Biden Health Adviser Has a Plan to Get Pandemic Under Control and Revive Economy: Pay People to Stay Home for 4-6 Weeks 

Biden Health Adviser Has a Plan to Get Pandemic Under Control and Revive Economy: Pay People to Stay Home for 4-6 Weeks

The government “could pay for a package right now” to cover economic losses—making it possible to curb Covid-19 transmission without increasing the financial suffering associated with shutting down commerce, said epidemiologist Michael Osterholm.

By Kenny Stancil

A nationwide lockdown of four to six weeks would help contain the coronavirus pandemic and need not cause economic hardship, according to Dr. Michael Osterholm, a top health adviser to President-elect Joe Biden, who said that paying people to stay home would limit the spread of Covid-19 in the United States and put the country on track for a smoother recovery.

“History will judge us harshly if we miss this life- and economy-saving opportunity to get it right this time.”
—Michael Osterholm and Neel Kashkari

In an interview with CNBC earlier this week, Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota and a member of Biden’s coronavirus advisory board, acknowledged that people have clashing interpretations of the meaning and consequences of a “lockdown.”

Part of the problem, the epidemiologist explained, is that public health and economic health have been pitted against each other, the implication being that too many people view far-reaching interventions to get the pandemic under control as economically harmful.

“It’s a false notion to keep the economy going versus Covid,” Osterholm said. “When Covid is running out of control, the economy is going to be suffering mightily. So the things we have to do to get Covid under control will ultimately affect the economy in a positive way.”

“Look no further than Asia, which has done a remarkable job of bringing these cases under control, and look what’s happening to their economy,” he added. 

On Wednesday, Osterholm told Yahoo! Finance that “we could pay for a package right now to cover all of the lost wages for individual workers, for losses to small companies, to medium-sized companies or city, state, [and] county governments.”

The federal government “could do all of that,” he noted, and if it did, “then we could lock down for four to six weeks.” 

“And if we did that, we could drive the numbers down, like they’ve done in Asia, like they did in New Zealand and Australia,” said Osterholm. “And then, we could really watch ourselves, cruising into the vaccine availability in the first and second quarter of next year, and bringing back the economy long before that.”

The alternative—continuing with the inadequate and haphazard measures that characterize the status quo—ensures that the U.S. will remain on a bleak trajectory, public health officials say.

As Common Dreams reported Wednesday, the coronavirus crisis is entering an extremely dangerous phase that has some epidemiologists worried about whether the U.S. has a sufficient number of mobile morgues.

 

Yet, at precisely the moment when the ongoing catastrophe warrants a stronger, more effective response, President Donald Trump is engaging in what journalist David Dayen on Wednesday called “the world’s worst coup attempt.” 

By hampering Biden’s ability to get a head start on facilitating a well-coordinated response to the Covid-19 emergency and its economic fallout, Dayen explained, Trump is relegating even more Americans to “death and suffering.”

“The next three to four months are going to be, by far, the darkest of the pandemic,” Osterholm told CNBC earlier this week. 

“What America has to understand is that we are about to enter Covid hell. It is happening,” said Osterholm. “I don’t think America quite gets this yet. This is going to get much worse.”

“This is not to scare people out of their wits,” he added. “It’s to scare people into their wits… We can basically limit the contacts we have with people, [which] will dramatically impact our risk of getting this disease.”

To save thousands of lives and the economy, however, Osterholm stressed on Wednesday that a comprehensive and stringent lockdown is necessary.

He referred to a New York Times op-ed, co-authored in August with Minneapolis Federal Reserve president Neel Kashkari, in which they argued that the U.S. “reopened too quickly.”

“To successfully drive down our case rate to less than one per 100,000 people per day, we should mandate sheltering in place for everyone but the truly essential workers,” wrote Osterholm and Kashkari. “We have the resources to support those who have been laid off… Congress should be aggressive in supporting people who’ve lost jobs because of Covid-19.”

“There is no trade-off between health and the economy,” they noted. “Both require aggressively getting control of the virus.”

“History,” Osterholm and Kashkari added, “will judge us harshly if we miss this life- and economy-saving opportunity to get it right this time.”

Source: Biden Health Adviser Has a Plan to Get Pandemic Under Control and Revive Economy: Pay People to Stay Home for 4-6 Weeks | Common Dreams News

 

 

 

 

‘Banking for the People’: Tlaib and Ocasio-Cortez Unveil Bill to Foster Creation of Public Banks Across US

Banking for the People’: Tlaib and Ocasio-Cortez Unveil Bill to Foster Creation of Public Banks Across US

“It’s time for an option that works for the people and not solely privatized profits.”

By Jessica Corbett

“It’s long past time to open doors for people who have been systematically shut out and provide a better option for those grappling with the costs of simply trying to participate in an economy they have every right to—but has been rigged against them.”

That’s according to Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), who along with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and a handful of other progressives in Congress introduced legislation on Friday they say “would provide a much-needed financial lifeline to states and municipalities, as well as unbanked and underbanked residents, that have been left in dire straits by the Covid-19 pandemic.”

Specifically, as a joint statement from the congresswomen explains, the Public Banking Act (pdf) would enable “the creation of state and locally administered public banks by establishing the Public Bank Grant program administered by the secretary of the Treasury and the Federal Reserve Board which would provide grants for the formation, chartering, and capitalization of public banks.”

“We spent $30 trillion in the global crisis from 2007-2009 propping up financial institutions that held the country hostage for their reckless behavior. Only $8 trillion dollars has been committed thus far in the Covid-19 pandemic,” Tlaib noted. “These banks have been, are, and will continue to depend on the public dollar. It is time for this relationship to be reciprocated and have the banks work for the people and not solely privatized profits wreaking havoc on communities of color.”

In addition to allowing the Treasury secretary and the Fed’s board to give grants to public banks for “bank formation, capitalization, developing financial market infrastructure, supporter operations, covering unexpected losses, and more without the requirement to provide matching funds,” the bill:

  • Allows the Federal Reserve to charter and grant membership to public banks, and in conjunction with the appropriate federal agencies, establish a separate regulatory scheme with respect to these.
  • Establishes public banking incubator program to provide technical assistance to public member banks to develop technologies, practices, and data that promote public welfare.
  • Establishes new liquidity and credit facilities at the Federal Reserve to provide direct federal support to state and local public banks and their communities;
  • Prohibits investment in fossil fuel projects.

Tlaib and Ocasio-Cortez argue that public banks not only would benefit city and state governments and aspiring entrepreneurs due to lower interest rates and fees, but also could result in broader community benefits by, for example, funding public infrastructure projects. Ocasio-Cortez called their legislation “monumental.”

“Public banks are uniquely able to address the economic inequality and structural racism exacerbated by the banking industry’s discriminatory policies and predatory practices,” she said. “The creation of public banks will also facilitate the use of public resources to construct a myriad of public goods including affordable housing and local renewable energy projects. Public banks empower states and municipalities to establish new channels of public investment to help solve systemic crises.”

The other half of the Squad—Congresswomen Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) and Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.)—and Reps. Jesús G. “Chuy” García (D-Ill.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Al Green (D-Texas), Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.), Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), and Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) are backing the bill, as are 29 outside groups.

Organizations supporting the measure include the California Public Banking Alliance (CBPA), Take on Wall Street, Americans for Financial Reform, Beneficial State Foundation, Communications Workers of America, Friends of the Earth, Food & Water Action, Americans for Financial Reform, California Reinvestment Coalition, Center for Popular Democracy, Community Change, Farm Aid, Institute for Policy Studies, Jobs With Justice, NJ Citizen Action, Oil Change International, Oil Change International, People’s Action, Strong Economy for All, UNITE HERE, Working Families Party, Democracy Collaborative, ACRE, and Public Citizen.

Climate Justice Alliance policy coordinator Anthony Rogers-Wright expressed excitement that “our values regarding the need for a rapid Fossil Fuel phaseout” are represented in the bill, highlighting evidence that economically, “Big Oil is in big trouble and the people don’t want the money they keep in their banks utilized to bailout or finance an industry that’s killing people and planet.”

Take on Wall Street campaign director Porter McConnell explained that her group supports the Public Banking Act “because public banks can create jobs and boost the local economy, save cities and states money, and lend counter-cyclically to blunt the impact of Wall Street booms and busts.”

“As we learned recently from the Paycheck Protection Program, when you pay big Wall Street banks to provide public goods, they inevitably reward themselves and their friends at the expense of white, Black, and brown working families,” McConnell said, referencing the business loan program established in March by Congress’ last Covid-19 relief measure. “We deserve a financial system for working families, not the big banks.”

Source: ‘Banking for the People’: Tlaib and Ocasio-Cortez Unveil Bill to Foster Creation of Public Banks Across US | Common Dreams News

 

‘Reckless Incompetence and Intentional Cruelty’: House Issues Scathing Report on Trump Migrant Family Separation Policy

‘Reckless Incompetence and Intentional Cruelty’: House Issues Scathing Report on Trump Migrant Family Separation Policy

The “inhumane” policy was “driven by an administration… determined to go to unthinkable extremes to deliver on political promises,” the report found.

By Brett Wilkins

The Trump administration knew it would not be able to reunite refugee and other migrant families as it ripped children—including infants—from the arms of their parents but did so anyway, according to a congressional report released Thursday on the U.S. government’s family separation policy.

“The Trump administration’s family separation policy lasted far longer than is commonly known and was marked by reckless incompetence and intentional cruelty.” 
—House Judiciary Committee report

The House Judiciary Committee spent 21 months investigating the planning and execution of the administration’s policy, which resulted in the seizure of more than 2,500 migrant children—including some with physical and mental disabilities—from their parents. Its report (pdf) is the “first complete narrative of the inhumane family separation policy in the administration’s own words.” 

The report reveals that the separation policy “lasted far longer than is commonly known and was marked by reckless incompetence and intentional cruelty.” 

“Worse still, administration officials knew that the government lacked the capacity to track separated family members and moved forward with separations anyway,” the report states.  

The investigators conclude that the family separation policy “was driven by an administration that was willfully blind to its cruelty and determined to go to unthinkable extremes to deliver on political promises.” 

To this day, the government is unable to find the parents—roughly two-thirds of whom are believed to have been deported—of 545 children. An unknown number of these children, some of whom were babies when they were taken, may never see their mothers or fathers again.

Many of these victims of what prominent critics including Physicians for Human Rights have called “torture” and “state-sanctioned child abuse” had done nothing wrong, having presented themselves at U.S. ports of entry and requested asylum in full accordance with the law after fleeing violence or persecution in their home countries, much of it resulting from U.S. policies and actions. 

“The committee’s report makes clear that the Trump administration was willing to go to extreme lengths, including ripping young children and children with disabilities from the arms of their parents, to stop migrants fleeing violence from seeking protection in the United States,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) and Immigration Subcommittee Chair Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) in a joint statement.

“Now, more than a year since the end of this cruel policy, the Trump administration has failed to reunite hundreds of children with their families,” they said. “The incompetence is unforgiveable. As we move forward, we need a whole of government approach to reunite these families and put an end to this dark chapter in our nation’s history.”

“The incompetence is unforgiveable. As we move forward, we need a whole of government approach to reunite these families and put an end to this dark chapter in our nation’s history.”
—Reps. Jerrold Nadler and Zoe Lofgren 

The report found that the administration began devising its plan to separate families within weeks of President Donald Trump’s inauguration, and that it accelerated separations even before fully developing its policy. By March 2017, separations had increased 900% from November 2016. 

In July 2017, “without warning,” the administration launched a pilot program in El Paso that lasted five months and in which hundreds of children were seized from their parents. It was during this program that the government determined it would not be able to track or reunite many families—nevertheless, the administration expanded the policy nationwide in May 2018. 

Making matters worse, the administration failed to notify frontline agents and officers of the new program, causing “unnecessary chaos and inconsistent implementation of the policy across border sectors.”

 

Human rights groups once again condemned the administration’s policy and actions in the wake of the new report. 

“Today’s report only confirms what this administration’s immigration policies have shown: cruelty was always the point,” Amnesty International refugee and migrant rights researcher Denise Bell said in a statement.

“This administration’s deliberate policy to separate families inflicted severe mental suffering—all in order to deter people from seeking safety or to coerce them into giving up,” said Bell. “This is called torture, and there must be accountability for these heinous acts.”

“There must be an effective criminal investigation of all government officials, personnel, and contractors who are responsible for this shameful period of our history—no matter their current or former level of office,” Bell added. 

Immigrant advocates have called family separation—along with forced surgical removal of reproductive organs of migrant women—the worst domestic human rights violations of the Trump administration. 

As public outrage mounted in the face of stories like a breastfeeding baby being torn away from her mother and a father driven to suicide after being separated from his wife and child, the administration reluctantly rolled back the policy in late June 2018. But the damage was done.

Both parents and children—who were often told by U.S. officials that they would never see each other again—have suffered tremendous emotional and psychological trauma. Some, as shown by the hundreds of children still separated from their parents, may indeed never be reunited. Some of the children have been given to U.S. families, who are sometimes able to petition for permanent custody of them.

Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) said last week said that those “545 children are effectively orphaned with the explicit consent and active participation of the Trump administration.” 

“They were ripped from their parents’ arms, off-handedly placed in shelters, and left to wonder when, if ever, they would see their parents again,” he said. “Due to the cruelty of Donald Trump and the xenophobia of [White House adviser] Stephen Miller, we know that some of them may never see their parents again.”

At least seven children have also died while imprisoned by U.S. authorities. 

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden promised Thursday that, if elected, he will form a task force to reunite the 545 separated children with their parents. 

Trump, on the other hand, continues to defend the separation policy, falsely claiming that the seized children were brought into the country by human traffickers. 

Source: ‘Reckless Incompetence and Intentional Cruelty’: House Issues Scathing Report on Trump Migrant Family Separation Policy | Common Dreams News