for most of 2020, those volunteers disappeared until the Aina Corps launched.
"We all needed people--people needed jobs. CARES money did that," said Ward.
Ward says that for some households an Aina Corps job means the difference between missing meals or not being able to pay rent.
"This particular crew is younger," she said of the team doing mangrove removal.
"Some of them are only a little over a year out of high school. Their job prospects completely dried up."
The various non-profits involved in the program are looking for alternate sources of money to preserve as many jobs as they can after CARES funding expires.
Crew leader Amanda Millin is optimistic about the possibility of finding more grant funding, but believes uncertainty over the future is taking its toll on everyone.
"It's definitely unsettling, and it's a huge risk," she said.
"I'm constantly reminding myself that I think it will pan out and it's worth the risk. I'm 35 years old and I have two degrees."
Without new funding, the 350 Aina Corps workers will be thrust into the worst job market in decades.


npr--2020-12-22--Vaccines Are Coming, But The U.S. Still Needs More Testing To Stop The Surge

Vaccines Are Coming , But The U.S .
Still Needs More Testing To Stop The Surge The nation is at a pivotal moment in the fight against the pandemic .
Vaccines are finally starting to roll out , but the virus is spreading faster than ever — and killing thousands of Americans daily .
And it will be months before enough people get inoculated to stop it .
That means it 's critical to continue the measures that can limit the toll : mask-wearing , hunkering down , hand-washing and testing and contact tracing .
`` Vaccines will not obviate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , '' says Dr. Ashish Jha , the dean of the Brown School of Public Health .
`` It does n't mean we can let our guard down .
The virus will not be gone . ''
So where do things stand with testing in the U.S. ?
A new analysis that researchers at Brown and Harvard universities conducted for NPR finds that the country may finally be close to doing enough testing to identify most people reporting symptoms and at least two of their close contacts .
The amount needed for that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 , 2021 .
The U.S. is currently conducting nearly 1.9 million tests daily .
Testing simply those who are sick and two of their contacts is a bare minimum to respond to current outbreaks , Jha explains .
The analysis finds that the U.S. should be doing about three times more than that — or nearly 6 million daily tests — to stop outbreaks from growing and protect the most vulnerable .
This approach would proactively screen key groups of asymptomatic people including college students and school teachers for example .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made progress , '' says Jha .
`` But testing in this country is still really inadequate . ''
Even that progress is spotty around the country .
Only 12 states plus Washington D.C. are conducting enough testing to reach the bulk of symptomatic people , according to the analysis .
Those states are : Alaska , California , Connecticut , Illinois , Maine , Michigan , Montana , New Jersey , New Mexico , New York , Oregon and Vermont .
Another nine are very close , and the remaining 29 states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states have invested a lot of resources into trying to do more testing and we 're seeing payoffs and we 're seeing some states are able to do that basic level of testing , '' Jha says .
`` That is progress . ''
But even 2 million tests a day is really far from what 's needed to actually slow raging outbreaks and prevent them from springing back up again , Jha explains .
The minimum targets for testing symptomatic people are based on modeling growth of current outbreaks .
It assumes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tested , because of the difficulties many states report conducting contact tracing .
Since as many as one out of two infections are spread by people without symptoms , more ambitious testing efforts are needed for communities to screen high-risk , asymptomatic people .
`` Just focusing on testing people who have symptoms or their close contacts is really not enough .
That has been the Achilles heel of our entire disease outbreak control , '' Jha says .
`` We 've never really had a strategy for identifying people with asymptomatic infection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jha and his collaborators propose that communities should be testing , at a minimum : 20 % of students and teachers in K-12 schools weekly ; college and university students , prisoners and guards , health care workers and first responders weekly ; and nursing home residents and staff twice weekly .
`` What we need is a jump-start of our testing if we want to actually move to an offensive strategy around active screening of our asymptomatic individuals , '' says Dr. Thomas Tsai , an assistant professor in the Department of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ T.H .
Chan School of Public Health , who helped conduct the testing analysis .
`` It would mean that students can return to school safely .
Nursing home residents and family members know that their loved ones in nursing homes and the people who work [ there ] can do so safely , '' he says .
In spite of the optimistic vaccine news , Tsai says this type of coordinated and proactive coronavirus screening is still critical to stopping the pandemic in the U.S .
It will `` buy time for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' he says .
`` Testing is just as important as before vaccines , '' Tsai says .
`` The vaccine is n't an either/or strategy .
Vaccines are part of the tool kit along with continued testing and masking and social distancing .
In fact it 's even more important now that all of these strategies are working together to suppress the virus . ''
The researchers hope the incoming Biden administration will provide the federal leadership needed for a more coordinated national response to provide more testing .
The proposed 6 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 10 to $ 20 billion dollars for at least three months , the group estimates .
`` It will take a real effort from the federal government , but it 's not going to break the bank , '' Jha says .
Some other researchers say the estimate that about 2 million tests are needed as a bare minimum today may be an underestimate .
Jennifer Nuzzo , a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Center for Health Security , notes that the percentage of people testing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far too few people are being tested , to capture the actual infections in the community .
`` We probably need to at least double the amount of testing we 're doing , '' Nuzzo says .
Unfortunately , the increase in testing appears to have stagnated , Nuzzo notes .
`` The rate at which we have increased testing in the last month is much slower compared to the previous month and yet we have more infections now than we 've ever had , '' Nuzzo says .
Jha , Tsai and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tests could quickly increase the nation 's testing capabilities and hope the targets in the new analysis will spur policymakers to make that happen .
`` Testing is slowing in the United States .
We 're hearing reports of shortages once again and test turnaround time increasing .
All of the warning signs are there that now is the time to take this problem seriously and fix this problem for good , '' Nuzzo says .

Is Your State Doing Enough Coronavirus Testing? Use Our Tool To Find Out
Enlarge this image toggle caption Mario Tama/Getty Images Mario Tama/Getty Images
The nation is at a pivotal moment in the fight against the pandemic. Vaccines are finally starting to roll out, but the virus is spreading faster than ever — and killing thousands of Americans daily. And it will be months before enough people get inoculated to stop it.
That means it's critical to continue the measures that can limit the toll: mask-wearing, hunkering down, hand-washing, testing and contact tracing.
"Vaccines will not obviate the need for testing any time soon," says Dr. Ashish Jha, the dean of the Brown School of Public Health. "It doesn't mean we can let our guard down. The virus will not be gone."
So where do things stand with testing in the U.S.?
Loading...
A new analysis that researchers at Brown and Harvard universities conducted for NPR finds that the country may finally be close to doing enough testing to identify most people reporting symptoms and at least two of their close contacts.
The amount needed for that is 2 million a day by Jan. 1. The U.S. is currently conducting nearly 1.9 million tests daily.
Testing simply those who are sick and two of their contacts is a bare minimum to respond to current outbreaks, Jha explains.
The analysis finds that the U.S. should be doing about three times more than that — or nearly 6 million daily tests — to stop outbreaks from growing and protect the most vulnerable. This approach would proactively screen key groups of asymptomatic people, including college students and school teachers, for example.
"There's no doubt that we've made progress," says Jha. "But testing in this country is still really inadequate."
Even that progress is spotty around the country. Only 12 states plus Washington, D.C., are conducting enough testing to reach the bulk of symptomatic people, according to the analysis. Those states are: Alaska, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Vermont.
Another nine are very close, and the remaining 29 states fall short.
"A lot of states have invested a lot of resources into trying to do more testing, and we're seeing payoffs and we're seeing some states are able to do that basic level of testing," Jha says. "That is progress."
But even 2 million tests a day is really far from what's needed to actually slow raging outbreaks and prevent them from springing back up again, Jha explains.
Loading...
The minimum targets for testing symptomatic people are based on modeling growth of current outbreaks. It assumes a modest two contacts per infection get tested, because of the difficulties many states report conducting contact tracing. Since as many as 1 out of 2 infections are spread by people without symptoms, more ambitious testing efforts are needed for communities to screen high-risk, asymptomatic people.
"Just focusing on testing people who have symptoms or their close contacts is really not enough. That has been the Achilles' heel of our entire disease outbreak control," Jha says. "We've never really had a strategy for identifying people with asymptomatic infection."
To capture those cases, Jha and his collaborators propose that communities should be testing, at a minimum: 20% of students and teachers in K-12 schools weekly; college and university students, prisoners and guards, health care workers and first responders weekly; and nursing home residents and staff twice weekly.
"What we need is a jump-start of our testing if we want to actually move to an offensive strategy around active screening of our asymptomatic individuals," says Dr. Thomas Tsai, an assistant professor in the Department of Health Policy and Management at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, who helped conduct the testing analysis.
"It would mean that students can return to school safely. Nursing home residents and family members know that their loved ones in nursing homes and the people who work [there] can do so safely," he says.
Loading...
In spite of the optimistic vaccine news, Tsai says this type of coordinated and proactive coronavirus screening is still critical to stopping the pandemic in the U.S. It will "buy time for the vaccine to be rolled out," he says.
"Testing is just as important as before vaccines," Tsai says. "The vaccine isn't an either/or strategy. Vaccines are part of the toolkit along with continued testing and masking and social distancing. In fact, it's even more important now that all of these strategies are working together to suppress the virus."
The researchers hope the incoming Biden administration will provide the federal leadership needed for a more coordinated national response to provide more testing. The proposed 6 million tests a day would probably require $10 billion to $20 billion for at least three months, the group estimates.
"It will take a real effort from the federal government, but it's not going to break the bank," Jha says.
Some other researchers say the estimate that about 2 million tests are needed as a bare minimum today may be an underestimate.
Jennifer Nuzzo, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Center for Health Security, notes that the percentage of people testing positive has been increasing, suggesting that far too few people are being tested, to capture the actual infections in the community.
"We probably need to at least double the amount of testing we're doing," Nuzzo says.
Unfortunately, the increase in testing appears to have stagnated, Nuzzo notes.
"The rate at which we have increased testing in the last month is much slower compared to the previous month and yet we have more infections now than we've ever had," Nuzzo says.
Jha, Tsai and others hope the increasing availability of antigen tests could quickly increase the nation's testing capabilities and hope the targets in the new analysis will spur policymakers to make that happen.
Nuzzo hopes so too.
"Testing is slowing in the United States. We're hearing reports of shortages once again and test turnaround time increasing. All of the warning signs are there that now is the time to take this problem seriously and fix this problem for good," Nuzzo says.


npr--2020-12-22--Despite COVID, Thousands Of Lawmakers Plan To Gather In State Capitols Next Month

Despite COVID , Thousands Of Lawmakers Plan To Gather In State Capitols Next Month It happens at the beginning of every year : elected officials , legislative staff , lobbyists , journalists and the public gather in large numbers in state capitol buildings around the country for a relentless few weeks — or months — of lawmaking .
In 2020 , official business had wrapped in many states by mid-March when lockdowns began .
In others , the spread of COVID-19 sent lawmakers home early .
Since then , lawmakers have gotten together in some states , though not to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2021 when legislative sessions could include hundreds of people under one roof for weeks on end .
So 2021 is a test .
How do the nation 's thousands of state legislators , desperate to perform their duties , safely assemble during a pandemic ?
That question is especially critical considering that there have already been some deaths among legislators , along with more than 150 infections , according to one tally .
We asked several of our public radio station reporters who work in capital cities around the country what to expect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are points of pride at New Hampshire 's State House .
Four hundred twenty-four lawmakers serve for $ 100 a year , every bill gets a hearing , and committee rooms can resemble a scrum , where lawmakers , citizens , lobbyists and reporters pack themselves into poorly ventilated spaces .
When COVID-19 hit last spring , Democratic-leaders quickly closed the State House .
Some legislative action migrated to Zoom , other business was conducted in-person but at a distance , including several House sessions held inside the hockey rink at the University @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reclaimed the majority in the November elections , leaders said they hoped to renew in-person hearings and explore ways to `` reoccupy '' the capital , as incoming House Speaker Dick Hinch put it .
But a week after winning the top seat in the House , Hinch died of COVID-19 .
GOP Gov .
Chris Sununu called Hinch 's death , which followed several Republican gatherings , `` a tragic , cautionary tale . ''
Last week , the New Hampshire House 's third-ranking Republican announced she had tested positive for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ testing sites to accommodate lawmakers , state house staff and their families .
But safety policies for the new year remain murky .
The first step will be for the New Hampshire House to elect a new speaker .
That vote , which will be held outdoors with lawmakers gathering in cars ( like a drive-in movie ) is slated for Jan. 6 .
The decision to have lawmakers in the Capitol building in Helena was made solely by Republicans , who hold strong majorities in both the state Senate and House of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Democrats to postpone the session , require testing and mandate masks building-wide .
They instead created a controversial COVID-19 response panel they say will deal with virus-related issues as they arise .
Lawmakers also say that public health rules from other entities — like Gov .
Steve Bullock 's statewide mask mandate — do not apply to them when they conduct business in the Capitol building .
That was determined by the Legislature 's code commissioner in order to maintain separation of powers .
Montana Republicans have decided to allow for some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decision came after pleas from Democrats , residents , local public health officials and lobbyists to hold an all-remote session .
Republican Sen. Jason Ellsworth defended the hybrid model saying , `` I would imagine we are going to have members who are going to get sick .
It 's a possibility there are members that die , '' Ellsworth continued , `` But the one thing we can do is come together and serve the great state of Montana . ''
Republicans , the majority party in Utah , have taken a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ During Utah 's session , lawmakers will continue to have the option of attending meetings and floor time remotely — or to participate in person .
The legislature held a virtual special session in April , where all lawmakers debated and voted remotely , except for the House Speaker and Senate President .
In subsequent special sessions and interim meetings , lawmakers have had the option to come into the Capitol building .
Lawmakers will get rapid COVID-19 tests twice a week if they want to enter the floors of their respective chambers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the floor , but not required .
Plexiglass dividers have been installed between the lawmakers ' desks .
The Capitol building has been closed to the public throughout the pandemic , but it will reopen for the 2021 session .
Visitors are required to wear masks and the legislature will designate `` mask ambassadors '' to remind people .
The Utah Highway Patrol will ask people to leave if they refuse to wear a mask .
The public will also be allowed to comment during committee meetings in person , but are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been able to since May .
Committee rooms have been altered to allow for social distancing in the audience .
In Michigan , 11 state lawmakers and 37 legislative staffers have tested positive for the coronavirus this year .
That number does n't include Democratic Rep. Isaac Robinson who was 44 when he died of suspected COVID-19 in March .
And despite the state 's occupational safety agency investigating the House of Representatives over alleged safety violations , incoming House leadership does not plan to make any changes for the coming year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of national scrutiny after holding an hourslong hearing with Rudy Giuliani , President Trump 's personal lawyer , who may have been infected with the virus at the time .
Remote testimony was not allowed for the gathering .
State Senator Mallory McMorrow , a Democrat , introduced a resolution in the state Senate back in April that would 've allowed for remote meetings but Republicans , who control both chambers , have insisted on continuing to meet in person .
Temperature checks and health screenings have not prevented coronavirus spread in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ n't wear masks .
`` There are just so many people who are hanging on by a thread , '' says state Sen. McMorrow of the Michiganders who she and her colleagues serve , `` But there just does not seem to be any interest in modifying the rules to allow for virtual meeting . ''
In Colorado , it looks as though Democratic leaders have decided to delay the annual legislative session due to the pandemic and the perils of trying to conduct business in a crowded state capitol building .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on January 13 each year and run for no more than 120 days .
But Colorado 's declared state of emergency allows more flexibility within that timeline , though leaders of both parties are still working out the details .
The state supreme court ruled in the spring that lawmakers can temporarily pause their work and return later in the year .
Incoming Speaker of the House , Alec Garnett , says he and others think that 's the safest option .
According to leadership , lawmakers will stay in session next month @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get the most urgent and necessary work done , such as swearing in their new members , then they 'll adjourn until at least mid-February .
Garnett says the goal for the break is to get to a point `` that 's removed from the potential spike from Christmas and New Year 's and gives a little bit more time for the vaccine to circulate . ''
The legislature met in person for two and a half days in early December for a special session to pass a COVID-19 relief package .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of coronavirus safety , the effectiveness of mask-wearing and rapid testing .
The state requires masks to be worn in most indoor settings , but it 's not enforced for lawmakers inside the Capitol .
Some Republican lawmakers declined to wear masks during the session and most did not get a rapid test available to them .
About one-third of the legislature decided to participate remotely .
`` The biggest thing is — how do we do things in the safest manner possible ? ''
said Democratic Rep. Kyle Mullica , of returning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's an Emergency Room nurse and was the first state lawmaker to receive the coronavirus vaccine .
`` That 's our number one priority .
We want to make sure people do n't get hurt . ''

Despite COVID, Thousands Of Lawmakers Plan To Gather In State Capitols Next Month
Enlarge this image toggle caption Helen H. Richardson/Denver Post via Getty Images Helen H. Richardson/Denver Post via Getty Images
It happens at the beginning of every year: elected officials, legislative staff, lobbyists, journalists and the public gather in large numbers in state capitol buildings around the country for a relentless few weeks — or months — of lawmaking.
In 2020, official business had wrapped in many states by mid-March when lockdowns began. In others, the spread of COVID-19 sent lawmakers home early.
Since then, lawmakers have gotten together in some states, though not to the degree the country will witness in 2021 when legislative sessions could include hundreds of people under one roof for weeks on end.
So 2021 is a test. How do the nation's thousands of state legislators, desperate to perform their duties, safely assemble during a pandemic? That question is especially critical considering that there have already been some deaths among legislators, along with more than 150 infections, according to one tally.
We asked several of our public radio station reporters who work in capital cities around the country what to expect where they are.
New Hampshire
Openness and accessibility are points of pride at New Hampshire's State House. Four hundred twenty-four lawmakers serve for $100 a year, every bill gets a hearing, and committee rooms can resemble a scrum, where lawmakers, citizens, lobbyists and reporters pack themselves into poorly ventilated spaces. When COVID-19 hit last spring, Democratic-leaders quickly closed the State House. Some legislative action migrated to Zoom, other business was conducted in-person but at a distance, including several House sessions held inside the hockey rink at the University of New Hampshire.
But when Republicans reclaimed the majority in the November elections, leaders said they hoped to renew in-person hearings and explore ways to "reoccupy" the capital, as incoming House Speaker Dick Hinch put it.
Enlarge this image toggle caption Elise Amendola/AP Elise Amendola/AP
But a week after winning the top seat in the House, Hinch died of COVID-19.
GOP Gov. Chris Sununu called Hinch's death, which followed several Republican gatherings, "a tragic, cautionary tale."
Last week, the New Hampshire House's third-ranking Republican announced she had tested positive for the coronavirus. The state has since opened testing sites to accommodate lawmakers, state house staff and their families. But safety policies for the new year remain murky. The first step will be for the New Hampshire House to elect a new speaker. That vote, which will be held outdoors with lawmakers gathering in cars (like a drive-in movie) is slated for Jan. 6.
Montana
The decision to have lawmakers in the Capitol building in Helena was made solely by Republicans, who hold strong majorities in both the state Senate and House of Representatives. Republicans also voted down proposals from Democrats to postpone the session, require testing and mandate masks building-wide. They instead created a controversial COVID-19 response panel they say will deal with virus-related issues as they arise.
Lawmakers also say that public health rules from other entities — like Gov. Steve Bullock's statewide mask mandate — do not apply to them when they conduct business in the Capitol building. That was determined by the Legislature's code commissioner in order to maintain separation of powers.
Enlarge this image toggle caption Shayee Ragar/UM Legislative News Service Shayee Ragar/UM Legislative News Service
Montana Republicans have decided to allow for some to participate virtually, though. The decision came after pleas from Democrats, residents, local public health officials and lobbyists to hold an all-remote session.
Republican Sen. Jason Ellsworth defended the hybrid model saying, "I would imagine we are going to have members who are going to get sick. It's a possibility there are members that die," Ellsworth continued, "But the one thing we can do is come together and serve the great state of Montana."
Utah
Republicans, the majority party in Utah, have taken a more cautious approach to the virus. During Utah's session, lawmakers will continue to have the option of attending meetings and floor time remotely — or to participate in person. The legislature held a virtual special session in April, where all lawmakers debated and voted remotely, except for the House Speaker and Senate President. In subsequent special sessions and interim meetings, lawmakers have had the option to come into the Capitol building.
Lawmakers will get rapid COVID-19 tests twice a week if they want to enter the floors of their respective chambers. They are encouraged to wear masks on the floor, but not required. Plexiglass dividers have been installed between the lawmakers' desks.
Enlarge this image toggle caption George Frey/AFP via Getty Images George Frey/AFP via Getty Images
The Capitol building has been closed to the public throughout the pandemic, but it will reopen for the 2021 session. Visitors are required to wear masks and the legislature will designate "mask ambassadors" to remind people. The Utah Highway Patrol will ask people to leave if they refuse to wear a mask.
The public will also be allowed to comment during committee meetings in person, but are encouraged to do so online like they have been able to since May. Committee rooms have been altered to allow for social distancing in the audience.
Michigan
In Michigan, 11 state lawmakers and 37 legislative staffers have tested positive for the coronavirus this year. That number doesn't include Democratic Rep. Isaac Robinson who was 44 when he died of suspected COVID-19 in March.
And despite the state's occupational safety agency investigating the House of Representatives over alleged safety violations, incoming House leadership does not plan to make any changes for the coming year.
Enlarge this image toggle caption John Moore/Getty Images John Moore/Getty Images
The Michigan House became the subject of national scrutiny after holding an hourslong hearing with Rudy Giuliani, President Trump's personal lawyer, who may have been infected with the virus at the time. Remote testimony was not allowed for the gathering.
State Senator Mallory McMorrow, a Democrat, introduced a resolution in the state Senate back in April that would've allowed for remote meetings but Republicans, who control both chambers, have insisted on continuing to meet in person. Temperature checks and health screenings have not prevented coronavirus spread in the legislature, where some lawmakers still don't wear masks.
"There are just so many people who are hanging on by a thread," says state Sen. McMorrow of the Michiganders who she and her colleagues serve, "But there just does not seem to be any interest in modifying the rules to allow for virtual meeting."
Colorado
In Colorado, it looks as though Democratic leaders have decided to delay the annual legislative session due to the pandemic and the perils of trying to conduct business in a crowded state capitol building.
The Democratically-controlled legislature is legally required to begin on January 13 each year and run for no more than 120 days. But Colorado's declared state of emergency allows more flexibility within that timeline, though leaders of both parties are still working out the details.
The state supreme court ruled in the spring that lawmakers can temporarily pause their work and return later in the year. Incoming Speaker of the House, Alec Garnett, says he and others think that's the safest option.
According to leadership, lawmakers will stay in session next month only as long as it takes to get the most urgent and necessary work done, such as swearing in their new members, then they'll adjourn until at least mid-February.
Garnett says the goal for the break is to get to a point "that's removed from the potential spike from Christmas and New Year's and gives a little bit more time for the vaccine to circulate."
The legislature met in person for two and a half days in early December for a special session to pass a COVID-19 relief package. It highlighted deep divides between lawmakers on issues of coronavirus safety, the effectiveness of mask-wearing and rapid testing.
The state requires masks to be worn in most indoor settings, but it's not enforced for lawmakers inside the Capitol. Some Republican lawmakers declined to wear masks during the session and most did not get a rapid test available to them. About one-third of the legislature decided to participate remotely.
"The biggest thing is — how do we do things in the safest manner possible?" said Democratic Rep. Kyle Mullica, of returning to work at the Capitol. He's an Emergency Room nurse and was the first state lawmaker to receive the coronavirus vaccine. "That's our number one priority. We want to make sure people don't get hurt."