hotair--2020-03-30--Biden struggles to stay relevant: A new super PAC and... a podcast?

One silver lining during our national coronavirus crisis is that political campaigning has taken a pause , at least as far as public events and the media coverage of those events goes .
Candidates have to scramble to find ways of staying relevant now and that includes the Democrat frontrunner for the presidential nomination – Joe Biden .
It is a delicate balance that the former vice-president is navigating right now .
He wants to be seen and heard yet there is only one president at a time and it ain ’ t him .
At first , Biden was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it was radio silence from good old Joe .
Now though , we are further into what looks like an extended period of time sheltering in our own homes and the old guy has to do something for attention .
To put it kindly , his previous attempts of using shadow coronavirus briefings and doing a virtual town hall using Zoom as a means of communication with his supporters and those he hopes will support him have fallen short .
How embarrassing for Biden – he ’ s a veteran swamp creature of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is unable to get it together enough to get out his messages in a competent , articulate way .
On a good day , Biden struggles to be articulate but now it is particularly painful to watch .
CNN tried to come to his rescue with a town hall after Biden ’ s disastrous attempts to communicate from his basement at home .
He offered criticisms of President Trump ’ s handling of the crisis , of course , and little in the way of what he would actually do other than a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the government to pick up the tab on all health care expenses of the coronavirus .
Though he says he receives daily briefings on the medical and economic prices of the pandemic , Slow Joe must have dozed off .
Both of those issues have been regularly addressed by the president , his administration , and the coronavirus task force .
So , the point is , Joe Biden is irrelevant right now .
He ’ s just another voice in a chorus of talking heads and pundits on the sidelines .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ slow response initially , though that isn ’ t as legitimate of criticism the further out we go in this crisis , as we are discovering .
Trump has risen to the occasion and that is a bad thing for Biden ’ s hopes of winning in November .
For example , you may remember that Biden was one of those who criticized Trump when he closed air traffic from China at the end of January .
Biden joined the chorus of Trump ’ s opponents and described that action as racist and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ single biggest detriment to the spread of the virus to date .
This is where I remind you that Joe Biden has historically been wrong on big decisions throughout his very long time in office .
A super PAC has formed to ride to Joe ’ s rescue .
It is focused on the November election and the contest between President Trump and Joe Biden .
Lily Adams has been hired by Unite the Country as its chief communications officer and Jennifer Clyburn Reed , daughter of Rep. Jim Clyburn , to its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Clyburn , right ?
He single-handedly delivered a victory for Biden in South Carolina ’ s Democrat primary at the eleventh hour .
Adams is a former aide to Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris .
Just a personal opinion here but I am unaware that either Hillary Clinton or Kamala Harris are known for top-notch communication , aides or not .
But , the best news for all of us is the announcement of a podcast .
Yes , that ’ s right – Joe Biden is beginning a podcast .
This will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doubt .
His supporters will be happy to listen and the rest of us will be entertained by what will no doubt be an abundance of flubs , brain freezes , and blunders – unless he doesn ’ t do it live and uses a skilled editor .
Given his past attempts in the virtual world , though , do we think he has skilled technology advisers working in his campaign ?
That ’ s a legit question .
Biden ’ s podcast is called “ Here ’ s the Deal ” and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It is being launched today .
The first episode is 20 minutes long .
Ron Klain is Biden ’ s first guest and that will be no surprise to listeners if you ’ ve seen how Biden ’ s campaign has publicized that Klain is the former Obama Ebola czar and former chief of staff to Biden when he was vice-president .
If Biden wins in November , it ’ s safe to say that Klain will find himself gainfully employed at the White House again in some capacity .
Klain has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign already on the pandemic .
“ I think it ’ s important for people to know that you ’ re talking to almost , every day , top economists about what to do about this , ” Klain told Biden on the podcast .
“ You ’ re talking to Congressional leaders on Capitol Hill and making the point that it ’ s important that as we fight this economic crisis , we focus on people and families , not corporations.
” Besides trying to provide “ clarity ” on important issues @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the heart , compassion and wisdom ” of Biden to Americans as the campaign contrasts President Donald Trump ’ s crisis-management leadership to that of the former vice president .
“ Why am I doing this ?
, ” Biden asks listeners .
“ So we can keep talking to each other .
We can ’ t hold rallies anymore , but we ’ re not gathering in big public spaces .
We ’ re living in the new normal , but I want you to know that I ’ m with you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and we ’ re going to get through this together as a country.
” I haven ’ t listened to Biden ’ s podcast yet .
I will , though , out of curiosity .
Here ’ s a tweet from the GOP Rapid Response Director that points out that Biden is still not publicly acknowledging his sixth grandchild .
Thanks , Hunter .
You can hear a snippet of how Grandpa Joe visits with a couple of them now as he shelters at home .

One silver lining during our national coronavirus crisis is that political campaigning has taken a pause, at least as far as public events and the media coverage of those events goes. Candidates have to scramble to find ways of staying relevant now and that includes the Democrat frontrunner for the presidential nomination – Joe Biden.
It is a delicate balance that the former vice-president is navigating right now. He wants to be seen and heard yet there is only one president at a time and it ain’t him. At first, Biden was nowhere to be found. Blessedly, it was radio silence from good old Joe. Now though, we are further into what looks like an extended period of time sheltering in our own homes and the old guy has to do something for attention. To put it kindly, his previous attempts of using shadow coronavirus briefings and doing a virtual town hall using Zoom as a means of communication with his supporters and those he hopes will support him have fallen short.
How embarrassing for Biden – he’s a veteran swamp creature of 40 years in Washington and yet he is unable to get it together enough to get out his messages in a competent, articulate way. On a good day, Biden struggles to be articulate but now it is particularly painful to watch. CNN tried to come to his rescue with a town hall after Biden’s disastrous attempts to communicate from his basement at home. He offered criticisms of President Trump’s handling of the crisis, of course, and little in the way of what he would actually do other than a three-month freeze on rent payments and for the government to pick up the tab on all health care expenses of the coronavirus. Though he says he receives daily briefings on the medical and economic prices of the pandemic, Slow Joe must have dozed off. Both of those issues have been regularly addressed by the president, his administration, and the coronavirus task force.
So, the point is, Joe Biden is irrelevant right now. He’s just another voice in a chorus of talking heads and pundits on the sidelines. He can criticize what he perceives as a slow response initially, though that isn’t as legitimate of criticism the further out we go in this crisis, as we are discovering. Trump has risen to the occasion and that is a bad thing for Biden’s hopes of winning in November. For example, you may remember that Biden was one of those who criticized Trump when he closed air traffic from China at the end of January. Biden joined the chorus of Trump’s opponents and described that action as racist and xenophobic. It proved to be the single biggest detriment to the spread of the virus to date. This is where I remind you that Joe Biden has historically been wrong on big decisions throughout his very long time in office.
A super PAC has formed to ride to Joe’s rescue. It is focused on the November election and the contest between President Trump and Joe Biden.
Unite the Country is one of several Democratic groups to release ads hitting President Trump on the handling of the global health crisis. Earlier this week, the group released its first national television ad focused solely on Trump. The thirty-second TV ad criticizes his response to the coronavirus pandemic, with a narrator in the ad saying, “Crisis comes to every president. This one failed.”
Lily Adams has been hired by Unite the Country as its chief communications officer and Jennifer Clyburn Reed, daughter of Rep. Jim Clyburn, to its board of directors. You remember Daddy Clyburn, right? He single-handedly delivered a victory for Biden in South Carolina’s Democrat primary at the eleventh hour. Adams is a former aide to Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris. Just a personal opinion here but I am unaware that either Hillary Clinton or Kamala Harris are known for top-notch communication, aides or not.
But, the best news for all of us is the announcement of a podcast. Yes, that’s right – Joe Biden is beginning a podcast. This will offer something for everyone, without a doubt. His supporters will be happy to listen and the rest of us will be entertained by what will no doubt be an abundance of flubs, brain freezes, and blunders – unless he doesn’t do it live and uses a skilled editor. Given his past attempts in the virtual world, though, do we think he has skilled technology advisers working in his campaign? That’s a legit question.
Biden’s podcast is called “Here’s the Deal” and the first one was recorded last Tuesday. It is being launched today. The first episode is 20 minutes long. Ron Klain is Biden’s first guest and that will be no surprise to listeners if you’ve seen how Biden’s campaign has publicized that Klain is the former Obama Ebola czar and former chief of staff to Biden when he was vice-president. If Biden wins in November, it’s safe to say that Klain will find himself gainfully employed at the White House again in some capacity. Klain has starred in a video for the Biden campaign already on the pandemic.
“I think it’s important for people to know that you’re talking to almost, every day, top economists about what to do about this,” Klain told Biden on the podcast. “You’re talking to Congressional leaders on Capitol Hill and making the point that it’s important that as we fight this economic crisis, we focus on people and families, not corporations.” “Bingo,” Biden responds. Besides trying to provide “clarity” on important issues, the podcast promises to bring “the heart, compassion and wisdom” of Biden to Americans as the campaign contrasts President Donald Trump’s crisis-management leadership to that of the former vice president. “Why am I doing this?,” Biden asks listeners. “So we can keep talking to each other. We can’t hold rallies anymore, but we’re not gathering in big public spaces. We’re living in the new normal, but I want you to know that I’m with you and I’m on your side and we’re going to get through this together as a country.”
I haven’t listened to Biden’s podcast yet. I will, though, out of curiosity. Here’s a tweet from the GOP Rapid Response Director that points out that Biden is still not publicly acknowledging his sixth grandchild. Thanks, Hunter. You can hear a snippet of how Grandpa Joe visits with a couple of them now as he shelters at home.


hotair--2020-03-30--CNN media analyst: Trump's "self-isolating at Fox News"; <span class='red'>Update: CNN cuts away fro

CNN media analyst: Trump's "self-isolating at Fox News"; Update: CNN cuts away from presser

By the time you read this , Donald Trump will be mostly through his daily “ self-isolation ” open press conference .
This claim is so easily debunked that it ’ s amazing it appears at all , especially at CNN .
Donald Trump has long favored Fox News when it comes to one-on-one interviews , which perhaps mattered more when the White House dispensed with its daily briefings .
Trump often calls in to Fox & Friends , as he did this morning , and with Hannity as well , choosing to focus his strategic messaging delivery on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Fox ’ s morning show was the last straw for Brian Stelter , who declared that Trump was “ self-isolating at Fox News , ” as his way of providing himself political cover : President Trump ’ s go-to move in a crisis is always the same : to call Fox News .
On Monday morning , he called into “ Fox & Friends , ” one of his most reliable sources of support , and praised his own response to the pandemic .
It was Trump ’ s third interview on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it was more of the same : He talked for 54 minutes with hardly a tough question or assertive follow-up .
That ’ s not entirely true , and it ’ s a bit unfair to Brian Kilmeade , who actually did push back a bit this morning on China .
However , we then get to the root of Stelter ’ s complaint : Perhaps it ’ s because of nonsense accusations like this .
Far from “ self-isolating , ” Trump has made himself more available than ever over the past @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every day to update the media and the nation on the coronavirus outbreak , including on the weekends .
And during those pressers , Trump and his team take questions from a wide variety of media outlets , including a number of adversarial interrogatories .
In fact , he ’ s made himself so available that CNN thinks this kind of broad access should be curtailed .
Last week , CNN ’ s Daniel Dale complained that the pressers had “ replace [ d ] campaign rallies , ” and called them “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ familiar Trump Show ” .
Trump doesn ’ t usually take reporters ’ questions during his campaign rallies , of course , and coming from an outlet that has complained loud and long about the end of daily briefings and the paucity of Trump pressers until recently , it has a distinct ring of hypocrisy .
Not that CNN is alone in this .
A few days ago , the Daily Beast reported on complaints within CNN and MSNBC about the amount of live coverage given to Trump ’ s coronavirus pressers , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ratings these generate : On the one hand , their ratings have never been higher , and viewers ’ appetites for the live sessions have shown no signs of dwindling .
On the other hand , journalists and executives at MSNBC , CNN , and the often Trump-friendly Fox News—which scored an impressive 6.2 million viewers for Sunday ’ s installment of the Trump show , according to Nielsen—are increasingly facing the likelihood that they are becoming an uncritical and unvetted transmission belt for propaganda and misinformation .
… “ These White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and truthful information about this frightening crisis—are in fact working against that end , ” wrote Washington Post media columnist Margaret Sullivan , summarizing such concerns .
“ Rather , they have become a daily stage for Trump to play his greatest hits to captive audience members .
They come in search of life-or-death information , but here ’ s what they get from him instead : Self-aggrandizement… Media-bashing… Exaggeration and outright lies.
” In an echo of the self-criticism expressed during the 2016 presidential race , when the cable networks repeatedly broadcast @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unexpurgated , top MSNBC anchors have already argued publicly that their own network should not air the president ’ s pandemic musings in full .
Morning Joe host Joe Scarborough tweeted during Trump ’ s briefing on Monday that there was “ no public benefit to this briefing , ” and the cable news networks should “ cut away.
” MSNBC host Rachel Maddow , who anchors the network ’ s most highly rated program , also repeatedly called for news networks to stop carrying Trump ’ s statements live , saying that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the spread of misinformation .
“ If it were up to me , and it ’ s not , I would stop putting those briefings on live TV , ” Maddow said on her show earlier this week .
“ Not out of spite , but because it ’ s misinformation .
If the president does end up saying anything true , you can run it as tape .
But if he keeps lying like he has been every day on stuff this important , we should , all of us should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s going to cost lives.
” So on one hand , CNN and other media outlets complain bitterly about covering presidential pressers despite the ratings they generate and the public ’ s obvious interest in them .
Then they wonder why Trump ’ s not going out of his way to give them exclusive interviews , and claim that Trump ’ s hiding … in plain sight , apparently .
The basic argument here appears to be : Who you gon na believe — us , or your own lying eyes ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ratings bonanza .

By the time you read this, Donald Trump will be mostly through his daily “self-isolation” open press conference. This claim is so easily debunked that it’s amazing it appears at all, especially at CNN.
Donald Trump has long favored Fox News when it comes to one-on-one interviews, which perhaps mattered more when the White House dispensed with its daily briefings. Trump often calls in to Fox & Friends, as he did this morning, and with Hannity as well, choosing to focus his strategic messaging delivery on the friendliest platforms. Today’s appearance on Fox’s morning show was the last straw for Brian Stelter, who declared that Trump was “self-isolating at Fox News,” as his way of providing himself political cover:
President Trump’s go-to move in a crisis is always the same: to call Fox News. On Monday morning, he called into “Fox & Friends,” one of his most reliable sources of support, and praised his own response to the pandemic. It was Trump’s third interview on Fox in the past week, and it was more of the same: He talked for 54 minutes with hardly a tough question or assertive follow-up.
That’s not entirely true, and it’s a bit unfair to Brian Kilmeade, who actually did push back a bit this morning on China. However, we then get to the root of Stelter’s complaint:
If the ratings-conscious president had wanted to reach a bigger audience, he would have called into the “Today” show or “Good Morning America.” If he had wanted to be heard on the global stage, he would have granted an interview to CNN.
Perhaps it’s because of nonsense accusations like this. Far from “self-isolating,” Trump has made himself more available than ever over the past two weeks. He holds a presser every day to update the media and the nation on the coronavirus outbreak, including on the weekends. And during those pressers, Trump and his team take questions from a wide variety of media outlets, including a number of adversarial interrogatories.
In fact, he’s made himself so available that CNN thinks this kind of broad access should be curtailed. Last week, CNN’s Daniel Dale complained that the pressers had “replace[d] campaign rallies,” and called them “a kind of special spinoff of the familiar Trump Show”. Trump doesn’t usually take reporters’ questions during his campaign rallies, of course, and coming from an outlet that has complained loud and long about the end of daily briefings and the paucity of Trump pressers until recently, it has a distinct ring of hypocrisy.
Not that CNN is alone in this. A few days ago, the Daily Beast reported on complaints within CNN and MSNBC about the amount of live coverage given to Trump’s coronavirus pressers, arguing that they should ignore the high ratings these generate:
On the one hand, their ratings have never been higher, and viewers’ appetites for the live sessions have shown no signs of dwindling. On the other hand, journalists and executives at MSNBC, CNN, and the often Trump-friendly Fox News—which scored an impressive 6.2 million viewers for Sunday’s installment of the Trump show, according to Nielsen—are increasingly facing the likelihood that they are becoming an uncritical and unvetted transmission belt for propaganda and misinformation. … “These White House sessions—ostensibly meant to give the public critical and truthful information about this frightening crisis—are in fact working against that end,” wrote Washington Post media columnist Margaret Sullivan, summarizing such concerns. “Rather, they have become a daily stage for Trump to play his greatest hits to captive audience members. They come in search of life-or-death information, but here’s what they get from him instead: Self-aggrandizement… Media-bashing… Exaggeration and outright lies.” In an echo of the self-criticism expressed during the 2016 presidential race, when the cable networks repeatedly broadcast Trump’s campaign rallies live and unexpurgated, top MSNBC anchors have already argued publicly that their own network should not air the president’s pandemic musings in full. Morning Joe host Joe Scarborough tweeted during Trump’s briefing on Monday that there was “no public benefit to this briefing,” and the cable news networks should “cut away.” MSNBC host Rachel Maddow, who anchors the network’s most highly rated program, also repeatedly called for news networks to stop carrying Trump’s statements live, saying that the president’s daily comments contribute to the spread of misinformation. “If it were up to me, and it’s not, I would stop putting those briefings on live TV,” Maddow said on her show earlier this week. “Not out of spite, but because it’s misinformation. If the president does end up saying anything true, you can run it as tape. But if he keeps lying like he has been every day on stuff this important, we should, all of us should stop broadcasting it. Honestly, it’s going to cost lives.”
So on one hand, CNN and other media outlets complain bitterly about covering presidential pressers despite the ratings they generate and the public’s obvious interest in them. Then they wonder why Trump’s not going out of his way to give them exclusive interviews, and claim that Trump’s hiding … in plain sight, apparently.
The basic argument here appears to be: Who you gonna believe — us, or your own lying eyes? Maybe C-SPAN should get ready for a ratings bonanza.
Update: Maybe it’s CNN that’s self-isolating:
Fox News, MSNBC carrying Coronavirus Task Force briefing. CNN just cut away. — Joe Concha (@JoeConchaTV) March 30, 2020
How … predictable.


hotair--2020-03-30--Gottlieb's trigger for reopening businesses: When cases in your state have declined for two straight

Gottlieb's trigger for reopening businesses: When cases in your state have declined for two straight weeks

Not even then , really , but that ’ s the most basic prerequisite .
It ’ s common sense .
Why would we want people mingling again before we ’ re positive that the virus is no longer spreading aggressively ?
Got ta make sure the fire is ( mostly ) out before we start putting gasoline back into the economy .
Watch , then read on .
Gottlieb and his colleagues at AEI published a plan yesterday for how and when states should consider relaxing social distancing practices and letting people go back to work .
Its official @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A road map to reopening ” but we can think of it as “ A roadmap to turning the U.S. into South Korea.
” A two-week decline in cases is the foremost requirement — and in a way , it ’ s the easy part .
Cases in New York are projected to peak as soon as 10 days from now .
Conceivably NYC will have seen two weeks of declining case numbers by the fourth week of April .
The next trigger , being able to rapidly test anyone with symptoms , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ team believe that once the entire U.S. is able to test 750,000 people per week , we ’ ll have the threshold capacity we need to test everyone who needs testing .
By my count , we tested a bit more than 600,000 people last week .
We ’ re getting there .
As he says in the clip , the main impediment in testing right now isn ’ t the tests themselves or the labs required to perform them , it ’ s basic tools like swabs for taking samples .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that local hospitals are “ safely able to treat all patients requiring hospitalization without resorting to crisis standards of care.
” That … may take a little longer than two weeks after peak cases in New York , although maybe not in a place like Seattle that acted early to keep people from gathering together and is now reaping the benefits in the form of a health-care system that hasn ’ t ( yet ) been overloaded .
Any state following Gottlieb ’ s guidelines thus has an incentive to institute social distancing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the less of a crush at the hospitals , the sooner you can get back to work .
Plus , according to a new survey of economic experts , it ’ s good for the local economy in the long run : We already sort of knew that but it ’ s nice to have expert opinion aligned with empirical data .
So then : Two weeks of declining cases and enough tests to cover every new patient with symptoms and an end to the crush in hospitals .
It seems plausible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climbing the proverbial curve right now and/or states that shut down early to head off a major outbreak could meet those conditions before June .
States that acted more slowly , perhaps not .
But there ’ s another trigger for ending lockdowns that Gottlieb ’ s plan mentions .
This one seems dodgier to me : Implement Comprehensive COVID-19 Surveillance Systems .
The move toward less restrictive physical distancing could precipitate another period of acceleration in case counts .
Careful surveillance will be needed to monitor trends in incidence .
A high-performing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leverages : 1 .
Widespread and rapid testing at the point of care using cheaper , accessible , and sensitive point-of-care diagnostic tools that are authorized by the Food and Drug Administration ( FDA ) ; 2 .
Serological testing to gauge background rates of exposure and immunity to inform public-health decision-making about the level of population-based mitigation required to prevent continued spread in the setting of an outbreak ; and 3 .
A comprehensive national sentinel surveillance system , supported by and coordinated with local public-health systems and health care providers , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ across states and identify community spread while an outbreak is still small and at a stage in which case-based interventions can prevent a larger outbreak .
ILINet , the surveillance system for influenza-like illness in the United States , is a potential model for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance .
Medical professionals , are we capable of putting a system like that in place soon-ish ?
Rapid point-of-care testing is just getting going , but Abbott announced last week that it ’ s developed a test that can identify COVID-19 infections within five minutes and is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ month for use in doctor ’ s offices .
If they ’ re good for that , and if their testing machines are in wide enough use , that would meet Gottlieb ’ s target of 750,000 tests per week .
Serological testing is also in the works ; a biotech company is hoping to test everyone in Telluride , Colorado , to see how many have been infected , a model that could be expanded if it ’ s successful .
What about a “ comprehensive national sentinel surveillance system , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ undertaking , as does Gottlieb ’ s team calling for authorities to “ massively scale contact tracing and isolation and quarantine.
” They want the feds to use smartphone GPS to make sure people diagnosed with coronavirus are staying home , in isolation , and they want a “ surge ” in the existing public-health workforce to trace the contacts of each new infected person and make sure those people are in self-quarantine for 14 days too .
That ’ s exactly what South Korea is doing , and the feds are already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But building a bureaucracy to do the sort of contact tracing we need at the scale we need feels like something that ’ s not going to be done in a matter of months .
What ’ s the plan for reopening if local health bureaus just can ’ t pull this together by June ?
One more thing .
In order to prevent entire families from being infected by one sick member , they want infected people to have the option of quarantining away from home .
Where , though ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ their rooms to get back to business once they ’ ve reopened .
And even if they have vacancies , they won ’ t want guests to know there are coronavirus patients in the building .
If all of this is achievable and achieved , we ’ ll essentially have rebooted our system for coping with epidemics on the South Korean model .
We screwed it up in the first days of the outbreak by not testing enough ; now we ’ re locked down to deny the virus fuel while it burns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mostly extinguished , then we reemerge , supposedly , into a new South Korean reality — tons of testing , sustained surveillance of the sick , no hospital meltdowns , no mass lockdowns , everyone wearing masks in public ( another wise recommendation from Gottlieb and company ) , and judicious application of more modest social distancing measures while we bide our time for a vaccine to arrive .
If we can pull off the reboot , we can even move to a stage Germany is already approaching , one where people who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ certificates validating their immunity and freeing them up to return to the work force early .
That ’ s the only silver lining in getting COVID-19 : If you survive , in theory you should be free from the strictures the rest of us are coping with .
You passed your trial by fire .
You get your certificate and you ’ re done .
Is all of this actually doable ?
It ’ s above my pay grade .
From Gottlieb ’ s perspective , though , maybe it ’ s enough @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the feds are delaying on reopening .
There is a strategy here ; there are things that can be done to reopen for business in a safe-ish way ; but it ’ s not a two-week fix .
Not a two-month fix for some places either , I ’ d guess .
Here ’ s Governor Blackface in Virginia issuing a stay-at-home order for the state through … June 10th .
Why so long ?
Play it by ear and reassess every two or three weeks .

Not even then, really, but that’s the most basic prerequisite. It’s common sense. Why would we want people mingling again before we’re positive that the virus is no longer spreading aggressively? Gotta make sure the fire is (mostly) out before we start putting gasoline back into the economy. Watch, then read on.
WHAT COMES NEXT? @ScottGottliebMD tells @margbrennan that a new report out this morning – which he co-authored – suggests waiting for a two week decline in new #coronavirus cases before beginning to resume normal day-to-day activities pic.twitter.com/HfcFh63ICH — Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) March 29, 2020
Gottlieb and his colleagues at AEI published a plan yesterday for how and when states should consider relaxing social distancing practices and letting people go back to work. Its official title is “National coronavirus response: A road map to reopening” but we can think of it as “A roadmap to turning the U.S. into South Korea.” A two-week decline in cases is the foremost requirement — and in a way, it’s the easy part. Cases in New York are projected to peak as soon as 10 days from now. Conceivably NYC will have seen two weeks of declining case numbers by the fourth week of April.
The next trigger, being able to rapidly test anyone with symptoms, also seems feasible. Gottlieb and his team believe that once the entire U.S. is able to test 750,000 people per week, we’ll have the threshold capacity we need to test everyone who needs testing. By my count, we tested a bit more than 600,000 people last week. We’re getting there. As he says in the clip, the main impediment in testing right now isn’t the tests themselves or the labs required to perform them, it’s basic tools like swabs for taking samples.
The third trigger for reopening is making sure that local hospitals are “safely able to treat all patients requiring hospitalization without resorting to crisis standards of care.” That … may take a little longer than two weeks after peak cases in New York, although maybe not in a place like Seattle that acted early to keep people from gathering together and is now reaping the benefits in the form of a health-care system that hasn’t (yet) been overloaded. Any state following Gottlieb’s guidelines thus has an incentive to institute social distancing early. The sooner you do it, the less of a crush at the hospitals, the sooner you can get back to work. Plus, according to a new survey of economic experts, it’s good for the local economy in the long run:
Survey of leading economists: "Abandoning severe lockdowns at a time when the likelihood of a resurgence in infections remains high will lead to greater total economic damage than sustaining the lockdowns to eliminate the resurgence risk." 0% disagree.https://t.co/6NNAaLlSjq pic.twitter.com/7kcnVVPw2N — Justin Wolfers (@JustinWolfers) March 29, 2020
We already sort of knew that but it’s nice to have expert opinion aligned with empirical data.
So then: Two weeks of declining cases and enough tests to cover every new patient with symptoms and an end to the crush in hospitals. It seems plausible that states like New York that are climbing the proverbial curve right now and/or states that shut down early to head off a major outbreak could meet those conditions before June. States that acted more slowly, perhaps not. But there’s another trigger for ending lockdowns that Gottlieb’s plan mentions. This one seems dodgier to me:
Implement Comprehensive COVID-19 Surveillance Systems. The move toward less restrictive physical distancing could precipitate another period of acceleration in case counts. Careful surveillance will be needed to monitor trends in incidence. A high-performing disease surveillance system should be established that leverages: 1. Widespread and rapid testing at the point of care using cheaper, accessible, and sensitive point-of-care diagnostic tools that are authorized by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA); 2. Serological testing to gauge background rates of exposure and immunity to inform public-health decision-making about the level of population-based mitigation required to prevent continued spread in the setting of an outbreak; and 3. A comprehensive national sentinel surveillance system, supported by and coordinated with local public-health systems and health care providers, to track the background rate of infection across states and identify community spread while an outbreak is still small and at a stage in which case-based interventions can prevent a larger outbreak. ILINet, the surveillance system for influenza-like illness in the United States, is a potential model for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance.
Medical professionals, are we capable of putting a system like that in place soon-ish? Rapid point-of-care testing is just getting going, but Abbott announced last week that it’s developed a test that can identify COVID-19 infections within five minutes and is planning to roll out five million per month for use in doctor’s offices. If they’re good for that, and if their testing machines are in wide enough use, that would meet Gottlieb’s target of 750,000 tests per week. Serological testing is also in the works; a biotech company is hoping to test everyone in Telluride, Colorado, to see how many have been infected, a model that could be expanded if it’s successful.
What about a “comprehensive national sentinel surveillance system,” though? That sounds like … an undertaking, as does Gottlieb’s team calling for authorities to “massively scale contact tracing and isolation and quarantine.” They want the feds to use smartphone GPS to make sure people diagnosed with coronavirus are staying home, in isolation, and they want a “surge” in the existing public-health workforce to trace the contacts of each new infected person and make sure those people are in self-quarantine for 14 days too. That’s exactly what South Korea is doing, and the feds are already looking at smartphone data that tracks movements. But building a bureaucracy to do the sort of contact tracing we need at the scale we need feels like something that’s not going to be done in a matter of months. What’s the plan for reopening if local health bureaus just can’t pull this together by June?
One more thing. In order to prevent entire families from being infected by one sick member, they want infected people to have the option of quarantining away from home. Where, though? Hotels are going to want to use their rooms to get back to business once they’ve reopened. And even if they have vacancies, they won’t want guests to know there are coronavirus patients in the building.
If all of this is achievable and achieved, we’ll essentially have rebooted our system for coping with epidemics on the South Korean model. We screwed it up in the first days of the outbreak by not testing enough; now we’re locked down to deny the virus fuel while it burns itself out. Once the flames are mostly extinguished, then we reemerge, supposedly, into a new South Korean reality — tons of testing, sustained surveillance of the sick, no hospital meltdowns, no mass lockdowns, everyone wearing masks in public (another wise recommendation from Gottlieb and company), and judicious application of more modest social distancing measures while we bide our time for a vaccine to arrive.
Never been more jealous of a curve in my life. Man they nailed it.
Via Time. https://t.co/sktEp8booM pic.twitter.com/soPhg4iceJ — Ben White (@morningmoneyben) March 30, 2020
If we can pull off the reboot, we can even move to a stage Germany is already approaching, one where people who have tested positive and recovered are given certificates validating their immunity and freeing them up to return to the work force early. That’s the only silver lining in getting COVID-19: If you survive, in theory you should be free from the strictures the rest of us are coping with. You passed your trial by fire. You get your certificate and you’re done.
Is all of this actually doable? It’s above my pay grade. From Gottlieb’s perspective, though, maybe it’s enough for now to help people understand why the feds are delaying on reopening. There is a strategy here; there are things that can be done to reopen for business in a safe-ish way; but it’s not a two-week fix. Not a two-month fix for some places either, I’d guess.
Here’s Governor Blackface in Virginia issuing a stay-at-home order for the state through … June 10th. Why so long? Play it by ear and reassess every two or three weeks.


hotair--2020-03-30--Coronavirus job losses could reach 47 million with unemployment higher than the Great Depression

Yesterday Trump and Dr. Birx revealed that the best case for the U.S. death toll may be in the realm of 200,000 deaths , that ’ s assuming we follow strict social distancing for the next month at least .
Without shutting everything down , the same models say the death toll could be ten times higher .
But everything comes at a price .
Today we ’ re learning what the price could be : Economists at the Fed ’ s St. Louis district project total employment reductions of 47 million , which would translate to a 32.1 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ analysis .
That figure reflects the high nature of at-risk jobs that ultimately could be lost to a government-induced economic freeze aimed at halting the coronavirus spread .
“ These are very large numbers by historical standards , but this is a rather unique shock that is unlike any other experienced by the U.S. economy in the last 100 years , ” St. Louis Fed economist Miguel Faria-e-Castro wrote in a research paper posted last week… That would bring the U.S. unemployment rolls to 52.8 million , or more than three times worse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The 30 percent unemployment rate would top the Great Depression peak of 24.9 percent .
There are some caveats here .
This estimate doesn ’ t consider those who give up looking for work .
That could drive the unemployment rate down but obviously it doesn ’ t change the participation rate .
Also this doesn ’ t take into account the $ 2 trillion bill Congress just passed which could help stave off some layoffs .
This estimate was done was by looking at people in what are now considered non-essential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the unemployment rate skyrocket the general downturn is going to impact a lot more people .
If 50 million Americans are out of work that ’ s a lot less money circulating in the economy to keep everything else afloat .
When people are forced to devote everything they have to food and shelter , a lot of other businesses are going to fail .
While all of this is expected to be temporary , it ’ s probably not going to be over soon .
Yesterday President Trump pushed off the date @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the earliest .
Today Virginia announced it was issuing a stay-at-home order through June 10 .
Even 2-3 more months of lock down could be a disaster that will take us months or years to recover from .
Obviously the $ 1,200 checks going out shortly will help for a short period of time , but Congress is going to have to renew that every month to keep the disaster from getting worse .
If this is what it takes to save 2 million Americans ’ lives , then we have to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 700 times the number of people we lost on 9/11 .
But tens of millions of Americans are going to pay a very significant price for that effort in terms which are difficult to even begin to add up .
If the various estimates are right , the best case scenario as of now is 200,000 deaths , massive unemployment and trillions of dollars added to the debt .
If anyone had said we ’ d be hoping for those number two months ago they ’ d have been considered out of their @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Yesterday Trump and Dr. Birx revealed that the best case for the U.S. death toll may be in the realm of 200,000 deaths, that’s assuming we follow strict social distancing for the next month at least. Without shutting everything down, the same models say the death toll could be ten times higher. But everything comes at a price. Today we’re learning what the price could be:
Economists at the Fed’s St. Louis district project total employment reductions of 47 million, which would translate to a 32.1 percent unemployment rate, according to a recent analysis. That figure reflects the high nature of at-risk jobs that ultimately could be lost to a government-induced economic freeze aimed at halting the coronavirus spread. “These are very large numbers by historical standards, but this is a rather unique shock that is unlike any other experienced by the U.S. economy in the last 100 years,” St. Louis Fed economist Miguel Faria-e-Castro wrote in a research paper posted last week… That would bring the U.S. unemployment rolls to 52.8 million, or more than three times worse than the peak of the Great Recession. The 30 percent unemployment rate would top the Great Depression peak of 24.9 percent.
There are some caveats here. This estimate doesn’t consider those who give up looking for work. That could drive the unemployment rate down but obviously it doesn’t change the participation rate. Also this doesn’t take into account the $2 trillion bill Congress just passed which could help stave off some layoffs.
This estimate was done was by looking at people in what are now considered non-essential jobs. But clearly if we see the unemployment rate skyrocket the general downturn is going to impact a lot more people. If 50 million Americans are out of work that’s a lot less money circulating in the economy to keep everything else afloat. When people are forced to devote everything they have to food and shelter, a lot of other businesses are going to fail.
While all of this is expected to be temporary, it’s probably not going to be over soon. Yesterday President Trump pushed off the date for restarting the economy to May 1 at the earliest. Today Virginia announced it was issuing a stay-at-home order through June 10. Even 2-3 more months of lock down could be a disaster that will take us months or years to recover from.
Obviously the $1,200 checks going out shortly will help for a short period of time, but Congress is going to have to renew that every month to keep the disaster from getting worse.
If this is what it takes to save 2 million Americans’ lives, then we have to do it. That’s nearly 700 times the number of people we lost on 9/11. But tens of millions of Americans are going to pay a very significant price for that effort in terms which are difficult to even begin to add up.
If the various estimates are right, the best case scenario as of now is 200,000 deaths, massive unemployment and trillions of dollars added to the debt. If anyone had said we’d be hoping for those number two months ago they’d have been considered out of their minds, but here we are.


hotair--2020-03-30--No, Cuomo isn't going to be Biden's veep pick

No matter how impressed you may or may not be with New York Governor Andrew Cuomo ’ s daily briefings on the coronavirus situation , the love festival for this guy is getting a bit out of hand .
I ’ m still seeing the # PresidentCuomo hashtag trending on Twitter on and off and most of the hosts at both CNN and MSNBC have clearly fallen in love with the guy .
But are there bigger things awaiting him on the horizon ?
We previously discussed one oddball theory proposing that the DNC dump Joe Biden and replace him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reasons why that was both impractical and problematic .
Now , however , another plot seems to be emerging .
If they can ’ t get rid of Biden before the convention ( or after ) , perhaps Uncle Joe can pluck Cuomo out of the Empire State and set him up as his pick for Vice President .
Then , either in 2024 or before ( if Joe somehow can ’ t go the distance ) , Cuomo would be the POTUS-in-waiting .
Over at the New York Post , Bob McManus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pick Cuomo and how it would be a bad idea if he tried .
Let ’ s first look at the veep speculation from the governor ’ s perspective : His political instincts are as acute as anyone ’ s , so he doubtless knows that the instant politics pops up , the wheels fall off the Cuomo-as-calm-crisis-navigator wagon .
And then there goes the rationale for his even being in the conversation .
His star could set as quickly as it rose .
So why would the governor want that ?
After @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solidly positioned in a party now dominated by superannuated fixtures on one side , and earnest-but-untested strivers on the other .
Given that Biden , now 77 , very likely would be a one-termer , next time around has to be looking pretty good to Cuomo .
If nothing else , waiting would give him time to achieve a goal denied his father , Mario , a fourth term , and thence perhaps to the top of the ticket in 2024 .
McManus makes a number of good points about not only why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but why Cuomo would probably be crazy to accept the offer if he did .
While some may find Cuomo ’ s “ star to be rising ” at the moment , it could just as easily crash and burn .
It ’ s nowhere near a sure thing that Biden will win in November at this point and being the number two person on a losing POTUS ticket isn ’ t exactly the beginning of a road to political glory .
But let ’ s imagine for a moment that Biden was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he already promised to pick a woman for his running mate .
Preferably either a Black or Hispanic woman who is considerably younger .
( If somebody could comb through their contact list and come up with a black lesbian in her forties he could have the hat trick . )
So what happens to the significant portion of the base that lives and dies by identity politics if Joe goes back on his promise and instead delivers yet another straight white dude who is old enough to collect Social Security ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
A bunch of them are already seething over Bernie Sanders being shoved aside anyway and that would be a bridge too far .
Even if Biden ignores all of that and picks Cuomo anyway , there will still be months of campaigning left to do .
I already pointed this out in the previous article I mentioned above , but the oppo research file on Andrew Cuomo is about as thick as a Manhattan phone directory .
( At least back in the days when we still had phone books , anyway @ @ @ @ @ @ @ second to last paragraph .
Cuomo hasn ’ t exactly had a squeaky clean record since becoming governor and a significant number of his former aides , donors and other cronies are either serving time in prison , awaiting sentencing , on trial or have already been released .
How he managed to avoid an arrest warrant all of this time remains a mystery , but let ’ s just say it ’ s not a pretty picture .
Nobody wants to be so rude as to bring all of that garbage related @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while the Governor is in the midst of dealing with the pandemic , which is understandable .
That ’ s why he ’ s looking so popular at the moment .
But if you put him in the running for a national race it will all come rushing back .
So for all of the Cuomo cheerleaders out there , enjoy the daily briefings to your heart ’ s content .
He ’ s doing a pretty good job and I ’ ve given him plenty of credit myself .
But trying to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into a better Democratic Party outcome in November – no matter how you do it – is not something I see happening .

No matter how impressed you may or may not be with New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s daily briefings on the coronavirus situation, the love festival for this guy is getting a bit out of hand. I’m still seeing the #PresidentCuomo hashtag trending on Twitter on and off and most of the hosts at both CNN and MSNBC have clearly fallen in love with the guy. But are there bigger things awaiting him on the horizon? We previously discussed one oddball theory proposing that the DNC dump Joe Biden and replace him with Cuomo. I pointed out several reasons why that was both impractical and problematic.
Now, however, another plot seems to be emerging. If they can’t get rid of Biden before the convention (or after), perhaps Uncle Joe can pluck Cuomo out of the Empire State and set him up as his pick for Vice President. Then, either in 2024 or before (if Joe somehow can’t go the distance), Cuomo would be the POTUS-in-waiting. Over at the New York Post, Bob McManus discusses why Joe couldn’t possibly pick Cuomo and how it would be a bad idea if he tried.
Let’s first look at the veep speculation from the governor’s perspective: His political instincts are as acute as anyone’s, so he doubtless knows that the instant politics pops up, the wheels fall off the Cuomo-as-calm-crisis-navigator wagon. And then there goes the rationale for his even being in the conversation. His star could set as quickly as it rose. So why would the governor want that? After all, he is only 62, solidly positioned in a party now dominated by superannuated fixtures on one side, and earnest-but-untested strivers on the other. Given that Biden, now 77, very likely would be a one-termer, next time around has to be looking pretty good to Cuomo. If nothing else, waiting would give him time to achieve a goal denied his father, Mario, a fourth term, and thence perhaps to the top of the ticket in 2024.
McManus makes a number of good points about not only why Biden shouldn’t pick Cuomo, but why Cuomo would probably be crazy to accept the offer if he did. While some may find Cuomo’s “star to be rising” at the moment, it could just as easily crash and burn. It’s nowhere near a sure thing that Biden will win in November at this point and being the number two person on a losing POTUS ticket isn’t exactly the beginning of a road to political glory.
But let’s imagine for a moment that Biden was thinking about this. Keep in mind that he already promised to pick a woman for his running mate. Preferably either a Black or Hispanic woman who is considerably younger. (If somebody could comb through their contact list and come up with a black lesbian in her forties he could have the hat trick.) So what happens to the significant portion of the base that lives and dies by identity politics if Joe goes back on his promise and instead delivers yet another straight white dude who is old enough to collect Social Security? The phrase conniption fit comes to mind. A bunch of them are already seething over Bernie Sanders being shoved aside anyway and that would be a bridge too far.
Even if Biden ignores all of that and picks Cuomo anyway, there will still be months of campaigning left to do. I already pointed this out in the previous article I mentioned above, but the oppo research file on Andrew Cuomo is about as thick as a Manhattan phone directory. (At least back in the days when we still had phone books, anyway.) Go back and read the second to last paragraph.
Cuomo hasn’t exactly had a squeaky clean record since becoming governor and a significant number of his former aides, donors and other cronies are either serving time in prison, awaiting sentencing, on trial or have already been released. How he managed to avoid an arrest warrant all of this time remains a mystery, but let’s just say it’s not a pretty picture. Nobody wants to be so rude as to bring all of that garbage related to “The Buffalo Billion” up while the Governor is in the midst of dealing with the pandemic, which is understandable. That’s why he’s looking so popular at the moment. But if you put him in the running for a national race it will all come rushing back.
So for all of the Cuomo cheerleaders out there, enjoy the daily briefings to your heart’s content. He’s doing a pretty good job and I’ve given him plenty of credit myself. But trying to leverage the moment he’s having into a better Democratic Party outcome in November – no matter how you do it – is not something I see happening.


hotair--2020-03-30--Hmmm: Johnson & Johnson announce human trials of COVID-19 vaccine to start in September -- and a $45

Hmmm: Johnson & Johnson announce human trials of COVID-19 vaccine to start in September -- and a $456M contract to produce it

It ’ s not the first human trials for a COVID-19 vaccine , but it might be the best financed .
Pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson announced this morning that it has a vaccine candidate that will go into human trials in September .
The company said they foresee an emergency authorization by early next year , when some health experts expect to see a new wave of infections and deaths : Johnson & Johnson ( JNJ.N ) plans to start human testing of its experimental coronavirus vaccine by September and make it ready for emergency use in early 2021 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ J & J also committed more than $ 1 billion of investment along with U.S. agency Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority ( BARDA ) to co-fund vaccine research , expanding a previous collaboration .
… J & J said in January it had begun working on a possible vaccine for the coronavirus , using the same technologies used to make its experimental Ebola vaccine .
This won ’ t be the first human trial of a vaccine .
The National Institute of Health worked with Biotech to produce a vaccine candidate early @ @ @ @ @ @ @ subjects began two weeks ago .
That vaccine was experimental in another way ; it didn ’ t actually contain the COVID-19 virus itself .
Inovio Pharmaceuticals planned trials for its candidate next month with “ a few dozen volunteers ” in Pennsylvania and Kansas City , and plenty of other laboratories are rushing to find a vaccine , too .
What makes Johnson & Johnson different ?
For one thing , J & J just got a $ 456 million contract from the federal government to generate a vaccine and begin mass @ @ @ @ @ @ @ production capability vaults them to the top of the heap if and when a vaccine is developed , assuming they ’ re the ones who find it .
Or maybe not even that restriction applies : The Trump administration is spending nearly half a billion dollars on one company in the race to find a coronavirus vaccine .
That ’ s according to a $ 456 million order with Johnson & Johnson ’ s Pharmaceuticals arm Janssen , which specified a “ new vaccine asset for 2019 Novel Coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the largest reported amount spent on a vaccine project to date , even though the pharma giant hasn ’ t yet started any clinical trials as other firms have .
The deal was signed with the Health and Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response ( ASPR ) on March 27 , 2020 .
It followed another order , made as part of the same contract with Janssen , for $ 150 million on March 20 , 2020 , for a “ new antiviral ” for COVID-19 .
A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t provide any more details on the specific order , but confirmed the $ 456 million award related to a collaboration with ASPR ’ s Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority ( BARDA ) , as announced in February .
That work was built on previous contracts for developing countermeasures for other influenzas .
The value of the coronavirus-specific work hadn ’ t previously been revealed and is the largest known contract for a coronavirus vaccine to date .
That would seem to signal that the J & J effort is more serious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mean that the Trump administration is making a down payment on their manufacturing capacity .
The Defense Production Act , which has achieved a curious popularity over the last couple of weeks , could be used to order manufacturers to produce the best vaccine regardless of who develops it , and regardless of where the profits ( if any ) go , at least initially .
As soon as an effective vaccine is confirmed , the White House is likely to go all-out in producing it , eclipsing everyone else ’ s efforts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If that ’ s worrying Johnson & Johnson at all , their announcement does a good job of hiding it .
Hopefully one of these efforts will pay off sooner rather than later .
It does prompt a question , however : just how flexible does the FDA plan to get about its normal approval procedures ?
Last night ’ s emergency approval of chloroquine in two different forms for COVID-19 treatment was an easy call ; the medicines are already in use and their safety within prescription parameters is well established @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , especially in an era where more and more people tend to look at vaccines in general with more skepticism .
Any effective vaccine will need to go out far , wide , and fast to prevent another round of economic catastrophe and excess deaths , but the FDA isn ’ t built for that kind of response — yet .
An emergency authorization for “ early 2021 ” seems more hopeful than developing an effective vaccine does .

It’s not the first human trials for a COVID-19 vaccine, but it might be the best financed. Pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson announced this morning that it has a vaccine candidate that will go into human trials in September. The company said they foresee an emergency authorization by early next year, when some health experts expect to see a new wave of infections and deaths:
Johnson & Johnson (JNJ.N) plans to start human testing of its experimental coronavirus vaccine by September and make it ready for emergency use in early 2021, the drugmaker said on Monday. J&J also committed more than $1 billion of investment along with U.S. agency Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) to co-fund vaccine research, expanding a previous collaboration. … J&J said in January it had begun working on a possible vaccine for the coronavirus, using the same technologies used to make its experimental Ebola vaccine.
This won’t be the first human trial of a vaccine. The National Institute of Health worked with Biotech to produce a vaccine candidate early on, and clinical trials with human subjects began two weeks ago. That vaccine was experimental in another way; it didn’t actually contain the COVID-19 virus itself. Inovio Pharmaceuticals planned trials for its candidate next month with “a few dozen volunteers” in Pennsylvania and Kansas City, and plenty of other laboratories are rushing to find a vaccine, too.
What makes Johnson & Johnson different? For one thing, J&J just got a $456 million contract from the federal government to generate a vaccine and begin mass production as soon as possible. Their production capability vaults them to the top of the heap if and when a vaccine is developed, assuming they’re the ones who find it. Or maybe not even that restriction applies:
The Trump administration is spending nearly half a billion dollars on one company in the race to find a coronavirus vaccine. That’s according to a $456 million order with Johnson & Johnson’s Pharmaceuticals arm Janssen, which specified a “new vaccine asset for 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19),” Forbes found. It’s the largest reported amount spent on a vaccine project to date, even though the pharma giant hasn’t yet started any clinical trials as other firms have. The deal was signed with the Health and Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) on March 27, 2020. It followed another order, made as part of the same contract with Janssen, for $150 million on March 20, 2020, for a “new antiviral” for COVID-19. A spokesperson from Johnson & Johnson didn’t provide any more details on the specific order, but confirmed the $456 million award related to a collaboration with ASPR’s Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), as announced in February. That work was built on previous contracts for developing countermeasures for other influenzas. The value of the coronavirus-specific work hadn’t previously been revealed and is the largest known contract for a coronavirus vaccine to date.
That would seem to signal that the J&J effort is more serious than the others. It could also mean that the Trump administration is making a down payment on their manufacturing capacity. The Defense Production Act, which has achieved a curious popularity over the last couple of weeks, could be used to order manufacturers to produce the best vaccine regardless of who develops it, and regardless of where the profits (if any) go, at least initially. As soon as an effective vaccine is confirmed, the White House is likely to go all-out in producing it, eclipsing everyone else’s efforts, at least for the short run. If that’s worrying Johnson & Johnson at all, their announcement does a good job of hiding it. Hopefully one of these efforts will pay off sooner rather than later.
It does prompt a question, however: just how flexible does the FDA plan to get about its normal approval procedures? Last night’s emergency approval of chloroquine in two different forms for COVID-19 treatment was an easy call; the medicines are already in use and their safety within prescription parameters is well established. A vaccine is another issue entirely, especially in an era where more and more people tend to look at vaccines in general with more skepticism. Any effective vaccine will need to go out far, wide, and fast to prevent another round of economic catastrophe and excess deaths, but the FDA isn’t built for that kind of response — yet. An emergency authorization for “early 2021” seems more hopeful than developing an effective vaccine does.


hotair--2020-03-30--Fauci: Yes, we expect a second outbreak this fall, but...

You can treat this as a sequel to the last post if you like .
Will it really be safe to allow in-person voting in the midst of a second wave of coronavirus ?
, I asked .
Fauci doesn ’ t answer that specific question but watch him here and you get the sense that , yes , it might be generally safe .
Not completely safe : So long as we lack a vaccine , mass gatherings are a bad idea .
But the risk of visiting a polling precinct this fall will be smaller , maybe much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one now .
Why ?
Simple .
We ’ ll have seven more months ’ worth of capability in limiting the spread and severity of COVID-19 by then .
The particulars of what he outlines there should be familiar by now .
We ’ ll have greater testing by fall to identify infections quickly ; we ’ ll be able to trace contacts of infected people and isolate them ; we ’ ll have therapeutic drugs , possibly even very early vaccine use for medical providers .
Those are the core elements of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that I wrote about earlier .
They ’ re the same core elements of this Ezekiel Emanuel proposal for getting back to business .
There ’ s no real daylight among epidemiologists on what we need to do to end the lockdowns , restore some degree of normalcy and productivity , and prevent future coronavirus wildfires while we ’ re waiting for the vaccine .
Just follow the South Korean model .
Build up testing and surveillance , build up hospital resilience , clear people to return to work who were infected and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ early progress on therapeutics , per another new ( and small ) Chinese trial of hydroxychloroquine : All participants were randomized in a parallel-group trial , 31 patients were assigned to receive an additional 5-day HCQ ( 400 mg/d ) treatment , Time to clinical recovery ( TTCR ) , clinical characteristics , and radiological results were assessed at baseline and 5 days after treatment to evaluate the effect of HCQ .
Key findings : For the 62 COVID-19 patients , 46.8 % ( 29 of 62 ) were male and 53.2 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the mean age was 44.7 ( 15.3 ) years .
No difference in the age and sex distribution between the control group and the HCQ group .
But for TTCR , the body temperature recovery time and the cough remission time were significantly shortened in the HCQ treatment group .
Besides , a larger proportion of patients with improved pneumonia in the HCQ treatment group ( 80.6 % , 25 of 32 ) compared with the control group ( 54.8 % , 17 of 32 ) .
Notably , all 4 patients @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the control group .
However , there were 2 patients with mild adverse reactions in the HCQ treatment group .
Significance : Among patients with COVID-19 , the use of HCQ could significantly shorten TTCR and promote the absorption of pneumonia .
Ford Motor Co said on Monday it will produce 50,000 ventilators over the next 100 days at a plant in Michigan in cooperation with General Electric ’ s healthcare unit , and can then build 30,000 per month as needed to treat patients afflicted with the coronavirus .
Ford said the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by GE Healthcare from Florida-based Airon Corp and has been cleared by the Food and Drug Administration , can meet the needs of most COVID-19 patients and relies on air pressure without the need for electricity .
It may not be the case six months from now that no coronavirus patient needs a ventilator but it may well be the case that any coronavirus patient who needs one can get one , which will improve survival rates .
There ’ s evidence that social distancing is working right now to limit the toll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for 750,000 or so tests per week , in line with what Gottlieb recommended as the needed capacity to begin slowly reopening the economy next month or in May .
Meanwhile , there may be political benefits to Trump in having taken the advice of experts and extended the “ stay home ” guidelines through the end of April .
This data , from a Democratic pollster , was circulating over the weekend : His advisors were nervous that he ’ d stick with his Easter target date for returning some parts of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a fiasco that could have been .
Swing voters weren ’ t thrilled with it either .
Right now he ’ s largely immune from a backlash for any decision he makes that ’ s in line with expert scientific opinion ; if Fauci and other experts believe X , Y , and Z need to be done to spare the country from a public-health catastrophe then Trump can ’ t fairly be faulted for doing X , Y , and Z , even if the economic consequences are devastating .
Medicine is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crisis .
If Trump breaks from that , though , and goes his own way by encouraging people to go back to work and keep seeding the outbreak before it ’ s under control , everything that flows from that decision is on him akibe .
Deaths that could have been avoided , protracted economic pain in communities struggling to recover — all of it .
Democrats would eat him alive .
He did the prudent thing by sticking with his advisors in extending the guidelines .
It ’ s not often I @ @ @ @ @ @ @

You can treat this as a sequel to the last post if you like. Will it really be safe to allow in-person voting in the midst of a second wave of coronavirus?, I asked.
Fauci doesn’t answer that specific question but watch him here and you get the sense that, yes, it might be generally safe. Not completely safe: So long as we lack a vaccine, mass gatherings are a bad idea. But the risk of visiting a polling precinct this fall will be smaller, maybe much smaller, than the risk of visiting one now.
Why? Simple. We’ll have seven more months’ worth of capability in limiting the spread and severity of COVID-19 by then.
Asked about the cyclical nature of COVID-19 and whether the U.S. is prepared for it to strike again in the fall, Dr. Fauci told @KyraPhillips he anticipates "that would actually happen because of the degree of transmissibility." https://t.co/HG6qRxO974 pic.twitter.com/v9eVUusPzI — ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) March 30, 2020
The particulars of what he outlines there should be familiar by now. We’ll have greater testing by fall to identify infections quickly; we’ll be able to trace contacts of infected people and isolate them; we’ll have therapeutic drugs, possibly even very early vaccine use for medical providers. Those are the core elements of the Scott Gottlieb plan for reopening America that I wrote about earlier. They’re the same core elements of this Ezekiel Emanuel proposal for getting back to business. There’s no real daylight among epidemiologists on what we need to do to end the lockdowns, restore some degree of normalcy and productivity, and prevent future coronavirus wildfires while we’re waiting for the vaccine. Just follow the South Korean model. Build up testing and surveillance, build up hospital resilience, clear people to return to work who were infected and have since recovered.
There’s early progress on therapeutics, per another new (and small) Chinese trial of hydroxychloroquine:
All participants were randomized in a parallel-group trial, 31 patients were assigned to receive an additional 5-day HCQ (400 mg/d) treatment, Time to clinical recovery (TTCR), clinical characteristics, and radiological results were assessed at baseline and 5 days after treatment to evaluate the effect of HCQ. Key findings: For the 62 COVID-19 patients, 46.8% (29 of 62) were male and 53.2% (33 of 62) were female, the mean age was 44.7 (15.3) years. No difference in the age and sex distribution between the control group and the HCQ group. But for TTCR, the body temperature recovery time and the cough remission time were significantly shortened in the HCQ treatment group. Besides, a larger proportion of patients with improved pneumonia in the HCQ treatment group (80.6%, 25 of 32) compared with the control group (54.8%, 17 of 32). Notably, all 4 patients progressed to severe illness that occurred in the control group. However, there were 2 patients with mild adverse reactions in the HCQ treatment group. Significance: Among patients with COVID-19, the use of HCQ could significantly shorten TTCR and promote the absorption of pneumonia.
There’s progress on hospital resilience too:
Ford Motor Co said on Monday it will produce 50,000 ventilators over the next 100 days at a plant in Michigan in cooperation with General Electric’s healthcare unit, and can then build 30,000 per month as needed to treat patients afflicted with the coronavirus. Ford said the simplified ventilator design, which is licensed by GE Healthcare from Florida-based Airon Corp and has been cleared by the Food and Drug Administration, can meet the needs of most COVID-19 patients and relies on air pressure without the need for electricity.
It may not be the case six months from now that no coronavirus patient needs a ventilator but it may well be the case that any coronavirus patient who needs one can get one, which will improve survival rates.
There’s evidence that social distancing is working right now to limit the toll:
More data suggesting that New York could be approaching a peak in new cases. Over the next 7-10 days they could peak and start slowly turning the corner. Mitigation is working in New York. https://t.co/9rJiqCK4En — Scott Gottlieb, MD (@ScottGottliebMD) March 30, 2020
We’re now on pace for 750,000 or so tests per week, in line with what Gottlieb recommended as the needed capacity to begin slowly reopening the economy next month or in May.
Meanwhile, there may be political benefits to Trump in having taken the advice of experts and extended the “stay home” guidelines through the end of April. This data, from a Democratic pollster, was circulating over the weekend:
Day 5 of @NavigatorSurvey tracking poll: Trump’s “re-open” the economy trial balloon is very very far from where the public is. 74% (and 70% of Republicans btw) say social distancing should last however long it takes for public health experts to say it’s safe. pic.twitter.com/eFvYzAImNl — Nick Gourevitch (@nickgourevitch) March 28, 2020
His advisors were nervous that he’d stick with his Easter target date for returning some parts of the country to work, knowing what a fiasco that could have been. Swing voters weren’t thrilled with it either. Right now he’s largely immune from a backlash for any decision he makes that’s in line with expert scientific opinion; if Fauci and other experts believe X, Y, and Z need to be done to spare the country from a public-health catastrophe then Trump can’t fairly be faulted for doing X, Y, and Z, even if the economic consequences are devastating. Medicine is dictating the policy in an unprecedented medical crisis. If Trump breaks from that, though, and goes his own way by encouraging people to go back to work and keep seeding the outbreak before it’s under control, everything that flows from that decision is on him akibe. Deaths that could have been avoided, protracted economic pain in communities struggling to recover — all of it. Democrats would eat him alive. He did the prudent thing by sticking with his advisors in extending the guidelines. It’s not often I get to say that about him.


hotair--2020-03-30--Imperial College: We believe many countries have millions of undetected infections

Via Nate Silver , most of us are way out of our depth in trying to understand this stuff .
I feel more out of my depth each day as I try to reconcile the increasingly hair-raising projections being made by most epidemiologists with the implications of the Oxford model of the disease , which speculates that asymptomatic infections are much more common than anyone realizes .
But I ’ m going to try anyway .
If Oxford is right , it means two things are likely true and they ’ re both welcome news .
One : The case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve assumed .
A large number of people are going to die regardless — just turn on the news and feast your eyes on what ’ s developing in New York City — but deaths are flukier than we currently believe .
Two : This will be over more quickly in some countries than we ’ ve assumed because those countries are further along the road towards herd immunity than is understood .
Once half the population has been infected and acquired immunity ( *if* in fact a mild infection confers durable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ necessarily will begin to decline .
The virus simply runs out of people to infect .
That ’ s the right-hand side of the epidemiological bell curve with which we ’ ve all become familiar .
The Imperial College , whose projections have been dire , published a new study today that includes this data on estimated infection rates .
Check out the numbers for Italy and especially Spain .
The first number is their best guess at the infection ( or “ attack ” ) rate in each country and the numbers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ error .
In Spain the actual rate could be as little as 3.7 percent or as high as 41 percent , which would be approaching herd immunity .
In Italy almost 10 percent of the population is expected to be infected right now , although it could be as high as a quarter .
What does this mean for the fatality rate ?
In Italy there are 11,591 COVID-19 deaths as I write this out of a population of 60.48 million people .
If 9.8 percent of the population is infected , that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a fatality rate of 0.2 percent , lower than the estimates of one to two percent ( or higher ) that are based on Chinese data .
In Spain there are 7,340 deaths as of today in a population of 46.66 million .
Assuming 15 percent are infected , that ’ s just about seven million infections .
Case fatality rate : 0.1 percent .
One more .
The Imperial College estimates an infection rate in the United Kingdom of 2.7 percent .
Among a population of 66.44 million , that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They ’ ve had 1,408 deaths so far .
That ’ s a case fatality rate of 0.08 percent .
If you assume that actual infection rates run towards the higher end of the Imperial College ’ s statistical range , the fatality rate shrinks further .
As for our own country , if we assume , say , a two percent infection rate ( in line with most of the estimates in the table above ) , that would mean 6.5 million total infections in the U.S. against 2,945 deaths as of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fatality rate of just .045 percent .
If that ’ s true , then if all 327.2 million Americans were infected , we would expect the total number of deaths to be 147,240 — which , not coincidentally , is smack dab in the middle of the range given by Deborah Birx this morning .
Two things can simultaneously be true , then .
One is that the average American ’ s odds of dying may be very small , something like one in 2,200 .
( Smaller , actually , for younger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that a lot of Americans are going to die , whatever the odds may be .
Many more than would die in a flu outbreak .
On the other hand , maybe it ’ s a sucker ’ s game to compare the size of outbreaks in different countries : As I say , I ’ m out of my depth .
Readers who understand this stuff better are invited to correct me .
One additional thought , though : If fatality rates are much lower than we think then China ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and beyond logically means there were many more infections than the 82,200 known cases that the country is currently reporting .
Assuming a fatality rate of , say , .15 percent , that would mean 2.2 million infections , or around 27 times more than the official number .
That would fit with the British government ’ s suspicion that there were 15-40 times as many cases in China than Chinese authorities claim .
The Brits , though , seem to think that there are 15-40 times as many confirmed cases known to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on ; if there are something like 2.2 million known cases in China , it must be that there ’ s a gigantic number of unknown/asymptomatic infected population beyond that — maybe something like 50 million people or more — and many , many more deaths than China has revealed , which is what some suspect .
Anyway , just because the Oxford model might be on to something doesn ’ t mean social distancing isn ’ t important .
Scroll down to page 10 of today ’ s new Imperial College study @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of how many lives social distancing practices in Europe are projected to have saved this past month .
Result : 59,000 , the bulk of them in Italy .

Via Nate Silver, most of us are way out of our depth in trying to understand this stuff. I feel more out of my depth each day as I try to reconcile the increasingly hair-raising projections being made by most epidemiologists with the implications of the Oxford model of the disease, which speculates that asymptomatic infections are much more common than anyone realizes. But I’m going to try anyway.
If Oxford is right, it means two things are likely true and they’re both welcome news. One: The case fatality rate is much lower than we’ve assumed. A large number of people are going to die regardless — just turn on the news and feast your eyes on what’s developing in New York City — but deaths are flukier than we currently believe.
Two: This will be over more quickly in some countries than we’ve assumed because those countries are further along the road towards herd immunity than is understood. Once half the population has been infected and acquired immunity (*if* in fact a mild infection confers durable immunity) then the number of cases necessarily will begin to decline. The virus simply runs out of people to infect. That’s the right-hand side of the epidemiological bell curve with which we’ve all become familiar.
The Imperial College, whose projections have been dire, published a new study today that includes this data on estimated infection rates. Check out the numbers for Italy and especially Spain.
The first number is their best guess at the infection (or “attack”) rate in each country and the numbers that follow represent the proverbial margin of error. In Spain the actual rate could be as little as 3.7 percent or as high as 41 percent, which would be approaching herd immunity. In Italy almost 10 percent of the population is expected to be infected right now, although it could be as high as a quarter. What does this mean for the fatality rate?
In Italy there are 11,591 COVID-19 deaths as I write this out of a population of 60.48 million people. If 9.8 percent of the population is infected, that’s 5.9 million cases. That’s a fatality rate of 0.2 percent, lower than the estimates of one to two percent (or higher) that are based on Chinese data.
In Spain there are 7,340 deaths as of today in a population of 46.66 million. Assuming 15 percent are infected, that’s just about seven million infections. Case fatality rate: 0.1 percent.
One more. The Imperial College estimates an infection rate in the United Kingdom of 2.7 percent. Among a population of 66.44 million, that should mean about 1.8 million infections. They’ve had 1,408 deaths so far. That’s a case fatality rate of 0.08 percent.
If you assume that actual infection rates run towards the higher end of the Imperial College’s statistical range, the fatality rate shrinks further. As for our own country, if we assume, say, a two percent infection rate (in line with most of the estimates in the table above), that would mean 6.5 million total infections in the U.S. against 2,945 deaths as of this afternoon. That would be a fatality rate of just .045 percent. If that’s true, then if all 327.2 million Americans were infected, we would expect the total number of deaths to be 147,240 — which, not coincidentally, is smack dab in the middle of the range given by Deborah Birx this morning.
Two things can simultaneously be true, then. One is that the average American’s odds of dying may be very small, something like one in 2,200. (Smaller, actually, for younger age groups.) And two is that a lot of Americans are going to die, whatever the odds may be. Many more than would die in a flu outbreak.
On the other hand, maybe it’s a sucker’s game to compare the size of outbreaks in different countries:
If detection rates vary that much than it is NOT at all reliable to use the number of detected cases to compare countries (or states). Y'all really need to stop doing that until/unless you have a sense for how effective different places are at testing/detection. — Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) March 30, 2020
As I say, I’m out of my depth. Readers who understand this stuff better are invited to correct me. One additional thought, though: If fatality rates are much lower than we think then China’s death toll of 3,308 people in Wuhan and beyond logically means there were many more infections than the 82,200 known cases that the country is currently reporting. Assuming a fatality rate of, say, .15 percent, that would mean 2.2 million infections, or around 27 times more than the official number. That would fit with the British government’s suspicion that there were 15-40 times as many cases in China than Chinese authorities claim. The Brits, though, seem to think that there are 15-40 times as many confirmed cases known to Chinese authorities than they’re letting on; if there are something like 2.2 million known cases in China, it must be that there’s a gigantic number of unknown/asymptomatic infected population beyond that — maybe something like 50 million people or more — and many, many more deaths than China has revealed, which is what some suspect.
Anyway, just because the Oxford model might be on to something doesn’t mean social distancing isn’t important. Scroll down to page 10 of today’s new Imperial College study and you’ll find an estimate of how many lives social distancing practices in Europe are projected to have saved this past month. Result: 59,000, the bulk of them in Italy.


hotair--2020-03-31--Another pastor charged with violating a stay-at-home order by holding services

This morning Jazz wrote about the pastor of a church in Tampa , Florida who was arrested because he has continued to hold church services despite a stay-at-home order .
NBC News is reporting that another pastor in Louisiana has been given six summonses , which are equivalent to an arrest , for six separate meetings his church has held in violation of the state ’ s stay-at-home order : The pastor , Mark Anthony Spell , who goes by Tony , of Life Tabernacle Church , told NBC News in a brief phone interview Tuesday afternoon that police had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ services he has held since March 16 , when Gov .
John Bel Edwards announced an order against gatherings of more than 50 people .
Spell said he hosted about 500 worshippers at a service Sunday at the church in Central , a city of nearly 29,000 near Baton Rouge… Central Police Chief Roger Corcoran said he worked with the sheriff , State Police , State Fire Marshal and others to address the matter “ outside of legal action.
” “ Mr .
Spell made his intentions to continue to violate the law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Instead of showing the strength and resilience of our community during this difficult time , Mr .
Spell has chosen to embarrass us for his own self-promotion.
” The delivery of the six summonses was not an ugly scene .
Two police officers entered the church and met the pastor who greeted them in a suit .
He signed the documents and then asked to pray for the deputies , who he said were doing their jobs .
But two weeks ago , the pastor said he wasn ’ t concerned about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was politically motivated : Tuesday ’ s service was held at Life Tabernacle Church in the City of Central , located in East Baton Rouge Parish .
Rev .
Spell says he does not believe his congregation is at risk of getting COVID-19 .
“ It ’ s not a concern , ” Spell said of the virus .
“ The virus , we believe , is politically motivated .
We hold our religious rights dear and we are going to assemble no matter what someone says.
” I ’ m not sure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if he ’ s concerned this is a plot by a Democratic governor , why wouldn ’ t he at least listen to Trump who , along with VP Pence , has been pushing social distancing on a daily basis for the past two weeks ?
It ’ s worth noting that in the case Jazz wrote about earlier the church is claiming that it maintained social distancing measures during the services .
I don ’ t know if that ’ s true but they are saying they were being careful .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at all the case with this church in Baton Rouge which has had gatherings of over 1,000 people without social distancing efforts .
The police are doing the right thing in my view .
Of course the only opinion that will really matter will be that of the judge that eventually decides whether the pastor had a right to ignore the governor ’ s stay-at-home order .
But as I see it there ’ s no indication that the government ’ s goal here is to a ) silence him or b ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And that should matter because even if a court eventually decides he had a right to do this , that doesn ’ t make it wise .
It would be much wiser for this pastor to recognize this is a real and immediate threat and briefly shut down or live stream his services to protect people ’ s health .
Here ’ s the police press conference about the situation :

This morning Jazz wrote about the pastor of a church in Tampa, Florida who was arrested because he has continued to hold church services despite a stay-at-home order. NBC News is reporting that another pastor in Louisiana has been given six summonses, which are equivalent to an arrest, for six separate meetings his church has held in violation of the state’s stay-at-home order:
The pastor, Mark Anthony Spell, who goes by Tony, of Life Tabernacle Church, told NBC News in a brief phone interview Tuesday afternoon that police had given him the summonses for the six services he has held since March 16, when Gov. John Bel Edwards announced an order against gatherings of more than 50 people. Spell said he hosted about 500 worshippers at a service Sunday at the church in Central, a city of nearly 29,000 near Baton Rouge… Central Police Chief Roger Corcoran said he worked with the sheriff, State Police, State Fire Marshal and others to address the matter “outside of legal action.” “Mr. Spell made his intentions to continue to violate the law clear,” Corcoran said. “Instead of showing the strength and resilience of our community during this difficult time, Mr. Spell has chosen to embarrass us for his own self-promotion.”
The delivery of the six summonses was not an ugly scene. Two police officers entered the church and met the pastor who greeted them in a suit. He signed the documents and then asked to pray for the deputies, who he said were doing their jobs. But two weeks ago, the pastor said he wasn’t concerned about the virus and suggested the concern about it was politically motivated:
Tuesday’s service was held at Life Tabernacle Church in the City of Central, located in East Baton Rouge Parish. Rev. Spell says he does not believe his congregation is at risk of getting COVID-19. “It’s not a concern,” Spell said of the virus. “The virus, we believe, is politically motivated. We hold our religious rights dear and we are going to assemble no matter what someone says.”
I’m not sure what Spell meant by that, but if he’s concerned this is a plot by a Democratic governor, why wouldn’t he at least listen to Trump who, along with VP Pence, has been pushing social distancing on a daily basis for the past two weeks?
It’s worth noting that in the case Jazz wrote about earlier the church is claiming that it maintained social distancing measures during the services. I don’t know if that’s true but they are saying they were being careful. It sounds as if that’s not at all the case with this church in Baton Rouge which has had gatherings of over 1,000 people without social distancing efforts.
The police are doing the right thing in my view. Of course the only opinion that will really matter will be that of the judge that eventually decides whether the pastor had a right to ignore the governor’s stay-at-home order. But as I see it there’s no indication that the government’s goal here is to a) silence him or b) shut down his church for good. And that should matter because even if a court eventually decides he had a right to do this, that doesn’t make it wise. It would be much wiser for this pastor to recognize this is a real and immediate threat and briefly shut down or live stream his services to protect people’s health.
Here’s the police press conference about the situation: