usatoday--2020-04-03--Georgia Gov. Kemp slammed after saying he just learned coronavirus could spread without symptoms

After previously resisting calls to issue a statewide order for people to stay home to contain the spread of the coronavirus , Georgia Gov .
Brian Kemp announced he was issuing such a directive and that it would take effect Friday .
Though Kemp 's tightening of restrictions was welcomed by health officials , he drew criticism for his explanation that he was taking the step because the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was now `` finding out that this virus is now transmitting before people see signs . ''
`` The CDC has announced that individuals can be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than previously thought , even if they have no symptoms , '' Kemp said at a news conference Wednesday .
He called the information `` a revelation and a game changer . ''
The first-term Republican said that based on earlier CDC directives , his office had previously only been advising those who did not feel well to stay home .
`` Those individuals could have been infecting people before they ever felt bad , '' Kemp said .
`` We did n't know that until the last 24 hours . ''
Kemp @ @ @ @ @ @ @ governor was referring to a March 30 update from the CDC that said several studies show evidence of infected people who never showed symptoms .
Because people who do n't appear sick are not usually tested , `` the prevalence of asymptomatic infection and detection of pre-symptomatic infection is not well understood , '' the CDC said .
The governor 's office also referred to comments from CDC director Robert Redfield , who told NPR on Monday that the new coronavirus was `` three times as infectious as flu , '' largely because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infected never show symptoms and for those that do , they may not appear for up to 48 hours .
While Redfield 's comments reflect a new understanding of the level of asymptomatic transmission , he and other health officials have warned that people who do not appear sick could be spreading the disease since late January .
At a Jan. 31 White House news briefing , National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci said `` in the beginning , we were not sure if there were asymptomatic infection , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outbreak than what we ’ re seeing .
Now we know for sure that there are . ''
Though the study Fauci based that comment on was later determined to be flawed by public health officials because the patient was found to have had mild symptoms , a Feb. 19 study – which the CDC cites in its update – appeared to confirm asymptomatic spread .
`` I don ’ t think there ’ s any question that someone who is without symptoms and carrying the virus can transmit the virus to somebody @ @ @ @ @ @ @ York Times later that month .
On Feb. 13 , Redfield told CNN 's Dr. Sanjay Gupta that he had discovered `` the spectrum of this illness is much broader than was originally presented .
There 's much more asymptomatic illness . ''
He said they were talking with medical professionals in China to determine `` how much of the asymptomatic cases are driving transmission . ''
And on March 14 , Deborah Birx , the White House coronavirus response coordinator , said , `` Until you really understand how many people are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we think it ’ s better for the entire American public to know that the risk of serious illness may be low , but they could be potentially spreading the virus to others . ''
Democrats seized on Kemp 's remarks that he was just learning the illness could be spread by people not displaying symptoms .
`` If they had better election laws Stacey Abrams would be governor of Georgia .
Brian Kemp ’ s negligence could cost Americans thousands of lives , '' tweeted Sen. Amy Klobuchar , D-Minn. , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ March .
`` Kemp ’ s admission reveals that he and his administration hadn ’ t been listening to the health officials , including members of the White House coronavirus task force , who have been sharing that information for months , '' the Democratic Party of Georgia said in a statement .
`` Health officials knew .
Americans knew .
Brian Kemp failed to act , and now Georgians are paying the price . ''
`` This is why we need a national test , trace , and quarantine program , '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Because Governors and Mayors are n't public health experts , and Kemp is n't alone in totally misunderstanding the science and making fatal mistakes as a consequence . ''

Georgia Gov. Kemp slammed after saying he just learned coronavirus could spread without symptoms
Show Caption Hide Caption CDC could change guidelines on mask-wearing amid coronavirus outbreak The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has been asked to review its guidance on wearing masks amid the coronavirus pandemic. USA TODAY, Wochit
After previously resisting calls to issue a statewide order for people to stay home to contain the spread of the coronavirus, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp announced he was issuing such a directive and that it would take effect Friday.
Though Kemp's tightening of restrictions was welcomed by health officials, he drew criticism for his explanation that he was taking the step because the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was now "finding out that this virus is now transmitting before people see signs."
"The CDC has announced that individuals can be infected and begin to spread coronavirus earlier than previously thought, even if they have no symptoms," Kemp said at a news conference Wednesday. He called the information "a revelation and a game changer."
The first-term Republican said that based on earlier CDC directives, his office had previously only been advising those who did not feel well to stay home.
"Those individuals could have been infecting people before they ever felt bad," Kemp said. "We didn't know that until the last 24 hours."
Kemp's press secretary told USA TODAY the governor was referring to a March 30 update from the CDC that said several studies show evidence of infected people who never showed symptoms. Because people who don't appear sick are not usually tested, "the prevalence of asymptomatic infection and detection of pre-symptomatic infection is not well understood," the CDC said.
Coronavirus: Social distancing key to fighting COVID-19 Social distancing matters. Here is how to do it and how it can help curb the COVID-19 pandemic. Just the FAQs, USA TODAY
The governor's office also referred to comments from CDC director Robert Redfield, who told NPR on Monday that the new coronavirus was "three times as infectious as flu," largely because as many as 25% of those infected never show symptoms and for those that do, they may not appear for up to 48 hours.
While Redfield's comments reflect a new understanding of the level of asymptomatic transmission, he and other health officials have warned that people who do not appear sick could be spreading the disease since late January.
At a Jan. 31 White House news briefing, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci said "in the beginning, we were not sure if there were asymptomatic infection, which would make it a much broader outbreak than what we’re seeing. Now we know for sure that there are."
Though the study Fauci based that comment on was later determined to be flawed by public health officials because the patient was found to have had mild symptoms, a Feb. 19 study – which the CDC cites in its update – appeared to confirm asymptomatic spread.
"I don’t think there’s any question that someone who is without symptoms and carrying the virus can transmit the virus to somebody else," Fauci told The New York Times later that month.
On Feb. 13, Redfield told CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta that he had discovered "the spectrum of this illness is much broader than was originally presented. There's much more asymptomatic illness." He said they were talking with medical professionals in China to determine "how much of the asymptomatic cases are driving transmission."
And on March 14, Deborah Birx, the White House coronavirus response coordinator, said, "Until you really understand how many people are asymptomatic and asymptomatically passing the virus on, we think it’s better for the entire American public to know that the risk of serious illness may be low, but they could be potentially spreading the virus to others."
Democrats seized on Kemp's remarks that he was just learning the illness could be spread by people not displaying symptoms.
"If they had better election laws Stacey Abrams would be governor of Georgia. Brian Kemp’s negligence could cost Americans thousands of lives," tweeted Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., who was a presidential candidate into early March.
If they had better election laws Stacey Abrams would be governor of Georgia. Brian Kemp’s negligence could cost Americans thousands of lives. https://t.co/hFCBZ60v0a — Amy Klobuchar (@amyklobuchar) April 2, 2020
"Kemp’s admission reveals that he and his administration hadn’t been listening to the health officials, including members of the White House coronavirus task force, who have been sharing that information for months," the Democratic Party of Georgia said in a statement. "Health officials knew. Americans knew. Brian Kemp failed to act, and now Georgians are paying the price."
"This is why we need a national test, trace, and quarantine program," tweeted Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn. "Because Governors and Mayors aren't public health experts, and Kemp isn't alone in totally misunderstanding the science and making fatal mistakes as a consequence."


usatoday--2020-04-04--Trump fires watchdog who handled Ukraine complaint

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump notified Congress late Friday that he has fired the intelligence committee watchdog who handled a whistleblower 's complaint involving Trump 's pressure campaign against the Ukranian president that triggered his impeachment .
Trump informed the Senate Intelligence Committee of his decision to fire Michael Atkinson .
“ In the midst of a national emergency , it is unconscionable that the president is once again attempting to undermine the integrity of the intelligence community by firing yet another ... intelligence official simply for doing his job , '' said Sen. Mark Warner , D-Va. , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The work of the intelligence community has never been about loyalty to a single individual ; it ’ s about keeping us all safe from those who wish to do our country harm .
We should all be deeply disturbed by ongoing attempts to politicize the nation ’ s intelligence agencies.
” Atkinson informed Congress about an anonymous whistleblower complaint last year that described Trump ’ s pressure on Ukraine to investigate Democrat Joe Biden and his son .
That complaint prompted a House investigation that ultimately resulted in Trump ’ s impeachment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ' distracted him from fighting COVID-19 Rep. Adam Schiff , D-Calif. , House Intelligence Committee chairman who led the impeachment inquiry , called Trump 's action `` another blatant attempt by the president to gut the independence of the Intelligence Community and retaliate against those who dare to expose presidential wrongdoing . ''
`` At a time when our country is dealing with a national emergency and needs people in the Intelligence Community to speak truth to power , the president ’ s dead of night decision puts our country and national security @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's move comes as the nation is grappling with the coronavirus pandemic that has swept the globe and is now exacting a deadly toll in the United States , where nearly 280,000 people have been infected and more than 7,000 have died .
`` This retribution against a distinguished public servant for doing his job and informing Congress of an urgent and credible whistleblower complaint is a direct affront to the entire inspector general system , '' Schiff said .
Atkinson reviewed the whistleblower 's complaint that alleged Trump “ used the power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ help for the 2020 election , determining in late August that the complaint appeared credible .
The then-acting director of national intelligence , Joseph Maguire , prevented him from passing along the complaint to Congress within seven days , as is typically required for national-security whistleblower complaints after consulting with the White House and Justice Department .
Maguire said he thought the complaint might be protected by executive privilege , despite being a conversation with a foreign leader .
The Justice Department ruled that the complaint didn ’ t qualify as an “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or flagrant problem '' requiring notification of Congress because the target – Trump – isn ’ t a member of the intelligence community .
Atkinson , however , disagreed with that decision , saying in a Sept. 17 letter that the allegations related to “ one of the most significant and important ” of Maguire ’ s responsibilities to the American people .
Atkinson warned lawmakers that withholding the information could lead to “ a significant problem and deficiency ” relating to the nation 's intelligence programs .
`` Being fired for having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ makes him a patriot , '' Schumer said .
Contributing : Bart Jansen , Nicholas Wu and The Associated Press

Trump fires watchdog who handled Ukraine complaint
Show Caption Hide Caption President Trump calls 'B.S.' after impeachment acquittal in remarks to nation President Donald Trump delivered remarks a day after the U.S. Senate voted to acquit him. USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump notified Congress late Friday that he has fired the intelligence committee watchdog who handled a whistleblower's complaint involving Trump's pressure campaign against the Ukranian president that triggered his impeachment.
Trump informed the Senate Intelligence Committee of his decision to fire Michael Atkinson.
“In the midst of a national emergency, it is unconscionable that the president is once again attempting to undermine the integrity of the intelligence community by firing yet another ... intelligence official simply for doing his job," said Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., the Intelligence Committee's vice chairman.
"The work of the intelligence community has never been about loyalty to a single individual; it’s about keeping us all safe from those who wish to do our country harm. We should all be deeply disturbed by ongoing attempts to politicize the nation’s intelligence agencies.”
Atkinson informed Congress about an anonymous whistleblower complaint last year that described Trump’s pressure on Ukraine to investigate Democrat Joe Biden and his son. That complaint prompted a House investigation that ultimately resulted in Trump’s impeachment.
The Senate acquitted Trump in February.
Coronavirus: Trump says impeachment 'probably' distracted him from fighting COVID-19
Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., House Intelligence Committee chairman who led the impeachment inquiry, called Trump's action "another blatant attempt by the president to gut the independence of the Intelligence Community and retaliate against those who dare to expose presidential wrongdoing."
"At a time when our country is dealing with a national emergency and needs people in the Intelligence Community to speak truth to power, the president’s dead of night decision puts our country and national security at even greater risk."
Trump's move comes as the nation is grappling with the coronavirus pandemic that has swept the globe and is now exacting a deadly toll in the United States, where nearly 280,000 people have been infected and more than 7,000 have died.
"This retribution against a distinguished public servant for doing his job and informing Congress of an urgent and credible whistleblower complaint is a direct affront to the entire inspector general system," Schiff said.
Atkinson reviewed the whistleblower's complaint that alleged Trump “used the power of his office” to solicit foreign help for the 2020 election, determining in late August that the complaint appeared credible.
The then-acting director of national intelligence, Joseph Maguire, prevented him from passing along the complaint to Congress within seven days, as is typically required for national-security whistleblower complaints after consulting with the White House and Justice Department.
Maguire said he thought the complaint might be protected by executive privilege, despite being a conversation with a foreign leader. The Justice Department ruled that the complaint didn’t qualify as an “urgent concern” about "a serious or flagrant problem" requiring notification of Congress because the target – Trump – isn’t a member of the intelligence community.
Atkinson, however, disagreed with that decision, saying in a Sept. 17 letter that the allegations related to “one of the most significant and important” of Maguire’s responsibilities to the American people. Atkinson warned lawmakers that withholding the information could lead to “a significant problem and deficiency” relating to the nation's intelligence programs.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., called Atkinson a "man of integrity."
"Being fired for having the courage to speak truth to power makes him a patriot," Schumer said.
Contributing: Bart Jansen, Nicholas Wu and The Associated Press


usatoday--2020-04-04--Trump claims to use wartime powers to 'hit hard' on coronavirus. But the details are murky.

WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump and his senior aides say they are hitting companies `` hard '' with wartime demands for ventilators , masks and other equipment to fight coronavirus , but the details have been less muscular than the rhetoric .
Trump has framed the Korean War-era Defense Production Act as a weapon he is wielding against companies such as General Motors and 3M , both of which he has complained are not doing enough to crank out medical equipment .
But it 's not clear whether the White House is fully embracing its powers under the act .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ General Motors to ramp up the manufacture of ventilators , the administration has not yet formally ordered the automaker to create a single ventilator , USA TODAY found this week .
Without an order , the administration is n't forcing the company to do anything – just threatening .
White House aides ratcheted up the tough talk in recent days as the president signed a series of additional memos , including one for 3M and another for General Electric and five other companies .
But none of those orders provided any about exactly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to increase the supply of equipment .
Testing : White House to test people who get close to Trump for coronavirus '' What we have , essentially , is a nation at war , '' said Peter Navarro , the top trade and manufacturing aide to the president who is coordinating the use of the Defense Production Act for the White House .
`` The Defense Production Act is one of the most powerful weapons this administration can use to fight the invisible enemy of the virus . ''
Here are some unanswered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` weapon . ''
Trump and senior White House aides have said they are working with 10 to 11 companies to ramp up production of ventilators .
But it 's not entirely clear which companies they 're referring to .
The president has repeatedly named General Motors , the Detroit automaker that volunteered last month to convert some of its manufacturing capability to produce the breathing machines rather than cars .
Ford Motor and GE Healthcare announced this week that they would produce 50,000 ventilators in the next 100 days .
In a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ five other companies as being involved : Hillrom , Medtronic , ResMed , Royal Philips and Vyaire Medical .
It was not clear if those companies represented the extent of the effort or whether others are involved .
White House officials did not not respond to a request for information .
In a USA TODAY op-ed on Thursday , Navarro said that the administration is working with 10 different companies to deliver 5,000 ventilators in the next 30 days and more than 100,000 by the end of June .
Trump has set similar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from GM ?
Trump signed a memorandum March 27 directing Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar to use all `` available '' powers under the Defense Production Act to secure ventilators from General Motors .
But the law gives the administration many different powers – from prohibiting hoarding of supplies to forcing companies to take priority contracts with the government .
The administration has n't spelled out which are being used .
Most lawmakers have zeroed in on the president 's power to require a company to prioritize government orders or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – such as ventilators – needed in an emergency .
Both of those powers would require the government to send a formal order to GM stipulating certain points , such as specific delivery dates and which government regulations were be used to justify the order .
In some cases , those orders can be made public , but they do n't have to be .
Trump has repeatedly inferred that his administration is already forcing GM to make the units , saying he needed to `` compel General Motors to accept , perform @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But administration officials speaking on the condition of anonymity told USA TODAY this week that no formal orders had been placed – yet .
They also described the president 's moves so far as an effort nudge GM to voluntarily meet whatever demands the administration is making .
Robert Tompkins , co-chair of the government contracts practice at Holland & Knight , said it is common for the government and companies to negotiate before a formal order is issued .
That 's partly because the government has to make an assessment of what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ultimately wind up in court .
`` The government and the company are generally trying to find out what 's doable , '' said Tompkins , who was speaking generally about the process and declined to discuss any action taken against specific companies .
U.S. exported millions in masks and ventilators ahead of the coronavirus crisis What is Trump asking from 3M ?
Trump came out swinging this week against 3M , a manufacturer of the highly sought after N-95 face masks .
On Thursday the president said he signed an order giving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ buy masks from the company .
More : U.S. exported millions in masks and ventilators ahead of the coronavirus crisis Trump followed up with a tweet saying his administration `` hit 3M hard today after seeing what they were doing with their Masks , '' adding that the company would have a `` big price to pay '' for `` what they were doing . ''
Trump did n't explicitly explain his concern , but Navarro said the administration is worried that the masks were are exported .
The administration could use the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Production Act to ensure that products necessary for national security are not exported , experts said .
But in that case the government would have to send an order to 3M and it 's not clear whether it has done so .
Neither the White House nor the Department of Homeland Security responded to multiple questions about whether an order had been sent .
More : Trump blasts 3M as company says mask demand far exceeds ability to produce Unlike General Motors , 3M raised concerns publicly about the White House request , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ halting shipments to markets where they are a key supplier .
They argued halting the export of masks on U.S. soil might cause other countries to retaliate by banning export of other products to America .
In its statement , the company also said the administration had made its requests `` this past weekend , '' before the president signed the Defense Production Act memorandum .
A company spokeswoman declined to answer questions about whether the Trump administration had subsequently sent formal orders to the company .
What else does Trump want ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Act as an antagonistic tool , forcing companies to do something they 're reluctant to do .
Sometimes that is true .
But just often , there 's a tangible benefit for the companies subject to the orders .
For starters , companies handling a priority government contract under the act can demand that their suppliers also prioritize the government 's order .
The act also provides legal protection for companies who put aside one pending order for material to expedite those requested by Washington .
Navarro pointed to that dynamic this week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ manufacturer itself , what you want to make sure is that the supply chain , which can go seven tiers deep , has enough components in that supply chain so we can actually make what we need , '' he said at the White House on Wednesday .
Peter Shulman , a history professor at Case Western Reserve University in Ohio who has studied the Defense Production Act , said one of the motives of its authors was to allow the government to take a more systematic approach to the production of essential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Though the act is widely used today for more routine orders , it was drafted by lawmakers who had lived through the mobilization of World War II and who wanted to avoid the fits and starts of nationwide production that hamstrung efforts during World War I .
That means giving the president power to make sure companies are n't competing against each other to manufacture the same highly needed products .
`` It 's not about punishment ; it 's about mobilization , '' Shulman said .
`` It 's making companies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compete , in moments of actual crisis ... be cooperating with each other , '' he said .
`` That 's a much more rational way of using the power of the act that is not even remotely what they 're doing right now . ''

Trump claims to use wartime powers to 'hit hard' on coronavirus. But the details are murky.
Show Caption Hide Caption Donald Trump extends social distancing guidelines to slow coronavirus spread President Donald Trump is extending the voluntary national shutdown for a month as sickness and death from the coronavirus pandemic rises in the U.S. Associated Press, Wochit
WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump and his senior aides say they are hitting companies "hard" with wartime demands for ventilators, masks and other equipment to fight coronavirus, but the details have been less muscular than the rhetoric.
Trump has framed the Korean War-era Defense Production Act as a weapon he is wielding against companies such as General Motors and 3M, both of which he has complained are not doing enough to crank out medical equipment. But it's not clear whether the White House is fully embracing its powers under the act.
Despite a presidential memorandum last week pushing General Motors to ramp up the manufacture of ventilators, the administration has not yet formally ordered the automaker to create a single ventilator, USA TODAY found this week. Without an order, the administration isn't forcing the company to do anything – just threatening.
White House aides ratcheted up the tough talk in recent days as the president signed a series of additional memos, including one for 3M and another for General Electric and five other companies. But none of those orders provided any about exactly how the administration is using its powers to increase the supply of equipment.
GM: Trump hasn't formally ordered ventilators from GM despite wartime powers
Testing: White House to test people who get close to Trump for coronavirus
"What we have, essentially, is a nation at war," said Peter Navarro, the top trade and manufacturing aide to the president who is coordinating the use of the Defense Production Act for the White House. "The Defense Production Act is one of the most powerful weapons this administration can use to fight the invisible enemy of the virus."
Here are some unanswered questions about how Trump is using that "weapon."
Which companies make ventilators?
Trump and senior White House aides have said they are working with 10 to 11 companies to ramp up production of ventilators. But it's not entirely clear which companies they're referring to. The president has repeatedly named General Motors, the Detroit automaker that volunteered last month to convert some of its manufacturing capability to produce the breathing machines rather than cars.
Ford Motor and GE Healthcare announced this week that they would produce 50,000 ventilators in the next 100 days.
In a separate memo on Thursday, Trump named five other companies as being involved: Hillrom, Medtronic, ResMed, Royal Philips and Vyaire Medical. It was not clear if those companies represented the extent of the effort or whether others are involved. White House officials did not not respond to a request for information.
Op-ed: Trump administration moving swiftly to address ventilator shortages
In a USA TODAY op-ed on Thursday, Navarro said that the administration is working with 10 different companies to deliver 5,000 ventilators in the next 30 days and more than 100,000 by the end of June. Trump has set similar goals publicly.
What is Trump asking from GM?
Trump signed a memorandum March 27 directing Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar to use all "available" powers under the Defense Production Act to secure ventilators from General Motors. But the law gives the administration many different powers – from prohibiting hoarding of supplies to forcing companies to take priority contracts with the government. The administration hasn't spelled out which are being used.
Most lawmakers have zeroed in on the president's power to require a company to prioritize government orders or take control of the distribution of products – such as ventilators – needed in an emergency. Both of those powers would require the government to send a formal order to GM stipulating certain points, such as specific delivery dates and which government regulations were be used to justify the order.
In some cases, those orders can be made public, but they don't have to be.
Trump has repeatedly inferred that his administration is already forcing GM to make the units, saying he needed to "compel General Motors to accept, perform, and prioritize federal contracts." But administration officials speaking on the condition of anonymity told USA TODAY this week that no formal orders had been placed – yet.
They also described the president's moves so far as an effort nudge GM to voluntarily meet whatever demands the administration is making.
Robert Tompkins, co-chair of the government contracts practice at Holland & Knight, said it is common for the government and companies to negotiate before a formal order is issued. That's partly because the government has to make an assessment of what is possible. An unreasonable order could ultimately wind up in court.
"The government and the company are generally trying to find out what's doable," said Tompkins, who was speaking generally about the process and declined to discuss any action taken against specific companies.
What is Trump asking from 3M?
Trump came out swinging this week against 3M, a manufacturer of the highly sought after N-95 face masks. On Thursday the president said he signed an order giving the Department of Homeland Security authority to buy masks from the company.
More: U.S. exported millions in masks and ventilators ahead of the coronavirus crisis
Trump followed up with a tweet saying his administration "hit 3M hard today after seeing what they were doing with their Masks," adding that the company would have a "big price to pay" for "what they were doing." Trump didn't explicitly explain his concern, but Navarro said the administration is worried that the masks were are exported.
The administration could use the "allocation" provisions of the Defense Production Act to ensure that products necessary for national security are not exported, experts said. But in that case the government would have to send an order to 3M and it's not clear whether it has done so. Neither the White House nor the Department of Homeland Security responded to multiple questions about whether an order had been sent.
More: Trump blasts 3M as company says mask demand far exceeds ability to produce
Unlike General Motors, 3M raised concerns publicly about the White House request, citing "significant humanitarian implications" of halting shipments to markets where they are a key supplier. They argued halting the export of masks on U.S. soil might cause other countries to retaliate by banning export of other products to America.
In its statement, the company also said the administration had made its requests "this past weekend," before the president signed the Defense Production Act memorandum. A company spokeswoman declined to answer questions about whether the Trump administration had subsequently sent formal orders to the company.
We hit 3M hard today after seeing what they were doing with their Masks. “P Act” all the way. Big surprise to many in government as to what they were doing - will have a big price to pay! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 3, 2020
What else does Trump want?
Trump has often framed the Defense Production Act as an antagonistic tool, forcing companies to do something they're reluctant to do. Sometimes that is true. But just often, there's a tangible benefit for the companies subject to the orders.
For starters, companies handling a priority government contract under the act can demand that their suppliers also prioritize the government's order. The act also provides legal protection for companies who put aside one pending order for material to expedite those requested by Washington.
Navarro pointed to that dynamic this week.
"If you look at the manufacturer itself, what you want to make sure is that the supply chain, which can go seven tiers deep, has enough components in that supply chain so we can actually make what we need," he said at the White House on Wednesday.
Peter Shulman, a history professor at Case Western Reserve University in Ohio who has studied the Defense Production Act, said one of the motives of its authors was to allow the government to take a more systematic approach to the production of essential goods during wartime or a national emergency.
Though the act is widely used today for more routine orders, it was drafted by lawmakers who had lived through the mobilization of World War II and who wanted to avoid the fits and starts of nationwide production that hamstrung efforts during World War I. That means giving the president power to make sure companies aren't competing against each other to manufacture the same highly needed products.
"It's not about punishment; it's about mobilization," Shulman said.
"It's making companies that normally we would want to see compete, in moments of actual crisis...be cooperating with each other," he said. "That's a much more rational way of using the power of the act that is not even remotely what they're doing right now."
Contributing: Brett Molina