huffpost--2020-04-16--Tribes Aren't Getting COVID-19 Aid Because Federal Agencies Are Flailing

The Treasury Department , for one , is tasked with distributing $ 8 billion to tribal governments to help them stabilize economically amid the pandemic .
But none of that aid has moved , as the agency , which doesn ’ t otherwise interact with tribes , is bogged down in consultations with tribes in order to come up with a formula for distributing the funds .
Treasury has a statutory deadline of April 24 to get all the money out the door .
“ We ’ ve run into some serious problems , ” Sen. Tom Udall ( D-N.M. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senate Indian Affairs Committee , said in a recent interview .
“ Treasury is not familiar with tribes .
They don ’ t know how to interact in the appropriate way with tribes and they ’ re just not getting the job done.
” Meanwhile , the Small Business Administration has been overseeing $ 350 billion in emergency payroll relief to small businesses .
But tribal businesses have been at a huge disadvantage all along because the SBA decided that some casinos ― the financial lifeblood of many tribal governments ― wouldn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the agency relied on an existing regulation that prohibits small businesses from getting federal aid if they get one-third of their revenue from gaming activities .
When tribes protested and members of Congress told the agency they never intended for that regulation to be applied for emergency relief , the SBA issued new guidance this week that changed nothing in terms of tribal casinos qualifying for aid .
And now the funds are all gone anyway .
Tribal governments are struggling with these bureaucratic roadblocks at a time when their gaming operations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 246 tribal nations that own 500 gaming facilities .
An April 7 analysis by Meister Economic Consulting concluded that these casino closures have already resulted in 296,000 people losing their jobs , $ 1.5 billion in lost economic activity for tribal governments and $ 332 million in lost wages .
The first two bills required tribes to go through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for aid that should have been directly routed to tribal governments .
Because of the added layer of bureaucracy , tribes still have to fill out multiple @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to fight the spread of COVID-19 .
It is adding weeks to the process of tribes getting help .
In the latest bill , the $ 2 trillion stimulus package , the White House initially tried to cut tribes out altogether .
Senate Democrats , led by Udall , fought until literally hours before the bill was voted on to get tribes about $ 10 billion in aid .
Of that , $ 8 billion is for the tribal fund being overseen by the Treasury Department and $ 2 billion is in additional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ communities , like the Indian Health Service and the Bureau of Indian Affairs .
Never mind that the National Congress of American Indians , the largest organization representing the interests of tribal governments , told Congress in mid-March that tribes would need at least $ 20 billion in direct relief for economic stability ― more than double what they got .
Tribal communities are among the most vulnerable to a rapid and devastating spread of the coronavirus .
Native populations have some of the highest rates of health conditions like diabetes , heart @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leave them more susceptible to the coronavirus .
Tribal communities are often in remote parts of the country , where it ’ s tough to quickly disseminate resources , and where families live in small homes shared with elderly family members particularly at risk of getting COVID-19 .
And the Indian Health Service , which provides health care to nearly 3 million Native Americans , is already notoriously and chronically underfunded .
There are already unsettling numbers coming out of the Navajo Nation , the largest reservation in the country with a population @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Monday that it has more confirmed cases of COVID-19 per capita than almost every U.S. state , behind only New York and New Jersey .
Its number of cases surged 367 % in two weeks , jumping from 174 on March 31 to 813 on April 14 .
Navajo Nation President Jonathan Nez said earlier this month that the U.S. government “ once again has ignored ” Indigenous people by failing to deliver resources to fight the coronavirus .
The tribe has all but given up on getting federal help anytime soon .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 4 million of its own funds to try to deal with the emergency and keeping the receipts to send to the federal government later .
Part of Navajo Nation is in Udall ’ s state .
The reservation is “ a burning hot spot in the country ” for COVID-19 , he said , but noted that smaller tribes in his state are getting hit , too .
One tribe , the Zia Pueblo , only has about 1,000 members and as of last week had about 15 confirmed cases of COVID-19 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ rate per capita than the 1 or 2 people per 1,000 people found in nearly all other states .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON ― Weeks after Congress passed the $2 trillion coronavirus stimulus bill, Native American tribes still aren’t getting badly needed aid because the federal agencies in charge of distributing emergency relief to tribal governments don’t know how to work with them and aren’t listening to what they actually need, a key U.S. senator charged.
The Treasury Department, for one, is tasked with distributing $8 billion to tribal governments to help them stabilize economically amid the pandemic. But none of that aid has moved, as the agency, which doesn’t otherwise interact with tribes, is bogged down in consultations with tribes in order to come up with a formula for distributing the funds. Treasury has a statutory deadline of April 24 to get all the money out the door.
Advertisement
“We’ve run into some serious problems,” Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.), the vice chairman of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, said in a recent interview. “Treasury is not familiar with tribes. They don’t know how to interact in the appropriate way with tribes and they’re just not getting the job done.”
Meanwhile, the Small Business Administration has been overseeing $350 billion in emergency payroll relief to small businesses. But tribal businesses have been at a huge disadvantage all along because the SBA decided that some casinos ― the financial lifeblood of many tribal governments ― wouldn’t be eligible for relief. Specifically, the agency relied on an existing regulation that prohibits small businesses from getting federal aid if they get one-third of their revenue from gaming activities.
Relief workers pose at a farm used as a base for aid to Navajo families quarantined in their homes due to COVID-19 in Hogback, Shiprock, New Mexico, on April 7. Andrew Hay / Reuters
When tribes protested and members of Congress told the agency they never intended for that regulation to be applied for emergency relief, the SBA issued new guidance this week that changed nothing in terms of tribal casinos qualifying for aid. And now the funds are all gone anyway.
Advertisement
The stimulus bill made it “very clear” that any tribal business would be eligible for payroll relief, Udall emphasized. “The SBA did not see it that way or didn’t know enough about Indian affairs, public policy or Indian law, and relied on a regulation that simply didn’t fit.”
“It has very real consequences,” he added.
The Treasury Department and the Small Business Administration did not return requests for comment.
“Treasury is not familiar with tribes. They don't know how to interact in the appropriate way with tribes and they're just not getting the job done.” - Sen. Tom Udall
Tribal governments are struggling with these bureaucratic roadblocks at a time when their gaming operations have been shuttered for weeks, affecting 246 tribal nations that own 500 gaming facilities. An April 7 analysis by Meister Economic Consulting concluded that these casino closures have already resulted in 296,000 people losing their jobs, $1.5 billion in lost economic activity for tribal governments and $332 million in lost wages.
At least federal agencies have been consistent? Tribes have been forced to jump through hoops to get aid from all three of the emergency coronavirus bills passed by Congress.
The first two bills required tribes to go through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for aid that should have been directly routed to tribal governments. Because of the added layer of bureaucracy, tribes still have to fill out multiple rounds of applications to access their money to fight the spread of COVID-19. It is adding weeks to the process of tribes getting help.
Advertisement
“I’m hearing from tribes I’m on the phone with that they can’t fill all these things out fast enough and they need the money now,” said Udall. “That’s the crux of the problem. That’s the red tape.”
In the latest bill, the $2 trillion stimulus package, the White House initially tried to cut tribes out altogether. Senate Democrats, led by Udall, fought until literally hours before the bill was voted on to get tribes about $10 billion in aid. Of that, $8 billion is for the tribal fund being overseen by the Treasury Department and $2 billion is in additional appropriations for federal agencies that serve Native communities, like the Indian Health Service and the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
It’s a historic amount of direct aid for tribes in an emergency spending bill. But it’s a drop in the bucket when you consider what they are up against with COVID-19.
Never mind that the National Congress of American Indians, the largest organization representing the interests of tribal governments, told Congress in mid-March that tribes would need at least $20 billion in direct relief for economic stability ― more than double what they got. Tribal communities are among the most vulnerable to a rapid and devastating spread of the coronavirus.
Native populations have some of the highest rates of health conditions like diabetes, heart disease and asthma, all of which leave them more susceptible to the coronavirus. Tribal communities are often in remote parts of the country, where it’s tough to quickly disseminate resources, and where families live in small homes shared with elderly family members particularly at risk of getting COVID-19. And the Indian Health Service, which provides health care to nearly 3 million Native Americans, is already notoriously and chronically underfunded.
Advertisement
Put those pieces together and it’s not hard to imagine how quickly this could become a disaster.
“It is a perfect storm,” said Udall.
Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) has been urging the Treasury Department to hurry up and get badly needed COVID-19 relief to tribal governments. Alex Edelman via Getty Images
There are already unsettling numbers coming out of the Navajo Nation, the largest reservation in the country with a population of more than 350,000. It reported Monday that it has more confirmed cases of COVID-19 per capita than almost every U.S. state, behind only New York and New Jersey. Its number of cases surged 367% in two weeks, jumping from 174 on March 31 to 813 on April 14.
Navajo Nation President Jonathan Nez said earlier this month that the U.S. government “once again has ignored” Indigenous people by failing to deliver resources to fight the coronavirus. The tribe has all but given up on getting federal help anytime soon. Nez said the tribe is spending $4 million of its own funds to try to deal with the emergency and keeping the receipts to send to the federal government later.
Part of Navajo Nation is in Udall’s state. The reservation is “a burning hot spot in the country” for COVID-19, he said, but noted that smaller tribes in his state are getting hit, too. One tribe, the Zia Pueblo, only has about 1,000 members and as of last week had about 15 confirmed cases of COVID-19. That’s a much higher confirmation rate per capita than the 1 or 2 people per 1,000 people found in nearly all other states.
For the moment, the most important thing the federal government can do to support tribes is pick up the pace in distributing tribal stabilization funds, said Udall. Not that tribes are surprised that it’s been such a challenging process.
Advertisement


huffpost--2020-06-21--Minneapolis Shooting Leaves 1 Dead, 11 Injured

Police first said 10 people had been shot with “ various severity levels of injuries , ” but revised their total upward in a tweet posted just after 3 a.m .
The man died at the hospital , not at the scene , they said .
None of the other injuries were considered life-threatening .
Police said they believe there was more than one shooter , described only as “ individuals on foot.
” No one was in custody , and police have not said what may have prompted the shooting .
All of the injured were adults .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immediate aftermath , screams could be heard as small crowds of people gathered , with some crouched over people lying on the pavement before police officers on bicycles showed up to attend to them .
Fred Hwang , a manager at Hoban Korean BBQ , said he was working the front door when he heard shots from the sidewalk a couple of storefronts down .
Hwang described hearing “ a lot of shots ” and said it appeared to be groups of people shooting at each other .
“ People were trying to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” he said .
“ It was a very scary experience .
... We have bullet holes inside our restaurant like on the walls and stuff .
All of our front glass was broken and shattered .
Then , just like people being in here panicking and running around , breaking this or that , it was very chaotic.
” Across the street from where the shooting began , in a storefront shared by the Uptown Theater and a shoe store , a police officer later Sunday surveyed a shattered window and door @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the storefront .
The Uptown area is about 3 miles west of the Minneapolis commercial area and neighborhood hit by rioting in the wake of George Floyd ’ s May 25 death after being arrested by Minneapolis police .
Some of the violence from that period reached as far as Uptown , and many storefronts are still protected by plywood .
Floyd ’ s death has sparked a move to overhaul the Minneapolis Police Department , with a majority of City Council members pledging support for dismantling a department that many community @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That ’ s prompted pushback from opponents who question how residents will be protected from violent crime .
Even the most aggressive proponents for change have acknowledged it ’ s many months away and they ’ re not sure what it will look like .
“ Something needs to be done to protect us , ” Hwang said .
“ Normally the bars on Saturday night , we all have off-duty police officers as extra security parked in front of our businesses .
But no one has that right now because police are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to at least two other shootings in south Minneapolis in the hour before the Uptown violence erupted .
The Star Tribune reported that one was a man who may have shot himself near the site where Floyd died .
Another was a nonfatal double shooting .
Police spokesman John Elder told the newspaper that angry crowds at both scenes impeded officers .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — A shooting in a popular Minneapolis nightlife area early Sunday left one man dead and 11 people wounded in a chaotic scene that sent people ducking into restaurants and other businesses for cover.
The shooting broke out shortly after midnight in the city’s trendy Uptown neighborhood, a nightlife hub with bars, restaurants and retail including Apple and Fjallraven stores.
Advertisement
Police first said 10 people had been shot with “various severity levels of injuries,” but revised their total upward in a tweet posted just after 3 a.m. The man died at the hospital, not at the scene, they said. None of the other injuries were considered life-threatening.
Police said they believe there was more than one shooter, described only as “individuals on foot.” No one was in custody, and police have not said what may have prompted the shooting. All of the injured were adults.
The spokesman said that the shooting started in the middle of the 2900 block of Hennepin and continued through the end of the block; windows at a shoe store and the Uptown Theatre were apparently shot out. pic.twitter.com/A5AIw2zgLi — Libor Jany (@StribJany) June 21, 2020
In video posted to Facebook that showed the immediate aftermath, screams could be heard as small crowds of people gathered, with some crouched over people lying on the pavement before police officers on bicycles showed up to attend to them.
Advertisement
Fred Hwang, a manager at Hoban Korean BBQ, said he was working the front door when he heard shots from the sidewalk a couple of storefronts down. Hwang described hearing “a lot of shots” and said it appeared to be groups of people shooting at each other.
“People were trying to rush inside the restaurant for safety,” he said. “It was a very scary experience. ... We have bullet holes inside our restaurant like on the walls and stuff. All of our front glass was broken and shattered. Then, just like people being in here panicking and running around, breaking this or that, it was very chaotic.”
Across the street from where the shooting began, in a storefront shared by the Uptown Theater and a shoe store, a police officer later Sunday surveyed a shattered window and door and a bullet hole could be seen in the storefront.
A police vehicle is parked outside the Uptown Theatre Sunday, June 21, 2020, following a shooting in Minneapolis' Uptown neighborhood. ASSOCIATED PRESS
The Uptown area is about 3 miles west of the Minneapolis commercial area and neighborhood hit by rioting in the wake of George Floyd’s May 25 death after being arrested by Minneapolis police. Some of the violence from that period reached as far as Uptown, and many storefronts are still protected by plywood.
Advertisement
Floyd’s death has sparked a move to overhaul the Minneapolis Police Department, with a majority of City Council members pledging support for dismantling a department that many community activists have called brutal and racist. That’s prompted pushback from opponents who question how residents will be protected from violent crime. Even the most aggressive proponents for change have acknowledged it’s many months away and they’re not sure what it will look like.
Hwang was critical of the police response time, estimating it took officers more than 30 minutes to arrive.
“Something needs to be done to protect us,” Hwang said. “Normally the bars on Saturday night, we all have off-duty police officers as extra security parked in front of our businesses. But no one has that right now because police are a liability for us.”
A police spokesman didn’t immediately respond to questions about the department’s response.
Police responded to at least two other shootings in south Minneapolis in the hour before the Uptown violence erupted. The Star Tribune reported that one was a man who may have shot himself near the site where Floyd died. Another was a nonfatal double shooting. Police spokesman John Elder told the newspaper that angry crowds at both scenes impeded officers.
―


huffpost--2020-06-21--Millions Are Unemployed. Crises Abound. Is It Time To Guarantee Public Service Jobs?

Tcherneva is a key figure in the movement known as Modern Monetary Theory , or MMT , which popularized the idea that inflation is the only real limit to federal spending ― that there is no way for the federal government to go broke when it prints its own money .
In much the same way that the question of how to pay for the $ 2 trillion stimulus package Congress passed earlier this year was tertiary to its effects on people ’ s lives , I kept my hourlong interview with Tcherneva focused on the effects of guaranteeing a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ important question of how affordable it is .
( For more on that , you can read economist Stephanie Kelton ’ s new book on the subject , or watch this talk she recently gave with my colleague Zach Carter , or start reading researcher Nathan Tankus ’ s newsletter or check out the various MMT explainers online . )
The job creation is not so much the complicated problem .
You want to have a robust public sector , an adequately staffed [ Food and Drug Administration ] and [ Environmental Protection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is , if something happens to you , and you need a job , you need to be able to walk into an unemployment center and walk out with one .
It ’ s not terribly difficult to imagine a model in which we just solicit proposals from large community groups that already do work on an ongoing basis .
There are different ways in which you could run this .
The way I ’ m proposing it is from the ground up , a bottom-up approach where in every community you have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you have food kitchens , homeless shelters .
They try to do this on a voluntary basis , but they are always under pressure and understaffed .
So these kinds of things are ongoing .
You have the whole problem where you have police officers dealing with mental health issues when that shouldn ’ t be their job .
Imagine somebody can call a mental health crisis line .
First , there ’ s a dispatcher ― someone has to man that line , right ?
Then there is a whole service of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with these problems .
It ’ s also true with intimate partner violence ; the police may not be the right people to respond to this .
It should be some trained professionals that know how to do trauma interventions .
In almost every aspect of public life ― if you ’ re driving with a broken light ― why should you have an interaction with police ?
It could be just a public servant who , instead of giving you a ticket violation , is there as a public service to flag @ @ @ @ @ @ @ homeless people who are sleeping under bridges or intoxication , none of these problems should be attended by over-militarized police .
A job guarantee is essentially a program through which we can foster all those additional non-police public services .
The labor market as it is right now is a Catch-22 for many people .
It ’ s not that everyone has an opportunity .
In fact , the circumstances are stacked against most folks .
You have a last-in , first-out problem , where folks who are always the last ones to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stay in good jobs for very long , and they ’ re the first to lose them .
They tend to be people of color , elderly , people with disabilities .
Their unemployment rate was the last one to recover .
The way the labor market works , it always improves the conditions of whoever private firms think is the most employable person .
And right now the folks who actually need the jobs are the ones that are scrambling , and they end up working in the most terrible working conditions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ paradoxes .
Jobs are pitted against technology .
That need not happen .
It ’ s only because we have accepted and tolerated unemployment .
We should embrace technology .
Like , let ’ s automate meatpacking , right ?
We don ’ t want to have well-paid folks working in dangerous conditions .
To me , technology can improve our lives , but right now it is being used to create more precarity .
It ’ s the Uberization of jobs .
You don ’ t want that .
But maybe , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ autonomous driving machines and people won ’ t be driving for 10 hours across the states .
I ’ m less convinced of the technological Armageddon argument , that somehow all jobs are going to disappear .
But we should be arguing for reduced working hours , that ’ s long overdue .
This is not about jobs at all cost .
It ’ s about making the good life and providing one aspect of economic security .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
“Is there a limit to how much we can care for each other?”
That’s the radical question at the heart of economist Pavlina Tcherneva’s timely new book, ”The Case for a Job Guarantee,” due to be published this month.
The 128-page book went to print in December when the U.S. unemployment rate was near a postwar low of 3.5%. Yet that figure obscured the harsh realities of the economy it’s so often used to describe. Hallowed growth of the economy was less a rising tide than a wave that pummeled most and allowed a select few to surf.
Advertisement
Average real incomes for the bottom 90% of families fell from 2009 to 2012, the first three years of the post-Great Recession recovery. By 2017, that average was 2.2% lower than in 1997. And as wages continued their decades-long stagnation, planet-heating emissions soared and storms and fires grew more extreme, displacing thousands and threatening to send millions more fleeing in the years ahead.
Then came the coronavirus pandemic. By the end of May, 40.8 million Americans had filed jobless claims, representing roughly 1 in 4 workers in the labor force. As the virus ripped through nursing homes, the policy response in many states was to protect the private companies that run such facilities from liability. As the origins of the virus were revealed to be from wild animals ― offering yet another example of the threats rampant habitat and biodiversity loss pose to humans ― governments around the world, particularly the Trump administration, gutted environmental protections in a bid to spur private industries’ recovery.
It doesn’t have to be this way. Tcherneva makes the case that delivering on President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s nearly century-old promise of a job for every American who wants one would both set a modern living standard and marshal the power of the nation’s workforce to do work that so desperately needs doing. Rather than provide dubiously enforceable incentives for for-profit businesses to meet urgent societal needs, pay Americans directly to do those jobs. Then, during cycles of economic growth, allow the private sector to pay higher wages and reap the benefits of workers with new on-the-job training.
The concept is popular. Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) backed versions of a job guarantee during the Democratic presidential primary. When the left-leaning think tank Data for Progress polled the issue last summer, 55% of eligible voters supported guaranteeing a federally funded job to anyone who wants one, while just 23% opposed the proposal.
Advertisement
Tcherneva is a key figure in the movement known as Modern Monetary Theory, or MMT, which popularized the idea that inflation is the only real limit to federal spending ― that there is no way for the federal government to go broke when it prints its own money. In much the same way that the question of how to pay for the $2 trillion stimulus package Congress passed earlier this year was tertiary to its effects on people’s lives, I kept my hourlong interview with Tcherneva focused on the effects of guaranteeing a job rather than the theoretical and debatably important question of how affordable it is. (For more on that, you can read economist Stephanie Kelton’s new book on the subject, or watch this talk she recently gave with my colleague Zach Carter, or start reading researcher Nathan Tankus’s newsletter or check out the various MMT explainers online.)
This interview was edited and condensed for clarity.
To start, let me just read the opening line of your first chapter: “Unemployment? What unemployment?” What a difference a few months make.
Yes, indeed. In the way, I’m very glad that I wrote it in an environment of a very low unemployment rate because I was hoping to shake people’s kind of view of how we’ve normalized just millions out of work. And then the coronavirus crisis just forced many people to wrestle with this idea and consider, “You know, what if it’s me? What if it’s somebody I know?”
Workers clean an oil spill on a California beach. There's plenty more work where that came from. Lucy Nicholson / Reuters
Advertisement
Briefly outline for us what exactly a federal job guarantee is?
In simplest terms, it’s a public option for jobs that provide base wages and benefits. If you’re not able to find work for one reason or another, you can be assured that you can go to the unemployment office, and you will be guaranteed a menu of options in public service that you can pick from and there will be an employment opportunity there.
What would it look like if you were implementing a job guarantee today?
Look, we have a very large-scale problem today. So all manner of employment and hiring is needed. We have some very concrete things to tackle, like the COVID crisis, that require public service. Dealing with a public health issue requires that it not be for commercial return. It requires a strong public sector to put in place logistical systems ― everyone talks about contract tracing ― but it is everything; schools reorganize, workplaces reorganize. We have to make sure the elderly are taken care of and health centers are adequately staffed. We need centers for the homeless and shelters for those escaping their abusers. It is the whole wide range.
But even before this pandemic, we’ve had a lot of communities in distress. We have folks that live in awful conditions and polluted communities that don’t have clean water. What I’m saying is that the public service has been neglected for so long that we need a very robust public sector just to match these needs.
Surely, at some point, you get through the backlog. What happens, theoretically, in five or 10 years? How do you maintain a program of this size?
The job creation is not so much the complicated problem. You want to have a robust public sector, an adequately staffed [Food and Drug Administration] and [Environmental Protection Agency]. But the job guarantee is, if something happens to you, and you need a job, you need to be able to walk into an unemployment center and walk out with one. It’s not terribly difficult to imagine a model in which we just solicit proposals from large community groups that already do work on an ongoing basis. There are different ways in which you could run this. The way I’m proposing it is from the ground up, a bottom-up approach where in every community you have environmental groups, you have nonprofits, you have food kitchens, homeless shelters. They try to do this on a voluntary basis, but they are always under pressure and understaffed. So these kinds of things are ongoing.
Advertisement
But imagine also opening up new possibilities. We could have community theaters, urban farms, tool sheds, remediating and reclaiming materials. The way I put it: Is there a limit to which we can care for each other? Is there a limit to which we can provide services to each other? To which we can create some public value? I think the answer is probably no.
A lot of care work comes to mind, especially with an aging population.
The elderly are sheltered in isolation right now. But that is a problem all the time, where people who have reached the zenith of their life and may not have anyone to care for them, they’re left to these various private institutions that are run for profit and are inadequately staffed. I mean, that is a public purpose. We need to have some sort of infrastructure that adequately cares for the elder, for the young, for teachers stretched thin.
A chart from the think tank Data for Progress shows widespread support for a job guarantee. Data for Progress
One thing that came to mind as I was reading this is this debate unfolding right now about how to radically change or disband police departments. Guard labor, in general, makes up a growing percentage of the workforce in many U.S. cities ― I think Orlando was at the top ― which says a lot about the society we’re building. How would a program like this lend itself to reversing that trend?
Advertisement
You have the whole problem where you have police officers dealing with mental health issues when that shouldn’t be their job. Imagine somebody can call a mental health crisis line. First, there’s a dispatcher ― someone has to man that line, right? Then there is a whole service of folks who have the experience to deal with these problems. It’s also true with intimate partner violence; the police may not be the right people to respond to this. It should be some trained professionals that know how to do trauma interventions. In almost every aspect of public life ― if you’re driving with a broken light ― why should you have an interaction with police? It could be just a public servant who, instead of giving you a ticket violation, is there as a public service to flag this problem. Whether it’s homeless people who are sleeping under bridges or intoxication, none of these problems should be attended by over-militarized police. A job guarantee is essentially a program through which we can foster all those additional non-police public services.
What is your response to concerns that a job guarantee will create untenable competition with the private sector, making it impossible to have low-skilled jobs that have historically paid less than what some of these guaranteed jobs would pay?
The labor market as it is right now is a Catch-22 for many people. It’s not that everyone has an opportunity. In fact, the circumstances are stacked against most folks. You have a last-in, first-out problem, where folks who are always the last ones to catch this job train, they never stay in good jobs for very long, and they’re the first to lose them. They tend to be people of color, elderly, people with disabilities. Their unemployment rate was the last one to recover. The way the labor market works, it always improves the conditions of whoever private firms think is the most employable person. And right now the folks who actually need the jobs are the ones that are scrambling, and they end up working in the most terrible working conditions.
Because of this cruel game of musical chairs, we don’t have enough employment opportunities for everyone and enough good employment opportunities for everyone. So unemployment always looms in every negotiation, and firms use this to reduce costs, which means difficult working conditions. Is this a world that we want to reproduce? Don’t we want to move away from this kind of system that creates precarity? I’m not saying a job guarantee is a panacea, but it lifts up the floor and says, look, this is the standard for jobs. There’s really no reason why anyone who’s working should live in poverty. It’s just a basic commitment to living standards.
Advertisement
You also see in there this thinly veiled argument for the right of firms to pay poverty wages, or else mom-and-pop shops will go out of business because now they have to pay $15 an hour. But mom-and-pop shops like to pay good wages to their employees. It’s things like the meatpacking industry that are depending on low wages and migrant labor to be profitable. And that’s a model that has to end. The job guarantee is an alternative.
It’s a paradoxical argument because all the free-marketeers love competition. A job guarantee provides competition, another option in the marketplace for good jobs. So let them compete and may the best firms survive. We want to change the nature of work and make it more stable and better paid. So what we need is a firm standard.
Would you need a role for price controls? How do you address the potential inflation from a program like this?
We’ve had experiences like this. In 1948, we nearly doubled the minimum wage at a time when the economy was pretty much at full employment. We didn’t see inflation. What the job guarantee does is serve as an anti-cyclical stabilizer. When the private sector is booming, folks are transitioning from these living-wage jobs into better-paid employment opportunities. The stimulus that this program provides in a downturn decreases in an upturn. So it’s the same thing that unemployment does now, except you keep people in employment. It’s counter-cyclical.
Advertisement
So assuming a program were implemented like this in the United States, what would be the international effect, living in a globalized society?
The U.S. will be a much better place overall to live and invest in, instead of having this patchwork of depressed communities. This is what the unemployment numbers hide. If you look geographically at how unemployment moves, there are communities that are permanently depressed. They are not just in Detroit. They’re across the whole country. They’re in Washington, they’re in California. So you could have a far more vibrant overall community to invest in.
After World War II, it was understood that the benefits from trade are reaped when we have full employment. It’s not the case that countries that have lower unemployment rates are necessarily suffering in the global competition because they have low unemployment rates and a decent standard of living. And if you have, as I conclude in the book, a global Marshall Plan for full employment across the globe, these would be the foundations on which free trade is supposed to take place.
There’s certainly plenty of infrastructure and nature restoration work that lies ahead of us. But I wonder whether, at a certain point, you risk a program like this increasing emissions by needing to stimulate additional activity for individuals as opposed to, say, providing a basic income?
I think the opposite. If you do community work, and it’s local, and you cut out on all the commuting, and you do care work ...
Advertisement
President Franklin D. Roosevelt first proposed a job guarantee in the 1940s. Bettmann via Getty Images
Then it’s low carbon.
Exactly. The whole purpose of the job guarantee is actually to improve the environment. Now UBI [a universal basic income] has this promise that it will reduce carbon. But if you’re still dependent on the current supply chains and the current extractive system, then you’re just the consumer. There’s nothing inherent in the UBI that transforms the way we do things. It’s just a hypothetical. With the job guarantee, we’re saying very clearly and very explicitly, we have environmental work to do, so let’s put the two together.
In doing it locally, the one thing that kind of struck me is the ways in which different states currently administer unemployment benefits. Certain states, particularly conservative ones, are very adept at erecting barriers. So how do you allow a program like this to be locally administered and avoid, at the same time, their ability to obstruct it?
This is a serious question. We see how deliberately the current welfare system is being sabotaged. It doesn’t mean that the job guarantee is immune to this, of course. But the way I propose it is that we want to use all aspects of civil society to put this in place. In some circumstances, you could circumvent. Community groups and nonprofits could propose directly to the Department of Labor for funds. It creates buy-in from the community.
How would you expect immigration and the debate around it to change? Would this defuse some of the xenophobic arguments against immigration that we see right now?
Advertisement
This clearly has to be coupled with some sort of comprehensive immigration reform. In an ideal world, the point of the job guarantee is to provide dignified work to anyone.
How would you pitch a job guarantee to a conservative?
Jobs are not a partisan issue. We’ve surveyed the job guarantee, and it polls extremely high in deep-red Republican states.
They saw what happened after 2008 and that it took such a long time to dig out of this hole. For many, many people still living in a recession, their incomes have not been increasing. So the possibility of somebody saying, ‘Hey, do you want to work? And there’s something to do right here in the community’ ― that is a winning message with anyone.
What do you say to somebody who is afraid of what this will change and the potential disruption, when they feel they’ve carved out a decent place for themselves in the status quo?
I’d say it doesn’t necessarily concern them. If you’re happy with your life, that’s beautiful. Would you also be happy with having a new hiking trail in your community? Or maybe, you know, additional clean-up? I’m sure there’s something in your community that you drive by and you don’t like and you say, “Oh, why wasn’t that fixed?” Everybody experiences these things in our lives. If we just open up our minds to addressing that neglect and realizing improvements can be made, then folks needing good jobs can get them.
Advertisement
What is the relationship of a job guaranteed to the, you know, continued investment in and development of automation tools?
This is another one of those paradoxes. Jobs are pitted against technology. That need not happen. It’s only because we have accepted and tolerated unemployment. We should embrace technology. Like, let’s automate meatpacking, right? We don’t want to have well-paid folks working in dangerous conditions. To me, technology can improve our lives, but right now it is being used to create more precarity. It’s the Uberization of jobs. You don’t want that. But maybe, at some point, we will have autonomous driving machines and people won’t be driving for 10 hours across the states. I’m less convinced of the technological Armageddon argument, that somehow all jobs are going to disappear. But we should be arguing for reduced working hours, that’s long overdue. This is not about jobs at all cost. It’s about making the good life and providing one aspect of economic security.
I realize that, generally speaking, there isn’t much cause for optimism at the moment. But what makes you most optimistic that something like this could be realized?
There is an enormous appetite. There is conversation. The job guarantee is starting to pop up more and more in the conversation in the popular press. When we get a lot of different corners calling for the same thing, then hopefully that’ll be enough pressure for change on the policy level.


huffpost--2020-06-21--Zoomers Boast They Sabotaged Trump Rally Turnout With Fake Reservations

Members of Generation Z are claiming on social media that the “ Zoomers ” are at least partially responsible for a number of empty seats at President Donald Trump ’ s campaign rally in Tulsa , Oklahoma , on Saturday night .
As part of a campaign organized on social media , they reserved masses of tickets to the rally that they had no intention of using .
The rally-busting movement involved young TikTok users and K-Pop fans around the nation , according to the prank participants who posted their ( unused ) ticket confirmations or commented ( and celebrated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strategist Steve Schmidt boasted on Twitter that his daughter and her friends in Park City , Utah , signed up for “ hundreds ” of free tickets to the rally they had absolutely no intention of attending .
“ You have been rolled by America ’ s teens , ” Schmidt mocked Trump ’ s campaign manager Brad Parscale in a tweet .
My 16 year old daughter and her friends in Park City Utah have hundreds of tickets .
You have been rolled by America ’ s teens .
@ realDonaldTrump you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ You have been deserted by your faithful .
No one likes to root for the losing team .
@ ProjectLincoln https : //t.co/VM5elZ57Qp — Steve Schmidt ( @ SteveSchmidtSES ) June 20 , 2020 This is what happened tonight .
I ’ m dead serious when I say this .
The teens of America have struck a savage blow against @ realDonaldTrump .
All across America teens ordered tickets to this event .
The fools on the campaign bragged about a million tickets .
lol .
@ ProjectLincoln .
— Steve Schmidt ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Others responded to Schmidt ’ s tweets , saying they or their kids had also made fake ticket reservations .
The movement appears to have been launched by Mary Jo Laupp , a 51-year-old teacher from Iowa , who had worked on Pete Buttigieg ’ s campaign , CNN reported .
She explained her idea in a TikTok video that had 700,000 likes by late Saturday .
On Saturday night , Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( D-N.Y. ) tweeted at Parscale , saying he got “ ROCKED by teens on TikTok who flooded the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The congresswoman also hailed “ K-Pop allies , ” saying : “ We see and appreciate your contributions in the fight for justice , too.
” Actually you just got ROCKED by teens on TikTok who flooded the Trump campaign w/ fake ticket reservations & tricked you into believing a million people wanted your white supremacist open mic enough to pack an arena during COVID Shout out to Zoomers .
Y ’ all make me so proud .
☺ https : //t.co/jGrp5bSZ9T — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( @ AOC ) June 21 , 2020 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the plot , but may have misjudged its reach .
Erin Perrine , principal deputy communications director for the Trump campaign , told CNN last week it was no big concern .
“ Leftists do this all the time , ” she said .
“ They think if they sign up for tickets that will leave empty seats .
Not the case at all .
Always way more ticket requests than seats available at a rally .
All they are doing is giving us access to their contact information.
” Usually , tickets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the campaign told CNN .
But the situation was different for the Tulsa event , because reservations included a legal disclaimer that participants wouldn ’ t sue Trump or the campaign if they contracted COVID-19 at the rally .
And without a reservation , there would be no legal waiver for attendees to agree to beforehand .
When videos from the event showed huge swathes of empty blue seats at the BOK Center where Trump spoke , which holds 19,000 people , TikTok users were thrilled .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Members of Generation Z are claiming on social media that the “Zoomers” are at least partially responsible for a number of empty seats at President Donald Trump’s campaign rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, on Saturday night.
As part of a campaign organized on social media, they reserved masses of tickets to the rally that they had no intention of using.
Advertisement
The rally-busting movement involved young TikTok users and K-Pop fans around the nation, according to the prank participants who posted their (unused) ticket confirmations or commented (and celebrated) online after the rally.
Advertisement
Political strategist Steve Schmidt boasted on Twitter that his daughter and her friends in Park City, Utah, signed up for “hundreds” of free tickets to the rally they had absolutely no intention of attending. “You have been rolled by America’s teens,” Schmidt mocked Trump’s campaign manager Brad Parscale in a tweet.
My 16 year old daughter and her friends in Park City Utah have hundreds of tickets. You have been rolled by America’s teens. @realDonaldTrump you have been failed by your team. You have been deserted by your faithful. No one likes to root for the losing team. @ProjectLincoln https://t.co/VM5elZ57Qp — Steve Schmidt (@SteveSchmidtSES) June 20, 2020
This is what happened tonight. I’m dead serious when I say this. The teens of America have struck a savage blow against @realDonaldTrump. All across America teens ordered tickets to this event. The fools on the campaign bragged about a million tickets. lol. @ProjectLincoln. — Steve Schmidt (@SteveSchmidtSES) June 20, 2020
Others responded to Schmidt’s tweets, saying they or their kids had also made fake ticket reservations.
Omg my 13 year old told me about teens getting tickets to keep the stands empty. Man do I love this generation! I am finally getting optimistic about our future. — BeMerrie (@F2FNetwork) June 20, 2020
Advertisement
My 3 cats each have tickets 👍🏻 — ℍ𝕆𝕃𝕐 𝕊ℂℍℕ𝕀𝕂𝔼𝕊 🏳🌈 (@aWomanResisting) June 20, 2020
The movement appears to have been launched by Mary Jo Laupp, a 51-year-old teacher from Iowa, who had worked on Pete Buttigieg’s campaign, CNN reported. She explained her idea in a TikTok video that had 700,000 likes by late Saturday.
On Saturday night, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) tweeted at Parscale, saying he got “ROCKED by teens on TikTok who flooded the Trump campaign” with fake reservations. The congresswoman also hailed “K-Pop allies,” saying: “We see and appreciate your contributions in the fight for justice, too.”
She added a “shout out to Zoomers. Y’all make me so proud.”
Actually you just got ROCKED by teens on TikTok who flooded the Trump campaign w/ fake ticket reservations & tricked you into believing a million people wanted your white supremacist open mic enough to pack an arena during COVID
Shout out to Zoomers. Y’all make me so proud. ☺ https://t.co/jGrp5bSZ9T — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) June 21, 2020
Advertisement
KPop allies, we see and appreciate your contributions in the fight for justice too 😌 — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) June 21, 2020
Trump’s campaign had heard of the plot, but may have misjudged its reach. Erin Perrine, principal deputy communications director for the Trump campaign, told CNN last week it was no big concern.
“Leftists do this all the time,” she said. “They think if they sign up for tickets that will leave empty seats. Not the case at all. Always way more ticket requests than seats available at a rally. All they are doing is giving us access to their contact information.”
Usually, tickets aren’t required for campaign rallies, the campaign told CNN. But the situation was different for the Tulsa event, because reservations included a legal disclaimer that participants wouldn’t sue Trump or the campaign if they contracted COVID-19 at the rally. And without a reservation, there would be no legal waiver for attendees to agree to beforehand.
When videos from the event showed huge swathes of empty blue seats at the BOK Center where Trump spoke, which holds 19,000 people, TikTok users were thrilled.
Advertisement
“What did you guys do?” a stunned Laupp asked in a video Saturday after seeing the empty seats. “Like, seriously? Are you kidding me right now?”


huffpost--2020-03-30--We're Eating More Eggs Than Ever. Should We Avoid Eating The Yolks?

The coronavirus lockdown has given us all a crash-course in cooking from our pantries and learning to live on staple items like eggs .
Though they ’ re one of the most eaten foods in human history , we can never seem to figure out how many are healthy to eat , or whether the yolks are bad for us .
And then there ’ s the great debate over the health components of the different parts of eggs and whether the yolk should be avoided altogether .
Endless studies and articles out there can point you in several different @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should eat the whole egg , so we decided to chat with nutritionists to settle this once and for all .
Here ’ s what they had to say .
The nutrition content of a single whole egg is pretty spectacular .
First things first : Nutrition-wise , eggs are jam-packed with nutrients .
“ Eggs are an excellent source of several key nutrients found in both the egg yolk and the egg white , ” nutritionist Tamar Samuels said .
“ Eating a whole egg gives us the biggest bang for our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ micronutrients.
” While each part of the egg offers up different nutritional perks — whites are low-calorie and protein rich , while yolks are higher in calories and mostly good fats — most nutritionists will tell you that a whole egg is pretty much a “ perfect ” food .
So why does everyone try to avoid the yolk ?
We all have that one friend who orders an egg white omelet at brunch , stripping their meal of much of its flavor and joy .
But are they really doing right by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , high-protein part of the egg ?
While egg whites are a popular food for weight loss because of their low calorie-to-protein ratio ( meaning they can help you stay full longer than other low-calorie foods ) , in most cases going the white-only route is simply robbing your body of some great nutrients — especially if you ’ re skipping the yolk for cholesterol purposes .
She added that more recent , higher-quality studies have found that dietary cholesterol has little impact on levels of cholesterol in our blood for about 75 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ( U.S. Department of Agriculture ) dietary guidelines for Americans and the American Heart Association have lifted the outdated recommendations to limit dietary cholesterol , ” she said .
Nutritionist Vanessa Rissetto expanded on exactly how dietary cholesterol typically behaves in the body .
“ The liver produces cholesterol daily , and should be able to decrease its output if you are consuming a decent amount from your diet , Rissetto said , adding that if it ’ s unable to do so , that ’ s a condition called hypercholesterolemia .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , may want to limit or avoid eggs altogether.
” Rissetto said that in 70 % of people , eggs don ’ t raise cholesterol at all , while in 30 % of people — termed “ hyper responders ” — eggs can mildly raise cholesterol .
If you have a history of high cholesterol or are worried about your body ’ s response to eggs , check in with your doctor .
How to prepare your eggs the healthiest way possible .
If you ’ re still concerned about consuming eggs in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eggs can be prepared in a wide variety of ways .
From eggs benedict ( probably not the healthiest ) to straight-up boiled , you have plenty of options .
“ From a health standpoint , boiling eggs is probably best , as you don ’ t use any extra fat , because it ’ s boiled in water , ” Rissetto said .
“ One can also use a small amount of cooking spray and cook on a pan while adding some vegetables for added fiber .
Fiber helps to draw cholesterol @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to keep you feeling full , so nutrient-dense meals mean more bang for your buck .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The coronavirus lockdown has given us all a crash-course in cooking from our pantries and learning to live on staple items like eggs. Though they’re one of the most eaten foods in human history, we can never seem to figure out how many are healthy to eat, or whether the yolks are bad for us.
It seems like a new egg-related study comes out every other week, some of which draw correlations between egg consumption and mortality, while others find that people who eat eggs have lower rates of heart disease.
Advertisement
And then there’s the great debate over the health components of the different parts of eggs and whether the yolk should be avoided altogether. Endless studies and articles out there can point you in several different directions when it comes to whether you should eat the whole egg, so we decided to chat with nutritionists to settle this once and for all. Here’s what they had to say.
The nutrition content of a single whole egg is pretty spectacular.
First things first: Nutrition-wise, eggs are jam-packed with nutrients. “Eggs are an excellent source of several key nutrients found in both the egg yolk and the egg white,” nutritionist Tamar Samuels said. “Eating a whole egg gives us the biggest bang for our buck in terms of both macro and micronutrients.”
The nutritional profile of one large egg breaks down as 77 calories, 6 grams of fat and a handful of excellent vitamins, including A, B2, B5, B12, D and folate, as well as calcium and zinc.
Gingagi via Getty Images Recent studies have found that dietary cholesterol has little impact on levels of cholesterol in our blood for about 75% of the population.
Advertisement
While each part of the egg offers up different nutritional perks — whites are low-calorie and protein rich, while yolks are higher in calories and mostly good fats — most nutritionists will tell you that a whole egg is pretty much a “perfect” food.
So why does everyone try to avoid the yolk?
We all have that one friend who orders an egg white omelet at brunch, stripping their meal of much of its flavor and joy. But are they really doing right by their health by opting for the low-calorie, high-protein part of the egg?
While egg whites are a popular food for weight loss because of their low calorie-to-protein ratio (meaning they can help you stay full longer than other low-calorie foods), in most cases going the white-only route is simply robbing your body of some great nutrients — especially if you’re skipping the yolk for cholesterol purposes.
“Egg yolks have gotten a bad rap, mostly because of poor quality research studies from more than 50 years ago that found dietary cholesterol in foods like egg yolks contributes to high blood cholesterol and subsequently heart disease,” Samuels said.
She added that more recent, higher-quality studies have found that dietary cholesterol has little impact on levels of cholesterol in our blood for about 75% of the population. “Even the (U.S. Department of Agriculture) dietary guidelines for Americans and the American Heart Association have lifted the outdated recommendations to limit dietary cholesterol,” she said.
Advertisement
Nutritionist Vanessa Rissetto expanded on exactly how dietary cholesterol typically behaves in the body. “The liver produces cholesterol daily, and should be able to decrease its output if you are consuming a decent amount from your diet, Rissetto said, adding that if it’s unable to do so, that’s a condition called hypercholesterolemia. “People with hypercholesterolemia, or ApoE4, may want to limit or avoid eggs altogether.”
Rissetto said that in 70% of people, eggs don’t raise cholesterol at all, while in 30% of people — termed “hyper responders” — eggs can mildly raise cholesterol. If you have a history of high cholesterol or are worried about your body’s response to eggs, check in with your doctor.
How to prepare your eggs the healthiest way possible.
If you’re still concerned about consuming eggs in the healthiest way possible, remember that eggs can be prepared in a wide variety of ways. From eggs benedict (probably not the healthiest) to straight-up boiled, you have plenty of options.
“From a health standpoint, boiling eggs is probably best, as you don’t use any extra fat, because it’s boiled in water,” Rissetto said. “One can also use a small amount of cooking spray and cook on a pan while adding some vegetables for added fiber. Fiber helps to draw cholesterol away from the body and also helps to keep you feeling full, so nutrient-dense meals mean more bang for your buck.”
Bottom line: Most people are actually really missing out on some excellent vitamins, minerals and good cholesterol when they skip the yolk. So unless you have an underlying health condition that makes dietary cholesterol consumption a bad idea, go ahead — eat the whole egg.


huffpost--2020-03-30--Iowa, Ohio Sued Over Abortion Bans During Coronavirus Crisis

ASSOCIATED PRESS Iowa Gov .
Kim Reynolds ( R ) has said abortion must be halted to preserve medical supplies for coronavirus patients .
State officials in Iowa and Ohio were hit with lawsuits on Monday over their decisions to ban abortion during the coronavirus outbreak .
Both states recently deemed abortion a nonessential surgical procedure that must be deferred or canceled in order to preserve medical supplies for the pandemic .
Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa and Ohio are asking district courts to immediately restore abortion access , arguing that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that has been improperly categorized as elective .
A growing number of states largely governed by Republicans are using the coronavirus outbreak to crack down on abortion .
In addition to Ohio and Iowa , Texas and Mississippi have ordered health care facilities to stop providing abortions .
“ Patients presenting for time-sensitive care , including abortion care , need timely access to treatment , even during this pandemic , ” said Katherine Ragsdale , an Episcopal priest and president and CEO of the National Abortion Federation , in a statement .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a health care crisis in furtherance of an anti-abortion agenda.
” Leading medical experts , such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology have urged state leaders to classify abortion as a time-sensitive , essential medical procedure that can not be delayed .
Iowa Gov .
Kim Reynolds ( R ) halted elective , non-essential surgeries , including surgical abortions , in an emergency proclamation issued last week .
The lawsuit against Reynolds , filed by Planned Parenthood and the ACLU of Iowa @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proclamation as it applies to abortions .
In Ohio , Attorney General Dave Yost issued letters to at least three abortion clinics on March 20 , ordering them to stop providing abortion care .
The lawsuit against Yost , filed by abortion providers , the national and state branches of the ACLU and Planned Parenthood , calls for a temporary restraining order to stop the restriction from taking effect .
“ Plaintiffs ’ patients would be denied their right to access safe and legal previability abortion , in violation of nearly five decades @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states from banning abortion before viability , and is , therefore , unconstitutional , ” the lawsuit says .
“ Some of these patients will be forced to carry pregnancies to term against their will and at risk to their health amidst a health system overburdened by responding to COVID-19 , ” the disease caused by the coronavirus .
An emergency lawsuit was filed in federal court last week to overturn a similar ban in Texas , where women are currently unable to access abortions at all .
HuffPost spoke to one patient @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and cross multiple states to receive an abortion .
“ A global pandemic is not an excuse to attack essential , time-sensitive medical procedures like abortion , ” said Alexis McGill Johnson , acting president and CEO of Planned Parenthood , in a statement .
“ Anti-abortion politicians have gone too far.
” Are you trying to get an abortion during the coronavirus outbreak ?
We want to hear from you .
Email reporter Melissa Jeltsen at melissa.jeltsen @ huffpost.com .

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds (R) has said abortion must be halted to preserve medical supplies for coronavirus patients. ASSOCIATED PRESS
State officials in Iowa and Ohio were hit with lawsuits on Monday over their decisions to ban abortion during the coronavirus outbreak.
Both states recently deemed abortion a nonessential surgical procedure that must be deferred or canceled in order to preserve medical supplies for the pandemic.
Advertisement
Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa and Ohio are asking district courts to immediately restore abortion access, arguing that it’s an essential, time-sensitive procedure that has been improperly categorized as elective.
A growing number of states largely governed by Republicans are using the coronavirus outbreak to crack down on abortion. In addition to Ohio and Iowa, Texas and Mississippi have ordered health care facilities to stop providing abortions.
“Patients presenting for time-sensitive care, including abortion care, need timely access to treatment, even during this pandemic,” said Katherine Ragsdale, an Episcopal priest and president and CEO of the National Abortion Federation, in a statement. “Women deserve better than a craven exploitation of a health care crisis in furtherance of an anti-abortion agenda.”
Leading medical experts, such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology have urged state leaders to classify abortion as a time-sensitive, essential medical procedure that cannot be delayed.
Advertisement
Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds (R) halted elective, non-essential surgeries, including surgical abortions, in an emergency proclamation issued last week. The lawsuit against Reynolds, filed by Planned Parenthood and the ACLU of Iowa, asks the court to block the proclamation as it applies to abortions.
In Ohio, Attorney General Dave Yost issued letters to at least three abortion clinics on March 20, ordering them to stop providing abortion care. The lawsuit against Yost, filed by abortion providers, the national and state branches of the ACLU and Planned Parenthood, calls for a temporary restraining order to stop the restriction from taking effect.
“Plaintiffs’ patients would be denied their right to access safe and legal previability abortion, in violation of nearly five decades of Supreme Court precedent that categorically prohibits states from banning abortion before viability, and is, therefore, unconstitutional,” the lawsuit says. “Some of these patients will be forced to carry pregnancies to term against their will and at risk to their health amidst a health system overburdened by responding to COVID-19,” the disease caused by the coronavirus.
An emergency lawsuit was filed in federal court last week to overturn a similar ban in Texas, where women are currently unable to access abortions at all. HuffPost spoke to one patient who was forced to drive 24 hours and cross multiple states to receive an abortion.
“A global pandemic is not an excuse to attack essential, time-sensitive medical procedures like abortion,” said Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO of Planned Parenthood, in a statement. “Anti-abortion politicians have gone too far.”
Advertisement


huffpost--2020-05-20--U.S. Births Fall, And Coronavirus Could Drive Them Down More

The decline is the latest sign of a prolonged national “ baby bust ” that ’ s been going on for more than a decade .
And some experts believe the coronavirus pandemic and its impact on the economy will suppress the numbers further .
“ This unpredictable environment , and anxiety about the future , is going to make women think twice about having children , ” said Dr. Denise Jamieson , chair of obstetrics and gynecology at Emory University .
The latest numbers were released Wednesday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention .
The report , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on a review of more than 99 % of birth certificates issued last year .
The CDC found the number of births fell about 1 % from 2018 , to about 3.7 million .
Birth rates continued to fall for teen moms and for women in their 20s .
Aside from a one-year uptick in 2014 , U.S. births have been falling every year since 2007 , when a recession hit the country .
The drop continued even after the economy rebounded .
Experts say there are a number of causes , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ motherhood : Many women and couples delay childbearing and have fewer kids once they start .
The economy is a factor , but not because of short-term cycles in hiring .
Many jobs are low-paying and unstable , and that coupled with high rents and other factors have caused women and couples to be much more cautious about having kids , said Dr. John Santelli , a Columbia University professor of population and family health .
It ’ s unclear what will happen to births this year , said Brady Hamilton , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The impact of the last few months ’ events won ’ t become clear in maternity wards until late this year or early next , he said .
Santelli said it ’ s possible births will go up , at least among some groups .
Access to birth control and abortion has become more difficult , and some homebound couples may find themselves with greater opportunity to conceive , he said .
The idea that there will be a lot of “ coronababies ” is “ widely perceived as a myth , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pennsylvania fertility researcher .
The debate most demographers are having is not about whether there will be a decline , but whether it will be lasting , he said .
“ The decline due to COVID-19 might be different given the extent and severity of the crisis , and the long-lasting uncertainty that is caused by it , ” Kohler wrote in an email .
— Birth rates fell last year for nearly all age groups up to 34 years old , but rose for women in their early 40s .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
NEW YORK (AP) — U.S. births continued to fall last year, leading to the fewest number of newborns in 35 years.
The decline is the latest sign of a prolonged national “baby bust” that’s been going on for more than a decade. And some experts believe the coronavirus pandemic and its impact on the economy will suppress the numbers further.
Advertisement
“This unpredictable environment, and anxiety about the future, is going to make women think twice about having children,” said Dr. Denise Jamieson, chair of obstetrics and gynecology at Emory University.
The latest numbers were released Wednesday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The report, which is considered preliminary, is based on a review of more than 99% of birth certificates issued last year.
The CDC found the number of births fell about 1% from 2018, to about 3.7 million. Birth rates continued to fall for teen moms and for women in their 20s.
Aside from a one-year uptick in 2014, U.S. births have been falling every year since 2007, when a recession hit the country. The drop continued even after the economy rebounded.
Advertisement
Experts say there are a number of causes, but chief among them are shifting attitudes about motherhood: Many women and couples delay childbearing and have fewer kids once they start.
The economy is a factor, but not because of short-term cycles in hiring. Many jobs are low-paying and unstable, and that coupled with high rents and other factors have caused women and couples to be much more cautious about having kids, said Dr. John Santelli, a Columbia University professor of population and family health.
It’s unclear what will happen to births this year, said Brady Hamilton, the CDC report’s lead author. The impact of the last few months’ events won’t become clear in maternity wards until late this year or early next, he said.
Santelli said it’s possible births will go up, at least among some groups. Access to birth control and abortion has become more difficult, and some homebound couples may find themselves with greater opportunity to conceive, he said.
But others say it’s more likely births will plummet.
The idea that there will be a lot of “coronababies” is “widely perceived as a myth,” said Hans-Peter Kohler, a University of Pennsylvania fertility researcher.
Advertisement
The debate most demographers are having is not about whether there will be a decline, but whether it will be lasting, he said.
“The decline due to COVID-19 might be different given the extent and severity of the crisis, and the long-lasting uncertainty that is caused by it,” Kohler wrote in an email.
Other highlights from the CDC report:
— Birth rates fell last year for nearly all age groups up to 34 years old, but rose for women in their early 40s.
— The birth rate for 15– to 19-year-olds dropped 5% from 2019. It’s fallen almost every year since 1991.
— The cesarean delivery rate dropped to under 32%.
— The percentage of infants born at less than 37 weeks of gestation inched up for the fifth year in a row, to more than 10%.
Advertisement
___


huffpost--2020-05-19--U.S. Extends Heightened Border Enforcement During Coronavirus

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — The Trump administration announced Tuesday that it is indefinitely extending a policy of strict border enforcement because of the COVID-19 outbreak .
An order signed by Dr. Robert Redfield , the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , said it should remain because of public health conditions in the U.S. , Canada and Mexico as a result of the coronavirus pandemic .
The order enables U.S. Customs and Border Patrol to immediately expel anyone stopped trying to enter the country without authorization , including people seeking asylum .
The CDC will review @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if the policy should remain in effect .
The previous two versions had a 30-day limit at the outset .
The latest extension was due to expire Wednesday .
Department of Homeland Security officials say the COVID-19 pandemic makes it too dangerous to hold people in their detention facilities .
CBP is now expelling most captured migrants in about two hours , instead of the days or weeks it took previously .
Immigrant advocates say it deprives people of the legal right to seek asylum under international law .
Acting U.S. Secretary of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the extension that the order has been “ one of the most critical tools the department has used to prevent the further spread of the virus and to protect the American people , DHS frontline officers , and those in their care and custody from COVID-19 .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration announced Tuesday that it is indefinitely extending a policy of strict border enforcement because of the COVID-19 outbreak.
An order signed by Dr. Robert Redfield, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said it should remain because of public health conditions in the U.S., Canada and Mexico as a result of the coronavirus pandemic.
Advertisement
The order enables U.S. Customs and Border Patrol to immediately expel anyone stopped trying to enter the country without authorization, including people seeking asylum.
The CDC will review health conditions every 30 days to determine if the policy should remain in effect.
The previous two versions had a 30-day limit at the outset. The latest extension was due to expire Wednesday.
Department of Homeland Security officials say the COVID-19 pandemic makes it too dangerous to hold people in their detention facilities. CBP is now expelling most captured migrants in about two hours, instead of the days or weeks it took previously.
Advertisement
Immigrant advocates say it deprives people of the legal right to seek asylum under international law.


huffpost--2020-05-20--Billy Crystal Tells Jokes For Senior COVID-19 Hotline And He's On Fire

No flop sweat for this old pro .
Talk show host James Corden asked Billy Crystal to contribute jokes for @ @ @ @ @ isolated seniors during the coronavirus pandemic ― and the comedian worked the virtual room with @ @ @ @ @ .
( See the video below . )
On “ The Late Late Show ” @ @ @ @ @ Jamie Anderson , whose Calgary , Alberta , high school students organized a call service @ @ @ @ @ need of a morale boost .
The host then introduced the joke-telling ringer Crystal , @ @ @ @ @ I was just getting ready to not go out.
” The “ City Slickers ” @ @ @ @ @ , 72 , launched into some choice G-rated shtick .
“ Did you hear about @ @ @ @ @ Crystal asked .
“ All he wanted was a little more space !
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
No flop sweat for this old pro.
Talk show host James Corden asked Billy Crystal to contribute jokes for a phone hotline that entertains isolated seniors during the coronavirus pandemic ― and the comedian worked the virtual room with clean and delightfully corny gems. (See the video below.)
On “The Late Late Show” Tuesday, Corden was interviewing Jamie Anderson, whose Calgary, Alberta, high school students organized a call service for lonely older people in need of a morale boost. The host then introduced the joke-telling ringer Crystal, who was free “because I was just getting ready to not go out.”
Advertisement
The “City Slickers” star and nine-time Oscars host, 72, launched into some choice G-rated shtick.


huffpost--2020-05-03--How TikTok Star And Actor Tabitha Brown Is Becoming America's Mom

“ Baby , stop trying to fit in when clearly you were meant to stand out , ” she says in one of her more popular non-food-related videos , a testament to her journey .
Since going viral on the Gen Z-dominated platform , Brown has shared more than 100 videos displaying her infectious charm and showing how to properly use seasonings “ like so , like that , ” and adding lots of lime juice to guacamole “ cause that ’ s our business.
” She ’ s signed with Creative Arts Agency , a dream of hers that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Though Brown is seeing success now , her path wasn ’ t linear .
She never really knew how to cook and she definitely didn ’ t want to make videos for the internet .
But she said that listening to God has led her to get out of her comfort zone and win the hearts of millions .
Brown has wanted to act since she was a little girl watching play Rudy Huxtable on “ The Cosby Show.
” She found her calling early as she began performing in school plays , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Brown and her husband , Chance , moved to Los Angeles from Eden , North Carolina , in 1998 so she could pursue a career in acting , but she was unprepared , she told HuffPost , so she moved back to North Carolina .
“ My world stopped , ” she said .
She found herself back in North Carolina for long periods to help care for her mom until she died in 2007 .
“ During that time , it was very eye-opening for me as far as how short life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ look at the world a little different , ” she said .
“ However , I still wasn ’ t free within myself.
” “ I was still covering my accent because that ’ s what my agents had told me was necessary .
And also , working in corporate America for a while , you learn to do that to be accepted , ” she said .
“ I was always natural , but I would wear my hair very straight .
I would flat iron it every day , wear it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this one look that was acceptable , right ?
And constantly starving myself and trying to be skinny , working out crazy and barely eating and taking all kinds of diet pills , trying to fit into this look of Hollywood.
” “ I really thought I was going to die , and I was in a really dark , dark place of depression and anxiety and of asking God , ‘ Why you even keep waking me up ?
I ’ m exhausted with this life , ’ ” she recalled .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ get so far to the bottom and you get so far into that dark space , when you look back , you never want to go back there if you come out of it.
” Then she had a “ come-to-Jesus moment.
” She prayed , “ God , I ’ ve been sick for so long , but if you heal me , I ’ ll do whatever you ask and you can have me.
” She said she felt released from the former version of herself ( “ old Tab , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She had a revelation that she was probably sick because she was suffocating the real her .
“ I decided , ‘ You know what ?
No more trying to be somebody who was trying to fit in when I was always meant to stand out , ’ ” she said .
“ This is who I am , and honey , people are either going to love it or they ’ re going to hate you .
I ain ’ t going to try to talk proper no more .
I mean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so if I have to for a role or a character , then I ’ ll develop that character .
But if not , honey , this is who you ’ re going to get .
And so , I just made a choice to be free.
” But her physical health wasn ’ t the only transformation for Brown .
On the road to healing , she had a dream that she saw herself on a TV show with short hair .
She woke up confused , as she hadn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she couldn ’ t make out which show it was .
She prayed about it and said God told her to “ start doing videos.
” “ And he told me , ‘ If you start doing videos , you ’ ll reach thousands in minutes.
’ And I was so hesitant because I didn ’ t have thousands of followers , ” she continued .
“ But I live a life of obedience , now more so than ever .
And when you are desperate for healing and you prayed a specific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has asked .
And that is what kept me being consistent .
Looking back over my life every time I ’ ve ever heard the voice or saw a sign or had a dream , I ’ ve always had this feeling of a calling on my life.
” In March , Choyce told her mom that she should create a TikTok page .
Brown was hesitant until her Whole Foods colleague suggested it as well , saying that people would love her personality on the app .
Choyce taught her mom , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ learn the Renegade dance , how to use the app and ever since , Brown has been blessing her followers with her unique and welcoming personality .

Tabitha Brown is giving us all some much-needed comfort during the coronavirus pandemic.
The 41-year-old actress is rapidly winning over people on social media with her TikTok videos that invite us into her kitchen — and heart — with her warm, Southern accent. Since joining the app in March, Brown has gained 2.5 million followers with her combination of vegan cooking tutorials, motivational messages and videos with her family.
She’s created more than just a food blog. She’s created a sense of comfort, joy and hope at a time when so much feels so uncertain. And she’s been able to give her audience virtual hugs while staying true to her purpose.
“Baby, stop trying to fit in when clearly you were meant to stand out,” she says in one of her more popular non-food-related videos, a testament to her journey. Since going viral on the Gen Z-dominated platform, Brown has shared more than 100 videos displaying her infectious charm and showing how to properly use seasonings “like so, like that,” and adding lots of lime juice to guacamole “cause that’s our business.”
Advertisement
She’s signed with Creative Arts Agency, a dream of hers that was 15 years in the making. Though Brown is seeing success now, her path wasn’t linear. She never really knew how to cook and she definitely didn’t want to make videos for the internet. But she said that listening to God has led her to get out of her comfort zone and win the hearts of millions.
Brown has wanted to act since she was a little girl watching play Rudy Huxtable on “The Cosby Show.” She found her calling early as she began performing in school plays, at church and in community theater. Brown and her husband, Chance, moved to Los Angeles from Eden, North Carolina, in 1998 so she could pursue a career in acting, but she was unprepared, she told HuffPost, so she moved back to North Carolina.
The plan was to move back to Los Angeles in a year, but that year turned into nearly five and a forgotten dream. Thanks to a nudge from God in the form of a literal dream and a supportive husband, they were able to move back to L.A. in 2004.
Advertisement
After her second move to LA, her mother was diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. It altered life as she knew it.
“My world stopped,” she said. She found herself back in North Carolina for long periods to help care for her mom until she died in 2007. “During that time, it was very eye-opening for me as far as how short life is, and it started making me look at the world a little different,” she said. “However, I still wasn’t free within myself.”
On top of dealing with her mom being sick, she had to deal with overcoming the obstacle of not aligning with the very homogenous look and sound that Hollywood wanted.
“I was still covering my accent because that’s what my agents had told me was necessary. And also, working in corporate America for a while, you learn to do that to be accepted,” she said. “I was always natural, but I would wear my hair very straight. I would flat iron it every day, wear it long and straight. And to have this one look that was acceptable, right? And constantly starving myself and trying to be skinny, working out crazy and barely eating and taking all kinds of diet pills, trying to fit into this look of Hollywood.”
Brown’s wake-up call to stop conforming came when she got sick in 2016. She had chronic fatigue and a headache for a year and seven months. Doctors weren’t able to diagnose the ailment. Brown eventually fell into a deep depression.
Advertisement
“I really thought I was going to die, and I was in a really dark, dark place of depression and anxiety and of asking God, ‘Why you even keep waking me up? I’m exhausted with this life,’” she recalled. “And I feel like when you get so far to the bottom and you get so far into that dark space, when you look back, you never want to go back there if you come out of it.”
Then she had a “come-to-Jesus moment.” She prayed, “God, I’ve been sick for so long, but if you heal me, I’ll do whatever you ask and you can have me.” She said she felt released from the former version of herself (“old Tab,” as she puts it). She had a revelation that she was probably sick because she was suffocating the real her.
“I decided, ‘You know what? No more trying to be somebody who was trying to fit in when I was always meant to stand out,’” she said. “This is who I am, and honey, people are either going to love it or they’re going to hate you. I ain’t going to try to talk proper no more. I mean, I’m an actress, so if I have to for a role or a character, then I’ll develop that character. But if not, honey, this is who you’re going to get. And so, I just made a choice to be free.”
In August 2017, Brown’s daughter, Choyce, suggested she try veganism after watching the documentary “What The Health” at school. Since the medicines doctors prescribed her weren’t helping, she decided to try a 30-day vegan challenge with Chance. Within the first 10 days, her fatigue and headache went away. Though Chance didn’t make the change, Brown decided to go vegan full-time.
Advertisement
“I always tell people that I used to think vegan meant skinny, honey, but let me tell you, it don’t mean that because Tab is big. Okay?” she said.
But her physical health wasn’t the only transformation for Brown. On the road to healing, she had a dream that she saw herself on a TV show with short hair. She woke up confused, as she hadn’t been auditioning while she was sick and she couldn’t make out which show it was. She prayed about it and said God told her to “start doing videos.”
“I was offended. I thought people who did videos were never taken serious in Hollywood,” she told HuffPost.
She was skeptical, but remembered the promise she made to God at the peak of her illness.
“And he told me, ‘If you start doing videos, you’ll reach thousands in minutes.’ And I was so hesitant because I didn’t have thousands of followers,” she continued. “But I live a life of obedience, now more so than ever. And when you are desperate for healing and you prayed a specific prayer, then you do what he has asked. And that is what kept me being consistent. Looking back over my life every time I’ve ever heard the voice or saw a sign or had a dream, I’ve always had this feeling of a calling on my life.”
Tabitha Brown appeared in an episode of the final season of "Will and Grace" as a police officer. NBC via Getty Images
Advertisement
The mother of two began posting videos on Facebook. In December 2017, Brown posted one of her first videos that would go viral. The video was an impromptu review of Whole Foods’ TTLA sandwich (tempeh, tomato, lettuce and avocado). Brown’s convincing review led to the viral TTLA challenge in which people recorded themselves trying the sandwich for the first time.
Whole Foods then hired Brown as an ambassador. She appeared in commercials and traveled around the country to talk about veganism. Since then, she’s appeared in various roles, including a guest spot in a January episode of “Will and Grace.”
In March, Choyce told her mom that she should create a TikTok page. Brown was hesitant until her Whole Foods colleague suggested it as well, saying that people would love her personality on the app. Choyce taught her mom, who really only wanted to join to learn the Renegade dance, how to use the app and ever since, Brown has been blessing her followers with her unique and welcoming personality.
“I was literally shocked at all the response that I got, and the outpour from the younger generation of kids and teenagers blew my mind that they felt love for me,” she said. “And then, it became something more of a responsibility to me to them, because I read comments and I look at the responses, and I’m blown away at how many people need love.”
Her dream role is to play America’s mom. “I always say I’m the new Clair Huxtable meets Roseanne right in the middle,” she said. Her goal is to have her own show, ideally a scripted comedy similar to “The Bernie Mac Show.” She also wants to help make Hollywood more authentic so people know that being themselves is enough.
Advertisement


huffpost--2020-05-03--U.S. Nursing Homes, Faced With 20,000 Dead, Seek Protection From Lawsuits

NEW YORK ( AP ) — Faced with 20,000 coronavirus deaths and counting , the nation ’ s nursing homes are pushing back against a potential flood of lawsuits with a sweeping lobbying effort to get states to grant them emergency protection from claims of inadequate care .
At least 15 states have enacted laws or governors ’ orders that explicitly or apparently provide nursing homes and long-term care facilities some protection from lawsuits arising from the crisis .
And in the case of New York , which leads the nation in deaths in such facilities , a lobbying group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that apparently makes it the only state with specific protection from both civil lawsuits and criminal prosecution .
Now the industry is forging ahead with a campaign to get other states on board with a simple argument : This was an unprecedented crisis and nursing homes should not be liable for events beyond their control , such as shortages of protective equipment and testing , shifting directives from authorities , and sicknesses that have decimated staffs .
“ As our care providers make these difficult decisions , they need to know they will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ read a letter sent this month from several major hospital and nursing home groups to their next big goal , California , where Gov .
Gavin Newsom has yet to make a decision .
Other states in their sights include Florida , Pennsylvania and Missouri .
Watchdogs , patient advocates and lawyers argue that immunity orders are misguided .
At a time when the crisis is laying bare such chronic industry problems as staffing shortages and poor infection control , they say legal liability is the last safety net to keep facilities accountable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taking advantage of the crisis to protect their bottom lines .
Almost 70 % of the nation ’ s more than 15,000 nursing homes are run by for-profit companies , and hundreds have been bought and sold in recent years by private-equity firms .
“ What you ’ re really looking at is an industry that always wanted immunity and now has the opportunity to ask for it under the cloak of saying , ‘ Let ’ s protect our heroes , ’ ” said Mike Dark , an attorney for California Advocates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the industry ’ s efforts played out more starkly than in New York , which has a fifth of the nation ’ s known nursing home and long-term care deaths .
New York ’ s immunity law signed by Democratic Gov .
Andrew Cuomo was drafted by the Greater New York Hospital Association , an influential lobbying group for both hospitals and nursing homes that donated more than $ 1 million to the state Democratic Party in 2018 and has pumped more than $ 7 million into lobbying over the past three years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being led by the American Health Care Association , which represents nearly all of the nation ’ s nursing homes and has spent $ 23 million on lobbying efforts in the past six years .
Toby Edelman of the Center for Medicare Advocacy said immunity declarations could make even gross or willful negligence suits harder since homes could argue any deficiencies were somehow tied to the pandemic .
“ Everything can ’ t be blamed on COVID-19 .
Other things can happen that are terrible , ” she said .
“ Just to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so anything goes , that seems too far.
” All the new immunity laws notwithstanding , there is a potential wave of lawsuits coming .
Illinois lawyer Steven Levin said he ’ s received dozens of calls from people considering suing homes over the outbreak .
And a lawyer in Massachusetts said he ’ s gotten maybe 70 from families with relatives at homes struck by the virus .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
NEW YORK (AP) — Faced with 20,000 coronavirus deaths and counting, the nation’s nursing homes are pushing back against a potential flood of lawsuits with a sweeping lobbying effort to get states to grant them emergency protection from claims of inadequate care.
At least 15 states have enacted laws or governors’ orders that explicitly or apparently provide nursing homes and long-term care facilities some protection from lawsuits arising from the crisis. And in the case of New York, which leads the nation in deaths in such facilities, a lobbying group wrote the first draft of a measure that apparently makes it the only state with specific protection from both civil lawsuits and criminal prosecution.
Advertisement
Now the industry is forging ahead with a campaign to get other states on board with a simple argument: This was an unprecedented crisis and nursing homes should not be liable for events beyond their control, such as shortages of protective equipment and testing, shifting directives from authorities, and sicknesses that have decimated staffs.
“As our care providers make these difficult decisions, they need to know they will not be prosecuted or persecuted,” read a letter sent this month from several major hospital and nursing home groups to their next big goal, California, where Gov. Gavin Newsom has yet to make a decision. Other states in their sights include Florida, Pennsylvania and Missouri.
A patient is evacuated from the Magnolia Rehabilitation and Nursing Center in Riverside, Calif., Wednesday, April 8, 2020. (AP Photo/Chris Carlson) ASSOCIATED PRESS
Watchdogs, patient advocates and lawyers argue that immunity orders are misguided. At a time when the crisis is laying bare such chronic industry problems as staffing shortages and poor infection control, they say legal liability is the last safety net to keep facilities accountable.
Advertisement
They also contend nursing homes are taking advantage of the crisis to protect their bottom lines. Almost 70% of the nation’s more than 15,000 nursing homes are run by for-profit companies, and hundreds have been bought and sold in recent years by private-equity firms.
“What you’re really looking at is an industry that always wanted immunity and now has the opportunity to ask for it under the cloak of saying, ‘Let’s protect our heroes,’” said Mike Dark, an attorney for California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform.
Nowhere have the industry’s efforts played out more starkly than in New York, which has a fifth of the nation’s known nursing home and long-term care deaths.
New York’s immunity law signed by Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo was drafted by the Greater New York Hospital Association, an influential lobbying group for both hospitals and nursing homes that donated more than $1 million to the state Democratic Party in 2018 and has pumped more than $7 million into lobbying over the past three years.
While the law covering both hospital and nursing care workers doesn’t cover intentional misconduct, gross negligence and other such acts, it makes clear those exceptions don’t include “decisions resulting from a resource or staffing shortage.”
Advertisement
Cuomo’s administration said the measure was a necessary part of getting the state’s entire health care apparatus to work together to respond to the crisis and save lives.
Nationally, the lobbying effort is being led by the American Health Care Association, which represents nearly all of the nation’s nursing homes and has spent $23 million on lobbying efforts in the past six years.
Other states that have emergency immunity measures are Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Massachusetts; Michigan, Mississippi, New Jersey, Nevada, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin.
Their provisions vary but largely apply to injuries, deaths and care decisions, sometimes even to property damage. But there are limitations: Most make exceptions for gross negligence and willful misconduct.
Toby Edelman of the Center for Medicare Advocacy said immunity declarations could make even gross or willful negligence suits harder since homes could argue any deficiencies were somehow tied to the pandemic.
Advertisement
“Everything can’t be blamed on COVID-19. Other things can happen that are terrible,” she said. “Just to say we’re in this pandemic so anything goes, that seems too far.”
All the new immunity laws notwithstanding, there is a potential wave of lawsuits coming. Illinois lawyer Steven Levin said he’s received dozens of calls from people considering suing homes over the outbreak. And a lawyer in Massachusetts said he’s gotten maybe 70 from families with relatives at homes struck by the virus.
“We’re getting inundated,” said David Hoey, whose practice near Boston has been suing homes for 25 years. “They’re grieving and they’re confused. … ‘My loved one just died from COVID. What can I do?’”
American Health Care Association CEO Mark Parkinson said the notion of lawyers gearing up for lawsuits now is “pathetic.”
“These lawsuits are distracting facilities from being able to focus on taking care of people,” he said. “We are in the middle of a battle right now.”