vox--2020-07-28--Senate Republicans’ dramatically smaller unemployment insurance proposal, explained

Senate Republicans have released their proposal for a new coronavirus stimulus package — and they ’ re using the bill to focus on a key GOP priority : making cuts to enhanced unemployment insurance .
Changes to unemployment insurance ( UI ) comprise a core plank of the HEALS Act , which Republicans unveiled on Monday , just days before the July 31 expiration of existing federal unemployment benefits .
As part of their proposal , Republicans would reduce the amount of enhanced UI that people receive weekly .
Currently , as designated in the CARES Act , every unemployed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week in addition to their standard UI benefit .
Republicans ’ plan would pare down this boost to $ 200 per week through September .
Beginning in October , states would be directed to issue unemployment payments equal to 70 percent of a person ’ s previous wages , up to $ 500 per week in additional payments above their standard UI amount .
The enhanced UI introduced by the CARES Act was significant : Before its passage , the average UI recipient received $ 370 per week , an amount replacing roughly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The enhanced UI was meant to fill in some of that missing 60 percent , ensuring that amid a devastating public health crisis , the more than 30 million workers who ’ ve been laid off or furloughed would be able to stay afloat .
Republicans , however , have long opposed the size of the CARES Act ’ s UI expansion , arguing that it deterred people from returning to work , since some workers received more money with the enhanced UI than they had at their previous jobs .
The thinking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reduction in enhanced UI would eliminate this disincentive , because the proposed benefits would be less than what many workers had previously earned .
This structure would provide relief “ in a way that does not slow down reopening , ” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell argued in a floor speech on Monday .
That logic , though , ignores a harsh reality : Since the government still hasn ’ t been able to get the public health crisis under control , it ’ s not yet safe for many industries to resume @ @ @ @ @ @ @ under the current circumstances , millions of workers don ’ t have jobs to return to .
“ I don ’ t understand what ’ s different about the economy now than what was happening in March , ” said Michele Evermore , a senior policy analyst at the National Employment Law Project .
“ Dropping to $ 200 is unnecessarily cruel.
” Reducing the UI boost against this backdrop will likely have massive consequences for individual workers struggling to cover their living costs , as well as the broader economy .
According @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the chief economist at Moody ’ s Analytics , slashing UI benefits could result in nearly 1 million more job losses by the end of 2020 , due to declines in GDP and consumer spending .
It could also contribute to what advocacy groups warn is a looming homelessness and hunger crisis .
“ An extension of [ UI ] benefits will ... help me pay rent , provide for my family , and put food on the table , ” IT worker Nick Parisi previously told Vox .
“ Most importantly , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continue to survive during these troubling times.
” The Republican proposal sets up a major fight with Democrats To Democrats , lowering the weekly federal UI benefit to $ 200 per week is out of the question .
For now , Democrats are keeping their bar set at continuing the $ 600-per-week unemployment benefit , among a slew of other measures .
On Tuesday , Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer took to the Senate floor to rip into Republicans for delaying the release of their bill while failing to secure a consensus in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the bill ’ s contents .
“ Two Republican chairmen have said that probably half of the Republican Senate will vote against their own proposals , ” Schumer said .
“ Worst of all , the Republican plan falls dreadfully short : it is un-unified , unserious , completely unsatisfactory.
” Schumer derided the Republican bill as one filled with money for American big business , with little for families or strapped state governments .
It is true that a number of prominent Republicans , including Sens .
Ted Cruz ( TX @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , have said they won ’ t support the GOP legislation as written , and Republican leaders have openly admitted many more could follow .
“ At the end of the day , [ McConnell ] has to accept the reality that probably half of our members in the Senate won ’ t vote for it no matter what ’ s in it , ” Sen. Roy Blunt ( R-MO ) told Politico ’ s John Bresnahan and Andrew Desiderio .
This failure to get his own conference in line means McConnell will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with both Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on the final text of the bill .
Pelosi released the Democrats ’ proposal for the next round of pandemic stimulus , the HEROES Act , in mid-May .
Now comes the hard work of finding consensus between two vastly different proposals .
Negotiations between congressional Democrats and White House officials started Monday night , but Pelosi indicated the two sides have a long way to go before they can reach consensus .
“ We hope that we would be able to reach an agreement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Monday meeting .
“ We clearly do not have shared values .
Having said that , we just want to see if we can find some common ground to go forward .
But we ’ re not at that place yet.
” The HEROES Act was largely meant to extend federal aid to state and local governments who are suffering revenue losses related to the Covid-19 pandemic .
The bill would also extend the $ 600-per-week expanded benefits through January 31 , 2021 , and put in a so-called “ soft cutoff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ benefits through March 2021 without further legislation being passed .
Democrats also aimed to allocate $ 925 million to help states cover their portion of unemployment benefits and to speed up the processing of individual claims .
“ States have warned us the Republican plan is virtually unworkable to boot , ” Schumer said .
“ We called state unemployment offices yesterday to ask them what would happen if the Republicans passed this new scheme .
One state office simply said , ‘ Chaos , chaos.
’ ” The economic fallout from reducing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reducing UI could be huge for both individuals and the broader economy .
Nearly 32 million people are relying on unemployment benefits , per the most recent report from the Labor Department .
Were the weekly UI amount to go down , many individuals would face steep challenges when it comes to covering basic living costs including rent , mortgage , and food payments .
According to the Household Pulse Survey , a weekly survey conducted by the US Census Bureau , “ 11 percent of the population right now is food-insecure , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ increase .
26 percent are housing-insecure , you ’ re going to see that increase , ” University of Kansas economic professor Donna Ginther told Vox .
There could also be significant reductions in consumer spending as a result of such UI changes , leading to even more job losses in other industries .
According to an estimate from the Economic Policy Institute , the existing weekly $ 600 benefit is helping support roughly 5 million jobs .
As Zandi noted , a million more jobs could be lost by the end of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and consumer spending dips .
Republicans ’ focus on getting people back to work also disregards the current economic reality : As many as 11.9 million workers have no chance of returning to their prior jobs in the near term , an EPI analysis notes .
“ If they cut back the benefits , there will be millions and millions of [ UI recipients ] who will not be able to get a job afterward ... because the jobs aren ’ t available , and/or because it ’ s not safe for them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says Heidi Shierholz , the policy director at EPI .
States that are already overwhelmed will have a tough time implementing these changes Even if Congress is able to reach a compromise and pass a bipartisan bill , there may be additional delays that hurt individuals and families depending on unemployment insurance to pay the bills .
Many state unemployment insurance systems run on outdated and complicated software .
Earlier this spring , it took some states months to program the $ 600 federal benefit into their systems .
Changing the amount of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to match 70 percent of workers ’ preexisting wages up to a specific limit ( as Senate Republicans are proposing ) , could create new delays in getting money into the hands of those who need it .
Dropping the benefit to 70 percent of a person ’ s preexisting wages could take particularly long , Evermore said , as each recipient could receive a different amount .
The Senate GOP bill attempts to address this issue by giving states two months to program the updated benefits into their computer systems but would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a waiver , giving them an extra two months if they need more time .
“ They ’ re going to spend four months programming in a benefit that expires in a month ?
” Evermore said .
“ I think it ’ s not a serious proposal .
Even if at this point they reauthorize the $ 600 , it would take states two to four weeks to get it up and running again.
” This could put even more strain on people who have depended on the enhanced unemployment insurance , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people back to high-risk work while coronavirus cases are still surging across the country , particularly those predisposed to negative Covid-19 outcomes .
For instance , in July , the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated around 47 percent of UI recipients were people of color .
If the benefit is delayed and reduced significantly , it could disproportionately impact Black and brown communities — groups that are more likely than other communities both to become infected with the coronavirus and to die from it .
“ This [ benefit ] is going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incomes were the most impacted by Covid , ” Evermore said .
“ Those are going to be the people most impacted by the loss of $ 600.
” 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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 .

Senate Republicans have released their proposal for a new coronavirus stimulus package — and they’re using the bill to focus on a key GOP priority: making cuts to enhanced unemployment insurance.
Changes to unemployment insurance (UI) comprise a core plank of the HEALS Act, which Republicans unveiled on Monday, just days before the July 31 expiration of existing federal unemployment benefits. As part of their proposal, Republicans would reduce the amount of enhanced UI that people receive weekly.
Currently, as designated in the CARES Act, every unemployed person receives an additional $600 per week in addition to their standard UI benefit. Republicans’ plan would pare down this boost to $200 per week through September. Beginning in October, states would be directed to issue unemployment payments equal to 70 percent of a person’s previous wages, up to $500 per week in additional payments above their standard UI amount.
The enhanced UI introduced by the CARES Act was significant: Before its passage, the average UI recipient received $370 per week, an amount replacing roughly 40 percent of their previous wages. The enhanced UI was meant to fill in some of that missing 60 percent, ensuring that amid a devastating public health crisis, the more than 30 million workers who’ve been laid off or furloughed would be able to stay afloat.
Republicans, however, have long opposed the size of the CARES Act’s UI expansion, arguing that it deterred people from returning to work, since some workers received more money with the enhanced UI than they had at their previous jobs. The thinking behind their new plan is that a reduction in enhanced UI would eliminate this disincentive, because the proposed benefits would be less than what many workers had previously earned.
This structure would provide relief “in a way that does not slow down reopening,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell argued in a floor speech on Monday.
That logic, though, ignores a harsh reality: Since the government still hasn’t been able to get the public health crisis under control, it’s not yet safe for many industries to resume operations and bring workers back. And under the current circumstances, millions of workers don’t have jobs to return to.
“I don’t understand what’s different about the economy now than what was happening in March,” said Michele Evermore, a senior policy analyst at the National Employment Law Project. “Dropping to $200 is unnecessarily cruel.”
Reducing the UI boost against this backdrop will likely have massive consequences for individual workers struggling to cover their living costs, as well as the broader economy. According to an estimate from Mark Zandi, the chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, slashing UI benefits could result in nearly 1 million more job losses by the end of 2020, due to declines in GDP and consumer spending. It could also contribute to what advocacy groups warn is a looming homelessness and hunger crisis.
“An extension of [UI] benefits will ... help me pay rent, provide for my family, and put food on the table,” IT worker Nick Parisi previously told Vox. “Most importantly, it will provide assurance that I may continue to survive during these troubling times.”
The Republican proposal sets up a major fight with Democrats
To Democrats, lowering the weekly federal UI benefit to $200 per week is out of the question. For now, Democrats are keeping their bar set at continuing the $600-per-week unemployment benefit, among a slew of other measures.
On Tuesday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer took to the Senate floor to rip into Republicans for delaying the release of their bill while failing to secure a consensus in their own caucus — as well as for the bill’s contents.
“Two Republican chairmen have said that probably half of the Republican Senate will vote against their own proposals,” Schumer said. “Worst of all, the Republican plan falls dreadfully short: it is un-unified, unserious, completely unsatisfactory.” Schumer derided the Republican bill as one filled with money for American big business, with little for families or strapped state governments.
It is true that a number of prominent Republicans, including Sens. Ted Cruz (TX) and Mike Braun (IN), have said they won’t support the GOP legislation as written, and Republican leaders have openly admitted many more could follow.
“At the end of the day, [McConnell] has to accept the reality that probably half of our members in the Senate won’t vote for it no matter what’s in it,” Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO) told Politico’s John Bresnahan and Andrew Desiderio.
This failure to get his own conference in line means McConnell will have little leverage as his party negotiates with both Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on the final text of the bill. Pelosi released the Democrats’ proposal for the next round of pandemic stimulus, the HEROES Act, in mid-May.
Now comes the hard work of finding consensus between two vastly different proposals. Negotiations between congressional Democrats and White House officials started Monday night, but Pelosi indicated the two sides have a long way to go before they can reach consensus.
“We hope that we would be able to reach an agreement,” Pelosi told reporters after leaving the Monday meeting. “We clearly do not have shared values. Having said that, we just want to see if we can find some common ground to go forward. But we’re not at that place yet.”
The HEROES Act was largely meant to extend federal aid to state and local governments who are suffering revenue losses related to the Covid-19 pandemic. The bill would also extend the $600-per-week expanded benefits through January 31, 2021, and put in a so-called “soft cutoff” to ensure some individuals could get benefits through March 2021 without further legislation being passed. Democrats also aimed to allocate $925 million to help states cover their portion of unemployment benefits and to speed up the processing of individual claims.
“States have warned us the Republican plan is virtually unworkable to boot,” Schumer said. “We called state unemployment offices yesterday to ask them what would happen if the Republicans passed this new scheme. One state office simply said, ‘Chaos, chaos.’”
The economic fallout from reducing UI could be massive
The fallout from reducing UI could be huge for both individuals and the broader economy.
Nearly 32 million people are relying on unemployment benefits, per the most recent report from the Labor Department. Were the weekly UI amount to go down, many individuals would face steep challenges when it comes to covering basic living costs including rent, mortgage, and food payments.
According to the Household Pulse Survey, a weekly survey conducted by the US Census Bureau, “11 percent of the population right now is food-insecure, you’re going to see that increase. 26 percent are housing-insecure, you’re going to see that increase,” University of Kansas economic professor Donna Ginther told Vox.
There could also be significant reductions in consumer spending as a result of such UI changes, leading to even more job losses in other industries. According to an estimate from the Economic Policy Institute, the existing weekly $600 benefit is helping support roughly 5 million jobs. As Zandi noted, a million more jobs could be lost by the end of the year, if UI gets cut and consumer spending dips.
Republicans’ focus on getting people back to work also disregards the current economic reality: As many as 11.9 million workers have no chance of returning to their prior jobs in the near term, an EPI analysis notes.
“If they cut back the benefits, there will be millions and millions of [UI recipients] who will not be able to get a job afterward ... because the jobs aren’t available, and/or because it’s not safe for them and they have care responsibilities,” says Heidi Shierholz, the policy director at EPI.
States that are already overwhelmed will have a tough time implementing these changes
Even if Congress is able to reach a compromise and pass a bipartisan bill, there may be additional delays that hurt individuals and families depending on unemployment insurance to pay the bills.
Many state unemployment insurance systems run on outdated and complicated software. Earlier this spring, it took some states months to program the $600 federal benefit into their systems. Changing the amount of the benefit, or changing the benefits to match 70 percent of workers’ preexisting wages up to a specific limit (as Senate Republicans are proposing), could create new delays in getting money into the hands of those who need it.
Dropping the benefit to 70 percent of a person’s preexisting wages could take particularly long, Evermore said, as each recipient could receive a different amount. The Senate GOP bill attempts to address this issue by giving states two months to program the updated benefits into their computer systems but would also grant states the opportunity to obtain a waiver, giving them an extra two months if they need more time.
“They’re going to spend four months programming in a benefit that expires in a month?” Evermore said. “I think it’s not a serious proposal. Even if at this point they reauthorize the $600, it would take states two to four weeks to get it up and running again.”
This could put even more strain on people who have depended on the enhanced unemployment insurance, and Evermore fears it could force some people back to high-risk work while coronavirus cases are still surging across the country, particularly those predisposed to negative Covid-19 outcomes. For instance, in July, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated around 47 percent of UI recipients were people of color. If the benefit is delayed and reduced significantly, it could disproportionately impact Black and brown communities — groups that are more likely than other communities both to become infected with the coronavirus and to die from it.
“This [benefit] is going to low-income people; people with the lowest incomes were the most impacted by Covid,” Evermore said. “Those are going to be the people most impacted by the loss of $600.”


vox--2020-07-28--Emmys 2020: The nominees for the best TV of the year

Somehow , in a year as unpredictable as 2020 , the Emmys are still happening .
And Tuesday morning , the nominations for the TV industry ’ s most prominent awards were announced .
The 2020 Emmy Awards will air on September 20 , and ABC ’ s Jimmy Kimmel will host a virtual edition of the annual awards show .
The red carpet and pre-show interviews won ’ t be the same — if they happen at all — but the Television Academy will still hand out the usual awards .
The best TV series from the last year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ perhaps be a nice reminder of what once was , back in the pre-pandemic days .
There are some notable open slots this year in the top categories .
Last year , in its second and final season , Phoebe Waller-Bridge ’ s dramedy Fleabag won three big awards : Outstanding Comedy Series , Lead Actress in a Comedy Series , and Writing in a Comedy Series .
Those awards will be up for grabs now , and previous frontrunner and 2018 winner The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel should be a favorite .
Schitt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ final season this year , might also make a splash .
Similarly , Game of Thrones won Best Drama Series in its final season last year , and should open up the field a bit with its departure .
Better Call Saul , Succession , and Pose , which were all nominated alongside Game of Thrones last year , could benefit , based on their acclaimed recent seasons .
Below are the nominations .
You can watch the Television Academy announce the nominees in an archived , truly chaotic livestream , hosted by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Emmy Awards will air on ABC at 8 pm ET on September 20 .
What We Do in the Shadows Sterling K. Brown , This Is Us Mark Ruffalo , I Know This Much Is True Cicely Tyson , How to Get Away with Murder Laverne Cox , Orange Is the New Black Phylicia Rashad , This Is Us Ron Cephas , This Is Us 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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 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 @

Despite the never-ending unpredictability of 2020, the Emmys are still happening. On Sunday, September 20, ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel will host the first-ever all-virtual edition of the annual awards show.
This year’s show will come with more than a few tweaks, thanks to the Covid-19 pandemic: Although Kimmel will host the ceremony in person at the Staples Center in Los Angeles, there won’t be a red carpet, nor will there be a live audience. Wackiest of all is that there will be professional cameras placed in 130 different locations — including actors’ personal homes — so the producers will be able to cut to different nominees throughout the show. Where they “attend” from and whether there will be any notable fashion to critique is up to the nominees themselves.
Otherwise, as per usual, the best TV series from the last year will be celebrated in what will perhaps be a nice reminder of what was, back in the pre-pandemic days.
HBO’s Watchmen has the most nominations of any show with 26, including one for Outstanding Limited Series. It’s followed by Amazon’s The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, which has 20 nominations. Netflix’s Ozark and HBO’s Succession are next in line, with 18 nominations each.
There are some notable open slots in the top categories. At the 2019 Emmys, the second and final season of Phoebe Waller-Bridge’s wonderful dramedy Fleabag won three big awards: Outstanding Comedy Series, Lead Actress in a Comedy Series, and Writing in a Comedy Series. Those honors will be up for grabs in 2020, and previous frontrunner and 2018 winner The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel should be a favorite. The beloved Schitt’s Creek, which aired its final season this year, might also make a splash.
Similarly, Game of Thrones won Best Drama Series for its final season in 2019, and its departure opens up the field a bit. Better Call Saul, Succession, and Pose, all nominated alongside Game of Thrones last year and returning to the race in 2020, could benefit, based on their acclaimed recent seasons.
Below is the full list of 2020 Emmy nominees. (If you’re interested, you can — and should — watch the Television Academy announce the nominees in an archived, truly chaotic livestream that was hosted in July by a livewire Leslie Jones.)
We’ll find out who among them wins on Sunday, when the 2020 Emmy Awards air on ABC at 8 pm Eastern. Fingers crossed nothing too messy happens during the show.
Outstanding Comedy Series
Curb Your Enthusiasm
Dead to Me
The Good Place
Insecure
The Kominsky Method
The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel
Schitt’s Creek
What We Do in the Shadows
Outstanding Drama Series
Better Call Saul
The Crown
The Handmaid’s Tale
Killing Eve
The Mandalorian
Ozark
Stranger Things
Succession
Outstanding Limited Series
Little Fires Everywhere
Mrs. America
Unbelievable
Unorthodox
Watchmen
Outstanding TV Movie
American Son
Bad Education
Dolly Parton’s Heartstrings: These Old Bones
El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie
Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt: Kimmy vs. the Reverend
Outstanding Reality Competition Program
The Masked Singer
Nailed It!
RuPaul’s Drag Race
Top Chef
The Voice
Outstanding Variety Talk Series
The Daily Show with Trevor Noah
Full Frontal with Samantha Bee
Jimmy Kimmel Live
Last Week Tonight with John Oliver
The Late Show with Stephen Colbert
Lead Actress in a Comedy Series
Christina Applegate, Dead to Me
Rachel Brosnahan, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel
Linda Cardellini, Dead to Me
Catherine O’Hara, Schitt’s Creek
Issa Rae, Insecure
Tracee Ellis Ross, Black-ish
Lead Actor in a Comedy Series
Anthony Anderson, Black-ish
Don Cheadle, Black Monday
Ted Danson, The Good Place
Michael Douglas, The Kominsky Method
Eugene Levy, Schitt’s Creek
Ramy Youssef, Ramy
Lead Actress in a Drama Series
Jennifer Aniston, The Morning Show
Olivia Colman, The Crown
Jodie Comer, Killing Eve
Laura Linney, Ozark
Sandra Oh, Killing Eve
Zendaya, Euphoria
Lead Actor in a Drama Series
Jason Bateman, Ozark
Sterling K. Brown, This Is Us
Steve Carell, The Morning Show
Brian Cox, Succession
Billy Porter, Pose
Jeremy Strong, Succession
Lead Actress in a Limited Series/TV Movie
Cate Blanchett, Mrs. America
Shira Haas, Unorthodox
Regina King, Watchmen
Octavia Spencer, Self Made
Kerry Washington, Little Fires Everywhere
Lead Actor in a Limited Series/TV Movie
Jeremy Irons, Watchmen
Hugh Jackman, Bad Education
Paul Mescal, Normal People
Jeremy Pope, Hollywood
Mark Ruffalo, I Know This Much Is True
Supporting Actress in a Comedy Series
Betty Gilpin, GLOW
D’Arcy Carden, The Good Place
Yvonne Orji, Insecure
Alex Borstein, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel
Marin Hinkle, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel
Kate McKinnon, Saturday Night Live
Cecily Strong, Saturday Night Live
Annie Murphy, Schitt’s Creek
Supporting Actor in a Comedy Series
Andre Braugher, Brooklyn Nine-Nine
William Jackson Harper, The Good Place
Alan Arkin, The Kominsky Method
Sterling K. Brown, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel
Tony Shalhoub, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel
Mahershala Ali, Ramy
Kenan Thompson, Saturday Night Live
Daniel Levy, Schitt’s Creek
Supporting Actress in a Drama Series
Laura Dern, Big Little Lies
Meryl Streep, Big Little Lies
Helena Bonham Carter, The Crown
Samira Wiley, The Handmaid’s Tale
Fiona Shaw, Killing Eve
Julia Garner, Ozark
Sarah Snook, Succession
Thandie Newton, Westworld
Supporting Actor in a Drama Series
Giancarlo Esposito, Better Call Saul
Bradley Whitford, The Handmaid’s Tale
Billy Crudup, The Morning Show
Mark Duplass, The Morning Show
Nicholas Braun, Succession
Kieran Culkin, Succession
Matthew Macfadyen, Succession
Jeffrey Wright, Westworld
Supporting Actress in a Limited Series
Holland Taylor, Hollywood
Uzo Aduba, Mrs. America
Margo Martindale, Mrs. America
Tracey Ullman, Mrs. America
Toni Collette, Unbelievable
Jean Smart, Watchmen
Supporting Actor in a Limited Series
Dylan McDermott, Hollywood
Jim Parsons, Hollywood
Tituss Burgess, Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt
Yahya Abdul-Mateen II, Watchmen
Jovan Adepo, Watchmen
Louis Gossett Jr., Watchmen
Guest Actress in a Comedy Series
Angela Bassett, A Black Lady Sketch Show
Maya Rudolph, The Good Place
Wanda Sykes, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel
Bette Midler, The Politician
Maya Rudolph, Saturday Night Live
Phoebe Waller-Bridge, Saturday Night Live
Guest Actor in a Comedy Series
Luke Kirby, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel
Fred Willard, Modern Family
Dev Patel, Modern Love
Adam Driver, Saturday Night Live
Eddie Murphy, Saturday Night Live
Brad Pitt, Saturday Night Live
Guest Actress in a Drama Series
Alexis Bledel, The Handmaid’s Tale
Cicely Tyson, How to Get Away with Murder
Laverne Cox, Orange Is the New Black
Harriet Walter, Succession
Cherry Jones, Succession
Phylicia Rashad, This Is Us
Guest Actor in a Drama Series
Andrew Scott, Black Mirror
Giancarlo Esposito, The Mandalorian
Martin Short, The Morning Show
Jason Bateman, The Outsider
James Cromwell, Succession
Ron Cephas Jones, This Is Us
Outstanding Writing for a Comedy Series
Daniel Levy, Schitt’s Creek
David West Read, Schitt’s Creek
Michael Schur, The Good Place
Tony McNamara, The Great
Sam Johnson and Chris Marcil, What We Do in the Shadows
Paul Simms, What We Do in the Shadows
Stefani Robinson, What We Do in the Shadows
Outstanding Directing for a Comedy Series
Amy Sherman-Palladino, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel
Matt Shakman, The Great
James Burrows, Will and Grace
Ramy Youssef, Ramy
Andrew Cividino and Daniel Levy, Schitt’s Creek
Gail Mancuso, Modern Family
Daniel Palladino, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel
Outstanding Writing for a Drama Series
Thomas Schnauz, Better Call Saul
Gordon Smith, Better Call Saul
Chris Mundy, Ozark
John Shiban, Ozark
Miki Johnson, Ozark
Jesse Armstrong, Succession
Peter Morgan, The Crown
Outstanding Directing for a Drama Series
Lesli Linka Glatter, Homeland
Ben Semanoff, Ozark
Alik Sakharov, Ozark
Andrij Parekh, Succession
Mark Mylod, Succession
Benjamin Caron, The Crown
Jessica Hobbs, The Crown
Mimi Leder, The Morning Show


vox--2020-07-28--The Navajo Nation president on how his tribe slowed one of the worst Covid-19 outbreaks

When the Navajo Nation reported its first Covid-19 case on March 17 , tribal officials quickly declared a public health emergency and a shelter-in-place order .
As the virus spread , doctors scrambled to increase the reservation ’ s health care capacity for the sickest patients .
“ We knew this was just the beginning , and we would have to be very aggressive , ” says Loretta Christensen , the chief medical officer for the Navajo Area Indian Health Service .
The Navajo Nation ( Dine ’ é in Navajo language ) spans Utah , Arizona , and New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it ’ s the largest tribe in the United States .
Despite having an infection rate higher than New York City this spring , the Navajo Nation — under the leadership of its President Jonathan Nez — has since successfully flattened its curve .
Daily new cases have fallen from a high of 240 in May to 54 on July 26 .
Jeanne Noble is an associate professor of emergency medicine and an ER physician at the University of California San Francisco who joined a medical mission to the Navajo Nation in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see what they did with overwhelming patients and limited resources , ” essentially doubling the emergency room capacity , she told Vox .
The Nation also faces social and economic disparities that make its population particularly vulnerable during the pandemic .
This includes a high rate of preexisting conditions that increase the risk for severe Covid-19 , including diabetes , which affects more than one-fifth of its residents .
“ We have 13 supermarkets for 27,000 square miles , so people have to travel a long way to get food , ” Christensen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do with the high rate of diabetes , heart disease , and high autoimmune disorders , ” she says .
Additionally , access to clean , safe water is challenging : One in three households doesn ’ t have indoor plumbing , and decades of uranium mining has contaminated existing water supplies , adding to health problems .
Families are also more likely to live in multigenerational homes , making quarantining more difficult .
These disparities have worsened the pandemic ’ s impacts .
For example , although Native Americans are only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ population , they account for 57 percent of its Covid-19 deaths .
Many of these inequities stem from the US government ’ s breaking of treaty obligations : The Indian Health Service is chronically underfunded , with an annual budget about six times less than it actually requires to meet its needs .
The Navajo Area Indian Health Service Hospitals only have 15 ICU beds : Even in normal times , it relies on transferring critical care patients out to tertiary facilities in Albuquerque , Phoenix , Flagstaff , and Tucson .
With @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s hospital capacity has become so limited that the state has activated crisis standards of care — finding beds for transfer patients has become much harder .
Christensen is also worried about spillover viral transmission onto the reservation .
While it ’ s still possible that the Navajo Nation will see cases rebound in the coming months , both Noble and Nathan Teismann , another visiting emergency doctor from UCSF , say that the rest of the country has a lot to learn from its response .
“ The thing that keeps @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is for a community to come together around a problem , and not just be worried about their own personal liberty or business or children , ” Teismann says .
“ There , the health of the community at large was primary.
” Christensen adds , “ The loss of elders [ to Covid-19 ] and that history has been very hard , but the bottom line is we stood up — we ’ re strong.
” Central to the success is clear messaging from Navajo Nation President Jonathan Nez on masks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says , played a key role in reducing Covid-19 transmission .
To learn more , Vox called Nez to discuss the lessons he ’ s learned about controlling the virus — and leading the Navajo Nation through this difficult time .
The following interview has been edited and condensed for clarity .
How has the Navajo Nation responded to Covid-19 ?
The Navajo Nation is locked down — we ’ re telling residents to please stay home , and visitors to pass through .
We have travel advisories against leaving the Navajo Nation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ living off the reservation that now ’ s not the time to come visit relatives .
We ’ re asking everyone to wear a mask , social distance , wash their hands , and stay home .
Since early April , we mandated mask use in public .
It ’ s concerning that Arizona still doesn ’ t mandate masks , although New Mexico has .
Data shows that wearing masks slows the spread of Covid-19 .
If the Navajo Nation is to be a case study , we had a fast increase @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of family living under one roof , so Covid spread like wildfire — but wearing masks has flattened our numbers .
The Indian Health Service did a surge projection in March where they suggested that our peak of hospital use would be in mid-May .
We went door to door on a public health campaign , and the numbers show we beat that projection by a whole month — the peak of our cases actually happened in mid-April .
Since then , we ’ ve been on a downward trend .
Obviously , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but what new policies do you think have been most important in controlling transmission ?
Our message has to be repeated .
I ’ ve been saying , “ Wear your mask , masks save lives , masks slow the spread.
” We ’ ve gone door to door .
We have a database of high-risk patients and when we saw the virus coming in February we started reaching out to them .
We framed it within our cultural teaching : We teach that we have fought monsters , but today we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , depression , suicide , and disease .
In our society , we value our elders and we let people know they are warriors , and they are supposed to protect their families — in this case , to shield their elders , who have traditional and cultural knowledge for the future of our people .
We ’ re also doing daily updates on Facebook , and you can watch a town hall meetings online every Tuesday and Thursday .
There ’ s always a fear of catching the virus .
I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ community ] , so I had to move into a different room in my home — like a lot of first responders , I ’ m isolating away from my family , just in case .
What have been some of the biggest challenges you ’ ve faced during this crisis ?
At the beginning , there was a lot of media attention , making us look like the “ poor , poor Navajo people.
” But we are proud and resilient .
We overcame the Long Walk of the Navajo in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the federal government that said we would be in partnership together .
To this day , the Navajo people still honor that treaty — which stated the federal government would help us with education , health care , and infrastructure .
We have contributed greatly to this country and its freedom , and there have been so many broken promises .
It took a pandemic to educate US citizens about the failure of the US government in honoring those promises .
During the pandemic , because of the failure and slowness of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ share of the Cares Act [ federal funding to tribal governments was delayed over a lawsuit concerning whether Alaska Native corporations were eligible ] , so we had to use our sovereign ability to govern ourselves and keep our people safe .
A lot of people donated while we were waiting for funding from Washington , DC , and friends of all nationalities came to the aid of the tribes .
I appreciate their donations — it helped get us through — but these [ Cares ] dollars are not handouts , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
While all states got money right away , we had no federal money until long after we hit our surge .
Of course we ’ re grateful , but this money was intended for US citizens .
Tribal people are US citizens , and we had to wait and wait for our fair share .
We are doing our best to get all the protection equipment we need , but we need the federal government to step up .
Christensen , the chief medical officer for the Navajo Area Indian Health Service @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many existing problems .
She said , “ A meaningful lesson from Covid-19 is that when you have resources , use them to improve the infrastructure — this is essential to move toward health equity.
” What have you learned as president during this time ?
We have incorporated stringent public health orders .
Of course you ’ ll get pushback if you try to put restrictions on citizens , but we ’ ve showed how the data backs it up .
For example , we had 57-hour weekend curfews — so from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — until we saw a reduction in cases .
Then we ended the curfews for two weeks , but we saw new spikes in the states around the Navajo Nation , so we reinstated the curfews .
We ’ ve learned it ’ s important to be proactive .
Now , the Navajo people see the curfews worked , now the people themselves are saying they ’ re right .
For people who have been asking how they can help — please contact your congressional representatives .
Let them know there needs to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the federal government and the tribes .
Now is the time to reshape Indian Country , to bring us equal to the rest of the US citizens .
And that means changing federal policies , so we can be truly self-reliant and self-sufficient .
Lois Parshley is a freelance investigative journalist .
Follow her Covid-19 reporting on Twitter @ loisparshley .
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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 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 .

When the Navajo Nation reported its first Covid-19 case on March 17, tribal officials quickly declared a public health emergency and a shelter-in-place order. As the virus spread, doctors scrambled to increase the reservation’s health care capacity for the sickest patients.
“We knew this was just the beginning, and we would have to be very aggressive,” says Loretta Christensen, the chief medical officer for the Navajo Area Indian Health Service.
The Navajo Nation (Dine’é in Navajo language) spans Utah, Arizona, and New Mexico, and with over 300,000 members, it’s the largest tribe in the United States. Despite having an infection rate higher than New York City this spring, the Navajo Nation — under the leadership of its President Jonathan Nez — has since successfully flattened its curve. Daily new cases have fallen from a high of 240 in May to 54 on July 26.
Jeanne Noble is an associate professor of emergency medicine and an ER physician at the University of California San Francisco who joined a medical mission to the Navajo Nation in May. “It was incredible to see what they did with overwhelming patients and limited resources,” essentially doubling the emergency room capacity, she told Vox.
The Nation also faces social and economic disparities that make its population particularly vulnerable during the pandemic. This includes a high rate of preexisting conditions that increase the risk for severe Covid-19, including diabetes, which affects more than one-fifth of its residents.
“We have 13 supermarkets for 27,000 square miles, so people have to travel a long way to get food,” Christensen says. “It has a lot to do with the high rate of diabetes, heart disease, and high autoimmune disorders,” she says.
Additionally, access to clean, safe water is challenging: One in three households doesn’t have indoor plumbing, and decades of uranium mining has contaminated existing water supplies, adding to health problems. Families are also more likely to live in multigenerational homes, making quarantining more difficult.
These disparities have worsened the pandemic’s impacts. For example, although Native Americans are only 9 percent of New Mexico’s population, they account for 57 percent of its Covid-19 deaths.
Many of these inequities stem from the US government’s breaking of treaty obligations: The Indian Health Service is chronically underfunded, with an annual budget about six times less than it actually requires to meet its needs.
The Navajo Area Indian Health Service Hospitals only have 15 ICU beds: Even in normal times, it relies on transferring critical care patients out to tertiary facilities in Albuquerque, Phoenix, Flagstaff, and Tucson. With cases surging in the southwest — Arizona’s hospital capacity has become so limited that the state has activated crisis standards of care — finding beds for transfer patients has become much harder. Christensen is also worried about spillover viral transmission onto the reservation.
While it’s still possible that the Navajo Nation will see cases rebound in the coming months, both Noble and Nathan Teismann, another visiting emergency doctor from UCSF, say that the rest of the country has a lot to learn from its response. “The thing that keeps coming back to me is how important it is for a community to come together around a problem, and not just be worried about their own personal liberty or business or children,” Teismann says. “There, the health of the community at large was primary.”
Christensen adds, “The loss of elders [to Covid-19] and that history has been very hard, but the bottom line is we stood up — we’re strong.”
Central to the success is clear messaging from Navajo Nation President Jonathan Nez on masks and curfews; his leadership, she says, played a key role in reducing Covid-19 transmission. To learn more, Vox called Nez to discuss the lessons he’s learned about controlling the virus — and leading the Navajo Nation through this difficult time. The following interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.
Lois Parshley
How has the Navajo Nation responded to Covid-19?
Jonathan Nez
The Navajo Nation is locked down — we’re telling residents to please stay home, and visitors to pass through. We have travel advisories against leaving the Navajo Nation, and we’ve told citizens living off the reservation that now’s not the time to come visit relatives.
We’re asking everyone to wear a mask, social distance, wash their hands, and stay home. Since early April, we mandated mask use in public.
It’s concerning that Arizona still doesn’t mandate masks, although New Mexico has. Data shows that wearing masks slows the spread of Covid-19. If the Navajo Nation is to be a case study, we had a fast increase in cases — we have multiple generations of family living under one roof, so Covid spread like wildfire — but wearing masks has flattened our numbers.
The Indian Health Service did a surge projection in March where they suggested that our peak of hospital use would be in mid-May. We went door to door on a public health campaign, and the numbers show we beat that projection by a whole month — the peak of our cases actually happened in mid-April. Since then, we’ve been on a downward trend.
Lois Parshley
Obviously, Covid-19 has required a lot of changes, but what new policies do you think have been most important in controlling transmission?
Jonathan Nez
Our message has to be repeated. I’ve been saying, “Wear your mask, masks save lives, masks slow the spread.”
We’ve gone door to door. We have a database of high-risk patients and when we saw the virus coming in February we started reaching out to them.
We framed it within our cultural teaching: We teach that we have fought monsters, but today we also have modern monsters, like alcoholism, depression, suicide, and disease.
In our society, we value our elders and we let people know they are warriors, and they are supposed to protect their families — in this case, to shield their elders, who have traditional and cultural knowledge for the future of our people. We’re also doing daily updates on Facebook, and you can watch a town hall meetings online every Tuesday and Thursday.
There’s always a fear of catching the virus. I’m out there [working in the community], so I had to move into a different room in my home — like a lot of first responders, I’m isolating away from my family, just in case.
Lois Parshley
What have been some of the biggest challenges you’ve faced during this crisis?
Jonathan Nez
At the beginning, there was a lot of media attention, making us look like the “poor, poor Navajo people.” But we are proud and resilient.
We overcame the Long Walk of the Navajo in the 1860s, when we signed a treaty with the federal government that said we would be in partnership together. To this day, the Navajo people still honor that treaty — which stated the federal government would help us with education, health care, and infrastructure. We have contributed greatly to this country and its freedom, and there have been so many broken promises.
It took a pandemic to educate US citizens about the failure of the US government in honoring those promises.
During the pandemic, because of the failure and slowness of the federal government to give us our share of the Cares Act [federal funding to tribal governments was delayed over a lawsuit concerning whether Alaska Native corporations were eligible], so we had to use our sovereign ability to govern ourselves and keep our people safe.
A lot of people donated while we were waiting for funding from Washington, DC, and friends of all nationalities came to the aid of the tribes. I appreciate their donations — it helped get us through — but these [Cares] dollars are not handouts, they were supposed to be given as relief. While all states got money right away, we had no federal money until long after we hit our surge.
Of course we’re grateful, but this money was intended for US citizens. Tribal people are US citizens, and we had to wait and wait for our fair share.
We are doing our best to get all the protection equipment we need, but we need the federal government to step up.
Lois Parshley
Christensen, the chief medical officer for the Navajo Area Indian Health Service, told me the pandemic has highlighted many existing problems. She said, “A meaningful lesson from Covid-19 is that when you have resources, use them to improve the infrastructure — this is essential to move toward health equity.”
What have you learned as president during this time?
Jonathan Nez
We have incorporated stringent public health orders. Of course you’ll get pushback if you try to put restrictions on citizens, but we’ve showed how the data backs it up.
For example, we had 57-hour weekend curfews — so from 8:00 pm Friday to 5:00 am Monday — until we saw a reduction in cases. Then we ended the curfews for two weeks, but we saw new spikes in the states around the Navajo Nation, so we reinstated the curfews. We’ve learned it’s important to be proactive. Now, the Navajo people see the curfews worked, now the people themselves are saying they’re right.
For people who have been asking how they can help — please contact your congressional representatives. Let them know there needs to be a change in this relationship between the federal government and the tribes.
Now is the time to reshape Indian Country, to bring us equal to the rest of the US citizens. And that means changing federal policies, so we can be truly self-reliant and self-sufficient.
Lois Parshley is a freelance investigative journalist. Follow her Covid-19 reporting on Twitter @loisparshley.


vox--2020-07-28--What the Miami Marlins’ Covid-19 outbreak means for the MLB season, explained by an epidemiologist

Mere days after its belated beginning , the 2020 Major League Baseball season is already in a heap of trouble because of Covid-19 .
On Monday , news broke that 11 of the 33 Miami Marlins players who traveled with the team to Philadelphia for the opening series that took place from Friday to Sunday tested positive for the virus , as well as two coaches .
That news prompted MLB to postpone two games that were scheduled for Monday evening : the Marlins ’ home opener against the Baltimore Orioles and Philadelphia ’ s contest against the New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ using the same clubhouse that the Marlins did over the weekend while the coronavirus was apparently spreading among the team . )
Miami ’ s scheduled game on Tuesday has been postponed as well .
Then , on Tuesday , news broke that four more Marlins players tested positive , bringing the number of team members with confirmed cases in recent days up to 17 .
News of the Marlins ’ outbreak has put a spotlight on the team ’ s decision to play a game on Sunday against the Phillies , one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ projected starting pitcher , José Ureña , was scratched because of a positive Covid-19 test .
The Philadelphia Inquirer reported that players made the call to play in a text message chain , without input from Major League Baseball .
But the outbreak casts an even harsher light on MLB writ large : Unlike the NHL and the NBA , MLB is not confining players to a “ bubble.
” While the games are being played in empty stadiums and teams must observe strict protocols on game days , players are traveling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ homes or hotels each day .
Monday ’ s news doesn ’ t bode well for those hoping that sports outside of a bubble-like environment are sustainable in a US where the coronavirus has raged out of control .
Given the rash of positive test results on Sunday and Monday , it ’ s likely that some Marlins players who took the field on Sunday had the virus .
The Phillies ’ scheduled game on Tuesday was postponed as the team awaits test results .
Despite all that , New York Post sports @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Andrew Marchand said that at this point , he expects MLB to try to forge ahead — but that could change if , say , it turns out that Miami taking the field while the team was amid an outbreak resulted in another team having an outbreak .
“ I think MLB will try to play through .
I don ’ t see them canceling the season at this point , though a pause could be considered , ” Marchand wrote in a direct message .
“ In my opinion , the cancellation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there were more multiple outbreaks on teams or , more severely , if someone were to become gravely ill. ” To get a sense of what the Marlins coronavirus outbreak means from both a public health and baseball perspective , I spoke on Monday with Zachary Binney , an epidemiologist at Oxford College of Emory University .
Binney said he ’ s “ really blown away and deeply disappointed by MLB ’ s response to all of this so far , ” but added that he doesn ’ t think baseball needs to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transcript of our conversation , lightly edited for clarity and brevity , follows .
I ’ m curious how unexpected all of this is .
Obviously you ’ re coming at this more from the public health expertise standpoint than the baseball standpoint , but how surprised are you just a few days into the season that there ’ s already been an outbreak on this scale ?
Now it ’ s confirmed that a third of the players that were traveling with the Marlins have tested positive , so that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a couple of coaches .
Well , first of all , let me say I have been following it , and I ’ m a big baseball fan .
I work at the intersection of epidemiology and sports , more on injuries than on infections usually , but that ’ s my area .
So I ’ m fairly familiar with both sides .
My dad was actually a statistician for Ted Turner back from 1981 to ’ 86 , so he covered all the Braves games for TV , so we got @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So it ’ s funny that I ’ m in the sports stats world too .
I was somewhat surprised at the scale and the speed of the outbreak .
I was surprised that Covid-19 ripped through the clubhouse and the traveling party a little bit .
The number of cases is off the charts higher than I expected .
Do you have any sense at this point in time in terms of what might account for that ?
The best information I had seen is that it appears whoever the patient @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taken it from Miami to Philadelphia .
Obviously you ’ re not with the team so it ’ s a bit speculative , but what do you think might explain the wildfire-like nature of all these players being positive over one weekend ?
Well , just like you said , it ’ s speculative , so I don ’ t want to speculate too much .
But what I will say is , I think it ’ s very important for Major League Baseball and the Marlins to conduct a swift but thorough @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happened , and how this disease spread as quickly and widely as it did .
Was it players and staff engaging in risky behaviors away from the clubhouse , such as going out together to a bar or a nightclub ?
Was it mostly spread within the clubhouse or the dugout ?
And if so , what led to that ?
Was it some weakness in Major League Baseball ’ s protocols , or was it a lack of adherence by the Marlins to baseball ’ s protocols ?
Depending on the answer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how you proceed .
The other possibility is that , look , MLB ’ s protocols were pretty much as strong as you can make them outside of a bubble , the Marlins were adhering to those , and they simply are not strong enough to withstand operating in a market with as many cases as Miami has .
It ’ s one of the worst areas of the country right now in terms of virus .
So maybe MLB ’ s plan works okay in New York and Boston and Philadelphia , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that probably it did start in Miami just given the incubation period of the virus .
There ’ s an outside chance they picked it up soon after they got to Atlanta [ for a preseason series ] , so I can ’ t say definitively that it started in Miami , but that ’ s sure what it sounds like .
What do you think , if anything , this says about the two-day turnaround time for Covid-19 tests going through the MLB labs ?
That doesn ’ t seem totally ideal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ team members who received results on Monday played on Sunday and possibly exposed Philadelphia to the virus during the game .
Do you view that as being a problem , this delay in turnaround that can lead to a situation where players are practicing or playing in between getting the results ?
Would it be feasible for MLB to use rapid testing that would give more immediate results and possibly avoid situations like this ?
That was one thing that came to mind processing this story — this extra day could really cause @ @ @ @ @ @ @ read on that ?
The longer delay that you have between the test and the result is more time that someone who is positive can be potentially transmitting the virus to others on the team , both players and staff .
So the faster turnaround you can get , the better .
There is certainly I think some room and some discussion among my colleagues to be looking into quicker testing technologies , like these $ 1 to $ 2 paper strip tests , that can give you more or less instantaneous results @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but for Covid-19 .
I think that would certainly be something for MLB to look into in the future .
It may have helped them short-circuit the Marlins ’ outbreak to a degree .
But also , you have to look at the actions of Major League Baseball and the Marlins organization here , and they don ’ t look good .
The fact you had four positive tests and you still played a game ?
That you still put the Phillies at risk , and more to the point , put people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them together in a clubhouse and a dugout again , to play a game , when you knew there was a very real chance you had an outbreak ?
No testing is going to stop idiocy .
So I ’ m really blown away and deeply disappointed by MLB ’ s response to all of this so far .
It ’ s been a lot weaker than I would ’ ve hoped it had been .
I mean , I wrote a blog post back on June 30 warning about almost this exact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ four cases , and you need to act quickly then because if you identify three or four cases in rapid succession , there ’ s a very real chance that that doesn ’ t stay at three to four .
And what did we find out this morning ?
So , I don ’ t know how much quicker tests would help .
I think it would help some , certainly — anything you can do to improve turnaround time .
To put a finer point on that , do you think the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s a positive test , any game that night should be postponed ?
Or is there a different number that you think should trigger that ?
I ’ m thinking back to over this weekend — as a Nationals fan , Juan Soto had a positive test and they played a game that night .
Thankfully it seems like no other players tested positive .
I ’ m just wondering what your thoughts are on the MLB protocol and what you think the best practice should be .
With the amount of virus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are going to happen from time to time .
So I don ’ t think you should delay every single time a case pops up on a team .
If you ’ re testing frequently enough , then the theory is that that testing should catch the cases quickly enough that it should keep one case [ as ] one case , and not let it turn into three or four or five or 14 .
Obviously , that ’ s not what we saw in Miami and that ’ s really concerning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quick but thorough diagnosis of what went wrong and led to this rapid spread — was it a poorly timed false negative , or what ?
I ’ ve been consistent for weeks in saying that if you see three or four cases in a few-day span on a team , shut it down until you can figure out what ’ s going on and be very certain that you have nipped any outbreak and cut the transmission chains .
That ’ s not what happened here .
If you have reason to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to stay one case — there ’ s no risky behavior that people have been engaging in that you know of , especially in a sport like baseball where he didn ’ t necessarily have close contact with a lot of his fellow players or staff members — you can definitely make a case to continue through one positive .
But when you get into three or four , that ’ s clear evidence of an outbreak , and you ’ ve got ta be more cautious than MLB was here , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s the line I would draw : three to four cases in rapid succession , shut it down .
The team , not the league .
MLB announced they ’ re postponing the Marlins ’ game and the Phillies ’ game — obviously the Marlins were just there .
Do you think that ’ s the correct response , and how feasible do you think it is that the Marlins play as soon as Tuesday ?
That would be inhumanely reckless .
To have the Marlins come back tomorrow [ Tuesday ] @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be disgusted .
I would be vomiting with rage .
There is an out-of-control outbreak on this team .
You can not assume anybody in that traveling party is uninfected .
You have to assume the entire traveling party is infected .
So , I guess if you want to go with a just bloodless , next-man-up mentality , you could grab your entire satellite site and try to field a team from that .
But can we just have a moment of shared humanity here ?
A potentially serious virus is ripping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a broader global pandemic .
Can we hit pause here for a minute ?
Can we deal with that ?
Can we deal with the psychological fallout and the stress from that ?
I mean , some coaches are infected .
Depending on who they are , there ’ s no guarantee that they ’ re going to be fine .
There ’ s no guarantee that all the players will be fine , though I haven ’ t heard reports of any substantial symptoms yet , which is good .
You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ longer , and MLB needs to step in and put on its big boy pants and be the adult in the room and recognize that .
I would say for two weeks .
One day is laughable .
If they try to take anybody from that traveling party and have them play Tuesday or Wednesday or Thursday , I don ’ t even have words for how reckless that would be .
They know there ’ s a good chance some of them are sick , and they put them on the field @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that they don ’ t care .
They don ’ t care about the health of their athletes or their coaches , or the Marlins ’ opponents — the Orioles — they don ’ t care .
And the Orioles , by the way , would be stating that they don ’ t care about the people of Baltimore if that game happened , because they would be bringing in a group with a known raging outbreak to stay in a local hotel .
So everybody needs to take a minute , take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ themselves in the mirror for God ’ s sake .
We are people — can we act like it for a minute ?
That obviously raises a lot of logistical problems from the MLB ’ s standpoint .
It ’ s already a truncated season and postponing nearly a week ’ s worth of games is a big chunk .
So what do you think this portends in terms of the prospects of MLB being able to continue on with this season ?
The question you ’ ve got ta ask yourself if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , how likely do we think it is that the Marlins transmitted the infection to their opponents , the Phillies , over a three-game series ?
It may be unintentional , but they have run an experiment here : How easy is it for the virus to transmit from one team to another over the course of a three-game series ?
If they are confident that the answer is “ very unlikely , ” then the Phillies should play tonight because you can clean the clubhouse — I don ’ t think there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yankees picking it up as long as the visitors ’ clubhouse has been ventilated and scrubbed down to the studs .
But if you think there ’ s a chance , then waiting one day is not enough .
It ’ s optics , it ’ s theater .
You need to wait five days to see if any cases are going to pop up .
So , choose one .
Play tonight , which they ’ ve already decided not to do , or play in five days .
Otherwise , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s not based on any understanding of health or epidemiology or the biology of the virus .
It simply is not .
So if you had to handicap it , what do you think the odds are that this season has to be brought to a premature conclusion because the virus is so out of control that it becomes downright reckless to forge ahead ?
I think if you see another situation like the Marlins — another outbreak like this , especially in the central or western divisions which have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the eastern division — I think you would have to think very seriously about suspending the league .
What are the chances of that ?
I don ’ t know and I don ’ t want to speculate .
I hate trying to put numbers on this because I really don ’ t know .
But I ’ m a lot less optimistic than I was last Thursday .
I mean , I was starting to get surprisingly optimistic after we didn ’ t have this happen during preseason training .
Honestly , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blow up before they played a game .
But then it didn ’ t , and I ’ m a scientist — I update my opinions when more data comes in .
But I also knew that the past is no guarantee of the future .
And that ’ s what we ’ ve seen here in the last couple of days .
MLB stands in contrast to the approach taken by leagues like the NHL and NBA , where players are staying in a bubble-like environment , where players are staying in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ general public in a way that baseball players can when they go home or go out .
Is it correct to interpret this as a strike against the MLB approach ?
Do you think it ’ s much more likely that the NHL and NBA will be successful in reaching the ends of their season without a hitch , where baseball seems to be having these huge problems right away ?
If you ’ re looking at the data , here ’ s what I see .
I see the National Women ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a bubble .
I see that Major League Soccer had some bumps at the start — they had a couple of outbreaks when they were operating and training in home markets , in Dallas and Nashville , but those did not quite translate to blowing up the bubble .
The NBA bubble so far has looked quite successful , as has NHL ’ s plan , which is not only a bubble , but a bubble in Canada , which I think is another very wise thing to do — get the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What you ’ ve also seen is MLB ’ s plan of testing regularly but having everybody live at home in their communities has been successful .
The issue is it ’ s been successful in Germany and Spain and Italy and South Korea , and the US doesn ’ t look like any of those in terms of our response to the virus .
So I always had concerns that Germany ’ s plan would work here , and it looks like it ’ s certainly not as effective as it was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think you have to interpret that as a strike against being able to play sports outside of a bubble in the US , and that ’ s the result of our weak and poor response to the virus , and the fact that it ’ s so out of control .
We ’ re reaping what we sowed , it ’ s as simple as that .
If we ’ re able to bring sports back in the US , it ’ s going to be more difficult , more expensive , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 .

Mere days after its belated beginning, the 2020 Major League Baseball season is already in a heap of trouble because of Covid-19.
On Monday, news broke that 11 of the 33 Miami Marlins players who traveled with the team to Philadelphia for the opening series that took place from Friday to Sunday tested positive for the virus, as well as two coaches. That news prompted MLB to postpone two games that were scheduled for Monday evening: the Marlins’ home opener against the Baltimore Orioles and Philadelphia’s contest against the New York Yankees. (The Yankees will be using the same clubhouse that the Marlins did over the weekend while the coronavirus was apparently spreading among the team.) Miami’s scheduled game on Tuesday has been postponed as well.
Then, on Tuesday, news broke that four more Marlins players tested positive, bringing the number of team members with confirmed cases in recent days up to 17.
Marlins may have hard time filling out 30-man active roster considering their outbreak of positives. Currently trying to figure out how to make it work since many candidates for callup are currently are not on 40-man. Might — might — have to consider playing with less than 30. — Jon Heyman (@JonHeyman) July 28, 2020
News of the Marlins’ outbreak has put a spotlight on the team’s decision to play a game on Sunday against the Phillies, one that started just hours after the Marlins’ projected starting pitcher, José Ureña, was scratched because of a positive Covid-19 test. The Philadelphia Inquirer reported that players made the call to play in a text message chain, without input from Major League Baseball.
But the outbreak casts an even harsher light on MLB writ large: Unlike the NHL and the NBA, MLB is not confining players to a “bubble.” While the games are being played in empty stadiums and teams must observe strict protocols on game days, players are traveling between cities and leaving ballparks for their homes or hotels each day. Monday’s news doesn’t bode well for those hoping that sports outside of a bubble-like environment are sustainable in a US where the coronavirus has raged out of control.
Given the rash of positive test results on Sunday and Monday, it’s likely that some Marlins players who took the field on Sunday had the virus. The Phillies’ scheduled game on Tuesday was postponed as the team awaits test results.
Despite all that, New York Post sports media columnist and former Baseball Tonight contributor Andrew Marchand said that at this point, he expects MLB to try to forge ahead — but that could change if, say, it turns out that Miami taking the field while the team was amid an outbreak resulted in another team having an outbreak.
“I think MLB will try to play through. I don’t see them canceling the season at this point, though a pause could be considered,” Marchand wrote in a direct message. “In my opinion, the cancellation of the season would likely happen if there were more multiple outbreaks on teams or, more severely, if someone were to become gravely ill.”
To get a sense of what the Marlins coronavirus outbreak means from both a public health and baseball perspective, I spoke on Monday with Zachary Binney, an epidemiologist at Oxford College of Emory University. Binney said he’s “really blown away and deeply disappointed by MLB’s response to all of this so far,” but added that he doesn’t think baseball needs to cancel the season — yet.
A transcript of our conversation, lightly edited for clarity and brevity, follows.
Aaron Rupar
I’m curious how unexpected all of this is. Obviously you’re coming at this more from the public health expertise standpoint than the baseball standpoint, but how surprised are you just a few days into the season that there’s already been an outbreak on this scale? Now it’s confirmed that a third of the players that were traveling with the Marlins have tested positive, so that’s a pretty high rate, along with a couple of coaches.
Zachary Binney
Well, first of all, let me say I have been following it, and I’m a big baseball fan. I work at the intersection of epidemiology and sports, more on injuries than on infections usually, but that’s my area. So I’m fairly familiar with both sides. My dad was actually a statistician for Ted Turner back from 1981 to ’86, so he covered all the Braves games for TV, so we got baseball in our blood a little bit. So it’s funny that I’m in the sports stats world too.
I was somewhat surprised at the scale and the speed of the outbreak. I was surprised that Covid-19 ripped through the clubhouse and the traveling party a little bit. The number of cases is off the charts higher than I expected.
Aaron Rupar
Do you have any sense at this point in time in terms of what might account for that? The best information I had seen is that it appears whoever the patient zero in this outbreak is might have taken it from Miami to Philadelphia. Obviously you’re not with the team so it’s a bit speculative, but what do you think might explain the wildfire-like nature of all these players being positive over one weekend?
Zachary Binney
Well, just like you said, it’s speculative, so I don’t want to speculate too much. But what I will say is, I think it’s very important for Major League Baseball and the Marlins to conduct a swift but thorough epidemiological investigation to figure out just what happened, and how this disease spread as quickly and widely as it did. Was it players and staff engaging in risky behaviors away from the clubhouse, such as going out together to a bar or a nightclub? Was it mostly spread within the clubhouse or the dugout? And if so, what led to that? Was it some weakness in Major League Baseball’s protocols, or was it a lack of adherence by the Marlins to baseball’s protocols?
Depending on the answer, you have pretty different implications for how you proceed. The other possibility is that, look, MLB’s protocols were pretty much as strong as you can make them outside of a bubble, the Marlins were adhering to those, and they simply are not strong enough to withstand operating in a market with as many cases as Miami has. It’s one of the worst areas of the country right now in terms of virus. So maybe MLB’s plan works okay in New York and Boston and Philadelphia, but not Miami.
The outbreak isn't over.
To have them play on Wednesday in Baltimore would be crossing the line from everyday villainy into cartoonish supervillainy.
Shut the Marlins down, let them regroup, and restart their season once the virus has cleared out - ideally 14 days. https://t.co/Dovo1poEIz — Zachary Binney, PhD (@zbinney_NFLinj) July 28, 2020
My sense is that probably it did start in Miami just given the incubation period of the virus. There’s an outside chance they picked it up soon after they got to Atlanta [for a preseason series], so I can’t say definitively that it started in Miami, but that’s sure what it sounds like.
Aaron Rupar
What do you think, if anything, this says about the two-day turnaround time for Covid-19 tests going through the MLB labs? That doesn’t seem totally ideal in a case like this; some team members who received results on Monday played on Sunday and possibly exposed Philadelphia to the virus during the game.
Do you view that as being a problem, this delay in turnaround that can lead to a situation where players are practicing or playing in between getting the results? Would it be feasible for MLB to use rapid testing that would give more immediate results and possibly avoid situations like this? That was one thing that came to mind processing this story — this extra day could really cause some problems. What’s your read on that?
Zachary Binney
The longer delay that you have between the test and the result is more time that someone who is positive can be potentially transmitting the virus to others on the team, both players and staff. So the faster turnaround you can get, the better.
There is certainly I think some room and some discussion among my colleagues to be looking into quicker testing technologies, like these $1 to $2 paper strip tests, that can give you more or less instantaneous results — kind of like a pregnancy test but for Covid-19. I think that would certainly be something for MLB to look into in the future. It may have helped them short-circuit the Marlins’ outbreak to a degree.
But also, you have to look at the actions of Major League Baseball and the Marlins organization here, and they don’t look good. The fact you had four positive tests and you still played a game? That you still put the Phillies at risk, and more to the point, put people in your organization at risk by getting them together in a clubhouse and a dugout again, to play a game, when you knew there was a very real chance you had an outbreak? No testing is going to stop idiocy.
So I’m really blown away and deeply disappointed by MLB’s response to all of this so far. It’s been a lot weaker than I would’ve hoped it had been. I mean, I wrote a blog post back on June 30 warning about almost this exact scenario, where you had three or four cases, and you need to act quickly then because if you identify three or four cases in rapid succession, there’s a very real chance that that doesn’t stay at three to four. And what did we find out this morning?
So, I don’t know how much quicker tests would help. I think it would help some, certainly — anything you can do to improve turnaround time.
Aaron Rupar
To put a finer point on that, do you think the procedure should be that if there’s a positive test, any game that night should be postponed? Or is there a different number that you think should trigger that? I’m thinking back to over this weekend — as a Nationals fan, Juan Soto had a positive test and they played a game that night. Thankfully it seems like no other players tested positive.
I’m just wondering what your thoughts are on the MLB protocol and what you think the best practice should be.
Zachary Binney
With the amount of virus we have in this country, cases are going to happen from time to time. So I don’t think you should delay every single time a case pops up on a team. If you’re testing frequently enough, then the theory is that that testing should catch the cases quickly enough that it should keep one case [as] one case, and not let it turn into three or four or five or 14.
Obviously, that’s not what we saw in Miami and that’s really concerning, and we need to do some quick but thorough diagnosis of what went wrong and led to this rapid spread — was it a poorly timed false negative, or what? I’ve been consistent for weeks in saying that if you see three or four cases in a few-day span on a team, shut it down until you can figure out what’s going on and be very certain that you have nipped any outbreak and cut the transmission chains. That’s not what happened here.
If you have reason to believe that the one case is going to stay one case — there’s no risky behavior that people have been engaging in that you know of, especially in a sport like baseball where he didn’t necessarily have close contact with a lot of his fellow players or staff members — you can definitely make a case to continue through one positive. But when you get into three or four, that’s clear evidence of an outbreak, and you’ve gotta be more cautious than MLB was here, and the Marlins were here. So that’s the line I would draw: three to four cases in rapid succession, shut it down. The team, not the league.
Aaron Rupar
MLB announced they’re postponing the Marlins’ game and the Phillies’ game — obviously the Marlins were just there. Do you think that’s the correct response, and how feasible do you think it is that the Marlins play as soon as Tuesday?
Zachary Binney
That would be inhumanely reckless. To have the Marlins come back tomorrow [Tuesday] would be inhumanely reckless. I would be disgusted. I would be vomiting with rage.
There is an out-of-control outbreak on this team. You cannot assume anybody in that traveling party is uninfected. You have to assume the entire traveling party is infected. So, I guess if you want to go with a just bloodless, next-man-up mentality, you could grab your entire satellite site and try to field a team from that.
But can we just have a moment of shared humanity here? A potentially serious virus is ripping through your clubhouse that’s part of a broader global pandemic. Can we hit pause here for a minute? Can we deal with that? Can we deal with the psychological fallout and the stress from that? I mean, some coaches are infected. Depending on who they are, there’s no guarantee that they’re going to be fine. There’s no guarantee that all the players will be fine, though I haven’t heard reports of any substantial symptoms yet, which is good.
You need to press the pause button for longer, and MLB needs to step in and put on its big boy pants and be the adult in the room and recognize that. I would say for two weeks. One day is laughable. If they try to take anybody from that traveling party and have them play Tuesday or Wednesday or Thursday, I don’t even have words for how reckless that would be.
They know there’s a good chance some of them are sick, and they put them on the field anyway? They would just be declaring that they don’t care. They don’t care about the health of their athletes or their coaches, or the Marlins’ opponents — the Orioles — they don’t care. And the Orioles, by the way, would be stating that they don’t care about the people of Baltimore if that game happened, because they would be bringing in a group with a known raging outbreak to stay in a local hotel.
So everybody needs to take a minute, take a step back, and look at themselves in the mirror for God’s sake. We are people — can we act like it for a minute?
Aaron Rupar
That obviously raises a lot of logistical problems from the MLB’s standpoint. It’s already a truncated season and postponing nearly a week’s worth of games is a big chunk. So what do you think this portends in terms of the prospects of MLB being able to continue on with this season?
Zachary Binney
The question you’ve gotta ask yourself if you’re Major League Baseball is, how likely do we think it is that the Marlins transmitted the infection to their opponents, the Phillies, over a three-game series? It may be unintentional, but they have run an experiment here: How easy is it for the virus to transmit from one team to another over the course of a three-game series?
If they are confident that the answer is “very unlikely,” then the Phillies should play tonight because you can clean the clubhouse — I don’t think there’s a huge risk of the Yankees picking it up as long as the visitors’ clubhouse has been ventilated and scrubbed down to the studs. But if you think there’s a chance, then waiting one day is not enough. It’s optics, it’s theater. You need to wait five days to see if any cases are going to pop up.
Watch Commissioner Manfred's entire interview with Tom Verducci on MLB Tonight. pic.twitter.com/oAyJ1NoEyk — MLB Network (@MLBNetwork) July 27, 2020
So, choose one. Play tonight, which they’ve already decided not to do, or play in five days. Otherwise, the move you made was only for PR. It’s not based on any understanding of health or epidemiology or the biology of the virus. It simply is not.
Aaron Rupar
So if you had to handicap it, what do you think the odds are that this season has to be brought to a premature conclusion because the virus is so out of control that it becomes downright reckless to forge ahead?
Zachary Binney
I think if you see another situation like the Marlins — another outbreak like this, especially in the central or western divisions which have had no contact with the Marlins in the eastern division — I think you would have to think very seriously about suspending the league.
What are the chances of that? I don’t know and I don’t want to speculate. I hate trying to put numbers on this because I really don’t know. But I’m a lot less optimistic than I was last Thursday. I mean, I was starting to get surprisingly optimistic after we didn’t have this happen during preseason training. Honestly, I thought all this was going to blow up before they played a game. But then it didn’t, and I’m a scientist — I update my opinions when more data comes in.
But I also knew that the past is no guarantee of the future. And that’s what we’ve seen here in the last couple of days.
Aaron Rupar
MLB stands in contrast to the approach taken by leagues like the NHL and NBA, where players are staying in a bubble-like environment, where players are staying in a confined space without intermingling with the general public in a way that baseball players can when they go home or go out. Is it correct to interpret this as a strike against the MLB approach? Do you think it’s much more likely that the NHL and NBA will be successful in reaching the ends of their season without a hitch, where baseball seems to be having these huge problems right away?
Zachary Binney
If you’re looking at the data, here’s what I see. I see the National Women’s Soccer League held a successful tournament in a bubble. I see that Major League Soccer had some bumps at the start — they had a couple of outbreaks when they were operating and training in home markets, in Dallas and Nashville, but those did not quite translate to blowing up the bubble.
The NBA bubble so far has looked quite successful, as has NHL’s plan, which is not only a bubble, but a bubble in Canada, which I think is another very wise thing to do — get the heck out of the United States. What you’ve also seen is MLB’s plan of testing regularly but having everybody live at home in their communities has been successful. The issue is it’s been successful in Germany and Spain and Italy and South Korea, and the US doesn’t look like any of those in terms of our response to the virus.
So I always had concerns that Germany’s plan would work here, and it looks like it’s certainly not as effective as it was in Germany. So yeah, I think you have to interpret that as a strike against being able to play sports outside of a bubble in the US, and that’s the result of our weak and poor response to the virus, and the fact that it’s so out of control.
We’re reaping what we sowed, it’s as simple as that. If we’re able to bring sports back in the US, it’s going to be more difficult, more expensive, and more dangerous. Period, the end.