vox--2020-05-19--Trump dismisses hydroxychloroquine study that undermines him as a “Trump enemy statement”

President Donald Trump is now dismissing medical information promulgated by his own government as a “ Trump enemy statement.
” Trump made that remark on Tuesday afternoon , when he was asked following a lunch with Republican senators to explain his rationale for promoting unproven and potentially dangerous hydroxychloroquine treatments for coronavirus .
The president ’ s ensuing effort to defend the stunning announcement he made on Monday that he ’ s taking the anti-malarial drug didn ’ t end up making much sense .
But it did reveal a reflexive contempt for scientific reasoning that undercuts his talking points @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you to promote the use of this drug when you ’ re not a doctor ?
” a reporter asked .
Trump responded by making a case that he knows better than medical professionals do .
“ I worked with doctors , ” he began .
“ If you look at the one survey , the only bad survey , they were giving it to people that were in very bad shape , they were very old , almost dead .
It was a Trump enemy statement.
” The “ Trump enemy statement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus patients in Veterans Affairs hospitals that became the basis for a Food and Drug Administration ( FDA ) warning about hydroxychloroquine treatments for coronavirus .
The study , which the National Institutes of Health posted to its website last month and is the largest of its kind , was not peer-reviewed , but it found more deaths among those treated with hydroxychloroquine than those treated with standard care .
Researchers also reported finding no benefit to its use .
The Food and Drug Administration ( FDA ) subsequently posted a warning on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine for COVID-19 outside of the hospital setting or a clinical trial due to risk of heart rhythm problems.
” To hear Trump tell it , however , the FDA has been infiltrated by his deep state enemies .
“ That was a false study done .
Where they gave it to very sick people .
Extremely sick people .
People that were ready to die .
It was given by obviously not friends of the administration , ” Trump said later Tuesday , during a roundtable event at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saying at this point that it ’ s a bad idea to take medical advice from Trump — recall that his daily coronavirus press briefings basically came to an end last month after he was widely mocked for musing aloud about the possibility of treating the coronavirus with disinfectant and bizarre sunlight treatments .
Still , it ’ s instructive to note how quick the president is to attribute any conclusion that contradicts him as the product of an anti-Trump conspiracy , even when the conclusion in question comes from his own government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t agree with him It ’ s not like the study of VA patients was the first to raise concerns about hydroxychloroquine .
The drug is an effective treatment for malaria , but doctors have long warned that taking it can result in drug-induced cardiac arrest for a small subset of the population .
Those risks might be worth taking if it turned out that hydroxychloroquine was effective in helping people recover from coronavirus infections .
But health officials have consistently said preliminary research shows the opposite — and that more rigorous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be conducted .
To cite one notable example , a day after Trump called the drug a “ game changer ” on March 20 , his top health official on the coronavirus , Dr. Anthony Fauci , told the press it was too soon to say whether the drug was safe or effective .
“ The information that you ’ re referring to specifically is anecdotal , ” Fauci said , alluding to non-randomized , non-peer-reviewed studies conducted abroad that Trump has repeatedly invoked as evidence of hydroxychloroquine ’ s efficaciousness , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ done in a controlled clinical trial .
So you really can ’ t make any definitive statement about it.
” Clashes between Trump and government public heaths experts over unproven drugs led to the abrupt exit of Dr. Rick Bright as director of the Department of Health and Human Services ’ Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority , the federal agency tasked with developing a coronavirus vaccine .
Last month , Bright , who has since become a whistleblower , released a statement indicating he was pressured to give the green light to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prepared to look at all options and to think ‘ outside the box ’ for effective treatments , I rightly resisted efforts to provide an unproven drug on demand to the American public , ” Bright said .
“ I insisted that these drugs be provided only to hospitalized patients with confirmed Covid-19 while under the supervision of a physician.
” Trump ’ s infatuation with hydroxychloroquine can be traced back to a controversial French study released in March on a small number of Covid-19 patients that found hydroxychloroquine could lessen the duration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America has detailed , the French study and similar anecdotal evidence from China was covered by Fox News and amplified by Trump , with Trump ’ s amplification in turn being covered by Fox — in other words , it was the perfect illustration of the Fox-to-Trump feedback loop .
As it became clear that the United States was going to be especially hard hit by the coronavirus pandemic , Trump became insistent that the drug could be a savior , despite Fauci ’ s position .
The study of VA patients seemed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for hydroxychloroquine , at least among certain anchors .
Anchor Neil Cavuto even went as far as to warn his viewers immediately after Trump ’ s announcement on Monday that taking the drug without a doctor ’ s supervision can result in death for populations at risk .
Cavuto reiterated his concerns on Tuesday , following a roundtable event in which Trump falsely claimed about hydroxychloroquine that “ what has been determined is it doesn ’ t harm you.
” Instead of engaging with Cavuto ’ s measured criticisms , Trump on Monday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him .
Around the same time , Trump ’ s White House doctor released a statement saying of hydroxychloroquine that “ we concluded the potential benefits from treatments outweighed the relative risks ” — but notably , it stopped short of confirming that Trump is in fact taking the drug .
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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 .

President Donald Trump is now dismissing medical information promulgated by his own government as a “Trump enemy statement.”
Trump made that remark on Tuesday afternoon, when he was asked following a lunch with Republican senators to explain his rationale for promoting unproven and potentially dangerous hydroxychloroquine treatments for coronavirus. The president’s ensuing effort to defend the stunning announcement he made on Monday that he’s taking the anti-malarial drug didn’t end up making much sense. But it did reveal a reflexive contempt for scientific reasoning that undercuts his talking points.
“Why is it okay for you to promote the use of this drug when you’re not a doctor?” a reporter asked. Trump responded by making a case that he knows better than medical professionals do.
“I worked with doctors,” he began. “If you look at the one survey, the only bad survey, they were giving it to people that were in very bad shape, they were very old, almost dead. It was a Trump enemy statement.”
"It was a Trump enemy statement" — Trump dismisses doctors who have warned about possible bad consequences of hydroxychloroquine and insists he knows better pic.twitter.com/CiyTtOBJlu — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 19, 2020
The “Trump enemy statement” in question is a study of coronavirus patients in Veterans Affairs hospitals that became the basis for a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warning about hydroxychloroquine treatments for coronavirus.
The study, which the National Institutes of Health posted to its website last month and is the largest of its kind, was not peer-reviewed, but it found more deaths among those treated with hydroxychloroquine than those treated with standard care. Researchers also reported finding no benefit to its use.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) subsequently posted a warning on its website that “cautions against use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine for COVID-19 outside of the hospital setting or a clinical trial due to risk of heart rhythm problems.”
To hear Trump tell it, however, the FDA has been infiltrated by his deep state enemies.
“That was a false study done. Where they gave it to very sick people. Extremely sick people. People that were ready to die. It was given by obviously not friends of the administration,” Trump said later Tuesday, during a roundtable event at the White House.
"That was a false study done. Where they gave it very sick people. Extremely sick people. People that were ready to die. It was given by obviously not friends of the administration" -- Trump defends hydroxychloroquine by suggesting a study of VA patients was fruit of a conspiracy pic.twitter.com/a3neqa2U4y — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 19, 2020
It should go without saying at this point that it’s a bad idea to take medical advice from Trump — recall that his daily coronavirus press briefings basically came to an end last month after he was widely mocked for musing aloud about the possibility of treating the coronavirus with disinfectant and bizarre sunlight treatments.
Still, it’s instructive to note how quick the president is to attribute any conclusion that contradicts him as the product of an anti-Trump conspiracy, even when the conclusion in question comes from his own government.
Trump simply dismisses experts who don’t agree with him
It’s not like the study of VA patients was the first to raise concerns about hydroxychloroquine. The drug is an effective treatment for malaria, but doctors have long warned that taking it can result in drug-induced cardiac arrest for a small subset of the population.
Those risks might be worth taking if it turned out that hydroxychloroquine was effective in helping people recover from coronavirus infections. But health officials have consistently said preliminary research shows the opposite — and that more rigorous research into the drug still needs to be conducted.
To cite one notable example, a day after Trump called the drug a “game changer” on March 20, his top health official on the coronavirus, Dr. Anthony Fauci, told the press it was too soon to say whether the drug was safe or effective.
“The information that you’re referring to specifically is anecdotal,” Fauci said, alluding to non-randomized, non-peer-reviewed studies conducted abroad that Trump has repeatedly invoked as evidence of hydroxychloroquine’s efficaciousness, including on Tuesday. “It was not done in a controlled clinical trial. So you really can’t make any definitive statement about it.”
Clashes between Trump and government public heaths experts over unproven drugs led to the abrupt exit of Dr. Rick Bright as director of the Department of Health and Human Services’ Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, the federal agency tasked with developing a coronavirus vaccine. Last month, Bright, who has since become a whistleblower, released a statement indicating he was pressured to give the green light to hydroxychloroquine treatments.
“While I am prepared to look at all options and to think ‘outside the box’ for effective treatments, I rightly resisted efforts to provide an unproven drug on demand to the American public,” Bright said. “I insisted that these drugs be provided only to hospitalized patients with confirmed Covid-19 while under the supervision of a physician.”
Trump’s infatuation with hydroxychloroquine can be traced back to a controversial French study released in March on a small number of Covid-19 patients that found hydroxychloroquine could lessen the duration of infection. As Media Matters for America has detailed, the French study and similar anecdotal evidence from China was covered by Fox News and amplified by Trump, with Trump’s amplification in turn being covered by Fox — in other words, it was the perfect illustration of the Fox-to-Trump feedback loop.
As it became clear that the United States was going to be especially hard hit by the coronavirus pandemic, Trump became insistent that the drug could be a savior, despite Fauci’s position.
"I answered this 15 times. You don't have to answer." -- Trump prevents Dr Fauci from answering a question about hydroxychloroquine pic.twitter.com/8R1K1hDsaX — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 6, 2020
The study of VA patients seemed to cool Fox News’s enthusiasm for hydroxychloroquine, at least among certain anchors. Anchor Neil Cavuto even went as far as to warn his viewers immediately after Trump’s announcement on Monday that taking the drug without a doctor’s supervision can result in death for populations at risk.
Fox News's Neil Cavuto is stunned by Trump's announcement that he's taking hydroxychloroquine: "If you are in a risky population here, and you are taking this as a preventative treatment ... it will kill you. I cannot stress enough. This will kill you." pic.twitter.com/e6D5alfAgc — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 18, 2020
Cavuto reiterated his concerns on Tuesday, following a roundtable event in which Trump falsely claimed about hydroxychloroquine that “what has been determined is it doesn’t harm you.”
Instead of engaging with Cavuto’s measured criticisms, Trump on Monday evening posted a string of retweets demeaning him. Around the same time, Trump’s White House doctor released a statement saying of hydroxychloroquine that “we concluded the potential benefits from treatments outweighed the relative risks” — but notably, it stopped short of confirming that Trump is in fact taking the drug.


vox--2020-05-19--3 key races to watch in Oregon’s vote-by-mail primary

Oregon is going ahead with its usual vote-by-mail primary Tuesday , and though the presidential primary race is all but settled , three particular races for US House seats have drawn national attention — and spending .
Headlining the electoral slate is an 11-way race to replace retiring Republican Rep. Greg Walden in the state ’ s Second Congressional District , and a closer-than-expected primary challenge against Democratic Rep. Kurt Schrader in the Fifth .
All registered voters in the state received a mail-in ballot two to three weeks ahead of the primary , which they can then fill out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at one of the state ’ s ballot drop locations before 8 pm local time Tuesday .
As of Monday , just over 30 percent of registered voters had returned ballots , according to data released by the Secretary of State ’ s office , clocking in just under the turnout at the same point in the 2016 primary .
The US House primaries aren ’ t the only big races in the state worth keeping an eye on ; sitting Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler faces off against 17 — yes , 17 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also vote on a set of new income and business taxes which are estimated to raise $ 2.5 billion over a decade to fight homelessness .
In addition to the race to replace Walden and Schrader ’ s primary battle , Vox is following the coastal Fourth District race , a seat currently held by Democratic Rep. Peter DeFazio , which has been deemed a top GOP target for 2020 .
Vox is covering the results live , in partnership with our friends at Decision Desk .
The 11-way race for Oregon ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seat thanks to Walden ’ s upcoming retirement from the House , the Republican primary in Oregon ’ s Second District , which covers a largely rural area in the southeast portion of the state , has become a free-for-all over who can establish themselves as a “ true conservative.
” The race features 11 candidates in total for the safe Republican seat , but four candidates have established themselves as the favorites : Former state Rep. Knute Buehler , former state Sens .
Cliff Bentz and Jason Atkinson , and businessman Jimmy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emerged in the race , including what to do with the dams on the Klamath River and key forest management issues .
One fringe candidate , Jeff Smith , said he would like to abolish the Endangered Species Act in order to free up forestry operations in the region , according to OregonLive .
Buehler has had to defend himself from charges that he ’ s not conservative enough after running a more moderate campaign for governor of the blue state two years ago .
Back then , he encouraged President Donald Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Brett Kavanaugh to the US Supreme Court after allegations of sexual assault emerged .
He also waffled on abortion rights .
Bentz resigned from the state Senate to run for Congress full-time .
He was among a group of Republican state senators to walk out of the legislature last year to stall a climate change bill , eventually fleeing to neighboring Idaho to avoid Oregon State Police , according to the Oregonian .
Atkinson is the chairman of the Dove Christian Broadcast Network , which “ exists to proclaim the Good News @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” and unsuccessfully ran for governor in 2006 .
Crumpacker , a commodity trader , told OregonLive that he thought his status as a political newcomer would appeal to voters in the Second District .
“ People in the Republican Party are frustrated with career politicians , ” he said .
“ I ’ ve never run for public office , and I ’ m a staunch supporter of President Donald Trump.
” The race has drawn millions in outside spending , with anti-abortion groups like Oregon Right to Life and their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the anti-tax Club for Growth spending $ 213,000 attacking Buehler , according to a RollCall report .
Oregon Right to Life has endorsed Crumpacker in the race .
Buehler is backed by a group funded in part by Nike co-founder Phil Knight called Republican Leadership for Oregon .
The group has spent a total of $ 343,000 supporting Buehler and attacking other candidates in the race .
Progressive candidate Mark Gamba is primarying Blue Dog Democrat Kurt Schrader in the Fifth District The race for the Fifth District seat feels familiar to followers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years .
Milwaukie Mayor Mark Gamba , a progressive who supports Medicare-for-all , is challenging a more-established centrist House member , Rep. Kurt Schrader , in an energized primary .
Schrader is a member of the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition , a caucus of mostly centrist Democrats who frequently shoot down more ambitious spending plans in Congress .
Schrader also runs the Blue Dog ’ s PAC .
The six-term incumbent holds a significant money advantage , raising more than $ 3 million compared to Gamba ’ s $ 223,000 , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his fiscally centrist voting record .
Schrader , for example , was one of just 14 Democrats to vote against the $ 3 trillion Democratic coronavirus relief on Friday .
Gamba has gotten endorsements from several local and national progressives , like state Sen. Shemia Fagan , former Portland City Commissioner Steve Novick , and former presidential candidate Marianne Williamson .
But the mayor also has a checkered history of his own .
According to the Willamette Week , Gamba posted an anti-vax article on Facebook after a local measles outbreak in 2015 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time into some honest research rather than swallowing the status quo and scare tactics that the Big Pharma dishes out , ” Gamba said at the time , in response to criticism over the post .
Whoever wins the Democratic primary ( and Schrader is the heavily favored candidate ) is likely to go on to win the seat , as the district is rated “ Solid Democratic ” by RollCall .
Republicans think they can win in the coastal Fourth District this year In early February , the National Republican Congressional Committee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for retaking control of the House this fall .
Among them was Oregon ’ s Fourth District , which lies along the southern coast of the state .
The seat has been held by Democrat Peter DeFazio since 1987 but has trended more conservative over recent years .
In 2016 , Trump lost the district by less than two-tenths of a percentage point .
The Republican primary in the district also features a celebrity candidate , Afghanistan veteran and former Dancing With the Stars performer Alek Skarlatos .
In 2015 , Skarlatos and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Paris-bound train before going on to star in a movie about the incident .
He lost a race for Douglas County commissioner in 2018 .
Skarlatos is set to face off against Nelson Ijih , a former US intelligence officer who is running on a platform calling for mandatory term limits for federal legislators and more use of blockchain technology by the government .
According to RollCall , Skarlatos holds a significant fundraising advantage over his opponent , raising $ 490,000 with $ 109,000 on hand as of April 29 .
Robinson reportedly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ filing an FEC report .
DeFazio , a member of the progressive caucus , faces a challenger in the form of community organizer Doyle Canning , who has criticized the incumbent for taking it easy on Trump .
She ’ s also said the 72-year-old representative may be too old for the position .
“ This race is about the future ― of our district , of the country and of the Democratic Party , ” Canning told HuffPost .
“ And we need leadership that is willing to take a stand against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 .

Oregon is going ahead with its usual vote-by-mail primary Tuesday, and though the presidential primary race is all but settled, three particular races for US House seats have drawn national attention — and spending.
Headlining the electoral slate is an 11-way race to replace retiring Republican Rep. Greg Walden in the state’s Second Congressional District, and a closer-than-expected primary challenge against Democratic Rep. Kurt Schrader in the Fifth.
All registered voters in the state received a mail-in ballot two to three weeks ahead of the primary, which they can then fill out and mail back in or drop off at one of the state’s ballot drop locations before 8 pm local time Tuesday.
As of Monday, just over 30 percent of registered voters had returned ballots, according to data released by the Secretary of State’s office, clocking in just under the turnout at the same point in the 2016 primary.
The US House primaries aren’t the only big races in the state worth keeping an eye on; sitting Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler faces off against 17 — yes, 17 — challengers Tuesday. The city will also vote on a set of new income and business taxes which are estimated to raise $2.5 billion over a decade to fight homelessness.
In addition to the race to replace Walden and Schrader’s primary battle, Vox is following the coastal Fourth District race, a seat currently held by Democratic Rep. Peter DeFazio, which has been deemed a top GOP target for 2020. Vox is covering the results live, in partnership with our friends at Decision Desk.
The 11-way race for Oregon’s rural Second District
With an open seat thanks to Walden’s upcoming retirement from the House, the Republican primary in Oregon’s Second District, which covers a largely rural area in the southeast portion of the state, has become a free-for-all over who can establish themselves as a “true conservative.”
The race features 11 candidates in total for the safe Republican seat, but four candidates have established themselves as the favorites: Former state Rep. Knute Buehler, former state Sens. Cliff Bentz and Jason Atkinson, and businessman Jimmy Crumpacker.
Several important local issues have emerged in the race, including what to do with the dams on the Klamath River and key forest management issues. One fringe candidate, Jeff Smith, said he would like to abolish the Endangered Species Act in order to free up forestry operations in the region, according to OregonLive.
Buehler has had to defend himself from charges that he’s not conservative enough after running a more moderate campaign for governor of the blue state two years ago. Back then, he encouraged President Donald Trump to withdraw his support for the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the US Supreme Court after allegations of sexual assault emerged. He also waffled on abortion rights.
Bentz resigned from the state Senate to run for Congress full-time. He was among a group of Republican state senators to walk out of the legislature last year to stall a climate change bill, eventually fleeing to neighboring Idaho to avoid Oregon State Police, according to the Oregonian.
Atkinson is the chairman of the Dove Christian Broadcast Network, which “exists to proclaim the Good News of Jesus Christ through all media platforms,” and unsuccessfully ran for governor in 2006.
Crumpacker, a commodity trader, told OregonLive that he thought his status as a political newcomer would appeal to voters in the Second District. “People in the Republican Party are frustrated with career politicians,” he said. “I’ve never run for public office, and I’m a staunch supporter of President Donald Trump.”
The race has drawn millions in outside spending, with anti-abortion groups like Oregon Right to Life and their PAC dropping a combined $207,000 and the anti-tax Club for Growth spending $213,000 attacking Buehler, according to a RollCall report. Oregon Right to Life has endorsed Crumpacker in the race.
Buehler is backed by a group funded in part by Nike co-founder Phil Knight called Republican Leadership for Oregon. The group has spent a total of $343,000 supporting Buehler and attacking other candidates in the race.
Progressive candidate Mark Gamba is primarying Blue Dog Democrat Kurt Schrader in the Fifth District
The race for the Fifth District seat feels familiar to followers of Democratic politics over the last four years. Milwaukie Mayor Mark Gamba, a progressive who supports Medicare-for-all, is challenging a more-established centrist House member, Rep. Kurt Schrader, in an energized primary.
Schrader is a member of the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition, a caucus of mostly centrist Democrats who frequently shoot down more ambitious spending plans in Congress. Schrader also runs the Blue Dog’s PAC.
The six-term incumbent holds a significant money advantage, raising more than $3 million compared to Gamba’s $223,000, but has also had to weather attacks on his fiscally centrist voting record. Schrader, for example, was one of just 14 Democrats to vote against the $3 trillion Democratic coronavirus relief on Friday.
Gamba has gotten endorsements from several local and national progressives, like state Sen. Shemia Fagan, former Portland City Commissioner Steve Novick, and former presidential candidate Marianne Williamson. But the mayor also has a checkered history of his own.
According to the Willamette Week, Gamba posted an anti-vax article on Facebook after a local measles outbreak in 2015. “You need to put some time into some honest research rather than swallowing the status quo and scare tactics that the Big Pharma dishes out,” Gamba said at the time, in response to criticism over the post.
Whoever wins the Democratic primary (and Schrader is the heavily favored candidate) is likely to go on to win the seat, as the district is rated “Solid Democratic” by RollCall.
Republicans think they can win in the coastal Fourth District this year
In early February, the National Republican Congressional Committee released a list of 55 target races for retaking control of the House this fall. Among them was Oregon’s Fourth District, which lies along the southern coast of the state.
The seat has been held by Democrat Peter DeFazio since 1987 but has trended more conservative over recent years. In 2016, Trump lost the district by less than two-tenths of a percentage point.
The Republican primary in the district also features a celebrity candidate, Afghanistan veteran and former Dancing With the Stars performer Alek Skarlatos. In 2015, Skarlatos and two friends disarmed a terrorist on a Paris-bound train before going on to star in a movie about the incident. He lost a race for Douglas County commissioner in 2018.
Skarlatos is set to face off against Nelson Ijih, a former US intelligence officer who is running on a platform calling for mandatory term limits for federal legislators and more use of blockchain technology by the government.
According to RollCall, Skarlatos holds a significant fundraising advantage over his opponent, raising $490,000 with $109,000 on hand as of April 29. Robinson reportedly didn’t raise enough to warrant filing an FEC report.
DeFazio, a member of the progressive caucus, faces a challenger in the form of community organizer Doyle Canning, who has criticized the incumbent for taking it easy on Trump. Canning has played up her youth compared to her 72 year-old opponent.
“This race is about the future ― of our district, of the country and of the Democratic Party,” Canning told HuffPost. “And we need leadership that is willing to take a stand against the corruption of the Trump administration.”
Update May 20: This article has been updated to more accurately reflect the tenor of Canning’s comments about the generational divide between her and DeFazio.


vox--2020-05-19--Is it safe for day care centers to be open right now?

Share All sharing options for : Is it safe for day care centers to be open right now ?
Children under 5 are not known for respecting personal space or keeping germs to themselves — even in the best of circumstances .
And when you get lots of these little drooling , hugging , shouting humans together in one space , such as day care , illnesses tend to spread rapidly , bouncing among children , their families , and back again .
While some child care centers around the country have remained open in the Covid-19 pandemic , many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to close or limit services to health care worker parents only .
According to an April poll , about half of child care centers across the country were entirely closed , the Wall Street Journal reported .
An estimated 12.5 million children younger than 6 attend some sort of child care each year in the US , according to the Center for the Study of Child Care Employment ( CSCCE ) at the University of California Berkeley .
So the closures have created a crisis for millions of families who have previously depended @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Now , the question of how to restore child care is critical for helping millions of families get back to work , because “ as states rush to reopen , child care is expected to be available , ” Lea Austin , director of the CSCCE , told Vox .
Although the rate of severe Covid-19 in very small children is low , the illness does not entirely spare them .
And a spate of pediatric inflammatory illnesses have doctors concerned about more negative outcomes for the very youngest patients .
They also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can infect others even without getting sick themselves .
With so much still unknown about the role of children in the pandemic , day care centers and home-based care operators also have to consider the needs of essential workers ( and those of workers who might not be essential but depend on child care to earn money to work ) with the largely unknown health risk for their staff , students , and families — all with their own often-precarious finances .
And the federal government hasn ’ t exactly made the process @ @ @ @ @ @ @ angst about exposure and making sure [ child care centers ] do things ‘ right , ’ ” says Lucy Mullen Davis , consultant and coach at Denver ’ s Early Childhood Council .
Let ’ s walk through why weighing the risks , and benefits , of reopening remains so tricky .
What are the rules for reopening day care ?
The US federal government has essentially left it up to states , localities , and even individual care center owners to decide if they will be open — and if they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This has resulted in a patchwork of changing policies across the country , as the Hunt Institute , an education research group affiliated with Duke University , documents in a detailed report of states ’ rules and recommendations for child care operations .
California , for example , has allowed care centers to stay open but issued the guidance that they should only be for children of essential workers , and group sizes are limited to 10 .
Illinois closed all centers March 20 with the exception of facilities that obtained emergency @ @ @ @ @ @ @ workers .
South Carolina , on the other hand , let its child care centers know , “ it remains your decision as a provider whether to remain open , ” and the state currently has no Covid-19-specific group size limitations for child care .
So , especially in states that have closed or drastically limited child care center availability , many families have been scrambling to either do without child care or to try to find alternative care so they can work .
( And many older relatives that might previously have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at a higher risk for severe Covid-19 infection and advised to limit contact with others . )
Rhode Island , which closed its day cares , recommends finding a single in-home care provider , such as a nanny .
But such individualized care can cost a good deal more than day care .
( And even standard day care is a huge financial strain on many families . )
So that leaves potentially millions of families wondering when their usual child care will be back up and running .
And when it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In mid-May , the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) finally issued guidance ( which still defers largely to local guidelines ) to help child care centers , as well as camps , restaurants , bars , and other operations decide if they can safely reopen .
( These documents had been expected weeks earlier but had been held back by the White House . )
The newly published decision-making chart for child care facilities doesn ’ t add too much in the way of clarity .
It includes a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ as feasible ” and “ encourage.
” “ The CDC [ decision ] tree is extremely basic , ” says Mullen Davis , whose group in Denver has created its own additional decision-making tool for centers that also helps them evaluate their financial situation .
Austin also points to key differences between the new CDC guidance and earlier versions that were leaked but never published .
For example , in a previous version , the CDC recommended centers close if they were in a community that was still in the midst of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Further , the decision [ -making chart ] does not require increased screening for children or staff in such communities and instead recommends they should do this if feasible , ” she notes .
To boot , such guidelines can “ provide a false sense of security.
” This scattered response for child care programs has been vastly different from that for schools , which have been closed across the country , with many discussing switching to online learning for the fall as well .
These programs are also quite different from schools @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make infection control easier .
“ Because we ’ re talking about children at very different developmental stages , it ’ s important that we recognize some of the unique challenges being faced by child care centers , ” Dan Wuori , director of Early Learning at the Hunt Institute , told Vox .
“ Child care has some very different health and safety considerations that need to be approached with real deliberation.
” For centers that have stayed open or are reopening , the CDC published relatively detailed guidance in April .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s temperature each day upon arrival ( possibly while staff are in full personal protective gear ) , not using toys that can not be sanitized , and using cloth masks for children over 2 .
Many of these recommendations , such as changing gloves for every child temperature upon entry , are not always feasible due to supply availability and prices .
( An April survey of more than 2,000 child care programs in California found that 62 percent were having difficulty obtaining cleaning supplies or personal protective equipment . )
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ young kids ’ behavior and abilities , such as expecting 3-year-olds to keep masks on all day .
“ It would be difficult to have children 3-5 wear [ masks ] all day with any reliability , ” Allison Bartlett , associate medical director of the Infection Control Program and a pediatric infectious disease specialist at University of Chicago Medicine , told Vox .
“ In addition , kids with masks may be prone to remove them , touch their faces , reposition the masks , etc.
, contaminating themselves in the process.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the European Journal of Pediatrics concluded , “ If compliance is difficult , it is better that the child does not wear the mask , and other measures for reducing infection risk , including remaining at home , are practiced.
” We still don ’ t know much about the coronavirus in babies and very young children Part of the trouble with deciding on best practices for child care centers — as well as schools — is that we don ’ t know very much about the risk of the virus in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since the beginning of the pandemic that kids are at a lower risk of getting severely ill and dying from Covid-19 than adults are .
But some do still get sick , and some die .
Children with underlying health conditions , such as respiratory issues , are at higher risk , as are the very youngest children .
For example , those under the age of 1 had the highest rate of hospitalization for Covid-19 among those under the age of 18 , according to a report from the CDC .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a full 30 percent of documented pediatric ICU admissions .
“ Children of all ages appeared susceptible to Covid-19 , ” wrote the authors of an April article in Pediatrics that analyzed data from more than 2,100 pediatric Covid-19 patients in China .
From the children in their study , 7 percent of infant cases required critical care — compared with 0 percent of children ages 6-10 .
And there are also the increasing reports of severe inflammatory illness in children who have had the virus — even if they never appeared @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than 100 children — including some as young as infants and toddlers — have been diagnosed with this serious condition , and at least three have died from it .
And we also don ’ t have a good sense of how many very young children might be carriers of the virus without ever getting sick at all .
What role do very young children play in transmitting the coronavirus ?
In general , “ young children are well-known culprits in transmission of other respiratory viruses , ” Bartlett says .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ data is that they are vectors for Covid-19 transmission as well.
” Research has shown that adults can have a lot of the coronavirus in their system and still feel fine , suggesting that the illness can spread even from those who do not have symptoms .
“ There is lots of angst about exposure and making sure [ child care centers ] do things ‘ right ’ ” “ While we are thankful that children are relatively spared in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic , they are potential vectors of spread to other members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ We don ’ t know a lot about transmission among young children , but their propensity to put things in their mouths could increase risk of spread among children , ” she noted .
This liberalness with germ sharing is compounded with peer interactions at child care centers .
An April report in Science looked at the change in the number of daily contacts infants and young children had before and during pandemic restrictions in Wuhan and Shanghai , China .
They found there was a drop in the daily number @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about 12 to 2 in Wuhan and from about 14 to 2 in Shanghai .
Reducing the number of people everyone comes into contact with has been a cornerstone of efforts to slow the pandemic .
Looking at their data from children overall , the authors noted , “ while proactive school closures can not interrupt transmission on their own , they can reduce peak incidence by 40-60 percent and delay the epidemic.
” Conversations about day cares also often leave off the question of staff exposure .
Given that babies and young @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much all day — Austin says , there ’ s essentially no way for educators to physically distance themselves from the kids they are caring for .
Some precautions can help mitigate risk of Covid-19 transmission in close contact , such as “ making sure child care workers change clothes if they get spit up on , etc.
, and having them wash their necks/arms if they are in contact with children ’ s secretions can help as well , ” Bartlett says .
But these steps will need to be taken dozens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those caring for babies .
To add to the difficult situation , Austin notes , caregivers are frequently “ among the black and brown communities that are being disproportionately impacted by Covid-19.
” In California , for example , the majority of these roles are filled by people of color .
Austin and others have suggested child care workers who have underlying health conditions and those who are over 65 might consider not returning to work — or doing so in a capacity in which they do not interact with children .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ financially possible .
“ Pre-pandemic child care programs operated on thin margins , and staff were earning poverty wages , ” Austin says .
“ This crisis is exacerbating these conditions , leading many early educators to risk their lives by continuing work under the current conditions — or risk losing their livelihoods if they don ’ t work.
” Early education workers earn a national average of about $ 12 an hour , her group has determined .
Some child care staff have requested testing if they are to return to work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Families who still have access to care are worried There are also numerous concerns coming from families who have previously relied on group child care so they could earn money themselves .
In Colorado , Mullen Davis says they have seen an increase in families requesting tuition aid for their child care — “ many of whom have never asked for this aid before , ” she says .
“ It ’ s clear that many families are facing additional financial pressures right now.
” In addition , she says , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ children , while others ask for assurances that are often beyond the center ’ s control.
” The stress of the situation has trickled down to the children as well , who “ have their own fears and anxieties , which can add to behavior challenges in the classroom , ” says her colleague Karen Thiel , lead quality initiatives navigator at the council .
Families as well as educators have expressed other concerns related to how new health and safety guidelines at centers might impact children and their development .
Thiel has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ children going to learn to interact in socially appropriate ways if they are expected to stay 6 feet apart ?
” Mullen Davis heard from another parent recently who was worried about her infant surrounded by masked staff for 40 hours a week .
“ She was concerned about how masks affect language and social emotional development if children can not see their caregiver ’ s friendly or responsive face , ” she says .
“ We just don ’ t have research on this.
” Covid-19 might put many child care centers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ changes , a large proportion of child care centers — like so many other small businesses — might not survive the pandemic .
In Colorado , “ many center directors are worried that they will not have enough children to cover the costs of care if they reopen , ” Mullen Davis says .
Centers are also dealing with extreme fluctuations in staffing as well as attendance .
And with many states capping group size at around 10 , that takes a serious bite of tuition revenue , especially for preschool , where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The CSCCE found in a recent survey that 14 percent of the more than 2,000 California child care programs polled that are currently closed will not be able to sustain a closure that runs past the end of May .
And for those that have stayed open , they found that 63 percent would not be able to survive a closure of more than a month .
There is already a shortage of child care in the US .
Some half of US families with young children have reported having trouble finding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for American Progress , a progressive-leaning research and advocacy organization .
( The group estimated that in 2016 , 2 million US parents quit jobs or drastically changed their work due to issues with child care . )
“ This crisis has revealed the central role child care teachers play in our society , ” Austin says .
“ This is a moment to stabilize and invest in this critical component of our infrastructure so that it exists going forward and does so in a manner that protects the well-being of children , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states are taking large steps to ensure child care centers can remain solvent for now .
Vermont , for example , is using a combination of state and federal funds to provide any revenue centers have lost .
Others are reexamining earlier actions .
“ Gov .
Mike DeWine in Ohio really stands out , ” Javaid Siddiqi , president of the Hunt Institute , told Vox .
“ Just [ last ] week he pulled back and acknowledged that the reopening of child care was just too important to do haphazardly .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ on science and safety .
That ’ s a difficult stance to take in the face of pressure to reopen , but it ’ s clear that he really understands the gravity of the situation.
” The state ’ s child care centers have been closed there since March 26 ( with emergency care for health care workers ) , but there are now plans to reopen at the end of May with new measures in place .
But , as Bartlett notes , “ As parents of young children know , even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meticulous attention to hygiene have transmission of infections .
There are measures that we can undertake to decrease the risk of transmission , but it will never be zero.
” 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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 .

Share All sharing options for: Is it safe for day care centers to be open right now?
Children under 5 are not known for respecting personal space or keeping germs to themselves — even in the best of circumstances. And when you get lots of these little drooling, hugging, shouting humans together in one space, such as day care, illnesses tend to spread rapidly, bouncing among children, their families, and back again.
While some child care centers around the country have remained open in the Covid-19 pandemic, many US states and localities have required them to close or limit services to health care worker parents only. According to an April poll, about half of child care centers across the country were entirely closed, the Wall Street Journal reported.
An estimated 12.5 million children younger than 6 attend some sort of child care each year in the US, according to the Center for the Study of Child Care Employment (CSCCE) at the University of California Berkeley. So the closures have created a crisis for millions of families who have previously depended on care outside of the home.
Now, the question of how to restore child care is critical for helping millions of families get back to work, because “as states rush to reopen, child care is expected to be available,” Lea Austin, director of the CSCCE, told Vox.
Although the rate of severe Covid-19 in very small children is low, the illness does not entirely spare them. And a spate of pediatric inflammatory illnesses have doctors concerned about more negative outcomes for the very youngest patients. They also might be carriers of the virus who can infect others even without getting sick themselves.
With so much still unknown about the role of children in the pandemic, day care centers and home-based care operators also have to consider the needs of essential workers (and those of workers who might not be essential but depend on child care to earn money to work) with the largely unknown health risk for their staff, students, and families — all with their own often-precarious finances. And the federal government hasn’t exactly made the process easy.
“There is lots of angst about exposure and making sure [child care centers] do things ‘right,’” says Lucy Mullen Davis, consultant and coach at Denver’s Early Childhood Council. Let’s walk through why weighing the risks, and benefits, of reopening remains so tricky.
What are the rules for reopening day care?
The US federal government has essentially left it up to states, localities, and even individual care center owners to decide if they will be open — and if they choose to be, in what capacity.
This has resulted in a patchwork of changing policies across the country, as the Hunt Institute, an education research group affiliated with Duke University, documents in a detailed report of states’ rules and recommendations for child care operations.
California, for example, has allowed care centers to stay open but issued the guidance that they should only be for children of essential workers, and group sizes are limited to 10. Illinois closed all centers March 20 with the exception of facilities that obtained emergency licenses to care for children of essential workers. South Carolina, on the other hand, let its child care centers know, “it remains your decision as a provider whether to remain open,” and the state currently has no Covid-19-specific group size limitations for child care.
So, especially in states that have closed or drastically limited child care center availability, many families have been scrambling to either do without child care or to try to find alternative care so they can work. (And many older relatives that might previously have been first choice for that role are at a higher risk for severe Covid-19 infection and advised to limit contact with others.)
Rhode Island, which closed its day cares, recommends finding a single in-home care provider, such as a nanny. But such individualized care can cost a good deal more than day care. (And even standard day care is a huge financial strain on many families.)
So that leaves potentially millions of families wondering when their usual child care will be back up and running. And when it is, if it will be safe.
In mid-May, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) finally issued guidance (which still defers largely to local guidelines) to help child care centers, as well as camps, restaurants, bars, and other operations decide if they can safely reopen. (These documents had been expected weeks earlier but had been held back by the White House.)
The newly published decision-making chart for child care facilities doesn’t add too much in the way of clarity. It includes a lot of non-binding language, such as “as feasible” and “encourage.”
“The CDC [decision] tree is extremely basic,” says Mullen Davis, whose group in Denver has created its own additional decision-making tool for centers that also helps them evaluate their financial situation.
Austin also points to key differences between the new CDC guidance and earlier versions that were leaked but never published. For example, in a previous version, the CDC recommended centers close if they were in a community that was still in the midst of significant spread of the virus. “Further, the decision [-making chart] does not require increased screening for children or staff in such communities and instead recommends they should do this if feasible,” she notes. To boot, such guidelines can “provide a false sense of security.”
This scattered response for child care programs has been vastly different from that for schools, which have been closed across the country, with many discussing switching to online learning for the fall as well.
These programs are also quite different from schools — and not always in ways that make infection control easier. “Because we’re talking about children at very different developmental stages, it’s important that we recognize some of the unique challenges being faced by child care centers,” Dan Wuori, director of Early Learning at the Hunt Institute, told Vox. “Child care has some very different health and safety considerations that need to be approached with real deliberation.”
For centers that have stayed open or are reopening, the CDC published relatively detailed guidance in April. Some of these recommendations include taking children’s temperature each day upon arrival (possibly while staff are in full personal protective gear), not using toys that cannot be sanitized, and using cloth masks for children over 2.
Many of these recommendations, such as changing gloves for every child temperature upon entry, are not always feasible due to supply availability and prices. (An April survey of more than 2,000 child care programs in California found that 62 percent were having difficulty obtaining cleaning supplies or personal protective equipment.)
And many other guidelines seem incongruous with young kids’ behavior and abilities, such as expecting 3-year-olds to keep masks on all day.
“It would be difficult to have children 3-5 wear [masks] all day with any reliability,” Allison Bartlett, associate medical director of the Infection Control Program and a pediatric infectious disease specialist at University of Chicago Medicine, told Vox. “In addition, kids with masks may be prone to remove them, touch their faces, reposition the masks, etc., contaminating themselves in the process.”
As the authors of a letter in the European Journal of Pediatrics concluded, “If compliance is difficult, it is better that the child does not wear the mask, and other measures for reducing infection risk, including remaining at home, are practiced.”
We still don’t know much about the coronavirus in babies and very young children
Part of the trouble with deciding on best practices for child care centers — as well as schools — is that we don’t know very much about the risk of the virus in children.
It’s been clear since the beginning of the pandemic that kids are at a lower risk of getting severely ill and dying from Covid-19 than adults are. But some do still get sick, and some die. Children with underlying health conditions, such as respiratory issues, are at higher risk, as are the very youngest children. For example, those under the age of 1 had the highest rate of hospitalization for Covid-19 among those under the age of 18, according to a report from the CDC. The same analysis found that these infants accounted for a full 30 percent of documented pediatric ICU admissions.
“Children of all ages appeared susceptible to Covid-19,” wrote the authors of an April article in Pediatrics that analyzed data from more than 2,100 pediatric Covid-19 patients in China. From the children in their study, 7 percent of infant cases required critical care — compared with 0 percent of children ages 6-10.
And there are also the increasing reports of severe inflammatory illness in children who have had the virus — even if they never appeared sick. In New York state, more than 100 children — including some as young as infants and toddlers — have been diagnosed with this serious condition, and at least three have died from it.
And we also don’t have a good sense of how many very young children might be carriers of the virus without ever getting sick at all.
What role do very young children play in transmitting the coronavirus?
In general, “young children are well-known culprits in transmission of other respiratory viruses,” Bartlett says. “The safest assumption until we have good data is that they are vectors for Covid-19 transmission as well.”
Research has shown that adults can have a lot of the coronavirus in their system and still feel fine, suggesting that the illness can spread even from those who do not have symptoms.
“There is lots of angst about exposure and making sure [child care centers] do things ‘right’”
“While we are thankful that children are relatively spared in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, they are potential vectors of spread to other members in the community,” Bartlett says. “We don’t know a lot about transmission among young children, but their propensity to put things in their mouths could increase risk of spread among children,” she noted.
This liberalness with germ sharing is compounded with peer interactions at child care centers. An April report in Science looked at the change in the number of daily contacts infants and young children had before and during pandemic restrictions in Wuhan and Shanghai, China. They found there was a drop in the daily number of contacts children ages 0-6 had from about 12 to 2 in Wuhan and from about 14 to 2 in Shanghai. Reducing the number of people everyone comes into contact with has been a cornerstone of efforts to slow the pandemic.
Looking at their data from children overall, the authors noted, “while proactive school closures cannot interrupt transmission on their own, they can reduce peak incidence by 40-60 percent and delay the epidemic.”
Protecting the safety of child care workers
Conversations about day cares also often leave off the question of staff exposure. Given that babies and young children need such hands-on care — pretty much all day — Austin says, there’s essentially no way for educators to physically distance themselves from the kids they are caring for.
Some precautions can help mitigate risk of Covid-19 transmission in close contact, such as “making sure child care workers change clothes if they get spit up on, etc., and having them wash their necks/arms if they are in contact with children’s secretions can help as well,” Bartlett says. But these steps will need to be taken dozens of times a day, especially for those caring for babies.
To add to the difficult situation, Austin notes, caregivers are frequently “among the black and brown communities that are being disproportionately impacted by Covid-19.” In California, for example, the majority of these roles are filled by people of color.
Austin and others have suggested child care workers who have underlying health conditions and those who are over 65 might consider not returning to work — or doing so in a capacity in which they do not interact with children. But these options are not always feasible or financially possible.
My spouse is on the board of our (nonprofit, non-university-affiliated) daycare, and listening to the calls where they try to figure out when and how to reopen is equally devastating and disconcerting. Here are a few of the things they have to consider (a thread): — Jess Calarco (@JessicaCalarco) May 10, 2020
“Pre-pandemic child care programs operated on thin margins, and staff were earning poverty wages,” Austin says. “This crisis is exacerbating these conditions, leading many early educators to risk their lives by continuing work under the current conditions — or risk losing their livelihoods if they don’t work.” Early education workers earn a national average of about $12 an hour, her group has determined.
Some child care staff have requested testing if they are to return to work, while others have left their jobs.
Families who still have access to care are worried
There are also numerous concerns coming from families who have previously relied on group child care so they could earn money themselves.
In Colorado, Mullen Davis says they have seen an increase in families requesting tuition aid for their child care — “many of whom have never asked for this aid before,” she says. “It’s clear that many families are facing additional financial pressures right now.”
In addition, she says, “some parents are anxious to bring their children, while others ask for assurances that are often beyond the center’s control.”
The stress of the situation has trickled down to the children as well, who “have their own fears and anxieties, which can add to behavior challenges in the classroom,” says her colleague Karen Thiel, lead quality initiatives navigator at the council.
Families as well as educators have expressed other concerns related to how new health and safety guidelines at centers might impact children and their development. Thiel has had families ask, “How are children going to learn to interact in socially appropriate ways if they are expected to stay 6 feet apart?”
Mullen Davis heard from another parent recently who was worried about her infant surrounded by masked staff for 40 hours a week. “She was concerned about how masks affect language and social emotional development if children cannot see their caregiver’s friendly or responsive face,” she says. “We just don’t have research on this.”
Covid-19 might put many child care centers out of business
With all of these changes, a large proportion of child care centers — like so many other small businesses — might not survive the pandemic.
In Colorado, “many center directors are worried that they will not have enough children to cover the costs of care if they reopen,” Mullen Davis says. Centers are also dealing with extreme fluctuations in staffing as well as attendance. And with many states capping group size at around 10, that takes a serious bite of tuition revenue, especially for preschool, where classrooms often average close to 17 children.
The CSCCE found in a recent survey that 14 percent of the more than 2,000 California child care programs polled that are currently closed will not be able to sustain a closure that runs past the end of May. And for those that have stayed open, they found that 63 percent would not be able to survive a closure of more than a month.
There is already a shortage of child care in the US. Some half of US families with young children have reported having trouble finding child care, according to the Center for American Progress, a progressive-leaning research and advocacy organization. (The group estimated that in 2016, 2 million US parents quit jobs or drastically changed their work due to issues with child care.)
“This crisis has revealed the central role child care teachers play in our society,” Austin says. “This is a moment to stabilize and invest in this critical component of our infrastructure so that it exists going forward and does so in a manner that protects the well-being of children, early educators, and communities.”
Some states are taking large steps to ensure child care centers can remain solvent for now. Vermont, for example, is using a combination of state and federal funds to provide any revenue centers have lost.
Others are reexamining earlier actions. “Gov. Mike DeWine in Ohio really stands out,” Javaid Siddiqi, president of the Hunt Institute, told Vox. “Just [last] week he pulled back and acknowledged that the reopening of child care was just too important to do haphazardly. He wants their plan to be based on science and safety. That’s a difficult stance to take in the face of pressure to reopen, but it’s clear that he really understands the gravity of the situation.” The state’s child care centers have been closed there since March 26 (with emergency care for health care workers), but there are now plans to reopen at the end of May with new measures in place.
Beginning Sunday, May 31st childcare providers in #Ohio will be able to re-open, with reduced numbers of children in each classroom and intensified cleaning and handwashing practices. #ResponsibleRestartOhio pic.twitter.com/oxjoeYM26i — Governor Mike DeWine (@GovMikeDeWine) May 14, 2020
But, as Bartlett notes, “As parents of young children know, even the day care centers with the most meticulous attention to hygiene have transmission of infections. There are measures that we can undertake to decrease the risk of transmission, but it will never be zero.”


vox--2020-05-19--Here’s Facebook’s new plan to make you shop on Instagram

Facebook really wants you to go from “ Like ” to “ Buy.
” On Tuesday , Mark Zuckerberg announced a set of new features aimed at making Instagram and Facebook true shopping destinations , by offering struggling brick-and-mortar shops new options to sell to customers online .
If successful , the initiatives would make it easier for Instagram and Facebook users to discover and buy products right from the apps .
This could also boost Facebook ’ s business since it offers retailers of all sizes even more reasons to buy ads on the two giant social networking apps @ @ @ @ @ @ @ merchants is called Facebook Shops .
These customizable online storefronts , which live on a Facebook page or Instagram profile , allow people to browse and purchase items without leaving the apps .
Zuckerberg also said that in the coming months Instagram would be adding a dedicated shopping tab to the app ’ s main navigation bar , which would make it more obvious to Instagram users that they can do more than swipe and “ Like ” on the app .
“ This is the biggest step that we ’ ve taken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Zuckerberg said in an announcement livestreamed on Facebook on Tuesday afternoon .
Facebook ’ s new initiative comes as online shopping has grown significantly amid the pandemic , when nonessential brick-and-mortar shops were forced shut and stay-at-home recommendations left many consumers skittish about visiting stores that remained open .
Just before the pandemic , online shopping accounted for around 15 percent of total retail sales in the United States , but it now accounts for around 27 percent , according to Bank of America .
This new environment has actually been great for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ businesses .
Now , Facebook is attempting to take advantage , too , while trying to sell itself as a partner to small businesses struggling to stay afloat .
Unlike Amazon and Walmart , which appeal to shoppers who already have some idea of the product or brand they are looking to buy , Facebook and Instagram continue to push the idea that their apps can encourage discovery and the type of serendipitous shopping behavior that an older generation would have experienced by visiting a mall .
The pandemic has also caused a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is affecting Facebook ’ s bottom line , the company said in April .
Advertising on Facebook and its family of apps was flat year over year in the first three weeks of April , compared to 17 percent year-over-year growth in the first three months of the year .
In the long-run , Facebook hopes the new shopping features give big and small retailers more incentive to get their brands in front of Facebook and Instagram users .
Facebook is not charging a fee or taking a cut of sales from companies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Shops feature unless they use Facebook ’ s “ Checkout ” feature .
If they use “ Checkout ” to accept payments rather than using another e-commerce software firm , they pay 5 percent , which is higher than typical payment processing fees but lower than what Amazon or eBay charges .
“ As with other parts of Facebook , we use your activity from Facebook Shops to personalize your experience on our apps and show you more relevant content , including ads , ” the company said in a blog post .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ chapter in Facebook ’ s years-long attempts to become a shopping destination .
As far back as 2014 , Facebook tested features such as “ Buy ” buttons on products in ads , but that specific initiative never took off .
The company has had more success with its Craiglist-like Facebook Marketplace section and has more recently courted big retailers like Uniqlo and Zara to Instagram , where they have started selling some products directly within the app .
However , the new online shop feature is designed to make selling on Instagram @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them to create actual storefronts that reflect the feel of their brand , rather than the simple and uniform product catalogs available to them in the past .
Facebook is working with several e-commerce companies that make software specifically for online retailers .
The biggest of them is Shopify , the $ 80 billion Canadian software company that counts more than a million online retailers as customers globally .
Shopify recently made its own splash to get its businesses in front of more shoppers , by rebranding the Arrive package-tracking app it owns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you products from Shopify merchants located nearby or from which you ’ ve made a purchase before .
Shopify actually started working with Facebook five years ago on shopping features , including those so-called “ Buy ” buttons .
But the bet here by Facebook , Shopify , and the other partners is that consumer behavior has changed a lot since then and that people are much more comfortable interacting with retailers and brands on Instagram and Facebook today than before .
“ That behavior is just happening a lot more naturally than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Shopify executive Satish Kanwar said in an interview with Recode .
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 distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 .

Facebook really wants you to go from “Like” to “Buy.”
On Tuesday, Mark Zuckerberg announced a set of new features aimed at making Instagram and Facebook true shopping destinations, by offering struggling brick-and-mortar shops new options to sell to customers online. If successful, the initiatives would make it easier for Instagram and Facebook users to discover and buy products right from the apps. This could also boost Facebook’s business since it offers retailers of all sizes even more reasons to buy ads on the two giant social networking apps.
The big new feature for online merchants is called Facebook Shops. These customizable online storefronts, which live on a Facebook page or Instagram profile, allow people to browse and purchase items without leaving the apps. Zuckerberg also said that in the coming months Instagram would be adding a dedicated shopping tab to the app’s main navigation bar, which would make it more obvious to Instagram users that they can do more than swipe and “Like” on the app.
“This is the biggest step that we’ve taken yet [in e-commerce],” Zuckerberg said in an announcement livestreamed on Facebook on Tuesday afternoon.
Facebook’s new initiative comes as online shopping has grown significantly amid the pandemic, when nonessential brick-and-mortar shops were forced shut and stay-at-home recommendations left many consumers skittish about visiting stores that remained open. Just before the pandemic, online shopping accounted for around 15 percent of total retail sales in the United States, but it now accounts for around 27 percent, according to Bank of America.
This new environment has actually been great for Amazon’s and Walmart’s businesses. Now, Facebook is attempting to take advantage, too, while trying to sell itself as a partner to small businesses struggling to stay afloat. Unlike Amazon and Walmart, which appeal to shoppers who already have some idea of the product or brand they are looking to buy, Facebook and Instagram continue to push the idea that their apps can encourage discovery and the type of serendipitous shopping behavior that an older generation would have experienced by visiting a mall.
The pandemic has also caused a broad pullback in online advertising, which is affecting Facebook’s bottom line, the company said in April. Advertising on Facebook and its family of apps was flat year over year in the first three weeks of April, compared to 17 percent year-over-year growth in the first three months of the year. In the long-run, Facebook hopes the new shopping features give big and small retailers more incentive to get their brands in front of Facebook and Instagram users.
Facebook is not charging a fee or taking a cut of sales from companies that set up storefronts in the new Shops feature unless they use Facebook’s “Checkout” feature. If they use “Checkout” to accept payments rather than using another e-commerce software firm, they pay 5 percent, which is higher than typical payment processing fees but lower than what Amazon or eBay charges.
“As with other parts of Facebook, we use your activity from Facebook Shops to personalize your experience on our apps and show you more relevant content, including ads,” the company said in a blog post.
The new features mark just the latest chapter in Facebook’s years-long attempts to become a shopping destination. As far back as 2014, Facebook tested features such as “Buy” buttons on products in ads, but that specific initiative never took off. The company has had more success with its Craiglist-like Facebook Marketplace section and has more recently courted big retailers like Uniqlo and Zara to Instagram, where they have started selling some products directly within the app. However, the new online shop feature is designed to make selling on Instagram more accessible to smaller businesses and allow them to create actual storefronts that reflect the feel of their brand, rather than the simple and uniform product catalogs available to them in the past.
Facebook is working with several e-commerce companies that make software specifically for online retailers. The biggest of them is Shopify, the $80 billion Canadian software company that counts more than a million online retailers as customers globally. Shopify recently made its own splash to get its businesses in front of more shoppers, by rebranding the Arrive package-tracking app it owns into an app called Shop that shows you products from Shopify merchants located nearby or from which you’ve made a purchase before. Shopify actually started working with Facebook five years ago on shopping features, including those so-called “Buy” buttons.
But the bet here by Facebook, Shopify, and the other partners is that consumer behavior has changed a lot since then and that people are much more comfortable interacting with retailers and brands on Instagram and Facebook today than before.
“That behavior is just happening a lot more naturally than it was five years ago,” Shopify executive Satish Kanwar said in an interview with Recode.


vox--2020-05-19--Spotify is hiring Joe Rogan, one of the world’s most popular and controversial podcasters

Joe Rogan — one of the world ’ s most popular and influential podcasters — is taking his show to Spotify .
By the end of this year , Spotify will be the only place you can hear Rogan ’ s podcast .
The deal , which Rogan is announcing today via his Joe Rogan Experience show , is the fifth big investment Spotify has made in the podcasting industry over the last couple of years .
Unlike other deals , this isn ’ t an acquisition , but a “ multiyear licensing deal.
” So Rogan will end up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hop somewhere else .
But it may be the most significant podcasting move Spotify has made to date : Unlike previous deals , this one is taking an existing , popular show and making it exclusive to Spotify .
So Rogan and Spotify are betting that his millions of fans who are used to consuming his show on platforms like YouTube or Apple ’ s Podcast app will switch over to Spotify .
This has echoes of Sirius XM ’ s move to bring Howard Stern ’ s popular morning show to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ big difference : Sirius was a subscription-only service , and Spotify offers a free , ad-supported version ; an ad-free version of Spotify costs $ 10 a month in the U.S.
It ’ s also significant that Spotify , which like most big tech companies has tried to steer away from politics and political controversy , is hiring someone who has provided a platform to conspiracists like Alex Jones , along with key figures in the so-called “ Intellectual Dark Web.
” But Rogan and his politics are also difficult to pigeonhole : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ storm by sort-of endorsing then-presidential candidate Bernie Sanders .
Rogan will start working for Spotify on September 1 , and the company says it will move all of his archives , including videos of his lengthy interviews , to its platform .
At first , his fans will still be able to find his stuff outside of Spotify , but the audio company says his show will become exclusive to Spotify “ later this year.
” Spotify hasn ’ t released terms of the deal , but it would be reasonable to assume @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ballpark of what Spotify paid to acquire Bill Simmons ’ s The Ringer earlier this year : That deal cost Spotify around $ 190 million , plus another $ 50 million or so in employment contracts .
The Wall Street Journal pegs the price at $ 100 million but also suggests it could be more .
The big difference between these agreements is that in Simmons ’ s case , Spotify was buying a full staff but not making their most popular shows exclusive ; here , Spotify is essentially renting Rogan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Spotify to get him .
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 distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 .

Joe Rogan — one of the world’s most popular and influential podcasters — is taking his show to Spotify. By the end of this year, Spotify will be the only place you can hear Rogan’s podcast.
The deal, which Rogan is announcing today via his Joe Rogan Experience show, is the fifth big investment Spotify has made in the podcasting industry over the last couple of years. Unlike other deals, this isn’t an acquisition, but a “multiyear licensing deal.” So Rogan will end up owning his own work and can eventually hop somewhere else.
But it may be the most significant podcasting move Spotify has made to date: Unlike previous deals, this one is taking an existing, popular show and making it exclusive to Spotify.
So Rogan and Spotify are betting that his millions of fans who are used to consuming his show on platforms like YouTube or Apple’s Podcast app will switch over to Spotify. This has echoes of Sirius XM’s move to bring Howard Stern’s popular morning show to the satellite radio service in 2004. One big difference: Sirius was a subscription-only service, and Spotify offers a free, ad-supported version; an ad-free version of Spotify costs $10 a month in the U.S.
It’s also significant that Spotify, which like most big tech companies has tried to steer away from politics and political controversy, is hiring someone who has provided a platform to conspiracists like Alex Jones, along with key figures in the so-called “Intellectual Dark Web.” But Rogan and his politics are also difficult to pigeonhole: Earlier this year he kicked off a storm by sort-of endorsing then-presidential candidate Bernie Sanders.
Rogan will start working for Spotify on September 1, and the company says it will move all of his archives, including videos of his lengthy interviews, to its platform. At first, his fans will still be able to find his stuff outside of Spotify, but the audio company says his show will become exclusive to Spotify “later this year.”
Spotify hasn’t released terms of the deal, but it would be reasonable to assume that it’s at least in the ballpark of what Spotify paid to acquire Bill Simmons’s The Ringer earlier this year: That deal cost Spotify around $190 million, plus another $50 million or so in employment contracts. The Wall Street Journal pegs the price at $100 million but also suggests it could be more.
The big difference between these agreements is that in Simmons’s case, Spotify was buying a full staff but not making their most popular shows exclusive; here, Spotify is essentially renting Rogan but making sure you have to go to Spotify to get him.