theintercept--2020-03-19--States Suspend Legislatures Without Passing Emergency Coronavirus Legislation. Could Remote Voting P

States Suspend Legislatures Without Passing Emergency Coronavirus Legislation. Could Remote Voting Provide a Fix?

been suspended around the country over concerns about spreading the novel coronavirus Covid-19 .
The sudden disappearance of legislatures comes at a time when urgent lawmaking and public oversight is needed most , as many states grapple with how to proceed with elections , suspended civil liberties , emergency economic stimulus , and efforts to manage the unique burden expected on the healthcare system .
The unprecedented crisis already forced some legislatures to temporarily shift to remote operations .
On Monday , legislators in Pennsylvania and Utah announced a move to remote sessions of the state legislature .
Pennsylvania lawmakers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new laws to give Gov .
Tom Wolf authority to grant a public health emergency , expand telemedicine , and lift the state requirement on 180-day instructional days for students .
“ We ’ re researching what other legislatures did in the past , what the British Parliament did during the plague , ” says Connecticut state Sen. Matt Lesser , D-Middletown , one of the legislators studying the idea .
“ As lawmakers fall sick , legislative sessions across the country are being cut short out of legitimate fear of the pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Demand Progress and a former Rhode Island state representative , said in a statement .
“ This crisis will only worsen , ” added Segal .
“ It ’ s naive to assume that it will be possible to reconvene in a few weeks , so legislatures must make necessary changes to procedures now.
” Several state legislatures were evacuated in recent days to be disinfected , with some , including the Nebraska and Louisiana state legislature , potentially closed for weeks or longer .
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more people take place , while the Trump administration has advised as few as 10 people per room — constraints that could prevent the reconvening of many legislative bodies .
Lesser said he has convened calls with other state lawmakers grappling with the same problem , with many states further restricted by state constitutions that would need to be amended for remote voting to take place .
“ Is it possible to have a legislative session that meets remotely ?
Can we use Zoom and DocuSign ?
” Lesser asked .
“ If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you have a full debate on issues , full public participation that works with public meeting laws , and what does that look like ?
We ’ re behind the curve on this.
” Several states have laws or state constitutions that require legislative business to be done in settings that are open to the public on public grounds , such as a state capitol building .
The Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich , responding to the coronavirus crisis , has issued new guidance for how government entities may meet remotely under the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for online meetings to be posted with 24 hours of advance notice on an open platform , and for speakers to identify themselves before they speak as they address an online audience .
Presentations and other documents must be posted on the internet .
Many have urged the transition to vote-by-mail elections , to curb the public health risks around in-person voting .
Other state lawmakers have discussed urgent reforms around waiving student testing requirements this year given school closures and the need to oversee the influx of new Medicaid funding expected in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Members of Congress could face similar concerns as the public health crisis grows .
The average age of the U.S. Senate is 61 , and Democratic leadership of the House of Representatives is between the ages of 79 and 80 , well within the ranges most vulnerable to Covid-19 .
Experts fear that the virus could incapacitate Congress when legislative oversight of the executive branch is needed most .
Already , two New York members of the state Assembly , and two members of the U.S. House of Representatives , Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , D-Utah , have tested positive for Covid-19 .
Last week , a coalition of government reform organizations circulated a letter to Capitol Hill leaders similarly calling for a short-term shift to “ digital first ” legislative approach that prioritizes “ social distancing ” recommended by the CDC while maintaining the functions of Congress .
“ As both chambers admirably begin to implement steps toward telework for select staff , ” notes the letter , “ we encourage Congress to immediately begin working on ways that oversight and legislative work could be conducted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tools.
” The letter was signed by POPVOX , Taxpayers for Common Sense , Government Information Watch , Direct Democracy , Demand Progress Education Fund , Civic Impulse , and the International Association of Certified ISAOs , along with several academics .
Some voices in Congress , including Rep. Eric Swalwell , D-Calif. , have circulated telework ideas for years .
And in the aftermath of the attacks on September 11 , congressional leaders and prominent government experts formed the Continuity of Government Commission to study what would have happened if a terror @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if it killed enough lawmakers that the Senate lacked the constitutionally mandated quorum .
In response , Sen. John Cornyn , R-Texas , and then-Sen. Russ Feingold , D-Wisc.
, sponsored a constitutional amendment to allow states to create expedited succession plans in the event of the sudden death or disappearance of members of the House of Representatives , on the recommendation of the commission .
Other ideas included adding governors to the presidential line of succession and a new clause to the Constitution for a special election to replace the president .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ never acted upon .
But the remote Congress has gained new ground in recent days .
Last week , Rep. Jerrold Nadler , D-N.Y. , a senior lawmaker , embraced the idea for electronic voting .
On Wednesday , Rep. Katie Porter , D-Calif. , and Rep. Van Taylor , R-Tex.
, circulated a letter demanding an urgent move towards Swalwell ’ s electronic voting idea .
“ During this national public health emergency , ” they wrote , “ remote voting is a key part of maintaining continuity of operations.
” Norm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American Enterprise Institute , who was involved in the Continuity of Government Commission , has renewed the call for remote voting , claiming that secure software can be used for lawmakers to vote on legislation in emergency situations .
Even Rep. Steve King , R-Iowa , an archconservative , voiced support for remote congressional work on Monday , speaking with News Talk 1540 KXEL .
“ If this becomes too dangerous to move or fly , I could see it get to the point with a special focused exception , we might be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ controversial bill at a distance , ” said King .
“ I don ’ t recommend it .
I think we ’ d have to get in a really special circumstance because once you break that mold , everyone wants to stay home and vote from their living room , and that ’ s not what we ’ re hired to do.
” Leadership in both parties , however , have rejected calls for remote voting this week .
“ We ’ ll not be doing that , ” Senate Majority Leader Mitch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , D-Calif. , has also opposed the idea .

State legislatures have been suspended around the country over concerns about spreading the novel coronavirus Covid-19.
The sudden disappearance of legislatures comes at a time when urgent lawmaking and public oversight is needed most, as many states grapple with how to proceed with elections, suspended civil liberties, emergency economic stimulus, and efforts to manage the unique burden expected on the healthcare system.
The unprecedented crisis already forced some legislatures to temporarily shift to remote operations. On Monday, legislators in Pennsylvania and Utah announced a move to remote sessions of the state legislature. Pennsylvania lawmakers intend to work from home while passing new laws to give Gov. Tom Wolf authority to grant a public health emergency, expand telemedicine, and lift the state requirement on 180-day instructional days for students.
“We’re researching what other legislatures did in the past, what the British Parliament did during the plague,” says Connecticut state Sen. Matt Lesser, D-Middletown, one of the legislators studying the idea.
“As lawmakers fall sick, legislative sessions across the country are being cut short out of legitimate fear of the pandemic,” David Segal, executive director of Demand Progress and a former Rhode Island state representative, said in a statement.
“This crisis will only worsen,” added Segal. “It’s naive to assume that it will be possible to reconvene in a few weeks, so legislatures must make necessary changes to procedures now.”
Several state legislatures were evacuated in recent days to be disinfected, with some, including the Nebraska and Louisiana state legislature, potentially closed for weeks or longer. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend that no gatherings of 50 or more people take place, while the Trump administration has advised as few as 10 people per room — constraints that could prevent the reconvening of many legislative bodies.
Lesser said he has convened calls with other state lawmakers grappling with the same problem, with many states further restricted by state constitutions that would need to be amended for remote voting to take place.
“Is it possible to have a legislative session that meets remotely? Can we use Zoom and DocuSign?” Lesser asked. “If that’s the case, can you have a full debate on issues, full public participation that works with public meeting laws, and what does that look like? We’re behind the curve on this.”
“Is it possible to have a legislative session that meets remotely? Can you have a full debate on issues, full public participation that works with public meeting laws, and what does that look like?
Several states have laws or state constitutions that require legislative business to be done in settings that are open to the public on public grounds, such as a state capitol building.
The Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, responding to the coronavirus crisis, has issued new guidance for how government entities may meet remotely under the open meetings law. The guidelines call for online meetings to be posted with 24 hours of advance notice on an open platform, and for speakers to identify themselves before they speak as they address an online audience. Presentations and other documents must be posted on the internet.
Many have urged the transition to vote-by-mail elections, to curb the public health risks around in-person voting. Other state lawmakers have discussed urgent reforms around waiving student testing requirements this year given school closures and the need to oversee the influx of new Medicaid funding expected in the upcoming stimulus package from Congress.
Members of Congress could face similar concerns as the public health crisis grows. The average age of the U.S. Senate is 61, and Democratic leadership of the House of Representatives is between the ages of 79 and 80, well within the ranges most vulnerable to Covid-19. Experts fear that the virus could incapacitate Congress when legislative oversight of the executive branch is needed most.
Already, two New York members of the state Assembly, and two members of the U.S. House of Representatives, Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Fla., and Rep. Ben McAdams, D-Utah, have tested positive for Covid-19.
Last week, a coalition of government reform organizations circulated a letter to Capitol Hill leaders similarly calling for a short-term shift to “digital first” legislative approach that prioritizes “social distancing” recommended by the CDC while maintaining the functions of Congress.
“As both chambers admirably begin to implement steps toward telework for select staff,” notes the letter, “we encourage Congress to immediately begin working on ways that oversight and legislative work could be conducted online through existing commercial software and teleconference tools.”
The letter was signed by POPVOX, Taxpayers for Common Sense, Government Information Watch, Direct Democracy, Demand Progress Education Fund, Civic Impulse, and the International Association of Certified ISAOs, along with several academics.
Some voices in Congress, including Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., have circulated telework ideas for years. And in the aftermath of the attacks on September 11, congressional leaders and prominent government experts formed the Continuity of Government Commission to study what would have happened if a terror strike had destroyed the capital, or if it killed enough lawmakers that the Senate lacked the constitutionally mandated quorum.
In response, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and then-Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wisc., sponsored a constitutional amendment to allow states to create expedited succession plans in the event of the sudden death or disappearance of members of the House of Representatives, on the recommendation of the commission. Other ideas included adding governors to the presidential line of succession and a new clause to the Constitution for a special election to replace the president. The commission recommended several fixes that were never acted upon.
Read Our Complete Coverage The Coronavirus Crisis
But the remote Congress has gained new ground in recent days. Last week, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., a senior lawmaker, embraced the idea for electronic voting. On Wednesday, Rep. Katie Porter, D-Calif., and Rep. Van Taylor, R-Tex., circulated a letter demanding an urgent move towards Swalwell’s electronic voting idea. “During this national public health emergency,” they wrote, “remote voting is a key part of maintaining continuity of operations.”
Norm Ornstein, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, who was involved in the Continuity of Government Commission, has renewed the call for remote voting, claiming that secure software can be used for lawmakers to vote on legislation in emergency situations.
Even Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, an archconservative, voiced support for remote congressional work on Monday, speaking with News Talk 1540 KXEL.
“If this becomes too dangerous to move or fly, I could see it get to the point with a special focused exception, we might be able to do some voting on a controversial bill at a distance,” said King. “I don’t recommend it. I think we’d have to get in a really special circumstance because once you break that mold, everyone wants to stay home and vote from their living room, and that’s not what we’re hired to do.”
Leadership in both parties, however, have rejected calls for remote voting this week. “We’ll not be doing that,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told reporters. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has also opposed the idea.


theintercept--2020-03-19--Unable to Get Tested for the Coronavirus, Health Care Workers Fear They Are Infecting the Elderly

to fear that she might be infected with the new coronavirus .
Just last week , her husband was sick with a dry cough after taking several flights and attending conferences .
And this past weekend , her 8-year-old daughter had a high fever and cough .
Rhodes-Kropf was able to get her daughter tested for the flu and cytomegalovirus , another common viral infection — and she was negative for both — but she hasn ’ t been able to get a coronavirus test for herself or anyone else in her family .
And while everyone who hasn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sweeping the world is now likely fearing for their health , Rhodes-Kropf has a particular reason to worry : She cares for 185 patients whose an average age is 91 .
And if she has the new coronavirus known as SARS CoV-2 and passes it onto them , it could be disastrous .
“ They ’ re often very frail , ” said Rhodes-Kropf , a geriatrician who practices in Boston .
“ If they do get the virus , a lot of them would not survive it.
” A report released yesterday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her fears , showing that 27 percent of 130 patients who contracted the virus in the Life Care Center of Kirkland , Washington , had died as of March 9 .
Rhodes-Kropf , who is now seeing urgent patients after being fitted with an N95 face mask , tried to get tested .
She asked her daughter ’ s pediatrician first and then inquired at a local hospital .
But , even after explaining that she was a doctor caring for many elderly patients and had reason to suspect she might have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to find a site that would test her .
CDC testing guidelines say that coronavirus testing should be done on people who are residents of affected communities and have symptoms .
Nevertheless , many people who are already ill with fever and the dry cough that is a signature of the viral Covid-19 infection are finding it impossible to get tested .
For the asymptomatic , it is virtually impossible , even though there is ample evidence that they can spread the disease .
The widespread shortage of tests throughout the U.S. has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ respond to the deadly coronavirus outbreak .
Because people can be infected and pass on the virus without having any symptoms , identifying positive cases is critical for slowing its spread .
While some transmission is being stemmed by social distancing and shelter-in-place orders , exceptions are generally made for doctors and other essential workers .
Yet many of these critical front-line providers are themselves unable to get tested , leaving their vulnerable patients at particular risk and the health care workers themselves in a seemingly impossible bind .
“ I took an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said Jennifer Brinckerhoff , another Boston-area geriatrician , who cares for 250 very elderly patients .
“ But I ’ m aware that by just coming in the door and having contact and conversations with my patients that I may be exposing them , ” she said .
“ That feels ethically wrong.
” On the other hand , Brinckerhoff said , she and her colleagues also find the idea of staying home from work very upsetting , “ because if we don ’ t take care of the people there , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rhodes-Kropf , Brinckerhoff has also tried and failed to get tested for the novel coronavirus .
She reached out to her doctor ’ s office , who said that “ you need a documented exposure to a confirmed case.
” Although Brinckerhoff doesn ’ t have any symptoms of the illness and said she wouldn ’ t want to lie about it , she asked whether she could get tested if she had a fever .
“ And they said not under the current criteria.
” And then Brinckerhoff along with several of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ places where asymptomatic health care workers could be tested for the virus .
Brinckerhoff has been working remotely since Tuesday .
But , because elderly patients often need help with eating , bathing , and other basic functions , they come into regular contact with a team of nurses , aides , and other caregivers — few of whom are likely to have access to testing .
The same is true of the family members the elderly rely on for help .
“ Everyone with dementia needs somebody , ” said Virginia Templeton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nonprofit in Ashville , North Carolina , that provides outpatient care to patients with memory loss and their caregivers .
MemoryCare , like many similar facilities , is just now in the process of shifting all appointments to telemedicine .
While it has screened everyone walking into its facility for fever in recent days , “ it ’ s really unclear who is a carrier if they don ’ t have the symptoms.
” Templeton said she hadn ’ t been tested because she didn ’ t fit the criteria , but lives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emergency health care worker .
According to the CDC report published yesterday , staff of the Kirkland nursing home who came to work while infected with the virus , along with a shortage of protective equipment and the limited ability to test , contributed to the deadliness of the outbreak in Washington state .
The report concluded that long-term care facilities should be “ identifying and excluding potentially infected staff members and visitors , ensuring early recognition of potentially infected patients , and implementing appropriate infection control measures.
” But it didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those tests .
And the advice , which the federal agency published yesterday , is too late for nursing homes in Vermont , Illinois , Colorado , Texas , Florida , Oklahoma , and Wyoming , which are already reporting their own cases of Covid-19 .

Dr. Jennifer Rhodes-Kropf has reason to fear that she might be infected with the new coronavirus. Just last week, her husband was sick with a dry cough after taking several flights and attending conferences. And this past weekend, her 8-year-old daughter had a high fever and cough. Rhodes-Kropf was able to get her daughter tested for the flu and cytomegalovirus, another common viral infection — and she was negative for both — but she hasn’t been able to get a coronavirus test for herself or anyone else in her family. And while everyone who hasn’t already had the viral illness now sweeping the world is now likely fearing for their health, Rhodes-Kropf has a particular reason to worry: She cares for 185 patients whose an average age is 91. And if she has the new coronavirus known as SARS CoV-2 and passes it onto them, it could be disastrous.
“They’re often very frail,” said Rhodes-Kropf, a geriatrician who practices in Boston. “If they do get the virus, a lot of them would not survive it.” A report released yesterday by the Centers for Disease Control confirms her fears, showing that 27 percent of 130 patients who contracted the virus in the Life Care Center of Kirkland, Washington, had died as of March 9.
Rhodes-Kropf, who is now seeing urgent patients after being fitted with an N95 face mask, tried to get tested. She asked her daughter’s pediatrician first and then inquired at a local hospital. But, even after explaining that she was a doctor caring for many elderly patients and had reason to suspect she might have been exposed, she wasn’t able to find a site that would test her. CDC testing guidelines say that coronavirus testing should be done on people who are residents of affected communities and have symptoms. Nevertheless, many people who are already ill with fever and the dry cough that is a signature of the viral Covid-19 infection are finding it impossible to get tested. For the asymptomatic, it is virtually impossible, even though there is ample evidence that they can spread the disease.
The widespread shortage of tests throughout the U.S. has hobbled the country’s ability to respond to the deadly coronavirus outbreak. Because people can be infected and pass on the virus without having any symptoms, identifying positive cases is critical for slowing its spread. While some transmission is being stemmed by social distancing and shelter-in-place orders, exceptions are generally made for doctors and other essential workers. Yet many of these critical front-line providers are themselves unable to get tested, leaving their vulnerable patients at particular risk and the health care workers themselves in a seemingly impossible bind.
“I took an oath to help older patients,” said Jennifer Brinckerhoff, another Boston-area geriatrician, who cares for 250 very elderly patients. “But I’m aware that by just coming in the door and having contact and conversations with my patients that I may be exposing them,” she said. “That feels ethically wrong.” On the other hand, Brinckerhoff said, she and her colleagues also find the idea of staying home from work very upsetting, “because if we don’t take care of the people there, they’re in their 90s.”
Like Rhodes-Kropf, Brinckerhoff has also tried and failed to get tested for the novel coronavirus. She reached out to her doctor’s office, who said that “you need a documented exposure to a confirmed case.” Although Brinckerhoff doesn’t have any symptoms of the illness and said she wouldn’t want to lie about it, she asked whether she could get tested if she had a fever. “And they said not under the current criteria.” And then Brinckerhoff along with several of her colleagues spent hours unsuccessfully searching for places where asymptomatic health care workers could be tested for the virus.
Brinckerhoff has been working remotely since Tuesday. But, because elderly patients often need help with eating, bathing, and other basic functions, they come into regular contact with a team of nurses, aides, and other caregivers — few of whom are likely to have access to testing.
The same is true of the family members the elderly rely on for help. “Everyone with dementia needs somebody,” said Virginia Templeton, executive director of MemoryCare, a nonprofit in Ashville, North Carolina, that provides outpatient care to patients with memory loss and their caregivers. MemoryCare, like many similar facilities, is just now in the process of shifting all appointments to telemedicine. While it has screened everyone walking into its facility for fever in recent days, “it’s really unclear who is a carrier if they don’t have the symptoms.” Templeton said she hadn’t been tested because she didn’t fit the criteria, but lives with a family member who is an emergency health care worker.
Read Our Complete Coverage The Coronavirus Crisis
According to the CDC report published yesterday, staff of the Kirkland nursing home who came to work while infected with the virus, along with a shortage of protective equipment and the limited ability to test, contributed to the deadliness of the outbreak in Washington state. The report concluded that long-term care facilities should be “identifying and excluding potentially infected staff members and visitors, ensuring early recognition of potentially infected patients, and implementing appropriate infection control measures.” But it didn’t say how staff members should obtain those tests.
And the advice, which the federal agency published yesterday, is too late for nursing homes in Vermont, Illinois, Colorado, Texas, Florida, Oklahoma, and Wyoming, which are already reporting their own cases of Covid-19.


theintercept--2020-03-18--Yemen’s Health Care System, Battered by War, Braces for Coronavirus

Organization has yet to announce a case of Covid-19 in Yemen , but a new report sheds light on how years of attacks , many targeting hospitals and clinics , have helped push the country ’ s health system past the breaking point .
The report , produced jointly by Physicians for Human Rights and the Yemen-based human rights organization Mwatana for Human Rights , documents four years of attacks against health care facilities in the country , part of a global trend that has led to a record rise in attacks on health care workers and facilities in war @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , cross-checked with witness statements , photographs , and media and NGO reports , the report documents 120 attacks against medical facilities across 20 of Yemen ’ s 22 governorates between March 2015 , when Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates started a war there with U.S. backing , and the end of 2018 .
The report is the most comprehensive attempt to document attacks on medical facilities in the conflict to date , and sheds important light on an already overwhelmed health system that is struggling to cope with the fallout @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and escalating violence .
“ When you look at it , it ’ s really a death by a thousand cuts situation , ” said Kristine Beckerle , the legal director for accountability and redress at Mwatana for Human Rights .
“ Yemen ’ s health sector hasn ’ t been stretched to its limits ; it ’ s far beyond its limits.
” Of the attacks documented in the report , 35 were aerial assaults by the Saudi and Emirati coalition , and involved bombing raids on 32 separate medical facilitates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the facilities in question , destroying vital medical units and causing widespread disruptions in access and service provision , ” the report says .
Forty-six of the attacks were from ground-launched mortars or rockets , mainly operated by the Houthi rebel group or their allies , and nine were attempts by Houthi forces to occupy or commandeer medical facilities .
Rayan Koteiche , one of the authors of the report and a Middle East and North Africa researcher for Physicians for Human Rights , told The Intercept that all warring parties were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the Saudi and Emirati air forces to the Yemeni government they support and the Houthis , who occupy the capital of Sana ’ a in the North .
“ They ’ ve all been perpetrating violations of international humanitarian law by attacking — repeatedly — the health infrastructure and medical personnel in Yemen , ” Koteiche said .
Years of restricted access and infrastructure damage , as well as attacks against hospitals and other facilities , have left the country ’ s health system unable to respond to preventable diseases , let @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We ’ re not talking about buying hand sanitizer or disinfectant .
People can ’ t even purchase soap in some places .
You have to think about the basic measures people are taking to protect themselves — those might be largely unavailable to people in Yemen.
” During the war , the health care system has been strained by preventable diseases , and the breakdown in sanitation led to the largest cholera outbreak in modern history , reaching more than a million cases .
Before the war , Yemen was heavily @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of whom have returned home — and imported virtually all of its pharmaceuticals and medical equipment .
“ Cholera is a pretty good example of a disease that shouldn ’ t exist anywhere on the planet where there is the bare minimum response capacity from a medical system , ” Koteiche said .
Import and access restrictions from a Saudi and Emirati naval blockade , fighting , and siege-like conditions across swaths of the country have led to shortages in medicine and equipment .
And while comprehensive data on the number of health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.N. Office of for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs has said that only 51 percent of the country ’ s health centers “ remain fully functional.
” In recent days , authorities in Yemen have taken steps to prevent the spread of Covid-19 to the country .
Both the Houthis and internationally-backed government have halted flights and urged travelers to self-quarantine .
The internationally-backed government has also ordered school closures .
But Beckerle said that the health system in the country is far from ready to tackle advanced preparations for a pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stores of medical equipment , like ventilators .
“ The conversation is , can you get to a hospital , and do they have electricity ?
” Beckerle said .
“ And that is daily life .
”

The World Health Organization has yet to announce a case of Covid-19 in Yemen, but a new report sheds light on how years of attacks, many targeting hospitals and clinics, have helped push the country’s health system past the breaking point.
The report, produced jointly by Physicians for Human Rights and the Yemen-based human rights organization Mwatana for Human Rights, documents four years of attacks against health care facilities in the country, part of a global trend that has led to a record rise in attacks on health care workers and facilities in war zones.
Based on nearly 200 interviews, cross-checked with witness statements, photographs, and media and NGO reports, the report documents 120 attacks against medical facilities across 20 of Yemen’s 22 governorates between March 2015, when Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates started a war there with U.S. backing, and the end of 2018.
The report is the most comprehensive attempt to document attacks on medical facilities in the conflict to date, and sheds important light on an already overwhelmed health system that is struggling to cope with the fallout from years of malnutrition, preventable diseases, and escalating violence.
“When you look at it, it’s really a death by a thousand cuts situation,” said Kristine Beckerle, the legal director for accountability and redress at Mwatana for Human Rights. “Yemen’s health sector hasn’t been stretched to its limits; it’s far beyond its limits.”
Of the attacks documented in the report, 35 were aerial assaults by the Saudi and Emirati coalition, and involved bombing raids on 32 separate medical facilitates. “Most airstrikes caused significant damage to the facilities in question, destroying vital medical units and causing widespread disruptions in access and service provision,” the report says.
Forty-six of the attacks were from ground-launched mortars or rockets, mainly operated by the Houthi rebel group or their allies, and nine were attempts by Houthi forces to occupy or commandeer medical facilities.
Rayan Koteiche, one of the authors of the report and a Middle East and North Africa researcher for Physicians for Human Rights, told The Intercept that all warring parties were guilty of attacks against medical facilities, from the Saudi and Emirati air forces to the Yemeni government they support and the Houthis, who occupy the capital of Sana’a in the North.
“They’ve all been perpetrating violations of international humanitarian law by attacking — repeatedly — the health infrastructure and medical personnel in Yemen,” Koteiche said.
Read Our Complete Coverage The Coronavirus Crisis
Years of restricted access and infrastructure damage, as well as attacks against hospitals and other facilities, have left the country’s health system unable to respond to preventable diseases, let alone a pandemic, Beckerle said. “We’re not talking about buying hand sanitizer or disinfectant. People can’t even purchase soap in some places. You have to think about the basic measures people are taking to protect themselves — those might be largely unavailable to people in Yemen.”
During the war, the health care system has been strained by preventable diseases, and the breakdown in sanitation led to the largest cholera outbreak in modern history, reaching more than a million cases. Before the war, Yemen was heavily dependent on foreign medical workers — many of whom have returned home — and imported virtually all of its pharmaceuticals and medical equipment.
“Cholera is a pretty good example of a disease that shouldn’t exist anywhere on the planet where there is the bare minimum response capacity from a medical system,” Koteiche said.
Import and access restrictions from a Saudi and Emirati naval blockade, fighting, and siege-like conditions across swaths of the country have led to shortages in medicine and equipment. And while comprehensive data on the number of health facilities in Yemen is not public, the U.N. Office of for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs has said that only 51 percent of the country’s health centers “remain fully functional.”
In recent days, authorities in Yemen have taken steps to prevent the spread of Covid-19 to the country. Both the Houthis and internationally-backed government have halted flights and urged travelers to self-quarantine. The internationally-backed government has also ordered school closures.
But Beckerle said that the health system in the country is far from ready to tackle advanced preparations for a pandemic, such as increasing hospital beds or stores of medical equipment, like ventilators.
“The conversation is, can you get to a hospital, and do they have electricity?” Beckerle said. “And that is daily life.”


theintercept--2020-03-18--Facebook’s $1,000 Coronavirus Bonus Doesn’t Apply to Its Most Vulnerable Workers

tech news site The Information reported that Facebook would soon pay its staff a $ 1,000 bonus to help its employees working from home under emergency conditions induced by the novel coronavirus .
But the generous move comes with a catch : Facebook , which as of last December held over $ 50 billion in cash , will provide no such payout for the tens of thousands of contract workers who keep the company ’ s apps and sites running .
“ For contract workers , we are sending them home and paying them in full even if they are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can imagine is much more meaningful than a one off payment.
” “ The $ 1k is for full time employees who are working from home , ” a Facebook spokesperson told The Intercept .
“ For contract workers , we are sending them home and paying them in full even if they are unable to work — which as you can imagine is much more meaningful than a one off payment.
” When asked how Facebook — which earned over $ 20 billion in revenue last quarter — determined that a one-off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meaningful to its contract workers than its full-time staff , the spokesperson sent the same statement again .
Facebook announced that it would “ be working with our partners over the course of this week to send all contract workers who perform content review home , until further notice.
” Contractors at the tech giant have recently complained of contradictory , confusing safety guidance surrounding the Covid-19 pandemic , with disparities between what Facebook is telling employees working on contracts and what the corporations employing the contractors are saying .
Many of Facebook @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the world through firms like Accenture to review sexually disturbing and graphically violent content — among other tasks — work second or third jobs to make ends meet .
“ Facebook loves to remind us that we only work in their buildings and on their platforms and not for them , ” said one Accenture worker contracted to Facebook , who asked that their name not be used for fear of losing their job .
Another added , “ We have never been , nor will we ever be worthy of dignity and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the worker if a $ 1,000 payment would be “ meaningful , ” as the Facebook spokesperson had put it .
“ That ’ s almost two months of rent for me , ” the contractor said .
“ Would help ease the cost of not having hot food and snacks at work five days a week also .
”

This morning, the tech news site The Information reported that Facebook would soon pay its staff a $1,000 bonus to help its employees working from home under emergency conditions induced by the novel coronavirus. But the generous move comes with a catch: Facebook, which as of last December held over $50 billion in cash, will provide no such payout for the tens of thousands of contract workers who keep the company’s apps and sites running.
“For contract workers, we are sending them home and paying them in full even if they are unable to work — which as you can imagine is much more meaningful than a one off payment.”
“The $1k is for full time employees who are working from home,” a Facebook spokesperson told The Intercept. “For contract workers, we are sending them home and paying them in full even if they are unable to work — which as you can imagine is much more meaningful than a one off payment.”
When asked how Facebook — which earned over $20 billion in revenue last quarter — determined that a one-off payment of $1,000 would be less meaningful to its contract workers than its full-time staff, the spokesperson sent the same statement again.
Facebook announced that it would “be working with our partners over the course of this week to send all contract workers who perform content review home, until further notice.”
Contractors at the tech giant have recently complained of contradictory, confusing safety guidance surrounding the Covid-19 pandemic, with disparities between what Facebook is telling employees working on contracts and what the corporations employing the contractors are saying.
Many of Facebook’s hourly staff, contracted around the world through firms like Accenture to review sexually disturbing and graphically violent content — among other tasks — work second or third jobs to make ends meet.
“Facebook loves to remind us that we only work in their buildings and on their platforms and not for them,” said one Accenture worker contracted to Facebook, who asked that their name not be used for fear of losing their job.
Another added, “We have never been, nor will we ever be worthy of dignity and respect in their eyes.” I asked the worker if a $1,000 payment would be “meaningful,” as the Facebook spokesperson had put it. “That’s almost two months of rent for me,” the contractor said. “Would help ease the cost of not having hot food and snacks at work five days a week also.”


theintercept--2020-03-20--Trump Disagrees With Top Immunologist Over Untested Drug Treatment for Covid-19

White House briefing on Friday , Donald Trump publicly disagreed with the government ’ s most senior immunologist , Dr. Anthony Fauci , on the likelihood that the anti-malarial drug chloroquine could be an effective treatment for Covid-19 , the pandemic coronavirus respiratory illness .
Fauci was asked about the drug because the president had called it a potential “ game-changer ” on Thursday and claimed , incorrectly , that the FDA had already approved its use and the government would “ make that drug available almost immediately.
” Moments after the doctor had made it clear that there were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chloroquine might be effective or safe for patients with Covid-19 , or could be used as a prophylaxis , as Trump had suggested , the president said , “ I think , without seeing too much , I ’ m probably more of a fan of that , maybe than anybody.
” When Peter Alexander of NBC News then noted that Fauci had made it clear that “ there is no magic drug for coronavirus , ” Trump said : “ I disagree .
Maybe and maybe not.
” “ I will say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from a very positive school when it comes to in particular one of these drugs , and we ’ ll see how it works out , ” Trump added .
“ I ’ m not saying it will , but I think people may be surprised .
By the way , that would be a game-changer.
” Trump , of course , has made a career out of marketing products of little value with unmerited hype , and seems unable to turn off that instinct , even in a time when accurate scientific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Is it possible that your impulse to put a positive spin on things may be giving Americans a false sense of hope ?
” Alexander asked him .
“ Are you misrepresenting our preparedness right now ?
” After sarcastically deriding the question , Trump seemed to illustrate its premise by saying , “ I agree with the doctor , what he said : may work ; may not work .
I feel good about it .
That ’ s all it is , just a feeling .
I ’ m , you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feel good about it .
And we ’ re going to see , you ’ re going to see soon enough.
” “ Obviously , ” Trump added , “ I think I can speak from a lot of experience , because it ’ s been out there for 20 years , so it ’ s not a drug that you have a huge amount of danger with .
It ’ s not like a brand new drug that ’ s just been created that may have an unbelievable , monumental effect , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as hell think we ought to give it a try , ” Trump concluded .
“ I mean there ’ s been some interesting things happened — and some good , very good things .
Let ’ s see what happens , we have nothing to lose .
You know the expression , What the hell do you have to lose ?
” When Alexander tried to follow up by asking Trump what message he had for millions of Americans who are scared , citing the latest death toll , the president replied @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re a terrible reporter , that ’ s what I say.
” For the second day running , the president then used a briefing about a global public health emergency to attack the credibility of news organizations that have accurately reported on the slowness of his administration to tackle the threat he had spent weeks dismissing as no more dangerous than the flu .
“ I think it ’ s a very nasty question , ” Trump said , applying the label he now uses to dismiss any perceived criticism of his handling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people are looking for answers and they ’ re looking for hope , and you ’ re doing sensationalism , ” the president added , before launching into a tirade against Comcast , NBC ’ s parent company .
“ I don ’ t call it Comcast , I call it Concast , ” Trump said .
“ Let ’ s see if it works .
It might and it might not .
I happen to feel good about it , but who knows .
I ’ ve been right a lot.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the drug , Fauci was then forced to explain , delicately , that what the president had just said about its safety was not true .
While chloroquine was only rarely dangerous for people with malaria , Fauci said , “ what we don ’ t know , is when you put it in the context of another disease , whether it ’ s safe.
” “ I think it probably is going to be safe , but I like to prove things first , ” Fauci added .
“ It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , versus proving that it will work.
” Trump responded similarly poorly to being asked about his government ’ s most glaring failure , the ongoing lack of testing for the virus , which has been a key part of South Korea ’ s far more successful effort to slow its spread .
Two weeks after Trump claimed , falsely , that “ anybody that needs a test , gets a test , ” Yamiche Alcindor of PBS Newshour asked “ When will every American who needs a test , get a test @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
” “ Well , you ’ re hearing very positive things about testing , ” Trump began , trying to change the subject to his administration ’ s constant claims that testing capability was improving .
Then he attacked the reporter for raising a failing he has tried hard distract attention from .
“ We ’ re well into this , ” he said , “ and nobody ’ s even talking about it , except for you , which doesn ’ t surprise me.
” When Alcindor pressed him , saying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who say they have symptoms and can ’ t get tested , ” Trump suggested the problem was minor .
“ Yeah , well , okay , I ’ m not hearing it , ” he said .
Earlier in the briefing , however , Fauci had admitted that testing was still not meeting demand .
“ That is a reality that is happening now , ” he said .
“ We are not there yet , because otherwise people would be never calling up saying they can ’ t get a test @ @

At another unnerving White House briefing on Friday, Donald Trump publicly disagreed with the government’s most senior immunologist, Dr. Anthony Fauci, on the likelihood that the anti-malarial drug chloroquine could be an effective treatment for Covid-19, the pandemic coronavirus respiratory illness.
Fauci was asked about the drug because the president had called it a potential “game-changer” on Thursday and claimed, incorrectly, that the FDA had already approved its use and the government would “make that drug available almost immediately.”
Moments after the doctor had made it clear that there were anecdotal reports but no clinical evidence that chloroquine might be effective or safe for patients with Covid-19, or could be used as a prophylaxis, as Trump had suggested, the president said, “I think, without seeing too much, I’m probably more of a fan of that, maybe than anybody.”
When Peter Alexander of NBC News then noted that Fauci had made it clear that “there is no magic drug for coronavirus,” Trump said: “I disagree. Maybe and maybe not.”
“I will say that I am a man that comes from a very positive school when it comes to in particular one of these drugs, and we’ll see how it works out,” Trump added. “I’m not saying it will, but I think people may be surprised. By the way, that would be a game-changer.”
Trump, of course, has made a career out of marketing products of little value with unmerited hype, and seems unable to turn off that instinct, even in a time when accurate scientific information is at a premium.
“Is it possible that your impulse to put a positive spin on things may be giving Americans a false sense of hope?” Alexander asked him. “Are you misrepresenting our preparedness right now?”
After sarcastically deriding the question, Trump seemed to illustrate its premise by saying, “I agree with the doctor, what he said: may work; may not work. I feel good about it. That’s all it is, just a feeling. I’m, you know, a smart guy. I feel good about it. And we’re going to see, you’re going to see soon enough.”
“Obviously,” Trump added, “I think I can speak from a lot of experience, because it’s been out there for 20 years, so it’s not a drug that you have a huge amount of danger with. It’s not like a brand new drug that’s just been created that may have an unbelievable, monumental effect, like kill you.”
“I sure as hell think we ought to give it a try,” Trump concluded. “I mean there’s been some interesting things happened — and some good, very good things. Let’s see what happens, we have nothing to lose. You know the expression, What the hell do you have to lose?”
When Alexander tried to follow up by asking Trump what message he had for millions of Americans who are scared, citing the latest death toll, the president replied: “I say that you’re a terrible reporter, that’s what I say.”
NBC's @PeterAlexander asks Trump what he'd say to Americans who are frightened. Trump goes on rant against Alexander, says he asked a "nasty question," calls him a "terrible reporter" and attacks NBC and Comcast. pic.twitter.com/vZAk3M4mqR — Oliver Darcy (@oliverdarcy) March 20, 2020
For the second day running, the president then used a briefing about a global public health emergency to attack the credibility of news organizations that have accurately reported on the slowness of his administration to tackle the threat he had spent weeks dismissing as no more dangerous than the flu.
“I think it’s a very nasty question,” Trump said, applying the label he now uses to dismiss any perceived criticism of his handling of the crisis. “The American people are looking for answers and they’re looking for hope, and you’re doing sensationalism,” the president added, before launching into a tirade against Comcast, NBC’s parent company. “I don’t call it Comcast, I call it Concast,” Trump said. “Let’s see if it works. It might and it might not. I happen to feel good about it, but who knows. I’ve been right a lot.”
In response to a follow up question about the drug, Fauci was then forced to explain, delicately, that what the president had just said about its safety was not true. While chloroquine was only rarely dangerous for people with malaria, Fauci said, “what we don’t know, is when you put it in the context of another disease, whether it’s safe.”
“I think it probably is going to be safe, but I like to prove things first,” Fauci added. “It’s the hope that it will work, versus proving that it will work.”
On Saturday morning, Trump upped the ante by tweeting: “Hydrocholoroquine and Azithromycin, taken together, have a real chance to be one of the biggest game changers in the history of medicine,” and urging his own government health agencies to put the drugs “in use IMMEDIATELY.”
Fauci was again forced to explain that there remains no clinical proof that the drugs would be safe and effective for those infected with covid-19. “The president is talking about hope for people,” Fauci said at another briefing on Saturday.
I think that’s Fauci for: “Trump is an irresponsible moron.” https://t.co/tCqQF82C6l — Hans Kristensen (@nukestrat) March 21, 2020
The question, he added, is, “are you going to use a drug that someone says from an anecdotal standpoint, not completely proven, but might have some effect? There are those who lean to the point of giving hope and saying, ‘Give that person the option of having access to that drug.’ And then you have the other group, which is my job as a scientist, to say, ‘My job is to ultimately prove, without a doubt, that a drug is not only safe by that it actually works.'”
On Friday, Trump also responded poorly to being asked about his government’s most glaring failure, the ongoing lack of testing for the virus, which has been a key part of South Korea’s far more successful effort to slow its spread. Two weeks after Trump claimed, falsely, that “anybody that needs a test, gets a test,” Yamiche Alcindor of PBS Newshour asked “When will every American who needs a test, get a test — be able to get a test?”
Here’s the video of President Trump saying he hasn’t heard of Americans with symptoms of the coronavirus not being able to get tested. Note: Dr. Fauci today clearly said the demand for tests is not being met at this time. pic.twitter.com/GP6d8XyHwo — Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) March 20, 2020
“Well, you’re hearing very positive things about testing,” Trump began, trying to change the subject to his administration’s constant claims that testing capability was improving. Then he attacked the reporter for raising a failing he has tried hard distract attention from. “We’re well into this,” he said, “and nobody’s even talking about it, except for you, which doesn’t surprise me.”
When Alcindor pressed him, saying “There are Americans, though, who say they have symptoms and can’t get tested,” Trump suggested the problem was minor. “Yeah, well, okay, I’m not hearing it,” he said.
Earlier in the briefing, however, Fauci had admitted that testing was still not meeting demand. “That is a reality that is happening now,” he said. “We are not there yet, because otherwise people would be never calling up saying they can’t get a test.”
Q: "So we are not yet meeting the demand pressure [for testing]?"
Fauci: "We are not there yet, because otherwise people would never be calling up saying they can't get a test." Pence: "I just can't emphasize enough about the incredible progress that we have made on testing." pic.twitter.com/5ozUFEpBOi — CBS Evening News (@CBSEveningNews) March 20, 2020
As Trump then directed Vice President Mike Pence to take the podium and repeat the administration’s talking point — “I just can’t emphasize enough about the incredible progress that we have made on testing” — Fauci and his fellow scientific expert, Dr. Deborah Birx, had a brief, whispered exchange behind the politicians.
this quiet exchange between the two health experts … pic.twitter.com/FO4rbzuCs3 — Kate Bennett (@KateBennett_DC) March 20, 2020
Fauci, the veteran government scientist, also earned sympathy from many observers at another stage of the briefing, when Trump tossed in a gratuitous swipe at the nation’s career diplomats, referring to “The Deep State Department,” and the doctor was forced to conceal his response by hiding his face in his hand.
You can spot the exact moment he died inside https://t.co/griTrntI5s — marv ? (@mvn_dn) March 20, 2020
Updated: Saturday, March 21, 4:30 pm EDT
This article was updated to add comments from Donald Trump and Dr. Anthony Fauci on Saturday.


theintercept--2020-03-20--Lawmakers Demand That ICE Stop Arresting Immigrants to Prevent Spreading Coronavirus Among Detainees

Democratic lawmakers are calling on the Department of Homeland Security to freeze its enforcement-to-detention pipeline , suspend deportations , and release comprehensive plans to prevent a broader outbreak of the coronavirus in its facilities .
In a letter sent to the head of DHS on Friday , Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota , along with 14 of her colleagues , wrote that “ continuing status quo policies will contribute to the spread of the virus.
” The letter came less than 24 hours after officials in New Jersey confirmed that a member of an Immigration Customs Enforcement medical team at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Covid-19 , the disease caused by the new coronavirus .
In addition , officials in New Jersey said a correctional officer at Bergen County Jail , which contracts with ICE , had tested positive for Covid-19 , though the individual reportedly had no contact with ICE detainees or others in custody .
“ Immigration detention facilities , even before the start of the Covid-19 pandemic , have been breeding grounds for illness , ” Omar wrote .
“ For detainees who are immunocompromised or otherwise susceptible to the worst consequences of contracting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be literally a matter of life or death.
” From the outset of the epidemic , advocates have been raising the alarm that the U.S. network of immigration detention centers , like the country ’ s expansive prison system , presents a profound danger to the people locked inside .
“ Everyone would rather die on the outside with our families than in here , ” a person participating in a unit-wide hunger strike at Essex County Correctional Facility in Newark , New Jersey , said in a statement released Thursday .
Late @ @ @ @ @ @ @ second hunger strike involving immigrants detained by ICE , this one at the Hudson County Correctional Facility in Kearny , New Jersey .
ICE has defended its operations amid the pandemic .
Since the first week of the Trump administration , when the president signed an executive order doing away with Obama-era enforcement priorities , ICE has routinely said that no undocumented person is exempt from arrest and deportation .
Earlier this week , the agency suggested it might pull back on that approach , releasing a statement saying that it would “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ focus enforcement on public safety risks and individuals subject to mandatory detention based on criminal grounds.
” There has been no indication that ICE will release any of the individuals currently in its custody , including those who probably would not have been arrested under the agency ’ s adjusted enforcement posture .
For Omar and her colleagues , the measures ICE has taken to date don ’ t go far enough .
In the letter sent Friday to DHS Acting Secretary Chad Wolf , the lawmakers called for a commitment to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Covid-19 , and the freezing of interior immigration enforcement and visa overstay enforcement .
The lawmakers also called for an end to deportations during the pandemic , and a pause on in-person immigration court proceedings and naturalization ceremonies .
Halting immigration court hearings in particular has been the subject of demands from across the immigration legal world .
Just last week , a union that represents ICE ’ s own prosecutors joined with immigration judges and advocates in supporting such a measure .
On Friday , the union that represents the nation ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prosecutor in Newark had tested positive for Covid-19 , adding that “ all immigration courts must close NOW.
” Omar and her colleagues also demanded that DHS produce plans articulating how it intends to handle a range of pandemic-related emergencies , including instances in which detainees , or its own personnel , test positive for the coronavirus .
Earlier this week , Politico reported that nearly 500 DHS employees are quarantined because of the virus , with “ at least 13 are confirmed or presumed Covid-19 positive.
” “ What is your plan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that holds DHS/ICE detainees , including temporary CBP holding and processing facilities ?
” Omar asked .
“ Will you make public statements that nobody will be subject to immigration enforcement for seeking medical attention during the Covid-19 pandemic ?
” Omar and her colleagues gave the DHS chief until the end of day to respond .
The Intercept has reached out to the agency for comment and will update this story should it provide one .

More than a dozen Democratic lawmakers are calling on the Department of Homeland Security to freeze its enforcement-to-detention pipeline, suspend deportations, and release comprehensive plans to prevent a broader outbreak of the coronavirus in its facilities.
In a letter sent to the head of DHS on Friday, Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, along with 14 of her colleagues, wrote that “continuing status quo policies will contribute to the spread of the virus.”
The letter came less than 24 hours after officials in New Jersey confirmed that a member of an Immigration Customs Enforcement medical team at the Elizabeth Detention Center had tested positive for Covid-19, the disease caused by the new coronavirus. In addition, officials in New Jersey said a correctional officer at Bergen County Jail, which contracts with ICE, had tested positive for Covid-19, though the individual reportedly had no contact with ICE detainees or others in custody.
“Immigration detention facilities, even before the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, have been breeding grounds for illness,” Omar wrote. “For detainees who are immunocompromised or otherwise susceptible to the worst consequences of contracting Covid-19, holding them in detention may be literally a matter of life or death.”
From the outset of the epidemic, advocates have been raising the alarm that the U.S. network of immigration detention centers, like the country’s expansive prison system, presents a profound danger to the people locked inside. “Everyone would rather die on the outside with our families than in here,” a person participating in a unit-wide hunger strike at Essex County Correctional Facility in Newark, New Jersey, said in a statement released Thursday. Late Friday afternoon, news broke of a second hunger strike involving immigrants detained by ICE, this one at the Hudson County Correctional Facility in Kearny, New Jersey.
ICE has defended its operations amid the pandemic. Since the first week of the Trump administration, when the president signed an executive order doing away with Obama-era enforcement priorities, ICE has routinely said that no undocumented person is exempt from arrest and deportation.
Earlier this week, the agency suggested it might pull back on that approach, releasing a statement saying that it would “temporarily adjust its enforcement posture” and “focus enforcement on public safety risks and individuals subject to mandatory detention based on criminal grounds.” There has been no indication that ICE will release any of the individuals currently in its custody, including those who probably would not have been arrested under the agency’s adjusted enforcement posture.
For Omar and her colleagues, the measures ICE has taken to date don’t go far enough.
In the letter sent Friday to DHS Acting Secretary Chad Wolf, the lawmakers called for a commitment to releasing detainees at risk of dying of Covid-19, and the freezing of interior immigration enforcement and visa overstay enforcement.
The lawmakers also called for an end to deportations during the pandemic, and a pause on in-person immigration court proceedings and naturalization ceremonies. Halting immigration court hearings in particular has been the subject of demands from across the immigration legal world.
Just last week, a union that represents ICE’s own prosecutors joined with immigration judges and advocates in supporting such a measure. On Friday, the union that represents the nation’s immigration judges tweeted that an ICE prosecutor in Newark had tested positive for Covid-19, adding that “all immigration courts must close NOW.”
Omar and her colleagues also demanded that DHS produce plans articulating how it intends to handle a range of pandemic-related emergencies, including instances in which detainees, or its own personnel, test positive for the coronavirus.
Read Our Complete Coverage The War on Immigrants
Earlier this week, Politico reported that nearly 500 DHS employees are quarantined because of the virus, with “at least 13 are confirmed or presumed Covid-19 positive.”
“What is your plan to prevent an outbreak in any facility that holds DHS/ICE detainees, including temporary CBP holding and processing facilities?” Omar asked. “Will you make public statements that nobody will be subject to immigration enforcement for seeking medical attention during the Covid-19 pandemic?”
Omar and her colleagues gave the DHS chief until the end of day to respond. The Intercept has reached out to the agency for comment and will update this story should it provide one.


theintercept--2020-03-20--How to Save the U.S. Economy, With Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Stephanie Kelton

Wait !
Before you go on about your day , ask yourself : How likely is it that the story @ @ @ @ @ been produced by a different news outlet if The Intercept hadn ’ t done it @ @ @ @ @ of media would look like without The Intercept .
Who would hold party elites accountable @ @ @ @ @ to have ?
How many covert wars , miscarriages of justice , and dystopian technologies @ @ @ @ @ reporters weren ’ t on the beat ?
The kind of reporting we do is @ @ @ @ @ it is not easy , cheap , or profitable .
The Intercept is an independent @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t have ads , so we depend on our members — 35,000 and @ @ @ @ @ hold the powerful to account .
Joining is simple and doesn ’ t need to @ @ @ @ @ can become a sustaining member for as little as $ 3 or $ 5 a @ @ @ @ @ all it takes to support the journalism you rely on .

Subscribe to the Deconstructed podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Stitcher, Radio Public, and other platforms. New to podcasting? Click here.
Border closures. Economic meltdown. Skyrocketing unemployment claims. Every day brings new news of the Covid-19 pandemic’s unprecedented impact on American life. Will the federal government find the political will to enact the kinds of radical measures necessary to help Americans keep their heads above water during this crisis? New York congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and economist Stephanie Kelton join Mehdi Hasan to discuss what needs to be done.
Read Our Complete Coverage The Coronavirus Crisis
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: We cannot respond to this with a bandaid. We need to respond to this with permanent systems and structures so that we do not find ourselves in this fragile of a position again.
[Music interlude.]
Mehdi Hasan: Welcome to a special episode of Deconstructed, which I hope you’re listening to at home, while social distancing. I’m recording this here in my home, in my closet in fact. Because these are dark times. Here in the United States, the number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 continues to skyrocket. 200 Americans are dead and the US economy is in meltdown. How many more Americans will suffer and even die not just from the virus itself but from the massive economic fallout: the lost jobs, incomes, homes? As the economy comes to an unprecedented standstill, and some politicians, even top Democrats, don’t quite get it.
AOC: There’s a lot of this 90s wonkery going on but it doesn’t address the core issue which is that people are experiencing a shock right now, we need to get checks into people’s hands.
MH: That’s one of my guests today, yes, the one and only Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who’s making her debut on Deconstructed.
And I’m also joined for the first time by the brilliant lefty economist and former Bernie Sanders adviser Professor Stephanie Kelton.
Stephanie Kelton: When it becomes clear and it will, that a trillion dollars is insufficient, we have to be prepared to go back and do more.
MH: So, how do we save the U.S. economy? How do we save workers in this country?
Newscaster: Fears grow about the economic damage from the coronavirus outbreak.
Newscaster: Sweeping containment measures have disrupted markets around the world, including the U.S.
Newscaster: The Dow falling almost 3,000 points. That is the biggest one day point drop of all time.
Newscaster: This is going to be an economic catastrophe. One of the worst this country may have ever faced.
Newscaster: The unemployment rate, listen to this, could hit 20%.
Newscaster: The last time the number was that high, the country was in the midst of the Great Depression.
MH: While we’re all rightly focused on vaccines and ventilators and the need for social distancing, as the coronavirus pandemic continues and spreads, we can’t afford to take our eyes off the economic crisis also unfolding in front of us, as a direct result of this public health crisis. We are, I am sorry to say, heading into an economic unknown. We don’t know how bad it’s going to get, only that it’s going to be bad beyond anything we’ve seen before in our lifetimes.
Goldman Sachs is predicting a five percent decline in U.S. GDP this quarter alone. So is JP Morgan. You have unemployment claims rocketing upwards, the biggest week to week increase in jobless claims since the 2008 financial crisis. A poll out this week from NPR and PBS found one in five adults saying they’d been laid off or had their work hours cut, already. And as the New York Times pointed out, “what would normally be a few months’ worth of job loss” is happening in the space of days and weeks. In fact, Goldman Sachs is predicting a ten-fold rise next week in jobless claims. Yes, ten-fold, next week!
And look: It’s very hard to sustain any kind of normal economy, or growth, or spending, when you’re not supposed to leave your house. Let alone travel outside of your country. We’ve never been in a situation like this before which means any response to this crisis, the economic side of this crisis, has to be something beyond anything we’ve tried ever or ever done before. We can’t use the same playbook we’ve used before. And whatever we do: it can’t be small bore, it can’t lack ambition, and it can’t screw over ordinary working Americans. Again.
Barry Eichengreen, a professor of economics at Berkeley, who specializes in economic history. He’s an expert on the Great Depression, he told the New Yorker magazine this week that he’s working on the assumption that consumer spending will fall by around 30 percent in the second quarter of 2020. Thirty percent! Which would be unprecedented.
Let’s be clear: what’s happening right now is the economic and financial equivalent of 9/11 and the Financial Crash rolled into one. And what’s fast coming down the track could make even the Great Depression look like a stroll through the park. A total and complete shutdown of vast sections of the economy, indefinitely, with mass unemployment possibly around the corner. Even Trump’s own Treasury Secretary, ex-banker Steve Mnuchin conceded in a private meeting with Republicans senators that unemployment, right now at a record low, could hit 20 percent. Twenty percent!
So I’ll be honest, it was good to hear Mnuchin himself take to the White House podium earlier this week and announce that the U.S. government will be taking direct action to try and help people in this country keep their heads above water:
Steven Mnuchin: We’re looking at sending checks to Americans immediately and what we’ve heard from hardworking Americans many companies have now shut down, whether it’s bars or restaurants, Americans need cash now and the president wants to get cash now.
MH: The idea of cutting checks to Americans has had support from unusual Republican quarters, people like former GOP presidential candidate turned Utah Senator Mitt Romney:
Chris Hayes: Utah Republican Senator Mitt Romney endorsed the idea. “Every American adult should immediately receive a one-time check for $1,000.” Note that would not be monthly. Though others are calling for more sustained basic income.
MH: The problem is not only are a bunch of Republican senators like Lindsay Graham and Richard Shelby opposed to direct payments but also that on Thursday the Senate Republican leadership unveiled a big trillion-dollar rescue bill which promised checks of $1,200 to American adults earning up to 75k a year, but only offered $600 to people lower down the income scale. People who don’t earn enough money to pay income tax in the first place. Tens of millions of poorer Americans who need more help than the rest will get smaller checks. And oh, yeah: The GOP bill also offers — yes, you guessed it! — tax cuts for big corporations. So, even in a crisis like this, Congressional Republicans make sure to protect the wealthy while screwing over the poorest.
Now, on the other side of the aisle, almost two dozen Senate Democrats say they support the idea of direct payments, of checks sent out to Americans, but so far, at the time of this recording, not Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer or Speaker Nancy Pelosi, both of whom say they want more targeted payments, that they have their doubts about sending out checks to everybody. They prefer to focus on boosting unemployment insurance. Pelosi even agreed a deal with House Republicans on paid sick leave that doesn’t actually cover four out of five American workers. I mean, seriously, sometimes I just want to give up.
Over in France, they’ve suspended rent, taxes, household bills. In Italy, mortgage payments. In Spain, they’ve nationalized all private hospitals. In Denmark, the government is guaranteeing the vast majority of incomes of any workers threatened with job losses. See, it can be done. Radical measures in radical times.
So let me ask today: what can elected politicians in Washington DC, especially Democratic ones, progressive ones, do here in the face of this unprecedented economic meltdown?
Because this is serious, people are dying, people are losing everything, and it’s only going to get worse. Are our politicians and policymakers up to the challenge? Will they bail out the people this time, and not just big businesses and corporations?
[Music interlude.]
MH: I’m joined on the show to discuss all of this and more with two of the most brilliant, outspoken and progressive women in American public life right now: Stephanie Kelton is an economist and a professor at Stony Brook University, a former adviser to Bernie Sanders and a leading advocate of Modern Monetary Theory or MMT. She’s also the author of the forthcoming book, “The Deficit Myth: Modern Monetary Theory and the Birth of the People’s Economy.”
Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has represented New York’s 14th congressional district since her shock election in 2018 and, with the exception of Bernie Sanders, is probably the most famous socialist in America today. She’s also a member of, right now, the hugely influential House Financial Services Committee.
Thank you both for joining me on the show. Congresswoman, I know you’re short on time, so let me kick off with you and get straight into it. How bad is the economic crisis we’re facing right now? And how big, how radical does the response from Congress need to be?
AOC: I think that, you know, truly, it’s very important and it’s quite difficult to understand the scale and the lack of precedents that the sheer public health and economic shock that we’re experiencing right now. This is unlike 2008. This is unlike almost any other shock that we have seen in how quickly everything has ground to a halt, not just in the stock market but in everyday lives. And I truly do not believe that there is an action we can consider right now that is too small. I certainly have not seen any proposal that I would say is too large for us to be considering right now.
MH: And what kind of calls are you getting from constituents? What are they going through?
AOC: It’s everything and anything. I think what’s very important for us to realize in this moment is that what coronavirus has essentially done at least in the United States and in my district, is that it has taken all of these slow moving crises that we have already been experiencing in the United States and basically pressed fast forward on every single one. So housing insecurities have now been exacerbated. People don’t know if they’re going to be able to afford their rent this month. And even before the virus hit, 40% of Americans had less than $400 saved for an emergency. So my constituents are talking to me about how am I going to afford rent? Will I be evicted? If I go to the hospital, if I get sick, how much, is this going to cost me $10,000? And because we don’t have single payer health care, because we don’t pay a living wage, because we haven’t been investing in our health care infrastructure, because we haven’t been educating people to the level and allowing people to have access to an education, all of these things are coming to a head in this very moment.
MH: Stephanie Kelton, I believe you’ve been in conversation with senior Democrats in the Senate this week. Do you get a sense that they get A, the urgency of responding ASAP, and B, the scale of the response, how big it needs to be?
SK: Ah, well, I definitely get the impression that they understand the urgency, that seems very clear. On the scale, you know, I think that what’s happening is that people are looking back at the last crisis, at the financial crisis, and sort of coming away with this idea that we need to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past which is true, of course, but what I think that I’m a little concerned that the lesson that they appear to be drawing is that it’s really important to get the number right, that we don’t do something that’s too small for the moment, because you only get one chance at this thing. Because last time, you know, we got the 787 billion and then when it became clear that that was insufficient, there was just no appetite to go back and do more when it was urgently needed. And I’m trying to, the advice that I’m giving is, you know, don’t get into that mindset that you get one shot at this. And if you get it wrong, that’s the end of it. You just have to pay the price I’m urging them to, you know, do the legislation, the best piece of legislation they can now but be prepared, be steadfast in your commitment to do whatever it takes. And when it becomes clear and it will that a trillion dollars is insufficient, we have to be prepared to go back and do more.
MH: So, if you’re Chuck Schumer, you’re Nancy Pelosi, what would you be calling for right now from a podium? What would you be saying is top of your wish list?
SK: Yeah, so what I’ve explained is that there are basically two big ways that we can help working people and families. And you know, there are two broad categories. One is to increase cash inflows. We have to make it possible, as we tell people, you know, we want to keep people attached to their jobs, keep them on payroll, as we keep them out of the workforce. And so, to the extent that we can do things to help employers stay committed to paying their employees, keep them on payroll, that’s one really important thing to do. Cash payments, cash assistance is important. That increases cash inflow. It helps people you know, bridge this gap, where their incomes are going to be insufficient to cover bills and the other big category is to decrease cash outflows. So to the extent that you can do things in terms of a moratorium on whether it’s your rent and your mortgage, your tax payment, your student loan payment. So you’ve got those two moving parts, decrease the amount that people are required to pay out each month and increase what’s coming in because that’s the only way people are going to be able to hold it together. Go ahead.
MH: No, I was gonna say, Congresswoman, do you sign on to all of that? And also a follow up. Katie Porter, your fellow freshman Democrat from California came out in the Atlantic yesterday and said she disagrees with Speaker Pelosi is focused on “refundable tax credits” over direct cash payments. She says that’s too slow. Do you agree with Katie Porter? Is the Pelosi/Schumer way just too slow given how fast the economy is going downwards right now?
AOC: Yes, I completely agree. I sit with Katie Porter on the Financial Services Committee and she’s absolutely right. And I agree with Professor Kelton. I think one thing that’s important to underscore when Professor Kelton is talking about well, we want to look, last time we only have one bite at this apple, there won’t be appetite. We have to examine why there wasn’t political appetite to do more in 2008. And the reason for that was because there was a package that was entirely designed to favor corporations, to bail out Wall Street that was more concerned with stock prices than wages and the health of Wall Street than the actual healthcare system. And that’s why there wasn’t political appetite to do more because we passed out billions of dollars and then the CEOs came in flying in on their private jets, asking for more. And so that was the core of why Americans rejected doing more after the first package.
Now is a very different time. If we focus our package on immediate bailouts for everyday people, making sure that we’re issuing things like mortgage and rent and student loan debt moratoriums, making sure that we’re getting cash into people’s hands, ensuring the fact that if they have to go to the hospital, coronavirus related or not because as we know this can trigger a series of other health issues, that you will be financially okay. And that is the number one thing that we need to do right now. We need to be introducing stabilizers to working families. And Katie Porter is absolutely right on the point of tax credits. You know, I think sometimes with all due respect to my colleagues, we get into this, you know, there’s a lot of like this 90s wonkery going on where if we do a backdoor tax credit, oh, that’s a clever way of helping people. But it doesn’t address the core issue, which is that people are experiencing a shock right now. We need to get checks into people’s hands. If you’re concerned about it being means-based, tax it on the other end. Get everyone a check right now. And then if you want to make sure that the millionaire’s don’t get 1,000 bucks, do an extra, you know, tax them on the other end of that and make sure that they can’t wriggle out of that.
MH: It’s so frustrating when you have top Democrats, liberals saying stuff like no we need to target this. When we know that means testing doesn’t work especially in a crisis. And we know that something called progressive taxation which deals with the whole concept of universality. You mentioned, you know, the wonkery and getting behind the different policies. This week, we saw the Republicans do a bit of a bait and switch, where on the one hand, they were claimed to be outflanking the Democrats by proposing big amounts. Mnuchin coming out and saying direct checks, trillion dollars. And then you see the actual bill that Senate Republicans put out on Thursday. It had big tax cuts for corporations, as you mentioned, and some of the poorest Americans, millions of people who don’t earn enough to pay federal tax are going to get much smaller checks than everyone else.
AOC: Mmhmm. I mean, it’s abhorrent. You actually look at this kind of trash pile of legislation that the Republicans have just introduced and it’s phased in. I’ve never seen such a thing in my life of, we’re going to give the neediest people less. And we’re going to give people who are you know, need help but don’t need as much help more. It’s completely on its head. And you know, I think it’s important because, you know, this is an emergency. There is a very strong, compelling feeling to say, let’s put our partisan differences aside, but at the same time when they’re using this opportunity to, you know, essentially be public corporate raiders, it’s just not something that that we should be finding acceptable in this moment.
MH: Stephanie, you mentioned earlier that $1 trillion is too small a figure, you think it’s gonna be way too small, given the shock this economy is experiencing. How big do you think the check should be? And is this a time for a federal jobs guarantee which you’ve worked a lot on?
SK: Yeah, well, the first how big the checks should be is really dependent upon what you’re doing on the other side. So the less you do to reduce cash outflow if you’re not doing a moratorium on mortgages and rents and student loan payment, if you’re not guaranteeing health care payments for everything, the less you do on that side, the bigger I would say you need to go on the cash inflow side. So the bigger the checks were going to need to be. So I think it’s a question of, you know, the entirety of what it is you’re doing legislatively. You’re absolutely right. A trillion dollars is going to come nowhere near helping us get through this crisis. We’re looking at 37 million jobs that are vulnerable right now to short term layoffs. Goldman Sachs has already told us that we should expect next week that unemployment insurance claims could jump from what we saw most recently 281,000 to 2.25 million in a week’s time. This is catastrophic, and it will cascade like a domino through the economy. It will rip through this very, very quickly. So we’re going to be back at this again and again and again.
AOC: I would say that the other thing that’s important for us to realize in this moment is that we’ve been building the economy off of a sugar high for the last you know, who knows how many years? I want to say 10 years. But it’s really, in a lot of ways, structurally, it’s been multiple decades. And so what we’re seeing right now is the fragility of an economy that is built on tax cuts and subsidies instead of actual prosperity and increase in prosperity for working people. You know, this is what happens when wages don’t go up for 30 years in real terms when you account for inflation.
MH: It’s funny, Congresswoman, that you see some of you, we talk about federal jobs guarantee, we’re talking about getting, you know, involved in the economy, the government getting much more involved in the economy. Is it fair to say that just as there are no atheists in a foxhole, there are no capitalists, certainly no libertarians in a pandemic? We now have Republican senators basically endorsing the idea of big government. A Republican president saying this week he’s okay with the federal government taking equity stakes in companies that are bailed out. Are we all socialists now?
AOC: Yeah, I mean, they’ve always been socialist, it’s just about for who.
MH: Exactly.
AOC: And so they’ve never been this kind of hardscrabble bootstrapping capitalists ever. They’ve been that for struggling families, and they’ve been telling this entire time, you have these folks telling working families, oh, you know, poo-poo, if you’re about to get evicted from your apartment or evicted from your home or get foreclosed on, that’s your fault, because you don’t have three months savings. But the moment the airline industry has a bad week, they run through everything and run to the federal government and say you need to bail us out when they just spent 96% of their free cash flow and purchasing their own stock, we’re considering it. And so you know, the hypocrisy and all of it is laid open.
And really what this is about politically in people who are moving is whether you considered people struggling and people dying because they couldn’t afford insulin an emergency before and if you’re considering it an emergency now. And I hope that every single person who considers a lack of health care an emergency right now, ask themselves why wasn’t this an emergency a month ago, six months ago, a year ago? Because Americans have been dying. We have some of the highest maternal mortality rates in the developed world. And we’ve just been kind of strolling along as though everything has been fine.
And you know, one of the things about this pandemic, and our response right now is that we cannot respond to this with a bandaid. It cannot be a bailout package and we keep on going the way that we did before. We need to respond to this with permanent systems and structures so that we do not find ourselves in this fragile of a position again.
MH: So I know you have to run Congresswoman, but before you go, I do want to get very bluntly to the point: Nancy Pelosi rings you up tonight and says Congresswoman, what do you want me to do? What’s top of your wish list? What should I be saying? What would you say to her?
AOC: Oh, man, well, it’s hard to prioritize because so many of these issues are interconnected. But one thing that I would say, you know, speaking of Professor Kelton’s talk on outflows and inflows is that we need both debt moratorium and universal basic income right now. If we can get both of those pieces, then we can buy ourselves three to six months of breathing room. And we can enact a whole lot of other longer-term stabilizers. But right now, we need to stop the bleeding. And what that means is getting checks in the hands of working families and making sure that those checks aren’t going right out the door for being you know, for owing long term debts like mortgage and student loan payments.
MH: Should people have faith in the Democratic leadership to pull that off, though, with people like you perhaps pushing them?
AOC: I think that right now, what’s really important is, you know, this isn’t a spectator sport. We shouldn’t be sitting around looking at Congress and saying, I hope Democratic leadership does the right thing. We need to be blowing up their phones right now and telling them what we need, especially if you are a vulnerable worker, a gig worker, hourly, freelance, contracting. Most of these bills tend to be designed for an economy that existed 30 years ago. And that’s why we saw a paid sick leave bill that left out half of the workforce. So we really need to make sure that we’re not taking this like, Oh, do I have faith? I’m not here trying to pray to any person. I’m here to make sure that we put on the heat and the pressure to get demands and make sure that we take care of people.
MH: Congresswoman, I’d love to carry on this conversation with you and Stephanie, but I want to respect your time in this crisis. I know you have to run. I do hope we can get you back on the show soon for a longer period of time. But thanks for joining us. Good luck with your work.
AOC: Of course. Thank you so much. Have a good one.
MH: And Stephanie Kelton is still here with us. Stephanie, I’ve got to ask you the question that every lazy journalist and diehard conservative puts forward, how do you pay for it? How do we all pay for all this stuff? What do you say to that question?
SK: Well, I say that we’re getting a beautiful example of exactly how it works right now. In the span of the last week, Mehdi, Congress has moved first an $8.3 billion piece of legislation, the House and Senate put it through. President signed it. Those are the instructions that are being sent to the Federal Reserve by Congress to say we are ordering up $8.3 billion, go make the payments. A few days later, the House passed the bill that we were just talking about $104 billion. Congress passed it, I’m sorry the House passed it. The Senate passed it off it went. Another set of instructions went to the Federal Reserve. We are ordering up $104 billion go carry out the payments. Now, the White House is negotiating and it looks like we’re going to see a third piece of legislation this one probably for a trillion dollars. Again, Congress is ordering up a trillion dollars, the Fed will carry out all of those payments.
What people mean when they say, you know, oh, Senator Sanders, you want Medicare for All or you want to make public colleges and universities tuition free, you want to cancel student debt, how are you going to pay for it? Where is the money going to come from? What that means in beltway speak is how are you going to offset all of that spending with new revenue from somewhere else, or by spending less in defense or some other category, the budget? In other words, a lot of the time what happens is that Congress writes a piece of legislation ordering up, let’s say $50 billion, but then they pair that legislation with another set of instructions that says to the Fed, while you clear these payments for 50 billion, we also want you to take 50 billion away from people in the form of higher taxes. So you can give two sets of instructions and that’s what Congress usually means when they say how are you going to pay for it? It means how are you going to offset every dollar of new spending with, let’s say, a dollar of new revenue. But what we’ve seen in the last week is that you can send just one set of instructions. You can just tell the Fed, you’re ordering up dollars, but you’re not subtracting any away. And so I know —
MH: That blows a lot people’s minds, they say, “Wait a minute, what about deficits? What about debt? Aren’t we gonna have to pay all this back?
SK: So, here’s the thing, when you do a piece of legislation that’s “paid for,” it means you’re putting the 50 billion in and it goes to some parts of the economy, and you’re taking 50 billion out of some other parts of the economy so that you’re not deficit spending. What Congress has done in the span of the last week, let’s say, is commit to spending dollars into the economy without taking any back out. So it’s doing deficit spending. And we’ve been so badly educated to respond to that sort of financing as something that’s fiscally irresponsible, reckless, dangerous, whatever the case may be. It isn’t. The government is committing to dropping dollars into the economy without ripping them right back out again. It’s exactly what we want them to do right now.
MH: So a lot of people listening to this show who might know about deficit spending, might understand the position, especially in the last financial crash when this was a big debate, they will also hear the phrase MMT, Modern Monetary Theory, which you’re associated with. You have a new book coming out in June “The Deficit Myth” which is all about this, and people associate that with printing money. They talk about Zimbabwe, when things are out of control, the central bank just prints money, and it leads to hyperinflation. Explain to our listeners very briefly, especially in a time of crisis like this, what is MMT? And what role could it play?
SK: Well, in fact, MMT is almost entirely a descriptive project. There is a prescriptive policy piece as well. But MMT is mostly about helping people get a better understanding of the nature of the monetary system we have today. That is we’re not on a gold standard. We have something called a fiat currency, flexible floating exchange rate. So MMT says, let’s talk about the monetary system that we have today. Let’s try to understand it. Let’s understand what that affords a government that issues its own, let’s say sovereign currency, how much policy space is opened up around us? Because we’re no longer on a gold standard. We don’t have fixed exchange rates and how can we best take advantage of the monetary system of the policy space to build a better economy? That’s essentially what MMT is about.
MH: And I’ve gotta ask this question when we talk about kind of the left and economic solutions and Bernie Sanders, you’ve advised Bernie Sanders back when he was running in 2016, back when he was a senior Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee. Is it fair to say that Bernie may not be on course to win the presidential nomination, but his ideas seemed to have won the day. Ironically, paradoxically, at a time when he’s deemed as too extreme to be the presidential candidate, everyone’s dipping into the Sanders/socialist playbook right now.
SK: Well, yeah, and not just right now it started a little bit, the dipping in started a little bit in the 2016 election, right, because we managed to get to a point where the ultimate nominee did embrace things like making public colleges and universities tuition free. There was some means testing but it came closer. Now you have, you know, Medicare for All, student debt cancellation. I mean, these are the things we’re talking about in this crisis moment because as we’ve been saying, this crisis exposes widespread weaknesses and vulnerabilities in our social safety net, in our healthcare system, in our trade policies. So as we look for solutions to help us through this moment, it turns out we’re reaching right into that grab bag where so many of the things that he’s been fighting for happen to reside.
MH: Last question, Stephanie, then I’ll let you go: the president’s approval ratings are at 55%. A majority of Americans saying they approve of his handling of the crisis, according to a poll out astonishingly on Friday morning. Do you think that’s because Democrats haven’t been loud or forceful enough in pointing out both his manifest failures so far? And in providing alternative leadership, especially on the economy?
SK: Yeah, I mean, I think that’s definitely part of it. I think that to the extent that people are tuning in and hearing you know, that there is a response of some kind, it’s reassuring to know that, you know, he’s on TV. He’s communicating with the public. We see some people that are more credible than others, Dr. Fauci and people like that. So yeah, I don’t think the media and I don’t think Democrats have really been hammering at the inadequate to say the least, response in the early months where so much more could have been done to position us to avoid what appears to be where we’re headed in the next week or so with this huge strain being placed on the healthcare system and probably, Mehdi, honestly some of it is probably almost like patriotic post-9/11 coming together.
MH: Rally around the flag and the institution.
SK: Yeah.
MH: Well, I do hope you’re right about you know, things changing in the coming days in a way they haven’t in the last few weeks. We’ve got this big bill next week. The debate’s not going away. Stephanie, thanks so much for joining me on Deconstructed and do stay safe.
SK: Thank you, Mehdi. You too.
[Music interlude.]
MH: That was Stephanie Kelton, economist, academic, and author of the forthcoming book, “The Deficit Myth: Modern Monetary Theory and the Birth of the People’s Economy.” And I was also joined on this special edition of Deconstructed by Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
Thanks for listening, I hope at home, if you can afford to stay at home, and I hope we can all put pressure on our elected representatives in Congress to get legislation passed that gets financial help to people in this country who need it fast, that’s of the size and scope to tackle the monumental challenge this country, this economy, is facing right now.
I also hope you’re all washing your hands.
[Music interlude.]
MH: That’s our show! Deconstructed is a production of First Look Media and The Intercept. Our producer is Zach Young. The show was mixed by Bryan Pugh. Our theme music was composed by Bart Warshaw. Betsy Reed is The Intercept’s editor in chief.
And I’m Mehdi Hasan. You can follow me on Twitter @mehdirhasan. If you haven’t already, please do subscribe to the show so you can hear it every week. Go to theintercept.com/deconstructed to subscribe from your podcast platform of choice, iPhone, Android, whatever. If you’re subscribed already, please do leave us a rating or review. It helps people find the show. And if you want to give us feedback, email us at Podcasts@theintercept.com. Thanks so much! See you next week.


theintercept--2020-03-20--What Evangelical Leaders Told Their Congregations About Coronavirus

The following are excerpts from the sermons of evangelical leaders in the weeks leading up to an outbreak of Covid-19 in the U.S.