18 April 20
I believe very strongly in what you are doing. I am a retired high school teacher of 85 years young on a public library computer making a donation. I regret I cannot do more. Thank for what you do. Your work is essential and so much more forthright than much of the so-called "democratic/republican/independent factual media".
If you would prefer to send a check:
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts, CA 95611
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts, CA 95611
17 April 20
Garrison Keillor | What's Going On on the Twelfth Floor
Garrison Keillor, Garrison Keillor's Website
Keillor writes: "I come from people who anticipate the worst so this quarantine is right up my alley."
READ MORE
Garrison Keillor, Garrison Keillor's Website
Keillor writes: "I come from people who anticipate the worst so this quarantine is right up my alley."
READ MORE
A man wears a mask while walking past the New York Stock Exchange in New York City, March 17, 2020. (photo: Lucas Jackson/Reuters)
Experts: 90 Percent of US Coronavirus Deaths Could Have Been Avoided if Measures Taken Just Two Weeks Earlier
Joseph Guzman, The Hill
Guzman writes: "The novel coronavirus has killed more than 31,000 people in the United States and top health officials project about 60,000 Americans will die from COVID-19 by August, but two experts say the majority of deaths may have been avoided if social distancing measures were implemented just two weeks earlier than they were."
Joseph Guzman, The Hill
Guzman writes: "The novel coronavirus has killed more than 31,000 people in the United States and top health officials project about 60,000 Americans will die from COVID-19 by August, but two experts say the majority of deaths may have been avoided if social distancing measures were implemented just two weeks earlier than they were."
Two medical experts say issuing social distancing measures just two weeks earlier could have drastically changed the trajectory of coronavirus deaths in the United States.
Epidemiologists Britta L. Jewell and Nicholas P. Jewell Tuesday wrote in an op-ed in The New York Times that 90 percent of coronavirus deaths in the U.S. could have possibly been avoided if social distancing began March 2, when there were only 11 deaths recorded in the nation. If such policies would have been put in place one week earlier, on March 9, the epidemiologists say there could have been a 60 percent reduction in fatalities.
“Whatever the final death toll is in the United States, the cost of waiting will be enormous, a tragic consequence of the exponential spread of the virus early in the epidemic,” the experts wrote.
The Trump administration issued social distancing guidelines on March 16 urging Americans to avoid restaurants and bars, limit gatherings to 10 or fewer people and work and engage in schooling from home when possible. The move came more than two weeks after the first coronavirus death was confirmed in the U.S. The first death on American soil was recorded on Feb. 29.
In New York City, the site of the country’s largest outbreak, the experts noted fatalities could have been cut 50 to 80 percent if stay-at-home orders were put in place a week or two before March 22, when the orders took effect.
“The point here is not to cast blame on mayors or governors for the timing of what were difficult decisions for both public health and the economy, but rather, to alert cities and states where full social distancing measures are not in place that hesitation can come at a very high cost,” the epidemiologists wrote.
The experts compare Kentucky and Tennessee in demonstrating how just a few days can make a difference. Kentucky’s social distancing measures were issued March 26, while Tennessee’s was issued March 31. As a result, Kentucky has recorded a significantly less number of cases.
But Britta and Nicholas Jewell note that lockdowns are not a solution to the virus, but are important in buying time to prepare for waves of infection and to develop vaccines and treatments.
The White House plans to release guidelines Thursday to inform states on how to relax coronavirus restrictions and reopen businesses. The decision on what individual states do, however, will fall to governors across the country.
Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease and a member of the White House coronavirus task force, said in an interview with the Associated Press (AP) on Tuesday that the U.S. doesn’t currently have the capabilities in place to begin reopening the economy and described a May 1 target date as “a bit overly optimistic” for many parts of the country.
Former president Barack Obama. (photo: Getty)
Obama Administration Asked for Funding to Tackle Future Pandemics but Republicans Refused
Richard Hall, The Independent
Hall writes: "Barack Obama's efforts to replenish America's stockpile of protective equipment for healthcare workers were repeatedly blocked by Republican lawmakers, an investigation has found."
Richard Hall, The Independent
Hall writes: "Barack Obama's efforts to replenish America's stockpile of protective equipment for healthcare workers were repeatedly blocked by Republican lawmakers, an investigation has found."
Tea Party blocked hundreds of millions in funding, investigation finds
The investigation by ProPublica found requests for funding to purchase protective equipment and train medical staff to prepare for future outbreaks were denied by a Republican-controlled House of Representatives that was filled with Tea Party-affiliated politicians.
Citing budget documents, as was as administration and congressional officials involved in negotiations, the report discovered that “had Congress kept funding at the 2010 level through the end of the Obama administration, the stockpile would have benefited from $321m (£259m) more than it ended up getting.”
Healthcare workers treating coronavirus patients across the country have complained about a lack of proper protective equipment. Many are having to reuse masks, which puts them at greater risk of contracting the virus.
As the coronavirus has continued to spread across the US in recent weeks, Donald Trump has repeatedly tried to shift blame for shortfalls in the government’s response to the outbreak onto his predecessor. Speaking last month, the US president said the Obama administration “made a decision on testing that turned out to be very detrimental to what we’re doing.” It was unclear exactly what decision the president was referring to.
Mr Trump has also blamed the Obama administration and state governors for shortages of protective equipment for healthcare workers across the country.
Earlier this month he said he had “inherited a broken system.” He added: “They also gave us empty cupboards. The cupboard was bare … So we took over a stockpile with a cupboard that was bare.”
In fact, Mr Obama’s efforts to build up the stockpile and prepare for the next outbreak were stymied by a Republican-controlled House of Representatives that was heavily influenced by Tea Party-affiliated politicians elected on promises of cutting back government spending.
Speaking in 2014, Mr Obama argued it was necessary to set up a “public health infrastructure that we need to deal with potential outbreaks in the future.”
He said: “There may and likely will come a time in which we have both an airborne disease that is deadly, and in order for us to deal with that effectively we have to put in place an infrastructure, not just here at home but globally, that allows us to see it quickly, isolate it quickly, respond to it quickly, so that if and when a new strain of flu like the Spanish flu crops up five years from now or a decade from now, we’ve made the investment and we’re further along to be able to catch it.”
At the time, the former president was asking for hundreds of millions of dollars in funding to prepare the US for future pandemics, but the request was rejected by Republican politicians.
The funding was a small part of an emergency request for $6.18bn (£3.98bn) to deal with the Ebola epidemic in 2014. As part of that package, hundreds of millions were to be set aside to help the country prepare for the next outbreak by procuring personal protective equipment for the country’s strategic national stockpile and training medical staff.
Most of that money was eventually secured, but funding for the future preparedness programmes was reduced. According to ProPublica, only $165m (£132m) went to the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention’s public health emergency preparedness programmes, which included the stockpile.
Stephen Miller addresses reporters in 2019. (photo: Zach Gibson/Getty)
Stephen Miller Is Exploiting the Coronavirus Crisis for His Immigration Crackdown
Eric Lutz, Vanity Fair
Lutz writes: "Trump's senior adviser is reportedly pushing to leave immigrant children in the custody of border patrol for an extended period."
READ MORE
Eric Lutz, Vanity Fair
Lutz writes: "Trump's senior adviser is reportedly pushing to leave immigrant children in the custody of border patrol for an extended period."
READ MORE
Ilhan Omar in Nashua, New Hampshire, on 13 December 2019. (photo: Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters)
Ilhan Omar Unveils Bill to Cancel Rent and Mortgage Payments Amid Pandemic
Sophie Kasakove, Guardian UK
Kasakove writes: "The Minnesota congresswoman Ilhan Omar has unveiled a bill that would cancel rent and mortgage payments for millions of Americans struggling amid the coronavirus pandemic."
READ MORE
Sophie Kasakove, Guardian UK
Kasakove writes: "The Minnesota congresswoman Ilhan Omar has unveiled a bill that would cancel rent and mortgage payments for millions of Americans struggling amid the coronavirus pandemic."
READ MORE
A Central American migrant washes the hands of a child at an encampment in Matamoros, Mexico, on March 20, 2020. (photo: Daniel Becerril/Reuters)
US and Mexico Are Blocking Kids From Asking for Asylum Because of Coronavirus
Emily Green, The Intercept
Green writes: "As the coronavirus crisis sweeps across the U.S., asylum-seekers stuck in Mexico have grown increasingly desperate, terrified for themselves and for the children they have in tow."
READ MORE
Emily Green, The Intercept
Green writes: "As the coronavirus crisis sweeps across the U.S., asylum-seekers stuck in Mexico have grown increasingly desperate, terrified for themselves and for the children they have in tow."
READ MORE
The John E. Amos coal-fired power plant in Winfield, West Virginia, was retrofitted to comply with a rule on mercury enacted under President Barack Obama. (photo: Stacy Kranitz/The Washington Post)
EPA Overhauls Mercury Pollution Rule, Despite Opposition From Industry and Activists Alike
Brady Dennis and Juliet Eilperin, The Washington Post
Excerpt: "The Environmental Protection Agency changed the way the federal government calculates the costs and benefits of dangerous air pollutants, a shift that could restrict the ability of regulators to control toxins in the future."
Brady Dennis and Juliet Eilperin, The Washington Post
Excerpt: "The Environmental Protection Agency changed the way the federal government calculates the costs and benefits of dangerous air pollutants, a shift that could restrict the ability of regulators to control toxins in the future."
EXCERPTS:
In its controversial decision, the EPA declared that it is not “appropriate and necessary” for the government to limit mercury and other harmful pollutants from power plants, even though every utility in America has complied with standards put in place in 2011 under President Barack Obama.
While the agency technically plans to keep existing restrictions on mercury, the changes mean the government would not be able to count collateral benefits — such as reducing soot and smog — when it sets limits on toxic air pollutants.
Some coal executives lobbied for the rollback, calling the Obama-era rule one of the worst examples of what President Trump has labeled the “war on coal.”
But most utilities urged the EPA to leave intact a rule they once opposed. Some share the concerns of environmental advocates, who worry that the change could lead to a legal challenge, prompting some power plants to turn off their pollution controls to save money and ultimately sicken more Americans.
“It’s a disgraceful decision coming on the heels of other poor decisions on air quality at a time we can least afford it,” former EPA administrator Carol M. Browner, now chair of the board of the League of Conservation Voters, said in a statement.
Sen. Thomas R. Carper (Del.), the top Democrat on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said the move will worsen air quality and harm some of the country’s most vulnerable communities.
The rule in question, known as the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), targets a powerful neurotoxin that can affect the IQ and motor skills of children, even in utero. Between 2006, when states began to curb mercury from coal plants, and 2016, when the Obama-era rule took full effect, emissions have declined 85 percent.
The Obama administration initially projected that the industry would spend between up to $9.6 billion each year to comply with the regulation, while society as a whole would save between $37 billion and $90 billion from the prevention of thousands of premature deaths and lost work days.
Those estimates included not just lower mercury emissions but corresponding benefits from less soot and other smog-forming pollutants that contribute to asthma and other respiratory problems. Utilities ultimately paid far less to comply, spending about $18 billion between 2012 and 2018, or $3 billion annually.
The 2011 requirements did more to hasten the closure of coal-fired power plants than any other regulation adopted under Obama. Facing the first-ever limits on these pollutants, companies across the country chose to switch to natural gas or renewable energy rather than invest in costly new pollution controls.
Utilities initially fought the rule in court, along with coal producers and Republican attorneys general. The Supreme Court ruled in 2015 that the EPA had failed to adequately justify the economic impact of the standards. The following year, the Obama administration published an analysis saying the combined benefits of curbing mercury and other pollutants, such as soot, outweighed the costs even when taking industry expenditures into account.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.