motherjones--2020-07-30--In Attacking Amazon, Matt Gaetz Boosts a Terrorist Organization

During Tuesday ’ s House Judiciary Committee hearing with CEOs from major tech , Rep. Matt Gaetz ( R-Fla. ) defended multiple homophobic , Islamaphobic , and anti-Semitic groups , including one that is a federally designated terrorist organization .
Gaetz remarks came in the course of attacking the Southern Poverty Law Center , a nonprofit organization that maintains a list of hate groups that Amazon has chosen to ban from using its fundraising service .
“ The Southern Poverty Law Center , which you allow to dictate who can receive donations on your AmazonSmile platform , have said the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the Federation for American Immigration Reform , the American Family Association , the Family Research Council , the Jewish Defense League , and even Dr. Ben Carson are extremists , ” Gaetz said to Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos .
“ I ’ m just wondering why you would place your confidence in a group that seems to be so out of step and seems to take mainstream Christian doctrine and label it as hate ?
” While Gaetz seemed to highlight groups with innocuous-sounding names , the organizations he listed are considered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in similar issues .
Catholic Family Ministries and its publication Catholic Family News are a part of the anti-Semitic brand of Radical Traditional Catholicism that rejects the Vatican ’ s liberalizing reforms in the 60s and has played home to excommunicated priests .
On their website , they have a page for articles tagged with “ The Jews ” with posts rejecting the Roman church ’ s modern conciliatory overtures to the Jewish community .
They explicitly reject the kind of “ mainstream Christian doctrine ” that Gaetz ’ s question claimed they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Reform , according to the SPLC , has multiple ties to white nationalists and eugenicists .
The organization has documented FAIR ’ s founder , John Tanton , as saying the US should remain majority white .
The American Family Association and Family Research Council , have frequently espoused homophobic views , and in the American Family Association ’ s case , Islamaphobic statements as well .
As recently as 2010 , the Family Research Council likened being gay to pedophilia .
The Jewish Defense League is the most puzzling Gaetz endorsement .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ organization as a “ right-wing terrorist group.
” Federal officials found them responsible for 15 acts of terrorism between 1980 and 1985 , and JDL members were suspected of being responsible for a 1972 New York bombing that left two dead .
Despite the groups ’ history of hate , Bezos caved to Gaetz ’ s questioning .
“ Sir , I ’ m going to acknowledge this is an imperfect system , ” Bezos responded .
“ And I would like suggestions on better or additional sources.
” Gaetz fired back with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the SPLC , ” something conservatives angered by the watchdog group ’ s designations have long advocated .

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
During Tuesday’s House Judiciary Committee hearing with CEOs from major tech, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) defended multiple homophobic, Islamaphobic, and anti-Semitic groups, including one that is a federally designated terrorist organization.
While Gaetz seemed to highlight groups with innocuous names, the organizations he listed are considered fringe outfits.
Gaetz remarks came in the course of attacking the Southern Poverty Law Center, a nonprofit organization that maintains a list of hate groups that Amazon has chosen to ban from using its fundraising service. “The Southern Poverty Law Center, which you allow to dictate who can receive donations on your AmazonSmile platform, have said the Catholic Family News, Catholic Family Ministries, the Federation for American Immigration Reform, the American Family Association, the Family Research Council, the Jewish Defense League, and even Dr. Ben Carson are extremists,” Gaetz said to Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos. “I’m just wondering why you would place your confidence in a group that seems to be so out of step and seems to take mainstream Christian doctrine and label it as hate?”
While Gaetz seemed to highlight groups with innocuous-sounding names, the organizations he listed are considered fringe outfits by far larger groups involved in similar issues.
Catholic Family Ministries and its publication Catholic Family News are a part of the anti-Semitic brand of Radical Traditional Catholicism that rejects the Vatican’s liberalizing reforms in the 60s and has played home to excommunicated priests. On their website, they have a page for articles tagged with “The Jews” with posts rejecting the Roman church’s modern conciliatory overtures to the Jewish community. They explicitly reject the kind of “mainstream Christian doctrine” that Gaetz’s question claimed they represent.
The Federation for American Immigration Reform, according to the SPLC, has multiple ties to white nationalists and eugenicists. The organization has documented FAIR’s founder, John Tanton, as saying the US should remain majority white.
The American Family Association and Family Research Council, have frequently espoused homophobic views, and in the American Family Association’s case, Islamaphobic statements as well. As recently as 2010, the Family Research Council likened being gay to pedophilia.
The Jewish Defense League is the most puzzling Gaetz endorsement. In 2001, the FBI designated the organization as a “right-wing terrorist group.” Federal officials found them responsible for 15 acts of terrorism between 1980 and 1985, and JDL members were suspected of being responsible for a 1972 New York bombing that left two dead.
Despite the groups’ history of hate, Bezos caved to Gaetz’s questioning. “Sir, I’m going to acknowledge this is an imperfect system,” Bezos responded. “And I would like suggestions on better or additional sources.”
Gaetz fired back with the suggestion that Amazon should “divorce from the SPLC,” something conservatives angered by the watchdog group’s designations have long advocated.


motherjones--2020-07-30--John Lewis Says the Right to Vote Is in Danger. Then Trump Threatens to Take It Away.

In a posthumous op-ed published in the New York Times to coincide with his funeral on Thursday , John Lewis wrote about the importance of the right to vote but also warned of the danger it faces .
“ Voting and participating in the democratic process are key , ” wrote Lewis , the civil rights icon and longtime congressman from Georgia who passed away on July 17 .
“ The vote is the most powerful nonviolent change agent you have in a democratic society .
You must use it because it is not guaranteed .
You can lose it.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ published , President Trump suggested in a tweet that he might delay the 2020 election , dramatically escalating his massive disinformation campaign against voting by mail .
Trump ’ s tweet is nonsense .
For starters , the president doesn ’ t have the authority to postpone the election—Congress does .
Second , there ’ s no evidence of widespread vote-by-mail fraud—the conservative Heritage Foundation found only 143 criminal convictions for mail ballot fraud over the past 20 years , a rate of .000006 percent .
Third , Trump and 15 other top @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and attorney general , have voted by mail in the past .
But Lewis was right to be concerned about the threat to voting rights .
Since the 2010 election , half the states in the country have passed new restrictions on voting , such as voter ID laws , cutbacks to early voting , and closing polling places .
In 2013 , the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act , unleashing a wave of new voter suppression in states with a long history of discrimination like Georgia and Texas .
( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blocking a vote on bipartisan legislation to restore the VRA for most of a year . )
More recently , the Trump administration has waged an unrelenting campaign against vote-by-mail , lying about mail ballot fraud and filing a series of lawsuits opposing efforts to make it easier to vote by mail .
He has also politicized the United States Postal Service by appointing the former top fundraiser for the Republican National Committee as postmaster general , cutting overtime for postal workers , and slowing down mail delivery at a time when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which could lead to mail ballots not arriving in time to be counted .
All of these efforts have erected new barriers to mail voting at a time when the country will cast mail ballots in unprecedented numbers during a pandemic with no end in sight .
Lewis nearly died marching for the right to vote in 1965 .
Trump seems more determined than ever to undermine that right .

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
In a posthumous op-ed published in the New York Times to coincide with his funeral on Thursday, John Lewis wrote about the importance of the right to vote but also warned of the danger it faces.
“Voting and participating in the democratic process are key,” wrote Lewis, the civil rights icon and longtime congressman from Georgia who passed away on July 17. “The vote is the most powerful nonviolent change agent you have in a democratic society. You must use it because it is not guaranteed. You can lose it.”
Hours after Lewis’ article was published, President Trump suggested in a tweet that he might delay the 2020 election, dramatically escalating his massive disinformation campaign against voting by mail.
With Universal Mail-In Voting (not Absentee Voting, which is good), 2020 will be the most INACCURATE & FRAUDULENT Election in history. It will be a great embarrassment to the USA. Delay the Election until people can properly, securely and safely vote??? — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 30, 2020
Trump’s tweet is nonsense. For starters, the president doesn’t have the authority to postpone the election—Congress does. Second, there’s no evidence of widespread vote-by-mail fraud—the conservative Heritage Foundation found only 143 criminal convictions for mail ballot fraud over the past 20 years, a rate of .000006 percent. Third, Trump and 15 other top administration officials, including the vice president and attorney general, have voted by mail in the past.
But Lewis was right to be concerned about the threat to voting rights. Since the 2010 election, half the states in the country have passed new restrictions on voting, such as voter ID laws, cutbacks to early voting, and closing polling places. In 2013, the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act, unleashing a wave of new voter suppression in states with a long history of discrimination like Georgia and Texas. (Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has been blocking a vote on bipartisan legislation to restore the VRA for most of a year.)
Video Related: Mitch McConnell Refuses to Honor John Lewis' Legacy
More recently, the Trump administration has waged an unrelenting campaign against vote-by-mail, lying about mail ballot fraud and filing a series of lawsuits opposing efforts to make it easier to vote by mail. He has also politicized the United States Postal Service by appointing the former top fundraiser for the Republican National Committee as postmaster general, cutting overtime for postal workers, and slowing down mail delivery at a time when the agency faces a major budget crisis, which could lead to mail ballots not arriving in time to be counted. All of these efforts have erected new barriers to mail voting at a time when the country will cast mail ballots in unprecedented numbers during a pandemic with no end in sight.
Lewis nearly died marching for the right to vote in 1965. Trump seems more determined than ever to undermine that right.


motherjones--2020-07-30--How Our “Balkanized” Health Care System Made the Pandemic Far Worse

As the world grapples with the devastation of the coronavirus , one thing is clear : The United States simply wasn ’ t prepared .
Despite repeated warnings from infectious disease experts over the years , we lacked essential beds , equipment , and medication ; public health advice was confusing , and our leadership offered no clear direction while sidelining credible health professionals and institutions .
Infectious disease experts agree that it ’ s only a matter of time before the next pandemic hits , and that could be even deadlier .
So how do we fix what COVID @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mother Jones series , we ’ re asking experts from a wide range of disciplines one question : What are the most important steps we can take to make sure we ’ re better prepared next time around ?
William Hanage is an epidemiologist at Harvard ’ s T.H .
Chan School of Public Health who studies the spread of infectious diseases .
In the past , Hanage , who is British and trained at Oxford University and the Imperial College London , has looked at how viruses and bacteria evolve .
Since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ written a paper evaluating the effectiveness of coronavirus control measures in China—and he ’ s emerged as a sharp critic of the American government ’ s response to the virus .
In a recent Washington Post op-ed , he wrote : “ In the spring , the federal pandemic response was akin to bringing a rubber chicken to a gunfight .
The attempt to defend against the greatest threat to public health in a century was limp , grudging and delayed .
Now it is barely existent.
” On the problem of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Back in January or February , I remember thinking that the United States ’ health care system could almost have been precision engineered not to be able to deal with a pandemic—or to deal with it badly .
Part of it is the very many different parts of it .
You have a health insurance provider , and you have your health care provider , and then you have to get your medication from somewhere else .
It ’ s just not something that makes it possible for us to respond in any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comes at you really fast .
My experience with this one was this absolute rushing sense of a tidal wave coming in early March .
We were looking at the number of cases and predicting when that was going to be here—and then trying to convince people that we couldn ’ t be doing business as usual , because the doubling time was like twice a week .
There is a real problem with a balkanized health care system of the sort we have in the United States .
What is working in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s going to be working in another place , due to all kinds of local regulations .
The complicated system that the US has must be overhauled to become simpler , and that will take huge political will .
Medicare for All could be a step in the right direction .
Historically people have seen health care as a profit-making thing , which means that there ’ s much less investment in the possibility of having things like ventilators for an emergency .
And the situation in which states are having to compete @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ventilators is utterly counter to everything that we would hope for health care in a pandemic .
On what we can learn from the UK and Germany : Having a one-stop shop for health care , like the UK ’ s National Health Service , is helpful .
The dexamethasone finding came out of the UK , and I think one reason they could do that is it ’ s easier to do a trial like that there rather than here , where even the largest health care providers deal with coordinating massive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Germany ’ s response has been widely praised , and I would join in that praise .
It was focused on somewhat different things .
The thing that was interesting was that each of the Lander [ local regions ] were able to devise their own testing systems .
Whereas here , everything was supposed to be controlled by the FDA and the CDC , which ended up going completely awry in terms of developing a test that could be used effectively in order to study the emergence within the American population @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our mistakes : The most crucial part is to accept that mistakes are being made .
Don ’ t try and hide them and sugarcoat them for some political game .
Just accept that you have a once-in-a-century-scale public health crisis .
And once you ’ ve accepted that , you can start working on how to make it better rather than pretending it ’ s not there .
We need an honest accounting of the current situation , just looking at it and recognizing that the phases haven ’ t worked .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s not the same for every part of the country .
Here in Boston , we ’ ve gone through our three-week ICU surge and had a really tough time in that area .
But now community transmission has dropped .
We need to be talking to people , for example , in Arizona , because they ’ re quite in the thick of it .
On why we need to consider the worst-case scenario : The last administration thought about pandemics .
One of the biggest problems with the current situation actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In 2009 , a pandemic was called , and , as a result of a pandemic being declared by WHO , the world swung into action against the virus , which , in the end , turned out to be pretty serious .
It killed well over a million people .
But it was not the kind of existential threat that people had initially worried about .
And that means that when people warn about pandemics the tendency is to think that they are crying wolf , or that it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they say it ’ s going to be—when actually , it could be .
When I talk to local people , like a city council or a schools ’ committee , I say , “ What cost are you willing to accept for being wrong ?
What is an acceptable cost to you ?
” Frankly , we got lazy , and we ’ re not prepared for something like this .
Even people like me and my colleagues , we would look at the data and kind of think , can it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s hard to admit to yourself that it really can be that bad , but you have to know in the back of your mind that it may well be .
This interview has been edited for length and clarity .

As the world grapples with the devastation of the coronavirus, one thing is clear: The United States simply wasn’t prepared. Despite repeated warnings from infectious disease experts over the years, we lacked essential beds, equipment, and medication; public health advice was confusing, and our leadership offered no clear direction while sidelining credible health professionals and institutions. Infectious disease experts agree that it’s only a matter of time before the next pandemic hits, and that could be even deadlier. So how do we fix what COVID has shown was broken? In this Mother Jones series, we’re asking experts from a wide range of disciplines one question: What are the most important steps we can take to make sure we’re better prepared next time around?
William Hanage is an epidemiologist at Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health who studies the spread of infectious diseases. In the past, Hanage, who is British and trained at Oxford University and the Imperial College London, has looked at how viruses and bacteria evolve. Since the pandemic began, he’s written a paper evaluating the effectiveness of coronavirus control measures in China—and he’s emerged as a sharp critic of the American government’s response to the virus. In a recent Washington Post op-ed, he wrote: “In the spring, the federal pandemic response was akin to bringing a rubber chicken to a gunfight. The attempt to defend against the greatest threat to public health in a century was limp, grudging and delayed. Now it is barely existent.”
On the problem of a “balkanized” health care system: Back in January or February, I remember thinking that the United States’ health care system could almost have been precision engineered not to be able to deal with a pandemic—or to deal with it badly. Part of it is the very many different parts of it. You have a health insurance provider, and you have your health care provider, and then you have to get your medication from somewhere else.
It’s just not something that makes it possible for us to respond in any kind of coherent fashion. A pandemic comes at you really fast. My experience with this one was this absolute rushing sense of a tidal wave coming in early March. We were looking at the number of cases and predicting when that was going to be here—and then trying to convince people that we couldn’t be doing business as usual, because the doubling time was like twice a week. There is a real problem with a balkanized health care system of the sort we have in the United States. What is working in one place is not necessarily what’s going to be working in another place, due to all kinds of local regulations. The complicated system that the US has must be overhauled to become simpler, and that will take huge political will. Medicare for All could be a step in the right direction.
The most crucial part is to accept that mistakes are being made. Don’t try and hide them and sugarcoat them for some political game.
Historically people have seen health care as a profit-making thing, which means that there’s much less investment in the possibility of having things like ventilators for an emergency. And the situation in which states are having to compete for things like personal protective equipment or ventilators is utterly counter to everything that we would hope for health care in a pandemic.
On what we can learn from the UK and Germany: Having a one-stop shop for health care, like the UK’s National Health Service, is helpful. The dexamethasone finding came out of the UK, and I think one reason they could do that is it’s easier to do a trial like that there rather than here, where even the largest health care providers deal with coordinating massive numbers of patients in very different contexts.
Germany’s response has been widely praised, and I would join in that praise. It was focused on somewhat different things. The thing that was interesting was that each of the Lander [local regions] were able to devise their own testing systems. Whereas here, everything was supposed to be controlled by the FDA and the CDC, which ended up going completely awry in terms of developing a test that could be used effectively in order to study the emergence within the American population.
On the importance of learning from our mistakes: The most crucial part is to accept that mistakes are being made. Don’t try and hide them and sugarcoat them for some political game. Just accept that you have a once-in-a-century-scale public health crisis. And once you’ve accepted that, you can start working on how to make it better rather than pretending it’s not there. We need an honest accounting of the current situation, just looking at it and recognizing that the phases haven’t worked. We need to recognize that it’s not the same for every part of the country. Here in Boston, we’ve gone through our three-week ICU surge and had a really tough time in that area. But now community transmission has dropped. We need to be talking to people, for example, in Arizona, because they’re quite in the thick of it.
On why we need to consider the worst-case scenario: The last administration thought about pandemics. One of the biggest problems with the current situation actually dates back to 2009 and swine flu. In 2009, a pandemic was called, and, as a result of a pandemic being declared by WHO, the world swung into action against the virus, which, in the end, turned out to be pretty serious. It killed well over a million people. But it was not the kind of existential threat that people had initially worried about. And that means that when people warn about pandemics the tendency is to think that they are crying wolf, or that it’s not going to be as bad as they say it’s going to be—when actually, it could be.
When I talk to local people, like a city council or a schools’ committee, I say, “What cost are you willing to accept for being wrong? What is an acceptable cost to you?” Frankly, we got lazy, and we’re not prepared for something like this. Even people like me and my colleagues, we would look at the data and kind of think, can it really be that bad? It’s hard to admit to yourself that it really can be that bad, but you have to know in the back of your mind that it may well be.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.


motherjones--2020-07-31--This Black Lives Matter Activist Is Running for Congress. Can She Bring Down a 20-Year Incumbent?

Cori Bush smells tear gas when there isn ’ t any .
Loud noises frighten her , reminders of police brandishing sniper rifles , firing rubber bullets , and revving the engines of armored vehicles .
When the video of Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin kneeling on George Floyd ’ s neck began to circulate , Bush ’ s reaction was instinctual : “ Don ’ t look at it.
” She looked anyway .
For 400 days in 2014 and 2015 , protesters gathered in Ferguson , Missouri , to register their outrage over the police killing of unarmed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of those days , Bush joined them—at first , in her capacity as a registered nurse to tend to protesters ’ injuries , and later as a community organizer on the front lines .
She went out again in 2017 to organize after another white police officer was acquitted of murder in the 2011 shooting death of a Black man during a car chase in north St. Louis .
This year , as Americans across the country protested Floyd ’ s killing , a white police officer in the St. Louis suburb of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ man with his unmarked SUV before getting out of the car to repeatedly kick him .
And so Bush and her fellow Ferguson activists organized yet another demonstration against police brutality .
During a June gathering , she tweeted that she had been pepper-sprayed in the eyes by the cops .
“ It ’ s a reminder that we didn ’ t finish the work , ” Bush , 43 , tells me .
After Brown ’ s killing , Ferguson voters replaced several members of the city council , which now , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The city swore in its first Black police chief in 2016 , and , two years later , the much-criticized county prosecutor who oversaw the investigation into Brown ’ s killing lost his seat in a primary .
But for all the headway they ’ ve made at home , Ferguson activists have had little ability to rewrite the country ’ s broken criminal justice policies .
“ There ’ s only so much you can do when you don ’ t have that pen in your hand , ” Bush says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protests , Bush is in the final days of her second primary challenge against Rep. Lacy Clay ( D-Mo . )
, who has held the St. Louis-area 1st congressional district since 2001 .
The race features two Black leaders with very different ideas about how to create change .
Clay is a consummate insider who has spent decades building political power , which he has used to secure tangible , if incremental , progress on issues including police abuse .
Bush , who is also an ordained minister , has little patience @ @ @ @ @ @ @ district that helped turn Black Lives Matter into a national movement should have an activist in its congressional seat , someone who stands unwaveringly with BLM ’ s demands .
Bush began her career as a preschool teacher making minimum wage .
After a decade with the same company , she ’ d worked her way up to become the school ’ s assistant director—but she still made only $ 9 per hour .
She quit that job in 2001 , when she became ill while pregnant with her second child .
Not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her then-husband were evicted from the home they ’ d been renting .
For several months , they lived out of the family ’ s Ford Explorer with their 14-month-old son and newborn daughter .
When her children were small , Bush got stuck in a cycle of debt with predatory personal loans .
She borrowed small amounts— $ 250 here , $ 500 there—to cover rent , utility bills , and car repairs .
“ I remember one day I was sitting outside of the PayDay Loan office…I just remember thinking like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like me ?
’ ” Bush recalls .
“ Why do I keep having to live like this ?
” So for Bush , her crusade for office is personal .
She supports Medicare for All because she gave up her employer-sponsored health insurance to run for office—and has to pay out of pocket for two hospitalizations for a suspected case of COVID-19 .
She supports tuition-free college because she had to pay off student loans .
And she supports a $ 15 minimum wage because she made far less than that for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ struggled paycheck to paycheck , asking , ‘ Where ’ s our progress ?
’ ” Bush narrates in her first television ad .
“ As a Black mom , I ’ m sick of having to say , ‘ Just make it home safely.
’ ” The thing is…Clay supports these things , too .
He ’ s been a cosponsor of Medicare for All since former Rep. John Conyers ( D-Mich. ) first introduced it in 2003 .
He sided with progressives by voting against Trump ’ s replacement for NAFTA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In the most recent session of Congress , he signed onto Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ’ s ( D-N.Y. ) bill that would cap credit card interest rates at 15 percent—a limit that some of his more moderate colleagues on the House Financial Services Committee found preposterously low .
Then there ’ s criminal justice .
Two months before the 2014 Ferguson uprising , Clay had joined a majority of Democrats in voting against a measure that would have ended the transfer of military equipment to police .
But in the days that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ co-authored a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder demanding the Justice Department investigate the shooting and any patterns of police misconduct .
The DOJ did investigate , ultimately clearing the officer who killed Brown but issuing a damning report that determined Ferguson police were routinely “ stopping people without reasonable suspicion , arresting them without probable cause , and using unreasonable force against them.
” The St. Louis American , the local Black newspaper , endorsed Clay ’ s reelection bid in 2018 , observing that his “ insider game in Washington ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which ultimately resulted in a consent decree under which the city agreed to legally binding reforms .
“ St .
Louis will be better served by having an experienced congressman with nearly two decades of seniority , ” the paper concluded .
This year , while Bush was protesting Floyd ’ s murder , Clay and many of his colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus were shaping the Democrats ’ landmark police reform legislation .
The measure stops short of activists ’ demands to “ defund the police , ” but it would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , end qualified immunity—which prevents citizens from suing individual officers—and ban chokeholds .
Clay ’ s contributions to the bill would mandate deescalation training for officers , require that deadly force only be employed as a last resort , and provide for the appointment of an independent prosecutor anytime deadly force is used .
The bill passed the House on June 25 , exactly one month after Floyd died .
“ It is the role of an activist to push us as far as they can push us .
It is our role @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different role , ” CBC chair Rep. Karen Bass ( D-Calif. ) —herself a longtime civil rights activist—told Politico in June , as the bill was working its way through the House .
“ We are very committed to making a difference , and that is different than making a point .
You can either make a point , or you can make a difference.
” Bush ’ s run against Clay doesn ’ t neatly follow the pattern of successful progressive primary challenges , which have lately excelled on two planes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Marie Newman defeated Rep. Dan Lipinski ( Ill. ) this past March on the premise that no sitting House Democrat should oppose abortion rights .
Another is representation : Two years ago , Rep. Ayanna Pressley ( Mass . )
unseated Rep. Michael Capuano , a bona fide progressive , by arguing in part that her life experience would help her better serve her majority-minority district .
Jamaal Bowman ’ s recent win against New York Rep. Eliot Engel succeeded on both fronts—as did Ocasio-Cortez ’ s 2018 victory over House Democratic caucus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Clay on a third dimension : The rigorousness with which he fights for his constituents .
As an example , she points to the House ’ s police bill .
“ I think they ’ re too soft , ” she says of its provisions , criticizing the lack of any “ real ‘ defund ’ language.
” Bush has also slammed Clay ’ s coziness with corporate interests .
Three-quarters of the nearly $ 750,000 Clay raised through June of this year came from political action committees , nearly 80 percent of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ His top campaign contributor is Quicken Loans , a mortgage giant that Clay is charged with overseeing from his perch on the Financial Services Committee .
In 2015 , the Justice Department sued Quicken for originating hundreds of home loans for borrowers who weren ’ t eligible for them .
( The company agreed to pay $ 32.5 million to settle the case without admitting wrongdoing . )
Clay maintains that his fundraising has no bearing on how he votes .
But Fight Corporate Monopolies , a progressive group , placed a six-figure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in which Clay sided with financial services companies to fight against a rule that would force investment advisers to act in their clients ’ best interests .
( The rule took effect , but a GOP-appointed judge later gutted it , and Clay has since joined other Democrats in calling for its reinstatement . )
“ It doesn ’ t always align perfectly with a vote—often , stagnation is in return for a corporate donation , ” says Morgan Harper , a former Consumer Financial Protection Bureau adviser who recently waged an unsuccessful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ D-Ohio ) and now advises Fight Corporate Monopolies .
“ We need someone who is fighting for progressive policies that make sure the economy is working for everyone—with the maximum level of aggression that ’ s possible.
” The CBC counts some of Congress ’ most progressive lawmakers among its members , including Pressley and Rep. Ilhan Omar ( D-Minn. ) , who regularly oppose the positions of Democratic congressional leaders .
But many CBC members align closely with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) and are staunch defenders of institutional norms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that guiding principle as Clay , who won his seat upon the retirement of his father , a civil rights activist and founding member of the CBC who served in Congress for 32 years .
Between the two of them , a Clay has represented the district for more than half a century .
CBC allies view that longevity as an asset .
“ Seniority has played an important role in the rise of the CBC , ” a source close to Clay says .
“ The reality is that elevating those CBC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or 20 or 30 years has played a key part in the CBC ’ s ability to gain chairmanships and leadership roles and become as powerful as it is today.
” Bush sees things differently .
“ If that seniority is not benefiting the people directly anymore , then it ’ s time to retire , ” she tells me .
In recent cycles , the CBC ’ s political action committee has supported some long-serving white incumbents over their Black opponents—it backed Capuano and Engel , for instance—and its members generally do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This cycle , Justice Democrats , which played a role in Ocasio-Cortez ’ s and Pressley ’ s 2018 victories , endorsed challengers against two CBC members : Clay and Beatty .
Some members of the CBC were livid .
Clay told The Hill that Justice Democrats ’ actions were “ a bunch of B.S.
” and “ insulting ” to his constituents , likening their attempts to “ devastate the party ” to the “ Russian trolls of 2016.
” “ They want to come back again this year ?
” he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the progressive groups supporting Bush ’ s second attempt to oust him .
“ That ’ s fine .
I ’ m going to kick their [ posterior ] again , okay ?
” Clay defeated Bush by nearly 20 points in 2018 , but he ’ s nevertheless taking this year ’ s primary seriously , launching a series of sharply negative attacks in the final days of the race .
His campaign circulated a mailer that notes Bush failed to pay taxes four times in recent years , that she ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that her nursing license was suspended .
In essence , the fusilade amounts to criticism of Bush for being poor .
Bush ’ s campaign says her license was suspended because she couldn ’ t afford to pay her taxes , and she ’ d been evicted because she couldn ’ t afford her rent .
The Clay campaign did not respond to a request for comment .
Those attacks may have less efficacy than Clay imagines in this political moment , when Americans are attuned to the legacies of systemic racism more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of new donors have appeared on Bush ’ s side : She raised $ 170,000 in June as nationwide protests raged , an amount that accounts for nearly a third of all the money she ’ s brought in this cycle .
She received an endorsement from Bernie Sanders , for whom she served as a national surrogate , as well as from the recently victorious Bowman .
Notably absent from this growing list of supporters is Ocasio-Cortez , who hasn ’ t weighed in on the race this time around .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support than it did last cycle : In addition to the $ 40,000 the group helped her raise , its independent expenditure is now running a TV ad on her behalf .
Bush thinks the momentum is on her side .
“ Because of the work that we did [ in Ferguson in 2014 ] , such a foundation was laid to where some of this is easier for people—so more people have been activated , ” she says .
“ Now people are looking for those candidates .
They ’ re like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been actually doing this work.
’ That has been a huge boost to our campaign .
”

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
Cori Bush smells tear gas when there isn’t any. Loud noises frighten her, reminders of police brandishing sniper rifles, firing rubber bullets, and revving the engines of armored vehicles. When the video of Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin kneeling on George Floyd’s neck began to circulate, Bush’s reaction was instinctual: “Don’t look at it.” She looked anyway.
“It’s a reminder that we didn’t finish the work.”
For 400 days in 2014 and 2015, protesters gathered in Ferguson, Missouri, to register their outrage over the police killing of unarmed Black teenager Michael Brown. For most of those days, Bush joined them—at first, in her capacity as a registered nurse to tend to protesters’ injuries, and later as a community organizer on the front lines. She went out again in 2017 to organize after another white police officer was acquitted of murder in the 2011 shooting death of a Black man during a car chase in north St. Louis. This year, as Americans across the country protested Floyd’s killing, a white police officer in the St. Louis suburb of Florissant—Bush’s hometown—ran over a Black man with his unmarked SUV before getting out of the car to repeatedly kick him. And so Bush and her fellow Ferguson activists organized yet another demonstration against police brutality. During a June gathering, she tweeted that she had been pepper-sprayed in the eyes by the cops.
“It’s a reminder that we didn’t finish the work,” Bush, 43, tells me.
After Brown’s killing, Ferguson voters replaced several members of the city council, which now, like Ferguson itself, is majority Black. The city swore in its first Black police chief in 2016, and, two years later, the much-criticized county prosecutor who oversaw the investigation into Brown’s killing lost his seat in a primary. But for all the headway they’ve made at home, Ferguson activists have had little ability to rewrite the country’s broken criminal justice policies. “There’s only so much you can do when you don’t have that pen in your hand,” Bush says.
Half a decade after the Ferguson protests, Bush is in the final days of her second primary challenge against Rep. Lacy Clay (D-Mo.), who has held the St. Louis-area 1st congressional district since 2001. The race features two Black leaders with very different ideas about how to create change. Clay is a consummate insider who has spent decades building political power, which he has used to secure tangible, if incremental, progress on issues including police abuse. Bush, who is also an ordained minister, has little patience for incremental measures. She believes the district that helped turn Black Lives Matter into a national movement should have an activist in its congressional seat, someone who stands unwaveringly with BLM’s demands.
Bush began her career as a preschool teacher making minimum wage. After a decade with the same company, she’d worked her way up to become the school’s assistant director—but she still made only $9 per hour. She quit that job in 2001, when she became ill while pregnant with her second child. Not long after giving birth, she and her then-husband were evicted from the home they’d been renting. For several months, they lived out of the family’s Ford Explorer with their 14-month-old son and newborn daughter.
When her children were small, Bush got stuck in a cycle of debt with predatory personal loans. She borrowed small amounts—$250 here, $500 there—to cover rent, utility bills, and car repairs. “I remember one day I was sitting outside of the PayDay Loan office…I just remember thinking like, ‘Who speaks up for people like me?’” Bush recalls. “Why do I keep having to live like this?”
So for Bush, her crusade for office is personal. She supports Medicare for All because she gave up her employer-sponsored health insurance to run for office—and has to pay out of pocket for two hospitalizations for a suspected case of COVID-19. She supports tuition-free college because she had to pay off student loans. And she supports a $15 minimum wage because she made far less than that for so long. “I’ve struggled paycheck to paycheck, asking, ‘Where’s our progress?’” Bush narrates in her first television ad. “As a Black mom, I’m sick of having to say, ‘Just make it home safely.’”
The thing is…Clay supports these things, too. He’s been a cosponsor of Medicare for All since former Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) first introduced it in 2003. He sided with progressives by voting against Trump’s replacement for NAFTA. He cosponsored the Green New Deal. In the most recent session of Congress, he signed onto Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D-N.Y.) bill that would cap credit card interest rates at 15 percent—a limit that some of his more moderate colleagues on the House Financial Services Committee found preposterously low.
“I just remember thinking like, ‘Who speaks up for people like me?'”
Then there’s criminal justice. Two months before the 2014 Ferguson uprising, Clay had joined a majority of Democrats in voting against a measure that would have ended the transfer of military equipment to police. But in the days that followed Brown’s death, he co-authored a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder demanding the Justice Department investigate the shooting and any patterns of police misconduct. The DOJ did investigate, ultimately clearing the officer who killed Brown but issuing a damning report that determined Ferguson police were routinely “stopping people without reasonable suspicion, arresting them without probable cause, and using unreasonable force against them.” The St. Louis American, the local Black newspaper, endorsed Clay’s reelection bid in 2018, observing that his “insider game in Washington” had helped bring about the probe, which ultimately resulted in a consent decree under which the city agreed to legally binding reforms. “St. Louis will be better served by having an experienced congressman with nearly two decades of seniority,” the paper concluded.
This year, while Bush was protesting Floyd’s murder, Clay and many of his colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus were shaping the Democrats’ landmark police reform legislation. The measure stops short of activists’ demands to “defund the police,” but it would establish a national registry of police misconduct, end qualified immunity—which prevents citizens from suing individual officers—and ban chokeholds. Clay’s contributions to the bill would mandate deescalation training for officers, require that deadly force only be employed as a last resort, and provide for the appointment of an independent prosecutor anytime deadly force is used. The bill passed the House on June 25, exactly one month after Floyd died.
“It is the role of an activist to push us as far as they can push us. It is our role to legislate, and that is a different role,” CBC chair Rep. Karen Bass (D-Calif.)—herself a longtime civil rights activist—told Politico in June, as the bill was working its way through the House. “We are very committed to making a difference, and that is different than making a point. You can either make a point, or you can make a difference.”
Bush’s run against Clay doesn’t neatly follow the pattern of successful progressive primary challenges, which have lately excelled on two planes. One is ideology: Former marketing executive Marie Newman defeated Rep. Dan Lipinski (Ill.) this past March on the premise that no sitting House Democrat should oppose abortion rights. Another is representation: Two years ago, Rep. Ayanna Pressley (Mass.) unseated Rep. Michael Capuano, a bona fide progressive, by arguing in part that her life experience would help her better serve her majority-minority district. Jamaal Bowman’s recent win against New York Rep. Eliot Engel succeeded on both fronts—as did Ocasio-Cortez’s 2018 victory over House Democratic caucus chair Joseph Crowley.
Bush is challenging Clay on a third dimension: The rigor with which he fights for his constituents. As an example, she points to the House’s police bill. “I think they’re too soft,” she says of its provisions, criticizing the lack of any “real ‘defund’ language.” Bush has also slammed Clay’s coziness with corporate interests. Three-quarters of the nearly $750,000 Clay raised through June of this year came from political action committees, nearly 80 percent of which are backed by big business. His top campaign contributor is Quicken Loans, a mortgage giant that Clay is charged with overseeing from his perch on the Financial Services Committee. In 2015, the Justice Department sued Quicken for originating hundreds of home loans for borrowers who weren’t eligible for them. (The company agreed to pay $32.5 million to settle the case without admitting wrongdoing.)
Clay maintains that his fundraising has no bearing on how he votes. But Fight Corporate Monopolies, a progressive group, placed a six-figure television ad buy to revisit an episode in which Clay sided with financial services companies to fight against a rule that would force investment advisers to act in their clients’ best interests. (The rule took effect, but a GOP-appointed judge later gutted it, and Clay has since joined other Democrats in calling for its reinstatement.)
“It doesn’t always align perfectly with a vote—often, stagnation is in return for a corporate donation,” says Morgan Harper, a former Consumer Financial Protection Bureau adviser who recently waged an unsuccessful primary challenge against Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio) and now advises Fight Corporate Monopolies. “We need someone who is fighting for progressive policies that make sure the economy is working for everyone—with the maximum level of aggression that’s possible.”
The CBC counts some of Congress’ most progressive lawmakers among its members, including Pressley and Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who regularly oppose the positions of Democratic congressional leaders. But many CBC members align closely with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and are staunch defenders of institutional norms like seniority. Few so closely embody that guiding principle as Clay, who won his seat upon the retirement of his father, a civil rights activist and founding member of the CBC who served in Congress for 32 years. Between the two of them, a Clay has represented the district for more than half a century.
CBC allies view that longevity as an asset. “Seniority has played an important role in the rise of the CBC,” a source close to Clay says. “The reality is that elevating those CBC members who have been there for 10 or 20 or 30 years has played a key part in the CBC’s ability to gain chairmanships and leadership roles and become as powerful as it is today.”
Bush sees things differently. “If that seniority is not benefiting the people directly anymore, then it’s time to retire,” she tells me.
“If that seniority is not benefiting the people directly anymore, then it’s time to retire.”
In recent cycles, the CBC’s political action committee has supported some long-serving white incumbents over their Black opponents—it backed Capuano and Engel, for instance—and its members generally do not take kindly to primary challenges. This cycle, Justice Democrats, which played a role in Ocasio-Cortez’s and Pressley’s 2018 victories, endorsed challengers against two CBC members: Clay and Beatty. Some members of the CBC were livid. Clay told The Hill that Justice Democrats’ actions were “a bunch of B.S.” and “insulting” to his constituents, likening their attempts to “devastate the party” to the “Russian trolls of 2016.”
“They want to come back again this year?” he told the Washington Post, referring to the progressive groups supporting Bush’s second attempt to oust him. “That’s fine. I’m going to kick their [posterior] again, okay?”
Clay defeated Bush by nearly 20 points in 2018, but he’s nevertheless taking this year’s primary seriously, launching a series of sharply negative attacks in the final days of the race. His campaign circulated a mailer that notes Bush failed to pay taxes four times in recent years, that she’s been evicted three times, and that her nursing license was suspended. In essence, the fusilade amounts to criticism of Bush for being poor. Bush’s campaign says her license was suspended because she couldn’t afford to pay her taxes, and she’d been evicted because she couldn’t afford her rent. The Clay campaign did not respond to a request for comment.
Those attacks may have less efficacy than Clay imagines in this political moment, when Americans are attuned to the legacies of systemic racism more than ever before. And a sea of new donors have appeared on Bush’s side: She raised $170,000 in June as nationwide protests raged, an amount that accounts for nearly a third of all the money she’s brought in this cycle. She received an endorsement from Bernie Sanders, for whom she served as a national surrogate, as well as from the recently victorious Bowman.
Notably absent from this growing list of supporters is Ocasio-Cortez, who hasn’t weighed in on the race this time around. But Justice Democrats is giving Bush more financial support than it did last cycle: In addition to the $40,000 the group helped her raise, its independent expenditure is now running a TV ad on her behalf.
Bush thinks the momentum is on her side. “Because of the work that we did [in Ferguson in 2014], such a foundation was laid to where some of this is easier for people—so more people have been activated,” she says. “Now people are looking for those candidates. They’re like, ‘Okay, you’ve been actually doing this work.’ That has been a huge boost to our campaign.”


motherjones--2020-07-31--Jim Jordan Is Ranting Again

Jim Jordan Is Ranting Again

The Ohio Republican , during his turn at Friday ’ s House subcommittee hearing into the Trump administration ’ s @ @ @ @ @ , ranted over Dr. Anthony Fauci , attempted to trap the country ’ s top @ @ @ @ @ bogusly attacking the ongoing protests against police brutality , and grandstanded to an audience of @ @ @ @ @ It was a typical performance from Jordan , a yeller .
Fauci , demonstrating an @ @ @ @ @ refused to bite .

“A VOICE OF REASON.” “A DAILY DOSE OF SANITY.”
“A daily dose of sanity.” “Like chatting with a friend who actually knows what they’re talking about.” That’s how readers describe our free Mother Jones Daily newsletter. See why: Sign up today to get reporting that helps you cut through the noise, plus deep dives on underreported topics.
“Like chatting with a friend who actually knows what they’re talking about.” That’s how readers describe our free Mother Jones Daily newsletter. See why: Sign up today to get reporting that helps you cut through the noise, plus deep dives on underreported topics.
Close Thank you for subscribing!
By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from Mother Jones and our partners.


motherjones--2020-07-31--I’m a New Dad Scared About Pandemic-Era Day Care Safety. There’s Only One Expert I Wanted to Call.

When my wife and I told our next-door neighbor last year that we were expecting a baby , she ran inside to lend us a copy of Emily Oster ’ s 2014 book , Expecting Better .
( Earlier this year , we deduced that she was pregnant with her second when she asked for the book back . )
Oster , a Brown University economist , has become the pregnancy and early childhood guru for millennial parents .
Expecting Better and her 2019 followup , Cribsheet , rethink the pregnancy-and-baby-literature genre by adding something that ’ s been lacking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ studies from the bad and lays out the best evidence to answer such critical questions as whether it ’ s safe to eat sushi while pregnant .
( Answer : probably ! )
Recently , our family , not to mention the country and the world , have found ourselves in another confusing situation where objective information and guidance are in short supply .
And so , in her newsletter and a website she co-authors with Harvard medicine professor Galit Alter and a team of researchers called COVID-Explained , Oster decided to apply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ research as she did to pregnancy and parenthood .
With schools and parents around the country facing tough decisions about safety and education , school reopenings have become a higher-stakes question than sushi .
So I spoke to Oster to see if she could bring together her research on young children and on COVID-19 to answer key questions about returning to school .
And more selfishly , I asked her for an economist ’ s guidance on what my wife and I—and all the other parents out there—should be considering as we decide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our own son to day care .
I caught up with her at her home in Providence , where she ’ s sheltered with her husband and two elementary school–age children .
Here ’ s our conversation : We ’ re talking in the middle of this nationwide spike in COVID cases , and there are school districts deciding now that it ’ s not safe to reopen in the fall .
I ’ m curious , given what you ’ ve seen in data around infections at schools , whether you think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the increase in cases .
In some places , yes , and in some places , no .
There are spikes in cases in some parts of the country—in Florida , Texas , California—and for those places to respond by not opening schools seems sensible to me .
We have not seen any examples of places [ in the world ] that have opened schools with those kinds of rising and large caseloads .
I think there ’ s a lot of risk to doing that .
But we ’ ve seen some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Northeast , where the virus is fairly under control .
And I think it would be helpful for those conversations to be a bit more localized and to say , okay , maybe it makes sense to open schools in person in Massachusetts or New York , even though there are cases in Texas .
And the fact that the cases are rising in Texas should not necessarily mean that we need to adjust what we ’ re doing in Massachusetts .
I live in DC , and just yesterday three @ @ @ @ @ @ @ moderate caseloads announced they ’ re changing their minds and not reopening schools this fall .
From your reading of the data from around the world , what should US policymakers think about the risks of schools becoming hot spots ?
Most of our data does not suggest that schools will become hot spots .
I think that the European data is a good example of this .
We saw some cases in schools , but this has not been something that looks like it ’ s really increased the spread of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Israel is more concerning .
There was one very large outbreak in a high school .
There are a lot of schools that have closed in Israel , though I think it ’ s worth remembering that basically Israel adopted a policy where if there were any cases in the school , they close the school .
That is a very high bar .
And so you got a lot of school closures even for a relatively small number of cases .
So how should schools in the US be thinking about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ together , it does look like younger kids are at the least amount of risk .
And opening schools for younger kids seems to be the most safe thing you could do .
Since you ’ re an economist by day , I ’ d like to ask you about the economics around this , too .
We ’ re always hearing about how bad it is for local economies when bars and restaurants and shops are closed .
But have there been any studies of long-term economic impact of keeping kids home @ @ @ @ @ @ @ triangulate the possible long-term impacts of that .
We can look at , for example , what happened to learning in the spring .
And what happened was , kids did not learn as much as they were learning when they were in school , and that those learning losses are particularly large for low-income students , for students of color .
So I think it ’ s pretty clear that as we go remote , at least for some kids , that will be quite bad for their learning .
And then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ loss may translate into being less likely to finish high school , less likely to go to college .
That has long-term impacts on wages , on longevity , on all kinds of other stuff .
There are potentially really , really large long-term impacts of these disruptions , which don ’ t get that much discussion but I think should be part of the conversation .
I would also say there ’ s a very direct economic impact here , which is that if people are home with their kids and not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pretty bad for the economy as well .
So there ’ s a more direct and immediate part of this , in addition to the long term .
I have a personal agenda here .
I have a 9-month-old son , and I ’ m hoping you can help us answer a question that many thousands of parents around the country are facing : Should we be thinking about sending our son to day care in the coming months ?
I know you took a look at the public data that was available @ @ @ @ @ @ @ didn ’ t really shut down the same way schools did—and found that basically , there wasn ’ t any .
Yeah .
There is one study that ’ s supposed to come out of Yale , but it hasn ’ t come out yet .
And so we collected some of our own [ data ] in what I would describe as a non-scientific , Google Form sourcing mechanism .
But we have data now from almost 1,000 childcare settings which remained open and have some information on the number of COVID @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The two topline things that I would highlight are , one , the rates in the centers were very low .
It ’ s something like .15 percent of kids and about 1 percent of staff .
It ’ s clear that the staff are more at risk .
Now , that may well not reflect anything about infections in child care settings , just that in general , adults are at higher risk than kids .
If you took a random sample of people and asked who had COVID , you would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kids .
But in general , the numbers are really quite low .
The other thing I would highlight , that for me is more reassuring , is that there are a lot of isolated cases .
One way you could get to two-tenths of a percent is with a few places where there were really large outbreaks .
And that would suggest that there ’ s a lot of spread within the centers .
That ’ s not really what we see .
We see a lot of isolated cases , where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case or two cases , and that ’ s all they have .
It ’ s not that there haven ’ t been some outbreaks ; we ’ ve seen some , particularly in camps for slightly older kids .
But it doesn ’ t seem like it ’ s happening in a lot of cases .
So if there ’ s a day care center with just one case , that implies there ’ s a good chance that the kid got it somewhere else—maybe at home—and came in and didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The way that I think about it is , if you looked at something like norovirus , like stomach flu , when you send your kid to child care , if they come home at the end of the day and they say , “ Tommy vomited on the rug , ” you know that your kid is going to be vomiting on the rug pretty soon .
And so are all the other kids , because norovirus is super contagious .
If you looked at a data set , you would see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of child care centers with no stomach flu , but then the places that have it , like 60 percent of the kids get it because it ’ s just obviously spreading within the population .
There ’ s a real benefit to sending kids to school since it ’ s clear that distance learning is a pretty crappy substitute for the real thing , and kids are falling behind .
But what about for infants ?
Are you aware of evidence that keeping babies home , as opposed to sending them to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some way in the long run ?
No .
I talk a lot about this in Cribsheet , the question of day care versus nanny , and any differences that we can see across those kinds of groups seem to be very small , in inconsistent directions , and probably not super causal .
If you are worried , like , “ If I don ’ t send my kid to day care they ’ ll never learn to talk to other people , ” that is not a concern .
Plenty of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s no problem .
It ’ s funny , because the thing people were often worried about before was : If I send my kid to day care , they won ’ t love me anymore .
Everyone now has the opposite question , which is , is it okay to keep my kid at home ?
So yes , both are fine .
But I feel like in Cribsheet , you ’ re comparing day care to nanny to stay-at-home mom or dad , and you weren ’ t necessarily comparing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are also trying to work full-time .
Right .
Yes .
I was not aware that people were going to be facing that choice when I wrote that book .
Is there any way to assess whether that makes a difference ?
There ’ s probably no way to assess whether that makes a difference other than to ask : How is it affecting you ?
Adults have had very different emotional reactions to this process of being at home .
And adult mental health is actually a big piece of family happiness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is making you really stressed out and is making it very hard for you to be the kind of parent that you want , or conversely , if sending your kid is making you so anxious that it ’ s impossible to function , that is an argument for doing one or the other .
But we don ’ t have any evidence on highly stressed parents who are trying to work at the same time as taking care of their kid .
That will come after the pandemic .
Research ideas !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ access to child care was like getting a 5 percent pay cut , and there was a disproportionate impact on moms .
Is there a risk that women in particular may be potentially taking a long-term career hit by trying to balance full-time work and parenting ?
I think it depends a little bit on what kind of job you ’ re in .
A lot of people are worried that this is going to erode a lot of gains for women .
Somebody used the word “ shesession ” —like recession but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ highlight the fact that for a lot of women , there ’ s both increased job losses but also , people are going to step back from the workforce and realize , “ My kid has to be in virtual school , and somebody ’ s got to be supervising them , and I guess it ’ s gon na be me.
” It ’ s one thing to do that for a few months , but faced with an entire year of that , people may say , “ I need to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know that those kinds of breaks in work history are not good for long-term career prospects .
What else should factor into our decision about day care ?
At the top of my list is just : What are the other circumstances of your family ?
There are people who live with an elderly relative , where you could say , yeah , the chance of the kid getting sick is small , but it ’ s possible , and your kid will be fine .
I mean , the risks to kids @ @ @ @ @ @ @ healthy , non-immunocompromised young adults are fairly small .
The risks to your parents would be much larger .
Well that ’ s a real question for us .
All four of our son ’ s grandparents are in the mix now .
If we were to send him to day care , should we think about not seeing them anymore ?
I think this is the hardest thing .
I wish I could tell people an answer , because I wish I had an answer .
And I feel like there ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s like a childcare/grandparent tradeoff .
We ’ ve been thinking a lot about ways to make that safer .
We ’ re going to try to see my parents at some point , and I think we ’ ll try to be tested first , in the hopes that that will reduce some of the risks .
But unfortunately , there ’ s no good answer to this .
It may be that for you , from your kid ’ s standpoint , there ’ s less value to day care than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not .
I don ’ t know .
My kids are older , and I think there ’ s a huge amount of value to them to being out with other kids .
And so that ’ s kind of where we came down on that calculus .
Sort of childcare over grandparents .
But there ’ s no good answer to this .
If we were to decide to go with day care , and then the number of COVID cases keeps rising , is there a tipping point at which day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consider pulling our kid out ?
What I would say is that probably day care is a pretty low-risk activity relative to other things .
So if you ’ re still comfortable going to outdoor dining , you should probably be comfortable with day care .
If your view is , basically , it ’ s not socially responsible to do anything except take a walk around the block near my house , which is kind of where we all were in April or March , at least where I live , then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really a good idea to have your kid at day care .
Because it ’ s not reasonable to ask toddlers to wear masks and stay 6 feet apart , right ?
You can ’ t .
Kids are more adaptable with masks than I would have expected .
My 5-year-old has no problem , for reasonable periods of time , wearing a mask .
But if your view is the only way to safely open a day care is for 2-year-olds to wear a mask and to socially distance , I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ look at the ways that these [ day cares ] have been open , like for essential workers , they do not require all the kids to wear masks .
So that data is reflecting more of the reality , which is like , if you ’ re taking care of an infant , you can ’ t not touch them .
Right ?
That ’ s just physically not possible .
Have you decided where your kids are going to be in the fall ?
Well , if their school is open @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Currently , our kids ’ school has suggested that they will open in person normally , roughly normally , and they will be there if it does .
My kids are already in camp , and it ’ s really great .
To be fair , it ’ s like a three-hour outdoor camp where you play tennis .
So it ’ s probably about as low-risk as you get .
But it ’ s been really nice .
For you or for them ?
I think for both .
Actually , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for me .
I ’ ve been surprised at how much they seem to value not being in my household .
This interview has been edited for length and clarity .

When my wife and I told our next-door neighbor last year that we were expecting a baby, she ran inside to lend us a copy of Emily Oster’s 2014 book, Expecting Better. (Earlier this year, we deduced that she was pregnant with her second when she asked for the book back.) Oster, a Brown University economist, has become the pregnancy and early childhood guru for millennial parents. Expecting Better and her 2019 followup, Cribsheet, rethink the pregnancy-and-baby-literature genre by adding something that’s been lacking: empiricism. Oster separates the good studies from the bad and lays out the best evidence to answer such critical questions as whether it’s safe to eat sushi while pregnant. (Answer: probably!)
Recently, our family, not to mention the country and the world, have found ourselves in another confusing situation where objective information and guidance are in short supply. And so, in her newsletter and a website she co-authors with Harvard medicine professor Galit Alter and a team of researchers called COVID-Explained, Oster decided to apply the same type of analysis to COVID-19 research as she did to pregnancy and parenthood.
Listen to the latest episode of the Mother Jones Podcast: Subscribe using Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, or your favorite podcast app.
With schools and parents around the country facing tough decisions about safety and education, school reopenings have become a higher-stakes question than sushi. So I spoke to Oster to see if she could bring together her research on young children and on COVID-19 to answer key questions about returning to school. And more selfishly, I asked her for an economist’s guidance on what my wife and I—and all the other parents out there—should be considering as we decide whether it’s advisable to send our own son to day care. I caught up with her at her home in Providence, where she’s sheltered with her husband and two elementary school–age children. Here’s our conversation:
We’re talking in the middle of this nationwide spike in COVID cases, and there are school districts deciding now that it’s not safe to reopen in the fall. I’m curious, given what you’ve seen in data around infections at schools, whether you think that’s the right response to the increase in cases.
In some places, yes, and in some places, no. There are spikes in cases in some parts of the country—in Florida, Texas, California—and for those places to respond by not opening schools seems sensible to me. We have not seen any examples of places [in the world] that have opened schools with those kinds of rising and large caseloads. I think there’s a lot of risk to doing that.
But we’ve seen some increased hesitancy about school opening in places in the Northeast, where the virus is fairly under control. And I think it would be helpful for those conversations to be a bit more localized and to say, okay, maybe it makes sense to open schools in person in Massachusetts or New York, even though there are cases in Texas. And the fact that the cases are rising in Texas should not necessarily mean that we need to adjust what we’re doing in Massachusetts.
I live in DC, and just yesterday three counties in the DC area with pretty moderate caseloads announced they’re changing their minds and not reopening schools this fall. From your reading of the data from around the world, what should US policymakers think about the risks of schools becoming hot spots?
Most of our data does not suggest that schools will become hot spots. I think that the European data is a good example of this. We saw some cases in schools, but this has not been something that looks like it’s really increased the spread of the spread of the virus. The data in Israel is more concerning. There was one very large outbreak in a high school. There are a lot of schools that have closed in Israel, though I think it’s worth remembering that basically Israel adopted a policy where if there were any cases in the school, they close the school. That is a very high bar. And so you got a lot of school closures even for a relatively small number of cases.
So how should schools in the US be thinking about this evidence? Putting all of it together, it does look like younger kids are at the least amount of risk. And opening schools for younger kids seems to be the most safe thing you could do.
Since you’re an economist by day, I’d like to ask you about the economics around this, too. We’re always hearing about how bad it is for local economies when bars and restaurants and shops are closed. But have there been any studies of long-term economic impact of keeping kids home from school?
I think we can triangulate the possible long-term impacts of that. We can look at, for example, what happened to learning in the spring. And what happened was, kids did not learn as much as they were learning when they were in school, and that those learning losses are particularly large for low-income students, for students of color. So I think it’s pretty clear that as we go remote, at least for some kids, that will be quite bad for their learning. And then we know from other evidence that that loss may translate into being less likely to finish high school, less likely to go to college. That has long-term impacts on wages, on longevity, on all kinds of other stuff. There are potentially really, really large long-term impacts of these disruptions, which don’t get that much discussion but I think should be part of the conversation.
There are potentially really, really large long-term impacts of these disruptions, which don’t get that much discussion but I think should be part of the conversation.
I would also say there’s a very direct economic impact here, which is that if people are home with their kids and not at their jobs, that’s pretty bad for the economy as well. So there’s a more direct and immediate part of this, in addition to the long term.
I have a personal agenda here. I have a 9-month-old son, and I’m hoping you can help us answer a question that many thousands of parents around the country are facing: Should we be thinking about sending our son to day care in the coming months? I know you took a look at the public data that was available on COVID infections at day cares—since they didn’t really shut down the same way schools did—and found that basically, there wasn’t any.
Yeah. There is one study that’s supposed to come out of Yale, but it hasn’t come out yet. And so we collected some of our own [data] in what I would describe as a non-scientific, Google Form sourcing mechanism. But we have data now from almost 1,000 childcare settings which remained open and have some information on the number of COVID cases.
What have you found?
The two topline things that I would highlight are, one, the rates in the centers were very low. It’s something like .15 percent of kids and about 1 percent of staff. It’s clear that the staff are more at risk. Now, that may well not reflect anything about infections in child care settings, just that in general, adults are at higher risk than kids. If you took a random sample of people and asked who had COVID, you would find it’s more adults than kids. But in general, the numbers are really quite low.
The other thing I would highlight, that for me is more reassuring, is that there are a lot of isolated cases. One way you could get to two-tenths of a percent is with a few places where there were really large outbreaks. And that would suggest that there’s a lot of spread within the centers. That’s not really what we see. We see a lot of isolated cases, where there’s a center with one case or two cases, and that’s all they have. It’s not that there haven’t been some outbreaks; we’ve seen some, particularly in camps for slightly older kids. But it doesn’t seem like it’s happening in a lot of cases.
So if there’s a day care center with just one case, that implies there’s a good chance that the kid got it somewhere else—maybe at home—and came in and didn’t spread it around the center?
The way that I think about it is, if you looked at something like norovirus, like stomach flu, when you send your kid to child care, if they come home at the end of the day and they say, “Tommy vomited on the rug,” you know that your kid is going to be vomiting on the rug pretty soon. And so are all the other kids, because norovirus is super contagious. If you looked at a data set, you would see, basically, there are a lot of child care centers with no stomach flu, but then the places that have it, like 60 percent of the kids get it because it’s just obviously spreading within the population.
There’s a real benefit to sending kids to school since it’s clear that distance learning is a pretty crappy substitute for the real thing, and kids are falling behind. But what about for infants? Are you aware of evidence that keeping babies home, as opposed to sending them to day care, is hurting them in some way in the long run?
No. I talk a lot about this in Cribsheet, the question of day care versus nanny, and any differences that we can see across those kinds of groups seem to be very small, in inconsistent directions, and probably not super causal. If you are worried, like, “If I don’t send my kid to day care they’ll never learn to talk to other people,” that is not a concern. Plenty of people keep their 9-month-old home and it’s no problem.
It’s funny, because the thing people were often worried about before was: If I send my kid to day care, they won’t love me anymore. Everyone now has the opposite question, which is, is it okay to keep my kid at home? So yes, both are fine.
But I feel like in Cribsheet, you’re comparing day care to nanny to stay-at-home mom or dad, and you weren’t necessarily comparing them to stay-at-home mom and dad who are also trying to work full-time.
Right. Yes. I was not aware that people were going to be facing that choice when I wrote that book.
Is there any way to assess whether that makes a difference?
There’s probably no way to assess whether that makes a difference other than to ask: How is it affecting you? Adults have had very different emotional reactions to this process of being at home. And adult mental health is actually a big piece of family happiness. If having your kid at home is making you really stressed out and is making it very hard for you to be the kind of parent that you want, or conversely, if sending your kid is making you so anxious that it’s impossible to function, that is an argument for doing one or the other. But we don’t have any evidence on highly stressed parents who are trying to work at the same time as taking care of their kid. That will come after the pandemic. Research ideas!
We don’t have any evidence on highly stressed parents who are trying to work at the same time as taking care of their kid.
One pre-pandemic study found that having inadequate access to child care was like getting a 5 percent pay cut, and there was a disproportionate impact on moms. Is there a risk that women in particular may be potentially taking a long-term career hit by trying to balance full-time work and parenting?
I think it depends a little bit on what kind of job you’re in. A lot of people are worried that this is going to erode a lot of gains for women. Somebody used the word “shesession”—like recession but with “she” at the beginning—to highlight the fact that for a lot of women, there’s both increased job losses but also, people are going to step back from the workforce and realize, “My kid has to be in virtual school, and somebody’s got to be supervising them, and I guess it’s gonna be me.” It’s one thing to do that for a few months, but faced with an entire year of that, people may say, “I need to take time off my job.” We know that those kinds of breaks in work history are not good for long-term career prospects.
What else should factor into our decision about day care?
At the top of my list is just: What are the other circumstances of your family? There are people who live with an elderly relative, where you could say, yeah, the chance of the kid getting sick is small, but it’s possible, and your kid will be fine. I mean, the risks to kids are very small. The risks to healthy, non-immunocompromised young adults are fairly small. The risks to your parents would be much larger.
Well that’s a real question for us. All four of our son’s grandparents are in the mix now. If we were to send him to day care, should we think about not seeing them anymore?
I think this is the hardest thing. I wish I could tell people an answer, because I wish I had an answer. And I feel like there’s just a tradeoff. There’s like a childcare/grandparent tradeoff. We’ve been thinking a lot about ways to make that safer. We’re going to try to see my parents at some point, and I think we’ll try to be tested first, in the hopes that that will reduce some of the risks.
But unfortunately, there’s no good answer to this. It may be that for you, from your kid’s standpoint, there’s less value to day care than the grandparents. Maybe, or maybe not. I don’t know. My kids are older, and I think there’s a huge amount of value to them to being out with other kids. And so that’s kind of where we came down on that calculus. Sort of childcare over grandparents. But there’s no good answer to this.
If we were to decide to go with day care, and then the number of COVID cases keeps rising, is there a tipping point at which day care actually becomes unsafe and we should consider pulling our kid out?
What I would say is that probably day care is a pretty low-risk activity relative to other things. So if you’re still comfortable going to outdoor dining, you should probably be comfortable with day care. If your view is, basically, it’s not socially responsible to do anything except take a walk around the block near my house, which is kind of where we all were in April or March, at least where I live, then I think it’s also not really a good idea to have your kid at day care.
Because it’s not reasonable to ask toddlers to wear masks and stay 6 feet apart, right?
You can’t. Kids are more adaptable with masks than I would have expected. My 5-year-old has no problem, for reasonable periods of time, wearing a mask. But if your view is the only way to safely open a day care is for 2-year-olds to wear a mask and to socially distance, I think you cannot open.
When we look at the ways that these [day cares] have been open, like for essential workers, they do not require all the kids to wear masks. So that data is reflecting more of the reality, which is like, if you’re taking care of an infant, you can’t not touch them. Right? That’s just physically not possible.
Have you decided where your kids are going to be in the fall?
Well, if their school is open, they will be in their school. Currently, our kids’ school has suggested that they will open in person normally, roughly normally, and they will be there if it does.
My kids are already in camp, and it’s really great. To be fair, it’s like a three-hour outdoor camp where you play tennis. So it’s probably about as low-risk as you get. But it’s been really nice.
For you or for them?
I think for both. Actually, I knew it’d be nice for me. I’ve been surprised at how much they seem to value not being in my household.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.


motherjones--2020-08-01--A Hurricane, a Pandemic, and Trump: The Triple Crisis Is Barreling Down on Florida

Hurricane Isaias is expected to make landfall sometime tonight near southeast Florida after causing landslides , power outages , and widespread flooding in Puerto Rico , the Dominican Republic , and the Bahamas .
There ’ s still the risk that it strengthens again to a Category 2 storm , and the eastern coast of Florida faces a dangerous storm surge of anywhere between 2 to 4 feet .
This is the exact situation that disaster experts have been dreading from the beginning of the pandemic : A climate disaster while a state is battling an alarming number of COVID-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the country ’ s COVID-19 cases , with almost half a million cases and already 7,021 deaths .
Fifty-one hospitals have run out of ICU beds as the state still is adding another 9,725 new cases on average a day .
The hurricane has only contributed more chaos to the equation .
State-run coronavirus testing sites have closed on Florida ’ s eastern coast in anticipation of the storm ( originally , the state considered consider closing all of its testing sites before Isaias changed tracks ) .
And hospitals also must @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ron De Santis said he doesn ’ t “ anticipate hospitals needing to evacuate patients.
” But one small hospital in Brevard County , which is in the anticipated path of the storm , already has moved its COVID-19 patients .
The state has had to stockpile supplies in preparation , including 20 million masks , 22 million gloves , 10 million gowns , 1.6 million face shields , 270,000 coveralls and 20,000 thermometers , while ensuring there are generators for nursing facilities should the power go out .
All the usual rules @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year .
Nothing captures that better than the new language around evacuations .
Normally , officials urge residents to evacuate at all costs if they ’ re told to do so .
And while at least two counties are preparing to open emergency shelters , Palm Beach County cautioned , “ Residents are strongly urged to shelter in place if safe to do so .
It is safer at home .
Those utilizing designated shelters will be screened , temperatures taken , and required to wear facial coverings.
” The American Meteorological Society @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with new guidance on Thursday noting that evacuations and emergency kits will operate differently this year .
“ Residents may need to use different shelter sites than in previous years , as the capacity of disaster shelters has been reduced due to COVID-19 , ” AMS said .
“ Take time now to identify your evacuation zone and destination , and determine the sources from which you would receive evacuation orders.
” The country faces the dueling crises of a public health and climate crises at a level we ’ ve never experienced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a season that will witness coasts getting walloped by hurricanes riding higher seas , and blazes in southern California that have forced 200 people to evacuate this week .
Extreme heat waves have already resulted in testing sites throughout the country closing or modifying their schedules .
The heat even damaged 400 tests in Washington , DC , in June .
And the emergency responders with FEMA are already stretched thin by an unprecedented pandemic response , on top of years of budget cuts and staffing shortages at the disaster agency .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough , Florida faces a third threat .
And that is the active damage that Trump has done by holding a campaign rally on the Tampa International Airport tarmac on Friday .
It was smaller than his usual full-blown rally but a couple of hundred people still gathered , and Trump spoke in front of a line of maskless sheriffs .
On Saturday , he was back to his usual schedule : Making his 283rd trip of his presidency to play golf on his own course in Sterling , Virginia .

Hurricane Isaias is expected to make landfall sometime tonight near southeast Florida after causing landslides, power outages, and widespread flooding in Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic, and the Bahamas. There’s still the risk that it strengthens again to a Category 2 storm, and the eastern coast of Florida faces a dangerous storm surge of anywhere between 2 to 4 feet.
This is the exact situation that disaster experts have been dreading from the beginning of the pandemic: A climate disaster while a state is battling an alarming number of COVID-19 cases.
Florida accounts for 10 percent of the country’s COVID-19 cases, with almost half a million cases and already 7,021 deaths. Fifty-one hospitals have run out of ICU beds as the state still is adding another 9,725 new cases on average a day. The hurricane has only contributed more chaos to the equation. State-run coronavirus testing sites have closed on Florida’s eastern coast in anticipation of the storm (originally, the state considered consider closing all of its testing sites before Isaias changed tracks). And hospitals also must plan for the worst. Florida Governor Ron De Santis said he doesn’t “anticipate hospitals needing to evacuate patients.” But one small hospital in Brevard County, which is in the anticipated path of the storm, already has moved its COVID-19 patients. The state has had to stockpile supplies in preparation, including 20 million masks, 22 million gloves, 10 million gowns, 1.6 million face shields, 270,000 coveralls and 20,000 thermometers, while ensuring there are generators for nursing facilities should the power go out.
All the usual rules of disaster response must be reinvented this year. Nothing captures that better than the new language around evacuations. Normally, officials urge residents to evacuate at all costs if they’re told to do so. And while at least two counties are preparing to open emergency shelters, Palm Beach County cautioned, “Residents are strongly urged to shelter in place if safe to do so. It is safer at home. Those utilizing designated shelters will be screened, temperatures taken, and required to wear facial coverings.”
The American Meteorological Society acknowledged the new rules of hurricane season with new guidance on Thursday noting that evacuations and emergency kits will operate differently this year. “Residents may need to use different shelter sites than in previous years, as the capacity of disaster shelters has been reduced due to COVID-19,” AMS said. “Take time now to identify your evacuation zone and destination, and determine the sources from which you would receive evacuation orders.”
The country faces the dueling crises of a public health and climate crises at a level we’ve never experienced before. This is only the start of a season that will witness coasts getting walloped by hurricanes riding higher seas, and blazes in southern California that have forced 200 people to evacuate this week. Extreme heat waves have already resulted in testing sites throughout the country closing or modifying their schedules. The heat even damaged 400 tests in Washington, DC, in June. And the emergency responders with FEMA are already stretched thin by an unprecedented pandemic response, on top of years of budget cuts and staffing shortages at the disaster agency.
As if all this weren’t enough, Florida faces a third threat. And that is the active damage that Trump has done by holding a campaign rally on the Tampa International Airport tarmac on Friday. It was smaller than his usual full-blown rally but a couple of hundred people still gathered, and Trump spoke in front of a line of maskless sheriffs. On Saturday, he was back to his usual schedule: Making his 283rd trip of his presidency to play golf on his own course in Sterling, Virginia.


motherjones--2020-08-01--Rep. Grijalva Just Tested Positive for COVID-19. He Has Some Words for Mask-Refusing GOP Colleagues.

Following the announcement this week that Rep. Louie Gohmert ( R-Texas ) —who proudly refused to wear a mask in @ @ @ @ @ for COVID-19 , other members of Congress acknowledged their concerns about possible infection .
Today @ @ @ @ @ , who has represented Arizona since 2003 announced that he has tested positive for the @ @ @ @ @ didn ’ t name names , but his statement was pointed in its criticism of @ @ @ @ @ routinely strut around the Capitol without a mask to selfishly make a political statement at @ @ @ @ @ , staff and their families.
” Read his full statement here .
This far he @ @ @ @ @ yesterday , Grijalva said this about paying attention to science when addressing the pandemic .


motherjones--2020-08-01--Could Trump Have Another Reason for Banning TikTok?

The latest target in the Trump administration ’ s escalating tensions with China is TikTok , the wildly popular music-video app with 2 billion downloads worldwide and a 165 million in the United States .
“ As far as TikTok is concerned , we ’ re banning them from the United States , ” President Donald Trump told reporters on Air Force One on his way back from Tampa on Friday .
“ Soon , immediately .
I mean essentially immediately.
” Trump said he would sign an order Saturday .
He claimed , “ I have that authority , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president ’ s powers to ban foreign apps from American app stores granted by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act .
The United States and China have engaged in ever-increasing diplomatic and economic clashes that ’ s only grown more tense over the course of the pandemic , as Trump has sought to blame China for the skyrocketing 156,000 American death toll from coronavirus , constantly calling it the “ China virus ” in his remarks .
For months , the Trump administration has claimed that TikTok , a Chinese-owned company , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could be susceptible to censorship and breaches of data privacy by Chinese officials .
Congress in 2018 increased the powers of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States , whose members include the secretaries of State , Defense , and Homeland Security , led by Secretary of Treasury Steven Mnuchin .
Since November , the committee has investigated the app ’ s parent company for its 2017 purchase of Musical.ly , which later became TikTok .
With Microsoft now reportedly in talks to buy TikTok ’ s US operations , Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t change his decision to block the social media platform .
A TikTok spokesperson responded to Trump ’ s remarks on Friday : “ TikTok US user data is stored in the US , with strict controls on employee access .
TikTok ’ s biggest investors come from the US .
We are committed to protecting our users ’ privacy and safety.
” India has already blocked TikTok after a border dispute with China , and Australia is considering its own ban .
The president has another reason to dislike TikTok .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Tulsa , in spite of public health experts ’ warnings .
( There was a subsequent spike in coronavirus cases there . )
Before the rally , hundreds of K-pop fans and TikTok teens pranked the campaign by registering for the free tickets , with no intention of showing up .
When the campaign could only fill a fraction of the 19,000-seat stadium in a Republican stronghold , the TikTok teens claimed victory : “ best senior prank ever.
” Trump was furious that there were so many empty seats , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ teens had outsmarted his campaign .

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
The latest target in the Trump administration’s escalating tensions with China is TikTok, the wildly popular music-video app with 2 billion downloads worldwide and a 165 million in the United States.
“As far as TikTok is concerned, we’re banning them from the United States,” President Donald Trump told reporters on Air Force One on his way back from Tampa on Friday. “Soon, immediately. I mean essentially immediately.” Trump said he would sign an order Saturday. He claimed, “I have that authority,” with the administration pointing to the president’s powers to ban foreign apps from American app stores granted by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
The United States and China have engaged in ever-increasing diplomatic and economic clashes that’s only grown more tense over the course of the pandemic, as Trump has sought to blame China for the skyrocketing 156,000 American death toll from coronavirus, constantly calling it the “China virus” in his remarks. For months, the Trump administration has claimed that TikTok, a Chinese-owned company, is a threat to national security because it could be susceptible to censorship and breaches of data privacy by Chinese officials.
Congress in 2018 increased the powers of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, whose members include the secretaries of State, Defense, and Homeland Security, led by Secretary of Treasury Steven Mnuchin. Since November, the committee has investigated the app’s parent company for its 2017 purchase of Musical.ly, which later became TikTok. With Microsoft now reportedly in talks to buy TikTok’s US operations, Trump suggested Friday that a Microsoft stake wouldn’t change his decision to block the social media platform.
A TikTok spokesperson responded to Trump’s remarks on Friday: “TikTok US user data is stored in the US, with strict controls on employee access. TikTok’s biggest investors come from the US. We are committed to protecting our users’ privacy and safety.” India has already blocked TikTok after a border dispute with China, and Australia is considering its own ban.
The president has another reason to dislike TikTok. In June, Trump held a rally in Tulsa, in spite of public health experts’ warnings. (There was a subsequent spike in coronavirus cases there.) Before the rally, hundreds of K-pop fans and TikTok teens pranked the campaign by registering for the free tickets, with no intention of showing up. When the campaign could only fill a fraction of the 19,000-seat stadium in a Republican stronghold, the TikTok teens claimed victory: “best senior prank ever.”
Trump was furious that there were so many empty seats, and, quite possibly, resentful that TikTok teens had outsmarted his campaign.