truthout--2020-12-27--New Organizing Model Helps Build Worker Power Among the Unorganized During COVID

When the COVID-19 pandemic hit and lockdowns started in March , a new class of “ essential workers ” continued to go to work across the United States under new dangerous conditions .
As stories came out about workers lacking personal protective equipment , or PPE , and working in crowded workplaces , union workers began to take action .
They stopped work , organized sick-outs , won hazard pay , protested employer COVID-19 policies that left them unsafe and negotiated for improvements .
Unions have made workplaces safer , as research has shown that unionized essential workers have had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The presence of unions makes conditions safer for the general public as well .
For example , unionized nursing homes in New York were found to have a 30 percent lower COVID-19 mortality rate among residents .
When the U.S. Department of Labor ’ s Occupational Safety and Health Administration , or OSHA , and other government agencies failed to take adequate steps to protect workers , these workers had to take action .
But 90 percent of U.S. workers are not union members , and millions of these non-union workers still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them , essential has meant expendable .
There was a clear need to find ways to assist workers in confronting this new unsafe world at work .
That ’ s when the Emergency Workplace Organizing Committee , or EWOC , was born .
A joint project of the Democratic Socialists of America and the United Electrical workers union , EWOC recruited volunteer organizers to talk with workers who wanted to organize around COVID-19 concerns .
It created a request form for workers to fill out , which it spread through social media .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ day .
When EWOC receives the form , there ’ s an initial intake conversation , and an advanced organizer is assigned to collaborate with the workers on a plan to organize for improvements at work , on COVID-19 , or any other issues .
This takes the form of a series of phone and Zoom calls where they work through the basics of organizing .
Dawn Tefft is one of the leaders of the EWOC advanced organizers team .
She was involved in the Milwaukee Graduate Assistants Association during the Wisconsin uprising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in response to Gov .
Scott Walker ’ s anti-union legislation .
However , the massive protests at the capital failed to stop the new law .
That experience taught her that protest wasn ’ t enough , and that workers and union leaders throughout the state should have done more to prepare for a strike wave , as her union did .
She brought this focus on rank-and-file workplace power-building to EWOC , as part of a team that has developed the strategy for organizing with workers .
On a recent EWOC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ described that at the beginning of a campaign , an advanced organizer and the workers would rank issues and draft a set of demands .
Together , they begin building a list of workers , divide up workers to contact in order to ask them to join an organizing committee or sign a demands petition , and begin planning a first action or a series of escalating actions .
The organizing process is built around conversations among coworkers , and throughout these steps , the workers themselves must run the campaign , with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ role .
Since its launch , EWOC has already racked up a number of significant victories .
Taco Bell workers in Michigan won PPE , paid sick leave and hazard pay ; Jimmy John ’ s workers in Utah received better plexiglass barriers and rules allowing fewer customers in the store at any one time ; Sprouts grocery store workers in Texas demanded and got PPE and store customer limits ; and Good Vibrations store workers in Massachusetts had their concerns with COVID-19 and other issues addressed after a six week strike .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ at fairly small workplaces , they provide lessons for growing and sustaining organizing at larger employers , which is always a tough challenge .
I have been involved as an EWOC organizer for several months , talking with workers to develop their campaigns .
It ’ s clear from these conversations that most workers don ’ t have a solid understanding of unions or what workplace organizing is about .
Rarely do people learn much about the labor movement , and much of what they do hear is distorted and filtered through corporate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to move forward , it ’ s been inspiring to see them start to learn the art and science of workplace organizing .
These workers have faced a variety of issues .
One university worker wondered why her department couldn ’ t continue working from home .
A retail worker realized that coronavirus issues showed the real need to have a union at her store .
A health care clinic worker has started talking with colleagues about the danger of the new surge in COVID-19 cases , and how they could be safer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ woman who is employed at a small retail store .
She organized with her coworkers for a better sick leave policy .
“ It was extremely empowering , as a low wage worker , ” she said .
“ You often have a sense of powerlessness that there ’ s nothing you can do .
But with organizing , it ’ s the one thing you can do to actually give yourself the things that you really need in the workplace.
” She went on to describe the solidarity developed between her colleagues @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Having conversations with team members really built that sense of comradery and power amongst ourselves .
Realizing that we actually wanted the same things was a big deal too.
” I interviewed another worker at an agency that provides social services .
The workers there had a number of COVID-19 safety concerns and other issues .
She organized with her department to write a letter to their supervisor , and won regular health and safety meetings to design better COVID-19 protocols , more PPE , and paid travel time to their various @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has had a tremendous impact and folks feel more confident in bringing up issues .
This has led to broader conversations with workers at other agencies about the systemically bad working conditions and treatment of clients in the industry , and how they can better advocate for , and organize with , their clients .
“ [ EWOC ] has really helped give us a framework to understand how to start making changes about issues and grievances that we have about the care industry and treatment of people by organizing the workplace , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not complicated , but it is challenging .
Organizing is built on something as basic as having conversations with coworkers , but with an eye toward building power .
It involves developing relationships , assessing concerns , understanding workplace social networks , identifying leaders and agitating toward collective solutions to the personal problems everyone has at work .
It requires forging common demands and building the confidence of the workers with escalating collective actions that may lead to a strike if necessary .
EWOC has developed a training series to teach these organizing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not only helping workers to improve working conditions now , but also disseminating an understanding of workplace power and collective action to a large network of non-union workers .
They can spread these skills and may want to organize or join more formal unions later on .
Some of those workers eventually join EWOC as volunteers .
Now over six months old , EWOC has a few staff coordinators and has grown to involve hundreds of volunteers serving as intake and campaign organizers , media strategists , database administrators , trainers , researchers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2,000 workers have reached out to EWOC , and 25 workplace campaigns have won some of their demands , impacting about 1,000 workers .
Currently there are 60 campaigns running , and over 500 workers have been through some EWOC organizing training .
Where Does This Go ?
EWOC is an experiment in running a labor organizing project through a large network of volunteers outside of formal unions or worker centers .
Moreover , during the pandemic this organizing work necessarily occurs on the phone and online .
When the pandemic subsides , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to some in-person conversations and events .
The EWOC approach can be seen as part of a larger effort to bring a class struggle organizing framework back into the labor movement , with similar politics to the United Electrical workers ’ Them and Us Unionism .
This may look very different from standard workplace organizing campaigns based on government-run union elections .
Many workers may win improvements with direct action , but never seek official union recognition or a written contract .
Rooted in rank-and-file workplace organizing , the EWOC model is perhaps @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” of the Industrial Workers of the World .
As the network of workers involved in EWOC-assisted campaigns grows , organizers face a number of questions about the evolution of the project , including whether this group should evolve into a dues-funded membership organization .
We need to ensure that when workers win gains , they maintain an “ organized workplace ” over time as turnover happens , and possibly solidify their victory through unionization and a contract .
We have to find ways to grow linkages of solidarity between all these workplaces @ @ @ @ @ @ @ organizing at huge employers with thousands or tens of thousands of workers .
Can we distill some lessons from the growing list of campaigns , so we can learn how to win more effectively ?
EWOC is exploring ways to incorporate workers from the campaigns directly into these conversations .
EWOC has developed an encouraging new model in worker organizing that also draws from militant rank-and-file labor traditions .
As we continue through this horrific pandemic , workers are demonstrating that they can save themselves .
They just need the tools and training @ @ @ @

When the COVID-19 pandemic hit and lockdowns started in March, a new class of “essential workers” continued to go to work across the United States under new dangerous conditions. As stories came out about workers lacking personal protective equipment, or PPE, and working in crowded workplaces, union workers began to take action. They stopped work, organized sick-outs, won hazard pay, protested employer COVID-19 policies that left them unsafe and negotiated for improvements.
Unions have made workplaces safer, as research has shown that unionized essential workers have had better COVID-19 workplace practices during the pandemic. The presence of unions makes conditions safer for the general public as well. For example, unionized nursing homes in New York were found to have a 30 percent lower COVID-19 mortality rate among residents. When the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration, or OSHA, and other government agencies failed to take adequate steps to protect workers, these workers had to take action. But 90 percent of U.S. workers are not union members, and millions of these non-union workers still need help. For too many of them, essential has meant expendable.
There was a clear need to find ways to assist workers in confronting this new unsafe world at work. That’s when the Emergency Workplace Organizing Committee, or EWOC, was born. A joint project of the Democratic Socialists of America and the United Electrical workers union, EWOC recruited volunteer organizers to talk with workers who wanted to organize around COVID-19 concerns. It created a request form for workers to fill out, which it spread through social media. Inquiries from workers started coming in every day.
Organizing With EWOC
When EWOC receives the form, there’s an initial intake conversation, and an advanced organizer is assigned to collaborate with the workers on a plan to organize for improvements at work, on COVID-19, or any other issues. This takes the form of a series of phone and Zoom calls where they work through the basics of organizing.
Dawn Tefft is one of the leaders of the EWOC advanced organizers team. She was involved in the Milwaukee Graduate Assistants Association during the Wisconsin uprising of 2011, the movement that formed in response to Gov. Scott Walker’s anti-union legislation. However, the massive protests at the capital failed to stop the new law. That experience taught her that protest wasn’t enough, and that workers and union leaders throughout the state should have done more to prepare for a strike wave, as her union did.
She brought this focus on rank-and-file workplace power-building to EWOC, as part of a team that has developed the strategy for organizing with workers. On a recent EWOC call for volunteers and workers, she described that at the beginning of a campaign, an advanced organizer and the workers would rank issues and draft a set of demands. Together, they begin building a list of workers, divide up workers to contact in order to ask them to join an organizing committee or sign a demands petition, and begin planning a first action or a series of escalating actions. The organizing process is built around conversations among coworkers, and throughout these steps, the workers themselves must run the campaign, with EWOC organizers playing an advisory and mentorship role.
Since its launch, EWOC has already racked up a number of significant victories. Taco Bell workers in Michigan won PPE, paid sick leave and hazard pay; Jimmy John’s workers in Utah received better plexiglass barriers and rules allowing fewer customers in the store at any one time; Sprouts grocery store workers in Texas demanded and got PPE and store customer limits; and Good Vibrations store workers in Massachusetts had their concerns with COVID-19 and other issues addressed after a six week strike. While most of these campaigns are organized at fairly small workplaces, they provide lessons for growing and sustaining organizing at larger employers, which is always a tough challenge.
I have been involved as an EWOC organizer for several months, talking with workers to develop their campaigns. It’s clear from these conversations that most workers don’t have a solid understanding of unions or what workplace organizing is about. Rarely do people learn much about the labor movement, and much of what they do hear is distorted and filtered through corporate media. For the workers who want to move forward, it’s been inspiring to see them start to learn the art and science of workplace organizing.
These workers have faced a variety of issues. One university worker wondered why her department couldn’t continue working from home. A retail worker realized that coronavirus issues showed the real need to have a union at her store. A health care clinic worker has started talking with colleagues about the danger of the new surge in COVID-19 cases, and how they could be safer at work.
I worked with one woman who is employed at a small retail store. She organized with her coworkers for a better sick leave policy. “It was extremely empowering, as a low wage worker,” she said. “You often have a sense of powerlessness that there’s nothing you can do. But with organizing, it’s the one thing you can do to actually give yourself the things that you really need in the workplace.” She went on to describe the solidarity developed between her colleagues during their fight for sick leave. “Having conversations with team members really built that sense of comradery and power amongst ourselves. Realizing that we actually wanted the same things was a big deal too.”
I interviewed another worker at an agency that provides social services. The workers there had a number of COVID-19 safety concerns and other issues. She organized with her department to write a letter to their supervisor, and won regular health and safety meetings to design better COVID-19 protocols, more PPE, and paid travel time to their various work sites. She says this process has had a tremendous impact and folks feel more confident in bringing up issues. This has led to broader conversations with workers at other agencies about the systemically bad working conditions and treatment of clients in the industry, and how they can better advocate for, and organize with, their clients.
“[EWOC] has really helped give us a framework to understand how to start making changes about issues and grievances that we have about the care industry and treatment of people by organizing the workplace,” she said.
This work is not complicated, but it is challenging. Organizing is built on something as basic as having conversations with coworkers, but with an eye toward building power. It involves developing relationships, assessing concerns, understanding workplace social networks, identifying leaders and agitating toward collective solutions to the personal problems everyone has at work. It requires forging common demands and building the confidence of the workers with escalating collective actions that may lead to a strike if necessary.
EWOC has developed a training series to teach these organizing skills. It sees this project as not only helping workers to improve working conditions now, but also disseminating an understanding of workplace power and collective action to a large network of non-union workers. They can spread these skills and may want to organize or join more formal unions later on. Some of those workers eventually join EWOC as volunteers.
Now over six months old, EWOC has a few staff coordinators and has grown to involve hundreds of volunteers serving as intake and campaign organizers, media strategists, database administrators, trainers, researchers and other roles. So far over 2,000 workers have reached out to EWOC, and 25 workplace campaigns have won some of their demands, impacting about 1,000 workers. Currently there are 60 campaigns running, and over 500 workers have been through some EWOC organizing training.
Where Does This Go?
EWOC is an experiment in running a labor organizing project through a large network of volunteers outside of formal unions or worker centers. Moreover, during the pandemic this organizing work necessarily occurs on the phone and online. When the pandemic subsides, EWOC will have to coordinate a transition to some in-person conversations and events.
The EWOC approach can be seen as part of a larger effort to bring a class struggle organizing framework back into the labor movement, with similar politics to the United Electrical workers’ Them and Us Unionism. This may look very different from standard workplace organizing campaigns based on government-run union elections. Many workers may win improvements with direct action, but never seek official union recognition or a written contract. Rooted in rank-and-file workplace organizing, the EWOC model is perhaps most similar to the “solidarity unionism” of the Industrial Workers of the World.
As the network of workers involved in EWOC-assisted campaigns grows, organizers face a number of questions about the evolution of the project, including whether this group should evolve into a dues-funded membership organization. We need to ensure that when workers win gains, they maintain an “organized workplace” over time as turnover happens, and possibly solidify their victory through unionization and a contract. We have to find ways to grow linkages of solidarity between all these workplaces and develop the capacity to initiate successful organizing at huge employers with thousands or tens of thousands of workers. Can we distill some lessons from the growing list of campaigns, so we can learn how to win more effectively?
EWOC is exploring ways to incorporate workers from the campaigns directly into these conversations. EWOC has developed an encouraging new model in worker organizing that also draws from militant rank-and-file labor traditions. As we continue through this horrific pandemic, workers are demonstrating that they can save themselves. They just need the tools and training to do it.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-12-27--Inclusive Vaccine Trials Are Vital, But Let’s Not Boost Biological Views of Race

The novel coronavirus and its devastating effects have starkly exposed U.S. racial and ethnic health disparities .
Yet , despite ample evidence that health disparities are symptoms of social and economic inequalities resulting from a racist social system , narratives insisting on participation of marginalized people in clinical trials dangerously imply fundamental biological differences .
Professional organizations , such as the American Medical Association , have taken the official stance that race and ethnicity are social constructs rather than discrete biological categories .
Nonetheless , many COVID-19 researchers have attempted to increase the conventionally low levels of participation of people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inherent biological differences among racial and ethnic groups .
Specifically , when articulating the importance of clinical trial participation , many COVID-19 researchers and the media have reported that vaccines or therapies risk being ineffective or unsafe for people of color if such groups are not involved in the trials .
For example , Anthony Fauci , director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and a key figure in the U.S. response to COVID-19 , stated , “ If you don ’ t have [ minorities ] represented in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have definitively proven that the vaccine is safe and effective in them.
” The goal of this rhetoric is to encourage nonwhite participants to sign up for COVID-19 trials and to bolster trust not only in research but also in the vaccines and therapies that become available to the public .
Black and Latinx individuals are often underrepresented in clinical research , and most researchers acknowledge that some members of these groups are mistrustful of research because of the medical establishment ’ s historical abuses of people of color .
Indeed , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up as potential vaccine research participants have been non-Hispanic whites , but research teams for the trials have nonetheless employed concerted outreach efforts to enroll Black and Latinx participants at higher rates than is typical for most research , but notably still at levels below the prevalence of COVID-19 in these populations .
Campaigns to increase diverse trial participation by mobilizing threats of missing out on safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines are undoubtedly well-meaning .
A video posted on the website of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ( FDA ) highlights a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ viewers that people like her need to enroll in research to “ make sure the medical products that come to the market work just as well for us as they do in other communities.
” However , the messaging that people of color must participate in research — using the language of a mandate , rather than an entreaty — to ensure they benefit from science reproduces dangerous medical assumptions about the “ Otherness ” of Black and Brown bodies .
For example , many physicians incorrectly believe that Black people have thicker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ susceptible to pain .
As a result , Black people have been much less likely to receive medical treatment and relief for all causes of pain compared to whites .
Assumptions of difference are encouraged by a tendency for physicians and the general public to conflate genetic ancestry with race .
For example , a higher prevalence of genetic diseases like sickle cell anemia in the Black population has led many to falsely conclude only Black people have the disease .
Despite the fact that the scientific community widely acknowledges that there is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ between them , popular conceptions of a disease as “ racial ” tend to reify race as a biological category , with all members of minority groups assumed to be the same biologically because of some shared physical characteristics .
These misconceptions set the stage for statements about how medical testing on people of color is necessary for the development of safe and effective vaccines and therapies for these groups .
At the same time , it ignores the critical fact that FDA approval can not guarantee that any product — vaccine , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and effective for anyone .
Blaming people of color for the failure of therapies to safely treat their illnesses if those groups are not involved in clinical trials is a perverse interpretation of the system ’ s failure to regulate adequately the for-profit industry developing medical products .
Racial health disparities in treatment outcomes result from a research enterprise aimed at meeting FDA standards for market approval , not generating knowledge for clinical practice .
Commercial clinical trials typically provide data that support a pharmaceutical company ’ s claim to the FDA that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ harms .
Such benefits are nearly always evaluated in comparison to a placebo , an inert substance that can help assess whether an investigational drug or vaccine is better than nothing .
Once drugs get to the market and are used in clinical practice , their treatment benefits are considerably more modest and the risks to patients from side effects are much greater .
Industry clinical trials regularly enroll participants who are not representative of the patient populations that will eventually be treated with FDA-approved drugs or vaccines .
Instead of “ typical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trial participants tend to be younger and healthier , meaning they are less likely to be complex patients with multiple illnesses in need of treatment .
For example , diabetes patients often struggle with other medical problems , including hypertension , cardiovascular disease and obesity , but clinical trials might exclude such patients when testing the safety and efficacy of a new diabetes medication .
Because they have different medical issues , trial participants under 65 with fewer comorbidities can not always provide data relevant to typical patient populations .
The result is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trial results , and this pattern contributes to health disparities by often having more significant effects on people of color .
For those focused on racial justice , the reason to attend to the messaging around clinical trial inclusion is simple : When patients do not seem to benefit from new medical treatments , it is wrong to assume that inherent differences stemming from their race and/or ethnicity are the cause .
There might be physiological differences between those patients and the clinical trial participants upon whom those treatments were tested , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other factors , such as co-morbidities , weight , age and access to health care — factors that apply to many white patients as well .
In many cases , patients of color may benefit less from FDA-approved treatments because they are sicker or have more advanced disease or health complications than their white counterparts — a trend facilitated , again , by racism and economic inequalities , not inherent biological differences .
The continued underrepresentation of people of color in most medical research nevertheless has important health equity implications .
Clinical trial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to those who enroll , albeit with concomitant risks , and it is essential from a social justice perspective for all members of society to have access to those benefits .
In the context of life-threatening illness with no available cures or treatments already on the market , clinical trials provide the possibility for therapeutic benefit that might not be otherwise available .
Many of the COVID-19 vaccine trials would fit into this category .
The possibility for health benefit explains the brisk recruitment of participants for these trials relative to most other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ benefits associated with clinical research often depend on who is funding the research and the scientific goals of the trials .
When discussing the stakes of minority participation in clinical trials , it is imperative to remember that medical research can not be monolithically characterized as a social good .
Instead of pushing for racial and ethnic diversity in all clinical trials , it is more important first to acknowledge that commercial science rarely meets the needs of most patients .
Not all medical research is designed to answer the important questions that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Not all medical research is aimed at developing novel therapies that are safer and more effective than what is already available .
Not all medical research is worthy of the time , energy and risk that it asks of participants .
Pharmaceutical companies are not transparent organizations , and their scientific agendas and communication with clinicians and the public are often guided by a desire to protect their intellectual property and make profits when and where they can .
Even — or especially — in the era of COVID-19 , an examination of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of clinical trials can help ensure that increased minority involvement will be more likely to meet the treatment needs and provide the most affordable therapies possible for those groups .
This underscores the need for COVID-19 clinical trials to reflect the risk factors for how and why Black , Latinx and Indigenous people have higher rates of infection , severe illness and death .
Recruitment of people of color should ensure that the clinical trial participants bear the same risk factors as the communities for which they stand in .
Therefore , racial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when it comes to age , income level , and other sociodemographic factors , with particular focus on enrolling elderly adults and medically complex patients , subpopulations upon which the virus has its most virulent effects .
Otherwise , the result could be the exploitation of higher COVID-19 risks in people of color to enable bad science , overly hyped medications and vaccines , and exorbitant profits for the pharmaceutical firms that succeed in bringing their products to market .
With the number of U.S. COVID-19 infections and deaths soaring and the recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about how to ensure fair distribution of the vaccines and how to encourage community members to get vaccinated have begun to overshadow previous concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy .
Vaccination will be an essential way to curb the pandemic and save lives .
However , there should be no doubt that approved vaccines will prove less efficacious than the numbers currently being touted by Pfizer , Moderna and AstraZeneca .
The vaccines will also inevitably lead to thousands , if not tens of thousands , of adverse reactions .
While these trends @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vaccines relative to their clinical trial data should not stop campaigns to vaccinate those most vulnerable to COVID-19 , it is also important to critically examine the clinical trial results and voice concern about legitimate safety issues .
The narrative that people of color should feel obligated to participate in medical research to ensure that any therapies or vaccines that come to market will “ work ” for them is ultimately one that supports the current racist social order .
Insufficient representation in medical research is not the root cause of racial and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not be the ultimate solution .
Medical research is particularly ill-suited to correcting those disparities when its reward structure is designed to generate profits for some and unequal access to therapies for others .
COVID-19 has upended practically everything , but medical research can not be made into an anti-racist institution merely by involving more racial and ethnic minorities in clinical trials .
At the very least , the pandemic should not be used to entrench racism more by biologizing differences that have clear social and economic causes .

The novel coronavirus and its devastating effects have starkly exposed U.S. racial and ethnic health disparities. Yet, despite ample evidence that health disparities are symptoms of social and economic inequalities resulting from a racist social system, narratives insisting on participation of marginalized people in clinical trials dangerously imply fundamental biological differences. Professional organizations, such as the American Medical Association, have taken the official stance that race and ethnicity are social constructs rather than discrete biological categories. Nonetheless, many COVID-19 researchers have attempted to increase the conventionally low levels of participation of people of color in clinical trials by implying inherent biological differences among racial and ethnic groups.
Specifically, when articulating the importance of clinical trial participation, many COVID-19 researchers and the media have reported that vaccines or therapies risk being ineffective or unsafe for people of color if such groups are not involved in the trials. For example, Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and a key figure in the U.S. response to COVID-19, stated, “If you don’t have [minorities] represented in the clinical trial, then you will not have definitively proven that the vaccine is safe and effective in them.”
The goal of this rhetoric is to encourage nonwhite participants to sign up for COVID-19 trials and to bolster trust not only in research but also in the vaccines and therapies that become available to the public. Black and Latinx individuals are often underrepresented in clinical research, and most researchers acknowledge that some members of these groups are mistrustful of research because of the medical establishment’s historical abuses of people of color. Indeed, the vast majority of individuals who have signed up as potential vaccine research participants have been non-Hispanic whites, but research teams for the trials have nonetheless employed concerted outreach efforts to enroll Black and Latinx participants at higher rates than is typical for most research, but notably still at levels below the prevalence of COVID-19 in these populations.
Campaigns to increase diverse trial participation by mobilizing threats of missing out on safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines are undoubtedly well-meaning. A video posted on the website of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) highlights a Black clinical trial participant who explains to viewers that people like her need to enroll in research to “make sure the medical products that come to the market work just as well for us as they do in other communities.” However, the messaging that people of color must participate in research — using the language of a mandate, rather than an entreaty — to ensure they benefit from science reproduces dangerous medical assumptions about the “Otherness” of Black and Brown bodies. For example, many physicians incorrectly believe that Black people have thicker skin than whites, making them less susceptible to pain. As a result, Black people have been much less likely to receive medical treatment and relief for all causes of pain compared to whites.
Assumptions of difference are encouraged by a tendency for physicians and the general public to conflate genetic ancestry with race. For example, a higher prevalence of genetic diseases like sickle cell anemia in the Black population has led many to falsely conclude only Black people have the disease. Despite the fact that the scientific community widely acknowledges that there is more genetic diversity within racial/ethnic groups than between them, popular conceptions of a disease as “racial” tend to reify race as a biological category, with all members of minority groups assumed to be the same biologically because of some shared physical characteristics. These misconceptions set the stage for statements about how medical testing on people of color is necessary for the development of safe and effective vaccines and therapies for these groups. At the same time, it ignores the critical fact that FDA approval cannot guarantee that any product — vaccine, drug or device — will be safe and effective for anyone. Blaming people of color for the failure of therapies to safely treat their illnesses if those groups are not involved in clinical trials is a perverse interpretation of the system’s failure to regulate adequately the for-profit industry developing medical products.
Racial health disparities in treatment outcomes result from a research enterprise aimed at meeting FDA standards for market approval, not generating knowledge for clinical practice. Commercial clinical trials typically provide data that support a pharmaceutical company’s claim to the FDA that their product has benefits that outweigh its harms. Such benefits are nearly always evaluated in comparison to a placebo, an inert substance that can help assess whether an investigational drug or vaccine is better than nothing. Once drugs get to the market and are used in clinical practice, their treatment benefits are considerably more modest and the risks to patients from side effects are much greater.
Blaming people of color for the failure of therapies to safely treat their illnesses if those groups are not involved in clinical trials is a perverse interpretation of the system’s failure to regulate adequately the for-profit industry developing medical products.
Industry clinical trials regularly enroll participants who are not representative of the patient populations that will eventually be treated with FDA-approved drugs or vaccines. Instead of “typical” patients who physicians might see, trial participants tend to be younger and healthier, meaning they are less likely to be complex patients with multiple illnesses in need of treatment. For example, diabetes patients often struggle with other medical problems, including hypertension, cardiovascular disease and obesity, but clinical trials might exclude such patients when testing the safety and efficacy of a new diabetes medication. Because they have different medical issues, trial participants under 65 with fewer comorbidities cannot always provide data relevant to typical patient populations. The result is that FDA-approved drugs routinely underperform their clinical trial results, and this pattern contributes to health disparities by often having more significant effects on people of color.
For those focused on racial justice, the reason to attend to the messaging around clinical trial inclusion is simple: When patients do not seem to benefit from new medical treatments, it is wrong to assume that inherent differences stemming from their race and/or ethnicity are the cause. There might be physiological differences between those patients and the clinical trial participants upon whom those treatments were tested, but the differences should generally be ascribed to other factors, such as co-morbidities, weight, age and access to health care — factors that apply to many white patients as well. In many cases, patients of color may benefit less from FDA-approved treatments because they are sicker or have more advanced disease or health complications than their white counterparts — a trend facilitated, again, by racism and economic inequalities, not inherent biological differences.
The continued underrepresentation of people of color in most medical research nevertheless has important health equity implications. Clinical trial participation has the potential to provide benefits to those who enroll, albeit with concomitant risks, and it is essential from a social justice perspective for all members of society to have access to those benefits. In the context of life-threatening illness with no available cures or treatments already on the market, clinical trials provide the possibility for therapeutic benefit that might not be otherwise available. Many of the COVID-19 vaccine trials would fit into this category. The possibility for health benefit explains the brisk recruitment of participants for these trials relative to most other therapeutic areas. However, the societal benefits associated with clinical research often depend on who is funding the research and the scientific goals of the trials.
Patients of color may benefit less from FDA-approved treatments because they are sicker or have more advanced health complications — a trend facilitated by racism and economic inequalities, not inherent biological differences.
When discussing the stakes of minority participation in clinical trials, it is imperative to remember that medical research cannot be monolithically characterized as a social good. Instead of pushing for racial and ethnic diversity in all clinical trials, it is more important first to acknowledge that commercial science rarely meets the needs of most patients. Not all medical research is designed to answer the important questions that clinicians need to treat their patients. Not all medical research is aimed at developing novel therapies that are safer and more effective than what is already available. Not all medical research is worthy of the time, energy and risk that it asks of participants. Pharmaceutical companies are not transparent organizations, and their scientific agendas and communication with clinicians and the public are often guided by a desire to protect their intellectual property and make profits when and where they can.
Even — or especially — in the era of COVID-19, an examination of how commercial interests play into the design of clinical trials can help ensure that increased minority involvement will be more likely to meet the treatment needs and provide the most affordable therapies possible for those groups. This underscores the need for COVID-19 clinical trials to reflect the risk factors for how and why Black, Latinx and Indigenous people have higher rates of infection, severe illness and death. Recruitment of people of color should ensure that the clinical trial participants bear the same risk factors as the communities for which they stand in. Therefore, racial diversity in trials must include in-group diversity when it comes to age, income level, and other sociodemographic factors, with particular focus on enrolling elderly adults and medically complex patients, subpopulations upon which the virus has its most virulent effects. Otherwise, the result could be the exploitation of higher COVID-19 risks in people of color to enable bad science, overly hyped medications and vaccines, and exorbitant profits for the pharmaceutical firms that succeed in bringing their products to market.
With the number of U.S. COVID-19 infections and deaths soaring and the recent FDA approval of two vaccines, questions about how to ensure fair distribution of the vaccines and how to encourage community members to get vaccinated have begun to overshadow previous concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy. Vaccination will be an essential way to curb the pandemic and save lives. However, there should be no doubt that approved vaccines will prove less efficacious than the numbers currently being touted by Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca. The vaccines will also inevitably lead to thousands, if not tens of thousands, of adverse reactions. While these trends in diminished safety and efficacy of approved vaccines relative to their clinical trial data should not stop campaigns to vaccinate those most vulnerable to COVID-19, it is also important to critically examine the clinical trial results and voice concern about legitimate safety issues.
The pandemic should not be used to entrench racism more by biologizing differences that have clear social and economic causes.
The narrative that people of color should feel obligated to participate in medical research to ensure that any therapies or vaccines that come to market will “work” for them is ultimately one that supports the current racist social order. Insufficient representation in medical research is not the root cause of racial and ethnic health disparities, so it cannot be the ultimate solution. Medical research is particularly ill-suited to correcting those disparities when its reward structure is designed to generate profits for some and unequal access to therapies for others. COVID-19 has upended practically everything, but medical research cannot be made into an anti-racist institution merely by involving more racial and ethnic minorities in clinical trials. At the very least, the pandemic should not be used to entrench racism more by biologizing differences that have clear social and economic causes.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-12-28--Rep. Ro Khanna Won’t Vote to Override Trump Veto on Defense Bill

Congress is set to override President Trump ’ s veto of the National Defense Authorization Act , the $ 740 billion annual defense policy bill that funds the U.S. military .
Trump vetoed the legislation last week over objections to liability protections for social media companies and because he did not want to rename military bases currently named for Confederate generals .
Democratic Congressmember Ro Khanna says Trump ’ s reasons for vetoing the bill are “ disingenuous , ” but that he will not be voting to override the veto .
“ The bottom line is $ 740 billion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” says Khanna .
“ The priorities are wrong.
” AMY GOODMAN : So , let ’ s go to a tweet you sent out earlier this month .
You wrote , “ If you vote for a bloated $ 740 billion defense budget , which [ is ] over 50 % of our discretionary budget , or the Trump $ 1.6 trillion tax cut , please save us the lectures about deficits .
You have no credibility.
” In addition to voting on the $ 2,000 checks to go out , both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s veto of the NDAA .
Can you explain what this is all about ?
REP. RO KHANNA : It ’ s very simple .
Trump has vetoed the defense bill , which would be $ 740 billion .
Now , his reasons for vetoing it are disingenuous .
He wants to strip tech companies of Section 230 protections , which , if you strip them of that , would really hurt speech on the internet .
This is not some thoughtful reform .
But the bottom line is , $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spending .
We ’ re spending money on aircrafts .
We ’ re spending money on the modernization of nuclear weapons .
And we can ’ t find money to get food in to people who need it ?
We can ’ t find money to get more rental assistance for folks who are going to face evictions ?
We can ’ t find money to get $ 2,000 into the pockets of Americans ?
The priorities are wrong , and so I ’ m not going to vote to override his veto @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Washington , where everyone ’ s flying back in because they don ’ t want something to happen where we don ’ t pass the defense budget at this bloated level .
But my view is , let ’ s really ask why we are spending so much money on defense when we have such other needs of national security .
One other point , Amy : The NIH actually has the ability to have universal viral detectors , to have antiviral treatments .
Why aren ’ t we funding that , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aircraft carriers ?
AMY GOODMAN : Speaking of this military bill , that you say you will break from the Democrats in voting to override , the Trump administration has formally notified Congress it intends to authorize the sale of nearly a half-billion dollars ’ worth of laser-guided bombs to Saudi Arabia .
Critics say the weapons could be used on civilians in Yemen .
In 2019 , Trump vetoed bipartisan legislation that would have blocked arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates .
Congressmember Ro Khanna , you have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yemen and the stopping of U.S.-backed Saudi-UAE war on the people of Yemen .
Can you comment on what that means , what you ’ re going to do about it , and the fact you recently told The Washington Post Biden should immediately reverse course if this deal goes through ?
REP. RO KHANNA : President-elect Biden must reverse course .
And I am convinced he will .
I think Tony Blinken , his secretary of state designee , understands the humanitarian crisis in Yemen and wants to make sure that we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first thing we need to do is stop supplying the Saudis not just with weapons , but also with any logistical support , intelligence support , that they can use to increase their offensive in Yemen .
And we need to support Martin Griffiths at the U.N. , who ’ s been doing a terrific job in bringing the parties together .
So , this is a last-ditch effort from Trump to reward the Saudis .
He ’ s had a pro-Saudi policy for four years .
It ’ s unfortunately led to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the world .
But that is going to end January 20th .
I have confidence , actually , in Tony Blinken and Jake Sullivan .
They understand the depths of this crisis , and they will work with Congress to help bring it to an end .
AMY GOODMAN : Let me ask you about COVID .
You represent California in Congress .
COVID is raging across the country , with cases now topping 19 million , over a third of a million deaths .
One in every thousand Americans has now died @ @ @ @ @ @ @ month in the U.S. since the start of the pandemic , as experts warn things will likely get worse with post-holiday season travel leading to new spikes .
Your state , California , becoming the first state to top 2 million cases last week , as hospitals in Southern California are reporting just a handful to no ICU beds available .
Congressman Ro Khanna , can you talk about what is happening now and what needs to happen ?
REP. RO KHANNA : Well , it ’ s tragic .
It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we ’ re losing over 3,000 Americans a day .
I would say there are four things that need to happen .
First , new leadership needs to set a new tone about the importance of wearing masks and social distancing .
It ’ s not just legislation .
Leadership matters .
I think President Biden will do that .
Second , we need an efficient and fair distribution system of the vaccines .
That remains our best bet .
Third , we need to continue to invest in testing and contact tracing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in many parts of the country .
And finally , we need massive investment in making sure people have healthcare .
There are people , you know , who are paying $ 200 for tests .
In fact , I had to pay — I had my family tested .
It cost $ 200 for each test .
Now , we can get it reimbursed by insurance , and some insurance does , some doesn ’ t .
We need to make sure that the testing and the healthcare related to COVID is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incentivize people to do that .
AMY GOODMAN : How do you think the issue of Medicare for All will play , when you have COVID , that has really exposed the racial economic disparities when it comes to healthcare , particularly that — you know , who has access , who doesn ’ t ?
This goes to issues from vaccine access to test access to mask access .
How you , a proponent of Medicare for All , can lead a new Congress and a Democratic administration , which , frankly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ veto Medicare for All — do you think you could change that , given what so many people in this country have understood ?
REP. RO KHANNA : I do .
Medicare for All now has become a moral imperative .
Here is the thing , Amy .
In this country ’ s history when we have had past crises , we usually respond with bold legislation .
When there was the Depression , we responded with bold legislation on the economy .
When we had civil rights movement and Dr. King , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We have now just had the greatest healthcare crisis , arguably , in the last hundred years .
It has exposed that people who don ’ t have healthcare are having worse outcomes , are facing either death or facing higher risk of illness .
It should be obvious that the solution is to have people have healthcare coverage from the day they are born .
That is what Medicare for All is .
We need to have a vote in the House of Representatives on Medicare for All .
We need to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we have to build consensus for it .
Now , people say , “ Well , the votes aren ’ t there .
The Senate votes aren ’ t there.
” If Franklin Roosevelt or Lyndon Johnson had thought that way , they would have never gotten anything done .
LBJ could have just said , “ Well , the Southern votes aren ’ t there .
Let ’ s never pass civil rights.
” That is not imaginative leadership .
The challenge is for us to build a consensus and the votes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to do it in this crisis , then when ?
AMY GOODMAN : Ro Khanna , we want to thank you for being with us , Democratic congressmember from California .
He represents Silicon Valley , a member of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform .
Next up , we look at how dozens of immigrant women detained by ICE at the Irwin County Detention Center in Georgia have joined a class-action lawsuit against ICE over allegations they were either forcibly sterilized or subjected to nonconsensual , invasive gynecological procedures .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ speak with a woman who alleges this and to Jamaica , the country of Jamaica , where another woman was deported after her surgery .
Stay with us .

Congress is set to override President Trump’s veto of the National Defense Authorization Act, the $740 billion annual defense policy bill that funds the U.S. military. Trump vetoed the legislation last week over objections to liability protections for social media companies and because he did not want to rename military bases currently named for Confederate generals. Democratic Congressmember Ro Khanna says Trump’s reasons for vetoing the bill are “disingenuous,” but that he will not be voting to override the veto. “The bottom line is $740 billion is way too much defense spending,” says Khanna. “The priorities are wrong.”
AMY GOODMAN: So, let’s go to a tweet you sent out earlier this month. You wrote, “If you vote for a bloated $740 billion defense budget, which [is] over 50% of our discretionary budget, or the Trump $1.6 trillion tax cut, please save us the lectures about deficits. You have no credibility.” In addition to voting on the $2,000 checks to go out, both houses of Congress are expected to overturn Trump’s veto of the NDAA. Can you explain what this is all about?
REP. RO KHANNA: It’s very simple. Trump has vetoed the defense bill, which would be $740 billion. Now, his reasons for vetoing it are disingenuous. He wants to strip tech companies of Section 230 protections, which, if you strip them of that, would really hurt speech on the internet. This is not some thoughtful reform.
But the bottom line is, $740 billion is way too much defense spending. We’re spending money on aircrafts. We’re spending money on the modernization of nuclear weapons. And we can’t find money to get food in to people who need it? We can’t find money to get more rental assistance for folks who are going to face evictions? We can’t find money to get $2,000 into the pockets of Americans?
The priorities are wrong, and so I’m not going to vote to override his veto. There’s almost a crisis in Washington, where everyone’s flying back in because they don’t want something to happen where we don’t pass the defense budget at this bloated level. But my view is, let’s really ask why we are spending so much money on defense when we have such other needs of national security.
One other point, Amy: The NIH actually has the ability to have universal viral detectors, to have antiviral treatments. Why aren’t we funding that, those programs, instead of buying more aircraft carriers?
AMY GOODMAN: Speaking of this military bill, that you say you will break from the Democrats in voting to override, the Trump administration has formally notified Congress it intends to authorize the sale of nearly a half-billion dollars’ worth of laser-guided bombs to Saudi Arabia. Critics say the weapons could be used on civilians in Yemen. In 2019, Trump vetoed bipartisan legislation that would have blocked arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Congressmember Ro Khanna, you have continually championed the issue of peace in Yemen and the stopping of U.S.-backed Saudi-UAE war on the people of Yemen. Can you comment on what that means, what you’re going to do about it, and the fact you recently told The Washington Post Biden should immediately reverse course if this deal goes through?
REP. RO KHANNA: President-elect Biden must reverse course. And I am convinced he will. I think Tony Blinken, his secretary of state designee, understands the humanitarian crisis in Yemen and wants to make sure that we bring it to an end.
The first thing we need to do is stop supplying the Saudis not just with weapons, but also with any logistical support, intelligence support, that they can use to increase their offensive in Yemen. And we need to support Martin Griffiths at the U.N., who’s been doing a terrific job in bringing the parties together.
So, this is a last-ditch effort from Trump to reward the Saudis. He’s had a pro-Saudi policy for four years. It’s unfortunately led to one of the greatest humanitarian crises in the world. But that is going to end January 20th. I have confidence, actually, in Tony Blinken and Jake Sullivan. They understand the depths of this crisis, and they will work with Congress to help bring it to an end.
AMY GOODMAN: Let me ask you about COVID. You represent California in Congress. COVID is raging across the country, with cases now topping 19 million, over a third of a million deaths. One in every thousand Americans has now died of COVID-19. December, the deadliest month in the U.S. since the start of the pandemic, as experts warn things will likely get worse with post-holiday season travel leading to new spikes. Your state, California, becoming the first state to top 2 million cases last week, as hospitals in Southern California are reporting just a handful to no ICU beds available. Congressman Ro Khanna, can you talk about what is happening now and what needs to happen?
REP. RO KHANNA: Well, it’s tragic. It’s unprecedented, unfathomable. I mean, we’re losing over 3,000 Americans a day. I would say there are four things that need to happen.
First, new leadership needs to set a new tone about the importance of wearing masks and social distancing. It’s not just legislation. Leadership matters. I think President Biden will do that.
Second, we need an efficient and fair distribution system of the vaccines. That remains our best bet.
Third, we need to continue to invest in testing and contact tracing. That still isn’t happening in many parts of the country.
And finally, we need massive investment in making sure people have healthcare. There are people, you know, who are paying $200 for tests. In fact, I had to pay — I had my family tested. It cost $200 for each test. Now, we can get it reimbursed by insurance, and some insurance does, some doesn’t. We need to make sure that the testing and the healthcare related to COVID is free, so that we can actually incentivize people to do that.
AMY GOODMAN: How do you think the issue of Medicare for All will play, when you have COVID, that has really exposed the racial economic disparities when it comes to healthcare, particularly that — you know, who has access, who doesn’t? This goes to issues from vaccine access to test access to mask access. How you, a proponent of Medicare for All, can lead a new Congress and a Democratic administration, which, frankly, President Biden has said he will veto Medicare for All — do you think you could change that, given what so many people in this country have understood?
REP. RO KHANNA: I do. Medicare for All now has become a moral imperative. Here is the thing, Amy. In this country’s history when we have had past crises, we usually respond with bold legislation. When there was the Depression, we responded with bold legislation on the economy. When we had civil rights movement and Dr. King, we responded with civil rights legislation.
We have now just had the greatest healthcare crisis, arguably, in the last hundred years. It has exposed that people who don’t have healthcare are having worse outcomes, are facing either death or facing higher risk of illness. It should be obvious that the solution is to have people have healthcare coverage from the day they are born. That is what Medicare for All is.
We need to have a vote in the House of Representatives on Medicare for All. We need to continue to advocate for it. And we have to build consensus for it. Now, people say, “Well, the votes aren’t there. The Senate votes aren’t there.” If Franklin Roosevelt or Lyndon Johnson had thought that way, they would have never gotten anything done. LBJ could have just said, “Well, the Southern votes aren’t there. Let’s never pass civil rights.” That is not imaginative leadership. The challenge is for us to build a consensus and the votes. And if we’re not going to do it in this crisis, then when?
AMY GOODMAN: Ro Khanna, we want to thank you for being with us, Democratic congressmember from California. He represents Silicon Valley, a member of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform.
Next up, we look at how dozens of immigrant women detained by ICE at the Irwin County Detention Center in Georgia have joined a class-action lawsuit against ICE over allegations they were either forcibly sterilized or subjected to nonconsensual, invasive gynecological procedures. We’ll go inside Irwin to speak with a woman who alleges this and to Jamaica, the country of Jamaica, where another woman was deported after her surgery. Stay with us.


truthout--2020-12-28--Sanders Says Trump Must Get GOP to Stop Blocking $2,000 Relief Checks

After President Donald Trump belatedly signed a $ 900 billion coronavirus relief package into law late Sunday , Democratic lawmakers and Sen. Bernie Sanders turned their attention to an upcoming vote on stand-alone legislation that would increase the one-time direct payments in the aid measure from $ 600 to $ 2,000 .
The Democrat-controlled House of Representatives will attempt to pass the $ 2,000 payments bill on Monday ; if successful , the onus will be on the Republican-controlled Senate to either block or approve the legislation to send larger checks to millions of struggling Americans .
The push for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ both Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock , Democratic Senate candidates vying to unseat Republican Sens .
David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler in the January 5 Georgia runoffs .
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ( D-N.Y. ) said late Sunday that he will move to pass the $ 2,000 payments if the House approves the bill on Monday .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) has not publicly committed to allowing a vote on the Democratic measure .
In a statement late Sunday , House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on congressional Republicans to end their obstruction and to join him and Democrats in support of our stand-alone legislation to increase direct payment checks to $ 2,000.
” “ Every Republican vote against this bill , ” said Pelosi , “ is a vote to deny the financial hardship that families face and to deny the American people the relief they need.
” As the Washington Post ’ s Mike DeBonis pointed out on Twitter , Pelosi is bringing the $ 2,000 payments bill to the floor via suspension of House rules , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two-thirds vote for passage .
The House vote will come days after the chamber ’ s Republicans blocked a Democratic attempt to approve the $ 2,000 direct payments by unanimous consent on Christmas Eve .
The proposed $ 2,000 direct payments would meet one of several demands Trump issued after the relief legislation cleared both the House and Senate last week .
The president ’ s objections to the relief bill — and to the sprawling government funding legislation to which it was attached — held up the package for days , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Americans a full week of unemployment benefits .
After signing the package into law on Sunday , Trump said in a statement that he is demanding the removal of “ wasteful items ” from the legislation as well as the inclusion of larger checks .
“ Congress has promised that Section 230 , which so unfairly benefits Big Tech at the expense of the American people , will be reviewed and either be terminated or substantially reformed , ” Trump claimed .
“ Likewise , the House and Senate have agreed to focus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which took place in the November 3 presidential election .
The Senate will start the process for a vote that increases checks to $ 2,000 , repeals Section 230 , and starts an investigation into voter fraud.
” McConnell applauded Trump for signing the relief legislation but did not comment on the president ’ s push for significant changes to the bill or his call for a probe into baseless allegations of voter fraud .
In a tweet late Sunday , Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) — who has been campaigning for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said that “ Trump must get Mitch McConnell and his Republican friends in the Senate to pass legislation to provide $ 2,000 in direct payments to the working class.
” “ The House must pass this legislation tomorrow and the Senate must quickly follow suit , ” said the Vermont senator .
“ Let ’ s get this done — NOW !
” This story has been updated with procedural details on the upcoming House vote .

The House on Monday will attempt to pass legislation to increase the direct payments in the aid measure to $2,000.
After President Donald Trump belatedly signed a $900 billion coronavirus relief package into law late Sunday, Democratic lawmakers and Sen. Bernie Sanders turned their attention to an upcoming vote on stand-alone legislation that would increase the one-time direct payments in the aid measure from $600 to $2,000.
The Democrat-controlled House of Representatives will attempt to pass the $2,000 payments bill on Monday; if successful, the onus will be on the Republican-controlled Senate to either block or approve the legislation to send larger checks to millions of struggling Americans. The push for $2,000 checks has been embraced by both Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock, Democratic Senate candidates vying to unseat Republican Sens. David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler in the January 5 Georgia runoffs.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said late Sunday that he will move to pass the $2,000 payments if the House approves the bill on Monday. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has not publicly committed to allowing a vote on the Democratic measure.
“No Democrats will object,” said Schumer. “Will Senate Republicans?”
In a statement late Sunday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said that “the president must immediately call on congressional Republicans to end their obstruction and to join him and Democrats in support of our stand-alone legislation to increase direct payment checks to $2,000.”
“Every Republican vote against this bill,” said Pelosi, “is a vote to deny the financial hardship that families face and to deny the American people the relief they need.”
As the Washington Post’s Mike DeBonis pointed out on Twitter, Pelosi is bringing the $2,000 payments bill to the floor via suspension of House rules, which accelerates the process but requires a two-thirds vote for passage.
>@SpeakerPelosi says Trump needs to “immediately call on Congressional Republicans to end their obstruction” — which is true, because Dems are bringing up the $2K checks bill under suspension of the rules — i.e., needs 2/3rds (a lot of R votes) to pass. pic.twitter.com/9b9ejk4Zdp — Mike DeBonis (@mikedebonis) December 28, 2020
The House vote will come days after the chamber’s Republicans blocked a Democratic attempt to approve the $2,000 direct payments by unanimous consent on Christmas Eve.
Now let’s pass $2,000 survival checks that put money directly in people’s pockets. https://t.co/4DRb7cFFIL — Rep. Pramila Jayapal (@RepJayapal) December 28, 2020
The proposed $2,000 direct payments would meet one of several demands Trump issued after the relief legislation cleared both the House and Senate last week. The president’s objections to the relief bill — and to the sprawling government funding legislation to which it was attached — held up the package for days, a delay that will likely cost millions of Americans a full week of unemployment benefits.
After signing the package into law on Sunday, Trump said in a statement that he is demanding the removal of “wasteful items” from the legislation as well as the inclusion of larger checks.
“Congress has promised that Section 230, which so unfairly benefits Big Tech at the expense of the American people, will be reviewed and either be terminated or substantially reformed,” Trump claimed. “Likewise, the House and Senate have agreed to focus strongly on the very substantial voter fraud which took place in the November 3 presidential election. The Senate will start the process for a vote that increases checks to $2,000, repeals Section 230, and starts an investigation into voter fraud.”
McConnell applauded Trump for signing the relief legislation but did not comment on the president’s push for significant changes to the bill or his call for a probe into baseless allegations of voter fraud.
In a tweet late Sunday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) — who has been campaigning for $2,000 relief checks since March — said that “Trump must get Mitch McConnell and his Republican friends in the Senate to pass legislation to provide $2,000 in direct payments to the working class.”
“The House must pass this legislation tomorrow and the Senate must quickly follow suit,” said the Vermont senator. “Let’s get this done — NOW!”
This story has been updated with procedural details on the upcoming House vote.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-12-28--Trump Is Humiliated and More Dangerous Than Ever

More than 10,000 people in the U.S. died from COVID-19 in the time between when Donald Trump blew up the stimulus bill and when he finally signed it .
No , he doesn ’ t care about that .
The millions of people desperate for unemployment assistance , along with millions more in peril of eviction are nowhere on his mind , either .
The economic crash that would have come after a simultaneous stimulus bill collapse , an eviction eruption and a government shutdown in the middle of a pandemic ?
Not of concern .
The terrible disruption in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the federal government ?
Whatever .
As the tension over Trump ’ s refusal to act reached peak intensity , Republican Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania finally found his voice amid the muted GOP amen chorus .
If Trump fails to sign the dual relief/shutdown bill , said Toomey , “ he ’ ll be remembered for chaos and misery and erratic behavior if he allows this to expire.
” Senator Toomey , I do believe that ship has sailed .
Trump wanted his name in the papers , and that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and uncertainty was dropped on a nation already coiled in fear and uncertainty .
It was an act of sadism , the deliberate infliction of pain on a population already on its knees .
Folks need help badly , and instead they got the back of Trump ’ s orange little hand , again .
For the record , the man had no interest in seeing those direct payments increased to $ 2,000 .
This was a demand for another witless act of loyalty by congressional Republicans ; further , it draws a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s refusal to disburse more funds directly to the people .
This was , of course , deliberate .
Speaker Pelosi dreams of being able to box in the GOP the way Trump has over the last week .
The “ pork ” in the bill Trump denounced was in fact a laundry list of items from his 2018 budget proposal which his administration requested be included in this legislation .
Congress did as he requested and added the items to the stimulus , I suspect , to guarantee Trump ’ s signature @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were dealing with .
The cruelty is the point , The Atlantic ’ s Adam Serwer astutely observed in October 2018 , back when we innocently thought it couldn ’ t get any worse .
“ The Trump era is such a whirlwind of cruelty that it can be hard to keep track , ” he wrote .
Indeed , the latest chapter in this long book of deliberate pain now involves the 14 million people in need of unemployment assistance who were left to dangle , and dangle still , because of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did not sign the bill on Saturday , ” reports CNN , “ those in the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance and the Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation programs will likely not receive a payment for the final week of the year .
And the $ 300 federal enhancement may only last 10 weeks instead of 11 weeks for most folks .
That ’ s because states can ’ t provide benefits for weeks that start before programs are authorized , but the legislation calls for the extra payments to end on March 14.
” The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A nonsense signing statement claiming all sorts of considerations he wrung from Congress before signing is just that : Nonsense .
He wants them to investigate election fraud , repeal Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and demands that they strongly consider making those direct payments $ 2,000 .
Mitch McConnell , in his own statement thanking Trump for his signature , made no mention of these concessions .
That means , for all practical purposes , they do not exist .
“ Trump got taken to the cleaners , ” reports @ @ @ @ @ @ @ embarrassing episode for the president .
He opposed a bill his administration negotiated .
He had no discernible strategy and no hand to play — and it showed .
He folded , and got nothing besides a few days of attention and chaos .
People waiting for aid got a few days of frightening uncertainty… .
This is probably the most fitting coda to Trump ’ s presidency , and a neat encapsulation of his relationship with Congress .
He never cared to understand the place and was disengaged from its work .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , scratching their heads — at your genius about this one for a while , Mr. President.
” Why is Trump ’ s humiliation the worst part of all this ?
Surely , if any human being ever deserved a dollop of comeuppance on their menu , it is this small fraction of a man .
It is the worst part because of who and what we are dealing with .
Trump will continue to be among the most powerful people on Earth for three weeks and a day .
He has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and all for absolutely nothing except a few days of bad attention .
People of his bilious temperament are not known for going quietly under the best of circumstances , and for Trump , these circumstances are intolerable .
Compounding this defeat , the House and Senate have returned to Washington , D.C. , and their first order of business is an override of Trump ’ s veto of the defense authorization bill .
They have the votes , and most congressional Republicans are not willing to mess with military money , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If the veto override succeeds on the heels of his disgraceful behavior with the stimulus bill , Trump will not sit still and take his medicine .
He will see betrayal on every Republican face and react like Vesuvius .
There are still many ways for him to pull the building down before he ’ s gone , and if I know the man like I think I do , he will try every one of them before he leaves or is removed .
That cramp in your stomach ( and mine ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ little while longer .

Trump has been publicly shamed and routed off the field, and all for absolutely nothing but a few days of bad attention.
More than 10,000 people in the U.S. died from COVID-19 in the time between when Donald Trump blew up the stimulus bill and when he finally signed it. No, he doesn’t care about that.
The millions of people desperate for unemployment assistance, along with millions more in peril of eviction are nowhere on his mind, either.
The economic crash that would have come after a simultaneous stimulus bill collapse, an eviction eruption and a government shutdown in the middle of a pandemic? Not of concern.
The terrible disruption in vaccine distribution if the lights went out in the federal government? Whatever.
As the tension over Trump’s refusal to act reached peak intensity, Republican Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania finally found his voice amid the muted GOP amen chorus. If Trump fails to sign the dual relief/shutdown bill, said Toomey, “he’ll be remembered for chaos and misery and erratic behavior if he allows this to expire.”
Senator Toomey, I do believe that ship has sailed.
Trump wanted his name in the papers, and that’s why this long week of fear and uncertainty was dropped on a nation already coiled in fear and uncertainty. It was an act of sadism, the deliberate infliction of pain on a population already on its knees. Folks need help badly, and instead they got the back of Trump’s orange little hand, again.
For the record, the man had no interest in seeing those direct payments increased to $2,000. This was a demand for another witless act of loyalty by congressional Republicans; further, it draws a bright red circle around the GOP’s refusal to disburse more funds directly to the people. This was, of course, deliberate. Speaker Pelosi dreams of being able to box in the GOP the way Trump has over the last week.
The “pork” in the bill Trump denounced was in fact a laundry list of items from his 2018 budget proposal which his administration requested be included in this legislation. Congress did as he requested and added the items to the stimulus, I suspect, to guarantee Trump’s signature. Ha. They forgot who they were dealing with.
The cruelty is the point, The Atlantic’s Adam Serwer astutely observed in October 2018, back when we innocently thought it couldn’t get any worse. “The Trump era is such a whirlwind of cruelty that it can be hard to keep track,” he wrote. Indeed, the latest chapter in this long book of deliberate pain now involves the 14 million people in need of unemployment assistance who were left to dangle, and dangle still, because of the delayed signing.
More than 10,000 people died from COVID-19 in the U.S. in the time between when Donald Trump blew up the stimulus bill and when he finally signed it.
“Because Trump did not sign the bill on Saturday,” reports CNN, “those in the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance and the Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation programs will likely not receive a payment for the final week of the year. And the $300 federal enhancement may only last 10 weeks instead of 11 weeks for most folks. That’s because states can’t provide benefits for weeks that start before programs are authorized, but the legislation calls for the extra payments to end on March 14.”
The worst part? Trump stands humiliated. A nonsense signing statement claiming all sorts of considerations he wrung from Congress before signing is just that: Nonsense. He wants them to investigate election fraud, repeal Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and demands that they strongly consider making those direct payments $2,000. Mitch McConnell, in his own statement thanking Trump for his signature, made no mention of these concessions. That means, for all practical purposes, they do not exist.
“Trump got taken to the cleaners,” reports Politico. “What a bizarre, embarrassing episode for the president. He opposed a bill his administration negotiated. He had no discernible strategy and no hand to play — and it showed. He folded, and got nothing besides a few days of attention and chaos. People waiting for aid got a few days of frightening uncertainty…. This is probably the most fitting coda to Trump’s presidency, and a neat encapsulation of his relationship with Congress. He never cared to understand the place and was disengaged from its work. They’ll be laughing — er, scratching their heads — at your genius about this one for a while, Mr. President.”
Why is Trump’s humiliation the worst part of all this? Surely, if any human being ever deserved a dollop of comeuppance on their menu, it is this small fraction of a man.
It is the worst part because of who and what we are dealing with. Trump will continue to be among the most powerful people on Earth for three weeks and a day. He has been publicly shamed and routed off the field, and all for absolutely nothing except a few days of bad attention. People of his bilious temperament are not known for going quietly under the best of circumstances, and for Trump, these circumstances are intolerable.
Compounding this defeat, the House and Senate have returned to Washington, D.C., and their first order of business is an override of Trump’s veto of the defense authorization bill. They have the votes, and most congressional Republicans are not willing to mess with military money, even if it means defying Trump.
If the veto override succeeds on the heels of his disgraceful behavior with the stimulus bill, Trump will not sit still and take his medicine. He will see betrayal on every Republican face and react like Vesuvius. There are still many ways for him to pull the building down before he’s gone, and if I know the man like I think I do, he will try every one of them before he leaves or is removed. That cramp in your stomach (and mine) is going to be there for a little while longer.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-12-28--Fauci and Other Health Officials Warn of Post-Holiday Coronavirus Spike

The United States will most likely experience a “ post-seasonal ” spike in coronavirus infections largely due to holiday travel and gatherings , current and former U.S. health officials said on Sunday .
“ We very well might see a post-seasonal — in the sense of Christmas , New Year ’ s — surge… a surge upon a surge , ” said Dr. Anthony Fauci , director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and an incoming chief medical adviser to President-elect Joe Biden , on CNN ’ s “ State of the Union.
” “ We ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” he warned .
“ I share the concern of President-elect Biden that , as we get into the next few weeks , it might actually get worse , ” Fauci added , referring to Biden ’ s prediction earlier this week that “ our darkest days in the battle against Covid-19 are ahead of us , not behind us.
” U.S .
Surgeon General Jerome Adams also said that a post-holiday infection surge was likely .
“ But what the important thing for people to understand is that even if you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you just throw your hands up in the air and say , oh well , ” he said on ABC ’ s “ This Week.
” “ There are measures that you can take , ” said Adams , including getting tested , self-quarantining , and avoiding vulnerable people such as the elderly and those with pre-existing conditions .
Former U.S. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Scott Gottlieb , appearing on CBS “ Face the Nation , ” predicted “ a grim month.
” “ We have a very difficult month ahead of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ California , Massachusetts , New York , and New Jersey as places “ where cases are still building.
” When asked how long it will be until the nation sees results from the two vaccines which have been administered to some 1.9 million Americans and counting , Gottlieb said that while vaccinations are “ going to take about three weeks to get through all the nursing homes , ” there will be “ some indication ” that mass inoculation is “ probably having an effect maybe as early as this week.
” Fauci @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ herd immunity ” — the effective neutralization of the virus following the infection or vaccination of enough people — 70 % to 85 % of the public would likely need to be inoculated .
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported 179,104 new coronavirus infections and 1,309 new daily deaths on Sunday , for a total of 18.9 million U.S. infections and 330,901 Covid-19 deaths during the nine-month pandemic .
The health experts ’ warnings came the morning after Trump refused to sign a $ 900 billion pandemic relief bill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Americans to expire and threatening millions more with eviction as a federal moratorium was set to expire at the end of the year .
Trump acquiesced to bipartisan pressure and later on Sunday signed a $ 2.3 trillion Covid-19 relief and spending bill that will provide vaccine distribution , unemployment , small business , and airline company assistance , and fund the U.S. government through September 2021 .

The health experts’ warnings came the morning after Trump refused to sign a $900 billion pandemic relief bill.
The United States will most likely experience a “post-seasonal” spike in coronavirus infections largely due to holiday travel and gatherings, current and former U.S. health officials said on Sunday.
“We very well might see a post-seasonal — in the sense of Christmas, New Year’s — surge… a surge upon a surge,” said Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and an incoming chief medical adviser to President-elect Joe Biden, on CNN’s “State of the Union.”
“We’re really at a very critical point,” he warned.
“I share the concern of President-elect Biden that, as we get into the next few weeks, it might actually get worse,” Fauci added, referring to Biden’s prediction earlier this week that “our darkest days in the battle against Covid-19 are ahead of us, not behind us.”
U.S. Surgeon General Jerome Adams also said that a post-holiday infection surge was likely.
“But what the important thing for people to understand is that even if you traveled, it doesn’t mean you just throw your hands up in the air and say, oh well,” he said on ABC’s “This Week.”
“There are measures that you can take,” said Adams, including getting tested, self-quarantining, and avoiding vulnerable people such as the elderly and those with pre-existing conditions.
Former U.S. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, appearing on CBS “Face the Nation,” predicted “a grim month.”
“We have a very difficult month ahead of us,” he said, identifying California, Massachusetts, New York, and New Jersey as places “where cases are still building.”
When asked how long it will be until the nation sees results from the two vaccines which have been administered to some 1.9 million Americans and counting, Gottlieb said that while vaccinations are “going to take about three weeks to get through all the nursing homes,” there will be “some indication” that mass inoculation is “probably having an effect maybe as early as this week.”
More than 4.4 million Covid vaccines have been provided across the world (that we know of). That includes, in doses:
1.9 million in the U.S.
1 million in China
600,000+ in the UK Here’s a breakdown from @BBGVisualData https://t.co/tGqjSA83Hp pic.twitter.com/JSAX4V8BPc — Kristine Servando (@tinssoldier) December 28, 2020
Fauci told CNN that in order to achieve “herd immunity” — the effective neutralization of the virus following the infection or vaccination of enough people — 70% to 85% of the public would likely need to be inoculated.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported 179,104 new coronavirus infections and 1,309 new daily deaths on Sunday, for a total of 18.9 million U.S. infections and 330,901 Covid-19 deaths during the nine-month pandemic.
The health experts’ warnings came the morning after Trump refused to sign a $900 billion pandemic relief bill, allowing unemployment coverage for millions of Americans to expire and threatening millions more with eviction as a federal moratorium was set to expire at the end of the year.
Trump acquiesced to bipartisan pressure and later on Sunday signed a $2.3 trillion Covid-19 relief and spending bill that will provide vaccine distribution, unemployment, small business, and airline company assistance, and fund the U.S. government through September 2021.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.