truthout--2020-12-17--US COVID-19 Deaths and Infections Shatter Records During Vaccine Rollout

As the “ very exciting ” rollout of the COVID-19 vaccine distribution gets underway in the United States , Dr. Ashish Jha , dean of the Brown University School of Public Health , says the country is still experiencing “ astronomical ” numbers of new infections and deaths .
“ We ’ ve just had a federal government that has given up on any efforts to try and control the pandemic , ” he says .
“ What we have to do is get through the next few months with basic public health measures until vaccines become widely available and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there is no reason to let up whatsoever.
” This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : This is Democracy Now !
, democracynow.org , The Quarantine Report .
I ’ m Amy Goodman , with Nermeen Shaikh .
The United States has once again shattered global records for daily coronavirus cases and deaths , with nearly a quarter-million infections reported on Wednesday alone .
More than 3,600 Americans died of COVID-19 Wednesday , by far the worst one-day death toll for any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This comes as Politico reports former Trump appointee Paul Alexander repeatedly urged officials at the Department of Health and Human Services to deliberately allow tens of millions of Americans to become infected with coronavirus , promoting a widely discredited approach of herd immunity through natural infection .
In one email to top health officials , Alexander wrote , quote , “ Infants , kids , teens , young people , young adults , middle aged with no conditions etc .
have zero to little risk … so we use them to develop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Alexander said .
The approach has been condemned by the World Health Organization as highly unethical , with disease experts saying it could result in the deaths of millions of people .
This comes as Trump ’ s ally , the former New Jersey governor , Chris Christie , is urging Americans to wear masks , citing his hospitalization with COVID-19 in October after a superspreader event at the White House .
Christie spoke in a video posted to his Twitter account .
AMY GOODMAN : While he was hospitalized with COVID-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chris Christie was treated with a monoclonal antibody therapy produced by Eli Lilly , a promising drug that ’ s in extremely short supply .
Christie ’ s VIP treatment came after he reportedly turned down a chance to participate in a clinical trial for a separate antibody drug , produced by Regeneron , because he was unwilling to accept the chance that he could receive a placebo .
To discuss all of this and more , we ’ re joined by Dr. Ashish Jha .
He ’ s dean of the Brown @ @ @ @ @ @ @ director of Harvard University ’ s Global Health Institute .
Welcome back to Democracy Now !
, Dr. Jha .
All over this country , I mean , all of the corporate media , you see the celebrations of people getting that vaccine in their arm , the idea that the pandemic is over .
But at the same time , in that split screen , the numbers are going up astronomically , not only for this country , the wealthiest country in the world .
We have the worst numbers in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it does matter that people still wear masks and will probably have to for a very long time — the very reason your son says you ’ re boring on television , because you keep saying the same thing ?
DR. ASHISH JHA : Yes .
Good morning , and thank you for having me on .
I am a little boring on television , because I have a certain set of messages , based on public health , of where we are .
But let ’ s talk about where we are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ look , so , first of all , the vaccine news is very exciting .
It is worth celebrating .
It ’ s terrific .
But it does come at the same time that we are seeing just astronomical numbers of infections and deaths .
We ’ ve crossed 300,000 deaths .
We are going across 400,000 deaths probably around the time of the inauguration .
And the question is : When does this stop ?
And there are two reasons that have gotten us here , right ?
I mean , first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just had a federal government that has given up on any efforts to try to control the pandemic .
We haven ’ t heard from the president about it .
Scott Atlas , who is a very big believer in letting the infection spread widely , was running the show out of the White House until very , very recently .
So we ’ ve had that failure .
And then , the second is the political division that all of this has created , that has undermined mask-wearing .
The idea that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is absurd .
So , that ’ s where we are .
And what we have to do is get through the next few months with basic public health measures , until vaccines become widely available and widely adopted .
Until that time , there is no reason to let up whatsoever .
NERMEEN SHAIKH : And , Dr. Jha , could you explain what we know so far about asymptomatic spread from people who have been vaccinated , and when you expect to hear more ?
There hasn ’ t been very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t enough known , about how much people can spread the virus even if they have been vaccinated .
DR. ASHISH JHA : Yeah .
So , this is a critical issue , because if people can still spread after vaccination , then we don ’ t get the sort of population immunity benefits of the vaccine .
Until a few days ago , we had really no data whatsoever .
But a few days ago , in the release of data that came from the FDA from the — sorry , from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is , after one dose , spread of asymptomatic virus sort of drops by about two-thirds .
I suspect it ’ s even more after the second dose .
But we don ’ t have that data .
So we ’ re still sorting it out , but I am becoming more optimistic that we are going to see a substantial decline in asymptomatic spread among people who have been vaccinated .
NERMEEN SHAIKH : And , Dr. Jha , as you mentioned , a significant number , the vast majority of Americans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we reach anything like herd immunity .
But , of course , vaccine hesitancy remains a problem , though .
According to the Kaiser Family Foundation , which just conducted a poll in late November , early December , the number of Americans who are willing to take the vaccine is higher , but it may still not be sufficient .
And vaccine hesitancy remains highest among Republicans , according to this poll .
Could you talk about your concerns regarding people not taking the vaccine even once it ’ s available to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , absolutely .
So , vaccines only work , and their main benefits come , when a large majority of us take the vaccines .
I mean , again , there is some , obviously , individual protection , but it ’ s really about population protection , community protection , that matters most .
It ’ s true about , depending on the survey , between , let ’ s say , 30 and 40 % of Americans remain hesitant .
I think some of that hesitancy I understand completely .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Americans have questions about the safety and efficacy of these vaccines .
I think some of that will melt away as people see more and more people getting vaccinated , people doing well after the vaccination .
I think some of that will get better .
I think the issue around Republicans is concerning because there has been this campaign of misinformation that has tended to stick more to the right-wing media , from hydroxychloroquine to how masks are dangerous and to how the election was stolen , to now there ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or dangerous .
It ’ s really troubling .
And this is why I ’ ve been calling on President Trump to get vaccinated on national television .
I think that will help a lot .
But we also need Republican leaders , conservative leaders to speak up and get vaccinated and talk about the fruits of science that really are available to the American people .
I think only through them speaking up will we make progress on this .
And it ’ s absolutely true we need to get to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if our goal is to return to any semblance of a new normal .
If that doesn ’ t happen , then we will continue to have to have measures that will make life difficult and not where we want to be .
AMY GOODMAN : I mean , what ’ s amazing about Trump is he wanted to call it , you know , “ getting trumped ” or the “ Trump vaccine , ” very proud of Operation Warp Speed and how fast this happened , and yet he is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s a COVID conspiracy , and so clearly he is conflicted .
The Trump vaccine would be solving what problem ?
Calling it a hoax .
But I want to ask you about , last month , Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Dr. Ben Carson saying he had been desperately ill with COVID-19 but was recovering .
Carson said his condition improved at Walter Reed Medical Center after President Trump intervened on his behalf .
Carson wrote on Facebook , “ President Trump was following my condition and cleared me for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ received , which I am convinced saved my life.
” Now , Carson is just one of a handful of people able to access Regeneron ’ s therapeutic before the FDA granted the drug emergency use authorization last month .
Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani also received the treatment during his battle with coronavirus this month , leading to concerns that those with connections to the White House are getting access to these special treatments largely unattainable to the rest of the population .
Then you have Chris Christie , who didn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concerned that , you know , it was very effective , the treatment , and he didn ’ t want to end up with the placebo .
Can you talk about these therapeutics and who gets access to them ?
DR. ASHISH JHA : Yeah , absolutely .
And all of those examples you brought up are incredibly frustrating in the following way .
So , I have been watching the data on monoclonal antibodies .
I ’ m pretty optimistic that they will end up being a really important part of how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
What has happened is , these leaders have not followed public health measures , have gotten infected , and then they get access to these therapies that most Americans don ’ t have .
And part of the reason most Americans don ’ t have them is because we didn ’ t do an Operation Warp Speed for therapeutics the way we should have .
And so , these people get access to a relatively limited supply of therapies .
They get better .
And then they go , basically , make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ big deal .
And it ’ s incredibly destructive , in some ways , because , basically , it creates this impression that COVID is not a big deal .
Well , it may not be as big of a deal if you had access to world-class therapies , including things that are not accessible to most of us .
And so , I wish that that cycle would stop .
I wish we would have more of these therapies available for everybody .
And I think I wish that these individuals would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ something that most Americans don ’ t have access to .
NERMEEN SHAIKH : And , Dr. Jha , I wanted to ask you about what the FDA reported yesterday , namely , that the Pfizer vials appear to include as much as — as many as two additional doses per vial .
Could you talk about that and that fact that it could increase the vaccine doses available to Americans by 40 % ?
DR. ASHISH JHA : Yeah .
This is a surprise , and a pleasant one at that .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ with five doses .
And there ’ s a pretty long history of filling vials a little bit extra to deal with things like spillage or , you know , just that the withdrawing of the vaccine may not be perfect by the pharmacism , so that people always fill up a little extra on these things .
And what we ’ re finding is , at least some pharmacists have reported , that up to two extra doses in a five-vial dose — five-dose vial may be available .
I think this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that — and the FDA has basically said people should — pharmacists should feel encouraged to use those extra doses to vaccinate extra people .
Obviously , given what limited supply of vaccines we have , given the urgent need to vaccinate as many people as possible , I think this is terrific .
And we just have to pay close attention , but I certainly don ’ t see any downside to doing this .
AMY GOODMAN : I have a very quick double question , and that is the issue of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ apparently is for people aged 18 and above .
The Pfizer is age 16 and above .
How are kids , from infants to children to teenagers , tested ?
I mean , how does a parent say , “ I ’ m willing to give up my kid to be tested , ” number one ?
And what do you see happening with these age groups ?
And the other goes to the issue of what happens to the tests that are taking place right now , that are so invaluable ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t actually follow them in a systematic , scientific way where you can get information , just anecdotal — someone got Bell ’ s palsy , someone else got a rash .
How do these studies continue ?
Because people aren ’ t going to want to risk — like Chris Christie , not want to risk getting a placebo .
DR. ASHISH JHA : Yeah .
So , there are several issues here , so let ’ s talk about kids in general and then talk about kind of follow-up studies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the Pfizer vaccine was tested in 16- and 17-year-olds , not in large numbers .
So , that ’ s why , for instance , the FDA vote that happened by the advisory committee , a few people voted no , because they just said there wasn ’ t enough data on 16- and 17-year-olds .
But most people voted yes for even that age group .
And the Moderna vaccine has not been yet tested in 16- and 17-year-olds .
So , my general take is , certainly when you talk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , even 15-year-olds , again , let ’ s wait for the data , and we should follow the FDA guidance , but I don ’ t expect big biological differences between older teenagers and young adults .
Where it gets more complicated is in younger children .
And what we need , really , there is just the studies to be done .
Kids are getting enrolled in clinical trials now , because they ’ re so far away from being in the front of the line for getting a vaccine that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be testing this in kids .
There are always ethical issues of testing things in children .
Obviously , you need parental consent .
You need to have as much kid consent as possible .
These vaccines appear to be very safe overall , so I ’ m not as worried about it .
But I do think , over the next couple of months , we are going to see data coming out about younger children .
And that will be very helpful , and it will guide us in the decision-making @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part of your question , Amy , around the issue of kind of post-market surveillance , this idea that : What do we do now that we ’ re starting to vaccinate people ?
We can ’ t follow them in studies .
There is a whole mechanism set up so that if people have adverse events , that they will report it to their doctor , and their doctor will then report it into the FDA , that there are very active surveillance programs that exist for people who are getting vaccinated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now of tracking people who have been vaccinated to see how they ’ re doing .
So , I am hopeful that if there are other events , adverse events , that start happening , that we ’ ll catch them pretty early .
I doubt they will , but we should be absolutely tracking this .
And there ’ s a whole set of stuff happening now to make sure that we don ’ t lose out on all that information about what happens to people after they get vaccinated .
NERMEEN @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you mentioned earlier the importance of the vast majority of Americans getting the vaccine in order to reach anything like herd immunity .
Could you talk about that in the global context ?
We just spoke earlier in the program about a large number of people in the world — in fact , the majority — potentially not getting access to the vaccine ’ til 2024 in developing countries .
DR. ASHISH JHA : Yeah , I guess I am , by the way , more optimistic in terms of timeline than that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are going to see , in much of 2021 , a set of countries where most people have been vaccinated and a set of countries where most people have not been vaccinated .
And that , I think , is a real problem .
It ’ s certainly an ethical and moral problem .
It is also an epidemiological and infectious disease problem , because what we know from this pandemic and every other disease outbreak is that diseases don ’ t respect borders .
So I am very worried about that .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This is a place where the Trump administration has largely been absent .
I know the previous guest discussed COVAX .
I think mechanisms like that .
I think China and India , as two major producers of vaccines , being able to get billions of doses out .
I remain optimistic that much of the world will get vaccinated by sometime in 2022 .
But I realize I may be more on of the optimistic side than the majority of people .
But we ’ ve got to make the investments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we can .
One of the key things is going to be to see what happens with the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine , because that ’ s the one that has the best possibility for vaccinating billions of people .
We haven ’ t seen the data yet on that , not fully .
I hope it ends up being really good data and one that we can use to vaccinate a large chunk of the world .
AMY GOODMAN : Dr. Ashish Jha , we want to thank you for being with us , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Public Health , previously director of Harvard University ’ s Global Health Institute .
We ’ ll have you back on to talk about so many other issues .
This is such a critical time right now .
This is Democracy Now !
When we come back , we ’ re going to look at the stimulus package .
Where is it ?
Stay with us .
AMY GOODMAN : “ Don ’ t Worry ” by Love as Laughter , fronted by the widely loved indie musician Sam Jayne , who has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ search .
His former bandmate confirmed Tuesday that Sam Jayne has died at the age of 46 .

As the “very exciting” rollout of the COVID-19 vaccine distribution gets underway in the United States, Dr. Ashish Jha, dean of the Brown University School of Public Health, says the country is still experiencing “astronomical” numbers of new infections and deaths. “We’ve just had a federal government that has given up on any efforts to try and control the pandemic,” he says. “What we have to do is get through the next few months with basic public health measures until vaccines become widely available and widely adopted. Until that time, there is no reason to let up whatsoever.”
TRANSCRIPT
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The Quarantine Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Nermeen Shaikh.
The United States has once again shattered global records for daily coronavirus cases and deaths, with nearly a quarter-million infections reported on Wednesday alone. More than 3,600 Americans died of COVID-19 Wednesday, by far the worst one-day death toll for any nation since the start of the pandemic.
This comes as Politico reports former Trump appointee Paul Alexander repeatedly urged officials at the Department of Health and Human Services to deliberately allow tens of millions of Americans to become infected with coronavirus, promoting a widely discredited approach of herd immunity through natural infection.
In one email to top health officials, Alexander wrote, quote, “Infants, kids, teens, young people, young adults, middle aged with no conditions etc. have zero to little risk … so we use them to develop herd … we want them infected,” Alexander said.
The approach has been condemned by the World Health Organization as highly unethical, with disease experts saying it could result in the deaths of millions of people.
This comes as Trump’s ally, the former New Jersey governor, Chris Christie, is urging Americans to wear masks, citing his hospitalization with COVID-19 in October after a superspreader event at the White House. Christie spoke in a video posted to his Twitter account.
CHRIS CHRISTIE: You know, lying in isolation in ICU for seven days, I thought about how wrong I was to remove my mask at the White House. Today, I think about how wrong it is to let mask-wearing divide us, especially as we now know you’re twice as likely to get COVID-19 if you don’t wear a mask, because if you don’t do the right thing, we could all end up on the wrong side of history.
AMY GOODMAN: While he was hospitalized with COVID-19 in New Jersey, the former Governor Chris Christie was treated with a monoclonal antibody therapy produced by Eli Lilly, a promising drug that’s in extremely short supply. Christie’s VIP treatment came after he reportedly turned down a chance to participate in a clinical trial for a separate antibody drug, produced by Regeneron, because he was unwilling to accept the chance that he could receive a placebo.
To discuss all of this and more, we’re joined by Dr. Ashish Jha. He’s dean of the Brown University School of Public Health, former director of Harvard University’s Global Health Institute.
Welcome back to Democracy Now!, Dr. Jha. All over this country, I mean, all of the corporate media, you see the celebrations of people getting that vaccine in their arm, the idea that the pandemic is over. But at the same time, in that split screen, the numbers are going up astronomically, not only for this country, the wealthiest country in the world. We have the worst numbers in the world. Can you talk about why it does matter that people still wear masks and will probably have to for a very long time — the very reason your son says you’re boring on television, because you keep saying the same thing?
DR. ASHISH JHA: Yes. Good morning, and thank you for having me on. I am a little boring on television, because I have a certain set of messages, based on public health, of where we are. But let’s talk about where we are as a country.
You know, look, so, first of all, the vaccine news is very exciting. It is worth celebrating. It’s terrific. But it does come at the same time that we are seeing just astronomical numbers of infections and deaths. We’ve crossed 300,000 deaths. We are going across 400,000 deaths probably around the time of the inauguration. And the question is: When does this stop?
And there are two reasons that have gotten us here, right? I mean, first and foremost is, we’ve just had a federal government that has given up on any efforts to try to control the pandemic. We haven’t heard from the president about it. Scott Atlas, who is a very big believer in letting the infection spread widely, was running the show out of the White House until very, very recently. So we’ve had that failure.
And then, the second is the political division that all of this has created, that has undermined mask-wearing. The idea that wearing a mask is a political statement is absurd.
So, that’s where we are. And what we have to do is get through the next few months with basic public health measures, until vaccines become widely available and widely adopted. Until that time, there is no reason to let up whatsoever.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: And, Dr. Jha, could you explain what we know so far about asymptomatic spread from people who have been vaccinated, and when you expect to hear more? There hasn’t been very much released, because there isn’t enough known, about how much people can spread the virus even if they have been vaccinated.
DR. ASHISH JHA: Yeah. So, this is a critical issue, because if people can still spread after vaccination, then we don’t get the sort of population immunity benefits of the vaccine. Until a few days ago, we had really no data whatsoever. But a few days ago, in the release of data that came from the FDA from the — sorry, from the Moderna vaccine, what we see is, after one dose, spread of asymptomatic virus sort of drops by about two-thirds. I suspect it’s even more after the second dose. But we don’t have that data. So we’re still sorting it out, but I am becoming more optimistic that we are going to see a substantial decline in asymptomatic spread among people who have been vaccinated.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: And, Dr. Jha, as you mentioned, a significant number, the vast majority of Americans, would need to be vaccinated before we reach anything like herd immunity. But, of course, vaccine hesitancy remains a problem, though. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, which just conducted a poll in late November, early December, the number of Americans who are willing to take the vaccine is higher, but it may still not be sufficient. And vaccine hesitancy remains highest among Republicans, according to this poll. Could you talk about your concerns regarding people not taking the vaccine even once it’s available to them?
DR. ASHISH JHA: Yeah, absolutely. So, vaccines only work, and their main benefits come, when a large majority of us take the vaccines. I mean, again, there is some, obviously, individual protection, but it’s really about population protection, community protection, that matters most.
It’s true about, depending on the survey, between, let’s say, 30 and 40% of Americans remain hesitant. I think some of that hesitancy I understand completely. This vaccine has been developed quickly, and Americans have questions about the safety and efficacy of these vaccines. I think some of that will melt away as people see more and more people getting vaccinated, people doing well after the vaccination. I think some of that will get better.
I think the issue around Republicans is concerning because there has been this campaign of misinformation that has tended to stick more to the right-wing media, from hydroxychloroquine to how masks are dangerous and to how the election was stolen, to now there’s a shift towards vaccines somehow being inadequate or dangerous. It’s really troubling. And this is why I’ve been calling on President Trump to get vaccinated on national television. I think that will help a lot. But we also need Republican leaders, conservative leaders to speak up and get vaccinated and talk about the fruits of science that really are available to the American people. I think only through them speaking up will we make progress on this.
And it’s absolutely true we need to get to a large majority of Americans getting vaccinated, if our goal is to return to any semblance of a new normal. If that doesn’t happen, then we will continue to have to have measures that will make life difficult and not where we want to be.
AMY GOODMAN: I mean, what’s amazing about Trump is he wanted to call it, you know, “getting trumped” or the “Trump vaccine,” very proud of Operation Warp Speed and how fast this happened, and yet he is the one pushing the idea that it’s a COVID conspiracy, and so clearly he is conflicted. The Trump vaccine would be solving what problem? Calling it a hoax.
But I want to ask you about, last month, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Dr. Ben Carson saying he had been desperately ill with COVID-19 but was recovering. Carson said his condition improved at Walter Reed Medical Center after President Trump intervened on his behalf. Carson wrote on Facebook, “President Trump was following my condition and cleared me for the monoclonal antibody therapy that he had previously received, which I am convinced saved my life.”
Now, Carson is just one of a handful of people able to access Regeneron’s therapeutic before the FDA granted the drug emergency use authorization last month. Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani also received the treatment during his battle with coronavirus this month, leading to concerns that those with connections to the White House are getting access to these special treatments largely unattainable to the rest of the population. Then you have Chris Christie, who didn’t participate in the study because he was concerned that, you know, it was very effective, the treatment, and he didn’t want to end up with the placebo. Can you talk about these therapeutics and who gets access to them?
DR. ASHISH JHA: Yeah, absolutely. And all of those examples you brought up are incredibly frustrating in the following way. So, I have been watching the data on monoclonal antibodies. I’m pretty optimistic that they will end up being a really important part of how we treat people who do get infected. What has happened is, these leaders have not followed public health measures, have gotten infected, and then they get access to these therapies that most Americans don’t have. And part of the reason most Americans don’t have them is because we didn’t do an Operation Warp Speed for therapeutics the way we should have.
And so, these people get access to a relatively limited supply of therapies. They get better. And then they go, basically, make the case that COVID is not a big deal. And it’s incredibly destructive, in some ways, because, basically, it creates this impression that COVID is not a big deal. Well, it may not be as big of a deal if you had access to world-class therapies, including things that are not accessible to most of us.
And so, I wish that that cycle would stop. I wish we would have more of these therapies available for everybody. And I think I wish that these individuals would talk about how they’re getting something that most Americans don’t have access to.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: And, Dr. Jha, I wanted to ask you about what the FDA reported yesterday, namely, that the Pfizer vials appear to include as much as — as many as two additional doses per vial. Could you talk about that and that fact that it could increase the vaccine doses available to Americans by 40%?
DR. ASHISH JHA: Yeah. This is a surprise, and a pleasant one at that. Each of these vials is supposedly filled with five doses. And there’s a pretty long history of filling vials a little bit extra to deal with things like spillage or, you know, just that the withdrawing of the vaccine may not be perfect by the pharmacism, so that people always fill up a little extra on these things. And what we’re finding is, at least some pharmacists have reported, that up to two extra doses in a five-vial dose — five-dose vial may be available.
I think this is great. And I think what that — and the FDA has basically said people should — pharmacists should feel encouraged to use those extra doses to vaccinate extra people. Obviously, given what limited supply of vaccines we have, given the urgent need to vaccinate as many people as possible, I think this is terrific. And we just have to pay close attention, but I certainly don’t see any downside to doing this.
AMY GOODMAN: I have a very quick double question, and that is the issue of kids and teenagers. The Moderna vaccine apparently is for people aged 18 and above. The Pfizer is age 16 and above. How are kids, from infants to children to teenagers, tested? I mean, how does a parent say, “I’m willing to give up my kid to be tested,” number one? And what do you see happening with these age groups?
And the other goes to the issue of what happens to the tests that are taking place right now, that are so invaluable? When everyone gets injected, you don’t actually follow them in a systematic, scientific way where you can get information, just anecdotal — someone got Bell’s palsy, someone else got a rash. How do these studies continue? Because people aren’t going to want to risk — like Chris Christie, not want to risk getting a placebo.
DR. ASHISH JHA: Yeah. So, there are several issues here, so let’s talk about kids in general and then talk about kind of follow-up studies that need to happen.
You know, the Pfizer vaccine was tested in 16- and 17-year-olds, not in large numbers. So, that’s why, for instance, the FDA vote that happened by the advisory committee, a few people voted no, because they just said there wasn’t enough data on 16- and 17-year-olds. But most people voted yes for even that age group. And the Moderna vaccine has not been yet tested in 16- and 17-year-olds. So, my general take is, certainly when you talk about older teenagers, 16-, 17-year-olds, even 15-year-olds, again, let’s wait for the data, and we should follow the FDA guidance, but I don’t expect big biological differences between older teenagers and young adults.
Where it gets more complicated is in younger children. And what we need, really, there is just the studies to be done. Kids are getting enrolled in clinical trials now, because they’re so far away from being in the front of the line for getting a vaccine that this is a perfectly reasonable time to be testing this in kids. There are always ethical issues of testing things in children. Obviously, you need parental consent. You need to have as much kid consent as possible. These vaccines appear to be very safe overall, so I’m not as worried about it. But I do think, over the next couple of months, we are going to see data coming out about younger children. And that will be very helpful, and it will guide us in the decision-making.
You know, on the other part of your question, Amy, around the issue of kind of post-market surveillance, this idea that: What do we do now that we’re starting to vaccinate people? We can’t follow them in studies. There is a whole mechanism set up so that if people have adverse events, that they will report it to their doctor, and their doctor will then report it into the FDA, that there are very active surveillance programs that exist for people who are getting vaccinated. And there are people conducting studies now of tracking people who have been vaccinated to see how they’re doing. So, I am hopeful that if there are other events, adverse events, that start happening, that we’ll catch them pretty early. I doubt they will, but we should be absolutely tracking this. And there’s a whole set of stuff happening now to make sure that we don’t lose out on all that information about what happens to people after they get vaccinated.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: And, Dr. Jha, you mentioned earlier the importance of the vast majority of Americans getting the vaccine in order to reach anything like herd immunity. Could you talk about that in the global context? We just spoke earlier in the program about a large number of people in the world — in fact, the majority — potentially not getting access to the vaccine ’til 2024 in developing countries.
DR. ASHISH JHA: Yeah, I guess I am, by the way, more optimistic in terms of timeline than that. But I do agree that we are going to see, in much of 2021, a set of countries where most people have been vaccinated and a set of countries where most people have not been vaccinated. And that, I think, is a real problem. It’s certainly an ethical and moral problem. It is also an epidemiological and infectious disease problem, because what we know from this pandemic and every other disease outbreak is that diseases don’t respect borders. So I am very worried about that.
I think we need global leadership here. This is a place where the Trump administration has largely been absent. I know the previous guest discussed COVAX. I think mechanisms like that. I think China and India, as two major producers of vaccines, being able to get billions of doses out. I remain optimistic that much of the world will get vaccinated by sometime in 2022. But I realize I may be more on of the optimistic side than the majority of people. But we’ve got to make the investments to do it. And I think we can.
One of the key things is going to be to see what happens with the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine, because that’s the one that has the best possibility for vaccinating billions of people. We haven’t seen the data yet on that, not fully. I hope it ends up being really good data and one that we can use to vaccinate a large chunk of the world.
AMY GOODMAN: Dr. Ashish Jha, we want to thank you for being with us, dean of the Brown University School of Public Health, previously director of Harvard University’s Global Health Institute. We’ll have you back on to talk about so many other issues. This is such a critical time right now.
This is Democracy Now! When we come back, we’re going to look at the stimulus package. Where is it? Stay with us.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: “Don’t Worry” by Love as Laughter, fronted by the widely loved indie musician Sam Jayne, who has been reported missing, prompting a wide search. His former bandmate confirmed Tuesday that Sam Jayne has died at the age of 46.
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--2020-12-17--Cancel the Rent: A Rising National Rent Strike Movement Gains Momentum

Rent strikes have spread across the country with the spread of the coronavirus .
In the pandemic ’ s first months , 400 New York City families stopped paying rent in buildings with over 1,500 rental units .
In May , rent strikes involving 200,000 tenants spread to Philadelphia and elsewhere .
Washington , D.C. , in September saw tenant unions spring up in strikes at the Tivoli Gardens Apartments and the Woodner , as well as Southern Towers in nearby Alexandria .
Rent strikes had a history as a resistance tactic before the pandemic hit .
Cleveland tenants settled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 38 families forced concessions on the landlord of the 348-unit Vue Apartments in Beachwood .
San Francisco had a famous rent strike that went on for three years at the Midtown Park Apartments , ending in 2017 .
But with the pandemic , rent strikes have become a widespread response to brutal economic pressure .
According to the Terner Center for Housing Innovation at the University of California , Berkeley , 16.5 million families who rent housing lost income when the crisis began .
Its October report states , “ Nearly 50 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ income since March of 2020 , and one in five households ( 20.7 percent ) indicated that they have no or only slight confidence that they have the ability to pay their mortgage or rent next month.
” According to the National Multifamily Housing Council , 24.6 percent of apartment households were not paying rent as of December 6 .
But even before the pandemic , 16.8 percent had not paid their rent in a survey made a year earlier .
A website set up by Bay Area tenant activists , Bay Area @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the people in the U.S. live paycheck to paycheck .
The group urges people who can ’ t pay to act collectively — to “ work together to prevent eviction and foreclosure.
” It adds : “ We must demand an immediate suspension of rent and mortgage payments for everyone .
And if this demand is not met , we must refuse to pay our rents and our mortgages , together.
” Cancelling rents was the demand that spread across the country with the strikes .
In April , Cea Weaver , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Justice for All , said cancelling rent “ is the demand of the rent strike.
” In Los Angeles , Larry Gross , director of the Coalition for Economic Survival , says the city is full of rent strikes pushing for rent and mortgage forgiveness .
Voicing that demand , the LA Tenants Union grew from 400 to 2,000 members in 2020 .
Yet , despite LA ’ s strong tenant protections against eviction , enacted at the beginning of the crisis with no end date , the housing battle continues .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ removed , ” Gross charged in an email interview .
“ That was fashioned after the Oakland mothers ’ effort.
” In March , housing activists occupied homes purchased by CalTrans which the agency intended to demolish for a freeway , but then kept vacant for years .
On November 26 , Highway Patrol in riot gear took them out and arrested many .
Los Angeles activists were inspired by Moms 4 Housing , a collective of homeless and marginally housed mothers who occupied a vacant Oakland home in 2019 and forced the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , igniting a wave of housing activism .
Carroll Fife , a Moms 4 Housing member , was elected to the Oakland City Council in large part as a consequence .
On December 5 , she spoke to a rally organized by several tenants ’ unions , just prior to a caravan to the buildings where rent strikes are taking place .
“ People said cancelling rents was ridiculously radical and not popular , ” Fife declared , as the daughter of another activist squirmed and danced beside her .
“ But District @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and people here think otherwise .
We think a different reality is possible .
The current paradigm in this country is not only not working — it is killing us.
” The caravan then set out .
First a bicycle hauling a huge speaker , emblazoned with the slogan “ Cancel Rent Debt ” left a Lake Merritt parking lot , heading into the densely populated downtown apartment district .
Following it came other bicycles , with slogans taped to their frames .
Skateboarders and roller skaters snaked among them .
And finally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to their windows and doors .
The caravan , organized by the JDW Tenants Union , Alice Tenant Union , the People ’ s Tenants Union , Onday Tenants Council and Veritas Tenants Association , held impromptu rallies in front of several buildings where organized tenants have stopped paying rent .
A statement was read from one group , the SMC Tenants Council , at a building owned by the Sullivan Management Company .
“ We have been forced to advocate for our rights and our housing against a corporate landlord that is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” it charged .
“ Our corporate landlord has ample resources to forgive rent to its tenants for the duration of the COVID-19 crisis but chooses instead to squeeze its tenants , who have lost jobs and federal assistance.
” Councilwoman Fife is the director of the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment ( ACCE ) , which helps organize and support rent strikes throughout the state .
“ The ‘ shelter in place ’ orders will end , ” ACCE warns “ The crisis for low-income and working families will not .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ us were living paycheck to paycheck .
With the loss of income , there is no way for most Californians to pay back rent or back mortgage payments that went unpaid during the crisis .
Basic common sense dictates that because we won ’ t be getting back pay , we have no way to pay back housing payments.
” Cancelling the rent , ACCE says , is the only solution .

Rent strikes have spread across the country with the spread of the coronavirus. In the pandemic’s first months, 400 New York City families stopped paying rent in buildings with over 1,500 rental units. In May, rent strikes involving 200,000 tenants spread to Philadelphia and elsewhere. Washington, D.C., in September saw tenant unions spring up in strikes at the Tivoli Gardens Apartments and the Woodner, as well as Southern Towers in nearby Alexandria.
Rent strikes had a history as a resistance tactic before the pandemic hit. Cleveland tenants settled a rent strike in February, after 38 families forced concessions on the landlord of the 348-unit Vue Apartments in Beachwood. San Francisco had a famous rent strike that went on for three years at the Midtown Park Apartments, ending in 2017.
But with the pandemic, rent strikes have become a widespread response to brutal economic pressure. According to the Terner Center for Housing Innovation at the University of California, Berkeley, 16.5 million families who rent housing lost income when the crisis began. Its October report states, “Nearly 50 percent of households in California have lost employment income since March of 2020, and one in five households (20.7 percent) indicated that they have no or only slight confidence that they have the ability to pay their mortgage or rent next month.”
According to the National Multifamily Housing Council, 24.6 percent of apartment households were not paying rent as of December 6. But even before the pandemic, 16.8 percent had not paid their rent in a survey made a year earlier. A website set up by Bay Area tenant activists, Bay Area Rent Strike, notes that 78 percent of the people in the U.S. live paycheck to paycheck. The group urges people who can’t pay to act collectively — to “work together to prevent eviction and foreclosure.” It adds: “We must demand an immediate suspension of rent and mortgage payments for everyone. And if this demand is not met, we must refuse to pay our rents and our mortgages, together.”
Cancelling rents was the demand that spread across the country with the strikes. In April, Cea Weaver, organizer for New York’s Housing Justice for All, said cancelling rent “is the demand of the rent strike.” In Los Angeles, Larry Gross, director of the Coalition for Economic Survival, says the city is full of rent strikes pushing for rent and mortgage forgiveness. Voicing that demand, the LA Tenants Union grew from 400 to 2,000 members in 2020.
Yet, despite LA’s strong tenant protections against eviction, enacted at the beginning of the crisis with no end date, the housing battle continues. “People occupying the CalTrans housing were forcefully removed,” Gross charged in an email interview. “That was fashioned after the Oakland mothers’ effort.” In March, housing activists occupied homes purchased by CalTrans which the agency intended to demolish for a freeway, but then kept vacant for years. On November 26, Highway Patrol in riot gear took them out and arrested many.
Los Angeles activists were inspired by Moms 4 Housing, a collective of homeless and marginally housed mothers who occupied a vacant Oakland home in 2019 and forced the city to find financing for its purchase, igniting a wave of housing activism. Carroll Fife, a Moms 4 Housing member, was elected to the Oakland City Council in large part as a consequence. On December 5, she spoke to a rally organized by several tenants’ unions, just prior to a caravan to the buildings where rent strikes are taking place.
David Bacon David Bacon
With the pandemic, rent strikes have become a widespread response to brutal economic pressure.
“People said cancelling rents was ridiculously radical and not popular,” Fife declared, as the daughter of another activist squirmed and danced beside her. “But District 3 is ground zero for displacement, and people here think otherwise. We think a different reality is possible. The current paradigm in this country is not only not working — it is killing us.”
The caravan then set out. First a bicycle hauling a huge speaker, emblazoned with the slogan “Cancel Rent Debt” left a Lake Merritt parking lot, heading into the densely populated downtown apartment district. Following it came other bicycles, with slogans taped to their frames. Skateboarders and roller skaters snaked among them. And finally came the cars, with placards fixed to their windows and doors.
David Bacon David Bacon David Bacon David Bacon
The caravan, organized by the JDW Tenants Union, Alice Tenant Union, the People’s Tenants Union, Lonay Tenant Council and Veritas Tenants Association, held impromptu rallies in front of several buildings where organized tenants have stopped paying rent.
David Bacon
A statement was read from one group, the SMC Tenants Council, at a building owned by the Sullivan Management Company. “We have been forced to advocate for our rights and our housing against a corporate landlord that is backed by hedge funds and billionaires,” it charged. “Our corporate landlord has ample resources to forgive rent to its tenants for the duration of the COVID-19 crisis but chooses instead to squeeze its tenants, who have lost jobs and federal assistance.”
Councilwoman Fife is the director of the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE), which helps organize and support rent strikes throughout the state. “The ‘shelter in place’ orders will end,” ACCE warns . “The crisis for low-income and working families will not. Even before the crisis, most of us were living paycheck to paycheck. With the loss of income, there is no way for most Californians to pay back rent or back mortgage payments that went unpaid during the crisis. Basic common sense dictates that because we won’t be getting back pay, we have no way to pay back housing payments.”
Cancelling the rent, ACCE says, is the only solution.
David Bacon David Bacon David Bacon David Bacon David Bacon David Bacon
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 by David Bacon


truthout--2020-12-17--Instead of Propping Up a Dying Empire, It’s Time to Finally End US Wars

It was the end of October 2001 .
Two friends , Max Elbaum and Bob Wing , had just dropped by .
( Yes , children , believe it or not , people used to drop in on each other , maskless , once upon a time . )
They had come to hang out with my partner Jan Adams and me .
Among other things , Max wanted to get some instructions from fellow-runner Jan about taping his foot to ease the pain of plantar fasciitis .
But it soon became clear that he and Bob had a bigger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eager to recruit us for a new project .
And so began War Times/Tiempo de Guerras , a free , bilingual , antiwar tabloid that , at its height , distributed 100,000 copies every six weeks to more than 700 antiwar organizations around the country .
It was already clear to the four of us that night — as it was to millions around the world — that the terrorist attacks of September 11th would provide the pretext for a major new projection of U.S. military power globally , opening the way to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ War Times was a project of its moment ( although the name would still be apt today , given that those wars have never ended ) .
It would be superseded in a few years by the explosive growth of the Internet and the 24-hour news cycle .
Still , it represented an early effort to fill the space where a peace movement would eventually develop .
All-War-All-the-Time — For Some of Us We were certainly right that the United States had entered a period of all-war-all-the-time .
It ’ s probably hard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how much — and how little — things changed after September 2001 .
By the end of that month , this country had already launched a “ war ” on an enemy that then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld told us was “ not just in Afghanistan , ” but in “ 50 or 60 countries , and it simply has to be liquidated.
” Five years and two never-ending wars later , he characterized what was then called the war on terror as “ a generational conflict akin to the Cold War , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decades as allies work to root out terrorists across the globe and battle extremists who want to rule the world.
” A generation later , it looks like Rumsfeld was right , if not about the desires of the global enemy , then about the duration of the struggle .
Here in the United States , however , we quickly got used to being “ at war.
” In the first few months , interstate bus and train travelers often encountered ( and , in airports , still encounter ) a new and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ m referring to those long , snaking lines in which people first learned to remove their belts and coats , later their hats and shoes , as ever newer articles of clothing were recognized as potential hiding places for explosives .
Fortunately , the arrest of the Underwear Bomber never led the Transportation Security Administration to the obvious conclusion about the clothing travelers should have to remove next .
We got used to putting our three-ounce containers of liquids ( No more ! )
into quart-sized baggies ( No bigger !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ all-war-all-the-time , but mainly in those airports .
Once the shooting wars started dragging on , if you didn ’ t travel by airplane much or weren ’ t deployed to Afghanistan or Iraq , it was hard to remember that we were still in war time at all .
There were continuing clues for those who wanted to know , like the revelations of CIA torture practices at “ black sites ” around the world , the horrors of military prisons like the ones at Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still-functioning prison complex at Guantánamo Bay , Cuba .
And soon enough , of course , there were the hundreds and then thousands of veterans of the Iraq and Afghan wars taking their places among the unhoused veterans of earlier wars in cities across the United States , almost unremarked upon , except by service organizations .
So , yes , the wars dragged on at great expense , but with little apparent effect in this country .
They even gained new names like “ the long war ” ( as Donald Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ put it in 2017 ) or the “ forever wars , ” a phrase now so common that it appears all over the place .
But apart from devouring at least $ 6.4 trillion through September 2020 that might otherwise have been invested domestically in healthcare , education , infrastructure , or addressing poverty and inequality , apart from creating increasingly militarized domestic police forces armed ever more lethally by the Pentagon , those forever wars had little obvious effect on the lives of most Americans .
Of course , if you happened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where this country has been fighting for the last 19 years , things are a little different .
A conservative estimate by Iraq Body Count puts violent deaths among civilians in that country alone at 185,454 to 208,493 and Brown University ’ s Costs of War project points out that even the larger figure is bound to be a significant undercount : “ Several times as many Iraqi civilians may have died as an indirect result of the war , due to damage to the systems that provide food , health care , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a result , illness , infectious diseases , and malnutrition that could otherwise have been avoided or treated.
” And that ’ s just Iraq .
Again , according to the Costs of War Project , “ At least 800,000 people have been killed by direct war violence in Iraq , Afghanistan , Syria , Yemen , and Pakistan.
” Of course , many more people than that have been injured or disabled .
And America ’ s post-9/11 wars have driven an estimated 37 million people from their homes , creating the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
People in this country are rightly concerned about the negative effects of online schooling on American children amid the ongoing Covid-19 crisis ( especially poor children and those in communities of color ) .
Imagine , then , the effects on a child ’ s education of losing her home and her country , as well as one or both parents , and then growing up constantly on the move or in an overcrowded , under-resourced refugee camp .
The war on terror has truly become a war of generations .
Every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 9/11 was unique and invaluable .
But the U.S. response has been grotesquely disproportionate — and worse than we War Times founders could have imagined that October night so many years ago .
Those wars of ours have gone on for almost two decades now .
Each new metastasis has been justified by George W. Bush ’ s and then Barack Obama ’ s use of the now ancient 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force ( AUMF ) , which Congress passed in the days after 9/11 .
Its language actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ response to the 9/11 attacks and the prevention of future attacks by the same actors .
It stated that the president “ …is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations , organizations , or persons he determines planned , authorized , committed , or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11 , 2001 , or harbored such organizations or persons , in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations , organizations or persons.
” Despite that AUMF ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used it to justify military action in at least 18 countries .
( To be fair , President Obama realized the absurdity of his situation when he sent U.S. troops to Syria and tried to wring a new authorization out of Congress , only to be stymied by a Republican majority that wouldn ’ t play along . )
In 2002 , in the run-up to the Iraq War , Congress passed a second AUMF , which permitted the president to use the armed forces as “ necessary and appropriate ” to “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ threat posed by Iraq.
” In January 2020 , Donald Trump used that second authorization to justify the murder by drone of Qasem Soleimani , an Iranian general , along with nine other people .
In 2016 , peace activists were preparing to confront a Hillary Clinton administration that we expected would continue Obama ’ s version of the forever wars — the “ surge ” in Afghanistan , the drone assassination campaigns , the special ops in Africa .
But on Tuesday , November 8 , 2016 , something went “ Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump took over the presidency with a promise to end this country ’ s forever wars , which he had criticized relentlessly during his campaign .
That , of course , didn ’ t mean we should have expected a peace dividend anytime soon .
He was also committed to rebuilding a supposedly “ depleted ” U.S. military .
As he said at a 2019 press conference , “ When I took over , it was a mess… One of our generals came in to see me and he said , ‘ Sir @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ I said , ‘ That ’ s a terrible thing you just said.
’ He said , ‘ We don ’ t have ammunition.
’ Now we have more ammunition than we ’ ve ever had.
” It ’ s highly unlikely that the military couldn ’ t afford to buy enough bullets when Trump entered the Oval Office , given that publicly acknowledged defense funding was then running at $ 580 billion a year .
He did , however , manage to push that figure to $ 713 billion by fiscal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ threatened to veto an even larger appropriation for 2021 — $ 740 billion — but only because he wanted the military to continue to honor Confederate generals by keeping their names on military bases .
Oh , and because he thought the bill should also change liability rules for social media companies , an issue you don ’ t normally expect to see addressed in a defense appropriations bill .
And , in any case , Congress passed the bill with a veto-proof majority .
As Pentagon expert Michael Klare pointed out recently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump would both want to end the forever wars and to increase military spending , his actions actually made a certain sense .
The president , suggested Klare , had been persuaded to support the part of the U.S. military command that has favored a sharp pivot away from reigning post-9/11 Pentagon practices .
For 19 years , the military high command had hewed fairly closely to the strategy laid out by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld early in the Bush years : maintaining the capacity to fight ground wars against one or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Axis of Evil ” of Iraq , North Korea , and Iran ) , while deploying agile , technologically advanced forces in low-intensity ( and a couple of higher-intensity ) counterterrorism conflicts .
Nineteen years later , whatever its objectives may have been — a more-stable Middle East ?
Fewer and weaker terrorist organizations ?
— it ’ s clear that the Rumsfeld-Bush strategy has failed spectacularly .
Klare points out that , after almost two decades without a victory , the Pentagon has largely decided to demote international terrorism from rampaging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the U.S. must now prepare to confront the rise of China and Russia , even if China has only one overseas military base and Russia , economically speaking , is a rickety petro-state with imperial aspirations .
In other words , the U.S. must prepare to fight short but devastating wars in multiple domains ( including space and cyberspace ) , perhaps even involving the use of tactical nuclear weapons on the Eurasian continent .
To this end , the country has indeed begun a major renovation of its nuclear arsenal and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up its naval capacity .
And President Trump rarely misses a chance to tout “ his ” creation of a new Space Force .
Meanwhile , did he actually keep his promise and at least end those forever wars ?
Not really .
He did promise to bring all U.S. troops home from Afghanistan by Christmas , but acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller only recently said that we ’ d be leaving about 2,500 troops there and a similar number in Iraq , with the hope that they ’ d all be out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ words , he dumped those wars in the lap of the future Biden administration . )
In the meantime in these years of “ ending ” those wars , the Trump administration actually loosened the rules of engagement for air strikes in Afghanistan , leading to a “ massive increase in civilian casualties , ” according to a new report from the Costs of War Project .
“ From the last year of the Obama administration to the last full year of recorded data during the Trump administration , ” writes its author @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of civilians killed by U.S.-led airstrikes in Afghanistan increased by 330 percent.
” In spite of his isolationist “ America First ” rhetoric , in other words , President Trump has presided over an enormous buildup of an institution , the military-industrial complex , that was hardly in need of major new investment .
And in spite of his anti-NATO rhetoric , his reduction by almost a third of U.S. troop strength from Germany , and all the rest , he never really violated the post-World War II foreign policy pact between the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how they might disagree about dividing the wealth domestically , they remain united in their commitment to using diplomacy when possible , but military force when necessary , to maintain and expand the imperial power that they believed to be the guarantor of that wealth .
And Now Comes Joe On January 20 , 2021 , Joe Biden will become the president of a country that spends as much on its armed forces , by some counts , as the next 10 countries combined .
He ’ ll inherit responsibility for a nation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and special-operations deployments in 22 African nations alone .
He ’ ll be left to oversee the still-unfinished , deeply unsuccessful , never-ending war on terror in Iraq , Syria , Afghanistan , Yemen , and Somalia and , as publicly reported by the Department of Defense , 187,000 troops stationed outside the United States .
Nothing in Joe Biden ’ s history suggests that he or any of the people he ’ s already appointed to his national security team have the slightest inclination to destabilize that Democratic-Republican imperial pact .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They don ’ t last forever .
They overextend themselves .
They rot from within .
If you ’ re old enough , you may remember stories about the long lines for food in the crumbling Soviet Union , that other superpower of the Cold War .
You can see the same thing in the United States today .
Once a week , my partner delivers food boxes to hungry people in our city , those who have lost their jobs and homes , because the pandemic has only exacerbated this country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inequality .
Another friend routinely sees a food line stretching over a mile , as people wait hours for a single free bag of groceries .
Perhaps the horrors of 2020 — the fires and hurricanes , Trump ’ s vicious attacks on democracy , the death , sickness , and economic dislocation caused by Covid-19 — can force a real conversation about national security in 2021 .
Maybe this time we can finally ask whether trying to prop up a dying empire actually makes us — or indeed the world — any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a generation to start that conversation .
The alternative is to keep trudging mindlessly toward disaster .

It was the end of October 2001. Two friends, Max Elbaum and Bob Wing, had just dropped by. (Yes, children, believe it or not, people used to drop in on each other, maskless, once upon a time.) They had come to hang out with my partner Jan Adams and me. Among other things, Max wanted to get some instructions from fellow-runner Jan about taping his foot to ease the pain of plantar fasciitis. But it soon became clear that he and Bob had a bigger agenda for the evening. They were eager to recruit us for a new project.
And so began War Times/Tiempo de Guerras, a free, bilingual, antiwar tabloid that, at its height, distributed 100,000 copies every six weeks to more than 700 antiwar organizations around the country. It was already clear to the four of us that night — as it was to millions around the world — that the terrorist attacks of September 11th would provide the pretext for a major new projection of U.S. military power globally, opening the way to a new era of “all-war-all-the-time.” War Times was a project of its moment (although the name would still be apt today, given that those wars have never ended). It would be superseded in a few years by the explosive growth of the Internet and the 24-hour news cycle. Still, it represented an early effort to fill the space where a peace movement would eventually develop.
All-War-All-the-Time — For Some of Us
We were certainly right that the United States had entered a period of all-war-all-the-time. It’s probably hard for people born since 9/11 to imagine how much — and how little — things changed after September 2001. By the end of that month, this country had already launched a “war” on an enemy that then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld told us was “not just in Afghanistan,” but in “50 or 60 countries, and it simply has to be liquidated.”
Five years and two never-ending wars later, he characterized what was then called the war on terror as “a generational conflict akin to the Cold War, the kind of struggle that might last decades as allies work to root out terrorists across the globe and battle extremists who want to rule the world.” A generation later, it looks like Rumsfeld was right, if not about the desires of the global enemy, then about the duration of the struggle.
Here in the United States, however, we quickly got used to being “at war.” In the first few months, interstate bus and train travelers often encountered (and, in airports, still encounter) a new and absurd kind of “security theater.” I’m referring to those long, snaking lines in which people first learned to remove their belts and coats, later their hats and shoes, as ever newer articles of clothing were recognized as potential hiding places for explosives. Fortunately, the arrest of the Underwear Bomber never led the Transportation Security Administration to the obvious conclusion about the clothing travelers should have to remove next. We got used to putting our three-ounce containers of liquids (No more!) into quart-sized baggies (No bigger! No smaller!).
It was all-war-all-the-time, but mainly in those airports. Once the shooting wars started dragging on, if you didn’t travel by airplane much or weren’t deployed to Afghanistan or Iraq, it was hard to remember that we were still in war time at all. There were continuing clues for those who wanted to know, like the revelations of CIA torture practices at “black sites” around the world, the horrors of military prisons like the ones at Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan, Abu Ghraib in Baghdad, and the still-functioning prison complex at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. And soon enough, of course, there were the hundreds and then thousands of veterans of the Iraq and Afghan wars taking their places among the unhoused veterans of earlier wars in cities across the United States, almost unremarked upon, except by service organizations.
So, yes, the wars dragged on at great expense, but with little apparent effect in this country. They even gained new names like “the long war” (as Donald Trump’s Secretary of Defense James Mattis put it in 2017) or the “forever wars,” a phrase now so common that it appears all over the place. But apart from devouring at least $6.4 trillion through September 2020 that might otherwise have been invested domestically in healthcare, education, infrastructure, or addressing poverty and inequality, apart from creating increasingly militarized domestic police forces armed ever more lethally by the Pentagon, those forever wars had little obvious effect on the lives of most Americans.
Of course, if you happened to live in one of the places where this country has been fighting for the last 19 years, things are a little different. A conservative estimate by Iraq Body Count puts violent deaths among civilians in that country alone at 185,454 to 208,493 and Brown University’s Costs of War project points out that even the larger figure is bound to be a significant undercount:
“Several times as many Iraqi civilians may have died as an indirect result of the war, due to damage to the systems that provide food, health care, and clean drinking water, and as a result, illness, infectious diseases, and malnutrition that could otherwise have been avoided or treated.”
And that’s just Iraq. Again, according to the Costs of War Project, “At least 800,000 people have been killed by direct war violence in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, and Pakistan.”
Of course, many more people than that have been injured or disabled. And America’s post-9/11 wars have driven an estimated 37 million people from their homes, creating the greatest human displacement since World War II. People in this country are rightly concerned about the negative effects of online schooling on American children amid the ongoing Covid-19 crisis (especially poor children and those in communities of color). Imagine, then, the effects on a child’s education of losing her home and her country, as well as one or both parents, and then growing up constantly on the move or in an overcrowded, under-resourced refugee camp. The war on terror has truly become a war of generations.
Every one of the 2,977 lives lost on 9/11 was unique and invaluable. But the U.S. response has been grotesquely disproportionate — and worse than we War Times founders could have imagined that October night so many years ago.
Those wars of ours have gone on for almost two decades now. Each new metastasis has been justified by George W. Bush’s and then Barack Obama’s use of the now ancient 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF), which Congress passed in the days after 9/11. Its language actually limited presidential military action to a direct response to the 9/11 attacks and the prevention of future attacks by the same actors. It stated that the president
“…is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.”
Despite that AUMF’s limited scope, successive presidents have used it to justify military action in at least 18 countries. (To be fair, President Obama realized the absurdity of his situation when he sent U.S. troops to Syria and tried to wring a new authorization out of Congress, only to be stymied by a Republican majority that wouldn’t play along.)
In 2002, in the run-up to the Iraq War, Congress passed a second AUMF, which permitted the president to use the armed forces as “necessary and appropriate” to “defend U.S. national security against the continuing threat posed by Iraq.” In January 2020, Donald Trump used that second authorization to justify the murder by drone of Qasem Soleimani, an Iranian general, along with nine other people.
Trump Steps In
In 2016, peace activists were preparing to confront a Hillary Clinton administration that we expected would continue Obama’s version of the forever wars — the “surge” in Afghanistan, the drone assassination campaigns, the special ops in Africa. But on Tuesday, November 8, 2016, something went “Trump” in the night and Donald J. Trump took over the presidency with a promise to end this country’s forever wars, which he had criticized relentlessly during his campaign. That, of course, didn’t mean we should have expected a peace dividend anytime soon. He was also committed to rebuilding a supposedly “depleted” U.S. military. As he said at a 2019 press conference,
“When I took over, it was a mess… One of our generals came in to see me and he said, ‘Sir, we don’t have ammunition.’ I said, ‘That’s a terrible thing you just said.’ He said, ‘We don’t have ammunition.’ Now we have more ammunition than we’ve ever had.”
It’s highly unlikely that the military couldn’t afford to buy enough bullets when Trump entered the Oval Office, given that publicly acknowledged defense funding was then running at $580 billion a year. He did, however, manage to push that figure to $713 billion by fiscal year 2020. That December, he threatened to veto an even larger appropriation for 2021 — $740 billion — but only because he wanted the military to continue to honor Confederate generals by keeping their names on military bases. Oh, and because he thought the bill should also change liability rules for social media companies, an issue you don’t normally expect to see addressed in a defense appropriations bill. And, in any case, Congress passed the bill with a veto-proof majority.
As Pentagon expert Michael Klare pointed out recently, while it might seem contradictory that Trump would both want to end the forever wars and to increase military spending, his actions actually made a certain sense. The president, suggested Klare, had been persuaded to support the part of the U.S. military command that has favored a sharp pivot away from reigning post-9/11 Pentagon practices. For 19 years, the military high command had hewed fairly closely to the strategy laid out by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld early in the Bush years: maintaining the capacity to fight ground wars against one or two regional powers (think of that “Axis of Evil” of Iraq, North Korea, and Iran), while deploying agile, technologically advanced forces in low-intensity (and a couple of higher-intensity) counterterrorism conflicts. Nineteen years later, whatever its objectives may have been — a more-stable Middle East? Fewer and weaker terrorist organizations? — it’s clear that the Rumsfeld-Bush strategy has failed spectacularly.
Klare points out that, after almost two decades without a victory, the Pentagon has largely decided to demote international terrorism from rampaging monster to annoying mosquito cloud. Instead, the U.S. must now prepare to confront the rise of China and Russia, even if China has only one overseas military base and Russia, economically speaking, is a rickety petro-state with imperial aspirations. In other words, the U.S. must prepare to fight short but devastating wars in multiple domains (including space and cyberspace), perhaps even involving the use of tactical nuclear weapons on the Eurasian continent. To this end, the country has indeed begun a major renovation of its nuclear arsenal and announced a new 30-year plan to beef up its naval capacity. And President Trump rarely misses a chance to tout “his” creation of a new Space Force.
Meanwhile, did he actually keep his promise and at least end those forever wars? Not really. He did promise to bring all U.S. troops home from Afghanistan by Christmas, but acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller only recently said that we’d be leaving about 2,500 troops there and a similar number in Iraq, with the hope that they’d all be out by May 2021. (In other words, he dumped those wars in the lap of the future Biden administration.)
In the meantime in these years of “ending” those wars, the Trump administration actually loosened the rules of engagement for air strikes in Afghanistan, leading to a “massive increase in civilian casualties,” according to a new report from the Costs of War Project. “From the last year of the Obama administration to the last full year of recorded data during the Trump administration,” writes its author, Neta Crawford, “the number of civilians killed by U.S.-led airstrikes in Afghanistan increased by 330 percent.”
In spite of his isolationist “America First” rhetoric, in other words, President Trump has presided over an enormous buildup of an institution, the military-industrial complex, that was hardly in need of major new investment. And in spite of his anti-NATO rhetoric, his reduction by almost a third of U.S. troop strength from Germany, and all the rest, he never really violated the post-World War II foreign policy pact between the Republican and Democratic parties. Regardless of how they might disagree about dividing the wealth domestically, they remain united in their commitment to using diplomacy when possible, but military force when necessary, to maintain and expand the imperial power that they believed to be the guarantor of that wealth.
And Now Comes Joe
On January 20, 2021, Joe Biden will become the president of a country that spends as much on its armed forces, by some counts, as the next 10 countries combined. He’ll inherit responsibility for a nation with a military presence in 150 countries and special-operations deployments in 22 African nations alone. He’ll be left to oversee the still-unfinished, deeply unsuccessful, never-ending war on terror in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Yemen, and Somalia and, as publicly reported by the Department of Defense, 187,000 troops stationed outside the United States.
Nothing in Joe Biden’s history suggests that he or any of the people he’s already appointed to his national security team have the slightest inclination to destabilize that Democratic-Republican imperial pact. But empires are not sustained by inclination alone. They don’t last forever. They overextend themselves. They rot from within.
If you’re old enough, you may remember stories about the long lines for food in the crumbling Soviet Union, that other superpower of the Cold War. You can see the same thing in the United States today. Once a week, my partner delivers food boxes to hungry people in our city, those who have lost their jobs and homes, because the pandemic has only exacerbated this country’s already brutal version of economic inequality. Another friend routinely sees a food line stretching over a mile, as people wait hours for a single free bag of groceries.
Perhaps the horrors of 2020 — the fires and hurricanes, Trump’s vicious attacks on democracy, the death, sickness, and economic dislocation caused by Covid-19 — can force a real conversation about national security in 2021. Maybe this time we can finally ask whether trying to prop up a dying empire actually makes us — or indeed the world — any safer. This is the best chance in a generation to start that conversation. The alternative is to keep trudging mindlessly toward disaster.
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.
To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up to receive the latest updates from TomDispatch.com here.


truthout--2020-12-17--Ilhan Omar Says Congress Is “Not Embarrassed Enough” for Failing on COVID Relief

With a coronavirus relief deal finally coming together after months of disastrous inaction from Congress and obstruction by the GOP , Rep. Ilhan Omar said late Wednesday that lawmakers should be “ embarrassed ” by the inadequacy of the emerging package given the scale of the public health and economic emergencies facing the country .
In an interview on “ The Mehdi Hasan Show , ” the Minnesota Democrat lamented that the $ 900 billion relief measure congressional leaders are close to finalizing is dramatically smaller than the $ 2.2 trillion CARES Act approved in March .
“ It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ourselves negotiating a deal with such a small amount of money when we know just how devastated the American people are across our country , ” said Omar , the whip for the Congressional Progressive Caucus ( CPC ) .
“ Think about it : in March , we were able to send $ 1,200 checks to people and give them $ 600 in unemployment insurance benefits .
And now we ’ re talking about possibly sending a one-time check , eight months later , of $ 600 and reducing that unemployment benefit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not embarrassed enough as leaders , ” said Omar , who last week joined a CPC letter ( pdf ) demanding “ at least $ 2,000 for all working individuals and families ” in the relief package .
Omar ’ s frustration with the paltry size of the current relief measure relative to previous proposals has been echoed by other progressive lawmakers in recent days as the economic meltdown spurred by the coronavirus pandemic continues to inflict massive damage .
Researchers at the University of Chicago and the University of Notre Dame estimate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. have been pushed into poverty since the summer .
“ The economists say the sharp rise in poverty is occurring for two reasons : Millions of people can not find jobs , and government aid for the unemployed has declined sharply since the summer , ” the Washington Post reported .
“ The average unemployment payment was more than $ 900 a week from late March through the end of July , but it fell to about $ 300 a week in August , making it harder for the unemployed to pay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blocked necessary relief over the past several months , refusing to even consider ambitious legislation such as the $ 3.4 trillion HEROES Act , which the Democrat-controlled House passed in May .
Republicans also brushed aside the revised $ 2.2 trillion version of the HEROES Act that the House passed in October .
But Democratic leaders have also come under fire for their approach to the relief talks .
Alluding to a stimulus package that was discussed prior to the November presidential election but ultimately rejected by the Democratic leadership , Rep. Ro @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week , “ I was ridiculed when I said take $ 1.8 trillion.
” “ That had $ 1,200 for each adult , $ 1000 per child , $ 400 [ per week in additional unemployment benefits ] , $ 300 billion state and local , ” Khanna noted .
The California Democrat was among a small number of Democratic lawmakers who urged House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) to run with the $ 1.8 trillion offer floated by the White House , and then pursue a larger package after the election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inadequate , in part because it did not include enough aid to state and local governments .
The relief package currently under negotiation will likely not include any aid to state and local governments .
Speaking to Politico on Monday , Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) also criticized Democratic leaders for their handling of the negotiations .
“ What kind of negotiation is it when you go from $ 3.4 trillion [ in the House-passed HEROES Act ] to $ 188 billion in new money ?
” the Vermont senator said , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a bipartisan relief framework that served as a starting point for the current talks .
“ That is not a negotiation .
That is a collapse.
” The $ 900 billion package that could pass by the end of the week is nowhere near the level of spending that economists say is needed to relieve widespread suffering , bring the economy out of deep recession , and ensure a speedy and just recovery .
In a paper ( pdf ) released earlier this month by the Groundwork Collaborative , economists Dr. Mark @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Congress needs to provide economic relief of between $ 3-4.5 trillion in the short-term in order to get American families and businesses working at their full potential.
” “ Whereas our estimate for needed economic relief would bring the economy in line with true full employment , ” the pair wrote , “ falling short of this target will only widen the current health and economic crises .
”

Researchers estimate that nearly 8 million people in the U.S. have been pushed into poverty since the summer.
With a coronavirus relief deal finally coming together after months of disastrous inaction from Congress and obstruction by the GOP, Rep. Ilhan Omar said late Wednesday that lawmakers should be “embarrassed” by the inadequacy of the emerging package given the scale of the public health and economic emergencies facing the country.
In an interview on “The Mehdi Hasan Show,” the Minnesota Democrat lamented that the $900 billion relief measure congressional leaders are close to finalizing is dramatically smaller than the $2.2 trillion CARES Act approved in March.
“It’s really quite shameful that we find ourselves negotiating a deal with such a small amount of money when we know just how devastated the American people are across our country,” said Omar, the whip for the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC). “Think about it: in March, we were able to send $1,200 checks to people and give them $600 in unemployment insurance benefits. And now we’re talking about possibly sending a one-time check, eight months later, of $600 and reducing that unemployment benefit to $300.”
“We are not embarrassed enough as leaders,” said Omar, who last week joined a CPC letter (pdf) demanding “at least $2,000 for all working individuals and families” in the relief package.
Omar’s frustration with the paltry size of the current relief measure relative to previous proposals has been echoed by other progressive lawmakers in recent days as the economic meltdown spurred by the coronavirus pandemic continues to inflict massive damage. Researchers at the University of Chicago and the University of Notre Dame estimate that nearly eight million people in the U.S. have been pushed into poverty since the summer.
“The economists say the sharp rise in poverty is occurring for two reasons: Millions of people cannot find jobs, and government aid for the unemployed has declined sharply since the summer,” the Washington Post reported. “The average unemployment payment was more than $900 a week from late March through the end of July, but it fell to about $300 a week in August, making it harder for the unemployed to pay their bills.”
Senate Republicans have repeatedly blocked necessary relief over the past several months, refusing to even consider ambitious legislation such as the $3.4 trillion HEROES Act, which the Democrat-controlled House passed in May. Republicans also brushed aside the revised $2.2 trillion version of the HEROES Act that the House passed in October.
But Democratic leaders have also come under fire for their approach to the relief talks. Alluding to a stimulus package that was discussed prior to the November presidential election but ultimately rejected by the Democratic leadership, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) tweeted earlier this week, “I was ridiculed when I said take $1.8 trillion.”
“That had $1,200 for each adult, $1000 per child, $400 [per week in additional unemployment benefits], $300 billion state and local,” Khanna noted. The California Democrat was among a small number of Democratic lawmakers who urged House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to run with the $1.8 trillion offer floated by the White House, and then pursue a larger package after the election.
Pelosi dismissed the pre-election offer as inadequate, in part because it did not include enough aid to state and local governments. The relief package currently under negotiation will likely not include any aid to state and local governments.
Speaking to Politico on Monday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) also criticized Democratic leaders for their handling of the negotiations.
“What kind of negotiation is it when you go from $3.4 trillion [in the House-passed HEROES Act] to $188 billion in new money?” the Vermont senator said, referring to the level of new funding in a bipartisan relief framework that served as a starting point for the current talks. “That is not a negotiation. That is a collapse.”
The $900 billion package that could pass by the end of the week is nowhere near the level of spending that economists say is needed to relieve widespread suffering, bring the economy out of deep recession, and ensure a speedy and just recovery.
In a paper (pdf) released earlier this month by the Groundwork Collaborative, economists Dr. Mark Paul and Dr. Adam Hersh argued that “Congress needs to provide economic relief of between $3-4.5 trillion in the short-term in order to get American families and businesses working at their full potential.”
“Whereas our estimate for needed economic relief would bring the economy in line with true full employment,” the pair wrote, “falling short of this target will only widen the current health and economic crises.”
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.