vox--2020-07-22--This nurse has traveled from hot spot to hot spot during the Covid-19 pandemic

This past April , nurse Jennifer Byrd left her home in Knoxville , Tennessee , to lend a hand in New York City , which was then under siege by the Covid-19 pandemic .
“ I felt like I needed to go and help somewhere where help was actually needed , ” Byrd says .
Byrd , 31 , thought her assignment in a Brooklyn emergency room would be the end of her journey as a traveling nurse during Covid-19 .
That ’ s not what happened : Three months later , she ’ s still on the road .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ work at a testing site in Iowa , where the next closest testing location was more than three hours away .
Now she ’ s working in a critical care unit in Arizona , which is quite a change of pace from the ER .
She spends a lot more time with patients , allowing her to closely monitor their symptoms in case they begin to deteriorate .
“ A lot of patients have definitely been on my heart , ” Byrd says .
Health care professionals from across the country have signed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by traveling to areas where the disease is spiking .
Thousands like Byrd went to New York , the country ’ s original epicenter , early on , and many have since followed suit .
Beyond what they encounter on the front lines of the medical fight , they also have to contend with segments of the population that are eager to move on from the disease , refusing to wear masks and social distance or even doubting the coronavirus really exists .
They know firsthand the deadly costs of such attitudes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ you experience after experience that I ’ ve had in a couple of months , and seeing it firsthand , and people still just don ’ t believe it , ” Byrd says .
“ It ’ s so crazy to me .
Science doesn ’ t lie ; science is real.
” I spoke with Byrd about her experience as a traveling nurse hopping from contract to contract during the pandemic — why she decided to pitch in , what it ’ s been like , and how it has ( and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
She remains hopeful for the future , but not the near future : She ’ s canceled all her vacations for the year , and she thinks you should , too .
And soon after we spoke , Byrd became ill. A Covid-19 test came back negative , but given her symptoms , she ’ s all but certain she has the coronavirus .
She ’ s been asked to quarantine by the hospital .
What follows is a transcript of our conversation , lightly edited and condensed for clarity .
How @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and how did you get into it ?
I ’ m from Knoxville , Tennessee , and I worked on staff for a pediatric hospital at home .
Our business was really low , so they did a voluntary furlough , and I decided to take it back in April — that ’ s when Covid was really big in New York .
I decided since I couldn ’ t do much at my home hospital , I could go somewhere else that needed help .
That ’ s when I took the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ City , because I felt like I needed to go and help somewhere where help was actually needed .
So where have you been so far ?
I ’ ve been to New York City , I worked in Brooklyn in an emergency room .
[ Byrd ’ s contract was supposed to last for eight weeks , but it ended after four as the number of cases and hospitalizations in the city began to decrease . ]
Then I went to Iowa to a testing site , and I ’ m now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ critical care unit .
Every day is completely different .
When I was in New York I was working in the ER , and now in Phoenix , I ’ m working in a critical care inpatient setting , which is a little different for me because I ’ m normally an ER nurse .
One day , your patient might just be on two liters of oxygen , and the next time you come in they ’ re on a breathing machine .
And then with Covid , it ’ s constantly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ give a certain kind of medication , and then a couple days later there ’ s been new research , so we try a different kind of medication or antibiotics .
What was the New York emergency room like ?
It was just crazy .
Our patients up there , they tended not to come into the ER for simple stuff , just because they all wanted to stay out of the hospital because Covid was so rampant .
So by the time they would come in , they were just really , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just to take care of one person .
I was supposed to work 12-hour shifts , but I usually wound up working 14-hour shifts because it was so short-staffed .
And you got to New York when it was getting somewhat better , though , right ?
When I got there around April 20 , it was when things had started to quiet down a little bit .
I was expecting to go there and just be inundated with patients all the time , and we really weren ’ t .
It was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The staff told us , if you were here two or three weeks ago , the main ER that I was in was an 18-bed ER , and they had 30 to 40 patients in there .
So we were there on the downside of it , which was good for them .
We were thrilled to get there and have it not be as busy , because the staff needs a break .
They were exhausted .
And the hospital had several nurses pass away of Covid , or who were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Covid .
So it was nice to know they were finally getting some respite .
And then you went to Iowa ?
What was that like ?
In the state of Iowa , they made it so everyone can get tested regardless of symptoms .
I was the team lead for a site there and in charge of three other nurses , and we worked with the National Guard .
Basically , that was just having cars come through — we would check their ID , get their test kit , swab them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the swab back at the end of the day .
People would get their results back in 72 hours .
That was outside in full PPE for long days , and it was so hot every day .
None of us were used to that .
We were all used to being in a hospital setting .
The site I was at , the next closest site was three and a half hours away , so they were thrilled when we set up in their town and [ they ] could get tested @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one way just to get tested .
Most of the patients were asymptomatic and would say they were getting tested because they had contacts with people who had tested positive .
And we never knew how people had tested until they came back and would say , “ Oh , I was here last week , and I tested positive.
” We were up close with positives , and we had no idea — because of how this disease is , people can be totally asymptomatic .
And so now you ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spike in cases recently .
The unit I ’ m on is a step-down critical care unit , so we don ’ t have patients on ventilators , they ’ re in the ICU .
But we do have patients who are on BiPAPs or high-flow oxygen [ machines to help with breathing ] .
The people here , they ’ re pretty sick — they come in and either quickly end up on oxygen or on a ventilator .
Most of the patients that I ’ ve had have been in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the beginning of July .
Most don ’ t come in , are here for two days , and then go home .
Most are here for a little while because they need oxygen , they need medication .
We have people on blood thinners , on plasma , on remdesivir [ a drug approved to treat Covid-19 ] .
They ’ re doing trial medications out here , which is pretty interesting to see .
In all this time traveling around , what ’ s scared you ?
“ One minute she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ minutes later we were doing CPR on her and we lost her ” How young the patients are .
A lot of non-medical people that I talk to assume it ’ s older people , it ’ s people that are diabetic , that have COPD [ chronic obstructive pulmonary disease ] or severe asthma that are getting sick .
And that ’ s not the case at all .
I had a patient in New York who was Covid-positive , and we lost her .
One minute she was talking to us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing CPR on her and we lost her .
She was younger than I was , with no medical problems .
The virus doesn ’ t care how old you are .
It doesn ’ t care how healthy you are .
And that ’ s one thing that really scares me for my friends and family .
What are the obstacles you face when you join a new hospital ?
What ’ s it like ?
One of the first things I ask when I interview at a hospital is , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because PPE shortages have been a problem area .
In New York , Iowa , and Arizona I ’ ve had plenty of PPE , but I do bring a lot of my own .
I have my own respirator .
I have my own N95 masks that I bring just in case .
That ’ s one thing I always worry about : Do they have enough stuff to keep me safe ?
I have to learn each hospital and how they do things , because every hospital is different .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ m used to having patients for a very short time , and then they go to the floor or they go home .
In Arizona , where I ’ m in the critical care unit , I have the same patients all night , and figuring that out has been a bit of a challenge .
You ’ re checking on them regularly and their medications , and you keep an eye on them to see if they deteriorate and notify a doctor .
With Covid , they can deteriorate so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up on the subtlest changes — a heart rate going up 20 points , or a temperature going up a degree or two .
That can all be fine , but it can lead to a patient going septic .
It ’ s more intense .
I ’ m more aware , and I ’ m getting to know my patients better .
When I ’ m in the ER setting , a lot of the time I don ’ t get to know them because I don ’ t have them very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve had them for three nights in a row for 12 hours .
A lot of patients have definitely been on my heart .
Emotionally , this job in Phoenix is a lot harder than my job in New York because I ’ m getting to know my patients and their history so much more .
I had one patient who was upset about financial issues , and usually I don ’ t find out about those sorts of things — but here , because of taking care of them for several days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worried financially about being cared for , which as a nurse , I don ’ t care if he can pay or not .
I just want you taken care of , I just want to take care of you the best I can .
So to see somebody stressed out and upset about financials , it bothers me .
On the other side of that , most patients aren ’ t allowed visitors in the hospital — they ’ re only allowed if it ’ s an end-of-life situation , and then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my patients this week hadn ’ t seen his wife or daughter since he ’ d been in the hospital , and he had been in the hospital for several weeks .
He was in the ICU and got moved down to my unit , and his daughter called to talk to me and check on him .
And I asked , well , have you seen your dad ?
And she said she hadn ’ t been able to see him or talk to him .
And I said , well , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So I got his cellphone and we planned a time , and I was able to FaceTime his daughter and his wife from his phone .
We FaceTimed for about 30 minutes , and they were all so thankful for that .
The little things that bring happy moments make this job just so much more worth it .
There are a lot of hard times , but there are happy times too .
Are you surprised at how the pandemic has played out here , with cases rising across the country ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ d still be doing when you started three months ago ?
No , no .
Honestly , I expected to go to New York , go home , and go back to my staff job .
I did not expect to be doing back-to-back Covid assignments .
I didn ’ t ever think it would get this far .
Do you have to deal with people who think this isn ’ t real ?
“ I can sit here and tell you experience after experience that I ’ ve had ... and people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” All the time .
When I ’ m on Facebook and most news sites , I have had to stop reading comments because I just get so angry at people .
On Facebook I ’ ve unfriended people , including family , because they don ’ t understand it .
They don ’ t want to wear their masks , or they want to wear it looped around one ear and say they ’ re wearing a mask when it ’ s looped around their face .
And it ’ s just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tell you experience after experience that I ’ ve had in a couple of months , and seeing it firsthand , and people still just don ’ t believe it .
It ’ s so crazy to me .
Science doesn ’ t lie ; science is real .
I ’ ve had to deal with people that tell me it ’ s not real , it ’ s fake , it ’ s just the flu .
It ’ s so much more than that .
Yes , some people have very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other people who are 20 years old and on ventilators , and they may not come off of that ventilator .
There ’ s so much science , and people just don ’ t believe it .
It kills me .
Do you have a sense of when you ’ ll stop ?
I ’ m scheduled to go back to my staff job on September 1 , so this should be my last contract .
However , things can change at any time .
I ’ ve actually really enjoyed traveling , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might start traveling full-time .
I miss my family , I miss my dogs , so I ’ m probably going to go back home for a couple of months and rest , and go back to my staff job .
It ’ s been a lot , emotionally and mentally , traveling so much and seeing everything that I have , so I need a break .
I need to go back to my wife and our dogs and kind of rest and recoup .
How have the hospitals and communities treated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Everyone is so thankful , I think , that people are choosing to come and help them , because they ’ re just so happy to get extra help .
Are you hopeful about the future and what happens with the pandemic ?
I am because I ’ m a hopeful person .
I ’ m hoping that as we continue to learn more , more people will take it seriously and the experts will be taken more seriously .
I am hopeful that it will get better .
“ Our first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve never finished ” However , for most other countries , their first wave is over .
Our first wave is not over ; we ’ ve never finished .
And [ experts ] say there ’ s going to be a second wave , and the second wave is going to be even worse .
If we do get that second wave that ’ s worse , I can only imagine what it ’ s going to be like .
I ’ m hopeful that eventually it ’ s going to get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be a long time before we get to that point .
Even if we get a vaccine , the problem with that is going to be , is it affordable ?
Can everybody afford it , or is it just certain people who can ?
And is it going to work ?
It ’ s such a new virus , and we don ’ t have tons of research on it yet .
As someone who ’ s traveling around taking care of people in this pandemic , is there anything else @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
That it ’ s real , it ’ s not fake .
That ’ s my main thing .
And then practice hand-washing and social distancing .
Stay home .
As the weather has warmed up , I see people that are going on vacation because they ’ ve been cooped up , saying , “ Hey , I ’ m going to Florida , but it ’ s okay , I ’ m going to stay in my condo.
” I ’ ve already canceled a cruise , a trip to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ canceled two vacations ; I ’ m going to cancel my beach trip in August .
It ’ s just too soon .
Cases are spiking everywhere , and it ’ s too soon for anyone to be out traveling .
Stay at home to protect not just yourself but to protect your friends , your family , your neighbors .
It ’ s not just you that you ’ re keeping safe .
It ’ s your community .
I mean , if anyone deserves vacation , it ’ s you .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and I ’ ve just been sitting on my couch for months .
I love vacation .
I would love nothing more than to be laying on a beach right now .
But it ’ s too soon .
Not yet .
I think next year is going to be my year of vacations .
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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — 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 .

This past April, nurse Jennifer Byrd left her home in Knoxville, Tennessee, to lend a hand in New York City, which was then under siege by the Covid-19 pandemic. “I felt like I needed to go and help somewhere where help was actually needed,” Byrd says.
Byrd, 31, thought her assignment in a Brooklyn emergency room would be the end of her journey as a traveling nurse during Covid-19. That’s not what happened: Three months later, she’s still on the road. After New York, she went to work at a testing site in Iowa, where the next closest testing location was more than three hours away. Now she’s working in a critical care unit in Arizona, which is quite a change of pace from the ER. She spends a lot more time with patients, allowing her to closely monitor their symptoms in case they begin to deteriorate.
“A lot of patients have definitely been on my heart,” Byrd says.
Health care professionals from across the country have signed up to help during the Covid-19 pandemic by traveling to areas where the disease is spiking. Thousands like Byrd went to New York, the country’s original epicenter, early on, and many have since followed suit. Beyond what they encounter on the front lines of the medical fight, they also have to contend with segments of the population that are eager to move on from the disease, refusing to wear masks and social distance or even doubting the coronavirus really exists. They know firsthand the deadly costs of such attitudes.
“I can sit here and tell you experience after experience that I’ve had in a couple of months, and seeing it firsthand, and people still just don’t believe it,” Byrd says. “It’s so crazy to me. Science doesn’t lie; science is real.”
I spoke with Byrd about her experience as a traveling nurse hopping from contract to contract during the pandemic — why she decided to pitch in, what it’s been like, and how it has (and hasn’t) matched her expectations. She remains hopeful for the future, but not the near future: She’s canceled all her vacations for the year, and she thinks you should, too.
And soon after we spoke, Byrd became ill. A Covid-19 test came back negative, but given her symptoms, she’s all but certain she has the coronavirus. She’s been asked to quarantine by the hospital.
What follows is a transcript of our conversation, lightly edited and condensed for clarity.
Emily Stewart
How long have you been doing this, and how did you get into it?
Jennifer Byrd
I’m from Knoxville, Tennessee, and I worked on staff for a pediatric hospital at home. Our business was really low, so they did a voluntary furlough, and I decided to take it back in April — that’s when Covid was really big in New York. I decided since I couldn’t do much at my home hospital, I could go somewhere else that needed help.
That’s when I took the travel assignment and went to New York City, because I felt like I needed to go and help somewhere where help was actually needed.
Emily Stewart
So where have you been so far?
Jennifer Byrd
I’ve been to New York City, I worked in Brooklyn in an emergency room. [Byrd’s contract was supposed to last for eight weeks, but it ended after four as the number of cases and hospitalizations in the city began to decrease.] Then I went to Iowa to a testing site, and I’m now in Phoenix doing nursing work in a critical care unit.
Emily Stewart
What’s the work like?
Jennifer Byrd
“Every day is completely different”
Every day is completely different. When I was in New York I was working in the ER, and now in Phoenix, I’m working in a critical care inpatient setting, which is a little different for me because I’m normally an ER nurse. One day, your patient might just be on two liters of oxygen, and the next time you come in they’re on a breathing machine.
And then with Covid, it’s constantly evolving. One day we’ll give a certain kind of medication, and then a couple days later there’s been new research, so we try a different kind of medication or antibiotics.
Emily Stewart
What was the New York emergency room like?
Jennifer Byrd
It was just crazy. Our patients up there, they tended not to come into the ER for simple stuff, just because they all wanted to stay out of the hospital because Covid was so rampant. So by the time they would come in, they were just really, really sick and would require multiple nurses just to take care of one person. I was supposed to work 12-hour shifts, but I usually wound up working 14-hour shifts because it was so short-staffed.
Emily Stewart
And you got to New York when it was getting somewhat better, though, right?
Jennifer Byrd
When I got there around April 20, it was when things had started to quiet down a little bit. I was expecting to go there and just be inundated with patients all the time, and we really weren’t. It was fewer patients, but they were sicker. The staff told us, if you were here two or three weeks ago, the main ER that I was in was an 18-bed ER, and they had 30 to 40 patients in there.
So we were there on the downside of it, which was good for them. We were thrilled to get there and have it not be as busy, because the staff needs a break. They were exhausted. And the hospital had several nurses pass away of Covid, or who were out for weeks at a time with Covid. So it was nice to know they were finally getting some respite.
Emily Stewart
And then you went to Iowa? What was that like?
Jennifer Byrd
In the state of Iowa, they made it so everyone can get tested regardless of symptoms. I was the team lead for a site there and in charge of three other nurses, and we worked with the National Guard. Basically, that was just having cars come through — we would check their ID, get their test kit, swab them, and then we’d send the swab back at the end of the day. People would get their results back in 72 hours. That was outside in full PPE for long days, and it was so hot every day. None of us were used to that. We were all used to being in a hospital setting.
The site I was at, the next closest site was three and a half hours away, so they were thrilled when we set up in their town and [they] could get tested. We had people driving two hours one way just to get tested.
Most of the patients were asymptomatic and would say they were getting tested because they had contacts with people who had tested positive. And we never knew how people had tested until they came back and would say, “Oh, I was here last week, and I tested positive.” We were up close with positives, and we had no idea — because of how this disease is, people can be totally asymptomatic.
Emily Stewart
And so now you’re in Arizona, which has had a spike in cases recently.
Jennifer Byrd
The unit I’m on is a step-down critical care unit, so we don’t have patients on ventilators, they’re in the ICU. But we do have patients who are on BiPAPs or high-flow oxygen [machines to help with breathing]. The people here, they’re pretty sick — they come in and either quickly end up on oxygen or on a ventilator.
Most of the patients that I’ve had have been in the hospital since the end of June or the beginning of July. Most don’t come in, are here for two days, and then go home. Most are here for a little while because they need oxygen, they need medication. We have people on blood thinners, on plasma, on remdesivir [a drug approved to treat Covid-19]. They’re doing trial medications out here, which is pretty interesting to see.
Emily Stewart
In all this time traveling around, what’s scared you?
Jennifer Byrd
“One minute she was talking to us, and 30 minutes later we were doing CPR on her and we lost her”
How young the patients are. A lot of non-medical people that I talk to assume it’s older people, it’s people that are diabetic, that have COPD [chronic obstructive pulmonary disease] or severe asthma that are getting sick. And that’s not the case at all. I had a patient in New York who was Covid-positive, and we lost her. One minute she was talking to us, and 30 minutes later we were doing CPR on her and we lost her. She was younger than I was, with no medical problems.
The virus doesn’t care how old you are. It doesn’t care how healthy you are. And that’s one thing that really scares me for my friends and family.
Emily Stewart
What are the obstacles you face when you join a new hospital? What’s it like?
Jennifer Byrd
One of the first things I ask when I interview at a hospital is, “How’s your PPE?” because PPE shortages have been a problem area. In New York, Iowa, and Arizona I’ve had plenty of PPE, but I do bring a lot of my own. I have my own respirator. I have my own N95 masks that I bring just in case. That’s one thing I always worry about: Do they have enough stuff to keep me safe?
I have to learn each hospital and how they do things, because every hospital is different. I normally work in an ER, so I’m used to having patients for a very short time, and then they go to the floor or they go home. In Arizona, where I’m in the critical care unit, I have the same patients all night, and figuring that out has been a bit of a challenge. You’re checking on them regularly and their medications, and you keep an eye on them to see if they deteriorate and notify a doctor. With Covid, they can deteriorate so quickly, so you have to pick up on the subtlest changes — a heart rate going up 20 points, or a temperature going up a degree or two. That can all be fine, but it can lead to a patient going septic.
It’s more intense. I’m more aware, and I’m getting to know my patients better. When I’m in the ER setting, a lot of the time I don’t get to know them because I don’t have them very long — and here, I’ve had them for three nights in a row for 12 hours.
A lot of patients have definitely been on my heart. Emotionally, this job in Phoenix is a lot harder than my job in New York because I’m getting to know my patients and their history so much more. I had one patient who was upset about financial issues, and usually I don’t find out about those sorts of things — but here, because of taking care of them for several days, I did. He was so worried financially about being cared for, which as a nurse, I don’t care if he can pay or not. I just want you taken care of, I just want to take care of you the best I can. So to see somebody stressed out and upset about financials, it bothers me.
On the other side of that, most patients aren’t allowed visitors in the hospital — they’re only allowed if it’s an end-of-life situation, and then usually just one person. One of my patients this week hadn’t seen his wife or daughter since he’d been in the hospital, and he had been in the hospital for several weeks. He was in the ICU and got moved down to my unit, and his daughter called to talk to me and check on him. And I asked, well, have you seen your dad? And she said she hadn’t been able to see him or talk to him. And I said, well, if you want to FaceTime him. So I got his cellphone and we planned a time, and I was able to FaceTime his daughter and his wife from his phone. We FaceTimed for about 30 minutes, and they were all so thankful for that.
The little things that bring happy moments make this job just so much more worth it. There are a lot of hard times, but there are happy times too.
Emily Stewart
Are you surprised at how the pandemic has played out here, with cases rising across the country? Is this what you thought you’d still be doing when you started three months ago?
Jennifer Byrd
No, no. Honestly, I expected to go to New York, go home, and go back to my staff job. I did not expect to be doing back-to-back Covid assignments. I didn’t ever think it would get this far.
Emily Stewart
Do you have to deal with people who think this isn’t real?
Jennifer Byrd
“I can sit here and tell you experience after experience that I’ve had ... and people still just don’t believe it”
All the time. When I’m on Facebook and most news sites, I have had to stop reading comments because I just get so angry at people. On Facebook I’ve unfriended people, including family, because they don’t understand it. They don’t want to wear their masks, or they want to wear it looped around one ear and say they’re wearing a mask when it’s looped around their face. And it’s just like, I can sit here and tell you experience after experience that I’ve had in a couple of months, and seeing it firsthand, and people still just don’t believe it.
It’s so crazy to me. Science doesn’t lie; science is real. I’ve had to deal with people that tell me it’s not real, it’s fake, it’s just the flu. It’s so much more than that. Yes, some people have very minor symptoms, but then there are other people who are 20 years old and on ventilators, and they may not come off of that ventilator. There’s so much science, and people just don’t believe it. It kills me.
Emily Stewart
Do you have a sense of when you’ll stop?
Jennifer Byrd
I’m scheduled to go back to my staff job on September 1, so this should be my last contract. However, things can change at any time. I’ve actually really enjoyed traveling, so I’m thinking eventually I might start traveling full-time. I miss my family, I miss my dogs, so I’m probably going to go back home for a couple of months and rest, and go back to my staff job. It’s been a lot, emotionally and mentally, traveling so much and seeing everything that I have, so I need a break. I need to go back to my wife and our dogs and kind of rest and recoup.
Emily Stewart
How have the hospitals and communities treated you?
Jennifer Byrd
They’ve been amazing. Everyone is so thankful, I think, that people are choosing to come and help them, because they’re just so happy to get extra help.
Emily Stewart
Are you hopeful about the future and what happens with the pandemic?
Jennifer Byrd
I am because I’m a hopeful person. I’m hoping that as we continue to learn more, more people will take it seriously and the experts will be taken more seriously. I am hopeful that it will get better.
“Our first wave is not over; we’ve never finished”
However, for most other countries, their first wave is over. Our first wave is not over; we’ve never finished. And [experts] say there’s going to be a second wave, and the second wave is going to be even worse. If we do get that second wave that’s worse, I can only imagine what it’s going to be like. I’m hopeful that eventually it’s going to get better, but it’s going to be a long time before we get to that point.
Even if we get a vaccine, the problem with that is going to be, is it affordable? Can everybody afford it, or is it just certain people who can? And is it going to work? It’s such a new virus, and we don’t have tons of research on it yet.
Emily Stewart
As someone who’s traveling around taking care of people in this pandemic, is there anything else you’d want people to know?
Jennifer Byrd
That it’s real, it’s not fake. That’s my main thing. And then practice hand-washing and social distancing. Stay home. As the weather has warmed up, I see people that are going on vacation because they’ve been cooped up, saying, “Hey, I’m going to Florida, but it’s okay, I’m going to stay in my condo.”
I’ve already canceled a cruise, a trip to Disney World. I’ve already canceled two vacations; I’m going to cancel my beach trip in August. It’s just too soon. Cases are spiking everywhere, and it’s too soon for anyone to be out traveling.
Stay at home to protect not just yourself but to protect your friends, your family, your neighbors. It’s not just you that you’re keeping safe. It’s your community.
Emily Stewart
I mean, if anyone deserves vacation, it’s you. I want to go on vacation, and I’ve just been sitting on my couch for months.
Jennifer Byrd
I love vacation. I would love nothing more than to be laying on a beach right now. But it’s too soon. Not yet. I think next year is going to be my year of vacations.


vox--2020-07-22--What Republicans and Democrats want in the next stimulus package

Congress doesn ’ t have much time as it weighs a compromise over the next phase of coronavirus stimulus .
With expanded unemployment insurance benefits sunsetting after July 31 , lawmakers are under immense pressure to approve an extension — along with a number of other stimulus provisions — before 33 million people find themselves without the federal money they have relied on for months to pay their bills .
Republicans and Democrats are on track to begin negotiating a new stimulus bill in earnest , although the parties are currently quite far apart : Democrats are prioritizing the extension @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and additional funding for state and local governments , having laid out many of their top priorities in a $ 3 trillion bill in May .
Republicans , meanwhile , are expected to release their plan later this week and have signaled that they ’ re particularly interested in providing liability protections for businesses and other entities and reducing the amount of expanded UI , which currently provides unemployed people with an additional $ 600 per week on top of their state unemployment payments .
On Monday , Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin announced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 trillion in aid , a number that remains in flux and is sure to be hashed out in more detail in the coming days .
“ What we see as the focus is kids and jobs , ” Mnuchin said during a meeting with President Donald Trump , Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell , and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy .
“ We ’ ve said the No .
1 issue is we have to finish the technical fix on enhanced unemployment.
” ( Republicans have repeatedly expressed concern that the current @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work because it made some workers ’ unemployment payments higher than the wages they made . )
Further complicating the GOP position is dissent between Republican lawmakers and the White House on key policies including a payroll tax cut , which Trump has repeatedly pushed since the start of the pandemic .
The two parties have a tight timeline in which to turn around the next stimulus package .
Finding a compromise , however , is looking tougher than with prior coronavirus-related bills given the slew of divergent priorities between them .
What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want Democrat and Republican lawmakers met Tuesday afternoon to kick off talks about the new stimulus , a proposal on which they currently differ significantly .
The Democrats ’ HEROES Act , which was passed by the House in May , is a massive $ 3 trillion plan that includes more than $ 900 billion in funding for states and cities , as well as an extension of expanded UI until January 2021 .
Republicans , meanwhile , have indicated that they plan to unveil a roughly $ 1 trillion bill ; they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state and local funding , a stance that Democrats — and some Republican mayors and governors — have criticized .
“ Unfortunately , by all accounts the Senate Republicans are drafting legislation that comes up short in a number of vital areas , ” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer wrote in a “ Dear Colleague ” letter earlier this week .
GOP lawmakers and the White House , too , are still grappling with disagreements over the inclusion of both a payroll tax cut and funding for testing and contact tracing , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s a broad look at where Republicans and Democrats currently overlap and some provisions where they still differ .
• A second stimulus check : Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have announced support for another wave of direct payments to Americans , though it remains unclear whether the income threshold for receiving them will change .
“ We want another round of direct payments , ” McConnell said in a floor speech Tuesday .
Through the CARES Act , which was signed into law in March , most adults who made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ AGI ) of $ 75,000 annually were eligible to receive a $ 1,200 check , along with an additional $ 500 payment per qualifying child .
Payments were cut off for individuals who had an AGI of more than $ 99,000 .
In the HEROES Act , Democrats proposed that individuals receive up to $ 1,200 per dependent , capped at three dependents .
Republicans , meanwhile , have floated reducing the income threshold for direct payments to $ 40,000 , which means the checks would go out to a much smaller group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Funding for coronavirus vaccine development , testing , and treatment : There ’ s bipartisan interest in additional funding for coronavirus testing and treatment , though Republicans still need to sort out pushback from the White House on this front , CNBC reported July 18 .
Reducing coronavirus cases is of the utmost importance for any economic recovery since many businesses and industries have had to reduce operations ( and lay off workers as a result ) as part of efforts to limit the spread of the virus .
“ The key to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ involves bringing Covid-19 under control , and only then can we start to think about workers returning to work en masse , ” said Damon Jones , an associate professor at the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy .
Democrats and Republicans will likely have to negotiate on the final funding amount .
According to the New York Times , Republicans were interested in allocating $ 25 billion to states for testing and contact tracing , $ 10 billion in additional funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Institutes of Health .
In the HEROES Act , Democrats designated $ 75 billion for testing and contact tracing .
• Funding for schools : Both Republicans and Democrats have placed major emphasis on providing schools with the funding they need to reopen , though each party is set to propose its own amount and approach .
McConnell announced Tuesday that Republicans are interested in allocating $ 105 billion for schools , while House Democrats previously proposed $ 100 billion .
Senate Democrats , meanwhile , have introduced a $ 430 billion package @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cares , schools , and higher education institutions .
The Trump administration has said it could be interested in tying funds to schools ’ decision to reopen their physical locations , a limitation that Democrats and some congressional Republicans have been wary of supporting due to public health concerns .
“ These decisions may have to be made locally because of the rate of infection in certain areas , but they have to be made scientifically , ” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Monday during an appearance on Morning Joe .
• More @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrats are both interested in more support for small businesses , many of which have already seen the funds they previously obtained via the Paycheck Protection Program ( PPP ) run out .
Republicans say they ’ d like to do another wave of PPP that better targets the businesses that are struggling the most to stay afloat .
Democrats , too , have argued for targeted funding that reaches underrepresented business owners , particularly people of color and women .
• A “ fix ” for unemployment insurance : The current UI @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 600 to the weekly amount that recipients get from states , and Republicans have long been interested in either eliminating or reducing the extra money because they see it as deterring people from returning to work .
Their critique overlooks the current reality of the pandemic : Right now , the UI is helping people stay home in order to protect themselves and others from the coronavirus .
Additionally , the Republicans ’ view doesn ’ t acknowledge the fact that many jobs that have been lost aren ’ t coming back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could be an interesting time for that discussion when jobs are actually available , ” said Heidi Shierholz , senior economist and policy director at the Economic Policy Institute .
“ But right now that discussion just rings so false and ideological.
” Republicans are expected to push for a reduction in the expanded UI amount , and Mnuchin previously floated the idea of allocating funds that more closely match an unemployed person ’ s previous wages .
• Liability protections for businesses : Republicans have also repeatedly said that one of their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other entities are protected from coronavirus-related lawsuits that emerge from customers and employees .
“ One helpful policy would be strong legal protection for schools , colleges , nonprofits , and employers who are putting their necks on the line to reopen , ” McConnell said in a June floor speech .
“ So long as institutions follow the best available guidelines , they should not have to live in fear of a second epidemic of frivolous lawsuits.
” • Extension of expanded unemployment insurance : Democrats have called for an extension of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ January 2021 , arguing that it ’ s playing an important role in tiding workers over while policymakers work to address the pandemic .
Economists note that UI is helping workers cover vital living costs such as rent and food , and warn that curbing the benefits could result in steep declines in consumer spending and lead to even more job losses .
• Funding for state and local governments : There ’ s been a recurring push from Democrats for more state funding , which Republicans have been more reluctant to consider @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has reported , states are suffering from declines in sales tax revenue and rising costs related to addressing public health needs during the pandemic .
In the CARES Act , lawmakers allocated $ 150 billion to help states deal with this surge in coronavirus-related costs , but that amount was far from enough to cover the more expansive budget shortfalls many now face .
In the HEROES Act , Democrats proposed $ 500 billion for states , $ 375 billion for local governments , $ 20 billion for tribal communities , and another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rico , Guam , and the US Virgin Islands .
But Republicans have warned against giving states funds that they say are being used to address financial issues that existed prior to the pandemic .
Talks are slated to continue in the coming weeks Lawmakers are , once again , working down to the wire on the next package , given both the July 31 UI deadline and their planned recess that begins August 10 .
McConnell said that Republicans will introduce their bill later this week , with plans to use the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for negotiations .
Some of the chief points of contention are likely to be next steps on UI , as well as support for state and local governments , both of which are areas where Democrats and Republicans have long been at an impasse .
The fight over school funding , too , is set to focus heavily on how the money can best be used to protect teachers and students so schools can reopen safely .
Both parties will need to make concessions in order for any package to move forward .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ least seven Democrats to back a stimulus bill to get it through the Senate , and no bill will be able to make it through the House of Representatives without the support of most Democrats in that chamber .
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 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — 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 .

Congress doesn’t have much time as it weighs a compromise over the next phase of coronavirus stimulus.
With expanded unemployment insurance benefits sunsetting after July 31, lawmakers are under immense pressure to approve an extension — along with a number of other stimulus provisions — before 33 million people find themselves without the federal money they have relied on for months to pay their bills.
Republicans and Democrats are on track to begin negotiating a new stimulus bill in earnest, although the parties are currently quite far apart: Democrats are prioritizing the extension of expanded unemployment insurance (UI) and additional funding for state and local governments, having laid out many of their top priorities in a $3 trillion bill in May. Republicans, meanwhile, are expected to release their plan later this week and have signaled that they’re particularly interested in providing liability protections for businesses and other entities and reducing the amount of expanded UI, which currently provides unemployed people with an additional $600 per week on top of their state unemployment payments.
On Monday, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin announced that the GOP plan would recommend $1 trillion in aid, a number that remains in flux and is sure to be hashed out in more detail in the coming days.
“What we see as the focus is kids and jobs,” Mnuchin said during a meeting with President Donald Trump, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. “We’ve said the No. 1 issue is we have to finish the technical fix on enhanced unemployment.” (Republicans have repeatedly expressed concern that the current UI expansion deters people from returning to work because it made some workers’ unemployment payments higher than the wages they made.)
Further complicating the GOP position is dissent between Republican lawmakers and the White House on key policies including a payroll tax cut, which Trump has repeatedly pushed since the start of the pandemic.
The two parties have a tight timeline in which to turn around the next stimulus package. Finding a compromise, however, is looking tougher than with prior coronavirus-related bills given the slew of divergent priorities between them.
What we know about what Republicans and Democrats want
Democrat and Republican lawmakers met Tuesday afternoon to kick off talks about the new stimulus, a proposal on which they currently differ significantly.
The Democrats’ HEROES Act, which was passed by the House in May, is a massive $3 trillion plan that includes more than $900 billion in funding for states and cities, as well as an extension of expanded UI until January 2021. Republicans, meanwhile, have indicated that they plan to unveil a roughly $1 trillion bill; they’ve also shied away from supporting state and local funding, a stance that Democrats — and some Republican mayors and governors — have criticized.
“Unfortunately, by all accounts the Senate Republicans are drafting legislation that comes up short in a number of vital areas,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer wrote in a “Dear Colleague” letter earlier this week.
GOP lawmakers and the White House, too, are still grappling with disagreements over the inclusion of both a payroll tax cut and funding for testing and contact tracing, the Washington Post reported Tuesday.
Here’s a broad look at where Republicans and Democrats currently overlap and some provisions where they still differ.
Areas where Republicans and Democrats agree
A second stimulus check: Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have announced support for another wave of direct payments to Americans, though it remains unclear whether the income threshold for receiving them will change.
“We want another round of direct payments,” McConnell said in a floor speech Tuesday.
Through the CARES Act, which was signed into law in March, most adults who made less than an adjusted gross income (AGI) of $75,000 annually were eligible to receive a $1,200 check, along with an additional $500 payment per qualifying child. Payments were cut off for individuals who had an AGI of more than $99,000.
In the HEROES Act, Democrats proposed that individuals receive up to $1,200 per dependent, capped at three dependents. Republicans, meanwhile, have floated reducing the income threshold for direct payments to $40,000, which means the checks would go out to a much smaller group of people this time around.
Funding for coronavirus vaccine development, testing, and treatment: There’s bipartisan interest in additional funding for coronavirus testing and treatment, though Republicans still need to sort out pushback from the White House on this front, CNBC reported July 18.
Reducing coronavirus cases is of the utmost importance for any economic recovery since many businesses and industries have had to reduce operations (and lay off workers as a result) as part of efforts to limit the spread of the virus.
“The key to returning the economy to business as usual involves bringing Covid-19 under control, and only then can we start to think about workers returning to work en masse,” said Damon Jones, an associate professor at the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy.
Democrats and Republicans will likely have to negotiate on the final funding amount. According to the New York Times, Republicans were interested in allocating $25 billion to states for testing and contact tracing, $10 billion in additional funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and $15 billion to the National Institutes of Health. In the HEROES Act, Democrats designated $75 billion for testing and contact tracing.
Funding for schools: Both Republicans and Democrats have placed major emphasis on providing schools with the funding they need to reopen, though each party is set to propose its own amount and approach.
McConnell announced Tuesday that Republicans are interested in allocating $105 billion for schools, while House Democrats previously proposed $100 billion. Senate Democrats, meanwhile, have introduced a $430 billion package that would also provide funds for day cares, schools, and higher education institutions.
The Trump administration has said it could be interested in tying funds to schools’ decision to reopen their physical locations, a limitation that Democrats and some congressional Republicans have been wary of supporting due to public health concerns.
“These decisions may have to be made locally because of the rate of infection in certain areas, but they have to be made scientifically,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Monday during an appearance on Morning Joe.
More money for small businesses: Republicans and Democrats are both interested in more support for small businesses, many of which have already seen the funds they previously obtained via the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) run out.
Republicans say they’d like to do another wave of PPP that better targets the businesses that are struggling the most to stay afloat. Democrats, too, have argued for targeted funding that reaches underrepresented business owners, particularly people of color and women.
What Republicans want
A “fix” for unemployment insurance: The current UI expansion in the CARES Act adds another $600 to the weekly amount that recipients get from states, and Republicans have long been interested in either eliminating or reducing the extra money because they see it as deterring people from returning to work.
Their critique overlooks the current reality of the pandemic: Right now, the UI is helping people stay home in order to protect themselves and others from the coronavirus. Additionally, the Republicans’ view doesn’t acknowledge the fact that many jobs that have been lost aren’t coming back in the near term.
“There could be an interesting time for that discussion when jobs are actually available,” said Heidi Shierholz, senior economist and policy director at the Economic Policy Institute. “But right now that discussion just rings so false and ideological.”
Republicans are expected to push for a reduction in the expanded UI amount, and Mnuchin previously floated the idea of allocating funds that more closely match an unemployed person’s previous wages.
Liability protections for businesses: Republicans have also repeatedly said that one of their chief goals is ensuring that businesses and other entities are protected from coronavirus-related lawsuits that emerge from customers and employees.
“One helpful policy would be strong legal protection for schools, colleges, nonprofits, and employers who are putting their necks on the line to reopen,” McConnell said in a June floor speech. “So long as institutions follow the best available guidelines, they should not have to live in fear of a second epidemic of frivolous lawsuits.”
What Democrats want
Extension of expanded unemployment insurance: Democrats have called for an extension of the CARES Act’s UI until January 2021, arguing that it’s playing an important role in tiding workers over while policymakers work to address the pandemic.
Economists note that UI is helping workers cover vital living costs such as rent and food, and warn that curbing the benefits could result in steep declines in consumer spending and lead to even more job losses.
Funding for state and local governments: There’s been a recurring push from Democrats for more state funding, which Republicans have been more reluctant to consider.
As Vox’s Emily Stewart has reported, states are suffering from declines in sales tax revenue and rising costs related to addressing public health needs during the pandemic.
In the CARES Act, lawmakers allocated $150 billion to help states deal with this surge in coronavirus-related costs, but that amount was far from enough to cover the more expansive budget shortfalls many now face.
In the HEROES Act, Democrats proposed $500 billion for states, $375 billion for local governments, $20 billion for tribal communities, and another $20 billion for territories including Puerto Rico, Guam, and the US Virgin Islands. But Republicans have warned against giving states funds that they say are being used to address financial issues that existed prior to the pandemic.
Talks are slated to continue in the coming weeks
Lawmakers are, once again, working down to the wire on the next package, given both the July 31 UI deadline and their planned recess that begins August 10. McConnell said that Republicans will introduce their bill later this week, with plans to use the legislation as a “starting point” for negotiations.
Some of the chief points of contention are likely to be next steps on UI, as well as support for state and local governments, both of which are areas where Democrats and Republicans have long been at an impasse. The fight over school funding, too, is set to focus heavily on how the money can best be used to protect teachers and students so schools can reopen safely.
Both parties will need to make concessions in order for any package to move forward. The 53 Senate Republicans will need at least seven Democrats to back a stimulus bill to get it through the Senate, and no bill will be able to make it through the House of Representatives without the support of most Democrats in that chamber.


vox--2020-07-22--House Democrats passed a bill to repeal Trump’s travel bans

Even amid the pandemic , House Democrats are keeping a focus on President Donald Trump ’ s immigration agenda : They passed a bill on Wednesday that would repeal the travel ban on citizens of 13 countries and limit his authority to issue such sweeping bans in the future .
The bill — the No Ban Act , which passed 233-183 — will almost certainly go nowhere in the Republican-led Senate , where several Democrat-led immigration bills have languished .
But it allows Democrats to contrast themselves with Trump ahead of the presidential election and present themselves as a party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them out .
The bill would also strengthen existing prohibitions on religious discrimination in visa applications , which are guaranteed by the Immigration and Nationality Act ( INA ) .
Immigrant advocates have praised the House ’ s measure as a means of protecting the rights of American Muslims .
Democrats are hopeful that former Vice President Joe Biden will prioritize the legislation should he win the presidential election this fall .
He could quickly repeal Trump ’ s travel bans via executive order , but the bill would provide more lasting protection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ It ’ s a very clear signal about what the House Democratic Caucus stands for , ” said Tom Jawetz , vice president of immigration policy at the Center for American Progress think tank .
“ An incoming Biden administration can and should eliminate these bans by the stroke of a pen on day one .
But that act itself will not stop a future administration from trying to shape an immigration system in his or her own anti-immigrant , racist image .
This bill imposes important procedural and substantive constraints @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bill also cleared the House Wednesday : The Access to Counsel Act , which passed 231-184 , would allow immigrants to contact an attorney or other legal service provider when they are detained by US Customs and Border Protection or US Immigration and Customs Enforcement .
Immigrants taken into custody currently do not have any such assurance .
But these bills are only pieces of what should constitute broader immigration reform efforts if Biden assumes the presidency , Rep. Pramila Jayapal , who introduced the Access to Counsel Act , said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for comprehensive , humane immigration reform that really addresses the broken pieces of immigration law that we currently have , ” she said .
“ That is absolutely essential.
” The No Ban Act would prevent future travel bans The No Ban Act would vacate Trump ’ s existing travel bans on countries his administration deems to be threats to national security , as well as put in place measures to prevent future such bans .
Under the first version of Trump ’ s travel ban , unveiled in January 2017 , citizens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who held US green cards and dual US citizenship , were held for questioning for many hours at airports across the country and were denied entry to the US .
A de facto “ Muslim ban , ” the policy appeared to be the execution of Trump ’ s call on the campaign trail for a “ total and complete shutdown ” of Muslims entering the US and sparked widespread protests throughout the country .
That ban was amended in the face of court challenges ; the version of the ban now in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — was upheld by the US Supreme Court in June 2018 .
It places restrictions on citizens of Iran , Libya , Somalia , Syria , Yemen , Venezuela , and North Korea who seek to enter the US .
Citizens of those countries are barred from obtaining any kind of visas , largely preventing them from entering the US .
( Chad was taken off the list of countries subject to the ban after it met the Trump administration ’ s demands to share information with US authorities that could aid in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration expanded the ban in February to also place restrictions on immigrants from six additional nations : Myanmar , Eritrea , Kyrgyzstan , Nigeria , Sudan , and Tanzania .
Citizens of those countries can still visit the US and obtain temporary work and student visas , but for the most part , they aren ’ t allowed to settle in the US permanently .
The No Ban Act would dial back the president ’ s authority to issue such bans under the Immigration and Nationality Act , which was “ not intended @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president to ban large categories of individuals without justification , or to rewrite immigration laws with which he disagrees , ” Chair Jerrold Nadler said on the House floor Wednesday .
The INA currently bans discrimination in the issuance of visas only on the basis of “ race , sex , nationality , place of birth and place of residence.
” There is no provision prohibiting religious discrimination , which made it more difficult for immigrant advocates to argue that the travel ban was unlawful .
The No Ban Act would amend the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ban be temporary , based on credible evidence , subject to congressional oversight , and be created only in response to specific actions foreign entities have taken to threaten the US .
The bill also states that a ban must also advance a compelling government interest in the least restrictive way possible .
These proposals have been praised by immigration advocates , like those at the National Immigration Law Center , who said they would “ ensure that future presidents would not be allowed to issue orders based so clearly on anti-Muslim bias @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every visa applicant would receive individual consideration.
” But the Trump administration has argued that the bill will pose a threat to US national security , divert resources away from cooperating with foreign governments to improve screening , and diminish what has recently been a critical tool for combatting Covid-19 .
In recent months , Trump has blocked all travelers who have been in China , Iran , Europe , and Brazil within the last 14 days .
“ [ T ] he President ’ s authority to restrict travel into the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s ongoing efforts to safeguard the American people against the spread of COVID-19 , ” the White House said in a statement in March , threatening to veto the bill .
“ At a minimum , [ the bill ] would cause dangerous delays that threaten the safety , security , and health of the American people.
” The No Ban Act has a narrow exception that allows the president to institute travel bans during public health crises , including the current pandemic — an exception that Republicans have argued is too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican from Georgia , said Wednesday that Trump ’ s move to block Chinese nationals at the outset of the pandemic was critical to staving off coronavirus transmission .
“ Democrats want to take away the president ’ s power to keep Americans safe , ” he said .
But Jawetz said that the bill was carefully drafted to ensure that no future administration will have its hands tied in responding to public health emergencies .
It merely requires that the decision to block broad classes of foreigners be based on sound evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ using a public health crisis to impose a broader ban ” than is necessary , he added .
The Access to Counsel Act affirms basic rights in immigration detention The Access to Counsel Act was born out of the confusion in the days after the first travel ban was issued in 2017 , Jayapal said .
At that time , immigrants were detained in airports without the opportunity to hire an attorney .
Some immigration officials even pressured green card holders and those with valid visas to sign documents relinquishing their legal status @ @ @ @ @ @ @ early 2017 , but reintroduced it again this year after people of Iranian descent were subjected to similar treatment at the Canadian border .
About 200 individuals , including American and Canadian citizens , were held for questioning about their “ political views and allegiances ” without the opportunity to contact counsel .
“ That same set of circumstances kept repeating itself , ” Jayapal said .
“ It ’ s really about making sure that there is justice in these proceedings.
” The bill would affirm that people detained by immigration officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and under other specific circumstances have the right to access legal help , either in person or remotely .
They would , however , still have to find a lawyer independently since the bill doesn ’ t create any obligation on the part of the government to provide counsel or information about how to obtain counsel .
The bill would also prevent officials from persuading people to give up their legal immigration status , place limits on how long people can be detained , and require that officials detain people in the least @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , water , and restrooms .
While the bill would remove some obstacles to obtaining legal help , it ’ s likely that many immigrants would still go unrepresented if it becomes law .
Especially for migrants with limited English proficiency and those who can ’ t afford to hire an attorney , it may be a challenge to even identify a lawyer who will take their case .
And lawyers aren ’ t allowed inside the facilities where immigrants are being held for the purposes of soliciting clients .
The bill also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immigrants arriving at the southern border who have been rapidly returned to Mexico without the opportunity to consult an attorney under a Trump administration program implemented during the pandemic .
Migrants from Mexico , Guatemala , El Salvador , and Honduras are processed in the field rather than inside US Border Patrol stations , and , without so much as a medical exam , are being sent back to Mexico in an average of 96 minutes , the Texas Tribune reported .
More than 69,000 migrants have been sent back to Mexico under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to CBP .
Despite the partisan impasse on immigration issues in Congress , lawmakers of both parties agree that people should at least have the right to consult an attorney and that their basic needs should be met in detention , Jayapal said .
But because the bill takes on the president and his immigration policies , Republicans have distanced themselves from the legislation .
“ Nobody really denies that you should have access to food , water , and restrooms and [ be able ] to talk to a lawyer , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 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 distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

Even amid the pandemic, House Democrats are keeping a focus on President Donald Trump’s immigration agenda: They passed a bill on Wednesday that would repeal the travel ban on citizens of 13 countries and limit his authority to issue such sweeping bans in the future.
The bill — the No Ban Act, which passed 233-183 — will almost certainly go nowhere in the Republican-led Senate, where several Democrat-led immigration bills have languished. But it allows Democrats to contrast themselves with Trump ahead of the presidential election and present themselves as a party that welcomes immigrants, rather than keeping them out.
The bill would also strengthen existing prohibitions on religious discrimination in visa applications, which are guaranteed by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Immigrant advocates have praised the House’s measure as a means of protecting the rights of American Muslims.
Democrats are hopeful that former Vice President Joe Biden will prioritize the legislation should he win the presidential election this fall. He could quickly repeal Trump’s travel bans via executive order, but the bill would provide more lasting protection against such bans in any future administration.
“It’s a very clear signal about what the House Democratic Caucus stands for,” said Tom Jawetz, vice president of immigration policy at the Center for American Progress think tank. “An incoming Biden administration can and should eliminate these bans by the stroke of a pen on day one. But that act itself will not stop a future administration from trying to shape an immigration system in his or her own anti-immigrant, racist image. This bill imposes important procedural and substantive constraints on that authority.”
Another Democrat-led immigration bill also cleared the House Wednesday: The Access to Counsel Act, which passed 231-184, would allow immigrants to contact an attorney or other legal service provider when they are detained by US Customs and Border Protection or US Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Immigrants taken into custody currently do not have any such assurance.
But these bills are only pieces of what should constitute broader immigration reform efforts if Biden assumes the presidency, Rep. Pramila Jayapal, who introduced the Access to Counsel Act, said.
“We’re going to be pushing for comprehensive, humane immigration reform that really addresses the broken pieces of immigration law that we currently have,” she said. “That is absolutely essential.”
The No Ban Act would prevent future travel bans
The No Ban Act would vacate Trump’s existing travel bans on countries his administration deems to be threats to national security, as well as put in place measures to prevent future such bans.
Under the first version of Trump’s travel ban, unveiled in January 2017, citizens of seven majority-Muslim countries, including those who held US green cards and dual US citizenship, were held for questioning for many hours at airports across the country and were denied entry to the US. A de facto “Muslim ban,” the policy appeared to be the execution of Trump’s call on the campaign trail for a “total and complete shutdown” of Muslims entering the US and sparked widespread protests throughout the country.
That ban was amended in the face of court challenges; the version of the ban now in place — the third Trump has issued — was upheld by the US Supreme Court in June 2018. It places restrictions on citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Yemen, Venezuela, and North Korea who seek to enter the US. Citizens of those countries are barred from obtaining any kind of visas, largely preventing them from entering the US. (Chad was taken off the list of countries subject to the ban after it met the Trump administration’s demands to share information with US authorities that could aid in efforts to vet foreigners.)
The administration expanded the ban in February to also place restrictions on immigrants from six additional nations: Myanmar, Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Nigeria, Sudan, and Tanzania. Citizens of those countries can still visit the US and obtain temporary work and student visas, but for the most part, they aren’t allowed to settle in the US permanently.
The No Ban Act would dial back the president’s authority to issue such bans under the Immigration and Nationality Act, which was “not intended to provide carte blanche authority to the president to ban large categories of individuals without justification, or to rewrite immigration laws with which he disagrees,” Chair Jerrold Nadler said on the House floor Wednesday.
The INA currently bans discrimination in the issuance of visas only on the basis of “race, sex, nationality, place of birth and place of residence.” There is no provision prohibiting religious discrimination, which made it more difficult for immigrant advocates to argue that the travel ban was unlawful.
The No Ban Act would amend the current law to require that any travel ban be temporary, based on credible evidence, subject to congressional oversight, and be created only in response to specific actions foreign entities have taken to threaten the US. The bill also states that a ban must also advance a compelling government interest in the least restrictive way possible.
These proposals have been praised by immigration advocates, like those at the National Immigration Law Center, who said they would “ensure that future presidents would not be allowed to issue orders based so clearly on anti-Muslim bias or any other religion-based animus and that every visa applicant would receive individual consideration.”
But the Trump administration has argued that the bill will pose a threat to US national security, divert resources away from cooperating with foreign governments to improve screening, and diminish what has recently been a critical tool for combatting Covid-19. In recent months, Trump has blocked all travelers who have been in China, Iran, Europe, and Brazil within the last 14 days.
“[T]he President’s authority to restrict travel into the United States has been central to the Administration’s ongoing efforts to safeguard the American people against the spread of COVID-19,” the White House said in a statement in March, threatening to veto the bill. “At a minimum, [the bill] would cause dangerous delays that threaten the safety, security, and health of the American people.”
The No Ban Act has a narrow exception that allows the president to institute travel bans during public health crises, including the current pandemic — an exception that Republicans have argued is too narrow.
Rep. Doug Collins, a Republican from Georgia, said Wednesday that Trump’s move to block Chinese nationals at the outset of the pandemic was critical to staving off coronavirus transmission.
“Democrats want to take away the president’s power to keep Americans safe,” he said.
But Jawetz said that the bill was carefully drafted to ensure that no future administration will have its hands tied in responding to public health emergencies. It merely requires that the decision to block broad classes of foreigners be based on sound evidence, preventing “an opportunist administration from using a public health crisis to impose a broader ban” than is necessary, he added.
The Access to Counsel Act affirms basic rights in immigration detention
The Access to Counsel Act was born out of the confusion in the days after the first travel ban was issued in 2017, Jayapal said. At that time, immigrants were detained in airports without the opportunity to hire an attorney. Some immigration officials even pressured green card holders and those with valid visas to sign documents relinquishing their legal status.
Jayapal first introduced the bill in early 2017, but reintroduced it again this year after people of Iranian descent were subjected to similar treatment at the Canadian border. About 200 individuals, including American and Canadian citizens, were held for questioning about their “political views and allegiances” without the opportunity to contact counsel.
“That same set of circumstances kept repeating itself,” Jayapal said. “It’s really about making sure that there is justice in these proceedings.”
The bill would affirm that people detained by immigration officials in airports, at the border, and under other specific circumstances have the right to access legal help, either in person or remotely. They would, however, still have to find a lawyer independently since the bill doesn’t create any obligation on the part of the government to provide counsel or information about how to obtain counsel.
The bill would also prevent officials from persuading people to give up their legal immigration status, place limits on how long people can be detained, and require that officials detain people in the least restrictive setting possible with access to food, water, and restrooms.
While the bill would remove some obstacles to obtaining legal help, it’s likely that many immigrants would still go unrepresented if it becomes law. Especially for migrants with limited English proficiency and those who can’t afford to hire an attorney, it may be a challenge to even identify a lawyer who will take their case. And lawyers aren’t allowed inside the facilities where immigrants are being held for the purposes of soliciting clients.
The bill also wouldn’t help the thousands of immigrants arriving at the southern border who have been rapidly returned to Mexico without the opportunity to consult an attorney under a Trump administration program implemented during the pandemic. Migrants from Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras are processed in the field rather than inside US Border Patrol stations, and, without so much as a medical exam, are being sent back to Mexico in an average of 96 minutes, the Texas Tribune reported. More than 69,000 migrants have been sent back to Mexico under the new system since March, according to CBP.
Despite the partisan impasse on immigration issues in Congress, lawmakers of both parties agree that people should at least have the right to consult an attorney and that their basic needs should be met in detention, Jayapal said.
But because the bill takes on the president and his immigration policies, Republicans have distanced themselves from the legislation.
“Nobody really denies that you should have access to food, water, and restrooms and [be able] to talk to a lawyer,” Jayapal said.