Tuesday, April 14, 2020

"Welcome to the resistance...."


I watched the Governor of Connecticut being interviewed on PBS Newshour.  I realized after a few minutes how refreshing it was to listen to a government official in charge and capable of being responsible for the duties of office.

As opposed to this:

Or this:

Yeah, bullshit:

But over January and February, agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services not only failed to make early use of the hundreds of labs across the United States, they enforced regulatory roadblocks that prevented non-government labs from assisting, according to documents obtained by CNN, and interviews with 14 scientists and physicians at individual laboratories and national laboratory associations.

When the CDC stumbled out of the blocks in early February, releasing a flawed test that took it weeks to correct, labs across the country had been effectively sidelined. Many public health labs were waiting for the revised CDC tests, while commercial and clinical labs were barred from conducting their own tests unless they went through a complex, slow process of applying for their own "emergency use authorization" from the US Food and Drug Administration.

As a result, the government squandered a critical month during which aggressive and widespread testing might greatly have reduced the speed and scale of the pandemic.

"We really were... basically on a pause for a few weeks within the public health system," said Scott Becker, executive director of the Association of Public Health Laboratories. "And meanwhile, the academic laboratories who had developed their own tests also were not able to test because the regulations didn't allow it at that time."

In a written response to CNN's inquiries about why the 2018 agreement wasn't fully implemented, the CDC confirmed that it didn't seek to bring commercial labs quickly into the testing mix. Rather, the agency said it decided to "prioritize the nation's public health laboratories" but keep the commercial labs "well informed." Critics charge that the CDC and other federal agencies weren't quick enough to recognize the need for emergency action.
Governors couldn't do the testing because the CDC wouldn't release the test, and no one could get sufficient amounts of materials for testing.  I'm actually old enough to remember this, since it was only a month ago.  Trump, as many have said, is a goldfish.  Every few minutes the world seems new to him.

But put that in context, and Trump is again dodging responsibility.  It's his go-to move, and the only one he has aside from accepting the adulation of shouting...hundreds.

The Theme of tonight's performance:  everyone else let Trump down.  And his grasp of the country he is the President of is dicey, at best:


White House officials have stressed that any such plan would be coordinated with state and local authorities. Regardless of what Trump opts to announce, it will fall to governors and mayors to decide whether to reopen businesses and begin returning to normal in their own jurisdictions. And many governors are treading more cautiously than the president.
It could be a great deal slower than that.  Judy Woodruff interviewed the head of the Chamber of Commerce, and asked how store owners are supposed to insure the safety of their customers and staff?  Take the customer's temperature at the door?  And what liability would stores face for infecting others simply by being open?  It might be the biggest liability of all:  nobody comes back.

In the meantime, schools are not reopening until the fall, if then.  What do parents who work do with their children a month before summer?  How do they insure the sitters won't bring the virus into their house?

The decision to start over will be one made by individuals, not just companies.  If companies (as mentioned in that WaPo article) get indemnification from forcing employees back to work who then get sick, will that boost morale, raise productivity?  Are people waiting anxiously to crowd bars and restaurants and theaters?  I doubt it.  What of the "sunk cost" problem?  We've invested a month in this economic calamity for the sake of staying healthy and alive.  Do we throw that away for the sake of our jobs, the economy, the President's re-election chances, the need of Jamie Dimon to see his portfolio fatten up again?

Let's just end on this note:  it tells you a great deal, too.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)