truthout--2020-04-21--Pepper-Sprayed, Otay Mesa Detainees Demand Release as COVID-19 Spreads Inside

We look at the mounting number of COVID-19 cases inside immigration jails across the country and one of the largest @ @ @ @ @ Detention Center near San Diego , run by private prison company CoreCivic .
Prisoners were @ @ @ @ @ written only in English , in exchange for receiving face masks .
When some refused @ @ @ @ @ them .
This comes as activists say hundreds imprisoned in detention centers in California are @ @ @ @ @ get an update from Ruth Mendez , community activist and volunteer with Otay Mesa Detention @ @ @ @ @ later for full transcript .

We look at the mounting number of COVID-19 cases inside immigration jails across the country and one of the largest outbreaks at the Otay Mesa Detention Center near San Diego, run by private prison company CoreCivic. Prisoners were told to sign contracts, written only in English, in exchange for receiving face masks. When some refused to sign, guards pepper-sprayed them. This comes as activists say hundreds imprisoned in detention centers in California are on hunger strike. We get an update from Ruth Mendez, community activist and volunteer with Otay Mesa Detention Resistance.
Please check back later for full transcript.


truthout--2020-04-21--Trump Wants to Shield Companies Against COVID-19 Lawsuits From Sick Workers

President Donald Trump said during a press briefing Monday evening that his administration is aiming to shield corporations from legal responsibility for workers who contract the novel coronavirus on the job , a move that the Chamber of Commerce and right-wing advocacy groups are aggressively lobbying for as the White House pushes to reopen the U.S. economy against the warnings of public health experts .
“ We are trying to take liability away from these companies , ” Trump said in response to a reporter ’ s question on the subject .
“ We just don ’ t want that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and to open strong .
But I ’ ll get you a legal opinion on that.
” The president claimed that his administration had not previously discussed the issue of corporate liability , but the New York Times reported that business executives raised the matter with Trump in a conference call last week .
An “ issue of great concern to the executives on the call , ” according to the Times , “ was the need to address the liability companies could face if employees got sick after returning to work , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that they were brought back too soon — or were not placed in a safe environment — could sue en masse.
” Additionally , the Washington Post reported earlier this month that Trump administration officials discussed including in the next stimulus package “ a waiver that would clear businesses of liability from employees who contract the coronavirus on the job.
” In a memo to its members last week , the U.S. Chamber of Commerce — the most powerful business lobbying group in the nation — said that legal action from workers who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is “ perhaps the largest area of concern for the overall business community.
” The Chamber of Commerce “ argues the sheer number of lawsuits could overwhelm businesses , ” Roll Call reported .
“ Businesses say they keep their workplaces safe , ” Roll Call noted , “ but the memo indicates that major corporations privately acknowledge that many so-called essential employees will get sick or die.
” Americans for Prosperity , a Koch-backed organization , is also urging lawmakers to protect corporations from responsibility for exposing their workers to the coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the Occupational Safety and Health Administration ( OSHA ) has been flooded with thousands of complaints from workers in recent weeks accusing employers of violating federal coronavirus guidelines and failing to provide adequate protective equipment .
Justin Wolfers , an economics professor at the University of Michigan , wrote in a series of tweets last week that “ the whole point of making employers liable for risking the lives of their staff is to prevent them from exposing their staff to undue risk.
” “ Businesses are asking for the right to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no consequences .
It ’ s bad economics and bad policy , ” said Wolfers .
“ If this tweet sounds to you at all anti-business , let me be clear : I am absolutely against businesses profiting by exposing their workers to unconscionable risks of death .
”

Businesses are asking for the right to expose their workers to fatal risks with no consequences.
President Donald Trump said during a press briefing Monday evening that his administration is aiming to shield corporations from legal responsibility for workers who contract the novel coronavirus on the job, a move that the Chamber of Commerce and right-wing advocacy groups are aggressively lobbying for as the White House pushes to reopen the U.S. economy against the warnings of public health experts.
“We are trying to take liability away from these companies,” Trump said in response to a reporter’s question on the subject. “We just don’t want that because we want the companies to open and to open strong. But I’ll get you a legal opinion on that.”
The president claimed that his administration had not previously discussed the issue of corporate liability, but the New York Times reported that business executives raised the matter with Trump in a conference call last week.
An “issue of great concern to the executives on the call,” according to the Times, “was the need to address the liability companies could face if employees got sick after returning to work, given the possibility that workers who felt that they were brought back too soon — or were not placed in a safe environment — could sue en masse.”
Additionally, the Washington Post reported earlier this month that Trump administration officials discussed including in the next stimulus package “a waiver that would clear businesses of liability from employees who contract the coronavirus on the job.”
Watch Trump’s remarks:
REPORTER: [If companies] have employees come back to work and they get sick will these companies be liable? … TRUMP: I’ll give you a legal answer to that when we look it up. … REPORTER: You guys haven’t discussed that yet? TRUMP: Nobody’s discussed it, no. But we will now. pic.twitter.com/oDIo6BQbdS — JM Rieger (@RiegerReport) April 20, 2020
In a memo to its members last week, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce — the most powerful business lobbying group in the nation — said that legal action from workers who are infected by Covid-19 on the job is “perhaps the largest area of concern for the overall business community.”
The Chamber of Commerce “argues the sheer number of lawsuits could overwhelm businesses,” Roll Call reported.
“Businesses say they keep their workplaces safe,” Roll Call noted, “but the memo indicates that major corporations privately acknowledge that many so-called essential employees will get sick or die.”
Americans for Prosperity, a Koch-backed organization, is also urging lawmakers to protect corporations from responsibility for exposing their workers to the coronavirus.
As Common Dreams reported last week, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has been flooded with thousands of complaints from workers in recent weeks accusing employers of violating federal coronavirus guidelines and failing to provide adequate protective equipment.
Justin Wolfers, an economics professor at the University of Michigan, wrote in a series of tweets last week that “the whole point of making employers liable for risking the lives of their staff is to prevent them from exposing their staff to undue risk.”
“Businesses are asking for the right to expose their workers to fatal risks with no consequences. It’s bad economics and bad policy,” said Wolfers. “If this tweet sounds to you at all anti-business, let me be clear: I am absolutely against businesses profiting by exposing their workers to unconscionable risks of death.”
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--2020-04-21--The Day Petroleum Was Less Than Worthless

April 20 , 2020 , may not be remembered as the day when marijuana briefly became a more valuable commodity than petroleum .
It happened , though , right smack dab in the middle of the country ’ s unofficial 4/20 weed holiday .
Some ironies require no enhancement , and a Hollywood script with this plot twist would get laughed out of the room , but it happened all the same .
On Monday afternoon , as the COVID pandemic ran roughshod over governments and hospitals and the daily lives of billions , almighty oil was abruptly worth less @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if you had oil , you had to theoretically pay to get rid of it , instead of getting paid for delivering it .
It ’ s the equivalent of gassing up at your local station and having the attendant run you out a fiver for the privilege of depleting his stock .
The price of a barrel of oil on Monday stood at - $ 37.63 .
Note the minus sign .
Prior to yesterday , the lowest price a barrel of oil ever fetched on the market was $ 10 back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the minus sign .
This is beyond unprecedented territory .
We have run headlong through the looking glass into a surreal and disintegrating economic landscape that , again , lays bare the inherent weaknesses and inequities of the current hypercapitalist system .
What happened is a perfect example of the supply-and-demand principle that undergirds the system .
The pandemic hit , the world was told to stay home , and the demand for petroleum plummeted .
The juggernaut that is global oil production , however , can not stop on a dime and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kept producing and producing and producing , and a month later , nobody has room to store what was produced .
“ Black Gold ” abruptly became an enormous burden , and the market reacted .
That maxed capacity means if you have oil on your hands , you ’ re going to be paying someone to store it instead of profiting from it , and that ’ s what is killing the price .
By the all-holy rules of basic capitalism , any industry that gets so far out over its skis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deserves to collapse .
The grocer who consistently buys too much produce , the restauranteur who overstocks her kitchen , every small business in the country plays the supply-and-demand balancing act to their peril .
But this is oil we ’ re talking about , the “ lifeblood of the global economy , ” or at least it used to be .
The fact that petroleum zeroed out on 4/20 does not in any way diminish the choking grip that industry holds upon our country and the wider world .
The Middle East @ @ @ @ @ @ @ States , all have pinned their economies on the eternal worth of oil .
That decision just got weird .
So , of course , let us expect the Republicans in Congress and the featherweight in the White House to start pushing hard for a Big Oil bailout .
Working people can take a number ; the big dogs need to eat .
“ Lawmakers and advocacy groups alike are sounding the alarm on the dangers of a coming Big Oil bailout , ” writes Alexis Goldstein for Truthout .
“ The Center @ @ @ @ @ @ @ summarizing the unprecedented lobbying spree fossil fuel companies are undertaking to try and exploit the global pandemic , including : pushing for regulatory rollbacks , suspension of environmental law enforcement , criminalization of protest and seeking direct bailouts.
” Goldstein argues that now , right now , is the time for a Green New Deal that pushes the U.S. economy beyond the need to satisfy the voracious appetites of Big Oil .
“ It would not only end our current dependence on the decisions of petrostates like Saudi Arabia and Russia , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ create needed jobs for an economy that will be shrinking for months ( if not years ) to come .
And most importantly , a Green New Deal would ensure that the United States is not once again caught utterly unprepared by a crisis.
” Petroleum has been a part of my life since my mother smeared Vaseline on my bare baby bottom .
It was a rite of passage to learn how to operate the gas pump and smell the stink of those fumes , and later to gas up my first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of automotive “ freedom.
” September 11 happened because of oil , as did the ongoing war in Iraq .
Oil has owned politics since it was first discovered .
Oil has torn up the world , polluted the air and the water .
Oil gives with one hand , and takes twice as much with the other .
Oil is poison .
On Monday , thanks to a strange confluence of events , oil became worthless .
Within the context of the reality we have all come to either accept or endure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was the equivalent of being able to reach your hand through the wall and grab the beer you left in the next room .
It broke the rules of reality as we have been taught to understand them .
It showed that oil can cease to be important without the Earth tumbling into the sun .
Now that we know it can happen , let ’ s really start talking about what happens next .

We now know that oil can cease to be important without the Earth tumbling into the sun. Where do we go from here?
Part of the Series Despair and Disparity: The Uneven Burdens of COVID-19
April 20, 2020, may not be remembered as the day when marijuana briefly became a more valuable commodity than petroleum. It happened, though, right smack dab in the middle of the country’s unofficial 4/20 weed holiday. Some ironies require no enhancement, and a Hollywood script with this plot twist would get laughed out of the room, but it happened all the same.
On Monday afternoon, as the COVID pandemic ran roughshod over governments and hospitals and the daily lives of billions, almighty oil was abruptly worth less than zero. In other words, if you had oil, you had to theoretically pay to get rid of it, instead of getting paid for delivering it. It’s the equivalent of gassing up at your local station and having the attendant run you out a fiver for the privilege of depleting his stock.
The price of a barrel of oil on Monday stood at -$37.63. Note the minus sign. Prior to yesterday, the lowest price a barrel of oil ever fetched on the market was $10 back in 1986. Note the absence of the minus sign. This is beyond unprecedented territory. We have run headlong through the looking glass into a surreal and disintegrating economic landscape that, again, lays bare the inherent weaknesses and inequities of the current hypercapitalist system.
What happened is a perfect example of the supply-and-demand principle that undergirds the system. The pandemic hit, the world was told to stay home, and the demand for petroleum plummeted. The juggernaut that is global oil production, however, cannot stop on a dime and give you nine cents change. It kept producing and producing and producing, and a month later, nobody has room to store what was produced. “Black Gold” abruptly became an enormous burden, and the market reacted.
That maxed capacity means if you have oil on your hands, you’re going to be paying someone to store it instead of profiting from it, and that’s what is killing the price. By the all-holy rules of basic capitalism, any industry that gets so far out over its skis that its core product is rendered worthless deserves to collapse. The grocer who consistently buys too much produce, the restauranteur who overstocks her kitchen, every small business in the country plays the supply-and-demand balancing act to their peril.
But this is oil we’re talking about, the “lifeblood of the global economy,” or at least it used to be. The fact that petroleum zeroed out on 4/20 does not in any way diminish the choking grip that industry holds upon our country and the wider world. The Middle East, Russia, China, the United States, all have pinned their economies on the eternal worth of oil. That decision just got weird.
So, of course, let us expect the Republicans in Congress and the featherweight in the White House to start pushing hard for a Big Oil bailout. Working people can take a number; the big dogs need to eat.
“Lawmakers and advocacy groups alike are sounding the alarm on the dangers of a coming Big Oil bailout,” writes Alexis Goldstein for Truthout. “The Center for International Environmental Law released a report summarizing the unprecedented lobbying spree fossil fuel companies are undertaking to try and exploit the global pandemic, including: pushing for regulatory rollbacks, suspension of environmental law enforcement, criminalization of protest and seeking direct bailouts.”
The fact that petroleum zeroed out on 4/20 does not in any way diminish the choking grip that industry holds upon our country and the wider world.
Goldstein argues that now, right now, is the time for a Green New Deal that pushes the U.S. economy beyond the need to satisfy the voracious appetites of Big Oil. “It would not only end our current dependence on the decisions of petrostates like Saudi Arabia and Russia,” she writes, “it would also create needed jobs for an economy that will be shrinking for months (if not years) to come. And most importantly, a Green New Deal would ensure that the United States is not once again caught utterly unprepared by a crisis.”
Petroleum has been a part of my life since my mother smeared Vaseline on my bare baby bottom. It was a rite of passage to learn how to operate the gas pump and smell the stink of those fumes, and later to gas up my first car and go roving in an act of automotive “freedom.” September 11 happened because of oil, as did the ongoing war in Iraq. Oil has owned politics since it was first discovered. Oil has torn up the world, polluted the air and the water. Oil gives with one hand, and takes twice as much with the other. Oil is poison.
On Monday, thanks to a strange confluence of events, oil became worthless. Within the context of the reality we have all come to either accept or endure, the zeroing out of oil prices was the equivalent of being able to reach your hand through the wall and grab the beer you left in the next room. It broke the rules of reality as we have been taught to understand them. It showed that oil can cease to be important without the Earth tumbling into the sun.
Now that we know it can happen, let’s really start talking about what happens next.
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--2020-04-21--States Must Step Up to Help Immigrants Left Out of the COVID-19 Recovery

Nearly 1.5 million people who work in farming , delivery , trucking and other food supply professions — jobs that can ’ t be done from home — are undocumented immigrants or members of mixed-status families .
Many of these workers lack access to affordable health care .
They file taxes but can ’ t receive any benefits because of “ public charge ” and other rules that prohibit undocumented people from accessing welfare services .
These people , whom many consider essential to their own survival , are excluded from the CARES Act , the stimulus bill which Congress @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attempt to put a Band Aid on all the consequences of COVID-19 — mainly aids corporations while enabling those who earn more than a million dollars a year to get up to $ 1.7 million each in tax breaks .
Although the law does provide some relief to individuals , Congress deliberately left out the undocumented community and mixed-status families .
Xenophobia , instead of compassion and humanity , defines this legislation .
While the CARES Act expanded access to COVID-19 testing and treatment through Medicaid , it excludes immigrants , including many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Action for Childhood Arrivals , Temporary Protected Status holders and those who are undocumented — as if the virus is going to ask people for their immigration status .
This is a dangerous public health measure , one that leaves out many who are harvesting and picking our food ; who don ’ t get to go to the doctor regularly , and as a consequence , don ’ t know if they have high blood pressure , diabetes or other health conditions until they show critical symptoms ; and , whether lawmakers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in our communities and perform work that is critical for our survival .
“ More than ever , the wealth disparity is showing in neighborhoods like mine , ” said Antonio Alarcon , who works as an immigrant rights organizer with Make the Road NY in Jackson Heights neighborhood of New York City ’ s Queens borough .
“ This pandemic will kill people for two reasons : COVID and/or hunger .
This time I am not asking for papers for my community , what I am asking is for compassion — compassion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because of the lack of resources.
” A lot of people in the U.S. who meet certain income requirements will receive $ 1,200 from the federal government .
But this money won ’ t be available to anyone who filed their taxes with a tax identification number , which is what people who don ’ t have a Social Security number use to pay taxes .
( Yes , undocumented people pay taxes . )
It also leaves out anyone with a Social Security number who is included in the taxes of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ number , including their U.S. citizen spouse and children .
The only exception is for military families .
This provision not only excludes undocumented immigrants , but it punishes those who file with them .
It ’ s cruel to leave out people who don ’ t have any safety net ( health insurance , paid time off , sick leave ) and to also deny any cash assistance to all of those who have legal or financial relationships with undocumented immigrants .
Undocumented people can ’ t qualify for unemployment insurance .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ benefits .
This means that the same group of people who have to risk their lives by continuing to go into work during the pandemic and who don ’ t have health insurance are also left without any possible way to get an income if they lose their jobs due to COVID-19 .
When basic needs are all tied in a discriminatory way to Social Security and employment , we not only risk the lives of the people we leave out ; we risk the lives of everyone , including U.S. citizens .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been provided by the state of California , who earlier last week announced the creation of a $ 125-million Fund for All Immigrant Workers .
This public-private fund will allow undocumented immigrants impacted by COVID-19 to access much-needed help , including one-time cash payments of $ 500 for each adult with a cap of $ 1,000 per household , and other direct financial assistance .
“ [ This ] announcement is a necessary first step to close the widening gap between immigrants and vital assistance that could mean the difference between life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” said Pablo Alvarado , the co-director of the National Day Labor Alliance .
“ The abject failure of Congress and the sinister policies of the Trump administration have created a domestic human rights crisis with a disproportionate impact on California .
As a consequence , California lawmakers have a legal responsibility and moral obligation to respond accordingly.
” States like New York also have the moral responsibility to protect all the people living in the state by providing support where the federal government has failed .
This is the time for true @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the day , income , race and immigration status should not matter .
Immigrants need access to the same resources , care and opportunities as anyone else does to survive .
By excluding undocumented communities and their families from the CARES Act , Congress is ultimately saying that these lives don ’ t have value and are disposable — despite that many of these people are being labeled as “ essential ” workers and heralded as “ heroes ” by corporate media and elected officials .
Leaving immigrant communities without any protections @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but also the health of everyone else in this country .

Part of the Series Despair and Disparity: The Uneven Burdens of COVID-19
Nearly 1.5 million people who work in farming, delivery, trucking and other food supply professions — jobs that can’t be done from home — are undocumented immigrants or members of mixed-status families. Many of these workers lack access to affordable health care. They file taxes but can’t receive any benefits because of “public charge” and other rules that prohibit undocumented people from accessing welfare services.
These people, whom many consider essential to their own survival, are excluded from the CARES Act, the stimulus bill which Congress passed recently. This law — an attempt to put a Band Aid on all the consequences of COVID-19 — mainly aids corporations while enabling those who earn more than a million dollars a year to get up to $1.7 million each in tax breaks. Although the law does provide some relief to individuals, Congress deliberately left out the undocumented community and mixed-status families. Xenophobia, instead of compassion and humanity, defines this legislation.
While the CARES Act expanded access to COVID-19 testing and treatment through Medicaid, it excludes immigrants, including many lawful permanent residents, recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, Temporary Protected Status holders and those who are undocumented — as if the virus is going to ask people for their immigration status.
This is a dangerous public health measure, one that leaves out many who are harvesting and picking our food; who don’t get to go to the doctor regularly, and as a consequence, don’t know if they have high blood pressure, diabetes or other health conditions until they show critical symptoms; and, whether lawmakers like it or not, who live in our communities and perform work that is critical for our survival.
“More than ever, the wealth disparity is showing in neighborhoods like mine,” said Antonio Alarcon, who works as an immigrant rights organizer with Make the Road NY in Jackson Heights neighborhood of New York City’s Queens borough. “This pandemic will kill people for two reasons: COVID and/or hunger. This time I am not asking for papers for my community, what I am asking is for compassion — compassion [for] those who are dying because of the lack of resources.”
A lot of people in the U.S. who meet certain income requirements will receive $1,200 from the federal government. But this money won’t be available to anyone who filed their taxes with a tax identification number, which is what people who don’t have a Social Security number use to pay taxes. (Yes, undocumented people pay taxes.) It also leaves out anyone with a Social Security number who is included in the taxes of a person who files with a tax identification number, including their U.S. citizen spouse and children. The only exception is for military families.
This provision not only excludes undocumented immigrants, but it punishes those who file with them. It’s cruel to leave out people who don’t have any safety net (health insurance, paid time off, sick leave) and to also deny any cash assistance to all of those who have legal or financial relationships with undocumented immigrants.
Undocumented people can’t qualify for unemployment insurance. They can’t get any welfare benefits. This means that the same group of people who have to risk their lives by continuing to go into work during the pandemic and who don’t have health insurance are also left without any possible way to get an income if they lose their jobs due to COVID-19. When basic needs are all tied in a discriminatory way to Social Security and employment, we not only risk the lives of the people we leave out; we risk the lives of everyone, including U.S. citizens.
One ray of hope in this situation has been provided by the state of California, who earlier last week announced the creation of a $125-million Fund for All Immigrant Workers. This public-private fund will allow undocumented immigrants impacted by COVID-19 to access much-needed help, including one-time cash payments of $500 for each adult with a cap of $1,000 per household, and other direct financial assistance.
“[This] announcement is a necessary first step to close the widening gap between immigrants and vital assistance that could mean the difference between life and death for millions of Californians,” said Pablo Alvarado, the co-director of the National Day Labor Alliance. “The abject failure of Congress and the sinister policies of the Trump administration have created a domestic human rights crisis with a disproportionate impact on California. As a consequence, California lawmakers have a legal responsibility and moral obligation to respond accordingly.”
States like New York also have the moral responsibility to protect all the people living in the state by providing support where the federal government has failed. This is the time for true leadership and courage.
At the end of the day, income, race and immigration status should not matter. Immigrants need access to the same resources, care and opportunities as anyone else does to survive. By excluding undocumented communities and their families from the CARES Act, Congress is ultimately saying that these lives don’t have value and are disposable — despite that many of these people are being labeled as “essential” workers and heralded as “heroes” by corporate media and elected officials.
Leaving immigrant communities without any protections not only threatens their survival and well-being but also the health of everyone else in this country.
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--2020-04-22--Barr Threatens Legal Action Against States’ Stay-at-Home Orders

During an interview on Tuesday with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt , Attorney General William Barr said that he had several qualms with regard to stay-at-home orders issued by state governors across the country , and suggested he may seek legal action against those he believed went beyond constitutional bounds .
Barr tried to explain to Hewitt how the Justice Department might go about compelling states to lessen or remove their orders , which were initially put in place to lessen the spread of COVID-19 .
“ If we think one goes too far , we initially try to jawbone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adjusting them , ” Barr said .
“ If they ’ re not and people bring lawsuits , we file statement of interest and side with the plaintiffs.
” “ These are unprecedented burdens on civil liberties right now .
You know , the idea that you have to stay in your house is disturbingly close to house arrest , ” Barr explained , adding the caveat that in some places , stay-at-home orders “ might still be justified.
” Barr ’ s comments , however , do not appear to match reality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confinement in one ’ s home as an alternative to a prison sentence .
There are strict guidelines on how one can behave , and limits on where a person can travel , if at all .
Conversely , while 90 percent of the population is currently under some form of a stay-at-home order , such decrees are not as hardline as most house arrest arrangements are .
People are generally not limited by these orders from going outside or walking in parks , for example .
Some activities are limited , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , not heavily enforced in a lot of areas .
Still , Barr seemed to tout the line pushed by President Donald Trump , that stay-at-home orders should begin to be lifted , in his view .
“ We are now seeing that these are bending the curve , and we have to come up with more targeted approaches , ” he suggested .
Barr added that he thought Trump ’ s plan for “ reopening ” state economies across the U.S. was “ superb and very commonsensical , ” in spite of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to amp up testing to measure success rates .
Health experts disagree , with many arguing that opening things up now would be a mistake and risks creating a “ second wave ” of COVID-19 infections .
If Barr does indeed intend to join in lawsuits against states from residents , he may be limited in doing so due to precedent set by the Supreme Court .
In a decision about mandatory smallpox vaccinations made in the 1905 case Jacobson v. Massachusetts , the Court held that , “ in every well-ordered society @ @ @ @ @ @ @ respect of his liberty may at times , under the pressure of great dangers , be subjected to such restraint , to be enforced by reasonable regulations , as the safety of the general public may demand.
” In other words , a person has certain rights , but where dangerous circumstances arise , those rights can be suspended in a just manner .
Stay-at-home orders may fit those criteria .
Most across the country disagree with calls to end the stay-at-home orders .
According to a recently published Reuters/Ipsos poll , 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remain in place “ until the doctors and public health officials say it is safe .
”

During an interview on Tuesday with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt, Attorney General William Barr said that he had several qualms with regard to stay-at-home orders issued by state governors across the country, and suggested he may seek legal action against those he believed went beyond constitutional bounds.
Barr tried to explain to Hewitt how the Justice Department might go about compelling states to lessen or remove their orders, which were initially put in place to lessen the spread of COVID-19.
“If we think one goes too far, we initially try to jawbone the governors into rolling them back or adjusting them,” Barr said. “If they’re not and people bring lawsuits, we file statement of interest and side with the plaintiffs.”
“These are unprecedented burdens on civil liberties right now. You know, the idea that you have to stay in your house is disturbingly close to house arrest,” Barr explained, adding the caveat that in some places, stay-at-home orders “might still be justified.”
Barr’s comments, however, do not appear to match reality. House arrest is generally viewed as confinement in one’s home as an alternative to a prison sentence. There are strict guidelines on how one can behave, and limits on where a person can travel, if at all.
Conversely, while 90 percent of the population is currently under some form of a stay-at-home order, such decrees are not as hardline as most house arrest arrangements are. People are generally not limited by these orders from going outside or walking in parks, for example. Some activities are limited, but they are also, in many circumstances, not heavily enforced in a lot of areas.
Still, Barr seemed to tout the line pushed by President Donald Trump, that stay-at-home orders should begin to be lifted, in his view. “We are now seeing that these are bending the curve, and we have to come up with more targeted approaches,” he suggested.
Barr added that he thought Trump’s plan for “reopening” state economies across the U.S. was “superb and very commonsensical,” in spite of the fact that it lacks the means to amp up testing to measure success rates.
Health experts disagree, with many arguing that opening things up now would be a mistake and risks creating a “second wave” of COVID-19 infections.
If Barr does indeed intend to join in lawsuits against states from residents, he may be limited in doing so due to precedent set by the Supreme Court. In a decision about mandatory smallpox vaccinations made in the 1905 case Jacobson v. Massachusetts, the Court held that, “in every well-ordered society … the rights of the individual in respect of his liberty may at times, under the pressure of great dangers, be subjected to such restraint, to be enforced by reasonable regulations, as the safety of the general public may demand.”
In other words, a person has certain rights, but where dangerous circumstances arise, those rights can be suspended in a just manner. Stay-at-home orders may fit those criteria.
Most across the country disagree with calls to end the stay-at-home orders. According to a recently published Reuters/Ipsos poll, 72 percent of Americans say stay-at-home orders should remain in place “until the doctors and public health officials say it is safe.”
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--2020-04-22--Governor Kemp Is Lubricating the Economic Machine With His Constituents’ Blood

It is time to start saying this in a dreary loop of bad but necessary noise : This pandemic is not even vaguely close to being over .
Without testing , and until there is an effective vaccine , stay-at-home is how it has to be .
To prevent an escalation in deaths , we have to crouch in our foxholes until the bombardment ends .
It is as simple as that .
Those who are agitating to reopen everything are knowingly or unknowingly doing the bidding of conservative groups tied to Republican megadonors and the White House , all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work so they can start making money again .
They don ’ t care about us .
They never , ever have .
If social distancing is lifted before a national testing regimen has been undertaken , before a free vaccine for everyone is as available as fast food , COVID-19 will come back again and again until the precious economy these industrialists want us to die for will be nothing but dust and ashes .
Who agrees with me about the menace we face ?
Robert Redfield , director of the Centers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with me .
“ There ’ s a possibility that the assault of the virus on our nation next winter will actually be even more difficult than the one we just went through , ” Redfield told The Washington Post .
“ And when I ’ ve said this to others , they kind of put their head back , they don ’ t understand what I mean .
We ’ re going to have the flu epidemic and the coronavirus epidemic at the same time.
” The ‘ rona and the flu @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the scenario Redfield describes could actually be a third wave if the summer sees a second wave caused by ending the stay-at-home orders too early ?
Sounds like something we should definitely try to avoid , right ?
Enter Brian Kemp , Republican governor of Georgia , who achieved his office by way of perhaps the most brazen broad-daylight act of voter suppression ever seen in the modern era .
Kemp was secretary of state when he ran for governor in ‘ 18 and thus in charge of the election he was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
Kemp ’ s opponent in that race , Stacey Abrams , is waiting for a call from Joe Biden .
She should be running Georgia ’ s catastrophic COVID-19 response from the governor ’ s office .
Instead , like the rest of us , she gets to watch in horror as Kemp feeds his state to the virus in order to help Donald Trump look good for a news cycle or two .
“ Georgia Republican Gov .
Brian Kemp announced Monday that certain businesses can reopen this week in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of state leaders and defies the warnings of many public health officials , ” reports CNN .
“ Kemp said specifically that fitness centers , bowling alleys , body art studios , barbers , hair and nail salons , and massage therapy businesses can reopen as early [ as ] Friday , April 24 .
Theaters and restaurants will be allowed to open on Monday , April 27 , while bars and night clubs will remain closed for now.
” Kemp has his own COVID-19 task force , which is nice , except @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his decision to dramatically lift the social distancing rules .
They found out when everyone else did , and the news did not sit well .
Bernice King , daughter of Martin Luther King Jr. and a community outreach committee co-chair on the task force , is thinking about quitting in protest .
“ Like many of you who are in the state of Georgia , I ’ m extremely concerned about the governor ’ s plans and what his decisions will mean for the safety , health and lives of Georgia residents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statement .
There ’ s a grim irony in this : Kemp ignored his coronavirus task force , while Trump ’ s own coronavirus task force is laboring to ignore him .
This is not good government .
This is a frantic terrier chasing its tail .
All movement , no progress .
King ’ s concerns are shared by mayors all across the state of Georgia .
The mayors of Atlanta , Savannah , and other cities and towns in the state are preparing to tell their citizens to ignore Gov .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ I am beyond disturbed , ” Savannah Mayor Van Johnson told CNN .
“ In my mind , it ’ s reckless .
Our reality here in Savannah is our numbers are still going up.
” Indeed , they are .
“ Projections show that Georgia has not seen the worst of the coronavirus , ” reports The New York Times , “ with deaths not forecast to level off until early May , according to the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation .
The state has recorded about 19,000 confirmed cases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deaths as of Tuesday afternoon , according to state public health data.
” That forecast is based upon the stay-at-home model being in place .
Remove it , and the numbers in Georgia could skyrocket , as they have in several states whose governors have not taken this thing seriously because doing so would tarnish Trump .
That , right there , is the way a second wave gets rolling this summer , even as a vast majority believe we all need to stay at home until there ’ s a testing regimen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a vaccine .
This is not rocket science .
This is basic science .
“ There are more important things than living , ” Texas Lt. Gov .
Dan Patrick told Fox News yesterday , “ and that ’ s saving this country for my children and my grandchildren and saving this country for all of us.
” Tell that to the dead , Mr. Patrick .
They know better .
This push to reopen is not about “ saving the country.
” It is about getting the machine going again , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with blood .
We can get out from under this thing until people like Kemp and Patrick stop polishing the brass on Trump ’ s Titanic , start listening to scientists , and exercise patience .
The very right-wingers who sling the insult “ snowflakes , ” the tough guys with the AR-15s , the preppers ready for Armageddon , are decompensating after a few weeks of hard times , and all with people like Kemp , Patrick and Trump egging them on .
These quarantine protests are not a mass movement .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ clever agitprop artists on the right , are making it seem like a tide of patriotic humanity is throwing itself against the strictures of unreasonable personal restrictions .
This could not be further from the truth .
This is a video of the anti-quarantine protest in Ohio on Monday .
There are barely enough people there to start a college football team .
This “ movement ” is nothing more or less than a GOP-sponsored menace .
The crowds at these “ protests ” may be small , but every single one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it gets into these gatherings and goes home with the participants .
There ’ s your second wave , coming soon to your state , if it isn ’ t there already .
I do not see a way out of this that does not involve a monstrous body count among Trump ’ s most devoted supporters .
Brian Kemp and the governors of his ilk , like the president they kneel before , are in the process of committing manslaughter on a massive scale .
Why ?
Because this pandemic is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but Trump wants to win in November , and he has friends to help in that endeavor even if it costs thousands of lives .
It is a preposterous situation .
Stay home , Georgia .
Please .
Do not listen to your governor .

Kemp ignored his COVID-19 task force, while Trump’s task force is laboring to ignore him. This is not good government.
Part of the Series Despair and Disparity: The Uneven Burdens of COVID-19
It is time to start saying this in a dreary loop of bad but necessary noise: This pandemic is not even vaguely close to being over. Without testing, and until there is an effective vaccine, stay-at-home is how it has to be. To prevent an escalation in deaths, we have to crouch in our foxholes until the bombardment ends. It is as simple as that.
Those who are agitating to reopen everything are knowingly or unknowingly doing the bidding of conservative groups tied to Republican megadonors and the White House, all of whom want us all back to work so they can start making money again. They don’t care about us. They never, ever have.
If social distancing is lifted before a national testing regimen has been undertaken, before a free vaccine for everyone is as available as fast food, COVID-19 will come back again and again until the precious economy these industrialists want us to die for will be nothing but dust and ashes.
Who agrees with me about the menace we face? Robert Redfield, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, agrees with me. “There’s a possibility that the assault of the virus on our nation next winter will actually be even more difficult than the one we just went through,” Redfield told The Washington Post. “And when I’ve said this to others, they kind of put their head back, they don’t understand what I mean. We’re going to have the flu epidemic and the coronavirus epidemic at the same time.”
The ‘rona and the flu at the same time? The possibility that the scenario Redfield describes could actually be a third wave if the summer sees a second wave caused by ending the stay-at-home orders too early? Sounds like something we should definitely try to avoid, right?
Enter Brian Kemp, Republican governor of Georgia, who achieved his office by way of perhaps the most brazen broad-daylight act of voter suppression ever seen in the modern era. Kemp was secretary of state when he ran for governor in ‘18 and thus in charge of the election he was in, and he just … took it.
Kemp’s opponent in that race, Stacey Abrams, is waiting for a call from Joe Biden. She should be running Georgia’s catastrophic COVID-19 response from the governor’s office. Instead, like the rest of us, she gets to watch in horror as Kemp feeds his state to the virus in order to help Donald Trump look good for a news cycle or two.
“Georgia Republican Gov. Brian Kemp announced Monday that certain businesses can reopen this week in a move that breaks from the majority of state leaders and defies the warnings of many public health officials,” reports CNN. “Kemp said specifically that fitness centers, bowling alleys, body art studios, barbers, hair and nail salons, and massage therapy businesses can reopen as early [as] Friday, April 24. Theaters and restaurants will be allowed to open on Monday, April 27, while bars and night clubs will remain closed for now.”
Kemp has his own COVID-19 task force, which is nice, except he did not inform its members of his decision to dramatically lift the social distancing rules. They found out when everyone else did, and the news did not sit well.
Kemp ignored his coronavirus task force, while Trump’s own coronavirus task force is laboring to ignore him. This is not good government.
Bernice King, daughter of Martin Luther King Jr. and a community outreach committee co-chair on the task force, is thinking about quitting in protest. “Like many of you who are in the state of Georgia, I’m extremely concerned about the governor’s plans and what his decisions will mean for the safety, health and lives of Georgia residents,” King said in a video statement.
There’s a grim irony in this: Kemp ignored his coronavirus task force, while Trump’s own coronavirus task force is laboring to ignore him. This is not good government. This is a frantic terrier chasing its tail. All movement, no progress.
King’s concerns are shared by mayors all across the state of Georgia. The mayors of Atlanta, Savannah, and other cities and towns in the state are preparing to tell their citizens to ignore Gov. Kemp if he gives the all-clear. “I am beyond disturbed,” Savannah Mayor Van Johnson told CNN. “In my mind, it’s reckless. Our reality here in Savannah is our numbers are still going up.”
Indeed, they are. “Projections show that Georgia has not seen the worst of the coronavirus,” reports The New York Times, “with deaths not forecast to level off until early May, according to the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. The state has recorded about 19,000 confirmed cases of the virus, with nearly 800 deaths as of Tuesday afternoon, according to state public health data.”
That forecast is based upon the stay-at-home model being in place. Remove it, and the numbers in Georgia could skyrocket, as they have in several states whose governors have not taken this thing seriously because doing so would tarnish Trump. That, right there, is the way a second wave gets rolling this summer, even as a vast majority believe we all need to stay at home until there’s a testing regimen in place and, at some point, a vaccine.
This is not rocket science. This is basic science.
“There are more important things than living,” Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick told Fox News yesterday, “and that’s saving this country for my children and my grandchildren and saving this country for all of us.”
Tell that to the dead, Mr. Patrick. They know better. This push to reopen is not about “saving the country.” It is about getting the machine going again, even if it requires lubricating the gears with blood.
This push to reopen is about getting the machine going again, even if it requires lubricating the gears with blood.
We can’t get out from under this thing until people like Kemp and Patrick stop polishing the brass on Trump’s Titanic, start listening to scientists, and exercise patience. The very right-wingers who sling the insult “snowflakes,” the tough guys with the AR-15s, the preppers ready for Armageddon, are decompensating after a few weeks of hard times, and all with people like Kemp, Patrick and Trump egging them on.
These quarantine protests are not a mass movement. The news media, as well as clever agitprop artists on the right, are making it seem like a tide of patriotic humanity is throwing itself against the strictures of unreasonable personal restrictions. This could not be further from the truth.
This is a video of the anti-quarantine protest in Ohio on Monday. There are barely enough people there to start a college football team. This “movement” is nothing more or less than a GOP-sponsored menace. The crowds at these “protests” may be small, but every single one of them can and will spread COVID-19 if it gets into these gatherings and goes home with the participants. There’s your second wave, coming soon to your state, if it isn’t there already.
I do not see a way out of this that does not involve a monstrous body count among Trump’s most devoted supporters. Brian Kemp and the governors of his ilk, like the president they kneel before, are in the process of committing manslaughter on a massive scale. Why? Because this pandemic is not even vaguely close to being over, but Trump wants to win in November, and he has friends to help in that endeavor even if it costs thousands of lives.
It is a preposterous situation. Stay home, Georgia. Please. Do not listen to your governor.
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--2020-04-22--Greta Thunberg: Climate Activists Are Changing How They Organize Amid a Pandemic

AMY GOODMAN : Just before our broadcast , 17-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg spoke in an Earth Day live stream hosted by the Nobel Prize Museum .
She spoke about how Fridays for Future school strikes movement is responding to the pandemic .
GRETA THUNBERG : Some people feel like , “ How long is this going to go on ?
” And there ’ s this kind of big uncertainty .
And people are not always comfortable with that kind of uncertainty , and people want to know what will happen and how are we going to move @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for many to accept that we don ’ t know anything , what ’ s going to happen .
We don ’ t know how long this is going to go on , because we can ’ t predict that kind of things .
It feels like right now the world is totally different from how it was just a week ago .
So we just have to adapt and see what happens and change our behavior and plan from there , from — and because that is what you — simply what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
You have to adapt to the current situation .
But still I feel like within the Fridays for Future movement , there ’ s still this sort of big sense of resistance , and people are thinking , “ We will get out of this .
And when we do , we will continue , and we will do everything we can that is possible in that situation to continue to push even harder.
” And I feel like many people , they have not lost their sense of hope .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ things .
And we ’ re maybe just saving it for later at the moment .

AMY GOODMAN: Just before our broadcast, 17-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg spoke in an Earth Day live stream hosted by the Nobel Prize Museum. She spoke about how Fridays for Future school strikes movement is responding to the pandemic.
GRETA THUNBERG: Some people feel like, “How long is this going to go on?” And there’s this kind of big uncertainty. And people are not always comfortable with that kind of uncertainty, and people want to know what will happen and how are we going to move forward. And it might be hard for many to accept that we don’t know anything, what’s going to happen. We don’t know how long this is going to go on, because we can’t predict that kind of things.
It feels like right now the world is totally different from how it was just a week ago. So we just have to adapt and see what happens and change our behavior and plan from there, from — and because that is what you — simply what you have to do in a crisis. You have to adapt to the current situation.
But still I feel like within the Fridays for Future movement, there’s still this sort of big sense of resistance, and people are thinking, “We will get out of this. And when we do, we will continue, and we will do everything we can that is possible in that situation to continue to push even harder.” And I feel like many people, they have not lost their sense of hope. We have just changed the way we do things. And we’re maybe just saving it for later at the moment.


truthout--2020-04-22--Amid Hunger Crisis in Africa, Some Countries Face COVID-19 Without Ventilators

Some 265 million people are expected to face acute hunger as the coronavirus crisis could trigger a second pandemic of hunger .
The crisis is projected to disproportionately affect Africa , where there is already widespread hunger .
This comes as the World Health Organization estimates the number of COVID-19 cases in Africa could rise to 10 million in the next three to six months .
Ten African countries don ’ t have a single ventilator .
“ This is an extremely terrifying and frightening moment for the people of Africa .
… We were already facing a major food @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hit , ” says lifelong South African human rights and climate justice activist Kumi Naidoo , former secretary general of Amnesty International and former head of Greenpeace .
This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : This is Democracy Now !
The Quarantine Report .
I ’ m Amy Goodman , with Juan González .
Two hundred sixty-five million .
That ’ s the number of people expected to face acute hunger as the coronavirus crisis could trigger a pandemic of hunger , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ report .
The study , released Tuesday , says the number of severely hungry people worldwide will nearly double by the end of this year due to the impact of the spread of COVID-19 .
On Tuesday , the head of the World Food Programme warned the world will see “ multiple famines of biblical proportions ” if swift action isn ’ t taken .
The crisis is projected to disproportionately affect Africa , where there ’ s already widespread hunger .
In South Sudan , a food crisis affected more than 60 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Now with the coronavirus , reports of growing desperation are laying bare rampant inequality across the continent .
In South Africa , which is under strict lockdown as the African nation with the most reported COVID-19 cases , there ’ s reportedly a food crisis in Cape Town , as the ongoing lockdown has left informal workers who have lost their livelihoods with little relief .
There are also reports of growing panic about hunger in Nigeria .
This is a resident of Lagos , Nigeria ’ s largest city .
AMY GOODMAN @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Organization estimates the number of COVID-19 cases in Africa could rise to 10 million in the next three to six months .
The New York Times reports public hospitals in 41 countries across Africa have less than 2,000 ventilators ; 10 African countries do not have a single ventilator .
For more , we ’ re going to London , where we ’ re joined by Kumi Naidoo , the former secretary general of Amnesty International , former head of Greenpeace .
He is a lifelong South African human rights activist and climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to head Greenpeace .
Kumi , welcome back to Democracy Now !
As you hear those figures about Africa , and particularly what ’ s happening in your country of South Africa , where decades ago you were a very well-known anti-apartheid activist , as you started your activism right through to today , talk about what Africa faces .
KUMI NAIDOO : I think this is an extremely terrifying and frightening moment for the people of Africa .
It ’ s important to note that that report that was released by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the world that in 2020 we were already facing a major food crisis .
That was before the coronavirus hit .
Now we ’ re looking at a situation where the report says that we could be looking at about 300,000 deaths per day over a three-month period .
Now , the reality for Africa is that before even the coronavirus hits , this is what we are dealing with .
We ’ re dealing with healthcare systems that are not strong .
We ’ re dealing with a population that has high @ @ @ @ @ @ @ levels of HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis and malaria .
And we ’ re looking at economies that are actually really struggling .
So , right now I think we are in a very vulnerable state as the African continent , and we hope that international solidarity will be there to help our people get through this very bumpy ride ahead of us .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : And , Kumi , I ’ m wondering if you could talk about the impact especially on the most populous nations in Africa — Egypt , Nigeria , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Africa , where you are .
The question of the increasing globalization and urbanization of the world has led to these giant megacities , even in Africa , where a virus like the coronavirus can spread much more rapidly .
Amy mentioned South Sudan , a country of 11 million people .
It ’ s got more vice presidents — five vice presidents — than it has ventilators .
It only has four ventilators in the whole country .
How can these especially large countries , with these huge urban populations , cope @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , for instance , in Uganda , which Uganda has a massive public health program that ’ s already spreading out , trying to identify potential hot spots in their country ?
KUMI NAIDOO : Well , I think that the positive news is that the extent of how fast the virus has moved through the African continent has not been as devastating as it was in Europe .
So , when we look at the situation in South Africa , for example , the interventions that have been made by the South @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ensure , in the first instance , that we prevent deaths , but to actually buy time for when the pandemic peaks , so that during this time we ramp up on PPE , we ramp up on testing , field hospitals and so on .
So that ’ s what ’ s been planned .
Right now , as we stand , the level of loss of human life on the African continent , compared to Europe or the U.S. , for example , is still painful , but , you know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the number is still under a hundred deaths .
So , the preparedness , though , the preparedness of African countries , if we have a situation like what we had in New York in terms of ventilators , equipment , trained personnel and so on , is going to be pretty devastating .
So , that ’ s why I think the efforts now that are being made by individual African countries , but also by the African Union , needs to be generously supported , because for many people in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ almost also between , if you want , a pandemic that ’ s a health pandemic or a hunger pandemic .
And as many people are saying , you know , if we don ’ t get killed by COVID-19 , we ’ ll get killed by hunger .
And so , balancing this is going to be a very tricky act of leadership .
But what we hope is that we have a mentality , in terms of how we think , we need to build the continent forward , is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which shows all these vulnerabilities .
We have to learn from this so that we are building in a way that we address the climate crisis , we address inequality , we address maldistribution of budgetary resources and so on .
AMY GOODMAN : And , Kumi Naidoo , the price of oil dropping below zero for the first time ever Monday , the historic collapse due to this historic lack of demand as many in the world are told to shelter at home , what are the implications of this ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ two .
KUMI NAIDOO : Well , the one sort of short-term positive , if you want , impact is that emissions have actually reduced drastically .
And the fact that the scale of the impact has been so much and the fact that people have responded in most countries with such urgency and also ensuring that they ’ re taking the painful actions of being in lockdown — by the way , I ’ m not in South Africa ; I ’ m locked down in London at the moment , waiting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So , given the fact that people have taken all of these efforts shows that there is a greater capability within the people of our planet to take the big actions that we need to take to address the other challenges that have been with us for so long .
The major problem right now , we have to be conscious that , as we saw with the United States after 9/11 and the PATRIOT Act , that was a special reduction in civil liberties and so on , but we see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , many of those elements still remain .
One of the concerns we must have is that we want to be very clear that , as citizens , we are supporting what our governments are doing in this moment of crisis , but we also need to ensure that we do not have a situation where , immediately after this , most of those measures remain in place .
So , we have to understand the crisis that we ’ re in is a multifaceted crisis .
It ’ s a crisis of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , of course , climate and environment .
And let ’ s be clear that if we don ’ t address environmental degradation , the situation that we have now with the spread of viruses , as health professionals have been warning us , will continue .
Forests and other ecological assets help prevent the flow of viruses and so on .
And right now humanity must take a hard look at ourselves about whether we want to build back after corona exactly what we had , or if we want to build @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a more sustainable world .
AMY GOODMAN : Kumi Naidoo , we want to thank you for being with us , former secretary general of Amnesty International , previously the head of Greenpeace , lifelong South African human rights and climate justice activist , on this 50th anniversary of Earth Day special in the midst of the pandemic .

Some 265 million people are expected to face acute hunger as the coronavirus crisis could trigger a second pandemic of hunger. The crisis is projected to disproportionately affect Africa, where there is already widespread hunger. This comes as the World Health Organization estimates the number of COVID-19 cases in Africa could rise to 10 million in the next three to six months. Ten African countries don’t have a single ventilator. “This is an extremely terrifying and frightening moment for the people of Africa. … We were already facing a major food crisis — that was before the coronavirus hit,” says lifelong South African human rights and climate justice activist Kumi Naidoo, former secretary general of Amnesty International and former head of Greenpeace.
TRANSCRIPT
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now! The Quarantine Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González. Two hundred sixty-five million. That’s the number of people expected to face acute hunger as the coronavirus crisis could trigger a pandemic of hunger, this according to a new United Nations report. The study, released Tuesday, says the number of severely hungry people worldwide will nearly double by the end of this year due to the impact of the spread of COVID-19. On Tuesday, the head of the World Food Programme warned the world will see “multiple famines of biblical proportions” if swift action isn’t taken.
The crisis is projected to disproportionately affect Africa, where there’s already widespread hunger. In South Sudan, a food crisis affected more than 60% of the population last year. Now with the coronavirus, reports of growing desperation are laying bare rampant inequality across the continent. In South Africa, which is under strict lockdown as the African nation with the most reported COVID-19 cases, there’s reportedly a food crisis in Cape Town, as the ongoing lockdown has left informal workers who have lost their livelihoods with little relief. There are also reports of growing panic about hunger in Nigeria. This is a resident of Lagos, Nigeria’s largest city.
SHEHU ISAH DAIYANU: If this coronavirus did not kill people with disability, definitely this order of stay at home will kill people, because, let me tell you, most of my people, they don’t eat. Related Story News | Immigration African Migrants Pledge to Continue Journey Despite US Asylum Ban Migrants point out that U.S. policies created the conditions that led them to flee. Truthout
AMY GOODMAN: This comes as the World Health Organization estimates the number of COVID-19 cases in Africa could rise to 10 million in the next three to six months. The New York Times reports public hospitals in 41 countries across Africa have less than 2,000 ventilators; 10 African countries do not have a single ventilator.
For more, we’re going to London, where we’re joined by Kumi Naidoo, the former secretary general of Amnesty International, former head of Greenpeace. He is a lifelong South African human rights activist and climate justice activist, was the first African to head Greenpeace.
Kumi, welcome back to Democracy Now! As you hear those figures about Africa, and particularly what’s happening in your country of South Africa, where decades ago you were a very well-known anti-apartheid activist, as you started your activism right through to today, talk about what Africa faces.
KUMI NAIDOO: I think this is an extremely terrifying and frightening moment for the people of Africa. It’s important to note that that report that was released by the World Food Programme was already saying to the world that in 2020 we were already facing a major food crisis. That was before the coronavirus hit. Now we’re looking at a situation where the report says that we could be looking at about 300,000 deaths per day over a three-month period.
Now, the reality for Africa is that before even the coronavirus hits, this is what we are dealing with. We’re dealing with healthcare systems that are not strong. We’re dealing with a population that has high levels of vulnerability because of the high levels of HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis and malaria. And we’re looking at economies that are actually really struggling. So, right now I think we are in a very vulnerable state as the African continent, and we hope that international solidarity will be there to help our people get through this very bumpy ride ahead of us.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Kumi, I’m wondering if you could talk about the impact especially on the most populous nations in Africa — Egypt, Nigeria, Ethiopia and, of course, South Africa, where you are. The question of the increasing globalization and urbanization of the world has led to these giant megacities, even in Africa, where a virus like the coronavirus can spread much more rapidly. Amy mentioned South Sudan, a country of 11 million people. It’s got more vice presidents — five vice presidents — than it has ventilators. It only has four ventilators in the whole country. How can these especially large countries, with these huge urban populations, cope? And what lessons do they have, for instance, in Uganda, which Uganda has a massive public health program that’s already spreading out, trying to identify potential hot spots in their country?
KUMI NAIDOO: Well, I think that the positive news is that the extent of how fast the virus has moved through the African continent has not been as devastating as it was in Europe. So, when we look at the situation in South Africa, for example, the interventions that have been made by the South African government have really been to actually ensure, in the first instance, that we prevent deaths, but to actually buy time for when the pandemic peaks, so that during this time we ramp up on PPE, we ramp up on testing, field hospitals and so on. So that’s what’s been planned. Right now, as we stand, the level of loss of human life on the African continent, compared to Europe or the U.S., for example, is still painful, but, you know, like South Africa, for example, the number is still under a hundred deaths.
So, the preparedness, though, the preparedness of African countries, if we have a situation like what we had in New York in terms of ventilators, equipment, trained personnel and so on, is going to be pretty devastating. So, that’s why I think the efforts now that are being made by individual African countries, but also by the African Union, needs to be generously supported, because for many people in Africa right now, the choice is almost also between, if you want, a pandemic that’s a health pandemic or a hunger pandemic. And as many people are saying, you know, if we don’t get killed by COVID-19, we’ll get killed by hunger.
And so, balancing this is going to be a very tricky act of leadership. But what we hope is that we have a mentality, in terms of how we think, we need to build the continent forward, is not to build back exactly what we had, which shows all these vulnerabilities. We have to learn from this so that we are building in a way that we address the climate crisis, we address inequality, we address maldistribution of budgetary resources and so on.
AMY GOODMAN: And, Kumi Naidoo, the price of oil dropping below zero for the first time ever Monday, the historic collapse due to this historic lack of demand as many in the world are told to shelter at home, what are the implications of this? And we just have a minute or two.
KUMI NAIDOO: Well, the one sort of short-term positive, if you want, impact is that emissions have actually reduced drastically. And the fact that the scale of the impact has been so much and the fact that people have responded in most countries with such urgency and also ensuring that they’re taking the painful actions of being in lockdown — by the way, I’m not in South Africa; I’m locked down in London at the moment, waiting to try and get to South Africa. So, given the fact that people have taken all of these efforts shows that there is a greater capability within the people of our planet to take the big actions that we need to take to address the other challenges that have been with us for so long.
The major problem right now, we have to be conscious that, as we saw with the United States after 9/11 and the PATRIOT Act, that was a special reduction in civil liberties and so on, but we see that even though 9/11 is behind us, many of those elements still remain. One of the concerns we must have is that we want to be very clear that, as citizens, we are supporting what our governments are doing in this moment of crisis, but we also need to ensure that we do not have a situation where, immediately after this, most of those measures remain in place.
So, we have to understand the crisis that we’re in is a multifaceted crisis. It’s a crisis of poverty, hunger, human rights and, of course, climate and environment. And let’s be clear that if we don’t address environmental degradation, the situation that we have now with the spread of viruses, as health professionals have been warning us, will continue. Forests and other ecological assets help prevent the flow of viruses and so on. And right now humanity must take a hard look at ourselves about whether we want to build back after corona exactly what we had, or if we want to build back a more equitable, more just and a more sustainable world.
AMY GOODMAN: Kumi Naidoo, we want to thank you for being with us, former secretary general of Amnesty International, previously the head of Greenpeace, lifelong South African human rights and climate justice activist, on this 50th anniversary of Earth Day special in the midst of the pandemic.
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--2020-04-22--$300 Million in COVID-19 Aid Went Directly to Corporations Over Small Businesses

Multiple new lawsuits allege that financial giants responsible for doling out billions in small business relief “ prioritized ” large corporate clients for the loans after dozens of publicly traded firms received aid before the program ran out of funding .
The Paycheck Protection Program , a $ 349 billion fund for emergency loans to small businesses that would be forgiven if they keep their employees , ran out of money last week after banks backed by the Small Business Administration ( SBA ) processed about 1.6 million loans in a matter of days .
But not all of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after lawmakers added a provision allowing companies with more than 500 employees to qualify if they met certain criteria .
About 75 publicly traded companies , some with market values of more than $ 100 million , received a combined $ 300 million in loans from the program , according to the Associated Press .
Eight of the companies received $ 10 million apiece , the maximum loan amount .
Data previously released by the SBA show that 4,400 companies received loans of $ 5 million or more , though the national average @ @ @ @ @ @ @ restaurant chains like Shake Shack , Ruth ’ s Chris Steak House , Potbelly and Taco Cabana received $ 10 million apiece in loans sparked backlash .
Shake Shack , which had more than $ 100 million in the bank , said it will return the loan .
The news drew multiple class-action lawsuits from small businesses , who argue the banks “ prioritized corporate greed ” by putting large clients ahead of smaller companies .
Two lawsuits were filed against JPMorgan Chase and separate lawsuits were filed against Bank of America and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ District of California , according to the New York Times .
The SBA provided the loans on a first-come , first-serve basis but banks were given wide latitude to process the applications .
Bank of America , for example , rejected applications from small businesses that they had received previous loans or credit from other banks .
A judge ruled earlier this month that the practice did not run afoul of the program ’ s rules , but these new lawsuits allege that banks also set aside applications that had not rejected to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then the funding ran out .
“ Chase concealed from the public that it was reshuffling the PPP applications it received and prioritizing the applications that would make the bank the most money , ” said one of the suits against the bank .
“ It was supposed to be first come , first serve , but when you look at the statistics it seems clear that JPMorgan served its biggest clients first , ” Lou Rabon , the chief executive of a security consulting firm who is the lead plaintiff in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ When your bank is not there when you really need them , that ’ s not a bank we want to do business with.
” A spokesperson for the bank told the outlet that it did process the loans on a first-come , first-serve basis but different divisions processed applications for existing clients .
The commercial bank was able to process all of the thousands of applications it received while small business bankers were only able to process a fraction of the applications that division received .
“ JPMorgan ’ s explanation falls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ responsibility requires , ” Rabon ’ s attorney Dylan Ruga told CBS .
“ The PPP program was intended to help small business keep the lights on , and it was supposed to be first come , first serve .
This is just another instance of a program that was meant for Main Street being hijacked by Wall Street.
” A spokesperson for Bank of America denied that it sought to maximize profits by prioritizing corporate clients .
A spokesperson for Wells Fargo said the bank is “ is working as quickly as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Paycheck Protection Program in compliance with the regulations and guidance provided by the U.S. Treasury and the SBA.
” Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle criticized the program for allowing large companies to take advantage of money intended to help smaller firms .
“ I am concerned that many businesses with thousands of employees have found loopholes to qualify for these loans meant for small businesses .
Unfortunately , when it comes to the PPP , millions of dollars are being wasted , ” Sen. Rick Scott , R-Fla. , told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that are not being harmed at all by the Coronavirus crisis have the ability to receive taxpayer-funded loans that can be forgiven .
That ’ s wrong , and it takes money out of the hands of those Americans who really need it.
” Scott also criticized the banks for setting application requirements that were not authorized by Congress .
“ I have heard from many constituents that they are unable to access the loans at their bank because of requirements individual banks are setting , ” he said .
“ These requirements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leading to many small businesses having a very hard time accessing these dollars .
Congress must make it clear that banks should not and can not set these requirements that actively withhold help from those in need.
” Congress is expected to approve a second round of funding for the program as early as Tuesday after negotiations dragged on over proposed restrictions on the aid .
Rep. Ted Lieu , D-Calif. , urged Scott to take the issue up with the Trump administration and Republican leadership .
“ Can you tell [ the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Leader Mitch ] McConnell to stop trying to jam through PPP funding without changes to the law ?
” he asked .
“ This is one reason Dems blocked a clean PPP ; we need to first make it better before refunding it .
”

Multiple new lawsuits allege that financial giants responsible for doling out billions in small business relief “prioritized” large corporate clients for the loans after dozens of publicly traded firms received aid before the program ran out of funding.
The Paycheck Protection Program, a $349 billion fund for emergency loans to small businesses that would be forgiven if they keep their employees, ran out of money last week after banks backed by the Small Business Administration (SBA) processed about 1.6 million loans in a matter of days. But not all of the money went to “small” businesses after lawmakers added a provision allowing companies with more than 500 employees to qualify if they met certain criteria.
About 75 publicly traded companies, some with market values of more than $100 million, received a combined $300 million in loans from the program, according to the Associated Press. Eight of the companies received $10 million apiece, the maximum loan amount.
Data previously released by the SBA show that 4,400 companies received loans of $5 million or more, though the national average was $206,000.
Reports that big restaurant chains like Shake Shack, Ruth’s Chris Steak House, Potbelly and Taco Cabana received $10 million apiece in loans sparked backlash. Shake Shack, which had more than $100 million in the bank, said it will return the loan.
The news drew multiple class-action lawsuits from small businesses, who argue the banks “prioritized corporate greed” by putting large clients ahead of smaller companies. Two lawsuits were filed against JPMorgan Chase and separate lawsuits were filed against Bank of America and Wells Fargo, all in the Central District of California, according to the New York Times.
The SBA provided the loans on a first-come, first-serve basis but banks were given wide latitude to process the applications. Bank of America, for example, rejected applications from small businesses that they had received previous loans or credit from other banks. A judge ruled earlier this month that the practice did not run afoul of the program’s rules, but these new lawsuits allege that banks also set aside applications that had not rejected to process at a later time — and then the funding ran out.
“Chase concealed from the public that it was reshuffling the PPP applications it received and prioritizing the applications that would make the bank the most money,” said one of the suits against the bank.
“It was supposed to be first come, first serve, but when you look at the statistics it seems clear that JPMorgan served its biggest clients first,” Lou Rabon, the chief executive of a security consulting firm who is the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, told CBS News. “When your bank is not there when you really need them, that’s not a bank we want to do business with.”
A spokesperson for the bank told the outlet that it did process the loans on a first-come, first-serve basis but different divisions processed applications for existing clients. The commercial bank was able to process all of the thousands of applications it received while small business bankers were only able to process a fraction of the applications that division received.
“JPMorgan’s explanation falls short of what the law and civic responsibility requires,” Rabon’s attorney Dylan Ruga told CBS. “The PPP program was intended to help small business keep the lights on, and it was supposed to be first come, first serve. This is just another instance of a program that was meant for Main Street being hijacked by Wall Street.”
A spokesperson for Bank of America denied that it sought to maximize profits by prioritizing corporate clients. A spokesperson for Wells Fargo said the bank is “is working as quickly as possible to assist small business customers with the Paycheck Protection Program in compliance with the regulations and guidance provided by the U.S. Treasury and the SBA.”
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle criticized the program for allowing large companies to take advantage of money intended to help smaller firms.
“I am concerned that many businesses with thousands of employees have found loopholes to qualify for these loans meant for small businesses. Unfortunately, when it comes to the PPP, millions of dollars are being wasted,” Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., told CNN. “Right now, companies that are not being harmed at all by the Coronavirus crisis have the ability to receive taxpayer-funded loans that can be forgiven. That’s wrong, and it takes money out of the hands of those Americans who really need it.”
Scott also criticized the banks for setting application requirements that were not authorized by Congress.
“I have heard from many constituents that they are unable to access the loans at their bank because of requirements individual banks are setting,” he said. “These requirements were not in the law and are leading to many small businesses having a very hard time accessing these dollars. Congress must make it clear that banks should not and cannot set these requirements that actively withhold help from those in need.”
Congress is expected to approve a second round of funding for the program as early as Tuesday after negotiations dragged on over proposed restrictions on the aid.
Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., urged Scott to take the issue up with the Trump administration and Republican leadership.
“Can you tell [the Trump] Administration and [Senate Majority Leader Mitch] McConnell to stop trying to jam through PPP funding without changes to the law?” he asked. “This is one reason Dems blocked a clean PPP; we need to first make it better before refunding 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--2020-04-22--Trump Dismisses New Study on Danger and Ineffectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine

A drug that President Donald Trump frequently promoted for use in the treatment for COVID-19 ( at one point calling it a “ game-changer ” ) is getting renewed scrutiny after a study found that there was “ no evidence ” to suggest its application did any good for patients .
The study , in fact , found that those who were treated with hydroxychloroquine , an anti-malarial drug that some have said showed promise for the treatment of COVID-19 due to anecdotal observations , actually had a higher outcome of death than those who were not treated with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at VA hospitals across the country were observed by the study ’ s authors .
They found that 28 percent of patients who were given hydroxychloroquine ended up dying , versus just 11 percent of patients who were treated with standard care for COVID-19 who died .
The study also observed the use of the drug in combination with azithromycin , and found that 22 percent of those who received both drugs ( another treatment that some have said works anecdotally ) also died , but there were limitations in the number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outcomes in this case compared to those who were not treated with either drug .
The findings of the study were released on Tuesday .
Later that day , reporters asked Trump what his views on the study were , and whether he and the coronavirus task force team had talked about its conclusions .
“ No , we didn ’ t discuss it , and I don ’ t know of the report , ” Trump said , minutes after another member of the task force had answered questions about it .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the study was worth taking seriously or not .
“ Obviously , there have been some very good reports and perhaps this one is not a good report , ” he said .
“ But we ’ ll be looking at it.
” Earlier in the month , Trump had pushed the drug as safe enough for people to take even if it wasn ’ t yet proven to be effective in treating coronavirus .
“ I ’ m seeing people dying without it… .
When that ’ s happening , they should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have to lose ?
” Trump said on April 5 .
During much of March and early April , Trump and right-wing media had heavily pushed hydroxychloroquine ’ s use for combating the disease .
But since the emergence of other studies suggesting that the drug wasn ’ t as safe as the president led people to believe it was , organizations like Fox News suddenly stopped talking about it .
According to observations from Media Matters , that network ’ s mention of the drug has diminished by 77 percent since late @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the drug even resulted in large purchases of it by the federal government , which bought 29 million pills of hydroxychloroquine .
It ’ s possible that the money spent on those pills could have instead been used to help fund programs for Americans who are struggling financially , or for small businesses seeking loans to help them stay afloat .
Hydroxychloroquine is also used to help people suffering from rheumatoid arthritis and lupus , but the promotion of the drug as a possible “ game-changer ” by Trump has led to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ individuals who rely on it .

A drug that President Donald Trump frequently promoted for use in the treatment for COVID-19 (at one point calling it a “game-changer”) is getting renewed scrutiny after a study found that there was “no evidence” to suggest its application did any good for patients.
The study, in fact, found that those who were treated with hydroxychloroquine, an anti-malarial drug that some have said showed promise for the treatment of COVID-19 due to anecdotal observations, actually had a higher outcome of death than those who were not treated with the drug.
The outcomes for 368 patients at VA hospitals across the country were observed by the study’s authors. They found that 28 percent of patients who were given hydroxychloroquine ended up dying, versus just 11 percent of patients who were treated with standard care for COVID-19 who died.
The study also observed the use of the drug in combination with azithromycin, and found that 22 percent of those who received both drugs (another treatment that some have said works anecdotally) also died, but there were limitations in the number of patients observed to draw a conclusion on outcomes in this case compared to those who were not treated with either drug.
The findings of the study were released on Tuesday. Later that day, reporters asked Trump what his views on the study were, and whether he and the coronavirus task force team had talked about its conclusions.
“No, we didn’t discuss it, and I don’t know of the report,” Trump said, minutes after another member of the task force had answered questions about it.
The president also expressed doubts about whether the study was worth taking seriously or not.
“Obviously, there have been some very good reports and perhaps this one is not a good report,” he said. “But we’ll be looking at it.”
Earlier in the month, Trump had pushed the drug as safe enough for people to take even if it wasn’t yet proven to be effective in treating coronavirus.
“I’m seeing people dying without it…. When that’s happening, they should do it. What really do we have to lose?” Trump said on April 5.
Trump says some remarkably irresponsible stuff about hydroxychloroquin: "What do you have to lose? Take it. I really think they should take it … try it, if you'd like." pic.twitter.com/ULjKRfqEG5 — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 4, 2020
During much of March and early April, Trump and right-wing media had heavily pushed hydroxychloroquine’s use for combating the disease. But since the emergence of other studies suggesting that the drug wasn’t as safe as the president led people to believe it was, organizations like Fox News suddenly stopped talking about it. According to observations from Media Matters, that network’s mention of the drug has diminished by 77 percent since late March.
Trump’s consistent touting of the drug even resulted in large purchases of it by the federal government, which bought 29 million pills of hydroxychloroquine. It’s possible that the money spent on those pills could have instead been used to help fund programs for Americans who are struggling financially, or for small businesses seeking loans to help them stay afloat.
Hydroxychloroquine is also used to help people suffering from rheumatoid arthritis and lupus, but the promotion of the drug as a possible “game-changer” by Trump has led to a shortage of the drug for those individuals who rely on 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.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.