Monthly Archives: May 2020

President Donald Trump with Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds during a campaign rally in Des Moines, Iowa. (Tom Brenner / Getty Images)

EDITORS NOTE: The Nation believes that helping readers stay informed about the impact of the coronavirus crisis is a form of public service. For that reason, this article, and all of our coronavirus coverage, is now free. Please subscribe to support our writers and staff, and stay healthy.

Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!

Winterset, IowaThis weekend, Iowa began reopening 77 of its 99 counties, despite having some of the fastest-growing outbreaks of Covid-19 in the United States. According to The New York Times, the Sioux City metro area has the highest number of new confirmed cases per 1,000 residents in the country, largely due to the areas meatpacking plants. Sioux City is in Woodbury County, which has 1,323 of Iowas 10,404 confirmed cases of Covid-19 as of this writing and wasnt allowed to begin reopening.Ad Policy

Next door, however, is Ida County: a quieter place with about 7 percent of Woodbury Countys population and no confirmed cases of Covid-19. In fact, none of the five counties bordering Woodbury County have even 100 confirmed cases, but Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds has just provided incentive for the people of Woodbury County, and other counties with high infection rates, to travel to these more rural counties, by allowing the opening of their restaurants, fitness centers, malls, and other establishments as long as they operate at half capacity and follow some social distancing guidelines. And with Iowas geography, that situation isnt uncommon. Polk County is home to another of the countrys fastest-growing outbreaks, with 1,875 confirmed cases, and it was also forced to remain closed. But its not hard to imagine some of its residents heading south to Warren County or north to Story County, both of which were allowed to open, with only 67 cases between them. Given the frequency of asymptomatic cases, its also not hard to imagine some of those visitors accidentally bringing the virus with them.

At her daily coronavirus press briefing on Monday, Reynolds claimed that her response to the pandemic isnt politicalthough evidence would suggest it isnt rooted in science, either. Reynolds ignored a report from the University of Iowa College of Public Health warning that Iowa hasnt yet hit its peak and that ending mitigation efforts too soon would likely result in a second wave of cases. National models also projected an increase in deaths as states begin reopening. Early in April, the Iowa Board of Medicine and Iowa Medical Society both sent letters to Reynolds asking her to issue a shelter-in-place order. Instead, Reynolds relied on a rubric dividing the state into six regions and scoring each region on a 12-point scale. Scores ranged from zero to three in four categories: percentage of population older than 65, percentage of identified cases requiring hospitalization, infection rate per 100,000 population in the past 14 days, and the number of outbreaks at long-term-care facilities. A region would have to score a 10 or higher for a stay-at-home order to be implemented.

Reynolds has been a perfect Trumpian model throughout the pandemic, never issuing a stay-at-home order, temporarily banning abortions by declaring them nonessential surgeries, and even parroting Trumps line that sunlight could be what we need right now. And as she follows Trumps calls to begin reopening the country, Iowa Workforce Development is using the move as a way to strip people of their unemployment benefitseven as Republicans at the federal level seek protections for the employers who will force these people to go back to work. On Monday, the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation updated its prediction of how many Iowans will die of Covid-19 by August 4, increasing the total by about 1,000. But testing is still limited in the state, and its unclear if Iowans will ever know the true impact of Reynoldss decision. On a tip from Cedar Rapids native Ashton Kutcher, she signed a $26 million contract with a Utah-based health software company whose tests, according to new reporting by The Salt Lake Tribune, show a positive result for Covid-19 less than half as often as those of other companies.

Republicans have posited a false dichotomy during the pandemic: Save lives or save the economy. It shouldnt have to be said, but mass death is bad for economies. In a survey of economists from the Initiative on Global Markets, the vast majority agreed: Abandoning severe lockdowns at a time when the likelihood of a resurgence in infections remains high will lead to greater total economic damage than sustaining the lockdowns to eliminate the resurgence risk. Sending people in the most financially precarious situations back to work in unsafe conditions isnt just cruel and dangerous. It also threatens to erase any gains workers have made toward a functioning social safety net over the past two months. But when workers realize how much really depends on their labor, they become more powerful. They can make demands, and theyve started to do so. The choice isnt between public health and the economy; its between keeping workers safe and keeping capitalists rich, and Reynolds and Trump, among other GOP leaders, have made it very clear which side theyre on.

Thankfully, activists in Iowa arent staying silent. Iowa Student Action recently won a tuition freeze worth $6.5 million for Iowa students, and Iowa State student Alexa Rodriguez reflected on the victory with a perspective that can be applied to so many victories workers and students have won in the past month: These institutions have always had the power to protect the working class, students, and people of color who have been harmed at disproportionately high rates not only by the pandemic but by the structure of our education, health care, and economic systems as well. They have actively chosen not to help. Reynolds and the GOP are trying to make people feel powerless so they can continue exploiting them, but victories like Iowa Student Actions prove it doesnt have to be that way.

Read the original:

Iowas Republican Governor Sacrifices Citizens to Trump - The Nation

DECATUR, Ill. (WAND) - Instead of Gov. JB Pritzker's five-phase-plan, "Restore Illinois", Reps. Blaine Wilhour and Darren Bailey developed their own idea.

It's called the "Back to Business" plan, and it's cut down to three phases.

Under Pritzker's phase three, barbershops, salons and retail stores would be back in business. At last check, Illinois is under the governor's second phase, 'flattening'.

Wilhour told WAND News the lawmakers' goal is to open the central Illinois region faster and get people back to work.

Under the "Back to Business" plan. churches, parks and day cares would be open under phase one. It would start May 10, but all of what's allowed wouldn't work at 100% capacity.

"Our plan can go into effect basically immediately," Wilhour said.

In phase two, bars, theaters, summer camps and gaming facilities would be open. Toward the beginning of June, every business and public place would be open at 75% capacity or more, thus reaching phase three. This would be phase four in the governor's plan.

"We designed it to set a bar for these businesses," Wilhour said. "If the business can obtain that bar, they should be allowed to work."

Bailey told WAND News the three-phase-plan was reviewed by multiple Illinois health department directors. He said the plan will be sent the Illinois Department of Public Health for approval.

It should be known wearing masks and being socially distant would still be recommended through all three phases. Compared to Pritkzer's plan, this gives Illinoisans more freedom in the later phases. Bailey said people who are vulnerable to COVID-19 would be protected.

However, their three-phase-plan has not been approved. Illinois is still under the rules of Pritzker.

Follow this link:

Republican lawmakers come up with their own version of 'Restore Illinois' - WAND

(NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP via Getty Images)

After lying low for several election cycles, influential Republican super PAC American Crossroads is jumping into the 2020 presidential election to back President Donald Trump.

American Crossroads recently reported spending nearly $367,000 to support Trump in a 13-state text messaging campaign. The group placed its biggest bet of more than $89,000 in Florida, where presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden is polling slightly ahead of Trump.

The super PACs early investment indicates that Trumps reelection bid may find support from outside groups that didnt back his 2016 run. American Crossroads spent $91 million to support Mitt Romney and oppose President Barack Obama in 2012. But it spent just $135,000 to oppose Hillary Clinton in 2016 and spent nothing to support Trump.

Masterminded by former White House strategist Karl Rove, American Crossroads shares its staff and offices with One Nation, a dark money nonprofit that supports Senate Republicans. One Nation spent more than $2.4 million on digital ads since June 2018 when Google and Facebook started disclosing online advertising data, according to OpenSecrets analysis of digital ad data.

Senate Leadership Fund, the super PAC affiliated with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), is also part of the hub of conservative groups. Trump headlined a big-dollar fundraiser for the Senate Leadership Fund in November 2019. The super PAC has $52 million in the bank as party-tied groups prepare for expensive congressional election battles in November.

A lot has happened between American Crossroads declining to support Trump in the 2016 presidential race and the super PAC throwing its support behind him in the 2020 election. American Crossroads support of Trumps reelection comes three years after Trumps White House hiring of Mike Dubke, the co-founder of Crossroads Media LLC and Black Rock Group, American Crossroads and Senate Leadership Funds longtime vendors. Dubke served as Trumps communications director for 103 days in 2017 before making a full spin in the revolving door and returning to Black Rock, which continues to work for both super PACs in the 2020 election.

America First Action is the only super PAC that has Trumps stamp of approval to support his reelection campaign. The Trump campaign has disavowed many other super PACs that raise and spend political cash in his name. Political campaigns and outside groups are supposed to be independent of one another, but they often exploit loopholes to legally coordinate their efforts.

For its recent text messaging blitz, American Crossroads used Advantage Direct Communications, a firm specializing in voter contact and data services. The firms operation, which also includes Advantage Inc., had been a longtime vendor of the Republican National Committee and state Republican Party committees.

Trumps official super PAC, America First Action, also paid Advantage for polling expenses in 2018. The RNC paid Advantage for party-coordinated expenses promoting Trump in 2016 and another $639,000 for data services, phone services and voter registration during the 2020 election cycle. Trumps 2016 campaign paid Advantage Inc. for telemarketing services but neither the campaign nor its joint fundraising committees have reported any transactions with Advantage during the 2020 election cycle.

Voters who apply to use Advantages app through some state Republican party websites are informed that a Trump Victory Team Member will be in touch about the application.

Advantages app is used to facilitate so-called targeted multi-touch voter journeys by collecting data while targeting potential voters with calls, texts, emails and digital ads helping them to update their voter registration then urging them to support a specific candidate.

As traditional door-knocking efforts grind to a halt in light of COVID-19 lockdowns, Advantage revamped its menu of options for voter contact services tailored to capitalize on the coronavirus pandemic. A memo disseminated by Advantage says its team is testing best practices for peer-to-peer texts and phone banking to ensure there is no pandemic backlash, concluding that aggressive political messages and coronavirus themes are working.

American Crossroads did not make independent expenditures in the 2018 midterm cycle, but it continued to pay staff that also work for the Senate Leadership Fund and One Nation. The super PAC has only taken in a handful of contributions this cycle totaling $186,000 and reported having roughly $527,000 in the bank through March.

Support Accountability Journalism

At OpenSecrets.org we offer in-depth, money-in-politics stories in the public interest. Whether youre reading about 2020 presidential fundraising, conflicts of interest or dark money influence, we produce this content with a small, but dedicated team. Every donation we receive from users like you goes directly into promoting high-quality data analysis and investigative journalism that you can trust.Please support our work and keep this resource free. Thank you.

See the article here:

Influential Republican super PAC makes its return to boost Trump - Center for Responsive Politics

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis and more, subscribe to Mother Jones' newsletters.

How the hell did we get here? Thats what Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) wants to know. The congressman and colleagues have introducedlegislation to set up a commission to investigate and identify how the Trump administration failed in its response to the coronavirus. (Based on our timeline of the first 100 days of Trumps response, theyll have plenty to look into.)

Schiff recently joinedMother JonesEditor-in-Chief and the Commonwealth Club to talk hiring Twitter trolls into top intelligence positions, and chat about his alternative to universal basic income. Real time oversight is vitally important, he says. Even if its hard to do meaningful oversight when youre dealing with bodies that dont particularly want to share the answers. But Schiff believes his experience from the impeachment trial has prepared him for it.

You can watch the full interview here, or read an edited transcript below.

Congressmen, at the end of the impeachment trial, you posed a rhetorical question to the Senate: You may be wondering how much damage the president can do over the next few months before the election. Then you said, A lot, a lot of damage. What were you imagining then and how does that square with whats happening now?

I dont think anyone anticipated that we would very soon lose more lives than we did during the Vietnam War, and its due to the incompetence and maladministration of this president. We grossly underestimated the damage that he could do.

The impeachment proceedings and then-trial centered around the accusation that Trump essentially extorted the president of Ukraine and then covered it up. How is that mentality playing out here?

Those that have been willing to say nice things about him have seen the Trump campaign take those statements and put them into campaign ads. We cant have any confidence that this president or his administration are making those decisions on the basis of science, on the basis of need, on the basis of whats in the best interest of the American people, but as we said during the trial, the one thing you can always count on Donald Trump for is, he will do whats right for Donald Trump, not whats right for the country.

You said its hard to tell if something is of corrupt intent or just incompetence. How are you untangling that right now?

This has been the story of the Trump presidency. You can say, Thats really not in the presidents interest to do politically, but he does it nonetheless because he thinks its good for him personally. He thinks its good for him politicallyits part of the myopia of this extraordinary narcissism we see.

Its certainly not in the national interest for Donald Trump to be out there postulating that maybe people should inject bleach as a way of killing the virus or pushing out untested treatments. The entire prism is not whats best for the country with this president, [its] whats best for him.

Is that in part because his aides and children are unable, or unwilling, to tell him the truth? Or are they living in a bubble of their own creation as well?

One of the points we made during the trial is that youre not going to change the presidents character. He is who he is. In terms of his family, Jared Kushner was asked about this grim milestone we are crossing where more people are dying of the virus and have died of the virus than died during Vietnam, and his answer was, Weve made really good decisions. Were doing a really good job. [That] was equally revealing in terms of this whole familys blind spot.

The most that we can do in Congress is try to mitigate and limit the damage, do vigorous oversight, and insist on accountability. We need to do that in real time.

Do you feel confident that you are getting forthright briefings from the intelligence community?

Well, it grieves me to say that the answer is no, that there has been a tremendous politicization of the intelligence community under Trump.

It has really reached its pinnacle with the appointment of Rick Grenell as the top intel official in the country, someone who has virtually no intelligence experiencehe was essentially a Twitter troll. He did what you do to get a high appointment in the Trump administration: You go on Fox, on social media, and make the most incendiary attacks on the presidents opponents and say the most exaggerated claims on behalf of the president.

I think it came as a surprise to most people that inspectors general who were supposed to be this firewall against intergovernmental corruption, or malfeasance of other sorts, could be so easily dismissed by the very people that they are reporting on. Is that something that happened before and what could Congress do to fortify those rules and laws?

The inspector generals system, which has been really integral to rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse in government and has a great success record, is a post Watergate reform. But like so many of the post Watergate reforms, theyve been obliterated by this president.

In the intelligence bill that were drafting now, we are going to have a provision that provides you cannot fire an inspector general except for good cause. Were going to also have requirements that if you do fire an inspector general, Congress needs to be informed of what they were working on when they were fired. The existing law says that when you fire an inspector general you have to give 30 days notice. Well the president did an end run around that so that they couldnt fulfill that last 30 days. Now that 30 days might have given the opportunity for the inspector general to make sure that investigations that were ongoing were not closed, swept under the rug, or made to disappear.

We are going to be putting in statute protections for the inspector generals going forward, things that we didnt think were going to be necessary, because we thought presidents would never do what this president is doingour own post Watergate reforms. Things that will be necessary when this president has gone to make sure that our democratic norms and institutions are codified, or protections are codified, so that they can never be assaulted the way that this president has.

Have you found any bipartisan support for such line of thinking thus far?

Given the slave like devotion of particular House Republicans, Kevin McCarthy doesnt cross the street without asking Donald Trump. That kind of sycophantic, slavish devotion to the president isnt going to admit of independent reforms.

What kind of accountability can Congress muster now under these circumstances? The oversight committeewhat can it do and not do in the immediate future?

There are two kinds of oversight going on in Congress that are going to be very important in real time. Real time oversight is vitally important. Theres a whole host of other issues thoughits very difficult at a distance to do meaningful oversight when youre dealing with bodies that dont particularly want to share the answers. Much of what we will need to know in the intel committee will be classified and therefore we cannot do it at a distance. We certainly dont have the secure video capability among all of our members around the country right now to be able to conduct such a hearing.

In the meantime, we are doing the kind of oversight that we can by requesting, requiring information by teleconference, by using the budget where necessary to compel answers. For example, an oversight committee looking at the problem with protective gear. They did a bipartisan briefing where administration officials acknowledged that there were shortages of protective gear and tests and that there are shortages in reagents and swabs. Its less visible to the public, which is a problem, because a very important point of the oversight is getting good information out to the country.

When you talked to my colleague David Corn during the impeachment hearings, you were shocked that it was quite obvious that when you started making your arguments to the Senate, that they hadnt watched the house hearing, and not just hadnt watched the full of them, but seemed to have it all kind of mediated through Fox. Do you feel that thats going on with this crisis?

House Republicans have become such a cult of the president that theyre not even capable of acknowledging the facts staring them in the face. We had to operate from the premise, which turned out to be all too accurate, that the senators were really not watching the hearings in the House. They were getting the topline from Fox, which was completely misleading.

Have you seen any conciliatory movement within the California delegation when it comes to the pandemic? Kevin McCarthy, Devin Nunesdo the two of them, and you, and Barbara Lee and Maxine Waters ever come to any agreement about what needs to proceed in terms of representing the state of California?

I will say its been one of the biggest disappointments Ive had of the Trump administration, and that is, I had a much higher view of my Republican colleagues of their commitment to their own ideals, of their commitment to the constitution. They dont represent the Republican party anymore. They represent a cult of personality of the president. And so, I do think when the president is gone, I have to hope that they will return to being Republican once again.

COVIDs taken every inequity in our society and magnified it and increased it. What of any old fights may have a chance of being viewed in a new way by both members of Congress and more conservative constituents?

One thing I will say about what we ought to do right nowI was struck at the approach that European countries were taking, but also Asian countries. Where the government was guaranteeing payroll for businesses, large and small.

That seemed to me much more equitable, much more efficient. You didnt need a separate program for small business and one for large industry. You didnt need to overwhelm unemployment compensation. You didnt need to have so many people unemployed. And when this virus does pass, then who have to now go and find employment because people got to retain the jobs they had, even if they couldnt perform the work right now. That kind of a payroll guarantee is the best approach.

Do you think its via payroll or is it a UBI, a universal basic income, kind of start it up now, lets become Alaska?

Those are two good models for us to explore. Ive been particularly attracted to the payroll model because it has the effect of preserving employment. Theyre not also mutually exclusive. The stimulus checks are a form of universal basic income if you made them monthly. But I particularly think that the payroll guarantee is the right approach. America has made a choice to have millions and millions of its people now going to unemployment rolls.

Do you think election protection will be a part of the next stimulus bill?

Absolutely. I think we have to insist that in the next legislation that we take up, we protect the health of the American people, we protect the health of our economy, and we protect the health of our democracy. The American people have a right not only to be able to vote, but to know where their elected officials stand on the franchise, whether they are willfully trying to obstruct peoples ability to vote in this country.

So if the Republicans are determined to disenfranchise people, it ought to be abundantly clear what theyre doing so that they can be held accountable at the polls.

More:

Adam Schiff Says Trump's Cult of the President Has Infected the Republican Party - Mother Jones

How can the Republican Party be the self-proclaimed protector of the unborn while at the same time be advocating for a return-to-work policy during the COVID-19 pandemic that risks lives already being lived?

Gross hypocrisy? Not really. What then?

For almost my entire life, the Republican Party has perpetrated a scheme as old as civilization itself: divide and conquer, or, divide and rule if you prefer the Latin version (divide et impera).

The Republican Partys Southern strategy, utilized by both the Goldwater and Nixon presidential campaigns, was based on appealing to aggrieved white Southerners. In 1980, Ronald Reagan delivered a states rights speech at a fairgrounds only a few miles from Philadelphia, Miss., a town associated with the gruesome murders of three civil rights activists in 1964.

With respect to George H.W. Bushs presidential campaign in 1988, recall the infamous Willie Horton ads, a low point for dog-whistle politics. In 2004, political observers accused George W. Bush of using coded language to imply that Supreme Court decisionsi.e., Roe v. Wadecould be reversed.

Of course, W also mired us in the Iraq War, with estimates for Iraqi deaths ranging from 110,000 to more than a million. Does anyone feel safer today?

And now, our current divider-in-chief is cheering on us-against-them armed protestswhere the them are often health care workers pleading for common sense for the common good.

President Trump stands before us like a crop of wheat ready for harvest. To Republican strategists, past and present, representing an immoral minority, I say, Reap what youve sown.

The rest is here:

Letter: Not all lives matter to the Republican Party | INFORUM - INFORUM

A freeze watch is in place Friday evening for Marshalltown and much of Eastern Iowa.

The watch is coming along with below freezing temperatures. The low temperature Friday night is predicted to be 30 degrees, according to the National Weather Service.

Its sort of late in the season for a freeze, said Justin Glison, state climatologist. Marshalltown has actually had a 32 degree or less reading out to May 29 in 1947.

The last time Marshalltown had a recorded temperature on or below 29 degrees was in 1911.

Its not normal behavior, but its not extreme, Glison said.

The news is worse the further east with possible snow storms predicted in the Northeastern United States and New England.

Were just seeing a dip in the jet stream further south than normal, Glison said. Its allowing colder air to come to us.

The freezing temperatures will be prefaced by heavy rainfall on Thursday.

Temperatures will rise during the 50 and 60 degree days, albeit with rain and thunderstorms predicted this weekend, but the night temperatures will have a cold bite to them.

Sensitive plants could be affected by a potential freeze and should be covered.

Were not really concerned with stuff thats been planted already, Glison said. We might get some impacts on alfalfa that have already emerged and are growing.

Central Iowa will be around the freezing mark, depending on cloud cover.

Cloud cover and wind will keep the temperature from going below freezing, Glison said. If were under a clear sky we could get whats called radiational cooling and get cooler temperatures.

Usually when theres colder temperatures this late in the year its followed by warm weather, he said.

You always see a rebound, Glison said. Once we get through it well get a warm up.

Contact Thomas Nelson at tnelson@timesrepublican.com

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

View post:

Abnormally cold weather coming | News, Sports, Jobs - Marshalltown Times Republican

WASHINGTON Breaking with the leader of his own party, Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., called Thursday for tens of millions of diagnostic coronavirus tests to be administered to Americans before the country can begin to return to normal.

Those comments came a day after President Trump downplayed diagnostic testing as part of its post-pandemic reopening. By doing all of this testing, we make ourselves look bad, Trump said on Wednesday.

It was not clear if Alexander would want those millions of tests to be deployed daily or weekly, though the latter seemed to be the case.Either would be a drastic improvement over the current state of affairs. The U.S. currently administers about 200,000 tests per day, an insignificant number in a nation of 328 million.

But it is impossible to administer tests that do not exist. Those tens of millions of tests he deemed necessary, Alexander acknowledged, amount to many more than our current technologies can produce.

A former governor of Tennessee, Alexander appeared to break with Republican governors in Texas, Florida and Georgia who have begun to open up their states without having tested statistically significant portions of their populations.

All the roads back to work, and back to school, lead through testing, Alexander, the Senate Health Committee chairman, said during a hearing of the committee that was intended to promote the development of new testing technologies.

So far, 7,759,771 tests for the coronavirus have been conducted across the United States, according to the COVID Tracking Project, a public data clearinghouse. But because multiple tests are administered to those infected with the virus, the number of people who have been tested is far lower than that.

About 75,000 Americans have died from complications related to COVID-19, the lung disease caused by the coronavirus.

Although a reliable conservative, Alexander has never been a close ally of the president, and his planned retirement at years end leaves him free to speak without fearing the consequences of a presidential tweet.

Story continues

We will need millions more tests than we are producing today, Alexander asserted at one point. Members of his staff did not respond to a request for details, but the ambitious proposal is not entirely unprecedented. A recent Harvard study said that to reopen safely, the United States needs to test 20 million people per day. That would be 14 times greater than what Alexander appeared to be advocating, which in itself would be a major increase over current testing capacity.

His remarks pushing for a significant increase in the nations testing capacity came during a hearing called Shark Tank: New Tests for COVID-19. The reference is to Shark Tank, a popular television program in which entrepreneurs pitch their ideas to a panel of skeptical celebrity investors.

A similar shark tank project is now underway in the federal government for coronavirus testing. Called the Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics initiative, or RADx, it invites private companies to submit their own ideas for new coronavirus tests. Dr. Francis Collins, who directs the National Institutes of Health, testified before Alexanders panel that the initial call for submissions last month resulted in 1,087 proposals filed with the NIH.

Those companies seek to receive some of the $1.5 billion allocated for this project from federal coronavirus relief funds. The idea was initially proposed by Alexander and Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo. If theres a bold idea out there that will work, we need to make sure the funding is available to get it approved and in the hands of health-care providers quickly, they wrote.

Speaking on Thursday, Alexander compared the testing initiative to the Manhattan Project, which resulted in the development of the atomic bomb during World War II. One of the key facilities in that effort was based in Alexanders home state, at Oak Ridge, Tenn. (The Manhattan Project amounted to an investment of what would today be more than $20 billion.)

Alexander called RADx one of the most ambitious scientific enterprises in recent memory. It is being managed by NIH and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, whose director, Dr. Rick Bright, was recently demoted for refusing to endorse a dubious coronavirus treatment that had been touted by Trump and some of his supporters in the conservative media.

Brights replacement, Dr. Gary Disbrow, was present at Thursdays hearing, but refused to answer questions related to Brights dismissal posed by Sen. Patty Murray of Washington state and Christopher Murphy of Connecticut, both of whom are Democrats.

Disbrow did want to talk about the kinds of tests RADx might yield, including ones that can detect the virus in saliva, thus obviating the need for invasive nasal swabs. Trump underwent such a test in March and has complained about the procedure. Up your nose and then we hang a right, and it goes down here, the president said of that procedure. And then well wiggle it around here, under your eye.

Disbrow and Collins envisioned quick, easy-to-administer tests, with results available on smartphones. It was not clear whether such coronavirus tests had already been proposed through the RADx shark tank process.

Trumps skepticism about testing is shared by some members of the White House coronavirus task force, including the very official placed in charge of the testing issue. There is absolutely no way on earth, on this planet or any other planet, that we can do 20 million tests a day, or even 5 million tests a day, that official, Rear Adm. Brett Giroir, said late last month.

That was one of many confusing and contradictory assertions made by administration officials since the pandemic arrived in the United States about four months ago. Though they have routinely promised to drastically increase the number of people tested, those promises have been frustrated by logistical challenges the White House has been incapable of resolving.

Murphy, a progressive, has long criticized the Trump administration for its dilatory coronavirus response. And though he seemed to welcome the RADx initiative, he was disturbed by its timing. If we had a president who truly prioritized testing, this effort would have been launched the minute that we heard about the prospect for coronavirus coming to the United States, Murphy said.

Trump allegedly received that first warning on Jan. 3.

Cover thumbnail photo: Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

_____

Click here for the latest coronavirus news and updates. According to experts, people over 60 and those who are immunocompromised continue to be the most at risk. If you have questions, please refer to the CDCs and WHOs resource guides.

Read more:

Follow this link:

Republican breaks with Trump, calls for 'tens of millions' of coronavirus tests - Yahoo Parenting