vox--2020-08-17--Congress takes up the fight for the future of the Postal Service

The United States Postal Service is dealing with crippling backlogs of letters and packages .
A postmaster in upstate New York recently told their union that the regular mail was two days behind and , for the first time in their career , Express Priority Mail was not going out on time .
Despite a surge in package delivery during the pandemic , postal workers are no longer able to work overtime , and fewer mail trucks are on the road .
If your own mail seems delayed or unpredictable , it ’ s not a one-off problem .
Mail @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weeks due to a series of factors .
While the USPS has been suffering financially for years , the coronavirus pandemic has delivered an existential threat to the agency .
The self-funded Postal Service has been seeking billions in aid from Congress — an effort that ’ s been stymied by President Trump , who has long had a contentious relationship with the USPS and has pushed to privatize it .
And now , the USPS is adjusting to cost-cutting policies put in place by its new postmaster general , Louis DeJoy , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ longtime Republican fundraiser .
The policies include eliminating overtime for postal workers , limiting the number of mail trucks , and removing hundreds of sorting machines from postal facilities , including those in battleground states like Pennsylvania , Michigan , and Florida .
DeJoy also implemented a major restructuring of the Postal Service that , according to the Washington Post , “ deemphasizes decades ’ worth of institutional postal knowledge ” and “ centralizes power around DeJoy.
” These abrupt changes have led to delays in the delivery of everything from paychecks to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concern that these delays could interfere with the November election , when a record number of people are expected to vote by mail due to the pandemic .
Given the facts and the president ’ s ongoing public criticism of mail-in voting , many are accusing Trump of intentionally kneecapping the Postal Service in an attempt to sabotage the election , as he trails Joe Biden in the polls .
In mid-August , Trump himself admitted to holding back funding for the USPS in order to limit mail-in voting .
Soon thereafter , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sent a letter to 46 states and Washington , DC , in late July warning that it could not guarantee their mail-in ballots would be delivered in time to be counted .
Democrats in Congress are now stepping in to reverse the new postmaster ’ s policies and secure funding for the USPS .
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has called the House back early from its summer recess to vote on a Postal Service bill , and DeJoy has agreed to testify before the Oversight Committee on August 24 .
“ Lives , livelihoods @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are under threat from the President , ” she said in a letter that referred to DeJoy as a “ complicit crony.
” Meanwhile , two Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee are urging the FBI to open a criminal investigation into DeJoy , and at least six state attorneys general are exploring lawsuits to prevent the Trump administration from delaying mail ahead of the election .
All of this means the future of the Postal Service is in jeopardy .
It was actually in big trouble months ago , when postal leaders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the USPS could run out of cash as soon as September .
What ’ s happening now is even more urgent .
Decisions being made by Trump allies are leading to delays that could motivate the Postal Service ’ s biggest customers to send their packages through competitors like UPS and FedEx .
And according to some , the strategy could have devastating consequences .
“ It is unimaginable to think of an America without the Postal Service , ” said John McHugh , chairman of the Package Coalition , a trade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ members .
“ But if things go toward a worst-case scenario in this instance , which is entirely possible , that ’ s what would have to occur.
” The story of how we got here is complicated , and there is disagreement about what ’ s really going on .
However , according to postal leaders and Democrats , the way to fix the mail in time for the election involves an infusion of cash and an end to the delays .
Even then , the Postal Service faces a tough road @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blame all of the Postal Service ’ s service problems on the new postmaster general , DeJoy , but it wouldn ’ t be entirely fair .
After years of money problems tied to a decline in certain types of mail and an obligation to prefund its retirement benefits , the USPS suffered a very serious financial blow when the pandemic hit .
Starting in March , the volume of first-class mail began to plummet ( though a surge in package delivery has helped make up for that lost revenue ) .
Meanwhile @ @ @ @ @ @ @ got sick or began quarantining , leading to a labor shortage and the need for more overtime hours .
The Postal Service also spent hundreds of millions of dollars on personal protective equipment ( PPE ) and on retrofitting post offices with more plexiglass and more space for social distancing .
This is why postal leaders asked Congress for $ 75 billion when the CARES Act was being negotiated in April .
( This is not something the USPS likes to do , by the way .
It ’ s been 40 years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . )
In response , President Trump called the Postal Service “ a joke ” and threatened to veto the bill if it included any money for the USPS .
Despite the president ’ s attempts to avoid giving the Postal Service any money at all , the agency ended up making an agreement with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin for a $ 10 billion loan with strict terms .
Postmaster General DeJoy took office in mid-June amid the coronavirus crisis .
It ’ s worth pointing out that DeJoy was not appointed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the six members of the Postal Service Board of Governors , all of whom were appointed by Trump .
And it was after DeJoy got to work that the mail delays began , according to multiple postal service-related union leaders and trade groups interviewed by Recode .
DeJoy , a former logistics executive with no Postal Service experience , started his new gig by launching a series of pilot programs designed to slash USPS spending .
Multiple postal worker unions reported that DeJoy ’ s policies limited mail transportation , causing mail to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ days longer than it normally would .
Meanwhile , a crackdown on overtime hours meant that sorting machines are shut down before the day ’ s work is done .
( “ If the plants run late , they will keep the mail for the next day , ” read one USPS memo obtained by the Washington Post . )
The Postal Service also began the process of decommissioning 10 percent of its mail-sorting machines , which are designed to process flat mail , like letters and ballots .
As a result , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In response to questions about the recent issues , USPS spokesperson David Partenheimer used variations of the word “ efficient ” six times in explaining how the agency is adjusting its operations .
“ Of course we acknowledge that temporary service impacts can occur as we redouble our efforts to conform to the current operating plans , ” Partenheimer said , “ but any such impacts will be monitored and temporary , as the root causes of any issues will be addressed as necessary and corrected as appropriate.
” It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be .
In fact , none of the postal workers Recode spoke to were exactly sure what the new policies entailed , since DeJoy and his lieutenants did not communicate the details of the pilot programs to the unions or to individual postmasters .
“ In the field , we don ’ t have the details — only that we can ’ t approve overtime , only the district manager can , ” explained a postmaster who runs a post office in the Northeast and spoke on the condition of anonymity as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the press .
“ I ’ m in a delivery unit , so I can ’ t speak for delayed mail in a plant .
But by cutting the overtime , it would certainly delay a lot of mail.
” Individual managers might be selectively enforcing the new rules , they said , but with such poor communication from DeJoy , it ’ s hard to tell exactly what ’ s happening .
The postmaster , who is a 20-year veteran of the USPS , added , “ Amazon parcels are given @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” None of this confusion has helped DeJoy win any popularity contests in his short tenure as postmaster general .
Some call DeJoy “ a crony , ” and many are scrutinizing his background and political ties .
As a former logistics executive , DeJoy ran companies that counted the USPS as a client , and his family has invested $ 30.1 million to $ 75.3 million in USPS competitors or contractors , including UPS .
DeJoy is also a celebrated Republican party fundraiser who contributed over $ 1.5 million to Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ His wife , Aldona Wos , served as ambassador to Estonia in the George W. Bush administration and has been nominated by President Trump to be the next ambassador to Canada .
Others want to give DeJoy a chance .
After all , he did take on a tough job at a struggling agency in the middle of a pandemic .
“ Just to be honest , we ’ re very suspicious of this new postmaster general .
We have a healthy bit of skepticism , ” said Jim Sauber , chief of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Carriers .
“ But I know my boss and officers are not going to level charges that we can ’ t substantiate , and we ’ re not gon na jump to a conclusion until we can get a better fix on this.
” Democratic leaders in Congress seem less accommodating with regard to what DeJoy has done so far .
After the new postmaster general confirmed the details of the operational changes to the Postal Service in their early August meeting , Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Democrats said this and preserving funds for the Postal Service are essential for a deal on a new coronavirus relief package .
Still , even if the Postal Service does get an infusion of cash — you might call it a bailout — the agency ’ s future remains uncertain .
Whatever damage to the reputation of the USPS that ’ s being done now stands to affect the broader perception of the agency under the new postmaster general .
We might be hearing more about privatizing the Postal Service in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or not .
Trump ’ s campaign against voting by mail Considering DeJoy ’ s connections to Trump and the Republican Party and the reports of worsening mail delays with the election approaching , many are afraid that the president is plotting to rig the election in November by casting doubt on the dependability of mail-in voting .
“ The Trump administration ’ s ongoing campaign to sabotage the US Postal Service is a direct attack on our democracy , ” Rep. Gerry Connolly ( D-VA ) , chairman of the Subcommittee on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , told Recode .
“ Rural and urban , Democrat , Republican , or independent , every American has come to rely on the Postal Service , and our election is increasingly dependent on it .
Congress must with one voice and clear action ensure service standards are not allowed to falter.
” Delays and political connections aside , we don ’ t have much hard evidence of a Trump-led plot to overthrow the Postal Service .
It does look bad that the USPS appears to be facing an existential crisis just weeks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ postmaster general .
It looks worse that the president has spent months attacking the broader use of mail-in voting , even threatening executive action to stop it .
But these things don ’ t quite add up to proof of a conspiracy against the Postal Service .
“ The notion that the postmaster general makes decisions concerning the Postal Service at the direction of the president is wholly misplaced and off-base , ” Partenheimer , the USPS spokesperson , told Recode .
“ With regard to election mail , the Postal Service remains @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the electoral process when public policymakers choose to utilize the mail as a part of their election system , and to delivering election mail in a timely manner consistent with our operational standards.
” Still , Trump seems to be doing everything he can to undermine American voters ’ confidence in mail-in voting .
There are so many tweets : And that might be all he needs to discourage people from voting by mail .
Different states have different laws about how mail-in ballots work .
Currently , 34 states — including swing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Pennsylvania , and Wisconsin — require ballots to be received by election authorities by Election Day , so any delay in the mail could lead to untold numbers of votes going uncounted .
Rules about when states count the mail-in ballots also vary , so results are bound to be delayed in states like New York , where ballots can only be counted after the polls close .
It ’ s especially discouraging for voters that postal leaders felt the need to warn states that delays around Election Day could be so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Postal Service and postal unions are quick to point out that they take mail-in voting very seriously , and the process for delivering ballots is tried and tested .
“ The Postal Service has always given special attention to mail ballots , ” said Sauber .
“ In general , in most places in the country , during election time , if the Postal Service has mail ballots , they move heaven and earth to make sure it ’ s delivered .
They give top priority to the ballots.
” “ We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ postal workers for generations , ” said Mark Dimondstein , president of the American Postal Workers Union .
“ It ’ s been increasing in popularity .
In the last election , 31 million people voted by mail .
There ’ s virtually no fraud.
” Individual states can update their laws governing mail-in voting before November .
Aware of this fact , the Trump campaign has sued state and local governments across the country over mail-in ballot rules .
One suit , in Pennsylvania , argues that mail-in ballot drop boxes — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ look like mailboxes , and are monitored closely — are unconstitutional and should be removed .
Another lawsuit from the Trump campaign and other Republicans seeks to overturn a new law in Nevada that would require the state to mail everyone a ballot .
Still , assuming all laws remain as they are , disrupting the Postal Service is an obvious way to hinder the mail-in ballot process .
If slowing down the mail isn ’ t enough on its own , even creating a perception of problems with the mail could be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voting .
And it looks like Trump is being effective at doing this — perhaps too effective .
A June-July poll suggested that some voters in Florida , Pennsylvania , and Michigan have become so distrustful of mail-in voting that they might rather not vote at all than rely on mail-in ballots .
Not long after this poll was published , Trump assured voters in Florida that mail-in voting was safe there .
“ We ’ ll be able to deliver .
There won ’ t be a problem with vote-by-mail , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ National Rural Letter Carriers ’ Association .
“ I think even President Trump is starting to see that .
I think he ’ s lightened up a little bit.
” The most anxiety-inducing part of all this is that there seems to be little for the average American to do .
The Postal Service is an independent agency , and there ’ s only so much Congress can do to shape its policies .
Rep. Carolyn Maloney ( D-NY ) , chair of the House government oversight committee , and House leaders are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chair of the Postal Service Board of Governors to testify on August 24 .
Democrats in the Senate are also pressing DeJoy to reverse his new policies , which they say would disenfranchise millions of American voters .
But again , the Postal Service ’ s problems extend well beyond Trump ’ s war on vote-by-mail .
The election will come and go , and there ’ s a decent chance the USPS will still be in trouble .
Depending on how negotiations go around the new coronavirus stimulus package , these recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the mail delays could actually get worse in the weeks and months to come .
Ongoing delays could chase big package senders like Amazon and eBay away from the USPS , and without that revenue , the Postal Service would be in even more serious trouble .
After all , these customers have long been concerned about whether it might be better for their business to go through UPS or FedEx .
What the Postal Service needs right now — both to deliver mail and to keep existing — is money .
What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some say , is a bit of restructuring .
“ If you think of the analogy of a house , it needs to be remodeled , ” said Arthur B. Sackler , manager of the Coalition for a 21st Century Postal Service , whose members include not only Amazon and eBay but also catalog and greeting card companies .
“ And , at the same time , this house you ’ re remodeling , the roof is on fire .
So you ’ ve got to put the fire out first before you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Americans do not want to let the house burn down , by the way .
Americans don ’ t just rely on the Postal Service .
They love it .
For years , the USPS has been the most popular government agency in the United States .
According to a Pew Research Center study released in April , 91 percent of Americans have a favorable opinion of the Postal Service , and roughly the same percentage of Americans want to bail out the agency .
Similarly , countless companies that do business with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ retailers , including Amazon , even spent millions of dollars on an ad campaign begging lawmakers to save the Postal Service .
These facts leave us with a very curious situation .
The Postal Service is seriously struggling , but it ’ s never been more important .
It ’ s critical to get prescriptions to the homes of people during a pandemic and to deliver ballots to state election boards .
It ’ s even prized by huge corporations like Amazon , who could easily give their money to a competing private @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Postal Service .
At the same time , President Trump seems to disdain the agency , and the new postmaster general seems to be doing more harm than good .
The upshot of it all is that the USPS has survived difficult moments in the past .
The agency can trace its roots back to the days of the American Revolution .
Two and a half centuries later , mail service has never been more essential .
If anything , a crisis like this could serve to remind the country how much it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a handful of powerful people might believe .
Correction : A previous version of this story misstated the first name of Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin .
Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

The United States Postal Service is dealing with crippling backlogs of letters and packages. A postmaster in upstate New York recently told their union that the regular mail was two days behind and, for the first time in their career, Express Priority Mail was not going out on time. Despite a surge in package delivery during the pandemic, postal workers are no longer able to work overtime, and fewer mail trucks are on the road. If your own mail seems delayed or unpredictable, it’s not a one-off problem.
Mail service has been disrupted nationwide in recent weeks due to a series of factors. While the USPS has been suffering financially for years, the coronavirus pandemic has delivered an existential threat to the agency. The self-funded Postal Service has been seeking billions in aid from Congress — an effort that’s been stymied by President Trump, who has long had a contentious relationship with the USPS and has pushed to privatize it. And now, the USPS is adjusting to cost-cutting policies put in place by its new postmaster general, Louis DeJoy, who is a top Trump donor and longtime Republican fundraiser.
The policies include eliminating overtime for postal workers, limiting the number of mail trucks, and removing hundreds of sorting machines from postal facilities, including those in battleground states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Florida. DeJoy also implemented a major restructuring of the Postal Service that, according to the Washington Post, “deemphasizes decades’ worth of institutional postal knowledge” and “centralizes power around DeJoy.” These abrupt changes have led to delays in the delivery of everything from paychecks to prescriptions. There’s also widespread concern that these delays could interfere with the November election, when a record number of people are expected to vote by mail due to the pandemic.
Given the facts and the president’s ongoing public criticism of mail-in voting, many are accusing Trump of intentionally kneecapping the Postal Service in an attempt to sabotage the election, as he trails Joe Biden in the polls. In mid-August, Trump himself admitted to holding back funding for the USPS in order to limit mail-in voting. Soon thereafter, news emerged that the Postal Service had sent a letter to 46 states and Washington, DC, in late July warning that it could not guarantee their mail-in ballots would be delivered in time to be counted.
Democrats in Congress are investigating the new postmaster’s policies and working to secure funding for the USPS. Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the House back early from its summer recess to vote on a Postal Service bill, and DeJoy has agreed to testify before the Oversight Committee on August 24. “Lives, livelihoods and the life of our American Democracy are under threat from the President,” she said in a letter that referred to DeJoy as a “complicit crony.” Meanwhile, two Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee are urging the FBI to open a criminal investigation into DeJoy, and at least six state attorneys general are exploring lawsuits to prevent the Trump administration from delaying mail ahead of the election.
Postmaster General DeJoy responded to criticism of his new initiatives in an August 18 statement. Pointing broadly to working toward “significant reforms” of the Postal Service, he said, “To avoid even the appearance of any impact on election mail, I am suspending these initiatives until after the election is concluded.” The statement also said that postal workers’ overtime would be “approved as needed” and that processing equipment and collection boxes “will remain where they are.” DeJoy did not say whether any actions taken under earlier policies would be reversed or whether any of the dozens of sorting machines already removed from postal facilities would be returned before the election.
All of this means the future of the Postal Service is in jeopardy. It was actually in big trouble months ago, when postal leaders warned that, without intervention from Congress, the USPS could run out of cash as soon as September. What’s happening now is even more urgent. Decisions being made by Trump allies are leading to delays that could motivate the Postal Service’s biggest customers to send their packages through competitors like UPS and FedEx. And according to some, the strategy could have devastating consequences.
“It is unimaginable to think of an America without the Postal Service,” said John McHugh, chairman of the Package Coalition, a trade group that counts Amazon and eBay as members. “But if things go toward a worst-case scenario in this instance, which is entirely possible, that’s what would have to occur.”
The story of how we got here is complicated, and there is disagreement about what’s really going on. However, according to postal leaders and Democrats, the way to fix the mail in time for the election involves an infusion of cash and an end to the delays. Even then, the Postal Service faces a tough road ahead.
The Postal Service’s controversial new policies, explained
It’s tempting to blame all of the Postal Service’s service problems on the new postmaster general, DeJoy, but it wouldn’t be entirely fair. After years of money problems tied to a decline in certain types of mail and an obligation to prefund its retirement benefits, the USPS suffered a very serious financial blow when the pandemic hit.
Starting in March, the volume of first-class mail began to plummet (though a surge in package delivery has helped make up for that lost revenue). Meanwhile, tens of thousands of postal workers got sick or began quarantining, leading to a labor shortage and the need for more overtime hours. The Postal Service also spent hundreds of millions of dollars on personal protective equipment (PPE) and on retrofitting post offices with more plexiglass and more space for social distancing.
This is why postal leaders asked Congress for $75 billion when the CARES Act was being negotiated in April. (This is not something the USPS likes to do, by the way. It’s been 40 years since the Postal Service took taxpayer dollars.) In response, President Trump called the Postal Service “a joke” and threatened to veto the bill if it included any money for the USPS. Despite the president’s attempts to avoid giving the Postal Service any money at all, the agency ended up making an agreement with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin for a $10 billion loan with strict terms.
Postmaster General DeJoy took office in mid-June amid the coronavirus crisis. It’s worth pointing out that DeJoy was not appointed by President Trump. He was appointed by the six members of the Postal Service Board of Governors, all of whom were appointed by Trump. And it was after DeJoy got to work that the mail delays began, according to multiple postal service-related union leaders and trade groups interviewed by Recode.
DeJoy, a former logistics executive with no Postal Service experience, started his new gig by launching a series of pilot programs designed to slash USPS spending. Multiple postal worker unions reported that DeJoy’s policies limited mail transportation, causing mail to be left at the sorting plant for days longer than it normally would. Meanwhile, a crackdown on overtime hours meant that sorting machines are shut down before the day’s work is done. (“If the plants run late, they will keep the mail for the next day,” read one USPS memo obtained by the Washington Post.) The Postal Service also began the process of decommissioning 10 percent of its mail-sorting machines, which are designed to process flat mail, like letters and ballots. As a result, mail is sitting undelivered across the country.
In response to questions about the recent issues, USPS spokesperson David Partenheimer used variations of the word “efficient” six times in explaining how the agency is adjusting its operations. “Of course we acknowledge that temporary service impacts can occur as we redouble our efforts to conform to the current operating plans,” Partenheimer said, “but any such impacts will be monitored and temporary, as the root causes of any issues will be addressed as necessary and corrected as appropriate.”
It’s not entirely clear how temporary the delays will be. In fact, none of the postal workers Recode spoke to were exactly sure what the new policies entailed, since DeJoy and his lieutenants did not communicate the details of the pilot programs to the unions or to individual postmasters.
“In the field, we don’t have the details — only that we can’t approve overtime, only the district manager can,” explained a postmaster who runs a post office in the Northeast and spoke on the condition of anonymity as they’re not authorized to speak to the press. “I’m in a delivery unit, so I can’t speak for delayed mail in a plant. But by cutting the overtime, it would certainly delay a lot of mail.”
Individual managers might be selectively enforcing the new rules, they said, but with such poor communication from DeJoy, it’s hard to tell exactly what’s happening. The postmaster, who is a 20-year veteran of the USPS, added, “Amazon parcels are given priority over everything at a national level.”
None of this confusion has helped DeJoy win any popularity contests in his short tenure as postmaster general.
Some call DeJoy “a crony,” and many are scrutinizing his background and political ties. As a former logistics executive, DeJoy ran companies that counted the USPS as a client, and his family has invested $30.1 million to $75.3 million in USPS competitors or contractors, including UPS. DeJoy is also a celebrated Republican party fundraiser who contributed over $1.5 million to Trump’s campaigns in 2016 and 2020. His wife, Aldona Wos, served as ambassador to Estonia in the George W. Bush administration and has been nominated by President Trump to be the next ambassador to Canada.
Others want to give DeJoy a chance. After all, he did take on a tough job at a struggling agency in the middle of a pandemic.
“Just to be honest, we’re very suspicious of this new postmaster general. We have a healthy bit of skepticism,” said Jim Sauber, chief of staff for the National Association of Letter Carriers. “But I know my boss and officers are not going to level charges that we can’t substantiate, and we’re not gonna jump to a conclusion until we can get a better fix on this.”
Democratic leaders in Congress seem less accommodating with regard to what DeJoy has done so far. After the new postmaster general confirmed the details of the operational changes to the Postal Service in their early August meeting, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi demanded that DeJoy reverse the new policies. The Democrats said this and preserving funds for the Postal Service are essential for a deal on a new coronavirus relief package.
Still, even if the Postal Service does get an infusion of cash — you might call it a bailout — the agency’s future remains uncertain. Whatever damage to the reputation of the USPS that’s being done now stands to affect the broader perception of the agency under the new postmaster general. We might be hearing more about privatizing the Postal Service in the future, whether we like it or not.
Trump’s campaign against voting by mail
Considering DeJoy’s connections to Trump and the Republican Party and the reports of worsening mail delays with the election approaching, many are afraid that the president is plotting to rig the election in November by casting doubt on the dependability of mail-in voting.
“The Trump administration’s ongoing campaign to sabotage the US Postal Service is a direct attack on our democracy,” Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA), chairman of the Subcommittee on Government Operations, which oversees the USPS, told Recode. “Rural and urban, Democrat, Republican, or independent, every American has come to rely on the Postal Service, and our election is increasingly dependent on it. Congress must with one voice and clear action ensure service standards are not allowed to falter.”
Delays and political connections aside, we don’t have much hard evidence of a Trump-led plot to overthrow the Postal Service. It does look bad that the USPS appears to be facing an existential crisis just weeks after a Trump donor took over as postmaster general. It looks worse that the president has spent months attacking the broader use of mail-in voting, even threatening executive action to stop it. But these things don’t quite add up to proof of a conspiracy against the Postal Service.
“The notion that the postmaster general makes decisions concerning the Postal Service at the direction of the president is wholly misplaced and off-base,” Partenheimer, the USPS spokesperson, told Recode. “With regard to election mail, the Postal Service remains fully committed to fulfilling our role in the electoral process when public policymakers choose to utilize the mail as a part of their election system, and to delivering election mail in a timely manner consistent with our operational standards.”
Still, Trump seems to be doing everything he can to undermine American voters’ confidence in mail-in voting. There are so many tweets:
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
And that might be all he needs to discourage people from voting by mail.
Different states have different laws about how mail-in ballots work. Currently, 34 states — including swing states like Arizona, Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin — require ballots to be received by election authorities by Election Day, so any delay in the mail could lead to untold numbers of votes going uncounted. Rules about when states count the mail-in ballots also vary, so results are bound to be delayed in states like New York, where ballots can only be counted after the polls close. It’s especially discouraging for voters that postal leaders felt the need to warn states that delays around Election Day could be so bad that voters could be disenfranchised.
The Postal Service and postal unions are quick to point out that they take mail-in voting very seriously, and the process for delivering ballots is tried and tested.
“The Postal Service has always given special attention to mail ballots,” said Sauber. “In general, in most places in the country, during election time, if the Postal Service has mail ballots, they move heaven and earth to make sure it’s delivered. They give top priority to the ballots.”
“We’ve been doing mail ballots as postal workers for generations,” said Mark Dimondstein, president of the American Postal Workers Union. “It’s been increasing in popularity. In the last election, 31 million people voted by mail. There’s virtually no fraud.”
Individual states can update their laws governing mail-in voting before November. Aware of this fact, the Trump campaign has sued state and local governments across the country over mail-in ballot rules. One suit, in Pennsylvania, argues that mail-in ballot drop boxes — which are designed to handle ballots, look like mailboxes, and are monitored closely — are unconstitutional and should be removed. Another lawsuit from the Trump campaign and other Republicans seeks to overturn a new law in Nevada that would require the state to mail everyone a ballot.
Still, assuming all laws remain as they are, disrupting the Postal Service is an obvious way to hinder the mail-in ballot process. If slowing down the mail isn’t enough on its own, even creating a perception of problems with the mail could be enough to discourage some Americans from mail-in voting. And it looks like Trump is being effective at doing this — perhaps too effective. A June-July poll suggested that some voters in Florida, Pennsylvania, and Michigan have become so distrustful of mail-in voting that they might rather not vote at all than rely on mail-in ballots. Not long after this poll was published, Trump assured voters in Florida that mail-in voting was safe there.
“We’ll be able to deliver. There won’t be a problem with vote-by-mail,” said Ronnie Stutts, president of the National Rural Letter Carriers’ Association. “I think even President Trump is starting to see that. I think he’s lightened up a little bit.”
The most anxiety-inducing part of all this is that there seems to be little for the average American to do. The Postal Service is an independent agency, and there’s only so much Congress can do to shape its policies. Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), chair of the House government oversight committee, and House leaders are calling on DeJoy and Robert Duncan, chair of the Postal Service Board of Governors to testify on August 24. Democrats in the Senate are also pressing DeJoy to reverse his new policies, which they say would disenfranchise millions of American voters.
But again, the Postal Service’s problems extend well beyond Trump’s war on vote-by-mail. The election will come and go, and there’s a decent chance the USPS will still be in trouble. Depending on how negotiations go around the new coronavirus stimulus package, these recent delays could continue. Growing backlogs mean the mail delays could actually get worse in the weeks and months to come. Ongoing delays could chase big package senders like Amazon and eBay away from the USPS, and without that revenue, the Postal Service would be in even more serious trouble. After all, these customers have long been concerned about whether it might be better for their business to go through UPS or FedEx.
What the Postal Service needs right now — both to deliver mail and to keep existing — is money. What it needs in the long term, some say, is a bit of restructuring.
“If you think of the analogy of a house, it needs to be remodeled,” said Arthur B. Sackler, manager of the Coalition for a 21st Century Postal Service, whose members include not only Amazon and eBay but also catalog and greeting card companies. “And, at the same time, this house you’re remodeling, the roof is on fire. So you’ve got to put the fire out first before you can remodel.”
The vast majority of Americans do not want to let the house burn down, by the way. Americans don’t just rely on the Postal Service. They love it.
For years, the USPS has been the most popular government agency in the United States. According to a Pew Research Center study released in April, 91 percent of Americans have a favorable opinion of the Postal Service, and roughly the same percentage of Americans want to bail out the agency. Similarly, countless companies that do business with the Postal Service are fans. Online retailers, including Amazon, even spent millions of dollars on an ad campaign begging lawmakers to save the Postal Service.
These facts leave us with a very curious situation. The Postal Service is seriously struggling, but it’s never been more important. It’s critical to get prescriptions to the homes of people during a pandemic and to deliver ballots to state election boards. It’s even prized by huge corporations like Amazon, who could easily give their money to a competing private company but would rather work with the Postal Service. At the same time, President Trump seems to disdain the agency, and the new postmaster general seems to be doing more harm than good.
The upshot of it all is that the USPS has survived difficult moments in the past. The agency can trace its roots back to the days of the American Revolution. Two and a half centuries later, mail service has never been more essential. If anything, a crisis like this could serve to remind the country how much it needs the Postal Service, despite what a handful of powerful people might believe.
Additional reporting by Jason Del Rey.
Correction: A previous version of this story misstated the first name of Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin.


vox--2020-08-17--Your face mask — and your T-shirt — might have been made with Uighur forced labor

An international coalition of human rights and advocacy organizations is working to urge popular fashion brands and apparel companies to divest from the Xinjiang region in northwestern China , where millions of Uighur people have been held in reeducation camps and forced to work .
End Uyghur Forced Labour , a coalition of more than 190 organizations , published a call to action in late July , demanding brands to formally commit to withdrawing any supply chain ties from the region .
“ There is a grave risk that brands and retailers across sectors are benefiting from human rights violations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and from the Uyghur Region , ” the call to action reads .
“ This is especially true in the apparel and garment sector , which has been the focus of the majority of forced labor investigations in the region.
” It ’ s not just T-shirts and jeans ; the urgent demand for face masks helped shine a spotlight on these conditions .
As Jen Kirby reported for Vox , Chinese state officials have turned Xinjiang , the province where most Uighurs live , into a high-tech police state and implemented mass @ @ @ @ @ @ @ detaining members of the Muslim ethnic minority group .
“ Uighurs inside and outside the camps are exploited for cheap labor , forced to manufacture clothing and other products for sale both at home and abroad , ” Kirby wrote .
In July , a New York Times investigation revealed how some medical-grade face masks that are sold in the US were produced in Chinese factories powered by Uighur labor .
Before the coronavirus pandemic , the Times reported , only four companies in Xinjiang produced medical-grade personal protective equipment ( PPE ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the end of June , and at least 17 of those factories rely on the Uighur labor transfer program .
Advocacy groups argue that the problem doesn ’ t begin and end with PPE manufacturers ; they say that any company that relies on Uighur workers could be benefiting from forced labor .
In March , the nonpartisan think tank Australian Strategic Policy Institute published a report detailing how 82 foreign and Chinese companies have direct or indirect ties to the Xinjiang region and beyond based on their supply chain .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from these practices means that it is now difficult to guarantee that products manufactured in China are free from forced labour , ” the report concludes .
Several corporations listed by ASPI include Amazon , Apple , Dell , Nike , Nintendo , Uniqlo , Victoria ’ s Secret , and Zara .
End Uyghur Forced Labor has largely focused its efforts on bringing to light the potential for abuse in the apparel and textiles industries , said Penelope Kyritsis of the Worker Rights Consortium , a group that is part of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demands rest on a principle that anything that comes out of that region , whether it be a garment , mask , or machinery , could be tarnished by forced labor because there ’ s no way to prove otherwise , ” Kyritsis told Vox .
“ This is largely because of the surveillance apparatus set up ; people ’ s actions are monitored whether they ’ re at work or in their homes .
That makes it difficult for a worker to tell an independent labor investigator what their true conditions are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there ’ s no certainty that Uighur labor is not coerced.
” “ Absent of that evidence , there ’ s no certainty that Uighur labor is not coerced ” According to a report from Human Rights Watch researchers , Chinese authorities use a mobile app that allows local police to collect personal information and data from Xinjiang residents , from their religious affiliation to blood type and height .
Researchers who reverse-engineered the app used by officials discovered that the system “ monitors people ’ s relationships , identifying as suspicious traveling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , for example , or anyone related to someone who has recently obtained a new phone number , ” and can then generate “ lists of people to be evaluated by officials for detention.
” Given China ’ s standing as the second-largest cotton producer in the world , many retailers and brands that sell cotton products likely maintain ties with Chinese suppliers either directly or indirectly .
About 84 percent of China ’ s cotton is produced in the Xinjiang region , according to China Daily , and it ’ s responsible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cotton on the global market .
According to Jernigan Global , a company that offers global supply chain management between cotton producers and retailers , the amount of Chinese state subsidies directed toward the industry has created “ a modern mechanized cotton production operation that has also boosted production and quality , ” establishing Xinjiang as “ the heart of both China ’ s cotton and textile production.
” As more reports about the human rights abuses in Xinjiang have been unearthed , international leaders are becoming increasingly vocal about the political pressure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Vox ’ s Kirby reported that the United States has imposed sanctions on Chinese officials and companies believed to be reliant on forced Uighur labor , including suppliers to international brands like Apple , Ralph Lauren , and Tommy Hilfiger .
Now , though , major companies are being asked to account for the labor that goes into their supply chains , especially since the coronavirus pandemic brought greater scrutiny toward the relationship between suppliers and brands .
“ There ’ s a lot of unfairness baked into the structure of global supply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and suppliers , ” Kyritsis added , acknowledging how the coronavirus has impacted these manufacturing relationships .
“ From where we stand , if brands don ’ t know where their cotton or textile comes from , they ’ re choosing to not know .
They must do their due diligence and commit to ethical supply standards.
” In recent years , consumers have become more active in calling for supply chain transparency among popular brands .
The onus nowadays falls more heavily upon retailers and companies , which have become eager @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in support of sustainability and ethical sourcing to please customers .
Now that average Americans appear to be more informed about the Chinese treatment of the Uighurs , major companies can no longer brush the issue under the rug .
It has taken years for the international community to be as vocal as it is now about the plight of the Uighurs , said Peter Irwin of the Uighur Human Rights Project .
Now , American consumers are starting to become aware of the extent of forced labor as the issue has gained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ The fact that this labor is touching the supply chain of global companies , the average American consumer could very well be wearing a T-shirt or jeans that has been manufactured or sourced from the region , ” Irwin told Vox .
“ Forced labor is just one aspect and extension of the internment camp system run by the Chinese government.
” While countries like the United States , Canada , and parts of Europe have condemned China ’ s human rights violations , the pandemic has made it difficult for some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ added .
“ Many companies or states rely on Chinese-made PPE and masks for their hospitals , and in many cases , these products are being shipped to the West.
” The coalition is currently pressuring around 80 brands to issue a statement of commitment and map out their supply chain to show how they ’ ve cut ties from the Xinjiang region .
“ Some brands have been more responsive than others , ” Irwin said , adding that the group has not publicly released the list of companies they ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supply chain , especially when it comes to apparel brands , makes it difficult for consumers to track and understand where their products are coming from , Kyritsis said .
“ It ’ s not the consumer ’ s job to dig into a company ’ s supply chain , although I understand that they would not want their money to contribute to exploitative labor , ” she said .
“ There are certain things that can ’ t be changed by collective action , though , if the company is not willing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you become our 20,000th supporter ?
When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions , we weren ’ t sure how it would go .
Today , we ’ re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in .
The reason is both lovely and surprising : Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it , too .
We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been more important than today , during a public health crisis , racial justice protests , a recession , and a presidential election .
But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive , and advertising alone won ’ t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will help keep Vox free for all .
Contribute today from as little as $ 3 .

An international coalition of human rights and advocacy organizations is working to urge popular fashion brands and apparel companies to divest from the Xinjiang region in northwestern China, where millions of Uighur people have been held in reeducation camps and forced to work. End Uyghur Forced Labour, a coalition of more than 190 organizations, published a call to action in late July, demanding brands to formally commit to withdrawing any supply chain ties from the region.
“There is a grave risk that brands and retailers across sectors are benefiting from human rights violations, including forced labor, both in and from the Uyghur Region,” the call to action reads. “This is especially true in the apparel and garment sector, which has been the focus of the majority of forced labor investigations in the region.” It’s not just T-shirts and jeans; the urgent demand for face masks helped shine a spotlight on these conditions.
As Jen Kirby reported for Vox, Chinese state officials have turned Xinjiang, the province where most Uighurs live, into a high-tech police state and implemented mass surveillance programs, in addition to forcibly detaining members of the Muslim ethnic minority group. “Uighurs inside and outside the camps are exploited for cheap labor, forced to manufacture clothing and other products for sale both at home and abroad,” Kirby wrote. In July, a New York Times investigation revealed how some medical-grade face masks that are sold in the US were produced in Chinese factories powered by Uighur labor. Before the coronavirus pandemic, the Times reported, only four companies in Xinjiang produced medical-grade personal protective equipment (PPE). That number had grown to 51 by the end of June, and at least 17 of those factories rely on the Uighur labor transfer program.
Advocacy groups argue that the problem doesn’t begin and end with PPE manufacturers; they say that any company that relies on Uighur workers could be benefiting from forced labor. In March, the nonpartisan think tank Australian Strategic Policy Institute published a report detailing how 82 foreign and Chinese companies have direct or indirect ties to the Xinjiang region and beyond based on their supply chain. “The tainted global supply chain that results from these practices means that it is now difficult to guarantee that products manufactured in China are free from forced labour,” the report concludes.
Several corporations listed by ASPI include Amazon, Apple, Dell, Nike, Nintendo, Uniqlo, Victoria’s Secret, and Zara. End Uyghur Forced Labor has largely focused its efforts on bringing to light the potential for abuse in the apparel and textiles industries, said Penelope Kyritsis of the Worker Rights Consortium, a group that is part of the coalition.
“The coalition’s demands rest on a principle that anything that comes out of that region, whether it be a garment, mask, or machinery, could be tarnished by forced labor because there’s no way to prove otherwise,” Kyritsis told Vox. “This is largely because of the surveillance apparatus set up; people’s actions are monitored whether they’re at work or in their homes. That makes it difficult for a worker to tell an independent labor investigator what their true conditions are, and absent of that evidence, there’s no certainty that Uighur labor is not coerced.”
“Absent of that evidence, there’s no certainty that Uighur labor is not coerced”
According to a report from Human Rights Watch researchers, Chinese authorities use a mobile app that allows local police to collect personal information and data from Xinjiang residents, from their religious affiliation to blood type and height. Researchers who reverse-engineered the app used by officials discovered that the system “monitors people’s relationships, identifying as suspicious traveling with anyone on a police watch list, for example, or anyone related to someone who has recently obtained a new phone number,” and can then generate “lists of people to be evaluated by officials for detention.”
Given China’s standing as the second-largest cotton producer in the world, many retailers and brands that sell cotton products likely maintain ties with Chinese suppliers either directly or indirectly. About 84 percent of China’s cotton is produced in the Xinjiang region, according to China Daily, and it’s responsible for about one in five bales of cotton on the global market. According to Jernigan Global, a company that offers global supply chain management between cotton producers and retailers, the amount of Chinese state subsidies directed toward the industry has created “a modern mechanized cotton production operation that has also boosted production and quality,” establishing Xinjiang as “the heart of both China’s cotton and textile production.”
As more reports about the human rights abuses in Xinjiang have been unearthed, international leaders are becoming increasingly vocal about the political pressure that should be placed on China. Vox’s Kirby reported that the United States has imposed sanctions on Chinese officials and companies believed to be reliant on forced Uighur labor, including suppliers to international brands like Apple, Ralph Lauren, and Tommy Hilfiger. Now, though, major companies are being asked to account for the labor that goes into their supply chains, especially since the coronavirus pandemic brought greater scrutiny toward the relationship between suppliers and brands.
“There’s a lot of unfairness baked into the structure of global supply chains, specifically between brands, retailers, and suppliers,” Kyritsis added, acknowledging how the coronavirus has impacted these manufacturing relationships. “From where we stand, if brands don’t know where their cotton or textile comes from, they’re choosing to not know. They must do their due diligence and commit to ethical supply standards.”
In recent years, consumers have become more active in calling for supply chain transparency among popular brands. The onus nowadays falls more heavily upon retailers and companies, which have become eager to put out mission statements and campaigns in support of sustainability and ethical sourcing to please customers. Now that average Americans appear to be more informed about the Chinese treatment of the Uighurs, major companies can no longer brush the issue under the rug.
It has taken years for the international community to be as vocal as it is now about the plight of the Uighurs, said Peter Irwin of the Uyghur Human Rights Project. Now, American consumers are starting to become aware of the extent of forced labor as the issue has gained more attention in the mainstream press. “The fact that this labor is touching the supply chain of global companies, the average American consumer could very well be wearing a T-shirt or jeans that has been manufactured or sourced from the region,” Irwin told Vox. “Forced labor is just one aspect and extension of the internment camp system run by the Chinese government.”
While countries like the United States, Canada, and parts of Europe have condemned China’s human rights violations, the pandemic has made it difficult for some smaller states to speak up, Irwin added. “Many companies or states rely on Chinese-made PPE and masks for their hospitals, and in many cases, these products are being shipped to the West.”
The coalition is currently pressuring around 80 brands to issue a statement of commitment and map out their supply chain to show how they’ve cut ties from the Xinjiang region. “Some brands have been more responsive than others,” Irwin said, adding that the group has not publicly released the list of companies they’re communicating with. The muddiness of the supply chain, especially when it comes to apparel brands, makes it difficult for consumers to track and understand where their products are coming from, Kyritsis said.
“It’s not the consumer’s job to dig into a company’s supply chain, although I understand that they would not want their money to contribute to exploitative labor,” she said. “There are certain things that can’t be changed by collective action, though, if the company is not willing to alter their supply chain.”
Will you become our 20,000th supporter? When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions, we weren’t sure how it would go. Today, we’re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in. The reason is both lovely and surprising: Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it, too. We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy. That’s never been more important than today, during a public health crisis, racial justice protests, a recession, and a presidential election. But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive, and advertising alone won’t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires. Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation, but it will help keep Vox free for all. Contribute today from as little as $3.


vox--2020-08-17--4 changes doctors have made to better treat Covid-19 patients

Something I get asked a lot is : Have we actually learned anything about how to fight Covid-19 ?
Given the continued debate over ( proven ) tactics like social distancing and mask-wearing , and the reticence of some political leaders to take preemptive action to curb the disease ’ s spread , it ’ s not an unreasonable question .
But when I hear that question , the first thing I think about isn ’ t Zoom calls or isolating in a cabin or strapping on my mask before I walk into the grocery store .
I think about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Because , in fact , doctors and nurses have learned a ton about the best medicine for treating Covid-19 .
It ’ s too soon to say exactly how many lives have been saved by gains in our collective knowledge , but some effect seems certain .
Coronavirus deaths have been rising again in the wake of this summer ’ s record spike in cases , but they have not reached the same heights seen in the spring .
There are likely a few explanations for that trend .
First , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ March or April to identify all of the Covid-19 cases then and so a “ record ” number of cases in June and July may have been a bit of a mirage .
Younger people also made up a bigger share of cases in the summer wave , and they are less at risk of dying from the disease .
But the doctors and hospitals I ’ ve spoken with recently feel confident that improvements in their standards of care are having a meaningful effect , even if they are reluctant to put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ There is a lot that has changed .
We ’ ve made amazing progress , ” Dr. Daniel Kuritzkes , the chief of the infectious disease division at Brigham and Women ’ s Hospital and a professor at Harvard Medical School , told me in a phone interview last week .
“ Many of us do have the sense that we ’ ve gotten better at what we ’ re doing , and we are seeing less mortality , even among older hospitalized patients with Covid-19.
” Covid-19 deaths among Americans 65 and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , when nearly 13,800 people in that age bracket died .
In the first week of August , about 2,300 people over 65 died .
At the same time , the number of confirmed cases was roughly twice as high as it was in the spring .
( Again , these comparisons aren ’ t perfect , but the difference in death rates is stark . )
I talked with Kurtizkes about what we ’ ve learned about how to best treat Covid-19 .
There were at least four developments that seem to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maintain sufficient capacity to treat their coronavirus patients .
1 ) Letting some patients ride Covid-19 out at home Maybe the most important advance is one that doesn ’ t occur in the hospital at all .
Doctors have become more comfortable telling Covid-19 patients with a lower risk profile — younger , healthier , with less severe symptoms presenting — they can stay at home and monitor themselves , in consultation with their doctor , as their body fights off the disease , Kuritzkes told me .
By keeping those patients at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beds and their staff to focus on the most at-risk patients .
Simple medical equipment makes it easier to have those less at-risk patients stay home .
For example , patients can use a $ 50 at-home blood oxygen monitor to gauge how their lungs are working and whether their condition is deteriorating to the point that they should go to the hospital .
Doctors can rely more on home care now in part because many of the people getting infected are less at risk .
The recent surges in Covid-19 cases have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , among younger people .
They are less vulnerable to developing serious symptoms ( namely the difficulty with breathing ) that require patients to be hospitalized .
But it also reflects the growing confidence among doctors that they can manage these cases remotely .
2 ) Delaying ventilation as long as possible Early on in the Covid-19 pandemic , some doctors were quick to put hospitalized patients who were struggling with their breathing on a mechanical ventilator .
But they have done a 180-degree reversal in the months since , now striving to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s at all possible .
“ At the very beginning , there was some movement to intubate people quickly , ” Kuritzkes said .
“ That turned out not to be the best move.
” There was a logic to putting patients on a ventilator early in the disease ’ s progression .
Usually , doctors and nurses would prefer to do a controlled elective intubation rather than attempt to intubate a patient in the middle of a respiratory emergency .
All kinds of things can go wrong when putting a patient on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrong way and end up with something damaging in their lungs .
Doing it preemptively gave the staff more control over the situation .
There were also early reports out of Wuhan , China , that indicated early intubation was a good idea , Kuritzkes said .
However , the initial conventional wisdom turned out to be wrong .
Putting a person on a ventilator changes everything about their breathing and it can be very traumatizing to the body .
Air is being pushed into the lungs and that puts pressure on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ processing oxygen and expelling carbon dioxide .
Considering Covid-19 is already damaging a person ’ s lung capacity , that was a dangerous combination .
So now , hospitals are trying to delay ventilation as long as they can .
“ We ’ re attempting to avoid that trauma as much as possible , ” Kurtizkes said .
“ It would be better for patients than intubating them sooner if you could avoid it .
For some people , we are able to get them through without needing to intubate them at all.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to their usual standard operating procedure for patients who are having trouble breathing : they should be put into a prone position , meaning they are lying on their stomachs , for a certain amount of time every day .
In many ways , caring for Covid-19 patients is the same as caring for any patients with significant respiratory distress .
But prone positioning was a significant change from prior practices .
“ That was something that was not done very commonly prior to this epidemic , ” Kuritzkes said .
“ As @ @ @ @ @ @ @ positive experiences , it was rapidly picked up.
” The University Health System in San Antonio , one of the first US hospital systems to have a major influx of Covid-19 patients because they took in evacuees from Wuhan and the Diamond Princess cruise ship , told me they quickly learned putting patients in the prone position led to better outcomes .
The science is pretty simple : Blood flow changes depending on how much pressure is being put on the lungs and where the pressure is coming from .
Putting a patient @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blood to reach different parts of the lungs and improves lung function .
Research is still preliminary , but what ’ s available does indicate improvements in the blood oxygen levels of Covid-19 patients put in the prone position .
( This is also helpful toward the goal of delaying intubation . )
“ What you want to do is maximize the amount of blood going to the parts of the lung getting the best aeration , ” Kuritzkes said .
It ’ s not easy to flip a hospitalized patient from their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their tubes and drips .
It requires a dedicated team .
But at this point in the Covid-19 pandemic , hospital staff have much more experience with the process than they did at the beginning .
The other piece of the treatment puzzle is the actual medicine .
So far , the anti-inflammatory steroid dexamethasone and the antiviral medication remdesivir have proven the most promising and have been adopted by many hospitals across the US and around the world .
“ Without question , the advent of remdesivir had a big effect , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shown in studies to help hospitalized Covid-19 patients improve more quickly , as STAT has reported .
In one study with patients who had severe cases , they were shown to recover four days faster on remdesivir than patients who were given a placebo .
In a different study , patients with mild Covid-19 symptoms were 65 percent more likely to see improvement after being given the drug .
Helping patients recover quickly is important to maintaining hospital capacity and preventing staff from being overwhelmed .
It ’ s not yet clear whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , though a preliminary research paper presented at the AIDS 2020 Conference this summer did find lower mortality rates for patients who were given remdesivir .
Dexamethasone has been shown to reduce fatalities in Covid-19 patients with severe symptoms ( those who require mechanical ventilation or oxygen support ) and so it has also become part of the standard of care for those cases .
However , it does not appear to make much of a difference for patients who do not need respiratory support , and doctors are still trying to figure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Because dexamethasone is a steroid , it can have other deleterious effects on a patient ’ s body , making it more difficult to regulate blood sugar and sometimes leading to high blood pressure .
Patients are also more vulnerable to opportunistic infections , Kuritzkes told me .
“ You don ’ t want to give it where the benefits don ’ t outweigh the potential risks , ” he said .
So there is still much to learn .
And these are all imperfect measures .
A vaccine or a cure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus ’ s toll .
Improvements in treatment are not a reason to be complacent about social distancing or wearing masks , either .
But heading into the fall , when many experts expect another uptick in Covid-19 cases , doctors are in a much better position to treat their patients than they were in the spring .
Will you become our 20,000th supporter ?
When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions , we weren ’ t sure how it would go .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in .
The reason is both lovely and surprising : Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it , too .
We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy .
That ’ s never been more important than today , during a public health crisis , racial justice protests , a recession , and a presidential election .
But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive , and advertising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will help keep Vox free for all .
Contribute today from as little as $ 3 .

Something I get asked a lot is: Have we actually learned anything about how to fight Covid-19?
Given the continued debate over (proven) tactics like social distancing and mask-wearing, and the reticence of some political leaders to take preemptive action to curb the disease’s spread, it’s not an unreasonable question.
But when I hear that question, the first thing I think about isn’t Zoom calls or isolating in a cabin or strapping on my mask before I walk into the grocery store. I think about remdesivir, dexamethasone, and prone positioning.
Because, in fact, doctors and nurses have learned a ton about the best medicine for treating Covid-19. It’s too soon to say exactly how many lives have been saved by gains in our collective knowledge, but some effect seems certain.
Coronavirus deaths have been rising again in the wake of this summer’s record spike in cases, but they have not reached the same heights seen in the spring. There are likely a few explanations for that trend. First, the US wasn’t testing enough in March or April to identify all of the Covid-19 cases then and so a “record” number of cases in June and July may have been a bit of a mirage. Younger people also made up a bigger share of cases in the summer wave, and they are less at risk of dying from the disease.
But the doctors and hospitals I’ve spoken with recently feel confident that improvements in their standards of care are having a meaningful effect, even if they are reluctant to put an exact number on it.
“There is a lot that has changed. We’ve made amazing progress,” Dr. Daniel Kuritzkes, the chief of the infectious disease division at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and a professor at Harvard Medical School, told me in a phone interview last week. “Many of us do have the sense that we’ve gotten better at what we’re doing, and we are seeing less mortality, even among older hospitalized patients with Covid-19.”
Covid-19 deaths among Americans 65 and older peaked the week of April 15, when nearly 13,800 people in that age bracket died. In the first week of August, about 2,300 people over 65 died. At the same time, the number of confirmed cases was roughly twice as high as it was in the spring. (Again, these comparisons aren’t perfect, but the difference in death rates is stark.)
I talked with Kurtizkes about what we’ve learned about how to best treat Covid-19. There were at least four developments that seem to be improving patient outcomes and helping hospitals maintain sufficient capacity to treat their coronavirus patients.
1) Letting some patients ride Covid-19 out at home
Maybe the most important advance is one that doesn’t occur in the hospital at all.
Doctors have become more comfortable telling Covid-19 patients with a lower risk profile — younger, healthier, with less severe symptoms presenting — they can stay at home and monitor themselves, in consultation with their doctor, as their body fights off the disease, Kuritzkes told me.
By keeping those patients at home, hospitals can free up their beds and their staff to focus on the most at-risk patients.
Simple medical equipment makes it easier to have those less at-risk patients stay home. For example, patients can use a $50 at-home blood oxygen monitor to gauge how their lungs are working and whether their condition is deteriorating to the point that they should go to the hospital.
Doctors can rely more on home care now in part because many of the people getting infected are less at risk. The recent surges in Covid-19 cases have been concentrated, at least at first, among younger people. They are less vulnerable to developing serious symptoms (namely the difficulty with breathing) that require patients to be hospitalized. But it also reflects the growing confidence among doctors that they can manage these cases remotely.
2) Delaying ventilation as long as possible
Early on in the Covid-19 pandemic, some doctors were quick to put hospitalized patients who were struggling with their breathing on a mechanical ventilator. But they have done a 180-degree reversal in the months since, now striving to keep patients off ventilation if it’s at all possible.
“At the very beginning, there was some movement to intubate people quickly,” Kuritzkes said. “That turned out not to be the best move.”
There was a logic to putting patients on a ventilator early in the disease’s progression. Usually, doctors and nurses would prefer to do a controlled elective intubation rather than attempt to intubate a patient in the middle of a respiratory emergency. All kinds of things can go wrong when putting a patient on a ventilator; they can swallow the wrong way and end up with something damaging in their lungs. Doing it preemptively gave the staff more control over the situation. There were also early reports out of Wuhan, China, that indicated early intubation was a good idea, Kuritzkes said.
However, the initial conventional wisdom turned out to be wrong. Putting a person on a ventilator changes everything about their breathing and it can be very traumatizing to the body. Air is being pushed into the lungs and that puts pressure on the delicate air sacs that are responsible for processing oxygen and expelling carbon dioxide.
Considering Covid-19 is already damaging a person’s lung capacity, that was a dangerous combination. So now, hospitals are trying to delay ventilation as long as they can.
“We’re attempting to avoid that trauma as much as possible,” Kurtizkes said. “It would be better for patients than intubating them sooner if you could avoid it. For some people, we are able to get them through without needing to intubate them at all.”
3) Putting patients in the prone position
Hospitals have made another important change to their usual standard operating procedure for patients who are having trouble breathing: they should be put into a prone position, meaning they are lying on their stomachs, for a certain amount of time every day.
In many ways, caring for Covid-19 patients is the same as caring for any patients with significant respiratory distress. But prone positioning was a significant change from prior practices.
“That was something that was not done very commonly prior to this epidemic,” Kuritzkes said. “As soon as a few hospitals began reporting positive experiences, it was rapidly picked up.”
The University Health System in San Antonio, one of the first US hospital systems to have a major influx of Covid-19 patients because they took in evacuees from Wuhan and the Diamond Princess cruise ship, told me they quickly learned putting patients in the prone position led to better outcomes.
The science is pretty simple: Blood flow changes depending on how much pressure is being put on the lungs and where the pressure is coming from. Putting a patient on their stomach makes it easier for blood to reach different parts of the lungs and improves lung function. Research is still preliminary, but what’s available does indicate improvements in the blood oxygen levels of Covid-19 patients put in the prone position. (This is also helpful toward the goal of delaying intubation.)
“What you want to do is maximize the amount of blood going to the parts of the lung getting the best aeration,” Kuritzkes said.
It’s not easy to flip a hospitalized patient from their back to their stomach without dislodging all their tubes and drips. It requires a dedicated team. But at this point in the Covid-19 pandemic, hospital staff have much more experience with the process than they did at the beginning.
4) Using dexamethasone and remdesivir
The other piece of the treatment puzzle is the actual medicine. So far, the anti-inflammatory steroid dexamethasone and the antiviral medication remdesivir have proven the most promising and have been adopted by many hospitals across the US and around the world.
“Without question, the advent of remdesivir had a big effect,” Kurtizkes said.
Remdesivir has been shown in studies to help hospitalized Covid-19 patients improve more quickly, as STAT has reported. In one study with patients who had severe cases, they were shown to recover four days faster on remdesivir than patients who were given a placebo. In a different study, patients with mild Covid-19 symptoms were 65 percent more likely to see improvement after being given the drug.
Helping patients recover quickly is important to maintaining hospital capacity and preventing staff from being overwhelmed. It’s not yet clear whether remdesivir actually improves survival among Covid-19 patients, though a preliminary research paper presented at the AIDS 2020 Conference this summer did find lower mortality rates for patients who were given remdesivir.
Dexamethasone has been shown to reduce fatalities in Covid-19 patients with severe symptoms (those who require mechanical ventilation or oxygen support) and so it has also become part of the standard of care for those cases. However, it does not appear to make much of a difference for patients who do not need respiratory support, and doctors are still trying to figure out the best time to administer it.
Because dexamethasone is a steroid, it can have other deleterious effects on a patient’s body, making it more difficult to regulate blood sugar and sometimes leading to high blood pressure. Patients are also more vulnerable to opportunistic infections, Kuritzkes told me.
“You don’t want to give it where the benefits don’t outweigh the potential risks,” he said.
So there is still much to learn. And these are all imperfect measures. A vaccine or a cure would go even further toward reducing the coronavirus’s toll. Improvements in treatment are not a reason to be complacent about social distancing or wearing masks, either.
But heading into the fall, when many experts expect another uptick in Covid-19 cases, doctors are in a much better position to treat their patients than they were in the spring.
Will you become our 20,000th supporter? When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions, we weren’t sure how it would go. Today, we’re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in. The reason is both lovely and surprising: Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it, too. We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy. That’s never been more important than today, during a public health crisis, racial justice protests, a recession, and a presidential election. But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive, and advertising alone won’t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires. Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation, but it will help keep Vox free for all. Contribute today from as little as $3.


vox--2020-08-17--Convention polling bounces, explained

Convention polling bounces, explained

During convention week , a presidential candidate ’ s party gets saturation media coverage , with major speeches being aired in primetime .
The candidate tries to show off an all-star team of supporters , and to broadcast a message that will win the support of voters in crucial states .
That ’ s the main purpose of the conventions in the modern era — not to conduct party business , but to try to swing the election .
So how often do conventions actually make a difference ?
If the question is whether conventions affect the polls in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resounding yes .
In fact , a “ post-convention bounce ” is one of the most consistent and well-documented patterns in presidential polling — most candidates get one , though not all do , and the magnitude varies .
There are , of course , two conventions , and one has to go before the other ( traditionally , the incumbent president ’ s party goes second , which is the case this year ) .
So it ’ s common for the effects of the second convention to quickly dampen or drown @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In the four most recent presidential elections , in fact , the candidate with the second convention emerged with a poll lead that lasted weeks or even a month .
Yet in each of these cycles , polls eventually shifted again — sometimes after the debates , and sometimes after news events .
So the convention season can make an impact on the polls , but it ’ s hardly the last word , particularly as they come with months left in the campaign .
The polls usually move around during convention season @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of presidential polling lore .
In fact , it ’ s quite unusual for a candidate to fail to get a bounce — they usually do , as Geoffrey Skelley writes at FiveThirtyEight .
The obvious explanation would be that , when a party gets to put its preferred message forward ( mostly unanswered ) in four nights of primetime TV coverage , that party ’ s candidate tends to improve in the polls .
However , Columbia University statistics and political science professor Andrew Gelman and others have argued that sudden poll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ phenomenon of “ differential nonresponse ” — that , at certain points in the campaign , supporters of one candidate might be less likely to answer pollsters .
When it comes to the conventions , Democrats may be less likely to respond when Republicans ’ convention is getting all the news coverage , and vice versa .
Whatever the reason , the swings can be dramatic enough to change which candidate is leading polls : • In 2004 , George W. Bush and John Kerry were locked in a tight race in August @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up , Bush surged to around a 6-point lead .
• In 2008 , Barack Obama led John McCain throughout the summer , but McCain took a narrow lead after the early September GOP convention .
• In 2012 , Obama led all year , but Mitt Romney moved into a tie after the late August GOP convention .
Then , though , Obama quickly jumped back into first after Democrats ’ convention the following week .
• And in 2016 , the Republican convention in July put Trump briefly ahead of Clinton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ convention the following week put Clinton back in front .
Now , Biden holds about an 8-point lead in national polls .
He has led Trump in the RealClearPolitics national average all year , though the size of that lead has varied between 4 and 10 percentage points .
He also has leads of 5 to 6 percentage points or more in enough swing states to give him an Electoral College victory with room to spare .
So for Trump to actually surge into the lead in national polls , he ’ d @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
An 8 percentage point convention bounce is not unheard of but , per Skelley , a candidate hasn ’ t gotten such a bump since 2000 .
Is the convention effect more durable than other poll swings ?
It ’ s clear that polls move around a lot during conventions .
However , political scientists Robert Erikson and Christopher Wlezien have made the case that the net effect of convention season can be important .
The immediate post-convention period is chaotic and noisy for polls , but by about two weeks after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more predictive of the eventual outcome , according to their analysis .
So Erikson and Wlezien have argued that , historically , the convention period has usually been more important than subsequent campaign events like debates .
That could theoretically be because of the content of the conventions themselves , but part of it could also be that the election is drawing nearer and people are increasingly making up their minds .
Still , we need to keep in mind that the polls can and do shift once convention season is over — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough ( or if one candidate has an advantage in the Electoral College math ) , such shifts can be decisive .
For instance : • In 2004 , Bush ’ s 6 percentage point post-convention lead over Kerry held at that level for about a month .
It then shrank a bit after the first debate , but Kerry never regained the lead in RealClearPolitics ’ average .
• In 2008 , McCain ’ s small post-convention lead over Obama lasted just two weeks .
But by mid-September , Obama was ahead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worsened , he surged to an eventual 7 percentage point popular vote victory .
• In 2012 , Obama ’ s lead after the conventions wrapped up — about 4 percentage points — proved to be right on target with his eventual popular vote win .
But things got interesting in between , with Romney taking the lead after the first debate and polling staying extremely tight through October .
• And in 2016 , Clinton held a 6 percentage point lead in the month after the convention .
That lead then shrank @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and then shrank again in late October ( particularly after then-FBI Director James Comey released his letter about the Clinton email investigation ) .
Clinton ended up winning the popular vote by 2 points , but , of course , the Electoral College gave Trump the victory .
Overall , polling swings during and after the conventions are common , but the experience of 2016 especially should be a reminder that there ’ s little reason to assume they will matter more than happenings in the more than two months between the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ until then will include debates , intense advertising campaigns in swing states , and unpredictable news developments that could hurt one candidate or the other .
There ’ s a long road ahead , meaning neither candidate can count on post-convention polling boosts to swing the election their way .
Will you become our 20,000th supporter ?
When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions , we weren ’ t sure how it would go .
Today , we ’ re humbled to say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The reason is both lovely and surprising : Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it , too .
We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy .
That ’ s never been more important than today , during a public health crisis , racial justice protests , a recession , and a presidential election .
But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive , and advertising alone won ’ t let us keep creating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ moment requires .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will help keep Vox free for all .
Contribute today from as little as $ 3 .

During convention week, a presidential candidate’s party gets saturation media coverage, with major speeches being aired in primetime. The candidate tries to show off an all-star team of supporters, and to broadcast a message that will win the support of voters in crucial states. That’s the main purpose of the conventions in the modern era — not to conduct party business, but to try to swing the election.
So how often do conventions actually make a difference?
If the question is whether conventions affect the polls in the short term, the answer is a resounding yes. In fact, a “post-convention bounce” is one of the most consistent and well-documented patterns in presidential polling — most candidates get one, though not all do, and the magnitude varies.
There are, of course, two conventions, and one has to go before the other (traditionally, the incumbent president’s party goes second, which is the case this year). So it’s common for the effects of the second convention to quickly dampen or drown out the effects of the first. In the four most recent presidential elections, in fact, the candidate with the second convention emerged with a poll lead that lasted weeks or even a month.
Yet in each of these cycles, polls eventually shifted again — sometimes after the debates, and sometimes after news events. So the convention season can make an impact on the polls, but it’s hardly the last word, particularly as they come with months left in the campaign.
The polls usually move around during convention season
The convention bounce is a well-understood part of presidential polling lore. In fact, it’s quite unusual for a candidate to fail to get a bounce — they usually do, as Geoffrey Skelley writes at FiveThirtyEight.
The obvious explanation would be that, when a party gets to put its preferred message forward (mostly unanswered) in four nights of primetime TV coverage, that party’s candidate tends to improve in the polls.
However, Columbia University statistics and political science professor Andrew Gelman and others have argued that sudden poll swings can often be explained by the phenomenon of “differential nonresponse” — that, at certain points in the campaign, supporters of one candidate might be less likely to answer pollsters. When it comes to the conventions, Democrats may be less likely to respond when Republicans’ convention is getting all the news coverage, and vice versa.
Whatever the reason, the swings can be dramatic enough to change which candidate is leading polls:
In 2004, George W. Bush and John Kerry were locked in a tight race in August, but after the GOP convention wrapped up, Bush surged to around a 6-point lead.
In 2008, Barack Obama led John McCain throughout the summer, but McCain took a narrow lead after the early September GOP convention.
In 2012, Obama led all year, but Mitt Romney moved into a tie after the late August GOP convention. Then, though, Obama quickly jumped back into first after Democrats’ convention the following week.
And in 2016, the Republican convention in July put Trump briefly ahead of Clinton, but once again, Democrats’ convention the following week put Clinton back in front.
Now, Biden holds about an 8-point lead in national polls. He has led Trump in the RealClearPolitics national average all year, though the size of that lead has varied between 4 and 10 percentage points. He also has leads of 5 to 6 percentage points or more in enough swing states to give him an Electoral College victory with room to spare.
So for Trump to actually surge into the lead in national polls, he’d need a very big convention bounce indeed. An 8 percentage point convention bounce is not unheard of but, per Skelley, a candidate hasn’t gotten such a bump since 2000.
Is the convention effect more durable than other poll swings?
It’s clear that polls move around a lot during conventions. However, political scientists Robert Erikson and Christopher Wlezien have made the case that the net effect of convention season can be important.
The immediate post-convention period is chaotic and noisy for polls, but by about two weeks after they’ve concluded, polls become more predictive of the eventual outcome, according to their analysis. So Erikson and Wlezien have argued that, historically, the convention period has usually been more important than subsequent campaign events like debates. That could theoretically be because of the content of the conventions themselves, but part of it could also be that the election is drawing nearer and people are increasingly making up their minds.
Still, we need to keep in mind that the polls can and do shift once convention season is over — and that if the race is close enough (or if one candidate has an advantage in the Electoral College math), such shifts can be decisive. For instance:
In 2004, Bush’s 6 percentage point post-convention lead over Kerry held at that level for about a month. It then shrank a bit after the first debate, but Kerry never regained the lead in RealClearPolitics’ average.
In 2008, McCain’s small post-convention lead over Obama lasted just two weeks. But by mid-September, Obama was ahead again, and as the financial crisis worsened, he surged to an eventual 7 percentage point popular vote victory.
In 2012, Obama’s lead after the conventions wrapped up — about 4 percentage points — proved to be right on target with his eventual popular vote win. But things got interesting in between, with Romney taking the lead after the first debate and polling staying extremely tight through October.
And in 2016, Clinton held a 6 percentage point lead in the month after the convention. That lead then shrank in early September, expanded around mid-October, and then shrank again in late October (particularly after then-FBI Director James Comey released his letter about the Clinton email investigation). Clinton ended up winning the popular vote by 2 points, but, of course, the Electoral College gave Trump the victory.
Overall, polling swings during and after the conventions are common, but the experience of 2016 especially should be a reminder that there’s little reason to assume they will matter more than happenings in the more than two months between the conventions and election day. The time until then will include debates, intense advertising campaigns in swing states, and unpredictable news developments that could hurt one candidate or the other. There’s a long road ahead, meaning neither candidate can count on post-convention polling boosts to swing the election their way.
Will you become our 20,000th supporter? When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions, we weren’t sure how it would go. Today, we’re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in. The reason is both lovely and surprising: Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it, too. We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy. That’s never been more important than today, during a public health crisis, racial justice protests, a recession, and a presidential election. But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive, and advertising alone won’t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires. Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation, but it will help keep Vox free for all. Contribute today from as little as $3.