PodcastsVicious Cycle – Episode 067November 30, 2020Podcasts / Words of JenIn this episode, I read to you a short poem I wrote in 2017 on a Tumblr blog that no longer exists. It is about what it is like to suffer from pollen allergies while trying to get some work done. I read “Vicious Cycle” on episode 067 of Words of Jen. #NaPodPoMo 2020 If you enjoyed this episode please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/woj067.mp3Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: RSS... We are in the Wrong Timeline – Episode 066November 27, 2020Podcasts / Words of JenIn this episode, I read to you a poem I wrote in 2017 on a Tumblr blog that no longer exists. It unexpectedly fits right into today’s world. I read “We are in the Wrong Timeline” on episode 066 of Words of Jen. #NaPodPoMo 2020 If you enjoyed this episode please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/woj066.mp3Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: RSS... Ice Cream Delivery – Episode 065November 22, 2020Podcasts / Words of JenIn this episode, I read a piece of writing that was originally posted on social media. It is a true story about what happens when an order of ice cream is delivered to the wrong house during the COVID-19 pandemic. I read “Ice Cream Delivery” on episode 065 of Words of Jen. #NaPodPoMo 2020 If you enjoyed this episode please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/woj065.mp3Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: RSS... The Can of Tuna Rolled Away – Episode 064November 19, 2020Podcasts / Words of JenIn this episode, I read a piece of writing that was originally posted on a website that no longer exists. The story presents a problem. How were we going to get the can of tuna out from behind the stove? I read “The Can of Tuna Rolled Away” on episode 064 of Words of Jen. #NaPodPoMo 2020 If you enjoyed this episode please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/woj064.mp3Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: RSS... How a Washer and Dryer Changed Our Lives – Episode 063November 15, 2020Podcasts / Words of JenIn this episode, I read a piece of my writing that was written in 2013. It is about some of the ways our lives changed after we got our own washing machine and dryer. I read “How a Washer and Dryer Changed our Lives” in episode 063 of Words of Jen. #NaPodPoMo 2020 If you enjoyed this episode please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/woj063.mp3Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: RSS... How a Washer and Dryer Changed Our LivesNovember 15, 2020Podcasts / Words of JenI wrote this piece on February 2, 2013, on a blog that no longer exists. Shawn and I received a brand new washer and dryer as a gift from his mother. It surprised me how much having access to a washer and dryer changed our lives. I read “How a Washer and Dryer Changed Our Lives” in episode 063 of my Words of Jen podcast. Shawn’s mom was kind enough to buy us a brand new washer and dryer for Christmas. By “new”, I mean “purchased right from the store”. I don’t mean “replacements for our old ones” because there were no “old ones” to replace. This is the first time that Shawn and I have owned a washing machine and a dryer in our lives. Owning a washer and dryer changed our lives in ways that we did not anticipate. * No more weekly trips to the bank to purchase the roll of quarters we used to need to spend on the machines in the mobile home park “laundry hut”. Each roll cost $10.00. Obviously, this required us to have $10.00 on hand each time we needed to do laundry. That probably sounds easier than it actually was (especially since freelance writing can come with an erratic pay schedule at times). * Shawn no longer has to lug the laundry down to the “laundry hut”, and then return to put it into the dryer, and then return again to lug it all back home. * I no longer have to worry about what strange people he might encounter during these trips, or that a car will come around the corner and run him over. This was more of a worry at night, as Shawn tends to wear all black fairly often and drivers may not see him. * No more having to pick and choose which items get washed this week and which could wait until next week, (when we would be able to get more quarters). Now, everything that requires washing gets washed as needed. * No more being frustrated when the washing machines, or dryers, in the “laundry hut” would eat the quarters that Shawn fed them, and then refuse to do their jobs. No more having to decide if it is better to file a claim with the company that supplies the machines, or to simply give up on ever getting back those stolen quarters. * No more unhappy surprises when a trip to the “laundry hut” revealed that the company that owned the machines had raised the rates since the last time we tried to do laundry. * No more wondering just how expensive one load of laundry would cost next month, next year, or for the years that followed. No more worries that there would come a day when the company that supplied the machines would end their contract with the mobile home park and remove them (leaving us to have to use a laundromat that was farther away from home). * Zero chance of having items from our laundry stolen as they were washing or drying. We never had something go missing (except for the occasional sock). However, as we live near a homeless shelter, there was always the potential for someone to decide to help themselves to our clothing. No one is going to break in to steal a load of laundry from our new washer and dryer. * Things that take a long time to dry can go for another cycle through our dryer – no extra quarters required. Previous to this, we had been resorting to hanging up all the clothes that did not dry all the way on hangers across the bar for the shower curtain (sometimes in both bathrooms). * No more need to drape the bath mats over the railing on the back porch, in the hopes that they will finish drying. Also, no more need to be on the lookout for the various spiders and other insects that decided to hitch a ride inside on the bath mats. * I no longer have to worry that the person who used the washing machine before we did used a laundry soap that I am severely allergic to. This was always a gamble. I don’t have to worry about having freshly washed clothing cause me to break out in hives anymore. We have complete control over exactly what kind of laundry soap goes into our washing machine. We also can be certain that no floral scented dryer sheets are used in our dryer. * There is something about having our very own washing machine and dryer that makes the place we live in feel more like a home and less like a college dorm. I’m not sure how to explain that any better, other than to say it now feels like we are now living like grown-ups are supposed to. * The sounds that the washing machine and dryer make are quite soothing (once I got used to how they were supposed to sound). Unexpectedly, the sounds create a very calm, homelike, environment. It is nice to listen to while I am working on a batch of writing assignments. How a Washer and Dryer Changed Our Lives is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... That Demon Named Pain – Episode 062November 13, 2020Podcasts / Words of JenIn this episode, I read to you a poem I wrote in 2018. (It was temporarily posted on Medium.) The poem is about chronic pain caused by chronic illness. I recorded this on a high pain day because it seemed appropriate. I read “That Demon Named Pain” on episode 062 of Words of Jen. #NaPodPoMo 2020 If you enjoyed this episode please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/woj062.mp3Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: RSS... Mind Eraser – Episode 061November 11, 2020Podcasts / Words of JenMy dentist insisted that I take “sedation medication” before my root canal. I was told it would make me feel relaxed. I didn’t know it was a mind eraser. I read “Mind Eraser” on episode 061 of Words of Jen. #NaPodPoMo 2020 If you enjoyed this episode please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/woj061.mp3Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: RSS... NaPodPoMo 2020November 9, 2020PodcastsSound wave from a podcast I recorded on Garageband in 2013 I am participating in NaPodPoMo 2020. It stands for “National Podcast Post Month” – but it has included international podcasters as well. The goal is to post a total of 30 podcasts during November. Here is a list of the podcast episodes I released during NaPodPoMo 2020: ONE: Words of Jen episode 057 – When the Piggy Bank is Empty TWO: Diablo Video: Season 21: To Level 70! THREE: Words of Jen episode 058 – Dreaming of Buffets FOUR: Diablo Video: Season 21: Master Nephalem Rift FIVE: Words of Jen episode 059 – The Outrage Machine SIX: Diablo Video: Season 21: Queen Araneae SEVEN: Words of Jen episode 060 – Spider is Recalculating EIGHT: Shattered Soulstone episode 282 – Shades of the Nephalem NINE: Diablo Video: Season 21: Lunatics and Bloodmaw TEN: Diablo Video: Season 21: More Paragon ELEVEN: Words of Jen episode 061 – Mind Eraser TWELVE: Diablo Video: Season 21: Torment I Nephalem Rift THIRTEEN: Words of Jen episode 062 – That Demon Named Pain FOURTEEN: Diablo Video: Season 21: Running Greater Rifts Expert FIFTEEN: Words of Jen episode 063 – How a Washer and Dryer Changed Our Lives SIXTEEN: Diablo Video: Season 21: Greater Rifts and Revelations SEVENTEEN: Diablo Video: Season 21: Torment II EIGHTEEN: Words of Jen episode 064 – The Can of Tuna Rolled Away NINETEEN: Shattered Soulstone episode 283 – Ready for Season 22! TWENTY: Diablo Video: Season 21: Cow Level TWENTY-ONE: Words of Jen episode 065 – Ice Cream Delivery TWENTY-TWO: Diablo Video: Season 22: Barbarian Challenge Rift TWENTY-THREE: Diablo Video: Season 22: Nephalem Rift and Leveling Crafters TWENTY-FOUR: Diablo Video: Season 22: Cydaea and The Skeleton King TWENTY-FIVE: Words of Jen episode 066 – We are in the Wrong Timeline TWENTY-SIX: Diablo Video: Season 22: Adria and Vidian TWENTY-SEVEN: Shattered Soulstone episode 284 – MaxRoll TWENTY-EIGHT: Words of Jen episode 067 – Vicious Cycle TWENTY-NINE: Diablo Video: Season 22: Housekeeping THIRTY: Diablo Video: Season 22: Nephalem Rift on Hard Difficulty If you enjoyed these episodes, please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Spider is Recalculating – Episode 060November 8, 2020Podcasts / Words of JenIn this episode, I read a short story that I wrote in 2018 (and posted on Mastodon). It is a true story of what happened when a large and incredibly dumb spider decided to come in for a visit. I read “Spider is Recalculating” on Episode 060 of Words of Jen. #NaPodPoMo 2020 If you enjoyed this episode please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/woj060.mp3Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: RSS... DiabloSeason 22: Caldeum’s Most WantedFebruary 18, 2021Diablo III / Diablo VideosIn this video, my Softcore Barbarian started out at Level 47. She ran through a set of Act II Bounties and ended up at Level 49. Objective completed in this video: Caldeum’s Most Wanted: Obtain an Act II bounty cache. If you enjoyed this video, please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/Season_22_Caldeum_s_Most_Wanted.mp4Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: RSS... Season 22: Darkening of Tristram VideoFebruary 18, 2021Diablo III / Diablo VideosEvery year in January, I play through at least part of the Darkening of Tristram event in Diablo III. This year, just for fun, I made a video of my Barbarian going all the way through the Cathedral and leveling up a bit more. This video is a little over two hours long. I decided that is too long to release as a podcast, so it is in the form of a YouTube video. It was recorded on January 9, 2021. My softcore Barbarian started at Level 33. If you enjoyed this video, please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Season 22: Fast Act I BountiesFebruary 7, 2021Diablo III / Diablo VideosIn this video, my Softcore Barbarian started at Level 28. She was still playing on Hard difficulty. One of the Season Journey objectives requires players to complete a set of Act I Bounties. This is probably the fastest I’ve gotten that objective completed! Objectives completed in this video: Tristram’s Most Wanted: Obtain an Act I bounty cache.Let’s Get Started: Learn 5 Blacksmith Recipes. My Barbarian ended the video at Level 33. If you enjoyed this video, please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/Season_22_Fast_Act_I_Bounties.mp4Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: RSS... Season 22: ShoppingJanuary 31, 2021Diablo III / Diablo VideosIn this video, my Softcore Barbarian worked on some objectives that required her to find things. It felt like she was going shopping. She started out at Level 26 and was still playing on Hard difficulty. The first thing she did was a Nephalem rift, in the hopes of leveling up some more. For a little while, I had two Shadow Clones. Each lasts for one minute. So, if you hit a pylon or shrine that spawns a Shadow Clone – and then hit another pylon or shrine within a minute – you temporarily get two Shadow Clones at the same time! She hit Level 28 at the end of the Nephalem Rift. Objectives Completed in this video: Friends With Benefits: Fully equip one of your followers (Chapter II)Seasonal Socketing: Socket 5 gems into your gear. (Chapter I)Penchants for Enchants: Replace a property on an item with Enchanting at the Mystic. Enchanting is very useful for replacing an unwanted primary affix on a near-perfect item. (Chapter II)Change Clothes: Transmogrify an item at the Mystic (Chapter II)Level 1 Seasonal Cubist: Extract a Legendary power using Kanai’s Cube. (Chapter III)Exquisitness: Reforge a weapon property to a socket at the Mystic. (Chapter IV) If you enjoyed this video, please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/Season_22_Shopping.mp4Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: RSS... Season 22: Four Slot Kanai’s CubeJanuary 26, 2021Diablo III / Diablo VideosIn this video, my Softcore Barbarian started at Level 22, and traveled through The Ruins of Sescheron to find Kanai’s Cube. In Season 22, Kanai’s Cube has four slots instead of three! She got to fight Aletur – The Howling Storm – in Hard difficulty. After that, she happened upon a Bounty called “Clear the Icy Pit”. It involves killing monsters and then smashing a Ceremonial Khazra Drum. Doing so causes Gold Khazra to spawn, along with some of their followers. Fun! By the end, my Barbarian completed the Kanai’s Excellent Adventure objective (Chapter II) and was at Level 26. If you enjoyed this video, please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/Season_22_Four_Slot_Kanai_s_Cube.mp4Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: RSS... Season 22: Nephalem Rift on Hard DifficultyDecember 1, 2020Diablo III / Diablo VideosIn this video, my Softcore Barbarian started out at Level 18. She ran through a Nephalem Rift on Hard difficulty, and had her first death. By the end of the video, Zena the Softcore Barbarian was at Level 22. #NaPodPoMo 2020 If you enjoyed this video, please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/Season_22_Nephalem_Rift_on_Hard_Difficulty.mp4Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: RSS... Season 22: HousekeepingNovember 30, 2020Diablo III / Diablo VideosIn this video, my Softcore Barbarian started out at Level 13. She killed Azmodon, finished leveling up the Crafters, and completed a Nephalem Rift on Hard difficulty. There are flashing lights in this video. The first thing Zena the Softcore Barbarian did was kill Azmodon. He just so happened to be a Bounty, which means killing him gives the player a chest of goodies. This was the last Bounty I needed to complete a specific objective. Next, I leveled up the Crafters from Level 10 to Level 12. That’s as high as they can get. Doing so completes a Season Journey objective – and gives the player access to pretty much everything the Crafters can make or do. After that, I raised the difficulty from Normal to Hard, and ran through a Nephalem Rift on Hard difficulty. At the end of the video, Zena hit Level 18 the instant she killed off a Nephalem Rift Guardian. Objectives completed: A New Start: Complete 5 Bounties. Open up the Waypoint Map in Adventure Mode to see what Bounties are available.Maximum Efficiency: Raise the Blacksmith, Jeweler and Mystic to 12. #NaPodPoMo 2020 If you enjoyed this video, please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/Season_22_Housekeeping.mp4Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: RSS... Season 22: Adria and VidianNovember 29, 2020Diablo III / Diablo VideosIn this video, my Softcore Barbarian started at Level 9. I decided to try something new in order to complete a specific Chapter I objective. In the previous video, I killed The Skeleton King and Cydea, so I could complete two Chapter I objectives. What I didn’t know was that each one of them just so happened to be a Bounty. There is a Chapter I objective called “A New Start”. It requires the player to complete five Bounties. It doesn’t matter which Bounties they are. Two were already done. Just for fun, I decided to complete two more of the Bounties finding and killing two more bosses that happened to be a Bounty. I selected Adria and Vidian. Zena the Softcore Barbrian still needs to complete one more Bounty to finish that objective. She ended this video at Level 13. #NaPodPoMo 2020 If you enjoyed this video, please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/Season_22_Adria_and_Vidian.mp4Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: RSS... Season 22: Cydaea and The Skeleton KingNovember 26, 2020Diablo III / Diablo VideosIn this video, my Softcore Barbarian started out at Level 5, just a tiny bit away from hitting Level 6. She killed Cydea and The Skeleton King. She hit Level 6 while fighting her way to The Skeleton King. One skeleton was all it took! She hit Level 7 immediately killing The Skeleton King. It turned out that The Skeleton King just so happened to be a Bounty. Four more to go and I’ll have completed another Season Journey objective. To my surprise, the two “kill the bosses” objectives were not in the same Act. The Skeleton King was Act I. Cydaea was Act III. Maybe this has happened before and I was oblivious to it. But, I think it is a new thing. On my way to fight Cydaea, I found a Blood Thief Goblin. Of course, I chased it around. Eventually, I managed to kill it. My Barbarian hit Level 8 at the same time I killed the Blood Thief Goblin. I couldn’t pick up all of the Blood Shards, so I went back into town and gambled some with Kadala. In doing so, I completed another Season Journey objective. Then, I returned to pick up the rest of the Blood Shards. My Barbarian hit Level 9 the same second that she killed Cydaea. It also turned out to be a Bounty, which means I have now completed 2 of the 5 Bounties required for an objective. Objectives Completed: Fly to New Tristram: (Chapter I) Kill the Skeleton King.Hey There Kadala: (Chapter III)Calling All Heroes: (Chapter I) Kill Cydaea. #NaPodPoMo 2020 If you enjoyed this video, please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/Season_22_Cydea_and_The_Skeleton_King.mp4Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: RSS... Season 22: Nephalem Rift and Leveling CraftersNovember 24, 2020Diablo III / Diablo VideosFor Season 22, I decided to switch things up a bit and play a Softcore Barbarian (instead of my usual Hardcore Barbarian). My hope is that this decision would make it quicker for me to complete the Season Journey. Note: There are some flashing lights in this video. In this video, I ran a Nephalem Rift on Normal Difficulty and leveled the Crafters to Level 10. I started off by doing something I don’t normally do. I bought some armor and a shield from Squirt the Peddler before I started leveling up my Barbarian. Previously, I would start playing as is. I recommend buying armor before starting the leveling process on a new Seasonal character. It helped at lot! Immediately after doing that, my Barbarian ran through a Nephalem Rift on Normal difficulty. I attempted to prioritize going after the bigger monsters (packs of blue ones, or yellow ones with minions). I learned last Season that doing so makes it quicker to complete the Rift and get the Rift Guardian. I finished the Nephalem Rift at Level 5, and then finished leveling the Crafters to Level 10. Objectives completed: Begin Again: Complete a Nephalem Rift. Use the Nephalem Obelisk in town while in Adventure Mode to start a Nephalelm Rift.Life With Meaning: Raise the Blacksmith to level 10. Leveling up the Blacksmith unlocks access to higher weapon and armor recipes.Just a Hobby: Raise the Jeweler to level 10. Leveling up the Jeweler unlocks higher level gem recipes.Watch Yourself: Raise the Mystic to level 10. Leveling up the Mystic enables her to enchant more item types and unlocks new Transmogrify looks. #NaPodPoMo 2020 If you enjoyed this video, please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you! https://media.blubrry.com/bookofjen/p/ins.blubrry.com/bookofjen/Season_22_Nephalem_Rift_and_Leveling_Crafters.mp4Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: RSS... Book ReviewsThirteen Reasons Why – by Jay AsherOctober 20, 2020Book Reviews / fictionThirteen Reasons Why is a story about a teenager named Hannah Baker who died from suicide. Before ending her life, she recorded a series of cassette tapes in which she explained some of what happened to her that influenced her decision. She arranged to have those tapes sent to the people who had hurt her. This book was becoming popular at a time when I was working in a bookstore. Thirteen Reasons Why was located in the teen/young adult section. There was a day when one of my managers pointed out Jay Asher to me as he stood in the teen/young adult aisle, counting the number of copies of his book that were on the shelf. To be clear, this is an extremely common thing for writers to do. He eventually noticed us, turned around, and waved hello before going back to counting books. Years later, I found a hardcover autographed copy of the book in a thrift store. I live in a college town, and students who are moving back home for the summer tend to donate items that they don’t want to bring back home with them. My best guess is that someone did not want their parents to find this book and assume that their offspring was considering suicide. My visit to the thrift store happened after Netflix launched a TV series based on the book. Some found the series to be controversial because it depicted Hannah’s way of ending her life in graphic detail. (Netflix later removed that scene.) I have not watched the TV series that was based on the book. As such, this review is based entirely on the book itself The majority of Thirteen Reasons Why comes to the reader from the viewpoint of Clay Jensen. He received a mysterious box on his front porch that was addressed to him. Inside was a series of cassette tapes. There was no return address on the box. I’m not entirely certain what year the story takes place it, but it is clear that it is long after it was common for teenagers to record music on cassette tapes to share with a friend or with someone they were dating. We called them “mix tapes” back in the day. Clay doesn’t have anything that he could play the tapes on. Fortunately, his father has what I would have called a “boombox” in the garage. It is here that Clay starts playing the tapes, becoming more and more nervous and upset the more he listen to them. The instructions left by Hannah on the first tape include some warnings. If you received the box of tapes, it meant that you were on at least one of them. Those who find themselves on a tape are to listen to the rest before boxing up the tapes and mailing them to whoever is the focus of the tape after theirs. Failure to send the box of tapes to the next person would result in having all of the tapes released publicly. If that happened, all of the bad deeds and secrets on the tapes would spread. That’s a really potent threat that ensured that the tapes would be passed on. Clay “borrows” a Walkman – the kind that plays cassette tapes – from a friend (without the friend’s knowledge). He embarks on an extremely emotional and stressful journey listening to Hannah’s tapes while walking to different locations on a map that matches where the events of a specific tape happened. The reader learns that Hannah made those maps herself and pushed them into the lockers of the people who she talked about on the tapes. Clay shoved the map into his backpack and was able to dig it out of there. I thought it was really clever of Jay Asher to convey Hannah’s story via cassette tape. There is something really personal about listening to someone’s recorded voice. Having that voice on a cassette tape – a physical, tangible, object – increases the intensity of the shared audio moment. Clay spends several hours focusing on the tapes. Which one was he on? What did he do that hurt Hannah? I could feel his anxiety and nauseousness as he listened to the tapes. What makes this even more dramatic is that Clay really liked Hannah, and they only had a brief moment together before she passed away. The majority of the rest of the book comes to the reader from the viewpoint of Hannah. I found this very interesting because it gives her a voice and allows her to explain what she was thinking, and feeling, before she died. This can only happen in a fictional situation. In reality, people who lose a loved one to suicide are often left with more questions than answers. Without going into “spoilers” I will say that it wasn’t one incident that caused Hannah to decide end her life. Instead, it was a snowball of bullying and bad situations that really hurt her. Thirteen reasons why, each one explained in great detail, on either the A or B side of a cassette tape. While Clay is listening to the tapes, he starts making connections between what Hannah is describing and the confusing things that he saw happen in the months and days before she died. None of those situations made sense to him until after he listened to the tapes and heard Hannah’s side of the story. According to Wikipedia, Thirteen Reasons Why was released in 2007, long after the days when teenagers listened to music on tapes (or CDs, for that matter). Today, people of all ages mostly listen to digital music, and to podcasts of a variety of topics, online. It would be extremely difficult for a person who is a teenager today to follow in the fictional Hannah’s footsteps by recording their pain on a series of cassette tapes. To the best of my knowledge, stores don’t sell packages of cassette tapes anymore, or the Walkman or “boombox” to play the tapes on. I think Jay Asher chose wisely when he decided to have Hannah tell her story through the cassette tapes. Doing so made a nice contrast between Hannah’s recorded voice and the voice in Clay’s head as he agonized about what the tapes would reveal. In addition, he picked a means of sending a note to those Hannah left behind that could not be easily imitated by the teens of today. One big lesson that can be learned from stories like the one in Thirteen Reasons Why is valuable regardless of the age of the reader. Be kind. You cannot always know, for certain, what’s going through another person’s mind, or what is troubling them. A small moment of kindness can potentially make a big difference in the life of a person who is suffering. There are resources for people who are thinking about suicide. The National Suicide Prevention Hotline provides free and confidential support for people in distress, twenty-four hours a day, and all seven days of the week. You can speak to someone in English or in Spanish. They also can connect with people who are deaf or hard of hearing. Thirteen Reasons Why – by Jay Asher is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Father-Mucker – by Greg OlearJuly 28, 2020Book Reviews / fictionFather-mucker is a work of fiction from the viewpoint of Josh Lansky. He (tries) to make his living by pitching ideas to magazines and movie studios. He is a stay-at-home dad who is currently parenting his two young children by himself while his wife is on a business trip. Things do not go as planned. This book is, at times, hilarious. It also offers some interesting insights and commentary on parenting, modern culture, politics, and the problems that come when rumors spread. The title of this book confused my dyslexic brain, and I had to stop and take a closer look at it. The meaning of the title is explained in the story by the main character. It’s not anywhere near as bad a meaning as you may have suspected it would be. Josh and his wife, Stacy, have two preschoolers. Roland is autistic, and his primary interests are “states” (as in the individual states that make up the United States) and light fixtures. He enjoys looking at catalogs and online photos of lamps, bathrooms, and big houses – especially if he can find out what state the house is located in. Maude is the younger sibling. She is very demanding and speaks as though she is royalty. She is physically tough, and Josh thinks she might become a linebacker someday. Near the beginning of the story, Josh gets an email from a parenting magazine that has accepted one of his pitches. They will pay him to do an interview with a former punk-rocker who is now a father. Josh’s son happens to have the punk-rocker’s daughter in his class at preschool. Josh is instantly elated, and then realizes that it might not be easy to find a way to interview the former punk-rocker. All he knows is that Roland really likes the musician’s daughter. Of course, Josh posts this good news on Facebook. His friends are a group of mommies who have set up play-dates at one of their homes. Josh is an honorary mommy. Some of the interesting social commentary starts while Josh is on Facebook. For example, someone he follows plays a game that involves killing vampires. It is the type of game that automatically posts the player’s kills. These types of annoying posts were common back in the earlier days of Facebook. Josh wonders if the number of kills his friend has is a high number, or a low one. He considers the idea that that maybe the friend was actually killing vampires. Josh hadn’t finished his coffee yet. Later, Josh opens a magazine and thinks about the ridiculous names that celebrities choose for their children. Apple. Pilot Inspektor. He later thinks about movie stars who “boink babysitters”… and then, sometimes, divorce their wives and marry the babysitter. At the play-date, one of the mommies quietly tells Josh that she believes that his wife, Stacy, is having an affair. This rumor, of course, has him second-guessing his entire marriage. Sleep deprived and exhausted from being the only parent to his children for several days in a row, Josh struggles with this news. After the play-date ends, Josh returns home with Maude. (Earlier that day, he took Roland to preschool). The babysitter that Josh scheduled to come over and watch Maude arrives. She is twenty-six years old and still in college. He finds her to be ditzy, childish, and annoying. She wants a raise. Josh does not give her a raise. The purpose of the babysitter is to entertain Maude so Josh can go with Roland on a class field trip to a pumpkin patch. To his surprise, the punk-rocker dad is among the other parents who accompany their kids on this field trip. Josh is extremely nervous about how to approach the guy and ask for an interview. And then, all hell breaks loose… for a while. A meltdown occurs. There are difficult choices to be made. Josh must decide whether or not to believe the rumor about his wife cheating on him. He goes back and forth on this, often via flashbacks of unrelated things that happened years ago. As a writer, his mind is searching for the clues he now things he missed. Could she have started seeing one of her ex-boyfriends again? If so… which one? More rumors are spread. Could the husband of one of the mommies be having an affair? The mommy group (Josh included) discuss a rumor about two people who live in town that – supposedly – had sex with each other in a public place while having an affair. It’s like high-school, all over again. A clique of board and frustrated people are spreading gossip in an effort to harm others, to make themselves look better in comparison, or just to pass the time. By the end, the rumors get resolved. The truth is revealed. Some of it was predictable (even for the characters), and some was a mystery right up until the end. I won’t spoil the ending by revealing the outcome. Overall, Father-Mucker is a fast moving story, from the viewpoint of an exhausted dad who is struggling with being a (functionally) single parent for several days in a row. Parents who read this will probably relate to the difficulties and absurdities of potty-training, children throwing tantrums, and the high-pitched scream of a child who has been hurt by another kid in the play-group. As I mentioned, there’s a lot of social commentary about rumors, celebrity quirks, Facebook statuses (and the proper way to respond to them). There are brief glimpses of what Josh and Stacy went through while trying to get Roland on an IEP, and memories about what their life was like before children. I ended up liking Josh Lanksy more than I might have expected. I kept wanting things to work out for him, and hoping that he would, eventually, be able to get some sleep. Father-Mucker by Greg Olear is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... The Great Influenza – by John M. BarryJuly 18, 2020Book Reviews / non fictionThe full title of this book is The Great Influenza – The Story of the Deadliest Pandemic in History. I started reading it during the COVID-19 pandemic. It was a book I’d been meaning to read long before COVID hit, and now seemed like a very appropriate time to start. The influenza pandemic happened about 100 years before the COVID-19 pandemic did. There are so many similarities between how people back then reacted to influenza and how people today are reacting to COVID-19. The book is not for everyone, particularly those who are already overwhelmed by everything involved with the COVID-19 pandemic. That said, I recommend the book to those who happen to enjoy reading about science, and health, and history. The book is presented in a way that resembles a narrative. In other words, it is not just a dry pile of facts and figures. John M. Barry did an excellent job of making scientists and doctors who were involved in trying to stop the spread of influenza into relatable, interesting, people. He noted their skill set, their personalities, and their quirks. I learned a lot from this book. It was astonishing how little we have learned between the influenza pandemic and today. “Spanish Flu” The influenza pandemic was, at the time, referred to as the “Spanish Flu”. But, it didn’t start in Spain. Instead, it started in the United States, in rural Kansas. The pandemic started just before the United States got involved in World War I. The governments of the countries that allied with the United States imposed strict rules about what could, and could not, be published in newspapers, played in movie theaters, or sung. The goal was to prohibit anything that might reduce to morale of the troops. Spain stayed out of the war – or, at least, did not join it – for a long time. As such, the newspapers in the country were free to write whatever was newsworthy. Many people first heard about the influenza pandemic after reading about it in Spanish newspapers. At the time, Spain was one of the countries that had been hit by the virus. People (outside of Spain) started calling the virus “Spanish flu”. The book shows evidence that the influenza virus began in rural Kansas, and spread from there to Camp Funston in Fort Riley, Kansas. The enlisted went from there to other camps, some of which were in France. Young men, from different areas of the United States, were packed into quarters that were not designed to accommodate so many people. Influenza spread through the military very quickly. Today, the (impeached) President of the United States calls COVID-19 “The Chinese Virus“, or “Kung Flu“. It is clear that the COVID-19 virus began spreading in Wuhan, China. But, that’s no excuse for the President to refer to the virus in such racist terms. Overloaded Hospitals The hospitals during the influenza pandemic were as overloaded as the ones today that were hit by a surge of COVID-19 patients. In both cases, people did not understand what they were seeing when it started. Back then, the doctors thought their patients had pneumonia, or that it was “only influenza”. They had no way of knowing how bad this particular strain of influenza actually was, but understood that most influenza cases were mild. Today, doctors diagnosed many patients with pneumonia, when it turned out they most likely had COVID-19. Some were turned away from hospitals (in the United States, for sure, perhaps in other countries) because they weren’t considered sick enough for a bed. Access to testing was problematic, and there are many people who had COVID-19 but were never tested. Meanwhile, the (impeached) President Trump has asked his “people” to slow down the testing. Back then, doctors and nurses were dying as they attempted to provide care for overloaded wards of influenza cases. Today, doctors and nurses are getting sick with COVID-19 as they beg their governors, representatives, senators, and (impeached) president to provide them with enough PPE to keep them safe. Sadly, back then and now, morgues were filled to capacity and hospitals had to find other places to store bodies. In both cases, casket makers were unable to make enough to keep up with the need. Then, and now, people were dying at home. In 1918, part of the problem that people were afraid to help neighbors who had influenza. This was especially true in places where there was a high death rate. It should be noted that President Woodrow Wilson was strongly emphasizing that hospital beds should be reserved for the troops. Doctors and nurses were recruited and sent to camps to help treat enlisted men who had caught influenza. The result was that American civilians were dealing with a doctor and nurse shortage. There was also no infrastructure set up to properly remove the bodies of the deceased. Some families placed the bodies of their dead loved one on the porch. Others had no option but to put the person in a corner, or leave them on the bed they died in. Spouses were sleeping on that bed, and I cannot imagine the level of trauma that caused. Today, there are people dying at home from COVID-19. Their family members are calling paramedics, but the person dies before the ambulance can arrive. In 1918, cities sent out wagons which were used to collect the dead. Police came to the door of the houses of the deceased and put the bodies into the wagon. Again, coffins were scarce, so some bodies were in bags. A few were in boxes that were definitely not coffins. Today, there is a man in Houston, Texas, who is collecting the bodies of the dead. He has a contract with the county, the police, and various funeral homes. Mask Slackers The idea of wearing a mask to prevent the spread of a virus seems to annoy some people. That was true one-hundred years ago, and sadly, is true today. Back then, the Red Cross, which was an extremely helpful force in fighting the influenza pandemic, had women make gauze masks. The surgeons at the time wore gauze masks. So, the prevailing thought was the gauze masks would also help other people to prevent spreading the virus. It should be noted that this effort began after the influenza pandemic had spread widely across the United States. Members of the Red Cross set up tables and tried to hand masks to every un-masked person who walked by. Police at the time were allowed to insist that a “mask slacker” wear a mask. Those without masks had to pay a fine, and could be arrested. Today, a quick glance at social media will reveal that we have plenty of “mask-slackers” who like to gather together in large groups, unmasked, and not engaging in social distancing. They are clearly much more aggressive about their resistance to mask wearing than were like-minded people in 1918. To my knowledge, there aren’t any places in the United States today where people can be fined or arrested for refusing to wear a mask. It is possible that some states or counties are considering it. Today, we wear masks when we want to shop at a grocery store. Back then, people stood outside the store and shouted their order loud enough for the shop workers inside the store to hear them. Another option was to write down a list of what they wanted to buy, leave the list near the door, and wait. Science Takes Time The most frightening thing I learned from this book is how long it can take for scientists to develop a vaccine. The scientists of one-hundred years ago had disadvantages to overcome. Few had managed to create a vaccine – for anything. They had to start from scratch while trying to develop an influenza vaccine. Meanwhile, some doctors still believed that it was “only influenza”, and assumed the virus wasn’t very serious. My assumption is, as the death toll rose, at least some of the doctors realized they were mistaken about how dangerous influenza actually was. Shortly before the influenza virus started infecting people, a huge change was made in regards to the determination of who could be considered a doctor. The medical universities in the United States started out as for-profit. Today, we would probably call them “diploma mills”. The purpose of these schools was to create revenue, which was used to pay the professors salaries. Medical students learned from lectures or books, but never once actually saw a patient. Heaven help the first patient those doctors attempted to treat! Those who truly wished to practice medicine in the United States traveled to Europe to attend their medical schools. Those schools actually taught students the knowledge and skills they would need as a doctor. These students worked on cadavers and, eventually patients, before graduating. In short, what happened was the “diploma mills” were examined by someone who not only had plenty of knowledge about medicine, but also had no qualms about giving the schools the bad grades they deserved. Many closed after that, unable to meet the new criteria. Some merged with real medical schools. Johns Hopkins was formed around this time. Today, as I write this book review, we are approximately six months into the COVID-19 pandemic. We have some wonderful doctors and nurses, but they are suffering from not being able to obtain the PPE that they need in order to prevent catching the virus. There are several different companies that are attempting to develop a COVID-19 vaccine. Science takes it own time, however, and there is no way to be certain when a vaccine will become available. Meanwhile, the death toll continues to rise. Looking Ahead The version of The Great Influenza that I read was published in 2005. It includes a new Afterword that I found to be extremely informative. It delves into SARS, H1N1, and other corona viruses. In addition, John M. Barry offered advice about what the United States should do in order to be prepared for a new pandemic. At the time, Barry stated that we were not prepared at all. He recommended that the United States start making their own vaccines, and not depend upon other countries to supply us with it. In 2004, the United States was relying on Great Brittan for vaccines, and faced a problem when Great Brittan cut the total doses available outside of their country by 50%. Berry also emphasized “surveillance” in the form of what we may recognize as contract tracing. The earlier we identify a new virus, he wrote, the better chance we have to develop and distribute a vaccine. My hope is that the next President of the United States will take the time to read The Great Influenza and learn lessons from it. There is potential that we could have a new President in January of 2021. That person will have the opportunity to put plans in place to prepare for the next pandemic – while continuing to fight this one. Based on what we have seen, the current (impeached) President has little to no interest in protecting Americans from COVID-19. The Great Influenza – by John M. Barry is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... The Sovereignties of Invention – by Matthew BattlesJanuary 26, 2020Book Reviews / fictionThe Sovereignties of Invention is a book of short stories – all of which are at least somewhat creepy. Matthew Battles does a good job of keeping readers in a state of curiosity and wonder, which sometimes leads to dread and horror. This may not be the book for everyone, but I really enjoyed it. If you like stories that include strange situations that leave the reader wondering what happens next, this is the book for you. My favorite story in this book is called “The Gnomon”. It takes place at a technology convention, where everyone is walking around wearing lanyards with little plastic pockets that serve as their admission passes. The Gnomon is a black box that has no discernible ports, no lights, and absolutely no one there to explain what it does. It becomes a topic of conversation as people try to figure out what it might be. Then, it starts following the people who are attending the conference on social media. There is a point where the story goes from an interesting puzzle to true horror. The reader is never given a specific explanation of what The Gnomon is, or why it suddenly reacts the way it did. The first story in the book is called “The Dogs in Trees.” It involves a situation where people are noticing that dogs have started appearing in trees. At first, it seems like a quirky story, but it slowly becomes very disconcerting. Only the dogs seem to know why they’ve taken to the trees. A story called “I After the Cloudy Doubly Beautifully” had me interested in it just from the title alone. A librarian was given the tax of clearing out the “X cage” – a repository of things that didn’t quite fit anywhere else. The librarian finds a mechanical translator machine, that involves ball bearings with letters on them that are spun around inside a glass dome. A ticker tape comes out with the words that it makes. The machine can translate back and forth into several languages. The librarian starts translating things from one language, to another, to yet another one. I found myself wondering what the final translation would sound like. But, something happens before the librarian is finished with the machine. There are other stories that I have not mentioned and will leave the reader to discover for themselves. The Sovereignties of Invention is filled with glimpses of strange and beautiful things that can also be creepy and unnerving. I found myself thinking about these stories long after I’d finished reading the book. The Sovereignties of Invention – by Matthew Battles is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Restoration – by Olaf OlafssonJanuary 13, 2020Book Reviews / fictionThis is a heartbreaking story of love, and loss, and loneliness. It takes place in Italy, in the 1920’s. After the war begins, everything becomes more uncertain than it was before. It is the story of love gone wrong, due to misunderstandings. There are unanswered questions, dripping with regret and second guessing. All of this is set in a breathtakingly beautiful landscape, which provides a vivid contrast to the sadness that some of the characters are experiencing. Alice is a British ex-pat who is living in Florence, Italy with her family, surrounded by other families who are also British ex-pats. She comes from wealthy family, and is expected to marry an Englishman. Instead, she marries Marchese Claudio Orsini, a titled, Italian nobleman who was the son of a landowner. He is ten years older than Alice, which doesn’t bother her. Alice’s mother, however, is completely distraught that her daughter failed to marry an Englishman (like she was supposed to). The two newlyweds fled shortly after their wedding, in an effort to escape all the pointless social necessities. Most of Alice’s family were mean to Claudio, and this made it easier for her to leave her family and start a new life with him. Long story short, they buy a large farm in Tuscany. While they do have a few people who are helping them with the work, there is still much to do. Alice knows nothing about farming, and she has difficulty adjusting. Eventually, she decides she loves this life and never wants to leave. The couple have a son, who is delightful. He becomes sick, ends up in the hospital, and dies while there. His father, Claudio was there when he died. But, Alice was absent, because she left the hospital to visit her lover. This causes a huge rift between Claudio and Alice, one that is not repaired. He leaves one morning to tend to a family who lives on their land – and never returns. Alice is left mourning their son, while also wondering if Claudio would ever return. The sense of loneliness hangs thick and heavy in the air. Time goes on, and the war begins. It eventually enters Tuscany. Refugees are fleeing the countryside as the German army advances. Many end up at the farm, which by now, has a nurse and a make-shift hospital. There are homeless children who become part of a school/orphanage. Food is scarce, and times are very difficult. There is always the threat that the German army will one day come and take the farm. Some of the people Alice (and her workers) are protecting are those that the German army would happily kill. In the midst of all this, a woman arrives at the farm. Her leg is badly injured, and she does not give her name. The reader learns her story in pieces. She was once working for a painter, who became her lover. He refused to leave his wife. The woman has all kinds of doubts about whether she made the right choices, including one that was an indirect type of revenge. The story is heartbreaking, and beautiful, and desperately sad. I feel like most of the unanswered questions are resolved by the end of the book. It is the kind of story that gives the reader a rich, visual, environment to walk around in, filled with people who are longing for someone they cannot have.... The Sleepy Hollow Family Almanac – by Kris D’AgostinoDecember 10, 2019Book Reviews / fictionCalvin Moretti dropped out of college and has returned to his parent’s home. He has student loan debt that he must be find a way to pay off. So, he gets a job in something completely unrelated to what he went to college for. His father is sick, and has been laid-off from his lifelong career as an airline pilot. His mother tells Calvin that they are behind on the mortgage and could lose the house. The story is fiction, but feels like something that many families have lived through. The entire story is from the point of view of Calvin. The very first sentence is one that he was thinking, but didn’t actually say out loud. It is: “I work with retards”. Immediately, I decide that I don’t like him. My instant dislike of him probably comes from my background as a teacher and also as a day care worker. I’ve worked with kids who have special needs, and it bothers me immensely when someone refers to intellectually disabled people as “retards”. Calvin is basically a teacher’s aide, and should know better. But, he doesn’t. Calvin moved back into his old bedroom in his parent’s house, and realizes that he has pretty much reverted back to what he was like in high school. He’s listening to the same music, not helping much around the house, and getting wasted with old friends. Other than his job, he has no responsibilities to worry about. Calvin is stunted. I think this is something that can happen to people who return to their parent’s homes after finishing (or dropping out of) college. The situation puts them back into old roles with their parents, and in an unsettling emotional imbalance of power. For whatever reason, I decided to give Calvin a chance, hoping that he would grow up. There were some signs it could happen. For example, he had a notebook where he kept track of how much money he earned, and how much he sent to pay off part of his student loan. He appeared to be trying to be an adult. To be fair, there was a lot working against him. His father, who used to be an airline pilot, got sick and could no longer work. It was a job he loved, and, like many older men who lose their job, he kind of starts falling apart. The dad honestly believes that he is dying. He does have some kind of serious illness, but there is a medical intervention that might fix it. Or, it might not. To come home after dropping out of college, and see one’s father wearing a bathrobe and moping around, would be extremely stressful for most people. The dad starts hoarding things he thinks he will need if the world ends. He also starts carrying around a gun. Calvin’s mother tearfully lets Calvin know that they have fallen behind on the mortgage – far behind. His older brother, who was able to graduate and get a good paying job, has been helping with that as much as he could. I think this may have been the start of Calvin waking up from his regression into his teenage self and his thoughts about making better choices. Speaking of big life decisions, Calvin’s younger sister tells him that she is pregnant. She wants to keep the baby, but doesn’t want anything to do with the baby’s father. The sister is still in high school. By the end of the story, things are resolved in ways that are both a relief and also heartbreaking. Calvin is finally able to not only become an actual adult, but also to meaningfully help out his family. I’m glad I decided to read the book beyond the first sentence, because if I had not, I would have missed out on watching Calvin grow up. One of the most interesting things about this story, other than Calvin and his wandering thoughts, was the way the family interacted. This is not a dysfunctional family, but rather one that has experienced a series of unfortunate events. There is plenty of love, and that’s what helps them to stick together and work things out. The Sleepy Hollow Family Almanac – by Kris D’Agostino is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Drinking Closer to Home – by Jessica Anya BlauNovember 22, 2019Book Reviews / fictionAnna, Portia, and Emery – three siblings who are now adults, have returned to their parent’s home. Their mother, Louise, is in the hospital after suffering what has been described as a “massive” heart attack. The siblings are there to be able to visit their mother at the hospital, and also to provide emotional support for their father. Drinking Closer to Home is about a quirky family, each with their own unique problems. It is about living through situations that I would consider to be neglect, and somehow, being able to come together as a family during difficult times. The title of the book comes from a family story that involved the sibling’s mother when she was a tiny baby. It is the punchline of what, to me, is obviously an instance of severe neglect. I think this small part of the book is what makes the rest of it comprehensible. The members of this family have learned to find humor in situations that were neglectful, dangerous, and emotionally scarring. It is their way of coping. For example, the year that Anna was eleven, Portia was eight, and Emery was three, Louise told the girls that she had decided to quit being a housewife. Anna would be in charge of cooking, and Portia would be in charge of taking care of Emery. No one cleaned the house, and the backyard (including the pool) fell into disrepair. This was not a temporary situation! The book jumps around between the present – with chapters titled “Day 2” that mark time passing while Louise is in the hospital, and the past, with years as chapter titles. My impression is the the majority of the book comes from the viewpoint of one of the siblings. Portia is very pregnant with her second child, and has just gone through a divorce. She is co-parenting her first child with her ex-husband, and missing her daughter. And now, she is also very worried about her mother. Anna is an addict, who has gotten things mostly under control. (She has started eating too much red vines candy while visiting with her mother at the hospital). There is a lot of trauma in her past, in part, due to her own unfortunate choices. Anna is married, but isn’t necessarily monogamous. Emery brought his boyfriend, Alejandro, with him to his parents house. The two are an established couple, and they want to have children. This puts Emery into an uncomfortable position. How does one ask their sisters for their eggs at a time when their mother might be dying? Then, there’s Louise, who has been smoking for decades. The doctors want her to quit, but she’s not interested. Of course, she can’t smoke while she’s at the hospital, especially while recovering from a heart attack and very weak. Louise has her own issues with her parents, and also with her husband, Buzzy’s, parents. Buzzy has his own secrets to deal with. One reason I like this book so much is because the characters are vibrant and resilient. They find a way to keep going, despite using less than advantageous coping mechanisms. Overall, family honestly is very important to all of them. They manage to come together when times are tough. Another reason is because some of it reminds me of my own dysfunctional family. My mother never officially declared she decided not to be a housewife anymore – but that’s what her actions amounted to. Some of my family members were/are hoarders, and the house was never clean. In my case, my family is very toxic, and I needed to separate myself from them. So, I guess what I’m trying to say is that Drinking Closer to Home provides me with an satisfying story that allows me to imagine what it would be like if my family was able to overcome their issues and become functional. Drinking Closer to Home – by Jessica Anya Blau is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Stories for Nighttime and Some for the Day – By Ben LooryOctober 25, 2019Book Reviews / fictionStories for Nighttime And Some for The Day is, as you may have guessed, a book of short stories. One of them could probably fit into a single Tweet! Each short story feels like a parable or a fable. I got the feeling that there was a lesson in each one, if only I could puzzle out what it was trying to tell me. This imaginative collection of stories refuses to hand the reader an obvious answer about what it all means. One of my favorite short stories in the book is called “The Octopus”. It is about an octopus who lives in an apartment. His landlady brings up his mail. All of this is presented as though it is a perfectly normal occurrence. There is a letter from his two nephews, who live in the ocean. The nephews want to come visit, and upon arriving, want their uncle to take them around the city. He wasn’t expecting they would want to do that, and is largely disappointed by having to be a tour guide. When it is time for the nephews to return to the ocean, the octopus needs to make a decision. Should he go back to his apartment, or is it time for him to return to the ocean? My take on this story is that it is about that moment when you look back upon your life, and a big decision you once made… and decide to abandon it in favor of returning to the life you had before. Your understanding of the story may be entirely different from mine. That’s the beauty of the stories in this book! Another story that caught my attention is called “The Book”. A woman buys a book only to find that all of the pages are blank. The bookstore will not let her return it or exchange it. This makes the women irrationally angry at the book. She begins complaining about the book, and her complaints … go viral, so to speak. She unintentionally makes the book even more popular than it would have been had she decided to just forget about it. Years ago, I used to work in a big chain bookstore. Every so often, someone would come in to complain about a book that was currently rising in popularity (or was, at that moment, a best seller). Catholics came in to complain about The DaVinci Code (by Dan Brown) to insist that it was blasphemous and should be removed from the shelves. Confused people, who believed that if their children read the Harry Potter books they would actually learn magic, complained about those books being in the children’s section. The result was always the same. The complaints caused more people to become curious about whatever the controversial book was. In other words, I can relate to this particular short story from personal experience. Other stories in the book are not so dreamy. There are some rather terrifying stories that are creepy and confusing. I didn’t need to know what those stories were about to feel a visceral shiver as I read through them. I found the story about martians being treated as “the help”, and another story about an alien spaceship and two people who fell in love with each other, to be fascinating. Overall, reading these short stories reminded me of when I was a child and exploring the world inside of a new book with wonder and acceptance. Stories for Nighttime and Some for the Day – By Ben Loory is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... The Care and Feeding of Exotic Pets – by Diana WagmanOctober 8, 2019Book Reviews / horrorDespite the title, The Care and Feeding of Exotic Pets, is not a book about how to provide care and comfort to an unorthodox choice of pet. You won’t find this one in your local pet store! Instead, it is an intense, creepy, novel about a woman who is kidnapped by a man who owns a gigantic iguana. Diana Wagman does an excellent job of getting into her characters heads, frightening the reader, and building the intensity of the story as it goes on. I want to take a minute to talk about the cover art. At first glance, the white letters of the title (and the name of the author) pop out. It took a bit longer to see the huge, green, iguana, ominously curling around the title. Winnie is thirty-eight-years old, divorced, and sort of lost. Her husband, Jonathan, left her for a younger woman. Winnie and their daughter Lacy, still live in the home Lacy grew up in. But, things are different now. Jonathan is a somewhat-famous TV game show host. He left Winnie for a twenty-something woman who was a contestant on the show. Jonathan and Winnie are still in touch, in part because they are sharing custody of their daughter. Lacy is a teenager who has become rebellious, and is starting to get in trouble at school. Winnie believes Lacy has started smoking. Winnie wants to still be married. She wanted to grow old with someone. The life she is living now doesn’t feel right to her. As such, she has gone from being a person who kept a tidy home to one who has lost interest in doing laundry. After dropping Lacy at school, Winnie takes her car to the shop for repairs. She is dressed in a tennis outfit (that needs washing). She waits outside for the vehicle that is supposed to take her to where she can obtain a rental car. After getting one, she has plans to go to her tennis lesson. Winnie’s thoughts are a mile away. A car pulls up and stops in front of her. She gets in, without thinking much about it. Slowly, she learns that the man driving the car has no connection to the repair shop or the rental company. This is where the tension starts building. The man who kidnapped Winnie is very troubled. He owns a gigantic, male iguana, which lives in his kitchen. The iguana is ready to mate, and is uncomfortable and irritable. The entire house is kept at a stiflingly hot temperature, for the iguana’s benefit. How can Winnie escape? I spent much of the book wondering if the iguana would eat Winnie. The story gives readers little clues, slowly, that make connections that were not immediately apparent. I’m not going to tell you how it ends. What I will says is this book is intense, and scary, and includes violence. Diana Wagman did an excellent job of making the characters, even the unlikable ones, very real. The Care and Feeding of Exotic Pets – by Diana Wagman is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Where’d You Go, Bernadette – by Maria SempleSeptember 13, 2019Book Reviews / fictionBernadette is a quirky, unbalanced, architect who hasn’t worked in a while. Her husband, Elgin, works for Microsoft. They live in Seattle with their wonderful daughter, Bee. Bee comes home from school with a stellar report card and asks her parents for a trip to Antarctica (a promised reward for good grades). Bernadette disappears shortly before the trip. This leaves her family wondering: “Where’d you go, Bernadette?” I am aware that this book has been made into a movie, but I haven’t watched it yet. Everything I put into this book review is from what I read. The thing I liked the most about this book is the format that the story was presented in. Almost everything is a letter, note, email, or other type of information written by one of the characters and sent to another. The rest comes to the reader from the viewpoint of Bee. My best guess is that there may be other books written this way. But, this one felt unique because it included such a wide variety of things that the reader gets to take a look it. The reader learns about the various characters – their personalities, motivations, desires – by “snooping” on things they wrote that were intended to be private. Another advantage of using this technique of storytelling is that the reader never had to guess which character’s head they were in, or who was speaking. Just look at the bottom of the note, where someone signed their name! The reader isn’t the only one reading things they weren’t meant to see. As the book goes on, it is revealed that the little pieces of writing that connect to either Bernadette or Elgin are a collection that Bee is pouring over. She wants to try and solve the mystery of where her mother went, in the hopes of finding her. Without giving away too much of the story, I can say that part of it is about Bernadette’s past as an architect. She was brilliant, and had an eclectic style that often incorporated salvaged pieces. But then, something happened that she never quite got over. Elgin is described as a “guru” at Microsoft. He’s a bit distant, and tends to focus a lot on his work. As such, he comes across as either oblivious or simply uninterested in socializing with coworkers. Put this together with Bernadette’s agoraphobia, and it kind of explains why the two of them have become disconnected from each other. There is a hysterically funny scene involving a mudslide (and I know that sounds terrible). No one is physically harmed, but there is plenty of property damage. It is the culmination of a “fight” between Bernadette and a character that I found to be unlikable. I believe the reader is supposed to have that reaction to that specific character. There are beautiful descriptions of Antarctica, as seen from a cruise ship. Maria Semple paints a vivid picture, and I felt like I could “see” the different colors of the snow, ice, and sky as I read through that part of the book. As I already mentions, I have not watched the movie that was based on this book. I cannot help but wonder what the visuals in the movie are like. In many ways, this book is about characters who are too wrapped up in themselves to properly form relationships with others. They all have their own reasons for being like that. There is an underlying theme of broken trust and an attempt to repair it. By the end of the book, the mystery of where Bernadette went, and why she went there, is revealed. I found it to be a satisfying ending. The book is funny, and strange, and is has the most delightful way of giving the reader little pieces of the mystery of Bernadette’s disappearance to stitch together. Some of the characters grow, and in doing so, are able to see where they have made mistakes. It leaves the reader with the reassurance that, despite what happened, relationships can sometimes be repaired if everyone involved chooses to work on them. Where’s You Go, Bernadette – by Maria Semple is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... World of WarcraftSprite Darter’s WingsNovember 21, 2020World of Warcraft / World of Warcraft otherThe Sprite Darter’s Wings transmog was given for free to players who have a six-month World of Warcraft subscription. That’s how I got it. Players who don’t have a six-month WoW subscription can buy it for $20.00 from the Blizzard Shop. Enchant your friends and beguile your foes with this eight-piece transmogrification set inspired by the fey dragons of Azeroth. This appearance features cosmetic wings and a mesmerizing mask that make you a sprite to behold and will take the breath away from friend, foe, and dragonkin alike. This colorful transmog set was perfect for Meipo, my Gnome Mage. She is based on one of my Dungeons & Dragons characters named Meepo. (WoW wouldn’t let me have that spelling). Meepo is a Kobold Sorcerer who loves bright colors and shiny things. Each piece of the Sprite Darter set can be found in your Appearances tab. Splitting it up means you have to search around each piece in order to do the entire transmogrification. The advantage of splitting up this transmogrification set into pieces means that a player can pick and choose which parts to transmog. For example, maybe you just want to use the wings – but not the rest of the set. If I remember correctly, it cost one gold for each piece I chose to transmog. Here is the entire Sprite Darter transmogrification set on my Gnome. I honestly love it! The colors and goofiness of the set is perfect for Meipo. This is what the back of the Sprite Darter wings look like. The Sprite Darter set transmog doesn’t match the Steamscale Incinerator. The set matches quite well with the Squeakers, The Trickster mount. It makes Miepo look like a tiny fairy dragon who is riding a mouse. Sprite Darter’s Wings is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Steamscale IncineratorOctober 30, 2020World of Warcraft / World of Warcraft Pets and MountsThe Steamscale Incinerator was offered to players who had six-month World of Warcraft subscriptions. To me, it looks like a steampunk dragon. The World of Warcraft Steamscale Incinerator was presented to players who had six-month World of Warcraft subscriptions on July 9, 2020. It would be waiting for me where the rest of my mounts were located – but it wouldn’t wait forever. “Thanks for purchasing a 6-Month Subscription to WoW! Please, enjoy this majestic mount on us. Claim by January 31, 2021. Not usable in WoW Classic.” A mad gnomish inventor had a dream to ride a dragon, so he created this metal monstrosity. He powered it with a trapped demon, in order to create “an authentic dragon soul,” and did not survive its activation. Here’s what this mount looks like when walking on the ground. (Stormwind City Guard for scale). The Steamscale Incinerator looks awesome when flying at night. The underside of the dragon glows a bright red that seems to pulse. There are two large cogs spinning where the wings attach to the body. I took this screenshot on a whim while flying around Stormwind. Just for fun, I took this screenshot of the Steamscale Incinerator in Ironforge while the 2020 Hallow’s Eve event was taking place. Steamscale Incinerator is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... WoW Classic: EcheyakeeJuly 21, 2020World of Warcraft / World of Warcraft ClassicAt the start of today’s adventure, Vaca was at Level 15. She was ready to take her newly acquired Stonewood Hammer and use it on whatever the quest givers wanted her to kill. She was certain Neverlast was equally ready to go. These screenshots were taken on September 25, 2019. Serga Darkthorn: How goes your hunt, Vaca? Have you found the prowlers? Vaca and Neverlast started their day by turning in the Prowlers of the Barrens quest. It took longer than expected because some of the prowlers lacked claws. The Taurens assumed there was some kind of plague affecting the local wildlife. Serga Darkthorn: Whitemist, Echeyakee in the Tauren tongue, is the king of the savannah cats. He hunts with such stealth, they say he’s like a thin, white mist on the earth. And he kills so fast his prey have no time for fear, or pain. The Tauren say he is both mercy and death. You will learn if that’s true, for I now set you on the path to hunt Echeyakee. His lair is northeast of the Crossroads, among the bones of giant Kodo Go. Blow this horn when you reach his lair. Blow the horn, and he will come. The Taruen decided to take this quest. Did Echeyakee exist? Vaca was certain this would be an exciting battle. All Serga Darkthorn wanted from the kill was Echeyakee’s hide and a report on what the fight was like. The hunt for Echeyakee required Vaca and Neverlast to leave The Crossroads. On the way, they found some very obviously plagued antelope. Neverlast used his fancy Druid skills to heal the plagued antelope. It became healthy again, and appeared to be glowing as it ran off. When the Tauren arrived at what they thought might be the right place, they blew the horns that Serga Darkthorn gave them. After waiting a little while, Echeyakee appeared. He was real! Vaca, being a warrior, rushed into battle to fight this beautiful, dangerous, creature. It was the only way to get the hide that Serga Darkthorn wanted. The battle was difficult, and Vaca may not have survived it if it wasn’t for Neverlast’s ability to heal her with Druid magic. The Tauren were victorious. Echeyakee disappeared right after the Tauren collected its hide. All that was left to do was return to The Crossroads and turn in the quest. On the way back, Neverlast stopped to heal more plagued antelope. They always ran away after he healed them. It was as though they felt better and regained the strength required to run across The Barrens. They came across a herd of antelope. A few that looked fully grown were surrounded by smaller young ones. The Tauren took a moment to stand still and take in the beauty of this world. Vaca hit Level 16 while fighting two Ornery Plainstriders. She survived thanks to Neverlast healing her. The Tauren reluctantly decided to begin working on a quest from Darsok Swiftdagger (who was also at The Crossroads). He wanted Vaca and Neverlast to kill some Harpies and collect 6 Harpy Lieutenant Rings. The rings are only held by Witchling Slayer Harpies. Vaca and Neverlast struggled through their previous battle with harpies. And now, they had to fight the ones that were even tougher! There was a dead Tauren off to the side of where the harpies lived. That’s never a good sign! Neverlast and Vaca started fighting Witchwing Slayer Harpies, each very glad they did not have to do this quest alone. Some of the Harpies dropped Harpy Lieutenant rings. But, not all of them did. Darsok Swiftdagger didn’t mention that before sending the Tauren out on this quest. Neverlast used a Druid spell to hit a harpy from a distance. The harpy immediately flew over to them, where Vaca could fight it without ending up in a mob of Harpies. Neverlast called this technique “fishing for harpies”. Eventually, the Tauren ran out of harpies that were within range. Vaca jumped into a mob, and noticed that the harpies she and Neverlast fought before – that seemed tough at the time – were much easier to kill. Vaca had grown stronger. Meanwhile, Neverlast had gotten into some trouble. Vaca had just finished killing harpies, when she noticed the “parade” that Neverlast was leading. Vaca intercepted the harpies and tried to fight them off. It did not go well for the Tauren. After making a “corpse run”, the Tauren moved away from the harpies and took the high ground. They needed a place to safely rest and recover. When they were ready, the Tauren walked back down the hill and began “fishing for harpies” again. They had not yet obtained enough of the rings they were asked to collect. The Druid spell that Neverlast used was super effective at getting the attention of harpies that had isolated themselves. This was so much more efficient than having to fight a mob of harpies! Eventually, the Tauren decided to return to The Crossroads. First, they handed Darsok Swiftdagger the Harpy Lieutenant Rings he wanted. They were rewarded with some silver. Next, they returned to Serga Darkthorn so they could give her Echeyakee’s Hide. Serga was very interested in hearing about how that battle went. Serga Darkthorn: You’ve beaten Echeyakee, and though his days of hunting are over … his spirit is with you. He will show you the strength found in subtlety, and the honor in mercy. Your path is still long, warrior. Let’s hope you stride it well. Serga Darkthorn had another quest for Neverlast and Vaca. Serga Darkthorn: Now, Vaca, the hunt deepens. Now you must defeat your prey, and then find your way to its lair. Hunt the sunscale raptors to the south. Slay them and remove the feathers they wear. Place the feathers on the scytheclaw nests southwest of the Stagnant Oasis. Show their brethren you do not fear them! By now, after a long day of fighting, Vaca and Neverlast were tired. They decided to spend the night in The Crossroads. The sunscale raptors would still be out there tomorrow. WoW Classic: Echeyakee is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... WoW Classic: HarpiesApril 29, 2020World of Warcraft / World of Warcraft ClassicNeverlast and Vaca had traveled together, fighting a wide variety of creatures and turning in quests. They had no idea how difficult it would be to fight a flock of skinny bird people. These screenshots were taken on September 22, 2019. Today started with Vaca and Neverlast fighting a Lost Barrens Kodo. Vaca, being a Warrior, jumped right in and started swinging. Neverlast, a Druid, healed his impulsive friend. The Tauren would soon learn that fighting Kodos was much easier than fighting Harpies. They needed to collect a few more Prowler claws in order to complete a quest. Strangely, it turned out that many of the Prowlers lacked claws. Vaca and Neverlast assumed that the Prowlers were suffering from the same plague that caused the Zhevra’s to lack hooves. Fortunately, this particular Prowler had some claws. The Tauren would be able to turn in this quest when next they visited The Crossroads. Overall, the day was going pretty well, until they encountered Harpies. The Tauren were asked to collect 8 Witchwing Talons. Little did they know that these winged, annoying, creature would be so difficult to kill. “A fine trophy your head will make, Tauren,” the Harpy threatened. Vaca won this battle, thanks to Neverlast’s help and healing. But, it was a much tougher battle than Vaca was expecting against skinny bird people. “My talons will shred your puny body, Tauren,” the next Harpy yelled. Vaca knew she was much stronger and heavier than this little bird person. She wondered what the Harpies thought the word “puny” meant. Neverlast used a spell and trapped the Harpy in place. It was a good idea. This particular Harpy was tougher than the other ones, and both of The Tauren were getting really tired. Eventually, the last Harpy was down. Neverlast and Vaca finally had gathered up the necessary amounts of Witchwing Talons, and could turn them in to Darsock Swiftdagger at The Crossroads. It was time for a moment of celebration! The next thing to do was to hoof it back to The Crossroads. There was time to enjoy the scenery along the way. Vaca wondered what these big skeletons were. She kept finding them scattered across the land. Maybe they were kodos? On their way through The Forgotten Pools, another Lost Barrens Kodo picked a fight with Vaca. There was no choice but to fight back. You can’t talk a Kodo out of a course of action once they have chosen it. When the battle was over, Neverlast was able to pick up some Thin Kodo Leather. Apparently “thin” is a relative term in this case. Back at The Crossroads, The Tauren climbed a tower and spoke with Darsok Swiftdagger. He was the one who gave them the quest to fight Harpies. It would be great to turn that in and forget all about the horrible bird people. Darsok Swiftdagger: Cut up enough of them yet? Keep slicing and taking trophies. I want 8 Witchwing talons. Neverlast and Vaca happily handed over the Witchwing Talons they collected. They each received some silver coins in return. Harpies are tough to fight, but the pay was worth it. Before The Tauren could start their way back down the tower, Darsok Swiftdagger had something else to say to them. Darsok Swiftdagger: Hahaha. Vaca, Back for more? Good, I like to hear that. This time I want you to assassinate some of the harpy lieutenants in the Dry Hills. Only Witchwing Slayers can be lieutenants, and you can tell them apart by the rings they carry. They are a nasty bunch, but they lead some of the underlings in that area. Taking out 6 of them will be a decisive strike against their matriarchy. Make sure they die painfully, Vaca. We want those harpy wenches to know the idiocy of picking fights with the Horde. Vaca wondered why this tough-talking Orc didn’t go out and fight the harpies himself. But then, she thought about the words Darsok was using. He clearly was afraid of the Harpies, whom he hated in part because they were female. Darsok wanted their matriarchy destroyed. Vaca guessed he saw it as a threat to the Orc’s patriarchal system. It took Vaca a moment to realize that Darsok thought she was a small, male Tauren. The first batch of Harpies were exhausting, and this new group was going to be even tougher. Vaca and Neverlast turned to each other, shrugged, and accepted the quest. Neither were looking forward to it. They decided to rest up before taking on more awful Harpies. Hopefully, the money would be worth the effort. #Blapril2020 WoW Classic: Harpies is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Meipo the Mage – To Level 60!April 25, 2020Adventures of Meipo / World of WarcraftMeipo is the WoW version of one of my Dungeons & Dragon characters. I leveled her up to Level 50 in November of 2019, and eventually got her to Level 60 on February 17, 2020. My plan was to put together a blog about it shortly after that, but I wasn’t able to get around to it until now. Meipo hit Level 50 in Andorhal, so her adventure continues from there. She got in a fight with Darkmaster Gandling, and got pushed up into the air. Meipo was saved by Thassarian and Koltra Deathweaver. After that battle ended, Meipo was able to turn in the Scholomancer quest. Thassarian: Excellently done, Meipo. And now, with the leader of the Scourge forces eliminated from Andorhal, we bide our time. Gandling’s Gloves are a transmog item. Next, Meipo traveled to Chillwind Camp, to talk to Commander Ashlam Valorfist. An Achievement popped up when she arrived: The First Battle for Andorhal Commander Ashlam Valorfist: These farmers from the south wish to take these farms, but I can’t let them enter the plaguelands unprepared. Even with the Scourge gone, danger still looms in the form of the Forsaken. No, we must be ready to fight… and that includes our new visitors. Before doing anything else, however, I would recommend that you travel to Uther’s Tomb, to the east, and place this tribute before his statue to ask for his blessing. Speak with the priest that tends to the tomb when you are finished. She intended to do exactly that…. but got distracted by food instead. Now We’re Cookin’: Cook up one of every Pilgrim’s Bounty dish. Candied Sweet Potato, Cranberry Chutney, Pumpkin Pie, Slow-Roasted Turkey, Spice Bread Stuffing Pilgrim’s Progress: Complete each of the Pilgrim’s Bounty dailies. Can’t Get Enough Turkey, Don’t Forget The Stuffing, Easy As Pie, She Says Potato, We’re Out of Cranberry Chutney Again? Meipo put on all the Pilgrim’s clothing, and used this magic gun to turn some Rogues into turkeys. Short Order Cook: Learn 50 cooking recipes. Issac Allerton gave Meipo a Turkey Caller. It makes a noise like a turkey! It didn’t take long for Meipo to portal back to Stormwind, use the Turkey Caller, and catch all the turkeys she needed. She learned that some of her fire spells would not only stop a turkey from running, but also prepared it for cooking. Meipo also learned that the teleportation spell was extremely useful for getting things done during holiday festivals. Expert Cook: Obtain 225 skill points in the “Classic” category of cooking. Meipo learned the Candied Sweet Potato recipe. Meipo found herself surrounded by turkeys outside Ironforge. Meipo learned the Slow-Roasted Turkey recipe. Meipo hit Level 51 after turning in a cooking quest to Robby Flay. Getting back on track, Meipo flew past Aerie Peak. She noticed, for the first time, that there was a giant stone Gryphon standing on top of it. Meipo arrived at Uther’s Tomb and was greeted by High Priest Thel’danis. Uther the Lightbringer Here lies Uther the Lightbringer First Paladin – Founder of the Order of the Silver Hand Uther lived and died to defend the kingdom of Lordaeron. Though he was betrayed by his most beloved student, we believe that his spirit lives on. He continues to watch over us, even as the shadows close in around our ruined land. His light is the light of all humanity – and so long as we honor his example, it shall never fade. Anonymous Meipo received Uther’s Blessing. High Priest Thel’danis: You and the humans at Chillwind Camp wish to re-take Andorhal? I wish you luck. High Priest Thel’danis: If you truly intend to move forward in this battle for Andorhal… well, perhaps I can help. To the east lies a large crypt. The bottom level of the crypt was once used for storage of weapons and armor…until the Scourge came. Now that the undead have left, the weapons are free for the taking. Most of the weapons are probably rusted and rotten by now, but they will serve better than tunics and pitchforks. Meipo set out to find the Weapons Crate at the bottom of the Crypt in Western Plaguelands. She got temporarily distracted by this sculpture of Uther’s Hammer. Meipo found the Abandoned Crypt and a broken box of weapons. The Abandoned Crypt: Scattered all over the bottom level of the crypt, you find shattered crates that once held weapons and armor. It appears that somebody got here before you did. Meipo got ambushed by skeletons! She fought them with fire. After killing off the skeletons inside the Abandoned Crypt, Meipo gathered up the weapons she could find. Outside, there were more skeletons to fight. The Cryptkeeper’s Belt is a transmog item. Meipo took her collection of weapons, such as they were, to Thurman Grant. She remembered that he was leading a group of farmers who wanted to take back some farmland. But, he didn’t need the weapons. Thurman Grant: I told Commander Valorfist that we could hold our own, and we intend to. I had a little conversation with the death knight general, Thassarian, on my way over here. We farmers plan to help in our own way. We will take control of this farm, begin to cultivate the land… and then when the battle for Andorhal commences, we will attack the Forsaken from the rear. They’ll never expect it. First, we need to get rid of these Forsaken outsiders. Kill some. Then return to me. Meipo found that killing Forsaken with fire was pretty easy – especially if you had a group of farmers helping. The farmers worked surprisingly well as a team. Thurman Grant: In fact, you might still be able to help train some of my men. You probably noticed the abomination outside. We initially tried to fight him, but he didn’t fight back. He seems to want to help out on the farm. Take a group of four settlers and challenge this abomination to combat. He seems to be pretty tough, but with one of him and five of you, I think you’ll have a chance at beating him. Meipo gathered up four settlers and led them to the abomination. There was another group ahead of them, trying to fight the abomination. His name was Gory, and he wasn’t fighting back. Meipo decided to talk to Gory, and learned that he really does want to help out on the farm. He also enjoys standing in the warm sun. Meipo made a friend! She convinced the farmers to stop fighting Gory. Thurman Grant: We can handle things from here. I thank you for your help, Meipo. I assume that when we next meet, it will be in battle. Take care of yourself until then. We’ll get all the help we can get. Meipo earned the A Temporary Peace Achievement. Thurman Grant gave Training Leggings to Meipo. It is a transmog item. Meipo went to the Menders Stead and met Field Agent Kaartish. Field Agent Kaartish: Welcome, mage. As you can see, our camp is a joint expedition between Argent Crusade members and the Cenarion Circle druids, but we welcome all who wish to help heal the land. Miepo met Durnt Brightfalcon. She waved hello, but he didn’t wave back. Durnt Brightfalcon: Word is in from Andorhal, Meipo. The battle has resumed. It has become somewhat well-known among the Alliance forces that you’re a hero of the first battle of Andorhal. Thassarian has requested your presence immediately. Meipo was asked to report to Thassarian at Andorhal in Western Plaguelands. She started going there, but as usual, got a bit distracted on the way. She picked up a Plague Lurker Sample for…. someone. She forgot who. Meipo hit Level 52 while mining for shiny things. Meipo gave all the plague samples she found to Field Agent Kaartish. He was very happy to have them. Field Agent Kaartish: I will need some time to study these samples, Meipo. I will speak to you again when I have completed my analysis. Field Agent Kaartish: We are not the only Argent Crusaders here in the plaguelands. Our headquarters, Hearthglen, lies to the north. Even nearer to the north is a small lumber mill which we also control. Nathaniel Dumah is my main contact at the lumber mill. I encourage you to speak with him, should you find yourself in that part of the woods. Meipo intended to go to the Northridge Lumber Camp. But first… she decided to make more Spiced Bread Stuffing for Caitrin Ironkettle. In doing so, Meipo earned the 50 Daily Quests CompletedAchievement. Meipo made a friend! A Dun Morogh Chicken came up to sit by her campfire while Meipo was cooking. Got My Mind On My Money: Loot 100 Gold. Meipo watched a Dwarf fight a bunch of Goblin Brawlers at Booty Bay. Meipo stopped by the Ruins of Lordaeron to eat some Sweet Potatoes. The Forsaken didn’t seem to mind sharing with her. When Meipo finally made it to the Northridge Lumber Camp, she saw huge spiders everywhere! She decided to use teleport to “nope” on out of there. Meipo hit Level 53 while trying to reach the Pie Chair at Stillwater Pond. These elves were not as friendly as the Forsaken were! Meipo is wearing some combination of the holiday apparel. She also has on a Stormwind Tabard, gloves, and shoulders that are not part of the outfit. The Fine Pilgrim’s Hat is a transmog item. Meipo got lost and ended up in Thousand Needles, where she fought Needlespine Cobras. Meipo ended up in New Thalanaar fighting in a battle that she didn’t understand. These elves wanted help – so she threw fire at their enemies. Meipo fought Snarler in the Lower Wilds. She wasn’t intending to, but he jumped out and snarled at her. Snarler dropped a belt called Captain’s Waistguard of the Quickblade. It was not something Meipo could use. Archaeology involves digging – and that sounded like fun to Meipo. She went to the Ruins of Eldre’thar to see what she could find. Unfortunately, there were angry ghost elves there who tried to attack her. Meipo deployed an ice shield to protect herself. Eventually, she learned how to stay a safe distance away from them, and was able to dig up some interesting artifacts. Meipo learned that the Undead Ravagers in Desolace didn’t like fire! Professional Journeyman: Obtain 150 skill points in a “Classic” category of a profession. Meipo went to Shok’Thokar and fought some Doomguard Invaders. A fishing quest sent Meipo to go find Baby Octopus. They are as big as her! Meipo met Officer Jankie in Tehtris Aran. She stopped Meipo and directed her to Nijel’s Point. It wasn’t a choice. Officer Jankie: Halt! On behalf of the Nijel’s Point Guard, I am under orders to send all able-bodied allies to report directly to Corporal Melkins. I am not authorized to offer any other information. What I can offer is transportation. You are free to use my mount. It will deliver you directly. Dismissed. Shortly after arriving at Nijel’s Point, Meipo met Corporal Melkins. Corporal Melkins: Pentigast! Bring the new gnome up to speed, would you? Captain Pentigast: Yes, yes. Welcome to Desolace, gnome. Sorry we had to be so insistent, but we’re a small outpost, and there are big problems in this region – most of them quite urgent. Bottom line: We need all the help we can muster. To start with, our friend Vahlarriel over there has been getting pretty antsy, insisting that we send a contingent to visit the ruins in the east. Why don’t you go introduce yourself… Vahlarriel Demonslayer was nice to Meipo. “A pleasure to meet you, mage,” he said. Vahlarriel Demonslayer: Simply intolerable! Satyrs of all things, desecrating our sacred lands… Their days are numbered, gnome. I can assure you of that. As soon as we have the numbers, I shall lead a charge that will rid this land of the wicked creatures. For now, though, perhaps you could put my mind at ease? Travel just east of here to Sargeron and scour the ruins. Find the relics of Elune and ensure that they are in good condition. I’ll pay you well for the favor. Meipo hit Level 55 outside of Nijel’s Point. Meipo earned the Thistlefur Cap from finishing a quest. She tried it on, but couldn’t decide if it was better than what she was using before. So, she switched back and forth between them for a while. The Thistlefur Cap is a transmog item. The quests that Meipo was sent to do in Sargeron are a bit strange. First, she visited the Cup of Elune, which wants her to bring it 8 melons. The quest is called: “Nothing a Couple of Melons Won’t Fix.” The markings on the ruins here make one thing clear: There is something special about the old fountain in the Sanctuary of Elune. It would seem that one could expect special power from washing their face in the fountain. First, of course, there would need to be something in the ancient fountain with which to wash. Pondering this problem, you spot a melonfruit at the base of a nearby tree… After filling it with liquid from the melons, you proceed to wash your eyes from the ancient font. Upon opening your eyes, you are able to see the spirits of ancient elves, still faithfully carrying out rituals to their goddess. Spirits of ancient elves appeared. Three were close by the Cup of Elune, and more were wandering around the Sanctuary of Elune. There were spirits of ancient elves around Elune’s Brazier, too. What did the Brazier of Elune want Meipo to get for it? Ten pounds of flesh. Yes, really. According to ancient legend, this ancient brazier was placed her for the performing of sacrifices. From what little you remember of the history, a blessing is bestowed upon the being who places the flesh of Elune’s enemies on the brazier’s burning embers. Looking around, you determine that the satyrs who now possess this reagion would likely qualify. Meipo had no trouble finding Saytrs to fight. Gathering up a total of 10 pounds of Satyr Flesh was kind of icky. One of the Satyr’s dropped Hawkeye’s Cloak. It is a transmog item. Eventually, Meipo was able to gather up the Ten Pound of Flesh that Elune’s Brazier wanted. The divine brazier graciously endows you with a blessing. You feel a deep connection to the distant past having partaken of the ancient blessing granted by this relic. You determine to make as much as you can of this divine gift. Meipo found a statue of Elune’s Handmaiden. She had a quest called: To the Hilt! The handmaiden of Elune! It’s even more glorious than the stories tell. The legends surrounding this relic come to your mind as you draw near it. In ancient time, after battle, the enemies’ weapons were to be cast upon the basin in exchange for a divine gift of some sort. As you ponder this ritual, the glint of steel catches your eye from a nearby weapon rack… After collecting 20 Saytr Sabers from the weapon racks and various Satyrs in the region, Meipo brought them to the statue of Elune’s Handmaiden. With the ritual completed, you are awarded a divine gift. You can’t help but to feel a great sense of honor as you receive one of Elune’s boons. Sandals of Ritual are a transmog item. Meipo received Gloves of Nurture from Vahlarriel Demonslayer. The gloves are a transmog item. Meipo hit Level 56 at Firestone Point. Meipo earned the Pilgrim’s Peril Achievement at Thunder Bluff, will sitting in the Turkey Chair. Pilgrim’s Peril: While wearing either a Pilgrim’s Dress, Robe, or Attire, take a seat at each enemy capital’s Bountiful Table. Orgrimmar, Silvermoon City, Thunder Bluff, Undercity Meipo earned Pilgrim’s Paunch in Exodar while sitting in the Turkey Chair. Pilgrim’s Paunch: Acquire the Spirit of Sharing from a complete Bountiful Table feast at every Alliance capital. Darnassus, The Exodar, Ironforge, Stormwind Meipo earned the “FOOD FIGHT” Achievement outside of Stormwind. “FOOD FIGHT”: Bounce food off a fellow feaster’s head at a Bountiful Table. Meipo earned the Turkey Lurkey Achievement outside of Orgrimmar. There is a story that goes with that screenshot. Meipo was standing outside of Orgrimmar, hoping to turn a Goblin Rogue into a turkey so she could earn the Achievement. She started talking to a fellow Gnome, who just so happened to have a friend who was a Goblin Rogue. The Gnome convinced the Goblin to come by, and the Goblin agreed to be temporarily be turned into a Turkey. Turkey Lurkey: Blast those dirty sneaking Rogues with your Turkey Shooter! Blood Elf Rogue, Dwarf Rogue, Gnome Rogue, Goblin Rogue, Human Rogue, Night Elf Rogue, Orc Rogue, Troll Rogue, Undead Rogue, Worgen Rogue Meipo is riding the Squeakers, the Trickster mount. Together, they look like they fell out of a children’s story or a fairy tale. Meipo earned the Dangerous Love Achievement. Dangerous Love: Assist the Steamwheedle Cartel in stopping the sinister Crown Chemical Co. plot. Meipo hit Level 57 right after completing The Crown Chemical Co. dungeon. Meipo earned the Tough Love Achievement. Tough Love: Defeat the Crown Chemical Co. apothecaries in Shadowfang Keep. Meipo earned the Be Mine! Achievement by eating lots of candy hearts. Be Mine!: Eat the right “Bag of Candies” heart candies listed below: Be Mine!, I’ll follow you all around Azeroth, All yours, I’m all yours, Hot Lips, You’re Mine!, You’re the best!, I LOVE YOU! Meipo earned the Sweet Tooth Achievement by eating a lot of chocolate. Sweet Tooth: Sample the Love is in the Air candies listed below: Buttermilk Delight, Dark Desire, Sweet Surprise, Very Berry Cream It Might Just Save Your Life: Unleash the power of love contained within a holiday necklace. Meipo discovered Ban’ethil Hollow and hit Level 58. Meipo fought Agal (and one of Agal’s friends). Agal dropped the Imbued Pioneer Cloak. It is a transmog item. Meipo helped Oben Rageclaw in the Ban’ethil Barrow Den. Oben Rageclaw: I am finally free of the control of the Gnarlpine. Thank you, Meipo. My spirit may now rest peacefully forever in the Emerald Dream. Perhaps one day we may meet again, young mage. But for now, please accept this reward as a symbol of my gratitude. The Sleeping Robes are a transmog item. Meipo hit Level 59 after she completed The Crown Chemical Co. Dungeon. Meipo fought Ursal the Mauler. She also fought Lord Melenas. His head is a quest item. Meipo brought the quest item to Tallonkai Swiftroot. He gave her boots called Viny Wrappings. I don’t know if they are a transmog item. Meipo earned the Nation of Adoration Achievement. Nation of Adoration: Complete the Lovely Charm Bracelet daily quest for each Alliance capital. A Gift for the High Priestess of Elune, A Gift for the Prophet, A Gift for the Lord of Ironforge, A Gift for the King of Stormwind. Meipo hit Level 60 after she completed The Crown Chemical Co. Dungeon. #Blapril2020 Meipo the Mage – To Level 60! is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Deleting WoW ScreenshotsApril 20, 2020World of Warcraft / World of Warcraft otherOver the years, I have gathered up an abundance of screenshots from several games – including World of Warcraft. My goal is to use up as many of them as I can, since that was the point of taking them in the first place. The WoW screenshots in this blog post are from 2010. I no longer remember the quests, lore, or story line that goes with them. For context, I was using a Mac Mini in 2010. I don’t remember what type of monitor that was. Yes, my keyboard had stickers on it to look like a pirate flag. The mouse pad is of The Scream by Edvard Munch. My Tauren completed some kind of quest. I liked the contrast between the darkness of the cave and the bright light in front of my Tauren. This is Zoeie, a Dranei Shaman. She was my main for a long time. Zoeie is wearing a tabard with a spider web design. The design was changed often, but I liked this one the best. I took this screenshot because Zoeie had been cursed and I thought the glowing skulls, in a cloud of green poison, looked cool. The curse effect is more interesting when in a dark room. While I cannot remember what type of creature this one is, I do recall that it would run towards me and then suddenly stop. It sits and it stares. I’m fairly certain that this thing has undergone several aesthetic changes since 2010. Which one of my characters is looking at the green goo that is pouring down from somewhere? I have absolutely no idea. My shaman got lost in here. I took this screenshot because of the pattern of intertwined branches in the sky. The limited color palette in this screenshot was what caught my attention. Nearly everything is a variety of green. Zoeie is flying somewhere on a gryphon. The background of this screenshot uses a very limited gray color palette. I like the way the brightly colored gryphon stands out. Zoeie is riding a Striped Frostsaber through Westfall. Both of them look completely out of place. I’ve no idea why I bought her this mount. She’s definitely not a Night Elf, and this was long before mounts were automatically shared across characters. Once again, I’ve taken a screenshot where the subject matter pops out against the background. It was not intentional. Maybe this is just something that happens with people who have a degree in Art Education. Here is what Menethil Harbor looked like before it became flooded. In this one, Zoeie is flying over some ruins. This screenshot feels like something mystical is about to happen. In the center, there is a large stone with a mysterious rune carved on it. Below it, in a circle, is a row of candles (or something similar). A glowing creature is walking towards it. Floating rocks are in the air. This statue of an archer was located in the area where the Night Elves were at. I don’t think it exists in-game today. Or, if it does, it is probably in pieces. My very serious Death Knight, Riglee, is riding Gnome mount that is bouncy. I’ll end this blog post with a screenshot of Bessimu, my Tauren Warrior, riding a bat. Bessimu is wearing a hat from Brewfest. #Blapril2020 Deleting WoW Screenshots is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... WoW Classic: TeamworkApril 12, 2020World of Warcraft / World of Warcraft ClassicThe adventures of Vaca and Neverlast continue! This time, they set out to collect Raptor Heads and Centaur Bracers. If they were lucky, one of the Centaurs would drop a key that would open a chest. These screenshots were taken on September 19, 2019. Vaca started her day by learning how to cook Brilliant Smallfish. Warriors need a lot of food, so it seemed like a good idea to learn the Cooking Skill. Neverlast and Vaca took a flight to where they needed to be in order to complete a few quests they had started. It was much faster than walking there! They fought some Kolkars at The Forgotten Pools. It’s a lovely background to fight a battle in! Neverlast and Vaca make a good team. There’s just something about paring up a Warrior and a Druid that makes battles go well. The Tauren had the opportunity to explore The Forgotten Pools while working on a quest. The Tauren decided to find another area that had Centaurs, hoping that a different group would have more Bracers. There were plenty of Kolkar to fight in the Barrens, but they were too strong. The Tauren were able to separate out a few Kolkar from the crowd, and that almost worked. The disadvantage was that the battles lasted longer, and The Tauren had to take the time to heal up afterwards. They decided to return to The Forgotten Pools, where the Kolkar were easier to fight. This one didn’t have any Bracers, but did drop a Kolkar Booty Key. It was exactly what they needed to open a chest…. that they hadn’t found yet. Neverlast and Vaca celebrated their good luck and took a moment to enjoy the scenery. It’s easy to forget, while the fighting is going on, that there is still beauty in this world. The Tauren had managed to collect six out of the fifteen Centaur Bracers they needed in order to complete a quest. Vaca charged the next two Kolkar they saw, in an effort to speed things up. She knew that Neverlast was right behind her, and that he was very good at healing. The Kolkar Chest was located on top of a structure in the Barrens, near the area where the tougher Kolkar had gathered. Neverlast received 2 Mageroyal and 2 Briarthorn from the chest. It was a Druid quest, and Vaca was happy to help Neverlast complete it. Back to collecting Centaur Bracers. The Tauren now had eight out of the fifteen required for the quest. It was taking longer than expected, but for a Warrior, that just meant more opportunities to practice fighting skills. One would think that two Kolkar (who might have Cenatur Bracers) with two dinosaurs (who had parts needed for a separate quest) would be a lucrative battle. But, no. They didn’t drop anything useful. Vaca was Level 14, and Neverlast was Level 15. The aftermath of this battle was impressive, and worthy of taking a moment to remember it. Back to The Forgotten Pools! After slaying yet another Kolkar (that did not have Centaur Bracers), a small herd of graceful animals ran past Vaca and Neverlast. To Vaca, it looked like a mother deer, leading her babies to safety. Perhaps Neverlast, as a Druid, knew the proper names of these graceful creatures. The Tauren stood still and allowed them to pass by. To switch things up for a while, the Tauren changed targets and went after Sunscale Screechers. They needed to finish a quest that required them to collect the heads of these loud, fast, creatures. All of the Screechers clearly had heads at the start of the battle. Unfortunately, Vaca’s two-handed Goblin Smasher sometimes turned those heads into a pile of goo by the end of the battle, making them unusable. At least, that’s what she figured must have happened, since so many of the Screechers didn’t have a head anymore when The Tauren tried to loot their corpses. These two Kolkar dropped just enough Centaur Bracers for The Tauren to finish the quest. It was a big relief to not have to fight these angry people anymore. The Tauren returned to Rethgar Deathgate, an Orc who stood at the top of a tower in The Barrens. “How goes your hunting?”, he asked. Vaca and Neverlast handed a pile of Centaur Bracers to Rethgar Deathgate. Vaca hit Level 15 and obtained a Stonewood Hammer. It was two-handed, which she preferred, and more powerful than the Goblin Smasher. Next, Vaca followed Neverlast up Dreadmist Peak, so he could complete some kind of Druid quest. It wasn’t something Vaca understood, though he tried to explain it to her. The air grew thick with red colored dust, making it hard to see – and breathe. Vaca wasn’t sure how she would see their enemies before they were right on top of them. The Burning Blade Orcs at the top of this awful place used magic that glowed brightly. That made it much easier for Vaca to see – and hit – them. Together, The Tauren slayed them all so Neverlast could finish his Druid quest – whatever it was. Back to The Crossroads, where Neverlast and Vaca turned in the Raptor Heads to Garzog. He saw the raptors as “thieves”. Vaca didn’t much care what Garzog thought of them – she just wanted to turn in the raptor heads she and Neverlast collected. Bag space is scarce! The Tauren ran into Mankrik at the Crossroads. He gave them two quests to work on: Consumed by Hatred, and Lost in Battle. Mankrik had a lot to say: Mankrik: I came to the Crossroads from the south seeking help, warrior, but I find only cowards who turn their backs on me — even the mighty Thork insults me so. He is a good leader, but his dismissal of my plea causes me great anger. He claims my rage makes me hasty — that it clouds my judgement — but I will not rest until I have vengeance! The Tauren decided to help him out, as soon as they were able to. The Tauren ended their day at Thunder Bluff. Vaca decided to give the pile of wool she collected to Rumstag Proudstrider, who was seeking donations of wool. The Tauren had a shortage of cloth, and Vaca was willing to share what she had found. WoW Classic: Teamwork is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... WoW Classic: Questing for CashApril 5, 2020World of Warcraft / World of Warcraft ClassicVaca is a Tauren Warrior who recently hit Level 13. She, and her friend Neverlast, a Tauren Druid, have been adventuring together through WoW Classic. Today, they traveled around, turned in some quests that they were able to finish, and picked up some new quests they could work on next time. These screenshots were taken on September 17, 2019 Vaca’s day started where she stopped, in Hunter’s Rise near the Warrior Trainer and the Hunter Trainer. It was time to try out some of the new skills she learned. She flew to Thunder Bluff to meet up with her friend Neverlast. Zhevra made good targets for Vaca to test her new skills on. Neverlast and Vaca needed to kill off some Razormane in order to complete a quest. They ran into some helpful players who had the same quest, including a Troll named Zarakhan. It was surprisingly easy to find players who understand the value of joining up with others who are on the same quest as they are. Typically, this group lasts until everyone kills enough of the required enemy to finish their quest. An Orc Warlock named Brynni helped Vaca and Neverlast fight Kreening Snarlsnout. Neverlast marked him with a skull (possibly to help Vaca focus.) Together, they successfully killed Kreening Snarlsnout. Before leaving this area, our group needed to obtain a Supply Box and then take it to Crossroads. Thork: Welcome to the Crossroads, warrior. My name is Thork — I lead the defenses here in the name of the Warchief. Please feel free to make yourself at home. As long as you mind your business, no one should have any problem with you taking up some space. There are many threats to our safety here. If you’ve already become familiar with the lay of the land, speak to the others here — perhaps they have tasks for you to do. Thork is the questgiver who gave us The Disruption Ends quest and the Supplies for the Crossroads quest. Neverlast, Vaca, and Brynni were able to turn in two quests to Thork. Thonk: Cut off the head of their leader, and chaos ensues, Vaca. Learn this lesson well. It will aid you in the future. The boars will flounder without direction, and we will be able to take back the Barrens. He didn’t seem to care how many adventurers banded together to complete this quest. Vaca was rewarded with a Cinched Belt. Thork: How goes your search for the supplies, Vaca? I trust the quillboar fall under your strength easily. It was nice to unload a heavy box of Supplies on to Thork, and to get back some bag space. Our small party ventured out to collect Fungal Spores. The spores weren’t difficult to find. The Kolkars around the spores, however, were dangerous. All three party members died. The Lushwater Oasis was actually sort of pretty. It was nice to look at while taking a short rest after finally gathering up the required number of spores. Vaca hit Level 14 after right after kiling yet another Zhevra. We had a quest to collect Zevhra hooves. Many of them didn’t have hooves, which Vaca and Neverlast found both perplexing and disturbing. Back to The Crossroads to speak with Serga Darkthorn. Serga Darkthorn: How may zhevra have you slain? The Tauren looked at her, and decided not to directly answer that question. Was Serga Darkthorn aware of how difficult it was to find zhevra that actually had hooves? Unsure whether or not she was joking, The Tauren simply handed over the Zhevra hooves they had painstakingly collected. Serga Darkthorn: Not bad, Vaca. Those zhevra hold a lot of strength in their legs. A sharp kick from them on its haunches! It looks like you have some strength in you too. Are you ready for a real challenge? Serga Darkthorn gave us the Prowlers of the Barrens quest. She asked the Tauren to collect 7 Prowler Claws from Savannah Prowlers. The Tauren wondered if the prowlers would all actually have claws, or if they were experiencing the same mysterious plague as the zehvra were. Eventually, they shrugged, accepted the quest, and figured that the effort would at least give them some money. Next, Vaca and Neverlast spoke with Apothecary Helbrim. He was the one who sent them out to get Fungal Spores. Apothecary Helbrim: Do you have the spores, Vaca? There is a concoction I must send to my associate in Thunder Bluff, which requires the spores… Apothecary Helbrim: Ah, good. These spores have rendered nicely. Thank you, Vaca. Neverlast was already making arrangements for the flight to Thunder Bluff. Flying across the Barrens to Thunder Bluff is faster than walking there The Tauren needed to go to The Pools of Vision, which is a small cave system underneath Spirit Rise in Thunder Bluff. There are several Forsaken in there, which seemed very strange to Vaca. She wondered why they weren’t living in their own city. Were these Forsaken outcasts? On her way through the cave, Vaca was stopped by Clarice Foster, who was a higher level than she was. Clarice Foster: Filthy scum! Leaves me for his damn crusade. Because “the Light is the most important thing we have against the threats the undead pose.” Well, what about his children?! What about ME?! Night after night I sat patiently waiting for him… always second to his blasted duty! Well, witness what “justice” brings you, Vaca! He’s dead and I’m bearing the very thing he was trying to stop! Take this piece of junk and put it on his tomb at the Sepulcher. I want nothing to do with it anymore… or him! Clarice pressed a pendant into Vaca’s hand, and told her to look for Yuriv’s Tomb in Silverpine. Vaca didn’t entirely understand what Clarice Forster meant by “the Light”. Maybe these pale people can’t go out in the sun? Neverlast and Vaca found eventually found Apothecary Zamah in the Pools of Vision. They handed off the rendered spores from Apothecary Helbrim, and didn’t ask any questions about what those spores would be used for. Vaca’s day started, and ended, in Thunder Bluff. It was time for a rest. #Blapril2020 WoW Classic: Questing for Cash is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Squeakers, The TricksterApril 2, 2020World of Warcraft / World of Warcraft Pets and MountsSqueakers, the Trickster, is a mount that was released in January of 2020. It was made available to players who had an existing 6-month subscription with a future renewal date. Those who do not have a 6-month subscription to World of Warcraft can purchase Squeakers, the Trickster for $25.00 in the Blizzard Shop. I found Squeakers the Trickster in the Mounts tab. It is wrapped up in a gift box that the player gets to open. The flavor text on this mount says: The locals in Halfhill swear that whenever a batch of grain is missing, a farmworking instrument is misplaced, or a bushel of berries can’t be found, you can hear a mischievous squeaking, and are reminded to slow down and accept what life gives you. Inside is a highly decorated white rat that all of my World of Warcraft characters can use. It even has a saddle! And yes, it does make little squeaking sounds. Here is my Death Knight Gnome, Riglee, riding Squeakers. This mount automatically scales to the fastest riding skill known by each of your characters. It can be used as either a ground mount, or a flying mount, or both. If your character has the flying mount ability, Squeakers can launch itself into the air, while doing a graceful spin. It then stays in the air and you can direct it to where you want to go – just like with any other flying mount. Squeakers will do the graceful spin even if your character doesn’t have flying unlocked. The difference is that Squeakers will land back on the ground after spinning. Here is my Death Knight Gnome, Riglee, flying away on a rat mount with shiny wings! In this screenshot, you can see Squeakers’ adorable little hands and feet! Off they go, seeking adventure! #Blapril2020 Squeakers, The Trickster is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... WoW Classic: Flight PlansJanuary 27, 2020World of Warcraft / World of Warcraft ClassicVaca has acquired a weapon called Goblin Smasher, and is ready to put it to use! She was Level 12, and prepared to go finish some quests. These screenshots were taken on September 12, 2019. The day started with a flight over The Barrens. The goal for Vaca, and her friend Neverlast, was to turn in a quest at Thunder Bluff. Shortly after arriving, Vaca fell right off the ramp. She sat at the bottom, waiting for Neverlast to catch up with her. They turned in the Ride to Thunder Bluff quest to Ahana the Leather Armor Merchant. As you can see, Vaca and Neverlast had matching, fancy, purple cloaks. Ahanu: Ah, a new bundle of hides. I will get to work on these immediately! Thank you, sister. You have done me a great service. Here are some coins to pay for your time and travel costs. Ahanu quickly crafted some leather goods. He put them into a bag (one for each of us to carry) and sent us to to Tal the Wind Rider Master. Tal the Wind Rider Master: Greetings, warrior! What can I do for you? The answer to that question was obvious. Now leaving Thunder Bluff – destination Crossroads. Somewhere along the way, our Wind Riders synced up and became one. After landing on solid ground, Vaca and Neverlast spoke with Jahan Hawkwing at the Crossroads. He is the Leather & Mail Armor Merchant. We gave him Ahanu’s Leather Goods. Jahan Hawkwing: Vaca, you are back from Thunder Bluff? Did you deliver the hides to Ahanu? Eventually, the Tauren found their way to Ratchet. Neverlast and Vaca found the dock, and spoke with Wharfmaster Dizzywig. Wharfmaster Dizzywig: You seek passage on the next ship, or have some item you wish to send aboard it? I honestly cannot remember who we got this quest from, or where we obtained the Secure Crate that Wharfmaster Dizzywig wanted. It didn’t take long to walk from the dock to the Flight Master. Neverlast and Vaca discovered a new flight path! They immediately made use of it! It was easy to see why this place was called Thorn Hill. Neverlast and Vaca make a good team. But, sometimes Warriors get the idea that they can take on more than they actually are capable of fighting. Both of the Tauren ended up here. The Tauren needed to collect a few more body parts from plainstriders in order to finish a quest. Vaca was very close to hitting Level 13. Killing plainstriders for experience points will do! Vaca hit Level 13 after killing a plainstrider. Neverlast was already at Level 13, and had been for a little while. The Tauren spoke with Serga Darkthorn at the Crossroads. She was the one who sent Neverlast and Vaca out to obtain plainstrider parts. Serga Darkthorn: Have you collected the plainstrider beaks? The Tauren handed over the beaks, and completed the Plainstrider Menace quest. What was Serga Darkthorn doing with the plainstrider beaks? It was a mystery. Serga Darkthorn: How many zhevra have you slain? This was a quest that the Tauren hadn’t gotten around to working on yet. Serga Darkthorn wants Vaca and Neverlast to collect zhevra hooves. It wasn’t clear what Serga was going to do with those. The Tauren decided it was better not to ask her about it. Before leaving the Crossroads, Neverlast and Vaca stopped to talk with Thork. He was the one who gave them a quest called Disrupt the Attacks and sent them out to kill Razormane. Thork gave them a new quest called The Disruption Ends. Thork: One of my scouts witnessed an attack on a caravan from Durotar, Vaca. The culprits are indeed from the Razormane tribe of quilboars. One of the quilboars in particular is leading the raids: Kreenig Snarlsnout. He was seen northeast of here, just south of the road from Durotar. If the threat is to be ended, then Kreenig must die. To be sure the attacks cease, though, I say we add insult to injury. Kill Kreenig along with more of their tribe, and return to me when you have his tusk. Before slaughtering more Razormane, Neverlast and Vaca returned to Thunder Bluff. Hunter’s Rise had class trainers that could give them access to new and improved skills. The Hunter Trainer and the Warrior Trainer share this space. Vaca spent some time – and money – getting new skills and upgrading some of the skills she already had. She would have to return here again after leveling up some more and unlocking new skills. This seemed like a good place to stop and take a rest. Much progress was made, and Neverlast and Vaca needed to gather energy to fight the Razormane when next they set out. WoW Classic: Flight Plans is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Out of Spoons (Chronic Illness)More Dental Care During a PandemicJanuary 23, 2021Doctor Appointments / Out of SpoonsPhoto by Shawn Thorpe For whatever reason, I ended up needing a lot more dental care than I expected this year. Trying to see a dentist during a pandemic is difficult. It is also a little weird because of changes made in response to COVID-19. Before you read this blog post, you might want to read the first part: Dental Care During a Pandemic. My next dental appointment was scheduled for August 6, 2020. It wasn’t clear what would take place at that appointment. Would it be a cleaning? Would I be getting a small titanium rod in my jaw (the next step in a tooth-replacement process)? As before, my husband and I had to wait outside the dentist’s office when we arrived. The lobby was closed due to COVID-19 restrictions. I sent a text to the office to let them know I was waiting on a bench across the street. Eventually, the woman who does cleanings came out the back door of the office and waved me over. She used one of those forehead thermometers to check if I had a fever. After passing that test, she directed me inside to the room where the cleanings take place. This was my first cleaning of the year. The previous one got canceled shortly after California did a “stay at home” order in March. At the time, I think many of us believed that following that order would be annoying, but worth it, if the result was the end of COVID-19. I didn’t realize I was getting a cleaning that day until I was directed to the room where it happens. The woman who does the cleaning was in full PPE gear, which I had seen her use on my previous visit. (That visit was a quick check from the dentist to see if the site where a broken tooth was extracted was healing well). The woman who does the cleaning did not know that I had a tooth extracted since the last time she saw me. I had to explain that I somehow broke a permanent cap and what was left of the tooth that was underneath it. She shook her head. “I lot of people have broken their teeth,” she said. “I think it’s from stress because of the pandemic.” It turned out that she and I both had a birthday in the same month. She told me that she didn’t feel like celebrating it this year. “Can’t go anywhere,” she shrugged. I told her I felt the same way, and didn’t do anything special on my birthday this year either. The checkup and cleaning is covered by my insurance, and I wouldn’t have to pay for any of it. The woman who does the cleaning thought I had another cracked tooth. “It looks like a chunk has been taken out of it.” While I remembered the now extracted tooth making a crunch sound when I broke it – I had no memory of another tooth breaking. I have one more permanent cap left in my mouth. The woman who does the cleaning discovered that I was going to need a root canal on that one. The dentist, who came in after the cleaning to do a quick check, agreed. It turns out the broken tooth was not actually broken. He had altered it when the extraction was happening, in preparation for the next steps. This dentist referred me to a dentist in another town for an assessment on whether or not I needed a root canal. I kind of freaked out about that because neither I, nor my husband, drive. Taking an Uber or Lyft – there and back – would be really expensive. My dentist convinced me that having the root canal done in the other town would be less expensive than here. He did this as the receptionist was putting my appointment with him for a root canal into the computer. She seemed displeased that he was making her change that. The strangest thing about having to set up an appointment for a root canal at a dentist I’d never seen before is that I had no way to contact their office. The receptionist at my dentist’s office told me that the other dentist would call me when they were ready to make an appointment. I was told I’d have to negotiate a price with their office. I have absolutely no idea how to budget for this unknown cost. It is also a bit alarming to know that I likely need a root canal – and then to be stuck in limbo waiting for an appointment from a dentist I’ve never seen before. There was nothing I could do but wait. On August 19, I got a call from the receptionist at the dentist’s office that is in another town. She wanted to schedule me for a consultation for a root canal. Unfortunately, the appointment she was offering was on the exact same day that I would be having a titanium rod put in my jaw at my regular dentist’s office. “I have no idea how long it will take me to heal,” I informed her. The next option was an appointment two days from now. I decided to take it. When I was told the appointment would take an hour, so I could fill out paperwork, I convinced the receptionist to email those forms. Neither I, nor my husband, can drive due to our chronic illnesses. We don’t have a car anymore. This means we would be taking the bus to the town the new dentist is in and then walking part of the way to the office. My hope was the appointment would be shorter than expected. After that, my husband and I would be doing the same process in reverse to get back home. The bus would be less expensive than if we took an Uber or Lyft back and forth. At the moment, both ride-sharing companies were fighting a lawsuit that would require them to give their California workers the same benefits as full-time employees. Each one threatened to stop service in California rather than comply with the law. The bus was our only option. Later that day, I got a text from my regular dentist’s office. “Your co-pay for your appointment tomorrow is $605,” the receptionist texted. “I thought my appointment was on the 24th?” I texted back. Receptionist apologizes and clarified that yes, my appointment is on the 24th. “Wrong patient”. It was a huge relief that I was not expected to come up with an extra $605 on top of the $1,500 that the appointment would cost. The next day, I started getting worried about having to go out of town for the consultation on a root canal. The COVID-19 pandemic was ongoing and I, a person with autoimmune issues, was worried about what would happen if the people on the bus chose not to wear masks. The photo at the top of this blog post shows what the sky outside looked like. Smoke was coming from a fire that was too far away for us to have to worry about evacuation. The smoke from that fire drifted here. California’s fire season had begun, and it was really fierce this time around. It was 93 degrees outside at nearly 6 p.m. The weather app on my phone showed a warning about “unhealthy air quality”. The pollen count was 8.0, which was enough to make people who have no allergies cough and wheeze. I had a bad feeling about this. My weather app and the pollen.com app allow me to view data from not only where I live, but also whatever location I want to add. From this, I learned that the temperature in the other town would be 107 degrees tomorrow, and the pollen count would be 10.1. When the pollen count reaches 10 I lose all ability to focus. I stop making sense, cannot focus on anything, and feel extremely sick. The weather app said that the air quality where I live would be “Unhealthy Air Quality” tomorrow. The other town’s air quality would be “Very Unhealthy Air Quality”. Rather than risk my health, I called the out-of-town dentist and listened to the automated message informing me that the office was closed due to COVID-19. Patients who needed emergency dental care could leave a message and would be called back if the dentist thought the person was having an emergency. When the message ended, I stated my name, explained that the weather conditions and the smoke made it dangerous for me to go outside due to my chronic illnesses, and cancelled the appointment. And then I started to worry about how much I would be charged for cancelling an appointment the night before. When I start panicking about money, I have a tendency to push myself into working harder, even if I’m not really well enough for that to be a good idea. I was trying to complete as much of my freelance writing work as possible. It was 4 in the morning, and already 86 degrees outside. The pollen count was 8.5. The weather app warned that the air quality was “Unhealthy Air Quality for Sensitive Groups”. That’s me. I made the right decision to stay inside and away from the excessive heat and the smokey, pollen filled air. Here’s what I wrote on social media about how my day was going: I have a portable air conditioner on, sitting a few feet away from me. It helps lower the temperature in here in the summer, and filters the air somewhat.Nearby is a really good air filter/purifier that does a really good job of filtering out pollen, dust, and other particulate matter.All of the windows are shut, but I can still smell smoke in the air. The mobile home we live in is old and far from being air tight.The air smells like popcorn that has been slightly burned in a microwave.I have started coughing, and am typing this while wearing my thickest cloth mask. The coughing has stopped, for now. The receptionist at the out-of-town dentist called me back and was extremely nice to me. She honestly seemed to understand why I needed to cancel. She looked up some information and discovered that my referral will last for 90 days. There was time to reschedule, and they would call me back for an appointment in mid-September. This gives me enough time to get the titanium rod placed in my jaw at my dentist’s office and recover from it at least a little bit. To my great relief, I was not being charged anything for cancelling the appointment. Later, I learned that several businesses, including some that function as banks, had closed their offices due to the smoke. They didn’t want to expose their workers – or customers – to that danger. On August 23rd, my dentist texted me a form to fill out before my appointment the next day. It was a short questionnaire that was designed to help them figure out if I might have COVID-19. I filled out the questions with “no” to most of them. One question asked if I have any autoimmune diseases. Yes! I have allergies. On August 24th, I got up early so I could be at the dentist’s office in time for my 9 a.m. appointment. My husband and I took a Lyft to the office. The driver was wearing a mask, and so were we. As before, the reception area at the dentist’s office was closed, and I was told to text them when I arrived. Between the last time I was here, and now, the office had three very new wooden benches placed in front of it. We wouldn’t have to wait on the bench across the street anymore. The new benches were comfortable. The dentist gave me Novocaine – this time without epinephrine. (It makes me shake.) The office has the air conditioning blasting through a vent right above my feet. I started shaking, and the receptionist came in with a soft blanket for me to use. The shaking didn’t stop right away. I wasn’t scared. Eventually the dentist figured out that the shaking was because I hadn’t eaten breakfast and my blood sugar dropped. He offered me two different fruit drinks that contained sugar – which should counteract the shaking. Unfortunately, I was allergic to ingredients in both of them. The dentist sent someone to go to the 7-11 and pick up some sugar. The procedure to place a titanium rod into my jaw was absolutely painless. I didn’t feel a thing other than some pressure. From my perspective, it seemed like the dentist was screwing the titanium rod into my jaw, with a tiny Allen wrench. So, this is what it would feel like to be a piece of IKEA furniture! The whole thing was done in about 30 minutes. I watched the required video, and was given some paper that had the same information. The dentist, and the receptionist, both strongly recommended that I take a pain killer BEFORE the Novocaine wore off. I still had plenty of that leftover from when they did the extraction. The receptionist gave me a prescription for an antibiotic, which she said to start taking that day. To my surprise, the receptionist said that I still had some money on my account. I’m absolutely terrible about understanding numbers, especially right after having dental surgery. The total bill that was originally estimated to cost $1,500 was now $1,917. I have no explanation for why the cost increased. My husband had to wait outside for me, so I was texting him to let him know I was done and what the cost of the bill turned out to be. We took a Lyft home. As directed by my dentist, I took a pain killer before the Novocaine wore off. Spent a hazy half-hour or so watching a friend stream a video game on Twitch, and then went to sleep for a while. My husband went back outside while I was sleeping to get the prescription for the antibiotic filled, and I have been taking it as directed. The most interesting part about all of this is that the pain from the dental surgery is not much different in intensity than the pain my sinuses are in when the pollen count is too high. I walk around with this kind of pain all the time, and have grown used to it. This realization is actually kind of alarming. August 26: I have been taking Vicodin, as prescribed and directed by my dentist, to cope with pain from dental surgery. It feels like time stops while I’m under the influence of this medication. August 30: The receptionist at my regular dentist’s office sent me a text. My next appointment will be on September 29 at 11:00 AM. I texted back that I would be there, as requested. The appointment is so the dentist can check on how I am healing after having a titanium implant placed in my jaw, and a tiny metal plate on my gums to protect it. This is very similar to the appointment I had after the extraction, so I know it will be a quick appointment with no cost to me. August 31: The antibiotics I am taking are relatively mild. I’m not having any terrible reactions to them. My biggest problem is that they make me super tired. Between that, and the high pollen count, I am absolutely exhausted and taking way more long naps than typical. There are five more antibiotics left in the bottle. September 1: I finally finished all of the antibiotics! The generic I was given cost $2.11 for 24 capsules. Overall, I didn’t have any terrible side effects from it. The worst part was it made me even more exhausted than typical, and I ended up sleeping more than usual. September 6: The information that came with the antibiotic included a warning that side effects may last for a few weeks after I’ve taken all the medication. The only side effects I had while taken them was (additional) exhaustion. Very unpleasant side effects started today. I am in no danger – just really unhappy about this. Typically, I lose weight too quickly from this specific side effect. And doing so can push my borderline anemia into full anemia. The way to prevent that is to eat more – and I don’t wanna. September 29: Today, I went back to my dentist’s office – again – to have what I was told would be a quick check on the titanium screw that the dentist implanted a while ago. The purpose is to see how well I’m healing so we can do the next – extremely expensive part – as soon as possible. The dental assistant took an x-ray that showed that everything is good. I was given an appointment in early December to come back and start the extremely expensive part. It is unclear to me if this will take more than one appointment. The receptionist asked if the other dentist, the one they referred me to for a consultation about a root canal, gave me an appointment. I explained that I was given an appointment, but then the smoke from the fires got so bad that it was unsafe for me to go outside. I had to cancel and reschedule. “We got a lot of cancellations and reschedules, too”, she explained. She then made it clear that I really needed to call back the other dentist and try to get an appointment as soon as possible. It turns out that the referral only lasts for 90 days, and if they can’t get me in within that time frame – my dentist would have to send a referral all over again. I was feeling okay after leaving the dentist’s office. My husband and took a little walk downtown. I don’t leave the house anymore unless I have to for health care purposes because my immune system sucks, so it was nice to get a little bit of exercise. After returning home, I called the other dentist to get an appointment for a consultation on a root canal. The receptionist gave me an appointment for two days from then, and would be within the time span allowed by the referral. My husband helped me fill out an incredibly lengthy form that the dentist needed in order to assess my need for a root canal. We emailed the form back to the receptionist, who kindly emailed back that they received it. October 1, 2020: My husband hired a driver to take us to my dentist appointment. I have started thinking of this dentist as “second dentist”. It makes it easier for me to keep track of which dentist does what to me. The driver lives in the town that the office of “second dentist” is located. This driver usually takes people to, and from, wine tastings. He was happy to drive out of town to pick us up, drop us at the office of “second dentist”, and then take us home after I was all finished. We had a lovely conversation with the driver on the way out (and also on the way back). The office door was locked, and a note said to press a buzzer. A receptionist, wearing a mask, came to the door. She let me in to take my temperature – with one of those “forehead guns” – because it was incredibly hot outside. She then went around to behind a plastic screen and asked for my driver’s license and dental health insurance card. I had to sign some forms by picking up a pen from the “clean pens” can. The pen went into the “dirty pens” can when I was done. A nurse, covered in PPE, walked me into a room and took my blood pressure. She brought up an x-ray of the tooth that might need a root canal on a very large screen that was on the wall. The permanent cap I have on what is left of that tooth was obvious. Unfortunately, the x-ray was unable to show what was under the permanent cap. The dentist came in, also covered in PPE, and asked me a few questions. Everyone I met there was extremely calm and kind. He asked me to take off my mask so he could take a look at the tooth and asses if it needed a root canal. “Second dentist” poked at it with some dental tools, and used one of those little mirrors on a stick to take a closer look. He used some machine behind me to make a dental tool very cold, and I was instructed to raise my hand when I feel the cold. Eventually, I felt the cold. It did not hurt or bother me. After doing the assessment, “second dentist” announced that I probably do need a root canal. He noted what first dentist had already told me – that I had an opening in my gum above that tooth. He also said that I have an infection. When I asked if I needed antibiotics, I was informed that I did not. My body was fighting it. My body was fighting it? I found this hard to believe. When I got home, I started taking an herbal supplement that I got from my acupuncturist. The supplement functions like a mild antibiotic. There was potential that what was left of the tooth under the permanent cap would be insufficient, and he would be unable to do a root canal. If so, then he would put in a temporary cap and send me back to first dentist for an extraction. The nurse pointed out that she thought my insurance required the office to get permission before doing the work. I was left in the dental chair to watch what I assumed was a National Geographic video featuring birds who are trying to attract mates. The nurse returned and confirmed that my insurance requires permission before they can do the root canal. I was sent back to the receptionist, who gave me a pile of forms to fill, initial, and sign. The cost today was $45. The forms held an alarming list of potential things that could go wrong during a root canal. One was listed as “sinus perforation”. The receptionist stopped “second dentist” and the nurse to explain that one. “Second dentist” assured me that would not happen. I let them know I have bad allergies. “Second dentist” recommended I take allergy medication before the next appointment. He also wanted me to take a Sudafed, which is a decongestant. “Second dentist” explained that taking it would prevent me from having what I think of as post nasal drip while the procedure was going on. The paperwork also had an entire page that was focused on “sedation medication”. I had no idea what that was. Long story short, if the insurance approved, “second dentist” would send “sedation medication” to my pharmacy. I was instructed to pick it up immediately. It was important that I bring the medication to second dentist’s office and take the pill there, where they can monitor me. I tried to explain that I have a high pain tolerance, due to fibromyalgia. I also made it clear that it is incredibly difficult to knock me out. The receptionist explained that the purpose was to sedate me so I would be calm while the dentist was working. I ended up agreeing to pick it up from the pharmacy and bring it to “second dentist’s” office. No idea what kind of medication it will be, if it has gluten in it, or if it conflicts with the antihistamines I’m already taking. My husband was waiting for me on the bench outside the office. They only allow the patient to come inside. He contacted our driver, who took us back home. We intend to call on him again if/when second dentist hears back from the insurance company and has permission to grant me an appointment. The pre-authorization price I was given was $1,342. I am mentally and physically exhausted by the thought of the dental work in my near future and the money it is going to cost. October 2: I took a nap earlier today. After waking up, I wondered why I felt so awful. Then I remembered that I have an infection in the gum area where I (might) need a root canal, it is 100 degrees outside at 3PM, and my weather app says the air quality is “Unhealthy”. October 17, 2020: I received mail from my dental health insurance provider. It was a “Pre-Determination of Benefits”. The letter included a chart that showed each and every little piece of the dental care that “second dentist” was going to provide me with. The amounts shown were disturbing. Fortunately, the dental health insurance would actually cover some of it. It still was going to cost me $775 out of pocket. October 18, 2020: I got a second “Pre-Determination of Benefits” letter in the mail from my dental health insurance provider. It was identical to the one that was sent to me the day before. Hmm… I think I see a way for the dental health insurance to cut down on some of their costs. They could send ONE of “Pre-Determination of Benefits” letter to the patient instead of two. October 19, 2020: I got a phone call from the office of “second dentist”. The very kind receptionist was calling to schedule me an appointment for a root canal. She said the dental health insurance approved, and asked me if I received a copy of the cost from the dental health insurance. “Yes!”, I responded. “They sent two copies to me.” The receptionist giggled. She then asked me what day I would be available for the root canal appointment. She didn’t know that I had been sleeping right before she called. This left me a bit flustered. I got out of bed and went to my computer, trying to figure out what day would be best for me. “How about… a Tuesday?” I made a quick decision to pick a day when I didn’t have a Dungeons & Dragons game to play, and when I wouldn’t be planning to record a podcast. “Ok, a Tuesday…” The receptionist offered me an appointment on November 10, and I took it. The appointment would be at 1:00 in the afternoon, and could last until at least 3:30 to 4:00. Why would a root canal take so long? The reason was due to the “sedation medication”. Someone at the office of “second dentist” would call in a prescription for that medication to my pharmacy of choice a week before my appointment. I was to bring it with me to the dental appointment. They would monitor me as I took this medication. The receptionist made it clear that I would need to find someone else to drive me home from the appointment, as I would not be able to safely drive after taking the “sedation medication”. I asked the receptionist for the name of the medication, so I could research it online. This was important, because I’ve had too many bad experiences with medications that had an inactive ingredient that I was allergic to. I asked the receptionist if it was safe for me to take my regular allergy medication the night before I was on the “sedation medication”. She checked with “second dentist”, who said it would be okay to do that. I am not allowed to have food or drink six hours before the appointment. The receptionist explained that this is because I will be in the office for three hours. The first thing I did after the phone call ended was to get online and search for the inactive ingredients of the “sedation medication”. Fortunately, it appears to be gluten-free. This is not the first time I had a root canal. For the first one, the dentist (who has since retired) gave me Novocaine and started working on the procedure after it kicked in. I remember she had the lights in the room dimmed. It will be interesting to see what the “sedation medication” does to me. I have no fear of the dentist or the work he will do on me. If I had to guess, the office of “second dentist” gets a lot of patients who are extremely phobic of dentists. November 4, 2020: I ventured out of my home with my husband, during the pandemic. We both wore masks – because it is the smart thing to do – and the bus required riders to wear them. The purpose of this trip was to pick up the “sedation medication” that “second dentist” prescribed. We figured that, due to the type of medication, the pharmacy would not allow him to pick it up for me. I had to be there in person. My husband said that the pharmacy wanted to see my ID. I woke up with what I call “allergy face”, and took benadryl before going outside. This is not something I would do if I was alone, just in case the benadryl hit stronger than typical. If nothing else, this trip to the pharmacy would force me to stop refreshing The Guardian’s live feed about the election. November 10, 2020: My husband and I, once again, hired a driver to take us to “second dentist’s” office. It was not located in the town we live in. The dentist’s receptionist made it clear that I would NOT be able to drive myself home from this appointment. We were a little early, and the office was closed. Eventually, they let me in. Shawn had to wait outside due to COVID-19 restrictions. Long story short, the receptionist instructed me to take both of the “sedation medication” pills while she watched. They eventually kicked in. I have no conscious memory of having the root canal. I later learned that those pills were a mind eraser. We had to wait for the hired car to come pick us up. My husband later said that the dentist assistant came to the door and explained to my husband about important details that she knew I would not remember. I posted two mostly incoherent posts on social media. I didn’t remember typing them. Apparently, I wanted to let my friends know I was done with the root canal and was ok. The first post said: “Have returned from the dentist. Am on a high ammount of a drug ive never taken before Very sleep and uncoordinated now Dentist sat root canal went well. I,m not feeling any pain at the momet” The second post was one in which I tried to respond to a friend, who replied to my first post. It said: “Im really spacy right now and much less coordinated when tryintg to walk Cant spell mucj oh here right now Sleepy calm hungry Got root canal seems unlikly I need an extraction I’m not making muchsnse sorry” December 1, 2020: Today, I go back to the dentist for what is hopefully the last of 2020’s dental work. I’m not entirely sure what is being done today. It might be the day I get a porcelain tooth placed on the titanium screw that was put into my jaw earlier this year. If so… then I’m likely done with dental work for a while. December 1, 2020: I am back from the dentist. Today, the dentist did a thing that will be used to make my porcelain tooth. (I’m in “fibro fog” right now, so words are difficult). The weirdest thing that happened was when the dentist reached into my mouth and unscrewed the titanium screw in my jaw so he could do the … thing. No pain at all. I feel like a cyborg. I go back in three weeks for the porcelain crown. We have already paid for it. December 22, 2020: Porcelain tooth acquired! Took a little bit for the dentist to take out the titanium screw that was in my jaw and replace it with the titanium screw that is attached to my porcelain tooth. It’s gonna take a little while before this tooth feels normal. All dental work for 2020 is completed and paid off. The only thing I have scheduled for 2021 is a checkup/cleaning in March.... A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part 4: December and JanuaryJanuary 19, 2021health insurance / Out of SpoonsImage by David Peterson from Pixabay This blog post covers the damage that the Trump Administration – and the GOP – have done in an effort to restrict and remove access to health care from the American people. The series could be described as “receipts”. The good news is that the Trump Administration ends on January 20, 2021. The Biden-Harris Administration will replace them. Joe Biden was Vice-President during the Obama Administration – when the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act went into affect. I believe the incoming administration will put great effort into ensuring that people have affordable health care. There is more good news! The results of the 2020 election – including the Georgia runoff election – put Democrats in a good place. We will have a President who is a Democrat, a Democratic majority in the House, and a Democratic majority in the Senate. This blog post also highlights everything that the Democrats (and other people outside of government) have done in an effort to protect American’s access to health care – of all types. That includes protections for DACA recipients and people who are LGBTQ+. You may want to take a look at previous blog posts in this series. Doing so will give you an overall picture of what the Trump Administration and the GOP have done to harm American’s health since 2017. A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part One A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Two A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Three A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Three – Continued A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempt to Destroy Obamacare – Part Four A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Four: April, May, June A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Four; July, August, September A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Four: October and November December 2020 December 2, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Secures Appellate Court Victory in Lawsuit Challenging Trump Administration Public Charge Rule”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today secured an order from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirming a prior preliminary injunction in a multistate lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s public charge rule. The rule targets working immigrants and their families by turning the use of critical health, nutrition, and housing programs that supplement their modest incomes into barriers to lawful admission to the United States. The appellate court’s order applies to the multistate coalition and states involved in related Ninth Circuit cases. “We applaud today’s decision blocking the Trump Administration from enforcing its immoral public charge rule while we make our case in court,” said Attorney General Becerra. “As we continue to face an unprecedented economic and public health crisis, forcing hardworking families to choose between basic necessities and maintaining their immigration status is inhumane. Attacking the healthcare of even one community is an attack on us all. Today’s victory is critical, but the fight is not over. We won’t let the Trump Administration’s assault on our immigrant communities go unchecked.”Longstanding guidance by the federal government defined a public charge as a person who is primarily dependent on either public cash assistance for income maintenance or institutional long-term care at the government’s expense. The Trump Administration has sought to expand this definition by declaring that the use of additional government programs constitutes grounds for a public charge determination, including healthcare through Medi-Cal (California’s Medicaid program), nutrition and food support through CalFresh (California’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), and housing for families through Section 8 housing assistance. The public charge rule has an outsized impact on California, where one in four people are immigrants and one in two children have an immigrant parent. The rule discourages eligible immigrant and mixed immigration-status families, who are not otherwise subject to the rule, from applying for benefits that they need and are entitled to. It also makes it harder for low- and moderate-income immigrants to be admitted into the United States or obtain green cards……Attorney General Becerra is joined in the case by the attorneys general of the Maine, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia.A copy of the decision is available here. December 2, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a news release titled: “ACOG Appleauds CMS for Finalizing Obstetric Payment Updates, Urges Congress to Act on Gynecologic Care”. From the news release: The following statement was released by Eva Chalas, MD, FACOG, FACS, president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), and Maureen G. Phipps, MD, MPH, FACOG, chief executive officer of ACOG, on the final rule announced yesterday by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) for the 2021 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule:“ACOG applauds the CMS for finalizing the proposed payment update for obstetric services. This is just one of many steps to ensure continued access to quality medical care for pregnant and postpartum women. We strongly encourage state Medicaid programs and commercial payers to follow suit and recognize the importance of fair, equitable payment rates for obstetric services. ACOG and its members advocated for the CMS to amend a prior proposal that would have cut rates for obstetric services and threatened access to quality maternity care and we are pleased that our members’ voices were heard.“ACOG is also unwavering in our commitment to ensuring that women have access to care throughout their lifespan, as the health of women, their families, and their communities depends on it. ACOG is gravely disappointed that CMS finalized deep cuts in surgical services, including gynecologic services and cancer care. At a time when patients experience the consequences of barriers to care daily, cuts could further decimate access to lifesaving care and create additional barriers.“We are also disappointed in the CMS’s disregard for the challenges that frontline health care professionals face in securing personal protective equipment and the rollback of several telehealth provisions at the end of 2021. The CMS had the opportunity to provide stabilization to physician practices and preserve patient access to care by finalizing payment for the increased cost of personal protected equipment and permanently implementing changes to telehealth payment. ACOG is committed to continuing to work to ensure that frontline health care professionals have the PPE that they need and that evidence-based telehealth services are available for our members and their patients.“ACOG has continually advocated for the CMS to value women’s health services equitably and ensure that women’s health services value is on par with other evaluation and management value increases. We are surprised that the agency ignored the voice of the medical community in finalizing these cuts. While the final decision by the CMS is disappointing, Congress has the power to avert these harmful cuts and ensure that people do not face increased barriers to lifesaving care. This action is even more urgent during the COVID-19 pandemic, during which many physician practices are experiencing hardships and even closing.“To ensure that the United States has a foundation for care after the pandemic ends, Congress must act now to preserve patient access to critical gynecologic care.” December 2, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “Reproductive Freedom Is Under Threat in States Across the Country”. From the press release: Upon taking office in January, President-elect Joe Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris are poised to begin undoing the Trump administration’s egregious attacks on reproductive freedom over the last four years.However, anti-choice state lawmakers across the country remain determined to criminalize abortion – putting the advancement of their unpopular idelogy above the health and well-being of the American people, even during a still-raging pandemic. Thanks to the efforts of these anti-choice, anti-freedom legislators as well as Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s efforts to stack the federal judiciary with judges hostile to Roe v. Wade, reproductive freedom remains in jeopardy:“Anti-choice, anti-freedom lawmakers are determined to do whatever it takes to end the legal right to abortion—and thanks to Trump and Mitch McConnell’s takeover of the federal judiciary, reproductive freedom is in real jeopardy,” said Kristin Ford, national communications director at NARAL Pro-Choice America. “We must remain vigilant as attacks on reproductive freedom continue at the state level and do all that we can to ensure that every body has the freedom to control their own lives, bodies, and futures.”State lawmakers and judges hostile to our fundamental rights are putting reproductive freedom in danger in states across the country: In Arkansas, anti-choice Republicans in the state legislature recently filed legislation to criminalize abortion. The bill’s sponsor said the measure was meant to challenge Roe v. Wade in light of Amy Barrett’s confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court.A federal appeals court allowed Texas and Louisiana to block Medicaid patients from accessing healthcare at Planned Parenthood health centers. According to the Associated Press, though the Fifth Circuit previously blocked Texas and Louisiana’s bans on Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood, last month’s decision to allow the bans to proceed comes after the addition of six Trump nominees to the court, four of whom participated in this case.A federal appeals court allowed provisions of Tennessee’s expansive abortion ban passed earlier this year to go into effect, giving the green light to yet another attempt to chip away at the right to abortion.Last week in Nebraska, a law banning a safe and common method of providing abortion care went into effect. Just before Election Day, Donald Trump and Senate Republicans jammed through the confirmation of Amy Barrett, a judge with a record of hostility towards the legal right to abortion, to the Supreme Court. Barrett’s presence on the Court solidifies an anti-choice supermajority on the bench that could threaten our fundamental rights for decades. Dozens of cases that put Roe and access to abortion care at risk are making their way to the Supreme Court. Barrett has already proven her willingness to be the deciding vote on cases weighing ideology versus science, such as when she voted in last week’s 5-4 decision to block enforcement of New York’s public health guidelines that restricted attendance at houses of worship to prevent COVID-19 transmission.The confirmation of Trump nominee Brett Kavanaugh, another justice hostile to reproductive freedom, tipped the Court to an anti-choice majority in late 2018. With a newly minted majority opposing abortion rights, anti-choice state lawmakers launched an all-out assault on Roe in hopes that a challenge would make its way to the Court and lead to the rollback of the landmark case. Bans on abortion were introduced, passed, or signed in 31 states in 2019 alone. December 4, 2020: Senator Chuck Schumer (Democrat – New York) posted a press release titled: “Following National Push Launched In Upstate New York, Schumer Announces Must-Pass National Defense Bill Will Authorize $8 Billion In New Critical Health Benefits For Vets Suffering From Agent Orange-Linked Illnesses”. From the press release: After successfully securing in July an amendment to the Senate’s Fiscal Year 2021 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which expanded the list of diseases associated with Agent Orange exposure, U.S. Senator Charles E. Schumer today announced that the final version of the FY2021 NDAA includes his amendment, which authorizes $8 billion in new benefits for vets suffering from Agent Orange-linked illnesses. Schumer explained that upon the president’s signature, nearly 240,000 veterans around the country who might be suffering from bladder cancer, hypothyroidism and parkinsonism will be able to access healthcare and benefits, numbers that have expanded because of the senator’s amendment associating additional diseases with exposure to Agent Orange.“After years and years of suffering and fighting, I proudly stood shoulder to shoulder with our Vietnam Vets who were exposed to Agent Orange to get Congress to finally take a major step forward so they get access to the medical care they need,” said Senator Schumer. “It’s taken far too long, and we still need to see this change signed into law. But veterans across the country are celebrating today as a victory, and we will work together to get this across the finish line in the very near future so those who put their lives on the line for our freedom can get the healthcare they deserve.”Schumer added, “I’m especially proud today to have expanded access to this incoming influx of benefits by securing an amendment that adds bladder cancer, hypothyroidism, and Parkinsonism to the list of diseases associated with Agent Orange. Our veterans did not hesitate in the face of danger to fight for our country, and we must not nickel and dime them as they fight for their health now.”..…Schumer emphasized the importance of adding added bladder cancer, hypothyroidism, and Parkinsonism to the list of diseases associated with ‘Agent Orange’ exposure, and reiterated just how long this fight has been waged. Last year, the Senator secured a provision in the budget deal requiring OMB and the VA to issue a detailed report to Congress on the delay in adding these conditions to the presumptive conditions list, BUT the report was woefully insufficient and Schumer said those agencies failed to properly explain why they were denying veterans. In addition to the failure to include bladder cancer, hypothyroidism, and Parkinsonism on the Agent Orange presumptive conditions list, the VA has never acted on a 2018 National Academies report that found sufficient evidence of association between exposure to herbicides and hypertension.Schumer also explained that per the Agent Orange Act of 1991, the VA automatically accepts that if a Vietnam Veteran physically served in Vietnam between January 1962 and May 1975, it is probable that the veteran was exposed to an herbicide agent like Agent Orange. Furthermore, the Act established a list of “presumed” diseases that the VA stipulates are caused by Agent Orange exposure. Therefore, if a veteran served in Vietnam at any time between 1962-1975 and is diagnosed with one or more of the diseases VA recognizes as service connected, the VA will compensate the veteran and his or her family. However, even though there has been scientific evidence linking Parkinsonism, bladder cancer and hypothyroidism to Agent Orange exposure, they are not currently on the VA’s list of recognized presumptive conditions.Schumer said if an Agent Orange-related condition isn’t specifically listed on the presumptive conditions list then the VA forces the suffering veterans and their families to argue their claim in a lengthy, bureaucratic appeals process that can last years and often end in a denial. In many cases the veteran will die before the process is even concluded. Schumer said veterans shouldn’t have to wage their own war to gather the scientific facts and medical opinions about hypothyroidism in order to receive the care and benefits needed to treat the illnesses they contracted because they served our nation. Schumer said that is absolutely crucial that thousands of Vietnam-era veterans in New York State receive the healthcare benefits they need and deserve, and final passage of his amendment in the NDAA will allow that to happen. December 4, 2020: Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent – Vermont) posted a press release titled: “Sanders Statement on Manchin-Romney COVID19 Proposal”. From the press release: Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) issued the following statement on the Manchin-Romney COVID19 legislative proposal”“Given the enormous economic desperation facing working families in this country today, I will not be able to support the recently announced Manchin-Romney COVID proposal unless it is significantly improved.“Unfortunately, despite long-time Democratic opposition, this proposal provides 100% legal immunity to corporations whose irresponsibility has led to the deaths of hundreds of workers. It would continue to provide a get-out-of-jail free card to companies that put the lives of their workers and customers at risk. In fact, the Manchin-Romney proposal will, through this liability provision, encourage corporations to avoid implementing the common sense safety standards needed to protect workers and consumers – and make a bad situation worse.“Further, during the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, when over half of our workers are living paycheck to paycheck, when one out of four workers are either unemployed or make less than $20,000 a year, when 92 million Americans are uninsured or under-insured, when tens of millions of people face eviction and when hunger in America is exploding, it is unacceptable that the Manchin-Romney proposal does not even do what the CARES Act did and provide, at the very least, a $1,200 direct payment to working class Americans and $500 for their kids. Tens of millions of Americans living in desperation today would receive absolutely no financial help from this proposal. That is not acceptable.“Last March, with unanimous support in Congress, President Trump signed the $2 trillion CARES Act into law that provided a $600 a week supplement in unemployment benefits and a $1,200 direct payment to every working class adult, $500 per child and significant help for small businesses, states and cities. In October, as part of the negotiating process, the Trump Administration and a bi-partisan coalition in the House supported over $1.8 trillion in COVID-relief that also included another $1,200 direct payment. “Today, however, at a time when the COVID crisis is the worst that it has ever been in the U.S. with record-breaking levels of hospitalization and death, the Manchin-Romney proposal not only provides no direct payments to working families, it does nothing to address the healthcare crisis and has totally inadequate financial assistance for the most vulnerable. That is wrong morally and it is wrong economically if we hope to rebuild the economy.“The American people need help and they need help now. In my view, we have got to make sure that every working class American receives at least $1,200 in direct payments and that we do not provide a liability shield to corporations who break the law.“I look forward to working with my colleagues in the House and Senate to significantly improve this bill. But, in its current form, I cannot support it.” December 4, 2020: Senator Elizabeth Warren (Democrat – Massachusetts) posted a press release on her website titled: “Warren, Pressley Ask Independent Watchdog to Investigate Racial Inequity in Pandemic Response”. From the press release: United States Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), a member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, and Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), a member of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, sent a letter to Gene L. Dodaro, U.S. Comptroller General, requesting a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on how COVID-19 relief funds have been distributed to disproportionately affected communities. The request seeks to examine how much federal COVID-19 relief funding went to businesses and providers located in low-income and medically underserved communities, as well as Tribal businesses and health care providers, community health centers, and other organizations serving high-need populations.“The health and economic effects of the pandemic have been especially severe in communities of color and Native communities, yet it is not clear whether federal relief resources have reached these communities in proportion to their need. We, therefore, request an evaluation of supplemental appropriations provided under COVID-19 relief laws, including the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, with regard to how funds have been distributed to disproportionately affected communities,” wrote the lawmakers. The coronavirus pandemic has had a disproportionate impact on communities of color and Native communities. Black, Hispanic/Latino, and American Indian/Alaska Native people are being hospitalized with COVID-19 at higher rates and are dying from COVID-19 at younger ages. People living on tribal reservations are more than four times as likely to have been diagnosed with COVID-19 as the U.S. population as a whole. The same communities have also been hit hardest by the economic fallout: every month since the economic crisis began in March 2020, Black and Latino workers have had significantly higher unemployment rates than white workers, even after adjusting for age and education status.To date, the federal government has spent trillions of dollars to sustain our health system and mitigate the economic fallout during this public health emergency. However, it is not clear whether that relief has successfully reached the communities that are most in need. A survey of Black and Latino business owners found that only 12% of those who applied for a loan from the Paycheck Protection Program were approved for the full amount, and half expected their businesses to permanently close within six months.In health care, a study of the Provider Relief Fund found that hospitals with the most revenue from private insurance received more than twice as much funding per hospital bed as the hospitals with the least private insurance revenue – raising the question of whether funds truly reached health care providers serving communities that are most in need. COVID-19 testing may also be harder to obtain for people of color: one analysis found that testing sites located in predominantly Black and Hispanic neighborhoods of major cities face higher demand than those in predominantly white areas of those same cities, leading to longer wait times. Independent analyses have found that ZIP codes with large white populations have had more testing sites throughout the pandemic than ZIP codes with more people of color, and 35 percent of rural Black Americans live in a “highly vulnerable testing desert.”… December 4, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Leads Coalition Opposing Dangerous HHS Deregulation by the Trump Administration”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today led a coalition of attorneys general in submitting comments opposing the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services’ (HHS) misguided proposal to automatically “sunset” any HHS regulation that the agency does not review within a short time frame. The rule is an unprecedented and dangerous attempt by the Trump Administration to impede the incoming Biden Administration while the country grapples with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The rule impacts all of HHS’s regulations, putting in jeopardy the Department’s programs and services nationwide. Under the proposed rule, these regulations could abruptly end if not reviewed in the short time frame allotted, threatening critical programs like Medicaid, food safety, and medical and pharmaceutical research. The unlawful rule gives the agency just two years to review the regulations, unnecessarily hamstringing the incoming Administration.“As he’s on his way out, in the midst of a pandemic, the president is sowing chaos in our healthcare system,” said Attorney General Becerra. “This rule is an attempt by the outgoing Trump Administration to make it more difficult for President-elect Biden and his incoming administration to put in place useful policies that will see our country through the pandemic. This medieval proposal places American’s healthcare across the country in jeopardy. We urge Secretary Azar to withdraw this proposal.”In today’s letter, the coalition of attorney’s general argue this deregulation attempt by the Trump Administration will mire HHS in red tape during a global pandemic when the country needs the agency’s resources most, making it nearly impossible for the new Administration to enact new pandemic-related regulations. In addition, the drastic scope of the rule will put trillions of dollars in federal funding on which the states rely at risk.The coalition argues the proposed rule: Is unprecedented and dramatic in scope and poses a threat to the States’ healthcare systems and as a result, the health and safety of the states’ residents;Is legally questionable since it claims to implement the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), which Congress enacted to minimize the impact regulations have on small entities with limited resources. Instead. the rule would add expiration dates to all HHS regulations. Further, HHS lacks the legal authority for such action;Will drain agency resources and create significant uncertainty for state programs that would have to deal with the consequences if they federal regulations they rely on suddenly expired; andIs deeply problematic given it was proposed just a month before a new president takes office and while the country continues to weather the pandemic, and gives the public only 30 days to comment, in spite of the fact that it impacts every HHS regulation. In submitting today’s comment letter, Attorney General Becerra was joined by the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut. Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin and the District of Columbia. A copy of the comment letter is available here. December 7, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Biden-Harris Appointments in Health Care”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after President-elect Biden and Vice President-elect Harris announced appointments for key health care roles:“President-elect Biden has nominated an outstanding health care team, whose leadership, will be critical in the fight to crush the coronavirus and defend every American’s right to quality, affordable health care.“Attorney General Becerra is a towering champion of health care, whose strategic leadership, keen intellect and outstanding policy expertise were essential in the defense of the Affordable Care Act in the Courts. As Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, he will be a vital force for progress.“Jeff Zeints, Dr. Anthony Fauchi, Dr. Vivik Murthy, Dr. Marcella Nunez-Smith, Dr. Rochelle Walensky and Natalie Quillian bring great understanding and expertise to the challenges to health and financial security facing hard-working American families. Their leadership during this precarious moment will be life-saving, and our Democratic House Majority looks forward to working with this outstanding team.” December 8, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America Responds to Hearing on Hyde Amendment’s Discriminatory Ban on Abortion Coverage”. From the press release: Today, the U.S. House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies held a hearing on the harms of the racist and discriminatory Hyde Amendment and related abortion coverage bans.NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement in response:“Discriminatory bans on abortion coverage like the Hyde Amendment are designed to push needed care out of reach—particularly for marginalized people who are already burdened by multiple structural barriers that block access to abortion. We must end this harmful policy in order to realize a future where reproductive freedom is a reality for every body, regardless of who they are or how much money they make. Pregnant people with low incomes and women of color must have access to reproductive healthcare that centers their dignity and decision making when they are trying to avoid unintended pregnancy, end a pregnancy, or give birth to healthy children.”The Hyde Amendment refers to a series of bans on coverage of abortion care for those who receive their health insurance through the federal government, including those who are insured through Medicaid, Medicare and CHIP, federal employees and their dependents, military service members, veterans, and their dependents, Peace Corps volunteers, Indigenous communities, women who are incarcerated or held in immigration detention facilities, and people with low incomes in Washington, DC. Abortion coverage bans like the Hyde Amendment disproportionately hurt people already harmed by disparities in our healthcare systems, especially Black and Brown women, transgender and non-binary people, and those with lower incomes.Today’s hearing comes during a momentous year when an invigorated Movement for Black Lives, an unprecedented pandemic, and imperatives for economic justice have all taken center stage and highlighted a system that upholds white supremacy and perpetuates life-threatening racial disparities in healthcare, criminal justice, education, and more. It also comes at a moment when the future of reproductive freedom is front and center now that Trump, Mitch McConnell, and Senate Republicans rammed through the confirmation of Amy Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court and solidified an anti-choice supermajority on the Court hostile to Roe v. Wade. Their anti-choice, anti-freedom agenda could not be more out of step with the majority of Americans who support reproductive freedom. Polling shows that the majority of Americans support ending the Hyde Amendment and that 77% of Americans support the legal right to abortion.In August, House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said that the Hyde Amendment would not be included in funding bills starting next year. U.S. Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), who convened today’s hearing and was elected last week as chair of the House committee that is responsible for funding the federal government’s functions, recently reiterated her commitment to ending the discriminatory budget amendment.During the 2020 Democratic presidential primary, candidates including both President-elect Joe Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris coalesced around the party’s core values by voicing their support for ending the Hyde Amendment’s ban on abortion coverage once and for all. In July, NARAL Pro-Choice America joined a national coalition of progressive groups in their successful effort to urge the Democratic Party to deepen its advocacy for reproductive freedom by reaffirming key proposals included in the 2016 platform such as ending the Hyde Amendment. Politicians should never be allowed to interfere and deny coverage for abortion care based on how much money somebody has or how they get their insurance. December 8, 2020: Representative Ayanna Pressley (Democrat – Massachusetts) posted a press release titled: “Rep. Pressley Continues Fight to End Discriminatory Hyde Amendment”. From the press release: Today, Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07), Chair of the Pro-Choice Caucus’s Abortion Rights and Access Task Force, submitted a letter for the Congressional Record to Reps. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03) and Tom Cole (OK-04), Chairwoman and Ranking Member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, expressing her unequivocal support for eliminating the Hyde Amendment and all other harmful abortion coverage bans.The Congresswoman’s letter comes as the Committee holds a historic hearing on the harm caused by the Hyde Amendment and the need to repeal the 44 year old policy.“As our nation continues to face a moment of reckoning and transformation, it is absolutely critical that we remain unapologetic in our efforts to dismantle systems of oppression and stand against racist and discriminatory policies that push comprehensive health care—including abortion care—out of reach for our nation’s most vulnerable,” the Congresswoman wrote. “It is clear that the legal right to an abortion has never been enough and it is incumbent upon us to ensure that our policies and our budgets affirm the dignity and worth of all people, no exceptions.”In her letter, Congresswoman Pressley commended Chairwoman Rosa DeLauro and Congresswoman Barbara Lee (CA-13) for their leadership on these issues and for holding today’s hearing and emphasized the need to pass clean appropriation bills to ensure that comprehensive reproductive health care is available to all.“Congress has a responsibility to proactively legislate racial and reproductive justice and meaningfully advance policies that affirm that abortion care is health care and that health care is a fundamental human right,” the Congresswoman continued.First introduced 44 years ago by anti-choice, Republican lawmaker Rep. Henry Hyde in 1976, the Hyde Amendment has been included in federal funding bills every year since. This abortion coverage ban disproportionately harms low-income people, Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC) communities, transgender and gender nonconforming people, and targets those who receive Medicaid coverage. Currently, an estimated 30 percent of Black women and 24 percent of Latina women of reproductive age are covered by Medicaid — in comparison to just 14 percent of white women. Additionally, research has found that abortion coverage bans like the Hyde Amendment perpetuate cycles of poverty and economic inequality.As Chair of the Pro-Choice Caucus’s Abortion Rights and Access Task Force, Congresswoman Pressley has fought tirelessly to protect comprehensive reproductive health care for all, including abortion care… December 9, 2020: Senator Elizabeth Warren (Democrat – Massachusetts) posted a press release titled: “As Nation Grapples With COVID-19 Surge, Warren, Smith Release Their Findings on National Testing Capacity and Pediatric Testing Availability”. From the press release: United States Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Tina Smith (D-Minn.), members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, sent a letter to Alex Azar, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) summarizing the findings from their investigation into the nation’s testing capacity and the availability of pediatric testing and making recommendations for how the federal government can improve national testing infrastructure.On August 26, 2020, Senators Warren and Smith wrote to five of the largest COVID-19 testing laboratories regarding each company’s capacity to process COVID-19 diagnostic tests and deliver prompt results. From the responses to these letters, the lawmakers learned that lab companies experienced a large surge in COVID-19 diagnostic testing needs during the summer surge, straining lab company capacity and slowing test turnaround times in some cases. Supply shortages hampered their efforts to develop additional capacity. They also experienced confusion about payment and reimbursement in different scenarios – for instance, whether insurers or the government was responsible for payment when a test was not considered “medically necessary.”Furthermore, in response to reports that families were having difficulty obtaining COVID-19 testing for their young children, on October 7, 2020, Senators Warren and Smith wrote to the retail providers participating in the HHS Community-Based Testing Sites partnership to ask for information about their policies regarding pediatric testing and their plans to expand testing to more age groups. They found that pediatric testing is becoming more widely available, though most retail providers were not currently offering testing for young children. The responses from the retail providers indicated that the primary barrier to expanding pediatric testing is the providers’ use of “self-swab” test kits, which are difficult for children or their caregivers to use. Additionally, independent pharmacies have had difficulty obtaining the tests needed to participate in the HHS program. Following Senator Warren and Smith’s letters, Walgreens announced that it would begin offering testing for children as young as three years old, and Rite Aid announced that it would offer testing for children as young as 13. “Together, our findings reveal significant gaps in COVID-19 testing capacity, exacerbating the ongoing public health threat. Addressing these problems will require aggressive federal government action. We have previously called for dedicated federal funding and a national testing plan to ensure that everyone who needs a COVID-19 test can access one quickly and easily,” wrote the lawmakers… December 10, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Issues Statement on Unanimous U.S. Supreme Court Decision Upholding States’ Rights to Regulate the Rising Cost of Prescription Drugs”. From the press release: Attorney General Xavier Becerra issued a statement today on the unanimous decision by the United States Supreme Court in Rutledge v. Pharmaceutical Care Management Association that upholds the rights of states to regulate and address the rising cost of prescription drugs. In March, the attorney general led a bipartisan coalition of 46 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in the Supreme Court supporting the state of Arkansas’ position that federal law does not prevent states from regulating pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs). In the brief, the coalition also argued that regulation of the prescription drug market, including PBMs, is a critical tool states use to protect residents and address the access and affordability of prescription drugs. The Court agreed that federal law does not preempt these widespread and important state regulations.“States are on the frontlines of the fight to keep prescription drug prices down and make them more accessible to those who rely on them,” said Attorney General Becerra. “We are happy the Supreme Court recognized today that states must be able to regulate PBMs, the pharmaceutical middlemen who manipulate drug prices and access. Today’s decision will ensure states are able to improve prescription drug marketplace transparency and protect access to affordable medication.”PBMs act as intermediaries between pharmacies, drug manufacturers, health insurance plans, and consumers. They develop and maintain prescription drug formularies, contract with pharmacies, negotiate discounts with drug manufacturers, and process and pay prescription drug claims, and in this position, they have exercised their market power in a manner that harms consumers.In submitting the amicus brief in March, Attorney General Becerra was joined by the attorneys general of Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia.A copy of the decision can be found here. December 10, 2020: Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent – Vermont) posted a press release titled: “Sanders, Hawley Introduce $1,200 Direct Payments Amendment to Attach to End-of-Year Legislation”. From the press release: Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) are introducing a bipartisan amendment to attach to must-pass legislation to be considered by Congress, which would provide $1,200 in direct payments to working-class adults and $500 to each of their children. This amendment, similar to what was passed in the CARES Act, would be attached to must-pass legislation to keep the government going. “In the midst of this terrible pandemic and economic crisis, this amendment would make certain that working families get the urgent, direct support they need to survive,” said Sanders. “A direct payment of $1,200 for adults and $500 for kids would help desperate families pay rent and heating bills, put food on the table, and be able to go to the doctor. In the midst of so much economic desperation, Congress cannot go on recess without providing this $1,200 emergency assistance to the American people in their time of need. I look forward to working across the aisle with Senator Hawley to ensure that the United States Senate passes this amendment.”“It would be a dereliction of duty if Congress adjourns for Christmas without having a vote on providing working families with direct payments,” said Hawley. “Working people are struggling. And they should be the first people given relief, not last. The crisis of rising unemployment claims, ever-expanding food lines, evictions, and growing credit card debt has been staring us in the face for months. It’s time we do something about it and provide emergency relief to Americans.”The amendment is modeled on the $1,200 direct payment for working-class adults plus $500 for their children passed by Congress unanimously in the $2.2 trillion CARES Act in March and signed into law by President Trump. Watch Sanders’ and Hawley’s floor remarks on this proposal here. Read the text of the amendment here. December 11, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Bipartisan, Bicameral Surprise Billing Agreement”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi released this statement on the bipartisan, bicameral agreement on legislation to end surprise billing:“The bipartisan, bicameral agreement announced tonight will finally protect patients from surprise bills in both emergency and scheduled care. And with the patient taken out of the middle, the legislation creates a fair process for health care providers and health plans to sort out the out-of-network costs between themselves.“The surprise billing of patients for unexpected out-of-network care is deeply unfair and financially devastating to families. It must be stopped.“I especially congratulate Chairman Frank Pallone of the Energy & Commerce Committee, Chairman Bobby Scott of the Education & Labor Committee, and Chairman Richie Neal of the Ways & Means Committee as well as Senator Alexander, Chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee, for their leadership and dedication in reaching this bipartisan agreement. The House will push for this critical legislation to end surprise billing to be passed as part of the end-of-year package.” December 14, 2020: Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent – Vermont) posted a press release titled: “Sanders on Manchin-Romney Deal: Congress Cannot Go Home Until Working Class Receives $1,200 Direct Payments”. From the press release: Senator Sanders (I-Vt.) issued the following statement in response to the Manchin-Romney COVID19 legislation to be released this afternoon:“As a result of the pandemic, tens of millions of Americans are facing economic desperation. They can’t afford to pay their rent and face eviction, they can’t afford to go to the doctor, they can’t afford to feed their children and they are going deeper and deeper into debt. Congress cannot go home for the Christmas holidays until we pass legislation which provides a $1,200 direct payment to working class adults, $2,400 for couples, and a $500 payment to their children. This is what Democrats and Republicans did unanimously in March through the CARES Act. This is what we have to do today.” December 14, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Leads Bipartisan Coalition on 340B Drug Pricing Program Requirements”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today joined Connecticut Attorney General William Tong, Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt, and Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson in leading a bipartisan coalition of attorneys general urging the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to hold accountable drug manufacturers that are unlawfully refusing to provide discounts to federally qualified health centers, hospitals, and other providers that serve vulnerable patient populations through the 340B Drug Pricing Program. The 340B Drug Pricing Program provides discounts to covered healthcare entities that serve uninsured and low-income patients, and helps these providers keep costs low even as prescription drug prices rise. In today’s letter addressed to Health & Human Services Secretary Alex Azar, the attorneys general argue that by withholding or threatening to withhold these critical discounts, drug manufacturers Eli Lilly & Company, AstraZeneca PLC, Sanofi SA, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Merck & Co., United Therapeutics Corp., and others, put low-income patients at risk of losing access to affordable medications while communities continue to battle the COVID-19 pandemic. The 340B Drug Pricing Program has strong bipartisan support, and Congress has acted numerous times to ensure drug manufacturers continue to comply with the program’s mandates.“While Americans grapple with COVID-19, it is critical that we protect access to affordable care,” said Attorney General Becerra. “Discounts afforded under the 340B Drug Pricing Program are more critical now than ever. They ensure that low-income and uninsured patients have access to affordable medication as they deal with the substantial impact of the pandemic. We call on HHS to hold these non-compliant drug manufacturers accountable and provide immediate relief for healthcare centers and the Americans they serve.”As a condition of having their drugs covered by Medicaid and Medicare Part B, Congress required drug manufacturers to enter into Pharmaceutical Pricing Agreements (PPA) with the HHS Secretary to limit the amount public hospitals, community health centers, and others serving indigent patients have to pay drug manufacturers for medications. These PPAs require the companies to offer each covered medication to providers “at or below the applicable ceiling price”. Instead of complying with their obligations, Eli Lilly & Company, AstraZeneca PLC, Sanofi SA, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Merck & Co., United Therapeutics Corp., and others have unlawfully refused to provide discounts, potentially depriving Americans who rely on them with essential healthcare resources that they need as the country deals with a public health crisis. Under the 340B Drug Pricing Program, HHS has the authority to address violations of the program by drug manufacturers. For example, HHS may require manufacturers to reimburse covered healthcare centers and/or terminate manufacturers’ PPAs. While HHS has recently published regulations establishing an administrative dispute resolution (ADR) process under which covered entities can file complaints and seek relief, the ADR process is not sufficient to address immediate harm caused by drug companies.In submitting today’s letter, Attorney General Becerra was joined by the attorneys general of Connecticut, Kansas, Nebraska, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the letter to HHS is available here. December 15, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Federal Appeals Court Denies Rehearing in Case Challenging Arkansas Abortion Restrictions”. From the press release: The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals denied today the ACLU and the Center for Reproductive Rights’ request for en banc rehearing of an August 2020 decision that paved the way for Arkansas abortion restrictions to go into effect.With this order, the four Arkansas laws at issue in the case could go into effect as soon as Dec. 22. Absent further court intervention, that would completely block many people from obtaining abortion care and would leave Arkansans with even more limited access to abortion. These laws are just four of the more 480 abortion restrictions states have passed across the country since 2011. These four laws were passed to: Ban the standard method of abortion provided after approximately 14 weeks of pregnancy in Arkansas;Require that patients’ partners or other family members be notified of their abortion;Force the health care center to report a teenage patient’s abortion to local police and allow the state crime lab to indefinitely hold their personal medical information; andForce physicians to request a vast number of medical records for each patient with no medical justification, violating physician-patient confidentiality and delaying – or outright blocking – access to abortion care. “These Arkansas laws represent the worst motives of anti-abortion politicians: to shame, stigmatize, and humiliate abortion patients, and to make abortion care difficult if not impossible to access, ” said Ruth Harlow, senior staff attorney in the ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project. “While we’re disappointed with this order from the Eighth Circuit, we’re not backing down — this fight is nowhere near over. To the state of Arkansas: We’ll see you back in court.”… December 16, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Floor Speech in Support of Veterans Health Care and Benefits Improvement Act”. From the press release: Speaker Pelosi: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his great leadership. He makes us so proud as Chair of the Veterans Affairs Committee, and I proudly rise in support of H.R. 7105, a strong, bipartisan package of legislation that meets or strives to meet our responsibility to honor the service and sacrifice of those who don the uniform. The strength of this package and its support across the aisle is a testament to the outstanding leadership of Chairman Mark Takano. We are very proud of him, as a Californian, as a Member of this House. And the bill has been all hands on deck effort, and I salute the many Members whose provisions and perspective have strengthened it. Congresswoman Julia Brownley, the Chair of the Health Subcommittee, on the Women’s Veterans Task Force, who has worked tirelessly to achieve gender equity at VA, including, now, through the landmark Deborah Sampson Act, included in this omnibus……Mr. Speaker, last year, many Members were blessed to be able to travel to Europe to mark 75 years the Normandy landing and of the Battle of the Bulge on another visit. I mentioned Johnny, the Senator, at Normandy. At the commemoration of the Battle of Bulge, almost one year ago this day, I met a veteran in his nineties who urged us to pray for peace. To pray for peace… …In that spirit of peace, hope and respect, the Congress has honored our veterans, their families and caregivers with transformative action. From the Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act to expand benefits to those exposed to Agent Orange, to the really, cruelly unfair Widows Tax and Kiddie Tax – remember that? To passing the COMPACT Act to combat – combat veteran suicide, and to investing nearly $20 billion in VA readiness and pandemic research. Now, the House is building on this bipartisan momentum with this omnibus, which includes provisions from nearly 60 House-passed bills. This bill strengthens veterans’ education, investing nearly $350 million in improving GI benefits for surviving family members, increasing work study options and fellowship opportunities for veterans, securing benefits for those who cannot complete courses due to the pandemic and more. It safeguards veterans’ benefits, including by modernizing the benefit system with commonsense reforms, investing in benefits for surviving spouses and improving eligibility for housing and home loan assistance for National Guard and Reserve Members. This bill protects veterans’ health, including care for those exposed to the coronavirus and burn pits, improving VA scheduling process, increasing reporting from state veteran homes in the light of the COVID outbreaks. This bill is focused on justice, equality and opportunity. And we are particularly proud of the steps taken to help servicemembers transition to civilian work force, and to improve services and VA access to Native American veterans, including eliminating their copays. House Members can take pride in the inclusion of Congresswoman Brownley’s Deborah Sampson Act, the crown jewel in this package and the most comprehensive women’s veterans bill in over a decade. This bill improves the health, benefits, education and VA support system for women veterans, including by repairing – requiring the VA to create the anti-harassment and anti-assault policy, improving women-specific primary care, expanding access to child care and strengthening mental health initiatives. This bill could not be more timely. Last week, the VA Inspector General’s report found an appalling coverup and discrediting of a woman veteran who works in the taskforce that creates – that created this legislation, at the hands of Secretary Wilkie and top VA officials. It is a profound injustice for any patriot with the courage to serve to have to experience having his or her voice silenced and integrity questioned.Congress will not relent until every servicemember, every veteran and every woman can live free from the fear of assault or abuse. This package was drafted in consultation – this is what I’m so proud of because, on a regular basis, we meet with the veterans service organizations and it is their opportunity to tell us what their priorities are……This package was drafted in consultation with leading veterans groups and we’re proud to have the support of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the American Legion, the Military Officers Association of America, Student Veterans of America, Disabled American Veterans, the National Military Family Association, Iraq and Afghan Veterans of America, the Association of the U.S. Navy, Paralyzed Veterans of America, Veterans Education Success, just to name a few. The list goes on. As we send this package to the President’s desk, House Democrats are ready to take further action to honor our veterans in the next Congress working alongside the Biden- – the Biden-Harris Administration… December 16, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “Trump Administration Petitions Supreme Court to Undercut Medication Abortion Care During Global Pandemic”. From the press release: Yesterday, the Trump administration submitted yet another petition to the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to reinstate a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) rule that requires patients to travel to a health center during a global pandemic in order to obtain medication abortion care. Last week, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland upheld an injunction blocking this requirement, making it easier for people to access care without jeopardizing their health by unnecessarily exposing them to COVID-19.In response to news of this petition, NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement:“This petition is just another politically-motivated attempt to block abortion access by a lame duck president hellbent on causing this country as much harm as possible in his final weeks in office. Instead of focusing on a pandemic that has killed more than 300,000 Americans, Trump is focused on blocking people from the time-sensitive essential care they need. Patients’ health and safety must always come first. Especially during this pandemic, healthcare policy should be guided by sound science—not an ideological agenda.”Medication abortion is a safe, effective, and FDA-approved option for ending an early pregnancy. It involves taking two different prescribed medications. The ACLU’s lawsuit challenges the FDA’s current requirement that forces patients seeking medication abortion care to travel to a hospital, clinic, or medical office to pick up the first medication used in the two-step process, mifepristone. The ACLU filed the lawsuit on behalf of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective, and others. December 16, 2020: University of Vermont Medical Center posted a press release titled: “UVM Medical Center Rebukes Baseless Federal Enforcement Actions Threatening Access to Patient Reproductive Rights”. From the press release: The University of Vermont Medical Center sent a letter today to the United States Department of Health Services (HHS) Office for Civil Rights (OCR) reaffirming its compliance with federal laws that provide hospital employees the ablity to opt-out of participating in medical procedures they oppose on religious or personal beliefs, which include reproductive care, sterilizations, blood transfusions, and others. The letter is in response to December 11 and December 14 correspondence from HHS threatening the hospital with federal enforcement stemming from an August 2019 “Notice of Violation” OCR issued to UVM Medical Center and the press, despite lacking any legal authority to do so. The administration’s new threat of litigation is an abrupt turnaround by HHS’s and OCR’s leaders, who agreed late last year to not recommend any further enforcement of OCR’s 2019 allegations, following multiple decisions by federal courts rejecting OCR’s interpretation of the law. In the letter, UVM Medical Center informed HHS that it declined to further alter its opt-out policies and practices in a manner that would create barriers to the delivery of safe, legal, and effective reproductive health care and is also not required by law. In fact, since receiving OCR’s “Notice of Violation” last summer, the hospital has only strengthened its already-compliant provider opt-out policies and practices. For instance, the hospital has improved the way it schedules both patients and staff for pregnancy termination procedures, utilizing regular, designated operating room times for those procedures whenever possible and staffing them with providers who have opted into participating. Through this and other recent changes, UVM Medical Center’s goal is to eliminate those instances – already exceedingly rare – in which employees’ religious or moral beliefs come into conflict with the hospital’s patient care obligations, while enhancing the care provided to patients.“As the primary tertiary care center for our region, we have an obligation to provide access to safe and legal reproductive health care to our patients who rely on us,” said Stephen Leffler, MD, President and Chief Operating Officer of UVM Medical Center. “At the same time, since we were first contacted by OCR last year, we have taken a thorough look at all of our policies and practices and have modified and strengthened them to respect the many beliefs of the thousands of care givers that work here. OCR’s latest threats are not just baseless from a legal standpoint, they’re an attack on reproductive care and we will do everything we can to protect our patients’ access to the services they need.”The response by UVM Medical Center points out that the latest threat by HHS defies recent decisions issued by federal courts across the country, which have rejected the legal theory on which the current presidential administration is relying in its attempt to prevent the hospital from providing pregnancy termination services… December 16, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Planned Parenthood Health Centers Selected for New Initiative Aimed at Expanding Patient Access to Contraception”. From the press release: Today, as part of the We’re for Her initiative, Bayer announced that four health centers across the country will recieve grants from Direct Relief to help provide service to regions where there are high unintended pregnancy rates, steep barriers to accessing essential health care, and pressing need for sexual education. Two of the grantees named are Planned Parenthood affiliates, Planned Parenthood Great Plains (PPGP) and Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky (PPINK); they will each receive $40,000 to fund innovative projects in 2021, focused on expanding reproductive and sexual health and education in Indiana and Arkansas. Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“Planned Parenthood is thrilled to work with other nonprofits, corporate partners, and public health organizations to expand people’s access to expert, high-quality care and accurate health information. We’re grateful that Bayer and Direct Relief support sexual and reproductive health care and education, and understand that all people deserve access to the care they need, when they need it, no matter what.“Throughout this pandemic, Planned Parenthood has been working to expand access to essential health care, reaching patients and communities in new and innovative ways, and providing sexual and reproductive health care services and information people need to stay healthy during this unprecedented health and economic crisis. Sexual and reproductive health doesn’t stop for a pandemic, and neither does Planned Parenthood… December 17, 2020: Senator Chuck Schumer (Democrat – New York) posted a press release titled: “Schumer, Gillibrand Announce Nearly $892 Million in Federal Funding For New York’s Hospitals Battling Second Wave Of COVID Pandemic”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Charles E. Schumer and U.S. Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand announced today that 4,941 hospitals across New York will receive a total of $891,935,762 designated through previous COVID relief bills. The funding comes from the Provider Relief Fund and will make up for at least 87% of lost revenue at all hospitals and providers through Q2.“As New York battles a second wave in COVID cases, our hospitals are once again stepping up to the plate, making incredible sacrifices by putting public health above profit for months, and working ceaselessly to help New York beat back the virus,” said Senator Schumer. “Today’s funding is critical to making up for lost revenues from the first wave and keeping our hospital doors open. New York and its hospitals have been amongst the hardest hit in the nation, and with this funding going out, the continuing frontline fight being waged by our health care system and its incredible workforce will receive the dollars they need, and so very much deserve, to keep saving lives.”“We have asked so much of our doctors, nurses, hospital workers, and public health professionals across New York, and they continue to give it their all on the frontlines,” said Senator Gillibrand. “But the fact remains that they are being stretched to the limit, and are in desperate need of more resources to battle another dangerous surge. Today’s funding announcement is a great step in the right direction, but I won’t stop fighting until Washington delivers critical relief to hospitals and health care providers.”Schumer was the lead author and architect of the ‘Marshall Plan for Healthcare’, included in previous COVID relief legislation, securing hundreds of billions of dollars in support and relief for the health care system. The senators said the funding announced today is the first revenue-based tranche going out to New York’s hospitals.Across the state, hospitals and health systems reported losing hundreds of millions of dollars per month because of cancelled elective procedures, increased staffing and overtime costs, expanded bed capacity, and increased spending on supplies and equipment to meet the surge in COVID patients. As New York experiences a second wave of COVID cases, hospitals are facing huge financial risks again. Schumer and Gillibrand said today’s funding is imperative to keeping the state’s hospitals open and able to serve COVID patients. December 17, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Responds to Trump Administration Attacking California for Safeguarding Reproductive Freedom”. From the press release: Today, the Trump administration announced an inhumane effort to try to strip California of at least $200 million in federal healthcare funds during a global pandemic. This politically motivated announcement in the final days of the Trump administration is intended to punish the state for ensuring that Californians have access to comprehensive health insurance that includes coverage of abortion care.This cruel announcement comes just one day after California surpassed its previous highest number of deaths due to COVID-19 in a single day as cases continue to skyrocket. More than 21,000 Californians have lost their lives due to COVID-19, and the state reported more than 53,000 new cases today alone. In the midst of a public health crisis, we should be strengthening and expanding access to healthcare, not rolling back access or punishing states that work to provide comprehensive coverage to their residents.NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement in response:“The Trump administration’s threat to strip California of hundreds of millions of dollars in critical healthcare funding during a global pandemic is appalling. There is no limit to the destruction Trump is willing to leave in his wake as he is forced from office. He’s clearly attempting to play to a small group of supporters in this attack on healthcare and access to abortion. This pays no attention to the people he is punishing, especially BIPOC communities most hurt by these political games.”NARAL Pro-Choice California Director Shannon Olivieri Hovis said:“California is in the midst of a raging pandemic and the soon-to-be-former president of the United States is using his final days in office to attack funding for healthcare. We are proud that our state is committed to ensuring that Californians have comprehensive coverage for all of their healthcare needs — including abortion care.” The Trump-Pence administration has spent the last four years systematically attacking the right to abortion and undermining reproductive freedom. Now, in the final days of the administration, Trump’s Department of Health and Human Services, led by anti-reproductive freedom Secretary Alex Azar, is arguing that California’s law guaranteeing insurance coverage of abortion care violates the Weldon Amendment, an annual budget rider designed to interfere with policies that expand access to and coverage of abortion care. Ironically, the amendment refers to such policies as “discrimination.” Notably, in 2016, HHS’ Office for Civil Rights rejected complaints about California’s abortion coverage requirement and determined that the requirement does not violate federal law. These kinds of attacks on insurance coverage for the full range of reproductive healthcare, including abortion care, especially hurt communities of color, trans and non-binary people, and those with lower incomes.The Trump administration also announced today that the Department of Justice has filed a lawsuit against the University of Vermont Medical Center in an attack on the hospital’s policies that ensure patient access to reproductive healthcare, including abortion. This outrageous attack on a hospital, in the midst of a global pandemic, is further evidence that the Trump administration will stop at nothing to prioritize attacks on abortion access in its final days. December 18, 2020: BuzzFeed News posted an article titled: “Mitch McConnell Is Trying To Block Mandatory Paid Sick Leave For Workers Who Get COVID”. It was written by Paul McLeod. From the article: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is pushing to let businesses and governments deny sick leave to workers who fall ill with COVID-19.As Congress negotiates an end-of-year pandemic aid bill, McConnell is trying to block an extension of a paid sick leave program for people who get COVID that expires in two weeks, according to multiple Hill sources with knowledge of the negotiations.Back in March, Congress passed a law mandating that workers are able to draw two weeks of paid sick leave if they contract COVID, two weeks of paid sick leave to care for a quarantining relative, and up to 10 weeks of paid family leave to care for a child whose school or daycare is closed for COVID-related reasons.Those provisions are set to expire at the end of the year. Democrats initially sought to broaden the scope of the program and extend it. Those goals were lowered to merely extending the program for several more months due to Republican opposition, according to one Senate aide. Now Republicans, led by McConnell, are opposing an expansion of the program altogether.Paid sick leave was already watered down to exempt big businesses. Any company with over 500 employees does not fall under the requirement to provide paid leave…Businesses with under 50 employees can also apply for exemptions to the requirement. The federal government is footing the bill for the entirety of paid leave costs for businesses through refundable tax credits.But state and local governments are not eligible for the tax credit and must bear the sick leave costs on their own. Sen. Lamar Alexander, the powerful Republican chair of the Senate Health Committee, said this is why he opposes an extension of the program.“Paid sick leave is a good idea. We do it in my office, the federal government now does it, and many businesses do it. Unfortunately, current paid leave proposals impose billions of dollars in an unfunded mandate on state and local governments,” Alexander said in a statement to BuzzFeed News. “If the federal government wants to require paid leave, the federal government should pay for it.”The federal government can’t pay for it, however, because Republicans are also blocking funding for state and local governments from being included in the bill. This funding was one of the key demands from Democratic negotiators. But it was stripped out of the package, along with a Republican proposal for immunity from COVID lawsuits for businesses, because these were seen as the two most contentious negotiating points… December 18, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Administration Puts Health Care Access In Limbo for Texans During the Worst Stretch of a Pandemic”. From the press release: Today, Planned Parenthood is calling on Gov. Greg Abbott to maintain critical health care access for people with low incomes in Texas after the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals issued an order that could allow the state to “defund” Planned Parenthood. This is the latest in a five-year legal battle stemming from Gov. Abbott’s 2015 attempt to block Medicaid patients from getting care at Planned Parenthood health centers in Texas. The federal district court stepped in to prevent this from happening. The night before Thanksgiving, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling that gave Gov. Abbott permission to continue his attack. During legal battles over the last five years, Planned Parenthood affiliates have continued to serve thousands of patients through the Medical program each year, without incident or complaints from the Abbott administration.Earlier this week, Planned Parenthood affiliates in Texas asked the Abbott administration for time to allow providers time to care for their patients during the COVID-19 pandemic and connect them with new providers. Without this grace period, patients who rely on Planned Parenthood for preventative care would be abandoned during the pandemic and abruptly left scrambling to find care in an already-overloaded Medicaid system.During the most devastating public health crisis Texas has faced in a century, Planned Parenthood is calling on the Abbott administration to halt its efforts to dismantle health care for the most vulnerable Texans. This worsens the dual public health crises – systemic racism and COVID-19 – that disproportionately harm women and people of color who rely on programs like Medicaid. Blocking Medicaid patients from accessing basic health care at Planned Parenthood health centers would be devastating for the more than 8,000 Texans who rely on Planned Parenthood each year for high-quality, affordable services, including birth control, life-saving cancer screenings, STI testing and treatment, and more… December 18, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Abbott Administration Puts Health Care Access In Limbo For Texans During the Worst Stretch of a Pandemic”. From the press release: Today, Planned Parenthood is calling on Gov. Greg Abbott to maintain critical health care access for people with low incomes in Texas after the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals issued an order that could allow the state to “defund” Planned Parenthood. This is the latest in a five-year legal battle stemming from Gov. Abbott’s 2015 attempt to block Medicaid patients from getting care at Planned Parenthood health centers in Texas. The federal district court stepped in to prevent this from happening. Then right before Thanksgiving, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling that gave Gov. Abbott permission to continue his attack. During legal battles over the last five years, Planned Parenthood affiliates have continued to serve thousands of patients through the Medicaid program each year, without incident or complaints from the Abbott administration.Earlier this week, Planned Parenthood affiliates in Texas asked the Abbott administration for time to allow providers time to care for their patients during the COVID-19 pandemic and connect them with new providers. Without this grace period, patients who rely on Planned Parenthood for preventive health care would be abandoned during the pandemic and abruptly left scrambling to find care in an already-overloaded Medicaid system. During the most devastating public health crisis Texas has faced in a century, Planned Parenthood is calling on the Abbott administration to halt its efforts to dismantle health care for the most vulnerable Texans. This worsens the dual public health crises — systemic racism and COVID-19 — that disproportionately harm women and people of color who rely on programs like Medicaid. Blocking Medicaid patients from accessing basic health care at Planned Parenthood health centers would be devastating for the more than 8,000 Texans who rely on Planned Parenthood each year for high-quality, affordable services, including birth control, life-saving cancer screenings, STI testing and treatment, and more.Excerpt of remark from Dr. Bhavik Kumar, medical director for primary and trans care, Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast:“Anytime health care is restricted, people suffer. And it’s important to note that people of color and women rely on publicly funded health care programs like Medicaid at disproportionate rates because of systemic racism and discrimination in our country. There are no two ways about it: Blocking Medicaid patients from care at Planned Parenthood creates yet another sexist and racist barrier to affordable health care at a time when people need it most. Now, we’re asking the Abbott administration to give us time to ensure health care is not disrupted for more than 8,000 Texans. It’s the least they can do for the thousands of people who could soon lose their trusted provider in the middle of a pandemic.”Excerpt of remark from Vanessa Rodriguez, call center manager, Planned Parenthood Greater Texas:“Even before COVID-19 pushed our public health infrastructure to the brink, our patients enrolled in Medicaid had trouble getting an appointment quickly. And importantly, they do not feel safe or comfortable seeking sexual and reproductive health care with any provider. Patients should be able to access health care where they choose and, for many patients, that is at Planned Parenthood.”Excerpt of remark from Jeffrey Hons, president & CEO, Planned Parenthood South Texas:“We implore the state of Texas to, at the very least, do the minimum: Allow Planned Parenthood to continue providing care in the Medicaid program during the current crisis and give our patients time to find other providers, so they don’t go without care during a pandemic. The health care network for Medicaid recipients is not always easy to manage, and care is not always easy to find. The COVID-19 pandemic is exacerbating existing pressures on our safety- net infrastructure. The people who rely on Medicaid are the most vulnerable Texans, and likely experiencing some of the worst economic effects of the pandemic. Forcing people — many of whom are struggling to make ends meet, and care for their families in a global pandemic — to scramble for basic health care is terrible policy, certainly uncharitable, indeed un-American.”.. December 20, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Remarks at Media Availability on Coronavirus Relief & Omnibus Agreement with Leader Schumer”. From the press release: …Our purpose has always been to crush the virus, put money in the pockets of the American people, which we do in this legislation. Sadly, our third purpose to honor our heroes was not fully appreciated by our Republican colleagues and so our support for state and local government, which significant in this legislation, requires more to be done. So, we consider this a first step. And that, again, more needs to be done. And we’re so excited that that will be happening under the Biden-Harris Administration, about 700 hours from now.What I’m excited about in this bill – and it is really the Democratic difference – is what it does for America’s working families. As we see food lines all over the country. It was our legislation that had the initiatives for food, for nutrition, for our children in school and seniors, as well as America’s working families, their rental assistance and so many – let me just say about food, maybe 15 million children in America are food insecure. Many adult food insecure people. Highest percentage of them, I believe, is in the state of Kentucky. Nonetheless, the food, the nutrition piece of it has always been central to our Democratic proposal. With the millions of people on the verge of eviction, we have rental assistance and a moratorium until the Biden Administration. Food, rental assistance, Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit for America’s working poor families. The Democratic difference. CDFI, assistance for Community Development Financial Institutions to help small business, minority-owned businesses, women-, veterans-, rural, Native American-owned businesses to participate in a way. Because they’re not big and they don’t have financial relationships, sometimes they are overlooked. But that is central to what our legislation has done. Child care, child care. Children learning, parents earning. Very important, especially in the time of the pandemic, when children cannot actually in many cases, go to school. Therefore, their parents can’t go to work. Child care.In addition, we’re very pleased that investments in transportation system and what that means to our economy, jobs, etc. WRDA is in this legislation. We’re very pleased that bipartisan, bicameral support for WRDA. That is a job creator, as well. The Employment Retention Tax Credit. Some of these things just made it in late this evening. That’s why it’s taking us longer to write the bill to bring it to the Floor. But these are some of the later developments. And, of course, we’re very proud that surprise billing is a part of this. And again, one thing that we didn’t achieve – the money that was left over from the CARES Act: we wanted to have flexibility, so it could be used for revenue loss, as well as Coronavirus expenses by our communities in our states. Republican and Democratic governors, alike, supported that. We did get an extension of one year. So, perhaps, unfortunately, with the spread of the virus, they will have those kinds of expenses. So, in any case, whether it’s education, transportation – let me just say this one thing, because I, from time to time, hear a question here, Mr. Leader: ‘What took so long?’ What took so long is because we could not get our Republican colleagues to crush the virus. I couldn’t understand it. Why would they not want to invest in the science that has told us so importantly that it required testing, tracing, treatment, separation, sanitation and the rest?And when we had the bill in the Heroes Act and even in the smaller Heroes Act, because we reduced the time, they said, ‘We just made a light touch on your language on testing.’ No, 53 percent of it, to take out everything that referred to minority communities. Communities of color was so hard hit and all of this. And now, we see why. They didn’t believe in the science, we knew that. But they did believe in herd immunity. And that’s why they never, they never could come to that first bill pillar, to crush the virus. So, for these and other reasons, we’re on a new path now. I’m proud of the legislation. It’s a first step, we need to do more. But they – what gives us hope is a vaccine, and we have to make that available, free and fairly, equitably distributed in our country and I encourage everyone to be vaccinated. And, again, what gives me hope is that in that 700 hours, Joe Biden will be President of the United States, bringing his values, his commitment to America’s working families to the fore as we prepare for additional legislation. With that, I’m very pleased to, again, welcome our distinguished Democratic Leader of the Senate, praise him for his masterful work last evening, to take us from a place where American working families were shortchanged and left out to dry, except for his brilliance in getting the job done for us. In that spirit, I welcome Leader Schumer to the podium.Leader Schumer: Now, while this bill is far from perfect, nor is it the bill that we would pass if Democrats had a Majority in the Senate, it is a strong shot in the arm to help American families weather the storm. For the 20 million people who would lose unemployment benefits the day after Christmas, help is on the way. To the millions of small business owners who are worried their businesses would go under, help is on the way. To families struggling with less money, direct payments mean help is on the way. To people who might have been evicted from their homes because they didn’t have a job and couldn’t afford it, help is on the way. To those who need food because they have no money because of the pandemic, help is on the way. And to all of America who wants to make sure that the vaccine is distributed free and fairly and quickly, help is on the way.So, this bill is certainly not everything we wanted. Our Republican friends stood in the way of so much, but it is a strong, strong shot in the arm to get things going. We all know that President Trump has made the economy a mess by how he treated the pandemic. We all know that President Biden is entering his presidency in an economic deep hole caused by President Trump. This bill helps him begin to get out of that hole. It is $900 billion. That is the second largest stimulus amount of dollars that has ever gone into the economy. The first being the CARES bill, which we negotiated with Secretary Mnuchin, so it is a lot of money.Unfortunately, the troubles are so deep, the abyss is so, so, so long, that we need more, and this is just a first step. This is an emergency. We need a second bill to continue dealing with the emergency and to start stimulating our economy, so we get back to where we were. And that will be job number one in the new Biden Administration. And whether we have the Majority in the Senate or the Minority, we Democrats are going to push like anything to get a bigger, stronger bill. This bill is a good bill. Tonight is a good night, but it is not the end of the story. It is not the end of the job. Anyone who thinks this bill is enough does not know what’s going on in America, does not look into the eyes of a small business owner who’s losing his business. There are a lot of things in this bill that help New York. I’m very proud of the mass transit provision. I’m very proud of the Save Our Stages provisions. And when it came – comes to state and local, even though the Republicans were relentless against it, we found other ways to aid the states. So, the states will get at least some of the aid they need. The localities and the tribes will get some of the aid they need. But the Republican relentlessness against state aid is just befuddling. Why is it any different when someone who works for the local government loses his or her job and can’t feed their kids or someone from a small business loses it? They’re all for helping the small businesses and so are we, because they employ people. But what’s the difference between that and state and local governments where people are also losing their job and can’t feed their families? Ideology gets in the way, ideology gets in the way. But this bill gives us hope and confidence that we can do more, and we will do more. We must do more. And when we come back in January, that will be job number one, to fill in the gaps, the many gaps left by this bill and to make sure that this bill, a strong measure gets the – does the job by making sure it gets the money to the people as it was intended… Q: Speaker Pelosi, quick question, given how hard it was to get this deal, from May you were fighting. Are you under any illusion it’s going to be easy to this part two next year? Speaker Pelosi. I believe in public sentiment. You know that. And we have a great leader who has the confidence of the people that he is there for them, Joe Biden is. And he would, I think – the soapbox, the bully pulpit that he has to say, ‘We’re here for you. We know what you need, and we are going to fight the fight for you.’ No, I think that it’s – I think we’re going to have a much easier time than we’ve had with the Republican Senate and a Republican President.Leader Schumer. Let me just say something. The number one reason we didn’t get the bill we needed was the Republican Senate. And Donald Trump just obfuscated the whole issue. A Democratic President Joe Biden will be able to focus the American people’s attention on the Senate, the Republican Members of the Senate, who are obstructing, getting in the way of what they need. If Joe Biden says we need $1,200 checks instead of the $600 – they didn’t have any money for checks in their bill. Well, he’ll focus on the American people. If we feel we need more money for Unemployment Insurance, he’ll focus on the American people.And I believe the Republicans who have had – who have been able to hide under Trump’s circus, almost, will no longer be able to do it. I am very optimistic that we can get a lot more done in a Senate, certainly if there’s a Democratic Majority, but even if a Republican Majority remains, with a new President who’s going to focus the issue. He said he’s making COVID his number one issue. Things will be easier, better and will produce even more… December 21, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Arkansas Health Care Providers File Emergency Request to Block Anti-Abortion Laws”. From the press release: The ACLU and the Center for Reproductive Rights filed for emergency relief to block four anti-abortion laws from taking effect as early as tomorrow in Arkansas.The action comes after the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals denied a request for en banc rehearsing last week of an Aug. 2020 decision that paved the way for Arkansas abortion restrictions to go into effect. In their filing today in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, the groups asked the court to block the laws that would completely prevent many people from obtaining abortion care, create intrusive and stigmatizing requirements that violate patients’ privacy rights, and would leave the stat with even more limited access to abortion……”Not only are these laws unconstitutional, if they go into effect, they will unnecessarily expose pregnant people to severe and unwarranted harm,” said Jenny Ma, senior staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “If a pregnant person is in an abusive relationship or has a hostile home environment, the law requiring clinics to inform a patient’s partner or family of their abortion could seriously threaten their safety. And that’s just one of the laws. We will exhaust our legal options to make sure all of the challenged laws remain blocked.”The lawsuit was filed by the ACLU, the ACLU of Arkansas, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and the law firm of O’Melveny & Myers LLP on behalf of Frederick W. Hopkins, M.D., M.P.H. and Little Rock Family Planning Services. December 21, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Floor Speech on Emergency Coronavirus Relief & Omnibus Agreement”. From the press release: …I do want to speak to the bill that will be on the Floor shortly. It is a good bipartisan bill. It does – is different from bills that have been proposed by the Senate side by the Republican Leader. It does things that his bill never did and that is, it addresses the food needs of the American people. Maybe 15 million children are food insecure in our country and adults as well. Millions of families on the verge of eviction, and this legislation addresses the rental needs and short-term moratorium.We can accept the short-term because we’ll have a new president during the length of that moratorium to extend it further, if necessary. We also have in the legislation direct payments, which were not in the Republican bill – to America’s working families. I would like them to have been bigger, but they are significant and they will be going out soon……In addition to that, the list goes on of some of the very positive things that are on the bill. And, quite frankly, some of them did not – we did not come to agreement until yesterday. Whether we are talking about the WRDA, the Water Resources Development Act, a big jobs bill; it had bipartisan support, but some disagreement over language. And, by the time that was resolved, it pushed the bill from coming to the Floor later.We didn’t have, at the start of the day, sick leave. That is in the bill, almost $2 billion for sick leave. It didn’t have the EITC, the Earned Income Tax Credit for working poor people to have that boost, as well as the Child Tax Credit. It did not have the Employment Retention Tax Credit. Bipartisan support, WRDA and on that.And them, we came to agreement not only on the language, but where that initiative would be placed about. Many of these things need to be precisely written and assembled in order for a bill to come to the Floor, which we anticipate will be not to – pretty soon this morning……I think it would be interesting to point out that as enthusiastic as we are about the PPP provisions in this bill, and we all support them in a bipartisan way, it’s important to note that small businesses – I always say there is nothing more optimistic than starting a small business, maybe getting married – but the optimism, the hope, the dream that people have is completely, shall we say, darkened by this assault of this virus. And that’s why we had to start by crushing the virus. We didn’t do it. We couldn’t pass legislation until now because the Administration simply did not believe in testing, tracing, treatment, wearing masks, sanitation, separation and the rest – scientific approach. It becomes clear to us, now, that they believed in herd immunity, quackery, springing right from the Oval Office, and not denied sufficiently by some of the CDC and the rest……So, now we have a vaccine that we hope will reach everyone as soon as possible. What I – what I’m heartbroken about about this bill, though, is, while we make an attempt to crush the virus, we don’t do it adequately enough in terms of recognizing the toll on people of color. But we will have to do that in the public sentiment of it and in the demands that we make on governors and others who are in charge of the distribution. But we put money in the pockets of American people. We want to do more. But, nonetheless, we are meeting the deadline, December 26, when Unemployment Insurance, which was vital……It’s interesting, I think, to note that when we passed – we passed a number of bills in a bipartisan way, and we’ll pass this one, today. In the course of that, in the CARES Act and follow-up on the PPP bill, and this bill now, we are approaching $1 trillion that we are putting out for PPP. If that is what is needed and is spent effectively, that’s a worthy expenditure, but almost $1 trillion, well over $750 . This bill alone over $300 billion. So, we have PPP now, in order for the private sector to function. In order for us to live our lives, we need to have the public sector: public transportation, public schools, public health, the list goes on……Except Republicans insist on saying, ‘We don’t want to give money to blue states where the coronavirus is.’ It’s in red states, too. It knows no borders and it knows no party, this vicious virus. But, somehow or other, Republicans have said to our heroes, our health care workers, our teachers, our transportation, our police and fire and the rest, sanitation workers – so important – food, food, food – you are not worthy of support because, perhaps, you are in a blue state predominantly, and, therefore, we under-value your contribution to our society, to our economy, and especially now as we try to minister to the needs of people in this coronavirus crisis. Who do you think – these vaccines come into a state, they go from the lab to your arm, magically? No. They have to be received, distributed, administered and done so fairly, equitably and free. Who do you think is going to do those jobs if you don’t respect the role of state and local government in all of this? Don’t think about it as government. Think about it as people. Think about yourself needing all of that.So, I would hope that as we see the need for what we have done in this nearly $900 billion legislation that we’ll vote on today that everyone understands it’s a first step. It’s a first step, as President-elect Biden has said. It’s a first step, and we will need to do more, more to get more virus assistance to crush the virus, but also more money to buy vaccines. We need to have the Defense Production Act in play to hasten the manufacturing of these vaccines, and we need to be able to, as I say, to get the job done, and that takes people. And people need to be respected. Their work needs to be valued. And – again, and their entities for whom – under whose auspices they work, public hospitals, all the rest… …So, when we say it’s a first step, let us embrace it. Let us – you know, let us thank God Chuck Schumer was able to dismantle, in part, the Toomey resolution that would tie the hands of a President to meet the needs of the American people and our economy by exercising Section 13(3) of the national reserve – Federal Reserve Board. So, we got past that, which took a long time. I thought Wednesday night we were finished. This monstrosity reared its head the next morning. Chuck effectively was able to fix it. It’s still – it should not even have been initiated, but nonetheless, fix it in a way – excuse me – Leader Schumer, in a way that enabled us to go forward, and that’s why it’s taken us this long to get here in these last few days……As we review policy and legislation and negotiation and all that, let’s always have in our hearts every single one of the people who have died from the coronavirus. It can be stopped. It can be crushed, but that is a decision, it is a decision and decision to recognize where it is hurting people the most. So, with that, I invite – I look forward to strong bipartisan vote today on this legislation, respecting it for what it does, not judging it for what it does not, but recognizing that more needs to be done. Again, with high praise for all of our chairs and, again, special recognition of Madam Chair Nita Lowey for her last bill on the Floor. I say congratulations to them, all the staff who worked so hard… December 21, 2020: BuzzFeed News posted an article titled: “Businesses Will No Longer Have To Provide Paid Leave For Workers With COVID After Mitch McConnell Objected”. It was written by Paul McLeod. From the press release: Employers will no longer have to provide paid sick leave to workers who get infected with COVID-19 after Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell blocked that extension from being included in Congress’s latest coronavirus aid package.In March, Congress passed a law mandating that workers are able to draw two weeks of paid sick leave if they contract COVID, two weeks of paid leave to care for a quarantining relative, and up to 10 weeks of paid family leave to care for a child whose school or daycare is closed for COVID-related reasons.BuzzFeed News previously reported that McConnell was pushing to block the paid leave mandate from being extended. Congressional aides in both parties confirmed Monday that the extension was left out of the aid bill as a concession to McConnell.The bill does extend a refundable tax credit that fully subsidizes the cost to businesses of paying out sick leave until the end of March. Essentially, the federal government will continue to foot the bill for businesses that offer paid leave over the next three months, but it will be optional for businesses to opt into this program and let their employees take time off.The bill is set to pass on Monday night and President Donald Trump is expected to sign it into law soon thereafter……A Senate Republican aide said a deal on a COVID aid bill could have been reached Saturday night, but House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held it up because an extension of the paid leave mandate was not included. The aide said Pelosi held out until Sunday when she settled for the tax credit alone to be included.Democrats said they would keep pushing for paid leave. The party hopes to pass another COVID aid bill next year after President-elect Joe Biden takes office in January… December 21, 2020: U.S. News posted an article titled: “Mixed-Status Households Eligible for Stimulus Checks Under New Coronavirus Aid Package”. It was written by Claire Hansen. From the article: Households with individuals of mixed immigration status will be eligible for stimulus payments under the new coronavirus relief package expected to pass Congress on Monday – a key change from the aid measure passed in March, which excluded millions of people in mixed-status families from direct aid during a pandemic in which immigrants are overrepresented as among front-line workers.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said in a statement Sunday evening that the new coronavirus relief package includes direct payments of up to $600 per adult and child, including for mixed-status families……The CARES Act, passed by Congress in March, included direct payments of up to $1,200 per adult and $500 per child for individuals who filed taxes in the last two years using a Social Security number.Immigrants in the country illegally, as well as some other immigrants who are legally present in the U.S. but not eligible for a Social Security number, use what is called Individual Tax Identification Number, or ITIN, to pay taxes. Under the CARES Act, not only were people using an ITIN to file taxes ineligible for stimulus payments, but anyone filing jointly with someone using an ITIN was also ineligible for direct checks – meaning that, for example, a U.S. citizen married to an immigrant using an ITIN didn’t receive any money for themselves or their children. The act made an exception for military families……People in mixed-status families sued the government for excluding them from stimulus payments. Democrats and advocates pushed for the next major relief package to include relief for all people who pay taxes, including immigrants in the country illegally who use ITINs, to receive checks, despite opposition from Republicans. It is not yet clear if immigrants using ITINs to pay taxes will be eligible for this new round of checks or if only U.S. citizens or legal residents will be eligible, regardless of who they filed taxes with. December 21, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Dear Colleague on Next Steps in Addressing Health and Economic Crisis”. From the press release: Dear Democratic Colleague,Now that we have completed the coronavirus emergency relief and omnibus package, we must focus on the work to be done in the new Congress.While we have recognized the urgent need for resources to crush the virus so we can open our economy and schools safely, we must also recognize what needs to be done. To that end, we must honor our heroes by supporting state and local government. It is important to know that in the COVID relief bills this year, Congress has appropriated nearly $1 trillion for PPP to save small business jobs but only $160 billion to save the jobs of our heroic frontline workers: our health care, first responders, transportation, sanitation, food and our teachers, our teachers, our teachers. It is also important to note that the GOP insisted on a tax break of $160 billion for the wealthiest America in CARES.The legislation we pass today does acknowledge the role states must play in the distribution and administration of the vaccine, as well as in education and transportation as we go forward. However, state and local budgets are still overwhelmed by coronavirus expenses and revenue losses. As we agreed to the extension of the Coronavirus Relief Fund, I had hoped that Republicans would agree to flexibility, but they did not.Thanks to the good work of our chairs and their committees in the 116th Congress, we are well prepared to develop strong legislation with the Biden-Harris Administration to Build Back Better. The pandemic pulled back the curtain on the disparities in our economy and our society – and it also deepened the divide. In the new Congress, I am proposing a select committee to address economic disparities and promote fair growth. In doing so, Members have emphasized that our path forward must prioritize workforce development, child care and mental health.As we observe the holidays, we carry in our hearts the over 315,000 lives that were lost to the virus, remembering them and their families in our prayers.We advance this bill today as a first step. We have new hope which springs from the vaccine and from the commitment President-elect Biden has to following science. We are ready for the next step… December 21, 2020: Representative Ayanna Pressley (Democrat – Massachusetts) posted a press release titled: “Statement from Rep. Pressley on House Passage of COVID-19 Relief Package”. From the press release: Today, Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07) issued the following statement on the House passage of compromise legislation to address the COVID-19 pandemic.“For nearly nine months now, workers and families in my district and across the country have been left to fend for themselves in the midst of an unprecedented public health and economic crisis that has robbed us of over 300,000 lives and shoved thousands of families into poverty. As a result of Republican stonewalling and negligence, our communities are experiencing record levels of food and housing insecurity, thousands have lost their jobs and our immigrant neighbors have been locked out of federal relief altogether.“I have consistently heard from parents in my district who have exhausted their entire savings to keep the lights on and cover the costs of groceries, diapers and formula. I have heard from evicted seniors, immigrant families going hungry and essential workers deprived of PPE and access to paid leave and sick days. And I have heard from municipal leaders struggling to maintain critical jobs and services as the pandemic continues to worsen.“I have fought every step of the way to strengthen this legislation and center those most impacted. Our fight continues. I want to recognize the grassroots organizing efforts and the partnership of my fellow progressives and Democrats in improving the legislation from where it stood only days ago. There is no doubt that these negotiations have been difficult given the callous disregard of the other side. It is because of our collective advocacy and organizing that direct cash payments are a part of this package, the Federal Reserve’s authority to address future crises has not been severely limited, and that for the first time, mixed-status immigrant families will be able to access these critical resources. As a result of the efforts of Democrats, this package will include billions in rental assistance, resources to support the safe reopening of our schools, our public transportation systems and resources to combat hunger and food insecurity. “While I believe the legislation announced today by Congressional leadership failed to provide the comprehensive relief necessary to meet the scale of the crisis in the communities I represent, I voted yes on the package because it will provide a much needed and long overdue stopgap to help workers and families weather the crisis as we continue fighting for additional relief.“Since the onset of this pandemic, I have fought tirelessly for relief that would truly support our communities. Today’s vote marks a long-overdue step toward delivering relief for the people, but our work is far from over. I will continue to push for bold, comprehensive legislation that meets the moment and sets us on a path to a just and equitable recovery.“These negotiations have underscored just how clear it is that Mitch McConnell does not care about the health and livelihoods of the American people. He has delayed comprehensive relief for months, strangled the Senate’s ability to serve the people, and must be removed from power.“I will continue fighting for the people who sent me to Washington to do just that.” December 22, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi, Schumer Joint Statement on Coronavirus Relief & Omnibus Agreement”. From the press release: “Today we have reached agreement with Republicans and the White House on an emergency coronavirus relief and omnibus package that delivers urgently needed funds to save the lives and livelihoods of the American people as the virus accelerates.“We are going to crush the virus and put money in the pockets of the American people. As part of the agreement, Democrats have secured provisions that include: Accelerating vaccine distribution and crushing the coronavirus: The bipartisan COVID relief package finally recognizes that we cannot get our economy working unless we can get the coronavirus under control. The package provides billions in urgently need funds to accelerate the free and equitable distribution of safe vaccines to as many Americans as possible and as soon as possible, to implement a strong national testing and tracing strategy with billions reserved specifically for combating the disparities facing communities of color, and to support our heroic health care workers and providers.Ends surprise billing: The package includes bipartisan, bicameral legislation that will end surprise billing for emergency and scheduled care.Strong support for small businesses: Democrats secured critical funding and policy changes to help small businesses, including minority-owned businesses, and nonprofits recover from the pandemic. The agreement includes over $284 billion for first and second forgivable PPP loans, expanded PPP eligibility for nonprofits and local newspapers, TV and radio broadcasters, key modifications to PPP to serve the smallest businesses and struggling non-profits and better assist independent restaurants, and includes $15 billion in dedicated funding for live venues, independent movie theaters, and cultural institutions. The agreement also includes $20 billion for targeted EIDL Grants which are critical to smaller businesses on Main Street.Community Development Financial Institutions and Minority Depository Institutions: The agreement includes dedicated PPP set-asides for very small businesses and lending through community-based lenders like Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) and Minority Depository Institutions (MDIs); $9 billion in emergency U.S. Treasury capital investments in CDFIs and MDIs to support lending in low-income and underserved communities, including persistent poverty counties, that may be disproportionately impacted by the economic effects of the COVID–19 pandemic; and $3 billion in emergency support for CDFIs through the CDFI Fund to respond to the economic impact of the pandemic on underserved low-income and minority communities.Rental assistance: Democrats secured $25 billion in critically needed rental insurance for families struggling to stay in their homes and an extension of the eviction moratorium.Strengthens the Low Income Housing Tax Credit: The package enhances the LIHTC to help increase affordable housing construction and provide greater certainty to new and ongoing affordable housing projects.Direct payment checks: Democrats secured a new round of direct payments worth up to $600 per adult and child, also ensuring that mixed-status families receive payments.Strengthened Earned Income Tax Credit & Child Tax Credit: This agreement helps ensure that families who faced unemployment or reduced wages during the pandemic are able to receive a strong tax credit based on their 2019 income, preserving these vital income supports for vulnerable families.Support paid sick leave: The agreement provides a tax credit to support employers offering paid sick leave, based on the Families First framework.Employee Retention Tax Credit: The agreement extends and improves the Employee Retention Tax Credit to help keep workers in the jobs during coronavirus closures or reduced revenue.Enhanced Unemployment Insurance benefits: Democrats averted the sudden expiration of Unemployment Insurance benefits for millions and added a $300 per week UI enhancement for Americans out of work.Nutrition assistance for hungry families: Democrats secured $13 billion in increased SNAP and child nutrition benefits to help relieve the historic hunger crisis that has left up to 17 million children food insecure.Education and child care: The agreement provides $82 billion in funding for colleges and schools, including support for HVAC repair and replacement to mitigate virus transmission and reopen classrooms, and $10 billion for child care assistance to help get parents back to work and keep child care providers open.Historic expansion of Pell Grants: The package includes the largest expansion of Pell Grant recipients in over a decade, reaching 500,000 new recipients and ensuring more than 1.5 million students will now receive the maximum benefit.Broadband access: The agreement invests $7 billion to increase access to broadband, including a new Emergency Broadband Benefit to help millions of students, families and unemployed workers afford the broadband they need during the pandemic.Fights the climate crisis: The agreement includes sweeping clean energy reforms, R&D enhancements, efficiency incentives and extends clean energy tax credits to create hundreds of thousands of jobs across the clean economy. The package also phases out superpollutant HFCs positioning the U.S. to lead the world in avoiding up to 0.5 degree Celsius of global warming.WRDA: The agreement includes the bipartisan Water Resources Development Act of 2020, creating good-paying jobs strengthening and improving the vital water infrastructure that Americans rely on while unlocking the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund.Global Health: Democrats secured an additional $3.6 billion for a total of $4 billion for GAVI, the international vaccine alliance, recognizing that we are not truly safe until the whole world is safe from the coronavirus. “Importantly, the final agreement does not include several dangerous Republican proposals, including a long-demanded GOP provision that could unjustly put the health of workers at risk and take away their legal recourse, as well as an 11th hour attempt to sabotage the incoming administration’s ability to stabilize the economy and save jobs.“State and local governments will certainly need additional funding to prevent the senseless layoffs of heroic essential workers and critical service cuts. The agreement provides some important new targeted funds for state and local government functions that will help alleviate their overall budget burdens. These targeted funds include the emergency resources for schools, $27 billion for state highways, struggling transit agencies, Amtrak and airports, $22 billion for the health-related expenses of state, local, tribal and territorial government, and an additional year of eligibility for expenses under the CARES Coronavirus Relief Fund.“The emergency relief in this agreement, the second largest in history only to the CARES Act, is an important first step that Democrats look forward to building on under the new Biden-Harris Administration to meet the remaining needs of the American people during this historic health and economic crisis.“The House will move swiftly to pass this legislation immediately, so it can quickly be sent to the Senate and then to the President’s desk for his signature. With the horrifying acceleration of daily infections and deaths, there is no time to waste.” December 22, 2020: BuzzFeed News posted an article titled: “Surprise Medical Billing Is Finally Coming To An End After Congress Reached A Last-Minute Deal”. It was written by Paul McLeod. From the article: Hospitals will no longer be able to hit patients with surprise medical bills under a new law passed by Congress to address the coronavirus pandemic on Monday.Surprise billing happens when someone goes to a hospital covered by their insurance network only to be hit with unforeseeable bills because the doctor or specialist who treated them is out of network. Congress has for years talked about ending the practice, but even two weeks ago it seemed clear that a bill to end surprise medical billing was dead in the water yet again, as more than 115,000 people are currently in US hospitals with COVID-19, according to the COVID Tracking Project.But in a turnaround that stunned observers, Congress finally acted to end the exploitive practice……Insurance companies will now be forced to cover those bills. If there is a disagreement on cost between the insurer and healthcare providers — the doctors, specialists, or hospitals issuing the bills — then the price will be decided by an independent arbiter.The deal only came together after some last-minute changes were made to appease doctor and hospital groups. The final concession, demanded by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, is that arbitrators are not able to consider Medicare or Medicaid rates — which are much lower than private market rates — when ruling on the cost……While all sides believed patients should not be hit with surprise medical bills, insurers did not want to pick up all the slack and providers did not want to lose their ability to charge higher prices than in-network rates. These industries battled publicly and privately to avoid having to absorb the cost of a fix.What started as a gap in the system was turned into a profit driver for private equity firms. Two private equity giants, Blackstone Group and KKR & Co., bought up the largest physician staffing firms which led to more doctors going out of network and charging exorbitant surprise bills.These private equity firms then created a dark money front group called Doctor Patient Unity and spent tens of millions of dollars successfully opposing legislation to end private billing, denouncing it as “government rate setting.”.…The initial plan hatched between the House and the Senate was to force insurance companies to cover all emergency room bills and allow health providers to charge only the median in-network costs for fees. Providers fiercely opposed this “benchmarking” plan……These late changes softened opposition from providers and raised concerns that doctors and hospitals will be able to continue to inflate prices. The Department of Health and Human Services will oversee the crafting of the arbitration system and a provider-friendly administration in the future could stack the deck in their favor… December 22, 2020: Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent – Vermont) posted a press release titled: “Sanders Statement on Passage of COVID-19 Relief Package”. From the press release: Upon the Senate’s passage of the $908-billion COVID-19 spending package, Sen. Sanders (I-Vt.) issued the following statement:“Tonight, Congress passed a $908-billion COVID-19 relief bill that extends unemployment benefits through the early spring, and provides support for small businesses, schools, healthcare, nutrition, rental assistance, child care, broadband, the Postal Service, as well as funding to help distribute vaccines.“During the last several weeks, I have been working very hard, along with Republican Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri, to provide direct payments to working families throughout the country. Our goal was to replicate what was in the CARES bill of March, which was $1200 for every working-class adult and $500 for each child. While we did not get as much as we wanted, because of opposition from the Republican leadership and too many Democrats, the bill does include a $600 direct payment for every working-class American earning less than $75,000 a year, and a $1,200 direct payment for couples making less than $150,000 a year, plus $600 for each child. That means that the average family of four will receive a direct payment of $2400.“While including these direct payments ultimately improved this bill, given the enormous economic desperation that so many working families across this country are now experiencing, there is no question but that this legislation did not go anywhere near far enough. “When President-Elect Biden assumes office next month and when the Senate comes back into session in January, I will immediately begin fighting for another relief bill to help America’s working families—including another round of direct payments and more relief for the unemployed, the hungry, the uninsured and those who owe back rent and are behind on their mortgage payments. In this unprecedented crisis, it is imperative that we do everything we can to protect the working families of our country, the elderly, the children and the poor.” December 22, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Federal Court Blocks Four Arkansas Anti-Abortion Laws Hours After They Took Effect”. From the press release: In response to litigation from the ACLU and the Center for Reproductive Rights, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas issued an order blocking four anti-abortion laws in Arkansas hours after they took effect. While the laws were in effect today, clinics were forced to cancel appointments and were only able to offer medication abortion.Last week, the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals denied a request for en banc rehearing of an Aug. 2020 decision that paved the way for the abortion restrictions to go into effect. The ACLU and the Center for Reproductive Rights then asked the district court to block the laws that would completely prevent many people from obtaining abortion care, create intrusive and stigmatizing requirements that violate patients’ privacy rights, and leave the state with even more limited access to abortion. The litigation is supported by several medical experts and five previous Arkansas abortion patients who spoke to the devastating impact the laws would have enforced.“Access to abortion in Arkansas has been preserved — for now,” said Ruth Harlow, senior staff attorney in the ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project. “We are gratified that the court recognized the irretrievable harm these laws would cause to patients, and that it stepped in quickly. We have a fight ahead of us to ensure that no one is turned away, punished, or humiliated when trying to exercise their right to abortion in Arkansas — and we are not backing down.”“We’re relieved these harmful and unconstitutional restrictions have once again been blocked by the courts,” said Holly Dickson, executive director of the ACLU of Arkansas. “These laws would decimate access to abortion in Arkansas at a time when families are already struggling to get care. It shouldn’t take a court order to force Arkansas politicians to respect the basic human rights of the people they serve. That’s why we’ll continue to fight in the courts, in the capitol, and in communities to defend the right of every Arkansan to make their own personal medical decisions.” “Today, we got a preview of what would happen if these laws took effect permanently,” said Jenny Ma, senior staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “It caused uncertainty about whether Arkansans have access to abortion care and forced patients to be turned away, which is absolutely unacceptable. We will continue to fight these laws in court and are relieved they are blocked for now.”The lawsuit was filed by the ACLU, the ACLU of Arkansas, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and the law firm of O’Melveny & Myers LLP on behalf of Frederick W. Hopkins, M.D., M.P.H. and Little Rock Family Planning Services. December 22, 2020: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a news release titled: “ACOG Appalled Congress Declines to Enact Critical Maternal Health Legislation, Calls on Congress to Prioritize Moms in 2021”. From the press release: Maureen G. Phipps, MD, MPH, FACOG, CEO of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), issued the following statement following passage of the year-end legislation that excluded bipartisan maternal health legislation:“ACOG denounces Congress’ failure to enact two critical pieces of bipartisan legislation that prioritized the lives of women and famililes and would have helped eliminate preventable maternal deaths in this country. Amid a global pandemic that threatens to worsen the maternal mortality crisis, Congress chose not to protect our nation’s mothers.“The Maternal Health Quality Improvement Act (H.R. 4995) and the Helping Medicaid Offer Maternity Services Act (H.R. 4996) represent years of congressional and stakeholder collaboration to develop bipartisan legislation that will address our nation’s maternal health crisis.“Although these bills are supported by legislators on both sides of the aisle and recently passed unanimously in the U.S. House of Representatives, the U.S. Senate failed to advance them and Congress neglected to add them to the end-of-the-year legislative package. The United States is the only developed country with a rising maternal morality rate. According to the CDC, approximately 700 women die each year from pregnancy-related complications – that’s two women per day. Congress’ inaction means the difference between life and death for women.“During the COVID-19 pandemic, which has further exposed and exacerbated racial inequities, it is inconceivable that policymakers neglected the opportunity to pass meaningful legislation to eliminate racial disparaties in maternal health outcomes.“While we had hoped to celebrate a victory for America’s mothers before the end of 2020, we applaud the steadfast champions of House-passed H.R. 4995 and H.R. 4996, including Representatives Robin Kelly, PHD, Michael C. Burgess, MD, FACOG, Eliot Engel, Larry Buschon, MD, Greg Walden, and Anna Eshoo. We commit to carry this work forward into the 117th Congress”. December 22, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Continues Fight to Safeguard Women’s Access to Reproductive Health Care”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James, as part of a coalition of 20 attorneys general, today continued her leadership in the national fight to ensure women’s reproductive health care is not stifled or infringed upon in any way. In an amicus brief — filed in Memphis Center for Reproductive Health, et al. v. Herbert Slatery, et al. — Attorney General James and the coalition contest the constitutionality of two abortion bans enacted in the state of Tennessee, and urge the court to affirm a lower court injunction that prevents enforcement of the state law that would create barriers to safe, legal abortions and that would disproportionately impact Black, minority, and low-income women. The attorneys general argue that the laws place unconstitutional restrictions on a woman’s right to choose and that they do not promote women’s health care overall.“Time and again, Tennessee has used its power to try and turn back the clocks and unconstitutionally restrict women’s reproductive rights,” said Attorney General James. “This is just another power grab by politicians willing to sacrifice a woman’s right to access an abortion in the process, but we are standing up against these bans because Tennessee’s unlawful efforts to deny women their constitutionally-guaranteed rights will not go unchallenged. This is about protecting women’s bodies, their freedoms, and their choices.”This past summer, Tennessee enacted two different prohibitions on abortions: a so-called “reason ban” and so-called “cascading bans.” The reason ban prohibits abortion at any stage of a pregnancy if a health care provider “knows” that the patient’s decision to terminate the pregnancy is based on a Down syndrome diagnosis, or the sex or race of the fetus. The cascading bans prohibit abortion as soon as a fetal heartbeat is detected, which can be as early as six weeks after gestation. If this six-week ban is invalidated by the courts, the law includes a cascading series of bans that seek to impose the earliest ban that can withstand judicial review. Both of these restrictions would ban abortions before the stage of viability, contrary to the rights recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court. Additionally, because the cascading bans can take effect before some women even know they are pregnant, they amount to an absolute ban on abortion, in violation of clear Supreme Court law.In the brief — filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit — Attorney General James and the coalition highlight past cases in which the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that a state may not prohibit any woman from making the decision to terminate her pregnancy before viability. Additionally, the attorneys general emphasize that women’s health outcomes are advanced by meaningful access to the full range of comprehensive reproductive health care services, including abortion. The attorneys general also cite ample scientific evidence that has established the detrimental impact highly-restrictive abortion laws have on women’s health outcomes, as well as how states’ interests are served by promoting women’s health and ensuring access to abortion services.Further, the coalition points to data that shows that laws — like the one at issue in Tennessee — have a disproportionate impact on Black, minority, and low-income women. Having access to safe, legal abortions leads to better health outcomes, particularly for Black and minority women who are disproportionately represented in Tennessee’s increasing maternal mortality numbers. Low-income women are also disproportionately affected by abortion bans because in states like Tennessee — which have not expanded access to Medicaid — uninsured women are eligible for coverage only while pregnant, and coverage ends 60 days after they give birth. These inequities are exacerbated by the small number of abortion providers in Tennessee and the long distances many women must travel to access abortion services. Attorney General James and the coalition argue states can promote women’s health without curtailing the right to choose. For instance, many states, including New York, provide residents with access to family planning and contraception programs.Despite Tennessee’s claims that its reason ban law is intended to limit discrimination against those with disabilities, such as Down syndrome, the coalition maintains that combating discrimination should not come at the expense of women’s reproductive rights. States can promote medically-accurate, unbiased information to help women make informed reproductive choices. Further, states can support those with developmental disabilities and their families by providing civil rights protections and delivering social and medical services……Joining Attorneys General James in filing today’s amicus brief are the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia. December 23, 2020: NPR posted an article titled: “Trump Vetos Defense Bill, Setting Up Congressional Vote To Potentially Override Him”. It was written by Claudia Grisales. From the article: President Trump has followed through on his threats to veto the annual defense bill, triggering plans for Congress to return from its holiday break to potentially override him for the first time in his four-year administration.“My Administration has taken strong actions to help keep our Nation safe and support our service members,” Trump wrote in a message to the House of Representatives. “I will not approve this bill, which would put the interests of the Washington, D.C. establishment over those of the American people.”This month, the National Defense Authorization Act won annual congressional approval for its 60th straight year. And the legislation drew overwhelming bipartisan majorities in both chambers, signaling that Congress likely has the support to override Trump’s veto.Because of Trump’s repeated veto threats, Congress has already scheduled voting sessions to override the move during rare floor votes next week. The House is now slated to meet on Monday to override the defense bill veto, while the Senate is scheduled to follow suit on Tuesday……This month, the Senate approved the measure 84-13, while the House passed the bill by a vote of 335-78. This signals that both chambers have more than the two-thirds majority of their members needed to overcome Trump’s rejection of the bill.Supporters had also hoped that backing the plan by a supermajority would send a message to Trump to not veto.However, starting in June, Trump began to signal he would reject the legislation. That month, he took aim at Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., who spearheaded a provision in the bill to rename military installations that honor figures from the Confederacy.Then, this month, Trump doubled down on his threats to veto the bill if it didn’t include a last-minute provision to end legal protections for social media companies. But a bipartisan group of lawmakers, including key Republican leaders, proceeded with the legislation even though it didn’t have the repeal Trump demanded……Trump had wanted lawmakers to undo Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act over his feud with Twitter and other social media companies. Section 230 provides legal protection for technologies over content from third parties and users… December 23, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Dear Colleague on Unanimous Consent Request to Increase Economic Impact Payments”. From the press release: Dear Democratic Colleague,Just when you think you have seen it all, last night, the President said that he would possibly veto the bicameral agreement negotiated between Republicans and Democrats. He said he would do so, unless the economic impact payments were increased by $2,000.In the bipartisan negotiations, Leader Schumer and I repeatedly asked Republicans what would be the highest number the President would accept for direct payments, and they responded with Sphinx-like silence. In the negotiations, they would never go above $600 and in some cases proposed $500.Yesterday, I said that Democrats would go to the Floor and ask for Unanimous Consent to bring up a standalone bill to increase the payments. To do so requires the agreement of the Republican Leader. The agreement is necessary in the House and the Senate.If the President truly wants to join us in $2,000 payments, he should call upon Leader McCarthy to agree to our Unanimous Consent request.We are scheduled to go in for a pro forma session tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. We are awaiting word from Leader Hoyer as to whether Leader McCarthy will agree or reject our Unanimous Consent request.The entire country knows that its urgent for the President to sign this bill, both to provide the coronavirus relief and to keep government open!… December 23, 2020: BuzzFeed News posted an article titled: “Pelosi Is Daring Republicans To Pass $2,000 Direct Checks After Trump Called For Them”. It was written by Paul McLeod. From the article: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi offered Wednesday to immediately pass $2,000 direct checks to US residents, hours after Trump called for them to be included in the coronavirus aid bill that passed Monday.The move puts congressional Republicans in a tough spot. They pushed for smaller stimulus checks during COVID negotiations, only to be immediately undermined by their own president. In a “dear colleague” letter sent to members of the House, Pelosi offered to pass the $2,000 checks by unanimous consent on Christmas Eve if Republicans will go along with it.It’s unlikely that the checks will actually pass. Congress typically does not make changes to massive, negotiated bills after they are passed and Republicans had already railed about the high price tag of the one they voted on. Trump could still veto the coronavirus package if Republicans don’t meet his new demands, delaying the $600 checks and other critical aid Congress agreed to……The debate over checks has made for unusual partnerships. Initially, there were no checks at all in the coronavirus bill. But progressive Democratic Sen. Bernie Sanders and conservative Republican Sen. Josh Hawley teamed up to lead a public pressure campaign demanding the inclusion of $1,200 direct payments similar to what was contained in the CARES Act back in March. They didn’t get that, but negotiators did agree to include $600 checks for most American adults.Under the current wording of the bill, adults who earn up to $75,000 will receive $600 checks, and couples who earn up to $150,000 combined will receive $1,200. Parents will also receive $600 for each child dependent under the age of 17, but no money for older children or adult dependents. For people who earn above $75,000, the size of the checks is phased out at a rate of $5 for every $100 of income, drawing down to zero at $87,000 or $174,000 for joint filers. December 23, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on President Trump Veto of National Defense Authorization Act”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement on the President’s veto of the bipartisan, bicameral National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA):“The President’s veto of the National Defense Authorization Act is an act of staggering recklessness that harms our troops, endangers our security and undermines the will of the bipartisan Congress. For 60 years, the NDAA has been passed on a bipartisan and bicameral basis. “In a time when our country was just targeted with a massive cyberattack, it is particularly hard to understand the reasoning behind the President’s irresponsibility. Disturbingly, Trump is using his final hours in office to sow chaos, including by denying our servicemembers a long-overdue pay raise and hazard duty pay; our families paid family leave, child care, housing and health protections; and our veterans the benefits that they need and deserve. The President’s veto also deprives our country and allies of tools to protect global security – including for cyber-security.“Trump’s veto violates our national values, as it would block action to rename military bases and infrastructure named after those who served in the Confederacy – which is supported by an overwhelming majority of the American people, by House and Senate Democrats and Republicans and by our servicemembers and top military leaders.“Next week, December 28, the House will take up the veto override with bipartisan support.” December 24, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on House Republicans Blocking Unanimous Consent Request to Increase Economic Impact Payments”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement on House Republicans blocking Democrats’ Unanimous Consent request to increase impact payments to $2,000 as the President called for:“Today, on Christmas Eve morning, House Republicans cruelly deprived the American people of the $2,000 that the President agreed to support. If the President is serious about the $2,000 direct payments, he must call on House Republicans to end their obstruction.“House and Senate Democrats have repeatedly fought for bigger checks for the American people, which House and Senate Republicans repeatedly rejected – first, during our negotiations when they said that they would not go above $600 and now, with this act of callousness on the Floor.“On Monday, I will bring the House back to session where we will hold a recorded vote on our stand-alone bill to increase economic impact payments to $2,000. To vote against this bill is to deny the financial hardship that families face and to deny them the relief they need.“Hopefully by then the President will have already signed the bipartisan and bicameral legislation to keep government open and to deliver coronavirus relief.” December 24, 2020: Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent – Vermont) posted a press release titled: “Sanders Calls on Mitch McConnell to Pass $2,000 Direct Payments Legislation in the Senate”. From the press release: In response to President Trump’s disapproval of the $908-billion COVID-19 relief package passed by Congress on Monday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) issued the following statement:“In America today, millions of Americans are facing economic desperation and need help now. I have been calling on Congress for months to pass legislation to provide very working class American with $2,000 a month until the pandemic ends. Now that Senator Schumer, Speaker Pelosi, and President Trump have all indicated strong support for a $2,000 direct payment the ball is in Senate Majority Leader McConnell’s court. I say to Senator McConnell: Let the Senate vote immediately on a stand-alone bill to provide a $2,000 direct payment for the working class and $4,000 for couples. If no Republican objects to that bill, it could pass by unanimous consent today.”Sanders is the co-author, with Senators Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) and Ed Markey (D-Mass.), of the Monthly Economic Crisis Support Act, which would provide $2,000 direct monthly payments to working-class Americans for the duration of the pandemic. December 24, 2020: Representative Ayanna Pressley (Democrat – Massachusetts) posted a press release titled: “Reps. Pressley, Tlaib, Jayapal, Ocassio-Cortez & Omar Introduce Legislation to Provide $2,000 Survival Checks”. From the press release: Today, Congresswomen Ayanna Pressley (MA-07), Rashida Tlaib (MI-13), Pramila Jayapal (WA-07), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY-14), and Ilhan Omar (MN-05) introduced legislation to provide survival payments of up to $2,000 to families suffering due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the woefully inadequate relief provided to them so far. For months, the congresswomen have been at the forefront of pushing for substantial direct relief for families during the worst public health emergency in our lifetimes.“Families in my district and all across the country are struggling under the weight of this unprecedented crisis,” said Congresswoman Pressley. “We’ve been fighting all along for robust survival checks to help people meet their most basic needs, and the broad support that has emerged is a testament to the power of the people and the urgency of this moment. $2,000 in direct cash assistance will help families weather the crisis while we continue fighting for additional relief that meets the scale and scope of the hurt so many are feeling. Let’s get it done.”While President Trump has indicated support for the $2k direct payments, it is highly doubtful he has done anything to encourage congressional Republicans to support the effort. This morning on Christmas Eve, House Republicans blocked an attempt to provide survival checks.“This holiday season, families are being forced to make incredibly difficult decisions, such as whether they should keep their lights on or buy groceries,” said Congresswoman Tlaib. “They are suffering to no fault of their own. We must protect public health and the economic well-being of those we serve. Providing $2,000 survival checks would give those struggling right now a lifeline as we continue to fight to defeat COVID-19. It’s time for Trump to stop bluffing and get the members of his party in line so that the government can provide this long overdue relief to people across the country during this time of great need.”“It’s long overdue that Congress approves COVID-19 relief that actually meets the scale of this devastating crisis,” said Congresswoman Jayapal. “At the heart of any aid proposal must be putting money directly in people’s pockets so they can put food on the table, keep the heat on, pay their bills and withstand this pandemic. Our legislation for $2,000 survival checks will make it happen at a moment when it matters most.”The text of the bill can be viewed here. The House is expected to convene on Monday, December 28th to take action on showing up for the constituents they serve. December 25, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Congressman Mike Levin Delivers Weekly Democratic Address”. From the press release: “Hi, I’m Congressman Mike Levin. I’m proud to represent North County San Diego and South Orange County, with Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton at the heart of my district.“As we celebrate the holidays this year, we also mourn the loss of more than 320,000 Americans to this pandemic – including more than 5,500 veterans, a profound tragedy for our nation. Each individual lost was somebody’s parent or grandparent, a son or daughter, a friend or co-worker who will be deeply missed, especially during this holiday season.“The holidays are also challenging for many families who are struggling to make ends meet, for our heroic frontline workers and for small businesses that are trying to endure this pandemic.“I’m proud that Democrats negotiated an emergency coronavirus relief and omnibus package to save lives and livelihoods and crush the virus. This agreement is an important initial step, which we must build on under the Biden-Harris Administration.“We also took important action last week to honor the service and sacrifice of those who have worn the uniform. As Chair of the House Veterans’ Affairs Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity, I was proud to sponsor the Johnny Isakson and David P. Roe, M.D. Veterans Health Care and Benefits Improvement Act of 2020.“This landmark legislation is the product of years of bipartisan work and the strong leadership of House Veterans’ Affairs Committee Chairman Mark Takano and Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee Ranking Member Jon Tester. It includes numerous legislative initiatives from dozens of House Democrats and provisions from nearly 60 House-passed bills.“It includes the Homeless Veteran Coronavirus Response Act, a bill I introduced to expand and strengthen VA services for homeless veterans during the pandemic, allowing the VA to use existing funds for a wider range of services.“It includes the Reducing Veteran Homelessness Act, a bill I introduced to fill gaps in HUD-VASH case management.“It includes the Protect the GI Bill Act, a bill I introduced to increase transparency and accountability among educational programs that receive funding from the VA, and it includes the Pandemic Assistance for Student Veterans Act, which will minimize the impact of the pandemic on student veterans.“It also includes the Brian Tally VA Employment Transparency Act to support veterans who are the victims of medical malpractice by the VA or its contractors, and the Bill Mulder Transition Improvement Act to make the transition process easier for servicemembers returning to civilian life.“All of these provisions are critically important for the economic success and financial security of our veterans, and I was incredibly proud to lead them.“However, Speaker Pelosi said it best on the House Floor last week when she called the Deborah Sampson Act, led by Congresswoman Julia Brownley, ‘the crown jewel in this package.’ The Deborah Sampson Act takes long overdue steps to address the inequities and barriers that women veterans face when accessing VA care and benefits.“The legislation expands access to care for women veterans, combats sexual harassment and assault, increases cultural competency for all VA staff and improves data collection to ensure that our nation’s nearly two million women veterans get the care, benefits and resources they’ve earned.“With this legislation, we are fulfilling President Lincoln’s promise to care for those ‘who shall have borne the battle’ and for their families, caregivers and survivors.“While we celebrate this extraordinary accomplishment, I know that many troops, veterans and their loved ones are spending this holiday apart from one another. Please know that I deeply appreciate your service and sacrifice, and House Democrats will keep fighting for you in the new year.“Thank you, and happy holidays.” December 27, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Trump Signing Bipartisan Coronavirus Relief and Omnibus Funding Bill”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after the President signed the bipartisan coronavirus relief and omnibus funding bill:“The signing of the bipartisan, bicameral coronavirus relief legislation is welcome news for the fourteen million Americans who just lost the lifeline of unemployment benefits on Christmas Weekend, and for the millions more struggling to stay afloat during this historic pandemic and economic crisis.“This relief legislation is a down payment on what is needed to crush the virus, put money in the pockets of the American people and honor our heroes – our health care workers, first responders, transit and sanitation workers and teachers. We need to ensure robust support for state and local government to distribute and administer a vaccine, keep workers employed and prevent devastating service cuts – and we must do so as soon as possible.“Now, the President must immediately call on Congressional Republicans to end their obstruction and join him and the Democrats in support of our stand-alone legislation to increase direct payment checks to $2,000, which will be brought to the Floor tomorrow. Every Republican vote against this bill is a vote to deny the financial hardship that families face and to deny the American people the relief they need.” December 28, 2020: Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent – Vermont) posted a press release titled: “Sanders Demands McConnell Hold Vote on $2,000 Direct Payments”. From the press release: Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) issued the following statement in response to the House of Representatives’ overwhelming 275-134 passage of the $2,000 direct payments for the working class:“The House has passed a $2,000 direct payment for working people. It is time for the Senate to act. This week on the Senate floor Mitch McConnell wants to vote to override Trump’s veto of the $740 billion defense funding bill and then head home for the New Year. I’m going to object until we get a vote on legislation that provides $2,000 direct payment to the working class. Let me be clear: If Senator McConnell doesn’t agree to an up or down vote to provide working people of our country a $2,000 direct payment, Congress will not be going home for New Year’s Eve. Let’s do our job.” December 28, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Floor Speech on Caring for Americans with Supplemental Help Act of 2020”. From the press release: ..I’m interested in the comments made by Mr. Brady, because he said we could be putting more money into small businesses, and we do, indeed, in the COVID package, around $300 billion. And I think it is important to note, Madam Speaker, that that brings it to about almost a trillion dollars since March 27th – 28th – when the President signed the CARES Act, about $950 billion for small business. Nearly a trillion dollars, very important……But, if you want to talk about job creation, I hope the gentleman will join us when we go forward to do state and local: our health care workers, honoring our heroes. They are at risk while losing their jobs and they risk their lives to save lives. We are talking about health care workers. We are talking about police and fire, our first responders. We are talking about transportation, sanitation, food workers. We are talking about our teachers, our teachers, our teachers, the custodians of our children for a large part of the day. They are at risk of losing their jobs because of the failure of the Republican side of the aisle to support funds for state and local governments to honor our heroes.We want to honor them. We cheer them and applaud them. Let’s give them pay. Let’s let them have job security. Let’s give them PPE, the equipment that they need to do their jobs. So, if you want to talk about saving jobs or growing jobs, for the purpose the distinguished gentleman from Texas mentioned, how are we going to administer – focus on the distribution and administration of the vaccine? Where do you think that happens but in city, county and state hospitals in large measure, by health care workers in those places wherever it is distributed on an individual basis? But, they are the heart of the matter. And that is why we need to go forward with another bill that invests in our state and local governments, not to talk about government, but to talk about services: health care services, education, transportation, making our lives possible, making our very existence possible by what they do. And, without them, how do we function? ……So, this $2,000 – which, thank you for bringing to the Floor on Christmas Eve. Was roundly rejected by our Republican – we asked for Unanimous Consent, this could already be, exist as a law if it happened, but it didn’t. So, now, today we have another chance.Some of the Republicans said, ‘Oh, if they really wanted that, they would have called for a vote that day.’ That wasn’t true. It’s important to note that was a pro forma session and you had to have the consent of the Republicans to bring the bill to the Floor. They withheld their consent. So, here we are today, in a legislative day, where we just act with the Majority to bring the legislation to the Floor. I hope it will enjoy a strong bipartisan support. The President of the United States has put this forth as something that he wants to see and part of his signing the legislation yesterday. I hope that will be – that view will be shared by the Republicans in the Senate. Because we will pass this bill today. Either under suspension or under a rule, where it just requires a majority vote. Under suspension, as you know, two-thirds vote, requires Republican, a large number of Republican votes, which I hope we will have, because I do think the American people would love to see that unity on their behalf. We are a consumer economy. Putting money into the hands of the American people is a boost to our economy. Not much. This isn’t a big stimulus package. It’s a – the COVID bill is an emergency supplemental. But this piece will make it, will make it something very important to growing – sustaining our economy……Republicans have a choice. Republicans have a choice: vote for this legislation or vote to deny the American people the bigger paychecks this need. To reject this would be in denial of the economic challenges that people are facing and it would deny them, again, the relief they need. And with that, I urge a strong bipartisan vote for the aptly named CASH act… December 28, 2020: The U.S. House of Representatives voted on H.R. 9051 in a Roll Call vote. The vote was “On Motion to Suspend the Rules and pass the CASH Act”. It received 231 YEA votes and 44 NAY votes – which means it passed the House of Representatives. Votes by Party: Democratic: 231 YEAS, 2 NAYsRepublican: 44 YEAS, 130 NAYsIndependent: 0 YEAS, 2 NAYsTotal: 275 YEAS, 134 NAYS Votes by Representatives (by State): Alabama: Aderholt (R) YEA, Brooks (R) NAY, Byrne (R) NAY, Palmer (R) NAY, Roby (R) NAY, Rogers (R) NAY, Sewell (D) YEAAlaska: Young (R) not votingArizona: Biggs (R) NAY, Gallego (D) YEA, Gosar (R) NAY, Grijalva (D) YEA, Lesko (R) NAY, O’Halleran (D) YEA, Schweikert (R) NAY, Stanton (D) YEAArkansas: Crawford (R) YEA, Hill (R) NAY, Kirkpatrick (D) YEA, Westerman (R) NAY, Womack (R) NAYCalifornia: Aguilar (D) YEA, Barragán (D) YEA, Bass (D) YEA, Berra (D) YEA, Brownley (D) YEA, Calvert (R) YEA, Carbajal (D) YEA, Cárdenas (D) YEA, Judy Chu (D) YEA, Cisneros (D) YEA, Correa (D) YEA, Costa (D) YEA, Cox (D) YEA, Davis (D) YEA, DeSaulnier (D) YEA, Eshoo (D) YEA, Garamendi (D) YEA, Garcia (R) YEA, Gomez (D) YEA, Harder (D) YEA, Huffman (D) YEA, Khanna (D) YEA, LaMalfa (R) NAY, Lee (D) YEA, Ted Lieu (D) YEA, Lofgren (D) YEA, Lowenthal (D) YEA, Matsui (D) YEA, McCarthy (R) not voting, McClintock (R) NAY, McNerney (D) YEA, Napolitano (D) YEA, Nunes (R) NAY, Panetta (D) YEA, Pelosi (D) YEA, Peters (D) YEA, Porter (D) YEA, Roybal-Allard (D) YEA, Ruiz (D) YEA, Sánchez (D) YEA, Schiff (D) YEA, Sherman (D) YEA, Speier (D) YEA, Swalwell (D) YEA, Takano (D) YEA, Thompson (D) YEA, Torres (D) YEA, Vargas (D) YEA, Waters (D) YEAColorado: Buck (R) NAY, Crow (D) YEA, DeGette (D) YEA, Lamborn (R) NAY, Levin (D) YEA, Neguse (D) YEA, Perlmutter (D) YEA, Tipton (R) NAYConnecticut: Courtney (D) YEA, DeLauro (D) YEA, Hayes (D) YEA, Himes (D) YEA, Larson (D) YEADelaware: Blunt Rochester (D) YEAFlorida: Bilirakis (R) not voting, Buchanan (R) NAY, Castor (D) YEA, Crist (D) YEA, Demings (D) YEA, Deutch (D) YEA, Diaz-Balart (R) YEA, Dunn (R) not voting, Frankel (D) YEA, Gaetz (R) NAY, Hastings (D) YEA, Lawson (D) YEA, Mast (R) NAY, Mucarsel-Powell (D) YEA, Murphy (D) YEA, Posey (R) NAY, Rooney (R) YEA, Rutherford (R) YEA. Shalala (D) YEA, Soto (D) YEA, Spano (R) NAY, Steube (R) NAY, Waltz (R) NAY, Wasserman-Schultz (D) YEA, Webster (R) NAY, Wilson (D) YEA, Yoho (R) not votingGeorgia: Allen (R) NAY, Bishop (D) YEA, Carter (R) NAY, Collins (R) not voting, Ferguson (R) NAY, Hall (D) YEA, Hice (R) not voting, Johnson (D) YEA, Loudermilk (R) NAY, McBath (D) YEA, Austin Scott (R) NAY, David Scott (D) YEA,Woodall (R) NAYHawaii: Case (D) YEA, Gabbard (D) YEAIdaho: Fulcher (R) NAY, Simpson (R) NAYIllinois: Bost (R) NAY, Bustos (D) YEA, Casten (D) YEA, Danny K. Davis (D) YEA, Rodney Davis (D) YEA, Foster (D) YEA, Garcia (D) YEA, Kelly (D) YEA, Kinzinger (R) YEA, Krishnamoorthi (D) YEA, LaHood (R) NAY, Lipinski (D) NAY, Quigley (D) YEA, Rush (D) YEA, Schakowsky (D) YEA, Schneider (D) YEA, Shimkus (R) NAY, Underwood (D) YEAIndiana: Baird (R) YEA, Banks (R) NAY, Brooks (R) YEA. Buschon (R) NAY, Carson (D) YEA, Hollingsworth (R) not voting, Pence (R) YEA, Visclosky (D) YEA, Walorski (R) YEAIowa: Axne (D) YEA, Finkenauer (D) YEA, King (R) not voting, Loebsack (D) YEAKansas: Davids (D) YEA, Estes (R) NAY, Marshall (R) NAY, Watkins (R) not votingKentucky: Barr (R) not voting, Comer (R) YEA, Guthrie (R) NAY, Massie (R) NAY, Rogers (R) YEA, Yarmuth (D) YEALouisiana: Abraham (R) not voting, Graves (R) NAY, Higgins (R) YEA, Johnson (R) NAY, Richmond (D) YEA, Scalise (R) NAYMaine: Golden (D) YEA, Pingree (D) YEAMaryland: Brown (D) YEA, Harris (R) NAY, Hoyer (D) YEA, Mfume (D) YEA, Raskin (D) YEA, Ruppersberger (D) YEA, Sarbanes (D) YEA, Trone (D) YEAMassachusetts: Clark (D) YEA, Keating (D) YEA, Kennedy (D) YEA, Lynch (D) YEA, McGovern (D) YEA, Moulton (D) YEA, Neal (D) YEA, Pressley (D) YEA, Trahan (D) YEAMichigan: Amash (I) NAY, Bergman (R) YEA, Dingell (D) YEA, Huizenga (R) NAY, Kildee (D) YEA, Lawrence (D) YEA, Levin (D) YEA, Mitchell (I) NAY, Moolenaar (R) NAY, Slotkin (D) YEA, Stevens (D) YEA, Tlaib (D) YEA, Upton (R) YEA, Walberg (R) NAYMinnesota: Craig (D) YEA, Emmer (R) NAY, Hagedorn (R) not voting, McCollum (D) YEA, Omar (D) YEA, Peterson (D) YEA, Phillips (D) YEA, Stauber (R) YEAMississippi: Guest (R) NAY, Kelly (R) NAY, Palazzo (R) NAY, Thompson (D) YEAMissouri: Clay (D) YEA, Cleaver (D) YEA, Graves (R) NAY, Hartzler (R) NAY, Long (R) NAY, Leutkemeyer (R) NAY, Smith (R) YEA, Wagner (R) YEAMontana: Gianforte (R) NAYNebraska: Bacon (R) NAY, Fortenberry (R) not voting, Smith (R) NAYNevada: Amodei (R) NAY, Horsford (D) YEA, Lee (D) YEA, TItus (D) YEANew Hampshire: Kuster (D) YEA, Pappas (D) YEANew Jersey: Gottheimer (D) YEA, Kim (D) YEA, Malinowski (D) YEA, Pallone (D) YEA, Pascrell (D) YEA, Payne (D) YEA, Sherrill (D) YEA, Sires (D) YEA, Smith (R) YEA, Van Drew (R) YEA, Watson Coleman (D) YEANew Mexico: Haaland (D) YEA, Luján (D) YEA, Norcross (D) YEA, Torres Small (D) YEANew York: Brindisi (D) YEA, Clarke (D) YEA, Delgato (D) YEA, Engel (D) YEA, Espaillat (D) YEA, Jeffries (D) YEA, Katko (R) YEA, King (R) YEA, Lowey (D) YEA, Caroyn B. Maloney (D) YEA, Sean Moloney (D) YEA, Meeks (D) YEA, Meng (D) YEA, Morelle (D) YEA, Nadler (D) YEA, Ocasio-Cortez (D) YEA, Reed (R) YEA, Rice (D) YEA, Rose (D) YEA, Serrano (D) YEA, Stefanik (R) YEA, Suozzi (D) YEA, Tonko (D) YEA, Velázquez (D) YEA, Zeldin (R) YEANorth Carolina: Adams (D) YEA, Bishop (R) NAY, Budd (R) NAY, Butterfield (D) YEA, Foxx (R) NAY, Higgins (D) YEA, Holding (R) NAY, Hudson (R) NAY, Jacobs (R) YEA, McHenry (R) NAY, Murphy (D) YEA, Price (D) YEA, Rouzer (R) NAY, Walker (R) not voting, Wright (R) not votingNorth Dakota: Armstrong (R) – NAY, Bishop (R) NAYOhio: Balderson (R) NAY, Beatty (D) YEA, Chabot (R) NAY, Davidson (R) NAY, Fudge (D) YEA, Gibbs (R) NAY, Gonzalez (R) NAY, Johnson (R) YEA, Jordan (R) NAY, Joyce (R) YEA, Kaptur (D) YEA, Latta (R) NAY, Ryan (D) YEA, Stivers (R) NAY, Turner (R) NAY, Wenstrup (R) NAYOklahoma: Cole (R) YEA, Hern (R) NAY, Horn (D) YEA, Lucas (R) YEA, Mullin (R) not votingOregon: Blumenauer (D) YEA, Bonamici (D) YEA, DeFazio (D) YEA, Schrader (D) NAY, Walden (R) YEAPennsylvania: Boyle, Brendan F. (D) YEA, Cartwright (D) YEA, Dean (D) YEA, Michael F. Doyle (D) YEA, Evans (D) YEA, Fitzpatrick (R) YEA, Houlahan (D) YEA, Joyce (R) NAY, Keller (R) NAY, Kelly (R) NAY, Lamb (D) YEA, Meuser (R) NAY, Perry (R) NAY, Reschenthaler (R) NAY, Smucker (R) NAY, Wild (D) YEARhode Island: Ciciline (D) YEA, Langevin (D) YEA, Scanlon (D) YEASouth Carolina: Clyburn (D) YEA, Cunningham (D) YEA, Duncan (R) NAY, Norman (R) NAY, Rice (R) NAY, Timmons (R) NAY, Wilson (R) NAYSouth Dakota: Johnson (R) NAYTennessee: Burchett (R) NAY, Cohen (D) YEA, Cooper (D) YEA, DesJarlias (R) NAY, Fleischmann (R) NAY, Green (R) NAY, Kustoff (R) NAY, Roe (R) not voting, John W. Rose (R) NAYTexas: Allred (D) YEA, Arrington (R) NAY. Babin (R) NAY, Brady (R) NAY, Burgess (R) YEA, Carter (R) not voting, Castro (D) YAY, Cloud (R) YEA, Conaway (R) NAY, Crenshaw (R) NAY, Cuellar (D) YEA, Doggett (D) YEA, Escobar (D) YEA, Fletcher (D) YEA, Flores (R) YEA, Garcia (D) YEA, Gohmert (R) NAY, Gonzalez (D) YEA, Gooden (R) NAY, Granger (R) YEA, Green (D) YEA, Hurd (R) YEA, Jackson Lee (D) YEA, Johnson (D) YEA, Olson (R) YEA, Roy (R) NAY, Taylor (R) NAY, Thornberry (R) NAY, Veasey (D) YEA, Vela (D) YEA, Weber (R) NAY, Williams (R) NAYUtah: Bishop (R) not voting, Curtis (R) NAY, Marchant (R) not voting, McAdams (D) YEA, McCaul (R) YEA, Stewart (R) NAYVermont: Welch (D) YEAVirginia: Beyer (D) YEA, Cline, (R) NAY, Connolly (D) YEA, Griffith (R) NAY, Luria (D) YEA, McEachin (D) YEA, Riggleman (R) YEA, Scott (D) YEA, Spanberger (D) YEA, Wexton (D) YEA, Wittman (R) NAYWashington: DelBene (D) YEA, Heck (D) YEA, Herrera Beutler (R) YEA, Jayapal (D) YEA, Kilmer (D) YEA, Larsen (D) YEA, Newhouse (R) NAY, Rodgers (R) NAY, Schrier (D) YEA, Smith (D) YEAWest Virginia: McKinley (R) YEA, Miller (R) NAY, Mooney (R) NAYWisconsin: Gallagher (R) NAY, Grothman (R) NAY, Kind (D) YEA, Moore (D) YEA, Pocan (D) YEA, Sensenbrenner (R) NAY, Steil (R) NAY, Tiffany (R) NAYWyoming: Cheney (R) NAY Here is the text of H.R. 9051: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase recovery rebate amounts to $2,000 for individuals, and for other purposes.AN ACTTo amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase recovery rebate amounts to $2,000 for individuals and for other purposes.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.This Act may be cited as the “Caring for Americans with Supplemental Help Act of 2020” or the “CASH Act of 2020”.Sec. 2. RECOVERY REBATE AMOUNTS INCREASED.(a) IN GENERAL – Section 6438A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1985, as added by the COVID-related Tax Relief Act of 2020, is amended by striking “$600” each place it appears and inserting “$2,000”, and by striking “$1,200” each place it appears and inserting “$4,000”.(b) EFFECTIVE DATE. – The amendments made by this section are contingent upon the enactment of the COVID-related Tax Relief Act of 2020 and shall apply (if at all) as if included in the enactment of section 272 of such Act.SEC. 3. DEPENDENTS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN DETERMINING CREDIT AND REBATES.(a) Recovery Rebates –(1) IN GENERAL. – Section 6428(a)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 us amended by striking “qualifying children (within the meaning of section 24(c))” and inserting “dependents (as defined in section 152)”.(2) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS. – (A) Section 6428(g) of such Code is amended by inserting “and subsection (a)(2) were applied by substituting ‘qualifying children (within the meaning of section 24(c))’ for “dependent (as defined in section 152)” before the period at the end.(B) Section 6428(g) of such Code, as amended by the COVID-related Tax Relief Act of 2020 is amended –(i) in paragraph (1), by striking “qualifying child” each place it appears and inserting “dependent”,(ii) in paragraph (2)(C), by inserting “(determined after the application of subsection (f)(2))” after “subsection (a)(2)”, and(iii) in paragraph (3)(B), by inserting “or dependent” after “child” in both places it apepars.(3) EFFECTIVE DATE.- The amendments made by this subsection are contingent upon the enactment of the COVID-related Tax Relief Act of 2020 and shall apply (if at all) as if included in the enactment of section 273 of such Act.(b) ADDITIONAL 2020 RECOVERY REBATES.-(1) IN GENERAL.- Section 6428A(a)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as added by the COVID-related Tax Relief Act of 2020, is amended by striking “qualifying children (within the meaning of section 24(c))” and inserting “dependents (as defined in section 152)”.(2) AUTHORITY TO MAKE ADVANCE REFUNDS WITHOUT REGARD TO MODIFIED DEFINITION OF DEPENDENT.—Section 6428A(f) of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:“(7) AUTHORITY TO MAKE ADVANCE REFUNDS WITHOUT REGARD TO MODIFIED DEFINITION OF DEPENDENT.—To the extent the Secretary determines appropriate to make or allow the maximum number of advance refunds by the deadline described in paragraph (3)(A)(ii), the Secretary may determine the advance refund amounts under this subsection without regard to the amendments made by paragraphs (1) and (3) of section 3(b) of the CASH Act of 2020.”.(3) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—(A) Section 6428A(f)(2)(B) of such Code is amended by striking “qualifying child” and inserting “dependent”.(B) Section 6428A(g) of such Code is amended by striking “qualifying child” each place it appears and inserting “dependent”.(C) Section 6428A(g)(4)(B) of such Code is amended by striking “such child” and inserting “such dependent”.(4) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this subsection are contingent upon the enactment of the COVID-related Tax Relief Act of 2020 and shall apply (if at all) as if included in the enactment of section 272 of such Act.SEC. 4. Budgetary effects.(a) Statutory PAYGO Scorecards.—The budgetary effects of this Act shall not be entered on either PAYGO scorecard maintained pursuant to section 4(d) of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010.(b) Senate PAYGO Scorecards.—The budgetary effects of this Act shall not be entered on any PAYGO scorecard maintained for purposes of section 4106 of H. Con. Res. 71 (115th Congress).Passed the House of Representatives December 28, 2020. December 28, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on National Defense Authorization Act Veto Override”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after the House voted on an overwhelmingly bipartisan basis to override the President’s veto of the National Defense Authorization Act:“With this overwhelmingly bipartisan vote, the House has upheld our sacred Constitutional responsibility to keep our country and our people safe. The National Defense Authorization Act has been passed on a bipartisan and bicameral manner for sixty years, and it will become law, despite the President’s dangerous sabotage efforts.“The President’s reckless veto would have denied our servicemembers hazard duty pay; our families paid family leave, child care, housing improvements and health protections; and our veterans their benefits. It would have senselessly deprived our allies and country of key protections for global peace and security – including for cyber-security, following a massive attack on the country. And it would have undermined our nation’s values and work to combat racism, by blocking overwhelmingly bipartisan action to rename military bases and infrastructure after officials who served in the Confederacy.“The President must end his eleventh-hour campaign of chaos, and stop using his final moments in office to obstruct bipartisan and bicameral action to protect our military and defend our security.” December 28, 2020: Covered California posted a news release titled: “Amid Surging COVID-19 Pandemic and Impending Enrollment Deadline, Covered California Urges Consumers to Sign Up for Health Care Coverage”. From the news release: With the first open-enrollment deadline approaching this week, Covered California urged consumers to sign up now so they can have their health care coverage be effective on Jan.1.“Covered California is a critical safety net to help people get quality health care coverage during the surging pandemic and ongoing recession,” said Peter V. Lee, executive director of Covered California. “With our first enrollment deadline coming up this week, we want to encourage anyone who needs coverage to check out their options so they can start the New Year with protection and peace of mind.”In response to the pandemic, Covered California extended the enrollment deadline to receive Jan. 1 coverage from Dec. 15 to Wednesday Dec. 30. Consumers who sign up by Dec. 30 will need to pay their first bill in order to have their coverage take effect on Jan. 1.Right now, an estimated 1.2 million Californians are uninsured – even though they are eligible for financial help through Covered California, or they qualify for low-cost or no-cost coverage through Medi-Cal……Get Covered, Stay CoveredCovered California mailed masks to 1.5 million enrollees and asked consumers to take all necessary precautions to help prevent the spread of the virus, while sharing the news about open enrollment.“Getting covered with a mask will help protect Californians and their families and friends; getting covered with a health plan will help protect people if they get sick,” Lee said. “Covered California helps you get access to some of the best doctors and health care facilities in the country, and provides peace of mind during these challenging times where there is so much uncertainty.”… December 29, 2020: Senator Pat Toomey (Republican – Pennsylvania) tweeted: “Congress should continue helping workers who’ve lost their jobs. But blindly borrowing more than $600 billion so we can send $2,000 checks to millions of people who haven’t lost any income is terrible policy. I won’t consent to a vote.” The tweet included a link to a YouTube video. On September 25, 2020, 24/7 Wall street (via MSN) wrote the following: …Senators are paid a salary of $174,000 per year – more than triple the average wage across all American workers of $53,490 and higher than the median earnings of even the best paying jobs in America. Senate majority and minority leaders make even more – $193,400 annually. Further, according to the U.S. Federal Reserve, the typical American family has a net worth of about $97,300. Meanwhile, the estimated median net worth among sitting U.S. senators is around $2.4 million. December 29, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “GOP senator says he’ll block consent for $2,000 stimulus checks”. It was written by Alexander Bolton. From the article: Republican Sen. Pat Toomey (Pa.) on Tuesday evening announced he would object to a request to swiftly pass House-approved legislation to increase the amount of direct stimulus checks $2,000.Toomey is one several Republican senators who would object to such a request, including Sens. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.), according to a Senate to a Senate GOP aide……Toomey announced he will retire from Congress at the end of 2022 and that he doesn’t have plans to run again for political office.…His statement shows that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is not the only obstacle to passing legislation approved by the House on Monday to increase the size of direct stimulus checks from $600 to $2,000… December 29, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “McConnell blocks initial Democratic effort for $2,000 Covid stimulus checks”. It was written by David Smith. From the article: A growing number of Republicans on Tuesday backed Donald Trump’s demand to increase coronavirus relief payments to US citizens from $600 to $2,000, though the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, blocked Democrats’ efforts to quickly pass the measure.Trump’s party has been plunged into chaos and conflict over his demands to increase one-off cheques for Americans, a measure that passed the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives on Monday……Put on the spot by Trump, more Republicans on Tuesday abandoned their previous opposition to the higher sum and came over to the president’s side……Final passage of the aid increase in the Senate would require 60 votes and the backing of a dozen Republicans to hand Trump an unlikely victory. The Georgia runoffs could weigh heavily in McConnell’s thinking on whether to allow such a vote to go ahead……McConnell objected, blocking initial consideration of the measure, but was set to come under growing pressure from Democrats and members of his own party to hold an up-or-down vote this week.While blocking immediate consideration of a measure to increase Covid-19 relief payments, he suggested that the Senate would begin to examine the issue along with two others Trump has raised – the integrity of elections and limits on big technology companies……The defense bill is heading to the Senate after the House voted 322 to 87 to override Trump’s presidential veto. It was the first time either chamber of Congress delivered such a rebuke. Some 109 Republicans joined their Democratic colleagues to ensure the required two-thirds majority… December 29, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “McConnell blocks vote on $2K checks, signals new package”. It was written by Jordain Carney. From the article: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Tuesday blocked an attempt by Democrats to set up a stand-alone vote on increasing the amount of recently passed stimulus checks from $600 to $2,000.Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) both tried to get consent for the Senate to bring up legislation that passed the House in a 273-134 vote on Monday.The GOP leader did not directly address why he objected, but under the Senate’s rules any one senator can block efforts to set up votes or pass bills.McConnell signaled separately that he could package the increase in direct stimulus checks, with a repeal of a tech shield that has emerged as a top target for Trump and election-related investigations. Trump, in his statement on signing the $2.3 trillion package, said the Senate would “start the process for a vote” that tackles the three issues. “During this process, the president highlighted three additional issues of national significance he would like to see Congress tackle together,” McConnell said.“Those are the three important subjects the president has linked together. This week the Senate will begin a process to bring these three priorities into focus,” he added.McConnell did not provide additional details during his floor speech about how he might bring the measures up. But the GOP leader later filed a bill that would increase the amount of the stimulus checks, repeal a legal shield for tech companies known as Section 230 and create an election commission that would study the November elections.He also started the process for getting his bill and the House-passed measure, known as the CASH Act, on the Senate calendar — which would make them each available for a vote but doesn’t guarantee they will be brought up.But tying the stimulus checks to Section 230 or to Trump’s unsubstantiated claims that widespread election fraud cost him a second term would almost certainly undermine Democratic support for such legislation……Without the cooperation of every senator, the Senate is expected to debate Trump’s veto of an unrelated defense bill until Friday or Saturday, leaving them little to time to bring up and vote on a checks proposal before the start of the 117th Congress at noon Sunday.Democrats want a stand-alone vote on a bill to increase the stimulus checks from $600 to $2,000… December 29, 2020: Senator Charles E. Schumer (Democrat – New York) posted a blog post titled: “Who’s Blocking $2,000 Stimulus Checks? The Republican Senate Majority”. The blog post is on Data for Progress. From the blog post: Throughout this pandemic, working Americans have taken it on the chin. Tens of millions of Americans have lost their jobs through no fault of their own. Nearly 26 million had difficulty putting food on the table in the past week, per a US Census study in early December. By January, 12 million Americans will owe an average of nearly $6,000 in back rent and utility payments. Communities of color and the poorest Americans are bearing the brunt of the current economic crisis, the worst in seventy-five years.As Americans brace themselves for the hardest and darkest stretch of the coronavirus pandemic, the quickest way to help struggling Americans is to send some of their tax dollars right back into their pockets in the form of direct stimulus checks. For weeks, Democrats have pushed for generous direct payments to American families. Unfortunately, our Republican colleagues were only willing to agree to $600 checks in the most recent coronavirus-relief legislation, a pittance compared to the deep hole that many working families have fallen into. So Democrats are fighting to increase the amount of the stimulus checks to $2,000 per adult. Here’s the good news. Over the last few days, the idea of $2,000 checks has bridged the massive political divide here in Washington. On Monday, an overwhelming bipartisan majority in the House of Representatives passed legislation to approve immediate, $2,000 stimulus checks. Senate Democrats, too, strongly support $2,000 checks. Even President Trump supports $2,000 checks. Most importantly, the public supports it as well. A recent Data for Progress poll showed that nearly 80% of likely voters approve of $2,000 in direct financial support, including a majority of Republicans and Democrats who are “strongly” in favor. But here’s the bad news. When I went to the floor to ask the Senate to take up and pass the House bill to provide $2,000 checks, Majority Leader McConnell objected. It is only the latest example of how out-of-touch Senate Republicans are when it comes to helping struggling Americans during the coronavirus pandemic……But some Republican Senators object to these checks…because it might add to the national deficit. These are the same Republicans who added $2 trillion to the deficit in order to give massive tax breaks to billionaires and large corporations, and who fought to include a tax break for three-martini lunches in the most recent coronavirus-relief bill. But now that the economy is on life support, as Americans are queueing up on bread lines and filing for unemployment, and just as a Democratic President is about to take office: all of the sudden the deficit-scolds in the Republican party are back…. December 29, 2020: U.S. News posted an article titled: “Stimulus Checks Gain Momentum in Senate, But McConnell Won’t Commit to Vote”. It was written by Lisa Hagan. From the article: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell objected on Tuesday to Democrats’ requests for an immediate vote on increasing stimulus checks to $2,000 even as momentum builds among more GOP senators for the House-passed bill that’s also backed by President Donald Trump.From the floor, McConnell announced that the Senate will “begin a process” to address all three of Trump’s priorities that he highlighted on Sunday: higher stimulus checks, a review of voter fraud claims from the November election and consideration of reforms to Section 230, the regulation that shields tech companies from lawsuits over user content.For now, the Kentucky Republican is essentially punting on a standalone bill to increase direct payments from $600 to $2,000. And he initially gave little insight or detail on how he’d proceed with Trump’s requests or how he’d tie them all together with only five days left in the legislative session. A new Congress will be sworn in on Jan. 3.Before the Senate adjourned late Tuesday afternoon, McConnell introduced a long-shot bill that combines all of Trump’s demands: $2,000 stimulus checks, the repeal of Section 230, and the creation of a bipartisan committee that would “study the integrity and administration” of the Nov. 3 election. But no votes are currently scheduled, and McConnell could still decide to take up the House-passed checks bill……After McConnell’s announcement committing to move forward with Trump’s priorities, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York and Bernie Sanders of Vermont took to the floor to request immediate consideration and a standalone vote on stimulus checks. But McConnell rejected Schumer’s request for unanimous consent, which only takes one objection to kill the effort. McConnell also objected to Sanders’ request to consider a vote… December 29, 2020: San Antonio Express-News posted an article titled: “Pregnant, immunocompromised, or have allergies? Here’s what you need to know about COVID-19 vaccines”. It was written by Narina Starleaf Riker. From the article: …In December, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved emergency use of COVID-19 vaccines made by Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech. Unlike many other vaccines that use a killed or weakened virus, these new COVID-19 vaccines harness a groundbreaking technology called synthetic messenger RNA — mRNA for short — that directs cells to produce proteins that trigger the immune system to create antibodies.Those antibodies fight the real virus if a person becomes infected.We interviewed Dr. Ruth Berggren, an infectious disease specialist at UT Health San Antonio, to learn more about the vaccines’ safety. She served on a UT Health working group that examined the safety of the Pfizer vaccine and considered how it should be distributed among front-line health care workers……What safety concerns have come up so far?The biggest one is the possibility of having a very severe allergic reaction to one of the vaccine components and a severe allergic reaction we call “anaphylaxis.” That’s the allergic reaction where your throat closes up, and because of swelling back in your throat area, you can’t breathe. Because the vaccine is being given in a closely-monitored medical setting, we treat people who are showing even a glimmer of an anaphylactic reaction with appropriate treatments that can include antihistamines, steroids and then even epinephrine if there’s a real danger of the throat closing off.That’s the big concern. What are people being allergic to that’s causing this? The ingredients of the vaccine are publicly available in multiple places including FDA and CDC documents. Probably the most important ingredient is polyethylene glycol or PEG, which is not a weird or new compound. Polyethylene glycol is what is in the prep that people take when they’re going to go for a colonoscopy, that liquid stuff that you drink. It’s been used chemically to modify drugs that we give people, such as interferon. So this is not a new thing. There are decades and decades of safety information about it, but like everything else, some people could become allergic, just like some people can become allergic to a bee sting.Can you talk about the safety of these vaccines for people who are immunocompromised, such as people who have lupus or Type 1 diabetes?I want to make it really clear that this vaccine is not harmful for people whose immune system is weakened for one reason or another. It does not further harm your immune system, and it doesn’t predispose you to having some problem because you’re immunocompromised. The issue is that people who are immunocompromised need to know that their response to the vaccine may not even come close to being as protective as it is for other people. If my immune system is weak and I get vaccinated, I’ll probably mount some immune response, but I might not mount enough of one to fully protect me from getting infected or to fully protect me from severe disease.We have that note of caution, and people get asked prior to being vaccinated, “Are you pregnant? Are you immunocompromised?,” so that they can be informed of what this vaccine could or could not do for them. But being immunocompromised does not present a safety concern for the vaccine itself.It’s important for the public to know that in the Pfizer vaccine trial, people with well-controlled HIV, as well as people with controlled Hepatitis B and Hepatitis C, were included. And there was no problem in people with well-controlled HIV……Can you talk about what we know about the safety of these vaccines for people who are pregnant or breastfeeding?The Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine got up front with a statement recommending that pregnant women who are at risk for getting COVID-19 should not be prevented from getting the vaccine and that they should be allowed to make the decision in conjunction with their doctor. There is no evidence that the vaccine harms the fetus, but we also don’t have any large-scale evidence of intentionally giving this vaccine to pregnant women to watch what happens.It needs to be an individualized decision. If a pregnant mom is on the front lines of health care — let’s say she is intubating patients who have SARS-CoV-2 infection — that is a high-risk situation. If you add on that that pregnant woman may have gestational diabetes or hypertension — some of the risk factors for a bad COVID-19 disease outcome — it would be a bad thing to prevent such a woman from getting vaccinated. She should be allowed to have access to it… December 29, 2020: Steven Mnuchin, U.S. Secretary of Treasury tweeted: “.@USTreasury has delivered a payment file to the @FederalReserve for Americans’ Economic Impact Payments. These payments may begin to arrive in some accounts by direct deposit as early as tonight and will continue into next week (1/2)”. This tweet was the start of a short thread. December 29, 2020: Steven Mnuchin, U.S. Secretary of Treasury, tweeted: “Paper checks will begin to be mailed tomorrow. Later this week, you can check the status of your payment at IRS.gov.GetMyPayment (2/2). December 29, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Mnuchin: Stimulus payments to begin arriving Tuesday night”. It was written by Tal Axlerod and Naomi Jagoda. From the article: Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said that stimulus payments from the most recent coronavirus relief package could begin landing in Americans’ bank accounts as early as Tuesday night……He added that paper checks will begin to be mailed Wednesday.The coronavirus relief package, which President Trump signed on Sunday, provided for direct relief payments of up to $600 per adult and per child under 17. Individuals with income of up to $75,000 and married couples with income up to $150,000 are eligible for the full amount, and the amounts are reduced for people with incomes above those thresholds.Treasury and the IRS are issuing payments automatically to people who filed a 2019 tax return, non-filers who recieve certain federal benefits and people who provided their information to the IRS earlier this year through the agency’s web tool for non-filers. Most people will receive their payments by direct deposit, while others will get their payments in the mail in the firm of either a paper check or a debit card. Debit cards will be delivered in a white envelope with the Treasury seal, the IRS said.Under the relief package, the IRS has until Jan. 15 to issue the automatic payments. Eligible people who do not receive their payment or who did not receive some or all of the payment to which they were entitled under March’s CARES Act can claim a tax credit when they file their 2020 tax returns next year. The CARES Act authorized payments of up to $1,200 per adult and $500 per child.The announcement that $600 payments are starting to be sent out comes amid a push by Trump and some lawmakers to increase those payments to $2,000. Treasury said Tuesday that if further legislation is enacted to increase the payment amount, payments that have already been issued will be “topped up” as promptly as they can be. December 29, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Celebrates Passage of Abortion Access Provisions in Massachusetts”. From the press release: Today, the Massachusetts state legislature overrode Republican Governor Charlie Baker’s veto in order to enact legislation that removes critical barriers to accessing abortion care in Massachusetts. This legislation includes key provisions of the ROE Act, a bill that NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts, the ACLU of Massachusetts, and Planned Parenthood Advocacy Fund of Massachusetts have advocated for since 2019.Earlier this month, the legislature rejected Governor Baker’s proposed amendments to this legislation and returned it to his desk as written and passed by the legislature. Baker’s amendments would have maintained the Commonwealth’s medically unnecessary barriers to care. Governor Baker subsequently vetoed the original language on Christmas Eve, sparking outrage and criticism from voters and advocates, and today, the legislature overrode the veto to make this critical legislation law.The legislation removes several medically unnecessary barriers to care that existed in Massachusetts law. Specifically, it removes the ban on abortion care later in pregnancy in the case of a lethal fetal diagnosis, ensuring Bay State families can get the compassionate care they need in their home state without having to fly across the country. The section also partially repeals the state’s parental consent and judicial bypass law by allowing 16- and 17-year-olds to make their own decisions about abortion care, making Massachusetts the first state in the country to legislatively roll back a mandated parental involvement law accomplish this. It streamlines the judicial bypass process for young people under 16 by allowing remote hearings, removing the onerous and traumatic burden of having to appear in court before a judge. This new process mirrors existing practices set up during the COVID-19 pandemic and minimizes harmful delays to care. The section also affirmatively codifies the right to abortion into Massachusetts state law.In response to the legislation’s passage, NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts Executive Director Rebecca Hart Holder said:“This is a proud day for Bay Staters and supporters of reproductive freedom across the country. Today we repealed laws that have been on the books since 1974. Laws designed to prevent women and pregnant people from accessing abortion care when they need it. For far too long, our outdated abortion laws in Massachusetts did not reflect our values or voters’ widespread support for reproductive freedom. That changes today. By removing these medically unnecessary barriers to care, we have taken a major step toward ensuring that all Bay Staters can get the safe, legal abortion care when and where they need it.” NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement: “The passage of the Massachusetts budget with this key section on reproductive freedom is a huge win. Women and families need understanding, information, and support—not barriers to accessing care. NARAL Pro-Choice America was proud to stand with NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts, the ROE Act Coalition, and our more than 72,000 members across the Commonwealth in fighting to ensure that every body has the freedom to control their own lives, destinies, and futures.” A recent poll from Change Research finds that more than 3 in 4 Massachusetts voters believe the state should protect the right to abortion care through state legislation and support the core provisions of the ROE Act—including many provisions included in the FY 2021 budget. More than 4 in 5 voters in Massachusetts do not believe that vulnerable teens seeking abortion care need a courtroom judge, including 77% of Independents and 57% of Republicans. Further, nearly 3 in 5 voters supported repealing the parental consent law.This is a crucial win for reproductive freedom at a time when anti-choice state lawmakers across the country remain determined to criminalize abortion—putting the advancement of their unpopular ideology above the health and well-being of the American people, even during a still-raging pandemic. Thanks to these efforts from anti-choice, anti-freedom legislators—as well as Donald Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s efforts to stack the federal judiciary with judges hostile to Roe v. Wade—reproductive freedom remains in jeopardy. NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts advocated for this amendment as part of the ROE Act Coalition—a statewide reproductive rights coalition of more than 70 grassroots, community, advocacy, and labor organizations. December 30, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “McConnell and GOP reject House’s $2,000 stimulus checks”. It was written by Burgess Everett. From the article: Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans finished off any imminent chance of approving $2,000 stimulus checks on Wednesday, ending a push from President Donald Trump and Democratic leaders to approve bigger direct payments as the congressional term comes to an end.The Senate majority leader said he would not detach the $2,000 checks supported by President Donald Trump from other matters demanded by the president: Stripping legal protections from tech companies and establishing an election fraud commission. He declared that the House’s effort to more than triple the size of $600 checks approved earlier this week has “no realistic path to quickly pass the Senate.”……But Democrats indicated they would not abandon their efforts. Andrew Bates, a spokesman for President-elect Joe Biden, said he supports the House bill and said “it’s imperative that we build on the bipartisan stimulus downpayment.”……Trump continued pressing his case: “$2000 ASAP!” he said on Twitter on Wednesday. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) even printed out massive posters of Trump’s tweets pushing for more cash and read them on the Senate floor……The issue has dominated the Senate even as both parties are preparing to roll over Trump’s veto of the annual defense bill. Sens. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) and Cornyn battled with Democrats on the Senate floor on Wednesday, spurning requests to hold a roll call vote. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Sanders and Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) all tried to force votes, but each request was rejected.Sanders and other Democrats said they would not consent to finishing a critical $740 billion defense bill until they got their vote, as did Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.).“All that he has to do is give us an up or down vote on the issue of getting $2,000 to every working class adult in this country,” Sanders said of McConnell after the floor fight. “If he wants to bring up another approach, that’s fine too. But give us an up or down straight forward vote.”……Democrats and some Republicans oppose a blanket repeal, meaning McConnell’s bill probably can’t get 60 votes in the Senate anyway. Moreover, the House is gone for the year, leaving their standalone bill to boost the $600 checks to $2,000 as the only real option at this point.“There is no other game in town besides the House bill. The only way … to get to the American people the $2,000 checks they deserve and need is to pass the House bill and pass it now,” Schumer said… December 31, 2021: Oregon State University posted news titled: “OSU studies find Oregon’s Medicaid expansion improved prenatal care access, birth outcomes”. From the article: A pair of recent studies from Oregon State University found that Oregon’s Medicaid expansion in 2014 has led increased prenatal care among low-income women, as well as improved health outcomes for newborn babies.In the three years after the expansion, one study found that Oregon saw an almost 2 percentage point increase in first trimester prenatal care utilization, relative to 18% of the pre-expansion population who lacked any access to prenatal care in the earlier stages of pregnancy.In the same period, the second study found, Medicaid expansion was associated with a 29% reduction in low birthweight among babies born to women on Medicaid, as well as a 23% reduction in preterm births.Prior to the state’s Medicaid expansion as part of the Affordable Care Act, low-income women who were not otherwise eligible for Medicaid became eligible when they became pregnant. It was estimated that expanding Medicaid to include everyone earning up to 138% of the federal poverty level would extend coverage to an additional 77,000 women of childbearing age.“This means that women are getting preconception care before they’re pregnant,” said lead author Marie Harvey, associate dean for research in OSU’s College of Public Health and Human Sciences. “Then when they become pregnant, they’re more easily able to get prenatal care.”Prior to pregnancy, establishing that connection with a primary care provider means women are able to receive holistic medical and public health care to improve their overall well-being….…The study found almost twice the magnitude of gains in pre-pregnancy enrollment in Medicaid among Hispanic women compared with non-Hispanic white women, Gibbs said.In turn, increased pre-pregnancy enrollment in Medicaid likely contributed to the positive impacts on low birthweight and preterm births, researchers said, as women with health coverage had greater access to preventive care and preconception care… January 2021 January 1, 2021: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Senate overrides Donald Trump’s veto of defense spending bill”. It was written by Edward Helmore. From the article: Donald Trump’s fellow Republicans in the US Senate on Friday took the atypical rebellious step of overriding his veto for the first time in his presidency.The Senate pushed through a bill on defense spending against Trump’s strong objections – just 20 days before he leaves office.Meeting in a rare New Year’s Day session, the Senate secured the two-thirds majority needed to override the veto with bipartisan support two days before a new Congress will be sworn in on Sunday.Eight previous vetoes of legislation have been upheld. Under the US constitution, the president has the power to veto a bill passed by Congress, but lawmakers can uphold the bill if two-thirds of both the House of Representatives and the Senate vote to override it.The Republican-led Senate, following the Democratic-controlled House on Monday, passed the measure without Trump’s support, voting 81-13 on Friday afternoon……The $740bn National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) determines everything from military programs and construction projects to how to address geopolitical threats.Trump refused to sign it into law because of its failure to repeal Section 230, a federal law that provides a legal liability shield for internet companies, and because it includes a provision stripping the names of Confederate generals from military bases… January 1, 2021: The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) posted a press release titled: “AAP Statement on Passage of Global Child Thrive Act”. It was written by Lee Savio Beers, MD, FAAP, President of American Academy of Pediatrics. From the press release: “The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) applauds the Global Child Thrive Act becoming law. This vital provision represents important bipartisan effort tha will make significant and necessary strides toward supporting child health around the world.“Pediatricians understand that healthy, nurturing, and safe environments are critical to a child’s lifelong health and development. Without that support, children can face serious consequences to their overall health. Millions of children in low-and middle-income countries suffer from poor development due to inadequate nutrition, lack of stimulation and nurturing care, and exposure to stress. The Global Child Thrive Act will support children globally by integrating proven early childhood interventions – such as training caregivers to provide mental stimulation and nurturing care like singing and reading – into foreign assistance programs that serve children and their families.“The Global Child Thrive Act advanced as part of the National Defense Authorization Act, which also included important AAP-supported provisions that limit potential cuts to medical military personnel, helping to ensure access to needed health care services for military children and families.“Pediatrician advocacy for children extends far beyond our country’s borders. The Academy thanks Senators Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Representatives Joaquin Castro (D-Texas) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) for their committment to global child health and their leadership on the Global Child Thrive Act. As this legislation becomes law, we look forward to continuing to work with policymakers across the government to support the health of children and families everywhere.” January 3, 2021: CNN posted an article titled: “117th Congress sworn in Sunday amid pandemic”. It was written by Clare Foran, Kristin Wilson and Ted Barrett. From the article: The 117th Congress was officially sworn in on Sunday, bringing an influx of new lawmakers to Capitol Hill amid the ongoing pandemic.The Constitution calls for Congress to convene on January 3 at noon ET — the reason for the rare Sunday session. Newly elected and returning members took the oath of office and the full House of Representatives voted along party lines to reelect Nancy Pelosi as House Speaker.House Democrats kept control of the House in the November elections, but will now have a narrower majority after suffering a string of losses, despite projections that they would win more seats. House Republicans, meanwhile, outperformed expectations and are now poised to add a significant number of GOP women to their ranks in the new Congress. In the Senate, the balance of power still has yet to be decided with all eyes on a pair of Senate runoff elections taking place in Georgia on January 5 that will determine which party controls the chamber… January 5, 2021: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “ACLU and Center for Reproductive Rights Win in Federal Court, Blocking Four Anti-Abortion Laws in Arkansas”. From the press release: In a critical victory for abortion access in Arkansas, the ACLU and the Center for Reproductive Rights secured an order today from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas blocking four state anti-abortion laws.Last month, that court issued a 14-day temporary restraining order blocking the four laws only a few hours after the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals allowed them to take effect. During the short time the laws were in effect, Little Rock Family Planning Services was forced to cancel appointments. Today’s ruling will keep the laws blocked while the case continues.“This order will ensure that essential reproductive health care services will remain available in Arkansas,” said Ruth Harlow, senior staff attorney in the ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project. “The laws blocked by the court today do nothing but place roadblock after roadblock in front of patients, in violation of their constitutionally protected rights. Arkansas politicians may continue this ruthless attack on abortion, but we will see them in court every time.”If allowed to take effect, the laws would completely prevent many people from obtaining abortion care, create intrusive and stigmatizing requirements that violate patients’ privacy rights, and leave the state with even more limited access to abortion. The litigation is supported by several medical experts and five Arkansas abortion patients who spoke to the devastating impact the laws would have if enforced.“Arkansas legislators took an oath to protect people’s constitutional rights — not trample on them with harmful dictates and restrictions,” said Holly Dickson, executive director of the ACLU of Arkansas. “We’re relieved the court will continue to block these unconstitutional laws while we keep fighting to have them struck down for good.”“Today’s decision brings welcome, but temporary, relief to those seeking time-sensitive and essential abortion care in Arkansas,” said Jenny Ma, senior staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “For now, anti-abortion lawmakers have been halted from devastating abortion access in the state. Just last month, we saw the impact of these laws when they took effect for just a few hours: patients were turned away and abortion access was severely limited. We can’t allow that to become the status quo for Arkansas and will continue to fight in court.”The lawsuit was filed by the ACLU, the ACLU of Arkansas, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and the law firm of O’Melveny & Myers LLP on behalf of Frederick W. Hopkins, M.D., M.P.H. and Little Rock Family Planning Services. January 6, 2021: Miami Herald posted an article titled: “Warnock, Ossoff win in Georgia, handing Dems Senate control”. It was written by Steve Peoples, Bill Barrow and Russ Bynum. From the article: Democrats won both Georgia Senate seats — and with them, the U.S. Senate majority — as final votes were counted Wednesday, serving President Donald Trump a stunning defeat in his turbulent final days in office while dramatically improving the fate of President-elect Joe Biden’s progressive agenda.Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock, Democratic challengers who represented the diversity of their party’s evolving coalition, defeated Republicans David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler two months after Biden became the first Democratic presidential candidate to carry the state since 1992.Warnock, who served as pastor for the same Atlanta church where civil rights leader the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. preached, becomes the first African American from Georgia elected to the Senate. And Ossoff becomes the state’s first Jewish senator and, at 33 years old, the Senate’s youngest member… January 7, 2020: Houston Chronicle posted an article titled: “As Texas boots Planned Parenthood, Medicaid clients get 30 days to find new providers”. It was written by Jeremy Blackman. From the article: Thousands of low-income Texans have less than a month to find new providers of birth control, cancer screenings and other non-abortion services as the state moves forward with plans to boot Planned Parenthood from its Medicaid program, according to a letter sent from the state health agency.The nonprofit had asked for at least a six month extension to help recipients transition to new providers, following a November court ruling that allowed Republican officials to stop reimbursing it for Medicaid services. In the letter sent Monday, however, the health agency said it has only until Feb. 3, and is prohibited from accepting any new Medicaid patients.Planned Parenthood served about 8,000 Medicaid recipients last year. The program helps low-income Texans, but many health providers don’t participate because of low reimbursement rates from the state.“The Medicaid network needs more providers, not fewer,” Planned Parenthood said in a statement denouncing the decision, adding that it will harm people of color and women most. “Gov. Abbott knows full well that other providers can’t just absorb Planned Parenthood’s family planning patients — a well-documented fact explained by the experts, including the American Public Health Association.”……In a call last month with reporters, Planned Parenthood South Texas President and CEO Jeffrey Hons said its clinics are some of the only options for low-income communities, especially Black and Latina women who have less access to health care than white women and whose families have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19.To qualify for Medicaid in Texas, a single woman with a dependent child can’t make more than $196 per month. January 8, 2021: CNN posted an article titled: “Trump administration strikes parting blow at Medicaid with Tennessee block grant”. It was written by Tami Luhby. From the article: Just days before leaving office, the Trump administration took a step toward fulfilling a long-held Republican dream of curbing Medicaid costs and giving states more flexibility to run the program.The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Friday granted Tennessee’s request to turn its federal Medicaid funding arrangement into a so-called modified block grant. It is the first state to receive such permission and is similar to a guidance the agency issued in early 2020.The Biden administration, however, is expected to oppose the approval, which lasts 10 years. While incoming officials can reverse the decision, the state can request a hearing to challenge that determination. The overturning of approvals has rarely, if ever, happened……The Trump administration has encouraged states to make historic changes to their Medicaid programs, including adding work requirements — which is now before the Supreme Court……Tennessee’s waiver shifts federal funding for its TennCare program to a lump sum, which will increase annually based on projected Medicaid spending growth rates in the president’s budget. If enrollment rises or falls more than 1%, the block grant is adjusted accordingly. TennCare currently covers about 1.5 million low-income residents.If the program comes in under budget and meets certain quality metrics, the state can share in the savings. Among the target priorities for the extra funds, officials said, are addressing maternal health, serving individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities currently on a waiting list to receive services and addressing other state-specific public health crises……The waiver also gives the state more flexibility in administering its program, including limiting the number of prescription drugs covered and changing the optional benefits — such as prescription drugs and physical therapy — it provides without federal approval. Tennessee is one of a dozen states that has not expanded Medicaid to low-income adults under the Affordable Care Act… January 9, 2021: Pink News posted an article titled: “Donald Trump launches “parting assault on the LGBT+ community’ by stripping discrimination protections”. It was written by Lily Wakefield. From the article: Amid the fallout from extremist riots at the US capitol, Trump’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has officially adopted new rules allowing recipients of federal HHS grants to discriminate against LGBT+ people in the name of religious freedom.The final regulations, which were proposed in November, 2019, were released Thursday (7 January) in an 86-page document.They roll back Obama-era rules which ban discrimination by those receiving grants from HHS against people on the basis of age, disability, sex, race, colour, national origin, religion, gender identity or sexual orientation.The rules also rescind the requirement for HHS grantees to “treat as valid the marriages of same-sex couples”.Now, the regulations read: “It is a public policy requirement of HHS that no person otherwise eligible will be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination in the administration of HHS programs and services, to the extent doing so is prohibited by federal statute.”Except federal statute does not protect LGBT+ people from discrimination, therefore Trump has effectively given HHS grantees the green light to discriminate against people based on sexual orientation and gender identity.Where the HHS regulations used to require grantees to treat same-sex marriages as valid, they now read: “HHS will follow all applicable Supreme Court decisions in administering its award programs.”While the change allow discrimination under the guise of “religious liberty” in healthcare services like HIV and STI prevention programs, opioid programs and youth homelessness services, adoption and fostering services also come under the HSS department.If faith-based adoption and fostering services are funded by the government, they will be able to refuse to place children with families based on sexual orientation, gender identity or marital status, a change that religious conservatives have been pushing for... January 12, 2021: SCOTUSblog (which is NOT run by the Supreme Court Justices) tweeted: “BREAKING: SCOTUS grants Trump admin request, reverses nationwide injunction that allowed patients to receive abortion-related drugs via mail during the pandemic. Patients will now have to pick up medication in person. Breyer, Kagen, Sotomayor dissent.” The tweet included a link to the Supreme Court’s decision. January 12, 2021: The New York Times posted an article titled: “Supreme Court Revives Abortion-Pill Restriction”. It was written by Adam Liptak. From the article: In the Supreme Court’s first ruling on abortion since the arrival of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the court on Tuesday reinstated a federal requirement that women seeking to end their pregnancies using medications pick up a pill in person from a hospital or medical office.The court’s brief order was unsigned, and the three more liberal judges dissented. The only member of the majority to offer an explanation was Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who said the ruling was a limited one that deferred to the views of experts.The question, he wrote, was not whether the requirement imposed “an undue burden on a woman’s right to an abortion as a general matter.” Instead, he wrote, it was whether a federal judge should have second-guessed the Food and Drug Administration’s determination “because of the court’s own evaluation of the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic.”“Here as in related contexts concerning government responses to the pandemic,” the chief justice wrote, quoting an earlier opinion, “my view is that courts owe significant deference to the politically accountable entities with the ‘background, competence and expertise to assess public health'”.In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined by Justice Elena Kagen, said the majority was grievously wrong.“This country’s laws have long singled out abortions for more onerous treatment than other medical procedures that carry similar or greater risks,” Justice Sotomayor wrote. “Like many of those laws, maintaining the F.D.A.’s in-person requirements” for picking up the drug “during the pandemic not only treats abortion exceptionally, it imposes an unnecessary, irrational and unjustifiable undue burden on women seeking to exercise their right to choose.”She suggested that the next administration should revisit the issue.“One can only hope that the government will reconsider and exhibit greater care and empathy for women seeking some measure of control over their health and reproductive lives in these unsettling times,” Justice Sotomayor wrote… January 12, 2021: The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) tweeted: “BREAKING: SCOTUS reinstated a federal policy that makes it harder for people to acces abortion care during the pandemic. The policy forces medication abortion patients to needlessly risk COVID-19 exposure by traveling to a health center just to pick up a pill and sign a form.” This tweet was the start of a thread. January 12, 2021: The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) tweeted: “This was the court’s first abortion ruling with Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s vote. People of color and people with low incomes, who make up the majority of impacted patients and are suffering from COVID-19 at disproportionate rates, will be particularly harmed by this decision.” January 12, 2021: The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) tweeted: “The Biden administration could right this wrong by declaring that it won’t enforce the in-person requirement during the pandemic, in line with the government’s treatment of other medications during this time.” This tweet linked to an article on the ACLU website. This is the last tweet in the thread. January 12, 2021: Forbes posted an article titled: “House Reportedly Imposes Fine On Lawmakers Who Don’t Wear Masks”. It was written by Alison Durkee. From the article: House lawmakers who don’t wear masks on the House floor will now face a $500 fine on their first offense and a $2,500 fine on their second, multiple outlets report, after three Democratic lawmakers tested positive for Covid-19 after sheltering with unmasked Republican colleagues during Wednesday’s seizure of the Capitol……The fines will reportedly come out of the offending lawmakers paycheck, and Politico reports similar fines are being considered for House office buildings.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s decision to impose fines follows legislation introduced Tuesday by House Democrats that proposed a fine of $1,000 per day for any member of Congress who doesn’t wear a mask while on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol.House members were already required to wear masks on teh House floor, and Pelosi moved in December to prohibit members of Congress from speaking on the floor if they’re not wearing a mask… January 12, 2021: Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services Seema Verma posted information regarding the withdrawl of the Medicaid Fiscal Accountability Regulation proposed rule. From the information: …This document withdraws a proposed rule that was published in the Federal Register on November 18, 2019. The proposed rule would have established new reporting requirements and codified other Medicaid financing requirments, including related to permissible sources for non-federal share financing… …SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:On November 18, 2019, we published a proposed rule to amend our regulations dealing with grants to states for medical assistance programs, state fiscal administration, payments for services, Medicaid program integrity, and allotments to states and grants… After an internal review of the proposed rule, CMS has decided to withdraw the proposed rule.The proposed rule sought to promote accountability and transparency for Medicaid payments by establishing new reporting requirements for states to provide CMS with certain information on supplemental payments to Medicaid providers, including supplemental payments approved under either Medicaid state plan or demonstration authority, codification of parameters for Medicaid upper payment limit calculations, provider definitions associated with data reporting and Medicaid financing, Medicaid disproportionate share hospital audit requirements and changes to some existing operational processes to better align with technology improvements. This proposed rule also sought to establish additional requirements to ensure that state plan amendments proposing new supplemental payments are consistent with the proper and efficient operation of the state plan and with efficiency, economy, and quality of care. Finally, this proposed rule sought to address the non-federal share financing of supplemental and base Medicaid payments, including states’ uses of health care-related taxes and provider-related donations, and other requirements for sources of the non-federal share.We received approximately 10,188 individual comments (4,225 unduplicated comment submissions) through the extended comment period.1 We received significant comments on the proposed rule regarding its potential impact on states and their budgets, Medicaid providers and Medicaid beneficiary access to needed services. Many commenters stated their belief that the proposed rule did not include adequate analysis of these matters. Numerous commenters indicated that CMS, in some instances, lacked statutory authority for its proposals and was creating regulatory provisions that were ambiguous or unclear and subject to excessive Agency discretion.While we continue to support the intent and purpose of the rule to increase fiscal accountability and improve transparency in the Medicaid program, based on the considerable feedback we received through the public comment process, we have determined it appropriate to withdraw the proposed provisions at this time. Moving forward, we want to ensure agency flexibility in re-examining these important issues and exploring options and possible alternative approaches that best implement the requirements of the Medicaid statute. We also believe it is important to re-examine and fully analyze the proposed Medicaid reporting requirements in consideration of the recent Congressional action through the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 (H.R. 116-133, Pub. L. 116-260) which establishes new statutory requirementsfor Medicaid supplemental payment reporting. This withdrawal action does not limit our prerogative to make new regulatory proposals in the areas addressed by the withdrawn proposed rule, including new proposals that may be substantially identical or similar to those described therein.Finally, the withdrawal of this proposed rule does not affect existing federal legal requirements or policy that were merely proposed to be codified in regulation, including certain provisions related to Medicaid financing and Medicaid Upper Payment Limit (UPL) requirements. For example, without limitation, this includes guidance in State Medicaid Director Letter (SMDL) #13-003, which discussed a submission process to comply with the UPL requirements; SMDL #14-004, which discussed Medicaid financing and provider-related donations; as well as State Health Officials (SHO) Letter #14-001, which addressed health care-related taxes. This withdrawal action does not affect CMS’ ongoing application of existing statutory and regulatory requirements or its responsibility to faithfully administer the Medicaid program The document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on January 19, 2021 – the day before President-Elect Biden will be sworn in and will become President of the United States. January 13, 2021: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Supreme Court Reinstates Medically Unnecessary Barriers to Abortion During COVID-19”. From the press release: Today, the U.S. Supreme Court — which now includes three Trump-appointed justices — granted the Trump administration’s request to reinstate a medically unnecessary barrier to medication abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) restrictions on mifepristone mandate that patients pick up the medication directly from a doctor’s office, hospital, or health center, rather than from a pharmacy or by mail, as allowed for other equally safe medications. During the pandemic, this unnecessary travel can expose patients to needless COVID-19 risks related to transportation, child care, multiple health center trips, and more……In her dissent, Justice Sotomayor wrote:“Due to particularly severe health risks, vastly limited clinic options, and the 10-week window for obtaining a medication abortion, the FDA’s requirement that women obtain mifepristone in person during the COVID-19 pandemic places an unnecessary and undue burden on their right to abortion. Pregnancy itself puts a woman at increased risk for severe consequences from COVID-19. In addition, more than half of women who have abortions are women of color, and COVID-19’s mortality rate is three times higher for Black and Hispanic individuals than non-Hispanic White individuals”By reinstating this unnecessary barrier to critical health care during a global pandemic, this order risks the health of people seeking medication abortion. This harm will be felt most acutely by Black, Latino, Indigenous, and other communities of color who already face disproportionate economic and health outcomes, as well as illness and death, due to COVID-19.Mifepristone is safe, effective, and has been used by more than 4 million people since the FDA approved it 20 years ago. Leading medical associations, such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and American Academy of Family Physicians, have maintained that the FDA’s long-standing restrictions on mifepristone are not based on evidence and do not benefit patients. In fact, out of 20,000 prescription medications regulated by the FDA, mifepristone is the only home-use medication required to be dispensed in person… January 14, 2021: Democracy Forward posted an press release titled: “Health Care Providers Sue Trump Admin for Approving Unlawful Georgia Plan to Sabotage Georgia’s ACA Marketplace”. From the press release: Today, Planned Parenthood Southeast and Feminist Women’s Health Center, represented by Democracy Forward, sued Trump’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), among others, for unlawfully approving the State of Georgia’s plan to ignore essential Affordable Care Act (ACA) requirements and block Georgia residents’ access to healthcare.gov. Up to 100,000 Georgians stand to lose their insurance as a result of the plan, which the Trump administration approved via a “Section 1332” waiver of ACA requirements. The plan will do immense damage to Georgia’s health insurance market, force Georgians to shop for insurance throught private brokers and insurance companies, lead more residents to enroll in junk plans, and increase premiums. The plaintiffs’ lawsuit seeks to vacate the Trump administration’s unlawful approval of Georgia’s Section 1332 waiver and a 2018 Trump administration decision that provided the basis for the waiver approval……Nearly 80% of Georgia residents who enroll on the individual market find and purchase their health coverage on healthcare.gov. But, on November 1, 2020, the Trump administration unlawfully approved Georgia’s Section 1332 waiver request, which will terminate the state’s use of healthcare.gov or any other centralized marketplace.In order to grant stats flexibility to innovate in ensuring their residents are able to obtain affordable, high-quality health insurance, Section 1332 of the ACA allows the federal government to grant states waivers of some ACA requirements – but only if states demonstrate that their plans match or surpass the ACA’s benchmarks with respect to coverage, comprehensiveness, affordability, and deficit neutrality.The approval of Georgia’s unlawful waiver takes a wrecking ball to the ACA in Georgia and violates the statutory guardrails designed to ensure that Section 1332 waivers or surpass the ACA’s benchmarks. Georgia’s waiver will: Decrease enrollment by up to 100,000, violating the coverage guardrail;Shift consumers to junk plans that provide inadequate coverage, violating the comprehensiveness guardrail;Increase the premiums consumers must pay to recieve coverage, violating the comprehensiveness guardrail; HHS’s approval of Georgia’s extraordinary waiver request was rushed through in the last months of President Trump’s term with a limited public comment period, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. Of the 1,826 total comments HHS received on the waiver, only 8 supported the waiver.HHS’s decision to approve Georgia’s waiver request depended on 2018 guidance it promulgated, which substantially weakened the standards for approving waivers under Section 1332. The guideance thereby encouraged state plans – like Georgia’s – that will drive consumers to junk plans that fall short of the ACA’s coverage requirements. The Trump administration’s rushed approval of Georgia’s unlawful waiver is consistent with its endeavor to sabatoge the Affordable Care Act. For years, President Trump promised to decimate the Affordable Care Act. His administration has made good on that promise by promoting junk plans, slashing the open enrollment period and funding for outreach and navigators, and rolling back key protections enshrined by the law.Democracy Forward filed the lawsuit on behalf of Planned Parenthood Southeast and Feminist Women’s Health Center on January 14 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Read the full complaint here. January 15, 2021: SF Gate posted an article titled: “Tennessee OKs Medicaid block grant; fate unclear under Biden”. It was written by Kimberlee Kruesi and Jonathan Mattise. From the article: Tennessee’s GOP-dominant Legislature on Friday approved a contentious decision that would drastically overhaul the state’s Medicaid program, casting quick votes this week in hopes of making it difficult for incoming President-elect Joe Biden’s administration from overturning the deal.The House vote Friday sets in motion a plan that proponents, including Republicans, argue will produce flexibility and savings that can fuel additional health coverage offerings, with a promise that there won’t be eligibility or benefit cuts. Opponents, including many Democrats, are wary of that promise since the plan banks on big savings. They also point out that there’s no guarantee more patients will be eligible under the block grant, unlike their preferred action of expanding Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act.It’s still not a given that Tennessee will actually become the first state to receive funding in a lump sum for its Medicaid program through a block grant. While Tennessee received approval under President Donald Trump’s administration just last week, Biden has opposed block-grant efforts and can rescind the change.That tension fueled Republican lawmakers’ determination to prioritize their approval in the first week of the legislative session. The votes are required under the state law the General Assembly initially passed in 2019. Senators approved the plan Thursday……The rush to finalize approval infuriated the Legislature’s minority Democratic caucus……One reason for the push before Biden takes office is because the Trump administration took steps that could lengthen the process to rescind the deal by extending the waiver period and sending out new guidance on terminating a Medicaid waiver……TennCare, Tennessee’s Medicaid program, insures approximately 1.5 million low-income Tennesseans, including pregnant women, children, caretaker relatives of dependent children and older adults, and disabled adults.Currently, the federal government pays a percentage of each state’s Medicaid costs, regardless of cost increases in any given year. For Tennessee, that means receiving approximately $7.5 billion in federal money for its $12.1 billion Medicaid program, or 65%.Republicans argue the current system gives states little incentive to control expenses because no state pays more than half the total cost… January 15, 2021: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) posted a press release titled: “Changes to Medicare Advantage and Part D Will Provide Better Coverage, More Access and Improved Transparency for Medicare Beneficiaries”. From the press release: Today, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a final rule that further advances the agency’s efforts to strengthen and modernize the Medicare Advantage and Part D prescription drug programs. The changes finalized today are generally effective for the 2022 plan year and will potentially lower enrollee cost sharing on some of the most expensive prescription drugs. This final rule will allow enrollees to know in advance and compare their out-of-pocket payments for different prescription drugs. The changes will result in an estimated $75.4 million in savings to the federal government over ten years.“The changes in this final rule provide desperately needed transparency on the out-of-pocket costs for prescription drugs that have been obscured for seniors,” said CMS Administrator Seema Verma. “It will strengthen Part D plans’ negotiating power with prescription drug manufacturers so American patients can get a better deal.”As part of the administration’s commitment to promoting price transparency and lowering prescription drug prices, the final rule will require Part D plans to offer a real-time benefit comparison tool starting January 1, 2023, so enrollees can obtain information about lower-cost alternative therapies under their prescription drug benefit plan. Enrollees would be able to compare cost sharing to find the most cost-effective prescription drugs for their health needs. For example, if a doctor recommends a specific cholesterol-lowering drug, the enrollee could look up what the co-pay would be and see if a different, similarly effective option might save the enrollee money. With this tool, enrollees will be better able to know what they will need to pay before they are standing at the pharmacy counter. This follows a similar CMS requirement that Part D plans support a prescriber real-time drug benefit tool that went into effect January 1, 2021. Congress codified a similar requirement for prescriber real-time benefit tools in the recently enacted Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (Public Law No. 116-260).In the Medicare Part D program, enrollees choose the prescription drug plan that best meets their needs. Many plans offering prescription drug coverage place drugs into different “tiers” on their formularies. Today, all drugs on a plan’s specialty tier – the tier that has the highest-cost drugs – have the same level of cost sharing. Under the final rule, CMS is allowing Part D plans to have a second, “preferred” specialty tier with a lower cost sharing level than their other specialty tier. This change gives Part D plans more tools to negotiate better deals with manufacturers on the highest-cost drugs and lower out-of-pocket costs for enrollees in exchange for placing these products on the “preferred” specialty tier.Under the Part D program, plans currently do not have to disclose to CMS the measures they use to evaluate pharmacy performance in their network agreements. CMS has heard concerns from pharmacies that the measures plans use to assess their performance are unattainable or otherwise unfair. The measures used by plans potentially impact pharmacy reimbursements. Therefore, CMS is requiring Part D plans to disclose pharmacy performance measures to CMS, which will enable CMS better understand how such measures are applied. CMS will also be able to report pharmacy performance measures publicly to increase transparency on the process and to inform the industry in its new efforts to develop a standard set of pharmacy performance measures. January 15, 2021: The Texas Tribune posted an article titled: “Trump administration extends health care safety net for uninsured Texans”. It was written by Jolie McCullough. From the article: In the final days of President Donald Trump’s tenure, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services agreed Friday to extend for 10 years Texas’ health care safety net for uninsured residents.The federal funding agreement, known as the 1115 waiver, reimburses hospitals for the “uncompensated care” they provide to patients without health insurance. It alsopays for innovative health care projects that serve low-income Texans, often for mental health services. Safety-net hospitals have relied on the waiver to serve poor, uninsured Texans, and it was set to expire — alarming a broad coalition of doctors, hospitals and patient advocates who feared the funding could be lost.The new agreement will continue hospital reimbursements until September 2030, but it will allow the innovation fund to expire this year, according to a government letter announcing the waiver extension. A new program will be implemented to partially fund behavioral and mental health clinics.The state’s first 1115 waiver was approved in 2011 and was meant to be a “bridge” to Medicaid expansion under the newly passed Affordable Care Act. But a few months after the signing of the Texas waiver, a U.S. Supreme Court ruling gutted the Medicaid expansion portion of the sweeping federal health law. And Republican leadership in Texas — which has the nation’s highest rate of uninsured residents — stood fast against expanding Medicaid.But state officials have worked to keep the waiver’s federal funding, which was last extended for five years in 2017 by the new federal administration under President Donald Trump. Now, his administration has again extended the waiver as one of its last acts, this time by 10 years… January 16, 2021: The New York Times posted an article titled: “One Sentence in Biden Stimulus Plan Reveals His Health Care Approach”. It was written by Sarah Kliff. From the article: Tucked into President-elect Biden’s $1.9 trillion stimulus plan is a one-sentence provision that could drive billions in federal subsidies to help people afford to buy health insurance.The proposal would do two things: make upper-middle-income Americans newly eligible for premium subsidies on Obamacare marketplaces, and increase the financial help that already goes to lower-income enrollees. Taken together, some experts expect these changes to drive more sign-ups for Healthcare.gov plans after they fell in the Trump era.Democrats have spent much of the last two years pressing for these policies, outlining ideas in candidate platforms and fine-tuning them in congressional legislation. The House even passed a similar proposal this past summer, but none of it had a shot at becoming law with President Trump in office and a Republican majority in the Senate.Now, control of the White House and a slim majority in Congress mean the first real prospect of significantly strengthening Obamacare since it became law in 2010. President-elect Biden’s inclusion of policies to shore up the health law in his first major legislative package has raised those hopes further……The Biden plan would create a new cap — 8.5 percent of an individual or family’s income on premium contributions — for midlevel health plans, something the president-elect had also proposed during the campaign. This policy would mostly affect higher-earning Americans who do not currently qualify for subsidies.Experts do not expect large enrollment gains as a result of this policy, because most higher-income Americans already carry insurance. But it would provide economic relief to families that in some cases are spending 15 percent or even 20 percent of their income on premiums……For Americans just above the current premium subsidy cutoff, the impact could be large: The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that a family of four earning $110,000 would see monthly premiums for a midlevel health plan fall to $779 from $1,529.The Biden proposal also describes a second policy that appears to be aimed at increasing subsidies for those who already qualify. These are low-income Americans, who make up the majority of those who still lack coverage in the United States. These people already receive help buying coverage, but are still left with paying a monthly premium share that can be unaffordable.For this group, the Biden plan proposes increasing the tax credits to lower health premiums or even “eliminate” them. The proposal does not detail how this would be achieved, but analysts expect the incoming White House to use as a model the legislation that House Democrats passed this summer.That bill lowered the share of income that poor Americans are expected to pay for their coverage. Someone earning 150 percent of the federal poverty line ($19,140 for an individual), for example, would go from paying as much as 4 percent of income for a midlevel health plan to paying nothing if the House Democrats’ proposal became law. January 19, 2021: The Texas Tribune posted an article titled: “Low-income Texans struggle to find new doctors as state officials boot Planned Parenthood off Medicaid”. It was written by Shannon Najamabadi. From the article: Planned Parenthood employees are scrambling to help find new doctors for thousands of low-income patients after Texas officials and a court order booted the women’s health provider from Medicaid, the federal-state health insurance program for the poor and disabled.Experts say there’s a scarcity of places low-income patients can receive non-abortion services like cancer screenings, in part because Texas already has a shortage of doctors who accept Medicaid due to the state’s low payment rates. The coronavirus pandemic has also upended some health providers’ operations and left others with long waiting lists, meaning new patients could face a lengthy delay before they can come in for an appointment. The state’s health commission gave Planned Parenthood’s Medicaid patients until Feb. 3 to find new doctors……Dr. John Thoppil, president of the Texas Association of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said the reimbursement rates for Medicaid in Texas are low compared to other states — and can be four to six times less than that offered by private insurers……Far fewer people are eligible for Medicaid in Texas than in other states. Adults must be disabled or parents and, even then, a single person with two kids cannot make more than $230 a month to qualify. That’s about $2,760 a year, a fraction of the federal poverty level.Because most people have to be so “destitute” to qualify for Medicaid in Texas, Thoppil said he is just as concerned about access to the state’s Healthy Texas Women program for low- and middle-income residents. A large number of providers listed as participating in the program online, may not be taking new patients, he said……Advocates are skeptical other health care providers will be able to take on thousands of new patients during a pandemic that has already driven up demand for affordable health care… January 19, 2021: The Los Angeles Times posted an article titled: “Four years later, much of Obama’s policy has survived Trump”. It was written by David Lauter and Evan Halper. From the article: As President Trump prepares to leave office, more than 25 million Americans remain covered by the Affordable Care Act, which he tried to repeal; some 650,000 immigrants get the protections from deportation that he tried to rescind and employment continues to shrink in the coal industry, which he promised to revive……But his larger ambitions to uproot key domestic policies of President Obama largely failed. And now Obama’s vice president, Joe Biden, who is scheduled to take the oath of office at noon on Wednesday, will be able to build on the foundations that remain intact, starting with a wave of executive actions he’s expected to take Wednesday……On many of the efforts to uproot Obama’s agenda, Trump also suffered from divisions within his own party. The areas in which he had the greatest success largely enacted goals that “have long been the priorities of the Republican Party” — tax cuts and conservative judges, said Princeton University historian Sean Wilentz. On those topics, Trump largely adopted the party’s agenda, rather than the other way around.By contrast, the unsuccessful effort to repeal Obamacare highlighted Republican divisions.The repeal effort dominated much of the administration’s first seven months, ending in one of the signature images of Trump’s tenure — Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), less than a week after surgery and his announcement that he had brain cancer, walking onto the Senate floor, pausing for dramatic effect, then turning thumbs down to defeat the repeal bill.The lengthy congressional debate on repeal increased public support for the healthcare law, and Republican efforts to dismantle it played a major role in Democrats’ winning a majority in the House in the 2018 midterm elections and restoring Pelosi (D-San Francisco) to the speaker’s job.Opposition to the law continued to decline this year during the COVID-19 pandemic. Currently Americans by 53% to 34% view the healthcare law favorably, according to polling by the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation……After his initial defeat on repeal, Trump largely gave up his effort, except for one provision, the requirement that Americans purchase health insurance. That individual mandate had never been enforced, but was the law’s least popular major element. Congress repealed it as part of the tax bill, allowing Trump to claim a symbolic victory. Despite worries by healthcare experts, however, the repeal had relatively little impact on the number of people covered.Trump took other steps to impede the law, and by 2019, the number of uninsured Americans had started to creep back up… A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part 4: December and January is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Four: October and NovemberDecember 2, 2020health insurance / Out of SpoonsThis blog post covers that damage that the Trump Administration – and the GOP – have done in an effort to restrict and remove access to health care from the American people. The series could be described as “receipts”. This blog post has the “reciepts” about the ways that the Trump Administration and the GOP tried to destroy not only the Affordable Care Act, but also Medicaid, Medicare, and other health programs that Americans rely on. This blog post also highlights everything that the Democrats (and other people outside of government) have done in an effort to protect American’s access health care – of all types. That includes protections for DACA recipients and people who are LGBTQ+. You may want to take a look at previous blog posts in this series. Doing so will give you an overall picture of what the Trump Administration and the GOP have done to harm American’s health since 2017. A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part One A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Two A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Three A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Three – Continued A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempt to Destroy Obamacare – Part Four A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Four: April, May, June A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Four; July, August, September October October 1, 2020: American Medical Association (AMA) posted a press release titled: “AMA petitions U.S. Supreme Court to review Title X restrictions”. From the press release: The American Medical Association (AMA) today petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review a Court of Appeals decision upholding a 2019 Trump administration rule that imposed drastic changes on the Title X family planning program, inappropriately interfering with open communications between patients and health care professionals. The AMA’s petition was joined by Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association (NFPRHA), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Essential Access Health (EAH), the Oregon Medical Association and others.The petition asserts that the high court’s review is warranted following conflicting decisions by the Fourth Circuit and Ninth Circuit, leaving unresolved questions of law about an essential federal health care program. The Fourth Circuit found the Title X rule invalid, while the Ninth Circuit upheld the rule.The petitioners argue that until the Ninth Circuit’s erroneous decision is corrected, the administration’s gag rule is harming patient care and causing physicians and other health care professionals to violate ethical obligations by preventing Title X clinics from providing full information to patients about all of their reproductive care options. This marks the first time in recent history the AMA has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court, further underscoring the government’s significant overstep in issuing the rule.“The AMA strongly believes that our nation’s highest court must step in to remove government overreach and interference in the patient-physician relationship. Restricting the information that physicians can provide to their Title X patients blocks honest, informed conversations about all health care options—an unconscionable violation that is essentially a gag rule,” said AMA President Susan R. Bailey, M.D. “As physicians and leaders in medicine, we are fighting against the government’s intrusion in the exam room while protecting open communication between patients and physicians, which is the foundation of high-quality medical care.”Since its inception a half century ago, Title X has served as a vital public health program, ensuring vulnerable populations—especially low-income women—have access to basic, preventive reproductive health care. In addition to restricting physicians and other health care professionals from providing complete information and appropriate referrals for care to their Title X patients, the administration’s rule withholds federal funding from providers that do offer the full range of family planning services, much to the detriment of the millions of Americans who depend on Title X for reproductive care.The petition states that “the consequences of the rule are clear and stark—and already occurring.” Roughly one in every four Title X providers has withdrawn from the program in response to the rule’s implementation last year, ultimately jeopardizing care for 1.6 million patients nationwide. A recent U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) estimate supports these figures, acknowledging that Title X services sites decreased by 945 sites and the number of annual patients served in 2019 fell by 21%—despite the Title X rule being in effect for only a few months. In California, for example, it is projected that in 2020, there will be an almost 75% reduction in the number of patients served by Title X in the state. As of August 2020, six states are without any Title X site at all……Over the course of its 50-year history, Title X has been an enormous success for patients, their communities, and our country — serving more than 4 million patients a year with critical, often life-saving reproductive care. Without Title X, the rates of unintended pregnancy and abortions would have been 31% higher, according to estimates. Most of the patients served by Title X are economically disadvantaged and live in areas where there are few health care options.In emphasizing Title X’s immense impact, the petition notes that “for six in 10 women who obtain contraceptive care at a Title X-funded site, that provider was their only source of medical care over the past year.” The petition stresses that patients, physicians, and the health of the nation will be irreparably harmed without the Supreme Court’s review of the case. October 1, 2020: American Medical Association posted news titled: “Why the Supreme Court should take up Title X gag rule”. It was written by Andis Robeznieks, Senior News Writer. From the news: The AMA and other parties have filed a petition requesting that the U.S. Supreme Court review AMA v. Azar, a case that seeks to overturn a Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) gag rule that unlawfully dictates what physicians practicing at facilities funded under the Title X family planning grant program can’t say and must say.“The AMA strongly believes that our nation’s highest court must step in to remove government overreach and interference in the patient-physician relationship,” said AMA President Susan R. Bailey, MD.“Restricting the information that physicians can provide to their Title X patients blocks honest, informed conversations about all health care options—an unconscionable violation that is essentially a gag rule,” Dr. Bailey added. “As physicians and leaders in medicine, we are fighting against the government’s intrusion in the exam room while protecting open communication between patients and physicians, which is the foundation of high-quality medical care.”The case merits Supreme Court review because the questions it raises, according to the petition, “concern the integrity of the patient-provider relationship—founded on open and honest communications, the lynchpin of proper medical care.”These questions “arise in the context of a vitally important federal health care program—with significant real-world consequences,” the petition says.The HHS rule prohibits physicians who provide care at Title X-supported facilities from referring their pregnant patients to an abortion provider—even when their patients seek such referrals—and requires physicians to steer patients toward carrying a pregnancy to term. The Trump administration’s gag rule, which took effect May 3, 2019, also requires physicians with pregnant patients seeking an abortion to provide those patients with irrelevant information on prenatal care. “The gag requirement bans providers from referring their pregnant patients to abortion providers—even when that is the patient’s expressed wish; but it mandates referrals for prenatal care—even when the patient has no such interest,” the petition says. October 1, 2020: Urban Institute posted a brief titled: “Changes in New Mothers’ Health Care Access and Affordability under the Affordable Care Act”. It was written by Stacey McMorrow, Emily M. Johnston, Tyler Thomas, and Genevieve M. Kenney. From the brief: AbstractThough thousands of new mothers gained insurance following impletation of the coverage provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2014, there has been little documentations of changes in their health care access and affordability. This brief examines changes in access to and affordability of health care services for new mothers using data from the National Interview Survey. Comparing data from 2011-13 and 2015-18, we find that mothers were less likely to report having unmet health care needs due to cost and being very worried about paying their medical bills. In 2015-18, new mothers were more likely to report having seen a general doctor and recieved a flu vaccine in the past 12 months than in 2011-13. Even after these improvements, more than 1 in 10 new mothers were uninsured, and nearly 50 percent were at least somewhat worried about paying their medical bills. Proposals to extend postpartum Medicaid coverage for up to one year could benefit some of these mothers, but additional progress would likely require broader coverage expansions through Medicaid or the Marketplace. October 2, 2020: Representative Pramala Jayapal (Democrat – Washington) posted a press release titled: “House Passes Jayapal Resolution Condemning Forced Medical Procedures Conducted on Immigrant Women”. From the press release: The United States House of Representatives passed a resolution today urgently condemning the unwanted, unnecessary medical procedures—including partial and full hysterectomies —performed on immigrant women without their full, informed consent at the private, for-profit Irwin County Detention Center in Ocilla, Ga. H.Res. 1153—co-sponsored by 225 members of Congress and led by U.S. Representatives Pramila Jayapal (WA-07), Annie Kuster (NH-02), Sheila Jackson Lee (TX-18), Sylvia Garcia (TX-29) and Lois Frankel (FL-21)—also calls on the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to take a series of specific actions including immediately complying with all related investigations. “This resolution mandates a real investigation must happen but it also sends a clear message to doctors contracted by private, for-profit incarceration facilities everywhere that we will not stand by and allow you to treat people this way,” said Congresswoman Jayapal. “We will not stand by and allow history to repeat itself—a shameful history of medical abuse targeting Black people, Indigenous people, people of color, immigrants, poor people and people with disabilities. The women at Irwin, those who have been released and those who have been deported are brave and resilient, and I want them to know that the United States Congress sees you, hears you and will never stop fighting for you.”……The resolution passed less than one week after members of the House Judiciary Committee and Congressional Hispanic Caucus led a Congressional Delegation to the Irwin County Detention Center. It was there that they heard firsthand from numerous women who had unnecessary gynecological procedures—including surgeries involving their reproductive organs—performed on them by Dr. Mahendra Amin without their knowledge or consent. Many of the procedures resulted in sterilization. Today’s resolution also comes just one week after lawmakers on the House Judiciary Committee sent a letter to DHS Acting Secretary Chad Wolf calling on him to urgently take specified actions and immediately respond to a set of pressing document requests. Additionally, 173 members of Congress urged DHS Inspector General Joseph Cuffari to open an immediate and full investigation in mid-September.Investigative reporting by the New York Times released this week confirmed that Dr. Amin consistently performed surgeries on immigrant women’s reproductive organs, “even when it did not seem medically necessary at the time and nonsurgical treatment options were available.” The Times found striking similarities in the medical records and patient files they reviewed, and medical experts concluded that there is a, “pattern of excessively aggressive surgical intervention without adequate trial of medical remedies.” This new reporting was consistent with what at least five attorneys told Representative Jayapal during a Sept. 16 legal briefing after the initial release of Dawn Wooten’s whistleblower report. Today’s resolution condemns performing unwanted and unnecessary medical procedures without the full, informed consent of individuals. It also recognizes that everyone deserves to control their own reproductive choices and make informed choices about their bodies. Additionally, the resolution says that further accountability, oversight and transparency is necessary to protect people in the custody of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).The resolution also calls on DHS to take a series of specific actions, including pausing the removal of any individual who experienced any medical procedure at the Irwin County Detention Center and allowing individuals who may have experienced an unnecessary or non-consensual procedure to have immediate access to adequate, safe and consensual medical treatment. Additionally, it calls on DHS to immediately comply with all related investigations and records requests related while ensuring affected individuals are able to freely participate in any investigation without fear of reprisal. Finally, the resolution demands that DHS hold all individuals involved in these incidents accountable and bring them to justice.The resolution was endorsed by 54 organizations including the AFL-CIO; African Communities Together; Alianza Nacional de Campesinas; American Friends Service Committee; American Immigration Lawyers Association; Amnesty International USA; Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC ; Asian Pacific Institute on Gender- Based Violence; Casa de Esperanza: National Latin@ Network for Healthy Families and Communities; Center for Gender & Refugee Studies; Center for Victims of Torture; Church World Service; Congregation of Our Lady of Charity of the Good Shepherd, U.S. Provinces; Freedom for Immigrants; Human Rights First; In Our Own Voice: National Black Women’s Reproductive Justice Agenda; Jewish Women International; Justice for Migrant Women; MoveOn; NARAL; National Advocacy Center of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd; National Asian Pacific American Women’s Forum (NAPAWF); National Coalition Against Domestic Violence; National Council of Jewish Women; National Fair Housing Alliance; National Immigration Law Center; NETWORK lobby for Catholic Social Justice; Oxfam America; People’s Action; Planned Parenthood Federation of America; Project On Government Oversight; Project South; Southeast Asia Resource Action Center (SEARAC); SPLC Action Fund; T’ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights; Tahirih Justice Center; UnidosUS; United We Dream; Women’s Refugee Commission; Asian Americans Advancing Justice- Atlanta; Church Council of Greater Seattle; Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA); Georgia Detention Watch; Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights (GLAHR); Illinois Accountability Initiative; Iowa Coalition Against Domestic Violence; Khmer Anti-deportation Advocacy Group (KhAAG); Maine Coalition to End Domestic Violence; Mekong NYC; National Asian Pacific American Women’s Forum (NAPAWF) Seattle Chapter; OneAmerica; Vermont Network Against Domestic and Sexual Violence; Washington State Coalition Against Domestic Violence and Wind of the Spirit Immigrant Resource Center.It was co-sponsored by U.S. Representatives Pramila Jayapal, Sylvia Garcia, Ann McLane Kuster, Sheila Jackson Lee, Lois Frankel, Alma S. Adams, Pete Aguilar, Colin Allred, Cindy Axne, Nanette Diaz Barragán, Karen Bass, Joyce Beatty, Ami Bera, Donald S. Beyer Jr., Sanford D. Bishop Jr., Earl Blumenauer, Lisa Blunt Rochester, Suzanne Bonamici, Brendan F. Boyle, Anthony G. Brown, Julia Brownley, Cheri Bustos, G. K. Butterfield, Salud Carbajal, Tony Cárdenas, André Carson, Matt Cartwright, Ed Case, Sean Casten, Kathy Castor, Joaquin Castro, Judy Chu, David N. Cicilline, Gil Cisneros, Katherine Clark, Yvette D. Clarke, William “Lacy” Clay Jr., Emanuel Cleaver, II, James E. Clyburn, Steve Cohen, Gerald E. Connolly, Jim Cooper, J. Luis Correa, Jim Costa, Joe Courtney, TJ Cox, Angie Craig, Charlie Crist, Jason Crow, Henry Cuellar, Sharice Davids, Susan Davis, Danny K. Davis, Madeleine Dean, Peter DeFazio, Diana DeGette, Rosa L. DeLauro, Suzan DelBene, Antonio Delgado, Val Demings, Mark DeSaulnier, Ted Deutch, Debbie Dingell, Lloyd Doggett, Michael F. Doyle, Eliot L. Engel, Veronica Escobar, Anna G. Eshoo, Adriano Espaillat, Dwight Evans, Abby Finkenauer, Lizzie Fletcher, Bill Foster, Marcia L. Fudge, Tulsi Gabbard, Ruben Gallego, John Garamendi, Jesús “Chuy” García, Jimmy Gomez, Vicente Gonzalez, Josh Gottheimer, Al Green, Raúl M. Grijalva, Deb Haaland, Josh Harder, Alcee L. Hastings, Jahana Hayes, Denny Heck, Brian Higgins, Jim Himes, Kendra Horn, Steven Horsford, Chrissy Houlahan, Jared Huffman, Hakeem Jeffries, Eddie Bernice Johnson, Henry C. “Hank” Johnson Jr., Marcy Kaptur, William R. Keating, Robin Kelly, Joseph P. Kennedy, III, Ro Khanna, Dan Kildee, Derek Kilmer, Andy Kim, Ron Kind, Ann Kirkpatrick, Raja Krishnamoorthi, Conor Lamb, James R. Langevin, Rick Larsen, John B. Larson, Brenda L. Lawrence, Al Lawson, Barbara Lee, Susie Lee, Mike Levin, Andy Levin, Ted W. Lieu, David Loebsack, Zoe Lofgren, Alan Lowenthal, Nita M. Lowey, Ben Ray Luján, Elaine Luria, Stephen F. Lynch, Tom Malinowski, Carolyn B. Maloney, Sean Patrick Maloney, Doris Matsui, Lucy McBath, Betty McCollum, A. Donald McEachin, James P. McGovern, Jerry McNerney, Gregory W. Meeks, Grace Meng, Kweisi Mfume, Gwen S. Moore, Joseph D. Morelle, Seth Moulton, Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, Stephanie Murphy, Jerrold Nadler, Grace F. Napolitano, Richard E. Neal, Joe Neguse, Donald Norcross, Eleanor Holmes Norton, Tom O’Halleran, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Frank Pallone, Jr., Jimmy Panetta, Chris Pappas, Bill Pascrell Jr., Donald M. Payne Jr., Ed Perlmutter, Scott H. Peters, Dean Phillips, Chellie Pingree, Stacey Plaskett, Mark Pocan, Katie Porter, Ayanna Pressley, David Price, Mike Quigley, Jamie Raskin, Kathleen M. Rice, Cedric Richmond, Max Rose, Harley Rouda, Lucille Roybal-Allard, Raul Ruiz, C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger, Bobby L. Rush, Tim Ryan, Linda T. Sánchez, John Sarbanes, Mary Gay Scanlon, Jan Schakowsky, Adam B. Schiff, Brad Schneider, Kim Schrier, David Scott, Robert C. “Bobby” Scott, José E. Serrano, Terri Sewell, Donna Shalala, Brad Sherman, Mikie Sherrill, Albio Sires, Elissa Slotkin, Adam Smith, Darren Soto, Abigail Spanberger, Jackie Speier, Greg Stanton, Haley Stevens, Thomas R. Suozzi, Eric Swalwell, Mark Takano, Mike Thompson, Bennie G. Thompson, Dina Titus, Rashida Tlaib, Paul D. Tonko, Norma J. Torres, Xochitl Torres Small, Lori Trahan, David Trone, Lauren Underwood, Juan Vargas, Marc Veasey, Filemon Vela, Nydia M. Velázquez, Peter Visclosky, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Maxine Waters, Bonnie Watson Coleman, Peter Welch, Jennifer Wexton, Susan Wild, Frederica Wilson and John Yarmuth. October 2, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Applauds House Passage of Resolution 1153 Condemning Forced Sterilization of Women in Immigration and Customs Enforcement Custody”. From the press release: Today the U.S. House of Representatives passed by a vote of 232-156 House Resolution 1153,which condemns the heinous acts of forced sterilization of immigrant women in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody. This resolution was introduced by Representatives Jayapal (D-WA), Kuster (D-NH), Jackson Lee (D-TX), Garcia (D-IL) and Frankel (D-FL) in response to whistleblower reports of forced sterilizations at the Irwin County Detention Center (ICDC) in Ocilla, GA.“Reproductive oppression and forced sterilization is part of a long history of racist violence in this country. White supremacy has always depended on dehumanization and control over the bodies of women of color,” said Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America. “These utterly unconscionable and barbaric acts against immigrant women are designed to silence us, but we know we must call out this violent attempt to control people, especially immigrant women and women of color. We are grateful to see leadership from Democrats in the House seeking to put an end to these atrocities. The silence from Republican leadership in the House and the fact that the overwhelming majority of Republicans voted no, while unsurprising, speaks volumes.”… October 2, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on House Passage of Resolution Condemning Unwanted Medical Procedures on Immigrant Women”. From the Press Release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after the House passed House Resolution 1153 condemning the infliction of unwanted, unnecessary medical procedures on women in ICE custody:“Today, with the passage of H. Res. 1153, the House has sent a clear and unequivocal message: the infliction of unwanted, invasive and life-altering medical procedures on immigrant women is an appalling human rights abuse that demands immediate and full accountability. I salute Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal and the Democratic Women’s Caucus for their leadership to shine a light on this staggering abuse and to demand answers from the perpetrators.“With this resolution, the House calls on the Department of Homeland Security to protect women: providing those who have been forced to undergo these procedures with the care that they need and ensuring that they can participate in any investigation without the fear of reprisal. And we call on DHS to immediately comply with all investigations and hold all individuals involved accountable, and to bring them to justice.“The profoundly disturbing situation at the Irwin County Detention Center recalls some of the darkest moments of our nation’s history, from the exploitation of Henrietta Lacks, to the horror of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, to the forced sterilization of a stunning 25 percent of Native American women in the 1970s, to the sterilizations of tens of thousands of Black women in the twentieth century. “Sadly, the heartbreaking truth is that these forced sterilizations are part of a years-long campaign of abuse and neglect of our immigrants – some of the most vulnerable people in our midst – at the hands of this Administration. These reports point to the urgent need to overhaul our unaccountable detention system and its horrific misuse, to ensure that such abuses, and any other human rights abuse, cannot ever again happen.” October 2, 2020: Georgetown University Health Policy Institute Center for Children and Families posted a blog post titled: “House Passes Bill to Give States Option to Extend Postpartum Medicaid Coverage to New Moms”. It was written by Maggie Clark. From the blog post: Medicaid and CHIP cover nearly half of all births each year and have critical roles to play to ensure access to postpartum care that supports the lifelong health of mother and baby together. The Helping MOMS Act, passed with a bipartisan majority voice vote in the U.S. House of Representatives this week, would give states a clearer path to ensure that Medicaid and CHIP support women in the postpartum year as they build an essential bond with their child, setting the family on a healthy path.The bill would give states the option to cover women in pregnancy-related Medicaid and CHIP coverage for one year after delivery, extending their coverage well beyond the current cutoff of 60 days after the end of the pregnancy. Introduced by Reps. Robin Kelly (D-IL), Michael Burgess (R-TX), Lauren Underwood (D-IL), Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), and Buddy Carter (R-GA), the bill unanimously passed the U.S. House of Representatives.Currently, states can only receive federal matching funds to extend postpartum coverage beyond 60 days through a Section 1115 waiver. Three states (Illinois, New Jersey, Missouri) have applied for some version of a postpartum coverage extension waiver, but no state has been approved by CMS. Even more states– more than 20— are on a path to do the same. Still other states, notably California and Texas, are using state-only funds to offer more limited benefits to a subset of postpartum women.Instead of a waiver application, the bill allows states to submit a Medicaid and CHIP State Plan Amendment (SPA) if they choose to extend coverage for the full postpartum year. States that opt to extend postpartum coverage to women in Medicaid must extend coverage to pregnant women covered in CHIP as well.After the current 60 day postpartum period ends, states could either offer the current Medicaid benefit package that all mandatory populations in the state receive (which for mothers under age 21 would include the EPSDT benefit), or a benefit package determined by the HHS Secretary to be “substantially similar.” The original bill language included a five percentage point increase in the federal matching rate (FMAP) to incentivize states to take up the option, but that language was dropped from the version that passed.In addition to coverage, there’s also an effort to close some research gaps in the search for better birth outcomes for women in Medicaid and CHIP. The legislation directs the Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission (MACPAC) to publish a report on state Medicaid coverage of doula services and make recommendations for increasing access to doula services in Medicaid. GAO too must publish, two years after enactment, a report on gaps in coverage for pregnant and postpartum women in Medicaid and CHIP and to compare rates of insurance churn and mortality and morbidity in the states that elect the postpartum coverage extension and the states that do not.The bipartisan bill, which now moves to the Senate, responds to the alarming maternal mortality crisis in the U.S., the only developed country in the world where the rate of maternal death is continuing to rise. About 700 women die each year due to pregnancy-related complications. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), about 31 percent occur during pregnancy, 36 percent happen during delivery or the week after, and 33 percent of the deaths occur one week to one year after delivery. When Medicaid and CHIP coverage ends at 60 days postpartum, many women become uninsured and miss out on critical access to treatment. Cardiomyopathy, or a weakened heart muscle, is the leading cause of death for women nationally in the week to one year after delivery. About three out of five pregnancy-related deaths are preventable, the CDC reported……This bill is one small piece of a larger national call for improvements in Medicaid coverage for pregnant and postpartum people, including a package of bills known as the “Momnibus” that includes significant improvements in the maternal health care system, such as investments in research, innovative payment models, and specific funding to community-based organizations that are working to improve maternal health outcomes for Black women.For years, advocates, including the National Birth Equity Collaborative, Black Mammas Matter Alliance, American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, March of Dimes, and other maternal health groups have called for improvements in Medicaid to address maternal health equity, coverage extensions that expand access, and better data to understand the causes and prevention of maternal deaths. October 4, 2020: Senator Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (Democrat – New York) tweeted: “I want everyone in this country to have the same healthcare I receive as a member of Congress.” October 6, 2020: Openly posted an opinion piece titled: “OPINION: The appointment of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court should ring alarm bells for the LGBT+ community”. It was written by Richard Saenz, a senior attorney at Lambda Legal. From the opinion piece: If Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed to the Supreme Court, the body, already leaning to the right, would be an ultra-conservative court the likes that we have not seen in decades. The new make-up of the court, made up of nine justices, could slam the courthouse doors shut to many incarcerated people and LGBT+ people or those seeking to hold police officers and prison system accountable.The court could radically change the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. In Farmer v. Breenan, (1994), a case originally filed by Dee Farmer, a Black transgender woman, the court ruled that a prison officials’ “deliberate indifference” to substantial risk of serious harm to an inmate violates the Eighth Amendment.This standard has been applied in thousands of cases, including Lambda Legal’s cases on behalf of LGBT+ people who experienced violence or sexual assault while in custody, or people who were denied medical treatment such as hormone therapy due to a discriminatory policy.A more stringent standard could make it even more difficult for incarcerated people to bring cases against officials – especially given the fact that many of these cases are brought without an attorney.There is already reason for alarm.In the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, a Trump-appointed judge flatly stated that a policy that did not authorize sex reassignment surgery or even an individualized assessment of whether such surgery was medically necessary, did not constitute “deliberate indifference”.This ignores decades of what the Eighth Amendment requires and installs a blanket ban against gender confirmation surgery, or even an assessment not just for this plaintiff but for other incarcerated transgender people in this circuit. If other courts were to accept this reasoning, then access to healthcare for incarcerated transgender people will be in increased jeopardy.The modern LGBT+ rights movement was born in response to police violence.This summer millions took to the streets to further protest against police abuses and the killing of Black and brown and LGBT+ people by officers. The question now is whether people can turn to the courts to hold police departments and officers accountable for violating our communities’ rights.Last term, the Supreme Court declined to hear cases involving the legal defense of qualified immunity. Under this doctrine, a case can be dismissed if a police officer’s actions were not “clearly established” as a constitutional violation at the time of the event. This has led to a number of cases being thrown out regardless of how egregious the actions of the officials were. U.S. President Donald Trump has opposed limiting qualified immunity.Finally, an ultra-conservative court undermines our communities’ belief in the criminal legal system. LGBT+ people are entitled, as are all people, to courts that treat them with fairness and respect.Alarmingly, Judge Coney Barrett has referred to transgender women as “physiological males” and made public statements against same-sex marriage. Other Trump appointed judges have also gone out of their way to refer to trans plaintiffs as “gender dysphoric” or refuse to use correct pronouns, in referring to a trans person or misgender them, while ruling against trans people.There is much at stake for LGBT+ people.We know that Trump’s nominees are committed to using the constitution to deny legal protections to this country’s most vulnerable. But this is not the end. We and many others are committed to the fight for equal justice for all. October 6, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Leads Coalition Seeking Supreme Court Review Against Trump-Pence Administration’s Title X Family Planning Rule”. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, along with Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum and New York Attorney General Letitia James, yesterday led a coalition of 21 states and the District of Columbia in filing a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court. They join the American Medical Association, the Oregon Medical Association, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association, and Essential Access Health in seeking review of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit’s decision to uphold the Trump-Pence Administration’s Title X rule, which dismantles the nation’s family planning program. The rule restricts access to critical preventive healthcare and access to birth control and prohibits doctors from providing accurate information to patients on their healthcare options including referrals for abortion.“The Trump-Pence Administration has upended the nation’s family planning network that serves low-income women and families across the country,” said California Attorney General Becerra. “As a result, clinics have closed in many parts of the country and patients are left with no provider for critical reproductive and preventive health services. A patient’s medical decisions are between her and her doctor or healthcare provider, not between her and the President or Vice President. Once again, this Administration is playing games with reproductive healthcare, putting politics ahead of patients. This rule interferes with the practice of medicine and reproductive autonomy. A patient should be able to have honest and frank conversations with her provider and get the care she needs, period. Here in California, we will continue to stand up and fight for the millions of women and families who rely on Title X for healthcare services.” The Title X family planning program is instrumental in the delivery of preventive and reproductive healthcare to low-income women and families. In 2019, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a rule imposing major changes on the Title X program including: Limiting the information that can be shared with a patient at a Title X clinic;Prohibiting referrals for abortion, even when a patient specifically requests one;Mandating referrals for prenatal care for all pregnant patients, even if this care is not requested; andRequiring physician and financial separation for clinics for Title X funded services from abortion care Before 2019, the Title X program funded a wide array of critical public health services, including family planning counseling, access to FDA-approved contraceptive methods, pelvic exams, and crucial screenings for high blood pressure, anemia, diabetes, sexually transmitted diseases and infections, and cervical and breast cancer. The Trump-Pence Administration’s new Title X rule, however, has harmed the Title X program nationwide. In 13 states, more than 50 percent of Title X grantees have withdrawn from the program, and several states no longer have any Title X providers. New providers have not filled the gap caused by the withdrawals because these providers don’t provide family planning counseling or birth control. As a result, states have faced increased burdens to meet residents’ needs for essential healthcare.California alone has experienced a significant loss of Title X providers—going from 366 health centers in 38 counties to 229 health centers in only 18 counties. This leaves several rural counties with no Title X providers. As a result of these withdrawals, 38 percent fewer patients were served in 2019 compared to before the rule went into effect. Even before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Title X family planning network in California was projected to see fewer than 300,000 patients this year.Yesterday’s petition is the latest step in Attorney General Becerra’s efforts to protect the Title X program. In May, he and Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford filed a multistate amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, supporting the City of Baltimore in its lawsuit against the Trump-Pence Administration’s rule. On March 4, 2019, he filed a lawsuit challenging the final rule in the Northern District Court of California, claiming the proposed restrictions to Title X disregard the rule of law and harm California’s healthcare providers and over one million women in our state who relied on Title X for healthcare services. And on July 30, 2018, the Attorney General led a coalition of 13 attorneys general in filing a comment letter opposing the rule.Joining Attorney General Becerra in filing the petition are the attorneys general of New York, Oregon, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the petition to the U.S. Supreme Court is available here. October 6, 2020: Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent – Vermont) tweeted: “I believe every person in America is entitled to the same health care as the President of the United States – with no co-pays, no deductibles and no out-of-pocket expenses. If government-funded health care is good enough for Trump, it is good enough for all of us as a human right.” October 6, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Leads Coalition Seeking Supreme Court Review of Trump Administration’s Title X Family Planning Rule”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today announced she has led a coalition of 22 attorneys general from around the nation in filing a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review a circuit court decision upholding the Trump Administration’s Title X family planning rule, also known as the “gag rule.” The rule dismantles the nation’s family planning program by reducing access to critical reproductive health care services, including birth control and referrals for abortions.“Since day one, the Trump Administration has done everything in its power to deny women access to reproductive health coverage,” said Attorney General James. “By removing so many of the vital and essential services funded by Title X, President Trump and his administration are essentially holding women’s reproductive freedoms captive. These rules are baseless, dangerous, and will prevent millions of women from accessing quality, safe reproductive health care, which is why we are asking the Supreme Court to intervene and protect women’s reproductive rights.”In March 2019, the Trump Administration implemented its gag rule, which places an unlawful and unethical restriction on the ability of health care providers at clinics that receive Title X funds to fully inform patients of the reproductive health services available to them by disallowing referrals for abortions and restricting counseling related to abortions. Another provision requires such clinics to physically segregate abortion services and the provision of referrals for abortion from all Title X funded services — a requirement that is so expensive and so difficult to accomplish that it is driving many providers out of the program and could possibly drive them out of business. Immediately, Attorney General James and Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum, jointly, led a coalition of 21 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s regulations that threaten essential services provided under federal Title X funding.The Title X family planning program is instrumental in the delivery of preventive and reproductive health care to low-income and underserved women and families. The 2019 rule challenged in this case imposed major changes on the Title X program, including: Limiting the information that can be shared with a patient at a Title X clinic;Prohibiting referrals for abortion, even when a patient specifically requests one;Mandating prenatal care for all pregnant women, even when this care is not requested; andRequiring physical separation of clinics for Title X funded services from abortion care Before 2019, the Title X program funded a wide array of critical public health services, including family planning counseling, access to FDA-approved contraceptive methods, pelvic exams, and crucial screenings for high blood pressure, anemia, diabetes, sexually transmitted diseases and infections, and cervical and breast cancer. But, the Trump Administration’s Title X rule has severely reduced and in some cases caused a total loss of access to many of the services provided by Title X nationwide… October 6, 2020: Georgetown University Health Policy Institute Center for Children and Families posted a blog post titled: “ACA Improved Health Care Access and Affordability for New Mothers, Report Finds”. It was writen by Maggie Clark. From the blog post: We often get asked whether increases in health coverage rates result in more people getting care. In the case of new mothers following the implementation of the ACA’s major coverage provisions in 2014, a recent report from the Urban Institute shows the answer for this group is yes.In the years following the 2014 coverage expansions, new mothers were less likely to report unmet medical care or prescription medication needs, and more likely to have seen a general doctor and received a flu shot than in the years before the coverage expansions took effect.While barriers remain for new mothers to access health care–particularly because pregnancy Medicaid coverage ends just 60 days postpartum–the report findings suggest that the ACA likely contributed to improvements in health care access and affordability for new mothers, and that future coverage expansions could help even more.The report, which is based on data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), defines “new mother” as women ages 19 to 44 with an infant (younger than age 1) whose NHIS record indicates they are the child’s biological or adoptive mother. Because of sample size, the study periods are the years before and after the major 2014 ACA coverage expansions (2011-2013 and 2015-2018, respectively.)During these time ranges, the uninsured rate for new mothers dropped dramatically, from about 20.2 percent in 2011 to 11.3 percent in 2015, and remained steady in the following years through 2018. This translated to new mothers being about 60 percent less likely to have unmet needs for prescription drugs and specialist care after the ACA’s coverage provisions took effect in 2014, the authors found. The report findings also build on the evidence that when states expand Medicaid, more people seek preventive care and avoid preventable complications from diseases such as diabetes and hypertension. A recent study showed that the ACA’s Medicaid expansion closed coverage gaps for pregnant women too.However, the positive results for new mothers were not distributed equally, the report found. Black and Hispanic new mothers still have higher uninsured rates than their white peers, face greater risks of maternal mortality and morbidity, and are less likely to receive postpartum care. The authors also pointed to social barriers, such as lack of transportation, child care, family leave, and the specific barrier of racism for Black women that keep them from accessing quality health care. Future coverage expansions should be designed to reduce inequities for Black and Hispanic women, the authors recommend… October 7, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Center for Reproductive Rights Opposes Confirmation of Judge Amy Coney Barrett”. From the press release: Statement of Nancy Northup, President and CEO of the Center for Reproductive RightsFor only the second time since our founding in 1992, the Center for Reproductive Rights is opposing the confirmation of a U.S. Supreme Court nominee. Less than three weeks ago, the American people lost a champion for gender equality and reproductive rights with the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. On September 26, President Donald Trump nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett to replace her. The Senate majority is rushing a truncated confirmation hearing process to begin on October 12, barely two weeks after Judge Barrett’s nomination. While this is inadequate time for the Senators and public to fully appraise this nominee, her record in opposition to reproductive rights is clear and alarming. Based on the record of her judicial opinions, academic articles, speeches, and public statements, the Center for Reproductive Rights strongly opposes Judge Barrett’s confirmation to serve as an Associate Justice to the U.S. Supreme Court. President Trump has made reversing Roe v. Wade a litmus test for his Supreme Court nominees. Judge Barrett’s record supports that test. From 2010-2016, she was a member in the Notre Dame Chapter of University Faculty for Life. In 2006, she was a signatory on a newspaper advertisement sponsored by St. Joseph County Right to Life. The ad called for an end to Roe v. Wade and Barrett specifically signed onto a statement that she opposes “abortion on demand” and defends “the right to life from fertilization,” an extreme legal position that has implications for contraception, abortion care and fertility treatments. In 2012 she signed onto an advocacy letter that called contraception and sterilization “gravely immoral and unjust” and wrongly characterized emergency contraception as “an abortion-inducing” drug. She subscribes to the judicial philosophy of originalism that rejects constitutional protections for abortion rights. Her writings are clear that she does not view Roe as a “super precedent” and the principle of stare decisis would not be a restraint to overturning Roe. In the two abortion rights cases that have come before her as a federal appellate judge, Judge Barrett joined opinions that suggest upending Supreme Court law on both the substantive right to abortion and the procedural safeguards that allow the right to be vindicated in court. In sum, Judge Barrett’s approach to constitutional interpretation, opinions as a federal appellate judge, and vitriolic public advocacy disparaging contraception, opposing abortion, and defending “the right to life from fertilization” lay bare a deep disagreement with the established constitutional protections for reproductive rights. Indeed, Judge Barrett has the most extreme record in opposition to reproductive rights as any Supreme Court nominee since the rejected nomination of Judge Robert Bork over 30 years ago. Moreover, Judge Barrett has criticized the Supreme Court’s decisions upholding key provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which has expanded reproductive health insurance coverage to millions, including affordable contraceptive and maternity care. This is especially troubling, as the Supreme Court will be hearing the next challenge to the ACA on November 10. We do not make our decision to oppose Judge Barrett lightly. We win cases before a wide range of federal judges, who have been appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents. As an organization that litigates cases in federal courts, including in the Supreme Court, we are rigorous about factual accuracy and careful legal analysis. We are a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that does not support or oppose political parties or candidates. The stakes of this nomination could not be higher. Since the election of President Trump, states have accelerated their decades-long campaign to end abortion services and there are dozens of cases heading toward the Supreme Court. Some are test cases to overturn Roe v. Wade or to render it meaningless by upholding laws that make abortion impossible to access. The Supreme Court’s vital role in protecting and upholding civil rights and liberties – including reproductive rights – cannot be compromised by a nominee fundamentally hostile to our constitutional rights. October 7, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Warns of Pence’s Anti-Choice Radicalism Ahead of Vice Presidential Debate”. From the press release: As Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) and Vice President Mike Pence prepare to face off during tonight’s vice presidential debate, expect Pence to attack reproductive freedom. As the Republican Party often does, Pence will likely spew disinformation and attack abortion rights to distract from the Trump-Pence administration’s failed leadership and the illegitimate nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court. This debate comes just days after President Donald Trump again pushed lies and fear-mongering about abortion, a tactic he often turns to when he’s in hot water. NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement ahead of this evening’s debate:“Though Americans are already casting ballots, the Trump-Pence administration is prioritizing ramming through a Supreme Court nomination. Instead, they should be providing much-needed relief to Americans. The stakes have never been higher: Our reproductive freedom, our rights, and our democracy are at stake. Senator Kamala Harris has proven her prowess and leadership in her role on the Senate Judiciary Committee and as a senator committed to justice for all people. We know she will do the same tonight on the debate stage, not letting Pence off the hook for his regressive and oppressive politics that have harmed so many people in this country. We need proven leaders like her and Vice President Joe Biden now more than ever. There’s no question that this ticket will fight tirelessly for reproductive freedom and work to undo the damage to our fundamental rights waged by Pence and Trump. That’s why we are committed to doing everything we can to make sure they win the White House this November.”Vice President Mike Pence has made his disdain towards Roe v. Wade clear time and again, saying that the case should be “consigned to the ash heap of history.” The Trump-Pence administration is poised to do just that thanks to its nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, a judge with a record of hostility towards reproductive freedom who has even signed on to an ad calling Roe “barbaric.” Polls confirm that the Trump-Pence administration and Mitch McConnell’s rush to confirm Barrett is wildly unpopular. Despite the fact that the American people have already begun casting their ballots, the Republican Party remains laser-focused on ramming through Barrett’s confirmation and continuing their long-standing campaign to stack our courts and gut our rights. Pence has long prioritized his anti-choice fanaticism over the health and well-being of those he was elected to serve. He flouted life-saving public health guidance this summer when he embarked on a reckless multi-state tour of fake women’s health centers during the COVID-19 pandemic. As NARAL Pro-Choice America and Global Strategy Group’s new language guide to accurate reporting on abortion explains, these anti-choice organizations, sometimes referred to as “crisis pregnancy centers,” lie to, shame, and mislead those seeking an abortion to block them from accessing care… October 7, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Bacerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Leads Coalition in Support of Healthcare Rights for Transgender Americans”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today led a coalition of 17 states and the District of Columbia in filing an amicus brief supporting the plaintiffs in Kadel v. N.C. State Health Plan. The plaintiffs, Maxwell Kadel, Jason Fleck, Connor Thonen-Fleck, Julia McKeown, Michael D. Bunting, Jr., C.B., and Sam Silvaine, all state employees and their families, sued the North Carolina State Health Plan for denying health coverage. Specifically, the plaintiffs seek coverage for gender dysphoria or other gender-affirming treatment, arguing that Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) protects transgender individuals from discrimination in healthcare and requires the State to provide them with coverage.“All people should have access to healthcare, period. This includes transgender individuals who have a right to live their lives with dignity, free from discrimination,” said Attorney General Becerra. “Here in California, we have laws that protect transgender Americans from discrimination in accessing state services and benefits, including healthcare. We’ve seen the positive outcome that ensuring equality brings to our communities. We will continue to fight for equality for all transgender Americans.”The ACA provides millions of Americans with access to quality, affordable health insurance coverage. It also prevents discrimination in healthcare through Section 1557, which extends prohibitions on sex discrimination to healthcare programs and services. Section 1557 expressly prohibits health programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance, including medical providers, health systems, and health insurers, from discriminating against individuals on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability.In today’s brief, the coalition argues that by denying transgender individuals coverage for gender-affirming treatment and gender dysphoria, the North Carolina State Health Plan violated Section 1557’s anti-discrimination mandate. Systematic and widespread discrimination against transgender people in healthcare is what Section 1557 aims to prevent and combat. Instead, the Health Plan’s discriminatory tactics put the lives of transgender people at risk by denying them treatment known to improve their physical and mental health. The brief also argues that Section 1557 should be applied uniformly across the country in order to protect Americans from discrimination as Congress intended. The ACA’s reforms, along with state laws like California’s, which prohibit health insurers from excluding coverage for transgender health services, have significantly increased access to healthcare for LGBTQ+ individuals and their families. Allowing the North Carolina State Health Plan to selectively deny coverage to certain disadvantaged groups, like transgender people, causes uncertainty and confusion for people who are already reluctant to seek medical care. Applying Section 1557 uniformly will give all transgender Americans confidence that they will receive quality healthcare no matter where they are……In filing the amicus brief, Attorney General Becerra was joined by the attorneys general of Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the amicus brief is available here. October 8, 2020: NPR posted an article titled: “Supreme Court Punts on Abortion Pills, Allowing them to be Mailed – For Now”. It was written by Nina Totenberg. From the article: The U.S. Supreme Court has refused, for now, to reimpose FDA regulations that require women seeking medication abortion to pick up the prescribed pills in person at a clinic instead of by mail.The court’s decision came Thursday night on a 6-to-2 vote that rejected an emergency appeal from the Trump administration.The challenge to the Food and Drug Administration regulation was brought by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists after the the agency relaxed similar regulations for other drugs — including opioids — in order to limit patients’ exposure to COVID-19 during the pandemic. The FDA refused to relax the same rule for those with prescriptions for abortions with pills in the first 10 weeks of pregnancy.Federal Judge Theodore Chuang in Maryland ruled in favor of ACOG, declaring that requiring such in-person pickups of pills during a pandemic posed “a substantial obstacle to women seeking an abortion.” The Supreme Court has long ruled that such substantial obstacles unconstitutionally interfere with a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy.On Thursday night, the Supreme Court turned down the Trump administration’s attempt to block the lower court order. But the decision was more of a punt than a long-lasting decree.The high court said it would hold the Trump administration’s request “in abeyance” to permit the district court judge to promptly consider other efforts by the administration to “dissolve, modify, or stay” its previous order if “relevant circumstances have changed.” And the justices said that their decision did not indicate their views on the merits of the case should it come to them again.The language of the one-paragraph order seemed to suggest that the court was simply unwilling to make any decision in an abortion case three weeks after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died, and just days before the U.S. Senate is scheduled to take up the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett as Ginsburg’s replacement… October 8, 2020: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted news titled: “Recent Research Study: HPV Vaccination Substantially Reduces Risk of Invasive Cervical Cancer”. From the news: A recent Swedish study published in the New England Journal of Medicine assessed the association between HPV vaccination and the subsequent risk of invasive cervical cancer. During the study period, the researchers evaluated 1.7 million girls and women, 10 to 30 years old, for cervical cancer. The findings showed that, among Swedish girls and women 10 to 30 years old, quadrivalent HPV vaccination was associated with a substantially reduced risk of invasive cervical cancer, especially in women who were immunized at a younger age.ACOG recommends that obstetrician–gynecologists and other health care professionals should strongly recommend HPV vaccination to eligible patients and stress the benefits and safety of the HPV vaccine. Health care professionals play a critical role and should assess and vaccinate adolescent girls age 11–12 years and previously unvaccinated young women during the catch-up period (ages 13–26 years). Additionally, health care professionals may use shared clinical decision making with previously unvaccinated women aged 27–45 years, considering the patient’s risk for acquisition of new HPV infection and whether the HPV vaccine may provide benefit.Read the full research article. October 8, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Supreme Court Leaves in Place Suspension of Medically Unnecessary Barrier to Abortion During COVID-19 – For Now”. From the press release: Today, the U.S. Supreme Court delayed ruling on the Trump administration’s attempt to reinstate a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requirement that subjected patients to unnecessary COVID-19 exposure risks during the pandemic to access a safe medication for early abortion care.The FDA’s Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) restrictions on mifepristone mandate that patients pick up the medication directly from a doctor’s office, hospital, or other health center – rather than from a pharmacy or by mail, as allowed for other equally safe medications.The court’s decision to delay acting on the administration’s request follows the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a staunch advocate for reproductive health care and rights. While the court’s decision on the government’s request is delayed for now, 16 other cases on abortion access are one step away from the Supreme Court……PPFA joined the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), and other leading health care organizations in signing onto an amicus brief opposing the Trump administration’s attempt… October 8, 2020: Senator Cory Booker (Democrat – New Jersey) posted a press release titled: “Booker, Blackburn Introduce Bipartisan Legislation to Help Improve Maternal Health Outcomes for Pregnant Veterans”. From the press release: U.S. Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) introduced a bipartisan bill, Delivering Optimally Urgent Labor Access for Veterans Affairs, or the DOULA Act, to establish a pilot program to encourage the use of doulas in the Veterans Health Administration to support pregnant veterans and improve maternal health outcomes.A study in 2010 by the National Center for Biotechnology Information found that veterans returning from Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom who experienced pregnancy were twice as likely to have a diagnosis of depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder, or schizophrenia as those who had not experienced a pregnancy, which can lead to many complications during childbirth.This has led to an increasing number of doula organizations and veteran stakeholders coming together to advocate for the placement of doulas in the Veterans Health Administration as a support for pregnant veterans.A 2013 study published in the Journal of Perinatal Education found that “expectant mothers matched with a doula had better birth outcomes than did mothers who gave birth without involvement of a doula.”“Maternal mortality in the United States is a public health crisis that demands urgent action,” said Senator Booker. “Providing increased access to doula care for veterans—especially those who are survivors of military sexual trauma or experiencing a mental disorder—is a proven, effective way to improve health outcomes for mothers and children and support our veterans.”“Mental health resources must be readily available for our veterans, and pregnant veterans are no exception,” said Senator Blackburn. “The support of a doula during childbirth has proven to help women feel more at ease as their child comes into the world.“Under the Delivering Optimally Urgent Labor Access for Veterans Affairs, or the DOULA Act, the Department of Veteran Affairs would be required to measure the impact that doula support services have on pregnant veterans birth and mental health outcomes. The pilot program would allow for six Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISN), three with the highest percentage of female veterans, and three with the lowest rate of female veterans, to participate and compare results regarding barriers to care. If done successfully, it will lower childbirth complications and incentivize veterans to receive VA care during and after their pregnancy.The Delivering Optimally Urgent Labor Access for Veterans Affairs Act was borne out of conversations Senator Booker had with female veterans at a roundtable he hosted on Veterans Day in 2018. Full text of the bill can be viewed here. October 8, 2020: Georgetown University Health Policy Institute Center for Children and Families posted a report titled: “Children’s Uninsured Rate Rises by Largest Annual Jump in More Than a Decade”. It was written by Joan Alker and Alexandra Corcoran. From the report: Key Findings After reaching a historic low of 4.7 percent in 2016, the child uninsured rate began to increase in 2017, and as of 2019, jumped back to 5.7 percent. This increase of a full percentage point translates to approximately 726,000 more children without health insurance since the beginning of the Trump Administration when the number of uninsured children began to rise. Much of the gain in coverage that children made as a consequence of the Affordable Care Act’s major coverage expansions implemented in 2014 has now been eliminated.The number of uninsured children increased every year during the Trump Administration. The largest increase was observed between 2018 and 2019 when, despite a strong economy, the number of uninsured children was the largest annual jump seen in more than a decade. Moreover, since this data was collected prior to the pandemic, the number of uninsured children is likely considerably higher in 2020, as families have lost their jobs and employer-sponsored insurance, though it is impossible to know yet by precisely how much.One-third of the total increase in the number of uninsured children from 2016 to 2019 live in Texas. The state saw by far the greatest coverage loss over the period with an estimated 243,000 more children living without health coverage. Florida has the next biggest loss, adding about 55,000 children to the uninsured count over the three-year period. As a consequence, 41 percent of children’s coverage losses during the Trump Administration occured in Texas and Florida. Twenty-nine states experienced an adverse change for children from 2016 to 2019. The only state that bucked national trends and significantly reduced its number of uninsured children during this three-year period was New York.These coverage losses were widespread across income, age, and race/ethnicity, but were largest among White and especially Lationo children (who can be of any race). IntroductionFor many years, the United States was on a positive trajectory in reducing the number and rate of uninsured children; in 2016, the nation attained a historic low of 3.6 million uninsured children. This progress occured as a result of expansions of public coverage – primarily Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) – and was accelerated by the implementation of the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) major coverage expansion in 2014. As employer-sponsored insurance became increasingly unaffordable for dependents, public coverage ameliorated the impacts of private coverage losses for children. However, the number of uninsured children began to increase in 2017 as Medicaid enrollment began to decline, and Figure 1 shows, reached 4.4 million in 2019. This represents an increase of 726,000 children during this three-year-period. The rate of uninsured children rose a full percentage point from 4.7 percent to 5.7 percent. Much of the gain in coverage that children made as a consequence of the ACA’s major coverage expansions has now been eliminated. Moreover, the most recent year of data (2018 to 2019) shows the biggest one-year loss in children’s coverage during this time period, with 320,000 more children being uninsured. These coverage losses occured in a healthy economy with the lowest unemployment rate in decades prior to the economic shocks and job losses associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. October 9, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris, Leahy, Booker Press Chairman Graham Not to Conduct Supreme Court Hearings Without COVID-19 Testing Procedures In Place”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Friday joined Senators Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Cory Booker (D-NJ) in pressing Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) not to proceed with Supreme Court confirmation hearings next week unless stringent COVID-19 testing procedures are implemented immediately. Pointing out that two Judiciary Committee members have tested positive for COVID-19 and others have thus far refused to be tested, the senators told Graham that without testing procedures in place, the hearings could threaten the safety and health of all who attend in person. The senators wrote, “In the wake of news that Senators Lee and Tillis tested positive for COVID-19 after attending the White House event announcing Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to the Supreme Court, Judiciary Committee Democrats asked that you postpone her confirmation hearings to ensure that we don’t risk the health and safety of fellow Senators, Senate staff, other Senate employees, as well as Judge Barrett and her family. To date, we understand that you plan to proceed with these hearings on October 12, 2020, despite the serious risks they present. We urge you against unsafely moving forward with these hearings while no clear testing regime is in place to ensure that they do not become another super-spreader of this deadly virus.”The senators continued, “Without these precautionary measures in place, Senators, Senate staff, press, Judge Barrett and her family will face a serious, unnecessary risk of contracting COVID-19. We also have a moral responsibility to protect the workers who make it possible for us to do our jobs in the Senate each and every day. Absent these protocols, you are ignoring CDC best practices and may force Senators to participate in this hearing remotely which, for such a consequential hearing, would be entirely unprecedented. As Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, your first and foremost obligation is to ensure the safety and well-being of Committee members and staff. We urge you to honor that obligation in the days ahead.” Full text of the letter can be found HERE. October 9, 2020: Senator Cory Booker (Democrat – New Jersey) posted a press release titled: “Veterans’ Organizations Endorse Booker Bill to Help Improve Maternal Health Outcomes for Pregnant Veterans”. From the press release: Last week, U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) introduced a bipartisan bill, Delivering Optimally Urgent Labor Access for Veterans Affairs, or the DOULA Act, to establish a pilot program to encourage the use of doulas in the Veterans Health Administration to support pregnant veterans and improve maternal health outcomes. This legislation was borne out of various veteran organizations and leaders such as the Disabled American Veterans (DAV), Service Women’s Action Network, NJ SOS Veteran Stakeholders group, and advocate Lucy Del Gaudio speaking out on the importance to improve maternal health outcomes for pregnant veterans.A study in 2010 by the National Center for Biotechnology Information found that veterans returning from Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom who experienced pregnancy were twice as likely to have a diagnosis of depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder, or schizophrenia as those who had not experienced a pregnancy, which can lead to many complications during childbirth.This has led to an increasing number of doula organizations and veteran stakeholders coming together to advocate for the placement of doulas in the Veterans Health Administration as a support for pregnant veterans.A 2013 study published in the Journal of Perinatal Education found that “expectant mothers matched with a doula had better birth outcomes than did mothers who gave birth without involvement of a doula.”“Maternal mortality in the United States is a public health crisis that demands urgent action,” said Senator Booker. “Providing increased access to doula care for veterans—especially those who are survivors of sexual trauma or living with mental illness—is a proven, effective way to improve health outcomes for mothers and children and support our veterans.”“Pregnancy, labor and delivery, and the early days of motherhood can be difficult in the best of circumstances, but for women veterans, they can be further complicated by physical and mental health conditions related to military service,” said Disabled American Veterans (DAV) National Legislative Director Joy J. Ilem. “We owe our veterans the care they need, and the D.O.U.L.A. Act would offer much-needed support to women veterans at a time when they need it most. We thank Senators Booker and Blackburn for taking the needs of pregnant women veterans into account and working to establish this unique pilot program to foster better health outcomes for mother and baby as well as encourage veterans to continue using VA’s comprehensive care services, during and after pregnancy.”“The Service Women’s Action Network (SWAN) strongly supports Senator Cory Booker’s D.O.U.L.A Act of 2020. This legislation will provide veterans who are new mothers with trusted support as they begin the joyful journey of motherhood,” said Lory Manning, Captain, US Navy Retired, Director of Government Relations for the Service Women’s Action Network (SWAN).“Thank you Senator Booker for taking the time to listen to the needs of our women veterans and taking action. It’s one step in getting women veterans the healthcare they deserve,” said Co-chair of NJSOSVETS Stake Holder Group Dave Pearson. “We look forward to working with you in the future in giving our veterans a voice and helping to get the services they deserve.”“Survivors of trauma need to feel fully supported, calm, and confident during their childbirth experience,” said Co-chair of the SOSVETS Stakeholder Groups Women Veteran Subcommittee Lucy Del Gaudio. “The DOULA for VA Act will do that just. This will ensure that women, non-binary, and transgender veterans practicing holistic medicine and wellbeing will be fully supported. I truly appreciate the support that Senator Booker has provided to our sisters in arms and Senator Blackburn for co-sponsoring this bill. It’s an honor and a privilege to work with them both.”Under the Delivering Optimally Urgent Labor Access for Veterans Affairs, or the DOULA Act, the Department of Veteran Affairs would be required to measure the impact that doula support services have on pregnant veterans birth and mental health outcomes. The pilot program would allow for six Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISN), three with the highest percentage of female veterans, and three with the lowest rate of female veterans, to participate and compare results regarding barriers to care. If done successfully, it will lower childbirth complications and incentivize veterans to receive VA care during and after their pregnancy.The DOULA Act was introduced last week by Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN).Full text of the bill can be viewed here. October 9, 2020: Lambda Legal posted a press release titled “The Senate Judiciary Committee Must Oppose Amy Coney Barrett”. From the press release: Today, Lambda Legal sent a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee urging the members to oppose Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump’s nominee to fill the seat of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the United States Supreme Court. The rushed confirmation hearings are scheduled to begin on Monday, October 12, while voting for the next president and one-third of the senate is already underway. “Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s record is filled with red flags that should disqualify her from sitting on the U.S. Supreme Court. Given her perverse, reactionary judicial philosophy, Judge Barrett is unfit to fill the seat, much less the shoes, of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg,” said Sasha Buchert, Senior Attorney at Lambda Legal. “Furthermore, this rushed confirmation process undermines the integrity of the Court and betrays the legacy of Justice Ginsburg. The politically motivated decision of the Senate Judiciary Committee to rush this confirmation process will further jeopardize the reputation of the Court, which must have the respect and confidence of the people in order to be effective. Our country cannot afford having the Supreme Court be seen as just another political branch—unbalanced and wielding disproportionate power.“There is so much at stake for LGBTQ people and everyone living with HIV right now because so much of our civil rights progress has happened in the courts,” Buchert added. “Decades of hard work have led to legal victories such as the right to marry the person we love, to protect our families, to access health care and make decisions about our bodies. Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s record is fundamentally at odds with basic guarantees of equality, liberty, justice and dignity under the law for our communities. It is impossible for LGBTQ people to have confidence in Judge Barrett as her publicly available record makes clear that she would be unable or unwilling to respect and affirm our rights to equal protection of the laws.”In 2016, then-Professor Barrett gave a presentation in which she expressed that marriage should not be viewed as a fundamental right for same-sex couples and instead should be decided on a state-by-state basis. This approach mistakenly erases the duty of courts to enforce everyone’s constitutional rights. If followed, it would deny equal liberty, dignity and autonomy to LGBTQ people, women, racial minorities and any other marginalized community historically denied those rights. In a lecture discussing issues that could soon be before the Supreme Court, then-Professor Barrett took the troubling and legally unsound position that transgender people are not protected by federal protections against sex discrimination. Justice Gorsuch explained why her view is wrong in the Court’s Bostock v. Clayton County decision of this past June. More disturbing yet, she mischaracterizes transgender people. She has opined that “people will feel passionately on either side about whether physiological males who identify as females should be permitted in bathrooms especially where there are young girls present.” This ill-informed misgendering and disrespect of transgender people, and in particular of trans youth, ignores that it is transgender people who are at widespread risk of assault and discrimination. Spreading such inflammatory ignorance is dangerous to their very lives and ability to fully participate in public life.Further analysis of Amy Coney Barrett’s record reveals opinions that would immediately threaten the Affordable Care Act—which has expanded health care coverage for more than 20 million people, and helped countless LGBTQ people and those living with HIV who are more than twice as likely to be uninsured. She also has showed her lack of concern for racial equity – an important duty of our federal courts – when she denied rehearing of a decision that allowed a company to segregate its employees by race, violating a core tenant of Brown v. Board of Education. October 9, 2020: Center for American Progress posted an article titled: “Repealing the ACA Would Create Chaos for the Disability Community During a Pandemic”. It was written by Rebecca Cokley. From the article: …The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), enacted in 2010, was a game-changer for the disability community and was in some ways comparable to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in terms of the impact the law had on peoples’ lives. While much of the law’s importance has centered on its anti-discrimination protections for people with preexisting conditions—which do have a significant effect on people with disabilities and chronic health conditions—there are a multitude of lesser-known provisions that have had a life-changing impact on the United States’ 61 million people with disabilities and their families, both in terms of their health and their wallets.On November 10, the Supreme Court is expected to hear oral arguments in California v. Texas, a lawsuit backed by the Trump administration and state attorneys general that seeks to invalidate the entire ACA—including its protections for people with preexisting conditions. The vacancy on the Supreme Court in the wake of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s recent passing has left President Donald Trump and the Senate majority scrambling to fill the seat with a conservative justice who will side with them in repealing the 10-year old law. If the ACA is repealed, the ramifications for people with disabilities and their families will be widespread and catastrophic—and dramatically exacerbated in the midst of a pandemic. As the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention notes, “ome people with disabilities might be at a higher risk of infection or severe illness because of their underlying medical conditions.”…Repealing the ACA would harm people with COVID-19…Individuals who have contracted the coronavirus will face unique health care needs both now and in the future. As scientists and those in the medical profession continue to learn more each day about the virus that causes COVID-19, it is increasingly clear that the long-term effects of the coronavirus are still unknown. More than 7 million people in the United States have been infected with the virus since March and, as such, would likely be considered by insurance companies to have preexisting conditions. Some COVID-19 “long haulers,” or those for whom the effects of the coronavirus have lasted months, are experiencing aggressive side effects of the virus, including paralysis, blood clots, respiratory distress, and cardiac disease. COVID-19 survivors are also finding themselves medical anomalies, facing not only confusion among medical personnel about best courses of treatment but also an inability to receive in-person peer support, a staple in the disability community that has been limited due to social distancing. If the ACA is repealed, millions of Americans who have had COVID-19 will likely find themselves unable to obtain or maintain insurance, as was the case for millions of Americans before the law took effect.The White House and Senate majority failed to respond to the virus when it first emerged and are now actively working to destroy their health care in the courts and legislature, further affecting people with disabilities. The Safe to Work Act, backed by Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) and 23 other Republican co-sponsors, proposes allowing employers to waive the ADA and other civil rights laws to discriminate against employees with a history of the coronavirus. The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights called the Safe to Work Act “an extreme bill that would protect businesses at the expense of working people and the public by shifting the burden of the pandemic onto those who are most vulnerable to the health and economic impacts of this crisis.”Repealing the ACA would lead to coverage losses among people with preexisting conditionsFirst and foremost, repealing the ACA would roll back anti-discrimination protections for people with preexisting conditions. It is not commonly understood that people with preexisting conditions are regarded as people with disabilities under the ADA, meaning they are covered under the ACA’s anti-discrimination protections and the reasonable accommodations that come with it.This provision also made it easier for people with disabilities to leave a job and find another one without fear of being denied insurance coverage or jumping through arduous hoops to get covered. People with disabilities no longer had to weigh serious concerns about accessing coverage—which in the past may have caused them to stay in a job that paid poorly or that they had advanced beyond professionally or even to take a job out of state that offered the benefits they needed. The ACA helped guarantee the disability community was not disproportionately penalized when pursuing a career based on their own desires and personal choices rather than out of fear of losing health care. Repealing this law in the midst of a public health and economic crisis would mean a drastic curtailment of autonomy for millions of people……Repealing the ACA may mean a return to annual or lifetime caps on coverage…Prior to the passage of the ACA, insurance companies could enact annual or lifetime caps, or limits, on the benefits policyholders received. Depending on the severity of someone’s disability, or the age at which they acquired it, they could hit their lifetime cap at an expedited rate. This was common for young children with significant disabilities. The fear of an ACA repeal is also a fear that coverage caps will increase the likelihood of institutionalization. Making families pay for all additional medical costs above annual or lifetime limits would force them to make an unconscionable choice between the right of people with disabilities to live in the community, as established in Olmstead v. L.C., and families’ ability to pay for it. For survivors of COVID-19, ongoing health care costs will be highly unpredictable, as the virus’s long-term health effects are only beginning to be understood.Medicaid expansion, made possible by the ACA, has expanded care and increased employment among people with disabilitiesThe ACA also allowed states to expand Medicaid, extending eligibility for the program to people with incomes up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level. This has allowed many more people with disabilities to access health care without having to go through the long process of disability determination. It has also allowed people with disabilities who have slightly higher incomes to access benefits.Medicaid expansion has also increased employment rates among people with disabilities. Prior to expansion, people with disabilities had to go through the disability determination program and meet stringent income and asset limits for coverage. This prevented many people with disabilities from entering employment or returning to work after acquiring a disability due to the fear of making too much money to access needed health care. In states that expanded Medicaid, employment of people with disabilities increased from 41.3 percent to 47 percent, compared with a decrease from 43.5 percent to 41.4 percent in states that did not. Indeed, many of the states that are continuing to battle the pandemic—including Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and California—each have hundreds of thousands of enrollees in Medicaid expansion… October 9, 2020: Lambda Legal posted a press release titled: “Lambda Legal Urges Senate Judiciary Committee to Oppose Confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett”. From the press release: Today, Lambda Legal sent a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee urging the members to oppose Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump’s nominee to fill the seat of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the United States Supreme Court. The rushed confirmation hearings are scheduled to begin on Monday, October 12, while voting for the next president and one-third of the senate is already underway. “Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s record is filled with red flags that should disqualify her from sitting on the U.S. Supreme Court. Given her perverse, reactionary judicial philosophy, Judge Barrett is unfit to fill the seat, much less the shoes, of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg,” said Sasha Buchert, Senior Attorney at Lambda Legal. “Furthermore, this rushed confirmation process undermines the integrity of the Court and betrays the legacy of Justice Ginsburg. The politically motivated decision of the Senate Judiciary Committee to rush this confirmation process will further jeopardize the reputation of the Court, which must have the respect and confidence of the people in order to be effective. Our country cannot afford having the Supreme Court be seen as just another political branch—unbalanced and wielding disproportionate power.“There is so much at stake for LGBTQ people and everyone living with HIV right now because so much of our civil rights progress has happened in the courts,” Buchert added. “Decades of hard work have led to legal victories such as the right to marry the person we love, to protect our families, to access health care and make decisions about our bodies. Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s record is fundamentally at odds with basic guarantees of equality, liberty, justice and dignity under the law for our communities. It is impossible for LGBTQ people to have confidence in Judge Barrett as her publicly available record makes clear that she would be unable or unwilling to respect and affirm our rights to equal protection of the laws.”In 2016, then-Professor Barrett gave a presentation in which she expressed that marriage should not be viewed as a fundamental right for same-sex couples and instead should be decided on a state-by-state basis. This approach mistakenly erases the duty of courts to enforce everyone’s constitutional rights. If followed, it would deny equal liberty, dignity and autonomy to LGBTQ people, women, racial minorities and any other marginalized community historically denied those rights. In a lecture discussing issues that could soon be before the Supreme Court, then-Professor Barrett took the troubling and legally unsound position that transgender people are not protected by federal protections against sex discrimination. Justice Gorsuch explained why her view is wrong in the Court’s Bostock v. Clayton County decision of this past June. More disturbing yet, she mischaracterizes transgender people. She has opined that “people will feel passionately on either side about whether physiological males who identify as females should be permitted in bathrooms especially where there are young girls present.” This ill-informed misgendering and disrespect of transgender people, and in particular of trans youth, ignores that it is transgender people who are at widespread risk of assault and discrimination. Spreading such inflammatory ignorance is dangerous to their very lives and ability to fully participate in public life.Further analysis of Amy Coney Barrett’s record reveals opinions that would immediately threaten the Affordable Care Act—which has expanded health care coverage for more than 20 million people, and helped countless LGBTQ people and those living with HIV who are more than twice as likely to be uninsured. She also has showed her lack of concern for racial equity – an important duty of our federal courts – when she denied rehearing of a decision that allowed a company to segregate its employees by race, violating a core tenant of Brown v. Board of Education. Read Lambda Legal’s letter here: https://www.lambdalegal.org/in-court/legal-docs/20201009_letter_amy-coney-barrett-opposition-supreme-court October 12, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Denounces Senate Republicans’ Disgraceful Priorities as Amy Coney Barrett Confirmation Hearings Begin”. From the press release: This morning, the Senate Judiciary Committee began confirmation hearings for Amy Coney Barrett. More than 7 million voters have already cast their ballots and less than a month remains until Election Day. Still, Senate Republicans continue to prioritize ramming through another Trump justice to the U.S. Supreme Court instead of addressing the suffering the COVID-19 pandemic is causing to our health, safety, and economic well-being.NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement in response:“Two things are clear: Barrett poses a clear and present danger to our fundamental rights and this hearing is part of an illegitimate and craven power grab that could affect our Courts for a long time. Plowing ahead with the confirmation of a Supreme Court justice this close to Election Day is an attack on our democracy that we won’t forget. It’s disgraceful for Senate Republicans to continue this partisan charade to maintain control no matter the results of November’s election, all while refusing to help people struggling in the midst of the still-raging pandemic. No confirmation should be considered until after Inauguration Day, period.”Amy Coney Barrett’s record on reproductive freedom is clear. She has suggested that Roe v. Wade is an “erroneous decision.” She also signed onto an ad calling the landmark ruling “barbaric” and failed to disclose it in the documents submitted to the Senate ahead of her confirmation hearing. She sided with states trying to restrict abortion access, joined anti-choice groups in opposing the Affordable Care Act’s birth control benefit, and is connected to a group that calls for criminalizing in vitro fertilization. Her nomination comes after Trump’s promise to the Radical Right to only consider jurists hostile to reproductive freedom. It’s a vow he ran on in 2016 and doubled down on in a recent campaign letter to the anti-choice movement.Rather than letting the American people decide, Trump and Mitch McConnell are teeing up one of the most rushed confirmation processes in history in a massive power grab. For the last four years, the Trump administration, Mitch McConnell, and Senate Republicans have waged war on our fundamental rights and our democracy. That’s why we know we must do all that we can to flip the Senate, expand our majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, and send Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Kamala Harris to the White House… October 12, 2020: Elle posted an article titled: “Senator Gary Peters Shares His Abortion Story”. It was written by Laura Bassett. From the article: United States Senator Gary Peters, a low-key, moderate Democrat from Michigan, is in a very tight re-election race that could decide whether his party wins the Senate. But’ he’s not the type of guy who typically makes national headlines…. So it may come a as a surprise that with this story, he will become the first sitting senator in American history to publicly share a personal experience with abortion.“It’s a story of how gut-wrenching and complicated decisions can be related to reproductive health, a situation I went through with my first wife,” he told me in a phone interview Sunday afternoon.In the late 1980s in Detroit, Peters and his then wife, Heidi, were pregnant with their second child, a baby they very much wanted. Heidi was four months along when her water broke, leaving the fetus without amniotic fluid—a condition it could not possibly survive. The doctor told the Peters to go home and wait for a miscarriage to happen naturally.But it didn’t happen. They went back to the hospital the next day, and the doctor detected a faint heartbeat. He recommended an abortion, because the fetus still had no chance of survival, but it wasn’t an option due to a hospital policy banning the procedure. So he sent the couple again home to wait for a miscarriage. “The mental anguish someone goes through is intense,” Peters says, “trying to have a miscarriage for a child that was wanted.”As they waited, Heidi’s health deteriorated. When she returned to the hospital on the third day, after another night without a natural miscarriage, the doctor told her the situation was dire. She could lose her uterus in a matter of hours if she wasn’t able to have an abortion, and if she became septic from the uterine infection, she could die.The doctor appealed to the hospital’s board for an exception to their anti-abortion policy and was denied. “I still vividly remember he left a message on the answering machine saying, ‘They refused to give me permission, not based on good medical practice, simply based on politics. I recommend you immediately find another physician who can do this procedure quickly,’” Peters recalls.The Peters were able to get into another hospital right away because they were friends with its chief administrator. Heidi was rushed into an emergency abortion that saved her uterus and possibly her life. The whole experience was “painful and traumatic,” Heidi shared in a statement. “If it weren’t for urgent and critical medical care, I could have lost my life.”…Reflecting on the experience now, Senator Peters says it “enacted an incredible emotional toll.” So why go public with it? “It’s important for folks to understand that these things happen to folks every day,” he explains. “I’ve always considered myself pro-choice and believe women should be able to make these decisions themselves, but when you live it in real life, you realize the significant impact it can have on a family.”… October 12, 2020: Lambda Legal posted a press release titled: “What You Need to Know About Amy Coney Barrett”. From the press release: On Monday, October 12, at 9 am Eastern, the Senate Judiciary Committee began confirmation hearings for Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the United States Supreme Court.It is impossible to overstate how consequential a Justice Coney Barrett would be to the rights of LGBTQ people and everyone living with HIV.Lambda Legal has done a deep dive into her record with respect to the issues that affect our communities the most and put the following guide together explaining exactly what is at stake. Marriage EqualityJudge Barrett’s approach to questions of constitutionally protected personal liberty is not only inconsistent with, but would seek to roll back, landmark decisions that have been essential to the ability of LGBTQ people to live authentically, to protect their families, and to make deeply personal decisions without fear of government interference. In 2016, then-Professor Barrett gave a presentation in which she expressed that marriage should not be viewed as a fundamental right for same-sex couples and instead should be decided on a state-by-state basis. This approach mistakenly erases the duty of courts to enforce everyone’s constitutional rights. If followed, it would deny equal liberty, dignity and autonomy to LGBTQ people, women, racial minorities and any other marginalized community historically denied those rights. Just last week, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito authored a troubling statement in a case involving Kim Davis, the clerk in Kentucky who sought a special exception for issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. In their statement, they took issue with the majority opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges, the case that made marriage equality the law of the land, saying that individual states should have been able to “resolve this question through legislation” and claimed the Court wrongfully “bypassed that democratic process.” It is clear that if confirmed, Justice Barrett would be in good company.In 2015, Coney Barrett signed onto a letter that said that she supports “marriage and family founded on the indissoluble commitment of a man and a woman.”Transgender RightsIn a lecture discussing issues that could soon come before the Supreme Court, then-Professor Barrett expressed the legally unsound and troubling view that transgender people are not protected by Title IX’s federal prohibitions against sex discrimination in the context of education programs.Judge Barrett’s approach has been soundly rejected by jurists spanning the political spectrum, perhaps most authoritatively twenty years ago by her mentor, Justice Scalia, for a unanimous Supreme Court, and most recently reaffirmed by Justice Gorsuch for a six-member majority in Bostock v. Clayton County, which extended federal protections against sex discrimination to LGBTQ employees. Equally, if not more disturbing, is how Judge Barrett has characterized transgender people. For example, she has opined that “eople will feel passionately on either side about whether physiological males who identify as females should be permitted in bathrooms especially where there are young girls present.” (emphasis added). This misgendering of transgender people, particularly of transgender youth, callously disregards the legitimacy of their identity. Furthermore, this rhetoric invokes defamatory falsehoods suggesting not only that transgender girls are not truly girls, but that they somehow pose a threat to cisgender girls. Judge Barrett’s ardent but misguided views about transgender people deserve particular scrutiny due to the number of issues likely to come before the Supreme Court soon, including Title IX’s protections for transgender students, the Trump administration’s ban on military service by transgender people, and numerous rule changes adversely affecting the ability of transgender people to work, stay in school, receive medically necessary care, and fully participate in public life.Health CareDespite the Affordable Care Act’s success in making coverage available for millions and although our country is suffering through the worst health crisis in a century, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments about the constitutionality of the ACA just one week after the election. LGBTQ people and people living with HIV are more than twice as likely to be uninsured as the general population. Also, the judicial repeal of the ACA would unwind the progress made in significantly decreasing uninsured and underinsured rates for people living with HIV following the passage of the ACA. It is beyond question that Judge Barrett’s supporters, including President Trump, know they can count on her to remain consistent in her academically fringe view that the ACA is unconstitutional. Given her public positions and the partisan nature of the debates about the law’s fate, any claims to believe she would have an open mind if elevated cannot be credited.In 2017, then-Professor Barrett wrote that Justice Roberts “pushed the Affordable Care Act beyond its plausible meaning to save the statute” in NFIB v. Sebelius (SCOTUS case upholding the individual mandate a tax valid under the Taxing power). Access to health care is an issue of profound importance to LGBTQ people and people living with HIV. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has expanded health care coverage for over 20 million people and has saved and improved untold numbers of lives. In addition, over 130 million people in the U.S. (including millions of Coronavirus survivors) suffer from preexisting conditions.Reproductive RightsIn 2006, Judge Barrett signed onto a full-page newspaper ad demanding an end to legal abortion. Following a pattern set by many Trump administration nominees, Judge Barrett then failed to disclose this information on her Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire. Notably, Professor Barrett also has expressed her hostility towards contraceptive insurance by joining a letter in 2012, referring to the ACA’s birth control insurance coverage as “Unacceptable.” Her position reflects not only her personal view that human life should be protected from the moment an egg is fertilized, a view far outside the mainstream, but also that our legal system should support that view despite the equally sincere religious and moral beliefs of those who disagree and whose lives would be directly affected. If views about reproductive health care were to become the law of the land, many thousands of couples – LGBTQ and not – who have depended on infertility medicine to become parents would not be able to start families. Racial EquityWe are also deeply troubled by Judge Barrett’s apparent lack of commitment to racial equity. In one especially troubling case, Judge Barrett denied rehearing of a decision in favor of a company that had segregated its employees by race. She took this position despite the explanation given by the dissent that the policy had violated the core teaching of Brown v. Board of Education, that “separate is inherently unequal, because deliberate racial segregation by its very nature has an adverse effect on the people subjected to it.” Judge Barrett’s complicit acceptance of racial segregation in a contemporary workplace is deeply disturbing and demonstrates a profound misunderstanding or minimization both of the harms of such a policy and the overriding responsibility of federal judges to enforce the statutory and constitutional bans on such racialized abuses of power.Affiliation with Anti-LGBTQ OrganizationsJudge Barret has also given lectures for a law student training program sponsored by the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), an organization dedicated, among other goals, to recriminalizing same-sex relationships, to preventing marriage equality, and now to expanding religious rights to refuse services to same-sex couples, both married and unmarried, and to exclude transgender people from public life. ADF’s overseas advocacy defends harsh criminal penalties for same-sex intimacy and supports forced sterilization of transgender people. In the United States, ADF is among the largest, best known, and most extreme of the many anti-LGBT legal organizations. Judge Barrett’s decision to affiliate herself with this organization demonstrates a marked lack of respect and concern for the countless LGBTQ people who are denied services, shunned, and otherwise harmed due to the advocacy of organizations like ADF. It is impossible to believe that she would be able to administer fair and impartial justice to members of a group she has so disdained. October 12, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris posted a press release titled: “Harris: Republicans Are Rushing Confirmation to Strike Down Affordable Care Act”. From the press release: U.S Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday participated in the hearing to consider the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court of the United States. Senator Harris spoke out against Senate Republicans’ attempt to jam through a nominee who will take away healthcare from millions of Americans – all while our nation is in the midst of a deadly pandemic. In her statement, Harris highlighted that the legacy of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the rights she fought to protect are at stake with Barrett’s nomination. Harris demanded the committee wait to confirm a new Supreme Court justice until after the American people – who are currently voting – have the chance to decide who they want in the White House.Key Experts: This hearing has brought together more than 50 people to sit inside of a closed door room for hours while our nation is facing a deadly airborne virus. This committee has ignored commonsense requests to keep people safe.Senate Republicans have made it crystal clear that rushing a Supreme Court nomination is more important than helping and supporting the American people who are suffering from a deadly pandemic and a devistating economic crisis.A clear majority of Americans want whomever wins this election to fill this seat. And my Republican colleagues know that. Yet they are deliberately defying the will of the people in their attempt to roll back the rights and protections provided under the Affordable Care Act.Republicans finally realized the Affordable Care Act is too popular to repeal in Congress, so now they are trying to bypass the will of voters and have the Supreme Court do their dirty work.By replacing Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg with someone who will undo her legacy, President Trump is attempting to roll back Americans’ rights for decades to come.Every American must understand that with this nomination, equal rights under law is at stake. Our voting rights are at stake. Workers’ rights are at stake. Consumer rights are at stake. The right to safe and legal abortion is at stake. Holding corporations accountable is at stake.And again there is so much more.I believe we must listen to our constitutients and protect their access to health care, and wait to confirm a new Supreme Court justice until after Americans decide who they want in the White House. A full transcript of Harris’s statement is posted in that press release (under the bullet-point section. October 13, 2020: American Journal of Preventative Medicine posted a study titled: “Women’s Reproductive Rights Policies and Adverse Birth Outcomes: A State-Level Analysis to Assess the Role of Race and Nativity Status”. It was done by May Sudhinaraset; PhD, Dovile Vilda; PhD, Jessica D. Gipson, MPH, PhD; and Maeve E. Wallace, MPH, PhD. From the study: Introduction:Reproductive rights policies can potentially support or inhibit individuals’ abilities to attain the highest standard of reproductive and sexual health; however, research is limited on how broader social policies may differentially impact women of color and immigrants in the U.S. This study examines the associations among state-level reproductive rights policies, race, and nativity status with preterm births and low birth weight in the U.S….…Results:Compared with women in states with the most restrictive reproductive rights policies, women living in the least restrictive states had a 7% lower low birth weight risk… In particular, low birth weight risk was 8% lower among Black women living in the least restrictive states than among their counterparts living in the most restrictive states… In addition, low birth weight risk was 6% lower among U.S.-born Black women living in the least restrictive states than among those living in the most restrictive states, but this was marginally significant. …No other significant associations were found for race-nativity-stratified models.Conclusions:Women living in states with fewer restrictions related to reproductive rights have lower rates of low birth weight, especially for Black women……Discussion:Despite the increasing restrictions on reproductive rights in recent years, there are remarkably few empirical studies assessing the association between state-level restrictive reproductive policies and adverse birth outcomes by nativity status and race/ethnicity. This study aligns with other research that has found that women living in less restrictive versus those living in more restrictive states have better birth outcomes. Moreover, this study find that less restrictive policy environments were particularly protective for Black women, with evidence that this may be especially true for U.S.-born Black women.These findings provide evidence for important policy levers that could be implemented to improve women’s reproductive health generally, with particular benefits for U.S.-born Black women, such as increasing abortion access and mandatory sex education in schools. The U.S. has a long history of oppressive reproductive policies and ideologies that results in the devaluation of certain lives, mainly racial/ethnic minorities. Past examples include the passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 and the racist stereotypes of Black mothers as welfare queens to control reproduction, the eugenics movement; and the country’s history of involuntary and nonconsensual sterilization, especially among immigrant, Black, and incarcerated women. Moreover, new contraceptive technologies have been targeted to Black women, and several states have introduced legislation to restrict sex- and race-selective abortion policies, which are devoid of scientific justification and only serve to propagate stereotypes targeting Asian, Latina, and Black women and to restrict reproductive rights.There were no significant associations for foreign-born women. This suggests that other factors beyond nativity status may explain the association between reproductive rights and birth outcomes, such as documentation status, length of time in the U.S., social support networks, and broader policy climates. Undocumented women may be systematically excluded from public benefits altogether, whereas those living in mixed-status families may experience spillover/chilling effects owing to social proximity with targeted individuals. Moreover, recent immigrants are more likely to experience a health advantage in regard to birth outcomes, whereas others have found that broader restrictive immigration policies increase adverse birth outcomes among Latinas. Corroborating previous literature, this study also found that the extent to which states collaborate with federal immigration authorities was associated with higher rates of LBW.When considered jointly, both race/ethnicity and nativity played a role in shaping the risk for adverse birth outcomes associated with the state’s reproductive rights climate. That is, the findings showed significant associations between LBW and states’ reproductive rights climate among U.S.-born but not among foreign-born Black women. This finding is in line with the growing literature on the context-dependent nature of race as a determinant of population health. It may be that U.S.-born Black women’s reproductive health is shaped by the accumulation of insults to health accrued over their lifetime (and even over generations before them) living within a systematically racist society. Foreign-born women, on the other hand, may have had less time exposed to the historical and contemporary features of structural racism that restrict access to health-promoting resources and opportunities among people of color in the U.S. It should be noted, however, that fully adjusted interaction models and stratified models showed marginal significance, and therefore, these results may be due to chance. However, these significant findings persisted in the models run with different combinations of covariates (i.e., state-level poverty instead of poverty and opportunity index) for U.S.-born Black women. Future studies should explore this finding further, including qualitative studies to further examine the lived experiences of Black women….…Conclusions:Reproductive rights policies play a critical role in advancing maternal and child health outcomes. Further studies should assess specific evidence-based policies, particularly highlighting women’s lived experiences of policy exclusion or inclusion, and the effects on women and newborn health… October 13, 2020: Facebook posted information in their Newsroom titled: “Supporting Public Health Experts’ Vaccine Efforts”. It was written by Kang-Xing Jin, Head of Health, and Rob Leathern, Director of Product Management. From the post: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of preventive health behaviors. While public health experts agree that we won’t have an approved and widely available COVID-19 vaccine for some time, there are steps that people can take to stay healthy and safe. That includes getting the seasonal flu vaccine. So today we’re announcing new steps as part of our continued work to help support vaccine efforts. These include: Launching a new flu vaccine information campaign on Facebook, including new product features that provide additional vaccine-related content.Rejecting ads globally that discourage people from getting a vaccineWorking with global health partner on campaigns to increase immunization rates… …Prohibiting Ads that Discourage VaccinesToday, we’re launching a new global policy that prohibits ads discouraging people from getting vaccinated. We don’t want these ads on our platform.Our goal is to help messages about the safety and efficacy of vaccines reach a broad group of people, while prohibiting ads with misinformation that could harm public health efforts. We already don’t allow ads with vaccine hoaxes that have been publicly identified by leading global health organizations, such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Now, if an ad explicitly discourages someone from getting a vaccine, we’ll reject it. Enforcement will begin over the next few days……Ads that advocate for or against legislation or government policies about vaccines – including a COVID-19 vaccine – are still allowed. We’ll continue to require anyone running these ads to get authorized and include a ‘Paid for by’ label so people can see who is behind them. We regularly refine our approach around ads that are about social issues to capture debates and discussions around sensitive topics happening on Facebook. Vaccines are no different. While we may narrow enforcement in some areas, we may expand it in others…. October 13, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Texas Ban on Standard Abortion Procedure Struck Down by Federal Appeals Court”. From the press release: In a victory for Texans, the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals today struck down a Texas measure that would have banned the standard method of abortion after approximately 15 weeks of pregnancy, known as D&E. This lawsuit was filed in 2017 by Whole Woman’s Health — which operates three health clinics in the state of Texas — several Planned Parenthood affiliates, and other Texas abortion providers, represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Morrison & Foerster, and Patrick J. O’Connell. In the decision, Judge James L Dennis wrote, “ unduly burdens a woman’s constitutionally-protected right to obtain a previability abortion,” and that the law “also forces abortion providers to act contrary to their medical judgment and the best interest of their patient by conducting a medical procedure that delivers no benefit to the woman.”Doctors who violate the ban would have faced up to two years in prison. Major medical organizations including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) strongly oppose these types of abortion bans, noting, “These restrictions represent legislative interference at its worst: doctors will be forced, by ill-advised, unscientifically motivated policy, to provide lesser care to patients. This is unacceptable.” Courts have blocked similar bans in Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, and Oklahoma. Last year, the Supreme Court declined to review a lower court decision striking down a D&E ban in Alabama. “Today’s win is an important one for people not only in Texas but across the country,” said Amy Hagstrom Miller, President and CEO of Whole Woman’s Health. “Everyone deserves to benefit from advancements in medicine and from expert medical care, no matter where they live. With this victory, our physicians can continue to practice to the highest level of their training, and Texans will continue to benefit from their expertise. We are proud, once again, to lead the charge challenging bad laws and ensuring that all Texans get the healthcare they deserve.” “Today’s decision puts a stop to Texas’ strategy to ban one abortion procedure after another until it is all but inaccessible,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “Politicians should never decide what medical procedures a patient can and cannot receive. This ruling follows decades of Supreme Court precedent and the Fifth Circuit has joined every other federal court in striking down these types of bans.” ……The decision comes four months after the Supreme Court struck down a medically unnecessary Louisiana law in June Medical Services v. Russo — a case brought by the Center for Reproductive Rights. If that law had been allowed to take effect, it would have closed all but one of the remaining health centers providing abortion in Louisiana. In 2016, the Supreme Court struck down an identical law in Texas that shuttered half the abortion clinics in the state in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt. The Supreme Court ordered the state of Texas to pay $2.3 million in attorney’s fees for that case. “Today’s ruling means that my colleagues and I can continue to provide the highest quality medical care for our patients. The state’s attempt to interfere in private, deeply personal health care decisions by banning the most common method of abortion at this stage of pregnancy would have put patients in danger and punished doctors for using our best medical judgment, training, and expertise,” said Dr. Bhavik Kumar, abortion care provider, Planned Parenthood Center for Choice (serves Houston and southeast Texas). “Unfortunately, extremist politicians’ ongoing attempts to restrict access to abortion — method by method, state by state — until it is completely out of reach are all too familiar to physicians like myself. Thankfully, the court today affirmed what we have always known: that private medical decisions should stay between patients and the doctors they trust with their health care.”Just six months ago, Gov. Greg Abbott and Attorney General Ken Paxton successfully exploited the COVID-19 pandemic to temporarily ban abortion in Texas for approximately one month. While the abortion ban was in effect, patients were forced to travel hundreds of miles to access the care they needed.Since 2011, state politicians have passed more than 480 restrictions on abortion. Texas already has many onerous laws and regulations that make it harder for Texans to access abortion, including state-mandated biased counseling, a two-trip requirement and mandatory 24-hour delay in care, a ban on the use of telemedicine to provide medication abortion, a parental consent and notification law, and many more.This lawsuit challenging Texas’ ban on D&E procedures was filed in 2017 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas on behalf of Whole Woman’s Health, Planned Parenthood Center for Choice, Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas Surgical Health Services, Planned Parenthood South Texas Surgical Center, Alamo Women’s Reproductive Services, Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center, and several individual physicians. The plaintiffs are represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Morrison & Foerster who is serving as pro-bono counsel, and Austin attorney Patrick J. O’Connell. October 13, 2020: Slate posted an article titled: “Amy Coney Barrett Explained Why She Doesn’t Care About Preexisting Conditions”. It was written by Jeremy Stahl. From the article: …On Tuesday, as expected, the Democrats put the matter directly to the nominee. Barrett has expressed disagreement with the court’s reasoning in the 2012 case that upheld the Affordable Care Act, but when asked now, she emphasized that California v. Texas involves a completely different question than the previous decision did. Specifically, she said, the new case is about “severability”—that is, whether, with the act’s insurance mandate now cut down to zero, the rest of the statute can survive on its own or must also be abandoned.By Barrett’s account, this is a narrow legal question. If the question is decided a certain way, 20 million Americans will lose their health coverage and 100 million people will lose their protections for preexisting conditions. Nevertheless, Barrett told the committee that the upcoming case “doesn’t present the issue” of preexisting condition protections.Here, despite her efforts to tell the committee as little as possible about her beliefs, Barrett revealed an enormous amount about her judicial philosophy. In her opening statement on Monday, she told the committee that “courts are not designed to solve every problem or right every wrong in our public life.” Evidently, that meant real-world consequences of the decisions she may make should not be relevant to her, the Senate, or the general public.Here is that revelatory exchange, in which the ranking minority member, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, told a story about a constituent of Wisconsin Sen. Tammy Baldwin’s who, because of a cascade of health care expenses, depended on the ACA’s protections to be able to afford treatment…As you can see, Barrett answered that the case the court would soon be hearing had nothing to do with those protections, as far as she understood it. Here’s the text of the exchange:Feinstein: Jimmy is a 34-year-old and member of the Wisconsin state Legislature. In 2010 a drunk driver hit the family’s car as they were returning home from celebrating Jimmy’s 24th birthday. Jimmy’s mother, father, and little brother were killed in the accident. Jimmy was paralyzed from the waist down. His medical recovery was intense. As Jimmy as has said, “Doctors managed to patch me up with dozens of stitches and multiple surgeries and about a pound of steel in my spine.” But soon after, his insurance company told him he was nearing his lifetime maximums and he would have to pay for the rest of his health care expenses. As Jimmy explains: “With hundreds of thousands of dollars still left to go, I didn’t know what I was going to do. I was scared, I was terrified, I was just a student, I didn’t have that kind of money.” Fortunately, a few days later, the insurance company sent him a different letter. This one informed him that the provisions of the ACA had kicked in, which meant there were no longer lifetime maximums and his care would be covered. In Jimmy’s own words, “I was able to put my life back together and I credit the Affordable Care Act for that.” Judge Barrett, how should the loss of the ACA’s protection against lifetime caps, caps that can be used to end coverage for lifesaving care, factor into a court’s consideration of the validity of the ACA?Barrett: Senator, so far as I know, the case next doesn’t present that issue. It’s not a challenge to preexisting conditions coverage or to the lifetime maximum relief remote cap.This is a technical distinction so fine as to cross over into dishonesty. Barrett professes not to see how, if she made a ruling in a case that would strip away protections from people with preexisting conditions, that case would be a challenge to those protections. The people would only be losing their protections incidentally as she decided the completely different question of severability.Later, Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy asked a series of questions about whether Barrett had any awareness of how many people would lose protections if she were to rule against the ACA after being elevated to the Supreme Court. She responded that she had no clue.And here’s the text of the exchange:Leahy: Do you know how many Americans have obtained insurance through the Affordable Care Act?Barrett: I do not.Leahy: It’s more than 20 million. And do you know how many children under the age of 26 are able to stay on their parents’ insurance because of the Affordable Care Act?Barrett: I do not.Leahy: It’s 2.3 million. And do you know how many Americans are covered under the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion?Barrett: I do not.Leahy: It’s a little more than 15 million. … If the Republicans are successful in what they’re trying to do on Nov. 10, then Alex and actually 60,600 other Vermonters enrolled in Medicaid expansion are going to be left behind. And if you contract COVID-19, that’s seen as a preexisting condition. Do you know approximately how many million Americans have tested positive for the coronavirus and survived?Barrett: I do not.Leahy: It’s more than 7,700,000. Those are people now considered to have a preexisting condition. And one of the most common preexisting conditions is diabetes. The CDC estimated about 1 in 10 Americans has diabetes. The ACA’s Medicaid expansion is the single most important factor for expanding access to affordable insulin. Leslie is a Vermonter diagnosed with diabetes at the age of 25. For years she has depended on Medicaid to keep her alive and out of bankruptcy. … Do you have an idea how much her insulin would increase?Barrett: No, I do not.Leahy: I wouldn’t expect you to. There’s no reason you should. Leslie’s cost would more than triple—go up to $11,215 a year.Barrett doesn’t need to know the cost of insulin; she doesn’t need to know how many people in this country have COVID-19; she doesn’t need to know how many millions of Americans are covered under Medicaid expansion or under the Affordable Care Act as a whole. It’s not the courts’ job to “right every wrong,” even if those wrongs are directly caused by the decision the court would make… October 13, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Continues Fight to Stop Trump Administration Dangerous “Healthcare Refusal Rule”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today filed a brief in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals continuing the fight against the Trump Administration’s unconstitutional and illegal “Healthcare Refusal Rule.” The broad, unfettered Rule jeopardizes the health and safety of Californians by allowing anyone remotely involved in a healthcare transaction—from doctors to ambulance drivers or front office staff— to deny care. This exemption would open the door to discrimination, particularly against women, LGBTQ individuals, people of color, individuals in rural and low-income communities, and endanger the timely delivery of critical lifesaving care. In the brief, Attorney General Becerra reasserts that the Rule violates the U.S. Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act, arguing that the District Court was correct to vacate the rule in its entirety. “In the midst of a devastating pandemic, the Trump Administration continues to heartlessly attack Americans’ access to lifesaving healthcare by allowing a blank check for discrimination which will leave our communities vulnerable to loss of care or stigmatized for receiving basic care,” said Attorney General Becerra. “The Healthcare Refusal Rule dangerously and unlawfully throws open the doors to discrimination, going so far as to allow an EMT worker to leave a woman to bleed out by the side of the road. It’s unconscionable that the government would push this heartless rule. California will continue fighting for the right to healthcare and to ensure that this illegal rule will never take effect.”The Trump Administration’s rule vastly and illegally expands federal law and coerces state compliance by threatening federal funding. For California, nearly half a trillion dollars of federal funding is at stake. The State of California has laws and regulations to protect access to healthcare while respecting “conscience” objections, in accordance with numerous existing federal conscience provisions. However, the Healthcare Refusal Rule issued by the Trump Administration’s U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) goes far beyond existing provisions, creating a broad exemption that risks access to care. The new rule would allow anyone remotely involved in a healthcare transaction – from front desk staff to emergency personnel to private entities – to object not just for religious reasons, but for “moral, ethical, or other” reasons as well.In the brief, the attorney general asserts that the Rule would compromise patient access to care, and encourage discrimination against vulnerable patient populations, including women, people of color, LGBTQ individuals, and rural and low-income communities. The Rule would also have devastating impacts on patients and employers: the rule does not require any notice be given to patients who are refused care, and it provides no guidance for employers who must navigate how to accommodate these refusals. Furthermore, the Rule contains no exception for patients who need emergency care, thus threatening serious, potentially irreversible, harm to those in need of life-sustaining care. HHS’ counsel has even conceded that the Rule would permit an ambulance driver to cease driving in the middle of Central Park “en route to hospital…upon learning that the patient sought emergency care for ectopic pregnancy,” and that an employer’s failure to accommodate that ambulance driver could “result in a loss of federal funding.” These harsh outcomes not only conflict with federal law, but would greatly undermine California’s longstanding efforts to ensure access to emergency care for its residents.Attorney General Becerra also argues that the Rule violates the Administrative Procedure Act and the U.S. Constitution’s Spending Clause by threatening federal funding for California’s programs that provide crucial health, education, and labor services, including: $63 billion for healthcare services such as Medi-Cal;$1.5 billion for public health initiatives including emergency preparedness and vaccination programs;$6 billion for in-home supportive services;$2.5 billion for child welfare and refugee assistance$3.8 billion for educational programs, including child care and state preschool programs, migrant education, adult education, education for homeless children, special education, and vocational education; and$900 million for providing short-term income to unemployed individuals, funding local workforce development, and providing services to job seekers and employers… …Attorney General Becerra filed today’s brief alongside Santa Clara County, the City and County of San Francisco, Trust Women Seattle, Los Angeles LGBT Center, Whitman-Walker Clinic, Inc., Bradbury Sullivan LGBT Community Center, Center on Halsted, Hartford Gyn Center, Mazzoni Center, Medical Students For Choice, The Association of LGBT+ Psychiatrists, American Association of Physicians For Human Rights: Health Professionals Advancing LGBT Equality, and individual plaintiffs. A copy of the brief can be found here October 13, 2020: Former Vice President Joe Biden (Democrat) tweeted: “Donald Trump has been trying to throw out Obamacare for years. And now he sees an opportunity to finally get it done, all while ignoring the will of the people. We can’t let him.” October 14, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Federal Court Strikes Down Tennessee’s Forced Waiting Period for Abortions”. From the press release: Today, a federal district court struck down a Tennessee law that forced patients to wait at least 48 hours before they can access abortion services, after receiving in-person, state-mandated counseling written by anti-abortion politicians. The law had been in effect since 2015. Roughly half of the states in the U.S. have similar forced waiting period laws on the books. The case was brought by reproductive health care providers in the state, represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, Barrett Johnston Martin & Garrison, LLC, and Jessee & Jessee. In the decision, Judge Bernard Friedman wrote, “Defendants’ suggestion that women are overly emotional and must be required to cool off or calm down before having a medical procedure they have decided they want to have, and that they are constitutionally entitled to have, is highly insulting and paternalistic – and all the more so given that no such waiting periods apply to men.” He went on to write, “It is apparent that this waiting period unduly burdens women’s right to an abortion and is an affront to their ‘dignity and autonomy,’ ‘personhood’ and ‘destiny,’ and ‘conception of . . . place in society.’” ……This decision comes four months after the Supreme Court struck down a medically unnecessary Louisiana law in June Medical Services v. Russo. If that law had been allowed to take effect, it would have closed all but one abortion clinic in Louisiana. The Center is challenging waiting period measures in Arizona, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Oklahoma. PPFA, the ACLU, and the Center are also challenging a waiting period measure in North Carolina. These laws have particularly harsh consequences for those who already face systemic barriers to comprehensive reproductive health care, including individuals with low incomes, people of color, people living in rural areas, and individuals in abusive relationships, which are compounded by the mandatory delay and two-trip requirement. At trial in September 2019, Tennessee abortion providers testified that most patients are waiting much longer than 48 hours. The providers also testified that after this waiting period took effect in 2015, they saw a decrease in the number of patients with low incomes obtaining abortions at their facilities and a rise in the number of patients obtaining procedures later in pregnancy. Tennessee has one of the highest poverty rates in America, with poverty disproportionately impacting women, especially those who already have children. Delays in accessing abortion increase the costs associated with the procedure, and although abortion is extremely safe throughout pregnancy, the medical risks increase as pregnancy progresses. Major medical associations denounce these restrictions, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) states these laws “marginalize abortion services from routine clinical care and are harmful to women’s health.” In addition to the mandatory delay, Tennessee laws impose other barriers on abortion access, including limits on when state and public insurance can cover abortion services, a ban on the use of telemedicine to administer medication abortion, and a requirement that minor patients obtain parental consent. The Center and PPFA are currently challenging a series of abortion bans passed earlier this year in Tennessee and a law that forces doctors to tell their patients false information about medication abortion. Both laws are currently blocked. October 14, 2020: Senator Tammy Baldwin (Democrat – Wisconsin) tweeted: “Republicans in Congress tried repeatedly & failed to repeal the #ACA in Congress. So Trump’s Justice Department is asking the Supreme Court to overturn the health care law completely, including protections for people with pre-existing conditions #WhatsAtStake”. October 14, 2020: Lambda Legal posted a press release titled: “Advocates Urge Federal Court to Affirm Ruling Striking Down Trump Administration Denial of Care Rule”. From the press release: Today, Lambda Legal, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and the County of Santa Clara filed an answering brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit urging the court to affirm a lower court ruling striking down the Denial of Care Rule proposed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).In that earlier ruling issued in November, 2019, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California Judge William H. Alsup found the proposed Denial of Care Rule “saturated with error,” and struck the rule down in its entirety. Judge Alsup became the third judge in rapid succession last November to vacate the rule, joining judges for the Eastern District of Washington and Southern District of New York.“There is no rationale for breathing life into a rule Judge Alsup found ‘so saturated with error’ that he could find literally no aspect of it that passed constitutional muster,” said Camilla Taylor, Director of Constitutional Litigation, Lambda Legal. “Three separate federal judges last November recognized the Denial of Care Rule for what it is, an egregious and unconstitutional attack on women, LGBTQ people and other vulnerable populations. It deserved to be relegated to the dustbin of history, and it deserves to stay there.” The Denial of Care Rule, which was issued in May, 2019, by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, invited any health care worker – including doctors, nurses, EMTs, administrators, janitors and clerical staff – to deny medical treatment, information and services to patients because of personal religious or moral beliefs. Health care facilities risked losing essential federal funding if they did not grant employees carte blanche to deny services. Because the rule was confusing and infeasible to implement, many health care facilities would likely have been forced to eliminate services such as reproductive and LGBTQ care, leaving millions across the United States without access to critical health care.On November 6, 2019, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York issued a ruling in State of New York v. HHS completely vacating the Denial of Care Rule. The next day, November 8, 2019, Judge Stanley Bastian of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington ruled from the bench in State of Washington v. Azar, agreeing with the ruling out of New York. Judge Alsup’s ruling in three cases combined for argument – County of Santa Clara v. HHS, City and County of San Francisco v. Azar, and State of California v. Azar – issued on November 19, 2019.In addition to the County of Santa Clara, which runs an extensive health and hospital system that serves as a safety-net provider for the county’s 1.9 million residents, the plaintiffs in County of Santa Clara v. HHS include: the health providers Bradbury-Sullivan LGBT Community Center in Allentown, Pa.; Center on Halsted in Chicago; Hartford GYN in Connecticut; Los Angeles LGBT Center; Mazzoni Center in Philadelphia, and Whitman-Walker Health in Washington, D.C.; the associations AGLP, GLMA, and Medical Students for Choice; and five doctors. Read today’s filing here. In addition to the three cases combined in County of Santa Clara v. HHS, the Ninth Circuit has also added State of Washington v. Azar for purposes of the appeal. October 14, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Texas Ban on Standard Abortion Procedure Struck Down by Federal Appeals Court”. From the press release: In a victory for Texans, the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals today struck down a Texas measure that would have banned the standard method of abortion after approximately 15 weeks of pregnancy, known as D&E. This lawsuit was filed in 2017 by Whole Woman’s Health — which operates three health clinics in the state of Texas — several Planned Parenthood affiliates, and other Texas abortion providers, represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Morrison & Foerster, and Patrick J. O’Connell.In the decision, Judge James L Dennis wrote, “ unduly burdens a woman’s constitutionally-protected right to obtain a previability abortion,” and that the law “also forces abortion providers to act contrary to their medical judgment and the best interest of their patient by conducting a medical procedure that delivers no benefit to the woman.”Doctors who violate the ban would have faced up to two years in prison. Major medical organizations including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) strongly oppose these types of abortion bans, noting, “These restrictions represent legislative interference at its worst: doctors will be forced, by ill-advised, unscientifically motivated policy, to provide lesser care to patients. This is unacceptable.” Courts have blocked similar bans in Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, and Oklahoma. Last year, the Supreme Court declined to review a lower court decision striking down a D&E ban in Alabama……The decision comes four months after the Supreme Court struck down a medically unnecessary Louisiana law in June Medical Services v. Russo — a case brought by the Center for Reproductive Rights. If that law had been allowed to take effect, it would have closed all but one of the remaining health centers providing abortion in Louisiana. In 2016, the Supreme Court struck down an identical law in Texas that shuttered half the abortion clinics in the state in Whole Woman’s Health v.Hellerstedt. The Supreme Court ordered the state of Texas to pay $2.3 million in attorney’s fees for that case. Just six months ago, Gov. Greg Abbott and Attorney General Ken Paxton successfully exploited the COVID-19 pandemic to temporarily ban abortion in Texas for approximately one month. While the abortion ban was in effect, patients were forced to travel hundreds of miles to access the care they needed.Since 2011, state politicians have passed more than 480 restrictions on abortion. Texas already has many onerous laws and regulations that make it harder for Texans to access abortion, including state-mandated biased counseling, a two-trip requirement and mandatory 24-hour delay in care, a ban on the use of telemedicine to provide medication abortion, a parental consent and notification law, and many more.This lawsuit challenging Texas’ ban on D&E procedures was filed in 2017 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas on behalf of Whole Woman’s Health, Planned Parenthood Center for Choice, Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas Surgical Health Services, Planned Parenthood South Texas Surgical Center, Alamo Women’s Reproductive Services, Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center, and several individual physicians. The plaintiffs are represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Morrison & Foerster who is serving as pro-bono counsel, and Austin attorney Patrick J. O’Connell. October 14, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Joins Coalition in Fight Against Pharmaceutical Company AbbVie Inc.’s Anticompetetive Practices”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra yesterday joined a coalition of 20 state attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit to address significant issues of antitrust and anticompetitive pharmaceutical agreements involving AbbVie Inc.’s drug, Humira. AbbVie employed numerous strategies to prevent any competition to Humira, including entering into multiple anticompetitive agreements with rival drug companies that allowed AbbVie to raise the price of Humira and limit options for patients. Humira is used to treat inflammation that leads to autoimmune diseases such as Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis and plaque psoriasis.“California residents spend billions of dollars on prescription drugs like Humira,” said Attorney General Becerra. “When companies like AbbVie are allowed to monopolize the market and hike up the price of these drugs, they put the lives of Californians at risk. During a global pandemic when people have more to worry about than ever, they shouldn’t also have to worry about whether they can afford their prescription medication. My office will continue to tackle these dangerous, collusive pay-for-delay agreements head on.”Humira is the world’s largest selling drug, generating sales of some $20 billion a year and costing approximately $39,000 per year for treatment. AbbVie’s anticompetitive agreements, known as pay-for-delay agreements, allowed rival companies to compete against Humira outside the United States in 2018. But the agreements required the rival companies to delay the introduction in the U.S. of a competitive counterpart to Humira until 2023. With these pay-for-delay agreements, AbbVie could freely raise the price of Humira in the U.S. by 6.2 percent in 2019 followed by a 7.4 percent increase this year. While Humira prices are increasing in the U.S., they are decreasing in Europe where there is competition. Humira’s sky-high price tag and its scheme to protect the inflated Humira price hurts employers, patients, insurers and the government, who all shoulder the burden of those inflated prices. In California, Assembly Bill 824, which went into effect on January 1, 2020, gives the Attorney General a stronger platform to investigate and prosecute these illegal and harmful drug pricing practices.In the brief, the coalition argues: The District Court misapplied the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in FTC v. Actavis, Inc. (Actavis) to AbbVie’s agreements with its competitors. In Actavis, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Federal Trade Commission could challenge pay-for-delay agreements under federal antitrust law. The attorneys general argue the lower court decision effectively resurrects the very antitrust immunity that the U.S. Supreme Court specifically rejected in FTC v. Actavis. They assert that the lower court’s approach will embolden other pharmaceutical companies to fashion illegal settlements to creatively evade scrutiny.The Appeals Court should follow the majority of the Courts of Appeal and apply the California Motor Transport rule to serial sham petitioning. Four U.S. Courts of Appeals have reached this conclusion, and in cases alleging serial sham petitioning, the court is presented with more information and is therefore better equipped to assess whether AbbVie misused the government process to curtail competition… …In yesterday’s filing, Attorney General Becerra joined the attorneys general of Washington, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Virginia, and Wisconsin. A copy of the brief is available here. October 14, 2020: The Texas Tribune posted an article titled: “New Texas rule lets social workers turn away clients who are LGBTQ or have a disability”. It was written by Edgar Walters. From the article: Texas social workers are criticizing a state regulatory board’s decision this week to remove protections for LGBTQ clients and clients with disabilities who seek social work services.The Texas State Board of Social Work Examiners voted unanimously Monday to change a section of its code of conduct that establishes when a social worker may refuse to serve someone. The code will no longer prohibit social workers from turning away clients on the basis of disability, sexual orientation or gender identity.Gov. Greg Abbott’s office recommended the change, board members said, because the code’s nondiscrimination protections went beyond protections laid out in the state law that governs how and when the state may discipline social workers……The nondiscrimination policy change drew immediate criticism from a professional association. Will Francis, executive director of the Texas chapter of the National Association of Social Workers, called it “incredibly disheartening.”He also criticized board members for removing the nondiscrimination protections without input from the social workers they license and oversee……The Republican-led Texas Legislature has long opposed expanding nondiscrimination protections to LGBTQ Texans in employment, housing and other areas of state law.Alice Bradford, the board’s executive director, said she received an email from the governor’s staff recommending the change Friday, three days before the board’s Monday vote.The vote happened during a joint online meeting of the social work board and the Texas Behavioral Health Executive Council, which oversees a host of regulatory agencies for professions related to mental health……The social work board’s ban on discriminating against clients based on sexual orientation was approved in 2010, Francis said, and gender identity and expression protections were added in 2012.The board fielded comments from the public after it had already changed the rule. Austin social worker Tracy Abzug told board members that “it’s actually quite disturbing to me that the Texas State Board of Social Work Examiners has agreed today to lower our standards as it relates to discrimination towards sexual orientation and gender identity.”… October 14, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Federal Court Strikes Down Tennessee’s Forced Waiting Period for Abortions”. From the press release: Today, a federal district court struck down a Tennessee law that forced patients to wait at least 48 hours before they can access abortion services, after receiving in-person, state-mandated counseling written by anti-abortion politicians. The law had been in effect since 2015. Roughly half of the states in the U.S. have similar forced waiting period laws on the books. The case was brought by reproductive health care providers in the state, represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, Barrett Johnston Martin & Garrison, LLC, and Jessee & Jessee.In the decision, Judge Bernard Friedman wrote, “Defendants’ suggestion that women are overly emotional and must be required to cool off or calm down before having a medical procedure they have decided they want to have, and that they are constitutionally entitled to have, is highly insulting and paternalistic – and all the more so given that no such waiting periods apply to men.” He went on to write, “It is apparent that this waiting period unduly burdens women’s right to an abortion and is an affront to their ‘dignity and autonomy,’ ‘personhood’ and ‘destiny,’ and ‘conception of . . . place in society.’”“We hope today’s decision serves as a wake-up call to lawmakers trying to interfere with patients’ personal medical decisions,” said Autumn Katz, Senior Counsel at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “Patients do not need politicians to dictate their decision-making process. Patients should be trusted to make decisions about their own families and health care. This law is demeaning and actually harms patients by imposing unnecessary costs and pushing abortion later in pregnancy.” “We are so glad that we can now schedule our patients for care in a manner that centers their needs, not the political vagaries of our state government,” said Rebecca Terrell, executive director of CHOICES Memphis Center for Reproductive Health.“Today’s decision is a win for patients who deserve to be trusted, free of shame and stigma, to make the best health care decisions for themselves and their families. With 17 abortion-related cases one step away from the Supreme Court — including one from Tennessee banning abortion at nearly every stage of pregnancy — it’s clear that the right to access safe, legal abortion is under attack like never before,” said Ashley Coffield, President & CEO, Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi. “So many patients in our region regularly face barriers to care due to a lack of nearby health centers and systemic inequities that make it harder for people with low incomes and people of color to access care. Intrusive, unnecessary, and medically dangerous restrictions like the 48-hour waiting period only make it harder to access basic health care. At Planned Parenthood, we empower people with the information and the care they need to decide the course of their own lives. We will continue to defend their right to bodily autonomy, against any politician or bill that threatens it, no matter what.”This decision comes four months after the Supreme Court struck down a medically unnecessary Louisiana law in June Medical Services v. Russo. If that law had been allowed to take effect, it would have closed all but one abortion clinic in Louisiana.The Center is challenging waiting period measures in Arizona, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Oklahoma. PPFA, the ACLU, and the Center are also challenging a waiting period measure in North Carolina.These laws have particularly harsh consequences for those who already face systemic barriers to comprehensive reproductive health care, including individuals with low incomes, people of color, people living in rural areas, and individuals in abusive relationships, which are compounded by the mandatory delay and two-trip requirement. At trial in September 2019, Tennessee abortion providers testified that most patients are waiting much longer than 48 hours. The providers also testified that after this waiting period took effect in 2015, they saw a decrease in the number of patients with low incomes obtaining abortions at their facilities and a rise in the number of patients obtaining procedures later in pregnancy. Tennessee has one of the highest poverty rates in America, with poverty disproportionately impacting women, especially those who already have children.Delays in accessing abortion increase the costs associated with the procedure, and although abortion is extremely safe throughout pregnancy, the medical risks increase as pregnancy progresses. Major medical associations denounce these restrictions, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) states these laws “marginalize abortion services from routine clinical care and are harmful to women’s health.”In addition to the mandatory delay, Tennessee laws impose other barriers on abortion access, including limits on when state and public insurance can cover abortion services, a ban on the use of telemedicine to administer medication abortion, and a requirement that minor patients obtain parental consent. The Center and PPFA are currently challenging a series of abortion bans passed earlier this year in Tennessee and a law that forces doctors to tell their patients false information about medication abortion. Both laws are currently blocked. October 14, 2020: Lambda Legal posted a press release titled: “Advocates Urge Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to Affirm Ruling Striking Down Trump Administration Denial of Care Rule”. From the press release: Today, Lambda Legal, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and the County of Santa Clara filed an answering brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit urging the court to affirm a lower court ruling striking down the Denial of Care Rule proposed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).In the earlier ruling, issued in November, 2019, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California Judge William H. Alsup found the proposed Denial of Care Rule “saturated with error,” and struck the rule down in its entirety. Judge Alsup became the third judge in rapid succession last November to vacate the rule, joining judges for the Eastern District of Washington and Southern District of New York……The Denial of Care Rule, which was issued in May, 2019, by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, invited any health care worker – including doctors, nurses, EMT’s, administrtators, janitors and clerical staff – to deny medical treatment, information and services to patients because of personal religious or moral beliefs. Health care facilities risked losing essential federal funding if they did not grant employees carte blanche to deny services. Because the rule was confusing and infeasible to implement, many health care facilities would likely have been forced to eliminate services such as reproductive and LGBTQ care, leaving millions across the United States without critical access to care.On November 6, 2019, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York issued a ruling in State of New York issued a ruling in State of New York v. HHS completely vacating the Denial of Care Rule. The next day, November 8, 2019, Judge Stanley Bastian of the U.S District Court for the Eastern District of Washington ruled from the bench in State of Washington v. Azar, agreeing with the ruling out of New York. Judge Alsup’s ruling in three cases combined for argument – County of Santa Clara v HHS, City and County of San Francisco v. Azar, and State of California v. Azar – issued on November 19, 2019.In addition to the County of Santa Clara, which runs an extensive health and hospital system that serves as a safety-net provider for the county’s 1.9 million residents, the plaintiffs in County of Santa Clara v. HHS include: the health providers Bradbury-Sullivan LGBT Community Center in Allentown, Pa.; Center on Halsted in Chicago; Hartford GYN in Connecticut; Los Angeles LGBT Center; Mazzoni Center in Philadelphia, and Whitman-Walker Health in Washington, D.C.; the associations AGLP, GLMA, and Medical Students for Choice; and five doctors. Read today’s filing here. In addition to the three cases combined in County of Santa Clara v. HHS, the Ninth Circuit has also added State of Washington v. Azar for purposes of the appeal.More information about County of Santa Clara v. HHS is available here October 15, 2020: Senator Jack Reed (Democrat – Rhode Island) tweeted: “Having #healthinsurance can be the difference between life & death. The Trump Admin is suing in federal court to get #SCOTUS to strike down the #ACA & eliminate critical health protections for millions of Americans. We must #ProtectOurCare. The best way to do that is to vote.” October 15, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Center’s Legal Analysis Outlines Judge Barrett’s Extreme Record on Reproductive Rights”. From the press release: …The Center for Reproductive Rights has issued an analysis of the judicial rulings, writings and public advocacy of Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump’s nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Based on the analysis, the Center concludes that Judge Barrett “stands all too ready, if not eager, to undermine women’s basic liberty rights”—including the right to abortion. Based on these findings, the Center opposes Judge Barrett’s confirmation.The Center conducted an extensive review of Judge Barrett’s judicial rulings during her three years as an Appellate Court judge, her academic writings and speeches as a law professor at Notre Dame Law School, and her public statements and advocacy. Those records, according to a recent statement issued by the Center, show that “Judge Barrett has the most extreme record in opposition to reproductive rights of any Supreme Court nominee since the rejected nomination of Judge Robert Bork over 30 years ago.“ Highlights of the Center’s analysis include: On the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Judge Barrett ruled against abortion rights both times the issue was before her. In those cases, she joined opinions that suggest upending Supreme Court law on both the substantive right to abortion and the procedural safeguards that allow the right to be vindicated in court.In the first case, Planned Parenthood v. Indiana Department of Health, in 2018, the opinion suggested that the government can ban abortion based on a woman’s reason for having one.In the second case, in 2019, Planned Parenthood v Adams (later Box), the opinion questioned long-standing precedent that abortion providers may challenge restrictive laws before they go into effect.Judge Barrett subscribes to a judicial philosophy of originalism that rejects constitutional protections for abortion rights. Her writings make it clear that she does not view Roe v. Wade as a “super precedent” and she has suggested that if confronted with a conflict between precedent and her interpretation of the Constitution, she would side with the latter and overturn precedent – endangering settled law on abortion rights.She has publicly advocated to end Roe v. Wade and defends “the right to life from fertilization,” an extreme legal position that has implications for contraception, abortion care and fertility treatments. The stakes of this nomination could not be higher. The next Supreme Court justice will hear cases impacting people’s lives for generations to come – not only on issues of reproductive rights, but on access to health care, voting rights, LGBTQ rights, and disability rights. On abortion rights alone, more than a dozen cases are in the Supreme Court pipeline – some test cases to overturn Roe v. Wade or to chip away at Roe’s protections to make them meaningless.The Supreme Court’s vital role in protecting and upholding civil rights and liberties cannot be compromised by a nominee fundamentally hostile to our constitutional rights. The Center for Reproductive Rights opposes the confirmation of Judge Amy Coney Barrett – and urges all supporters of reproductive rights to tell their Senators to vote no on her confirmation. October 15, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Takes Action to Ensure Californians Have Access to Mental Health Care”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today urged California’s four largest health insurance providers: Anthem Blue Cross, Blue Shield of California, Health Net of California, and Kaiser Permanente, to demonstrate their compliance with state and federal mental health parity laws. In letters addressed to each of the managed care insurance companies, the Attorney General requested information that would help determine if they are providing coverage for mental health benefits and services without putting limitations or conditions on the coverage that are more restrictive than permitted by the law. Equal treatment for mental health conditions in insurance plans is mandated by state and federal laws, including the California Mental Health Parity Act, the federal Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008, and the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The plans have until November 16, 2020, to voluntarily comply with the information request.“One out of every six Californians experiences some type of mental illness, which is why it is important to ensure our mental health laws are being followed,” said Attorney General Becerra. “It is the job, mandated by the law, of health insurance providers to make access to care for mental health conditions as accessible as care for a medical illness. Now, when people are seeing their mental health worsen as they navigate the COVID-19 pandemic, is a critical time to ensure those who need it have access to care.”Despite multiple laws, including the California Mental Health Parity Act and the ACA, which expanded access to mental health treatment across the country, many Californians still struggle to find appropriate mental health treatment. Many Californians with insurance are also exponentially more likely to go out of network for mental health treatment than for medical services. According to a survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation/California Health Care Foundation, two-thirds of the individuals surveyed reported that they or one of their family members sought but were unable to locate mental health services.In order to investigate mental healthcare coverage, the Attorney General requested documents and information that would ensure Anthem Blue Cross, Blue Shield of California, Health Net of California, and Kaiser Permanente are following mental health parity laws. A copy of the letter to Anthem Blue Cross is available here.A copy of the letter to Blue Shield of California is available here.A copy of the letter to Health Net of California is available here.A copy of the letter to Kaiser Permanente is available here. October 15, 2020: National Organization for Women (NOW) posted a press release titled: “Women Won’t Tolerate Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham’s Trickery”. From the press release: The Senate Judiciary Committee wasn’t even finished hearing testimony on the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court when Lindsey Graham railroaded her onto the agenda for a final confirmation vote. He knows that he has no time to spare to make his goal of a final Senate floor vote just days before the election. Amy Coney Barrett couldn’t be a more dangerous choice for women, families, and the future of our democratic freedoms. Her record speaks for itself and shows that she is not someone who will work on behalf of the American people. In fact, she has consistently proven she will not hesitate to suppress our civil rights and freedoms. She has been outspoken in her opposition to the Affordable Care Act and called for the “barbaric legacy” of Roe to end. She took thousands of dollars from a group that was designated an anti-LGBTQIA+ hate group and affirmed a ruling that allowed a company to segregate its employees by race. Judge Barrett repeatedly ruled against the rights of immigrants, said Title IX protections do not extend to transgender Americans, and wrote that Supreme Court justices should not follow precedent with which they disagree. Graham and McConnell know that if Donald Trump loses the election, and the Republicans lose their Senate majority, they will face tough questions from their constituents that they cannot answer. Why have they enabled Trump to divert the work of the Senate away from the urgency of Covid relief for so long? Why should a lame-duck Senate be allowed to radically redefine the Supreme Court? Why are they hijacking the Senate agenda in the middle of a global pandemic to seat Amy Coney Barrett on the Supreme Court—where she can enshrine their opposition to abortion rights, equal pay, paid leave, affordable health care, voting rights, consumer protections, and other progressive policies for generations to come? We know the answer. It’s because they want to hijack democracy and steal another Supreme Court seat for Donald Trump. They don’t want to be held accountable for any of their actions or take the time to listen to what the overwhelming majority of this country has to say. But as Kamala Harris would say, “we’re speaking.” We’re speaking up for democracy, equality, and justice. NOW calls on Democrats in the Senate to do everything they can to stop this vote from coming to the floor this month. We will be turning our words into action with our votes—and the Senate must deal with the consequences. October 16, 2020: Former Vice President Joe Biden tweeted: “We need a president who will expand access to health care – not one who does everything he can to tear it away.” October 16, 2020: The Kansas City Star posted an article titled: “KC hospitals ‘bursting at the seams” with record numbers of COVID-19 patients”. It was written by Anna Spoerre. From the article: Some Kansas City area hospitals, facing their biggest influx of coronavirus patients since the pandemic began, are refusing ambulances because their beds are already filled, according to a leading doctor at St. Luke’s Health System.On Wednesday night, eight metro hospitals and emergency departments reported such high volumes of patients that they temporarily stopped accepting ambulances, Marc Larsen, Operations Director of Saint Luke’s COVID Response Team, said in a phone interview Thursday.Two of the eight were part of the St. Luke’s system, according hospital spokesperson, who did not identify the other medical centers.As of 1 p.m. Thursday, five were still diverting ambulances for all who weren’t in most critical need, such as stroke, heart attack and trauma patients, Larsen said. When this happens, alternative care areas accept the patients instead.“We’re bursting at the seams in the metropolitan area, and really across the state and the region,” said Larsen, who is also an emergency physician.The worsening conditions in Kansas City come as Missouri reports record hospitalizations and rural Kansas hospitals say they are under pressure.On Wednesday, Ascension Via Christi Hospital in Pittsburg, Kansas, put out a statement saying they are pausing elective and non-emergent procedures because of capacity concerns.In western Kansas, about 300 miles west of Kansas City, more than 50 employees at the Gove County Medical Center have been infected with the virus, the hospital said in a statement Tuesday. At least 25 staff members have recovered and two are hospitalized.In Kansas City, the St. Luke’s Health System hit a record number of COVID-19 patients — more than 100 — on Tuesday, more than double their August average. They had 90 coronavirus patients across their hospitals as of Thursday afternoon.The situation has worsened over the course of the year. In May and June, the hospital system averaged 15 patients a day. In July and August it was 50. In September, 63. In the first 14 days of October, Larsen said, St. Luke’s averaged 85 patients a day.The worsening conditions in Kansas City come as Missouri reports record hospitalizations and rural Kansas hospitals say they are under pressure.On Wednesday, Ascension Via Christi Hospital in Pittsburg, Kansas, put out a statement saying they are pausing elective and non-emergent procedures because of capacity concerns.Through this growth, the volume of sickest patients remains high, he added. As of Thursday, 25 of the 90 patients with coronavirus were in the intensive care unit.Some pre-operation and recovery rooms are being transformed into ICUs, Larsen said.“All of the systems across the metropolitan area are continually struggling with having adequate capacity for the surge that we are continually seeing and experiencing,” Larsen said.He pointed to New York City, Louisiana and Texas as examples of what can happen when hospital systems reach capacity.“I worry that if we don’t start taking this seriously as a metropolitan area, we’re going to be the next New York,” he said. “We’re going to be the next hot spot, because though we have a lot of hospitals, we have a lot of capacity in the area, we are filling up fast.”Larsen noted that flu season, when hospitals are often taxed with more patients, is not yet in full swing. He said it was the important that people get a flu shot this year… October 16, 2020: Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) posted information titled: “KFF Health Tracking Poll – October 2020: The Future of the ACA and Biden’s Advantage On Health Care”. From the information: Key Findings The confirmation hearings for Judge Barrett, President Trump’s appointment to fill the Supreme Court seat previously held by Justice Ginsburg, are underway this week and the future of the ACA’s protections for people with pre-existing conditions have been front-and-center. The latest KFF Health Tracking Poll finds a large majority of the public – including majorities of Democrats (91%), independents (81%), and Republicans (66%), now say they do not want to see the Supreme Court overturn the ACA’s pre-existing condition protections. The share who do not want to see these protections overturned has increased by double digits from one year ago for each group.Six in ten adults say they do not want to see the Supreme Court overturn the entire ACA, up 10 percentage points from one year ago. This includes majorities of both Democrats (89%) and independents (66%), but three-fourths of Republicans still want to see the entire law overturned. Overall views of the Affordable Care Act are slightly more positive this month, with 55% of the public saying they view the law favorably. This ties its highest favorability measured in ten years of KFF polling (tied with February 2020).Vice President Biden has the advantage over President Trump on all health policy issues included in the survey including at least a 20 percentage point advantage on who voters think has the better approach (Biden or Trump) to make decisions about women’s reproductive health choices and services, including abortion, family planning, and contraception (57% v. 34%), determining the future of the ACA (57% v. 37%), and maintaining protections for people with pre-existing health conditions (56% v. 36%). He also holds an advantage on surprise medical bills, the coronavirus outbreak and distribution of a vaccine, and lowering health care costs for individuals.While both presidential candidates say they have plans to ensure pre-existing condition protections, most Democrats and independent say they do not think President Trump has a plan to maintain such protections. Slightly more than half (53%) including majorities of Democrats (90%) and independents (57%) say they “do not think President Trump has a plan to maintain protections for people with pre-existing health conditions.” On the other hand, a large majority of Republicans (85%) say President Trump “has a plan” to maintain these protections afforded by the ACA. The Affordable Care Act and the Supreme CourtThis week marked the beginning of the U.S. Senate’s confirmation hearings for President Trump’s appointment to fill the seat held by the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. One of the major focuses of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s hearings for Judge Amy Coney Barrett has been her views of the constitutionality of the 2010 Affordable Care Act (ACA). The Court is set to hear oral arguments for California v. Texas, a case backed by the Trump administration challenging the future of the law, on November 10th.Eight in ten adults (79%) say they do not want to see the Supreme Court overturn the protections for people with pre-existing conditions established by the Affordable Care Act and a majority of U.S. adults (58%) also say they do not want to see the Supreme Court overturn the entire 2010 law. Majorities of Republicans (66%), independents (81%), and nine in ten Democrats (91%) say they do not want to see the Supreme Court overturn the pre-existing condition protections in the ACA. Nine in ten Democrats (89%) and two-thirds of independent (66%) also say they do not want to see the Supreme Court overturn the entire law while three-fourths of Republicans (76%) say they would like to see the entire law overturned……The ACA’s protections for people with pre-existing medical conditions has been a dominant issue in the 2020 presidential campaign since the passing of Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg and larger shares of the public now saying they do not want to see these protections overturned (up 17 percentage points from last November). A majority of Republicans now say they do not want to see the pre-existing condition protections overturned (up 19 points from last year), and while majorities of Democrats and independents had previously said they did not want to see these protections overturned, the share among these groups has also increased (16 percentage points and 18 points, respectively)……While both presidential candidates say they intend to ensure pre-existing condition protections, most Democrats and independent say they do not think President Trump has a plan to maintain such protections. Slightly more than half (53%) including majorities of Democrats (90%) and independents (57%) say they “do not think President Trump has a plan to maintain protections for people with pre-existing health conditions.” On the other hand, a large majority of Republicans (85%) say President Trump “has a plan” to maintain these protections afforded by the ACA. While President Trump signed an executive order on Sept. 24th saying people with pre-existing conditions should be able to obtain health insurance at an affordable rate, the order does not guarantee coverage if the ACA is overturned… October 16, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America tweeted: “Healthcare is on the line right now. Let that sink in. In the middle of a pandemic, another Trump Justice paves the way to gut the #ACA and take healthcare away from millions of Americans. #WeDissent @OurCourt” October 16, 2020: Senator Maria Cantwell (Democrat – Washington) tweeted: “If the #ACA is struck down, the # of uninsured Washingtonians could double. More than 21 million Americans could lose heath insurance coverage. Taking away health care options during a pandemic that has left millions of Americans out of work is dangerous & unconscionable.” October 16, 2020: Senator Catherine Cortez Mastro (Democrat – Nevada) tweeted: “Republicans in Congress have tried to repeal the #ACA over 70 times. Americans have made it clear that they don’t support repeal. So Republicans have resorted to far-fetched arguments in the courts and jamming through an unfit #SCOTUS nominee to dismantle the law.” October 16, 2020: Senator Tom Udall (Democrat – New Mexico) tweeted: “#SCOTUS will hear a case on the #ACA a week after the election. If Trump’s rushed nominee is on the bench, 130 million Americans – and 834,700 New Mexicans – could lose protections for preexisting conditions. This is #WhatsAtStake.” October 16, 2020: California Governor Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Fights Latest Challenge to California’s Landmark Anti-Pay-for-Delay Law”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra yesterday filed a brief opposing the Association for Accessible Medicine’s (AAM) latest attempt to challenge Assembly Bill 824 (AB 824), the California law that tackles illegal, anticompetitive deals between pharmaceutical companies known as pay-for-delay agreements. These so-called “pay for delay agreements” happen when a brand name drug maker enters an agreement and pays money to a generic company to keep them off the market. This results in fewer choices for patients and higher costs. AAM, a group of generic drug manufacturers, is seeking another preliminary injunction in its second lawsuit challenging the legislation. In July, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in the Attorney General’s favor, rejecting AAM’s initial challenge of AB 824 and preliminary injunction request.“Californians shouldn’t have to pay extra to pad the profits of pharmaceutical companies,” said Attorney General Becerra. “Our state’s anti-pay-for-delay law helps protect families from paying outrageous prices for life-saving medication. AAM already challenged this law before and lost in court. We believe we will be successful against them again.”AB 824 went into effect on January 1, 2020, and became the first law in the country to combat illegal, secretive pay-for-delay agreements. In a pay-for-delay agreement, one drug company pays its competition to delay the research, production, or sale of a competing version of its drug. As a result, pay-for-delay agreements stifle competition and allow pharmaceutical companies to raise the price of medications to often exorbitant amounts, leaving patients with few options and in many cases, the inability to afford their prescriptions.In the brief, Attorney General Becerra argues that as in its previous attempt, AAM does not have standing to challenge AB 824. The Attorney General also argues that AAM’s motion for preliminary injunction should be denied because: AAM is not likely to succeed on the merits;AAM has not demonstrated imminent and irreperable harm; andEnjoining AB 824 would not be in the public interest …A copy of the brief is available here. October 16, 2020: Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) posted information titled: “KFF Health Tracking Poll – October 2020: The Future of the ACA and Biden’s Advantage On Health Care”. It was written by Ashley Kirzinger, Lunna Lopes, Audrey Kearney, and Mollyann Brodie. From the information: Key Findings: The confirmation hearings for Judge Barrett, President Trump’s appointment to fill the Supreme Court seat previously held by Justice Ginsburg, are underway this week and the future of the ACA’s protections for people with pre-existing conditions have been front-and-center. The latest KFF Health Tracking Poll finds a large majority of the public – including majorities of Democrats (91%), independents (81%), and Republicans (66%), now say they do not want to see the Supreme Court overturn the ACA’s pre-existing condition protections. The share who do not want to see these protections overturned has increased by double digits from one year ago for each group.Six in ten adults say they do not want to see the Supreme Court overturn the entire ACA, up 10 percentage points from one year ago. This includes majorities of both Democrats (89%) and independents (66%), but three-fourths of Republicans still want to see the entire law overturned. Overall views of the Affordable Care Act are slightly more positive this month, with 55% of the public saying they view the law favorably. This ties its highest favorability measured in ten years of KFF polling (tied with February 2020).Vice President Biden has the advantage over President Trump on all health policy issues included in the survey including at least a 20 percentage point advantage on who voters think has the better approach (Biden or Trump) to make deciisions about women’s reproductive health care choices and services, including abortion, family planning, and contraception (57% v. 34%), determining the future of the ACA (57% v. 37%), and maintaining protections for people with pre-existing conditions (56% v. 36%). He also holds an advantage on suprise medical bills, the coronavirus outbreak and distribution of a vaccine, and lowering health care costs for individuals.While both presidential candidates say they have plans to ensure pre-existing condition protections, most Democrats and Independent say they do not think President Trump has a plan to maintain such protections. Slightly more than half (53%) including majorities of Democrats (90%) and independents (57%) say they “do not think President Trump has a plan to maintain protections for people with pre-existing health conditions.” On the ohtehr hand, a large majority of Republicans (85%) say President Trump “has a plan” to maintain these protections afforded by the ACA… October 16, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Federal Court Reinstates Kentucky Law That Was Designed To Eliminate Abortion Access In The State”. From the article: The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today to uphold a Kentucky law that was used by former Governor Bevin to try to close abortion clinics and cut off access in the state. The court’s decision forces the Commonwealth’s two clinics, EMW Women’s Surgical Center and Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, to apply for an unnecessary waiver from the health department every 90 days to continue providing abortion services.Today’s ruling lifts a 2018 injunction from the District Court and reinstates a politically motivated, medically unnecessary requirement that clinics obtain a written transfer agreement with a local hospital and a transport agreement with an ambulance in order to operate. Despite evidence that these agreements serve no medical benefit to patients, and that abortion is one of the safest medical procedures, the Sixth Circuit still overturned the 2018 ruling from the lower court. Short of further action by the courts, health care providers’ only recourse is to navigate this needless red tape every 90 days. If at any time the governor refuses to grant the waiver, Kentucky could become the first state without any abortion providers.In his dissenting opinion, Judge Clay wrote: “Today, the majority openly disregards our standard of review and discards binding precedent. In doing so, it condones the evisceration of the constitutional right to abortion access in Kentucky…At the end of the day, no matter what standard this Court is bound to apply, the majority’s decision today is terribly and tragically wrong.”The Commonwealth has passed numerous burdensome restrictions on abortion care in recent years, including an attempt to ban abortion when many people do not even know they are pregnant. The law at issue in this case is similar to abortion restrictions previously passed in Texas and Louisiana, both struck down by the Supreme Court in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt and June Medical Services v. Russo, respectively. It is just one of more than 480 restrictions on abortion passed by states since 2011 as part of a coordinated, nationwide effort to push abortion care out of reach.“This law threatens abortion access in the state. When health care access is attacked, it is Black and Brown people who are forced to navigate racist and discriminatory systems and who suffer the most,” said Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “Let me be clear: we will not allow Kentucky to be the first state in the country without a single abortion provider. Planned Parenthood Federation of America will continue working with our partners to ensure every person can access the care they need no matter who they are, where they live, or how much they earn, no matter what.”……This case was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Kentucky, and Lynch, Cox, Gilman & Goodman P.S.C. on behalf ofE.M.W Women’s Surgical Center, and Planned Parenthood Federation of America and Orrick on behalf of Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky. October 17, 2020: Former Vice President Joe Biden (Democrat) tweeted: “In the middle of a pandemic, President Trump is trying to eliminate Obamacare and increase health care costs for millions. Now, he’s rushing through a U.S. Supreme Court justice to help him get it done. It’s unconscionable. Make no mistake: Health care is on the ballot.” October 17, 2020: Former Vice President Joe Biden (Democrat) tweeted: “As president, I’ll protect and build on Obamacare by: Giving Americans the choice to buy a new public option Lowering premiums, deductibles, and co-pays Standing up to prescription drug corporations We’re going to make sure every American has access to the care they need.” October 17, 2020: Senator Catherine Cortez Masto (Democrat – Nevada) tweeted: “Trump and Republicans in Congress claim they’re concerned about people with preexisting conditions, but their actions say otherwise. If they really want to help folks with preexisting conditions, why don’t they withdraw their lawsuit that could overturn the #ACA?” October 20, 2020: Urban Institute posted a blog post titled: “Overturning the ACA Would Increase Uninsurance among People of All Ages, Races, and Ethnicities”. It was written by Linda J. Blumberg, Michael Simpson, Matthew Buettgens, Jessica Banthin, and John Holahan. From the blog post: …In our recent analysis, we found if the Supreme Court overturns the ACA, an additional 21.1 million people nationwide would be uninsured in 2022. We also found the following consequences of eliminating the ACA: 9.3 million people would lose income-related subsidies for marketplace insurance in 2022;Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program coverage would decline by 15.5 million people in 2022; andfederal government spending on health care would fall by $152 billion per year in 2022. Based on this study, we produced additional, state-level estimates on the effects of coverage by age group… and race and ethnicity… if the ACA is overturned… Some of our key findings include:1) Invalidating the ACA will increase uninsurance among the nonelderly in every age group. Children ages 18 and younger will feel the smallest effect because their pre-ACA eligibility for public insurance coverage (through Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program) is greatest. Still, 1.7 million more children will be uninsured, an increase of 48 percent. Adults ages 50-64 will experience a 95 percent increase in uninsurance, an additional 5.6 million people. And 4.9 million young adults ages 19-26 will be uninsured, a 76% increase compared with current law. Adults ages 27 to 49 will experience a 60 percent increase in uninsurance, 8.8 million more uninsured.2) States experiencing the largest coverage gains under the ACA will experience the largest increases in the uninsured. These states include those that expanded Medicaid eligibility under the law, those with high enrollment rates in the ACA-subsidized Marketplaces, and those that had high uninsurance rates before implementation of the law.For example, Pennsylania and Michigan are among the most populous states that will have the largest percent increases in the uninsured if the ACA is overturned. In Pennsylvania, the uninsurance rate among young adults will climb by more than 170 percent (to 27 percent uninsured). For adults ages 27 to 49, the uninsurance rate will increase will increase by 152 percent (to 20 percent uninsured), and for adults ages 50 to 64, by 154 percent (to 16 percent uninsured). In Michigan, the uninsurance rate for young adults will increase by nearly 200 percent (to 31 percent uninsured), by more than 150 percent for adults ages 27 to 49 (to 23 percent uninsured), and by 148 percent for adults ages 50 to 64 (to 18 percent uninsured).Among states that have not expanded Medicaid eligibility, Florida will experience the largest increases in the uninsured in both absolute numbers and percentage terms because the state has high enrollment in the ACA Marketplace. In Florida, the insurance rate among young adults will increase 35 percent (to 36 percent uninsured). For 27-to-49-year-olds, it will increase 52 percent (to 30 percent uninsured), and for 50-to-64-year-olds, it will increase 89 percent (to 25 percent uninsured).3) People of all races and ethnicities will experience large increases in uninsurance. Again, the largest increases across rates and ethnicities will occur in states that expanded Medicaid eligibilty under the law. In 10 states with insufficient sample sizes to measure the effects (Michigan, California, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Utah, Washington, New Jersey, Virginia and Ohio), uninsurance rates will more than double among American Indians and Alaska Natives. In Louisiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Indiana, and Pennsylvania, uninsurance rates for non-Hispanic Black people will nearly triple or more. Uninsuraed non-Hispanic white people will more than double the number in 29 states. Uninsurance among the Hispanic population will more than double in Pennsylvania and New Mexico.4) States that did not expand Medicaid eligibility under the ACA stand to lose somewhat less coverage, but uninsurance will still increase substantially among people of all races and ethnicities. Across all nonexpansion states combined, uninsurance among American Indians and Alaskan Natives will increase 26 percent (to 23 percent uninsured). Among Asian and Pacific Islander populations, uninsurance will increase by 25 precent (to 21 percent uninsured). Among non-Hispanic Black people, uninsurance will increase by 34 percent (to 19 percent uninsured). The number of uninsured Hispanic people will increase 15 percent in these states (to 33 percent uninsured). Uninsurance among non-Hispanic white people will increase 36 percent (to 15 percent uninsured), and uninsurance among other races and ethnicities will increase by 28 percent (to 14 percent uninsured)……However, the implications of the policies of the law being invalidated have far greater reach than we can estimate, because virtually all insurers, providers, and households across the nation have been affected by the law’s many provisions. Policymakers have straightforward legislative options that could protect the ACA as it is operating under current law if they are passed before the court issues its decision; thus far, Congress has not passed bills to do so. October 21, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) tweeted: “Tearing down the Affordable Care Act has been one of Republicans’ top priorities for more than a decade. They’ve tried 70 times to repeal or roll back the ACA in Congress. Now, they’re rushing through Trump’s Supreme Court nominee to ensure it finally happens.” October 21, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) tweeted: “Today, I joined @SenWarren in urging the administration to stop supporting a lawsuit to strike down the Affordable Care Act. It’s unconsscionable, especially during a pandemic. And it has to stop.” October 21, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Continues Fight to Stop Health Care Discrimination Promulgated by Trump Administration.” From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today announced she has led a coalition of 22 attorneys general in continuing the fight to stop the Trump Administration’s attempts to make it easier for health care providers to refuse to provide necessary and desired health coverage to individuals on the basis of their health care providers’ “religious beliefs or moral convictions.” In an amicus brief filed in support of the states of California and Washington in their lawsuits brought against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Attorney General James leads the coalition in opposing the Trump Administration’s ‘Refusal-of-Care’ rule. Attorney General James led her own lawsuit against the Trump Administration’s ‘Refusal-of-Care’ rule in May of 2019.“As we continue to battle a public health crisis that has only been exacerbated by the Trump Administration’s incompetence, the Department of Health and Human Services is still doing what it can to make it easier for health care providers to deny health coverage to millions of Americans,” said Attorney General James. “The ‘Refusal-of-Care’ rule gives health care providers free license to openly discriminate and deny care to patients, masking their bigotry and hatred in an invisible cloak of religious freedom. The courts have rejected this hatred every step of the way and we are confident they will do the same once again.”In May 2019, the Trump Administration’s HHS introduced a final rule that would vastly and unreasonably expand the ability of health care providers to deny patients access to certain lawful and medically needed procedures, services, and information, including that related to abortion, sterilization, and aid-in-dying — all while purporting to implement various federal conscience statutes. In reality, however, the rule violates the careful balance Congress struck in the underlying statutes by simultaneously expanding the job functions that objectors may refuse to perform based on their personal views and severely restricting the actions that employers may take to plan for and accommodate such objections while ensuring that patients receive uninterrupted care. The rule would disproportionately impact women and members of the LGBTQ+ community.Every federal court that has considered the rule has agreed that it is not authorized by law and has accordingly vacated the rule in full, including the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California and the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington. After those losses, the Trump Administration appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Attorney General James and the coalition filed this amicus brief in support of California and Washington in that appeal.The coalition argues, in the amicus brief, that the rule’s definition of “discrimination” is inconsistent with statute and is thus contrary to the Administrative Procedures Act and that HHS acted arbitrarily and capriciously in promulgating the rule. Specifically, HHS failed to acknowledge that the redefinition of “discrimination” represented a change in position, failed to consider the reliance interests created by HHS’s own past guidance as to the scope of the federal conscience statutes’ anti-discrimination provisions, and relied on empirical justification for the rule that is contradicted by the administrative record.Further, the coalition explains that the rule not only threatens to harm countless patients in disrupting their access to medically necessary care, but also places at risk billions in critical federal health care funding that Congress has appropriated to the states… October 21, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted an press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue Responds to Latest Evidence of Amy Barrett’s Extremism and Hostility to Reproductive Freedom”. From the press release: This afternoon, news broke that Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee will boycott tomorrow’s planned vote to advance Amy Barrett’s confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court. Their move will send a clear message about this power grab less than two weeks before Election Day, when over 42 million Americans have already voted. The development comes on the heels of Barrett submitting responses to written questions from senators following her Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. In response to questions from Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), she flat out refused to answer whether states could make abortion care a felony if Roe v. Wade is overturned or punish people seeking abortion care with the death penalty. She also refused to answer whether states could prosecute people for using contraception if Roe is overturned. This after Barrett refused to answer even basic questions in the hearing. Meanwhile, Senate Republicans tried to play coy about their agenda to end legal abortion and Barrett’s role in realizing their decades-long goal of overturning Roe v. Wade. Now we have even more cause for concern. “Amy Barrett’s refusal to make clear that putting a woman to death for seeking abortion care is wrong and should never be permitted is both shocking and disqualifying,” said Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America. “This country has a clear consensus around basic freedoms and rights and these non-answers not only undermine those, but put them in perilous danger. We strongly applaud the Senate Democrats making clear how egregious and antidemocratic this entire process is by refusing to dignify it with their presence. We will be outside with them calling attention to the dystopian future this nominee represents where women and pregnant people are controlled and criminalized by politicians with a malicious agenda.” October 21, 2020: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists posted a statement titled: “ACOG Statement on Recent Waiver Approvals that Limit Medicaid Coverage”. From the statement: Maureen G. Phipps, MD, MPH, chief executive officer of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, released the following statement:“ACOG is deeply disappointed that, by recently approving restrictive state Medicaid waivers in Georgia and Nebraska, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) continues to make Medicaid coverage and access to Medicaid-covered services more difficult for our patients to obtain. Medicaid was established to ensure that health care is available to all who are eligible, without condition. The waivers that CMS has approved in recent weeks and months serve the sole purpose of making coverage less accessible and will ensure that the program fails to meet its essential mission.“These Medicaid changes will no doubt fall heaviest on low-income women. Women represent almost two-thirds of those at risk of losing coverage under work requirements. Further, women have increased health care needs compared to men, so may be negatively affected by the excessive out-of-pocket costs imposed in these waivers. Rather than punishing women by making it harder for them to access health care, the government should be focusing on how improved access to reliable health coverage, including Medicaid coverage to 12 months after delivery, can address the ongoing maternal mortality crisis and, importantly, help us improve health equity across the country. Moreover, the approval of these waivers runs counter to the stated goal of the Department of Health and Human Services to improve maternal health outcomes.“It is especially unsettling that CMS and state bureaucrats are moving forward with restrictive health care policies in the middle of an unprecedented pandemic, which has already cost more than 200,000 lives across the country and underscores the critical importance of the Medicaid protram. Health care coverage must be reliable and stable for all of our patients now as we continue to battle COVID-19. Taking coverage away from those who have already been disproportionately impacted by the virus will certainly cost additional lives.” October 22, 2020: California Governor Gavin Newsom (Democrat – California) tweeted: “We’re in a pandemic. We need the Affordable Care Act.” October 22. 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Members of Congress, Medical Associations, Policy Experts, Nonprofits, States, Counties, and Cities Support Fight Against Healthcare Refusal Rule”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today announced that a diverse group that includes members of Congress, state attorneys general, healthcare providers, healthcare policy experts, and more filed amicus briefs this week in the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals supporting California’s fight against the Trump Administration’s unconstitutional and illegal “Healthcare Refusal Rule”. The rule, which was halted by multiple courts, would allow anyone involved in healthcare to deny care to an individual for religious, moral, ethical, or other reasons. This exemption would open the door to unfettered discrimination, particularly against women, LGBTQ individuals, people of color, and individuals in rural and low-income communities.“A diverse coalition consisting of individual citizens, elected leaders, experts, advocacy groups and others have helped shed light on the substantial negative impact of the Trump Administration’s Healthcare Refusal Rule on our healthcare system,” said Attorney General Becerra. “As we continue to battle a global pandemic, now is the time to ensure access to quality care, not create barries to care.”In a brief filed this month, the Attorney General reasserted that the Trump Administration’s Healthcare Refusal Rule violates the U.S. Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act, arguing that the District Court was correct to vacate the rule in its entirety. The amici support California’s fight to protect marginalized communities from potential healthcare discrimination resulting from the rule. The amicus briefs highlight the human cost of allowing this rule to stand. Rachael Lorenzo, Mindy Swank, and Meghan Eagen, three individuals who were denied essential, stabilizing treatment because medical professionals refused to provide emergency abortions: Mindy’s story: “Even though Saint Francis and Genesis knew that Mindy’s pregnancy was not viable and would ultimately put her life in danger if not terminated, doctors delayed the emergency care she needed. Not only did this risk the loss of Mindy’s ability to have children in the future and lead to the prolonged suffering of her baby after birth , but it also put her life in jeopardy and resulted in lasting emotional trauma.”A copy of the brief is available here.Coalition of 158 Members of the U.S. Congress: “Congress has consistently sought to protect and expand access to medical care in the United States, including by passing the Affordable Care Act in 2010, and in other statutes and legislation enacted over the last fifty years. HHS’s Rule is one in a series of more recent attempts to turn back this progress and limit access to care, especially abortion care.”A copy of the brief is available here.Coalition of 21 states and the District of Columbia: “That unprecedented redefinition poses severe disruptions to Amici States’ health care systems and our ability to deliver seamless patient care while accommodating conscience objections, and is thus particularly harmful to Amici States’ interests as health care providers, employers, and regulators.”A copy of the brief is available here.Coalition of cities and counties: “The Final Rule invites providers of emergency care to discriminate against the distressed patients they are duty-bound to treat, and attempts to undermine local governments’ antidiscrimination policies and laws in the provision of healthcare with the threat of withdrawal of critical federal funding.”A copy of the brief is available here.American Public Health Association: “By permitting any individual who works at a healthcare facility to elevate their personal beliefs above the health needs of the patient, the Rule disregards the most core principles of public health.”A copy of the brief is available here.Coalition of leading medical organizations: “The Rule endangers patients in emergency situations…For example, when a registered nurse anesthetist lodges a last-minute objection to assisting a patient with an urgent need, and s/he cannot be replaced because all colleagues are in COVID-19 ICUs, the patient may die. The COVID-19 crisis thus heightens the dangers the Rule threatens to the provision of necessary and urgent care.”A copy of the brief is available here.National Center for Lesbian Rights and a coalition of 27 nonprofit organizations: “The Final Rule will compound barriers to health care for LGBTQ people, particularly those who are transgender, by inviting health care workers to refuse services or referrals to LGBTQ people.” A copy of the brief is available here.The Williams Institute, and a coalition of experts on the health of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people: “Being denied healthcare can be devastating. Being denied care for discriminatory reasons compounds that harm and can result in avoidance of necessary care in the future. In turn, the minority stress associated with healthcare denials contributes to health disparities for the LGBT population.”A copy of the brief is available here.Institute for Policy Integrity: “It is difficult to imagine how a rule could cause more workers to assert a right to deny care without also causing an increase in denials of care. HHS cannot have it both ways.” A copy of the brief is available here. October 22, 2020: National Organization for Women (NOW) posted a press release titled: “NOW Denounces Senate Judiciary Committee’s Illegitimate Push for Amy Coney Barrett”. From the press release: The only way Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell were going to get away with stealing another Supreme Court nomination was to do what they always do— break rules and rig the system. After forcing into practice a new standard for filling a Supreme Court vacancy before a presidential election, they went back on their own new rules and are now rushing to hold a floor vote on Amy Coney Barrett days before the election. Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination is being rushed through to consolidate conservative power and turn back the clock on voting rights, reproductive freedoms, and access to health care. This has been a cynical, partisan political exercise from the beginning. NOW calls on Senators to use whatever tools are at their disposal to push this vote past the election. Republican Senators who lost their races because of Donald Trump may realize they can redeem their place in history after years of enabling him by what they do in a lame-duck session – which includes passing years of legislation currently in the Senate graveyard and voting “nay” on Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation. NOW is more motivated than ever – to show how the largest, grassroots feminist force in history will turn the tide in this election. We will elect a new president, the first woman vice president, and a feminist Senate—that will soon vote on a feminist nomination to the Supreme Court. October 22, 2020: Lambda Legal posted a press release titled: “Senate Judiciary Committee Advances Nomination of Anti-LGBTQ Judge, Amy Coney Barrett to Supreme Court”. From the press release: Today, pressing ahead in flagrant disregard of longstanding rules and procedures, Senate Republicans voted unanimously to advance the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the United States Supreme Court. Senate Democrats on the committee walked out from the vote in protest and were counted as absent. The nomination, which Senate Republicans are jamming through at breakneck speed, now moves on to a full Senate floor vote. Judge Barrett could be confirmed as soon as Monday, October 26. In response, Lambda Legal CEO Kevn Jennings issued the following statement:“Rushing a U.S. Supreme Court nomination like this is reckless and just plain despicable. This has been an affront to our democracy and the will of the American people, 35.9 million of whom have already cast ballots and the majority of whom believe the next president should choose Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s replacement. This shouldn’t even be happening. Every Senator who will soon vote on this nomination has a choice to make; our democratic values or partisan ideology.“It is impossible for LGBTQ peopel to have confidence in Judge Barrett. During the hearings, she refused to answer questions about some of the most pressing issues facing our nation’s highest Court and refsused to say whether she believed cases that are the backbone of the legal rights of LGBTQ people – such as Lambda Legal’s landmark case, Lawrence v. Texas, which decriminalized same-sex intimacy,and Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage – were correctly decided. She even used loaded and outdated terms like ‘sexual preference,’ which is explicitly intended to erase our identities and deny the validity of our claim to equal protection under the law. We can read between the lines of her coded language and what we’re reading isn’t good. Nothing we heard allayed our concerns, and much of what we heard raised red flags about what her confirmation will mean for the LGBTQ community.” October 22, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Members of Congress, Medical Associations, Policy Experts, Nonprofits, States, Counties, and Cities Support Fight Against Healthcare Refusal Rule”. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today announced that a diverse group that includes members of Congress, state attorneys general, healthcare providers, healthcare policy experts, and more filed amicus briefs this week in the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals supporting California’s fight against the Trump Administration’s unconstitutional and illegal “Healthcare Refusal Rule.” The rule, which was halted by multiple courts, would allow anyone involved in healthcare to deny care to an individual for religious, moral, ethical, or other reasons. This exemption would open the door to unfettered discrimination, particularly against women, LGBTQ individuals, people of color, and individuals in rural and low-income communities.“A diverse coalition consisting of individual citizens, elected leaders, experts, advocacy groups and others have helped shed light on the substantial negative impact of the Trump Administration’s Healthcare Refusal Rule on our healthcare system,” said Attorney General Becerra. “As we continue to battle a global pandemic, now is the time ti ensure access to quality care, not create barriers to care.”In a brief filed this month, the Attorney General reasserted that the Trump Administration’s Healthcare Refusal Rule violates the U.S. Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act, arguing that the District Court was correct to vacate the rule in its entirety. The amici support California’s fight to protect marginalized communities from potential healthcare discrimination resulting from the rule. The amicus briefs highlight the human cost of allowing this rule to stand… October 22, 2020: Urban Institute posted a brief titled: “Urgent Action Needed to Address Children’s Unmet Health Care Needs During the Pandemic”. It was written by Stacey McMorrow, Dulce Gonzalez, Clara Alvarez Caraveo, and Genevieve M. Kenney. From the brief: AbstractIt has become increasinglyclear that the pandemic has had dramatic spillover effects on the reciept of health care services unrelated to the coronavirus. In this brief, we review the evidence on children’s unmet needs during the pandemic and identify promising strategies to address these gaps, as well as barriers to widespread implementation of these strategies. We find large declines in childhood vaccinations in 2020 compared with prior years and serious concerns about children’s access to specialized therapies and mental health services. Children of color, children with special health care needs, children in families with low incomes or members with limited English proficiency, and children in rural areas face higher risks of unmet health care needs. We also find that health care providers have implemented several strategies to encourage reciept of needed care during the pandemic, including telehealth options, mobile clinics, pharmacist-administered vaccines, and expanded school-based services. But limitations in funding, access to internet-enabled devices,and interpretation and translation services can prevent widespread and successful adoption of these strategies.Thus, more coordinated, publicly funded, and focused efforts to reduce children’s unmet needs are urgently needed. State Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Programs, and the private managed-care plans that cover many children in these programs, have both policy tools and financial resources that could help address the declines in preventive care receipt among their child enrollees. Targeted to federal funding to underresourced providers and communities and more concerted efforts to incorporate children’s health needs into policies for both in-person and virtual education would also be beneficial. Without these efforts to address children’s needs and reduce long standing inequities, racial and socioeconomic disparities in children’s health and health care access will likely widen as the pandmeic continues. October 23, 2020: WBUR posted an article titled: “Overturning The Affordable Care Act Would Be Catastrophic – Especially For People With Disabilities”. It was written by Elizabeth Warren and Matthew Cortland. From the article: For the 61 million Americans who live with a disability, there’s an important date on the calendar this fall: November 10, the day the Supreme Court will hear a case about whether to overturn the Affordable Care Act. President Donald Trump and Senate Republicans have picked a Supreme Court nominee whose position is clear: she doesn’t like the ACA, or the previous court rulings that upheld it. There is so much at stake.Before the ACA, the disability community faced critical barriers to high-quality medical care. Health insurers could deny or cancel coverage for people with pre-existing conditions — including millions of people with disabilities. Insurers regularly imposed “lifetime limits” on their coverage, a gut punch for people with disabilities whose medical needs cost a lot of money. For babies born prematurely and children with disabilities, this sometimes meant hitting their lifetime caps before they were even old enough for school.This lack of basic health protections put people with disabilities in an economic bind, too. Many were forced to hold on to dead-end, low-paying jobs for the sake of keeping health insurance they couldn’t find anywhere else. Meanwhile, if people with disabilities couldn’t find insurance and had to turn to Medicaid, they could only qualify by going through a cumbersome disability determination process and declaring their inability to work. If they wanted to work, they were forced to give up their insurance — an impossible choice no one should have to make.The ACA made a lot of progress. It banned the cruel practice of lifetime limits, ensuring that children with disabilities and their families won’t have to go bankrupt to get the care they need. It protected people with pre-existing conditions. It ensured that people with disabilities could buy insurance in the Marketplace and expanded the Medicaid program, making it easier to get high-quality, affordable care without leaving the job market. In fact, Medicaid expansion increased employment rates among people with disabilities. And for young people with disabilities, being able to stay on their parents’ insurance until the age of 26 means the opportunity to build a career for themselves, without having to worry about whether they will continue to have access to life-saving health care.The ACA didn’t just expand access to health insurance. It also meant that people with disabilities could actually get the high-quality services and treatments they need. The Community First Choice Program in the ACA helps states provide home- and community-based services that allow people with disabilities to live with their families and in the community, rather than in institutions. Especially at a time when people living in nursing homes, assisted living facilities, and group homes are at heightened risk from the COVID-19 pandemic, these supports are more crucial than ever. We still have a long way to go: I’m fighting in Congress for better funding for home- and community-based services and better oversight of nursing homes and assisted living centers. But overturning the ACA would reverse all the important gains we’ve made.The ACA also ensured that mental health care is treated as exactly what it is: health care. People with disabilities have higher rates of depression and may face barriers to getting treatment for mental and behavioral health conditions. The ACA made mental and behavioral health treatment an Essential Health Benefit — one that all insurers are required to cover.All of these guarantees were important before the pandemic, but they are even more essential now. More than 7 million people in the United States have been diagnosed with COVID-19. Many of these survivors may have long-lasting health effects that we are only beginning to understand. In other words, the number of Americans with pre-existing conditions is growing every day. Without the ACA in place, anyone who ever tested positive for COVID-19 could be denied coverage because of a pre-existing condition. At the same time, economic turmoil and social isolation have created a mental health crisis. There has never been a greater need for quality, accessible, affordable mental health care.With the election just days away, the president, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and their enablers are trying to ram through Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination before the American people have a chance to make their voice heard. They want her on the bench on November 10 to help accomplish what Republicans have been trying to do since the beginning: end the ACA and rip health care away from 21 million people, including millions of people with disabilities.But we won’t tolerate it. Disabled people are used to uphill battles, and they know how to persist. Together, we’re fighting to stop this nomination and to make our voices heard by sharing our stories and voting to protect the health care that people with disabilities — and all Americans — deserve. October 23, 2020: Georgetown University Health Policy Institute Center for Families and Children posted a blog post titled: “What’s New for 2021 Marketplace Enrollment?” From the blog post: On November 1, the eight open enrollment period begins for marketplace coverage under the Affordable Care Act. This year there are several policy changes that could have an impact on the affordability of plans on the marketplace including:… Public Charge Rule: Beginning Feburary 24, 2020, the current test to determine a person’s application for admission to the U.S. or permanent residency expanded. Previously, only an applicant’s use of two public benefits – cash assistance and institutional long-term care – were negatively effected when making a public charge determination. The Trump Administration expanded this policy to include an individual’s application for health programs such as Medicaid (with some important exceptions including reciept of Medicaid for children under 21) and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) as factors for consideration. Application and enrollment in marketplace coverage and the application for and use of premium tax credits and cost-sharing reductions, however, will not be negatively factored into the public charge test. Though this rule has been finalized nationwide, the expansion has been blocked in New York, Connecticut and Vermont…ACA Litigation at SCOTUS: The constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) will again be considered by the United States Supreme Court. A decision on this case is not expected until Spring 2021 and until that happens the ACA’s insurance reforms, the marketplaces, and federal assistance remains in place…New Special Enrollment Period (SEP) for Individuals Newly Eligible for Advanced Premium Tax Credits (APTCs): In prior years, individuals who were covered under an employer-sponsored plan or a plan purchased through the marketplace could access a SEP if they became newly eligible for APTCs. However, individuals who purchased an individual market plan outside of the marketplace (“off-marketplace”) could not. In 2020, HHS expanded this opportunity to allow individuals who are enrolled in off-marketplace plan and who experience a decrease in income that makes them newly eligible for APTCs to use a SEP to enroll in an on-marketplace plan. However, this may not be immediately available in all states, and consumers may have to contact the marketplace call center to access the opportunity…Retroactive Effective Dates: CMS has streamlined its rules and processes for retroactive coverage for consumers who recieve a special enrollment period, a favorable appeal decision, or a processing delay. Consumers have the option to pay the premiums for all the months of retroactive coverage, or only pay the premium for one month of coverage and receive prospective coverage only…Two Payment Rule for Abortion Services: A federal judge has enjoined a Trump Administration regulation that requires insurers to send two separate monthly bills, one for abortion coverage and one for coverage of all other service. Pending the outcome of this litigation, consumers are still able to pay their monthly premium a single transaction.Contraception Mandate: In July of 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal rules expanding exemptions to the ACA’s contraceptive coverage requirement could go into effect. These rules, previously subject to a nationwide injunction, allow eligible organizations including employers, insurers, and universities to exclude contraceptive coverage on the basis of “sincerely held religious beliefs or moral convictions.” While previously, the federal government required these entities to provide an accomodation so that plan enrollees could still access contraceptive coverage, that accommodation process is now optional. Some plan enrollees could still access contraception coverage. The rules are subject to further legal proceedings… October 25, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Lesley Stahl: Giant health care book in Trump interview had ‘no comprehensive health care plan'”. It was written by Brooke Seipel. From the article: CBS’s Lesley Stahl said the giant book presented to her as the president’s health care plan after President Trump walked out of a “60 Minutes” interview had “no comprehensive healthcare plan.”The moment took place just after Trump cut short an interview last week. Press secretary Kayleigh McEnany then walked in to deliver what she said was the White House health care plan, warning it was a little heavy. Stahl can be heard saying, “I can’t lift it” in the interview.Then, in a voiceover for Sunday’s “60 Minutes” episode, Stahl says the book lacked a health care plan.“Kayleigh McEnany, gave us a heavy book she described as the president’s health care plan. It was filled with executive orders and congressional initiatives, but no comprehensive healthcare plan,” she said… October 25, 2020: CBS Philly posted an article titled: “Sen. Bob Casey Says Affordable Care Act Now In Danger With Amy Coney Barrett’s Assured Confirmation To Supreme Court”. From the article: Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey says the Affordable Care Act is now in danger with Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s assured confirmation to the Supreme Court. On Sunday night, Casey joined other Democratic senators on a Zoom call.The Affordable Care Act faces a legal challenge before the Supreme Court.The senators fear Barrett will cast the deciding vote to overturn the law.Casey says the elimination of the ACA would have a negative impact on Pennsylvania.“Much is at stake. You all know the numbers, the 135 million with preexisting conditions translates into 5-and-a-half million in Pennsylvania,” Casey said. “The 23 or so million who would lose coverage that had gained it translates into 1, or one of the 23, million.”The Supreme Court will hear the challenge to the Affordable Care Act on Nov. 10. October 25, 2020: Senator Diane Feinstein (Democrat – California) tweeted: “I voted AGAINST advancing Judge Barrett’s nomination today. She represents the conservative vote to overturn the Affordable Care Act, strip protections from Americans with pre-existing conditions, overturn Roe v. Wade and undermine many other fundamental rights.” October 26, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) tweeted: “It’s this simple: Republicans are trying to bypass the will of voters and have the Supreme Court dismantle the Affordable Care Act.” October 26, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) tweeted: “Today Republicans denied the will of the American people by confirming a Supreme Court justice through an illegitimate process – all in their effort to gut the Affordable Care Act and strip health care from millions with pre-existing conditions. We won’t forget this.” October 26, 2020: Senator Diane Feinstein (Democrat – California) tweeted: “I just voted against Judge Barrett’s confirmation. The American people want an independent jurist, not one who Republicans rushed onto the Supreme Court to help strike down the Affordable Care Act, end women’s reproductive rights and strip away voting rights.” October 26, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “Our fight continues. One week after Election Day, I’ll be at the Supreme Court to stop Trump and his GOP allies from dismantling the Affordable Care Act. We intend to win.” October 26, 2020: Oregon Governor Kate Brown (Democrat – Oregon) tweeted: Accessible, affordable health care saves lives. Now the Supreme Court is poised to rip away protections in the middle of a pandemic. Thanks to the Affordable Care Act, up to 94% of Oregonians have had health care coverage. Without the ACA? 546,000 + Oregonians could lose coverage.” October 26, 2020: Senator Dick Durbin (Democrat – Illinois) tweeted: “I am deeply concerned about Judge Barrett’s views on the Affordable Care Act – along with her downright refusal to answer questions about whether a President could delay an election, whether tehre should be a peaceful transfer of power, and the legality of voter intimidation.” October 26, 2020: Planned Parenthood Affiates of Calfornia tweeted: “Tonight’s confrmation of Amy Coney Barrett is a devistating attack on reproductive rights. But in CA — your right to critical health care is still protected, and Planned Parenthood is going to fight like hell to ensure it stays that way. But we need you to VOTE #WeDissent”. This was the start of a short thread. October 26, 2020: Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California tweeted: “In the legacy of Justice Ginsburg, we commit to not only fight to protect the rights she fought for – repro rights, affordable health care, racial equity, gender equity – but to work with CA’s leaders to close the widening gap between rights and true access. #WeDissent #SCOTUS” October 26, 2020: Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California tweeted: “With Barrett’s confirmation, 17 abortion-related cases one step from #SCOTUS, and the #ACA are about to be considered, the future of our health care is on the line. We need CA leadership @CAgovernor @AssemblyDems @CASenateDems to work to ensure health care access is protected #WeDissent”. This was the last tweet in the short thread. October 26, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “Our fight continues. One week after Election Day, I’ll be at the Supreme Court to stop Trump and his GOP allies from dismantling the Affordable Care Act. We intend to win.” October 26, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) tweeted: “President Trump and Senate Republicans have committed an act of supreme despiration: jamming through a Supreme Court nominee just days before Election Day as part of their years-long campaign to destroy Americans’ health care.” October 26, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Denounces Senate Republicans’ Illegitimate Confirmation of Amy Barrett to the Supreme Court”. From the press release: Senate Republicans today jammed through Amy Barrett’s confirmation to the Supreme Court, in spite of her record of anti-choice, anti-freedom extremism and as over 61 million Americans have already voted in the presidential election. With roughly a week left until Election Day, Republicans disregarded the will of the people, who believe that the next president should have filled the vacancy on the Court and that the Senate should prioritize much-need COVID-19 relief instead. NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement in response to this illegitimate confirmation: “This power grab by Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell is a shameful attack on our democracy. Amy Barrett’s extreme position on our fundamental rights is disqualifying. We know that they cannot be shamed, so we will see every single Republican who has played a role in this charade at the ballot box.”Further underscoring the Trump administration’s willingness to put its own political agenda above the health and well-being of the American people, they are planning to recklessly hold an in-person swearing-in ceremony for Barrett this evening. The event is scheduled to take place despite the fact that her nomination ceremony is believed to have been a “superspreader” event… October 26, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Center for Reproductive Rights Statement on the Confirmation of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett”. From the press release: Statement of Nancy Northup, President and CEOToday, in a deeply divided nation while an election is already underway, the U.S. Senate confirmed Amy Coney Barrett as an Associate Justice to the U.S. Supreme Court by a vote of 52-48. The American public deserved a comprehensive vetting and full assessment of the legal views of the person nominated to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. What the public got was a shamelessly truncated and woefully partisan process. Justice Barrett’s academic writings, court decisions, and public advocacy reveal a legal view that the U.S. Constitution does not protect an individual’s personal liberty to make decisions about their reproductive health. This has incredibly troubling implications for the Supreme Court’s settled jurisprudence that the Fourteenth Amendment protects the right to access contraception and abortion care. Counter to her clear and documented record of extreme opposition to reproductive rights, Justice Barrett testified in her Senate Judiciary Committee hearing that she would join the Court with no agenda. Only time will be the judge of that. Dozens of abortion-rights cases are heading toward the Supreme Court and one is already there; the state of Mississippi is seeking review of its 15-week abortion ban, which the Center for Reproductive Rights successfully blocked in the lower courts as unconstitutional under Roe v. Wade. Also in the pipeline are other cases we are litigating on abortion access, contraception, and the ability to make our own healthcare decisions. The stakes are too high for us to back down. We go to court because it matters to people’s lives. We don’t bring cases to vindicate abstract legal theories; we bring cases to ensure that the promise of the Constitution is realized for everyone. The Supreme Court has long recognized the fundamental truth that control over reproductive decisions critically impacts “he ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation.” We see this every day in the way women in the U.S. live their lives. The overwhelming majority use contraception. One in four will make the decision to end a pregnancy. Increasingly, people are turning to assisted reproduction in creating their families. Millions have already benefited from the Affordable Care Act, including gaining access to maternal health care, no co-pay contraception, and coverage for pre-existing conditions. And when access to reproductive healthcare is burdened, when clinics are closed, and when healthcare is unaffordable, the consequences fall hardest on Black, Indigenous and people of color, rural communities and people living in poverty. This is why we go to court. Daunting challenges are ahead but we are undaunted. We will fight in the courts. We will push for federal and state legislation that will remove barriers to accessing reproductive healthcare, including the Women’s Health Protection Act and the EACH Woman Act. October 26, 2020: National Organization for Women (NOW) posted a press release titled: “NOW Denounces Amy Coney Barrett’s Confirmation to SCOTUS”. From the press release: Amy Coney Barrett says when it comes to interpreting the Constitution, she’s an “originalist” in the mold of her mentor, Antonin Scalia. This means that she interprets the Constitution exactly how the authors wrote it. However, the white male authors of the Constitution (many of whom were also slave owners) left out women, people of color, religious minorities, and LGBTQIA+ people. According to this interpretation, none of these groups are considered people deserving of equal rights. And that’s exactly how Justice Amy Coney Barrett will treat these groups. She has been groomed to overturn many of the important equality gains of the last 60 years, starting with a challenge to the Affordable Care Act that will come before the Court a week after Election Day. She has been outspoken in her opposition to abortion care, affordable birth control, LGBTQIA+ rights, and environmental protections, and she told the Senate she thought the science of climate change is still “in dispute.” NOW knows that even if Amy Coney Barrett and a conservative-leaning SCOTUS are not willing to defend our right to equality, that our voices still matter and we will not stop until we are heard. We’re reminded of how crucial a progressive, feminist majority in the Senate is to the future of the Supreme Court, and the women’s rights agenda. NOW members are even more energized than ever to turn out the largest feminist voting force in history to defeat Donald Trump, elect Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, and flip the Senate. We know what’s at stake—everything. October 26, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a statement titled: “Harris Statement on Confirmation of Judge Amy Coney Barrett”. From the statement: U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, on Monday released the following statement on her vote against the confirmation of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to be Associate Judge of the Supreme Court of the United States.“Senate Republicans jammed through this nomination in the middleof an election where over 60 million Americans have already voted. Senate Republicans have ignored the will of the people, decideing instead to replace Justice Rute Bader Ginsburg – who devoted her life to fighting for equal justice – with someone who was selected to undo her legacy.“President Trump repeatedly made it clear that he would only nominate judges who would get rid of the Affordable Care Act. President Trump and Senate Republicans are determined to take away health care coverage and protections for people with pre-existing conditions. On November 10, Trump administration lawyers will be before the Supreme Court arguing to strike down the Affordable Care Act in its entirity. This is a big reason why Senate Republicans rushed this confirmation. If they succeed, millions of people will lose access to health care in the middle of a devistating pandemic that has killed over 225,000 Americans and sickened millions more.“The American people see this confirmation for what it is: an illegitimate move that will set our country back for generations. Access to health care is now in jeopardy. Our voting rights are now in jeopardy. Workers’ rights are now in jeopardy. LGBTQ equality is now in jeopardy. The right to a safe and legal abortion is now in jeopardy. The ability to address a changing climate is now in jeopardy. And so much more.I share the American people’s outrage at this rushed process to confirm a nominee who has the potential to do great harm.” October 26, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Confirmation of Justice Amy Coney Barrett”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after the Republican Senate confirmed Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court:“Eight days from Election Day, after 60 million Americans have already cast their ballots, President Trump and the GOP Senate have committed an act of supreme desperation by jamming through a Supreme Court justice – all so they can achieve their years-long campaign to destroy Americans’ health care.“Now, Americans must continue to make their voices heard in the election. Congress will have to reverse the damage of a radical Republican court and defend pre-existing condition protections together with every other benefit and protection of the Affordable Care Act.“With this usurped Supreme Court seat, the President is ripping away millions of families’ health care in the middle of a pandemic that has infected over 8.6 million and killed nearly one-quarter of a million Americans. In her confirmation hearing, Justice Barrett refused to answer whether she believes that Medicare is constitutional. She refused to acknowledge the scientific fact that climate change is happening, saying she isn’t a scientist, calling it ‘controversial.”“The President’s Supreme Court manipulation threatens the very values and rights that define and distinguish our nation: a woman’s constitutional right to make her own medical decisions, the right of LGBTQ Americans, the right of workers to organize and collectively bargain for fair wages, the future of our planet and environmental protections, voting rights and the right of every American to have a voice in our democracy.“We must have a Congress that is prepared to remedy what the Supreme Court will do to undermine the health, financial security, and well-being of American families.” October 26, 2020: Former President Barack Obama tweeted: “In the middle of a pandemic, this administration is trying to dismantle the Affordable Care Act in the Supreme Court. Here’s how Joe and I fought to expand health care, protect millions of Americans with preexisting conditions, and actually get it done:” The tweet includes a link to an article titled: “The President Looks Back on His Toughest Fight“. It is in The New Yorker and was written by Barack Obama. October 26, 2020: Lambda Legal posted a press release titled: “Lambda Legal Responds to Confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett to Supreme Court”. From the press release: This evening, with a 52-48 vote, the Senate confirmed Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the United States Supreme Court. In response, Lambda Legal CEO Kevin Jennings issued the following statement:“This is a dark day for our justice system and American democracy. The Supreme Court of the United States, the court of last resort for justice in our country, should not be up for a power grab, but that is exactly what happened today. Amy Coney Barrett deeply alarmed us during her confirmation hearings when she refused to say whether she believed cases that are the backbone of the legal rights of LGBTA people – such as Lambda Legal’s landmark case, Lawerence v. Texas which decriminalized same-sex intimacy, and Obergfell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage – were correctly decided. We fear that all the progress we have made in recent years is now at risk.“But as perverse as this nomination and forced confirmation against the will of American voters has been, we are not deterred. We have fought for the rights and dignity of LGBTQ people and everyone living with HIV for almost 50 years, and we will not stop now. Party politics may have prevailed today, but Lambda Legal will continue to fight; our communities can count on that.”Read Lambda Legal’s letter to Senate members opposing the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court: https://www.lambdalegal.org/in-court/legal-docs/20201022_letter_amy-coney-barrett-opposition-supreme-court-senate October 28, 2020: Georgetown University Health Policy Institute Center for Children and Families posted a blog post titled: “Georgia’s Medicaid Waiver is Fiscally Foolish and Anti-Family”. It was written by Joan Alker and Allexa Gardner. From the blog post: On October 15th, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Seema Verma traveled to Atlanta to announce the approval of Georgia’s “Pathways to Coverage” Section 1115 Medicaid demonstration. The approval is the latest in CMS Administrator Verma’s ideological crusade to “reframe” Medicaid and promote her signature initiative — work requirements. The creation of a maze of complex rules to ensure that people don’t get health care when they need it will drive up administrative costs and discriminate against parents with young children who will find it nearly impossible to pass the many tests presented in the state’s demonstration.Interestingly, the state’s companion and dangerous Section 1332 proposal, which was expected to be approved at the same time, has still not been approved. CMS has said it is working with the state to “finalize the terms and conditions for approval.”The state’s Medicaid approach is the kitchen sink of bad ideas that have been bumping around for years and found a home together in Georgia’s misguided approach. Administrator Verma and Governor Kemp’s mutual antipathy toward the Affordable Care Act has led to this misguided approach under the facade of “expanding” coverage. The state’s proposal will not qualify for the ACA’s enhanced 90% match, so, as a consequence, the state will receive its regular match rate of 67% (currently enhanced by 6.2% during the public health emergency) for those individuals who do get coverage after navigating an extremely difficult set of barriers including work reporting requirements.Currently, Georgia is one of 12 states that has not expanded Medicaid and has some of the highest uninsured rates in the nation for both children and adults. The state also has significant health disparities, yet only provides Medicaid coverage to adults who are parents and deep in poverty — below 35 percent of the federal poverty level ($634 per month for a family of three)……Under the approved demonstration, adults between ages 19 and 64 with incomes under 100 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL) must meet a requirement of 80 hours of work or “qualifying activities” (i.e. work hours or “community engagement”) per month to be eligible for Medicaid coverage. Once enrolled, these individuals must complete and report 80 hours of work or qualifying activities every month to maintain their health coverage. People with incomes between 50 percent ($905 per month for a family of three) and 100 percent FPL ($1,810 per month) are also required to pay a monthly premium to maintain coverage. It will not only be very difficult for individuals to break through these enrollment barriers, but it will also be arduous for them to maintain coverage. Individuals will have their benefits suspended, and will eventually be disenrolled from Medicaid, if they fail to meet the work requirements or pay their monthly premiumsIf that wasn’t enough, CMS also approved the elimination of 3-month retroactive coverage, non-emergency medical transportation (NEMT) services, and hospital presumptive eligibility (the first state to receive approval to do so). Other approved elements include cost-sharing and copayments for non-emergency use of the emergency department.The entire demonstration was approved under (a)(2) expenditure authority, which our colleague Andy Schneider has written about as part of Administrator Verma’s new litigation strategy to impose work requirements and other restrictions without being stopped by the courts. For a demonstration that claims to expand coverage, almost all of the provisions actually limit benefits and put low-income beneficiaries’ health coverage at risk.The per person cost of the demonstration is high and few would get coverage — especially when compared to the number of people who would be covered under a standard Medicaid expansion. Over the five-year demonstration period, the state estimates approximately 64,300 individuals will be covered (pg. 17 of cover letter). There are no meaningful budget neutrality estimates provided to show the estimated number of beneficiaries enrolled by year, or the total cost of the demonstration, nor does the state provide any hard estimates of the administrative costs that would result from such a complex system of rules. Because of the kitchen sink of approved policies with proven disenrollment effects, the state likely won’t come close to its predicted enrollment.The state previously estimated that if Georgia fully expanded Medicaid without the work requirements and other barriers to coverage, between 486,500 and 598,300 adults would be covered once the program reached full enrollment. This means at full enrollment, which is unlikely given all of the red tape, Georgia’s waiver will only cover 11% to-13 % of the potential expansion population with the state paying a greater share of the per-person cost, bringing far fewer federal dollars into the state, and incurring much higher administrative costs...…Of the 12 work requirement approvals, Georgia’s is one of the harshest we have seen for parents. Because meeting the work requirement is a condition of eligibility, the demonstration provides no exemptions for individuals who may not be able to meet the work requirement because they are taking care of children. Every other state work requirement includes an exemption for parents or caregivers with dependent children, at least until age 6.As a result of these restrictions, parents will be the least likely to gain coverage. There are no accommodations made for parents who may need child care – child care is not a qualifying activity for meeting the requirement nor are there any flexibilities for parents of children with disabilities. Child care is unaffordable for many low-income families, creating a barrier for parents to be able to meet the work requirement… October 29, 2020: Georgetown University Health Policy Institute Center for Children and Families posted a blog titled: “National Strategy Needed to Close Health Care Gaps, Protect Children’s Health and Well-Being”. It was written by Kelly Whitener. From the blog post: …The new research from the Urban Institute should serve as a wake-up call to policymakers……Well-child visits and vaccination rates are down, children with special needs are struggling to access needed care, and adolescents are missing out on impotant reproductive health care. Prolonged worry and stress brought on by the pandemic are harmful to mental health for both children and parents. The authors point out that approximately 35 percent of adolescents reported receiving their mental health services in schools before the pandemic so the transition to virtual learning has likely decreased children’s access to behavioral health care. All of the challenges posed by the pandemic add to existing pediatric behavioral health workforce shortages that could lead to the social and emotional needs of children being further neglected.The good news is there are known solutions. Modifications to in-person health care have made it safer for children to continue to seek preventative care. Expanded access to telehealth and hybrid care models, with both virtual and in-person components, have made it easier for families to access needed care without unnecessary exposure to the novel Coronavirus. Outreach and education campaigns from state leaders and health care providers have helped parents stay informed about the importance of ongoing preventative care and how they can meet their children’s health care needs safely.The bad news is that without intervention from federal leaders, these interventions will not be distributed evenly, modified to remove remaining barriers, or targeted to children who need them most. States, providers, and child health advocates have been pushing the federal government for more support for months, but there’s been no movement on meaningful COVID relief in the Senate since March. Thankfully, states have intervened when possible and there is more they can do while we continue to wait for Godot……Lawmakers left Washington earlier this wek, but their work is far from done. November November 1, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on First Day of Open Enrollment in the ACA Insurance Marketplaces Across the Country”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi released this statement on the first day of open enrollment for Affordable Care Act marketplaces for 2021, which runs from November 1, through December 15:“Affordable health coverage is more essential than ever during the pandemic. While Republicans try to tear down the Affordable Care Act in the Supreme Court, families can enroll knowing that Democrats in Congress stand ready to defend and strengthen pre-existing conditions protections and every other benefit of the ACA. Despite Republicans ‘ continued sabotage campaign, millions of Americans will have access to quality, affordable plans, with most people using the Marketplaces qualifying for financial help and, as a result, many will be able to find plans for as little as $10 per month.“Democrats will continue our work For The People to lower health care costs and prescription drug prices while protecting the pre-existing condition benefit for all Americans.” November 2, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becera Condemns Latest Trump Administration Attack on Health and Well-Being of Immigrant Families”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today led a coalition of state and local governments in a comment letter condemning the Trump Administration’s new efforts to restrict family-based immigration through a proposed regulation that directly threatens state health care systems and efforts to combat the coronavirus. The proposed rule by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) would force many U.S. citizens and green card holders to sacrifice the reciept of benefits for which they qualify – including Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program – to preserve their best opportunity to sponsor a family member for lawful permanent residency. The proposal is part of the Trump Administration’s ongoing effort to racially transform public charge law. In the comment letter, the coalition urges the Trump Administration to immediately withddraw the rule and postpone consideration of any similar rules until after the resolution of the ongoing global pandemic and national public health emergency.“Keeping citizen and immigrant families apart is a cruel but defining characteristic of the Trump Administration,” said Attorney General Becerra. “DHS’s proposal runs counter to America’s core values and the law. It threatens public health in the middle of a pandemic. No family should ever be forced to choose between accessing healthcare and food assistance or bringing the family together in this time of pandemic.”On October 2, 2020, DHS proposed a new regulation to drastically alter requirements for affidavits of support, which are contracts signed by a sponsor to show that their close family member who is applying for a green card is not likely to become dependent on the government. Among the harsh changes sought, DHS has proposed a joint-sponsor requirement when sponsors or their household members have received a public benefit for which they qualify within the 36-month period prior to the execution of an affidavit of support. The proposed rule would disqualify individuals from serving as a joint sponsor if they have received such a benefit within the same time period. It would preclude sponsors from pooling their income with the income of other relatives who reside with them and are willing to promise support for the intending immigrant if needed, except where the relative is the sponsor’s own spouse. The proposal also needlessly subjects sponsors and their household members to onerous documentation requirements. Ultimately, the new requirements would significantly hinder family unification and — like the public charge rule — penalize modest income and working-class families for accessing public benefits for which they are eligible — all during an economic and public health crisis of historic proportions that has infected more than 9.1 million Americans and resulted in the deaths of more than 229,000 people across the country.In the comment letter, the attorneys general assert that the proposed rule will: Deter eligible U.S. citizens from receiving critical public benefits, endangering public health;Generate confusion with regards to immigration laws and increase administrative burdens on state and local governments;Weaken states’ response to the pandemic by sowing distrust in government services and creating reluctance to seek needed healthcare — exacerbating the disparate impacts of the pandemic on our communities; andViolate federal statutes, failing to pass muster under laws such as Immigration and Nationality Act and the Administrative Procedure Act.. …In filing the comment letter, Attorney General Becerra is joined by the attorneys general of Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia, as well as the Cook County State’s Attorney, Corporation Counsel of New York City, and County Counsel of the County of Santa Clara County.A copy of the comment letter is available here. November 2, 2020: Georgetown University Health Policy Institute Center for Children and Families posted a blog post titled: “New CMS Rule Would Weaken Families First Continuous Coverage Protection in Medicaid”. It was written by Edwin Park. From the blog post: On October 28, the Trump Administration announced that it would weaken the current continuous coverage protection for Medicaid beneficiaries by permitting states to cut or scale back benefits and increase cost-sharing charges.The Families First COVID-19 relief legislation provided a temporary 6.2 percentage point increase in the federal Medicaid matching rate (FMAP) through the end of the calendar year quarter in which the current public health emergency expires (PHE). Because the Secretary of Health and Human Services extended the PHE through at least January 20, 2021, this means the FMAP increase remains in effect through at least March 31, 2021.Under a maintenance-of-effort (MOE) requirement, as a condition of receiving the increased Families First FMAP, state Medicaid programs must not implement eligibility standards, methodologies and procedures that are more restrictive or charge higher premiums than were in place on January 1, 2020. They must also cover COVID-19 testing and treatment without cost-sharing. They must also not disenroll any beneficiaries who were enrolled as of March 18, 2020 (or newly enrolled beneficiaries after such date) through the end of the month in which the PHE ends. That means that state Medicaid programs must maintain enrollment through at least January 31, 2021. This last “continuous coverage” requirement is critical to ensuring that low-income individuals and families have access to health coverage and to needed care during the pandemic……CMS, however, is issuing a new interim final rule reversing its earlier sound reading of the continuous coverage requirement. Under the most harmful change, state Medicaid programs would now be permitted to eliminate optional benefits such as dental coverage and reduce the amount, duration and scope of covered benefits (like imposing lower visit limits or adding other utilization controls), compared to what was covered on March 18, 2020. They may also now increase co-payment and other cost-sharing levels (subject to federal limits) and require nursing home residents to contribute more to the monthly cost of their care (known as post-eligibility treatment of income), above what was required on March 18, 2020.In addition, states would be permitted to transfer beneficiaries from one eligibility category to another if they are no longer eligible under their original category, even if it may reduce the benefits available to them. For example, if an expansion state has opted to cover 19 and 20 year-olds under their child eligibility category, the continuous enrollment protection would no longer require the state to maintain the young person in the child eligibility category when they turn age 21 and could instead transfer them to the adult expansion group. This, however, means the beneficiary would lose access to the comprehensive Early Periodic Screening Diagnostic and Treatment (EPSDT) benefit. Similarly, a near-elderly Medicaid beneficiary enrolled in the expansion who turns age 65 and becomes eligible for Medicare could be switched to the Medicare Savings Programs (which only covers Medicare premiums and cost-sharing, not other Medicaid benefits that may not be covered by Medicare)……Finally, CMS indicates that a state would not be out-of-compliance with the continuous coverage requirement if it disenrolls a beneficiary who was not validly enrolled in the first place (the eligibility determination was erroneous or the result of fraud and abuse). Beneficiaries found enrolled in two or more states who fail to respond to a request for information related to residency may also be disenrolled. In addition, states that have opted to cover full benefits for lawfully residing children and pregnant women in in the first 5 years after entry into the United States would be required to limit their coverage to emergency services if individuals are found to no longer meet the definition of such children and pregnant women.These changes would be effective immediately (upon public display of the interim final rule). Notably, while CMS issued its original interpretation of the continuous coverage requirement as guidance, it is now reversing it through an interim final rule. That both makes these changes harder for a different Administration to modify procedurally but also essentially takes away meaningful public comment, as these changes will already be in effect well before any comments are submitted, let alone considered. November 3, 2020: The Denver Post posted an article titled: “Colorado Prop 115 results: Ban on most later-term abortions defeated”. It was written by Judith Kohler. From the article: A ban on most abortions at 22 weeks or later in pregnancy was defeated Tuesday night as voters rejected the fourth attempt since 2008 to more stringently regulate abortions in Colorado.About 1.6 million voters, or 59.2%, rejected Proposition 115 with 83% of the vote counted, while 1.1 million, or 40.8%, supported it.Proponents, who said they had strong grassroots support, were vastly outspend by opponents. Proponents spent $505,488, compared to opponents’ nearly $9 million, according to the Colorado News Collaborative’s FollowtheMoneyCO project.The ballot measure would have subjected doctors ever attempting to perform a later-term abortion to misdemeaner charges and at least a three-year suspension of their license. The only exception would have been for an abortion that is immediately required to save the woman’s life….…those campaigning against Proposition 115 said it would have undermined women’s rights to reproductive health……Colorado was the first state in the country to decriminalize abortion, passing a law in 1967 to allow the procedure in cases of rape, incest, if the woman’s life was threatened or if the unborn child might have birth defects.The vote on abortion restrictions came as the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court has raised the stakes for the fate of Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 ruling that legalized abortion. Barrett has been involved in organizations opposed to abortion… November 3, 2020: Lift Louisiana posted news titled: “Louisiana Coalition for Reproductive Freedom Responds to Passage of Amendment 1”. From the news: Louisiana voters approved Amendment 1, which explicity states there is no righ to an abortion and the funding of an abortion in the Louisiana Constitution. The Louisiana Coalition for Reproductive Freedoms (LCRF), which is a statewide alliance of organizations and individuals, fought against the amendment for a number of reasons including that it would deny the personal freedom of bodily autonomy and would hurt already marginalized communities: BlackIndigenouspeople of coloryoung peopleundocumented peoplepeople living on low or no income; and people experiencing homelessness; andLGBTQ+ people Everyone should have the right and freedom to make decisions about their bodies and whether, when, and how they become a parent. Proponents of the amendment tried to say it would prevent public funding of abortion, but state and federal laws have prohibited public funds from being used for abortion services in Louisiana for more than 40 years.The right to an abortion is still unconstitutionally protected by the United States Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, but Amendment 1 could prevent a judicial intervention for abortion rights should Roe ever be overturned. With Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation to the Supreme Coirt, there are many who feel Roe is in jeopardy. Louisiana, which has passed 89 abortion-restrictive laws since the 1973 Roe decision, has only three remaining abortion care facilities, making it one of the most difficult states to obtain abortion care… November 3, 2020: The Hill posted an opinion piece titled: “COVID-19 could become a widespread pre-existing condition in a post-ACA world”. It was written by Carter C. Price (a senior mathematician at the nonprofit, nonpartisan RAND Corporation who worked on the COMPARE microsimulation model to study the impact of health reform.) It was also written by Raffaele Varadavas (a mathematician at RAND and a member of Pardee RAND Graduate School faculty who constructs and analyzes epidemic models.). From the article: On Nov. 10, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Californai v Texas, a cast that asks: When Congress eliminated the penalty for not carrying health insurance, did that make the whole Affordable Care Act (ACA) unconstitutional? In the midst of the pandemic, this question takes urgency for COVID-19 survivors.If the ACA is struck down, protections for pre-existing conditions will go with it. That could mean tens of millions of Americans could be charged higher premiums or even denied health insurance coverage altogether……Given the chronic problems associated with some COVID-19 cases, it is possible that some insurers would place restrictions on anyone who had a confirmed case of COVID-19. As of late October, there have been about 5.8 million confirmed cases among people under the age of 65 (and therefore not eligible for Medicare in most circumstances), and those numbers keep rising. If a history of COVID is considered to be a pre-existing condition, access to affordable insurance will be greatly diminishedfor those in the South and parts of the Great Plains (North and South Dakota, in particular) and Midwest.Access to testing was limited in the earlier days of the pandemic, so many other COVID-19 infections were not identified. But some of those may be detected in the future with antibody testing. A portion of this population may also have significant long-term health consequences, and insurers may want to avoid that risk, which would put a total of 23 million people or more at risk of being flagged with a pre-existing condition.More than a quarter of people in the state of New York could be at risk of being flagged as having had a pre-existing condition based on antibody testing. Louisiana, Illinois and states in the mid-Atlantic and portions of New England also have high levels of positive antibody tests that could be considered signs of a pre-existing condition. These numbers will only grow and could be more than two or three times as high or higher before the pandemic is under control. In practice, it may be challenging for insurance companies to exclude or apply rescission on all COVID-19 survivors without a positive test, but this does suggest a scale of the population who may be vulnerable.COVID-19 has not spread evenly through the population. Black and Latino populations, low-income Americans and essential workers have been particularly hard hit. In a world without the ACA, this would, perversely, mean that the demographic groups most affected by COVID-19 will have the least access to affordable health care.The threat of being denied insurance because of a COVID-19 diagnosis could also change behavior. Specifically, individuals might avoid getting tested. Conversely, the same threat may encourage some people to take precautions like wearing face masks and social distancing and to get vaccinated when available… November 4, 2020: The RAND Blog posted a blog post titled: “COVID-19 Could Become a Widespread Preexisting Condition in a Post-ACA World”. It was written by Carter C. Price and Raffaele Vardavas. From the blog post: On November 10, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in California v. Texas, a case that asks: When Congress eliminated the penalty for not carrying health insurance, did that make the whole Affordable Care Act (ACA) unconstitutional? In the midst of the pandemic, this question takes an urgency for COVID-19 survivors.If the ACA is struck down, protections for preexisting conditions will go with it. That could mean tens of millions of Americans could be charged higher premiums or even denied health insurance coverage altogether……Without these ACA protections, there are several ways that an insurance company might consider COVID-19 to be a preexisting condition to discriminate against applicants and policyholders.Given the chronic problems associated with some COVID-19 cases, it is possible that some insurers would place restrictions on anyone who had a confirmed case of COVID-19. As of late October, there have been about 5.8 million confirmed cases among people under the age of 65 (and therefore not eligible for Medicare in most circumstances), and those numbers keep rising. If a history of COVID-19 is considered to be a preexisting condition, access to affordable insurance will be greatly diminished for those in the South and parts of the Great Plains (North and South Dakota, in particular) and Midwest……Access to testing was limited in the earlier days of the pandemic, so many other COVID-19 infections were not identified. But some of those may be detected in the future with antibody testing. A portion of this population may also have significant long-term health consequences, and insurers may want to avoid that risk, which would put a total of 23 million people or more at risk of being flagged with a preexisting condition……The threat of being denied insurance because of a COVID-19 diagnosis could also change behavior. Specifically, individuals might avoid getting tested. Conversely, the same threat may encourage people to take precautions like wearing face masks and social distancing and to get vaccinated when available… November 7, 2020: Joan Alker (ED of Georgetown Center for Children and Families) tweeted: “Goodbye and good riddance to Medicaid work requirement waivers”. November 9, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “More than a Dozen Countries Call for U.S. to Advance Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights as Part of U.N. Review”. From the press release: Today, as part of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process, representatives from United Nations (UN) member states offered recommendations to the U.S. on how to correct recent human rights abuses. Many representatives focused on regressive policies from the Trump administration, and its allies across the U.S. government, that attack sexual and reproductive health and rights. With the election of President-elect Joe Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris, two champions for sexual and reproductive health, this critical work of restoring policies that advance human rights can begin……The UPR process involves a review of the human rights records of all UN member states every four years, with the aim of improving the human rights situation on the ground. Planned Parenthood Federation of America submitted a report for the UPR on the U.S. human rights record, including recommending to overturn the Title X and global gag rules and to repeal the Hyde and Helms Amendments. During today’s session, the following countries offered recommendations to the U.S. to ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health, and address policies that limit access to family planning through the Title X program and restrict funding for sexual and reproductive rights, including abortion, through U.S. foreign aid: Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Finland, France, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, and the United Kingdom.These damaging policies that restrict sexual and reproductive health access have been in place, and been harming people across the globe, for years. But tragically, the COVID-19 pandemic has magnified health care disparities, in turn impacting reproductive rights. In the U.S., one in three women have reported delays in accessing sexual and reproductive health care, with this rate even higher among Black and Hispanic women. Similar disruptions are occurring in other countries and are exacerbated by U.S. policies like the global gag rule.The impact of these regressive policies are clear. Upon taking office, the Biden administration must end the global and domestic gag rules so that health care providers and patients can speak freely about all reproductive healthcare options. The administration must also propose a budget that reflects a committment to sexual and reproductive health – including ending the Hyde and Helms Amendment. November 9, 2020: American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) posted news titled: “The Affordable Care Act – and With It, Our Civil Rights – Are Under Attack”. It was written by Lousie Melling, Deputy Legal Director and Director of Ruth Bader Ginsburg Center for Liberty. From the news: …But the Affordable Care Act is now imperiled. This week, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in California v. Texas – a case that puts this critical law in jeopardy of being struck down in its entirety. While most legal scholars think such a ruling unlikely, any decision striking the law would have devistating ramifications for the civil liberties advancements that the ACA has provided. And it would have particlarly cruel and deadly consequences in the midst of a pandemic and recession. Dismantling the ACA now would exacerabate the longstanding, systemic disparities in access to health care, economic opportunities, and other resources faced by Black, Latinx, and disabled people in this country – disparaties that are now approaching epic proportions in light of the pandemic.The Affordable Care Act made huge advancements for many groups of people to whom stable health insurance and health care were often denied, whether because of express discrimination or the effects of discrimination.Women: The ACA bars sex discrimination, full stop. This means, for example, that at long last insurers may no longer charge women higher rates. The ACA as implemented covers care long excluded from insurance coverage that was seen as exclusively women’s care: mammograms, screenings for cervical cancer, contraception coverage and counseling, lactation support, and prenatal care. These forms of discrimination had material consequences. Before passage of the Affordable Care Act, women were estimated to spend 68 percent more than men in out of pocket health care costs. The ACA takes aim at discrimination that perpetuates gender inequity, including the discrimination in health care that perpetuates gender disparities in wealth.LGBTQ people: The ACA’s bar on sex discrimination also means that LGBTQ people can’t be subject to discrimination in federally funded institutions, public health care programs, or by insurance companies. The ACA eliminates barriers that many LGBTQ people previously faced in receiving health care — a crucial step toward ensuring health care is accessible to all — regardless of gender identity or sexual orientation.People of color: The ACA makes important strides to address racial injustice in health care as well. It bars discrimination based on preexisting conditions, a provision critical to ensuring that those who are sick — and thus most in need of health insurance — aren’t effectively barred from accessing it. While this provision is important to people of all races, it is also an essential part of beginning to redress the health disparities that reflect the legacy of race discrimination in the country. This is evident in the higher rates of hypertension among Black people, for example, and the disproportionate rates of COVID-19 infections and deaths among Black and Latinx communities. The data is striking: Because of the ACA, between 2013 and 2017, the coverage gap between Black and white Americans declined from 11 to 5.3 percentage points. Similarly, during the same period, the coverage gap between Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites dropped from 25.4 to 16.6 percentage points. Additionally, the ACA expanded Medicaid for people whose income is below 138 percent of the federal poverty level. In short, the ACA has helped make important strides in reducing racial, ethnic and economic disparities in in access to health care and coverage. People with disabilities: The ACA has been a life saver for people with disabilities. It protects against coverage limitations based on preexisting conditions or lifetime limits, and guarantees coverage of services for mental illnesses and developmental disabilities. It provides access to long-term, home-based health care, which can mean the difference between institutionalization and independence for people with disabilities. And it expressly precludes discrimination in access to health care based on disability.People experiencing poverty: The ACA also expanded Medicaid for people up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level — although not every state availed itself of the option, despite its literal life-giving opportunities. Prior to the ACA’s passage, Medicaid eligibility for parents was limited to those with very low incomes (often below 50 percent of the poverty level), and adults without dependent children were ineligible under federal rules, regardless of their income level, according to a report from the Kaiser Family Foundation.The ACA is part of the path to equity — remedying systems of oppression and discrimination — that runs to the core of living or dying, particularly during the time of COVID-19. As we said in our 2012 brief, the ACA “advances the twin goals of liberty and equal protection.” The ACA is worth fighting for. Our civil liberties and civil rights are worth fighting for. November 9, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “On Eve of Oral Arguments in the U.S. Supreme Court, Attorney General Becerra Issues Statement in Defense of the Affordable Care Act”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today issued a statement on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) ahead of tomorrow’s oral arguments before the United States Supreme Court in the healthcare repeal case, California v. Texas. The California Attorney General’s Office is leading a coalition of 20 states and the District of Columbia in defense of the ACA including the law’s protections for people with preexisting conditions, public health investments, and Medicaid expansion, among others. In the midst of rising COVID-19 cases and deaths nationwide, the Trump Administration and the Texas-led state coalition are risking the healthcare of millions of Americans and financial support for states. The State of California alone, would stand to lose an estimated $160.2 billion in federal program funding, and millions of people would lose their healthcare coverage as a result of the loss of the ACA.“COVID-19 has made one thing undeniable: We must safeguard the Affordable Care Act – lives depend on it,” said Attorney General Becerra. “Every nation around the world has had to confront the devistating impact of the global pandemic. The United States, under President Trump’s watch, continues to set records going in the wrong direction. Millions infected, hundreds of thousands dead. As if on cue, the Trump Administration cavilerly continues its march to dismantle the ACA and strip Americans of their healthcare. We will do everything we can to defeat this unprecedented assault on a critical federal law by a sitting president.”……Every American could be affected if the ACA is destroyed. In particular, the following is at stake: Healthcare for the 20 million Americans who are able to afford insurance either through Medicaid expansion or thanks to tax credits and employer-sponsored plans through healthcare exchanges, such as Covered California;Guaranteed coverage for the 133 million Americans who have a pre-existing condition, including 17 million kids, and benefit from the law’s protection against discrimination and higher costs based on health status;Healthcare for young adults under the age of 26 covered by a parent’s plan;Families of children with chronic health conditions who are currently protected from lifetime insurance limits; andFunding for our nation’s public health system, including investments in local and state public health systems that help during the pandemic, FDA biosimilars which power drug costs, and more including Medicare payment reforms, Indian Health Services, and work to fight the opioid epidemic… November 9, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Defends ACA on Eve of Supreme Court Oral Arguments”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today continued her strong defense of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) ahead of tomorrow’s oral arguments before the United States Supreme Court in the health care repeal case, California v. Texas. Attorney General James and a coalition that includes 20 states and the District of Columbia are defending the many provisions of the ACA — including coverage of preexisting conditions, public health investments, and Medicaid expansion, among others — against the Trump Administration and a Texas-led state coalition seeking to dismantle the health care reform law that has provided new coverage to at least 20 million Americans. The Trump Administration and the Texas-led state coalition’s actions are even more dangerous given their attempts to strip health care coverage away from millions of Americans as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) deaths and infections — which hit numerous highs last week — continue to rise exponentially across the nation.“For years, Donald Trump and Republicans across the country have tried to repeal the ACA and strip health coverage away from millions of Americans, but we will continue to fight this assault on our health care,” said Attorney General James. “Even more dangerous is that this attack comes in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has killed more than 237,000 Americans and infected more than 10 million. That’s 10 million Americans who now have a pre-existing condition and who Republicans want to charge more for coverage. Eight years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that the ACA was legal, so we will not allow President Trump and his Republican allies to dismantle the ACA, piece-by-piece, or undo all the progress made since the law’s passage after failing to get Congress to do its dirty work.”……The lawsuit — originally filed by a Texas-led coalition and later supported by the Trump Administration — argued that a Republican-led Congress rendered the ACA’s individual mandate unconstitutional when it reduced the penalty for forgoing coverage to $0. They further argued that the rest of the ACA should be held invalid as a result of that change. Attorney General James and a coalition of attorneys general defended the ACA in its entirety, supported by a bipartisan group of amici, including scholars, economists, public health experts, hospital and provider associations, patient groups, counties, cities, and more. While the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held the individual mandate to be unconstitutional, it declined to further rule on the validity of the ACA’s remaining provisions. The court instead sent the case back to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas to determine whether the problem with the mandate requires striking down the whole law. In January, however, Attorney General James and the coalition petitioned the Supreme Court for expedited review to protect Americans’ health care and resolve the uncertainty created by the Fifth Circuit decision. The Supreme Court granted review of the case in March for the upcoming term.In addition to New York, the coalition arguing before the Supreme Court tomorrow includes the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota (by and through its Department of Commerce), Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia, as well as the governor of Kentucky. November 9, 2020: Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent – Vermont) tweeted: “Every year, 68,000 Americans die because they can’t afford to go to a doctor on time – almost 200 people a day. Health care is a human right. Lack of health care is a death sentence. We must guarantee health care to everyone through a Medicare for All, single-payer program.” November 9, 2020: American Academy of Pediatrics posted a news release titled: “Leading Children’s Health Groups Urge Lawmakers and Administration to Address Troubling Trends in Children’s Uninsurance”. From the news release: Leading children’s health groups are urging comprehensive and immediate action by Congress and the Administration to protect and improve access to health care coverage for all children. The call to action comes on the heels of recent data from the U.S. Census Bureau showing that 320,000 fewer children had health insurance coverage in 2019 than in 2018, even before the COVID-19 pandemic. Today, a new report from the Georgetown University Center for Children and Families shows that in 2019, an estimated 4.4 million children did not have health insurance coverage, an increase of 726,000 or nearly 20 percent more children without insurance since 2016, when the nation reached a historic low in children without coverage. The child uninsured rate has grown from 4.7 to 5.7 percent over the same time period.The American Academy of Pediatrics, Children’s Defense Fund, Family Voices, First Focus on Children, Georgetown University Center for Children and Families, March of Dimes, and the National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners issue the following statement:“Our organizations are sounding the alarm over the growing number of children without health insurance. Recent data show the largest increase in the number of uninsured children in more than a decade. A new report today shows that years of progress in covering more children has been eroded, with widespread coverage losses across income, age, racial and ethnic groups.“Since 2016, the number of uninsured children has grown each year. Especially concerning is that these 2019 numbers do not reflect the devistating consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic and economic downturn this year, which has caused millions of families to lose jobs and employer-sponsored insurance. These data underscore that the children’s health coverage landscape was already headed in a dangerous direction, even before the pandemic hit.“Without health care coverage, children’s health suffers. Often, no coverage means no care, which means fewer preventive screenings to catch conditions before they become severe and costly. It means no access to affordable dental coverage, vaccines, or prenatal services for pregnant mothers. While the latest data show that children across all regions and income levels experienced coverage losses in 2019, the greatest coverage losses were among Hispanic children. The COVID-19 pandemic, which has had a disproportionate impact on communities of color, only exacerbates the impact on children and families who lack access to affordable, comprehensive and high-quality health coverage. We know that children without health coverage could also suffer long-term harm, ending up in poorer health, with less emotional attainment and less financial security in adulthood.“Before the pandemic, the Administration’s actions – such as the public charge rule, which has reduced immigrant families’ willingness to enroll their children in Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and other problematic policy changes that impeded access to Medicaid and the CHIP and private insurance – are contributors to this erosion of children’s coverage. The ongoing global pandemic and subsequent economic recession lead us to believe coverage losses for children will only continue to get worse.“Children need health care coverage that they can rely on. Congress took the first step to protect children and families by providing greater financial support for Medicaid in the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, along with its continuous coverage protections ensuring that children, pregnant women, and families won’t lose Medicaid coverage due to red tape during the pandemic. We call on Congress and the Administration to advance policies that ensure all children and families have health care coverage, not policies that stand in the way of making that possible. Our children’s futures depend on our ability to act now.” November 10, 2020: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted news titled: “ACOG Statement on the Affordable Care Act”. From the news: The following is a statement from Eva Chalas, MD, FACOG, FACS, President of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), and Maureen G. Phipps, MD, MPH, Chief Executive Officer of ACOG, regarding the challenge to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) before the U.S. Supreme Court:“The ACA has revolutionized access to care for tens of millions of women by helping them obtain meaningful health coverage, ensuring that essential care is covered by insurers, and protecting patients from unfair practices. ACOG urges the Supreme Court to recognize that overturning the ACA will leave tens of millions of patients without reliable access to care. In any year, this would be devastating, and during a global pandemic, it is unconscionable and would be one of the most singularly disruptive acts to be committed during this public health crisis.“Years of data clearly demonstrate how the ACA has changed lives by improving patient access to care, reducing out of pocket costs, enhancing peace of mind, and bettering the health and wellbeing of so many individuals and families.“ACOG is hopeful that tens years after its historic enactment, the ACA will continue to stand. Moving forward, we are eager to work with policymakers to build on the advances of the ACA to continue to protect meaningful health coverage, eradicate preventavle maternal mortality, and achieve health equity in the United States.”Access the amicus brief that ACOG filed with other major medical associations. November 10, 2020: National Organization for Women (NOW) posted a press release titled: “We Refuse To Go Backwards, We Must Protect Our Health Care”. From the press release: Donald Trump packed the Supreme Court with justices the could count on to strike down the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Today, in the midst of a global pandemic when health care is needed most, we are watching to see if Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch deliver the goods to the outgoing President.Women and the most vulnerable in our society know what’s at stake today. The repeal lawsuit, supported by the Trump administration, will be heard by the Supreme Court in California v. Texas and could end ACA as we know it.The ACA is what allows parents to keep their children on their health insurance plans until age 26, ensures women are able to obtain preventative care services such as mamograms, and helps protect access for birth control. Prior to the ACA, women could be charged more for insurance and could be denied maternal coverage like pregnamcy care and childbirth. Additionally, insurance companies could deny LGBTQIA+ individuals insurance coverage, services related to gender transition, or charge higher rates based on sexual orientation or gender identity.Perhaps the most alarming aspect of a ACA repeal would be the loss of the prohibition against denying coverage for those with pre-existing conditions. According to the Department of Health and Human Services, this could impact anywhere between 50 and 129 million individuals. And as the COVID pandemic takes an exponential toll on Americans and the nation’s mental health, if the ACA is overturned, mental illness and even COVID-19 itself may soon be the most common pre-existing condition.The ACA’s essential health benefits ensure everyone with insurance can have comprehensive care, including mental healthcare, maternity care, and more. NOW members are monitoring today’s arguments carefully. These justices cannot allow themselves to be used as partisan pawns, intent on eviscerating our healthcare system. It is the duty of the Supreme Court to uphold the Constitution and protect our civil rights and liberties.We refuse to go back to a dangerous time when insurance companies could deny or charge more for coverage and discriminate against the millions of people with pre-existing conditions. Repealing access to health care, with no alternative plan in sight moving forward, will only put the lives of women and families at risk. November 10, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James’ Statement on ACA Supreme Court Oral Arguements”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James and a coalition that includes 20 states and the District of Columbia today defended the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) in the United States Supreme Court in the health care repeal case, California v. Texas. The coalition defended the many provisions of the ACA agaisnt the Trump Administration and a Texas-led state coalition seeking to dismantle the health care reform law that has provided new coverage to at least 20 million Americans.“The Affordable Care Act has been the law of the land for a decade now, but President Trump, his administration, and Republicans allies are trying to take us backwards in time by stripping health coverage away from millions of Americans,” said Attorney General James. “Today, Donald Trump and Republicans fought to kick children off their parents’ health care plans, fought to rip health coverage away from the 133 million with pre-existing conditions, fought to charge women more for no other reason than being a woman, fought to increase the cost of prescription drugs for seniors, and fought to deprive millions of Americans access to quality, affordable health care. Time after time, President Trump and his Republican allies have failed to get Congress to do its dirty work and has instead attempted to dismantle the ACA, piece-by-piece. We are confident the court will reject Republicans’ arguments today, just like it did in 2012, and that we will prevail in protecting Americans’ right to health care.”Every American across the nation could be affected if the ACA is dismantled. At risk is: Health care for the 20 million Americans who are able to afford insurance either through Medicaid expansion or thanks to tax credits and employer-sponsored plans through health care exchanges.Guaranteed coverage for the more than 133 million Americans who have a pre-existing health condition, including 17 million kids, that benefit from the law’s protections against discrimination and higher costs based on health status.Health care for young adults under the age of 26 covered by a parent’s plan.Health care for families of children with chronic health conditions who are currently protected from lifetime insurance limits.Funding for our nation’s public health system, which includes investments in local and state public health systems that have helped during the COVID-19 pandemic; FDA biosimilars, which power drug costs; and more, including Medicare payment reforms, Indian health services, and work to fight the opioid epidemic. The lawsuit — originally filed by a Texas-led coalition and later supported by the Trump Administration — argued that a Republican-led Congress rendered the ACA’s individual mandate unconstitutional when it reduced the penalty for forgoing coverage to $0. They further argued that the rest of the ACA should be held invalid as a result of that change. Attorney General James and a coalition of attorneys general defended the ACA in its entirety, supported by a bipartisan group of amici, including scholars, economists, public health experts, hospital and provider associations, patient groups, counties, cities, and more. While the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held the individual mandate to be unconstitutional, it declined to further rule on the validity of the ACA’s remaining provisions. The court instead sent the case back to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas to determine whether the problem with the mandate requires striking down the whole law. In January, however, Attorney General James and the coalition petitioned the Supreme Court for expedited review to protect Americans’ health care and resolve the uncertainty created by the Fifth Circuit decision. The Supreme Court granted review of the case in March for the upcoming term.In addition to New York, the coalition that argued the case before the Supreme Court included the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota (by and through its Department of Commerce), Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia, as well as the governor of Kentucky. November 10, 2020: National Women’s Law Center posted a press release titled: “NWLC responds to Supreme Court’s ACA oral arguements”. From the press release: Today, the newly comprised U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments to decide whether or not the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is constitutional, the first with Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who was confirmed just a week before the election.Invalidation of the ACA will force at least 20 million people to immediately lose health care, in addition to critical reforms and protections that ended discriminatory and harmful insurance industry practices that disproportionately impacted wimen as highlighted in our amicus brief.Because of the ACA: Insurance companies are prohibited from denying coverage based upon pre-existing conditions, and 68 million women with pre-existing conditions have access to health coverage.The practice of charging women significantly more than men for the same health insurance is banned, saving them approximately $1 billion a year.Expanded Medicaid eligibility covers 18% of women across the country, including 27 percent of Latinas and 31 percent of Black women ages 15-44.There is a broad federal protection against discrimination in health care based on race, color, national origin, age, disability, or sex, including gender identity, sex stereotyping, pregnancy, termination of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.Plans must cover women’s preventive services without out-of-pocket costs, including breast and cervical cancer screenings; comprehensive breastfeeding support services; and the full range of FDA-approved methods of contraception for women and related education and counseling. Over 64 million women now have coverage of preventive services without cost-sharing.Plans must cover a baseline of essential health benefits for individual and small group insurance, including maternity and newborn care, preventative services, mental health and substance abuse disorder services, and prescription drugs.Insurance companies are prohibited from setting lifetime limits on coverage.Young adults can stay on their parents’ health insurance plan until they turn 26. The following statement is from Fatima Goss Graves, president and CEO of the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC):“It’s deeply disturbing that this politically motivated effort to take health coverage away is at the Court for a third time, while COVID-19 cases continue to skyrocket. The Court should see this for what it is: Trump’s agenda to destroy the ACA, without a legal basis. People across the country know what’s at stake, and a decisive majority just voted for progress. People need and deserve expanded access to health care, especially during a pandemic. We will fight to make this a reality, no matter the decision of the Court.” November 10, 2020: U.S. News posted an article titled: “Obamacare’s Birth Control Coverage May Have Reduced Unplanned Pregnancies”. It was written by Cara Murez. From the article: When Obamacare made contraception affordable, the rate of unplanned pregnancies among poor Americans declined, a new study reports.The Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) elimination of out-of-pocket costs for birth control was tied to fewer births in all income groups, but especially among poorer women, the new research found. In fact, the lowest income group had a 22% decline in births after the law as passed.“Our findings suggest that expanded coverage of prescription contraception may be associated with a reduction in income-related disparities in unintended pregnancy rates,” said lead author Dr. Vanessa Dalton. She’s an obstetrician-gynecologist at Michigan Medicine Von Voiglander Women’s Hospital, in Ann Arbor……For the study, the researchers examined birth rates among 4.6 million women aged 15 to 45 who had employer-sponsored health plans between 2008 an 2013, before the ACA eliminatd cost-sharing for contraceptives. It compared those rates to the time period between 2014 and 2018, after the ACA (also known as Obamacare) was passed.The investigators found lower birth rates, as well as a decrease in women not filling their birth control prescriptions.The ACA included contraception as a preventative service that most employer-sponsored insurance plans were required to provide. This gave women access to birth control, including long-acting forms of birth control such as intrauterine devices, with no co-pays or deductible payments… November 10, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi, Schumer Joint Statement on Supreme Court Oral Arguments for Trump-GOP Lawsuit to Strip Health Care Coverage from Millions of Americans”. From the press release: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) today issued the following joint statement on the Supreme Court hearing of the Trump-Republican backed lawsuit to strip health care protections from millions of Americans during a global pandemic:“Today, the Trump-Republican plan to repeal the Affordable Care Act and strip health care away from millions of Americans during a global pandemic was on full display as the California v. Texas lawsuit was heard by the Supreme Court. Republicans have tried and failed to repeal the ACA at least 70 times in Congress and twice through the courts, but as it was heard in today’s oral arguments, the Supreme Court must be deferential to Congress’s intent and uphold the law. With their legal argument detached from reality, Senate Republicans rushed through the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court just days before the election, in an obvious attempt to make good on President Trump’s promise to only appoint judges who would ‘terminate’ the ACA.“With support for the ACA at an all-time-high, Republicans are still waging a decade-long war against Americans’ health care protections. If the Trump-GOP lawsuit is successful, more than 20 million Americans could lose their health care coverage, 130 million Americans with pre-existing conditions could lose protections, and drug costs could skyrocket for seniors. Republicans voted just weeks ago to greenlight this lawsuit but still falsely try to claim they will protect Americans with preexisting conditions. It is clear that striking down the ACA is what Republicans want.“Democrats believe this lawsuit has no merit, and we will continue to fight to make coverage more affordable for all Americans.” November 11, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Court Lets Part of Tennessee Abortion Ban Take Effect”. From the press release: Today, a 6th Circuit Court of Appeals panel granted a request from the state of Tennessee, letting part of a law take effect that prohibits abortion based on a patient’s reason, including a potential Down syndrome diagnosis or the sex or race of the fetus. These “reason bans” were signed into law in July as part of a larger abortion bill that also contains a series of gestational age bans prohibiting abortion starting at six weeks in pregnancy — all of which were immediately blocked by a lower court.Today’s ruling will allow the reason bans to take effect while the litigation continues. The groups that brought this case will be going back to the district court later tonight to ask for a temporary restraining order blocking these reason bans once again, on the grounds that it is a violation of the constitutional right to abortion before viability. These kinds of reason bans inflict harm by peddling stigma around abortions and stereotypes of Asian Americans and Black and brown communities, and by attempting to co-opt the mantle of disability rights.“These bans are just another way anti-abortion politicians are attempting to limit the constitutional right to abortion care and to create stigma,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “Decisions about whether and when to continue or end a pregnancy are best made by the individual and their family. We will continue to fight these bans in the courts.”……More than a dozen states have passed similar reason bans. Tennessee’s gestational age bans, which would ban abortion at nearly every stage of pregnancy starting as early as six weeks, remain blocked through this same lawsuit.Tennessee has many additional abortion restrictions on the books, including a ban on the use of telehealth for medication abortion; limits on when state and public insurance can cover abortion services; and a requirement that minors obtain parental consent. A federal district court struck down the state’s 48-hour waiting period for abortion in October in a case litigated by the Center and Planned Parenthood. The Center, Planned Parenthood, and the ACLU filed another case challenging the state’s medication abortion “reversal” law in August, and that law has been temporarily blocked from taking effect.The case was filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the ACLU of Tennessee on behalf of the Memphis Center for Reproductive Health, Planned Parenthood Tennessee and North Mississippi, Knoxville Center for Reproductive Health, carafem, and two abortion providers in Tennessee. November 11, 2020: National Women’s Law Center posted an article titled: “What you might have missed this week: Voters Protect Abortion Access in Colorado but Louisiana Legislators Pass Yet Another Anti-Abortion Measure”. It was written by Anna Rodriquez. From the article: …ColoradoProp 115 would have banned abortion after 22 weeks gestation, with no exceptions for health or individual circumstances. The proposal was intentionally confusing and a threat to people who become pregnant as a result of rape, people whose health is endangered by carrying a pregnancy to term, and pregnant people with a lethal fatal diagnosis. Bans on abortion like Prop 115 particularly target Black, Latinx, and Indigenous people; LGBTQ+ people; people with low-income; and folks who live rurally.A coalition lead by Abortion Access for All, among others, successfully defended Coloradans’ access to abortion care yet again. This was the fourth time in twelve years Coloradans have voted against anti-abortion ballot measures. Lucy Olena, Campaign Manager at No on 115 Campaign’s stated, “when we build a diverse movement and educate people about the complex realities of abortion later in pregnancy, voters unite to reject the bans.”This is another example of how Colorado is a leader on reproductive health, rights and justice, but this win is not just a victory for Coloradans. Colorado has become a safe-haven for out-of-state families, many who travel from states, like Texas, due to abortion restrictions.LouisianaLouisianans have faced an onslaught of medically unnecessary abortion restrictions, with anti-abortion legislators passing over 89 abortion restrictions since the passage of Roe, well above any other state. Just a few months ago, the Supreme Court slapped down one of Louisiana’s anti-abortion laws, in June Medical Services v. Russo, but Louisiana lawmakers are still at it – no matter the consequences for Louisiana families and healthcare providers.Anti-abortion legislators got their wish when voters approved Amendment 1. The Amendment adds language to the state constitution stating “to protect human life, a right to abortion and the funding of abortion shall not be found in the Louisiana Constitution.”… November 12, 2020: American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) posted news titled: “President-Elect Biden’s Reproductive Freedom To-Do List”. It was written by Georgeanne M. UsovA, Legislative Counsel. From the news: After four years of attacks on our reproductive rights and health by the Trump administration and the anti-abortion legislators it has emboldened around the country, there is much to repair. When President-elect Biden and Vice President-elect Harris take office, their administration must make it a top priority to not just undo the damage, but to take bold, visionary steps to make reproductive health care — including abortion — accessible to all, regardless of their income or ZIP code. Congress, too, has a key role to play in ensuring that everyone is afforded the dignity to make our own decisions about our lives.Here are just a few of the many items that should top our elected officials’ to-do list:Reverse dangerous Trump administration regulations targeting reproductive health care including: The refusal of care rule, which aimed to dramatically expand health care institutions’ and workers’ ability to withhold and obstruct access to essential, even life-saving medical care and information — with no regard for patients’ well-being. While it was rightly struck down in court, it is one of many attempts by the Trump administration to invoke religious or personal beliefs to justify discrimination, particularly against LGBTQ people and people seeking reproductive health care. The Biden administration must ensure that religious liberty is never used as a license to discriminate, and that patients’ needs always come first in health care.The rule undermining the ACA’s birth control benefit, which allows employers and universities to deny their employees or students insurance coverage for contraception by invoking religious or moral objections. This is yet another example of how the Trump administration has discriminated against those seeking health care under the guise of protecting religious liberty. In July, the Supreme Court allowed this discriminatory rule to take effect, potentially robbing hundreds of thousands of people of their no-cost birth control coverage, and forcing employees and students to instead pay out of pocket. The Biden administration must guarantee that no one is denied birth control coverage because of where they work or where they go to school.The rule that has devastated Title X, the 50-year-old family planning program that has provided 4 million patients with low or no incomes with affordable birth control, cancer screenings, STI testing and treatment, and other critical preventive care. The rule prohibits family planning clinics that participate in the program from referring patients for abortion care and imposes other onerous and dangerous requirements. It has resulted in the widespread loss of Title X providers and reduced access to family planning services for those who rely on the program. The Biden administration must restore and rebuild the critical Title X program. Ensure safe access to medication abortion during the pandemic and beyond.During the pandemic, the Trump administration went all the way to the Supreme Court to make it as difficult as possible for people to safely access medication abortion care — specifically mifepristone, a prescription medication that has been used to safely end early pregnancies and treat early miscarriages for 20 years. The administration has refused to allow patients to obtain their prescription by mail, insisting that patients travel to a health center solely to pick up a pill, subjecting patients to needless COVID-19 risks. This is despite the Food and Drug Administration having suspended similar requirements for other, far less safe medications during the pandemic. The ACLU won in court, blocking the in-person requirement during the pandemic, but the Supreme Court will soon consider the Trump administration’s request to reinstate it.This in-person dispensing requirement is part of a longstanding package of outdated, medically unnecessary FDA restrictions that, even prior to COVID-19, have obstructed access to medication abortion — particularly for people with low incomes and communities of color. The Biden administration must immediately pause enforcement of the mifepristone in-person dispensing requirement during the public health emergency. And the FDA should undertake a comprehensive review of the full set of restrictions on mifepristone to ensure that, beyond the pandemic, patients’ access to this safe, effective medication is based on the latest science and medical evidence. Make the Hyde Amendment history once and for all.President-elect Biden has pledged his support for ending the Hyde Amendment, a harmful ban on abortion coverage for people enrolled in Medicaid and other insurance programs. For decades, Hyde and related bans have pushed abortion care out of reach for people struggling to make ends meet, particularly women of color — the same communities that face severe health care disparities as a result of structural inequality and are now being hit hardest by the pandemic and economic crisis. Now it’s time for Biden to take the critical first step toward ending these discriminatory coverage bans by striking Hyde and all related abortion coverage restrictions from his first budget. This, along with calling on Congress to pass the EACH Woman Act to lift coverage bans, will send a clear message that this administration will work to make abortion not only legal, but also accessible to all. Enact a natiowide safeguard against state restrictions.States have passed more than 460 politically motivated laws to push abortion care out of reach over the last decade çefforts buoyed recently by Trump’s appointment of multiple Supreme Court justices. These laws range from bans on abortion from the earliest days of pregnancy, to laws that interfere with the provider-patient relationship like forced ultrasounds and mandatory delay periods, to clinic shutdown laws that force patients to travel long distances (paying for transportation, lodging, and child care in the process) to obtain care. These restrictions have so severely eroded access to care across vast regions of the country, leaving the right to abortion effectively hollow for many people. President-elect Biden should also call for swift passage of the Women’s Health Protection Act to address the crisis of state attacks on abortion access. WHPA would put a stop to these state attacks and, paired with EACH, would make care more affordable and accessible for people throughout the country… November 12, 2020: Lambda Legal posted a press release titled: “West Virginia Medicaid Participants and State Employees File Lawsuit to Challenge Unlawful Ban on Transgender Health Care Coverage”. From the press release: A federal lawsuit challenging West Virginia’s blanket exclusions for coverage of gender-affirming care in West Virginia’s Medicaid and state employee health insurance plans was filed today. The class-action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia on behalf of Christopher Fain, a Medicaid participant; and Zachary Martell and Brian McNemar, a dependent and state employee, respectively. The suit was filed by Lambda Legal, Nicholas Kaster, PLLP, and the Employment Law Center, PLLC.“Transgender and nonbinary West Virginians are denied coverage for essential, and sometimes life-saving, gender-confirming care – while cisgender West Virginians recieve coverage for the same kind of care as a matter of course. The exclusions of gender-confirming care in West Virginia’s state health plans are unconstitutional and discriminatory, and deny transgender and nonbinary West Virginians basic dignity, equality, and respect,” said Avatara Smith-Carrington, Tyrone Garner Memorial Fellow at Lambda Legal and lead attorney on the case.Fain v. Crouch is a class action lawsuit challenging blanket exclusions of coverage for gender-affirming care in West Virginia’s state health plans. The blanket exclusions of coverage for care are stated expressly in the health plans offered to Medicaid participants and to state employees. West Virginia’s state health plans serve approximately 564,000 Medicaid participants and 15,000 state employees……Christopher Fain studies nonprofit leadership at Marshall University and works at a clothing store in Huntington. He is enrolled in Medicaid, the nation’s largest healthcare provider for low-income individuals, but the program does not cover his testosterone prescription, forcing Mr. Fain to cover his care out-of-pocket, creating a stressful and inequitable financial burden. The Medicaid plan’s exclusion of coverage for his care has caused Mr. Fain economic hardship and humiliation.Zachary Martell is married to Brian McNemar, who works as an accountant at a state hospital. Both Mr Martell and Mr McNemar rely on the state employee health plan for coverage. Mr. Martell – who receives coverage for care as Mr. McNemar’s dependent – has been denied coverage both for his prescriptions and office visits with his healthcare provider becasue the state employee health plans explicitly exclude coverage of “treatments associated with gender dysphoria.” As a result, Mr. Martell and Mr. McNemar have been forced to pay out-of-pocket for Mr. Martell’s care and, at times, even delay or forego care altogether……Learn more about the case: https://www.lambdalegal.org/in-court/cases/fain-v-crouchRead the complaint: https://www.lambdalegal.org/in-court/legal-docs/fain_wv_20201112_complaint November 12, 2020: Georgetown University Health Policy Institute Center for Family and Children posted a blog post titled: “What Can We Expect from Biden Administration on Work Requirement Waivers?”. It was written by Joan Alker. From the blog post: …As we have blogged about countless times, this group of “demonstrations” is nefarious policy that doesn’t support employment but does seem to result in people losing their health insurance. Promoting this approach has been a centerpiece of CMS Administrator Seems Verma’s legacy and part of a larger pattern of efforts by the Trump Administration to eliminate the Affordale Care Act, hobble Medicaid, and generally limit access to public coverage.So, what should we expect from a Biden-Harris Administration, the team that made access to health insurance a central tenet of their campaign, when they take office in January 2021? How easy is it to say goodbye and good riddence to these demonstrations?First, let’s review the basic law of Section 1115 demonstration waivers. States apply to the Secretary of Health and Human Services for permission to use federal funds to try out and evaluate new approaches to improving Medicaid coverage, As the recent litigaition on work requirement waivers has reminded us all – they are only granted at the discretion of the Secretary of Health and Human Services. And the Secretary of HHS must determine that the demonstration project is “likely to assist in promoting the objectives of title…XIX”……It is worth noting that no state is currently implementing work requirements – as a consequence of judicial intervention, states voluntarily delaying them, or postponed implementation. Moreover, while Medicaid’s disenrollment freeze associated with the public health emergency remains in efect, no state could terminate anyone’s Medicaid coverage for non-complyance with a work reporting requirement……Every waiver approval has a long list of “terms and conditions” many of which are boilerplate material that appear in every Medicaid demonstration. Either party – the state or federal government may terminate the demonstration. For a state to wind down a demonstration there are more conditions involved including public notice and comment etc. Federal CMS may withdraw approval of waivers “at any time if it determines that continuing the waivers… would no longer be in the public interest or promote the objectives of title XIX”. The state is guaranted the right to a hearing to challenge the federal determination……So there is no question that a new Secretary can unwind these demonstrations but when and how that will happen remains to be seen. It is not possible that this will happen overnight, but an early and strong signal of the intention of a new Biden Administration would be to quickly withdraw the 1/11/18 “Dear State Medicaid Director” letter issued by the Trump Administration encouraging states to apply for “community engagement” waivers. This would also have the effect of letting states know that pending or future requests for work requirements will not be granted… November 17, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Secures Victory in Lawsuit Defending Medicaid In-Home Supportive Service Workers”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today secured a court decision blocking the Trump Administration’s efforts to implement a rule that would have undermined the rights of more than half a million healthcare workers in California’s In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) Medicaid program, and several hundred thousand more workers nationwide. In California, these workers have the right to collectively bargain for better wages, benefits, and training, which results in a more stable, quality IHHS program for beneficiares. The court held that the rule would have unlawfully created barriers for states to deduct employee benefits and union dues from workers’ paychecks, a practice which makes it easier or workers to stand up together for their workplace rights and to provide quality home-and community-based care to those in need. The court found that the Trump Administration’s rule was illegally promulgated and vacated it.“When the President attacks unionized healthcare workers, he puts the care of hundreds of thousands of vulnerable Californians at risk. Now more than ever, our healthcare workers are heroes serving on the front lines of the pandemic, and should be applauded for their work,” said Attorney General Becerra. “Fortunately, the court saw through the administration’s faulty posturing and sent them packing. This ruling is a victory for our state and for the collective bargaining rights of homecare workers who play a vital role in our healthcare system. Together, we’ll continue to stand up for workers every step of the way.”……Attorney General Becerra was joined in the case by the attorneys general of Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, Oregon, and Washington.A copy of the decision is available here. November 19, 2020: National Women’s Law Center posted an article titled: “Celebrating the Wins: A Reminder the ACA is Working”. It was written by Lauren Wallace. From the article: …Here’s what we do know. The National Women’s Law Center has calculated that – thanks to the ACA – 84.3 million women have insurance coverage of preventative services, including birth control, without out-of-pocket costs (166 million people total). This is a 5% increase from 2019, meaning that nearly 3 milion more women had no-cost birth control coverage in 2020 than they did the year before. While this news alone is enough to rejoice in celebration, there’s even more to enjoy! A new study conducted by the University of Michigan reports that eliminating out-of-pocket costs for birth control is tied to narrowing the disparity in unintended pregnancy rates between lower-and higher-income women who have employer-sponsored health insurance. The investigators not only found that birth control benefit reduced unintended pregnancies, but also reduced the rate of women not filling their birth control prescriptions…. November 18, 2020: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities updated research titled: “States’ Experiences Confirm Harmful Effects of Medicaid Work Requirements”. It was written by Jennifer Wagner and Jessica Schubel. From the research: Beginning in 2018, the Trump Administration encouraged states to adopt policies taking Medicaid coverage away from people not meeting work requirements. While 12 states received approval for these policies, several were blocked by the courts, and none are currently in effect. But data from Arkansas’ ten-month implementation of its policy and brief implementation in Michigan and New Hampshire provide direct evidence of these policies’ harmful effects. A large fraction of people subject to the policies lost coverage or were at risk of losing coverage. In Arkansas more than 18,000 people – nearly 1 in 4 of those subject to work requirements – lost coverage over the course of just seven months. In New Hampshire, almost 17,000 people, or about 40 percent of those subject to work requirements, would have lost coverage had state policymakers not put the policy on hold. Some 80,000 Michiganders – nearly 1 in 3 of those subject to work requirements – were in danger of losing coverage had a court not stopped the policy.In all three states, evidence suggests that people who were working and people with serious health needs who had been eligible for exemptions lost coverage or were at risk of losing coverage due to red tape. Large numbers of beneficiaries in both states reported that they didn’t know about the work requirement or whether it applied to them. It’s likely that people with disabilities were paritcularly at risk.Taking coverage away from people not meeting work requirements also increases financial hardship and reduces access to care. A survey of people with low incomes in Arkansas and neighboring states showed that the people who lost coverage because of Arkansas’ work requirements experienced adverse consequences, including having problems paying off medical debt and delaying care or forgoing medications because of cost.Arkansas’ work requirement increased uninsured rates without increasing employment, studies by Harvard researchers found. In both an initial and a follow-up survey of people with low incomes in Arkansas and neighboring states, researchers found evidence that Arkansas’s policy increased uninsured rates; people who lost Medicaid did not transition to other coverage. The researchers found no evidence that it increased employment. …In January 2018, the Trump Administration began approving state work requirements in Medicaid, which the federal government had never previously permitted. Between June 2018 and March 2019, Arkansas, the first state to implement a work requirement, required some enrollees in the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) Medicaid expansion to document that they worked or engaged in work-related activities (e.g., job training or volunteer work) for at least 80 hours per month, unless they reported that they qualified for limited exemptions. In June 2019, New Hampshire began implementing its work requirement, requiring all expansion enrollees to work or engage in work-related activities for 100 hours each month or obtain an exemption. And in January 2020, Michigan began implementing its work requirement, requiring all expansion enrollees to work or engage in work-related activities for 80 hours each month or obtain an exemption.In March 2019, a federal district court vacated the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) approval of Arkansas’ work requirement policy (and a similar waiver in Kentucky, which had not yet been implemented), thereby preventing Arkansas from continuing to implement it. In February 2020, a federal appeals court upheld this decision, which the Trump Administration is now appealing to the Supreme Court. New Hampshire voluntarily suspended its work requirement in July 2019. A few weeks later, the same federal district court vacated HHS’ approval of New Hampshire’s policy, and in March 2020, it vacated HHS’ approval of Michigan’s work requirement policy as well.Arkansas is the only state to have taken coverage away from people for not meeting work requirements, but Michigan and New Hampshire did not pause their requirements until they were on the brink of doing so. Thus, all three states’ experiences provide important information about who loses coverage and why as a result of these policies.The Trump Administration has approved similar policies in other states, but due to court decisions, voluntary moratoriums states have adopted, and federal protections put in place during the pandemic, none of the others have been implemented (at least to date)……A study by Harvard researchers found that the uninsured rate among low-income Arkansans aged 30-49 – the group potentially subject to work requirements – rose from 10.5 percent in 2016 to 14.5 percent in 2018, after the work requirement took effect. There was no similar increase for low-income Arkansans of other ages or for low-income people aged 30-49 in other, similar states. This finding refutes claims, for example from HHS Secretary Alex Azar, that most people leaving Medicaid due to the policy did so because they found jobs with health insurance……Work Requirements Endanger People With DisabilitiesWhen the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), in announcing the Administration’s support for Medicaid work requirements, notified states that the policies must comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, we and others warned that protecting people with disabilities would prove impossible without extensive efforts. Indeed, Arkansas didn’t adequately explain beneficiaries’ rights under the Act, and it lacked a comprehensive system for providing reasonable modifications to protect people with disabilities, such as modifying the hourly requirement or providing support to help people meet the reporting requirement. Due to the lack of protections and the design of the work requirement itself, individuals with disabilities lost coverage and may face serious harm as a result. In fact, “people with disabilities were particularly vulnerable to losing coverage under the Arkansas work and reporting requirements, despite remaining eligible,” a Kaiser Family Foundation study concluded.Losing coverage is especially harmful to people with disabilities who rely on regular care to manage their conditions. Coverage interruptions and subsequent gaps in care can lead to increased emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and admissions to mental health facilities. In addition, the financial risk from medical expenses and debt is high for people with disabilities, who are already a greater risk of homelessness; additional financial hardship could make it harder for people with disabilities to afford other necessities like housing and food, which could contribute to bankruptcy or homelessness and further jeopardize their health… November 20, 2020: Lambda Legal posted a press release titled: “Lambda Legal Condemns Eleventh Circuit Ruling Striking Down Palm Beach County Conversion Therapy Ban”. From the press release: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit today reversed a lower court ruling and struck down local Palm Beach County, Florida, and the City of Boca Raton ordinances banning so-called conversion therapy on minors. Lambda Legal CEO Kevin Jennings issued the following statement:“The City of Boca Raton and Palm Beach County joined states and municipalities across the country who have properly banned the discredited and harmful practice of so-called ‘conversion therapy’ on minors in order to protect LGBTQ youth. Laws prohibiting this dangerous practice have withstood legal challenges in numerous courts. Today’s decision is a marked departure from precedent and an incredibly dangerous decision for our youth.“So-called ‘conversion therapy’ is nothing less than child abuse. It poses documented and proven critical health risks, including depression, shame, decreased self-esteem, social withdrawal, substance abuse, self-harm and suicide. Youth are often subjected to these practices at the insistance of parents who don’t know or don’t believe that the efforts are harmful and doomed to fail: when these efforts predictably fail to produce the expected result, many LGBTQ children are kicked out of their homes.“Both judged joining today’s decisions were appointed by President Trump. We fear that today’s decision may be the tip of the iceburg in terms of the harm that may come from a federal judiciary that has been packed for the last four years with dangerous ideologues. The damage done by this misguided opinion is incalcuable and puts young people in danger. November 22, 2020: Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent – Vermont) tweeted: “Health care is a human right, not a job benefit. We cannot continue spending twice as much per capita as any other country, while 92 million are uninsured or under-insured, and 68,000 die unnecessarily each year. Medicare for All is coming sooner or later. Let’s make it sooner.” November 23, 2020: Senator Maria Cantwell (Democrat – Washington) tweeted: “The Affordable Care Act stops companies from charging women more than men for the same health care plan. And the #Medicaid expansion in the #ACA has helped people in every corner of the State of Washington. That’s why it is so important to keep fighting for the ACA.” November 23, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Federal Court Allows Texas Politicians To Block Health Care Access for Medicaid Patients”. From the press release: Today, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Texas politicians will be able to block Medicaid patients from accessing care at Planned Parenthood health centers. These terminations are a blatantly political attack that will jeopardize critical health care access for Texans with low incomes during a global pandemic. This ruling has not yet taken effect, and for now Planned Parenthood health centers in Texas continue to serve Medicaid patients across the state. Today’s ruling is the latest in a long history of Texas’ attempts to score political points with relentless attacks on Planned Parenthood and access to health care. Earlier this year, Gov. Abbott blocked access to time-sensitive, essental abortion care in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, forcing some patients to travel hundreds of miles to neighboring states for the care they need. And during the 2019 legislative session, Texas politicians passed Senate Bill 22 – banning local governments from partnerships with trusted provideres, such as Planned Parenthood, for health care and education services.Generations of racism and discriminatory policies force a disproportionate number of people of color and women to enroll in public health programs like Medicaid. When politicians attack Medicaid patients, people of color and women who already navigate inherently discriminatory systems with fewer freedoms than others, lose the ability to choose the best provider for them. It’s just one more assault against the same communities that face unjust, systemic barriers to basic human rights, including access to affordable health care, education, and housing……Three additional states – Tennessee, South Carolina, and Idaho – have pending Medicaid waivers in front of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services that would restrict the ability of people enrolled in Medicaid to access Planned Parenthood health centers. Numerous other states have tried to terminate Planned Parenthood providers from Medicaid for baseless reasons, but most have been blocked by courts from doing so.This decision follows years of attempts by Texas to cut off Medicaid patients from Planned Parenthood based on a series of elaborate, false, and debunked claims peddled by the Center for Medical Progress. In 2011, Texas replaced its own state-funded program when the Obama administration refused to allow the Texas to exclude Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers from its Medicaid program. Earlier this year, the Trump administration allowed federal funds to go back into Texas’ failed program. November 23, 2020: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted news titled: “ACOG Updates Committee Opinion on Increasing Access to Abortion”. From the news: In updated guidance, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) reaffirms its longstanding position that access to safe abortion is a necessary component for comprehensive health care. The updated Committee Opinion on Increasing Access to Abortion responds to an increasingly restrictive policy environment and outlines specific legislative, structural, societal, and financial barriers that must be addressed in order to protect and expand equitable access to abortion care. The document also explains how stigma and fear of violence can be just as powerful as other factors in imposing barriers to care.Although abortion is extremely safe, it is often targeted for medically unnecessary, arbitrary requirements that restrict the ability of patients to access abortion care. Specifically, the Committee Opinion calles for the cease and repeal of: bans on abortion at arbitrary gestational ages,requirements that only physicians or obstetrician-gynecologists may provide abortion care,telemedicine bans,restrictions on medication abortion,requirements for mandatory counseling and forced delay before obtaining care,ultrasound requirements,mandated parental involvement, andfacility and staffing requirements known as Targeted Regulation of Abortion Provider (TRAP) laws. “Abortion is important to the health and lives of our patients, yet access remains a legislative and regulatory target at both the state and the federal levels,” said Eva Chalas, MD, FACOG, FACS, President of ACOG. “Data have shown that when abortion is restricted, our patients’ health suffers. That’s why ACOG is committed to leading the medical community in pursuing evidence-based policies and structural change that will make essential abortion care accessible and available.”“For the sake of patients across the country, we must continue to advocate for the repeal of barriers to abortion access and for patient-focused, constructive policies to protect the health and well-being of patients and to promote equitable care,” said Daniel Grossman, MD, who contributed to the Committee Opinion. “But beyond that, we must work together as a community to address the stigma and fear that prevents some patients from getting the care they need and that prevents some clinicians from offering comprehensive reproductive medical care that includes abortion.”“Restrictions and barriers on access to abortion care disproportionately impact those who are historically marginalized from medical care more broadly. This includes young people, people of color, those living in rural areas, those with low incomes, and individuals who are incarcerated” said Jamila Perritt, MD, MPH, Chair of the ACOG Committee on Health Care for Underserved Women, which issued the guidance. “Focusing our efforts on improving access for communities most affected by these barriers and restrictions will improve health outcomes for all.”Protecting comprehensive reproductive health care access is a policy priority for ACOG. This year, ACOG secured a nationwide temporary injunction against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone, providing many ACOG members with the option of prescribing medication abortion to patients through the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic without exposing themselves and their patients to unnecessary risk of infection or travel delays. November 23, 2020: Lambda Legal posted a press release titled: “Lambda Legal Takes Blue Cross Blue Shield of Illinois to Court Over Anti-Transgender Policy”. From the press release: Today, Lambda Legal and Sirianni Youtz Spoonemore Hamberger PLLC filed a federal lawsuit challenging Blue Cross Blue Shield of Illinois’s (“BCBSIL”) administration of a blanket exclusion of gender-affirming care in an employer-provided health insurance plan provided by Catholic Health Initiatives Franciscan. The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District in Washington in Tacoma on behalf of a 15-year-old transgender boy “C.P.”, and his parent, and argues that the exclusion is in direct violation of the nondiscrimination provisions under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act.“My son needs the medical care that will allow him to live, be healthy, and to thrive. However, because he is transgender, I have to fight and jump through hoops for him to have access to the care that he needs, is legally entited to and that he deserves,” said Pattie Prichard, C.P.’s mother and the primary beneficiary on the employer-provided health benefit plan that BCBSIL administers. “This denial also sends a message to my son and all transgender people, that their health care needs aren’t real or they’re not worthy of care. I won’t accept that.”BCBSIL is a “covered health entity” under the ACA, which means BCBSIL cannot, and it has represented that it does not, discriminate on the basis of race, national origin, sex, age, and disability. The ACA’s Section 1557, which BCBSIL agrees it must abide by, prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex and gender identity, such as in the provision of transition-related care. As such, BCBSIL cannot administer the discriminatory terms of the health plan provided by Pattie Pritchard’s employer – St. Michael Medical Center in Bremerton, Washington, which is part of the Catholic Helath Initiatives Franciscan Health System, now known as CommonSpirit Health.“The law is clear, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Illinois cannot deny C.P., or any transgender person, the health care that he needs,” said Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, Senior Attorney and Health Care Strategist for Lambda Legal. “Section 1557 of the ACA expressly prohibits categorical bans on gender-affirming care because it is discrimination on the basis of sex, plain and simple. BCBSIL cannot adopt or administer discriminatory terms on behalf of others. As a covered entity under the ACA, BCBSIL has to play by the same rules as everyone else, no exceptions.”……C.P. is a dependent on his mother’s employer-provided health insurance plan and began receiving medically necessary gender-affirming care three years ago. Recently, however, C.P. and his family were informed that some of his care would not be covered because of an exclusion of any care “for or leading to gender reassignment surgery”, including the same care and medical interventions that other cisgender patients receive without question or problem. C.P.’s family has had to pay out-of-pocket for his care, causing unnecessary financial stress……The case is C.P. v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Illinois and is being litigated by Lambda Legal Senior Attorney and Health Care Strategist Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, Law and Policy Director Jennifer C. Pizer and Eleanor Hamburger of Sirianni Youtz Spoonemore Hamburger PLLC, in Seattle, Washington.Read the complaint here: https://www.lambdalegal.org/in-court/legal-docs/cp_wa_20201123_complaintLearn more about the case here: https://www.lambdalegal.org/in-court/cases/cp-v-bcbsil November 25, 2020: Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent – Vermont) tweeted: “The year 2020 has been very difficult for mental health. The pandemic, isolation and economic downturn has greatly increased depression, anxiety and suicidal ideation. When we talk about real health care reform, we mean a major expansion of mental health services.” November 27, 2020: Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent – Vermont) tweeted: “The United States cannot continue to be the only major country not to guarantee health care to all. Too many people are unnecessarily dying, getting sick or going bankrupt because of thsie cruel and dysfunctional system. Health care is a human right, not a privilege Let’s do it”. November 29, 2020: Georgetown University Health Policy Institute Center for Children and Families posted a report titled: “HIV and Medicaid Expansion: Failure of Southern States to Expand Medicaid Makes Elimination of HIV Infection in the United States Much Harder to Achieve”. It was written by Adam Searing, JD, MPH and Adaora A. Adimora, MD, MPH. From the report: Key Findings Advances in public health programs and medical treatment mean HIV can be treated successfully in the long term, improving the health of individuals and significantly reducing the spread of the infection. Ending the HIV epidemic in the United States is achievable. However, lack of health coverage is a major barrier to success in the fight against HIV as without health coverage, individuals are unable to access medical treatment that can improve their health and minimize the spread of HIV.These medical treatments combined with a robust health campaign, have led to a decline in HIV infection and transmission in many states. The HIV epidemic has slowed. Approximately 45 percent of all people living with an HIV diagnosis in the U.S. live in the South despite the region containing only about one-third of the total U.S. population. In addition, more than half (52 percent) of all new HIV diagnoses in 2017 were in the South.Medicaid expansion is a key building block to ending the HIV epidemic. Unfortunately, 12 states – largely in the South – are still refusing the federal funding for Medicaid expansion and leaving many people and families who could benefit from HIV interventions still lacking access to comprehensive health coverage. Only 5 percent of people with HIV remain uninsured in states that have been implemented the Medicaid expansion, compared to a 19 percent uninsured rate among people with HIV in non-expansion states. Expanding Medicaid would significantly improve health care in coverage for people with HIV and their families and move the U.S. forward in the public health fight to end the HIV epidemic IntroductionAdvances in public health programs and medical treatment mean HIV can be treated successfully in the long term, improving the health individuals and reducing the spread of the virus. While the federal government has multiple initiatives aimed at addressing and eventually eliminating HIV, a fundamental base to ensure successful health outcomes for people with HIV and the families is access to comprehensive, affordable health care coverage. A proven way to increase levels of coverage is for states to expand Medicaid under the federal Affordable Care Act (ACA).Unfortunately, the 12 states—largely in the South—still refusing the federal funding for Medicaid expansion leave many people and families who could benefit from HIV interventions still lacking access to comprehensive health coverage. Expanding Medicaid would significantly improve health care and coverage for people with HIV and their families. Medicaid is the key building block to ending the epidemic. States that have not expanded medicaid coverage experience moreHIV infections and higher mortality rates from the condition. Failure to prioritize Medicaid expansion in dealing with HIV ignores extensive research and the fact that the center of the epidemic in the United States—the South—is also the center of resistance among states to expanding Medicaid. Federal and state plans to reduce and eliminate HIV infection must acknowledge the important role of Medicaid expansion.Layered on top of the HIV epidemic is the current COVID-19 pandemic. Striking parallels between the response to HIV and COVID-19 were pointed out earlier this year in the course of the pandemic. The urgency of dealing with COVID-19 severely complicates the ongoing response to the HIV epidemic, making response to HIV and multiple other public health challenges more difficult. However, the basic fact remains that successful response to the HIV epidemic requires more health coverage through Medicaid expansion.... Key Things to Know About Joe Biden’s Health Care PlanOctober 25, 2020Out of Spoons / Public HealthPhoto by Gustavo Fring from Pexels Joe Biden’s health care plan is built upon the Affordable Care Act (also called ACA or “Obamacare”). It is not a direct copy, however. Joe Biden’s health plan starts with the ACA, and builds up from there. The purpose is to make sure everyone can afford good health insurance coverage. Building on the Affordable Care Act Making it More Affordable Right now, families and individuals that make between 100% and 400% of the federal poverty index may receive a tax credit to help them pay for premiums on ACA insurance purchased through the Marketplace. The dollar amount eligible families and individuals receive was designed to ensure that families don’t have to pay more than a certain percentage of their income on health insurance premiums. The dollar amount of of the tax credit that eligible families and individuals receive was based on a silver plan. But, that amount is still too high for some eligible families or individuals to pay for. Another problem hits families that make more than 400% of the federal poverty level (which is about $50,000 for a single person and $100,000 for a family of four). These people don’t qualify for financial assistance in the form of a tax credit that can be used to pay for their ACA health insurance premiums. This makes ACA plans too expensive for them to afford. Joe Biden will fix this problem by eliminating the $400,000 cap on tax credit eligibility. Doing so would allow individuals and families who make more than 400% of the federal poverty level to be eligible for tax credits that they can use on an ACA plan from the Marketplace. The Biden Plan is also going to increase the size of tax credits by basing them on a gold plan – the most generous plan on the Marketplace – instead of the silver plan. Doing so gives more people the ability to afford more generous coverage. Expanding Medicaid The Affordable Care Act expanded Medicaid eligibility for low-income Americans. Unfortunately, governors and legislators in some states, including Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Wisconsin and Wyoming, still refuse to expand Medicaid eligibility. Some states have tried to implement work requirements in order for low-income people to be eligible for Medicaid. On March 27, 2019, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg blocked Kentucky from implementing their work requirements and Arkansas from continuing its program. At the time, more than 18,000 Arkansas enrollees had lost Medicaid coverage since that work requirement mandate began. Judge Boasberg said that the approval of work requirements by the Department of Health and Human Services “is arbitrary and capricious because it did not address… how the project would implicate the ‘core’ objective of Medicaid: the provision of medical coverage to the needy.” In February of 2020, residents of Kentucky and Arkansas brought an action to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Their argument was that Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar “acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner when he approved Medicaid demonstration requests for Kentucky and Arkansas” (referring to the work requirements). Joe Biden believes that access to affordable health insurance shouldn’t depend on the politics of the state that you happen to live in. The Biden Plan will ensure that people who are eligible for Medicaid – but aren’t getting it due to the politics of their state government – will get Medicaid coverage. The coverage will come through the premium-free public option, which will cover the full scope of Medicaid benefits. States that have already expanded Medicaid will have the choice of moving the expansion population to the premium-free public option (as long as those states continue to pay their current share of the cost covering those individuals). Biden’s plan will ensure that people making below 138% of the federal poverty level get covered. They will automatically be enrolled in the premium-free public option when they interact with certain institutions (such as public schools), or other programs for low-income people (such as SNAP). What is the Public Option? Biden’s Plan includes something for people that don’t like “Obamacare”. It is called the public option. It is similar to the premium-free public option that people who are eligible for Medicaid would receive. Those who make too much money to be eligible for Medicaid can purchase a public option health insurance like Medicare. To be clear, the public option is not a “Medicare for All” plan. In my opinion, it might serve as the basis upon which a true “Medicare for All” plan could be built up from. At the start, however, the public option plan will require people to pay for it. The good news is that, just like with the Medicare we know today, the public option would reduce costs for patients by negotiating lower prices from hospitals and other health care providers. It will better coordinate among all of a patient’s doctors to improve efficacy and quality of care. Primary care will be covered without any co-payments. Whether you’re covered through your employer, buying your health insurance on your own, or going without coverage altogether, Biden will give you the choice to purchase a public health insurance option like Medicare. Small businesses that find themselves struggling to afford health insurance coverage for their workers could find relief though the public option plan. Vox has an article that was written by Matthew Yglesias in July of 2019 that provides a good explanation of why Biden’s public option plan would be a great choice for many people: …Medicare pays lower unit prices than almost any private health insurance plan because it’s such a big program that it’s able to drive a very hard bargain. Biden is promising to unleash that same bargaining power on behalf of a public option available to all Americans — which should generate an insurance option that is cheaper for patients and stingier to providers. That’s why the Partnership for America’s Health Care Future — a joint venture of the American Medical Association, the American Hospital Association, and a bunch of other health industry groups — don’t like it. Industry likes the idea of government-subsidized health care but hates the idea of government-orchestrated bargaining over prices.But that’s why Biden’s proposal would be a much bigger deal than the hypothetical ACA public option. By using Medicare purchasing power, the public option would deliver lower premiums, which would make it a very attractive option for all kinds of people who currently have private insurance. Nobody would be “forced” onto the public plan, but in practice lots of people would opt for it… Lowering the Cost of Prescription Drugs Companies that make prescription medications currently do not have to negotiate with Medicare over drug prices. This causes the cost of medications to be too high for many people who are covered by Medicare (including seniors and people with disabilities). Biden’s plan will change that by repealing the existing law that explicitly bars Medicare from negotiating lower prices with drug corporations. Remove that law, and pharmaceutical companies will have to negotiate lower prices with Medicare. The result will be much lower costs on prescription drugs for people who are currently covered by Medicare. It will also benefit those who chose to purchase Biden’s public option. In addition, Biden’s Plan will limit launch prices for biotech drugs that have little to no competition. Under the Biden Plan, the Secretary of Health and Human Services will establish an independent review board to asses the value of biotech drugs. The board will recommend a reasonable price, based on the average price in other countries. This is called external reference pricing. In short, it means finding out what a medication costs outside of the United States, and negotiating with pharmaceutical companies for a reasonable price. This will lower the cost of prescriptions for people who use Medicare or the public option. Biden’s Plan will also allow private “Obamacare” plans that participate in the individual Marketplace to access a similar rate. Biden’s Plan will also allow consumers to buy prescription drugs from other countries. Personally, I think this is a fantastic idea! It would force pharmaceutical companies to lower their costs in order to compete with the less expensive medications from outside of the United States. Biden’s Plan also will improve the price of generic medication by accelerating the development of safe generics. This could be done via The CREATES Act that would ensure that generic manufacturers have access to a sample of a brand name drug. But Wait, There’s More! Here are more things that Biden will do to protect people’s access to health care: Stop “Surprise Billing”: Would put an end to unexpected medical bills that consumers get stuck with because they had no way of knowing that a specialist at a hospital who treated them was not part of their insurance company’s network. Biden’s plan would bar health care providers from charging patients out-of-network rates when the patient doesn’t have control over which provider they see (for example, during a hospitalization). California passed a law in 2017 that banned “surprise billing”.Expand Access to Abortion: Biden’s supports repealing of the Hyde Amendment. That controversial amendment was passed in 1976 (just a few years after Roe v. Wade). It barred federal Medicaid funds from being used for abortion – except for instances in which the woman’s life would be endangered by carrying out the pregnancy. The Hyde Amendment prevents low-income pregnant people who want an abortion from obtaining one because they can’t use Medicaid to pay for it. Reverse the Trump Administration and states assault on women’s right to choose: Biden will work to codify Roe v. Wade and his Justice Department will do everything in its power to stop state laws that prevent pregnant people from getting abortion.Biden will rescind President Trump’s “Mexico City Policy”. It is also called the “Global Gag Rule” because it prevents global health organizations that provide help for malaria and HIV/AIDS in developing countries from providing that aid if they also offer information on abortion services.Restore Federal Funding to Planned Parenthood: Biden will reissue guidance specifying that states cannot refuse Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood and other providers that refer for abortions or provide related information. Biden will reverse the Trump Administration’s rule preventing Planned Parenthood and other family planning programs from obtaining Title X funds. Those funds are used to provide contraception, treatment of STIs, preventative services (screening for breast and cervical cancer), pregnancy tests and counseling, and educational programs.Reduce the Maternal Mortality Rate: Biden will institute a strategy that California came up with in which “crash carts” are used in hospitals to ensure that doctors can save the life of a person who has a hemorrhage while giving birth (or after giving birth). The maternal death rate for Black women is more than three times higher than the rate for non-Hispanic white women. The “crash carts” halved California’s maternal death rate.Defending Health Care Protections for All, Regardless of Gender, Gender Identity, or Sexual Orientation: Biden will overturn the Trump Administration rule that removed the “ObamaCare” nondiscrimination protections for sex and gender identity. It was released during Pride Month and targeted people who are LGBTQ+. It allowed doctors, receptionists, janitors, and anyone else working in a health care office to deny care to people who were LGBTQ+, and to people who were seeking contraception or abortion.Expanding Access to Mental Health Care: Biden will continue to make efforts to ensure enforcement of mental health parity laws and expand funding for mental health services. Key Things to Know About Joe Biden’s Health Care Plan is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Chronic Illness MomentsOctober 19, 2020Out of Spoons / Spoonie WritingPhoto by Pascal Meier on Unsplash What’s worse than struggling with chronic illneses? The answer to that question would be suffering through fall pollen season, while California is on fire, during a pandemic. In this blog, I have a collection of things I posted on social media while exhausted, sick, and on various drugs that somewhat alleviate my chronic illnesses. June 7: Earlier today, smoke came into my home through open windows. BBQ, I assumed. Windows got closed. Air conditioner turned on for filtering. I took Benadryl so I can breathe. Previous to smoke in air, I was wheezing due to the super strong winds we are having here. It kicks up dust, etc. Been avoiding Twitter, but went there just now. Turns out there’s a vegetation fire not too far away from me. The winds blew the smoke over here. Don’t worry, I am safe. June 10: I am having a really hard time focusing on anything today. Could be the heatwave. Could be * waves generally at 2020 * June 11: Back from acupuncture. Doing well! Acupuncture office is going all out on protecting people from COVID-19. Restaurants across the street have started to open up. NO ONE is wearing masks but me. My county has been getting more and more COVID-19 cases since people decided to stop wearing masks and stop social distancing. I expect things to close again real soon. June 16: Woke up today with a whole bunch of fibromyalgia pain starting at my hip and radiating through that leg (as fibro does). I suspect I “slept funny” and the pain started then. But, being asleep, I didn’t notice it until it I woke up. Have taken CBD. Waiting to see if that makes things better. If not – I have wine. I hope everyone else’s day is better than mine. June 17: This week, the mobile home park has had workers put “slurry” on the roads. This comes after ripping out, and improving the roads in… I think it was October. The roads with slurry look good. They managed to avoid covering what is being used as a sidewalk in the middle of the roads (that was designed to drain away rain water and that has new sewage pipes underneath it). Today, they added the slurry on the road right outside my home. It is making me miserable sick. Having a high pain day Taking appropriate meds In hopes of sleeping (June 26 haiku) Still a high pain day Benadryl helped a little I’m giving it time (June 26 haiku) Anemia sucks Crossed over the borderline Am lost in a fog (July 2 haiku) Acupuncture day! I feel so much better now. And had a great nap (July 14 haiku) July 19: My day started with my body deciding to reject all the food I’d eaten. Not happy about this at all! July 19: Just learned that the building that includes the office where I go to acupuncture is currently on fire. July 19: Update: It is being described as a construction fire. It turns out the address the fire department listed is NOT the building my acupuncturist’s office is in. The pollen count is Seven point eight today and I’m malfunctioning (August 5 haiku) August 18: Bought a box of cookies from the grocery store and had them delivered (with other groceries). Before doing so, I went to the cookie company’s website and looked up the ingredients in these cookies. Either the ingredients on the website were outdated, or I missed it. These chocolate chip gluten free cookies have rosemary in them. It tastes like pine. A quick check of Wikipedia says rosemary is related to pine. I’m very allergic to pine (and fir, etc.). Spat out the cookie and am now on Benadryl. I’m safe, just really annoyed. August 23: The pollen count today is 8.0. I will be itchy and uncomfortable all day long. The weather app on my phone has yet another warning that says “Smoke”. Pollen.com says tomorrow will be 8.1 and will go up from there. Wednesday will be a 9.0, and Thursday is gonna be 9.6. I’m going to be physically miserable for a while. August 26: The pollen count today is 9.5 Tomorrow will be the same. Friday is gonna be 9.8. Saturday will be 10.3, and Sunday will be 10.8. I will not remember anything that happens on days that hit 10 or higher. August 28: The pollen count today is 9.9. It’s gonna be in the tens for… let’s see… in the four days coming up. This is REALLY BAD (and painful). I may become too delirious to type. September 2: The pollen count today 10.8. Tomorrow will be 10.4. This is gonna hurt. It is the start of a new month, so I’m trying real hard to get some paid writing work done before the pollen makes me absolutely useless. September 4: Pollen count today is 10.4 Not happy about it. September 6: Today the pollen count is 9.6 I am itchy and grumpy. Trying to write as much stuff for pay as I can before my body requires medication. The medication will (hopefully) reduce the itching. But it will also make it harder for my dyslexic self to write. September 6: The local college recorded a temperature of 120 degrees today. It is the most official recorder of weather temperatures in town. Our AC has been on all day – it is still incredibly hot in here at 5:30 PM. There is a grass fire burning over on the other side of town. Videos online show that there are already fire trucks and firefighters there. Overhead, a scout plane from the fire department circles. The fire is not close enough, or big enough (at this moment) to put us at risk of having to evacuate. This explains why my weather app is warning me about smoke. September 6: There is now a second fighter plane marking the site of the fire from the air. My husband thinks he heard a helicopter – which could be doing air drops to put out the grass fire. September 6: About half an hour ago, local fire department tweeted that the fire activity has diminished significantly. 50 acre fire. No reported structure losses (so far). Forward progress has been stopped. People closer to the fire than I am are being evacuated. The city is providing a city bus to take people to a nearby shopping mall. The bus has AC. My husband and I are not in any danger from the fire – other than the smoke in the air. We have windows shut and the AC on. It is still too warm in here at nearly 7 p.m. California has declared a stage 2 emergency (regarding the usage of electrical power). “Consumers should prepare for outages. Conservation will be critical for avoiding or limiting power interruptions.” In short, its possible our power could go out at any moment. Which means we will have to open the windows to prevent our home from becoming even hotter inside than it is now. Which means we will be breathing in smoke from the fire. I’m hoping our power stays on. September 6 (hours later): Good news! The stage one emergency has been lifted (about an hour ago). This means my husband and I do not have to worry about our power suddenly being shut off. The evacuation orders have been lifted for the fire. (We were never under evacuation orders). Forward progress on the fire has been stopped. Fire crews are continuing to work on the fire. September 7: The pollen count today is 9.4. The is the thirteenth day in a row where the pollen count is way too high for me to be comfortable. The weather app says there is still enough smoke in the air to have reason to keep the windows shut. Gonna be 100 degrees today at around 1:00 P.M. And the mobile home park is in the midst of yet another construction project. Fortunately, this one isn’t located immediately outside my house. Instead, large trucks haul debris past my house all day long. September 7: Right now, my weather app says it is 102 degrees outside. The airport, which is the official record of temperature, says 108 was the high overall today. When I rolled out of bed around 3 in the afternoon (I’m nocturnal) my weather app said it was 106 degrees here. There is still a lot of smoke in the air, so we can’t open the windows… again. We have AC. Pollen count is 9.4 – which is very unpleasant. Today’s new fire is described by the local fire department as “a fully engulfed vehicle fire with threat to vegetation.” It appears this fire is nearly out at the time I am writing this. That fire is not near me, but there’s a chance smoke from it will drift over here. There are a lot of things I love about California – but fire season isn’t one of them. Especially during a heat wave that takes place during fall pollen season. September 9: Today, the pollen count is 9.4. It’s not good, but it is better than the tens that came before it. The heat wave has ended, and the weather here is comfortable for the first time in I can’t remember how long. The weather app on my phone still says there is smoke in the air. My air purifier has needed a new filter for a while now. Today, my husband put a new one in. This involves washing off a reusable part and and letting it dry before putting it back into the machine. For an hour or so, I was sitting inside my home with a face mask on, to filter the dust. Am now on Benadryl. I’ve already taken most of my allergy meds (and can take a different one in a few hours). Not a good day. But I’ve been worse. Here’s where I began losing track of the days. September 10: Today, the pollen count is 9.4. Again. My weather app says today will be a high of 80, which sounds pretty good. The app no longer shows a smoke warning, but the sky outside is definitely full of smoke – again. Today’s fire (well, one of them) is in another county and far enough away for my husband and I not to have to worry about evacuation. September 10 (hours later): The pollen count today is 9.4 (again). That makes five days in a row with pollen count in the nines. It has been 17 days in a row where the pollen is too high for me. My weather app says fog – not smoke – which is a pleasant change. Sun isn’t up yet, so I’ll check later to see if it is just fog – or if it is fog and smoke, or whatever. I’m exhausted. I’m trying to get some paid work done while I can. I’ve been sleeping more than usual. Today is only September 10? It feels like we should be farther through this month than we are. September 10: Update: The sun has come up and there is a thick fog in the air. It looks like the kind of “fog” we get when the clouds over the ocean roll in. My weather app is, once again, giving me a smoke warning. Which means what I’m seeing outside is a mix of fog and smoke from fires. I started getting allergy symptoms and some coughing before I looked out the window to see what today was like. This sucks. September 11: Today’s pollen count is 9.2 – a tiny tiny improvement over yesterday. It has now been six days in a row where the pollen count has been in the nines and… either 18 or 19 days where the pollen count has been too high for me to be comfortable. I’ve lost track, despite literally writing it down. My weather app is giving me a smoke warning. Again. Yesterday, the Clean Air Twitter account for my county said: “Smoke impacts across have increased. Air quality levels have degraded into the MODERATE level with some occasional spikes of Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups. If you smell smoke, see ash falling, or are experiencing symptoms, head indoors. People on Twitter, who live in or near the places that are on fire on the West Coast have been experiencing symptoms including nausea, migraine, vomiting, exhaustion. I’ve been nauseous for days, despite not going outside, and (mostly) having the windows closed. I assumed it was due to allergies, but no. It’s smoke. September 11: Took a long nap. When I woke up, my weather app had an “Unhealthy Air Quality” warning. The Clean Air Twitter account for my county said (hours ago, when I was sleeping) the Air Quality Alert is in effect due to smoke impacting . Smoke is expected to continue to impact on my county this weekend. This sucks. September 12: The pollen count today is 9.0. It is going down, but is still in the nines, which is bad for me. The weather right now is 52 degrees and the high will be 78 degrees. That sounds good! The weather app is giving me an “Unhealthy Air Quality Warning for Sensitive Groups”. That’s me. If I had to guess, I would suspect the air quality warning is due to smoke from a fire – or many fires – that are located somewhere else. Smoke has drifted over to where I am at. Again. September 13, 2020: It is just a few minutes after 3 AM, and it is 54 degrees outside, which seems about right for this time of year, at this time of day, in California. My weather app has a “Unhealthy Air Quality for Sensitive Groups” warning. Again. This is likely due to the smoke that has blown here from the multitude of fires on the west coast. The pollen count today is 9.1, which is too high for me to be comfortable, no matter how much allergy medication I take. It has been nineteen days in a row where the pollen count has been too high for me. I haven’t bothered to count the days with too much smoke, because the thought of doing so is overwhelming. I managed to take a shower, several hours ago, something I find difficult when I am sicker than usual for long stretches of time. Tiny amounts of progress. Best I can do at the moment, as I struggle to focus on anything with almost no motivation to try and be productive. September 14: Yesterday, I took a long nap and woke up because my fibromyalgia decided to act up while I was sleeping. It is not fun to wake up with leg pain so bad it feels like I’ve stabbed. Took some CBD and it quickly eased my pain. Pain is exhausting, and I used all my spoons dealing with it. Went back to sleep after that. Fibromyalgia is triggered from stress. It can be physical or mental, or a mix of both. I suspect that this was, in part, triggered by the high pollen count plus smokey air. My body is working too hard as a result. Also, the pajama pants I was wearing are tapered. My calves have too much muscle for the space the tapered part provides. Move wrong while wearing them, and fibro makes me pay for it. Solution? Cut the tapered part open so my legs fit. Not pretty, but seems ot be working. Will know how well it works when next I sleep. September 14: It is almost 5 in the morning here, and the weather app says it is 55 degrees outside. Weather app also has a “Unhealthy Air Quality” warning – which means another day of smoke. Yesterday, my husband took out the trash and picked up the mail. The mail boxes in this mobile home part are located near the dumpsters. My husband returned, saying he could smell smoke while he was out there. Felt sick after breathing that for just a few minutes. The air purifier next to me has three lights: Blue = good. Purple = not so good. Red = bad. He left the door open for just a few minutes and the smoke was bad enough to make a red light. The pollen count today is 8.8, which is the lowest its been in… gonna guess about 20 days. Still too high for me. But moving in the right direction. September 14: Going to sleep now, in the hopes doing so will give me enough spoons to do something fun and/or productive after I wake up. September 15: The weather app right now, at almost 7 am says it is 52 degrees outside. For the first time in a long time, the background is of a nice, clean, blue sky with clouds. It is apparently a lie. The weather app has yet another “Unhealthy Air Quality” warning. Yesterday, I listened to a local news video that pointed out that the hardware stores have run out of air purifier machines. That’s how bad the smoke is in my county. I’m fortunate to have had an air purifier for years AND a fresh filter for it. The air purifier has three colors: Blue = good. Purple = not so good. Red = bad. At the moment, it is purple. It’s been switching between purple and red for hours. The pollen count today is 8.8, which is moving in the right direction, but still too high for me to be comfortable. I need the smoke to go away. I need the pollen count to be seven or below for a least a week straight before I can begin to recover and maybe even feel better. September 16: My weather app says it is 54 degrees outside right now, in California, at a little after four in the morning. The weather app says “Partly Cloudy”. Just a few hours ago, it gave me the “Unhealthy Air for Sensitive Groups” warning, due to smoke in the air. Not sure I trust that the smoke has cleared between now and then. I’ll check back later. The pollen count today is 8.9, which may as well be a 9. This day is going to hurt, and my sinuses are already very irritated due to the many days and nights of pollen and smoke. I am, quite literally, mad at the world itself right now. September 17: I slept through most of yesterday, and have very little ability to focus on anything right now. September 25: My period started 37 days after the previous one began. This is extremely frustrating because I desperately want to be in menopause. I was diagnosed with borderline anemia in high school. Every time I have a period – I cross over that border and become anemic again. It takes roughly about a month before I grow the blood back. And then I get a period and it starts all over again. There are no words for me to use to explain how exhausting anemia is. If you’ve experienced it – then you know. Add the exhaustion that my fibromyalgia causes, and I’m just super tired all the time. The thing that is incredibly disappointing is that menopause will cure my borderline anemia (because I wouldn’t be losing blood every damn month anymore). It is the only one of my chronic illnesses that has the potential to go away. But, that’s clearly not going to happen anytime soon, because my body refuses to allow me to have nice things. October 3: My weather app says it is 70 degrees outside right now – at about 4:30 AM. Not bad. It also says there is “haze” and has given me a warning that says: “Unhealthy Air for Sensitive Groups”. I suspect the unhealthy air has drifted here from whatever fire(s) are still burning in California. Another day of keeping the windows closed, turning the AC on, and hoping PG&E doesn’t decide to randomly shut off our electricity with no warning. Might be a “wear a mask inside” kind of day, depending on how much smoke/haze seeps into our very old mobile home. October 8, 2020: I had acupuncture earlier today and then did absolutely nothing of financial value after returning home. Just goofed off on the internet. It was nice! Helped clean a bird cage Now I am on Benadryl Am floating away (October 8 haiku) October 9: Had just enough energy today to take a walk with my husband to pick up food from a nearby Thai place. We both wore masks, of course. We had to walk by a lot of construction sites that put particulate matter into the air. After returning home with the food, my husband checked his watch and said we had walked a little over a mile. I ended up sleeping for about 12 hours straight, due to fibromyalgia. October 15: My husband and I took our completed mail-in-ballot for the 2020 General Presidential Election to the County Clerk Recorder’s office downtown. We took a Lyft, and had a nice conversation with a driver who seemed very interested in voting. He wore a mask, as did my husband and I. Nearly everyone inside the was wearing a mask. After handing our ballots to a masked employee, and having the envelope checked to make sure that we signed it and dated it, we were able to place out ballots into a small box on the desk. It was nice outside, so we took a short walk to a restaurant that we enjoy. All of the workers wore masks. All of the customers who came inside the restaurant also wore masks. After obtaining food, we got into another Lyft and went home. The food was tasty. October 16: I spent most of to day dealing with muscle cramps because I dared to take a short walk while having fibromyalgia the day before. It wasn’t the worst experience, but it definitely slowed me down and made me more exhausted than usual. October 19: Fall Pollen Season finally ended. I determine the ending by frequently checking pollen.com, and writing down the pollen count for each day. When I get seven days in a row where the pollen count is 7.0 or lower – I declare that pollen season over! Chronic Illness Moments is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Four: July, August, SeptemberSeptember 28, 2020health insurance / Out of SpoonsImage by Comfreak from Pixabay This blog post is part of a series provides information about what President Trump – and the GOP – have done in an effort to restrict and remove access to health care from the American people. The series could be described as “reciepts”. The series also highlights everything that the Democrats have done in an effort to protect American’s access to health care – of all types. This includes protections for DACA recipients and people who are LGBTQ+ You may want to take a look at the previous blogs in this series. Doing so will give you an overall picture of what the Trump Administration and the GOP have done to harm American’s health starting in 2017. A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part One A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Two A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Three A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Three – Continued A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempt to Destroy Obamacare – Part Four A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Four: April, May, June July July 1, 2020: NPR posted an article titled: “Oklahoma Votes For Medicaid Expansion Over Objections of Republican State Leaders”. It was written by Jackie Fortier. From the article: Voters in Oklahoma narrowly approved a ballot measure Tuesday night to expand Medicaid to eligible adults who need health insurance. Oklahoma is now the 37th state to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act; coverage will begin a year from now, on July 1, 2021.Based on the final unofficial count, the measure passed with just over a 6,000-vote margin — less than one full percentage point……In Oklahoma, Medicaid expansion will likely help drive down the state’s 14% uninsured rate, the second highest in the nation after Texas. It’s estimated that at least 200,000 Oklahomans will be newly eligible for Medicaid, with enrollment potentially climbing even higher as millions lose their jobs amid the pandemic.Under 2020 poverty guidelines, expanded Medicaid coverage would provide health insurance to a single adult making less than $17,608 annually, or adults in a family of four making less than $36,156 annually….…The language used in the ballot measure ensures that Medicaid expansion is enshrined in the state’s constitution, which would make it extremely difficult for Republican Gov. Kevin Stitt or the Republican-controlled legislature to dismantle the expansion in the future… July 1, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris posted a press release titled: “Harris, Murray, Colleagues to Barr: Reverse Anti-LGBTQ Position, Protect Transgender Workers from Discrimination”. From the press release: Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, Ga., which held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination, U.S. Senators Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) and Patty Murray (D-WA) on Tuesday sent a letter to Attorney General William Barr demanding the Department of Justice (DOJ) reverse its anti-LGBTQ position that federal law does not shield transgender workers. The senators called on Barr to immediately rescind a 2017 memorandum issued by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions articulating the Justice Department’s current anti-transgender stance. In 2017, Senators Harris and Murray led their colleagues in a letter condemning then Attorney General Sessions’s discriminatory memorandum.“We strongly urge you to rescind a 2017 U.S. Department of Justice memorandum in which former Attorney General Jeff Sessions ordered DOJ to take the position that transgender workers are not protected from workplace discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.” The senators wrote that the Supreme Court’s decision “compels DOJ to rescind the Sessions memorandum,” which “misstates the law, poses an ongoing threat to the well-being of transgender workers, and invites liability for employers that misguidedly rely upon it.”The senators continued, “In light of the landmark Bostock decision, there can remain no justification for leaving in place an enforcement policy that flatly contradicts Supreme Court precedent. Accordingly, we call on you to rescind the Sessions memorandum immediately.”Joining Harris and Murray on the letter are Senators Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Bernard Sanders (I-VT), Mazie K. Hirono (D-HI), Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT), Jeffrey A. Merkley (D-OR), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Jack Reed (D-RI), Tina Smith (D-MN), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Cory A. Booker (D-NJ), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Robert P. Casey, Jr. (D-PA), Christopher A. Coons (D-DE), Richard J. Durbin (D-IL), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Michael F. Bennet (D-CO), and Tom Carper (D-DE). A full copy of the letter can be found HERE July 1, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Passage of H.R. 2, The Moving Forward Act”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement on the passage of H.R. 2, the Moving Forward Act, House Democrats’ transformative infrastructure package For The People:“Today, House Democrats have taken a bold step to move America forward, as we deliver on our For The People promise to increase paychecks by rebuilding America with green, resilient, modern and job-creating infrastructure by passing H.R. 2, the Moving Forward Act. I salute Chairman Peter DeFazio and all the Chairs of the Committees of Jurisdiction, and especially our Freshmen who have invigorated Democrats’ mission to revitalize America’s infrastructure.“H.R. 2 takes bold, broad and transformational action to rebuild our infrastructure, while addressing key injustices in America, which have been laid bare by the COVID-19 crisis. We are proud that this legislation addresses environmental justice, including by investing boldly in affordable housing, expanding affordable high-speed Internet to underserved rural and urban communities, and ensuring that all have access to clean water. H.R. 2 makes a strong down payment in a clean energy future and solving the climate crisis, as we create millions of good-paying jobs and rebuild our highways, bridges, transit, rail, airports, ports and harbors to improve safety, reduce gridlock and put America on a path to zero pollution.“We urge Leader McConnell and the GOP Senate to join the House in supporting this transformative legislation For The People. As Americans across the country come together to peacefully demand justice, equality and progress, the Congress must meet this moment by moving our country forward with real action.” July 2, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a joint statement titled: “Joint Statement from Women’s Health Groups, Medical Groups on June Medical”. From the joint statement: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists joins the American Academy of Nursing, American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Osteopathic Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American College of Physicians, American Public Health Association, North American Society for Adolescent and Pediatric Gynecology, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and Society of OB/GYN Hospitalists in issuing this statement.The medical community celebrates the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of June Medical Services v. Russo. This decision confirms once again that our justice system will not tolerate restrictions on our patients. However, we recognize that the law overturned in this case was just one example of a litany of restrictive policies that seek to interfere with the patient-clinician relationship. We also know that access to care continues to be delayed or denied for many women due to systemic inequities and inequalities. With the Supreme Court once again protecting the right to access safe, legal abortion, we now call on lawmakers to stop passing harmful, burdensome laws that target our patients. Policymakers must refrain from attempting to mandate if, when, and how we can provide them with the care they need. It is time to stop legislating medical practice and it is time for all lawmakers to recognize that reproductive health care is a critical part of comprehensive health care for all patients. As clinicians and public health practitioners, we advocate for patients every day and in many ways. The decision in June Medical Services encourages us to continue to do so, and we will remain vigilant in our demand for patient-focused policies that will help us achieve health equity. July 2, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “As groups supporting the healthcare repeal lawsuit submit amicus briefs about why they think “the #ACA must fall”, remember what’s at stake: #ProtectOurCare” July 2, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “Protections for 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions,” July 2, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “Coverage for 12 million Americans receiving insurance through Medicaid expansion” July 2, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “$900 million in grants to improve public health through the Prevention and Public Health Fund,” July 2, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “Essential health benefits like prescription drug coverage and hospital stays, and other patient protections.” July 2, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “The Trump Administration is fighting to rip away our healthcare during a global pandemic that has infected millions of Americans with no signs of stopping. Our coalition of 20 States + DC is ready to go to the Supreme Court to #ProtectOurCare. Lives are at stake.” July 2, 2020: New Times SLO posted an article titled: “Continued care: In the face of Trump’s rollback of LGBTQ-plus health care protections, Planned Parenthood isn’t going anywhere”. It was written by Malea Martin. From the article: Between a landmark Supreme Court ruling for the LGBTQ-plus community and a Trump administration rule that goes in the opposite direction, this year’s Pride Month has been one for both victory and distress for members of the queer community.But no matter what the federal government decrees, Planned Parenthood Central Coast wants residents to know that they will continue to get the services they need.“Regardless of your sexual orientation or gender identity, where you’re from, the language you speak, or whether you’ve had an abortion, every person deserves access to health care, free from judgement and discrmination,” Planned Parenthood Central Coast CEO and President Jenna Tosh said. “I think especially during a public health crisis, any rule that makes it harder for marginalized people to access health care is unconscionable.”U.S. Rep. Salud Carbajal (D-Santa Barbara) echoed this sentiment, saying that the Trump administration “is looking at every way to continue to undermine , in this case health benefits, to members of the LGBTQ community.”Tosh explained that the Trump administration’s June 12 ruling, which rolls back nondiscrimination protections for sex and gender identity put in place by the Affordable Care Act, will allow “health care providers, hospitals, and insurance companies that recieve federal funding to refuse to provide or cover services such as LGBTQ health care.”But, she said, this will not have any immediate impact on Planned Parenthood patients’ ability to get access to care……In addition to welcoming folks regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity, Planned Parenthood Central Coast started providing general affirming care about a year ago, Tosh said… July 2, 2020: ABC 27 News posted an article titled: “High court won’t hear abortion clinic ‘buffer zone’ cases”. It was written by Jessica Gresko. From the article: The Supreme Court on Thursday turned away pleas from anti-abortion activists to make it easier for them to protest outside clinics, declining to wade back into the abortion debate just days after striking down a Louisiana law regulating abortion clinics.The justices said in a written order that they would not hear cases from Chicago and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, where anti-abortion activists had challenged ordinances that restrict their behavior outside clinics.As is usual, the justices did not comment in turning away the cases. The order from the court noted Justice Clarence Thomas would have heard the Chicago case……On Thursday, one of the two cases the court declined to take up involved an ordinance passed by the city counsel in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania’s capital, in 2012 that made it illegal to “congregate, patrol, picket or demonstrate” in a zone 20 feet from a health care facility. Anti-abortion activists sued, arguing that the ordinance violates their free speech rights. Lower courts have upheld the ordinance, however, ruling it doesn’t apply to “sidewalk counseling,” where individuals who oppose abortion offer assistance and information about alternatives to abortion to those entering a clinic.The second case the court turned away on Thursday involved a Chicago ordinance that regulates the space 50 feet from the entrance of any abortion clinic or other medical facility. In that space, a person cannot come within 8 feet of another person without their consent to hand them information or engage in “oral protest, education, or counseling.” The ordinance was modeled on a statute upheld by the Supreme Court in 2000……The court’s announcement that it would not hear the cases comes on the heels of its decision Monday that a Louisiana law requiring doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals violates abortion rights the court first announced in the landmark Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. The decision divided the court’s conservatives and liberals 5-4 with Chief Justice John Roberts joining his four more liberal colleagues to strike down the law.It was the first big abortion case of the Trump era and a surprising defeat for abortion opponents, who thought that the court’s new conservative majority with two members appointed by President Donald Trump would start chipping away at abortion access.As a result of the decision, the justices also on Thursday ordered lower courts to revisit cases involving Indiana abortion laws previously blocked by courts. One required a woman to have an ultrasound 18 hours before having an abortion and the other would have made it tougher for girls under age 18 to get an abortion without their parents’ knowledge.In their decision earlier this week, the justices told lower courts how to determine whether a restriction is permissible or puts an unconstitutional obstacle in the way of women who want an abortion. July 6, 2020: Representative Ayanna Pressley (Democrat – Massachusetts) posted a press release on her official website titled: “Rep. Pressley Statement on Inclusion of Hyde Amendment in Labor-HHS Appropriations Bill”. From the press release: Today, Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07) released the below statement following release of the proposed FY 2021 Appropriations bill for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and related agencies.“For generations, the Hyde Amendment has restricted the constitutional right to safe and legal abortion care for millions– disproportionately impacting our most vulnerable, low-income, Black, Brown and Indigenous communities.When I say it is time to legislate our values and write budgets that affirm the dignity and worth of Black and Brown lives, I mean it.Let me be clear, discriminatory abortion bans like the Hyde Amendment are blatantly racist and perpetuate systems of oppression and white supremacy that target people of color–especially Black people–and their bodily autonomy.This first ever pro-choice majority in the House of Representatives has a mandate and a responsibility to stand up for reproductive rights and justice for all, not just those who can afford it. This is a racial justice issue.We know that Black women are statistically denied access to medical care across the board. Their pain is delegitimized and their lives devalued by a broken for profit health care system.I am deeply disappointed to see that the Hyde Amendment was included in the House LHHS funding bill. Black and Brown people should not have to continue to wait to have their humanity and freedoms recognized. I intend to work with my colleagues to finally repeal Hyde when the bill comes to the House floor and I will file an amendment to do just that.” July 7, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled:” Attorney General James Continues to Take on Trump Administration’s Anti-Abortion Rule as Coronavirus Pandemic Rages On”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today continued her leadership in the national fight to ensure women’s reproductive health care is not stifled or infringed upon in any way during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) public health crisis. Attorney General James co-led a multistate coalition of nine attorneys general in asking the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to withdraw a new interim final rule or delay implementation of it as the nation continues to battle COVID-19. In response to the pandemic, the interim rule only delays for 60 days a previously-implemented HHS rule that threatens to potentially kick millions of women across New York and the rest of the nation off their health plans if they fail to comply with a technical billing issue related to abortion coverage. The coalition argues that the final rule is not only unlawful, but that it would harm states and insurers, as well as consumers seeking reliable health coverage during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, the coalition highlights that a 60-day delay is not a sufficient remedy to the problems posed by the final rule.“As the number of confirmed coronavirus infections continue to rise exponentially across the nation, it is unconscionable that President Trump and his administration continue to move forward with plans that risk stripping women of their health coverage at this time — something that endangers us all,” Attorney General James said. “Instead of repeatedly focusing on cutting off women’s access to reproductive health care, the Trump Administration should be expanding health coverage for all Americans, so that no one is left without the coverage they need as we continue to battle COVID-19. But the origin of this rule is no doubt rooted in the president’s anti-choice ideology that aims to take us backwards almost half a century, which is why our coalition will never stop fighting against this burdensome and controlling regulation that strips women of their constitutional right to an abortion.”Issued by HHS in December 2019, the final rule reinterprets Section 1303 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) by requiring qualified health plans that participate in the state exchanges, like the New York State of Health, to send two separate monthly bills for payments of a health insurance premium — even if no abortion service is provided — and collect separate monthly payments for abortion services to all consumers. One bill would be for the premium amount attributable to abortion coverage (and would need to be at least one dollar) and a second bill would compromise the premium amount attributable to the remaining covered services, which may include services like primary doctor appointments, hospital visits, and other services covered by insurance. If a consumer misses even a single one-dollar payment, that individual could lose all health coverage on the exchange. HHS itself has conceded that requiring separate bills and separate payments will inevitably lead to confusion, putting more than 160,000 New Yorkers who have already enrolled in a qualified health plan this year alone at risk of losing coverage if they inadvertently fail to make full premium payments on time. Additionally, the new rule places unreasonable burdens on health insurers by requiring them to make onerous administrative changes in the middle of the plan year, instead of at the end of the plan year — when all other benefit and rate changes are made. In January, Attorney General James and the coalition filed a multistate lawsuit arguing that HHS’s onerous and confusing requirement threatens women’s access to abortion and puts millions at risk of accidentally losing their health insurance coverage. In late March, the coalition filed a motion for summary judgment in the lawsuit, calling for the courts to immediately vacate the rule because it violates federal law and is inconsistent with the Affordable Care Act. And in early April, the coalition sent a separate letter to HHS arguing against final implementation of the rule, as the nation was first responding to the COVID-19 public health crisis that required every resource of the federal government to be focused on the pandemic. Following the onset of COVID-19, HHS issued the interim final rule that is the focus of today’s letter — delaying enforcement of the separate abortion billing rule by a mere 60 days — purportedly to allow insurers additional time to address immediate challenges posed by the pandemic.In today’s comment letter, the coalition argues that the interim final rule: Forces states and insurers to make onerous changes in the middle of the plan year, because the 60-day delay is insufficient;Burdens states, state agencies, and insurers, and hampers their efforts to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic; andEndangers the gains recently made through several exchanges’ special enrollment periods… July 7, 2020: EMILY’s List posted a press release titled: “EMILY’s List Puts Five More House Republicans “On Notice” For Targeting Women’s Rights”. From the press release: Today, EMILY’s List, the nation’s largest resource for women in politics, expanded its “On Notice” opposition program to include five more House Republicans. EMILY’s List is calling out incumbent Republicans for their anti-women and anti-family records and is working to flip governorships, congressional seats, and legislative chambers from red to blue by electing pro-choice Democratic women in the upcoming 2020 election.“With just over four months until the general election, EMILY’s List is expanding its On Notice program to include five House Republicans who have actively worked to impede progress and strip women of their fundamental rights. These members have cosponsored dangerous legislation, including the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, a desperate attempt by Republicans to instill fear and spread misinformation about abortion. From supporting a party pushing to repeal health care in the midst of a global pandemic to pandemic to prioritizing big corporations over the small business owners they were elected to represent, it is clear that these Republicans must be voted out. EMILY’s List is actively targeting these flippable districts. We look forward to replacing these members with pro-choice Democratic women who will serve as true champions for women and working families.”The following Republicans are included in EMILY’s List’s of House targets. The full “On Notice” list, including Senate, statewide, and state legislative targets, can be found online here. Rep. French Hill (AR-02)Rep. Doug LaMalfa (CA-01)Rep. Tom McClintock (CA-04)Rep. Joe Wilson (SC-02)Rep. Dan Crenshaw (TX-02) July 7, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra: Separate Abortion Billing Rule Threatens Health Coverage During the Pandemic, A 60-Day Delay Won’t Fix What’s Broken”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and New York Attorney General Letitia James today led a coalition of nine attorneys general in filing a comment letter opposing the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) new interim final rule relating to their unlawful 2019 rule for health Exchanges under Section 1303 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The Separate Abortion Billing Rule requires consumers to make two separate payments for healthcare – one for their insurance premium and a separate one-dollar payment for abortion coverage – or risk losing their coverage altogether. The interim final rule would delay implementation of the new Separate Abortion Billing Rule by 60 days – despite states and the healthcare industry asking for more time or to halt the rule altogether. The coalition argues that the final rule is unlawful, would harm states, insurers, and consumers seeking reliable health coverage during the COVID-19 pandemic, and highlights that a 60-day delay is not sufficient remedy to the problems posed by the final rule. “The Trump Administration’s unlawful Separate Abortion Billing Rule puts Americans’ healthcare at risk in the midst of a pandemic, just as they need it most. A 60-day delay won’t fix what’s broken,” said Attorney General Becerra. “Issuing a rule halfway through the plan year that burdens our health system and risks consumers’ healthcare is simply irresponsible. It’s our duty to protect Americans’ healthcare, including women’s access to safe and legal abortion care.”On December 27, 2019, HHS issued a final rule requiring qualified health plans participating in health Exchanges to send and collect separate bills—one for a health insurance premium and one of at least one dollar for abortion coverage. If a consumer misses the one-dollar payment, they could lose all coverage. This onerous and confusing requirement threatens women’s access to abortion and puts health insurance coverage at risk for millions of individuals. HHS itself has conceded that requiring separate bills and separate payments will inevitably lead to confusion, putting more than 1.4 million enrollees in California alone at risk of losing coverage if they inadvertently fail to make full premium payments on time. Furthermore, the rule places unreasonable burdens on health insurers by requiring them to make onerous administrative changes in the middle of the plan year, instead of the end of the plan year, when all other benefit and rate changes are made. On January 30, 2020, Attorneys General Becerra and James filed a lawsuit contesting the final rule. Following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, HHS issued an interim final rule, delaying enforcement of the Separate Abortion Billing Rule by 60 days, purportedly to allow insurers time to address immediate challenges posed by the pandemic.In the comment letter, the coalition argues that the interim final rule: Forces states and insurers to make onerous changes in the middle of the plan year, because the 60-day delay is insufficient;Imposes significant burdens given that insurers and state agencies must work through the summer months to establish and adjust new premium rates for the following open enrollment period;Burdens states, state agencies, and insurers and hampers their efforts to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic; andEndangers the gains recently made through several Exchanges’ special enrollment periods. Attorney General Becerra was joined in filing today’s comment letter by the attorneys general of New York, Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the comment letter is available here. More information on the Attorney General’s ongoing lawsuit challenging the final rule is available here. July 7, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Responds to Inclusion of Discriminatory Anti-Choice Amendment in House Democrats’ Spending Bill”. From the press release: NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement in response to Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives including the discriminatory Hyde Amendment, an anti-choice policy restricting coverage for abortion care for those who receive their health insurance through the federal government, in the FY’ 21 Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill:“Every day that the Hyde Amendment remains in place, it hurts women of color and women with low incomes just as it was intended to from the day Henry Hyde introduced it in 1976. It’s disappointing that, despite having a majority and the most pro-choice slate of elected officials ever serving in the U.S. House of Representatives, Democratic leadership has chosen to include a discriminatory abortion coverage ban in this year’s appropriations bill. The Hyde Amendment restricts access to abortion for those already facing the greatest hurdles to getting the time-sensitive and essential care they need. While we appreciate the spending bill’s inclusion of other pro-choice priorities, such as blocking the Trump administration’s dangerous refusal of care rule and its attempt to roll back nondiscrimination protections under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, it isn’t enough.As our country faces a public health crisis and a long-overdue uprising against entrenched white supremacy and structural racism, we must be more committed than ever to ending barriers to care like Hyde, which disproportionately affects communities of color and people with low incomes, so that every body is free to make their own personal decisions about pregnancy free from political interference.”Restrictions on abortion care like the anti-choice Hyde Amendment endanger women and families already facing enormous hurdles to accessing care, especially Black and Brown women and those with low incomes. At a time when the freedoms enshrined by Roe v. Wade face unprecedented attack, the 2020 Democratic presidential field coalesced around the party’s core values—including ending the Hyde Amendment’s ban on abortion coverage once and for all.We know that abortion is front and center for Democrats: Support for abortion rights is at an all-time high and polling confirms reproductive freedom is a major issue for Democratic voters in particular. These values are non-negotiable to the 77% of Americans who support the legal right to abortion in the United States. July 8, 2020: Bloomberg Law posted an article titled: “Top Court Backs Religious Rights in Contraceptive, School Cases”. It was written by Greg Stohr. From the article: The U.S. Supreme Court struck two blows for religious rights, including a decision that upholds Trump administration rules giving employers a broad right to refuse to offer birth control through their health plans.The justices also gave religious organizations a bigger exemption from discrimination suits, throwing out bias claims filed by two teachers who were fired by Roman Catholic grade schools in California. Both decisions Wednesday were 7-2 as Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan joined the court’s five conservatives in the majority.The decisions came as the court said it will issue the last opinions of its term on Thursday. Those will include rulings on subpoenas for President Donald Trump’s financial records from Congress and a New York grand jury.The contraceptive ruling, which stems from an Obamacare guideline requiring health plans to include free coverage, lets Trump’s administration expand a narrower religious exemption offered under President Barack Obama. Critics say the new exemption could leave tens of thousands of women without ready access to birth control.The ruling focused more on federal administrative law than religion. Writing for the court, Justice Clarence Thomas said the Affordable Care Act gives administrators “broad discretion” to carve out religious and moral exemptions. The law itself doesn’t explicitly mention birth control, instead requiring cost-free “preventive care and screenings” and leaving it to a federal agency to determine what’s included.Dissenting Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg pointed to a government estimate that between 70,500 and 126,400 women would immediately lose access to free contraception.“This court leaves women workers to fend for themselves, to seek contraceptive coverage from sources other than their employer’s insurer, and, absent another available source of funding, to pay for contraceptive services out of their own pockets,” Ginsburg wrote.The ruling leaves open the possibility the exemption could be narrowed if Democrat Joe Biden wins the presidential election and revises the policy.The Trump administration issued its rules in November 2018. The new policy expands the types of employers who can claim religious exemptions to include publicly traded companies for the first time, and also applies it to universities in their student health plans. The rules also permit opt-outs on moral grounds.In a concurring opinion, Kagan said lower courts could still consider arguments that the administration didn’t engage in “reasoned decisionmaking,” as required under federal law. She pointed to a “mismatch between the scope of the religious exemption and the problem the agencies set out to address.”… July 8, 2020: NPR posted an article titled: “Supreme Court Undercuts Access to Birth Control Under Obamacare”. It was written by Nina Totenberg. From the article: The U.S. Supreme Court has made it more difficult for women to get access to birth control as part of their health plans if their employer has religious or moral objections to contraceptives. The opinion upheld a Trump administration rule that significantly cut back on the Affordable Care Act requirement that insurers provide free birth control coverage as part of almost all health care plans.“We hold that the had the authority to provide exemptions from the regulatory contraceptive requirements for employers with religious and concientious objections,” Justice Clarance Thomas wrote for the majority.He was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, and Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh……Dissenting from the opinion were Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor.“Today, for the first time, the Court casts aside countervailing rights and interests in its zeal to secure religious rights to the nth degree,” Ginsburg wrote. The Supreme Court ruling on Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter And Paul Home v Pennsylvania can be found here. July 8, 2020: The Associated Press tweeted: “BREAKING: Supreme Court sides with Trump effort to let more employers out of health care law’s no-cost birth control requirement.” The tweet included a link to the Associated Press website. July 8, 2020: The Associated Press tweeted: “The high court said 7-2 the administration acted properly when it allowed more employers who cite a religious or moral objection to opt out of covering birth control”. The tweet included a link to an Associated Press article titled: “Court: Some employers can refuse to offer free birth control”. July 8, 2020: EMILY’s List posted a statement titled: “EMILY’s List Statement on U.S. Supreme Court Ruling in Trump V. Pennsylvania”. From the statement: Today, Stephanie Schriock, president of EMILY’s List, the nation’s largest resource for women in politics, released the following statement on the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Trump v. Pennsylvania, which weakens the “contraceptive mandate” of the 2010 Affordable Care Act.“The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the Trump-Pence rule is an assault on reproductive freedom for all women, and it disproportionately targets low-income women and women of color. The ruling will allow employers and universities to dismantle no-cost birth control coverage, denying their employers vital health care during the height of a global pandemic. This decision greenlights discrimination in our health care system, but despite today’s ruling, the ability to get birth control should be a universal right, not a privilege. At EMILY’s List, we are proud to stand with the majority of Americans who support reproductive freedom and help elect women who will support those rights.” July 8, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Supreme Court Gives Green Light for Employers to Deny Birth Control Coverage to Employees”. From the press release: Today, the U.S. Supreme Court let stand the Trump-Pence rules allowing nearly any employer and university to deny birth control coverage to their employees and students. The Court held that the Trump-Pence administration had the authority to issue these harmful contraceptive coverage rules under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). This decision leaves the rules in place, putting contraceptive coverage at risk for hundreds of thousands of people, especially low-income workers and students, people of color and LGBTQ people.Said Lourdes Rivera, Senior Vice President of U.S. Programs at the Center for Reproductive Rights:“Contraception should not be singled out from the rest of health insurance coverage. Today’s ruling has given bosses the power to dictate how their employees can and cannot use their health insurance—allowing them to intrude into their employees’ private decisions based on whatever personal beliefs their employers happen to hold.“Refusing women the health care they are guaranteed by law is an act of discrimination. This fundamentally wrong-headed ruling is a critical misinterpretation of the Affordable Care Act and what Congress intended. We now look to Congress to act swiftly to ensure that only workers and students, not their bosses or universities, have the authority to decide what health care choices are appropriate for them and their families. Congress should take action to ensure the Administration is prevented from enforcing these discriminatory rules.”This is the third time the high court has addressed the issue of the ACA’s contraceptive coverage benefit. The no-cost birth control guarantee remained intact for most people in the U.S. until 2017, when the Trump Administration introduced new rules that would expand the exemption so broadly that it could render the birth control guarantee meaningless for hundreds of thousands of people. Under the rules, any entity of any size, whether non-profit or for-profit, could deny birth control coverage for its workers or students as long as it claimed to have religious or in many cases even moral objections.Earlier this year, the Center for Reproductive Rights joined 20 other organizations, led by Americans United for Separation of Church and State, in filing a “friend of the court” brief in the case, telling the Supreme Court, “Through the rulemaking challenged here, the government has sought to… religious and moral exemptions that effectively nullify the contraceptive-coverage requirement’s protections for hundreds of thousands of women…”. The amicus brief filed by religious and civil-rights organizations, including the Center, notes, “The rights to believe and practice one’s faith, or not, are sacrosanct. But they do not extend to imposing on others by operation of law the costs and burdens of one’s beliefs. Government should not, and under the Establishment Clause cannot, favor the religious beliefs of some at the expense of the rights, beliefs, and health of others.” July 8, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a statment titled: “ACOG Statement on Contraceptive Coverage Under the ACA”. From the article: The following is a statement from Maureen G. Phipps, MD, MPH, chief executive officer of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, regarding today’s U.S. Supreme Court decision about contraceptive coverage under the Affordable Care Act:“Contraception is an integral part of comprehensive health care. Insurance coverage of birth control is essential for patients to be able to access this needed preventive service. ACOG is still reviewing the Supreme Court’s decision, but it is clear that once again the health of our patients has been subject to regulatory and legal scrutiny that is not medically or scientifically grounded. “Evidence has repeatedly shown that the freedom to choose if and when to become pregnant can improve health outcomes and quality of life for patients, their families, and their communities. In addition, the Affordable Care Act’s birth control provisions have provided our patients with the ability to control their own reproductive health. These gains are now in jeopardy after today’s ruling. “Denying our patients unimpeded, affordable access to the care they need, including all safe and effective methods of contraception, will exacerbate health inequities in the United States.”ACOG’s amicus brief can be found here. July 8, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release on her official website titled: “Pelosi Statement on Supreme Court Ruling on ACA Contraceptive Coverage Case”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled to weaken the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive-coverage requirement by allowing private employers to opt out of providing contraceptive coverage for their employees:“The Supreme Court’s decision to enable the Trump Administration’s brutal assault on women’s health, financial security and independence is a fundamental misreading of the statute. The Affordable Care Act was explicitly designed to prevent discrimination against women and to ensure that women have access to preventive care, including contraception.“It is unconscionable that, in the middle of the worst global pandemic in modern history, the Administration is focusing on denying basic health care to women that is essential for their health and financial security, instead of protecting lives and livelihoods.“The Democratic House will continue to fight to uphold and strengthen the ACA and just last week, passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Enhancement Act to further lower health care costs and strengthen coverage. Access to affordable health care is a matter of life-or-death, and Democrats will never stop fighting For The People at this devastating time.” July 8, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris Statement on Supreme Court Decision Restricting Access to Birth Control”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Wednesday released the following statement in response to the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case that considered the Trump administration’s rules that would allow virtually any employer or university to declare itself exempt from the Affordable Care Act (ACA) requirement that health plans cover birth control without out-of-pocket costs:“Today’s ruling is a setback for reproductive health. As our country continues to face an unprecedented public health crisis, we should be building upon the success of the ACA and expanding access to affordable health care for everyone in America. Instead, the Trump administration has relentlessly attempted to rip health care away from millions of people across the country, including the 61.4 million people whose contraception has been covered without out-of-pocket costs thanks to the ACA.“For scores of workers, the Court ruled that whether their health insurance covers birth control is up to their boss. This decision is dangerous, particularly for people of color, low-wage workers, and LGBTQ+ people who are more likely to face financial and other barriers to care. Now, more than ever, Congress must take action to protect and expand access to contraception and other reproductive health care.” July 8, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Responds to Supreme Court’s Reckless Decision to Green Light Trump’s Attacks on Birth Control Access”. From the press release: The U.S. Supreme Court today issued its decision in Trump v. Pennsylvania, allowing the Trump administration to implement its rule allowing virtually any employer or university to declare itself exempt from the Affordable Care Act’s landmark requirement that health insurers cover birth control without co-pays. In response, NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement:“The Supreme Court’s decision to allow the Trump administration to put control over people’s birth control in the hands of the whims of their bosses and employers is deplorable. This decision just further exposes that ultimately, the Radical Right is really about controlling women and our lives with no eye towards equality or public health and well being. It’s clear that our reproductive freedom is in immediate peril. That’s why we’re more determined than ever to make sure Trump is a one-term president come November and to hold to account all of the politicians who have greenlit his agenda by voting to confirm his nominees to the Court.”The Supreme Court’s decision in the birth control case comes just after its narrow decision in June Medical Services LLC v. Russo striking down a medically unnecessary clinic shutdown law in Louisiana as unconstitutional. The law threatened to decimate abortion access in Louisiana, where access is already extremely restricted. The clinic shutdown law at issue in the case was identical to one blocked in another case, Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, decided by the Supreme Court in 2016 before Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch joined the Court. Though the Court’s ruling in June Medical Services LLC v. Russo will allow people in Louisiana to maintain access to abortion care through the three clinics in the state, what we really won was the chance to fight another day—and the Court’s anti-choice, anti-freedom majority means our reproductive freedom is still on the line. The threat to reproductive freedom presented by both of these Supreme Court cases is part of a coordinated effort by the anti-choice movement and the Radical Right to attack our fundamental rights in order to advance their unpopular ideological agenda and gain power and control. Leading voices in the anti-choice movement oppose birth control and have repeatedly pushed disinformation about it in order to restrict access to it, even though the public overwhelmingly supports access to contraception. Most voters (75%) consider birth control part of preventive care for women and 77% of women voters want to keep the Affordable Care Act (ACA) birth control benefit.As the Trump administration and anti-choice politicians across the country target reproductive rights in their quest to maintain white patriarchy and control women, NARAL has embarked on its multi-faceted, largest-ever electoral program for the 2020 election. Key to NARAL’s strategy is reaching, persuading, and mobilizing key voter segments including soft-partisan persuadable women voters, and low-propensity, pro-choice voters who are motivated by Trump and Republicans’ commitment to ending Roe v. Wade, criminalizing abortion, and punishing women. These critical voting blocs value reproductive freedom and align with the 77% of Americans who support Roe v. Wade. Donald Trump and Senate Republicans have waged a sustained war on the ACA, including its landmark birth control benefit requiring that contraception be covered without copays. When Republicans fought to repeal the ACA in 2017, NARAL and its members mobilized to let members of Congress know we wouldn’t stand by and allow them to jeopardize the healthcare coverage of millions of Americans. Our members made thousands of phone calls and sent 50,000 messages to Congress opposing the repeal efforts, ultimately helping to stop these dangerous efforts in their tracks. July 8, 2020: The Texas Tribune posted an article titled: “Texas is going to end Obamacare. It hasn’t produced a plan to replace it.” It was written by Emma Platoff and Edgar Walters. From the article: Last year, after a federal judge in Texas declared the entirety of the Affordable Care Act unconstitutional, throwing into question millions of Americans’ health coverage, the state’s Republican leaders promised they would come up with a plan to replace it.But on Tuesday, after a legislative session that seemed to have no room for issues other than property tax reform and school finance, Texas will ask a federal appeals court in New Orleans to end the law in its entirety — without offering a replacement plan.The conservative crusade against portions of the act, known as Obamacare, has spanned a decade. But Texas’ latest lawsuit, filed in February 2018, became an existential threat to the law after U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor ruled in December that it is unconstitutional in its entirety. At stake: the subsidized health coverage of roughly 1 million Texans, sweeping protections for patients with preexisting conditions, young adults staying on their parents’ insurance plans until age 26 and a host of low-cost benefits available to all people with health insurance, including those covered through their employers.Texas already has the highest uninsured rate in the nation.In a highly unusual — if not entirely surprising — move, the U.S. Department of Justice has declined to defend the federal law, leaving a California-led coalition of blue states to protect it. As the case proceeds, Obamacare has remained in place, and likely will until the litigation is finally resolved.Attorneys for the state of Texas argue the health law cannot stand since the Republican-led Congress in 2017 zeroed out Obamacare’s individual mandate — a penalty imposed on people who chose to remain uninsured. Democrats had favored the penalty as a way to induce more people to purchase health insurance, with the goal of reaching near-universal coverage. Without it, Texas argues, the whole law must fall.But the state’s Republican leaders have offered few ideas about what should replace Obamacare, a law that touches practically every aspect of health care regulations and includes several popular protections for patients. Gov. Greg Abbott — a vocal critic of the law — pledged in December that if the law remained struck down on appeal, “Texas will be ready with replacement health care insurance that includes coverage for pre-existing conditions.”Since then, he’s been quiet on the issue, including during this year’s 140-day Texas legislative session. Abbott did not respond to questions for this story.A three-judge panel on the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals will hear arguments on the case Tuesday afternoon and then rule in the coming weeks on whether the law should stand.One bill that did emerge from the legislative session would allow the Texas Department of Insurance to reestablish a high-risk health insurance pool for individuals with severe health problems. That pool, an expensive option for sick patients that was phased out under Obamacare, only insured about 28,000 people at its peak, experts said — a tiny fraction of the Texans poised to lose coverage if Obamacare is struck down……It would be up to the governor to call a special legislative session to pass a more robust plan. If he does not, the Legislature next meets in January 2021.Reestablishing the high-risk pool in the absence of Obamacare would be like applying “a tiny Band-Aid” to a gaping wound, said Stacey Pogue, a health policy expert with the left-leaning Center for Public Policy Priorities……Total abolition of the law is one possible outcome from this week’s litigation. But legal experts across the ideological spectrum agree that Texas has a high bar to clear before Obamacare would be struck down.For the lawsuit to proceed at all, both sides will have to convince a three-judge panel that they have standing to sue. That’s not a given; the court recently asked for additional information on that issue… July 9, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “House Appropriations Committee Affirms and Protects Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights Around the World”. From the press release: Today, the U.S. House Committee on Appropriations passed a budget bill that increases funding and protections for reproductive health and rights across the globe. The FY 2021 State and Foreign Operations (SFOPs) bill would increase U.S. funding for international family planning programs, restore and increase assistance to the United Nations Populations Fund (UNFPA), and fully repeal the expanded and harmful global gag rule.Opponents of reproductive health offered an amendment to try and strip these important provisions from the bill, which was soundly rejected along party lines 29-21. Chairwoman Nita Lowey (D-NY-17), Representatives Lois Frankel (D-FL-21), Marcy Kaptur (D-OH-9), Brenda Lawerence (D-MI-14), Barbara Lee (D-CA-13), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL-14), and Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ-12) offered powerful remarks about the urgent need to repeal the global gag rule, restore our partnership with UNFPA, and expand access to family planning globally.Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America: “As the administration doubles down on efforts to withhold funding from UNFPA and expand the global gag rule, Chairwoman Lowey and other health care champions in the House offer a welcome alternative vision of what U.S. leadership and engagement on sexual and reproductive health could look like. This bill would end the global gag rule once and for all and invest in UNFPA and other family planning partners, expanding access to life-saving services and sending a resounding message that reproductive health services are essential. At a time when the COVID-19 pandemic has challenged health systems around the world, we need policies like these that help build and strengthen health care access instead of undermining it.”The SFOPs bill includes: $750 million for family planning — an increase of $175 million above the FY 2020 enacted level and $513 million above the president’s budget request.$55.5 million for the United Nations Population Fund — an increase of $23 million above the FY 2020 enacted level and $55.5 million above the president’s budget request.The Global HER Act, which would permanently repeal the global gag rule and it also includes a prohibition on current and prior funds from being used to implement the Mexico City Policy.Other smaller, but meaningful policy changes to ensure family planning is treated the same as other global health programs when it comes to aid exemptions and the use of the HIV/AIDS Working Capital Fund to effectively purchase family planning products. The bill continues to reiterate additional abortion restrictions for foreign assistance, which we hope to see repealed in the future to remove barriers to legal abortion for people around the world. July 10, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Breaking: Court Blocks Trump Administration Rule That Threatened Insurance Coverage for Abortion”. From the press release: In a major victory for abortion access, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland today blocked a Trump administration rule designed to make insurance companies stop offering coverage for abortion. This ruling comes after Planned Parenthood of Maryland, Inc., and several individual consumers, on behalf of a nationwide class, filed a lawsuit in February challenging the rule.In December 2019, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the U.S. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released a new rule that, if implemented, would have forced insurance companies that sell plans in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) individual marketplaces to send two separate bills to customers – one for the coverage of abortion, and another for coverage of other health care. Insurers would have had to instruct their customers to pay the bills using two checks, two money orders, or two electronic transactions every month.The court found today that this separate-billing requirement creates an unreasonable barrier for patients seeking medical care and is at odds with the ACA. It also held that the rule was arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act. It explained that the rule did nothing to “ensur government funds are not spent on unauthorized purposes,” and that the rule ignored the ACA’s purpose to “increase the number of Americans covered by health insurance and decrease the cost of health care.”Had the rule been implemented, more than 3 million consumers would have been affected by the rule’s onerous restrictions, including the individual plaintiffs in the lawsuit from Maryland, the District of Columbia, New Jersey, and Maine. The rule would also have affected one-third of the individual-market exchange plans nationwide, including every individual plan offered on the marketplace in Maryland.“Abortion opponents are waging everything they’ve got as part of their massive war on our access to health care,” said Karen Nelson, president and CEO, Planned Parenthood of Maryland, Inc. “The attacks and deceptions continue, but here’s the truth: abortion care is health care, and it should not be separated, ‘carved out,’ or treated differently from any other medical service. We will always fight to eliminate barriers and protect access to safe, legal abortion and we will continue to provide people with the health care they need.” “Today is a huge victory for the people who need and deserve access to safe, legal abortion,” said Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “Abortion is essential health care, and this rule was an obvious attempt by the Trump administration to put it out of reach for millions of people in the country. Planned Parenthood Federation of America was proud to stand with Planned Parenthood of Maryland, the ACLU and these brave consumers to fight back against this harmful rule. As always, we will never stop fighting for our patients, or for the right of all people to access sexual and reproductive health care, including abortion, without shame or needless hurdles.”……As the administration acknowledged in finalizing the rule, the extensive administrative burdens would have led to higher premiums for consumers and would have caused some insurers to drop insruance coverage for abortion altogether. As the administration also acknowledged, confusion about these new requirements would have caused some people to miss payments and risk losing their health insurance coverage entirely. A fact sheet on the impact of the rule can be found here…. July 10, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a statement titled: “STATEMENT: Center for Reproductive Rights Condems the United States’ Withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO)”. From the statement: Statement of Nancy Northup, President and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, in response to the United States’ withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO):“The Center for Reproductive Rights condemns the Trump administration’s unjustified and harmful withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO). The United States’ termination of its relationship with WHO will exacerbate the devastating impact of the global COVID-19 pandemic, further disrupting and restricting essential sexual and reproductive health services precisely at the time when they are needed the most. It is undermining of global efforts to respond to the pandemic, with real harm to those who are already at risk, and especially marginalized populations, threatening their rights to life, health, and gender equality in fundamental ways.“WHO provides important human rights-based guidance for reproductive healthcare, which can be life-saving. This guidance is relied upon by governments and health care institutions across the globe, including in the United States, to develop and implement policies and practices that are central to ensuring women’s health and guaranteeing their human rights. “WHO has issued critical guidance during the pandemic on caring for pregnant women, infants, and mothers with COVID-19, as well as information on intrapartum care and breastfeeding, and on access to abortion and contraception during the COVID-19 response. Years of evidence and direct experience have clearly demonstrated the acute need for sexual and reproductive health services in times of crisis and conflict. “The United States’ withdrawal of support for WHO will harm us all at this time, when the need has never been greater for a coordinated global response to a global pandemic.” July 13, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Federal Court Blocks Medically Unnecessary Barriers to Abortion During COVID-19”. From the press release: Today, a federal court ruled that the U.S. Food and Drug Administation (FDA) must temporarily suspend enforcement of the in-person requirements on the medication mifepristone, which unnecessarily subject patients to COVID-19 risks in order to access abortion during the pandemic. The lawsuit was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on behalf of the American College of Obstetricions and Gynecologists. (ACOG), SisterSong WOmen of Color Reproductive Justice Collective, and other leading medical organizations and reproductive health, rights, and justice advocates.The Court issued a nationwide preliminary injunction blocking part of the FDA’s Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) restrictions on mifepristone when it is used for medication abortion, yet failed to suspend the restrictions when the medication is used for managing an early miscarriage. The temporary easing of the in-person requirements allow mifepristone to be mailed from the health center to the patient where state law permits. The injunction will last for the duration of the litigation, or until the Trump administration end the federal public emergency declaration……Mifepristone is safe, effective, and has been used by more than four million people since the FDA approved it twenty years ago. Leading medical associations have maintained that the FDA’s REMS restrictions on the distribution of mifepristone are not based on evidence and do not benefit patients. Research has repeatedly shown that mifepristone is safe and effective when prescribed through telehealth and self-administered at home. July 13, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a statement titled: “ACOG Statement on Court’s Order Lifting Burdensome FDA Restriction”. From the statement: The following is a statement from Eva Chalas, MD, FACOG, FACS, president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, on today’s decision from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland:Today’s ruling represents a victory for patients, who should not have to face the additional burden of increased COVID-19 exposure as a condition of receiving their prescribed mifepristone. It also represents a victory for the dedicated clinicians who are working to provide needed care without unnecessary exposure of patients, their families and the members of the healthcare team, to the novel coronavirus.“ACOG undertook this legal challenge because we believe strongly in our position, which is founded on clear science and the consensus of the medical community. Mifepristone is a safe medication and FDA’s in-person dispensing requirements provide no medical benefit to patients. There is no basis for FDA’s decision to treat mifepristone differently than other medications. During the COVID-19 pandemic – which is likely to impact the U.S. for many months to come – requiring in-person dispensing of mifepristone needlessly threatens both patients and clinicians, and we are relieved to see that our members and their patients will no longer face this additional burden when it comes to abortion care.“Nonetheless, we are disappointed that the injunction issued by the Court does not apply to women experiencing miscarriage and the clinicians treating them, putting these individuals at risk for needless COVID-19 exposure and increased potential harm during what is already a painful time for these patients. This decision particularly adversely affects women in states with rising rates of COVID-19 infection with resulting limitation of access to surgical procedures, which may be required to complete the miscarriage in the absence of access to mifepristone. As always, ACOG feels strongly that access to women’s health care should not be singled out and burdened with regulation that renders patient care less accessible or, in this case, potentially dangerous, and we will continue our advocacy to seek removal of these restrictions during the pandemic.“The FDA’s burdensome in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone has had a disproportionate effect on communities hit hardest by the pandemic, including communities of color who already face existing inequities and structural barriers to care. Suspending the REMS requirement for mifepristone for early pregnancy termination represents a necessary step forward in our collective work toward health equity during this unprecedented time of pandemic.” July 13, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted an article titled: “BREAKING: Tennessee Abortion Ban Blocked by Federal Court Minutes After Being Signed into Law”. From the press release: Today, a federal district court in Tennessee issued a temporary restraining order, blocking a law signed by Gov. Bill Lee earlier today that bans abortion at nearly every stage of pregnancy and for reasons related to race, gender, or fetal diagnosis. The emergency restraining order was granted at the request of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and the ACLU of Tennessee; they filed a lawsuit to block the law immediately after it passed the state legislature on June 19. The ban was in effect for less than an hour today before being blocked by the court.Part of the law blocked today prohibits patients from obtaining an abortion based on their reason for seeking the procedure, including the potential for a Down syndrome diagnosis or the sex or race of the fetus. These “reason bans” inflict harm by peddling stigma around abortions and stereotypes of Black and Brown communities, Asian Americans, and people with disabilities. Abortion patients – like all patients – should have the right to make private medical decisions with their families and their doctors, without interference from politicians.The restraining order comes just weeks after the Supreme Court struck down a Louisiana law in June Medical Services v. Russo, which would have devastated abortion access in that state and could have affected abortion across the country.Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“Today’s ruling ensures that for now, people in Tennessee can continue accessing safe, legal abortion in their home state. But while we can enjoy a moment of relief today, we can’t forget that legislators passed this dangerous abortion ban in the dead of night without public input. While the country rises up against racism, it’s important to recognize that these laws are inherently discriminatory. Abortion bans are part of a larger public health care system that targets people of color through barriers to care, and systematically erases their freedoms and bodily autonomy. Enough is enough. Banning abortion is illegal, full stop. Planned Parenthood won’t back down in the face of any attacks on our rights and freedoms. Not today, not ever.”Statement from Ashley Coffield, president & CEO, Planned Parenthood Tennessee and Mississippi: “This is a victory for patients in Tennessee, but the fight is far from over. This sweeping abortion ban is part of a multi-layered effort to target people who already face systemic barriers to care because of racist and discriminatory policies. If the law sounds familiar, its because Gov. Lee already tried banning abortion earlier this year using fear around the pandemic as an excuse to carry out his dangerous political agenda. As we continue to fight for all of our patients, we’re glad that today’s ruling will allow Tennesseans to continue to seek the health care they choose in their home state… July 13, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Federal Court Strikes Down Georgia’s 2019 Abortion Ban”. From the press release: A federal court permanently struck down Georgia’s 2019 six-week abortion ban in SisterSong v. Kemp. It is the second federal ruling today blocking a state abortion ban, coming just hours after a Tennessee ban was blocked.The lawsuit was filed by the ACLU, the ACLU of Georgia, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and Planned Parenthood Federation of America in June 2019, after Georgia was one of nine states last year to pass six-week abortion bans, banning abortion from the earliest weeks of pregnancy, before many even know they are pregnant. In October 2019, the federal district court issued a preliminary injunction blocking the ban from taking effect.The bill, which passed by two votes, sparked widespread opposition from business leaders, the film and entertainment industry, and activists across all parts of Georgia. Nearly 200 Georgia business leaders spoke out publicly against the ban. The $9 billion Georgia film and entertainment industry published letters, threatening to stop working in Atlanta if the ban was enacted.The law was in clear violation of Roe v. Wade and nearly a half century of Supreme Court precedent. Every ban passed in 2019 remains blocked, despite continued attacks – including efforts from several states across the South and Midwest to restrict access to abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic. Today, abortion is still legal in all 50 states; though politically motivated, medically unnecessary restrictions still make access a challenge for too many.Statement by Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“Georgia politicians and Governor Kemp, our message to you is clear: Banning abortion is illegal and unconstitutional. Not only that, the reality is that abortion bans are another barrier in a health care infrastructure built on systemic racism, putting basic rights out of reach for Black and Brown Georgians and pushing their freedoms out of reach. While today is a victory for Georgia patients, we are committed to fighting back against all policies – overt or subtle, that make access to basic health care dependent on who you are or where you live.”Statement by Staci Fox, president and CEO Planned Parenthood Southeast:“We said it from the start: Abortion bans like Georgia’s are blatantly unconstitutional, and the courts reaffirmed that fact today. While people across this state and around the country are literally dying from COVID-19 and systemic racism, our leaders should be focused on expanding access to health care – not restricting it. We celebrate this victory, but we know the fight is far from over. We will not back down until access to health care – including safe, legal abortion – is recognized as a basic human right.”… July 13, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Condemns Tennessee Abortion Ban that Effectively Bans All Abortion in the State”. From the press release: Today anti-choice, anti-freedom Governor Bill Lee signed into law a cruel and sweeping measure (SB 2196/HB 2263) that effectively outlaws abortion in the state of Tennessee. In addition to banning abortion before many people even know they’re pregnant, the law includes an exhaustive list of provisions meant to chip away at and ultimately end the right to abortion. The ACLU, Center for Reproductive Rights, and Planned Parenthood Federation of America have filed litigation and abortion bans found in the new law have already been temporarily blocked in federal court.Among the law’s provisions are bans on abortion at almost every stage of pregnancy; a forced ultrasound mandate; a ban that requires interrogating women about why they’re ending a pregnancy; and criminalizing doctors who provide abortion care. The law carries no exceptions for rape or incest. The timing of the legislation serves as a stunning display of Lee’s misplaced priorities — and his commitment to an extreme ideological agenda — in the midst of a dramatic spike in COVID-19 cases that may force the state’s largest county to roll back reopening efforts. Lee’s signing of the bill follows anti-choice politicians’ efforts to ram this legislation through overnight on the eve of Juneteenth. NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue release the following statement in response:“Anti-choice, anti-freedom lawmakers in Tennessee’s state legislature pushed a bill effectively banning abortion under the cover of darkness, while the entire country grapples with an unprecedented pandemic and overdue uprising against entrenched white supremacy. And now, Governor Lee is joining these extremist lawmakers in ignoring the cries of constituents in order to prioritize banning the right to access abortion. In a time of crisis, they remained laser-focused on removing the right of Tennesseans to make decisions about their own health, lives, and families. The hypocrisy and cruelty could not be more clear. But it’s not surprising: Governor Lee and his fellow anti-choice extremists have proven time and again that they’re more than willing to trade our fundamental freedoms in furtherance of their out-of-touch ideological agenda. NARAL’s members in Tennessee will never stop fighting to protect these freedoms. NARAL stands in solidarity with the litigating organizations fighting this legislation in the courtroom and will continue to work to expose the true agenda of the anti-choice movement, whose priorities stand in stark contrast with the values of the 77% of Americans who support the legal right to abortion.” NARAL recently released a new report, “Accurate and Unbiased? A deep dive into how the media covers abortion in the US,” conducted by Global Strategy Group, that includes key findings on how major US news outlets cover abortion and illuminates best practices when covering abortion (such as avoiding using medically inaccurate or inflammatory language such as “heartbeat” bill without context or explanation.) Anti-choice, anti-freedom politicians who introduced this legislation specifically said their goal was to give the state “multiple shots” at ending Roe v. Wade. Their objectives are clear: control women and restrict their freedom to make their own decisions about pregnancy, effectively outlawing abortion and threatening doctors who provide abortion care with criminal punishment.Tennessee legislators jammed through this extreme bill late at night in June, with the hastily-scheduled vote taking place after midnight. Anti-choice lawmakers in the state have a track record of going out of their way to attack reproductive freedom — last summer they called a special hearing on a bill that would ban abortion with no exceptions for rape or incest. Reproductive freedom is under attack in the United States like never before. While the recent Supreme Court decision in the June Medical Services, LLC v. Russo case was a reprieve for now, the threats to reproductive freedom loom large. Anti-choice extremists have shown time and again that they will stop at nothing to advance their dangerous ideological agenda, and in the June v. Russo ruling, Roberts has made it clear that the Court is still looking for ways to help them get their way.The anti-choice movement has spent decades working overtime to decimate access to abortion, state by state, law by law. Since 2011, anti-choice politicians have pushed nearly 450 laws restricting reproductive freedom through state legislatures, despite the fact that American public overwhelmingly believes decisions about pregnancy should be made by women rather than politicians — including 94% of Democrats, 79% of Independents, and 59% of Republicans. July 14, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris, Durbin Lead 33 Senators Demanding Administration Comply With Supreme Court Decision on DACA”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA), member of the United States Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ranking Member of the Senate Immigration Subcommittee and author of the Dream Act, on Tuesday led a letter from 33 Senators to Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Chad Wolf calling on the Trump Administration to immediately comply with the Supreme Court’s decision rejecting the Administration’s rescission of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and requiring the Administration to reopen DACA for new applicants.The Supreme Court announced its decision on June 18, with Chief Justice John Roberts calling the Administration’s effort to repeal deportation protections for Dreamers—young immigrants who came to the United States as children—“arbitrary and capricious.” Yesterday, 25 days after the Court’s decision, was the deadline for the Administration to file a petition for rehearing.“There is no indication that your agency has taken any steps to fully reinstate DACA protections, as the Court’s decision unequivocally requires,” the senators wrote. “We have not located a single statement by you or any other Department of Homeland Security (DHS) official notifying the public that your agency is complying with the Supreme Court’s decision. To the contrary, on June 19, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) updated its website to falsely claim that the Supreme Court’s decision has ‘no basis in law’ and attack DACA recipients.”They continued, “Congress and the American people have not received any information regarding your agency’s compliance with the Court’s holding. It is unclear what steps, if any, USCIS has taken to implement the Supreme Court decision, including receiving and processing initial DACA applications, DACA renewal applications, and requests for advance parole as well as publication of information regarding DACA for new applicants and current recipients.”“The Roberts decision requires your immediate compliance. We await your prompt assurance that you will respect the Court’s decision and reopen DACA for all eligible applicants,” the senators concluded.More than 800,000 Dreamers have come forward and received DACA. Dreamers have contributed to our country as soldiers, nurses, teachers, and small business owners. Even as their own fates remained uncertain due to the Trump Administration’s rescission of DACA, more than 200,000 DACA recipients have served as essential workers during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic by teaching children; growing, packaging, cooking, and shipping food; stocking the shelves at grocery stores; and providing healthcare services to those who fall sick. The letter was also signed by Senators Charles Schumer (D-NY), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Jack Reed (D-RI), Thomas Carper (D-DE), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Bernard Sanders (D-VT), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Robert Casey (D-PA), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Tom Udall (D-MN), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Christopher Coons (D-DE), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Christopher Murphy (D-CT), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Angus King (I-ME), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Edward Markey (D-MA), Cory A. Booker (D-NJ), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Tina Smith (D-MN), Jacky Rosen (D-NV). Full text of the letter is available HERE July 14, 2020: Representative Ayanna Pressley (Democrat – Massachusetts) posted a press release titled: “Pressley, Warren, Question Trump Administration’s Failure to Follow the Law and Publicly Release Plans to Address Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care”. From the press release: Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07) and Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) sent a letter to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) asking for HHS’s report on the Administration’s efforts to address racial disparities in health care access and outcomes, as required by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA).The lawmakers requested answers on why the Trump Administration has failed to provide Congress and the public with this legally required information. In the letter, the lawmakers highlighted the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on communities of color and the need to address systemic racism and racial disparities in health care to mitigate and control the COVID-19 pandemic.“The unjust reality that Black, Brown, and Indigenous communities have been disproportionately infected and killed by COVID-19 underscores that racism, discrimination, and bias are public health problems that the federal government must prioritize,” the lawmakers wrote. “The Department of Health and Human Services is required by law to report biannually to Congress on its progress to address health disparities, but these reports appear to have stopped under the Trump Administration. Without successfully addressing these racial disparities in health outcomes and health care access, we will not be able to mitigate and fully control the COVID-19 pandemic. You have, to date, failed to do so, with tragic consequences.”In 2010, Congress recognized racial disparities as an urgent health crisis and as part of the ACA, elevated the HHS Office of Minority Health to “lead and coordinate activities that improve the health of racial and ethnic minority populations and reduce health disparities.” The ACA also required the Office of Minority Health to report to Congress on its activities every two years. However, the Trump Administration has not publicly produced reports as mandated by Congress for 2017 and 2019.Recent data shows that the COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected communities of color. The data reveals that Black and Latinx individuals are at higher risk of contracting the virus because of systemic injustices that create in disparities in chronic health conditions and impede access to quality health care.The lawmakers asked HHS to respond to their inquiry by no later than July 28, 2020.The letter is part of the lawmakers’ efforts to press the Trump Administration to respond effectively to this crisis and address existing racial disparities in the United States. Congresswoman Pressley and Senator Warren have introduced bicameral legislation to require the federal government to collect and report coronavirus demographic data–including race and ethnicity. In March, the lawmakers urged HHS to collect racial and ethnic demographic data on testing and treatment for COVID-19 to identify and address racial disparities. The lawmakers also sent a letter to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) calling on the agency to immediately release racial and ethnic data of Medicare beneficiaries who are tested or hospitalized for COVID-19. July 15, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a news release titled: “Women’s Health Organizations Urge Continued U.S. Leadership in WHO”. From the news release: The following is a statement from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), joined by AAGL, the American College of Nurse-Midwives (ACNM), the American College of Osteopathic Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOOG), the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), the American Urogynecologic Society (AUGS), the Council of University Chairs of Obstetrics and Gynecology (CUCOG), the North American Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology (NASPAG), the Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO), the Society of Family Planning (SFP), and the Society for Maternal–Fetal Medicine (SMFM):“The recent actions of the administration to withdraw from the WHO require adamant opposition from leaders and health care professionals worldwide. We are in the midst of a historic global health crisis, and now is not the time for the United States to relinquish our role as a steadfast leader in global health by terminating our partnership with this essential organization.“The COVID-19 pandemic is not the only crisis facing the world, or the United States. The WHO works to eliminate gender-based disparities that leave women around the world subject to disproportionate illness, violence, and suffering. Our country’s participation as a member state in the WHO can help maintain advances in the efforts to improve lives of women around the world.“We strongly urge the administration to rescind the effort to terminate the United States’ relationship with the WHO and to work to reestablish the United States’ constructive participation by in the effort to find worldwide solutions to the grave global health problems of our times.” July 15, 2020: Senator Cory Booker (Democrat – New Jersey) posted a press release titled: “Booker, Menendez Urge DHS to Comply with Supreme Court Decision on DACA”. From the press release: U.S. Senators Cory Booker and Bob Menendez (both D-N.J.) joined a group of colleagues in calling on the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to immediately comply with the Supreme Court’s decision rejecting the Administration’s rescission of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and requiring the Administration to reopen DACA for new applicants. The Supreme Court announced its decision on June 18, with Chief Justice John Roberts calling the Administration’s effort to repeal deportation protections for Dreamers—young immigrants who came to the United States as children—“arbitrary and capricious.” Almost a month after the Court’s decision the Trump Administration has not reinstated DACA protections.“There is no indication that your agency has taken any steps to fully reinstate DACA protections, as the Court’s decision unequivocally requires,” the Senators wrote to DHS Acting Secretary Chad Wolf. “We have not located a single statement by you or any other Department of Homeland Security (DHS) official notifying the public that your agency is complying with the Supreme Court’s decision. To the contrary, on June 19, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) updated its website to falsely claim that the Supreme Court’s decision has ‘no basis in law’ and attack DACA recipients.”“Congress and the American people have not received any information regarding your agency’s compliance with the Court’s holding. It is unclear what steps, if any, USCIS has taken to implement the Supreme Court decision, including receiving and processing initial DACA applications, DACA renewal applications, and requests for advance parole as well as publication of information regarding DACA for new applicants and current recipients,” the senators added. “The Roberts decision requires your immediate compliance. We await your prompt assurance that you will respect the Court’s decision and reopen DACA for all eligible applicants.”More than 800,000 Dreamers have come forward and received DACA. Dreamers have contributed to our country as soldiers, nurses, teachers, and small business owners. Even as their own fates remained uncertain due to the Trump Administration’s rescission of DACA, more than 200,000 DACA recipients have served as essential workers during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic by teaching children; growing, packaging, cooking, and shipping food; stocking the shelves at grocery stores; and providing healthcare services to those who fall sick.As New Jersey battled the second highest number of COVID-19 cases in the nation earlier this year, 5,000 DACA recipients in the state were working in health care, education, and food-related occupations.The letter was also signed by Sens. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Thomas Carper (D-Del.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Bob Casey Jr. (D-Penn.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Christopher Coons (D-Del.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Christopher Murphy (D-Conn.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Angus King (I-Maine), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), and Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.).A full copy of the letter can be found … below.Dear Acting Secretary Wolf:We call on you to immediately comply with the Supreme Court’s decision rejecting the Trump Administration’s rescission of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and requiring the Administration to reopen DACA for new applicants.On June 18, in an opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Court held that the Administration’s effort to repeal deportation protections for Dreamers, young immigrants who came to the United States as children, was “arbitrary and capricious.” Yesterday, 25 days after the Court’s decision, was the deadline for the Administration to file a petition for rehearing. And last Friday, President Trump said, “I’m going to do a big executive order. I have the power to do it as president and I’m going to make DACA a part of it.”However, there is no indication that your agency has taken any steps to fully reinstate DACA protections, as the Court’s decision unequivocally requires. We have not located a single statement by you or any other Department of Homeland Security (DHS) official notifying the public that your agency is complying with the Supreme Court’s decision. To the contrary, on June 19, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) updated its website to falsely claim that the Supreme Court’s decision has “no basis in law” and attack DACA recipients. As of today, the USCIS webpage titled “Consideration for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)” appears to have last been updated on February 14, 2018, and the USCIS “Frequently Asked Questions” page regarding DACA appears to have last been updated on March 8, 2018.Your agency has had ample opportunity to prepare for the recent Supreme Court decision. On March 4, 2020, at a Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee (HSGAC) hearing, you committed to provide Congress with your agency’s plans in preparation for the Supreme Court decision. On March 20, 2020, 36 Senators and 87 Representatives sent you a letter requesting those plans.However, to date, Congress and the American people have not received any information regarding your agency’s compliance with the Court’s holding. It is unclear what steps, if any, USCIS has taken to implement the Supreme Court decision, including receiving and processing initial DACA applications, DACA renewal applications, and requests for advance parole as well as publication of information regarding DACA for new applicants and current recipients.The stakes are high. More than 800,000 Dreamers have come forward and received DACA. DACA has allowed Dreamers to contribute to our country as soldiers, nurses, teachers, and small business owners. Even as their own fates remained uncertain due to the Trump Administration’s rescission of DACA, over 200,000 DACA recipients have served as essential workers during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic by teaching children; growing, packaging, cooking, and shipping food; stocking the shelves at grocery stores; and providing healthcare services to those who fall sick.Since the Trump Administration rescinded DACA on September 5, 2017, USCIS has not accepted initial DACA applications from Dreamers who are eligible for DACA but have never received this protection. For example, children who have turned 15, the youngest age at which someone can receive DACA, have been blocked from applying since the DACA rescission. The Center for American Progress estimates that approximately 300,000 Dreamers who have never received DACA are now eligible to apply for the program, including 55,500 young people who have turned 15 since September 5, 2017.Now that 25 days have passed, the Roberts decision requires your immediate compliance. We await your prompt assurance that you will respect the Court’s decision and reopen DACA for all eligible applicants. July 15, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Amicus Brief in District Court LGBTQ Health Care Discrimination Case”. Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after the House of Representatives filed an amicus brief in the case of Whitman-Walker Clinic v. HHS in the District of Columbia, opposing the Trump Administration’s rule undermining the Affordable Care Act’s protections for LGBTQ patients:“The Affordable Care Act is a pillar of health and financial security for millions of Americans, designed to ensure that all Americans, regardless of who you are or whom you love, can access the quality, affordable health care they and their families need. In the midst of the unprecedented coronavirus crisis, this landmark law is more vital than ever. Yet, President Trump and Republicans continue their relentless campaign to eliminate Americans’ health care, fan the flames of hatred and division and undermine the rule of law.“Despite last month’s Supreme Court decision unequivocally affirming that discrimination ‘on the basis of sex’ applied to sexual orientation and gender identity, the Administration blatantly ignored the law to continue advancing its shameful, politically-motivated assault on the LGBTQ community. The Administration’s rule is a gross violation of the rights of LGBTQ Americans and fails to honor the Administration’s responsibility to faithfully execute the law. LGBTQ individuals, particularly transgender Americans, have suffered a long history of fear and inequality in accessing health care, leaving them and their families open to discrimination and potentially dangerous health risks. Bigotry is not a permissible excuse to prohibit any American from accessing the health care that is their right. “House Democrats remain committed to upholding the rights and dignity of all Americans and will continue to oppose the Administration’s outrageous efforts to eliminate the Affordable Care Act and its life-saving protections. In the courts and in Congress, we will never stop fighting to ensure that health care remains a right, not a privilege for all.” July 16, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a statement titled: “STATEMENT: Trump Administration Releases Draft Report of the Commission on Unalienable Rights”. From the statement: Statement from Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“Today, the Trump Administration rolled out a draft report by the Commission on Unalienable Rights, seeking once again to erase reproductive rights from the global discourse. Rather than reaffirming our nation’s commitment to advancing the full spectrum of human rights protections, including reproductive rights, the Commission’s report reveals how the Administration plans to pick and choose which rights the United States will recognize and prioritize, and which it will abandon. “Contrary to well-established human rights principles, the report suggests that abortion is a ‘contestable political preference’ and not a basic right, and ominously warns against any so-called ‘prodigious expansion of human rights.’ “This report is yet another attempt by this Administration to roll back human rights protections for women, LGBTQI people, and other vulnerable, marginalized communities in the U.S. and around the world by manufacturing confusion and stoking controversy, while simultaneously and hypocritically claiming the mantle of global exemplar.” July 16, 2020: Representative Ayanna Pressley (Democrat – Massachusetts) posted a press release titled: “Reps. Pressley, Garcia Introduce Lead Abatement for Families Act to Remove Lead Pipes from Public and Subsidized Housing”. From the press release: Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07) and Congressman Jesús “Chuy” García (IL-04) introduced the Lead Abatement for Families Act, a bill to require the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to identify and remove lead pipes in public and subsidized housing and provide grants to public housing authorities and property owners to remove them.As many as ten million homes in the U.S. get their water from lead pipes, and residents of federally assisted housing are disproportionately impacted. Lead poisoning is especially serious for children: A 2015 study determined that by the third grade, children in Chicago with even small amounts of lead in their blood were more than 32% more likely to fail standardized tests.“We must center racial and economic justice in all of our policymaking, and housing is no exception,” said Congresswoman Pressley. “For far too long, our government has allowed families living in public and federally-assisted housing to be exposed to lead poisoning—resulting in disproportionately worse health, economic and educational outcomes for Black, brown, and low-income communities. This legislation would correct these historic injustices and ensure that public housing in the Massachusetts 7th and beyond is safe, healthy and lead pipe-free. Our families do not deserve less, simply because they cannot afford more.”“It is a national scandal that millions of homes across the country still get water from lead pipes, and unfortunately lead poisoning is especially prevalent in black and brown communities like the ones I represent in Chicago’s 4th District. I’m proud to introduce the Lead Abatement for Families Act with Representative Pressley to get lead pipes out of public and federally subsidized housing,” said Congressman Jesús “Chuy” García. “Affordable housing should never jeopardize the health of its residents, and Congress must act immediately to prevent our children and communities from exposure to lead in their drinking water.” July 17, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Conditionally Approves Sale of St. Francis Medical Center”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra issued a letter conditionally approving the sale of St. Francis Medical Center, a Verity Health System (Verity) medical facility in Los Angeles County, to Prime Healthcare, Inc (Prime). Under California law (Corporations Code section 5914 et seq., and California Code of Regulations, title 11, section 999.5), any proposed sale of a non-profit health facility to a for-profit corporation must secure the approval of the state Attorney General, whose statutory charge is to consider the factors set forth in the law, including whether the transaction is in the public interest and whether the transaction affects the availability or accessibility of healthcare services to the affected community. The Attorney General’s conditional consent represented in today’s letter seeks to protect access to care for the Los Angeles communities served by the hospital. If Verity and Prime close on the sale with the conditions outlined in the letter, they are consenting to comply with the conditions. The transaction must still be approved in Court where Verity has filed for bankruptcy.“The California Department of Justice has a responsibility to the families who live around and rely on St Francis Medical Center. The COVID-19 public health crisis has brought home the importance of having access to lifesaving hospital care nearby in our communities,” said Attorney General Becerra. “The conditions we have attached to the proposed sale of St. Francis focus on maintaining or improving care and services at the hospital – from treatment for COVID-19 to cancer and emergency care. No change in ownership, no bankruptcy filing can be allowed to diminish that priority. St. Francis Medical Center is not just an asset, it is an indispensable neighbor, it is the workers who serve the patients, and the doctors who save lives. We conditionally approve this sale to keep it that way.”The Attorney General’s conditions are based on an independent health expert’s in-depth analysis of the health and medical needs in the surrounding communities. Among other things, these conditions call for Prime, the prospective purchaser, to: Maintain Operations at the Hospital: Requires that Prime keep St. Francis open for at least ten years after sale and continue operating as a Trauma II Center. St. Francis will continue to provide cancer services, cardiac services, women’s health services, neonatal intensive care, perinatal and pediatric services, psychiatric and other critical services recommended by the health expert;Strengthen Charity Care Policy:Requires that Prime increase of its reach of charity care policy at St. Francis by covering care in full, serving those who earn at the 400 percent of federal poverty level ($51,040 for an individual and $86,880 for a family of three) and up to 600 percent of federal poverty for the discount payment policy;Requires that Prime commit $10,186,173 in charity care for patients in the surrounding community, and Prime has agreed to improve its charity care policies to cover significantly more patients;Increase Community Benefits:Requires that Prime increase the community benefit of St. Francis to $1,597,077 for six years exclusive of any grants received, to support the Southern California Crossroads Program, the Health Benefit Resource Center, Welcome Baby Program, Healthy Community Initiatives, American Career College access for onsite training, Paramedic Training and Education, and Patient Transportation Support;Maintain Hospital Staff and Medical Providers:Prime is required to maintain admitting privileges for staff in good standing, maintain on-call coverage contracts and comparable arrangements with physicians at fair market value to maintain Level II trauma care at St. Francis; Maintain Safety in Hospitals:Requires that Prime commit the necessary investments required to maintain seismic compliance at St. Francis. Prime will be required to expend at least $35 million for capital improvements, excluding seismic retrofit costs, at St. Francis Medical Center over the five-year period from the closing date, including but not limited to upgrading its electronic medical records system. The expert report identified seismic issues at St. Francis; andMaintain Access to Care for Women and LGBTQ individuals:Prime is required to maintain access to women’s healthcare services for ten years, and no limitations on LGBTQ healthcare services offered at St. Francis. A copy of the conditional approval letter is available here. July 17, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on D.C. Circuit Ruling on Trump’s Junk Health Insurance Plans”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi released this statement after a panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2 to 1 to allow the Trump Administration to continue its expansion of short-term, limited duration health insurance plans that are not required to provide essential health benefits and can discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions:“Even in the middle of the devastation of the coronavirus epidemic, President Trump has continued his all-out assault on the protections of the Affordable Care Act and dependable, affordable health care. It is disappointing that this court ruling will enable the Trump Administration to keep railroading vulnerable families into shoddy junk health insurance plans.“After an accident or an illness, those pushed into President Trump’s junk plans will find they’ve been paying for coverage that doesn’t cover much at all. An investigation by the Energy & Commerce Committee uncovered widespread evidence of the abusive tactics and tragic consequences of the Trump Administration’s junk plans.“Instead of protecting people with pre-existing conditions, President Trump is in court defending his abusive junk plans while demanding that every last protection and benefit of the Affordable Care Act be struck down. Democrats will continue to fight to protect families from junk insurance plans while lowering health costs and prescription drug prices for all Americans.” July 20, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Celebrates District Court Win Protecting Access to Abortion”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra applauded today’s ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, which found the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) rule reinterpreting Section 1303 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) unlawful. The Trump Administration’s Separate Abortion Billing Rule would require consumers to make two separate payment transactions for healthcare – one of at least $1 for abortion coverage and one for the remaining health benefits – or risk losing coverage altogether. In today’s decision, the District Court held that the Separate Abortion Payment Rule is arbitrary and capricious, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.“Today’s ruling by the district court affirmed what we already knew – the Trump Administration’s Separate Abortion Billing Rule is not only foolish, it’s illegal,” said Attorney General Becerra. “At the California Department of Justice, we will continue to fight for access to equitable healthcare and reproductive rights for all. As our nation continues to wrestle with the COVID-19 pandemic, it is more important than ever that we fight so that every American can access the healthcare they need.”On March 30, 2020, Attorney General Becerra and New York Attorney General Letitia James led a coalition of eight attorneys general in filing a motion for summary judgment in their case opposing the HHS rule. The coalition argued that the new rule violates federal law, disproportionately affects states committed to ensuring comprehensive reproductive healthcare, places excessive burdens on consumers seeking reliable health coverage, and is inconsistent with the ACA’s requirement of equitable access to healthcare.The Attorney General has been a leader in fighting for women’s reproductive freedom: he led a multistate coalition in filing amicus briefs in support of lawsuits challenging a series of restrictive abortion laws in Missouri and Arkansas; joined a coalition of 22 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief supporting a constitutional challenge to a Louisiana law requiring abortion providers to maintain hospital admitting privileges; led a coalition of 20 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief challenging Mississippi’s near-total ban on abortion in Jackson Women’s Health Organization, et al. v. State Health Officer of the Mississippi Department of Health, et al; led a coalition of 22 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in support of a lawsuit challenging Mississippi’s House Bill 1510; and secured injunctions against the Trump Administration’s harmful rules that would do away with the ACA’s contraception coverage requirement.Attorney General Becerra was joined in defending today’s lawsuit by the attorneys general of New York, Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Oregon, Vermont, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the court order is available here. July 20, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Sues Trump Administration for Allowing Health Care Discrimination”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today led a coalition of 23 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit to stop a new Trump Administration rule that makes it easier for health care providers and insurance companies to discriminate against certain vulnerable and protected classes of Americans. In a lawsuit filed against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), HHS Secretary Alex Azar, and the head of HHS’s Office of Civil Rights, Roger Severino, Attorney General James and the coalition argue that the new rule emboldens providers and insurers to discriminate against LGBTQ+ individuals, those with limited English proficiency, and women, among others, by stripping express protections for these groups in HHS regulations that implement the nondiscrimination provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). The provision of the ACA prohibits discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, disability, or age by health programs or facilities that receive federal funds, but the Trump Administration is seeking to undermine many of those protections.“Despite failing to repeal the ACA again and again, President Trump and his administration continue to unlawfully chip away at health care for Americans,” said Attorney General James. “By rolling back rules that ensure the ACA protects all Americans, the president is unlawfully giving health care providers and insurers license to deny care to LGBTQ+ individuals, those who do not speak English, and women. It is never acceptable to deny health care to Americans who need it, but it is especially egregious to do so in the middle of a pandemic. For more than a decade, the ACA has provided tens of millions of Americans with quality, affordable health coverage, which is why we will use every tool at our disposal to stop the Trump Administration from taking us backwards.”The Obama Administration’s HHS issued regulations implementing Section 1557 of the ACA in 2016 — making clear that discrimination on the basis of gender identity, nonconformity to sex stereotypes, and pregnancy status are forms of sex discrimination prohibited by the statute. Specifically, Section 1557 prohibits discrimination by any health care program — including providers and insurers — against individuals on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, disability, or age. Federal courts have also held that the statute’s prohibitions on sex discrimination protect transgender and other LGBTQ+ individuals from discrimination, which was confirmed in last month’s Supreme Court decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, which held that discrimination based on sexual orientation and transgender status are forms of sex discrimination prohibited by federal civil rights law.But, despite numerous failed legislative and legal battles to repeal and dismantle the ACA, the Trump Administration’s new rule would now eliminate many of the express protections contained in the Section 1557 regulations, unlawfully exclude many health insurers from Section 1557’s scope, and would embolden health care providers and health insurers to deny care and insurance coverage. The new rule would also impose unreasonable barriers and impede timely access to health care for Americans, in violation of Section 1554 of the ACA.Before the rule was finalized, Attorney General James and the coalition previously called on the Trump Administration to withdraw the rule by submitting a comment letter to HHS last August, as well as by sending a letter to HHS this past April, at the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) public health crisis, in an effort to stop the further exacerbation of the nation’s health care system.In the lawsuit filed today — in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York — Attorney General James and the coalition argue that HHS has unlawfully ignored the harms that the new rule will impose on vulnerable populations, including LGBTQ+ individuals, individuals with limited English proficiency, and women, as well as other protected classes. The coalition additionally contends that HHS has failed to justify why it abandoned its prior policy, which, among other things, explicitly prohibited discrimination in health care and required health entities to provide meaningful language assistance services to individuals with limited English proficiency, including notifying them of their rights to translation and interpretation services. The lawsuit finally alleges that the Trump Administration was motivated by animus toward the transgender community in issuing this rule.The coalition specifically argues that the new rule is arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), and that it violates the equal protection guarantee of the Fifth Amendment.Attorney General James led today’s lawsuit with the assistance of the attorneys general of California and Massachusetts. Additionally, the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia joined Attorney General James in filing today’s lawsuit… July 20, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Files Lawsuit Challenging Trump Administration’s Rule Rolling Back ACA Healthcare Anti-Discrimination Protections”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey and New York Attorney General Leticia James, today, leading a coalition of 23 attorneys general, filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s final rule undermining “Nondiscrimination in Health and Health Education Programs or Activities” (Section 1557) of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Section 1557 prohibits discrimination in healthcare based on gender, race, national origin, sex, age, or disability. The Trump Administration’s final rule undermines Section 1557’s critical anti-discrimination protections for marginalized populations including the LGBTQ community, women, communities of color, and individuals with disabilities, at a time when they are most needed to help address the coronavirus pandemic. In the lawsuit, the coalition argues that the Section 1557 rule violates the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and the equal protection guarantee of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. “Hard to believe any President would willingly expose Americans to discrimination in healthcare. But that’s what President Trump’s latest rule would do,” said Attorney General Becerra. “In the midst of a global pandemic, it is critical that our leaders open doors to care and push back against existing biases in our healthcare system. Too many Americans already struggle to access essential care. We don’t need discrimination to make it worse. But this guy won’t stop, so neither will we. We’re taking President Trump to court to stop discrimination.” The ACA prohibits discrimination in federal healthcare — from Medicaid, Medicare, and the healthcare exchanges, to federal healthcare grant programs providing safeguards against discrimination. Further, the ACA expressly seeks to provide equity in healthcare and prohibits any regulation that creates unreasonable barriers for individuals to obtain healthcare. The Trump Administration’s final rule contradicts this and other federal civil rights laws by rolling back anti-discrimination protections for communities of color, women, LGBTQ individuals, those with limited English proficiency, and people with disabilities, effectively sanctioning discrimination in our healthcare system. Data shows that the coronavirus pandemic is already exacerbating racial and ethnic disparities in healthcare that the ACA attempted to address, particularly in states that have not expanded Medicaid. In the lawsuit, the coalition argues that the Trump Administration’s final rule undermining Section 1557’s anti-discrimination protections is unlawful because it: Conflicts with the ACA and the APA; Misconstrues federal civil rights laws including Title IX;Exceeds HHS’s authority by redefining which communities are subject to Section 1557’s anti-discrimination protections; andViolates the equal protection guarantees of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. On April 30, 2020, Attorneys General Becerra, Healey and James led a multistate coalition in filing a comment letter urging HHS not to finalize its proposed regulation undermining the ACA’s critical Section 1557 anti-discrimination protections. Attorneys General Becerra, Healey and James, are joined by the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the complaint is available here. July 21, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Wins Suit, Stops Trump Administration from Raising Costs of Abortion Coverage”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today announced a nationwide victory for women’s reproductive freedoms after a federal court threw out, late last night, a Trump Administration rule that would have made it more difficult for women in New York and across the nation to access abortion services under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). In January, Attorney General James and California Attorney General Xavier Becerra co-led a coalition of eight attorneys general in filing a lawsuit to stop the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) from implementing the rule, which threatened to potentially kick millions of women off their health plans if they failed to comply with a technical billing issue related to abortion coverage. In March, Attorney General James and Attorney General Becerra co-led the coalition in asking a federal court to provide today’s expedited decision when she filed a motion for summary judgment in the case.“From the beginning, this rule was an egregious attempt by President Trump and his administration to control women, and make it harder for those struggling financially to exercise their constitutional right to access an abortion,” said Attorney General James. “This decision will immediately stop the Trump Administration’s anti-choice assault on women’s reproductive choices and will allow millions of women across New York and the rest of the nation to retain control over their bodies. While we celebrate this victory, we remain vigilant against the president’s continued attacks on women’s reproductive freedoms, and we will stand ready to fight to ensure every woman is able to make her own reproductive choices.”The rule in question illegally reinterpreted Section 1303 of the ACA by requiring qualified health plans that participated in the state exchanges, like the New York State of Health, to send two separate monthly bills for payments of a health insurance premium — even if no abortion service was provided — and to have collected separate monthly payments for abortion services from all consumers. One bill would have been for the premium amount attributable to abortion coverage (and would have needed to be at least one dollar), and a second bill would have compromised the premium amount attributable to the remaining coverage, which may have included services like primary doctor appointments, hospital visits, and other services covered by insurance. If a consumer missed even a single one-dollar payment, that individual could have lost all health coverage on the exchange. HHS itself had conceded that requiring separate bills and separate payments would have inevitably led to confusion, putting more than 160,000 New Yorkers who already enrolled in a qualified health plan this year alone at risk of losing coverage if they inadvertently failed to make full premium payments on time. Late last night, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted Attorney General James’s motion for a summary judgment, ruling that the Trump Administration’s rule departed from prior HHS policy without “provid a reasoned explanation” or any “context for why belief advances Congress’s intent.” The court went on to state that the new rule would have “increased costs, created enrollee confusion, and risked reduced health care coverage (which contravenes the ACA’s purpose)” — concluding that the rule “is arbitrary and capricious.”……Joining Attorney General James in filing this lawsuit were the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Oregon, Vermont, and the District of Columbia… July 21, 2020: Senator Cory Booker (Democrat – New Jersey) posted a press release titled: “Booker Leads 33 Democratic Senators Colleagues in Urging Trump to Reverse his Decision to Withdraw from the World Health Organization”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) today led 33 of his Senate colleagues in urging President Trump to reverse his decision to withdraw from the World Health Organization (WHO). The Senators warned that an American withdrawal from WHO will upend efforts to implement a collective international response to the COVID-19 pandemic, inevitably put American lives and economic interests at risk, and undermines American leadership within the international community, while empowering China.“As it is now grimly clear, diseases do not respect borders. This is a crisis of global proportions, one that has painfully exposed the vulnerabilities and deficiencies of even the strongest economies and most competently governed societies,” the senators wrote in their letter to President Donald Trump. “This means in part continuing to collaborate and support the World Health Organization (WHO), which is coordinating the global response to COVID-19. Currently, for example, the WHO is using its convening power to undertake an unprecedented effort to identify effective treatments and vaccines. The organization’s “Solidarity Trial,” which includes more than 100 countries, enables research on potential therapeutics to be collected much faster and more efficiently than individual country efforts, dramatically reducing the amount of time to determine effectiveness.”“As it stands, a decision to end our engagement and funding of the WHO may be interpreted as abandoning vulnerable countries in their hour of need, further weakening their ability to identify and stop diseases at their source, before they become difficult and costly to contain. It also plays into the hands of countries, like China, who would seek to distract from their role in the outbreak and could be used to portray the United States as uninterested in helping other countries deal with COVID-19. In short, withdrawing from the WHO makes our country less safe and empowers China within the organization,” the senators continued.“The fact remains that we are currently in the midst of a global health emergency that is unprecedented in our lifetimes; now is not the time to take our eyes off the ball and engage in attacks on the one global institution that is working day-in and day-out to counter the threat posed by this disease. We therefore urge you to reverse this short-sighted and dangerous decision, and to commit to reengagement with the WHO – and Congress – on collective efforts to address the COVID-19 pandemic,” the senators concluded.This letter was also signed by Senators Gillibrand (D-NY), Van Hollen (D-MD), Durbin (D-IL), Coons (D-DE), Brown (D-OH), Jones (D-AL), Markey (D-MA), King (D-ME), Warren (D-MA), Wyden (D-OR), Warner (D-VA), Merkley (D-OR), Hirono (D-HI), Blumenthal (D-CT), Reed (D-RI), Carper (D-DE), Casey (D-PA),Bernard Sanders (D-VT), Cortez Masto (D-NV), Cantwell (D-WA), Bennet (D-CO), Heinrich (D-NM), Baldwin (D-WI), Tom Udall (D-NM), Klobuchar (D-MN), Tina Smith (D-MN), Murphy (D-CT), Schatz (D-HI), Shaheen (D-NH), Whitehouse (D-RI), Rosen (D-NV), Cardin (D-MD), Hassan (D-NH). Full text of the letter is available here. July 23, 2020: Representative Ayanna Pressley (Democrat – Massachusetts) posted a press release on her official website titled: “Reps. Pressley, Lee, Schakowsky and Ocasio-Cortez Introduce Amendment to Strip Discriminatory Hyde Amendment from Labor-HHS Appropriations Bill”. From the press release: Today, Congresswomen Ayanna Pressley (MA-07), Chair of the Pro-Choice Caucus’s Abortion Rights and Access Task Force, Barbara Lee (CA-13), Co-Chair of the Pro-Choice Caucus, Jan Schakowsky (IL-09), Chair of the Pro-Choice Caucus’s Providers and Clinics Taskforce and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY-14) filed an amendment to finally repeal the Hyde Amendment, language that prohibits federal Medicaid funds from being used to cover abortion care, from the FY2021 Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies appropriations bill.First introduced 43 years ago by anti-choice, Republican lawmaker Rep. Henry Hyde in 1976, the Hyde Amendment has been included in federal funding bills every year since. This abortion coverage ban disproportionately harms low-income people and people of color, and targets those who receive Medicaid coverage. Currently, an estimated 30 percent of Black women and 24 percent of Latina women of reproductive age are covered by Medicaid — in comparison to just 14 percent of white women. Additionally, research has found that the abortion coverage bans like the Hyde Amendment have a devastating economic impact.“The Hyde Amendment is a racist, discriminatory policy that has perpetuated inequity and injustice in our nation for far too long,” said Congresswoman Pressley. “Since its introduction more than four decades ago, Hyde has punished low income people and blocked countless individuals from exercising their constitutional right to comprehensive reproductive health care—including abortion care. Abortion care is critical health care, period. Our nation is in the midst of connected crises, an unprecedented public health crisis exacerbated by systemic racism and the plague of police brutality disproportionately robbing us of Black and brown lives, and we must actively dismantle all racist and discriminatory policies—including those that deny us the ability to make our own healthcare decisions. As a firm believer in reproductive justice and as Chair of the Abortion Rights and Access Task Force, I’m committed to doing everything in my power to finally repeal the Hyde Amendment and affirm reproductive justice for all.”“For years I’ve been fighting to end the harmful and discriminatory Hyde amendment,” said Congresswoman Lee. “In 2015 I introduced the EACH Woman Act with my colleagues, including Congresswoman Schakowsky, to do exactly that, and I will keep working with them move this fight forward until we repeal it once and for all. Reproductive care is a human right, regardless of race or socioeconomic status.”“In 2015, my friend Barbara Lee and I introduced the EACH Woman Act to allow every woman to make her own reproductive health care decisions regardless of her income, her race, where she works, or how she gets her insurance. In 2019, the first-ever Pro-Choice Majority was sworn into the United States House of Representatives,” said Congresswoman Schakowsky. “We are honoring that history today by introducing an amendment to finally end the Hyde Amendment and affirming that comprehensive reproductive health care is a human right.”“The Hyde Amendment has blocked federal funding for abortion services since 1976,” said Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez. “Since then, Congress has voted to include the Hyde Amendment in our appropriations packages every year- including this year in a Democrat controlled House. The Hyde Amendment is a back-end attempt to outlaw abortion that disproportionately denies the right of choice to low-income women and women of color. It is critical that we put an end to this inhumane policy now.” July 23, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris, Brown, Booker Introduce Senate Resolution Declaring Racism A Public Health Crisis”. From the press release: U.S. Senators Kamala D. Harris (D-CA), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), and Cory Booker (D-NJ) on Wednesday introduced a Senate Resolution to declare racism a public health crisis. The coronavirus pandemic has been the great revealer – underscoring the racial disparities that continue to pervade public health as a direct result of systemic racism. Barriers to quality health care access, housing, jobs, wages and so much else contribute to stark health disparities for communities of color. This virus has proven especially lethal for those communities – the infection, hospitalization, and mortality rates are disproportionately high among Black, Latino, and AI/AN populations. Data show 22 percent of COVID-19 patients are Black, when Black people make up 13 percent of the entire population, and 33 percent of COVID-19 patients are Latino, when they make up just 18 percent of the entire population. Representative Jahana Hayes (D-CT-5) will introduce companion legislation in the House of Representatives.“COVID-19 has caused a public health crisis that is disproportionately impacting people of color. In fact, available data shows that African American and Latinx people are three times as likely to get sick with the virus; and nearly twice as likely to die,” said Senator Harris. “This is, in part, due to long-standing barriers to care that are rooted in generations of systemic racism. This resolution affirms Congress’ commitment to fully acknowledge and address racial inequities and injustice across all sectors.”“We will not make progress until we acknowledge and address all of the ways that centuries of racism and oppression have harmed Black and brown Americans,” said Senator Brown. “This resolution is an important step toward recognizing the racial disparities in healthcare that have existed for far too long while also outlining concrete action we can take now to help reverse them. Though this resolution is not a solution in and of itself, it will help to lay the foundation for change that is continually subverted by and for the status quo. I am proud to join my colleagues in introducing this important resolution.”“For too long, communities of color have suffered disproportionately from countless illnesses and conditions, from maternal and infant mortality to now COVID-19,” said Senator Booker. “These health inequities are the direct result of centuries of racist policy that have disenfranchised, disinvested, and disrespected Black, Indigenous, and other communities of color. Declaring racism a public health crisis is a small, but necessary, step toward addressing the deep-rooted and systemic inequities that have created and continue to exacerbate unfair and unjust health outcomes and enabling us to finally move forward in creating a truly equitable health care system for all.” The resolution acknowledges the history of racism and discrimination within health care and the systemic barriers that people of color continue to face when seeking care. The resolution also highlights the effects of systemic racism on the health and wellness of communities of color, resulting in shorter life expectancy, worsened health outcomes, and enhanced exposure to harmful or dangerous environments. This resolution encourages concrete action to address health disparities and inequity across all sectors in society. Along with Harris, Brown, and Booker the resolution was cosponsored by Sens. Charles E. Schumer (D-NY), Tom Carper (D-DE), Edward Markey (D-MA), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Tina Smith (D-MN), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Bernard Sanders (I-VT), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Patty Murray (D-WA), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Robert Casey (D-PA), Richard Durbin (D-IL), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Jack Reed (D-RI), and Angus King (I-ME). Full text of the resolution is available HERE. July 23, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Applauds Submission of Amendment to End Discriminatory Abortion Coverage Ban in House Spending Bill”. From the press release: U.S. Representatives Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) today submitted an amendment to the House Rules Committee which would strike the racist and discriminatory Hyde Amendment from the FY’21 Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill. The Hyde Amendment is an anti-choice policy banning coverage for abortion care for those who receive their health insurance through the federal government. The move comes after the Democratic-led U.S. House of Representatives introduced a federal funding bill that included the abortion coverage ban earlier this month. NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement in response:“We are grateful for the fearless leadership and work of Reps. Ayanna Pressley, Barbara Lee, Jan Schakowsky, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to end the Hyde Amendment. Reproductive freedom must be for every body, and to make that a reality we have to end discriminatory bans on abortion coverage. We urge House Democrats to support this effort to remove abortion coverage restrictions from the spending bill and speak out against any provisions that would limit access to reproductive healthcare, including coverage for abortion care. We remain deeply disappointed that Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives elected to include this anti-choice abortion coverage ban in their funding bill in the first place, despite voters electing a majority that supports reproductive freedom. The Hyde Amendment hurts women and families, especially BIPOC communities and those with lower incomes, and all Democrats must be unwavering in their commitment to putting an end to this policy once and for all.” Bans on abortion coverage like the anti-choice Hyde Amendment disproportionately affect Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) communities. These bans create additional barriers to care for those already facing enormous hurdles to access. During the 2020 Democratic presidential primary, candidates coalesced around the party’s core values by voicing their support for ending the Hyde Amendment’s ban on abortion coverage once and for all. Democrats included ending this discriminatory anti-choice policy in their 2016 party platform. Earlier this month, NARAL Pro-Choice America joined a national coalition of progressive groups in urging the the Democratic Party to deepen its advocacy for reproductive freedom by reaffirming key proposals included in the 2016 platform, including ending the Hyde Amendment.Abortion is front and center for Democrats in 2020: Support for abortion rights is at an all-time high and polling confirms reproductive freedom is a major issue for Democratic and Independent voters. These values are non-negotiable to the 77% of Americans who support the legal right to abortion in the United States. July 24, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Federal Court Blocks Tennessee Abortion Bans”. From the press release: Today, a federal district court in Tennessee issued a preliminary injunction blocking parts of a new Tennessee law, including a series of gestational age bans that would ban abortion at nearly every stage of pregnancy, starting as early as six weeks. The court also blocked a part of the law that bans abortion based on a patient’s reason for seeking abortion, including reasons related to race, sex, or a fetal diagnosis of Down syndrome.Abortion bans, especially those that ban the procedure before many people even know they are pregnant, threaten the health, rights, and lives of people of color disproportionately. Additionally, “reason bans” inflict further harm by perpetuating stigma around abortions and stereotypes of Black and Brown communities, Asian Americans, and people with disabilities. Abortion patients — like all patients — should have the right to make private medical decisions with their families and their doctors, without interference from politicians.The court granted today’s preliminary injunction at the request of numerous abortion providers in the state represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, the American Civil Liberties Union, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and the ACLU of Tennessee. Moments after Gov. Bill Lee signed the law on July 13, the court issued a restraining order blocking the abortion bans temporarily. Today’s injunction provides longer-term relief, blocking the bans until the lawsuit is resolved.In the decision, Judge William L. Campbell wrote, “Applying binding Supreme Court precedent and the factors required for the extraordinary remedy of an injunction… the Court concludes that an injunction should issue.”While we welcome today’s ruling, it is outrageous that Tennessee’s anti-abortion lawmakers chose this path,” said Jessica Sklarsky, lead attorney on this case and senior staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “As the deep roots and tragedies of white supremacy are laid bare, and the pandemic exposes long-ignored health inequities, these anti-abortion lawmakers chose to utilize the state’s limited resources to defend clearly unconstitutional abortion bans that prey on stereotypes, disproportionately harm communities of color, and further entrench systemic racism. Rather than perpetuate these injustices, Tennessee lawmakers should focus their time and resources on policies that address them.”……Just three months ago, Gov. Lee attempted to ban abortion procedures during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic by labeling abortion care as non-essential despite opposition from leading national medical groups. In April, that attempt was blocked in court after a lawsuit was filed by the same organizations litigating today’s case.Last year alone, 25 abortion bans were enacted in 12 states, including: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio, Tennessee, and Utah. The Center for Reproductive Rights, the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, and other organizations responded by filing litigation to ensure abortion remains legal in all 50 states. To date, the groups’ lawsuits have stopped these illegal bans from depriving pregnant people of their constitutional right to abortion.Tennessee has numerous additional abortion restrictions on the books, including a ban on the use of telehealth for medication abortion; a mandatory 48-hour waiting period (which includes a requirement that forces patients to delay care by adding a medically unnecessary trip to the clinic to receive state-mandated information); limits on when state and public insurance can cover abortion services; and a requirement that minors obtain parental consent. The Center for Reproductive Rights and Planned Parenthood are litigating another case in the state challenging the 48-hour waiting period.The case was filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the ACLU of Tennessee on behalf of CHOICES Memphis Center for Reproductive Health, Planned Parenthood Tennessee and North Mississippi, Knoxville Center for Reproductive Health, carafem, and two abortion providers in Tennessee. July 24, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerray Applauds Ninth Circuit Ruling Denying Challenge to California’s Landmark Pay-for-Delay Law”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra applauded today’s ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, rejecting a challenge by a group of generic drug manufacturers, the Association for Accessible Medicine (AAM), against California’s landmark law tackling pay-for-delay agreements. In the decision, the Court held that AAM lacks standing to challenge the law.“Today’s victory is a win for every family who has unfairly shouldered higher prices for life-saving medicine, simply because pharmaceutical companies staved off competition to pocket higher profits,” said Attorney General Becerra. “Californians shouldn’t have to pay an arm and leg to afford a prescription, particularly amidst a public health crisis of historic proportions. This Ninth Circuit ruling should serve as a reminder that the well-being of loved ones must come first.”The California law, AB 824, combats illegal, secretive deals between pharmaceutical companies in which one drug company pays its competitor to delay the competitor’s research, production, or sale of a competing version of its drug. These collusive agreements, known as “pay-for-delay” agreements, stifle competition and hike the price patients and employers pay for prescription medicines. AB 824 is the first state law in the nation to tackle pay-for-delay agreements. A copy of the ruling is available here. July 24, 2020: President Trump signed an “Executive Order on Access to Affordable Life-saving Medications”. From the executive order: By the authority vested on me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:Section 1: Purpose. Insulin is a critical and life-saving medication that approximately 8 million Americans rely on to manage diabetes. Likewise, injectible epinephrine is a life-saving medication used to stop severe allergic reactions.The price of insulin in the United States has risen dramatically over the past decade. The list price for a single vial of insulin today is often more than $250 and most patients use at least two vials per month. As for injectable epinephrine, recent increased competition is helping to drive prices down. Nevertheless, the price for some types of injectable epinephrine remains more than $600 per kit. While Americans with diabetes and severe allergic reactions may have access to affordable insulin and injectable epinephrine through commercial insurance or Federal programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, many Americans still struggle to purchase these products.Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs),.. receive discounted prices through the 340B Prescription Drug Program on prescription drugs. Due to the sharp increases in list prices for many insulins and some types of injectable epinephrine in recent years, many of these products may be subject to the “penny pricing” policy when distributed to FQHCs, meaning FQHCs may purchase the drug at a price of one penny per unit of measure. These steep discounts, however, are not always passed through to low-income Americans at the point of sale. Those with low-incomes can be exposed to high insulin and injectable epinephrine prices, as they often do not benefit from discounts negotiated by insurers or the Federal or State governments.Section 2. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to enable Americans without access to affordable insulin and injectable epinephrine through commercial insurance or Federal programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, to purchase these pharmaceuticals from an FQHC at a price that aligns with the cost at which the FQHC acquired the medication.Section 3. Improving the Availability of Insulin and Injectable Ephinephrine for the Uninsured. To the extent permitted by law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall take action to ensure future grants available under… the Public Health Service Act, as amended… are conditioned upon FQHCs’ having established practices to make insulin and injectible epinephrine available at the discounted price paid by the FQHC grantee or sub-grantee under the 304B Prescription Drug Program (plus a minimal administration fee) to individuals with low incomes, as determined by the Secretary, who:a have a high cost sharing requirement for either insulin or injectible epinephrine;b have a high unmet deductible; orc have no health care insurance… July 24, 2020: ABC 7 posted an article titled: “With no deal to curb drug costs, Trump tries his own changes”. It was written by Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar. From the article: Unable to land the big deal with Congress to curb drug costs, President Donald Trump is moving on his own to allow imports of prescription medicines, along with other limited steps that might have some election-year appeal.At a White House ceremony, Trump is set to sign four executive orders. One is about importation. The others would direct drugmaker rebates to go straight to patients, provide insulin and EpiPens at steep discounts to low-income people, and use lower international prices to pay for some Medicare drugs……consumers may not notice many immediate changes from the new orders, which must be carried out by the federal bureaucracy and could face court challenges……A drive to pass major legislation this year stalled in Congress. Although Trump told Republican senators that lowering prescription prices is “something you have to do,” many remain reluctant to use federal authority to force drugmakers to charge less……Last year the House passed Pelosi’s Medicare negotiations bill, which would have capped out-of-pocket drug costs for older people and expanded program benefits as well. It had no path forward in the Senate, and the White House calls it unworkable.But there was an alternative. A bipartisan Senate bill backed by Trump stopped short of giving Medicare bargaining power, but would have limited annual price increases and capped costs for older people. The bill passed out of a Senate committee but was never brought to the full body……The pharmaceutical industry is adamently opposed to government efforts to curb prices, and pushed back strongly against earlier versions of the proposals in Trump’s new orders. Broadcast ads from groups aligned with the industry are already airing, dubbing the plan to use international prices for certain Medicare drugs as “socialist,” without mentioning Trump by name… July 24, 2020: President Trump signed: “Executive Order on Lowering Prices for Patients by Eliminating Kickbacks to Middlemen”. From the executive order: By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:Section 1. Purpose. One of the reasons pharmaceutical drug prices in the United States are so high is because of the complex mix of payers and negotiators that often separates the consumer from the manufacturer in the drug-purchasing process. The result is that the prices patients see at the point-of-sale do not reflect the prices that the patient’s insurance companies, middlemen hired by the insurance companies, actually pay for drugs. Instead, these middlemen – health plan sponsors and pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) – negotiate significant discounts off the list prices, sometimes up to 50 percent of the cost of the drug. Medicare patients, whose cost sharing is typically based on list prices, pay more than they should for drugs while the middlemen collect lare “rebate” checks. These rebates are the functional equivalent of kickbacks, and erode savings that could otherwise go to the Medicare patients taking those drugs. Yet currently, Federal regulations create a safe harbor for such discounts and preclude treating them as kickbacks under the law.Fixing this problem could save Medicare patients billions of dollars. The Office of the Inspector General at the Department of Health and Human Services has found that patients in the catastrophic phase of the Medicare Part D program saw their out-of-pocket costs for high-price drugs increase by 47 percent from 2010 to 2015, from $175 per month to $257 per month. Narrowing the safe harbor for these discounts under the anti-kickback statute will allow tens of billions of dollars of rebates on prescription drugs in the Medicare Part D program to go directly to the patients, saving many patients hundreds or thousands of dollars per year at the pharmacy counter.Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of the United States that discounts offered on prescription drugs should be passed on to patients.Sec. 3. Directing Drug Rebates to Patients Instead of Middlemen. The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall complete the rulemaking process he commenced seeking to:(a) exclude from safe harbor protections under the anti-kickback statute, section 1128B(b) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 1320a–7b, certain retrospective reductions in price that are not applied at the point-of-sale or other remuneration that drug manufacturers provide to health plan sponsors, pharmacies, or PBMs in operating the Medicare Part D program; and(b) establish new safe harbors that would permit health plan sponsors, pharmacies, and PBMs to apply discounts at the patient’s point-of-sale in order to lower the patient’s out-of-pocket costs, and that would permit the use of certain bona fide PBM service fees.Sec. 4. Protecting Low Premiums. Prior to taking action under section 3 of this order, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall confirm — and make public such confirmation — that the action is not projected to increase Federal spending, Medicare beneficiary premiums, or patients’ total out-of-pocket costs… July 24, 2020: President Trump signed “Executive Order on Increasing Drug importation to Lower Prices for American Patients”. From the executive order: By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:Section 1. Purpose. Americans spend more per capita on pharmaceutical drugs than residents of any other developed country. Americans often pay more for the exact same drugs, even when they are produced and shipped from the exact same facilities.One way to minimize international disparities in price is to increase the trade of prescription drugs between nations with lower prices and those with persistently higher ones. Over time, reducing trade barriers and increasing the exchange of drugs will likely result in lower prices for the country that is paying more for drugs. For example, in the European Union, a market characterized by price controls and significant barriers to entry, the parallel trade of drugs has existed for decades and has been estimated to reduce the price of certain drugs by up to 20 percent. Accordingly, my Administration supports the goal of safe importation of prescription drugs.Sec. 2. Permitting the Importation of Safe Prescription Drugs from Other Countries. The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, take action to expand safe access to lower-cost imported prescription drugs by:(a) facilitating grants to individuals of waivers of the prohibition of importation of prescription drugs, provided such importation poses no additional risk to public safety and results in lower costs to American patients, pursuant to section 804(j)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), 21 U.S.C. 384(j)(2);(b) authorizing the re-importation of insulin products upon a finding by the Secretary that it is required for emergency medical care pursuant to section 801(d) of the FDCA, 21 U.S.C. 381(d); and(c) completing the rulemaking process regarding the proposed rule to implement section 804(b) through (h) of the FDCA, 21 U.S.C. 384(b) through (h), to allow importation of certain prescription drugs from Canada… July 24, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Trump’s Latest Empty Promises on Prescription Drug Prices”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi released this statement after President Trump signed executive orders on prescription drugs, once again failing to advance any rules to lower Americans’ prescription drug prices:“Once again, President Trump has pulled his punch on reducing prescription drug prices, this time with empty Executive Orders that take no real action to lower Americans’ skyrocketing drug costs. After promising that he would ‘negotiate like crazy’ for lower prescription drug prices, it is clear that President Trump meant not negotiate at all.“Instead of meaningfully lowering drug prices, President Trump’s Executive Orders would hand billions of dollars to Big Pharma. The last version of the Trump Administration’s rebate proposal would put Medicare beneficiaries at risk of higher premiums and total out-of-pocket costs and puts the American taxpayer on the hook for hundreds of billions of dollars. Thanks to President Trump, the pharmaceutical industry could see even bigger profits and even less restraint on what they charge seniors.“While President Trump continues to cave to Big Pharma, Democrats have acted to advance real drug price negotiation with the Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act. If President Trump was serious about stopping drug companies from charging Americans more than they charge for the same medicines overseas, he would tell Leader McConnell to pass the Lower Drug Costs Now Act immediately. Sadly, Big Pharma calls the shots in the Trump White House.” July 26, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on the 30th Anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today commemorating the 30th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which was signed into law on July 26, 1990:“Thirty years ago, our nation came together in a bipartisan way to honor our founding principle that all are equal under the law. For three decades, the Americans with Disabilities Act has stood as a landmark civil rights victory, rooted in the belief that every American has the right to live with dignity and respect.“For the 55 million Americans living with a disability, the ADA has been transformative. Yet, despite this progress, the Trump Administration continues to advance dangerous policies that undermine the rights of those living with a disability. We must oppose these outrageous actions while ensuring that our laws keep pace with the rapidly evolving technology that is opening new doors of opportunity for all people. We must make sure that vulnerable communities have access to the quality health care, long-term support and skills and tools needed to grow and thrive. And we must continue to remove enduring barriers to people with disabilities so that they are able to vote and fully participate in the economic, educational, social and cultural opportunities of our nation.“We must respect people for what they can do and not judge people for what they cannot. On this historic anniversary, House Democrats are committed to fighting to uphold and expand the promise of the ADA as we work to empower people with disabilities and build a more just and equal future for all Americans.” July 27, 2020: EMILY’s List posted a press release titled: “EMILY’s List Puts Vice President Mike Pence “On Notice”. From the press release: Today, EMILY’s List, the nation’s largest resource for women in politics, puts Vice President Mike Pence “On Notice.” EMILY’s List is calling out incumbent Republicans for their anti-women and anti-family records and is working to flip governorships, congressional seats, and legislative chambers from red to blue by electing pro-choice Democratic women in the upcoming 2020 election.“Mike Pence has built his career on extremist policies that legalize discrimination and target the rights of women and working families,” said Stephanie Schriock, president of EMILY’s List. “Pence attempted to defund Planned Parenthood six times while in Congress, including by threatening a government shutdown. He has built a long record of attacking women’s rights and punishing women who choose to exercise reproductive freedom and he has taken those views into the administration.“Beyond stripping women of their fundamental rights, Mike Pence’s negligence and disregard for the facts during the HIV crisis in Indiana shows just how dangerous it is for him to lead the handling of a global health pandemic. His dangerous far-right views are further proof he lacks the skill and wherewithal to lead this country out of crisis,” Schriock continued. “Time and time again, Mike Pence has proven that he will pursue extreme policies regardless of the cost to America’s working families. We look forward to making history in November by replacing the vice president with a strong pro-choice Democratic woman.” Pence’s Record: In Congress, Pence sponsored the first bill to defund Planned Parenthood in 2007. He repeatedly voted to defund Planned Parenthood until it passed the U.S. House in 2011. (Vox, 1/12/17).Pence signed one of the country’s most extreme anti-choice bills into law. Pence signed Indiana House Bill 1337 (HB1337) into law. Among other things, the bill required a doctor to describe a woman’s embryo to her in graphic detail at least 18 hours before having an abortion. HB1337 also mandated the burying or cremating of a fetus, even in cases of early miscarriage, and required women to justify their abortion to a doctor. The bill stated that the doctor must possess admitting privileges to their local hospital. (Indy Star, 3/24/16).As Indiana governor, Pence signed the discriminatory Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The law’s broad language allowed “any individual or corporation to cite religious beliefs as a defense when sued by a private party,” disproportionately targeting LGBTQ+ individuals. (Huffington Post, 04/02/15).Pence’s crusade against Planned Parenthood led to an HIV outbreak in Indiana. Pence’s policies forced the closure of several Planned Parenthoods, including a clinic that served as the sole testing stie for HIV. (Huffington Post, 3/31/15).Pence cosponsored several appalling anti-choice bills in Congress. As a member of Congress, Pence cosponsored the discriminatory Ultrasound Informed Consent Act, Protect Life Act, Life at Conception Act, and No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act. Respectively, these bills would force doctors to show women their ultrasounds before an abortion, allow hospitals to deny life-saving abortion procedures, and limit the definition of rape to prevent abortions.Pence penned a letter against working mothers. In an anti-family letter to the Indianapolis Star, Pence claimed that working mothers stunt childrens’ emotional growth. (Indianapolis Star, 1997). July 27, 2020: Representative Ayanna Pressley (Democrat – Massachusetts) posted a press release titled: “Pressley, Warren, Sanders, Colleagues Urge HHS to Fund Community Health Centers as the U.S. Undergoes Another Surge of COVID-19 Cases”. From the press release: Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07) and Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) led a letter with 54 other lawmakers to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) urging the agency to provide additional funding to community health centers (CHCs) as they continue to work on the front lines of the COVID-19 pandemic.In the letter, the lawmakers expressed concern that CHCs were largely excluded from funding disbursements under the Provider Relief Fund and urged HHS to immediately reverse this decision and provide CHCs with the support they need as they provide services and relief to vulnerable communities during this public health crisis. The lawmakers also expressed their belief that Congress should allocate additional funds to health care providers, including CHCs, to help them stay afloat during the COVID-19 pandemic.“As the United States experiences a surge in COVID-19 cases and as the economic toll of the pandemic continues to grow, it is imperative these crucial health care providers who treat many of the most vulnerable Americans are provided funds to keep their doors open,” the lawmakers wrote. “We urge you to immediately reverse your decision to exclude CHCs from the PRF and provide these institutions with additional financial support as you continue to distribute these funds.”As CHCs continue to play an outsized role in the COVID-19 pandemic, they have suffered a serious financial toll. To date, CHCs have received almost $2 billion from Congress targeted toward pandemic-related testing and treatment, but nothing has been specifically directed to CHCs from the Provider Relief Fund. Substantial declines in inpatient visits have caused significant decreases in revenue for CHCs, threatening their ability to continue to provide care. Each week, 1,500-2,000 CHC sites must close at least temporarily as a result of financial pressures related to the pandemic. CHCs are lynchpins of the nation’s health care system and provide a wide array of services to chronically underserved areas of the country. They serve nearly 30 million patients, including over 385,000 veterans, over 8.5 million children, and 1.4 million individuals experiencing homelessness, in thousands of rural, urban, and frontier communities across the United States. Of the almost 30 million patients they treat each year, nearly 90% are low-income and 63% are racial or ethnic minorities. CHCs provide easily-accessible and affordable services, such as dental and behavioral health care to some of the most vulnerable Americans, and also help patients access healthy and affordable foods, housing support, and transportation assistance. The letter was also signed by Representatives, Nydia M. Velázquez (D-N.Y.), Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Susan Wild (D-Penn.), John P. Sarbanes (D-Md.), Gregory W. Meeks (N.Y.) Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), Jesús G. “Chuy” García (D-Ill.), Joseph P. Kennedy, III (D-Mass.), Gwen Moore (D-Wis.), Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.), Alan Lowenthal (D-Calif.), David N. Cicilline (D-R.I.), André Carson (D-Ind.), Judy Chu (D-Calif.), Steven Cohen (D-Tenn.), Peter A. DeFazio (D-Ore.), Nanette Diaz Barragán (D-Calif.), Mark DeSaulnier (D-Calif.), Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-Calif.), Grace Meng (D-N.Y.), Anthony G. Brown (D-Md.), Dina Titus (D-Nev.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Frederica S. Wilson (D-Fla.), Bill Foster (D-Ill.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Cedrick L. Richmond (D-La.), Stephen F. Lynch (D-Mass.), Gregory W. Meeks (D-N.Y.), Chris Pappas (D-N.H.), Tony Cárdenas (D-Calif.), Albio Sires (D-N.J.), Sean Patrick Maloney (D-N.Y.), Emanuel Cleaver, II (D-Mo.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.), Bobby L. Rush (D-Ill.), William R. Keating (D-Mass.), Lori Trahan (D- Mass.), Cheri Bustos (D-Ill.), Bonnie Watson Coleman (D- N.J.), Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), Henry C. “Hank” Johnson Jr. (D-Ga.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Danny K. Davis (D-Ill.), Chellie Pingree (D-Maine.), and Sanford D. Bishop, Jr. (D-Ga.). Also signing the letter were Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Ed Markey (D-MA), Tina Smith (D-MN), Kamala D. Harris (D-CA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), and Richard J. Blumenthal (D-CT)… July 27, 2020: Idaho Press posted an article titled: “Idaho transgender inmate becomes 2nd in country to receive gender confirmation surgery”. It was written by Tommy Simmons. From the article: After a yearslong court battle, an Idaho prisoner has become only the second incarcerated person in the country to receive gender confirmation surgery while in prison.Adree Edmo, 32, a transgender woman, received the surgery on July 10, according to Deborah Ferguson, Edmo’s lawyer. Jeff Ray, spokesman for the Idaho Department of Correction, confirmed Edmo is currently at the Idaho Correctional Institution-Orofino to facilitate follow-up medical care, but she will be transferred to the Pocatello Women’s Correctional Center in Pocatello, “once it is medically appropriate to do so.”Edmo, 32, was born male but identifies as female. In 2012 prison doctors diagnosed her with gender dysphoria — a condition in which the dissonance between a person’s birth gender and the gender with which they identify is significant and hurtful. Not all transgender people have gender dysphoria, and not everyone who has gender dysphoria requires gender confirmation surgery, but in severe cases — such as Edmo’s — it can be a treatment option. At the core of the case was a disagreement between medical experts about whether Edmo needed the surgery or not……In 2017, Edmo filed a lawsuit against the state of Idaho and the Idaho Department of Correction’s health care partner, Corizon Health, saying they had violated her Eighth Amendment right against cruel and unusual punishment by not providing the surgery as treatment.Both a federal district court and an appellate court ruled in Edmo’s favor, but Gov. Brad Little vowed repeatedly to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary, a promise he followed through on. The state had been ordered to provide surgery for Edmo by July, and as that deadline loomed, state attorneys asked the U.S. Supreme Court to pause that timeline so the case could be argued. In May, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to do so — all but guaranteeing the surgery would take place.The state exhausted a number of attempts at recourse in fighting the order to provide surgery for Edmo. The first order came in December 2018, from a U.S. District Court judge. Idaho appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals; a panel of judges there ruled in August that Idaho and Corizon must provide the surgery for Edmo. After that, Idaho asked for another hearing at the circuit court level, this one including a larger panel of judges. The circuit court in February rejected that request. The U.S. Supreme Court’s refusal to step in the way of the surgery followed… July 28, 2020: Representative Ayanna Pressley (Democrat – Massachusetts) posted a press release on her official website titled: “Congresswoman Pressley’s Statement on Senate GOP HEALS Act”. From the press release: Today, Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07) released the following statement on the HEALS Act unveiled by Senate Republicans earlier this week: “In the Massachusetts 7th and around the country, workers and families are hurting due to the dual public health and economic crises caused by COVID-19. This past weekend, the last unemployment checks went out and the limited eviction moratorium expired. Next weekend, the rent will be due and 30 percent of Americans have little to no confidence they will make it. People need real relief now, but the Occupant of the White House and Republicans in Congress continue to play games with people’s lives as they work to cut unemployment benefits and force students and teachers back to school before it’s safe to do so. It is shameful, it is callous, and it is reckless. “Our response must match the scale, scope, and urgency of the hurt so many are experiencing—that means extending unemployment benefits, providing a second stimulus payment and expanding eligibility to our immigrant neighbors, and extending the moratorium on evictions and foreclosures for the duration of this crisis. I’ll continue fighting to ensure that working people in my district and across America get the relief they need and deserve in the face of this unprecedented pandemic.” July 29, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Stops Trump Administration from Continuing to Implement Public Charge Rule During Coronavirus Pandemic”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today secured a major victory for immigrants across New York and the rest of the nation by blocking the Trump Administration from continuing to implement its Public Charge Rule while the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) public health crisis rages on. Attorney General James led a coalition — that includes three states and New York City — in winning a motion for a preliminary injunction, in federal court, that immediately halts implementation of the rule that changed the established meaning of public charge.“This victory will immediately halt the Trump Administration’s discriminatory rule from continuing to hurt every person across the nation,” said Attorney General James. “For nearly five months, the Public Charge Rule has further exacerbated the public health crisis the country faces by punishing New York and other immigrant-rich states — stripping families of their ability to access basic services. Immigrants have been on the front lines fighting this pandemic from the start, and today’s injunction will ensure they are not targeted for obtaining health coverage or other vital services, as they continue to battle COVID-19. This order is vital to our national health, as every person who doesn’t get the health coverage they need today risks infecting another person with the coronavirus tomorrow.”Federal law allows lawful immigrants to apply for certain supplemental health and nutritional public benefits if they have been in the country for at least five years. But, last August, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security issued a Public Charge Rule that changed the established meaning of public charge, which had long been that immigrants who use basic, non-cash benefits are not considered public charges because they are not primarily dependent on the government for survival. This “bait-and-switch” consequently jeopardized immigrants’ chances of becoming legal permanent residents or renewing their visas if they used these supplemental benefits to which they are legally entitled.Last August, days after the Trump Administration initially issued the Public Charge Rule, Attorney General James and a coalition of states and New York City filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration rule in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, noting that the rule specifically targets immigrants of color, immigrants with disabilities, and low-income immigrants, while putting these communities at risk, and would have short- and long-term impacts on public health and the economy.In October 2019, after Attorney General James and the coalition filed a motion for a preliminary injunction, the district court issued an order that stopped the rule from going into effect during the litigation. The Trump Administration then filed a motion to stay the order, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied the request. The Administration finally filed a motion in the U.S. Supreme Court, which issued a stay of the district court’s preliminary injunction, pending the Second Circuit’s decision in the case and any subsequent petition to the Supreme Court.Despite the Supreme Court’s decision in January, in April, Attorney General James led a coalition in asking the Supreme Court to take emergency measures to temporarily halt its earlier order on the Public Charge Rule until the end of the COVID-19 national pandemic. While the Supreme Court did not halt its own order, the court gave Attorney General James and the coalition permission to take the request back to the district court.At the end of April, Attorney General James and the coalition filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, which the court granted today, ordering that DHS is “enjoined from enforcing, applying, implementing, or treating as effective the Rule for any period during which there is a declared national health emergency in response to the COVID-19 outbreak.”The attorneys general of Connecticut and Vermont, as well as corporation counsel for New York City all joined Attorney General James in filing the motion for a preliminary injunction that was won today. July 29, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Health Care Champions in House Announce Legislation To Repeal Harmful Helms Amendment”. From the press release: Today, Reps. Schakowsky (D-IL), Lowey (D-NY), Lee (D-CA), DeGette (D-CO), Speier (D-CA), Torres (D-CA) ,and Pressley (D-MA), introduced the Abortion is Health Care Everywhere Act, legislation that would recognize abortion as essential health care and stop the egregious U.S. policy of creating barriers for those who need abortion access across the globe. Planned Parenthood applauds this overdue legislation and urges others to join the effort to end the Helms Amendment by cosponsoring the bill.For nearly 50 years, the Helms Amendment has blocked the use of U.S. foreign assistance to expand access to abortion services. By creating significant barriers to safe and legal health care globally, this policy endangers lives, stigmatizes abortion, and undermines our ability to advance health, human rights, and gender equality. The Helms Amendment hurts millions of people around the world by restricting the ability of individuals to make their own personal medical decisions, and denying access to comprehensive reproductive health care. This harm is focused on women and young people in low income countries around the world, including in humanitarian crises where sexual violence occurs at high rates and where displaced communities are particularly disconnected from health care……Unsafe abortion is a global health crisis. Annually, there are more than 25 million unsafe abortions worldwide and they contribute to as many as 13.2% of maternal deaths each year. The Helms Amendment exacerbates this crisis by putting safe abortion care out of reach for those served by U.S. global health programs. U.S. policy should explicitly support access to safe and legal abortion throughout the world, as part of U.S. efforts to advance health, human rights, and gender equality. July 29, 2020: Representative Ayanna Pressley (Democrat – Massachusetts) posted a press release on her official website titled: “Reps. Pressley, Schakowsky, Colleagues Introduce First-Ever Bill to Repeal the Helms Amendment, a 47-Year-Old, Anti-Choice Policy Restricting Abortion Access Around the Globe”. From the press release: Congresswomen Ayanna Pressley (MA-07), Chair of the Pro-Choice Caucus’s Abortion Rights and Access Task Force, and Jan Schakowsky (IL-09), a Senior Chief Deputy Whip and Chair of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus Providers and Clinics Task Force, today introduced the Abortion is Health Care Everywhere Act of 2020, the first-ever legislation to repeal the Helms Amendment and expand abortion access globally. Representatives Nita Lowey (NY-17), Barbara Lee (CA-13), Jackie Speier (CA-14), Diana DeGette (CO-01), and Norma Torres (CA-35) joined Congresswomen Pressley and Schakowsky as original cosponsors.“Abortion care is health care and health care is a fundamental human right. For too long, anti-choice policy, including the Helms Amendment and the Hyde Amendment, has dictated who has access to critical healthcare, economic opportunity and bodily autonomy. We must be consistent in our calls to dismantle racist policies that perpetuate inequities and exacerbate health disparities for Black and brown people here in the United States and around the globe,” said Congresswoman Pressley. “I am proud to join Congresswoman Schakowsky in this fight to affirm abortion rights and reproductive justice for all.”“The Helms Amendment is a policy deeply rooted in racism. It imposes our arbitrary and medically unnecessary abortion restrictions on international communities, allowing the United States to control the health care and bodily autonomy of billions Black and brown people around the world. Just like the Hyde Amendment, the Helms Amendment puts reproductive and economic freedom out of reach for women of color. But enough is enough, and both amendments must fall if we want to realize true health equity and reproductive justice,” said Congresswoman Schakowsky. “I am proud that my sisters Representatives Lowey, Lee, Speier, Pressley, DeGette, and Torres are joining me to introduce the Abortion is Health Care Everywhere Act, which will finally repeal the Helms Amendment. Comprehensive reproductive health care, including safe, legal, and accessible abortion, is a human right.”Enacted in 1973, the Helms Amendment bars U.S. foreign assistance funding for abortion and has been passed as part of Congressional appropriations bills every year for nearly five decades. The legislation was first introduced by then Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC), who was known for racist legislative efforts throughout his career. As the United States grapples with systemic inequities and engages in a national conversation about racial injustice, the Helms Amendment is yet another example of a systemic, racist policy that has become commonplace in society. In the case of the Helms Amendment, the U.S. uses foreign policy and promises of foreign aid to control the health care and bodily autonomy of Black and brown people around the world.“The Helms Amendment is a shameful policy. It is long past time to repeal it and ensure that women everywhere, in particular women of color who are disproportionately harmed by this restriction, have access to a full range of safe, legal reproductive health services,” said Appropriation Committee Chairwoman Nita Lowey. “As a longtime advocate of women’s health, I know the Abortion is Health Care Everywhere Act will make a huge difference in advancing women’s rights. With this bill, we can enable and empower women around the world to make fully-informed decisions about their own health and that of their families.” “While many countries have made inroads toward increased reproductive freedoms over the past two decades, the U.S. continues to restrict aid through the Helms Amendment, making safe abortions out of reach and putting millions of lives at risk,” said Rep. Lee, Co-Chair of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus. “Each year, millions of people around the world have unsafe abortions, leading to debilitating injuries. As co-chair of the Pro-Choice Caucus, I strongly support ending this discriminatory and dangerous policy.“The Helms Amendment not only denies women around the world the right to control their own bodies and lives, it disproportionately harms women of color in developing countries. It’s a throwback to Republicans’ cruelest calculations and instincts in light of the 1973 landmark Roe v Wade decision and red meat to the President’s base. These people would rather see women die from botched and unsafe procedures than provide basic health care to avoid 25 million unsafe abortions worldwide that lead to millions of injuries and at least 22,800 preventable maternal deaths. Where is the humanity, or even the logic, in this policy?,” said Rep. Speier, Co-Chair of the Democratic Women’s Caucus. “I applaud Congresswoman Schakowsky’s courage in taking on this longstanding issue, and I’m proud to join her and our colleagues in introducing the Abortion is Health Care Everywhere Act of 2020 to finally repeal the blatantly misogynistic and racist Helms Amendment.”“Abortion is health care, period,” said Rep. DeGette, Co-Chair of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus. “Every year, the lives of millions of women around the world are needlessly put at risk by the performance of unsafe abortions. This legislation will remove the barriers that have prevented the U.S. from helping to provide these women access to safe and comprehensive reproductive care.” “The Helms Amendment uses vital U.S. foreign assistance as a tool to deny women, especially Black and brown women around the world of autonomy over their own medical decisions,” said Rep. Torres, Vice Chair of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus. “It creates barriers to receiving a safe abortion for some of the most vulnerable people around the world. I’m proud to stand with Rep. Schakowsky to demand an end to the Helms Amendment with the Abortion is Health Care Everywhere Act, and I urge my colleagues to support it.”“While U.S. foreign aid has been critical for communities across Kenya, restricting funds for abortion has been harmful to the health and autonomy of people across the country. Because of these restrictions, too often, an unsafe abortion from someone without training becomes the only option,” said Dr. Ernest Nyamato, a Kenyan doctor who leads Ipas’s Quality of Care global team and is former director of the Ipas Africa Alliance in Kenya. “As someone who has worked in multiple roles in health and human rights, I see just how critical comprehensive health care, including abortion is, for people, their families, and their communities. Unfortunately, we are already seeing health inequities grow due to COVID-19 and people using the crisis to try to eliminate abortion access. Global support must help prioritize women’s health care, not perpetuate barriers that make it harder for people to get the health care they need.”Health systems worldwide are already overwhelmed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, leading to a reduction in access to sexual and reproductive health care in many countries, despite the fact that abortion care is time sensitive. The Helms Amendment is poised to further exacerbate these disparities and put critical health care out of reach for millions across the globe.“Having lived through other health crises, I know that women and girls often suffer disproportionately. COVID-19 has devastated many of the communities where I work, and now is not the time to further limit people’s options,” said Monica Oguttu, an international women’s rights advocate, Kenyan midwife with decades of experience, founder of Kisumu Medical and Education Trust in Kenya, and an Ipas board member. “My patients can’t afford more red tape right now, and I ask that the U.S. government help, not harm Kenyan people.”The Helms amendment is related to, but distinct from, the global gag rule (also known as the ‘Mexico City policy’), an executive order that prohibits foreign organizations that receive U.S. global health assistance from using non-U.S. funding to provide abortion services, information, counseling, or referrals and from engaging in advocacy to expand abortion access. Both policies are discriminatory and deeply unjust.The Abortion is Health Care Everywhere Act of 2020 is endorsed by more than 115 organizations, including Advocates for Youth, American Jewish World Service, Catholics for Choice, Center for Reproductive Rights, CHANGE (Center for Health and Gender Equity), Guttmacher, International Center for Research on Women, Ipas, International Women’s Health Coalition, NARAL Pro-Choice America, Open Society Policy Center, PAI, Population Connection Action Fund, Population Institute, and Planned Parenthood Federation of America. More information can be found at repealhelms.org … July 29, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Federal judge blocks Trump immigration ‘public charge’ rule due to pandemic”. It was written by Nathaniel Weixel. From the article: The Trump administration’s controversial “public charge” rule linking immigrants’ legal status to their use of public benefits on Wednesday was blocked by a federal judge. Judge George Daniels of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York issued a nationwide injunction stopping the administration from enforcing the requirements, citing the urgency of the coronavirus pandemic.The rule, from the Department of Homeland Security, would make it easier for immigration officials to deny entry or legal status to people likely to rely on government assistance.The matter is now likely to head to the Supreme Court, which has previously acted on it……In his opinion, Daniels wrote that since the ruling in April, the pandemic has gotten worse and “the irreparable harm and public interests that warrant an injunction have come into sharper focus.”“We no longer need to imagine the worst-case scenario; we are experiencing its dramatic effects in real time,” Daniels wrote.Under the rule, any immigrant who receives at least one designated public benefit — including Medicaid, food stamps, welfare or public housing vouchers — for more than 12 months within any three-year period will be considered a “public charge” and will be more likely to be denied a green card……The plaintiffs argued that the rule makes it more difficult for immigrants to seek COVID-19 testing and care. Despite a notice from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services that medical treatment for COVID symptoms will not count toward a public charge analysis, Daniels said the rule is a deterrent for immigrants to seek medical help.“Any policy that deters residents from seeking testing and treatment for COVID-19 increases the risk of infection for such residents and the public. Adverse government action that targets immigrants, however, is particularly dangerous during a pandemic,” Daniels wrote. July 29, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Leads Multistate Reply Brief in Supreme Court Fight to Save the ACA”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, leading a coalition of 20 states and D.C., today filed a reply brief in the U.S. Supreme Court defending the Affordable Care Act (ACA) against a lawsuit filed by the State of Texas and the Trump Administration that would dismantle the entire ACA, putting the healthcare of tens of millions of Americans at risk. The Court agreed to review a Fifth Circuit decision that held the ACA’s individual mandate unconstitutional and called into question whether the remaining provisions of the law could still stand—jeopardizing Medicaid expansion, critical public health programs that help fight COVID-19, and subsidies that help working families access care, among countless others. If successful, this lawsuit would rescind criticalhealthcare coverage protections for 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions, including by allowing health insurance companies to deny individuals care or charge more based on their health status. In today’s reply brief, the coalition argues that the ACA is not only legal, but a crucial resource for Americans during the COVID-19 pandemic and recession……In today’s filing, California’s coalition pushes back against the arguments made by the Trump Administration and the Texas coalition. The reply brief makes clear that patients, doctors, hospitals, employers, workers,and States will be negatively impacted by this litigation and an adverse ruling. If the Trump Administration and Texas get their way, they would put at risk important advancements in healthcare access made under the ACA, including: More than 12 million Americans receiving coverage through Medicaid expansion;Nearly 9 million individuals nationwide receiving tax credits to help afford health insurance coverage through individual marketplaces;Millions of working families relying on high-quality, employer-sponsored insurance plans; Important protections prohibiting insurers from denying health insurance to the 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions (like diabetes, cancer, or pregnancy) or from charging individuals higher premiums because of their health status; The refined way Medicare payments are made to improve health outcomes and access to medical services for seniors and people with disabilities; Nearly $1.3 trillion in federal funding dedicated to keeping Americans healthy and covered, including Medicaid expansion and public health dollars; andThe expansion of health insurance and services that have been critical in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. Joining Attorney General Becerra in defending the ACA are the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota (by and through its Department of Commerce), Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia, as well as the Governor of Kentucky. A copy of the brief is available here. July 29, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on House Reply Brief to Supreme Court on GOP’s Anti-ACA Lawsuit”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi released the following statement as the House of Representatives filed a reply brief in the case of California v. Texas, to support the Affordable Care Act:“In the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, with over 150,000 Americans tragically dead, millions of Americans infected, and millions more losing their jobs and their health care coverage, the Affordable Care Act’s life-saving protections are more important than ever. Yet Republicans continue their shameful, unjustifiable legal campaign to tear away protections for people with pre-existing conditions along with every other benefit and protection of the ACA.“As our House brief argues, ‘That respondents persist in such a meritless challenge—in the midst of a public-health emergency that continues to claim thousands of lives each week, ravage the economy, and make normal life impossible—is difficult to comprehend. The debilitating uncertainty that respondents’ lawsuit has inflicted on the nation’s health care system—and the fear and insecurity it has inflicted on millions of Americans—should be brought to an end now.’“Republicans must abandon their relentless efforts to rip away health care from the 130 million Americans with pre-existing conditions and every other family who depends on the Affordable Care Act’s life-saving protections. In the depths of this ferocious pandemic, when the health of countless Americans is at risk, Democrats will never stop our work in the courts and in the Congress to defend and strengthen affordable health care for all Americans.” July 29, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Health Care Champions in House Announce Legislation To Repeal Harmful Helms Amendment”. From the press release: Today, Reps. Schakowsky (D-IL), Lowey (D-NY), Lee (D-CA), DeGette (D-CO), Speier (D-CA), Torres (D-CA), and Pressley (D-MA), introduced the Abortion is Health Care Everywhere Act, legislation that would recognize abortion as essential health care and stop the egregious U.S. policy of creating barriers for those who need abortion access across the globe. Planned Parenthood applauds this overdue legislation and urges others to join the effort to end the Helms Amendment by cosponsoring the bill. For nearly 50 years, the Helms Amendment has blocked the use of U.S. foreign assistance to expand access to abortion services. By creating significant barriers to safe and legal health care globally, this policy endangers lives, stigmatizes abortion, and undermines our ability to advance health, human rights, and gender equality. The Helms Amendment hurts millions of people around the world by restricting the ability of individuals to make their own personal medical decisions, and denying access to comprehensive reproductive health care. This harm is focused on women and young people in low income countries around the world, including in humanitarian crises where sexual violence occurs at high rates and where displaced communities are particularly disconnected from health care. Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“Abortion is essential health care — period. Politicians in the U.S. should not be able to deny anyone’s access to health services, here in the U.S., or abroad. The Helms Amendment has always been a coercive policy, pushing the extreme ideology of a vocal minority in the U.S. on people in many of the lowest income countries in the world — people in need of health care. The policy is a stark example of neocolonialism, taking advantage of the uneven relationship between the U.S. and the countries that receive aid. Planned Parenthood thanks Reps. Schakowsky, Lowey, Lee, DeGette, Speier, Torres, and Pressley for being champions for sexual and reproductive health care. And we’re calling on others in Congress to support their efforts to repeal the Helms Amendment.”Unsafe abortion is a global health crisis. Annually, there are more than 25 million unsafe abortions worldwide and they contribute to as many as 13.2% of maternal deaths each year. The Helms Amendment exacerbates this crisis by putting safe abortion care out of reach for those served by U.S. global health programs. U.S. policy should explicitly support access to safe and legal abortion throughout the world, as part of U.S. efforts to advance health, human rights, and gender equity. July 30, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris Introduces Legislation to Support Uterine Fibroids Research and Education”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Thursday introduced the Uterine Fibroid Research and Education Act, legislation to initiate crucial research and education in relation to uterine fibroids and ensure women get the information and care they need. Congresswoman Yvette Clarke (NY-11) introduced this legislation in the House of Representatives……Uterine fibroids affect an estimated 26 million women between the ages of 15 and 50, across all racial backgrounds and socioeconomic levels in the United States. While this issue affects women across all racial backgrounds, Black women develop uterine fibroids earlier, have larger and a greater number of fibroids, and are three times more likely than white women to be hospitalized for uterine fibroids. Also, more than 80% of Black women and about 70% of white women develop fibroids by the time they reach menopause. Further, they are the leading cause for hysterectomy: 22% of Black women and 7% of white women with uterine fibroids have hysterectomies as a result of the condition.Despite being the most common gynecological condition, there is a lack of awareness and prioritization about uterine fibroids as an important health issue. Some women who experience uterine fibroids have no symptoms; however, those that do experience: severe pelvic pain, iron-deficiency, anemia, miscarriages, infertility, and heavy bleeding. Building awareness around uterine fibroids is not only a health equity issue, but an economic imperative. Uterine fibroids cost our health care system an estimated $9.4 billion annually.The Uterine Fibroid Research and Education Act would: Provide $30 million annually for FY21-FY25 to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to expand research on uterine fibroids.Direct the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to expand the Chronic Conditions Warehouse research database to include data on the services provided to women who experience symptoms of uterine fibroids.Create a uterine fibroids public education program through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to disseminate information on the incidence and prevalence of uterine fibroids among women—including the elevated risk for women of color—and the available treatment options.Direct the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), in consultation with medical societies, to develop and disseminate information regarding uterine fibroids to health care providers, including the elevated risk for women of color to develop uterine fibroids and the available treatment options. In addition to Harris and Clarke, this legislation is co-sponsored in the Senate by Senators Van Hollen (D-MD) and Booker (D-NJ) .This bill is supported by: Black Women’s Health Imperative, The Fibroid Foundation, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American Sexual Health Association, American Society for Reproductive Medicine, CARE About Fibroids, HealthyWomen, National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women’s Health, National Black Nurses Association, National Coalition of 100 Black Women, National Hispanic Medical Association, National Medical Association, National Organization of Black Elected Women (NOBEL Women), Nurse Practitioners in Women’s Health, Society for Women’s Health Research, Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), and The White Dress Project… …The Uterine Fibroids Research and Education Act can be read HERE. July 30, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on 55th Anniversary of Medicare and Medicaid”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi released this statement marking the 55th anniversary of Medicare and Medicaid being signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson, on July 30, 1965:“For 55 years, Medicare and Medicaid have stood as pillars of health and economic security for millions of seniors and families. These landmark achievements fundamentally transformed our nation and have ensured that all Americans receive the support they need and the dignity they deserve.“Yet, for decades, Republicans have worked to make Medicare ‘wither on the vine’ and to cut and cap Medicaid into oblivion. Now, as we confront the unprecedented coronavirus pandemic, Republicans are doubling down on their dangerous, anti-health care agenda, rolling back vital health care protections for seniors, families and all Americans, and arguing in court to dismantle the entirety of the Affordable Care Act. House Democrats believe in honoring our responsibility to hard-working Americans. That is why we are fighting these callous Republican attacks, and why we passed urgently-needed legislation to lower the cost of prescription drugs, help generics move more quickly to market and improve Medicare’s lifesaving benefits. “As we celebrate this important day, House Democrats remain firmly committed to Medicare and Medicaid’s bedrock promises. We will continue strengthening Medicare and Medicaid’s vital lifeline for seniors and families as we work to build a healthier, more secure and equal future for generations to come.” July 30, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris, Bennet, Colleagues Introduce Legislation to Bolster Medicaid Coverage for COVID-19 -Related Treatment”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Thursday joined Senator Michael Bennet (D-CO), along with Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), in introducing legislation to increase coverage for uninsured Americans receiving Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related treatment and vaccines through Medicaid. The Stronger Medicaid Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic Act directly responds to the increased need for health care resulting from the public health and economic crisis. The legislation builds on The Families First Coronavirus Response Act, which provided Medicaid coverage for COVID-19 testing, and would allow Medicaid programs to pay for treatment, hospitalization, drugs, and vaccines for individuals with COVID-19 who are uninsured. In April, Harris, together with Sen. Hirono, announced the Coronavirus Immigrant Families Protection Act, criticallegislation to ensure everyone has access health care and other vital resources during the COVID-19 pandemic.“Let’s be clear: no one should be prevented from COVID-19 treatment simply because they are uninsured,” said Harris. “This virus impacts everyone and it does not care about your race, your gender, your age, your immigration status, or your health insurance status. I’m proud join my colleagues in introducing the Stronger Medicaid Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic Act– this critical legislation will allow Medicaid to provide coverage for COVID-19-related treatment to any uninsured individuals.”“For many Americans, losing a job also means losing their health insurance. We cannot let millions of Americans lose access to care during the worst public health crisis in a century due to job loss or other circumstances that are out of their control,” said Bennet. “Our legislation would ensure these families and individuals who have experienced a job loss during the pandemic are able to receive the COVID-19 treatment they need by bolstering Medicaid coverage for the uninsured.” “The COVID-19 pandemic created an unprecedented health and financial crisis, which has exacerbated existing problems impacting Americans’ ability to access affordable health care services. This is especially true for those who are currently uninsured,” said Shaheen. “This bill would allow Medicaid to cover COVID-19 treatment costs for the uninsured and ensure that cost is not a barrier to care for those who are fighting this devastating virus. The bill gives states an incentive to take up this option by providing federal funding to reimburse states for the cost of this COVID-19 treatment for the uninsured. Combating this crisis requires an all-hands-on-deck approach, which is precisely why this legislation is urgently needed. No one should be denied lifesaving care because they cannot afford it.”“The coronavirus pandemic has caused catastrophic damage to our nation’s public health and economy,” said Hirono. “This legislation will make sure that everyone in America—regardless of their immigration status, employment status, or insurance status—has access to COVID-19 testing and treatment, because we all benefit when our community is healthy.”“Every American deserves a vaccine or treatment against COVID-19, regardless of cost,” said Blumenthal. “As more Americans are unemployed, and therefore uninsured, we must assure that no one is left behind. It’s vital to all of our health.”Over 71 million individuals are enrolled in Medicaid and CHIP, providing essential coverage of health care services, like primary and preventive care, mental and behavioral health, and chronic illness treatment. Researchers estimate that more than 10 million people will lose employer-sponsored health insurance as a result of pandemic-related job loss in their household between April and December 2020. Just in the first three months of the pandemic, 5.4 million laid-off workers became uninsured.The Stronger Medicaid Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic Act is supported by The Arc of the United States, Epilepsy Foundation, National Hispanic Medical Association, Asian & Pacific Islander American Health Forum, Families USA, Colorado Safety Net Collaborative, The Arc of Colorado, National Immigration Law Center, National Health Law Program, and People’s Health Clinic. The bill text is available HERE. A one-pager is available HERE. July 31, 2020: Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar posted a statement titled: “HHS Secretary Azar Statement on Court Victory for President Trump’s Drug-Pricing Agenda”. From the statement: On Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that the Trump Administration and HHS had the legal authority to reduce payments by 28.5 percent for drugs purchased under the 340B discount program by hospital outpatient departments, reversing a decision by the lower court on HHS’s 2017 action on this issue. HHS Secretary Alex Azar issued the following statement:“Today’s court decision is another major victory for President Trump’s agenda of lower drug prices and better healthcare for all Americans. Since HHS took the action that the court affirmed today, we have saved more than $4.8 billion in lower drug costs and reinvested these savings in the Medicare program. Thanks to President Trump’s actions, Medicare patients, and especially those who live in more vulnerable areas, are now paying less out-of-pocket for the drugs they need.” August August 3, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Leads Multistate Amicus Brief Supporting Challenge to Trump Administration’s Healthcare Refusal Rule”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today led a multistate coalition in filing an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit supporting a multistate challenge led by New York, opposing the Trump Administration’s illegal Healthcare Refusal Rule. The Healthcare Refusal Rule jeopardizes the health and safety of state residents by creating a broad exemption that would allow anyone remotely involved in a healthcare transaction to deny care based on their religious or moral beliefs. This exemption would open the door to discrimination, particularly against women and LGBTQ individuals, and endanger the timely delivery of critical lifesaving care. In the brief, the coalition urges the Court of Appeals to uphold the district court ruling, which found the Rule to be unlawful……In the brief, the attorneys general argue that the Amici States have already tailored their laws and regulations to balance the need to protect access to healthcare while respecting providers’ right to lodge “conscience” objections, in accordance with numerous existing federal conscience provisions Congress has enacted. However, the Healthcare Refusal Rule issued by the Trump Administration’s U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) goes far beyond existing provisions, creating a broad exemption that risks access to care. The new rule would allow anyone remotely involved in a healthcare transaction – from front desk staff to emergency personnel to private entities – to object not just for religious reasons, but for “moral, ethical, or other” reasons as well.The coalition argues that the Rule would compromise patient access to care, and encourage discrimination against vulnerable patient populations, including women, people of color, LGBTQ individuals, and rural and low-income communities. In the New York district court, HHS’ counsel even conceded that the Rule would permit an ambulance driver to cease driving in the middle of Central Park “en route to hospital…upon learning that the patient sought emergency care for ectopic pregnancy,” and that an employer’s failure to accommodate that ambulance driver could “result in a loss of federal funding.” These harsh outcomes not only conflict with federal law, but would greatly undermine Amici States’ longstanding efforts to ensure access to emergency care in their own states.In addition to impeding access to basic healthcare, including reproductive and emergency care, the Rule has substantial material costs. It threatens hundreds of billions of dollars in federal funding for healthcare programs and services using unlawful, draconian penalties for non-compliance. For Amici States alone, the Rule puts at risk some $100 billion in federal funds. The Rule, quite simply, puts a “gun to the head” of Amici States, and many others.In the brief, the coalition asserts that the district court correctly concluded that HHS’s new conscience regulation exceeds the agency’s authority, is arbitrary and capricious, and contrary to federal law and the United States Constitution. The amici urge the Court of Appeals to uphold the district court’s ruling. Attorney General Becerra has fought against the Trump Administration’s Healthcare Refusal Rule at every turn. On May 21, 2019, he filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, challenging the rule. On September 12, 2019, he filed a motion for summary judgment, to swiftly resolve the case and stop the rule from taking effect in California. On November 19, 2019, the district court granted California’s motion, finding the Rule illegal.In filing the brief, Attorney General Becerra is joined by the attorneys general of North Carolina, Maine, and Washington.A copy of the brief is available here. August 4, 2020: Business Wire posted a press release titled: “Congress Must Act to Prevent Further Damage to the Health Care System”. From the press release: The proposed 2021 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) issued by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) on August 3, 2020 failed to address a significant shift in physician and nonphysician payments. Due to the agency’s inaction, organizations representing more than 350,000 physicians and 764,000 nonphysician health care providers across the United States, are urging Congress to pass legislation to stop arbitrary Medicare cuts to specialty physicians and nonphysician providers — including audiologists, physical and occupational therapists, and speech-language pathologists — to protect patient access to medically necessary services.n late 2019, CMS announced new Medicare payment policies for office and outpatient visits — also known as evaluation and management (E/M) services — billed by physicians and some nonphysician providers. These changes go into effect beginning on January 1, 2021 and will result in cuts of up to 10 percent or more for certain specialties. Due to Medicare’s budget-neutrality requirements, physician, nonphysician, and institutional providers billing under the PFS will experience substantial payment reductions to offset payment increases to physicians and other providers who primarily deliver office-based services. These cuts will be devastating to a health care system that is already struggling and may lead to reduced access to care for older Americans and Americans with disabilities.Our groups are calling on Congress and CMS to collaborate on developing a solution that will allow the changes to the E/M services to proceed, while at the same time preventing cuts to our health care professionals. Waiving budget neutrality requirements for the E/M policy is the most straightforward solution. It will provide a critical reprieve for a broad array of physicians and nonphysician health care providers facing substantial payment reductions in the coming months, while also allowing payment increases to go forward for those who provide E/M services to Medicare beneficiaries in a stand-alone office visit or outpatient setting.As practices plan for 2021, they must anticipate and account for these cuts to their Medicare payment at a time when they are struggling with the devastating financial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. If Congress fails to mitigate these cuts, decreases in Medicare payments will further exacerbate the problems occurring across the country with practices furloughing or cutting staff and an increasing number closing their doors. Of great concern is the impact that this will have on access to needed health care services, especially for beneficiaries in rural and underserved areas. Because, in the end, if these detrimental cuts are implemented, those who suffer the most will be patients. The letter was signed by: American Academy of AudiologyAmerican Academy of Dermatology AssociationAmerican Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive SurgeryAmerican Academy of OphthalmologyAlliance for Physical Therapy Quality and InnovationAmerican Association of Neurological SurgeonsAmerican Association of Orthopaedic SurgeonsAmerican Chiropractic AssociationAmerican College of Obstetricians and GynecologistsAmerican College of Osteopathic SurgeonsAmerican College of Radiation OncologyAmerican College of RadiologyAmerican College of SurgeonsAmerican Occupational Therapy AssociationAmerican Physical Therapy AssociationAmerican Psychological AssociationAssociation for Quality ImagingAmerican Society of Cataract and Refractive SurgeryAmerican Society of Colon and Rectal SurgeonsAmerican Society of Hand TherapistsAmerican Society of Plastic SurgeonsAmerican Society for Radiation OncologyAmerican Society of Retina SpecialistsAmerican Society for Surgery of the HandAmerican Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationAmerican Urological AssociationCardioVascular CoalitionCollege of American PathologistsCongress of Neurological SurgeonsDialysis Vascular Access CoalitionInstitute for Critical Care FoundationNational Association for the Support of Long Term CareNational Association of Rehabilitation Providers and AgenciesPrivate Practice Section of the American Physical Therapy AssociationSociety of Interventional RadiologySociety of Thoracic Surgeons August 4, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a statement titled: “ACOG Commends CMS for Recognizing the Importance of Maternity Care, Pledges Continued Advocacy for Gynecologic Care”. From the statement: The following statement was released by Eva Chalas, MD, FACOG, FACS, president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and Maureen G. Phipps, MD, MPH, FACOG, chief executive officer of ACOG, on the proposed rule announced yesterday by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for the 2021 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule:“ACOG commends CMS for protecting the availability of quality medical care for pregnant and postpartum women by proposing to increase the relative value of the global obstetric packages commensurate with the increases for other types of office visits in 2021. “We thank CMS for directly responding to input provided by ACOG regarding the methodology and valuation used to determine payment rates for maternity care. By listening to ACOG and the concerns of our 60,000 members, CMS will help to ensure the sustainability of high-quality obstetric practices across the country, improving health care for women.“CMS previously finalized a policy to increase Medicare payment rates for outpatient evaluation and management (E/M) services, but because CMS did not apply those increases to the global obstetric packages, this policy would have resulted in payment cuts for obstetric services in 2021. Those cuts would have reduced reimbursement rates across payers, including Medicaid, TRICARE, and commercial insurers, increasing barriers to care and potentially worsening inequities in maternal health outcomes.“We also thank CMS for recognizing the increased expense incurred by obstetrician-gynecologists when performing many gynecologic procedures by adjusting their relative values for practice expense and professional liability costs.“For the last year, ACOG has advocated for CMS to value women’s health services equitably and to ensure that their value is on par with other E/M value increases. “These proposals, along with proposals to improve Medicare beneficiaries’ access to telehealth services, demonstrate CMS’ commitment to advancing our common goal of improving women’s health. While we are still reviewing the proposal, ACOG urges CMS to finalize the increased values for obstetric and gynecologic services in the 2021 final rule.“Although we appreciate the agency’s actions, ACOG is deeply concerned that CMS is moving forward with payment cuts for surgical services. This will further jeopardize access to gynecologic surgery and the ongoing stability of obstetrics and gynecology practices that were struggling financially even before the COVID-19 pandemic. We strongly oppose these unfair cuts and pledge to continue our advocacy to ensure that all women’s health services are equitably and fairly valued.” August 4, 2020: Representative Ayanna Pressley (Democrat – Massachusetts) posted a press release titled: “Massachusetts Congressional Delegation Requests Additional Funding for Massachusetts Hospitals in Next Relief Package”. From the press release: Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07), Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Edward J. Markey (D-MA) and Representatives James P. McGovern (MA-02), Stephen F. Lynch (MA-08), William Keating (MA-09), Joseph P. Kennedy III (MA-04), Katherine Clark (MA-05), Seth Moulton (MA-06), and Lori Trahan (MA-03), today urged Congressional Leadership to provide additional funding for Massachusetts hospitals in the next coronavirus relief package as they continue to face the COVID-19 pandemic.“In Massachusetts, our hospitals continue to be on the front lines of the coronavirus pandemic, treating patients, protecting their staff, and ensuring that the pandemic does not disrupt other essential care,” the lawmakers wrote. “In return, they continue to need our support. The recently released proposal from Senate Republicans, which includes a mere $25 billion in additional funding for the Provider Relief Fund, is insufficient.”As hospitals continue to play an outsized role in the COVID-19 pandemic, they have suffered a serious financial toll. Hospitals continue to face higher operating costs as they take precautions to protect their patients and staff from infection, and while most hospitals have resumed preventative and elective procedures, the suspension of these procedures earlier this year cost hospitals millions of dollars per day, creating losses that will take years to recoup. The delegation called for an additional $100 billion for the Provider Relief Fund to alleviate this financial pressure and ensure that hospitals can continue to provide care to patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. “Hospitals and their staff have made heroic efforts to contain the coronavirus pandemic, including by putting themselves at risk of infection in order to care for their patients,” the lawmakers continue. “We owe it to them, and to our constituents who rely on these health care providers for exceptional medical care, to support their ongoing financial needs.” August 5, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Files Amicus Brief Opposing FDA’s Unnecessary Barriers to Abortion Medication During COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra joined a multistate amicus brief supporting the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Council of University Chairs of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the New York State Academy of Family Physicians, Sistersong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective, and Honor MacNaughton, M.D. These healthcare providers oppose the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) motion for stay of the district court ruling halting the federal government’s restrictions imposed on Mifepristone, the medication abortion prescription drug. Currently, due to FDA restrictions, Mifepristone can only be dispensed by certified providers at a hospital, clinic, or medical office — and not via pharmacy or mail — requiring women to go in person for a prescription. Evidence shows these restrictions are dated and not medically based. In the brief filed in the Fourth Circuit, the attorneys general argue that allowing enforcement of the FDA requirements during the current public health crisis will harm patient safety and the public interest by conditioning access to constitutionally protected abortion on an increased risk of virus infection and transmission. They also argue that allowing enforcement will undermine the amici’s ongoing efforts to manage the crisis through measures limiting unnecessary in-person contacts……In the brief, the coalition argues that the FDA’s Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) designation impedes women’s access to the medication abortion prescription drug despite the fact that it has been proven safe and effective. Mifepristone has been approved by the FDA since 2000, and it remains the only drug approved in the United States for pregnancy termination. Since its approval, about three million women in the United States have used the medication to terminate a pregnancy. Indeed, according to the FDA, this medication “has been increasingly used as its efficacy and safety have become well-established by both research and experience.” However, under REMS, the FDA imposed several unnecessary requirements: Healthcare providers must be registered with the drug manufacturer; Patients must sign a “Patient Agreement” form confirming that they received counseling on the risks associated with the medication; and Patients must be handed the medication at a clinic, medical office, or hospital under the supervision of a healthcare provider if the medication is prescribed for the purpose of terminating a pregnancy – yet the drug can be dispensed by mail in higher doses if prescribed for other purposes, such as ulcer relief. During this unprecedented crisis, it is essential that women across the country have access to critical healthcare services. Many states have already taken steps to increase telehealth care at the federal government’s request. Yet, the current FDA REMS creates unnecessary barriers for women to access abortion care. In the brief, the coalition argues that these onerous and medically unnecessary requirements limit healthcare providers’ ability to assist their female patients, particularly during this global healthcare crisis. Furthermore, these requirements impose significant burdens on women in rural and medically underserved communities who would be required to travel long distances — sometimes up to 200 miles — for time-sensitive, in-person care. Forcing women to travel at a time when many states and the federal government are urging people to stay home to curb the spread of COVID-19 puts women across the country in harm’s way.In June, Attorney General Becerra joined a coalition filing an amicus brief supporting ACOG’s challenge to the FDA’s REMS. In March, Attorney General Becerra led a multistate coalition in sending a letter to the FDA, asking them to remove REMS restrictions or waive enforcement of these requirements in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and nationwide stay-at-home orders.In filing the amicus brief, Attorney General Becerra joins the attorneys general of New York, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the brief is available here. August 5, 2020: Vox posted an article titled: “Missouri approves Medicaid expansion ballot initiative, extending coverage to 200,000 people”. It was written by Dylan Scott. From the article: Missouri voters approved an expansion of the state’s Medicaid program in Tuesday’s election, according to Vox’s partners at Decision Desk – making another success story at the ballot box for the program in a state where it had been stifled by Republican opposition.The ballot initiative expands Medicaid eligibility to 138 percent of the federal poverty level (about $17,500 for an individual or $30,000 for a family of three) as authorized under the Affordable Care Act. An estimated 230,000 low-income Missourians will become eligible for Medicaid, though that number could end up being even higher given the recent job losses in the Covid-19 crisis. The federal government will cover 90 percent of the expansion costs; the state will be responsible for the other 10 percent.The vote passed over the objections of Missouri’s Republican governor, Mike Parson, and conservative interest groups. Bills had been introduced in previous legislative sessions that would have expanded Medicaid, but they were ignored by the GOP majority.This makes Missouri the 39th state to expand Medicaid through Obamacare; all the holdouts have been driven by GOP opposition to the 2010 health care law. About 2.3 million people nationwide are estimated to be uninsured because their state has refused to extend Medicaid eligibility and they make too little money to qualify for tax subsidies to buy private coverage. (Eligibility for the ACA subsidies starts at 100 percent of the poverty level.)……Republican officials have sometimes tried to undo the results at the ballot box — in Utah, for example, GOP lawmakers sought to add restrictions on eligibility — but the Missouri initiative was specifically written to prevent tampering by the state legislature or the governor. Medicaid expansion would be written into the state constitution, and the state cannot introduce work requirements or any other limits on benefits.Conservative groups had sued to try to stop the Medicaid expansion initiative from appearing on the ballot, arguing it violated the Missouri Constitution, but the language was upheld by state courts. Republicans argued that the state could not afford the expansion, in spite of the 90 percent federal funding match… August 5, 2020: NPR posted an article titled: “Missouri Voters Approve Medicaid Expansion Despite Resistance From Republican Leaders”. It was written by Alex Smith. From the article: Despite strong opposition from Republicans and rural voters, Missouri on Tuesday joined 37 states and the District of Columbia in expanding its Medicaid program.Voters in Missouri approved creating a state constitutional amendment that will open Medicaid eligibility to include healthy adults starting on July 1, 2021.Voters approved expansion by a vote of 53.25% to 46.75%. A total of 1,263,776 voters weighed in on the measure.Missouri joins five other mostly conservative states that have passed Medicaid expansion via ballot initiatives, most recently Oklahoma, which voted in the measure on June 30. Most of the remaining 12 states that haven’t expanded Medicaid are Republican-leaning states in the South……Medicaid expansion, which states have the option of adopting as part of the Affordable Care Act, opens eligibility in the program to individuals and families with incomes up to 138% of the federal poverty level. The federal government covers 90% of expansion costs. A family of three, like Nika’s, could make up to $29,974 to qualify.Researchers from Washington University in Saint Louis estimated in 2019 that around 230,000 people in Missouri would enroll for Medicaid if it were expanded. As of 2018, 9.3% of Missourians were uninsured. The study also showed expansion would save the state an estimated $39 million a year, largely by eliminating the need for other state health spending……Support for expansion came largely from voters in and around the urban centers of Kansas City, Saint Louis, Springfield and Columbia. Voters in Kansas City, Mo., for example, approved the measure by 87.6%.Amendment 2 was rejected overwhelmingly by conservative voters in the mostly rural parts of the state that have the highest uninsured and poverty rates.Voters in McDonald, Morgan and Scotland counties, which have the three highest uninsured rates in the state, rejected the measure by margins of nearly 2 to 1 or greater… August 5, 2020: Kansas Governor Laura Kelly (Democrat) posted a press release titled: “Governor Kelly Statement on Medicaid Expansion in Missouri”. From the press release: The following statement is from Governor Laura Kelly regarding the passage of Medicaid expansion in Missouri:“Last night, Missourians voted to join our neighbors in Colorado, Nebraska, and Oklahoma to become the 39th state to expand Medicaid. Every single Kansas voter must ask themselves why, year after year, Republican leadership in the Legislature has blocked expansion.“Their obstruction has left 150,000 Kansans without access to healthcare during a global health crisis. They have forfeited $4 billion Kansas taxpayer dollars. They have rejected 13,000 new jobs that we could bring to Kansas.“Republican leadership in the Legislature must stop playing politics with Kansans’ lives and support Medicaid expansion.” August 5, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Wins Another Victory Against Trump Administration’s Public Charge Rule”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James yesterday secured another major victory for immigrants across New York and the rest of the nation in her lawsuit against the Trump Administration’s Public Charge Rule. Attorney General James led a coalition — that includes three states and New York City — that today obtained a ruling from the the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upholding a preliminary injunction against the rule that changed the established meaning of public charge.“The Second Circuit has now recognized that the Trump Administration acted unlawfully in issuing its Public Charge Rule,” said Attorney General James. “The federal government’s change to this rule was wrong when it was first issued, long before the public health crisis that now plagues the nation. Unfortunately, the realities of the current pandemic underscore the importance of this fight, and we remain committed to delivering justice for New Yorkers and for our immigrant neighbors seeking to make a better life for themselves here.”Today’s decision enjoined the Public Charge Rule in its entirety in the plaintiff states and localities (New York, Connecticut, Vermont, and New York City), upholding a decision issued by a trial court many months ago. Because the original injunction had been stayed by the Supreme Court, last week the trial court issued a second preliminary injunction against the Public Charge Rule, just for the duration of the public health crisis caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), finding that the rule was exacerbating the spread of the disease by deterring people from seeking needed health care.Federal law allows lawful immigrants to apply for certain supplemental health and nutritional public benefits if they have been in the country for at least five years. But, last August, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a Public Charge Rule that changed the established meaning of public charge, which had long been that immigrants who use basic, non-cash benefits are not considered public charges because they are not primarily dependent on the government for survival. This “bait-and-switch” consequently jeopardized immigrants’ chances of becoming legal permanent residents or renewing their visas if they used the supplemental benefits to which they are legally entitled.In today’s order, the court held that the Public Charge Rule is likely contrary to the immigration law set by Congress and arbitrary and capricious. As the court noted: “Accepting help that is offered to elevate one to a higher standard of living, help that was created by Congress for that precise purpose, does not mean a person is not self-sufficient — particularly when such programs are available not just to persons living in abject poverty but to a broad swath of low- and moderate-income Americans, including those who are productively employed. DHS goes too far in assuming that all those who participate in non-cash benefits programs would be otherwise unable to meet their needs and that they can thus be categorically considered ‘public charges.’ Its unsupported and conclusory claim that receipt of such benefits indicates an inability to support oneself does not satisfy DHS’s obligation to explain its actions.”Last August, days after the Trump Administration initially issued the Public Charge Rule, Attorney General James and a coalition of states and New York City filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration rule in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, noting that the rule specifically targets immigrants of color, immigrants with disabilities, and low-income immigrants, while putting these communities at risk, and would have short- and long-term impacts on public health and the economy.The attorneys general of Connecticut and Vermont, as well as corporation counsel for New York City all joined Attorney General James in filing the motion for a preliminary injunction that was affirmed today.This appeal was handled by Senior Assistant Solicitor General Judith N. Vale, Deputy Solicitor General Steven C. Wu, and Solicitor General Barbara D. Underwood. The public charge matter is being handled by Deputy Bureau Chief of the Civil Rights Bureau Elena Goldstein, Civil Enforcement Section Chief of the Labor Bureau Ming-Qi Chu, and Assistant Attorneys General Abigail Rosner and Amanda Meyer, all under the supervision of Chief Counsel for Federal Initiatives Matthew Colangelo. The Division for Federal Initiatives is overseen by First Deputy Attorney General Jennifer Levy. August 7, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “Trump says he’s working on health insurance executive order on pre-existing conditions”. From the article: President Donald Trump said on Friday he would be working over the next couple of weeks on an executive order to require health insurers to cover pre-existing conditions.Insurance companies were prohibited from denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions under the Affordable Care Act passed under former President Barack Obama, known as Obamacare, which the Trump administration has tried to scrap.“Over the next two weeks, I’ll be pursuing a major executive order requiring health insurance companies to cover all pre-existing conditions for all customers,” Trump said at a news conference at his golf property in Bedminster, New Jersey.The Republican president, who is trailing Democratic candidate Joe Biden ahead of the Nov. 3, gave no details about his plan.Trump criticized the cost and coverage under Obamacare and has been promising since his 2016 campaign to replace it with a better plan. His administration asked the Supreme Court in June to invalidate the Obamacare law…. August 7, 2020: Lambda Legal posted news titled: “Victory! Court Confirms Idaho’s Anti-Transgender Birth Certificate Law Violates Ruling”. The federal district court in Idaho today slapped down an effort by the Idaho legislature and Idaho Gov. Brad Little to resuscitate a ban preventing transgender people born in Idaho from changing the gender marker on their birth certificates to match their gender identity. In so doing, the judge held that Idaho state officials’ enforcement of House Bill 509 is currently in violation of the court’s permanent injunction issued in 2018 that declared any such ban unconstitutional and blocked its enforcement.“It is astonishing that the Idaho legislature and Gov. Little plowed forward with resuscitating this dangerous and archaic ban in direct defiance of multiple court orders that repeatedly ordered the government to stop discriminating against transgender people and placing them in harm’s way,” said Nora Huppert, a Renberg Fellow and attorney with Lambda Legal. “The court could not have been clearer: What was discriminatory in 2018 remains discriminatory today. Idaho officials may not block transgender people from obtaining identity documents that reflect who they are. This law seeks to deny the very existence of transgender people by stripping them of their identity.”The ruling comes on the heels of an earlier ruling by the court on June 1, 2020, in which it warned Idaho state officials that the court’s permanent injunction continued to apply to HB 509, and cautioned them against “experimentation with disobedience of the law.” Despite that warning, Idaho state officials pushed forward with enforcement of HB 509 on its effective date of July 1, 2020, prompting another round of litigation that resulted in today’s ruling.“When you treat the federal court like a doormat, there are going to be consequences,” Huppert added. “The rule of law comes to a grinding halt if government officials can act as if they are above the law that the rest of us are expected to follow.”From the ruling: “The Idaho Department of Health and Welfare’s enforcement of HB 509 “denies transgender individuals a meaningful process for changing the sex listed on their birth certificate to reflect their gender identity. This violates the Injunction’s directive prohibiting IDHW from categorically rejecting applications from transgender people to change the sex listed on their birth certificates and its mandate that IDHW allow such applications.”Lambda Legal filed the original lawsuit, F.V. v. Barron, in 2017. The lawsuit argued that denying transgender people born in Idaho the ability to obtain accurate birth certificates discriminates against them and invades their privacy, liberty, and freedom from compelled speech under U.S. Constitution. For example, after one plaintiff, who is a transgender woman, displayed her birth certificate at a social security office, she was subjected to harassment for being transgender. In March, 2018, the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho ruled that the government unconstitutionally discriminated against transgender people, and it issued a permanent injunction against state officials… August 7, 2020: Representative Ayanna Pressley posted a press release titled: “Mass. Congressional Delegation Reiterates Request for Trump Administration to Fully Fund COVID-19 Response for Tribal Nations in Massachusetts”. From the press release: Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07), Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Edward J. Markey (D-MA), and Representatives William Keating (MA-09), Stephen F. Lynch (MA-08), Katherine Clark (MA-05), Lori Trahan (MA-03), Joseph P. Kennedy III (MA-04), James P. McGovern (MA-02), Richard E. Neal (MA-01), and Seth Moulton (MA-06), sent a letter to President Trump to reiterate their request to direct the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to waive all of the traditional cost-share requirements for all COVID-19-related assistance for the Commonwealth’s two federally recognized tribal nations, the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) and the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe. In early April, the chairperson of each tribal nation wrote to President Trump to request a waiver from any cost share, citing the financial hardship caused by the pandemic. The Massachusetts congressional delegation then wrote to President Trump to urge him to direct FEMA to increase its federal cost share to 100% for the two tribal nations. Unlike states, the two tribal nations do not have a tax base to help cover the cost of services to their citizens and as a result, they have not been able to implement fully all the emergency measures they would have been able to take if they did not bear a significant share of the cost. In addition, the federal government’s trust and treaty obligations require that tribal nations not be left to suffer severe hardship from an emergency.“We have not received a reply to our letter, nor have the tribal nations received a response to their requests. Given the emergency faced by the tribal nations, and their nation-to-nation relationship with the federal government, further delays are unacceptable,” the lawmakers wrote.“Granting the requests of the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) and the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe, and waiving the traditional cost share requirements for all COVID-19-related assistance to them, will better empower them to address this pandemic,” the lawmakers continued. They also noted that other funding provided by Congress to tribal nations is not a substitute for this waiver.“The COVID-19 pandemic has had a disproportionate and tragic impact on Native communities. Seven tribal nations have COVID-19 case rates higher than any state in the United States. Indian Country has not received adequate resources for public health and emergency management, either before or during this public health emergency,” the lawmakers wrote. August 8, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Trump teases order requiring insurers to cover preexisting conditions”. It was written by Brett Samuels. From the article: President Trump on Friday teased an executive order to require health insurers to cover all preexisting conditions, something already established under the Affordable Care Axt, which his administration is suing to dismantle.“Over the next two weeks, I’ll be pursuing a major executive order requiring health insurance companies to cover all preexisting conditions for all companies,” Trump said during a news conference at his Bedminister property in New Jersey. “That’s a big thing. I’ve always been very strongly in favor. We have to cover preexisting conditions.”Trump claimed such a move “has never been done before,” though insurance companies are already required to cover patients with preexisting conditions under the Affordable Care Act, which was enacted in 2010.Despite Trump’s insistance he will protect those with preexisting conditions, the Justice Department argued in a Supreme Court briefing in late June that the entire Affordable Care Act should be invalidated……Trump has, throughout his first term, promised to unveil a health care plan of his own, though has yet to do so while seeking reelection. In an interview late last month with Chris Wallace on “Fox News Sunday”, Trump promised a comprehensive health care bill within two weeks. Two weeks later, he said it would likely be out within a month… August 9, 2020: Times Union posted an article titled: “Uninsured stuck with COVID testing bill”. It was written by Crhis Bragg. From the article: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress allocated billions of dollars enabling health care providers to give coronavirus tests – for free – to people lacking health insurance. But the program is voluntary. And health care providers can turn a greater profit by charging the uninsured for the full price of testing, out of pocket, rather than seeking a lesser reimbursement from the government for treating those patients.In the Capital Region, instead of giving free tests and making less money, several upstate New York-based “urgent care” chains are making the uninsured pay the bill, according to interviews and records reviewed by the Times Union. That has left uninsured patients paying $125 or significantly more to get tested, a potential financial barrier to widespread testing needed to counter the pandemic.At the same time they’ve shunned the federal dollars that would give the uninsured free testing, urgent care chains — WellNow, Community Care Physicians, and Albany Med EmUrgentCare — have applied for and received millions in federal subsidies benefiting their own bottom lines……Any health care provider getting support from the $50 billion federal Provider Relief Fund — the entity that gave the millions to the Capital Region urgent cares to cover their COVID-19 costs — should, as a condition of receiving the funds, be required to refrain from billing the uninsured for services such as testing, the authors wrote.If the Trump administration fails to adopt such a requirement, then Congress should act, the authors said.The Trump administration does not appear poised to adopt such a requirement. Asked about these concerns, a spokesman for the federal Department of Health and Human Services said only that the agency “continues to promote the availability” of the uninsured testing program and “encourages” providers to utilize the program in an “effort to support vulnerable uninsured individuals.”……The cost for the diagnostic and antibody tests, as well as doctor visits associated with them, could all be covered by the billions in federal funding making uninsured testing free — but only if a provider participates… August 10, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Files Amicus Brief in Support of Kings County Woman Arrested for Murder After the Loss of Her Pregnancy”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today filed an amicus brief in support of granting Chelsea Becker’s petition to end the prosecution and all criminal proceedings against her. Ms. Becker was arrested and charged with murder after delivering a stillborn child in Kings County. The Kings County District Attorney alleged that Ms. Becker’s methamphetamine use led to teh death of the fetus and constituted murder. The District Attorney charged Ms. Becker with violating section 187 of the California Penal Code on October 31, 2019, and the superior court denied Ms. Becker’s motion to dismiss the charges on June 4, 2020. She has been in custody since she was charged and is currently awaiting trial.“Today we filed an amicus brief supporting Chelsea Becker’s appeal, because we believe the law was misapplied and misinterpreted,” said Attorney General Becerra. “Section 187 of the California Penal Code was intended to protect pregnant women from harm, not charge them with murder. Our laws in California do not convict women who suffer the loss of their pregnancy, and in our filing today we are making clear that this law has been misused to the detriment of women, children, and families. We will work to end the prosecution and imprisonment of Ms. Becker so we can focus on applying this law to those who put the lives of pregnant women in danger.”In the brief, Attorney General Becerra argues that the Kings County District Attorney misinterpreted the law’s intention and the superior court was subsequently incorrect in its judgment of Ms. Becker’s motion to dismiss the charges against her. The brief argues that the text, purpose, and history of the law make it clear that a woman cannot be prosecuted for murder as a result of her pregnancy loss.Attorney General Becerra is committed to seeing Ms. Becker released from jail with the charges against her dropped and the law applied the way it was intended – to protect women. A copy of the amicus brief can be found here. August 10, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “Trump: Executive order on pre-existing conditions is ‘a signal'”. From the article: President Donald Trump on Monday acknowledged a prospective executive order he’s considering to make insurers cover pre-existing conditions amounted to political messaging — and that Obamacare already offered such protections.“It’s a signal to people … it’s a second platform,” Trump said at a White House briefing. “Pre-existing conditions will be taken care of 100 percent by Republicans and the Republican party. I actually think it’s a very important statement.”Trump had teased the executive order Friday night at his private club in Bedminster, N.J., while unveiling other executive actions to address the coronavirus crisis and economic crash.Background: Trump and Republicans are vulnerable on the issue of pre-existing conditions after waging a lengthy legal battle to strike down Obamacare and its consumer protections without offering a replacement.Trump’s administration has also increased the availability of cheap, skimpier health plans that don’t meet Obamacare’s coverage requirements and wouldn’t protect some patients with chronic conditions…. August 11, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Leads Coalition of Attorneys General in Opposition to IRS Proposed Rule that Undermines the ACA”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, leading a coalition of 20 attorneys general, submitted a comment letter opposing the Department of the Treasury and Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) proposed rule which seeks to treat payments made to healthcare sharing ministries (HSMs) as deductible medical expenses under Section 213(d) of the Internal Revenue Code —expanding non-ACA compliant coverage in the market. The letter urges the agencies to withdraw the proposed rule, arguing that allowing tax deductions for payments made to Healthcare Sharing Ministries (HSMs) undermines the ACA and leaves consumers with junk coverage.“We are in the middle of a global health crisis in which millions of Americans have lost their jobs and their health insurance,” said Attorney General Becerra. “So what does the Trump Administration propose? A rule that would treat junk insurance plans as the real deal. Healthcare sharing ministries are not full coverage health insurance, should not be treated as such, and will only cause confusion and harm as families desperately seek to get covered. We urge the Department of the Treasury and the IRS to withdraw this proposed rule immediately before it leaves even more Americans without robust health coverage.”Prior to the passage of the ACA, HSMs allowed people to pool their money with others who shared their religious beliefs in order to assist each other in times of medical crisis. When the ACA was passed, millions of uninsured Americans became insured and gained access to quality, affordable health insurance. However, many companies began to capitalize on the exemption of HSMs from many of the coverage mandates in the ACA by marketing them as a less expensive alternative to ACA-compliant health insurance. Unlike ACA-compliant health insurance, HSMs do not guarantee payment for covered services and fail to cover essential health benefits, like birth control, prescriptions, preexisting conditions, and mental health care.In their letter, the attorneys general argue the proposed rule will: Further increase consumer confusion and fraud in the healthcare marketplace: HSMs are not mandated by the ACA to provide the ten essential health benefits required of health plans sold in the individual market, including coverage for preventive care, services for mental health and substance use disorders, and reproductive care. The letter explains that many HSMs have chosen to capitalize on this by mirroring the structure of ACA-compliant insurance plans in order to market themselves as a less expensive healthcare option, while not actually providing full coverage insurance to their members. By treating expenses for HSMs as deductible medical expenses, HSMs will further resemble traditional health insurance companies while continuing to dodge the requirement to provide their consumers with essential health benefits; andWorsen market segmentation: If companies are able to use the proposed rule to boost confusing marketing tactics that paint HSMs as a quality health insurance option, market segmentation will occur as younger, healthier people choose them over ACA-compliant coverage. The letter argues that this will increase the cost of premiums for older and less healthy Americans who must remain in ACA-compliant health plans in order to receive full health coverage. The letter also argues that the proposed rule is in excess of authority and is an example of capricious rulemaking as it does not take into account the consumer confusion, fraud, and risk of market segmentation the rule could cause.In sending the letter, Attorney General Becerra was joined by the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Virginia. A copy of the letter can be found here. August 11, 2020: Representative Ayanna Pressley (Democrat – Massachusetts) posted a press release on her official website titled: “Rep. Pressley, Task Force on Aging and Families Release Statement on President Trump’s Executive Action Destabilizing Social Security and Medicare”. From the press release: In response to President Trump’s executive action destabilizing Social Security and Medicare, Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07), Vice-Chair of the House Democratic Caucus Task Force on Aging & Families, and her colleagues on the Task Force released the following statement:“Americans are facing both a public health crisis and an economic one due to the coronavirus pandemic. It is nothing short of cruel that President Trump has chosen this moment to plunge Social Security and Medicare into chaos, along with the millions of children and older Americans who survive on these earned benefits.Seniors are already endangered by the coronavirus, as evidenced by its grave toll in our nation’s nursing homes and long-term care facilities. President Trump is further endangering their long-term well-being and financial stability in favor of the wealthy, the well-off and the well-connected with his payroll tax scheme.President Trump may be calling this a “tax holiday.” In reality, this legally questionable executive action is nothing more than another GOP tax scam that hurts working families. They will still be forced to eventually pay these taxes, while the president’s actions will decimate the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds in the meantime.This week marks 85 years since President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act of 1935 into law, in a different time of economic turmoil and hardship. It is in this spirit that House Democrats are fighting to protect the benefits Americans have earned against this unconscionable attack by the president.” August 14, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Reaches Settlement with Verity Health on Conditions of Transfer of St. Francis Medical Center”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today announced a settlement with Verity Health System of California, Inc. (Verity) and Prime Healthcare Services, Inc. (Prime), putting in place additional conditions on Verity’s sale of St. Francis Medical Center in Los Angeles County to Prime. The settlement requires Prime to provide funding for charity care and community benefit services in the communities surrounding St. Francis over the next six fiscal years. “The California Department of Justice has a responsibility to the families who live around and rely on St. Francis Medical Center. The COVID-19 public health crisis has brought home the importance of having access to lifesaving hospital care nearby in our communities,” said Attorney General Becerra. “Today’s settlement ensures that St. Francis will continue to deliver services to the community through increased charity care, which helps those who don’t have coverage, and community benefit services to Los Angeles communities.”Over the course of the six fiscal years of the deal, the settlement requires Prime to provide: $9.35 million per year in charity care, an increase of $1.35 million per year beyond what is required by court order, or a total increase of $8.1 million; andApproximately $1.6 million per year in community benefit services, an increase of nearly $458,000 per year beyond what is required by court order, or a total increase of nearly $2.75 million. Under California law (Corporations Code section 5914 et seq., and California Code of Regulations, title 11, section 999.5), any proposed sale of a non-profit health facility to a for-profit corporation must secure the approval of the state Attorney General, whose statutory charge is to consider the factors set forth in the law, including whether the transaction is in the public interest and whether the transaction affects the availability or accessibility of healthcare services to the affected community. Today’s settlement resolves matters pending in bankruptcy court relating to the sale of St. Francis to Prime. A copy of the settlement is available here. August 17, 2020: Human Rights Campaign posted a press release titled: “Human Rights Campaign Wins Preliminary Injunction against Trump Health Care Rule”. From the press release: The injunction comes after the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) sued the Trump-Pence administration for advancing a rule that would have eliminated explicit protections from discrimination based on sex stereotyping and gender identityToday, Federal District Court Judge Frederic Block issued a preliminary injunction against a recently published regulation by the United States Department of Health and Human Services which would illegally strip away critical anti-discrimination protections in the Affordable Care Act. The injunction comes after the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) sued the Trump-Pence administration for advancing a rule that would have eliminated explicit protections from discrimination based on sex stereotyping and gender identity, thereby sanctioning discrimination against LGBTQ people, particularly transgender people, in health care programs and activities. The rule was scheduled to take effect on August 18 but will now be precluded from becoming operative.…This failed attempt to callously strip away non-discrimination health care protections is merely the latest in a long line of attacks against the transgender community from the Trump-Pence team. Today’s victory is a step in the right direction, and we at the Human Rights Campaign will continue to fight the administration’s attempts to dehumanize and stigmatize the LGBTQ community. This rule should be permanently tossed out and we will fight in court to ensure that it is.”The lawsuit was filed by the Human Rights Campaign and BakerHostetler on behalf of two plaintiffs, both transgender women of color: Tanya Asapansa-Johnson Walker, an Army veteran, two-time lung cancer survivor and community leader who co-founded a statewide advocacy group for transgender and gender non-conforming New Yorkers, and Cecilia Gentili, an entrepreneur, activist, writer and storyteller with over a decade of experience as a patient and health care policy advocate… August 17, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on District Court Victory for LGBTQ Americans”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after the Eastern District Court in New York, in the case of Walker v. Azar (EDNY), enjoined the Department of Health and Human Services from implementing its anti-LGBTQ rule, which was slated to take effect tomorrow. The House of Representatives participated in the case as amicus curiae in support of the plaintiffs:“In the midst of a pandemic, the Trump Administration has executed a relentless assault on the health and well-being of our communities, working tirelessly to dismantle all of the Affordable Care Act’s life-saving protections for millions of Americans. The Trump Administration’s discriminatory HHS rule, denying crucial health care benefits to LGBTQ Americans, is just the latest cruel attack in the Administration’s ongoing anti-health care agenda. Today’s district court decision enjoining this dangerous rule is a victory for the LGBTQ community and the rule of law.“The Court was unambiguous in its ruling that the Administration’s actions were in blatant violation of the Affordable Care Act’s protections and the Supreme Court’s recent Bostock decision, which affirmed that discrimination ‘on the basis of sex’ included sexual orientation and gender identity. Further, in instituting its shameful, politically-motivated assault on the LGBTQ community, HHS acted ‘arbitrarily and capriciously.’ “LGBTQ Americans, particularly in the transgender community, have faced a long history of discrimination and inequality in access to health care. House Democrats are proud to have fought for this important victory to ensure that all Americans can access the quality, affordable coverage that is their right. We will continue to oppose the Administration’s outrageous attempts to undermine health care and sow fear and hatred in our communities as we work to build a brighter, healthier future for all Americans.” August 18, 2020: Human Rights Campaign posted a press release titled: “Human Rights Campaign Wins Preliminary Injunction against Trump Administration Health Care Rule, Impacting LGBTQ North Carolinians”. From the press release: Federal District Court Judge Frederic Block issued a preliminary injunction against a recently published regulation by the United States Department of Health and Human Services which would illegally strip away critical anti-discrimination protections in the Affordable Care Act. The injunction comes after the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) sued the Trump-Pence administration for advancing a rule that would have eliminated explicit protections from discrimination based on sex stereotyping and gender identity, thereby sanctioning discrimination against LGBTQ people, particularly transgender people, in health care programs and activities. The rule was scheduled to take effect on August 18 but will now be precluded from becoming operative.This preliminary injunction means that 319,000 LGBTQ North Carolinians will be protected from discrimination by health care providers based on their sexual orientation or gender identity until the conclusion of the lawsuit, likely after the upcoming election……The lawsuit was filed on behalf of two plaintiffs, both transgender women of color: Tanya Asapansa-Johnson Walker, an Army veteran, two-time lung cancer survivor and community leader who co-founded a statewide advocacy group for transgender and gender non-conforming New Yorkers, and Cecilia Gentili, an entrepreneur, activist, writer and storyteller with over a decade of experience as a patient and health care policy advocate.Read the Court decision granting the preliminary injunction here. Read the complaint here and the Plaintiffs’ declarations here and here. HRC’s guide to best practices for creating equal access to quality health care for transgender patients can be found here. … The Human Rights Campaign also won a preliminary injunction agaisnt the Trump Administration Health Care Rule Impacting LGBTQ Arizonans, Montanans, Coloradans, Iowans, and Michiganders. August 18, 2020: Chair of Texas Women’s Healtcare Coalition Evelyn Delgado wrote a letter to Texas state lawmakers. From the letter: On behalf of the Texas Women’s Healthcare Coalition, I am writing to express concerns regarding the proposed Health and Human Services Commission’s (HHSC) funding cuts to the Family Planning Program (FPP) and Healthy Texas Women (HTW) program for the remainder of this biannium. These proposed cuts would undermine the Legislature’s efforts to support healthy moms, healthy pregnancies, and healthy babies. The proposed cuts would end up costing the state more during our next budget cycle, and would harm families who are already hurting during these very difficult times. Considering the global health pandemic and over a million Texans losing employer sponsored health insurance, we cannot afford to cut any health services, including women’s health.The Texas Women’s Healthcare Coalition (TWHC) – composed of 87 healthcare, faith, and community-based member organizations – is dedicated to improving the health and well-being of Texas women, babies, and families by ensuring access to preventative health care for all Texas women. HTW and FPP provide essential preventative women’s healthcare screenings, family planning services, and limited screening and treatment for chroinc conditions to those without access to other forms of healthcare coverage. In FY 2029 alone, there were a total of 3,266 HTW and FPP providers that served over 291,000 individuals.In addition to providing essential services, HTW and FPP save state dollars. The cost savings are realized by helping women avoid unintended pregnancies, which then result in savings from eliminating Medicaid labor and delivery costs and a year of infant healthcare……Texas Should Build on Recent Progress MadeWomen’s health in Texas has a long history of programmatic and administrative disruptons, and it is the providers and clients bearing the brunt of these changes. The 2011 family planning budget cuts resulted in at least 82 women’s healthcare clinics closing, cutting off preventative care, including well-women examinations, breast and cervical cancer screenings, and contraception for low-income women. As a result, the state saw a rise in Medicaid births in 2014-2015 and in increase in costs of Medicaid by approximately $103 million.In recent years, the Legislature has shown its committment to rebuilding these programs and ensuring Texas women have access to healthcare. It has taken many years to stitch the safety net back together after the last budget cuts. As the state continues responsive measures to preserve physical and fiscal health during the COVID-19 emergency, Texas cannot afford to cut support to healthcare programs, especially ones that have provem cost-savings……Preventative Healthcare Improves Maternal HealthTexas’ efforts to reduce maternal mortality and morbidity is intrinsically linked to women having timely access to preventative and primary care services. Healthy pregnancies begin well before conception. Women who obtain needed preventative care throughout their reproductive life-span are more likely to have better birth outcomes.HHSC’s reduction plan clearly stated that client services that benefit long-term health care for families and children with disabilities were prioritizd = as were services directly impacting short-term mortality over long-term benefits – so it was surprising to learn that women’s health services were not prioritized. The Maternal Mortality and Morbidity Task Force has repeatedly recommended increasing access to preconception and interconnection health care services – the types of services offered by HTW and FPP – to improve birth outcomes and reduce maternal mortality and morbidity, concluding in its most recent report: “increasing access to care for all reproductive aged women is important. The management of acute and chronic health care and preventative care are essential for healthy pregnancies and long-term health. Healthier women are healthier mothers, and healthier mothers lead to healthier infants and families.For the reasons outlined above, we strongly encourage reevaluating reducing funding for these vital programs that support women and families and urge continued investments in HTW and FPP… August 19, 2020: SCOTUSblog posted an article titled: “Justices will hear argument in ACA case one week after Election Day”. It was written by Amy Howe. From the article: The Supreme Court on Wednesday released the calendar for the November argument session, which will include the latest challenge to the Affordable Care Act and a clash between religious liberty and LGBTQ rights. Over five days between Nov. 2 and Nov. 10, the justices will hear eight hours of oral argument in nine cases. On the day after the Nov. 3 presidential election, the justices will hear a challenge to Philadelphia’s exclusion of a faith-based agency from its foster-care system because the agency will not work with same-sex couples. One week after the election, the justices will hear the two consolidated ACA cases, which ask whether the law’s individual insurance mandate is unconstitutional without a tax penalty and, if so, whether the rest of the law can remain standing. Notably, the foster-care case and the ACA cases are the only cases scheduled on their respective days, giving the justices some flexibility to extend the argument past the 60 minutes currently allotted to each. In the ACA challenge, the U.S. House and a pair of states (Ohio and Montana) have asked the justices to grant additional time for the oral argument; the court has not yet acted on those requests… August 19, 2020: U.S Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) posted a release titled: “HHS Expands Access to Childhood Vaccines during COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the release: The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a third amendment – PDF* to the Declaration under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) to increase access to lifesaving childhood vaccines and decrease the risk of vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks as children across the United States return to daycare, preschool and school……The amendment authorizes State-licensed pharmacists (and pharmacy interns acting under their supervision to administer vaccines, if the pharmacy intern is licensed or registered by his or her State board of pharmacy) to order and administer vaccines to individuals ages three through 18 years, subject to several requirements: The vaccine must be approved or licensed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).The vaccination must be ordered and administered according to the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) immunization schedules.The licensed pharmacist must complete a practical training program of at least 20 hours that is approved by the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE). This training program must include hands-on injection technique, clinical evaluation of indications and contraindications of vaccines, and the recognition and treatment of emergency reactions to vaccines.The licensed or registered pharmacy intern must complete a practical training program that is approved by the ACPE. This training program must include hands-on injection technique, clinical evaluation of indications and contraindications of vaccines, and the recognition and treatment of emergency reactions to vaccines.The licensed pharmacist and licensed or registered pharmacy intern must have a current certificate in basic cardiopulmonary resuscitation.The licensed pharmacist must complete a minimum of two hours of ACPE-approved, immunization-related continuing pharmacy education during each State licensing period.The licensed pharmacist must comply with recordkeeping and reporting requirements of the jurisdiction in which he or she administers vaccines, including informing the patient’s primary-care provider when available, submitting the required immunization information to the State or local immunization information system (vaccine registry), complying with requirements with respect to reporting adverse events, and complying with requirements whereby the person administering a vaccine must review the vaccine registry or other vaccination records prior to administering a vaccine.The licensed pharmacist must inform his or her childhood-vaccination patients and the adult caregivers accompanying the children of the importance of a well-child visit with a pediatrician or other licensed primary care provider and refer patients as appropriate. The above requirements are consistent with many States that already permit licensed pharmacists to order and administer vaccines to children.A May 2020 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) report found a troubling drop in routine childhood immunizations as a result of families staying at home. While families followed public health warnings about going out, an unfortunate result was many missed routine vaccinations. This decrease in childhood-vaccination rates is a public health threat and a collateral harm caused by the COVID-19 pandemic… August 19, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Reacts to Supreme Court Setting Oral Arguments in Affordable Care Act Repeal Case”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today issued the following statement in response to the announcement that the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) case on November 10, 2020:“Why President Trump and 18 states have decided to go all the way to the Supreme Court to rip away the Affordable Care Act at a time when our nation is suffering the worst pandemic we’ve seen in more than a century makes no sense,” said Attorney General Becerra. “We will be at the Supreme Court to lead the argument to save affordable healthcare, and with it, the lives of countless loved ones. We won’t rest until we stop this harmful attack and every American has access to quality, affordable care.”California Attorney General Becerra has led a coalition of 20 states, plus D.C., to protect the Affordable Care Act in federal court for more than two and a half years. Most recently in July, the coalition filed a reply brief defending the ACA against efforts by the Trump Administration and 18 anti-ACA states led by Texas to repeal the entire ACA. The Attorney General was joined by the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota (by and through its Department of Commerce), Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia, as well as the Governor of Kentucky… August 19, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “One Year After Being Forced Out of Title X, Planned Parenthood Continues to Fight for Patients”. From the press release: Today marks the one-year anniversary of the Trump administration forcing Planned Parenthood grantees out of the Title X program — the nation’s only federal program dedicated to providing affordable birth control and other reproductive health care to people with low incomes. The Trump administration’s abhorrent and unethical domestic gag rule undermined reproductive health care for millions of people across the country, by demanding health care providers in the program withhold information about abortion from their patients. It also imposed cost-prohibitive and unnecessary “physical separation” restrictions on health centers that also separately provide abortion.Prior to the implementation of the gag rule, Planned Parenthood health centers served about 40% of the 4 million patients who got care through the Title X program each year. The majority of Title X patients identified as people of color, Hispanic, or Latino. In many communities, Planned Parenthood is the only source of reproductive health care. Barring patients from seeking care at Planned Parenthood health centers has left many with nowhere else to go — community health centers themselves said they couldn’t fill the gap. Recent data from the Guttmacher Institute highlights how the gag rule has reduced the Title X family planning system’s capacity to provide contraceptive services by at least 46% — drastically reducing care at the same time the country is facing a global pandemic. The vast majority of people oppose this cruel rule……Last week, the Blueprint for Sexual and Reproductive Health, Rights, and Justice released First Priorities, a detailed punch list of executive and agency actions for the opening days of an incoming administration. Among other urgent actions named in the First Priorities, the broad coalition called for initiating the process of rescinding the domestic gag rule within 45 days. August 24, 2020: SCOTUSBlog tweeted: “New: Supreme Court expands the oral argument in the constitutional challenge to the Affordable Care Act. Each side will get 40 minutes instead of the usual 30. The argument is scheduled for Nov. 10 (one week after Election Day).” The tweet included a link to a “Orders in Pending Cases” list with the Affordable Care Act case at the top. August 24, 2020: SCOTUSBlog also tweeted: “The court also denies a request from Ohio and Montana to participate in the ACA oral argument. Those states are pushing a middle-ground position in the case. They say the zeroed-out individual mandate is unconstitutional, but they believe the rest of the ACA should remain intact.” August 26, 2020: Senator Cory Booker (Democrat – New Jersey) posted a press release titled: “Booker, Menendez Announce $5M to Bolster Community Health Centers”. From the press release: U.S. Senators Bob Menendez and Cory Booker today announced $5,319,625 in annual federal funding from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to support the operations of Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) across New Jersey and their continued response to the COVID-19 public health crisis.“FQHCs are often the first place families and seniors across the state go to when they need affordable and high quality health care,” said Sen. Menendez. “Community health centers have been on the frontlines of the pandemic since the very beginning and they continue to play a critical role in the state’s response and recovery. This funding will ensure they continue to serve the residents of New Jersey and have the personal protective equipment and medical supplies they need to keep their patients and health care providers safe and healthy.”“New Jersey health centers have been essential in the fight against COVID-19 by providing critical care to those who need it most,” said Sen. Booker. “This federal funding will help ensure our community health centers can continue to provide critical health care services to some of our most underserved communities in order to protect the health and safety of all New Jerseyans.”In New Jersey, there are 24 Community Health Centers that operate 137 satellite sites, providing preventive and primary health care services to over a half-million New Jersey residents.Sen. Menendez authored a provision of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that requires private insurance plans on the exchange to fully reimburse FQHCs at no less than the same rate as Medicaid in order to ensure the economic vitality of community health centers and properly recognize them for the valuable role they play in the American healthcare system…. Visit the press release to see a list of which Community Health Centers will recieve funding. August 26, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Praises Court Decision Allowing Transgender Students to Use Bathrooms in Line with Their Gender Identity.” From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today praised a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Gavin Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board, issued this morning, that found that a local school board in Gloucester County, VA violated the constitutional rights of a transgender boy by not allowing him to use the common male restroom at his high school when he was a student. The Office of the Attorney General previously led multiple amicus briefs on this matter in various courts, the most recent being led by Attorney General James in November of 2019.“The court today has upheld what we all already knew: That trans rights are human rights, and human rights are trans rights,” said Attorney General James. “No individual should ever fear discrimination for proudly being their true self, especially when at school. Every individual deserves equal protection under the law, which is why we will continue to lead the fight to ensure no transgender individual or any member of the LGBTQ+ community is discriminated against.”Grimm not only sued to challenge the Gloucester County School Board’s policy of banning him from using the common male restrooms at his high school, but also the board’s refusal to update his educational records to correspond with his updated birth certificate that reflects his male gender.The case has made its way through multiple courts, including all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court before being sent back down to the lower courts. The Fourth Circuit today held that the Gloucester County School Board violated both the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 by not allowing Grimm to use the restroom in line with his gender identity.This is the second case this month in which Attorney General James has fought for transgender rights. On August 7, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled in favor of a transgender student named Drew Adams, who sued the St. Johns County School Board in Florida for discrimination for its policy prohibiting transgender boys and girls from using restrooms that were in line with their gender identities. In March 2019, Attorney General James also led a coalition of attorneys general in filing an amicus brief supporting Adams and opposing the St. Johns’ School Board. Nearly 1.5 million people in the United States — including approximately 150,000 teenagers — currently identify as transgender. August 27, 2020: New Times SLO posted an article titled: “Hospital antitrust bill passes through committees”. It was written by Peter Johnson. From the article: A state bill that would strengthen the Attorney General’s oversight of for-profit hospital mergers and acquisitions cleared the Assembly’s health and appropriation committees this summer and awaits a final vote on the Assembly and Senate floors. Those votes are expected to take place before the end of the Legislative session on Sept. 1.Senate Bill 977, introduced by Sen. Bill Monning (D-Carmel) earlier this year, would give the Attorney General’s Office the power to review private hospital deals and reject them if they’re found to hurt consumers and/or cause anticompetitive impacts.“The data cannot be clearer: Concentrated health care markets immediately result in higher costs in insurance premiums, and hospital and physician services. Patient access to providers and affordable care is more critical than ever,” Monning said in a statement.Health watchdogs who support the bill say that unfettered hospital consolidation has allowed the cost of health care to go up, while the bill’s opponents, which include hospitals’ and doctors’ associations, say it would hamstring hospitals already struggling with COVID-19.If made law, SB 977 would also carve out new enforcement mechanisms against anticompetitive hospital behavior, and would establish a Health Policy Advisory Board to analyze California health care markets… August 28, 2020: American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and others posted a letter they sent to U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Secretary Alex Azar. From the letter: …On behalf of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and 44 chapters of the AAP -non-profit organizations representing tens of thousands of pediatricians dedicated to the health, safety, and well-being of all children – we write today alarmed and concerned by the US Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) decision to allow pharmacists to provide immunizations to children ages 3 – 18 regardless of state laws. Specifically, HHS recently announced that state-licensed pharmacists and pharmacy interns can administer all Advisory Committe on Immunization Practice (ACIP)-recommended immunizations to children and adolescents. This announcment threatens the medical home, depriving children and families of much needed medical care and clinical guidance, and further exacerbates inequalities in the delivery of childhood immunizations.We do not need an alternative vaccine delivery infrastructure in this country. Instead, we must invest in the existing one, which is centered around the pediatric medical home.During this pandemic, families are looking for reassurance and clinical guidance from the doctors they trust most to care for their children: pediatricians. The pediatric medical home is where children’s medical needs are best met; pediatricians assess children’s developmental and mental health, counseling about nutrition and injury-prevention, and chronic disease management in addition to administering vaccines. The pediatric medical home also provides a greater opportunity for parents who may have questions about vaccines to discuss these issues with their pediatrician. AAP and its chapters advocate that immunizations be provided in this context of treating the whole child. The safest place for children to get vaccinated is their medical home.Pediatric practices are safe, open, and stocked with vaccines, ready to deliver all needed preventative care to our nation’s children. We have taken counteless steps to encourage children and families to return to pediatric practices for both recommended well-child visits and ACIP-recommended immunizations because children need both. Moreover, pediatric practices have worked to ensure that care during the pandemic is provided safely, from offering famlies different sick/well visit times to administering vaccinations in the parking lot, and many other practice modifications.The August 19 HHS announcement allowing pharmacists to provide childhood immunizations does nothing to encourage all needed preventative care in the medical home and may in fact deter it. Diseases that go undiagnosed, developmental delays not screened for, child abuse and neglect not identified, and mental health issues not addressed will cost the health of our children and our nation dearly.Moreover, it will only further exacerbate health inequities children have faced during this pandemic. Few pharmacies participate in the Vaccines for Children (VFC) program, a federal program that provides vaccines at no cost to children who are Medicaid-eligible, uninsured, underinsured, or American Indian or Alaska Native. Data show that the VCF program has increased vaccination rates across all races, ethnicities, and income groups, and reduced racial and ethnic disparities. Now is not the time to further excerbate existing disparities by creating an alternative vaccine delivery system.For all of these reasons, we encourage HHS to rescind its August 19 decision and stand ready to work with you to bolster the existing pediatric immunization delivery system: our nation’s pediatric practices. Here are the organizations that were part of this letter: American Academy of PediatricsAlabama Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsArizona Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsArkansas Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsCalifornia Chapter 1,American Academy of PediatricsAmerican Academy of Pediatrics,Colorado Chapter Connecticut Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsDelaware Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsDistrict of Columbia Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsFlorida Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsGeorgia Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsAmerican Academy of Pediatrics, Hawaii ChapterIllinois Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsIndiana Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsIowa Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsKansas Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsLouisiana Chapter, American Academy of PediatricsMaine Chapter, American Academy of Pediatrics Maryland Chapter,American Academy of PediatricsMichigan Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsMississippi Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsMissouri Chapter,American Academy of PediatricsMontana Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsNevada Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsNew Hampshire Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsNew Jersey Chapter,American Academy of PediatricsNew Mexico Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsNew York Chapter 1 of the American Academy of PediatricsNew York Chapter 2 of the American Academy of PediatricsNew York Chapter 3 of the American Academy of PediatricsNorth Carolina Pediatric Society, the North Carolina Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsNorth Dakota Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsOhio Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsOklahoma Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsPennsylvania Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsPuerto Rico Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsAmerican Academy of Pediatrics, Rhode Island Chapter South Carolina Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsSouth Dakota Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsTennessee Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsTexas Pediatric Society, the Texas Chapter of the AAPAmerican Academy of Pediatrics, Utah ChapterAmerican Academy of Pediatrics,Vermont Chapter Virginia Chapter of the American Academy of PediatricsWest Virginia Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics August 29, 2020: The New York Times posted an article titled: “Trump Program to Cover Uninsured Covid-19 Patients Falls Short of Promise”. It was written by Abby Goodnough. From the article: …Ms. Cortez’s care is supposed to be covered under a program Mr. Trump announced this spring as the coronavirus pandemic was taking hold — a time when millions of people were losing their health insurance and the administration was doubling down on trying to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, the law that had expanded coverage to more than 20 million people.“This should alleviate any concern uninsured Americans may have about seeking the coronavirus treatment,” Mr. Trump said in April about the program, which is supposed to cover testing and treatment for uninsured people with Covid-19, using money from the federal coronavirus relief package passed by Congress.The program has drawn little attention since, but a review by The New York Times of payments made through it, as well as interviews with hospital executives, patients and health policy researchers who have examined the payments, suggest the quickly concocted plan has not lived up to its promise. It has caused confusion at participating hospitals, which in some cases have mistakenly billed patients like Ms. Cortez who should be covered by it. Few patients seem to know the program exists, so they don’t question the charges. And some hospitals and other medical providers have chosen not to participate in the program, which bars them from seeking any payment from patients whose bills they submit to it.Large numbers of patients have also been disqualified because Covid-19 has to be the primary diagnosis for a case to be covered (unless the patient is pregnant). Since hospitalized Covid patients often have other serious medical conditions, many have other primary diagnoses. At Jackson Health in Miami, for example, only 60 percent of uninsured Covid-19 patients had decisively met the requirements to have their charges covered under the program as of late July, a spokeswoman said……The program has clearly paid what, in many cases, would be staggering and unaffordable bills for thousands of Covid-19 patients. In addition to hospital care, it covers outpatient visits, ambulance rides, medical equipment, skilled nursing home care and even future Covid vaccines for the uninsured, “subject to available funding.” It does not cover prescriptions once patients leave the hospital, or treatment of underlying chronic conditions that make many more vulnerable to the virus……Nationally, the total average charge for uninsured Covid- patients requiring a hospital stay is $73,300, according to FAIR Health, a health care cost database, although they may be able to negotiate a lower amount……Unlike previous administrations during public health emergencies, Mr. Trump’s has not encouraged even temporary expansions of Medicaid — except for limited Covid testing — in states where the program covers few poor adults. It also declined to broadly reopen enrollment for Affordable Care Act plans once the pandemic began, although people who lose job-based coverage can enroll……Ms. Cortez still needs an oxygen tank, blood thinners and other medications that cost more than $500 a month. She also needs to start seeing a cardiologist because of all the blood clots she developed during her illness. Oxygen and outpatient visits related to Covid are supposed to be covered by the federal program, but nobody has told her that.If Ms. Cortez lived in a different state, all her expenses would likely have been covered by Medicaid. But, like several million poor Americans, she is in the so-called coverage gap: ineligible for Medicaid because Texas is among a handful of states that have resisted expanding the program under the Affordable Care Act. And because of a glitch with the law, she and others are also ineligible for the subsidies that the law provides to help pay for private insurance… August 26, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Trump Administration Asks SCOTUS to Reinstate Medically Unnecessary Barries to Medication Abortion During Pandemic”. From the press release: Today, the Trump Administration asked the Supreme Court to reinstate a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) policy that unnecessarily subjects patients to COVID-19 risks in order to access safe and legal medication abortion during the pandemic. The FDA’s Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) restrictions on mifepristone mandate that patients pick up mifepristone directly from a doctor’s office, hospital, or other health center — rather than from a pharmacy or mail as they could for other equally safe medications.Mifepristone is safe, effective, and has been used by more than four million people since the FDA approved it twenty years ago. Research has repeatedly shown that mifepristone is safe and effective when prescribed through telehealth and self-administered at home. Since July, the medically unnecessary REMS requirements have been temporarily suspended by a preliminary injunction in a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on behalf of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective, and other leading medical organizations and reproductive health, rights, and justice advocates… August 31, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Tennessee’s Medically Unsound ‘Abortion Reversal’ Law Challenged in Court”. From the press release: Abortion providers in Tennessee filed a lawsuit today challenging a requirement that forces doctors to provide false and misleading information to their patients about the potential to “reverse” a medication abortion — an unproven and politically-motivated claim that has no basis in medical research. The groups are asking a federal court to block the law before it takes effect on October 1, 2020. By forcing doctors to lie to patients and share misinformation that isn’t backed up by credible science, politicians are eroding the trust between patients and their providers. If this law goes into effect, providers will be forced to share this misinformation with patients at least 48 hours in advance of providing a medication abortion and again after the patient has taken the first medication, as well as post signs with large, bold print throughout their clinics informing patients about abortion “reversal.” Providers who don’t comply will face criminal prosecution for a Class E felony, punishable by up to six years in prison. Facilities will face a $10,000 fine per day for failure to display the required signs.Since 2015, politicians across the country have passed similar laws trying to force providers to promote the medically inaccurate idea that a medication abortion can be “reversed” — a debunked claim based on junk science peddled by anti-abortion researchers. Last year, courts blocked similar laws in North Dakota and Oklahoma. No one benefits from forcing providers to share misinformation with patients, who rely on their providers to help them make informed medical decisions. The lawsuit is being brought by Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi, Knoxville Center for Reproductive Health, Memphis Center for Reproductive Health (“CHOICES”), and carafem — represented by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and the ACLU of Tennessee. If the court does not intervene, the law is set to take effect on October 1……These “reversal” laws are opposed by medical experts, including the American Medical Association (AMA) and the American College for Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). In fact, the AMA is a party to the lawsuit in North Dakota challenging a similar “reversal” law.Just four months ago, Gov. Lee attempted to exploit the COVID-19 pandemic to ban abortion, despite opposition from leading national medical groups. In April, that attempt was blocked in court after a lawsuit was filed by the same organizations litigating today’s case.Tennessee has numerous additional abortion restrictions on the books, including a ban on the use of telehealth for medication abortion; a mandatory 48-hour waiting period (which includes a requirement that forces patients to delay care by adding a medically unnecessary trip to the clinic to receive state-mandated information); limits on when private and public insurance can cover abortion services; and a requirement that minors obtain parental consent. A copy of the complaint can be found here. September September 1, 2020: American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) posted a press release titled: “A Tennessee Law Requires Doctors to Lie to Their Patients. We’re Suing”. From the press release: It’s a pretty basic premise: When we go to the doctor, we expect that they will tell us the truth. It shouldn’t be controversial to expect the information you receive from a medical professional to be accurate and based in science.But if you’re looking for abortion care in Tennessee, politicians are doing everything they can to ensure that’s no longer the case. Together with the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood, the ACLU of Tennessee, and five abortion providers in the state, we sued to challenge a law that requires doctors to lie to their patients.The law, signed by Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee last month, coerces the speech of abortion providers and mandates that they lie to their patients. Under the law, physicians are required to tell their patients that if they have a medication abortion, it can be “reversed.” Doctors then have to refer their patients to a governmental website encouraging them to partake in experimental treatments that run counter to their patients’ best interest, all in violation of their ethical obligation as medical providers.To be clear: There is absolutely no medical basis for this law.The claim that medication abortion can be “reversed” is wholly unsupported by reliable scientific evidence. Leading medical organizations including the American Medical Association have condemned it, saying such laws “undermines relationship…with messages that contradict reality and science.” The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has said that there is “no evidence” to support the reversal claim. Still, anti-abortion politicians continue to push ahead.This law is also plainly unconstitutional. It is a clear violation of the First Amendment for the state to force doctors to personally deliver a government-ordered message that they and the overwhelming majority of the medical profession reject. It’s a direct violation of patients’ privacy rights under the 14th Amendment to be subjected to misleading and inaccurate statements about the constitutionally protected medical care they seek. And, it is a violation of the constitutionally mandated guarantee of equal protection under the 14th Amendment for Tennessee to single out medication abortion providers and patients for state-mandated inaccurate disclosures that aren’t imposed in any other health care context.And this infuriating treatment isn’t limited to Tennessee. Just last year, North Dakota and Oklahoma passed bills requiring doctors to tell this lie about medication abortion, both of which have been blocked by courts. During the course of that litigation, medical professionals emphasized that the laws forced them to deliver false information to patients in violation of their ethical obligations.Disturbingly, these “reversal” laws are just one example of “biased counseling” requirements that states have passed in recent years to control and distort the information abortion patients get from their medical providers by inserting anti-abortion talking points into physicians’ mouths.In four states, doctors have to tell their patients that abortion increases the risk of breast cancer, even though that is factually wrong. Eight states insist that physicians include “negative emotional response” among the lists of risks associated with the procedure, even though mainstream medical associations have uniformly determined that this is false. Four states require doctors to lie to their patients about the risk having an abortion could have on their future fertility.The intent of all these laws is clear: to shame, humiliate, and deceive people who have decided to have an abortion. The laws are designed to make the process so laborious and so confusing that some patients give up and abandon their constitutional right to abortion altogether.One Kentucky doctor described the scene when she performed a state-mandated ultrasound in which she was forced by the government to narrate the specifics of the scan and show her patient the screen, even over the patients’ objection:“We have had patients burst into tears when we tell them that they must undergo an unwanted narrated ultrasound and that they must close their eyes and cover their ears if they want to avoid the speech Kentucky politicians insist we force upon them. I’ve had patients sob through the experience, and others pull their shirts up over their faces to cover their eyes.” The stakes could not be higher. If Tennessee’s law is allowed to take effect, it would damage the trust at the heart of the physician-patient relationship, mislead patients when they are making important medical decisions, and expose patients to a scientifically unsupported and potentially harmful medical practice. Four clinics in Tennessee and an independent provider joined our lawsuit to fight back, because the doctors aren’t taking this sitting down.And neither is the ACLU. We’ve said it before, and we’ll say it again: abortion is health care, and it is a right. And we will never stop fighting to protect it. September 2, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Condemns U.S. Senators Joni Ernst and Kelly Loeffler for Joining Effort to Ban Medication Abortion Amid Pandemic”. From the press release: Yesterday Sens. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) and Kelly Loeffler (R-Georgia) joined 18 other anti-choice, anti-freedom Republican senators in a letter asking the FDA to ban mifepristone, which is used in medication abortion care.Both Ernst and Loeffler have a track record of using health disinformation to manipulate voters and attack reproductive freedom. Mifepristone is an FDA-approved medication used for ending an early pregnancy that has been approved in the United States for 20 years. Medication abortion accounts for nearly 40% of abortion care in the United States.Earlier this week — amid reports that Iowa officially has the worst COVID-19 rates in the nation — Sen. Ernst amplified a radical conspiracy theory questioning the COVID-19 death toll, downplaying the number of lives lost and dangerously calling into question the motives of healthcare providers. Medical experts have repeatedly confirmed the COVID-19 toll has not been inflated, and evidence suggests the actual number of cases far exceeds current tallies.In response to news of Sens. Loeffler and Ernst signing onto the letter, NARAL Pro-Choice America National Communications Director Kristin Ford released the following statement:“This letter is nothing more than a politically motivated attempt to ban abortion, and has absolutely no basis in science and medicine. In the midst of a public health crisis, our leaders should be working to expand, not restrict, access to essential care that women need. Patients’ health and safety must always come first. We cannot stand by as Ernst, Loeffler, and their fellow anti-choice, anti-freedom senators continue to prioritize their dangerous agenda above our collective health and well-being. Now more than ever, medical care should be determined by science and patients’ needs—not extremist ideology.” Just last week, a new Public Policy Polling survey found that a large majority (70%) of Iowa voters believe that abortion should be legal, and that the government should not prevent a woman from making that decision for herself. Just 14% say they would only consider voting for a candidate who supports banning abortion in the November election.A 2019 Public Policy Polling survey of Georgia swing House districts also found that a majority (69%) of voters across parties — including 86% of Democrats, 69% of independents, and 52% of Republicans — believe abortion should be legal and that the government should not prevent a woman from making the decision whether or not to have an abortion for herself. September 3, 2020: Representative Ayanna Pressley (Democrat – Massachusetts) posted a press release titled: “Pressley, Warren, Lee Introduce Legislation to Confront the Public Health Impacts of Structural Racism”. From the press release: Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07), Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Congresswoman Barbara Lee (CA-13) today announced their bicameral bill to confront the public health impacts of structural racism through two bold new programs within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).“For far too long, our federal government has failed to recognize and address the structural racism that has devastated Black and brown communities and denied access to quality health care,” said Congresswoman Pressley. “With the COVID-19 pandemic unveiling and exacerbating racial disparities in health outcomes, it is time we recognize and treat structural racism and police brutality as the public health crises that they are. This first-of-its-kind bill would expand federal research and investment into the public health impacts of structural racism, require the federal government to proactively develop anti-racist health policy, and take a public health approach to combatting police violence. We must have a coordinated public health response to structural racism, and this bill would do just that.”“It is time we start treating structural racism like we would treat any other public health problem or disease: investing in research into its symptoms and causes and finding ways to mitigate its effects,” said Senator Warren. “My bill with Representatives Lee and Pressley is a first step to create anti-racist federal health policy that studies and addresses disparities in health outcomes at their roots.”“COVID-19 has exposed the injustices in health outcomes for Black and Brown people, and it’s no coincidence,” said Rep. Barbara Lee. “In addition to addressing the lasting impacts of systemic racism in criminal justice, economic inequality and the like, we must also commit resources to understanding racially unjust health outcomes. I’m taking steps, alongside Congresswoman Pressley and Senator Warren, toward reversing racism in our health care system with this legislation.”The COVID-19 pandemic has made it impossible to ignore how centuries of structural racism have created deep disparities in health outcomes for Black and Brown communities: Black and Brown people are nearly three times more likely than white people to contract COVID-19 and one to two times more likely to die from the disease. People of color are also disproportionately affected by chronic health conditions such as diabetes, asthma, hepatitis, and hypertension; infant mortality; maternal mortality and morbidity; and police brutality — and also less likely to be insured and have access to health care providers.The federal government’s failure to adequately collect race and ethnicity data on COVID-19 testing, hospitalization, and deaths has also demonstrated why comprehensive research is needed to study the health impacts of structural racism and to develop race-conscious public health approaches and reverse disparities that have plagued our nation for too long.To help expand research and investment into the public health impacts of structural racism, as well as to require the federal government to begin actively developing anti-racist health policy, Congresswoman Pressley, Senator Warren, and Congresswoman Lee have introduced the Anti-Racism in Public Health Act, which would: Create a “National Center for Anti-Racism” at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to declare racism as the public health crisis that it is and further develop the research base and knowledge in the science and practice of anti-racism. The Center would undertake such activities as: Conducting research, collecting data, awarding grants, and providing leadership and coordination on the science and practice of anti-racism in the provision of health care, the public health impacts of systemic racism, and the effectiveness of interventions to address these impacts.Creating at least three regional centers of excellence in anti-racism.Educating the public on the public health impacts of structural racism and anti-racist public health interventions.Consulting with other Centers at the CDC to ensure that scientific and programmatic activities initiated by the agency consider structural racism in their designs, conceptualizations, and executions.Create a Law Enforcement Violence Prevention Program within the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the CDC. Physical and psychological violence perpetuated by law enforcement results in deaths, injuries, trauma, and stress, and disproportionately affects marginalized populations. This bill would take a public health approach to combating police brutality and violence by creating a dedicated law enforcement violence prevention program at the CDC. The bill is endorsed by the following organizations: Center for Policing Equity; Center for Popular Democracy; Center for Reproductive Rights; Center for the Study of Racism, Social Justice & Health at UCLA; Hispanic Federation; The Justice Collaborative; Justice in Aging; The Lawyer’s Committee; The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights; National Medical Association; National Partnership for Women & Families; NAACP; National Urban League; Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP); PolicyLink; Poverty & Race Research Action Council (PRRAC); Public Citizen; Social Security Works; UCLA’s COVID-19 Task Force on Racism and Equity; UnidosUS; Union for Reform Judaism; We Must Count Coalition…. September 3, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “New Ads Expose Anti-Choice Politicians’ “Pro-Life” Hypocrisy”. From the press release: Today Vice President Mike Pence and Republican Senator Thom Tillis will tour a fake women’s health center in Raleigh, North Carolina as part of a larger campaign tour Pence is headlining with anti-choice extremist organization Susan B. Anthony List. On the same day, NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation released a five-figure digital ad buy in North Carolina exposing anti-choice politicians like Vice President Pence and Sen. Tillis who claim to value the “sanctity of life” but expose the depths of their hypocrisy by blatantly ignoring a public health emergency in the name of advancing their unpopular and radical anti-choice agenda.NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement in response:“Mike Pence and Trump-cheerleader Senator Thom Tillis are putting their hypocrisy and recklessness on full display in Raleigh today. In the midst of an ongoing public health crisis, Pence and Tillis are sending a simple message to North Carolinians and Americans across the country: that their extremist ideology takes precedence over science, medical expertise, and people’s health and safety. As countless Americans suffer as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and Republican leaders’ botched handling of the crisis, these politicians’ blatant ‘pro-life’ hypocrisy is truly something to behold.”As reported in CNN, the fake women’s health center they plan to visit openly promotes medical disinformation about abortion on its website, including the false claim that abortion causes breast cancer– a claim that has been debunked by medical experts such as the American Cancer Society and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG.)These fake clinics (often referred to as “crisis pregnancy centers”) masquerade as legitimate reproductive healthcare centers yet are actually just anti-choice organizations that intentionally lie to, shame, and mislead women seeking an abortion in order to block them from accessing abortion care. They frequently push health disinformation to dissuade women from having an abortion, and have been repeatedly denounced by experts such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.Vice President Pence and Sen. Thom Tillis’ unrelenting attempts to advance their extreme anti-choice ideology while turning a blind eye to health, safety, and science is wildly unpopular in North Carolina and across the country. NARAL released new polling from battleground states illustrating that an overwhelming number of North Carolinians and Americans support reproductive freedom, and spotlighting how out-of-touch Trump, Pence, and Tillis are with voters. The poll shows that: A large majority (80%) of voters in North Carolina agree that any decision about pregnancy should be made by the woman with the support of the people she loves and trusts — including 83% of independent voters and 63% of Republicans. Among Black voters, 96% agree.Even a majority of voters who supported Trump in 2016 support reproductive freedom: 65% agree that decisions about pregnancy should be made by the woman with the support of people she loves and trusts.Just 11% of voters in North Carolina say they would only consider voting for a candidate who supports banning abortion in the November election. September 3, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “North Carolina Abortion Providers And Reproductive Justice Activists File Sweeping Litigation Challenging Multiple Abortion Restrictions”. From the press release: Abortion providers in North Carolina and SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective today filed litigation challenging several medically unnecessary abortion restrictions that have pushed abortion out of reach in the state and stigmatized essential health care. Decades of attacks on reproductive rights and health care access by state legislators have already led to provider shortages and an inadequate public health infrastructure in the state, with the COVID-19 pandemic only exacerbating these issues. The discriminatory policies violate civil and reproductive rights, and disproportionately impact North Carolina’s communities of color, particularly Black communities, as well as rural communities. The restrictions being challenged include: A licensing scheme that arbitrarily singles out abortion providers with medically unnecessary and onerous requirements A ban on qualified advanced practice clinicians (APCs), such as physician assistants, certified nurse-midwives, and nurse practitioners, from providing abortions A ban on the use of telehealth for medication abortionA requirement that providers deliver state-mandated biased counseling with no medical benefit to their patients A mandatory delay for patients seeking an abortion of at least 72 hours after they receive state-mandated information. Access to abortion is limited in North Carolina as a result of decades of political attacks that reached a fever pitch under former Governor Pat McCrory. During the McCrory-Forest administration, 11 abortion facilities were shut down, leaving 91 percent of North Carolina counties without an abortion provider and disproportionately hurting rural communities. And politicians showed they’d stop at nothing to chip away at abortion access even further. Then-Speaker of the House Thom Tillis infamously added numerous abortion restrictions into a motorcycle safety bill as a backdoor attempt to quietly erode reproductive rights on the final day of the 2013 legislative session. The plaintiffs in the case are Planned Parenthood South Atlantic; SisterSong; A Woman’s Choice of Charlotte, Inc.; A Woman’s Choice of Greensboro, Inc.; A Woman’s Choice of Raleigh, Inc; three doctors; and one advanced practice clinician. They are represented by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the ACLU of North Carolina, and the Center for Reproductive Rights. September 4, 2020: AJC posted an article titled: “Kemp’s plan to block the federal ACA insurance exchange under fire”. It was written by Ariel Hart. From the article: Gov. Brian Kemp wants to block Georgians’ access to the Affordable Care Act health insurance exchange, instead directing them to buy insurance on the private market where he says they will have more options. Advocacy groups, though, contend the move could result in perhaps 60,000 people going without health insurance, while others may wind up with policies that won’t cover health needs.By contrast, on the federal exchange healthcare.gov, the only plans available are those that meet ACA standards for covering pre-existing conditions and “essential health benefits” such as psychiatric care, noted the Brookings Institution, which along with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities this week issued an analysis of Kemp’s plan.Kemp’s office disputed those findings……Georgia currently has nearly the highest rate of uninsured people of any state, tied with Oklahoma for second-worst, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.About 460,000 Georgians have signed up for insurance plans under the Affordable Care Act, most of them through the federal exchange. The healthcare.gov website allows people to shop and compare insurance plans, knowing the price they’ll actually be charged after federal subsidies are added for their income level. All the insurance plans available to them and the final premiums for each are presented at once so shoppers can compare.Kemp’s proposal asks the federal government to waive the ACA requirement that Georgia participate in that website or create its own exchange website. Instead, Georgians would be diverted to contact information for private insurance agents and brokers, health insurance carriers and online broker websites that offer plans.Kemp’s proposal contends that the change would give Georgians a wider range of health insurance choices. Those who don’t want robust insurance plans could buy skimpier plans. They wouldn’t get subsidized, but with low enough coverage the plans might be cheaper even so. The Kemp administration estimates that the plan would add 25,000 Georgians to the insured rolls.The problem with that logic, the critics say, is that people already have access to those options. They can even find private brokers and agents by going on healthcare.gov and searching for their zip code. If they can’t go to healthcare.gov at all, the critics say, some people may instead give up on health insurance.And those that ended up signing up themselves or their children for Medicaid through healthcare.gov may well not have that option with an insurance agent. Brookings says 38,000 Georgians signed up for Medicaid on healthcare.gov on their own last year……Psychiatric coverage is a particular concern to critics. The advocacy group Georgians for a Healthy Future, which supports the exchange, said the plan leaves those with mental or behavioral health issues “exposed and in danger” at a time when the pandemic and opioid abuse are increasing the need for coverage… September 4, 2020: San Francisco Chronicle posted an article titled: “California bill would enhance the role of nurse-midwives”. It was written by Bill Dodd (Democrat – California). From the article: In California, nurse-midwives really deliver — to the tune of 50,000 babies a year. These unsung women’s health practitioners attend 10% of all births, providing mothers in mostly rural and typically poorer communities with excellent maternity care, all while saving millions on medical costs.They fill an important role in a women’s health system struggling to keep up across the state. Despite population increases, the arrival of new obstetrician-gynecologists has remained flat since 1980, worsening “maternity deserts” and health provider shortage areas. Now, at least nine counties have no OB/GYN doctors at all and 19 other counties have five or fewer. A critical shortfall of obstetrical care is projected in less than five years.Fortunately, our state’s cadre of well-trained midwives is ready to step up. A bill I co-wrote with my Los Angeles colleagues, Sen. Holly Mitchell and Assemblymember Autumn Burke, would allow midwives to practice with more independence, freeing them to attend routine cases now requiring the supervision of a sometimes-elusive doctor.Physician supervision requirements currently force nurse-midwives to concentrate in geographic areas where physicians physically practice, thereby reducing access particularly in rural counties and lower income communities. That extra latitude will lead to greater access, especially for Black and Latino women, who are typically underserved and experience higher infant and maternal morbidity and mortality.The promise of greater equity has won Senate Bill 1237 the support of many sponsors including the Black Women for Wellness Action Project, the California Nurse-Midwives Association, NARAL Pro-Choice California, United Nurses Association of California and The Women’s Foundation of California, Women’s Policy Institute. It has been approved by both houses of the Legislature with overwhelming, bipartisan support.What’s clear is that states promoting and integrating midwives into their systems greatly improve women’s health, in part by cutting down on cesarean deliveries, preterm babies and underweight births. By one estimate, Black women are three to four times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes than white women, and Black babies are four times more likely to die before their first birthday. That disparity is unacceptable, and greater access to midwives can help correct it.Consistent with what 46 other states have already done, this bill will remove the “physician permission to practice” law for nurse-midwives. We need to increase access to care for expecting mothers and babies and create a collaborative model of care for certified nurse-midwifery in California. There is a direct link among race, access and maternity outcomes in minority communities. Improving access to nurse-midwifery care has been named by leading organizations, such as the March of Dimes and the World Health Organization, as one of the most important strategies in improving health outcomes and reducing racial disparities… September 8, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Continues Fight to Maintain Access to Reproductive Health Care at Supreme Court”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today led a multistate coalition of 23 attorneys general in supporting legal action against the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for attempting to increase the risk that women nationwide will contract the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as they seek abortions in their state. In an amicus brief filed in support of the plaintiffs in FDA et al. v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists et al. in the U.S. Supreme Court, Attorney General James leads the coalition in encouraging the court to reject a request from the Trump Administration to halt a preliminary injunction issued by a district court in July and thereby reinstate an FDA requirement that forces women to appear in person in a clinical setting to receive a drug known as mifepristone for an early abortion. The coalition has argued in the past — and continues to argue in today’s amicus brief — that the drug should be readily accessible via telehealth and mail delivery, so as to not potentially expose women to COVID-19 by requiring unnecessary travel. “Despite multiple courts ruling, again and again, that women should be able to maintain access to reproductive health care even during the coronavirus pandemic, the Trump Administration is still trying to strip women of their rights and control their bodies,” said Attorney General James. “Telehealth can help provide us with the health care we need in so many instances, including helping women maintain their constitutional right to access an abortion without risking a COVID-19 infection. With so many parts of the country still seeing spikes in coronavirus infections, this technology can keep women safe and healthy while protecting their reproductive rights. We won’t allow the Trump Administration to take us backwards, which is why we are fighting this in the Supreme Court.”Since the widespread onset of COVID-19 across the United States in March, more than 6.3 million Americans have contracted the disease, resulting in more than 189,000 deaths, including more than 440,000 infections in New York and more than 25,000 deaths in the state. In response, legislators, officials, and agencies across the nation have been instituting various emergency measures to slow the spread of the virus by limiting face-to-face contact and reducing in-person social gatherings, such as by closing schools and requiring all nonessential employees to work from home, as limiting interpersonal contact is central to the ability of states to control the spread of the virus.But the FDA’s requirements — temporarily halted by a lower court, and the subject of today’s amicus brief — force patients to appear in person in a clinical setting to receive mifepristone and heighten the risk of contracting and transmitting COVID-19 for everyone involved, including patients and health care providers. Before the pandemic, patients seeking medication abortions represented nearly 40 percent of all abortion patients in the U.S. in 2017. Forcing these women to travel at a time when many states are urging people to limit in-person contacts to curb the spread of COVID-19 is shortsighted — not only putting women across the country and their close contacts in harm’s way, but also harming the public health more generally. Further, the FDA requirements undermine states’ ability to effectively manage the pandemic.In today’s brief, Attorney General James and the coalition specifically argue that reinstating and enforcing the FDA requirements during the current public health crisis will harm patient safety and the public interest in at least two ways: 1) by conditioning access to essential reproductive health care on an increased risk of virus infection and transmission and 2) by undermining the states’ ongoing efforts to manage the crisis through measures limiting unnecessary in-person contacts, such as stay-at-home orders, stay-safe orders, and telehealth. The states have already effectively utilized such measures to control the spread of the virus, and these measures remain necessary to safely reopen communities, allow for essential in-person activities, and maintain health care capacity during the upcoming flu season.Additionally, the coalition argues that many women will need to travel long distances in order to reach a clinic that dispenses mifepristone, especially if they reside in rural and medically underserved locations, therefore increasing the likelihood of coming into contact with an individual who has contracted COVID-19.But by using measures like telehealth to reduce unnecessary person-to-person contacts, states can decrease their infection rate, as necessary, to safely commence reopening even as the pandemic continues. In fact, the coalition argues that telehealth should be used wherever possible — even as phased reopenings of the states occur — because it maximizes the number of capable health care workers providing necessary medical treatment, while protecting health care staff and patients. And in the context of reproductive care, the counseling required prior to a medication abortion is routinely and safely provided through telehealth in order to reduce in-clinic interactions.Another division of HHS and one of the FDA’s sister agencies — the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — has advocated for telehealth, advising health care practitioners to use telemedicine “whenever possible” as “the best way to protect patients and staff from COVID-19.” The coalition goes on to highlight that their states have already taken numerous steps to expand the use of telehealth during the current public health crisis, including the suspension of existing statutes and regulations that limit the use of telehealth in order to allow the delivery of regulated services through telehealth to additional patient populations, including especially vulnerable ones. These suspension orders expand the types of practitioners who can use telehealth, the settings in which it can be provided, the modalities that can be used to deliver telehealth services, and the circumstances under which telehealth can be initiated. Further, many states have also suspended rules that prohibit telehealth in the absence of an existing patient-provider relationship so that patients can receive care from new providers.The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists — a plaintiff in this case — has championed telehealth as an effective substitute for in-clinic dispensing of mifepristone that can improve patient safety and outcomes during the COVID-19 public health crisis. And even before the pandemic, in 2018, the American Medical Association passed a resolution urging the FDA to lift the requirement… September 8, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Files Amicus Brief Opposing FDA’s Attempt to Restrict Safe Access to Abortion Medication During COVID-19 Crisis”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra joined a multistate coalition of attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in support of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), the Council of University Chairs of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the New York State Academy of Family Physicians, Sistersong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective, and Honor MacNaughton, M.D. The multistate coalition joins these healthcare providers in opposing the Trump Administration’s petition to stay a federal district court’s ruling that halted enforcement of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) requirement that Mifepristone, a single-dose oral medication used for early-term abortions, be dispensed in-person. The coalition argues that granting the Administration’s request to stop the district court’s preliminary injunction will be harmful to patients and public health because it will require women to travel to in-person visits with their doctor in order to obtain time-sensitive medication, potentially exposing them to COVID-19. “We are experiencing an unprecedented global pandemic and instead of making care more accessible by taking precautions to reduce the spread of COVID, the Trump Administration continues to push for anti-choice restrictions that put women in harm’s way,” said Attorney General Becerra. “The federal government should be removing barriers that force women to unnecessarily go in-person to obtain safe and legal abortion medication. We will continue to fight President Trump’s attempts to restrict women’s access to safe healthcare options.”In the brief, the attorneys general argue no one will be harmed by the preliminary injunction granted by the district court, but granting the federal government’s petition will cause irreparable harm, including to the states’ public health efforts to reduce COVID-19 transmission by limiting unnecessary in-person contact. The preliminary injunction allows women to have telehealth visits with their healthcare providers before being prescribed Mifepristone. These visits only take place when the healthcare provider determines telehealth to be an appropriate option that is consistent with the standards of care. The patient’s prescription may then be mailed to them under the supervision of a certified provider, allowing women to avoid potential COVID-19 transmission from an unnecessary in-person appointment. If the district court’s preliminary injunction is stayed, the federal government can reinstate restrictive measures in accessing care. These measures include requiring patients to obtain medication from a clinic, medical office, or hospital under the supervision of a healthcare provider if the medication is prescribed for the purpose of terminating a pregnancy. The restrictive measures would be applied even if the healthcare provider believes a telehealth consultation and delivery of the medication by mail or courier would be safe. In contrast, the federal government has approved access to highly controlled substances, like some opioids, by suspending in-person evaluation requirements during the pandemic.Mifepristone has been approved by the FDA since 2000, and remains the only drug approved in the United States for pregnancy termination. Since its approval, about three million women in the United States have used the medication to terminate a pregnancy.On August 5, 2020, Attorney General Becerra joined a multistate amicus brief supporting ACOG’s opposition to the FDA’s motion for stay of the district court ruling halting the federal government’s restrictions imposed on Mifepristone. In June, Attorney General Becerra joined a coalition filing an amicus brief supporting ACOG’s challenge to the FDA’s Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS). In March, Attorney General Becerra led a multistate coalition in sending a letter to the FDA, asking them to remove REMS restrictions or waive enforcement of these requirements in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and nationwide stay-at-home orders. In filing the amicus brief, Attorney General Becerra joins the attorneys general of New York, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the brief is available here. September 9, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL President Responds to Announcement of Trump’s Supreme Court Shortlist”. From the press release: Today, just as damning news breaks that Donald Trump knowingly lied to the American public about his knowledge of the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic, Trump released a new shortlist of potential U.S. Supreme Court nominees to fill a future vacancy. Today’s announcement tracks with Trump’s history of trying to distract and deflect from his countless failures in leadership by throwing a bone to his anti-choice, extremist base. Unsurprisingly, Trump’s list is rife with anti-choice extremists and radical ideologues. In 2016, Trump campaigned on his promise to only nominate judges who will work to overturn Roe v. Wade. He delivered on that promise by nominating Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh to the Court, tipping its balance to an anti-choice, anti-freedom majority and paying back his debt to the ideological extremists he has relied on throughout his presidency and bid for reelection.NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement in response:“Donald Trump’s Supreme Court shortlist paints an alarming picture of his dark vision for the future of this country. Make no mistake, this should terrify anyone invested in the integrity of the Court and in the fundamental rights and freedoms that we hold dear. We know that an intent to gut Roe v. Wade is an explicit litmus test for Trump judicial nominees as the administration seeks to halt progress and advance its broader agenda of power and control. Appointing judges with blatant disregard for the precedent of Roe poses an imminent threat to the future of reproductive freedom in this country. Gaining power over the Court has long been part of the Radical Right’s efforts to enshrine into law their unpopular agenda—which includes eroding reproductive freedom, overturning Roe v. Wade, and decimating access to abortion. This list illustrates the absolute urgency of voting Trump out of office and flipping the Senate to a pro-reproductive freedom majority.”The stakes for our democracy could not be higher heading into the November election. Given the opportunity, Trump and the Radical Right will wreak havoc on every level of the judicial branch. Just as they have done for the last four years, Trump and Republicans will undoubtedly spend the next four years actualizing their long-term goal of stacking the Supreme Court with regressive, ideological extremists who will turn back the clock on progress and undo generations of hard-fought victories. September 10, 2020: Senator Cory Booker posted a press release titled: “Booker and Durbin Introduce Bill to Fund the World Health Organization” From the press release: Today, United States Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Dick Durbin (D-IL) introduced a bill to ensure the United States fulfills its commitments to the World Health Organization. Under the Abiding by U.S. Commitments Act, the United States will continue payments of its dues to the WHO and the other international organizations of which it is a member.In addition to Booker and Durbin, the bill is cosponsored by Senators Leahy (D-VT), Van Hollen (D-MD), Cantwell (D-WA), Gillibrand (D-NY), Hirono (D-HI), Merkley (D-OR), Reed (D-RI), and Feinstein (D-CA).Earlier this year, the White House announced it would begin the process of terminating the United States’ relationship with the World Health Organization, isolating the United States in the midst of a global pandemic and endangering access to up to date information about COVID-19 and other diseases. Last week, the Trump Administration announced it would not join 172 countries in an effort to secure a safe vaccine simply because the World Health Organization was involved. These reckless actions severely undermine the global efforts to secure a vaccine and the U.S’s historic leadership in global health diplomacy. The Trump Administration continues to risk millions of American lives simply to divert attention from its own failures to contain the COVID-19 pandemic.According to recent reports, COVID-19 has killed U.S. citizens at six times the global average rate and has recorded eight times the number of infections of other high-income countries.“COVID-19 is a global pandemic that requires a coordinated global response, but because of the Trump Administration, the United States has not only lost more of our citizens to this virus than our global peers but is almost entirely absent from international efforts to contain and stop the spread of this virus,” said Sen. Booker. “Congress needs to act urgently to ensure that the U.S. keeps its commitments to our international partners like the WHO so a coordinated global response to COVID-19 saves lives both here at home and abroad.”“With the United States leading in the number of COVID-19 infections, we do not have time to play along with the President’s political stunt to withdraw from vital international organizations like the World Health Organization, which is leading a global effort to find and distribute a vaccine for a disease responsible for the death of more than 190,000 Americans,” said Sen. Durbin. “With this legislation, we are taking steps to reaffirm our commitment to our global allies in fighting this virus. After all, while I hope a vaccine is developed here, we don’t want the American people left out if one is developed abroad.”Booker and Durbin’s, Abiding by U.S. Commitments Act of 2020: Expresses a sense of Congress that the U.S. should participate in global efforts to develop a vaccine for COVID-19, including the COVAX facility.Requires the Secretary of State to pay 2020 assessed dues to the International Organizations to which the U.S. belongs.Requires that $118.9M (the United States’ annual assessed and treaty-obligated dues) be made available to the WHO. Today’s bill comes after Booker led a letter with 33 of his Senate colleagues in July urging the President to reverse his decision to withdraw from the World Health Organization. Full text of the bill is available here. September 10, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Seeks to Immediately Halt Trump Administration from Allowing Health Care Discrimination to Move Forward”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today filed a motion for summary judgment in a lawsuit seeking to immediately stop a new Trump Administration rule that makes it easier for health care providers and insurance companies to discriminate against certain vulnerable and protected classes of Americans.“The Trump Administration has tried again, again, and again to repeal, dismantle, and chip away at the many protections in the ACA, but we won’t allow President Trump’s desire to strip Americans of these vital health care protections to undo all the years of progress we’ve made,” said Attorney General James. “The president’s lack of concern for so many different groups as the nation continues to battle the COVID-19 pandemic shows his blatant disregard for the health and well-being of the American people. We’re filing today’s motion to immediately halt and set aside the president’s efforts to rip coverage away from millions, including LGBTQ+ individuals, those who do not speak English, and women. Our coalition will continue to fight and do everything in our power to ensure health care remains a right for every American, and not just a privilege for the rich and powerful.”In July, Attorney General James co-led a coalition of 23 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), HHS Secretary Alex Azar, and the head of HHS’s Office of Civil Rights, Roger Severino, arguing that the new Trump Administration rule emboldens providers and insurers to discriminate against LGBTQ+ individuals, those with limited English proficiency, and women, among others, by stripping away express protections for these groups in HHS regulations that implement the nondiscrimination provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). Section 1557 of the ACA — issued by the Obama Administration in 2016 — prohibits discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, disability, or age by health programs or facilities that receive federal funds, but — despite numerous failed legislative and legal battles to repeal and dismantle the ACA by the Trump Administration — HHS is still trying to undermine many of the protections in this provision.Today’s motion for summary judgment was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.Joining Attorney General James in filing today’s motion for summary judgment are the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia.This matter is being handled by Senior Trial Counsel Joseph Wardenski and Assistant Attorney General Fiona Kaye, both of the Executive Division; Deputy Bureau Chief Elena Goldstein and Assistant Attorney General Travis England, both of the Civil Rights Bureau; and Special Assistant Attorney General Marissa Lieberman-Klein of the Environmental Protection Bureau — all under the supervision of Chief Counsel for Federal Initiatives Matthew Colangelo. Both the Civil Rights Bureau and the Environmental Protection Bureau are part of the Division for Social Justice. The Executive Division and the Division for Social Justice are both overseen by First Deputy Attorney General Jennifer Levy. September 10, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Files Motion to Stop Trump Administration Rule that Would Permit Discrimination in Healthcare”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey, and New York Attorney General Letitia James, leading a coalition of 23 attorneys general, today filed a motion for summary judgment in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York asking that the Trump Administration’s discriminatory rule undermining Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) be vacated and set aside. Section 1557 is the first federal civil rights law to expressly prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, disability, and age in federal health programs. The rule issued by the Administration illegally rolls back these critical protections.“The game-changing power of Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act lies in its simplicity. It guarantees every American the right to be free from discrimination in accessing healthcare under federal programs. There was a time when many of us could not expect that,” said Attorney General Becerra. “Especially during a global pandemic when all of our communities need safe, reliable access to essential care, no American should fear they will be left behind because of their race, color, sex, national origin, disability or age. Yet, the Trump Administration seeks to dismantle Section 1557’s protections. This is 2020, not 1920. We’re taking President Trump to court to prove that this is not 1920.”In the motion for summary judgment, the coalition argues that the rule should be vacated in its entirety because: It is contrary to law, including ACA Section 1557;The States will bear new administrative, regulatory, investigative, enforcement, and healthcare burdens and costs because of it;The removal of the definition of “on the basis of sex” and weakened protections for language assistance services is arbitrary and capricious; andThe rule’s addition of broad religious exemptions for abortion are arbitrary and capricious, contrary to law, and exceed statutory authority. On April 30, 2020, Attorneys General Becerra and Healey led a multistate coalition in filing a comment letter urging the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) not to finalize its proposed regulation which sought to undermine Section 1557’s critical anti-discrimination protections for marginalized populations. In July, the coalition, led by Attorneys General Becerra, Healey and James filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s final rule. Federal judges in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York and the District of Columbia have recently blocked HHS from enforcing portions of the rule in cases filed by private litigants. Attorneys General Becerra, Healey and James are joined by the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the motion is available here. September 13, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Trump’s Latest Prescription Drug Price Sham”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi released the following statement on President Trump’s continued failure to take real action to lower prescription drug prices: “Once again, President Trump is making empty promises instead of taking actual action to lower Americans’ drug prices. In fact, Trump’s rebate rule will increase premiums for American’s seniors and people with disabilities.“Four years of President Trump caving to Big Pharma have culminated in this sham. It is clear that Trump’s promise in the campaign to negotiate drug prices “like crazy” means not negotiate at all.“President Trump’s latest empty announcement is an insult to all the seniors and families who are still waiting for real action to lower their prescription drug costs.“Again, President Trump should stop making a big deal of hollow executive actions that he knows won’t work.” September 14, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Announces $11.8 Million Settlement Against Novartis Pharmaceuticals”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today announced an $11.8 million settlement against Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation (Novartis) related to allegations that the company engaged in a kickback scheme from January 2002 through November 2011 that impacted beneficiaries of Medicare and Medi-Cal. Novartis was accused of violating the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and False Claims Act, as well as the California False Claims Act, by offering payment in the form of cash, meals, and honoraria to healthcare practitioners to encourage them to prescribe certain Novartis drug products, including drugs such as Lotrel, Valturna, Starlix, Tekamlo, Diovan HCT, Tekturna HCT, and Exforge HCT, Diovan, and Exforge, to recipients of Medicare and Medicaid. “Kickbacks are illegal, they increase prices for consumers — and they cost you dearly once you’re caught. Novartis is the latest company we caught cheating,” said Attorney General Becerra.“In holding Novartis accountable, our state’s Medi-Cal recipients and our taxpayers win to the tune of over $11.8 million.”The settlement is a result of a whistleblower case filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in 2011. As part of the agreement, Novartis is required to pay California $11.8 million, which will be split between the General Fund and Medi-Cal. This settlement agreement is a part of the work of the California Department of Justice’s Bureau of Medi-Cal Fraud and Elder Abuse (BMFEA). Through BMFEA, the Attorney General’s office works to protect Californians by investigating and prosecuting those who perpetuate fraud on the Medi-Cal program. BMFEA also investigates and prosecutes those responsible for abuse, neglect, and fraud committed against elderly and dependent adults in the state. The Bureau regularly works with whistleblowers and law enforcement agencies to investigate and prosecute.A copy of the settlement agreement is available here. September 15, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Trump Administration Seeks to Expand Global Gag Rule It Knows to Be Harmful During a Global Pandemic”. From the press release: Despite the fact that multiple studies found that the global gag rule disrupts access to critical health care around the world, and as COVID-19 continues to claim lives across the globe, today, the Trump administration published a proposed rule for public comment seeking to expand this devastating policy. The “Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance” proposed rule would broaden the global gag rule to apply to global health contracts, newly impacting over 250 contracts and as much as 40% of global health assistance. Because of the global gag rule, the communities that already faced the greatest barriers to care — including women and girls, young people, and LGBTQ+ people — have experienced the most devastating constraints on services. They are also disproportionately affected by the pandemic. They would only be further harmed by this proposed, unprecedented expansion. Statement from Monica Kerrigan, executive director, Planned Parenthood Global: “The global gag rule was among the first of many attacks the administration launched against health and human rights. Study after study — including from the State Department — has demonstrated that this neocolonialist policy has inflicted a crushing blow to health care access for people around the world, especially those who already face systemic barriers to care, including women and girls, young people, and LGBTQ+ people. And as COVID-19 continues to claim lives and devastate communities, the administration is knowingly moving to expand this policy. There is no excuse for this brazen disregard for people’s health and rights.”Since 2017, the global gag rule has prohibited foreign non-governmental organizations from receiving any U.S. global health assistance if they provide information, referrals, or services for legal abortion or advocate for the legalization of abortion in their country, even if these activities are supported solely with non-U.S. funds. The Trump administration has already expanded this harmful policy twice, first to apply to all global health assistance and again by extending the gag to any funds from any source that flow through a gagged organization.Last month, the U.S. Department of State itself released a report on its own global gag rule, confirming that the rule dangerously disrupts access to health care. Despite the State Department’s claims to the contrary, the report outlined a profound impact of the policy on U.S. global health assistance, clearly describing disruptions in care across a range of global health programs, including HIV/AIDS, family planning and reproductive health, tuberculosis, and nutrition. Partners of Planned Parenthood Global — the Heilbrunn Department of Population and Family Health at the Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health and the African Population and Health Research Center — also recently released research detailing how the Trump administration’s global gag rule has disrupted health care access in Kenya and harmed individuals and communities. Nearly 170 diverse global health groups explicitly oppose the administration’s global gag rule and there is widespread support in Congress to repeal it entirely. September 15, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Whistleblower Complaint on Massive Health Care Abuse at ICE Detention Centers”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement on a whistleblower complaint filed on behalf of a nurse at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention center documenting ‘jarring medical neglect’ within the facility, including a refusal to test detainees for coronavirus and mass hysterectomies being performed on immigrant women:“If true, the appalling conditions described in the whistleblower complaint – including allegations of mass hysterectomies being performed on vulnerable immigrant women – are a staggering abuse of human rights. This profoundly disturbing situation recalls some of the darkest moments of our nation’s history, from the exploitation of Henrietta Lacks, to the horror of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, to the forced sterilizations of Black women that Fannie Lou Hamer and so many others underwent and fought.“The DHS Inspector General must immediately investigate the allegations detailed in this complaint. Congress and the American people need to know why and under what conditions so many women, reportedly without their informed consent, were pushed to undergo this extremely invasive and life-altering procedure. “It is also essential that we get answers regarding ICE’s egregious handling of the coronavirus pandemic, in light of reports of their refusal to test detainees including those who are symptomatic, the destruction of medical requests submitted by immigrants and the fabrication of medical records.“Reports such as these point to the urgent need to overhaul our unaccountable detention system and its horrific misuse by the Trump Administration, to ensure that these abuses cannot ever again happen.” September 15, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release: “Planned Parenthood President Reacts to Reports of Forced Hysterectomies in ICE Detention Center”. From the press release: Planned Parenthood Federation of America president and CEO Alexis McGill Johnson and Planned Parenthood Southeast president and CEO Staci Fox released the following statements in response to allegations that women are being forced to undergo hysterectomies at an ICE detention center.Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, President and CEO of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“I am horrified by reports that immigrant women trapped in an ICE detention center are being subjected to forced and coerced hysterectomies, often without their full knowledge or consent. Immigrants are human beings with autonomy and rights, not bodies to be experimented on, and one’s documentation status should not change that. The history of forced sterilization in the United States is long, dark, disturbing, and dehumanizing. Preventing women, particularly Black women and women of color, from having full autonomy over their bodies and reproductive futures is white supremacy in action. We will work with our partners however we can to immediately stop this practice, not just in detention centers, but also in the prison system and globally, where these atrocities continue.”Statement from Staci Fox, President and CEO, Planned Parenthood Southeast:“I was sickened to learn that a Georgia detention center is performing forced hysterectomies and ignoring COVID safety protocols. It is absolutely despicable and it is part of the ongoing dehumanization of immigrants and people of color in this country. Bodily autonomy and basic human rights do not end at the gates of ICE detention centers. We stand with Project South, the Government Accountability Project, and other partners fighting to end these inhumane practices and hold the people who perpetuate them accountable.” September 16, 2020: Representative Ayanna Pressley (Democrat – Massachusetts) posted a press release titled: “Rep. Pressley, 173 Members of Congress Urge DHS Inspector General to Immediately Open Investigation Into Startling Whistleblower Allegations Regarding High Rates of Hysterectomies Being Performed on Immigrant Women in Irwin County, Georgia”. From the press release: Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07) today joined Representatives Judy Chu (CA-27), Pramila Jayapal (WA-07), Jerrold Nadler (NY-10), Zoe Lofgen (CA-19), and more than 170 members of Congress in urging the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Inspector General Joseph Cuffari to open an immediate investigation into new whistleblower allegations of mass hysterectomies being performed on women detained at the privately-run Irwin County Detention Center in Ocilla, Ga. The lawmakers demanded an urgent response as well as a briefing on the status of an investigation by next Friday, Sept. 25. “We are horrified to see reports of mass hysterectomies performed on detained women in the facility without their full, informed consent and request. Everyone—regardless of their immigration status, their language, or their incarceration—deserves to control their own reproductive choices and make informed choices about their bodies,” wrote the lawmakers. “We request that your office immediately open an investigation to thoroughly examine allegations raised.”The letter follows alarms raised by a whistleblower and numerous immigrants who shared their concerns about the high rates of hysterectomies being performed, calling the facility an, “experimental concentration camp” and the doctor performing the procedures, “the uterus collector.” One immigrant reported that she knew of five women who had hysterectomies within a three month period. The whistleblower complaint also raises questions as to whether there was proper, informed consent by many of the women. It details that several women did not know why they even went to a doctor.The lawmakers’ letter also notes the abhorrent similarities between the allegations from the Irwin County Detention center and the United States’ shameful history of sterilization. More than 30 states passed eugenic-sterilization laws that disproportionately targeted people of color and incarcerated individuals. By the end of 1963, more than 3,000 individuals had been sterilized in Georgia alone as the state was responsible for the fifth highest number of sterilizations. This cruel practice has unfortunately continued into more recent times for incarcerated individuals. Today’s letter was signed by United States Representatives Ayanna Pressley, Pramila Jayapal, Judy Chu, Jerrold Nadler, Zoe Lofgren, Alma S. Adams, Ph.D., Colin Allred, Karen Bass, Nanette Diaz Barragán, Joyce Beatty, Ami Bera, M.D., Donald S. Beyer Jr., Sanford D. Bishop, Jr., Earl Blumenauer, Lisa Blunt Rochester, Suzanne Bonamici, Brendan F. Boyle, Anthony G. Brown, Julia Brownley, Cheri Bustos, G. K. Butterfield, Salud O. Carbajal, Tony Cárdenas, André Carson, Matt Cartwright, Sean Casten, Kathy Castor, Joaquin Castro, David Cicilline, Katherine Clark, Yvette D. Clarke, Emanuel Cleaver, Ii, Steve Cohen, Gerald E. Connolly, Jim Cooper, J. Luis Correa, Joe Courtney, Charlie Crist, Jason Crow, Danny K. Davis, Susan A. Davis, Madeleine Dean, Peter A. Defazio, Diana Degette, Rosa L. Delauro, Suzan Delbene, Val Demings, Mark Desaulnier, Ted Deutch, Debbie Dingell, Lloyd Doggett, Mike Doyle, Eliot Engel, Veronica Escobar, Anna G. Eshoo, Dwight Evans, Abby Finkenauer, Bill Foster, Lois Frankel, Marcia Fudge, Ruben Gallego, Jesús G. “Chuy” García, Sylvia R. Garcia, Jimmy Gomez, Raul M. Grijalva, Deb Haaland, Alcee L. Hastings, Jahana Hayes, Denny Heck, Brian Higgins, Steven Horsford, Steny Hoyer, Jared Huffman, Sheila Jackson Lee, Hakeem Jeffries, Eddie Bernice Johnson, Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr., Marcy Kaptur, William R. Keating, Robin L. Kelly, Joseph P. Kennedy, Iii, Ro Khanna, Daniel T. Kildee, Derek Kilmer, Ann Kirkpatrick, Raja Krishnamoorthi, Ann Mclane Kuster, Rick Larsen, John B. Larson, Brenda L. Lawrence, Barbara Lee, Andy Levin, Mike Levin, Ted W. Lieu, Dave Loebsack, Alan Lowenthal, Nita M. Lowey, Elaine G. Luria, Stephen F. Lynch, Doris Matsui, Betty Mccollum, James P. Mcgovern, Jerry Mcnerney, Gregory W. Meeks, Grace Meng, Gwen Moore, Joseph D. Morelle, Seth Moulton, Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, Grace F. Napolitano, Joe Neguse, Eleanor Holmes Norton, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Jimmy Panetta, Bill Pascrell, Jr., Donald M. Payne, Jr., Ed Perlmutter, Scott H. Peters, Dean Phillips, Chellie Pingree, Mark Pocan, Katie Porter, David E. Price, Mike Quigley, Jamie Raskin, Cedric L. Richmond, Harley Rouda, Lucille Roybal-Allard, C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger, Bobby L. Rush, Tim Ryan, Linda T. Sánchez, John P. Sarbanes, Mary Gay Scanlon, Jan Schakowsky, Adam B. Schiff, Bradley S. Schneider, Kim Schrier, M.D., Jose Serrano, Terri A. Sewell, Donna E. Shalala, Brad Sherman, Mike Sherrill, Albio Sires, Adam Smith, Darren Soto, Abigail D. Spanberger, Jackie Speier, Greg Stanton, Haley M. Stevens, Thomas R. Suozzi, Eric Swalwell, Mark Takano, Bennie G. Thompson, Mike Thompson, Dina Titus, Rashida Tlaib, Norma J. Torres, Lori Trahan, David Trone, Lauren Underwood, Juan Vargas, Marc Veasey, Filemon Vela, Nydia M. Velázquez, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Maxine Waters, Bonnie Watson Coleman, Peter Welch, Susan Wild, Frederica S. Wilson And John Yarmuth. The full letter is available here. September 17, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Praises House Passage of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act”. From the press release: Today, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 2694, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), a bill that will advance reproductive freedom by promoting economic security and workplace fairness for pregnant working people. The bill passed 329-73 with bipartisan support and with every Democrat present voting in favor. “Protecting against pregnancy discrimination in the workplace is an absolutely non-negotiable facet of reproductive freedom,” said Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America. “No one should ever have to choose between a paycheck and a healthy pregnancy, and no one should have to face discrimination or retaliation in the workplace because of a pregnancy, full stop. NARAL applauds the passage of this important legislation and the Members of Congress who fought hard to bring this bill over the finish line including rejecting Republicans’ shameful attempt to hijack progress, attack reproductive freedom, and pursue an agenda of control under the guise of ‘religion.’ The House has delivered an important win for pregnant workers — now it’s time for the Senate to act.” The bill passed despite efforts led by anti-choice Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC), in a blatant attempt to attack reproductive freedom, to incorporate a religious exemption into the bill that was fundamentally at odds with the bill’s purpose and that would have emboldened employers to refuse accommodations to pregnant workers. NARAL Pro-Choice America, its members, and our coalition partners fought tirelessly in recent years for the passage of H.R. 2694, including placing calls to build support for the bill and joining with over 200 organizations in calling for Congress to pass the bill. The text of H.R. 2694 can be found here. September 18, 2020: Senator Cory Booker (Democrat – New Jersey) posted a press release titled: “Senators to DHS IG: Investigate Alleged Forced Hysterectomies at ICE Facility”. From the press release: Senators Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.) and 37 senators today called on the Department of Homeland Security’s inspector general to expeditiously investigate a whistleblower complaint alleging forced hysterectomies at the Irwin County Detention Center (ICDC) in Ocilla, Ga.“Forced sterilizations infringe on reproductive rights and autonomy,” the senators wrote. “To understand whether such violations may have been committed against immigrants in our federal government’s custody, the Inspector General’s Office should immediately investigate the reproductive health policies and practices at the ICDC and at other facilities, including but not limited to, all instances of forced, coerced, or medically unnecessary hysterectomies.”In addition to Senators Booker, Feinstein, Leahy, Murray and Casey, the letter was signed by Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Angus King (I-Maine), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Mark R. Warner (D-Va.), Jack Reed (D-R.I), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).The full letter can be viewed below and downloaded here:September 18, 2020Hon. Joseph V. CuffariInspector GeneralDepartment of Homeland Security245 Murray Lane SWWashington, DC 20528-0305Dear Mr. Cuffari:The Department of Homeland Security’s Office of the Inspector General should expeditiously conduct a thorough investigation into a whistleblower complaint alleging forced hysterectomies and other egregious abuses at the Irwin County Detention Center (ICDC) in Ocilla, Georgia. LaSalle Corrections operates that facility for the federal government, including for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The alleged abuses detailed in the complaint and in related reports must be thoroughly and swiftly investigated to protect the rights and safety of women and patients in our nation’s care.The whistleblower expressed alarm about the “rate at which the hysterectomies have occurred” at the facility. Specifically, the complaint alleges that between October and December 2019 at least five women detained at the ICDC received hysterectomies. When asked about the procedures, however, the women “reacted confused when explaining why they had one done.” The complaint also describes how a gynecologist once removed the wrong ovary on a young woman, causing her “to go back to take out the left and she wound up with a total hysterectomy,” leaving her unable to bear children. Another detained woman who received a hysterectomy recounted that medical personnel “did not properly explain to her what procedure she was going to have done.” Although she asked for more information about why she was receiving a hysterectomy, she was “given three different responses by three different individuals.” When the woman told a nurse that the procedure “isn’t for me,” the nurse “responded by getting angry and agitated.”Forced sterilizations infringe on reproductive rights and autonomy. To understand whether such violations may have been committed against immigrants in our federal government’s custody, the Inspector General’s Office should immediately investigate the reproductive health policies and practices at the ICDC and at other ICE facilities, including but not limited to, all instances of forced, coerced, or medically unnecessary hysterectomies.In addition to thoroughly investigating the recent alleged abuses at the ICDC, we urge you to immediately conduct a national review of reproductive health policies and practices at ICE facilities to ensure that the human rights of women in federal immigration custody are assured. September 18, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a press release titled: “ACOG Calls for Swift Investigation of Reports of High Rates of Hysterectomies in Immigration Detention”. From the press release: ACOG CEO Dr. Maureen Phipps this week wrote a letter to the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security urging a swift and thorough investigation of complaints filed by a whistleblower alleging high rates of hysterectomy procedures on detained persons held in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody, as well as unsafe and unsanitary conditions and denial of access to medical care.ACOG opposes the unethical practice of reproductive coercion in any form and acknowledges the history in the United States, including the recent past, of the unethical practice of coerced or forced sterilization procedures performed on individuals without their consent. Communities of color and incarcerated individuals have been disproportionately impacted by these breeches.In the letter Dr. Phipps quotes directly from Committee Opinion 695, Sterilization of Women: Ethical Issues and Considerations, which clearly states that coercive or forcible sterilization practices are unethical and should never be performed:“Coercive or forcible sterilization practices are unethical and should never be performed. Ethical sterilization care requires access to sterilization for women who request it, without undue barriers. It simultaneously requires protections from unjust or coercive practices, particularly for low-income women, incarearated women, or any women whose fertility and parenting has historically been devalued or stereotyped as problematic or in need of control or surveillance.”Dr. Phipps offered ACOG as a resource for evidence-based information about the provision of ethical clinical care, and shared ACOG’s clinical guidance documents, including Committee Opinion 695, to help inform the investigation.The concerns alleged in the complaint are alarming and ACOG continues to closely monitor this issue. September 19, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice California Celebrates Major Victory for Reproductive Freedom as Governor Newsom Signs Justice and Maternity Care Act (SB 1237) into Law”. From the press release: Yesterday Governor Newsom took a critical and long overdue step to expand reproductive freedom and improve pregnancy and birth outcomes in California by signing the Justice and Equity in Maternity Act (SB 1237) into law.Despite being a leader on reproductive freedom and healthcare innovation, California is an outlier in access to nurse-midwifery care and is one of only four states that still require physician supervision in order for nurse-midwives to practice.SB 1237 — authored by Sen. Bill Dodd (D-Napa) and co-sponsored by NARAL Pro-Choice California, Black Women for Wellness Action Project, California Nurse-Midwives Association, and United Nurses Association of California — will remove California’s outdated physician supervision requirement for Certified Nurse-Midwives, improving pregnancy and birth outcomes and expanding access to affordable, high-quality care.In response, NARAL Pro-Choice California Director Shannon Hovis released the following statement:“NARAL Pro-Choice California and our 295,000 members statewide applaud Governor Newsom for signing the Justice and Equity in Maternity Act (SB 1237) into law. As one of the last states in the nation to still have this outdated requirement on the books — and the state with the highest number of COVID-19 cases in the country — this law is a long overdue step toward expanding access to midwifery care at a time when Californians need it most. By better integrating and removing unnecessary barriers to care, SB 1237 will reduce racial disparities in pregnancy and birth outcomes which have only been further exacerbated by the COVID-19 crisis. We thank Governor Newsom for honoring his commitment to fight for equitable access to high-quality care for pregnant people and families across California.” The text of SB-1237 is here. September 19, 2020: CNMA Midwives tweeted: “There are a lot of mixed emotions right now – but we do have something really big to celebrate. Governor @GavinNewsom has signed #SB1237, and The Equality and Justice in Maternity Care Act is now California law! Thank you to everyone who helped make this a reality!” The tweet included a graphic that said “SB 1237 is officially California law!” CNMA is The California Nurse-Midwives Association. September 19, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Citing Exposure of Chilfren to Lead Poisoning, Attorney General James Files Suit Against Buffalo Group Over Failure to Address Lead-Based Paint Dangers”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James, joined by Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown, today announced a lawsuit against a group of individuals and companies in the Buffalo region for repeatedly and persistently violating county, city, state, and federal laws by illegally allowing lead paint-related hazards to proliferate in their rental properties. The violations by the group, which has owned and managed more than 150 single- and two-family homes in predominantly low-income communities of color, has led to dozens of reported instances of childhood lead poisoning.The rental housing operations addressed in the suit are controlled by Angel Elliot Dalfin. In the lawsuit, the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) identifies six specific Dalfin properties that serve as examples of the egregious and illegal lead hazard management practices used by the landlords and the poisoning of children in those properties.“It is as immoral as it is illegal that a landlord would knowingly expose families to lead poisoning, which disproportionately threatens the health and development of Black and brown children,” said Attorney General James. “Our children deserve to live in safe and healthy homes, not dangerous and poisonous ones. This group of landlords and property managers put low-income Buffalo communities at extreme risk, and today we are holding them accountable. As Buffalo continues to have some of the highest rates of childhood lead poisoning in the country, my office will continue to hold bad actors responsible. Every family deserves to live in a home free of lead hazards, and I will work to ensure that happens.”The lawsuit, filed in Erie County Supreme Court, alleges that since 2013, the Erie County Department of Health has identified dozens of children with elevated blood lead levels (EBLLs) in 22 of the Dalfin properties. In addition, since 2013, at least 63 of these houses have been cited by county and city inspectors for housing code violations, either for conditions conducive to lead poisoning, which are prohibited by the Erie County Sanitary Code, or for chipping, peeling, or deteriorating paint, which is prohibited by both the county and city. The landlords frequently allowed paint on their properties to deteriorate to the point of being a lead hazard instead of preventing deterioration of paint, as required by local and state building codes, and only addressed the lead hazard after a lead-poisoned child was discovered. The group also consistently violated federal lead disclosure requirements by providing either no lead disclosure statement to tenants or false disclosures, which stated that the landowner had no reports of lead paint or lead paint hazards, when in fact there were multiple reports of lead paint and lead paint hazards regarding the residences. The OAG began its investigation into Dalfin and the other individuals and entities in 2017, when upon a painstaking review of county and city violation histories, tax records, deed transfers, and corporate filings, the office identified the interrelated group of landlords and property managers with a record of repeated and persistent lead paint violations and childhood lead poisonings. Since 2017, OAG has found that the group violated the law in other ways, such as: Using shell companies to avoid complying with city rental registration requirements;Failing to comply with city and state property management and real estate broker licensing requirements;Conducting business in New York without authority to do so from the Department of State; andInitiating evictions of tenants in lead-poisoned houses in violation of New York law. The poisoning of children from lead paint in aging rental housing is an ongoing national public health crisis, but is of particular concern within New York, and especially the Buffalo region. Tens of thousands of rental properties in Buffalo that were constructed before 1978 contain lead paint which, if not properly maintained and managed, can cause lead poisoning. If such properties are properly maintained, however, lead poisoning can be prevented.The health impacts of lead paint in rental housing are particularly acute in the Buffalo region, where children who live in communities of color are 12 times as likely than children who live in predominately white neighborhoods to be diagnosed with an elevated blood lead level. Elevated blood lead levels are also more prevalent in Buffalo’s low-income neighborhoods than high-income neighborhoods… September 21, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a press release titled: “ACOG Applauds House Passage of H.R. 4995, the Maternal Health Quality Act”. From the press release: Eva Chalas, MD, FACOG, FACS, president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), issued the following statement regarding the passage of H.R. 4995, the Maternal Health Quality Improvement Act in the U.S. House of Representatives:“The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists applauds the U.S. House for prioritizing the lives of women and families by passing the Maternal Health Quality Improvement Act.“As we’ve seen over the last several months, the COVID-19 pandemic has further exposed health inequities experienced by women of color in this country and may be worsening the U.S. maternal mortality crisis. This timely, bipartisan legislation will help our nation reverse course on this crisis by implementing evidence-based policies that will improve maternal health outcomes for all women and take steps to eliminate racial inequities.“ACOG urges the U.S. Senate to build on its commitment to healthy moms and babies by acting expeditiously to ensure this important legislation is passed and signed into law by the end of year.“While H.R. 4995 will significantly help us move the needle on eliminating preventable maternal deaths, it is also critical that Congress passes H.R. 4996, the Helping Medicaid Offer Maternity Services Act, so that women who rely on Medicaid have coverage and access to quality health care after childbirth when they are most at risk for experiencing life threatening conditions, such as cardiovascular disease, hypertension, postpartum depression, and substance use disorder.“The pandemic has underscored the importance of the Medicaid program, which already plays a critical role in maternity care—covering 43 percent of births nationwide. By also passing H.R. 4996, the House and Senate would support state efforts to extend Medicaid coverage beyond the standard 60 days to one year postpartum and close critical coverage gaps for women after pregnancy.“These policies can mean the difference between life and death for so many women. The time to act is now.” September 22, 2020: Senator Tammy Baldwin (Democrat – Wisconsin) tweeted: “During the wore public health crisis in our lifetimes, Trump supports a lawsuit to eliminate the #ACA completely, taking health care away from millions of Americans, including those with pre-existing conditions. That is the Republican health care plan – plain and simple.” September 23, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris, Casey, Booker, Durbin Urge Finance Committee Leaders to Adopt Proposals to Reduce Maternal Mortality Rate”. From the press release: U.S. Senators Kamala D. Harris (D-CA), Bob Casey (D-PA), Cory Booker (D-NJ), and Dick Durbin (D-IL) wrote a letter urging the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee to draw on their individually proposed maternal health bills as the committee develops policy recommendations to expand and improve coverage and services for pregnant and post-partum people.Those bills are: Senator Kamala Harris’ Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act (S. 3424)Senator Kamala Harris’ Maternal Care Access and Reducing Emergencies (CARE) Act (S. 1600)Senator Bob Casey’s Improving Coverage and Care for Mother’s Act (S. 3443)Senator Cory Booker’s Maximizing Outcomes for Moms through Medicaid Improvement and Enhancement of Services (MOMMIES) Act (S. 1343)Senator Richard Durbin’s Mothers and Offspring Mortality and Morbidity Awareness (MOMMA’s) Act (S. 916) “Maternal mortality and morbidity is a problem that plagues America and must be confronted. At 17.4 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births, the United States ranks last among similarly situated countries. For Black mothers that rate rises to 37.1 deaths per 100,000 live births. American Indian and Alaskan Native mothers also face their own unique challenges that lead to higher than average maternal mortality rates. This is unacceptable,” the senators wrote. They continued,“If done right, this effort can have a truly positive impact and reduce the United States’ dismal maternal mortality and morbidity rate.”In their letter to Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-OR), the Senators highlighted six main areas for improving maternal health rates: Access to coverage: Expand Medicaid coverage for at least one year for post-partum care;Access to services: Increase access to services so pregnant people can receive the full range of health care services and not just pregnancy-related care;Enable non-clinical professionals to provide services: Allow providers including doulas, midwives and lactation consultants to provide services and be reimbursed by Medicaid;Reduce racial disparities in maternal health care: Ensure employees in health care settings receive ongoing, evidence-based anti-racism and bias training;Ensure continuity of maternal health demonstrations: Allow states and communities to create local maternal health projects that the federal government can learn from; andSupport telehealth: Provide resources to help states implement telehealth services for maternity care—especially for those living in rural or underserved areas. The letter is available HERE. September 23, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America President Responds to News of Trump’s Latest Executive Order”. From the press release: Today Donald Trump announced his plan to issue a new executive order, coined as a “Born Alive” order, an intentionally inflammatory term that is not grounded in medical science. The move is a clear political calculation aimed at distracting the American public—77% of which supports Roe v. Wade—and a bad-faith attempt to rile up Trump’s anti-choice base in order to ram through the confirmation of a U.S. Supreme Court justice hostile to reproductive freedom to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. In response, NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement:“It is downright cruel and a slap in the face to the American public that President Trump is deploying dangerous disinformation in a power grab for the Supreme Court, not to mention using executive powers to impose his own extreme ideology when he can’t jam through his agenda legislatively. Trump is once again eager to interfere with difficult, complicated family decisions that we all hope to never find ourselves facing, while exploiting disinformation about these devastating circumstances in order to score cheap political points. The U.S. has tragically surpassed 200,000 deaths from COVID-19. If Trump, Mitch McConnell, and Senate Republicans spent half as much time trying to deal with the pandemic as they do pushing lies on the American people, this country would be better for it. But putting people’s health and lives before their draconian agenda is not, and will never be, their priority.”The term “born alive” is not a term rooted in science or reality. Not only does Trump’s reasoning for this executive order completely mischaracterize abortion care, this disinformation opens the door to allowing politicians to interfere with family decisions about palliative care for an infant who tragically won’t survive for long. These families are making the best decision they can in heartbreaking circumstances. The myth that Trump peddles is cruel to families facing deeply difficult situations and reveals a desire to tie families’ hands and curb their ability to decide what care or path forward is best. Parents facing these situations often want to spend this very limited time with their infant comforting them. Politicians shouldn’t force medical intervention when families are trying to peacefully say goodbye to a child who cannot survive. The disinformation vilifies families and the doctors who care for them and wildly misleads the public about these rare and complicated scenarios. In covering this news, it is important to avoid amplifying right-wing disinformation and to include critical context around the inflammatory term “born alive.” Here is a language guide created by NARAL Pro-Choice America and Global Strategy Group to guide accurate reporting on abortion… September 23, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Planned Parenthood: Supreme Court Vacancy Could Further Impact Family Planning Decisions”. Following the passing of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, there is mounting concern about how her vacant seat will affect people’s access to sexual and reproductive health care services, including birth control and abortion, in the months and years ahead.In late 2016, Planned Parenthood saw an unprecedented surge in questions about access to health care and birth control, both online and in health centers, including a more than 900% increase in appointments for IUDs. Patient after patient shared concerns about losing their birth control coverage under the Affordable Care Act’s birth control rule or their access to health care.Planned Parenthood providers are already seeing patients make decisions, such as choosing to end pregnancies they otherwise would have continued and delaying their plans to expand their families, due to burdens imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic. With 17 cases concerning abortion access one step away from the Supreme Court, and other federal court cases threatening health care access more broadly, more people may be forced to make medical and family planning decisions based on their fears of the unknown.Statement from Dr. Gillian Dean, Senior Director of Medical Services, Planned Parenthood Federation of America: “With the recent passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg — a staunch champion of reproductive health care and rights on the Supreme Court — and dozens of cases about reproductive health in the federal courts right now, many people have concerns about the threat to accessing essential sexual and reproductive health services, such as birth control and abortion.“While it’s too soon to tell what impact Justice Ginsburg’s passing will have on cases before the Supreme Court or what impact those cases will in turn have on people’s family planning decisions, one thing is for certain: People should not be forced to make critical health care decisions based on fear. Politics should not be a factor people must consider when deciding to start using birth control, choosing a method, or switching methods. This is true for people who depend on birth control to prevent unintended pregnancy or manage health conditions, and for those who otherwise would not have access to health care without the ACA.“It is unconscionable that in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, our political climate determines people’s access to health care from one day to the next. Patients have already been forced to make tough decisions about their reproductive health during the pandemic. Regardless of who is on the bench or in office, everyone should be able to access the critical, essential care they need, including contraception and abortion. It has always been Planned Parenthood’s mission to make sexual and reproductive health care accessible to as many people as possible — and we will continue to work toward that mission, no matter what.”Long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) are appealing options to people concerned about losing their access to health care in uncertain times, because once inserted, they work for years: IUDs are more than 99% effective and work to prevent pregnancy for up to three to 12 years, depending on the type. Because it’s a reversible method, IUD users get extremely effective pregnancy prevention, and their ability to get pregnant returns quickly once the IUD is removed. However, cost is a major barrier for people without health insurance coverage for birth control. Out-of-pocket costs for IUDs can range from $500 to $1,000.Implants are also more than 99% effective and can prevent pregnancy for up to 5 years. People can get pregnant right away after the implant is removed. The cost of the implant can range from $0 to $1,300 without access to insurance, Medicaid, and other government programs. IUDs and implants are safe and highly effective birth control options for many people who can become pregnant and desire long-term, highly effective and safe pregnancy prevention, and who may also want to preserve their fertility. IUDs and implants now represent the third most commonly used category of reversible contraceptives in the United States, after the pill and condom. September 24, 2020: President Trump issued an “Executive Order on An America-First Healthcare Plan“. It does not sound like he was the one who wrote this executive order. There is absolutely nothing in it that specifically states what pre-existing conditions his “America-First” plan covers. A large part of this executive order is nothing more than a reiteration of the things that the Trump Administration has done in an attempt to destroy the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). If you want to read the entire executive order, you can do so by clicking the link I have provided. I will not put the President’s long-winded gaslighting attempt into my blog post. September 24, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Trump signs largely symbolic pre-existing conditions order amid lawsuit”. It was written by Peter Sullivan. From the article: President Trump on Thursday signed a largely symbolic executive order aimed at protecting people with pre-existing conditions as he takes fire for a lawsuit seeking to overturn ObamaCare, which enacted those protections.“The historic action I am taking today includes the first-ever executive order to affirm it is the official policy of the United States government to protect patients with pre-existing conditions,” Trump said during a speech in North Carolina, a key swing state. “So, we’re making that official.”……The White House did not immediately release the text of the order, but from Trump and other officials’ descriptions it simply states that protecting people with pre-existing conditions is the policy of the government, something that does not have the force of law on its own.The Trump administration is backing a GOP-led lawsuit seeking to overturn all of ObamaCare, including the law’s protections for people with pre-existing conditions. If the Supreme Court does strike down the health law, a new law would still be required to replace the protections, despite Trump’s executive order. Trump also did not lay out the details of how he would protect people with pre-existing conditions. As Trump noted, Democrats have made attacks on the Trump-backed lawsuit a key part of the campaign as Election Day approaches, particularly noting that the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg now increases the odds that the Supreme Court will strike down the law. The Court will hear the case one week after Election Day, on Nov. 10…Experts noted the lack of details in Trump’s comments and the limits of the legal authority of an executiver order, when legislation would be required if ObamaCare is struck down……Trump has proposed a range of potentially far-reaching actions to lower drug prices, from allowing importation of drugs from Canada to lowering Medicare drug prices to match prices paid in other countries, a policy known as “most-favored nation.”But both of those proposals have not actually gone into effect yet, as they still require further steps in the rulemaking and policy implementation process.Trump announced he was also planning to mail $200 discount cards to Medicare beneficiaries to use for prescription drugs, a move that could try to boost his support with seniors ahead of the election……Trump also pointed to previous actions like expanding skimpier, cheaper health plans called short-term plans. While those plans have lower premiums, they are allowed to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions… September 24, 2020: Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on President Trump’s Bogus Pre-Existing Condition Protection Executive Order”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi released this statement after President Trump signed an executive order he claims will protect people with pre-existing conditions, despite three years of working to dismantle their protections, including his lawsuit asking the Supreme Court to tear down the pre-existing condition benefit and every other protection of the Affordable Care Act:“President Trump’s bogus executive order on pre-existing conditions isn’t worth the paper it’s signed on. It is an insult to every family with someone with a pre-existing condition that President Trump thinks he can get away with this farce while he races a justice onto the Supreme Court to strike down the lifesaving protections enshrined into law by the Affordable Care Act.“For his entire Administration, President Trump has used every tool and every chance he gets to weaken or rip away protections for people with pre-existing conditions. If President Trump cared at all about people with pre-existing conditions, he would drop his lawsuit to overturn the Affordable Care Act in the middle of a pandemic.“Democrats will continue our fight to defend and strengthen pre-existing condition protections from Congress to the Courts.” September 24, 2020: NBC News posted an article titled: “Trump signs EO on health care, but does little to change existing legislation”. It was written by Lauren Egan and Caroline Vakil. From the article: President Donald Trump announced two new health care executive orders Thursday on protecting pre-existing conditions and preventing surprise billing as the president seeks to shore up his support on an issue that remains top of mind to voters amid to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.The actions, however, have minimal impact. The surprise billing order requires Congress to pass legislation and pre-existing conditions are already protected under the Affordable Care Act, legislation that Trump is currently fighting to get rid of……Trump has been promising a health care overhaul since his 2016 campaign for president. But nearly four years into his administration and as the country suffers from one of the worst health care crises in its history, Trump has struggled to land on a concrete alternative to the Affordable Care Act, which continues to grow in popularity.In June the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to repeal Obamacare, arguing that the individual mandate is unconstitutional and that the rest of the law must be struck down with it. The Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments for Nov. 10, just a week after Election Day……Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar defended the need for an executive order on pre-existing conditions to reporters on Thursday, pointing to the Supreme Court case. Azar said that the White House wanted to ensure that Americans will be protected even if the ACA is struck down by the Supreme Court.But the executive order appears to fall short of that goal. The order states that protecting pre-existing conditions was “the policy of the United States” but did not provide any legislative guarantees that Americans would not lose such protections if the ACA were nixed by the Supreme Court……When pressed by reporters earlier Thursday on why Trump was signing an executive order directing Congress to pass legislation on surprise billing rather than signing an order to fix the problem right away, Azar said “that is the plan the president plans to announce. It is what it is, as described.”..…Trump has recently used executive actions to address issues important to voters this election cycle, such as coronavirus economic relief. Similar to Thursday’s orders, many of those actions have been largely symbolic and have not led to significant or meaningful policy change. September 24, 2020: Bloomberg posted an article titled: “Trump says Elderly to Get $200 for Drugs in Bid for Senior Vote”. It was written by Justin Sink and Jordan Fabian. From the article: President Donald Trump said that Americans in the Medicare program for the elderly and disabled will be sent $200 discount cards for prescription drugs within weeks, potentially putting cash in their pockets ahead of his November re-election……Trump didn’t explain in his speech what program or authority would allow the government to provide the cards. Assuming they are sent to 33 million Medicare beneficiaries, the figure Trump used, the cards would cost about $6.6 billion.Money for the cards will be drawn from a demonstration program Medicare uses to test new payment systems and other projects, and the cost will be offset by future savings generated from new price cuts Trump has ordered for drugs bought by Medicare, according to a White House official. The cards can be used for prescription drugs co-pays, the official said, but didn’t elaborate.The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services referred questions about the cards to the White House……The White House has been negotiating with drug makers over an order Trump signed in August that would cut the U.S. prices of some medicines by tying them to prices paid in other Western countries with national health-care systems.But the leading lobby group for the industry, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, said last week it had rejected a request from the administration to provide discount cards to Medicare patients as part of the deal.Trump issued the drug price order last week, after negotiations with the industry broke off, but it hasn’t yet taken effect. It isn’t clear whether it will ever generate savings for the government or whether they would be enough to offset the cost of the drug discount cards.Drug companies aren’t aware of Trump’s plans or where funding for the cards will come from, according to a person familiar with the industry’s negotiations with the White House.Trump’s speech was intended to set forth a health care agenda for his second term, addressing a key vulnerability for the president in the election. After his remarks, he signed an executive order that calls on Congress to retain protections for sick people buying insurance — safeguards guaranteed by the Affordable Care Act, a law Trump’s administration is asking the Supreme Court to strike down.The president has often promised he would produce a replacement for Obamacare, which guarantees insurers can’t deny coverage to sick people or charge them more. Just last week, the president said his plan is “ready.” But the order he signed essentially abandons the issue to Congress, suggesting he won’t offer his own plan before the election……Trump’s order purporting to protect people with pre-existing conditions won’t apply to consumers who buy short-term insurance policies that last less than a year, according to the White House official. The Trump administration has promoted the plans as a cheaper alternative to Obamacare plans. But they are cheaper because companies offering them are allowed to exclude sick people and because the plans seldom cover as many services as Obamacare policies. September 24, 2020: Representative Abigail Spanberger (Democrat – Virginia) posted a press release titled: “As Affordable Healthcare Law Faces Growing Threat, Spanberger Pushes to Protect and Imprive medicare Part D Drug Coverage”. From the press release: U.S. Representative Abigail Spanberger today released the following statement to recognize the 10th anniversary since the Affordable Care Act began the work of closing the Medicare Part D coverage gap for seniors’ prescription drug costs.“A decade ago this week, provisions in the Affordable Care Act took the first step toward closing the Medicare Part D coverage gap that left millions of American seniors struggling to pay for their prescription drugs. Ten years later, drug prices have continued to skyrocket – and the administration’s persistent attempts to destroy the existing healthcare law threaten to turn back the clock and pry open that Medicare coverage gap once again,” said Spanberger. “We have made significant progress since 2010, expanding and improving on the existing healthcare law to provide affordable coverage to millions of Americans – including those with preexisting conditions. Unfortunately, during this ten-year period, we’ve also seen an explosion in the cost of drugs like insulin that our seniors depend on every day. Yet at a time when the need for affordable prescription drug coverage is most acute, we continue to see the administration pursue every avenue to dismantle our healthcare system.”“If they succeed, thousands of seniors in Virginia’s 7th District could be confronted with Medicare Part D benefits that are significantly less generous, forcing them to spend more out-of-pocket on prescription drugs. Personal budgets are already strained to breaking by the ongoing pandemic, and a sudden loss of assistance with prescription drug costs would be very harmful to the financial security of many Central Virginia seniors. I routinely hear from neighbors in our district who are paying hundreds if not thousands of dollars for their necessary medications each year. We should be working to build and improve on the existing law to reduce prescription drug costs across the board – not pursuing reckless lawsuits that would stick seniors with a higher bill.”“I’ve worked across the aisle in the U.S. House to advance legislation that tackles the prescription drug affordability crisis. In December, I voted to pass landmark legislation that finally empowers Medicare Part D to negotiate directly with big pharmaceutical companies, attacking the problem at the root by fighting for lower prices. Even as we reflect on the progress of the past decade, I know our work on the issue of prescription drug costs is far from over. I’ll continue fighting to lower drug costs; increase competition and transparency in the pharmaceutical industry; expand access to safe, cheaper generics; and protect coverage for seniors and those with preexisting conditions.” September 25, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Trump Raiding Seniors’ Medicare for One-Time Prescription Drug Gimmick”. From the press release: Speaker Pelosi released this statement after President Trump said he would mail seniors a one-time $200 discount card for prescription drugs, raiding the Medicare Trust Fund after failing to take real action to lower prescription drug prices:“After failing to take real action to lower seniors’ prescription drug prices, President Trump wants to steal from the Medicare Trust Fund for a desperately transparent political gimmick. The Administration’s claim to be using imaginary savings from non-existent drug price reforms means that Trump’s coupons come at Medicare’s expense, and that seniors and taxpayers are paying the price for this stunt.“President Trump has consistently pulled his punch on Big Pharma, after promising to ‘negotiate like crazy’ in the campaign. He vowed to veto the powerful drug price negotiation for seniors and families provided by the House-passed Lower Drug Costs Now Act, after giving big pharmaceutical companies massive tax cuts with his GOP tax scam for the rich.“Drug companies hiked prices on more than 850 prescription drugs in the first six months of this year alone. Now, the bill is coming due on four years of caving to Big Pharma, and Trump thinks he can trick seniors with a one-time coupon paid for with their own tax dollars.” September 25, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “70% of Americans Favor Ending the Global Gag Rule, According to Latest Research Released Ahead of World Contraception Day”. From the press release: New polling released today shows that an overwhelming majority of Americans believe the global gag rule should be overturned. According to the research, 70% of Americans favor ending the global gag rule so that funding for global health can resume without restrictions. Over 60% of respondents expressed fairly major or very major concerns about the policy’s many consequences, including the danger of restricting health care in low-income countries amidst the global COVID-19 pandemic.Earlier this month, the administration published a proposed rule for public comment seeking to expand the policy. Statement from Monica Kerrigan, executive director, Planned Parenthood Global: “Americans strongly agree — the global gag rule is a devastating policy that needs to go. Studies by research institutions, and the State Department itself, have outlined the disastrous impact the global gag rule has had on health care access around the world, including on contraceptive access. And this latest polling confirms that the American people do not support this policy. As COVID-19 continues to claim lives and devastate communities, now is the time to be expanding health care access, not taking it away.”Since 2017, the global gag rule has prohibited foreign non-governmental organizations from receiving any U.S. global health assistance if they provide information, referrals, or services for legal abortion, or advocate for the legalization of abortion in their country, even if these activities are supported solely with non-U.S. funds. The administration has already expanded this harmful policy twice, first to apply to all global health assistance, and again by extending the gag to any funds, from any source, that flow through a gagged organization.Last month, the U.S. Department of State itself released a report on its own global gag rule, confirming that the rule dangerously disrupts access to health care. Despite the State Department’s claims to the contrary, the report outlined a profound impact of the policy on U.S. global health assistance, clearly describing disruptions in care across a range of global health programs, including HIV/AIDS, family planning and reproductive health, tuberculosis, and nutrition. Partners of Planned Parenthood Global — the Heilbrunn Department of Population and Family Health at the Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health and the African Population and Health Research Center — also recently released research detailing how the administration’s global gag rule has disrupted health care access in Kenya and harmed individuals and communities. Nearly 170 diverse global health groups explicitly oppose the administration’s global gag rule and there is widespread support in Congress to repeal it entirely. September 25, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) tweeted: “The outcome of this election will determine the course of our country for generations. Everything from the Affordable Care Act, racial justice, equal rights, and environmental justice is on the ballot. 39 days. Let’s mobilize and give this everything we’ve got.” September 25, 2020: National Organization for Women (NOW) posted a press release titled: “Presumptive SCOTUS Nominee Amy Coney Barrett Will Turn Back the Clock on Equality”. From the press release: Donald Trump has made clear what he wants from the Supreme Court. Like all of his other appointments, Trump wants personal allies who will validate his lawlessness, enable his authoritarianism, and protect him from accountability. Trump has demonstrated time and time again that he does not care about the rights of women, the LGBTQIA+ community, people of color, immigrants, or our most marginalized communities. Amy Coney Barrett, his nominee to fill the seat left by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, is certain to follow this pattern – and no one will feel the consequences of this more harshly than these communities who have already suffered the most under the Trump Administration. Amy Coney Barrett is everything Donald Trump could have ever hoped for—and more. A former clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia, she has been called “Scalia’s ideological heir.” She has compared Roe v. Wade to “abortion on demand” and has been critical of stare decisis, the doctrine that requires judges to follow settled law, which has been the foundation of ensuring women’s access to reproductive care. She was extremely critical of Chief Justice John Roberts’ decision to uphold the Affordable Care Act and fought efforts to ensure that all women have access to contraceptives.Now, Donald Trump and the Senate Republicans want to steal another seat on the Supreme Court so that Amy Coney Barrett can help repeal Roe and shred the Affordable Care Act—but not before she votes with a new, ultra-conservative majority to validate an election he intends to steal. NOW members are fired up and ready to mobilize against this dangerous and illegitimate Supreme Court nomination, and a confirmation process that short-circuits democracy to guarantee a corrupt outcome. Donald Trump breaks everything he touches—but we must act now to keep him and the Senate Republicans from causing irreparable damage and turning back the clock on our progress towards equal rights under the Constitution. September 25, 2020: The Texas Tribune posted an article titled: “After Ginsburg’s death, high stakes for Texas’ legal challenge to the Affordable Care Act”. It was written by Emma Platoff and Edgar Walters. From the article: As a Texas-led lawsuit to end the Affordable Care Act made its way through the federal courts in 2018, Gov. Greg Abbott pledged that should his state’s legal team succeed, he and his policymakers would have a plan ready to keep Texans — including the millions with preexisting health conditions — insured.Now that the unlikely lawsuit has perhaps its best odds yet, with a hearing set for Nov. 10 before a U.S. Supreme Court that no longer includes liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Texas Republicans have yet to show any evidence that such a plan exists……The lawsuit won early success in a federal court in Texas and then at the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, and now it’s before a Supreme Court that appears likely to tilt more conservative if the U.S. Senate quickly confirms President Donald Trump’s third nominee to the high court.Experts who have long dismissed the lawsuit as a long shot say the Affordable Care Act faces new uncertainty, though they are betting on its survival.A legal victory for the state in this case would herald an immediate policy emergency for Texas lawmakers. The state has long boasted the nation’s highest uninsured rate, a gulf that has only widened this year as millions of Americans lost employer health coverage during the coronavirus pandemic. And because the Affordable Care Act touches so many facets of health care policy, from insurance benefits to the federal process for approving certain prescription drugs, the effects of its repeal would be felt by virtually everyone.If the Supreme Court struck down the law, some 1 million Texans would lose subsidized health insurance plans. It would also end popular consumer protections for patients with preexisting health conditions and for young adults who are allowed to stay on their parents’ health plans until age 26……In the absence of action from a gridlocked U.S. Congress, Texas policymakers would have to weave a replacement for a relatively popular and immensely complicated piece of legislation — while also managing a perilous budget crisis, electing a new speaker of the Texas House, addressing the coronavirus pandemic for the first time through legislation, and drawing new political maps for the state in a high-stakes once-in-a-decade exercise of political will……In most other states, the Affordable Care Act also pays for low-income adults to receive free health insurance under Medicaid, but Texas has never opted in to that program’s expansion.If the federal health law were struck down in its entirety, pressure would likely mount on Congress to come up with a replacement, Pogue said. When Republicans took control of Congress and vowed to repeal the law in 2017, an outpouring of popular support for it put pressure on Senate Republicans, who ultimately could not muster the votes for repeal……Legal experts who have followed the case for years still believe it’s unlikely that the high court will strike down Obamacare in its entirety. But they say Ginsburg’s death may help Texas’ side.“The likeliest outcome is that the justices vote to get rid of the lawsuit, because it’s so galactically stupid, to be totally candid,” said Nicholas Bagley, a University of Michigan law professor who has followed the case closely. “But I think any confidence you might have had before Justice Ginsburg died that the case would be turned away has surely been shaken. And I think there’s a lot more uncertainty about the future of the ACA.”The lawsuit hinges on an argument that the law’s original requirement for most Americans to have health insurance is no longer valid — and that because the mandate to purchase insurance is such a core component of the sweeping law, the entire Affordable Care Act falls without it……A coalition of states led by California, as well as a slew of legal experts all over the ideological map, dispute almost every facet of Texas’ argument. They say the individual mandate remains constitutional, but also that even if it were not, the rest of the Affordable Care Act would still stand.The lawsuit turns on that question of “severability,” experts agree……The least likely outcome, according to legal scholars of many political persuasions, is the court striking down the Affordable Care Act in its entirety. That would leave millions of Americans without insurance coverage during the coronavirus pandemic, and also destabilize practically every piece of the U.S. health care system, from no-cost benefits for certain “essential” health services to annual limits protecting patients from spending massive amounts on expensive treatments… September 25, 2020: Marianne Williamson tweeted: “If Republicans succeed in putting a justice on SCOTUS who allows them to repeal Roe v. Wade, it will not stop abortions in America. Rich women will continue to have safe ones, and poor women will go back to the days of back alley abortions where many were harmed and many died.” September 25, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Denounces Trump Following Reports of Amy Coney Barrett Nomination to U.S. Supreme Court”. From the press release: According to news reports, President Donald Trump plans to nominate Amy Coney Barrett, a judge known to stridently oppose reproductive freedom, to fill Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat on the U.S. Supreme Court. News of the nomination for the lifetime position on the bench comes just 39 days before Election Day, and as Americans have already begun voting for the presidency. Rather than let the American people decide, Trump and Mitch McConnell are teeing up one of the most rushed confirmation processes in history in a massive power grab and affront to our democracy.NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement in response:“This nomination is an attack on our very democracy. Trump and McConnell are pushing this process even though voters are already casting ballots in states around the country. The American people must decide who gets to fill this vacancy on the highest Court in the land. Our lives are on the line. If confirmed, Barrett will cement Trump’s supermajority against keeping abortion legal, protecting healthcare access, safeguarding our right to vote, and so many other questions of fundamental freedom and justice. Make no mistake: Senate Republicans’ willingness to go back on their word and confirm a justice this close to the election is all about cementing their control, riling up their base ahead of the election, and installing one of their own on the bench in case of a contested election. The entire charade is un-American. Amy Coney Barrett’s record tracks with Trump’s promises in the 2016 election—a nominee who would be a sure vote to end legal abortion in this country. Her positions show she is a clear and present threat to reproductive freedom and the promise of Roe. Every body should have the freedom to make their own decisions about their bodies, their families, and their lives, free from political interference. Hostility to abortion access and antipathy to the idea that we must all be free to make our own decisions is an indicator for hostility towards other crucial forms of social progress including gender justice, racial justice, economic justice, and LGBTQ rights. The Federalist Society knows that and so do Trump and McConnell—Barrett’s record is the case in point of their quest for control. We stand united in doing everything we can to stop this power grab that will hurt so many in a time of great pain. The fact that the Republican Party is moving this nomination forward while the pandemic continues to ravage American lives and economic well-being—and while evidence has never been more clear that a majority of Americans support the legal right to abortion and will vote that way—shows an appalling lack of focus on the priority of what voters want and need in this moment. Senators who support this move and use the Court as a tool for an undemocratic and oppressive agenda will feel their own pain at the ballot box in November.”Trump made a promise to the Radical Right to only consider jurists hostile to reproductive freedom—a vow he ran on in 2016 and doubled down on in a recent campaign letter to the anti-choice movement. It’s no surprise that Amy Coney Barrett has an extreme record that falls in line with that commitment. She has suggested that Roe v. Wade is an “erroneous decision, stated that life begins at conception, sided with states trying to restrict abortion access, and joined anti-choice groups in voicing opposition to the Affordable Care Act’s birth control benefit. Numerous activists hostile to abortion consulted with Trump on his strategy for this nomination, and have publicly praised Barrett. This nomination is just the latest effort in the Radical Right’s coordinated campaign to take over our courts, systematically laying the groundwork to halt progress, end Roe, and push ahead their agenda of power and control. Trump rode to power thanks in part to a boost from the Radical Right, and he has diligently worked to pay off that debt by nominating Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh to the Court, tipping its balance to an anti-choice, anti-freedom majority that has put reproductive freedom on the line like never before.Even amid a pandemic that has taken the lives of over 200,000 Americans, Senate Republicans remain laser-focused on prioritizing the confirmation of Trump’s judicial nominees rather than our health and well-being. Mitch McConnell has even said he would “leave no vacancy behind” and that “the pandemic will not prevent us from achieving that goal.” But they are doing so against a stark backdrop, as support for Roe is the highest it has been in decades: 77% of Americans support the legal right to abortion and do not want to see Roe overturned. Given the opportunity, Trump and the Radical Right will continue to wreak havoc on every level of the judicial branch—including the Supreme Court. That’s why NARAL Pro-Choice America has embarked on its largest-ever electoral program for the 2020 election, investing $34.7 million toward an integrated organizing, communications, digital, and political program designed to win races up and down the ballot and reach 3.6 million voters in key states. Through this unprecedented investment, NARAL is employing an array of tactics aimed toward reaching, persuading, and mobilizing key voter segments who will be essential to win critical races. September 26, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Trump picks Barrett as he moves to tilt U.S. Supreme Court rightward”. It was written by Steve Holland, Lawrence Hurley, and Andrew Chung. From the article: President Donald Trump on Saturday nominated Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, and she pledged to become a justice in the mold of the late staunch conservative Antonin Scalia – another milestone in Trump’s rightward shift of the top U.S. judicial body.Trump’s announcement during a flag-festooned White House Rose Garden ceremony – with Barrett, 48, by his side and her seven children on hand – sets off a scramble by Senate Republicans to confirm her as the president has requested before Election Day in 5-1/2 weeks as he seeks a second term in office.If confirmed by the Senate to replace liberal icon Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died at age 87 on Sept. 18, Barrett would become the fifth woman ever to serve on the court and would push its conservative majority to a commanding 6-3.Like Trump’s two other appointees, Neil Gorsuch in 2017 and Brett Kavanaugh in 2018, Barrett is young enough that she could serve for decades in the lifetime job, leaving a lasting conservative imprint. Barrett is the youngest Supreme Court nominee since conservative Clarence Thomas was 43 in 1991.Scalia, who died in 2016, was one of the most influential conservative justices in recent history. Barrett previously served as a clerk for Scalia on the high court and described him as her mentor, citing his “incalculable influence” on her life……An emboldened Supreme Court conservative majority could shift the United States to the right on hot-button issues by, among other things, curbing abortion rights, expanding religious rights, striking down gun control laws, halting the expansion of LGBT rights, and endorsing new restrictions on voting rights.Barrett, a devout Roman Catholic who earned her law degree and taught at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana, was appointed by Trump to the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2017 and is a favorite of religious conservatives, a key Trump voter bloc……Trump noted that she would be the first mother of school-age children ever on the court. Along with her lawyer husband, her children, two of whom were adopted from Haiti, were in the audience… September 26, 2020: Joe Biden (Democrat – Former Vice President) tweeted: “Today, President Trump nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court – a jurist with a written track record of disagreeing with the Court’s decision to uphold the Affordable Care Act. Vote like your health care is on the ballot – because it is” September 26, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to Supreme Court”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after President Trump nominated Amy Coney Barrett, a circuit judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, to serve as Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court:“For four years, President Trump has tried to crush the Affordable Care Act in the Congress and the Courts. This nomination threatens the destruction of life-saving protections for 135 million Americans with pre-existing conditions together with every other benefit and protection of the Affordable Care Act. “The rules preventing insurance companies from treating being a woman as a pre-existing condition will be gone. Young people’s ability to stay on their parents’ insurance until age 26 will be gone. The Medicaid expansion bringing health care to millions and Medicare drug savings for seniors from closing the ‘donut hole’ will be gone. The ban stopping insurers from going back to placing annual and lifetime limits on your health care will be gone. And the out-of-pocket cost maximums that prevent families from going bankrupt from endless medical bills will be gone too.“If this nominee is confirmed, millions of families’ health care will be ripped away in the middle of a pandemic that has infected seven million Americans and killed over 200,000 people in our country. “Everything hangs in the balance with this nomination: a woman’s constitutional right to make her own medical decisions about her own body, the right of LGBTQ Americans to marry who they love, the right of workers to organize and collectively bargain for fair wages, the future of our planet and environmental protections, voting rights and the right of every American to have a voice in our democracy. “Trump is exploiting this vacancy against the clear and overwhelming will of the American people, as he dismantles the pillars of health and economic security in America.“Every vote to confirm this nominee is a vote to dismantle health care. The American people will hold every Senator responsible for their vote at the ballot box.” September 26, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) tweeted: “Trump’s hand-picked successor to Justice Ginsburg’s seat makes it clear: they intend to destroy the Affordable Care Act & overturn Roe. This selection would move the court further to the right for a generation & harm millions of Americans. I strongly oppose Judge Barrett’s nomination.” September 26, 2020: Lambda Legal posted a press release titled: “Lambda Legal: Rushed Nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to Supreme Court Imperils U.S. Democracy”. From the press release: In response to reports that President Trump intends to nominate Judge Amy Coney Barrett, currently on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, to the United States Supreme Court to fill the vacancy left by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Lambda Legal CEO Kevin Jennings issued the following statement opposing Judge Barrett’s nomination and denouncing the rushed confirmation process proposed by U.S. Senate Republicans:“The Supreme Court of the United States, the court of last resort for those seeking justice in our country, should not be up for a power grab. We are a democracy, and this unprecedented attempt to confirm a nominee with an election already underway is undemocratic and indefensible. “It is impossible to overstate how much is at stake, not only for LGBTQ people and everyone living with HIV, but for our entire country. “If confirmed, Judge Amy Coney Barrett will unleash a Supreme Court majority that is hostile to all of our basic civil rights, and the impact will be felt for decades. Judge Barrett’s personal belief that marriage is between a man and a woman, coupled with her unwillingness to affirm that the Supreme Court’s decision making marriage equality the law of the land is settled law, should sound the alarm for anyone who cares about LGBTQ people and their families. However, her cramped so-called “originalist” view of the Constitution threatens the civil rights of not just LGBTQ people but a host of others, including women and people of color, who have relied on the courts to make progress in the fight for equality and justice. “The fight for this Supreme Court seat is about the fundamental rights that shape our lives. We are in the midst of an election that could reroute the course of our nation’s history. For that reason alone, we oppose the confirmation of any Supreme Court justice until that process has run its course. But on the merits alone, regardless of timing, Judge Barrett is simply not someone who can be trusted to affirm the right of all people, particularly those who are LGBTQ, to equal justice under law. We strongly urge the Senate to reject her nomination.” Lambda Legal has conducted detailed research on Judge Barrett, an excerpt of which can be found below. We will be providing questions from the LGBT community for Judge Barrett’s confirmation hearing and will release further information about this nomination.Judge Barrett on the record: Judge Barrett joined a letter in 2015 supporting the position that “marriage and family is founded on the indissoluble commitment of a man and a woman” and the “significance of sexual difference and the complementarity of men and women.”Judge Barrett wrote a law review article promoting a theory that U.S. Supreme Court case law is broken down into decisions that operate as mere precedent and decisions that serve as “superprecedent” (decisions that no Justice would overrule). To a critic, this approach seems to allow the Supreme Court to more easily overturn cases it views as merely “precedent.” Unsurprisingly, Judge Barrett would not respond to questions posed regarding whether she believes Obergefell v. Hodges qualifies as “superprecedent.”Judge Barrett was sharply critical of Chief Justice Roberts’ opinion in NFIB v. Sebellius, which upheld the Affordable Care Act. Judge Barrett characterized the decision as pushing the ACA “beyond its plausible meaning to save the statute.”Judge Barrett joined an en banc panel refusing to hear an appeal of a case involving the segregation of Black workers at AutoZone.Judge Barrett has given speeches for Alliance Defending Freedom, an organization whose animus towards the LGBTQ community is so great; it earned them a “Hate Group” designation from the Southern Poverty Law Center. When asked if she was aware of their classification, she pushed back, saying that they were only opining on a matter of “public controversy.” September 26, 2020: Senator Cory Booker (Democrat – New Jersey) tweeted: “Donald Trump’s nominee is a direct threat to the Affordable Care Act, reproductive choice, and so many other liberties we hold sacred. We can’t be silent as he tries to rush a Supreme Court Justice through the Senate. The American people deserve to have their voices heard.” September 26, 2020: Senator Amy Klobuchar (Democrat – Minnesota) tweeted: “With Americans already voting in droves, the President wants to jam through a Court nominee who has voiced serious opposition to the legality of the Affordable Care Act. Strip away healthcare in the middle of a pandemic? RBG always fought for what was right – I’ll do the same.” September 26, 2020: California Governor Gavin Newsom (Democrat, California) tweeted: “We’re in the midst of a global pandemic. Over 200,000 lives have been lost. And we are rushing through a nominee to the Supreme Court who is openly hostile toward the Affordable Care Act — willing to take away healthcare for millions of Americans.” September 26, 2020: Congressman Raja Krishamoorthi (Democrat – Illinois) tweeted: “Even as the President is now pledging his commitment to improving America’s health care, his Administration’s incessant attacks on the Affordable Care Act are primed to strip millions of Americans of their health insurance.” The tweet included a link to an article from CNBC. September 26, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “The Supreme Court may gut the Affordable Care Act. What’s next?” It was written by Greg Iacurci. From the article: The Supreme Court may soon erase the Affordable Care Act from existence — an outcome that could have far-reaching consequences for American health care.The high court is expected to hear oral arguments in a case seeking to overturn the law, also known as Obamacare, in November after the presidential election.It may be easier to secure a vote against the decade-old law if President Donald Trump can quickly install a sixth conservative justice to replace justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died last Friday. She was among the liberal ranks of the nine-member court……Millions of Americans could lose their health insurance as a result. They would likely face cost and access barriers to regain coverage, especially those with pre-existing conditions, according to experts. Expenses may rise for those who do retain their insurance, as they may lose coverage for some ACA-required services, experts said.The case, California v. Texas, hinges on a part of the Affordable Care Act known as the “individual mandate.”That provision requires people to have a minimum level of health insurance coverage or pay a financial penalty. The Supreme Court upheld this part of the law as constitutional in a 2012 case, NFIB v. Sebelius.However, in 2017, the Republican-majority Congress eliminated the financial penalty associated with the mandate as part of a tax-reform package.Plaintiffs in the upcoming Supreme Court case (who are primarily Republican state officials) argue the individual mandate is unconstitutional without the tax. They also argue the entire law is invalid without the mandate.The case, California v. Texas, hinges on a part of the Affordable Care Act known as the “individual mandate.”That provision requires people to have a minimum level of health insurance coverage or pay a financial penalty. The Supreme Court upheld this part of the law as constitutional in a 2012 case, NFIB v. Sebelius.However, in 2017, the Republican-majority Congress eliminated the financial penalty associated with the mandate as part of a tax-reform package.Plaintiffs in the upcoming Supreme Court case (who are primarily Republican state officials) argue the individual mandate is unconstitutional without the tax. They also argue the entire law is invalid without the mandate.The Trump administration supports these positions.More than 20 million Americans have gotten health insurance coverage as a result of the ACA.That includes around 12 million people who became newly eligible through an expansion of Medicaid to low-income adults, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. Thirty-four states and the District of Columbia adopted the expansion.Another 11 million got insurance through new marketplaces where individuals could buy health plans. More than 2 million gained coverage through a provision extending dependent coverage to adult children up to age 26… September 26, 2020: Senator Chris Murphy (Democrat – Connecticut) tweeted: “If Republicans push through a Supreme Court nominee, within weeks the Affordable Care Act will be gone (a case is pending). 20 million Americans will lose their health insurance and rates will skyrocket for anyone with a preexisting condition. In the middle of a pandemic.” September 26, 2020: Senator Tom Udall (Democrat – New Mexico) tweeted: “Let’s be clear: Senate Republicans want to rush a justice onto #SCOTUS in time to destroy the Affordable Care Act – as we battle a pandemic that’s killed 200,000+. The GOP told struggling families to wait on COVID relief. But they’ll confirm a lifetime justice in a few weeks.” This is the start of a short thread. September 26, 2020: Senator Tom Udall (Democrat – New Mexico) tweeted: “Trump and Senate Republicans are pulling out all the stops to rip away health care from millions in the middle of a pandemic. And they’re even threatening to use this nominee to put their thumb on the scale of the upcoming election – to stop counting votes. It is indefensible.” September 26, 2020: Senator Tom Udall (Democrat – New Mexico) tweeted: “On the eve of a presidential election, the GOP assault on precedent & principle – all to destroy the #ACA & advance an extreme right wing agenda they can’t pass in Congres – is unconscionable. I will fight as hard as I can. And I urge all Americans to make their voices heard.” This is the end of the thread. September 26, 2020: Representative Grace Ming (Democrat – New York) tweeted: “#SCOTUS nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett is a threat to the Affordable Care Act that gave millions of people health coverage, including those with preexisting conditions. @realDonaldTrump wants to evicerate the ACA & seating Judge Barrett would be one step close to doing this.” September 26, 2020: Representative David E. Price (Democrat – North Carolina) tweeted: “Instead of racing to combat COVID-19, Trump’s rushing to nominate Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. She’ll repeal the Affordable Care Act, during a pandemic, and strip health care away from millions of Americans. Let the American people decide – they’re already voting.” September 26, 2020: Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent – Vermont) tweeted: “After mismanaging a deadly pandemic, Trump and Senate Republicans want to ram through a Supreme Court nominee who will vote to destroy the Affordable Care Act, kick millions off their health care, and eliminate protections for preexisting conditions. An absolute outrage.” The tweet included a screenshot of Senator Sander’s statement on the SCOTUS Nomimation: Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) issued the following statement on President Trump’s nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court:“President Trump and Senate Republicans have badly mismanaged a deadly pandemic for months. Now, in the midst of an unprecedented public health crisis, they are willing to ram through a Supreme Court nominee – within days – who will vote to destroy the Affordable Care Act, kick millions of Americans off their health care, and eliminate protections for millions more who have preexisting conditions. This is an absolute outrage.“The American people will not stand for this cynical effort to fill a Supreme Court vacancy, just days before an election with someone who will roll back basic protections for women, workers, voters, people of color, the LGBT community, and our environment. I strongly oppose this nomination and we must fight as hard as we can to ensure that this nominee is not confirmed.” September 26, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Planned Parenthood Clergy Advocacy Board Statement on Donald Trump’s New Executive Order”. From the press release: Today, the Clergy Advocacy Board of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America issued the following statement on Donald Trump’s new executive order, which he announced earlier this week at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast and released last night:“As clergy, people invite us into their lives when the unexpected arises. But in these times of overheated political rhetoric, we must clarify: politicians are creating a false narrative to score political points. We are clergy to people facing real-life health crises and we know this is not how medical care works. The situation this executive order pretends to address simply does not happen, but the cruel stigma it creates for those seeking abortions is very real.“Our experience teaches, first and foremost, to avoid judging those who would seek an abortion, no matter the reason. When we are called upon to provide prayer, counsel, and support, we see that every pregnancy is different, and that pregnancy must not be taken for granted, especially in those circumstances when something goes horribly wrong. “We realize that many people’s faith will influence their decisions. We underscore the importance of allowing people to honor their differing faith teachings and personal conscience in these most trying and intimate moments of life. We respect these heartfelt personal decisions. “Meanwhile, we acknowledge that people disagree about abortion. Yet we underscore the importance of ensuring that everyone has access to high quality health care throughout their pregnancy. Health care providers and their patients need all of their options.“As religious leaders, we believe that God created human beings with the capacity to make wise decisions that direct their personal, private lives. We believe that each person deserves access to quality health care and must be spared from unwanted interference by politicians and hostile rhetoric.“We walk in no one’s shoes but our own, and we would all be wise to react with compassion for every pregnant person and their loved ones who face such an exceptional and sorrowful situation.” September 26, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press rlease titled: “Statement: Judge Amy Coney Barrett Nominated to the Supreme Court”. From the press release: Statement from Nancy Northup, President and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights on President Trump’s Nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court Just one week ago, the American people lost a champion of equal justice under law with the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She understood how critical legal rights are to unwedge oppressive structures that exacerbate societal inequalities. She fought to dismantle sex discrimination and understood that women must have control over their fertility and receive fair treatment during pregnancy if we are to achieve gender equality. Justice Ginsburg’s passing comes on the cusp of a presidential election, in the middle of a pandemic and economic crisis, and a national moral reckoning over the nation’s past and present manifestations of racial oppression. At this unprecedented time, and while the nation is still mourning and paying tribute to Justice Ginsburg’s tremendous contributions to advancing equality, President Donald Trump has nominated a replacement who would gut Justice Ginsburg’s legacy and turn back five decades of advancement for reproductive rights. The Senate Majority’s attempt to bulldoze this deeply troubling nomination through before the inauguration in January is unconscionable, an insult to the American public, an assault on the integrity of the Supreme Court, and a threat to critical constitutional rights. Americans need to make clear that their fundamental rights for generations to come will not be pawns in a political power grab. In the three years that Judge Amy Coney Barrett has served on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, she has ruled against abortion rights both times the issue was before her. The cases involve challenges to Indiana abortion restrictions, including one that bans abortion care if sought because of a fetal diagnosis or for reasons of sex or race. Judge Barrett joined an opinion which argued that “one of the Court’s abortion decisions holds that states are powerless to prevent abortions” on grounds such as those in the Indiana statute. In fact, Roe v. Wade and the cases that follow are very clear that the government does not have the power to interrogate women or scrutinize their decisions to choose to end a pregnancy prior to viability. What is alarming is that Judge Barrett went out of her way to make the argument that states could ban abortion if they don’t like a woman’s reason, even though Indiana had not sought further review of the issue. In a second case out of Indiana, Judge Barrett again joined an opinion that sought to review long-standing abortion rights law that clinics and doctors may challenge restrictive abortion laws before they go into effect. President Trump has vowed to nominate to the U.S. Supreme Court only justices who will overturn Roe v. Wade “automatically.” With the nomination of Judge Barrett, the President is presumably making good on his promise. Indeed, both of President Trump’s prior Supreme Court nominees failed to follow clear precedent in the most recent abortion rights case, June Medical Services v. Russo (2020), which the Supreme Court decided in June. Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch would have allowed a Louisiana abortion restriction to go into effect, despite the fact that an identical law from Texas was struck down as unconstitutional just four years before. Since the election of President Trump, states have accelerated their decades-long campaign to end abortion services. While there have been over 450 abortion restrictions passed at the state level since 2011, recent years saw more extreme bans, including Mississippi’s ban on abortion at 15 weeks, a case which is now pending for review by the Supreme Court. Chillingly, there are dozens of abortion rights cases currently moving through lower federal courts heading towards the Supreme Court. Some are test cases to overturn Roe v. Wade or to render it meaningless by upholding laws that make abortion impossible to access. In the strategy to end abortion access in the U.S., courts are the linchpin. It is imperative that no nominee be confirmed who would overturn or gut the constitutional protections for abortion access. One in four women in the U.S. will make the decision that ending a pregnancy is the right decision for her. The overwhelming majority of Americans do not want to see Roe overturned or hollowed out into a meaningless shell. They understand, as has been articulated by the Court, that the Constitution guarantees to each person the right to make the “most basic decisions about family and parenthood” because these are “choices central to personal dignity and autonomy.” The stakes are extraordinarily high for health care at large and the rights of all. The President has also vowed to end the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which has substantial protections for women’s health, including requiring that health insurance plans cover maternity care, provide contraception without a copay, do not charge women more for insurance premiums, and do not exclude coverage for pre-existing conditions, such as cesarean sections, domestic violence, or breast cancer. This Supreme Court term, the Court will decide whether it agrees with the Trump Administration that the ACA is unconstitutional, a position that could mean millions of Americans lose their health insurance in the middle of a pandemic. The Supreme Court has a vital role in protecting and upholding civil rights and liberties – including reproductive rights – for everyone in the United States. We cannot barrel forward with a nomination that will impact people’s lives for generations. September 29, 2020: Morning Consult posted an article titled: “Obamacare Support Hits Record High as Supreme Court Faces Ideological Shift”. From the article: …With the survival of the Affordable Care Act in jeopardy following President Donald Trump’s nomination of conservative Judge Amy Coney Barrett to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court, a new Morning Consult poll finds a record-high 62 percent of voters in support of the 2010 health law.That level of backing, which is up 7 percentage points from a Morning Consult survey conducted in the first quarter of 2020, comes as the ACA, also known as Obamacare, re-emerged as a flashpoint issue in the Nov. 3 elections: The Supreme Court is preparing to hear arguments Nov. 10 in a case that could entirely overturn the landmark health law. The lawsuit, brought by Republican-led states and backed by the Trump administration, hinges on the GOP’s 2017 tax law that wiped out the ACA’s individual mandate penalty, an unpopular provision that required all Americans to have health insurance or pay a fine. Without it, the lawsuit argues, the entire law is invalid……The record-high level of ACA support in the latest poll of 1,991 registered voters was fueled by increases among independents and Republicans: 36 percent of GOP voters said they support Obamacare, up 8 points from earlier this year, and backing from independents increased 9 points, to 59 percent. The vast majority of Democrats support the ACA, at 85 percent, and roughly half of Republicans (49 percent) oppose the law.Voters were mixed when asked about the health law’s fate, the poll shows, with 42 percent saying they think it’s likely the Supreme Court will strike down the ACA, while 32 percent said they think it’s unlikely.Yet more than half of voters (56 percent) think Obamacare should be improved and strengthened, while 20 percent said the law should be struck down in the upcoming Supreme Court case California v. Texas and 9 percent said it should be left as is. Republicans were the most divided, with 42 percent saying the ACA should be struck down and 33 percent saying the law should be improved and strengthened.That compares to 4 percent and 75 percent, respectively, among Democrats. Just 11 percent of Democrats and 8 percent of Republicans said the ACA should be left as is……One of the ACA’s key provisions has much broader support than the law itself: 79 percent of voters favor ensuring health coverage for people with pre-existing conditions, including 91 percent of Democrats and 63 percent of Republicans……The president has his work cut out for him in convincing voters that he is the candidate to safeguard those protections, according to the survey: 61 percent of voters said they trusted Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden more to protect insurance coverage for Americans with underlying conditions, compared with 29 percent who said they trusted Trump. Similarly, voters were more likely to trust Democrats in Congress (49 percent) than Republicans in Congress (35 percent) to handle health care for the country. September 30, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) tweeted: “More than 100 million Americans with preexisting conditions could lose their health care protections if Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans put another Trump justice on the Supreme Court. It’s that simple.” September 30, 2020: American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) posted news titled: “Victory: After Three Years of Battling in Court, the Trump Administration Abandons its Policy of Banning Abortion for Unaccompanied Immigrant Minors”. It was written by Brigitte Amiri and Meagan Burrows. From the news: As a direct result of the immense courage of our clients and three years of litigation, the Trump administration has officially abandoned its policy of preventing young immigrants in its custody from accessing abortion care. Yesterday, the administration adopted a new policy that prohibits Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) staff and staff employed by any ORR-funded shelter from blocking or interfering with unaccompanied pregnant minors’ access to abortion. ORR’s adoption of this new policy was a condition of our agreement to dismiss our case, which we have done today.It was three years ago that our heroic client Jane Doe — who at the time was 17 and was seeking refuge in the United States on her own — took on the Trump administration. In September 2017, we learned that ORR was trying to stop Ms. Doe from having an abortion through her fierce guardian ad litem, Rochelle Garza, and Texas-based Jane’s Due Process. Pursuant to the orders of then-ORR Director Scott Lloyd, Ms. Doe was effectively held hostage in the shelter where she was residing for over a month. The federal government prevented her from leaving the shelter to attend any abortion-related appointments; forced her to undergo a medically unnecessary ultrasound and to receive religious “counseling” from an anti-abortion crisis pregnancy center, where they also prayed over her; and she was kept under intensive surveillance. Lloyd also instructed staffers to inform Jane Doe’s parents of her pregnancy and abortion request against Ms. Doe’s express wishes, and despite the fact that she had already obtained a court order permitting her to proceed with her abortion without involving her parents.We rushed into court on behalf of Ms. Doe, and after weeks of court battles, obtained a court order allowing her to access abortion. Since then, we have fought alongside Ms. Doe and on behalf of our other plaintiffs, Jane Poe, Jane Roe and Jane Moe, who were also subjected to ORR’s coercive, anti-abortion tactics, to stop the federal government from commandeering the reproductive decisions of all young immigrants in its custody. Today, we are able to proudly declare that justice has finally been served.Our success is especially meaningful for Ms. Doe, who fearlessly represented hundreds of others to ensure that what happened to her would never happen to anyone else. In response to our victory, she said, “I am happy to know that my fight means that other young women like me will be able to make the decision about whether to become a parent for themselves.”… September 30, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Federal Court Temporarily Blocks Tennessee’s Medically Unsound Medication Abortion “Reversal” Law”. From the press release: Yesterday, a federal district court in Tennessee temporarily blocked from going into effect a law that would have forced providers to share false and misleading information with patients about the potential to “reverse” a medication abortion — an unproven and politically-motivated claim that has no basis in medical research. By passing a law that would force doctors to share misinformation not backed up by credible science, politicians are trying to steer patients to unproven, experimental medical treatments, and erode trust between patients and their providers. Nashville District Attorney Glenn Funk, one of the defendant state officials charged with enforcing this harmful law, recently filed a declaration with the court saying that he “will not enforce” the new law because it is “unconstitutional” and “criminal law must not be used by the State to exercise control over a woman’s body.” Tennessee Attorney General Herbert Slatery tried to block Funk’s filing.The law was set to go into effect on Oct. 1, 2020. If it had, providers would have been forced to share this misinformation with patients at least 48 hours in advance of providing a medication abortion, and again after the patient had taken the first medication, as well as post misleading signs with large, bold print informing patients about medication abortion “reversal.” Under the law, providers who did not comply would have faced criminal prosecution for a Class E felony, punishable by one to six years in prison. Facilities also faced a $10,000 fine per day for providing abortions while failing to display the required, misleading signage……The lawsuit is being brought by Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi, Knoxville Center for Reproductive Health, Memphis Center for Reproductive Health (“CHOICES”), and carafem — represented by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and the ACLU of Tennessee. A copy of the original complaint can be found here. THIS BLOG POST WILL BE UPDATED WHEN ADDITIONAL CREDIBLE INFORMATION IS FOUND. A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Four: July, August, September is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Four: April, May, JuneSeptember 22, 2020health insurance / Out of SpoonsImage by Omni Matryx from Pixabay This blog post, like the ones that preceded it, has the “receipts” about every bad thing the GOP and Trump tried to do to American’s health care. (It also includes the good things that Democrats – and occasionally some Republicans – did to protect our healthcare.) If you would like the full story, you may want to start with the blogs I’ve written about this topic so far. They include: A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part One A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Two A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Three A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Three – Continued A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Four 2020 marks the fourth year of the Donald Trump Presidency. His administration, and the Republicans in Congress, are still trying to destroy Obamacare. They are also going after reproductive health care, Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security Disability, the ability for LGBTQ people to receive health care, and the ability for undocumented children to be covered by Medicaid. The Guardian reported that President Trump was impeached on December 19, 2019, when the House of Representatives voted 230-197 to approve a first article of impeachment. April April 1, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Responds to Indiana Governor Eric Holcomb Exploiting COVID-19 Crisis to Push Anti-Choice Agenda”. From the press release: Indiana Governor Eric Holcomb announced yesterday that he intends to block access to abortion care in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, prioritizing an extreme ideological agenda over medical expertise and science. He joins at least five other Republican anti-choice governors who have exploited the public health crisis to advance their agenda to gut reproductive freedom. Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said:“The radical right has been working for decades to end the legal right to abortion—no matter the cost—and now they are using COVID-19 to achieve that goal.“As we face this national emergency, we must centralize sound science and medical experts in guiding decision making and not allow the individuals driven by ideology to craft policy to meet their beliefs over public welfare. “The medical community is clear and unified: Abortion care is time-sensitive and essential healthcare. They should be allowed to continue their work based on medicine and not arbitrary policy. The health and well-being of all Americans are at risk. Allowing ideology to trump science in this moment imperils everyone and sets a terrifying precedent as we face this national crisis.”The American Medical Association has criticized officials for “exploiting this moment to ban or dramatically limit women’s reproductive health care,” noting that during “this critical moment and every moment, physicians – not politicians – should be the ones deciding which procedures are urgent-emergent and need to be performed, and which ones can wait, in partnership with our patients.”Indiana already has some of the most extreme restrictions on abortion in the United States, including interrogating women about why they’re ending a pregnancy, forcing delays before a woman can receive abortion care, and subjecting women to mandatory biased counseling. At least 70% of Indiana women live in counties with no abortion clinic.Vice President Mike Pence, who is leading the federal COVID-19 response effort, has a history of prioritizing his own extreme personal beliefs over the health, safety, and well-being of Americans. As Governor of Indiana, Pence notoriously botched his handling of the state’s HIV crisis by failing to proactively implement public health measures at the urging of medical experts. April 2, 2020: Senator Cory Booker (Democrat -New Jersey) posted a press release titled: “Booker Blasts Trump Decision to Reject Healthcare Special Enrollment Period, Urges Congress to Pass His Legislation to Reopen HealthCare.gov”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) today blasted President Trump for his decision against reopening HealthCare.gov so that individuals currently without health insurance could sign up for coverage. Booker was the first lawmaker to propose leglislation that would create such an enrollment period so that millions of individuals impacted by COVID-19 could access coverage.“This decision is the height of callousness and irresponsibility,” Booker said. “We’re in the midst of a global pandemic and people need health care coverage, yet the President is denying people access to it. The Affordable Care Act was created for this very purpose – so individuals without health insurance could get affordable, quality coverage. At a time when our health care system is already under enormous strain, it makes no sense to willingly allow even one more individual to go without coverage.”“The President should reverse course immediately and allow for a special enrollment period. Failing that, Congress should quickly pass my Carefor COVID-19 Act, which would immediately create a special enrollment period so that uninsured individuals can get covered.”Booker introduced the Care for COVID-19 Act in early March. In addition to creating a special enrollment period for individuals impacted by Coronavirus, the bill would also require health insurance plans to cover services related to the virus, like testing and prevention, with no cost-sharing to patients. This measure, which Booker was also the first to propose, was incorporated in the two Coronavirus relief packages recently passed by the Senate. Millions of Americans will no longer face a cost barrier for Coronavirus testing or preventative services. April 2, 2020: Human Rights Campaign posted news titled: “HRC Responds to Trump Refusing to Reopen Obamacare Exchanges”. From the news: Over 20 million Americans and almost one-in-five LGBTQ people lack health coverage.Today, HRC responded to the Trump administration’s decision against reopening the Affordable Care Act’s Healthcare.gov marketplaces to new customers despite millions of Americans living without health insurance during a global pandemic.“Our country is in crisis. Americans are finding themselves jobless, lying awake at night trying to find ways to make ends meet and put food on their tables. The last thing people should worry about in a pandemic is access to health care,” said HRC President Alphonso David. “Over 20 million Americans and almost one-in-five LGBTQ people lack health coverage. By not reopening the ACA exchange, Trump is making the LGBTQ community, and every marginalized community across this nation, more vulnerable to the virus. Yet again, Trump has failed us when we needed presidential leadership most. Americans need the exchange reopened, President Trump must act now.”… April 3, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorneys General Becerra and Stein Send Letter Urging Trump Administration to Instate Special Enrollment Period on Healthcare.gov to Help Millions of Consumers with COVID-19”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein today led a coalition of 22 attorneys general in sending a letter to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and its Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), urging them to reconsider their shortsighted decision to deny a special enrollment period on HealthCare.Gov during the current worldwide pandemic. In the letter, the attorneys general argue that the federal government should take action to make it possible for Americans across the country – who are facing uncertainty as a result of COVID-19 – to obtain the healthcare coverage they need during this critical time.“As Americans work together to ‘flatten the curve’ of this global health crisis, our leaders must do all they can to support our communities through this period of physical and economic uncertainty,” said Attorney General Becerra. “At a time when millions have lost their jobs as a result of the pandemic, denying people the opportunity to gain healthcare coverage through HealthCare.Gov is not only irresponsible, it’s immoral. We’re calling on the Trump Administration to do their part so that people across our nation can access affordable, life-saving healthcare treatment. No one should have to choose between taking care of their health and going bankrupt.” In the letter, the attorneys general point out that as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, millions of individuals have lost their jobs—and with their jobs, their ability to pay for healthcare. Many people may be prevented from obtaining treatment because they lack healthcare coverage, or face financial ruin if they seek care. People working on the front lines in grocery stores, food service, transportation, and sanitation are suffering the brunt of the pandemic as they often lack health insurance and work jobs that do not provide sick leave. Because they are uninsured, they are less likely to have a regular place to obtain healthcare and are more likely to delay obtaining care due to fears of the cost. The Trump Administration has long touted choice and “informed healthcare decisions” as the bedrock of its healthcare policies, but now refuses to give Americans the option of obtaining comprehensive healthcare coverage to combat this unprecedented healthcare care crisis.The attorneys general also highlight that a national solution to this problem requires federal action. While some states run their own health insurance exchanges and may independently extend enrollment – like Covered California did on March 20, 2020 – 38 states, including North Carolina, rely on HealthCare.Gov to run their exchanges. The federal government has the legal ability to call for a special enrollment period, and must take decisive action so that people in those 38 states can obtain the healthcare they need during this critical time. Joining Attorneys General Becerra and Stein in sending the letter are the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the letter is available here. April 3, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a press release titled: “ACOG Leads Coalition of Nearly 1 Million Medical Professionals to Oppose Texas Restrictions on Abortion During the COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) led a coalition of major medical organizations representing nearly 1,000,000 health care professionals in filing an amicus brief telling the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that the COVID-19 pandemic should not be used as a pretext to effectively ban abortion in Texas.The right to terminate a pregnancy is a constitutionally protected legal right. However, a March 22, 2020, Order from Texas Governor Greg Abbott concerning procedures to be delayed or cancelled during the COVID-19 pandemic and its interpretation by the Texas Attorney General would impose criminal and other penalties on medical professionals for providing such care. “For the first time since 1973, abortion is effectively illegal in Texas,” the brief states. The brief explains that abortion is an essential, time-sensitive, and safe component of health care and that the there is no medical justification for this move.The 20 major medical organizations, which include the American Medical Association and organizations of front-line medical professionals such as the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American College of Physicians, the American College of Nurse-Midwives, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Osteopathic Association, and the American Academy of Nursing, explain that abortion is a time-sensitive procedure that should not be delayed or restricted. The brief explains that permitting abortion care – which is essential, time-sensitive health care – will not substantially increase the burdens hospitals face as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Instead, forcing women to carry pregnancies to term or to resort to illegal methods of abortion will increase reliance on the already strained health care system. Texas’s approach is contrary to the shared position of ACOG, the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and other physician organizations, which categorizes abortion as a time-sensitive, essential procedure. The AMA holds a similar position, as do other professional societies.The brief adds: “The Governor’s decision to effectively ban abortion in Texas and to criminalize physicians and medical professionals for providing necessary abortion care during the COVID-19 pandemic lacks a valid medical justification. If allowed to remain in effect, the Governor’s order will render abortion inaccessible in the state and severely harm women.”The brief explains that there is no evidence that delaying abortion during the pandemic would mitigate personal protective equipment (PPE) shortages or promote public health and safety. Indeed, forcing women to carry pregnancies to term or to resort to illegal abortion is likely to increase use of PPE.ACOG President Ted L. Anderson, MD, PhD, FACOG, FACS, stated, “In the face of this pandemic, physicians and clinicians across specialties on the frontlines are putting themselves at risk in order to meet our professional, ethical, and moral obligation to care for our patients. Imposing criminal penalties on health care professionals during this time will leave them unable to provide patients with needed care. The consequences of being unable to obtain an abortion profoundly impact a person’s life, health, and well-being.”Skye Perryman, JD, Chief Legal Officer for ACOG, added, “We are disappointed to see that Texas is ignoring the voice of the medical community and placing politics above the advice of physicians. Using the COVID-19 pandemic to push political agendas is unconscionable and is harmful the health of women.” Read the full brief. April 3, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Leads Fight to Stop Texas from Blocking Abortions During Coronavirus Pandemic.” From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today continued her leadership of the nation’s fight to ensure women’s reproductive health care is not stifled or infringed upon in any way during the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) public health crisis. Attorney General Games is leading a coalition of 19 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief – supporting the plaintiffs in Planned Parenthood v. Abbott, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit – opposing the State of Texas’s directive banning nearly all abortion services in the state, using the coronavirus as an excuse.“Neither Texas nor any other state has the right to use the coronavirus as an excuse to restrict a woman’s constitutional right to access an abortion,” said Attorney General James. “This is clearly an effort to circumvent the Supreme Court’s decision nearly 50 years ago guaranteeing women control over their bodies. Instead of trying to strip women of their choices, Texas should be joining us to increase access to medical abortions as we battle COVID-19. Our coalition will not hesitate to take legal action against any assault on women’s choices, women’s freedoms, and women’s bodies.”On Sunday, March 22, Texas Governor Greg Abbott issued Executive Order GA-09, “postpon all surgeries and procedures that are not immediately medically necessary” in the State of Texas for at least 30 days. The next day, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced that the executive order banned abortion services unless the life of the mother was in jeopardy. The executive order also states that any health care worker caught defying the order could be fined up to $1,000 and/or imprisoned in jail for up to 180 days.Last Wednesday, a lawsuit was filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and the Lawyering Project in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, which called on the courts to immediately issue a temporary restraining order blocking the ban.Earlier this week, District Court Judge Lee Yeakel issued a temporary restraining order that stopped the abortion ban from taking effect, stating, “Regarding a woman’s right to a pre-fetal-viability abortion, the Supreme Court has spoken clearly. There can be no outright ban on such a procedure.” Judge Yeakel continued, “This court will not speculate on whether the Supreme Court included a silent ‘except-in-a-national-emergency clause’ in its previous writings on the issue. Only the Supreme Court may restrict the breadth of its rulings.”The very next day — following a request by Texas — the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit halted the district court’s decision, effectively reinstituting the ban on abortions in Texas. According to news reports, women in Texas have already been turned away when seeking an abortion because of the directive.Today, Attorney General James is following through on last week’s pledge to lead a coalition of attorneys general in opposing Texas’ ban and filing an amicus brief in support of the plaintiff organizations. In the amicus brief, Attorney General James and the coalition argue that reproductive health care is an “essential medical service” that should be available to women, despite the ongoing public health emergency and that Texas’s “prohibition blocks the exercise of a woman’s constitutional right to access abortion.” Although Texas claims that its abortion ban is needed to conserve limited personal protective equipment (PPE), “most pre-viability abortions do not use PPE or hospital services, and thus restricting such abortions does not appreciably preserve those resources.”The coalition goes on to argue, at a time when the entire U.S. population is being asked to limit travel, any restriction on abortions could force “women to seek those services in other States, thereby increasing the potential for transmission of COVID-19 and for burdening petitioners’ hospital facilities and PPE supplies.” Further, the coalition contends that residents of New York and other amici states may currently be in Texas without a way to return home, but they still have a right to time-sensitive reproductive care. Additionally, the coalition highlights that as New York nears the peak of projected COVID-19 hospitalizations, health care professionals from other states are being asked to travel to New York to assist, on the understanding that New York health care professionals will eventually travel to other states in an effort to assist when other states’ COVID-19 infection rates rise. These New York physicians should be able to provide residents in Texas with the same health care options they would receive anywhere else.The coalition concludes by arguing that “a public health crisis should not be used as an excuse to deny women ‘an ability to control their reproductive lives,’” and that any ban on abortion — even for a matter of weeks — can end up restricting a woman’s “constitutional right to choose to terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability,” especially in states, like Texas, which already have limited timetables in place for electing to have an abortion.Instead of limiting women’s access to abortions, Texas should be joining Attorney General James’ call to increase access to telehealth medicine and the medical-abortion pill so that woman who choose to have an abortion don’t have to fear going out and contracting COVID-19 during this public health crisis. Earlier this week, Attorney General James sent a letter to both the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration requesting that the Trump Administration waive or utilize its discretion not to enforce its Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) designation, which dictates and subsequently impedes women’s access to the medical-abortion prescription drug known as Mifepristone. Attorney General James called on the Trump Administration to ensure that women across the country can more easily access this critical health care service while the pandemic leaves many women unable to seek in-person care.The States of Alabama, Iowa, Mississippi, and Ohio have also implemented similar orders banning abortions during the COVID-19 pandemic, limiting their residents’ constitutional rights to access an abortion. Attorney General James plans to lead coalitions opposing these bans as well… April 3, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Joins Multistate Amicus Brief Challenging Texas’ Restrictions on Abortion During COVID-19″. From the press release”: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today joined a multistate coalition of 19 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in the Fifth Circuit Court supporting Planned Parenthood health centers (Planned Parenthood for Choice, Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas, Planned Parenthood of South Texas), Whole Woman’s Health, and other providers in their case challenging a Texas executive order that declares abortion non-essential medical care during the COVID-19 response. The order would ban all abortion services in the state. In the brief, the attorneys general argue that abortion care is an essential healthcare service and urge the Court to enjoin the executive order, so that women can access needed, time-sensitive healthcare, including safe and legal abortion. “During the COVID-19 pandemic, we should be making it easier for women to safely access time-sensitive, essential healthcare, not using a crisis as an excuse to pander to antichoice ideology,” said Attorney General Becerra. “We’re standing with attorneys general across the country to defend women’s right to reproductive healthcare, including safe and legal abortion.” On March 22, 2020, Texas Governor Greg Abbott issued Executive Order GA 09, “relating to hospital capacity during the COVID-19 disaster.” The Executive Order prohibits all surgeries and procedures that are not immediately medically necessary to correct a serious medical condition or to preserve a patient’s life. In response to this Executive Order, on March 23, 2020, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton issued a press release singling out abortion providers and suggesting that non-emergency abortions would violate the Executive Order and could be subject to criminal penalties, including jail time. This also precludes medication abortion which only involves taking medication and is neither a “surgery” nor a “procedure.” In essence, Attorney General Paxton’s press release operates as a near-complete ban on abortion in Texas during the COVID-19 public health emergency. As a result of the Attorney General’s statements, plaintiff providers have cancelled scheduled appointments and have stopped providing all abortion care. This means that the women of Texas do not have the freedom to make a very personal decision in consultation with their medical providers. In the amicus brief the attorneys general argue that the executive order: Harms patients’ physical, emotional, and financial wellbeing, and the wellbeing of their families;Denies Texas women their fundamental right to determine when and whether to have a child or to add to their existing families; and Will force some women to travel to other states in search of services, increasing the potential for transmission of COVID-19 and the burden on state hospitals and healthcare workers. In filing the brief, Attorney General Becerra joins the attorneys general of New York, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District Of Columbia. A copy of the brief is available here. April 3, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “How Trump surprised his own team by ruling out Obamacare”. It was written by Adam Cancryn, Nancy Cook, and Susannah Luthi. From the article: As the coronavirus ran rampant and record jobless numbers piled up, the nation’s health insurers last week readied for a major announcement: The Trump administration was reopening Obamacare enrollment to millions of newly uninsured Americans.It was an announcement that never came.The White House instead rejected the prospect of allowing new sign-ups across the 38 Affordable Care Act marketplaces it controls — a decision that shocked the health care industry, triggered widespread criticism and prompted a scramble within the administration to find a new way to care for the growing population left exposed to the pandemic.It’s also one that allowed Trump to sidestep an awkward reckoning with the Affordable Care Act, which he’s long vowed to kill, and the health care program bearing the name of his Democratic predecessor.The president opposed reopening the Obamacare marketplaces when presented with the option, one person familiar with the decision said — prompting the creation of an initiative that federal officials are now rushing to construct……On Friday, Trump touted his administration’s plan to cover uninsured patients’ coronavirus treatments by paying hospitals for their costs, on the condition that providers also not stick those people with separate charges……That declaration surprised even some officials in the Health and Human Services Department, who believed the concept was still under consideration. And amid a crush of criticism from Democrats led by 2020 presidential frontrunner Joe Biden, it worried officials who viewed the verdict as an unforced error in the middle of a historic pandemic……Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar on Friday insisted that paying providers directly for coronavirus treatment represented a faster and more targeted solution.The uninsured will be able to seek treatment immediately, without worrying about first purchasing insurance coverage, Azar said. And hospitals will be reimbursed swiftly for their expenses, on the additional condition that they not stick their patients with surprise bills……Yet the announcement comes with fresh questions about how smoothly the administration can run the payment process in the middle of an all-consuming crisis, how much of the $100 billion fund already earmarked for hospitals it will consume and how expansive the coverage for the uninsured will be.If Trump had chosen instead to reopen the HealthCare.gov website — as 11 largely blue states that control their own markets have already done — people without insurance could buy more comprehensive policies that not only would cover coronavirus treatments but any follow-up treatment, mental-health care, and future check-ups.Trump, however, has long opposed Obamacare, pledging on the campaign trail to eliminate it and making the law’s repeal and replacement a top priority of his presidency. That aspiration ended in failure in 2017, though the administration has successfully rolled back a central requirement that all Americans purchase health insurance.The White House has since sought to limit Obamacare’s reach, while backing a lawsuit by GOP-led states to wipe out the law altogether — a position it’s continued to hold as coronavirus cases mount……The White House decision also caught the hospital industry off guard, frustrating executives who spent the past week awaiting guidance for how strained front-line facilities could access the new funding… April 3, 2020: California Governor Gavin Newsom posted a press release titled: “Governor Newsom Issues Executive Order to Expand Telehealth Services”. From the press release: Governor Gavin Newsom today signed an executive order to expand protections to medical providers as they amplify the use of video chats and similar applications to provide routine and non-emergency medical appointments in an effort to minimize patient exposure to COVID-19.The order relaxes certain state privacy and security laws for medical providers, so they can provide telehealth services without the risk of being penalized. This action is similar to the federal HHS Office for Civil Rights waiver issued on March 17, 2020 regarding federal privacy and security laws.“This order provides flexibility to our medical and health providers so that they are able to provide continuity of health services to people across the state, and will allow providers to assess a greater number of patients while limiting the risk of exposure and infection of other persons from in-person consultations,” said Governor Newsom.Governor Newsom continues to encourage people to practice safe physical distancing and to comply with stay-at-home orders to bend the COVID-19 curve. A copy of the Governor’s executive order can be found here, and the text of the order can be found here. April 4, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Court Blocks Oklahoma’s COVID-19 Abortion Ban”. From the press release: Today a federal district judge in Oklahoma granted a temporary restraining order at the request of the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America and Dechert LLP, allowing providers to continue time-sensitive, essential abortion care in spite of Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt’s order requiring all elective surgeries and minor medical procedures be postponed. He singled out abortion care in a press release, claiming the order prohibited abortions in the state. Today’s ruling allows medication abortions to resume in the state, along with abortion procedures for patients who would be pushed beyond the gestation limit for care.In his decision, federal district Judge Charles Goodwin wrote that the state of Oklahoma, “has acted in an ‘unreasonable,’ ‘arbitrary,’ and ‘oppressive’ way—and imposed an ‘undue burden’ on abortion access—in imposing requirements that effectively deny a right of access to abortion.” Orders like these have forced some patients to travel hundreds of miles in a pandemic just to access basic and essential health care. “The court has stopped Governor Stitt from exploiting this devastating pandemic as a weapon in his battle to ban abortion,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “Abortion is time-sensitive, essential healthcare. Women in Oklahoma are again able, for the time being, to access abortion care in their state at a time when travel is even more challenging.”……The Center for Reproductive Rights is challenging a host of other abortion restrictions in Oklahoma, including: a ban on the use of telemedicine to provide medication abortion care; a law that forces patients to delay their abortion care for at least 72 hours after receiving certain state-mandated information; a “physician-only” law that bans qualified medical professionals from providing medication abortion care; a ban on the standard method of abortion after approximately 14 weeks of pregnancy; and a law requiring doctors to tell patients that some abortions can be “reversed”—a patently false statement. This lawsuit was filed by T.J. Tu with the Center for Reproductive Rights, along with Planned Parenthood Federation of America, pro-bono counsel Dechert LLP, and local counsel Blake Patton of Walding & Patton PLLC. Plaintiffs in the case are Trust Women—an abortion provider with clinics in Oklahoma and Kansas—Dr. Larry Burns, and Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains—which provides abortion services in Oklahoma and Kansas. The decision is available here. April 6, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Court Blocks Oklahoma’s COVID-19 Abortion Ban”. From the press release: Today a federal district judge in Oklahoma granted a temporary restraining order at the request of the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America and Dechert LLP, allowing providers to continue time-sensitive, essential abortion care in spite of Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt’s order requiring all elective surgeries and minor medical procedures be postponed. He singled out abortion care in a press release, claiming the order prohibited abortions in the state. Today’s ruling allows medication abortions to resume in the state, along with abortion procedures for patients who would be pushed beyond the gestation limit for care.In his decision, federal district Judge Charles Goodwin wrote that the state of Oklahoma, “has acted in an ‘unreasonable,’ ‘arbitrary,’ and ‘oppressive’ way—and imposed an ‘undue burden’ on abortion access—in imposing requirements that effectively deny a right of access to abortion.” Orders like these have forced some patients to travel hundreds of miles in a pandemic just to access basic and essential health care. “The court has stopped Governor Stitt from exploiting this devastating pandemic as a weapon in his battle to ban abortion,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “Abortion is time-sensitive, essential healthcare. Women in Oklahoma are again able, for the time being, to access abortion care in their state at a time when travel is even more challenging.”“It’s a huge relief that we can start seeing patients again, at least for now,” said Julie Burkhart, founder and CEO of Trust Women. “We hope the court will keep the ban blocked so our patients aren’t forced to travel to other states to find abortion care at a time when travel is risky and discouraged.”“Though this is a relief for patients, they should have never had to wait for a judge to rule before accessing the time-sensitive care they needed. Gov. Stitt is wasting valuable time and resources using the COVID-19 pandemic to score political points,” said Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “To politicians and anti-abortion groups playing political games amid a pandemic, let this be a lesson to you that we won’t allow you to put our patients and the community at risk.” “Planned Parenthood is committed to ensuring that every person is able to get the essential health care they need,” McGill Johnson continued. “But the same cannot be said for Gov. Stitt. Planned Parenthood will work day by day, week by week to safeguard the ability of patients and the community to access essential health care, no matter what.”“Today’s ruling is important because our patients need and deserve access to abortion care,” said Brandon Hill, Ph.D., president and CEO of Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains. “Abortion is an essential and time-sensitive medical procedure that should not be caught in the crosshairs of poltical agendas—especially during this public health crisis. Access to health care is a basic human right, and every person deserves care that gives them control over their own bodies, lives, and futures. Planned Parenthood Great Plains will always be there for our patients. We will do everything in our power to ensure access for patients who need sexual and reproductive health care, including access to abortion.”Oklahoma is not the first state to attempt to ban abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the ACLU, and other allies have also filed lawsuits in Alabama, Iowa, Ohio, and Texas. Temporary restraining orders were also secured in Ohio, Alabama, and Texas. However, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stayed the temporary restraining order in Texas on March 31.Leading medical organizations like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Medical Association (AMA) have opposed these attempts to restrict abortion during the pandemic. The AMA stated, “At this critical moment and every moment, physicians – not politicians – should be the ones deciding which procedures are urgent-emergent and need to be performed, and which ones can wait, in partnership with our patients.”The Center for Reproductive Rights is challenging a host of other abortion restrictions in Oklahoma, including: a ban on the use of telemedicine to provide medication abortion care; a law that forces patients to delay their abortion care for at least 72 hours after receiving certain state-mandated information; a “physician-only” law that bans qualified medical professionals from providing medication abortion care; a ban on the standard method of abortion after approximately 14 weeks of pregnancy; and a law requiring doctors to tell patients that some abortions can be “reversed”—a patently false statement. This lawsuit was filed by T.J. Tu with the Center for Reproductive Rights, along with Planned Parenthood Federation of America, pro-bono counsel Dechert LLP, and local counsel Blake Patton of Walding & Patton PLLC. Plaintiffs in the case are Trust Women—an abortion provider with clinics in Oklahoma and Kansas—Dr. Larry Burns, and Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains—which provides abortion services in Oklahoma and Kansas. The decision is available here. April 6, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted an article titled: “Court Blocks Oklahoma’s COVID-19 Abortion Ban”. From the press release: Today a federal district judge in Oklahoma granted a temporary restraining order at the request of the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America and Dechert LLP, allowing providers to continue time-sensitive, essential abortion care in spite of Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt’sorder requiring all elective surgeries and minor medical procedures be postponed. He singled out abortion care in a press release, claiming the order prohibited abortions in the state. Today’s ruling allows medication abortions to resume in the state, along with abortion procedures for patients who would be pushed beyond the gestation limit for care. In his decision, federal district Judge Charles Goodwin wrote that the state of Oklahoma, “has acted in an ‘unreasonable,’ ‘arbitrary,’ and ‘oppressive’ way—and imposed an ‘undue burden’ on abortion access—in imposing requirements that effectively deny a right of access to abortion.” Orders like these have forced some patients to travel hundreds of miles in a pandemic just to access basic and essential health care.Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“Though this is a relief for patients, they should have never had to wait for a judge to rule before accessing the time-sensitive care they needed. Gov. Stitt is wasting valuable time and resources using the COVID-19 pandemic to score political points. To politicians and anti-abortion groups playing political games amid a pandemic, let this be a lesson to you that we won’t allow you to put our patients and the community at risk.“Planned Parenthood is committed to ensuring that every person is able to get the essential health care they need. But the same cannot be said for Gov. Stitt. Planned Parenthood will work day by day, week by week to safeguard the ability of patients and the community to access essential health care, no matter what.”Statement from Brandon Hill, Ph.D., president and CEO of Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains:“Today’s ruling is important because our patients need and deserve access to abortion care. Abortion is an essential and time-sensitive medical procedure that should not be caught in the crosshairs of political agendas—especially during this public health crisis. Access to health care is a basic human right, and every person deserves care that gives them control over their own bodies, lives, and futures. Planned Parenthood Great Plains will always be there for our patients. We will do everything in our power to ensure access for patients who need sexual and reproductive health care, including access to abortion.”Statement from Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“The court has stopped Governor Stitt from exploiting this devastating pandemic as a weapon in his battle to ban abortion. Abortion is time-sensitive, essential healthcare. Women in Oklahoma are again able, for the time being, to access abortion care in their state at a time when travel is even more challenging.”Statement from Julie Burkhart, founder and CEO of Trust Women:“It’s a huge relief that we can start seeing patients again, at least for now. We hope the court will keep the ban blocked so our patients aren’t forced to travel to other states to find abortion care at a time when travel is risky and discouraged.”Oklahoma is not the first state to attempt to ban abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the ACLU, and other allies have also filed lawsuits in Alabama, Iowa, Ohio, and Texas. Temporary restraining orders were also secured in Ohio, Alabama, and Texas. However, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stayed the temporary restraining order in Texas on March 31.Leading medical organizations like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Medical Association (AMA) have opposed these attempts to restrict abortion during the pandemic. The AMA stated, “At this critical moment and every moment, physicians – not politicians – should be the ones deciding which procedures are urgent-emergent and need to be performed, and which ones can wait, in partnership with our patients.”The Center for Reproductive Rights is challenging a host of other abortion restrictions in Oklahoma, including: a ban on the use of telemedicine to provide medication abortion care; a law that forces patients to delay their abortion care for at least 72 hours after receiving certain state-mandated information; a “physician-only” law that bans qualified medical professionals from providing medication abortion care; a ban on the standard method of abortion after approximately 14 weeks of pregnancy; and a law requiring doctors to tell patients that some abortions can be “reversed”—a patently false statement.This lawsuit was filed by T.J. Tu with the Center for Reproductive Rights, along with Planned Parenthood Federation of America, pro-bono counsel Dechert LLP, and local counsel Blake Patton of Walding & Patton PLLC. Plaintiffs in the case are Trust Women—an abortion provider with clinics in Oklahoma and Kansas—Dr. Larry Burns, and Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains—which provides abortion services in Oklahoma and Kansas.The decision is available here. April 6, 2020: Centers for Reproductive Rights posted an article titled: “In the Face of COVID-19 Pandemic, Sexual and Reproductive Health Services Are Essential”. From the press release: As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to spread across the globe – pushing healthcare systems to their limits and compelling governments and healthcare institutions to make difficult and increasingly urgent decisions about how to deliver care while also curbing virus transmission – it is critical that responses to this crisis recognize that sexual and reproductive health services are essential, respecting people’s rights to make decisions about their bodily autonomy and integrity.The COVID-19 pandemic poses particular threats to poor and marginalized women who face greater difficultly in protecting themselves from transmission due to lack of information, resources, and access to quality health and social services. Women’s societal roles as caregivers, both within their own households and for others, places them at greater risk of infection and exacerbates the impact of COVID in their lives. The rights and health of these women must be central considerations as governments and other stakeholders formulate their response to this public health crisis.At the same time, anti-abortion groups and some governments are exploiting this situation to deny women and girls access to abortion services. These cynical attempts to rollback decades of progress in increasing women and girls’ access to safe, legal abortion care must be stopped. They otherwise threaten to increase the strain on already over-burdened health care systems by compelling individuals to seek out unsafe abortion services and increase the need for post-abortion care. As resources are rapidly being redeployed in response to COVID-19, we are calling on all governments to:Provide abortion as an essential health service. Abortion access is essential preserve the life and health of pregnant people.The attendant impacts of COVID-19 have the potential to severely undermine access to abortion services, as travel restrictions limit transportation options, the economic slowdown pushes many individuals into more precarious financial situations, and healthcare system capacity becomes increasingly limited. Abortion is always a time-sensitive procedure that should not be postponed. Measures that undermine access to abortion care will force people to seek out unsafe abortion services or services later in pregnancy, putting their lives and health at risk. Remove Legal and Administrative Barriers to Abortion Services, including to Medical Abortion. Governments and healthcare institutions must also remove all legal and administrative hurdles to access abortion services, including lifting criminal sanctions on abortion, and ensure all possibilities to guarantee safe access while minimizing contact with healthcare personnel at the frontlines of tackling the pandemic, including the adoption of technological advancements such as telemedicine and ensuring women and girls are not unnecessarily compelled to make multiple trips to healthcare facilities.Medication abortion is a safe, cost-effective means for enabling women and girls to end an unwanted pregnancy. Misoprostol, one of the active drugs for Medication abortion, is included in the WHO’s Model List of Essential Medicines—meaning that governments should register it as an essential medicine. Yet in many countries, Medication abortion remains unavailable. To increase access to safe abortion services while also reducing the strain on healthcare systems, medication abortion should be made widely available, including over the counter at pharmacies. When desired, women and girls should also be able to utilize telemedicine to consult with healthcare providers on medication abortion.Comply with the Minimum Initial Services Package for Reproductive Health, an international standard of care that should be implemented at the onset of every emergency, including public health emergencies. This priority set of lifesaving and essential services includes obstetric, prenatal, and postnatal care; contraceptive information and services, including emergency contraception; and post abortion care and post-rape care.Guarantee Access to Quality, Respectful Maternal Health Care. As resources are reallocated to respond to the pandemic, it remains critical that all people have access to quality maternal health care, free from discrimination, violence and coercion. Resource constraints and emergency situations are often precursors to human rights violations in maternal health settings, such as mistreatment and abuse of women during delivery and violations of the right to informed consent. Such violations disproportionately impact marginalized populations, such as racial and ethnic minorities, poor women and rural women. Governments must take steps to guarantee women and girls’ rights in these settings. Furthermore, as information continues to evolve about the risk of COVID-19 to pregnant women and newborn children, it is paramount that governments and health care providers continue ensuring women’s rights to make decisions about labor and childbirth to the extent feasible.Ensure Timely Access to Contraception, Including Emergency Contraception. Disrupted supply chains and reallocation of health resources during COVID-19 can have dire impacts on access to contraception. In addition to being essential for enabling people to make decisions about their reproductive autonomy, guaranteeing access to contraception can also mitigate near-term demands on the healthcare system that would result from unplanned pregnancy. States must ensure access to contraceptive information and services as an essential measure for enabling people to avoid unintended pregnancy, which can have significant impacts on their lives and health. April 6, 2020: Human Rights Campaign posted news titled: “An Update on Gender Affirming Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the news: The postponement of essential surgeries can take a dangerous mental health toll on patients, many of whom have waited years and gone through a long and painful process in order to finally get them scheduled.Post submitted by Carl G Streed Jr. MD, MPH (Research Lead), Jennifer Siegel MD (Medical Director), Center for Transgender Medicine & Surgery at Boston Medical CenterBy now, we all have seen the impact of COVID-19 on our daily lives. We have been quarantining and physically distancing from our loved ones, witnessed hospitals overwhelmed by the crisis and seen people lose their jobs and livelihoods. Some of us may have already experienced personal loss. We know LGBTQ communities are particularly vulnerable to both the economic and health impacts of the virus–because they are more likely to work in industries highly-impacted by the pandemic, such as service industries–and they may have more health risk factors that exacerbate the disease, like smoking.As part of their response to the pandemic, hospital systems across the country have postponed non-emergency surgeries and procedures in order to prioritize care for COVID-19 patients. This includes many gender-affirming procedures, which are now unfortunately on hold.We know that gender-affirming medical and surgical care are essential to the long-term well-being of our transgender and gender diverse patients, families and communities. Just because these procedures have currently been classified as non-urgent does not mean we consider them to be non-essential. We know that gender-affirming care is indeed lifesaving, but we also know that right now the immediate health of the public is paramount. While our transgender and gender-diverse patients understand this, we know that understanding reasons for postponing procedures does not make these postponements any less distressing.As health care professionals, we recognize that the postponement of these essential surgeries can take a dangerous mental health toll on our patients, many of whom have waited years and gone through a long–and often painful–process in order to finally get them scheduled. We want to be sure that our patients know that we are still here for them during this stressful and painful time. If you or a loved one has had gender-affirming care postponed due to COVID-19, you are not alone.Our Center for Transgender Medicine & Surgery at Boston Medical Center is still fielding phone calls, conducting telemedicine visits and managing hormone therapy. We do not know of any shortages of hormone therapy at this time, and we ask that patients do not “stock up” or “hoard” medications as that could potentially lead to a temporary shortage. We need to look out for each other and be sure that everyone is getting the care they can at this time — so please reach out to your trans siblings to let them know they are supported and loved… April 7, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Co-leads Letter Urging Trump Administration to Safeguard Americans’ Healthcare Coverage, Halt Implementation of Their Abortion Separate Payment Rule”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and New York Attorney General Letitia James, leading a coalition of seven attorneys general, sent a letter urging the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to delay the implementation of its rule that unlawfully reinterprets Section 1303 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Implementing the rule would limit healthcare coverage, including reproductive care, and endanger Americans’ health as the nation works to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. In the letter, the attorneys general argue that HHS should halt implementation of the rule to aid states’ response to COVID-19 and protect the healthcare coverage that Americans rely on. “The Trump Administration’s separate payment rule puts Americans’ healthcare coverage at risk, and burdens states and health plans at a time when we should be streamlining our response to the global COVID-19 crisis,” said Attorney General Becerra. “This burdensome rule is intended to limit access to women’s reproductive care, but it will foolishly endanger access to all healthcare when people need it most. The Trump Administration should do the right thing and protect Americans’ healthcare coverage during this unprecedented public health crisis.” Under California law, all health plans regulated by the state are required to offer abortion coverage as part of their basic healthcare services. On December 27, 2019, HHS issued a final rule requiring qualified health plans participating in the state exchanges like Covered California to separately bill for the portion of health insurance premiums attributable to abortion coverage. This would require consumers to make a separate payment of at least one dollar for these services. Failure to pay the separate bill puts individuals at risk of losing all of their healthcare coverage. HHS itself has conceded that requiring separate bills and separate payments will inevitably lead to confusion, putting more than 1.4 million enrollees in California alone at risk of losing coverage if they inadvertently fail to make full premium payments on time. The rule also burdens states with unnecessary administrative costs and harms consumers who may face higher insurance premiums as a result of increased costs to carriers. In the letter, the attorneys general argue that implementing the rule during this public health and economic crisis is irresponsible and harmful to people across the country. Over the past several weeks, the U.S. has experienced a significant increase in the need for aid, funding, and other support to help various states respond to the pandemic. Pressing ahead with implementation of this rule during the global health crisis would impose additional financial burdens on state agencies; require countless personnel hours, funds, and resources to come into compliance; and jeopardize the health of consumers more in need of health coverage than ever. Furthermore, HHS has recognized that implementing the rule will have significant economic consequences. According to HHS’s own estimates, the one-time costs to bring all affected health plans into compliance would include over 2.9 million hours of work and approximately $385 million for insurers across the nation. These costs would likely result in increased prices for consumers, who are already suffering from the economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. The attorneys general call on HHS to halt implementation of the rule to protect the health and economic security of consumers across the nation. In sending the letter, Attorney General Becerra joined the attorneys general of New York, Colorado, Maryland, Oregon, Vermont, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the letter is available here. April 7, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Planned Parenthood’s Clergy Advocacy Board: COVID-19 Response Must Preserve Access to Abortion, Reproductive Health Care”. From the press release: The Planned Parenthood Federation of America Clergy Advocacy Board today condemned efforts by some state and national leaders to use the COVID-19 response to halt abortions. This call from faith leaders to support access to reproductive health care follows the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals’ use of an extraordinary measure to allow Texas Gov. Greg Abbott to drastically restrict essential, time-sensitive abortion procedures. Planned Parenthood and our partners are fighting in court in Texas, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Alabama to protect access. Statement from The Rev. Marci Auld Glass, Planned Parenthood Federation of America Clergy Advocacy Board Chair and a Presbyterian minister in Boise, Idaho:“As a pastor who often accompanies members of my community through personal struggle, I know that individuals should always be assured the right to follow their consciences and make their own decisions about their health care, including abortion. Anxieties about how so many will provide and care for themselves and their families are already so high. In this moment of crisis, people of faith must stand together and demand that politicians stop using this pandemic to gamble with women’s health, lives, and well-being by denying them access to abortion care.”For more than two decades, the Clergy Advocacy Board has worked with Planned Parenthood at the national and state levels to further reproductive rights and freedom for all people, building on a history of faith leaders’ activism in support of reproductive health care. Its members, who are dedicated clergy and faith leaders from different denominations and communities throughout the U.S., lead a national effort to increase public awareness of the theological and moral basis for reproductive health.The full statement from the Clergy Advocacy Board is below.Statement of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America Clergy Advocacy Board:“The Clergy Advocacy Board calls upon people of faith to speak out in this moment of crisis and affirm that access to abortion care is a religious value. Every person in our country has the right to make decisions about their reproductive lives, informed by their own culture, faith tradition, conscience, and community values. Americans should not fear that politicians will take advantage of a pandemic to impose their own beliefs on others. We condemn all efforts to put the health and well-being of pregnant people at risk by delaying or denying access to abortion care.“As leaders in our communities, we know how critical it is that our neighbors and friends can receive the essential health care that they, in their hearts, know is right for them. Many of us serve as pastoral counselors and chaplains to families and individuals. People invite us into their lives during the most challenging moments and the hardest medical decisions. Our experience leads us to protect access to reproductive health care, especially during this national medical emergency. We care about community health and want to ensure that basic health care is available in our localities.“The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbates the vulnerabilities faced by a disturbing percentage of our population. So many are already struggling to make ends meet, to get the care they need, and to plan for their families and their futures. This is especially true for our black and brown neighbors, our refugee and immigrant neighbors, our unhoused neighbors, our LGBTQ+ neighbors, those facing domestic violence, and all who face the burden of inequality. Therefore, we call on national, state, and local leaders to do everything necessary to provide health care coverage to all who need it, regardless of their ability to pay, and that must include essential reproductive health care.” April 7, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “5th Circuit Allows Texas to Continue Blocking Abortion Access During COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: Today, in a 2-1 decision, a three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals used a rare procedural mechanism to rule that the district court was wrong to grant emergency relief to protect access to essential, time-sensitive abortion care. This allows Gov. Abbott to use his COVID-19 order to block access to abortion. This is the latest twist in a lawsuit brought by Texas abortion providers — represented by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and the Lawyering Project — to protect access to care. Plaintiffs include Planned Parenthood Center for Choice, Planned Parenthood Greater Texas Surgical Health Services, Planned Parenthood South Texas Surgical Center, Whole Woman’s Health, Whole Woman’s Health Alliance, Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center, and Austin Women’s Health Center. Despite this setback, the providers will continue to fight for patients, who are now scrambling to access care during this pandemic.Enforcement of the governor’s order has already had a dramatic effect on patients’ lives, with some being forced to travel hundreds of miles in a pandemic to access basic and essential health care.The American Medical Association, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and other national medical groups filed an amicus brief with the 5th Circuit calling out the hypocrisy of this executive order, stating: “Indeed, the Governor’s order is likely to increase, rather than decrease, burdens on hospitals and use of PPE. At the same time, it will severely impair essential health care for women, and it will place doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals in an untenable position by criminalizing necessary medical care.”Statement from Nancy Northup, president & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“This is not the last word—we will take every legal action necessary to fight this abuse of emergency powers. Texas has been trying to end abortion for decades and they are exploiting this pandemic to achieve that goal. Texas women are not waiting for the courts—those who are able to travel are already leaving the state to get care. Others are tragically being left behind. The need for abortion care doesn’t disappear during a pandemic.” Statement of Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“This is unconscionable. Patients are already being forced to put their lives in harm’s way during a pandemic, and now will be forced to continue doing so to get the health care they need. Abortion is essential, it’s time-sensitive, and it cannot wait for a pandemic to pass. Instead of playing politics during a pandemic, Gov. Abbott should be focusing on the health care needs of his constituents. Planned Parenthood won’t let this injustice stand. Our patients deserve better. We’ll use every tool at our disposal to fight this harmful order and protect our patients’ health care.”As doctors and nurses in his state work around the clock to care for patients suffering from COVID-19, Gov. Abbott inserted politics into what should be a personal medical decision. As a result, providers have had to cancel appointments for hundreds of patients in the ensuing confusion.Abortion providers in mulitple states also filed similar lawsuits last week to protect abortion access during the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus far, judges have provided temporary relief to protect access to care in Alabama, Ohio, and Oklahoma. The plaintiffs in this case — abortion providers throughout Texas — are represented by attorneys from Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Lawyering Project, and the Law Offices of Patrick J. O’Connell PLLC. A copy of the complaint can be found here. April 7, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “5th Circuit Allows Texas to Continue Blocking Abortion Access During COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: Today, in a 2-1 decision, a three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals used a rare procedural mechanism to rule that the district court was wrong to grant emergency relief to protect access to essential, time-sensitive abortion care. This allows Gov. Abbott to use his COVID-19 order to block access to abortion. This is the latest twist in a lawsuit brought by Texas abortion providers — represented by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and the Lawyering Project — to protect access to care. Plaintiffs include Planned Parenthood Center for Choice, Planned Parenthood Greater Texas Surgical Health Services, Planned Parenthood South Texas Surgical Center, Whole Woman’s Health, Whole Woman’s Health Alliance, Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center, and Austin Women’s Health Center. Despite this setback, the providers will continue to fight for patients, who are now scrambling to access care during this pandemic.Enforcement of the governor’s order has already had a dramatic effect on patients’ lives, with some being forced to travel hundreds of miles in a pandemic to access basic and essential health care.The American Medical Association, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and other national medical groups filed an amicus brief with the 5th Circuit calling out the hypocrisy of this executive order, stating: “Indeed, the Governor’s order is likely to increase, rather than decrease, burdens on hospitals and use of PPE. At the same time, it will severely impair essential health care for women, and it will place doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals in an untenable position by criminalizing necessary medical care.”Statement of Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“This is unconscionable. Patients are already being forced to put their lives in harm’s way during a pandemic, and now will be forced to continue doing so to get the health care they need. Abortion is essential, it’s time-sensitive, and it cannot wait for a pandemic to pass. Instead of playing politics during a pandemic, Gov. Abbott should be focusing on the health care needs of his constituents. Planned Parenthood won’t let this injustice stand. Our patients deserve better. We’ll use every tool at our disposal to fight this harmful order and protect our patients’ health care.”Statement from Nancy Northup, president & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“This is not the last word—we will take every legal action necessary to fight this abuse of emergency powers. Texas has been trying to end abortion for decades and they are exploiting this pandemic to achieve that goal. Texas women are not waiting for the courts—those who are able to travel are already leaving the state to get care. Others are tragically being left behind. The need for abortion care doesn’t disappear during a pandemic.”As doctors and nurses in his state work around the clock to care for patients suffering from COVID-19, Gov. Abbott inserted politics into what should be a personal medical decision. As a result, providers have had to cancel appointments for hundreds of patients in the ensuing confusion.Abortion providers in multiple states also filed similar lawsuits last week to protect abortion access during the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus far, judges have provided temporary relief to protect access to care in Alabama, Ohio, and Oklahoma.The plaintiffs in this case — abortion providers throughout Texas — are represented by attorneys from Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Lawyering Project, and the Law Offices of Patrick J. O’Connell PLLC. A copy of the complaint can be found here. April 7, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris, Senate Democrats to HHS: Reopen the ACA Marketplace, Allow More Americans to Get Health Insurance During COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Tuesday joined Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) and Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and 25 Senate Democrats in urging the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to reopen the Affordable Care Act’s online marketplace to allow more un- and under-insured Americans to get health insurance as they face potential health issues related to COVID-19. In a letter to the Secretary Alex Azar, the senators urged HHS to allow Americans to enroll through a unique Special Enrollment Period (SEP) that should last throughout the duration of the pandemic in an effort to ensure comprehensive coverage for families and communities to protect themselves from COVID-related illness.The senators wrote, “Currently, millions of Americans are uninsured and anxious, not only about what the possibility of contracting COVID-19 could mean for their health and that of their family, but also for their financial stability. Opening up the ACA marketplace would provide an easy pathway to coverage for those who under previous circumstances may have decided to forego health insurance or purchase a substandard, junk insurance plan, but now in a global pandemic are in vital need of comprehensive coverage to protect themselves, their families, and our broader community.”“We believe opening an ACA SEP is the clearest way to cover the millions of uninsured and underinsured Americans in the 38 states that use the federal platform, and to provide comprehensive protections for COVID-19-related treatment and prevention,” the senators continued.The senators concluded, “We urge you to put aside the partisan politics of the past, and to expand health coverage to millions of Americans by opening an SEP expeditiously.”In addition to Senators Harris, Murphy and Baldwin, the letter was also signed by U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Joe Manchin (D-WV), Bob Casey (D-PA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Tina Smith (D-MN), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Angus King (I-ME), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Doug Jones (D-AL), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Jack Reed (D-RI), Gary Peters (D-MI), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Jon Tester (D-MT), Tom Carper (D-DE), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Sherrod Brown (D-OH) and Tom Udall (D-NM).A full text of the letter can be found here and below.Dear Secretary Azar,We write to urge you to reopen the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) online marketplace through a unique Special Enrollment Period (SEP) to allow any American to enroll in a comprehensive health insurance plan. Currently, millions of Americans are uninsured and anxious, not only about what the possibility of contracting COVID-19 could mean for their health and that of their family, but also for their financial stability. Opening up the ACA marketplace would provide an easy pathway to coverage for those who under previous circumstances may have decided to forego health insurance or purchase a substandard, junk insurance plan, but now in a global pandemic are in vital need of comprehensive coverage to protect themselves, their families, and our broader community.The Trump Administration’s reported decision not to open an SEP and leave millions of Americans uninsured and underinsured during this unprecedented public health crisis will inevitably mean fewer individuals seeking testing and treatment—prolonging the spread of the disease—and will put more families in dire financial straits. The COVID-19 pandemic is also causing millions of people to lose their jobs and their employer-provided health insurance. We should be promoting comprehensive health insurance plans to all those impacted, not looking to divert funds appropriated to support hospitals, or promoting junk insurance plans that don’t have to provide coverage for needed services or offer consumer protections. When the ACA was passed, Congress included the authority to establish SEPs because we understood that everyday Americans may face extenuating circumstances for which they should not be penalized. It is inexcusable for you not to exercise that authority during perhaps the largest extenuating circumstance of our lifetimes, and to choose to lock out millions of Americans from the ACA exchanges because they failed to predict a sweeping global pandemic. Furthermore, the Administration’s continued promotion of junk plans which are not required to comply with consumer protections that limit out-of-pocket costs or coverage of essential health benefits, including those that are needed to pay for the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 such as hospital care, emergency care, laboratory services, or preventive services, leave many Americans vulnerable. Families already struggling to make ends meet in light of the global economic downturn should not be exposed to potential financial ruin because of a lack of comprehensive insurance coverage.An additional benefit of opening an SEP is that it would publicize to all Americans who have lost their jobs that the exchanges are open again and that they can enroll in high-quality health insurance, providing at least a modicum of reassurance during these deeply troubling times. Given the millions of job losses in recent weeks and the likelihood of millions more in the near future, now is the time to open up the health insurance marketplace to everyone so that people know that losing their job does not mean they must also lose access to health insurance coverage.We believe opening an ACA SEP is the clearest way to cover the millions of uninsured and underinsured Americans in the 38 states that use the federal platform, and to provide comprehensive protections for COVID-19-related treatment and prevention. In a demonstration of the dramatic demand for such a move, all but one of the 13 state-based marketplaces have opened an SEP, with such high levels of interest that many are now extending the period by several weeks.We urge you to put aside the partisan politics of the past, and to expand health coverage to millions of Americans by opening an SEP expeditiously. April 7, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Leads Multistate Coalition Calling on Trump Administration to Halt Anti-Abortion Rule as Coronavirus Pandemic Rages On”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today continued her leadership in the national fight to ensure women’s reproductive health care is not stifled or infringed upon in any way during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) public health crisis. Attorney General James is co-leading a multistate coalition of eight attorneys general in asking the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to delay implementation of a final rule that would unlawfully reinterpret Section 1303 of the ACA by requiring qualified health plans that participate in the state exchanges — like the New York State of Health — to send separate bills and collect separate payments of at least one-dollar for abortion services to all consumers. In a letter to HHS Secretary Alex Azar, Attorney General James and the coalition argue against final implementation of the rule that threatens women’s access to abortion coverage, as well as jeopardizes health coverage of all consumers confused by the billing practice as the nation responds to a public health crisis requiring every resource of the federal government focused on battling COVID-19.“At a time when states and the federal government must use every resource as efficiently as possible, it is utterly reckless for the Trump Administration to continue to divert means away from responding to this pandemic just so they can further restrict women’s reproductive rights,” said Attorney General James. “This rule not only stands in direct contrast to federal directives issued by the Administration, but specifically threatens to kick individuals off their health plans as we battle a public health crisis, endangering us all. But the origin of this rule is no doubt rooted in the president’s anti-choice ideology that aims to take us backwards almost half a century, which is why our coalition will never stop fighting against this burdensome and controlling regulation that strips women of their constitutional right to an abortion.”In their letter to Secretary Azar today, Attorney General James and the coalition argue that “implementation of the final rule during this public health and economic crisis is irresponsible and harmful to the residents of the States and the rest of the country, as it will divert attention and resources from fighting the pandemic and saving lives.”Moreover, any effort by HHS to implement the final rule in the coming months would be inconsistent with Office of Management and Budget Directive M-20-16 — issued just three weeks ago — instructing federal agency heads to “prioritize all resources to slow the transmission of COVID-19” and otherwise focus exclusively on “mission-critical activities.”The attorneys general go on to argue in their letter, “There is no plausible argument that implementation or enforcement of the Final Rule, which puts at risk consumers’ health coverage, would slow the transmission of COVID-19; nor can implementation of separate billing procedures be considered mission-critical,” continuing, “HHS unnecessarily detracts from the States’ abilities to prioritize responding to the national crisis of COVID-19, and contravenes the White House’s Directive.”The attorneys general additionally argue that implementing this final rule would impose additional financial burdens on state agencies. “HHS itself recognized that implementation of the Final Rule will have significant economic consequences,” costing approximately $385 million in one-time costs for insurance issuers in the nation to bring all affected issuers across the country “into compliance with the Final Rule and implement the necessary technical changes.”Under New York law, all private health plans regulated by the state are required to offer abortion coverage as part of their basic health care services. The new Trump Administration rule, however, will require consumers to return premium payments in two separate transactions, otherwise risk jeopardizing their health care coverage because issuers are forced to issue separate bills in order to segregate funds attributed to abortion care. HHS itself has conceded that requiring separate bills and separate payments will inevitably lead to confusion for the more than 260,000 New Yorkers that have already enrolled in a qualified health plan this year. Additionally, the rule burdens states with unnecessary administrative costs and harms consumers who may face higher insurance premiums as a result of increased costs to carriers. Last week, the coalition also filed a motion for summary judgment in this lawsuit, calling for the courts to immediately vacate the rule because it violates federal law and is inconsistent with the Affordable Care Act. April 8, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Texas Abortion Providers Push for Emergency Relief in Federal District Court”. From the press release: This afternoon, Texas abortion providers went back to a federal district court to renew their request for emergency relief for their patients. This comes one day after the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals used unusual legal procedures to enforce Gov. Abbott’s COVID-19 order targeting abortion. Abortion providers are pursuing every legal avenue available to them, which includes seeking a more limited temporary restraining order from the lower court in response to the concerns expressed by the 5thCircuit. Providers are committed to ensuring Texans have access to the health care they need during this pandemic. Statement from Molly Duane, Staff Attorney with the Center for Reproductive Rights“We’re asking the district court to block the state’s order because we believe this is the fastest way to resume full access to abortion in Texas, which is our number one priority. The Fifth Circuit suggested there are outstanding factual questions about the impact of this order. During the last two weeks, abortion has been largely unavailable in Texas, and we have seen that the impact on patients is devastating. That is exactly what we will show the district court.”Read more about the need for abortion access in Texas and the detrimental effects of Abbott’s order from the country’s leading physician organizations, including the American Medical Association (AMA) and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG): Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures performed in the United States, and the vast majority of abortions are performed in out- patient non-hospital settings.But the COVID-19 pandemic does not justify restricting abortion care in Texas. Most abortions do not require use of any hospital resources and use only minimal PPE. Indeed, the Governor’s order is likely to increase, rather than decrease, burdens on hospitals and use of PPE. At the same time, it will severely impair essential health care for women, and it will place doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals in an untenable position by criminalizing necessary medical care. While abortion is a safe and common medical procedure, it is also a time-sensitive one for which a delay may increase the risks or potentially make it completely inaccessible. The consequences of being unable to obtain an abortion profoundly impact a person’s life, health, and wellbeing. Advances in medical science have expanded safe options for pregnancy termination. For example, medication abortion is a safe and effective option in the first trimester. Thirty percent of abortions are medication abortions, where patients typically take the medication to complete the procedure at home. The full amicus brief from the AMA and ACOG can be found here. April 8, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorneys General Becerra and Healey Lead Multistate Amicus Brief Defending ACA Birth Control Coverage Mandate in Supreme Court.” From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey today co-led a coalition of 21 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in the United States Supreme Court supporting Pennsylvania in its case defending contraceptive coverage and counseling mandated under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). In the brief filed in Donald Trump et al. v. Pennsylvania, the attorneys general explain that states have an interest in safeguarding the ACA’s birth control coverage requirement, which has benefited more than 62 million women across the country. The coalition argues that access to affordable birth control is critical to the health, well-being, and economic security of the states’ residents. “As our communities grapple with the COVID-19 public health crisis, the importance of delivering critical preventative care to women and families is more clear than ever,” said Attorney General Becerra. “More than 62 million women have benefited from the Affordable Care Act’s birth control coverage over the last decade. This law not only protects equality in healthcare, it supports women’s ability to control their own reproductive health, and promotes access to education, jobs and financial empowerment. We will continue to fight to keep healthcare decisions between women and their doctors, not their employers.”“Decisions about birth control are for women to make, not their bosses, and certainly not the White House,” said Attorney General Healey. “We are urging the Supreme Court to protect the health, well-being and economic security of women in Massachusetts and across the country by upholding their right to access affordable contraception.”In 2017 and 2018, the Trump Administration issued rules which ignored the ACA’s birth control requirement and allowed employers to deny birth control coverage to their employees based on religious or moral objections. California successfully led a coalition of 14 states and Washington, D.C. in defending the ACA’s birth control coverage requirement. California obtained injunctions against the Trump Administration’s harmful, illegal rules in the Ninth Circuit, while Pennsylvania obtained an injunction in the Third Circuit. After California and Pennsylvania won injunctions that protect the birth control coverage mandate, the federal government, Little Sisters of the Poor, and March for Life filed petitions for certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court granted the petitions in the Pennsylvania litigation. The petitions from the California litigation remain pending. In the amicus brief, the attorneys general argue that the states have a vested interest in providing women seamless contraceptive coverage. The coalition argues that tens of thousands of women will lose their cost-free contraceptive coverage if employers are allowed to exempt themselves from the ACA requirement. This loss of coverage will result in a reliance on state-funded programs that will increase the states’ costs associated with the provision of reproductive healthcare, and will likely lead to an increase in unintended pregnancies. Joining Attorneys General Becerra and Healey in filing the amicus brief are the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the brief is available here. April 8, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Amicus Brief in Supreme Court Contraception Case”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after joining a bicameral amicus brief in the United States Supreme Court in the cases of Trump v. Pennsylvania and Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania arguing against the Trump Administration’s expansive rule allowing private employers to opt out of providing contraception coverage for their employees, in violation of the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive-coverage requirement:“The Trump Administration’s despicable rule allowing private employers and health plans to deny women coverage for contraception is an outrageous attack on women’s health, women’s pocketbooks, and women’s independence.“While our nation faces an unprecedented health crisis, the Administration continues to fight to take away every woman’s right to the critical, comprehensive care that they and their families need. At the same time, the Trump Administration continues to support the outrageous GOP lawsuit to dismangle the entirity of the Affordable Care Act including lifesaving protections for 130 million Americans with pre-existing conditions. And as coronavirus poses a growing threat to all Americans, the Administration is ignoring the health experts by refusing to reopen ACA enrollment of health coverage to millions of uninsured workers and families.“House Democrats are committed to upholding the ACA and its critical protections for women and families. We will continue to oppose any actions by the Trump Administration that jeopardizes the safety and well being of the American people as we work tirelessly to combat this deadly virus and ensure that everyone receives the care and support needed to stay healthy.” The amicus brief is here. April 8, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Fights Trump Admin. Effort to Strip Women of their Right to Birth Control Coverage Under the ACA”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today continued her leadership in the national fight to ensure women’s reproductive health care is not stifled or infringed upon in any way by the Trump Administration. Attorney General James and a coalition of 20 additional attorneys general from around the nation filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court supporting the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the State of New Jersey in their lawsuit defending the contraceptive coverage and counseling requirement mandated as part of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). In the brief — filed in Donald Trump et al. v. Pennsylvania — the attorneys general explain that states have an interest in safeguarding the ACA’s birth control coverage requirement, which has benefited more than 62 million women across the country. The coalition argues that access to affordable birth control is critical to the health, well-being, and economic security of the states’ residents. “Employers should never have a role in making reproductive health care decisions for their employees, yet the Trump Administration’s rules do exactly that,” said Attorney General James. “The president has repeatedly worked to pit Americans against each other by using faith as a wedge between us, but our coalition will not allow religion to be used as a tool that divides us. This is about ensuring women retain control of their bodies, their choices, and their freedoms, which is why we will never stop fighting to protect women’s access to the health care they need, deserve, and choose.”In 2017 and 2018, the Trump Administration issued rules that ignored the ACA’s birth control coverage requirement by allowing employers to deny birth control coverage to their employees based on religious or moral objections. New York and several coalitions of attorneys general defended the ACA’s birth control coverage requirement and obtained injunctions against the Trump Administration’s harmful, illegal rules in the U.S. Court of Appeals for both the Third Circuit and the Ninth Circuit.The Trump Administration, Little Sisters of the Poor, and March for Life filed petitions for certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court. The court granted the petitions for review of the Third Circuit decision, while the petitions for review of the Ninth Circuit decision are still pending.In the amicus brief filed today, Attorney General James and the coalition of attorneys general argue that states have a vested interest in ensuring that women have access to seamless contraceptive coverage. Tens of thousands of women will lose access to cost-free contraceptive coverage — one of the preventive benefits guaranteed by the ACA — if employers are allowed to use their own religious or moral beliefs as an excuse to exempt themselves from the ACA’s requirement. This loss of coverage would result in a reliance on state-funded programs — increasing states’ costs and likely leading to an increase in unintended pregnancies nationwide. April 9, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Federal Court Blocks Gov. Abbott’s COVID-19 Order Against Abortion Care AGAIN”. From the press release: Today, a federal district court granted a second temporary restraining order against Gov. Abbott’s COVID-19 order, which the State threatened to enforce as a ban on time-sensitive abortion services. Under this latest order, abortion providers — represented by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and the Lawyering Project — may provide medication abortion as well as abortion procedures for patients who would be unable to access abortion due to their gestational age on April 22 (the day after Gov. Abbott’s executive order is set to expire).This comes two days after the 5th Circuit used a rare procedural mechanism to reverse the first emergency restraining order granted to the Texas abortion providers — Planned Parenthood Center for Choice, Planned Parenthood Greater Texas Surgical Health Services, Planned Parenthood South Texas Surgical Center, Whole Woman’s Health, Whole Woman’s Health Alliance, Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center, and Austin Women’s Health Center. As a result of the governor’s order and the 5th Circuit’s rulings, the providers have been forced to turn hundreds of patients away while the legal battle continues.After just a few weeks, the enforcement of Abbott’s order has already had dramatic effects on patients’ lives, with some being forced to travel hundreds of miles in a pandemic to access basic and essential health care.Statement of Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“This is a temporary sigh of relief for at least some Texas patients. We know that abortion is essential because it is time-sensitive care that cannot wait. Gov. Abbott should stop trying to force Texans into unconscionable choices: to travel long distances and increase their risk of exposure to the new coronavirus or carry a forced pregnancy. We won’t stand for it. Planned Parenthood will continue to fight these cruel attacks on our patients. We know your health cannot wait and we are here with you.”Statement from Nancy Northup, president & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“We are relieved that the district court has again stepped in to stop Governor Abbott from blocking women from accessing time-sensitive, essential abortion care. It’s time for Texas to stop its crusade to end abortion, which will inflict irreparable harm on women seeking care at this difficult time.”Statement Rupali Sharma, Senior Counsel and Director at the Lawyering Project:“Today’s ruling ensures some Texans will be able to get the care they need, despite the all-out war politicians in the state have declared on abortion access. The Lawyering Project will continue to fight alongside people who need to end their pregnancies safely and with the dignity they deserve.” Already, courts in Alabama, Ohio and Oklahoma are allowing abortion providers, just like all other doctors, to decide when to provide essential abortion care while conserving needed resources during this pandemic. Texas should be no different. In fact, forcing people to carry their pregnancies to term against their will only creates a heavier burden on a hospital system that’s already stretched thin caring for COVID-19 patients.Medical experts including the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists said: “Indeed, the Governor’s order is likely to increase, rather than decrease, burdens on hospitals and use of PPE. At the same time, it will severely impair essential health care for women, and it will place doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals in an untenable position by criminalizing necessary medical care.”Texans already have to navigate a long list of restrictions that force abortion patients to have medically unnecessary face-to-face contact with providers, and for some, push abortion out of reach altogether. These harmful restrictions include state-mandated in-person counseling and a mandatory 24-hour waiting period. For many people, traveling out of state or waiting weeks for their medical care will mean they won’t be able to access an abortion at all.The plaintiffs in this case — abortion providers throughout Texas — are represented by attorneys from Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Lawyering Project, and the Law Offices of Patrick J. O’Connell PLLC. A copy of the ruling can be found here. April 9, 2020: Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement Calling for Immediate Investigation into Abuse and Mistreatment of Pregnant Women in DHS Custody”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement calling on the Department of Homeland Security’s Inspector General to conduct an investigation into recent reports of severe mistreatment of pregnant women legally seeking asylum in the United States:“The reports of abuse and neglect inflicted by U.S. immigration agents on a pregnant Guatamalan women in labor during asylum processing insist that we investigate this unacceptable behavior.“Very sadly, the appalling and inhuman situation that this woman faced is not an isolated case. There is a pattern of U.S. officials denying and delaying medical treatment to pregnant women and subjecting them to prolonged detention and inappropriate treatment in inadequate facilities. This mistreatment is more disturbing and dangerous, as the coronavirus threatens the health and lives of the most vulnerable among us.“As Speaker of the House, I join Senator Blumenthal and other Senators in calling on the Department of Homeland Security’s Inspector General to immediately conduct an investigation into reports of abuse and mistreatment of pregnant people in custody.“As we observe Holy Week, Passover and Ramadan, we pray for all who are suffering during this heartbreaking time. We also pray that those in power will remember their moral responsibility to ensure that all people are treated with compassion and dignity.” April 10, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Legal Whiplash: Abortion Providers Forced to Cancel Appointments Yet Again After Appeals Court Reinstates Gov. Abbott’s COVID-19 Order Blocking Abortion Access”. From the press release: Today, for the second time this week, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against abortion providers, this time granting a stay reversing in part the federal district court’s latest temporary restraining order. This means abortion is once again largely inaccessible in the state of Texas. The ruling is one of many that has created legal whiplash, causing confusion and uncertainty for hundreds of patients in need of essential, time-sensitive abortion care.Abortion providers — represented by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and the Lawyering Project — were in the midst of calling patients back to health centers when the 5th Circuit’s ruling came down today. Once again, providers — Planned Parenthood Center for Choice, Planned Parenthood Greater Texas Surgical Health Services, Planned Parenthood South Texas Surgical Center, Whole Woman’s Health, Whole Woman’s Health Alliance, Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center, and Austin Women’s Health Center — will have to turn patients away unless they will pass the gestational limit for abortions in Texas before April 22 (the day after Gov. Abbott’s order is set to expire). Plaintiffs will evaluate this latest ruling from the 5th Circuit and continue exploring every option, including emergency relief from the Supreme Court, in order to ensure patients can access essential, time-sensitive abortion services.Medical experts including the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists warned the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals: “Indeed, the Governor’s order is likely to increase, rather than decrease, burdens on hospitals and use of PPE. At the same time, it will severely impair essential health care for women, and it will place doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals in an untenable position by criminalizing necessary medical care.”Statement of Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“We are in a time of crisis — and the state of Texas is sowing fear, confusion, and chaos about whether people can access health care. The same people who are caring for their families, working essential jobs, and trying to make ends meet during this pandemic are now having to experience the trauma of medical uncertainty. This is a nightmare inside of a nightmare. One day patients are called back for their procedures, the next day they are canceled — all at the whim of Gov. Abbott. Abortion is essential because it is time-sensitive. It cannot wait for lengthy legal battles or a pandemic to pass. This political game will have a lasting consequence on Texans for generations to come.”Statement from Nancy Northup, president & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“Once again, Texas women cannot access abortion–with the important exception of those close to the legal limit, who the Fifth Circuit will allow to go forward. The court is unjustifiably forcing women to wait until the eleventh hour to get the time-sensitive, essential healthcare that they are constitutionally guaranteed. We will pursue all legal options to ensure no women are left behind.”Statement Rupali Sharma, Senior Counsel and Director at the Lawyering Project:“Texas politicians are intent on restricting abortion access even as a global pandemic threatens the health and welfare of its residents. With today’s ruling, Texans are once again thrown into a state of uncertainty, as many wonder if they’ll be forced to carry pregnancies to term or risk their well-being to travel out of state to obtain an abortion in a public health crisis. We will continue to explore all legal options to help ensure Texans — no matter how vulnerable — get the health care they need and deserve.”Already, courts in Alabama, Ohio and Oklahoma have stepped in to allow abortion providers, just like all other doctors, to decide when to provide essential care. Texas has not shown why its residents deserve less. In fact, according to medical experts, forcing people to carry their pregnancies to term only creates a heavier burden on a hospital system that’s already stretched thin caring for COVID-19 patients.Texans already have to navigate a long list of state restrictions that force abortion patients to have medically unnecessary face-to-face contact with providers, and for some, push abortion out of reach altogether. These harmful restrictions include state-mandated in-person counseling and a mandatory 24-hour waiting period. For many people, traveling out of state or waiting weeks for their medical care will mean they won’t be able to access an abortion at all.The plaintiffs in this case — abortion providers throughout Texas — are represented by attorneys from Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Lawyering Project, and the Law Offices of Patrick J. O’Connell PLLC. A copy of the ruling can be found here. April 10, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Legal Whiplash: Abortion Providers Forced to Cancel Appointments Yet Again After Appeals Court Reinstates Gov. Abbott’s COVID-19 Order Blocking Abortion Access”. From the press release: Today, for the second time this week, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against abortion providers, this time granting a stay reversing in part the federal district court’s latest temporary restraining order. This means abortion is once again largely inaccessible in the state of Texas. The ruling is one of many that has created legal whiplash, causing confusion and uncertainty for hundreds of patients in need of essential, time-sensitive abortion care.Abortion providers — represented by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and the Lawyering Project — were in the midst of calling patients back to health centers when the 5th Circuit’s ruling came down today. Once again, providers — Planned Parenthood Center for Choice, Planned Parenthood Greater Texas Surgical Health Services, Planned Parenthood South Texas Surgical Center, Whole Woman’s Health, Whole Woman’s Health Alliance, Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center, and Austin Women’s Health Center — will have to turn patients away unless they will pass the gestational limit for abortions in Texas before April 22 (the day after Gov. Abbott’s order is set to expire). Plaintiffs will evaluate this latest ruling from the 5th Circuit and continue exploring every option, including emergency relief from the Supreme Court, in order to ensure patients can access essential, time-sensitive abortion services.Medical experts including the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists warned the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals: “Indeed, the Governor’s order is likely to increase, rather than decrease, burdens on hospitals and use of PPE. At the same time, it will severely impair essential health care for women, and it will place doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals in an untenable position by criminalizing necessary medical care.”… April 10, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Leads Coalition Fighting Oklahoma’s Unconstitutional Ban on Abortion During COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today led a multistate coalition of 19 attorneys general in seeking to stop the State of Oklahoma from banning almost all abortions in the state, using the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) public health crisis as an excuse. Continuing her leadership of the nation’s fight to ensure women’s reproductive health care is not infringed upon, Attorney General James led the coalition in filing an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit supporting the plaintiffs in Southwind Women’s Center LLC v. Stitt, as they fight to preserve access to reproductive health care for the women across Oklahoma.“Oklahoma’s executive order is just the latest in a series of unconstitutional attacks taken by ideologues across the nation who are using the coronavirus as an excuse to trample on women’s reproductive rights,” said Attorney General James. “A global pandemic should never be used as a backdoor channel for any state to chip away at the protections guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution, yet we are still being forced to fight to defend women’s bodies, choices, and freedoms nearly 50 years after Roe v. Wade. Our coalition will not hesitate to challenge Oklahoma, Texas, or any other state using this crisis as an unlawful justification to attack women’s reproductive rights.”On March 24, Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt issued Executive Order 2020-07 (4th amended), postponing all elective surgeries and minor medical procedures in the State of Oklahoma. Three days later, Governor Stitt’s office confirmed that “any type of abortion services…which are not a medical emergency…or otherwise necessary to prevent serious health risks” to the woman would be included in the executive order. The governor’s office even went so far as to compare an abortion to a “routine” dental procedure. This order came just days after the Oklahoma governor posted on social media about eating out with his family in a “packed” Oklahoma establishment, and after his office encouraged Oklahomans to do the same.Soon after, on March 30, several reproductive health care providers — including the South Wind Women’s Center, the Comprehensive Health Care of Planned Parenthood Great Plains, and Dr. Larry Burns — filed a lawsuit challenging the executive order in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma. Earlier this week, U.S. District Judge Charles Goodwin issued a temporary restraining order halting portions of the Oklahoma abortion ban on the grounds that banning such care was “oppressive” and “unreasonable,” and would cause “irreparable harm” to women unable to obtain abortions in the state. The State of Oklahoma asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit to set aside the lower court’s decision and reinstate the ban. Today, Attorney General James and the coalition of attorneys general filed an amicus brief opposing Oklahoma’s request for a stay of the temporary restraining order, stressing that a ban on medication abortions (an abortion brought on by taking two prescription drugs) or on other abortions for patients who would otherwise permanently lose their right to lawfully obtain an abortion in Oklahoma infringes on a woman’s constitutional rights. The coalition explains that the “characterization of the ban as prohibiting only ‘elective’ procedures fails to recognize how the time-sensitive nature of abortion care distinguishes that care from services that can be deferred without patient harm during the current public health crisis.”The coalition goes on to highlight that if the ban were to be reinstated, women in Oklahoma would be forced to make “risky and expensive” travel plans to cross state lines and obtain an abortion, a point not disputed by the State of Oklahoma. This is especially troublesome at a time when the entire U.S. population is being asked to limit travel to stop the spread of COVID-19.Additionally, the coalition explains why a ban on abortion would not help the state preserve personal protective equipment (PPE), free up hospital beds, or prevent the spread of COVID-19 transmissions. The exact opposite is actually true, as medical abortions do not typically require any PPE and neither a medical abortion nor a procedural abortion require regular hospitalization.Further, the coalition notes that residents of New York and other amici states may currently be in Oklahoma without a way to return home, but they still have a right to time-sensitive reproductive care.The attorneys general conclude by stating that abortion “clinics in amici States have increased the use of telehealth” in an effort to provide women with the proper health care they want and need. Instead of limiting women’s access to abortions, Oklahoma should be joining Attorney General James’ call to increase access to telehealth medicine and the medical abortion pill so that woman who choose to have an abortion don’t have to fear going out and contracting COVID-19 during this public health crisis. Last week, Attorney General James sent a letter to both the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration requesting that the Trump Administration waive or utilize its discretion not to enforce its Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) designation, which dictates and subsequently impedes women’s access to the medication abortion prescription drug known as Mifepristone. Attorney General James called on the Trump Administration to ensure that women across the country can more easily access this critical health care service while the pandemic leaves many women unable to seek in-person care… April 11, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “BREAKING: Texas Abortion Providers Ask Supreme Court to Urgently Restore Medication Abortion During Pandemic; Abortion Services Remain Virtually Inaccessible Under Gov. Abbott’s COVID-19 Order”. From the press release: Today, Texas abortion providers — represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Lawyering Project, and Planned Parenthood Federation of America — asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take emergency action to restore essential, time-sensitive medication abortion services while the case proceeds. This comes after Gov. Greg Abbott tried to block virtually all abortion services through his COVID-19 order. The emergency request comes after the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals granted most of the state’s request to stay a federal district court’s second temporary restraining order. Under the 5th Circuit’s latest ruling, only patients who will be over the state’s gestational age cutoff by April 22 (the day after Gov. Abbott’s executive order lifts) can access an abortion procedure.For almost three weeks, providers — including Planned Parenthood Center for Choice, Planned Parenthood Greater Texas Surgical Health Services, Planned Parenthood South Texas Surgical Center, Whole Woman’s Health, Whole Woman’s Health Alliance, Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center, and Austin Women’s Health Center — have had to cancel appointments for hundreds of patients while Gov. Abbott continues to exploit a pandemic in order to score political points.Meanwhile, leading medical experts, including the American Medical Association, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology told the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals that abortion should not be delayed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Doing so, they said, only creates a greater strain on the hospital system during this global public health crisis.Statement of Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“The past few weeks have been untenable for Texans in need of time-sensitive abortion procedures. We’ve heard patients grow increasingly more desperate for care. Gov. Abbott has blocked abortion access for mothers who have lost their jobs because of COVID-19, people quarantined with abusive partners, and patients with fatal fetal diagnoses. Now is the time to be making abortion more accessible, not less. Medical professionals everywhere are being trusted to make necessary but difficult decisions about if and when to treat patients. Doctors who provide abortions are asking to do the same — because they, not politicians, know what’s best for their patients. This is a matter of health care, not political opinion.”Statement from Rupali Sharma, senior counsel and director, Lawyering Project:“Texans who seek abortion care deserve dignity and compassion — particularly during a public health crisis. Instead, they’ve been thrown into a tailspin of uncertainty, unsure if and when they’ll be able to obtain essential, constitutionally protected healthcare. These extraordinary circumstances require urgent intervention. That’s why we’re asking the Supreme Court to step in and stop Texas from blocking abortion access as its residents contend with unprecedented challenges.”Statement from Nancy Northup, president and CEO, Center for Reproductive Rights:“It is vital that the Supreme Court step in and protect the health, lives and futures of Texas women. This is an extraordinarily difficult time, but this is an easy case. Texas is blatantly abusing its emergency power to obliterate Roe v. Wade. This tactic of using bogus health and safety justifications to close clinics is nothing new. In fact, we have another case before the Supreme Court right now challenging a different sham law designed to shut down clinics. These thinly veiled attempts to end abortion must stop.”Already, courts in Alabama, Ohio and Oklahoma are allowing abortion providers, just like all other doctors, to decide when to provide essential abortion care while conserving needed resources during this pandemic. Texas should be no different. In fact, forcing people to carry their pregnancies to term against their will only creates a heavier burden on a hospital system that’s already stretched thin caring for COVID-19 patients. Texans already have to navigate a long list of restrictions that force patients to have medically unnecessary face-to-face contact with providers, and for some, push abortion out of reach altogether. These harmful restrictions include state-mandated in-person counseling and a mandatory 24-hour waiting period. For many people, traveling out of state or waiting weeks for their procedure will mean they won’t be able to access an abortion at all.The Texas plaintiff abortion providers are represented by attorneys from Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Lawyering Project and the Law Offices of Patrick J. O’Connell PLLC. A copy of the complaint can be found here. April 11, 2020: Human Rights Campaign posted news titled: “Virginia Values Act Signed Into Law – Extending Long Delayed, Critical Protections to LGBTQ Virginians”. From the news: …Today, HRC celebrated the signing into law of the Virginia Values Act by Governor Ralph Northam. The law will extend existing state non-discrimination protections in public employment, housing and credit to Virginians on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity and several other characteristics. Similar legislation passed through the Virginia Senate several times in recent years but was blocked by anti-equality lawmakers in the House of Delegates. In the 2019 election, voters in the commonwealth elected pro-equality majorities to both houses of the General Assembly, making this victory possible. In addition to sexual orientation and gender identity, the law also creates all-new protections for Virginians in private employment and places of public accommodation on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, disability, and status as a veteran. Virginia is the first state in the South to have non-discrimination protections for LGBTQ people, the first state in over a decade to add both sexual orientation and gender identity to existing non-discrimination law, and the first state since 1993 to add a prohibition on discrimination in public accommodations (protecting all Virginians) where none existed before.“When this law goes into effect on July 1, LGBTQ people in Virginia — and people of color, people of faith, immigrants, women and more — are at last protected from discrimination at work and in their communities,” said Alphonso David, president of the Human Rights Campaign. “No one should be discriminated against simply because of who they are or whom they love. Right now, as the country and the world deals with an unprecedented pandemic, it is more important than ever to ensure that leaders are looking out for all of us. In this period of uncertainty, it is vital that we are all protected from bias as we earn a living, access housing and healthcare, and seek goods and services. We have arrived at this moment today because of years and years of tireless work from advocates across the commonwealth, and the Virginia voters that filled the halls of the General Assembly with pro-equality champions who fulfilled their promises to their constituents. HRC worked to elect pro-equality lawmakers across Virginia in 2019, and we are proud to see that effort culminate with the signing of this vital law. We want to thank all who helped make this day possible.” “Equality Virginia has been working with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle for years to create a safer and more welcoming commonwealth for LGBTQ people,” said Vee Lamneck, executive director of Equality Virginia. “This law will have a transformative and positive impact on the lives of LGBTQ Virginians and bring Virginia into alignment with its voters.”Virginia is home to 257,400 LGBTQ adults. Under prior Virginia law, LGBTQ people were not explicitly protected from discrimination, meaning they were at risk of being fired, evicted or denied service in restaurants or stores. Virginia was one of only five states without protections in public accommodations for any protected class. The new law brings Virginia into the 21st century, and into alignment with Virginia voters, by modernizing and expanding existing human rights law… April 13, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Appeals Court Allows Care to Continue in Oklahoma During COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: Today, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals let stand a lower court’s decision temporarily blocking Gov. Kevin Stitt’s ban on abortion care in Oklahoma during the COVID-19 pandemic. This means abortion providers in the state can continue providing essential, time-sensitive abortion care. The appeals court denied the state’s request to block a temporary restraining order issued by a lower court on April 6. Abortion providers will now seek a preliminary injunction from the district court which will continue to block the ban from taking effect until the case concludes.“Today Oklahomans can breathe a temporary sigh of relief. But the fight is not over. Instead of responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, Gov. Stitt is wasting valuable time and resources to attack essential, time-sensitive abortion services that cannot wait for a pandemic to pass,” said Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “Gov. Stitt’s relentless attacks on health care access during a public health crisis is making a dire situation even worse. We won’t stand for it. Planned Parenthood will continue to fight these cruel attacks on the abortion services our patients need in Oklahoma and across the country — no matter what.” “We are relieved that the court upheld access to abortion, since we know our patients who need essential, time-sensitive medical procedures like abortion cannot wait,” said Brandon Hill, PhD, president and CEO of Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains. “The last thing public officials should do in the midst of a public health crisis is attack health care of any kind. We will do everything in our power to ensure our doors remain open for the patients who need sexual and reproductive health care, including access to abortion.”……This lawsuit was filed on March 30 by the Center for Reproductive Rights and Planned Parenthood Federation of America after Gov. Stitt issued an order requiring all elective surgeries and minor medical procedures be postponed. Gov. Stitt subsequently declared that the order prohibits all abortions in the state, forcing all health centers to halt abortion services. Executive orders like these have forced some patients to travel hundreds of miles to find abortion services during the pandemic.Oklahoma is not the first state to attempt to ban abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the ACLU, and other organizations have filed lawsuits in multiple states. Temporary restraining orders allowing abortion services to continue have been secured in Alabama and Ohio. Over the weekend, abortion providers in Texas filed an emergency request with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking that medication abortions be allowed to continue in the state.Leading medical organizations like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Medical Association (AMA) have opposed these attempts to restrict abortion during the pandemic. Both groups filed an amicus brief in this case, stating: “anning abortion will not help address the pandemic. Most abortions do not require any hospital resources and use only minimal PPE. And banning abortion will actually increase use of those resources and contribute to spread of the virus.” The Center for Reproductive Rights is challenging a host of other abortion restrictions in Oklahoma, including: a ban on the use of telemedicine to provide medication abortion; a law that forces patients to delay their abortion for at least 72 hours after receiving certain state-mandated information; a “physician-only” law that bans qualified medical professionals from providing medication abortion; a ban on the standard method of abortion after approximately 14 weeks of pregnancy; and a law requiring doctors to tell patients that some abortions can be “reversed” — a patently false statement… April 13, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris, 22 Senators Reintroduce Resolution Designating April 11-17 as Black Maternal Health Week”. From the press release: On Monday, U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) led 22 of her colleagues in reintroducing a resolution to designate April 11-17, 2020 as Black Maternal Health Week to raise awareness about the Black maternal health crisis. The resolution was led in the House of Representatives by Congresswoman Alma Adams (D-NC).According to the Centers for Disease Control, Black mothers in the United States are three to four times more likely than white mothers to die from pregnancy-related complications and are two times more likely than white mothers to suffer from pregnancy-related illnesses, known as maternal morbidities.“The potential ramifications that could come with giving birth during the coronavirus pandemic — specifically a pandemic that is disproportionately impacting African Americans — is of particular concern to Black women who were already facing a maternal health crisis in our country,” said Senator Harris. “Now more than ever, we need to address this issue. During Black Maternal Health Week, we must continue in the fight to ensure Black women are taken seriously when they speak about their health concerns, and remove disparities and implicit bias from our health care system.”Joining Harris on the resolution are Senators Merkley (D-OR), Durbin (D-IL), Blumenthal (D-CT), Van Hollen (D-MD), Booker (D-NJ), Klobuchar (D-MN), Hirono (D-HI), Markey (D-MA), Jones (D-AL), Duckworth (D-IL), Menendez (D-NJ), Wyden (D-OR), Sanders (I-VT), Feinstein (D-CA), Murray (D-WA), Bennet (D-CO), Baldwin (D-WI), Peters (D-MI), Smith (D-MN), Brown (D-OH), Cortez Masto (D-NV), Stabenow (D-MI), and Gillibrand (D-NY).The resolution is sponsored by Black Mamas Matter Alliance, Center for Reproductive Rights, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Black Women’s Health Imperative, Center for Health and Gender Equity (CHANGE), Commonsense Childbirth, Every Mother Counts, In Our Own Voice: National Black Women’s Reproductive Justice Agenda, March for Moms, National Birth Equity Collaborative, National Black Midwives Alliance, National Medical Association, National Partnership for Women & Families, National Perinatal Task Force, National Women’s Law Center, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Southern Birth Justice Network, and WomenHeart: The National Coalition for Women with Heart Disease.“This resolution says, unequivocally, that Black Moms matter,” said Representative Adams, co-founder and co-chair of the Black Maternal Health Caucus. “I’m proud to stand with my colleagues to raise awareness of Black Maternal Health Week, and urge our Congressional leaders to take action on one of the greatest public health crises of our time.”“The Black Mamas Matter Alliance (BMMA) thanks Senator Harris and Congresswoman Adams for their continued support and amplification of Black Maternal Health Week (#BMHW20). As the founders of #BMHW20, BMMA believes that the experiences, voices, and maternity care work of Black women must be centered in order to address the U.S. maternal health crisis – hence the importance of recognizing April 11th – 17th as Black Maternal Health Week!” said Angela D. Aina, Interim Executive Director of BMMA.“The Center for Reproductive Rights applauds Senator Kamala Harris and Congresswoman Alma Adams on the introduction of this year’s Black Maternal Health Week Resolution. Now more than ever we need recognition of this crisis and federal solutions to save the lives of Black mothers,” said Jennifer Jacoby, Federal Policy Counsel. Breana Lipscomb, Senior Manager, U.S. Maternal Health and Rights Initiative, and BMMA Board Member added, “The COVID-19 pandemic has proven that chronic underinvestment in the public health infrastructure is deadly and Black people pay the price. This year’s resolution is a call to action, reminding us that in this time of crisis we cannot sacrifice the human rights of birthing people.”“Black Maternal Health Week is an important opportunity to bring national attention to the maternal mortality crisis facing Black women. This is a year like no other, as we grapple with the COVID-19 pandemic, an emergency that is endangering the health and economic well-being of millions and having a particularly harmful–and deadly–impact on the Black community. Sadly, we know the maternal mortality crisis and COVID-19 disparities share a common underlying force: racism and structural inequality. Now is the time to address those evils in this country once and for all, and do all that we can to ensure health equity along racial lines,” said Dr. Jamila Taylor, Director of Health Care Reform and Senior Fellow for the Century FoundationThe United States is one of only 13 countries in the world where rates of illness and death during pregnancy are on the rise. From 2000 to 2014, the U.S. experienced a substantial increase of 26.6 percent in maternal mortality rates.A full copy of the resolution can be found here. April 13, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted an article titled: “Black Maternal Health Week: Planned Parenthood calls on Congress to Endorse The Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act of 2020”. From the press release: This Black Maternal Health Week — an initiative spearheaded by the Black Mamas Matter Alliance (BMMA) — Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) joins patients, advocates, and providers to call for reform to improve maternal health care for Black women. Along with 90 other partners and organizations, PPFA endorses the The Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act of 2020, which was introduced last month by U.S. Representatives Lauren Underwood (D-IL) and Alma Adams (D-NC), U.S. Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA), and members of the Black Maternal Health Caucus. The bill addresses the racial disparities in pregnancy outcomes among Black women in America, including higher rates of death and severe morbidity.According to the latest data from the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Black women are 3 times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes compared to white women. These outcomes are the result of bias of medical providers, structural racism, and economic inequality — leading to limited access to health care and a heightened risk of health complications. And recent data shows that Black Americans are disproportionately affected by COVID-19 due to medical racism and structural barriers to testing and receiving care. Congress must act now and pass the Momnibus Act so that research, policies, resources, and funds are allocated to combat the inequities in maternal health…While there is currently limited data and research on the effects of COVID-19 on pregnant women and infants, there are clear racial disparities in testing, treatment, and mortality rates among Black people who have been infected by the new coronavirus. The COVID-19 crisis makes the problems associated with maternal health even more acute, with social distancing guidance that keeps loved ones and doulas from the delivery room, reducing their ability to advocate for those in labor — and environmental factors that make pre- and postnatal care less feasible. Health equity will not be achieved without addressing racial equity, and addressing implicit bias in health care delivery is a top priority for Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood health center providers and staff undergo training to understand and eliminate provider bias, racial microaggressions, and stereotypes. Many Planned Parenthood health centers serve pregnant patients with screenings for diabetes, depression, substance abuse, and environmental and teratogenic exposures, as well as offering obesity management, smoking cessation support, vaccinations (including flu), and preconception genetic screening. Some Planned Parenthood health centers offer care for patients experiencing miscarriage and primary care and behavioral health. Planned Parenthood advocates for Black mothers and maternal health, and the improved health outcomes for Black women and communities. We endorse legislation that improves maternal health care, including the The Healthy MOMMIES Act and The Rural MOMS Act. The Momnibus bill would help ensure pregnancy and birth experiences are not contingent on race and that Black women have the freedom to be pregnant without added fear. It allocates the resources, investment, and support that would allow Black mothers to thrive…. April 13, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Leads Coalition Urging Supreme Court to Halt Public Charge Rule as Coronavirus Rages On”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today led a coalition of three states and New York City in urging the U.S. Supreme Court to revisit the question of whether to halt implementation of the Trump Administration’s Public Charge Rule as New York and the nation undergo a public health crisis created by the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The Public Charge Rule drives immigrants and their families away from accessing health benefits to which they are entitled by threatening applicants’ eligibility for green cards and visa renewals. The Supreme Court issued an order in January that had been denied by the lower courts, allowing the rule to take effect while legal challenges to the rule are pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and through a possible petition to the Supreme Court. Attorney General James and the coalition are today asking the court to revisit the question of interim relief in light of the new and devastating effects that the rule has had on the nation’s public-health and economy as COVID-19 has spread over the last six weeks, and — in an effort to prevent the rule from impeding efforts to slow the continued spread of the virus happening nationwide — to temporarily halt the Public Charge Rule until the national pandemic is over.“Every person who doesn’t get the health coverage they need today risks infecting another person with the coronavirus tomorrow,” said Attorney General James. “Immigrants provide us with health care, care for our elderly, prepare and deliver our food, clean our hospitals and public spaces, and take on so many other essential roles in our society, which is why we should all be working to make testing and health coverage available to every single person in this country, regardless of immigration status. Our country cannot afford to wait, yet the sustained application of the Public Charge Rule continues to harm this nation’s public health and our economy to its core. We’re asking the Supreme Court to temporarily halt this rule until this national crisis is over because any rule that threatens an immigrant’s well-being, threatens all of us.”Last August, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security issued a Public Charge Rule that changed the established meaning of public charge, which had long been that immigrants who use basic, non-cash benefits are not considered public charges because they are not primarily dependent on the government for survival.Federal law allows lawful immigrants to apply for certain supplemental public benefits if they have been in the country for at least five years. But the new Public Charge Rule creates a “bait-and-switch” ― if immigrants use these supplemental benefits to which they are legally entitled, they may jeopardize their chances of later becoming a legal permanent resident or renewing their visa……In the more than two months since the Supreme Court issued its ruling, COVID-19 has fundamentally changed the national landscape. The United States went from not a single reported COVID-19 case to well more than 575,000 confirmed infections and more than 23,000 confirmed deaths, and is now the country with the most virus-related deaths in the world. More than 195,000 of those infections and more than 10,000 deaths have been reported in New York State alone……Since that time, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has issued a state of emergency, as have cities across the United States. New York Governor Andrew M. Cuomo has issued a state of emergency, as has every other state in the nation. President Donald J. Trump has declared a national state of emergency and has approved federal disaster declarations for all 50 states, as well as Washington, D.C., the U.S. Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and Puerto Rico.The motion filed with the Supreme Court today by Attorney General James and the coalition asks the court to take into consideration the extraordinary events of the last six weeks and the new harms that the rule is causing to the public health and the economy during the COVID-19 crisis. The motion asks the court to temporarily lift or modify its stay to halt implementation of the Public Charge Rule until the national emergency concerning COVID-19 is over. Of note is the fact that immigrants make up a large number of essential workers helping move our nation along at this time, and if they don’t have access to the proper health care today, they are more likely to spread the virus to all Americans, inadvertently, tomorrow — not only contributing to the exponential growth of infection rates, but of fatalities as well.“By deterring immigrants from accessing publicly funded health care, including programs that would enable immigrants to obtain testing and treatment for COVID-19, the Rule makes it more likely that immigrants will suffer serious illness if infected and spread the virus inadvertently to others — risks that are heightened because immigrants make up a large proportion of the essential workers who continue to interact with the public,” the motion argues. “The Rule’s deterrent effect on immigrants’ access to health care and other public benefits for which they are indisputably eligible is impeding efforts to stop the spread of the coronavirus, preserve scarce hospital capacity and medical supplies, and protect the lives of everyone in our communities — citizens and noncitizens alike.”Further, the coalition argues that the nation’s economy cannot undergo further damage from the spread of COVID-19. In the three-week period between March 19 and April 9, more than 16 million residents across the nation lost their jobs and filed for unemployment. And according to estimates by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, between February and March 2020, the number of immigrant adults who are unemployed rose by 26 percent. As today’s motion argues, “many workers who lose their jobs and their employer-sponsored health insurance because of the pandemic are likely to need Medicaid coverage until they can find another job.”Attorney General James and the coalition conclude by arguing that none of these harms were before the Supreme Court when it decided to stay the district court’s orders in January, justifying a temporarily halt of the stay order. “The nature and magnitude of the harms currently being imposed by the Rule warrant temporary relief from the stay, particularly when these harms were not known to the parties or the Court when the Court considered defendants’ stay application. Although this case has always concerned issues of public health and welfare, the COVID-19 outbreak and its ramifications on public health and the economy present sudden and stark new circumstances not previously considered by the Court and have vastly changed and amplified the irreparable harms caused by the Rule. And the likelihood of these harms occurring is no longer a prediction. The Rule’s devastating effects are happening now. Given these new circumstances, the Court should modify or lift its stay temporarily to meet the exigencies and equities of the current public-health and economic crisis.”Joining Attorney General James in filing today’s motion with the Supreme Court are the attorneys general of Connecticut and Vermont, as well as corporation counsel for New York City. April 13, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Responds to Emergency Appeal to Supreme Court After Texas Exploits Pandemic to Block Abortion Access”. From the press release: Today, doctors in Texas who provide abortion care— represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Lawyering Project, and Planned Parenthood Federation of America — filed an emergency appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the Court to take immediate action to restore access to medication abortion in the state as the case unfolds.Texas Governor Greg Abbott, along with anti-choice officials in 11 other states, recently seized upon the COVID-19 pandemic to try to ban abortion, falsely claiming abortion care is “elective” rather than time-sensitive and essential healthcare for women. In response, NARAL President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement:“The fate of countless women and pregnant people in my home state of Texas now rests with the Supreme Court. Nine Justices face a choice between following an anti-choice GOP down a path to ignore science and prioritize ideology that undercuts fundamental freedoms and hurts women and families, or they can uphold the rule of law and scientific and medical advice. We’re here. We’re watching. And we’ll never stop fighting.”Anti-choice politicians in Texas have consistently worked to ban abortion and roll back reproductive freedom, even going so far as to introduce a bill last legislative session which would have punished women seeking abortion care with the death penalty. April 14, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “SCOTUS won’t face abortion case after lower court eases Texas’ pandemic ban”. It was written by Alice Miranda Ollstein. From the article: Abortion rights groups on Tuesday withdrew their request for the Supreme Court to lift Texas’ coronavirus emergency ban on the procedure after a lower court allowed some abortions to resume in the state.The move allows the high court, at least for now, to avoid considering whether anti-aborion states can block access to the constitutionally protected procedure in the name of a public health crisis. However, bans from red states have popped up across the country in recent weeks, so the court could soon be confronted again with a similar question.Abortion rights groups called off their challenge to the Texas ban after the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in a Monday night ruling said medication abortions could continue under the state’s pandemic emergency order.Texas and several other conservative states who have long sought to curb abortion have deemed the procedure nonessential amid the public health crisis, arguing it would cut into short supply of protective gear for health workers and create unnecessary risk of coronavirus infection. Abortion rights advocates say the bans ultimately hurt public health and accuse Republican governors of using a health emergency to advance an anti-abortion agenda……Surgical abortions remain banned in the state for now for most patitents, except for those who would be unable to get an abortion under the state’s 22-week ban if further delayed……Texas’ emergency order is set to expire next week, but the state could decide to extend it. April 14, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “5th Circuit Court of Appeals Backs Down, Restores Medication Abortion in Texas for Now”. From the press release: Late Monday night, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals backed down from its stay of a lower court’s temporary restraining order that had protected access to medication abortions under Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s COVID-19 order banning “non-essential procedures.” This means medication abortions — a two-pill process — will once again be available in Texas, for now.Last week, for a second time, the 5th Circuit blocked a temporary restraining order and made abortion largely inaccessible across the state. The appeals court ruled without even allowing providers time to respond. Instead, it waited to ask any questions until two days after abortion providers — represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Lawyering Project, and Planned Parenthood Federation of America — asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take emergency action to restore access to medication abortion. Only then did the 5th Circuit ask the parties to further explain whether medication abortion is a “procedure.” This, despite the providers’ submission of numerous briefs in both the trial and appellate courts over the past few weeks making clear medication abortion is not a “procedure.”Consistent with all of its briefing in the case, including several to the 5th Circuit, abortion providers — including Planned Parenthood Center for Choice, Planned Parenthood Greater Texas Surgical Health Services, Planned Parenthood South Texas Surgical Center, Whole Woman’s Health, Whole Woman’s Health Alliance, Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center, and Austin Women’s Health Center — once again explained that medication abortion consists of two pills administered without any personal protective equipment (PPE).Even with the 5th Circuit’s decision to allow medication abortions under Gov. Abbott’s COVID-19 order, the only other abortion procedures that remain available are for Texas patients with a gestational age that would exceed the state’s legal limit by April 22 (one day after Gov. Abbott’s COVID-19 order expires).Statement of Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“It has become a day by day, week to week fight for people whose health care cannot wait. Planned Parenthood and its partners have never wavered in the facts: abortion is safe, necessary, and time-sensitive. While this is a very temporary relief for some Texans, many others still cannot access time-sensitive abortion procedures. As people try and navigate their new realities under a pandemic — job loss, quarantining with abusive partners, or still having to work essential jobs — we need more abortion access, not less. This fight is far from over.”……The 5th Circuit has yet to consider Texas Attorney General’s second petition for writ of mandamus, a rare procedural motion that could quickly end abortion access once again in the state.Leading medical experts, including the American Medical Association, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the American Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology agree: forcing people to carry their pregnancies to term against their will only creates a heavier burden on a hospital system that’s already stretched thin caring for COVID-19 patients.Already, courts in Alabama, Ohio and Oklahoma are allowing abortion providers — just like all other doctors — to decide when to provide essential abortion care while conserving needed resources during this pandemic. Texas should be no different… April 14, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Louisiana’s COVID-19 Ban on Abortion Challenged in Court”. From the press release: Today, the Center for Reproductive Rights filed a lawsuit challenging Louisiana’s latest attempt to close abortion clinics in the state. Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry has targeted abortion clinics for closure, citing the COVID-19 pandemic as justification. The Center is asking a federal court to immediately block the state’s attempts to shutter Hope Medical Group for Women and other abortion clinics.“This is a shameful abuse of power,” said Nancy Northup, President & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “Louisiana has been trying for decades to end abortion. We are already fighting a separate Louisiana law at the Supreme Court that would shut down nearly every clinic in the state. If the state’s latest actions are not blocked, that will become a reality before the Supreme Court even rules.”“Hope Medical Group for Women is in full compliance of the Notice, but the Attorney General’s recent actions have thrown our patients into a state of fear and panic. There are women in Louisiana who need an abortion today—they cannot wait. But our hands are now being tied by the state,” said Kathaleen Pittman, clinic administrator for Hope Medical Group for Women in Shreveport, Louisiana. “If women can’t access abortion here in Louisiana, they will no doubt attempt to access care in other states, which will only hurt efforts to contain the spread of the coronavirus. Most of our patients are already mothers, so they are dealing with all this on top of caring for kids while schools are closed, and many are struggling financially.”Louisiana is one of several states that have attempted to restrict abortion access during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the ACLU, and other allies have filed challenges in multiple states. Temporary restraining orders allowing abortion care have been secured in Alabama, Ohio, and Oklahoma. Just last night, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals amended its previous ruling to allow medication abortion care to continue in Texas while they consider the rest of the state’s appeal.Leading medical organizations like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Medical Association (AMA) have opposed these attempts to restrict abortion during the pandemic. Both groups filed an amicus brief in the case challenging Texas’s COVID-19 abortion ban, stating that interpreting Health Department Notices like Louisiana has “is likely to increase, rather than decrease, burdens on hospitals and use of PPE. At the same time, it will severely impair essential health care for women, and it will place doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals in an untenable position by criminalizing necessary medical care.”The Center’s lawsuit argues that although Hope has been in full compliance with the Health Department’s Notice, Louisiana’s recent actions and application of the Notice, would deny Louisianans’ access to essential, time-sensitive healthcare and violate their constitutional right to choose abortion prior to viability and nearly 50 years of Supreme Court precedent protecting a woman’s right to bodily integrity and autonomy under the Fourteenth Amendment. The lawsuit also argues that—contrary to the state’s claims—forcing women to carry a pregnancy to birth or travel out of state for abortion care in the middle of this current crisis is not only cruel and unconstitutional but will also undermine public health, by increasing the risk of spreading COVID-19 and expending more medical resources.The Center is currently litigating three other cases in Louisiana, including June Medical Services v. Russo—a case awaiting a decision from the Supreme Court that could leave just one abortion provider in the state. The Center also filed a lawsuit challenging seven abortion restrictions passed in 2016; and a lawsuit challenging the state’s targeted regulation of abortion providers (TRAP) laws.Louisiana has more abortion restrictions than any other state, andmore than 92% of Louisiana parishes have no abortion clinic. Since 2001, the number of abortion clinics in Louisiana has fallen from 11 to three as the state has imposed a slew of onerous requirements for abortion providers. There are nearly one million women of reproductive age in the state. This case was filed by Center for Reproductive Rights attorneys Jenny Ma, Caroline Sacerdote, and Arielle Humphries on behalf of Hope Medical Group for Women. The full complaint is available here. April 14, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Planned Parenthood Sexual Health Care Via Telehealth To Be Available in All 50 States”. From the press release: Today, Planned Parenthood announced a national expansion of telehealth services to provide health care by phone or video to patients in all 50 states by the end of April. Planned Parenthood knows that even during a pandemic, sexual and reproductive health services can’t wait — they are time-sensitive and essential. Through telehealth, patients can access timely care and information from Planned Parenthood’s trusted providers with fewer visits or without the need to visit a health center at all.While many things are different right now, you can still have a safe, healthy sex life. Planned Parenthood also has new digital resources available with information on the new coronavirus, or COVID-19, and how it can affect sexual and reproductive health. Planned Parenthood’s new webpages provide medically accurate answers to questions like “Can I still have sex?” and “What do I do if my birth control method is about to expire?” and “Can I still get an abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic?” Planned Parenthood has added new information to Roo, our sexual health chatbot, and to our popular Chat/Text program to help people understand how COVID-19 affects their sexual health and how to access health care during the pandemic. Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:Sexual health needs don’t go away, even when our country is in crisis. Planned Parenthood is proud to redouble our efforts to make sure people can still access the care and information they need. We know this pandemic has increased barriers to health care for many of the communities we serve — at exactly the time when people need that care the most. Through telehealth, Planned Parenthood is providing the high-quality care and information people need to stay safe and healthy, even as our everyday reality is rapidly changing. Challenging times require us to innovate, and expand the tools that connect our expert, compassionate providers with patients who need care. No matter how you meet Planned Parenthood — in our health centers, online, or on your phone — we’re here with you.Telehealth appointments, where a patient connects with a provider in a different location using technology, are a secure and private way for people to access health care services without the need to travel. While telehealth services vary health center to health center, patients can access direct-to-patient services including birth control, sexually-transmitted infection (STI) testing and/or treatment, gender-affirming hormone therapy, pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), UTI screening and treatment, and emergency contraception (also known as the morning-after pill). Some Planned Parenthood health centers also offer counseling and follow-up for abortions through telehealth. April 14, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Co-Leads Push with Michigan and North Carolina AGs for Increased Federal Government Outreach to Inform Americans of Healthcare Coverage Eligibility During COVID-19”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today co-led a multistate letter to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and its Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) urging them to immediately develop and implement an outreach plan to inform the millions of Americans who have lost – or may lose – their employer-sponsored health insurance coverage about the Special Enrollment Period available to them through Healthcare.gov, the federal Exchange. In the letter, the attorneys general highlight the importance of providing families with the information and tools they need to navigate their healthcare options and access coverage during the unprecedented international healthcare crisis posed by COVID-19. “Healthcare is not a luxury. Neither, sadly, is it a right in America. Not yet. COVID-19 has made that crystal clear, especially for millions of American families suddenly struggling against health and economic uncertainty,” said Attorney General Becerra. “The federal government has the tools to help under the Affordable Care Act. HHS and CMS can actively and immediately reach out to and inform Americans, especially those who have lost their jobs and insurance, that they can now apply for affordable healthcare coverage through the federal healthcare Exchange. We call on the federal government to act, this is no time for spectating.”In the letter, the attorneys general highlight that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) provides the flexibility necessary to help people wrestling with the loss of their livelihood and their family’s healthcare coverage during this critical time. The ACA requires the HHS Secretary to provide yearly open enrollment periods on the Exchanges to permit individuals to enroll in new or different healthcare coverage. Outside of this period, individuals may enroll in coverage through the Exchange only if they qualify for a Special Enrollment Period due to certain life events such as loss of employment offering healthcare coverage. Informing individuals of the potential for replacing the coverage they have lost through Healthcare.gov is vital, as most Americans obtain their healthcare coverage through their employer. In 2018, over half of individuals under age 65 had insurance through an employer. The importance of this outreach will only increase as the economic upheaval of this crisis continues to expand. A new study by the Health Management Associates estimates that the number of people receiving coverage from an employer could decline by up to 35 million due to layoffs caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. This same study estimates that the economic impact to the labor market could disproportionately impact the roughly 58 million non-elderly individuals who have employer-sponsored coverage and earn less than $50,000 per year. This heavily hit population could greatly benefit from navigating their options on the Exchanges where they may qualify for subsidies to help pay for healthcare coverage. The coalition expresses concern that, without immediate and widespread outreach, Americans who have recently been laid off will remain unaware of the Special Enrollment Period and thus not access needed healthcare coverage. Evidence shows that marketplace advertising and consumer assistance increases enrollment numbers and stabilizes markets. For this reason, states that run their own Exchanges, like California, continue to invest heavily in marketing and outreach to support their state-based marketplaces. Yet, over the last few years, the Trump Administration has actively cut marketplace advertising and consumer assistance. HHS, as the operator of Healthcare.gov, must step in to get the word out to consumers in the 38 states that rely on the federal Exchange. HHS should also ensure that outreach materials are translated into the same range of languages as other HHS vital documents in order to ensure meaningful access to information about the Special Enrollment Period. The attorneys general urge HHS to empower individuals and working families across the country to pursue the best coverage option for them, whether it is Exchange coverage, COBRA, Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program. While the federal government’s promise to reimburse for the testing and treatment of COVID-19 for the uninsured is a step in the right direction, it will not help provide these Americans the comprehensive healthcare they so desperately need and could leave many families with large hospital and insurance bills in the long-run.Joining Attorney General Becerra in sending the letter are the attorneys general of Michigan, North Carolina, and Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and the District of Columbia. April 14, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Emergency Lawsuit Filed in Tennessee to Keep Abortion Accessible During Pandemic”. From the press release: Today, a Tennessee order effectively banning abortion procedures in the state was challenged by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee. The April 8 order, issued by Tennessee Governor Bill Lee in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, limits “non-emergency” health care procedures and bars people from getting a procedural abortion. Patients who are less than 11 weeks pregnant are still permitted to obtain medication abortions in the state.Tennessee is not the first state to restrict abortion care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the ACLU, and other allies have filed lawsuits in multiple states. In Texas, most abortions are currently prohibited, and providers have asked the Supreme Court to intervene on an emergency basis. Court decisions allowing abortion care to continue have occurred in Alabama, Ohio and Oklahoma. Statement from Nancy Northup, President & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“We have filed this case to protect the constitutional rights of women in Tennessee who need access to essential, time-sensitive abortion care. All signs indicate that this crisis will not be over soon, and patients cannot wait until it is. Leading medical experts have been clear that COVID-19 responses should not ban abortion care.”..…The lawsuit filed today argues that Tennessee’s order effectively bans abortion in the state for many women, violating Roe v. Wade and nearly 50 years of Supreme Court precedent protecting a woman’s right to liberty and autonomy under the Fourteenth Amendment. The lawsuit also argues that forcing women to travel out of state for abortion care, or to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term and give birth, will increase the risk of spreading COVID-19 and undermine the state’s asserted goal of preserving medical resources and limiting person-to-person encounters. Leading medical organizations like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Medical Association (AMA) have opposed these attempts to restrict abortion during the pandemic. Both groups filed an amicus brief in the case challenging Texas’s COVID-19 abortion ban, stating: “Indeed, the Governor’s order is likely to increase, rather than decrease, burdens on hospitals and use of PPE. At the same time, it will severely impair essential health care for women, and it will place doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals in an untenable position by criminalizing necessary medical care.” Tennessee also bans the use of telehealth for medication abortion — a tool that could greatly expand access and reduce in-person contact. Other abortion restrictions in Tennessee include: a mandatory 48-hour waiting period (which includes a requirement that patients make an additional, medically unnecessary trip to the clinic to receive state-mandated information); limits on when state and public insurance can cover abortion services; and a requirement that minors obtain parental consent. This lawsuit was filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the ACLU, the ACLU of Tennessee and pro-bono counsel Kramer Levin. Plaintiffs in the case are CHOICES Memphis Center for Reproductive Health, Knoxville Center for Reproductive Health, Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi, Adams & Boyle P.C, and Dr. Kimberly Looney. The full complaint is available here. April 15, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: Trump Administration’s Decision to Suspend Funding to the World Health Organization is Devastating for Global Health”. From the press release: Yesterday evening, the Trump administration announced it would suspend funding to the World Health Organization (WHO), a move that would be devastating for global health especially amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. An effective response must be evidence-based and grounded in data; it requires global cooperation and coordination from all countries around the world, especially the United States, which now has the largest number of COVID-19 fatalities. As the foremost institution for global health research and response, the WHO has a mandate to promote the highest standard of health for all and provide leadership and expertise in the delivery of essential health care, including sexual and reproductive health. Since its founding over 70 years ago, the WHO has led the global response to health emergencies such as tuberculosis, HIV, malaria, Zika, avian influenza, and SARS.Statement from Monica Kerrigan, Executive Director, Planned Parenthood Global: “As the world faces the COVID-19 pandemic, we need global cooperation and the leadership of the World Health Organization more than ever. Cutting funding to the WHO undermines global health and endangers the lives of all people, including those living in the U.S. This is not the time for political maneuvering—it is the time for bold leadership and urgent action both globally and locally. Abandoning the foremost institution for global health – a powerhouse of research with decades of experience responding to global pandemics – is shortsighted and devastating. We cannot forget that the fates of the U.S. and the rest of the world are intertwined.”This isn’t the first time the Trump administration has withdrawn from UN agencies. For the past three years, the administration has withheld funding from UNFPA, the principal UN agency providing reproductive health care around the world. And in 2018, the Trump administration withdrew from the Human Rights Council, the UN body charged with protection of global human rights. April 15, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Statement from the Center for Reproductive Rights on the Trump Administration’s suspension of funding of the World Heath Organization”. From the press release: The following is the statement of Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights regarding the Trump Administration’s suspension of funding of the World Health Organization (WHO).“It is irresponsible and unjust for President Trump to direct the United States to halt funding to the WHO during this extraordinary crisis. Countries, health professionals and humanitarian relief organizations across the globe rely on WHO guidance and support to effectively respond to the pandemic. Suspension of funding will limit this ability, including the ability to effectively provide time-sensitive, essential health care, grounded in evidence, equity and human rights.Delay or denial of time-sensitive, essential health care, exacerbates the dire situation we are facing around the globe, but especially for marginalized populations, including women and girls, threatening their rights to life, health and gender equality in fundamental ways. The WHO has provided important guidance for reproductive healthcare, which is central to women’s health and can itself be life-saving. WHO guidance during this pandemic has included information on caring for pregnant women, infants and mothers with COVID-19 as well as information on intrapartum care (IPC) and breastfeeding, and on contraception and family planning during the Covid-19 response.“We call on President Trump to continue United States funding to the WHO and support its urgent global, evidence-based, public health response. April 15, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on President Trump Halting WHO Funding”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after President Trump announced that he would halt funding to the World Health Organization in the middle of the coronavirus crisis:“The President’s halting of funding to the WHO as it leads the global fight against the coronavirus pandemic is senseless.“We can only be successful in defeating this global pandemic through a coordinated international response with respect for science and data. But sadly, as he has since Day One, the President is ignoring global health experts, disregarding science and undermining the heroes fighting on the frontline, at great risk of the lives and livelihoods of Americans and people around the world. This is another case, as I have said, of the President’s ineffective response, that ‘a weak person, a poor leader, takes no responsibility. A weak person blames others.’“This decision is dangerous, illegal and will be swiftly challenged.” April 17, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Court Blocks Tennessee’s COVID-19 Ban on Most Abortions”. From the press release: Today — at the request of the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee — a federal district court in Tennessee granted an emergency motion, allowing clinics to resume procedural abortions during the COVID-19 pandemic. The decision comes after Gov. Bill Lee issued a state order limiting “non-emergency” health care procedures. That order banned all abortions other than medication abortions (which involve taking pills and are only available until 11 weeks of pregnancy), despite leading national medical groups agreeing that abortion procedures are essential and time-sensitive.In his decision, Judge Bernard Friedman wrote, “Moreover, abortion is a time-sensitive procedure. Delaying a woman’s access to abortion even by a matter of days can result in her having to undergo a lengthier and more complex procedure that involves progressively greater health risks, or can result in her losing the right to obtain an abortion altogether. Therefore, plaintiffs have demonstrated that enforcement of EO-25 causes them irreparable harm.” “Women in Tennessee can breathe a sigh of relief for now, knowing abortion procedures are available again in their home state,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “Today’s ruling in Tennessee joins those from courts across the country that have blocked these abuses of emergency powers. Women cannot wait until the pandemic is over to access abortion care, and we will continue fighting to make sure they can.” ……Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, many states have attempted to ban or limit abortion. In addition to Tennessee, lawsuits are ongoing in Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Texas. Court decisions allowing abortion care to continue have been issued in Alabama, Arkansas, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas. Leading medical organizations like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Medical Association (AMA) have opposed these attempts to restrict abortion during the pandemic. Both groups filed an amicus brief in the case challenging Oklahoma’s COVID-19 ban, stating: “anning abortion will not help address the pandemic. Most abortions do not require any hospital resources and use only minimal PPE. And banning abortion will actually increase use of those resources and contribute to spread of the virus.” Tennessee also bans the use of telehealth for medication abortion — a method that could greatly expand access and reduce in-person contact. Other abortion restrictions in Tennessee include: a mandatory 48-hour waiting period (which includes a requirement that patients make an additional, medically unnecessary trip to the clinic to receive state-mandated information); limits on when state and public insurance can cover abortion services; and a requirement that minors obtain parental consent. This lawsuit was filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the ACLU, the ACLU of Tennessee and pro-bono counsel Kramer Levin. Plaintiffs in the case are CHOICES Memphis Center for Reproductive Health, Knoxville Center for Reproductive Health, Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi, Bristol Regional Women’s Center, and Dr. Kimberly Looney. The decision is available here. April 19, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Demands Insurance Providers Obey the Law, Protect Women’s Access to Birth Control”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today demanded that three health insurance companies immediately provide coverage for 12-month supplies of contraceptives in accordance with New York State law. Under the Comprehensive Contraception Coverage Act (CCCA), health insurance providers are required to cover 12-month supplies of contraception at one time, yet the Attorney General’s Office found that Aetna, MetroPlus Health, and Oscar Health have refused to provide coverage for 12-month supplies to patients. In letters to these three companies, Attorney General James stressed the importance of adhering to this law especially in the midst of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, as many New Yorkers lose their jobs, health insurance coverage, and need to limit unnecessary trips to pharmacies.“There’s nothing more important than protecting New Yorkers’ health care, including reproductive care,” said Attorney General James. “With more than one million New Yorkers losing their jobs, and with it their health insurance, it’s critically important that women are able to fill their birth control prescriptions for the full duration allowed under the law. Insurance companies must comply with the law and permit women to get up to a year’s supply of birth control. During this crisis and beyond, I will continue to fight to protect New Yorkers’ health care and their rights.”The Attorney General’s Office received multiple complaints from New Yorkers that these companies refused to provide patients with 12-month supplies when requested and that representatives did not know this was required. The Attorney General’s Office is also reminding other insurers in New York State of their obligations under the CCCA. In addition to ensuring access to 12-month supplies, the CCCA, which took effect on January 1, 2020, requires that health plans cover all forms of contraception without deductible, coinsurance, copayment, or any other cost-sharing requirements, ensures access to emergency contraception, and prohibits any restrictions or delays on coverage, such as pre-authorizations. Attorney General James encourages anyone who has been denied this coverage by their health insurance plan or pharmacy or who believes they are being wrongfully denied other care to please report it to the Attorney General’s Office Health Care Bureau Helpline by filing a complaint or calling 1-800-428-9071. New Yorkers seeking information about available health plans in New York State should visit the state’s health plan marketplace…. April 20, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Court Blocks Tennessee’s COVID-19 Ban on Most Abortions”. From the press release: Today, at the request of the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee – a federal district court in Tennessee granted an emergency motion, allowing clinics to resume procedural abortions during the COVID-19 pandemic. The decision comes after Gov. Bill Lee issued a state order limiting “non-emergency” health care procedures. That order banned all abortions other than medication abortions (which involve taking pills and are only available until 11 weeks of pregnancy), despite leading national medical groups agreeing that abortion procedures are essential and time-sensitive.In his decision, Judge Bernard Friedman wrote, “Moreover, abortion is a time-sensitive procedure. Delaying a woman’s access to abortion even by a matter of days can result in her having to undergo a lengthier and more complex procedure that involves progressively greater health risks, or can result in her losing the right to obtain an abortion altogether. Therefore, plaintiffs have demonstrated that enforcement of EO-25 causes them irreparable harm.” “Let’s be clear: Abortion is essential, it’s time-sensitive, and it cannot wait. Though this is good news for our patients today, we should never have had to go to court to defend their health care access. A pandemic is a time to expand health care, not an excuse to take it away,” said Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “Planned Parenthood is here for the patients and communities we serve in Tennessee, and we won’t back down when it comes to protecting our patients.” “Abortion is essential health care and today is a win for our patients who need and deserve access to that care,” said Ashley Coffield, president & CEO of Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi. “The priority of Planned Parenthood health centers has always been the health and safety of our patients, staff, and community. Since the onset of the pandemic, we have done our part to promote best practices that reduce the transmission of the coronavirus and conserve needed resources. I am grateful that the guidance in the executive order has been clarified so we may continue to do so while still meeting the needs of our patients.”“Women in Tennessee can breathe a sigh of relief for now, knowing abortion procedures are available again in their home state,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “Today’s ruling in Tennessee joins those from courts across the country that have blocked these abuses of emergency powers. Women cannot wait until the pandemic is over to access abortion care, and we will continue fighting to make sure they can.” ……Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, many states have attempted to ban or limit abortion. In addition to Tennessee, lawsuits are ongoing in Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Texas. Court decisions allowing abortion care to continue have been issued in Alabama, Arkansas, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas.Leading medical organizations like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Medical Association (AMA) have opposed these attempts to restrict abortion during the pandemic. Both groups filed an amicus brief in the case challenging Oklahoma’s COVID-19 ban, stating: “anning abortion will not help address the pandemic. Most abortions do not require any hospital resources and use only minimal PPE. And banning abortion will actually increase use of those resources and contribute to spread of the virus.” Tennessee also bans the use of telehealth for medication abortion — a method that could greatly expand access and reduce in-person contact. Other abortion restrictions in Tennessee include: a mandatory 48-hour waiting period (which includes a requirement that patients make an additional, medically unnecessary trip to the clinic to receive state-mandated information); limits on when state and public insurance can cover abortion services; and a requirement that minors obtain parental consent. This lawsuit was filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the ACLU, the ACLU of Tennessee and pro-bono counsel Kramer Levin. Plaintiffs in the case are CHOICES Memphis Center for Reproductive Health, Knoxville Center for Reproductive Health, Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi, Bristol Regional Women’s Center, and Dr. Kimberly Looney.The decision is available here. April 20, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Medication Abortion Blocked Again in Texas COVID-19 Court Battle”. Today, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against abortion providers, prohibiting medication abortion yet again for women in Texas. At Texas’ request, the court vacated a lower court’s ruling that allowed medication abortion to continue. Today’s decision means that most abortions are again prohibited in Texas. Only patients who will pass the state’s gestational limit by April 22 (when the emergency order expires) will be allowed to have an abortion. The ruling is one of many that has created legal whiplash, causing confusion and uncertainty for hundreds of patients in need of essential, time-sensitive abortion care.Statement from Nancy Northup, president & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“The appellate court is creating chaos and uncertainty for women seeking abortions in Texas. Patients who had appointments scheduled will now be thrown into a state of panic yet again. It’s clear this abortion ban has nothing to do with the pandemic. Texas has been trying to restrict abortion for decades and this is part of that larger strategy. We will continue to fight for the rights of the women of Texas.” April 20, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Leads Coalition Fighting Arkansas’ Unconstitutional Abortion Ban During COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James has led a multistate coalition of 19 attorneys general in seeking to stop the State of Arkansas from banning almost all procedural abortions in the state, as the state uses the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) public health crisis as an excuse. Continuing her leadership of the nation’s fight to protect women’s reproductive health, Attorney General James led the coalition in filing an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, supporting the plaintiffs in Little Rock Family Planning Services v. In re Leslie Rutledge, as they fight to preserve access to reproductive health care for the women across Arkansas.“While multiple states are using the coronavirus as an excuse to push their anti-choice political agenda, we will continue fighting every day so that women retain control of their reproductive rights across this country,” said Attorney General James. “A pandemic does not give any state the right to undo all the progress made in the nearly 50 years since Roe, which is why I will continue to lead the fights against Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, or any other state that attempts to use this public health crisis as unjustified grounds to control women’s bodies, their choices, and their freedoms.”Women seeking an abortion in Arkansas typically have the choice between one of two options: a medication abortion (induced by taking two different prescription drugs) or a procedural abortion (a procedure performed by aspiration or by dilation and evacuation, neither of which involves general anesthesia or incision). Medication abortions can take place through the 10th week of pregnancy in Arkansas, while a procedural abortion can currently take place through approximately 22 weeks of pregnancy, despite new state laws, passed last year, attempting to scale back that period to just 18 weeks. Only one abortion clinic in the entire State of Arkansas is currently licensed to perform procedural abortions — the Little Rock Family Planning Services (LRFPS) health clinic.On March 11, 2020, Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson issued Executive Order 20-03, declaring a state of emergency. Ten days later, on March 21, 2020, the Arkansas Department of Health (ADH) issued a public statement recommending that health care facilities and clinicians “prioritize urgent and emergency visits and procedures now and for the coming several weeks.” The statement detailed that its goals were to “preserve staff, personal protective equipment (PPE), and patient care supplies; ensure staff and patient safety; and expand available hospital capacity during the COVID-19 pandemic.” The ADH stated that “rocedures … that can be safely postponed shall be rescheduled to an appropriate future date.” The ADH issued another directive on April 3 with the same language as the March 21 directive, but which further specified that “urgent” and “care designated as an exception…will continue,” including care for circumstances in which “there is a risk of…progression of staging of a…condition if surgery is not performed.”On April 1, representatives from the ADH called LRFPS twice to inquire about what the clinic was doing to reduce non-essential services, preserve PPE, and protect against the spread of COVID-19. On both occasions, LRFPS summarized practices it was following. On April 7, ADH inspectors performed an unannounced, in-person inspection at LRFPS. At no point during either of the phone calls or the in-person inspection (which occurred on a day during which both procedural and medication abortions were being provided) did the ADH representatives suggest that LRFPS was not complying with the state’s April 3 directive.However, on the morning of April 10, ADH inspectors hand delivered a cease-and-desist order to LRFPS, asserting that the clinic was “in violation of the April 3, 2020 Arkansas Department of Health Directive on Elective Surgeries,” despite acknowledging that the April 7 inspection “did not reveal any deficiencies with respect to the rules for abortion facilities in Arkansas.” The cease-and-desist order stated that the April 3 “prohibition applies to surgical abortions that are not immediately necessary to protect the life or health of the patient” and that “ny further violations of the April 3 Directive will result in an immediate suspension of license.”Although the ADH is using the April 3 directive as the basis for ordering LRFPS to stop performing procedural abortions — except when the life or health of the woman is at immediate risk — the ADH has, to date, continued to allow a range of other non-urgent medical services, including orthodontist visits to adjust orthodontic wires and dentist visits to treat cracked teeth. Further, at an April 9 press conference with Governor Hutchinson and Arkansas State Health Director Dr. Nathaniel Smith, Dr. Smith was asked if “elective surgery” was still permitted in the state, and he responded that judgments at surgical centers would be left primarily to the providers.A lawsuit LRFPS filed last year against government officials in the State of Arkansas in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas was amended on April 13 to add a challenge to the ADH April 3 directive and, specifically, the cease-and-desist order issued on April 10. The next day, the district court issued a temporary restraining order blocking the state from shutting down LRFPS’s procedural abortion services, in which the court noted that the state’s ban would, among other things, “bar access to abortion because medication abortion is contraindicated” for some women; “likely push to a more complex and more time-intensive” abortion procedure; and “likely push beyond the point at which abortion is available in the State.”The district court also noted that the continuation of procedural abortions would not preserve PPE or hospital resources because procedural abortions make minimal use of both, and that continuing to allow procedural abortions would not increase the risk of transmission of COVID-19 any more than other activities that Governor Hutchinson has allowed to continue in Arkansas. Instead, the court observed, the state’s decision to bar procedural abortions in Arkansas will cause some women to undertake lengthy interstate travel that will actually increase the risk of transmission of the disease. The different defendants then asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit to halt the lower court’s order, which would effectively reinstitute the ban on procedural abortions in the State of Arkansas.In the amicus brief filed on Friday, Attorney General James and the coalition lay out why they oppose the request to halt the lower court’s temporary restraining order, stressing that the ban on procedural abortions in Arkansas infringes on a woman’s constitutional rights. The coalition explains that the “characterization of the ban as prohibiting only ‘elective’ procedures fails to recognize how the time-sensitive nature of abortion care distinguishes that care from services that can be postponed without patient harm during the current public health crisis” because “abortions cannot be deferred indefinitely or for long stretches without increasing risks for some women and denying access to others.” The coalition explains that Arkansas’ “ban on abortions will irreparably injure any woman who reaches the legal limit for an abortion during the ban,” resulting in some women “permanently los their right to lawfully obtain an abortion in Arkansas.”Additionally, Attorney General James and the coalition go on to highlight that if the ban were to be reinstated, some women in Arkansas would be forced to make “risky and expensive” travel plans to cross state lines in order to obtain an abortion. This is especially troublesome at a time when the entire U.S. population is being asked to limit travel to stop the spread of COVID-19. Further, the coalition notes that residents of New York and other amici states may currently be in Arkansas without a way to return home, but they still have a right to time-sensitive reproductive care.Finally, the coalition explains why a ban on abortion would not help the state preserve PPE, free up hospital beds, or prevent the spread of COVID-19 transmissions. As the district court noted in its temporary restraining order, the exact opposite is actually true. The attorneys general note that procedural abortions require limited PPE and actually require “far less PPE and medical resources than continuing a pregnancy” does. Additionally, procedural abortions rarely require admission to a hospital.The amended complaint by LRFPS was filed in a suit brought last year when the governor, in March 2019, signed into law several bills intended to restrict a woman’s access to abortion services throughout the state. The laws would criminalize abortions performed after 18 weeks and impose additional undue burdens on a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion. In July 2019, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas granted a preliminary injunction and temporarily blocked the laws restricting abortion care from taking effect. The State of Arkansas appealed the decision to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals shortly thereafter. Earlier this year, in January, Attorney General James filed a multistate amicus brief in support of LRFPS’s lawsuit that seeks to protect a woman’s right to safe and legal abortion care without the burdensome restrictions imposed by Arkansas’ laws… April 20, 2020: American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) posted a press release titled: “AAP does not recommend home births, but offers guidance”. From the press release: The AAP has released updated guidance to protect the health of infants born at home, even as the Academy does not recommend this option.Hospitals and accredited birth centers remain the safest settings for birth in the U.S.Planned home birth in the U.S. has been associated with a two- to three-fold increase in infant mortality and an increased incidence of low Apgar scores and neonatal seizures, according to the policy statement Providing Care for Infants Born at Home from the AAP Committee on Fetus and Newborn.But because some women will continue to choose a home birth, the AAP has issued the guidance – similar to a 2013 policy – to help pediatricians discuss the issue with those seeking information or counsel……The AAP and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists support provision of care by midwives who are certified by the American Midwifery Certification Board or its predecessor organizations or whose education and licensure meet International Confederation of Midwives Global Standards for Midwifery Education.Two care providers should be present at each delivery. At least one should have primary responsibility for the newborn and appropriate training, skills, and equipment to perform full resuscitation of the infant according to the Neonatal Resuscitation Program.This guidance also is supported by the American Heart Association. April 21, 2020: Centers for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Court Says Oklahoma Abortion Providers Can Stay Open as COVID-19 Lawsuit Continues”. From the press release: Last night, a federal district judge in Oklahoma granted a preliminary injunction allowing most abortion care to continue in the state, and allowing abortion access to resume fully on Friday, April 24, despite Gov. Kevin Stitt’s order banning abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic. The judge previously granted a temporary restraining order allowing most abortion care to continue through April 20, but yesterday’s decision extends that relief until the case concludes, and allows all abortion care to resume on Friday. The request for emergency relief came from the Center for Reproductive Rights and Planned Parenthood Federation of America on behalf of Oklahoma abortion providers.Statement from Nancy Northup, President & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“This ruling should send a clear message: enough is enough. Oklahoma now has struck out three times–twice at the district court and once at the appellate court. It’s time for Oklahoma and other states to stop exploiting the pandemic to close abortion clinics and deny women essential, time-sensitive healthcare.” The decision is available here. April 21, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Leads Coalition Fighting Tennesse’s Unconstitutional Abortion Ban During COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today led a multistate coalition of 19 attorneys general in seeking to stop the State of Tennessee from banning almost all procedural abortions in the state, using the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) public health crisis as an excuse. Continuing her leadership of the nation’s fight to protect women’s reproductive health, Attorney General James led the coalition in filing an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, supporting the plaintiffs in Adams & Boyle, P.C., v. Slatery, as they fight to preserve access to reproductive health care for women across Tennessee.“Tennessee is the latest state to use the coronavirus as an excuse to outlaw abortion and strip women of their constitutional rights,” said Attorney General James. “This is just another power grab by a state willing to sacrifice women’s abortion rights to push a suppressive political agenda. We are standing up against this ban because the efforts by Tennessee and multiple other states to deny women their constitutionally-guaranteed rights will not go unchallenged. This is about protecting women’s bodies and their freedoms.”Women seeking an abortion in Tennessee typically can obtain a medication abortion (induced by taking two different prescription drugs) or a procedural abortion (performed by aspiration or by dilation and evacuation, neither of which involves general anesthesia or incision). Medication abortions can take place through the 11th week of pregnancy in Tennessee, while a procedural abortion can currently take place through the 20th week of pregnancy, despite indications by the governor and many members of the legislature to scale back those timeframes.On March 23, 2020, Tennessee Governor Bill Lee issued Executive Order No. 18, in which he declared: “All hospitals and surgical outpatient facilities…shall not perform non-essential procedures, which includes any medical procedure that is not necessary to address a medical emergency or to preserve the health and safety of a patient, as determined by a licensed medical provider.” Although the governor — through his aides — made clear his “hope and expectation” that “elective” abortions wouldn’t take place during the pandemic, he allowed for certain exemptions in his order, including one for “pregnancy-related visits and procedures.”As has been reported in multiple news outlets, opponents of abortion — including legislatures, lobbyists, and activists — then put pressure on the governor’s office to clarify the first executive order and ban all abortions in the state. Emails released in the media show one lawmaker even asking the governor’s office if they had explored how other states addressed the “apparent way around” the order Tennessee abortion providers were using to continue providing abortion services. On April 8, before his earlier emergency order expired, Governor Lee issued Executive Order No. 25 with stricter guidelines that declared: “All health care professionals and health care facilities in the State of Tennessee shall postpone surgical and invasive procedures that are elective and non-urgent,” in which the life or health of the patient is not in jeopardy. Following that order, Tennessee Health Commissioner Lisa Piercey warned health care providers about the potential to be charged with a Class A misdemeanor and face penalties and discipline by medical boards if they did not comply with the governor’s executive order.The next week, on April 13, the CHOICES Memphis Center for Reproductive Health, the Knoxville Center for Reproductive Health, Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi, Adams & Boyle P.C, and Dr. Kimberly Looney (an obstetrician-gynecologist) sought to file an amended complaint in a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, along with a motion for a preliminary injunction to immediately halt the ban of all procedural abortions. In that suit, the providers had previously challenged Tennessee’s 48-hour waiting period for any woman seeking an abortion.Last Friday, on April 17, the district court accepted the plaintiffs’ amended complaint and granted a preliminary injunction that immediately halted the ban of procedural abortions. The court found that “elaying a woman’s access to abortion even by a matter of days can result in her having to undergo a lengthier and more complex procedure that involves progressively greater health risks, or can result in her losing the right to obtain an abortion altogether.”That same day, Tennessee appealed the order for a preliminary injunction to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.In the amicus brief filed today in the Sixth Circuit, Attorney General James and the coalition lay out why they oppose the request to halt the lower court’s preliminary injunction, stressing that the ban on procedural abortions in Tennessee infringes on a woman’s constitutional rights. The coalition explains that the Tennessee defendants’ “characterization of the ban as a few weeks’ postponement of an ‘elective and non-urgent’ procedure fails to recognize how the time-sensitive nature of abortion care distinguishes that care from services that can be deferred without patient harm during the current public health crisis” because procedural “abortions cannot be deferred indefinitely or for long stretches without increasing risks for some women and denying access to others.”The coalition notes that a ban on procedural abortions — “which appellants do not dispute will likely be extended even further — will irreparably injure any woman who reaches the legal limit for an abortion during the ban,” resulting in some women losing their constitutional right to a legal abortion.Attorney General James and the coalition also explain that a prohibition on procedural abortions, even for a short period of time, would harm some women by requiring them “to undergo a more invasive and complex procedural abortion.”Additionally, the coalition goes on to highlight that the procedural abortion ban would force some women in Tennessee to make “risky and expensive” travel plans to cross state lines in order to obtain a procedural abortion. This is especially troublesome at a time when the entire U.S. population is being asked to limit travel to stop the spread of COVID-19. Further, residents of New York and other amici states may currently be in Tennessee without a way to return home, but they still have a right to time-sensitive reproductive care.The attorneys general add that: “To decrease transmission risks, reproductive health care clinics in amici States have increased the use of telehealth to conduct assessments, which reduces travel and in-person interactions. Some amici have modified state rules to allow increased use of telehealth during the pandemic. While Tennessee has taken similar steps to increase telehealth, it has refused to do so for abortion care.”Instead of limiting women’s access to abortions, Tennessee should be joining Attorney General James’ call to increase access to telehealth medicine for abortion care and timely medication abortions so that women seeking abortions don’t have to fear going out and contracting COVID-19 during this public health crisis. Last month, Attorney General James sent a letter to both the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration requesting that the Trump Administration waive or utilize its discretion not to enforce its Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) designation, which dictates and subsequently impedes women’s access to the medication abortion prescription drug known as Mifepristone. Attorney General James called on the Trump Administration to ensure that women across the country can more easily access this critical health care service while the pandemic leaves many women unable to seek in-person care.Finally, the coalition explains why a ban on procedural abortion would not help the state preserve PPE or prevent the spread of COVID-19 transmissions. As the district court found in the preliminary injunction it ordered, the exact opposite is actually true. The court found that “ abortions require significantly less PPE and provider-patient interaction than continuing a pregnancy” does. The coalition’s brief also notes that procedural abortion procedures rarely require admission to a hospital. In fact, only one out of 10,000 emergency room visits in the United States each year are abortion-related, whereas “a significant number of hospitalizations resulting from complications and miscarriages” occur early on in a pregnancy. The coalition adds, “ecause some of these events are inevitably avoided by providing access to timely abortion procedures, denying access to timely abortions may not appreciably conserve PPE and reduce transmission risk even in the short term,” but could actually use more resources… April 22. 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Urges FDA to Move Toward Risk Based, Gender Neutral Screening for Blood Donations to Eliminate Bias Against Gay and Bisexual Men”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra led a multistate coalition in submitting comments to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Food and Drug Administration (FDA) supporting efforts to maintain an adequate national blood supply to aid the nation’s medical response during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the letter, Attorney General Becerra argues that while the FDA’s guidance easing restrictions on blood donations from the LGBTQ population, specifically gay and bisexual men, is a step in the right direction, the guidance does not go far enough to meet the nation’s needs. The letter advocates moving toward a risk-based, gender neutral screening model and further revising guidance to make it easier for the LGBTQ population to donate blood and plasma in response to the nation’s needs during the COVID-19 public health emergency. “As Americans stay home to stop the spread of coronavirus, the nation is facing a shortage of blood donations, which provide critical medical support to hospitals and their patients,” said Attorney General Becerra. “During this pandemic, it is important to continue to evaluate and modernize blood donation guidance to be inclusive of LGBTQ Americans. A risk-based model not only protects the health and safety of our communities – it’s the right thing to do.”In the midst of the COVID-19 health crisis, blood drives and donations have dropped significantly. Every day, the United States needs approximately 36,000 units of red blood cells, nearly 7,000 units of platelets, and 10,000 units of plasma to provide blood transfusions for major surgeries, treat patients and victims of trauma, and more. The American Red Cross, which provides about 40 percent of our nation’s blood and blood components, recently reported less than a five-day blood supply on hand. As of mid-March, over 4,000 blood drives have been canceled across the country due to coronavirus concerns and closures of schools and workplaces where these drives are usually held, resulting in over 100,000 fewer blood donations.Recently, the FDA issued revised guidance related to blood donation policies for the LGBTQ community. This guidance reduced the wait period after sexual activity for gay and bisexual men from 12 months to three months. While this reform takes a step toward increasing blood donations made by healthy bisexual and gay men in a time when the nation’s supply of blood and blood products is at risk of collapse due to the COVID-19 pandemic, it does not go far enough. Data from the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law Williams Institute indicates that lifting restrictions completely, as compared to a 12-month waiting period, would produce more than 2 million additional eligible blood donors, including nearly 175,000 likely blood donors, and would potentially produce nearly 300,000 pints of additional donated blood annually.Attorney General Becerra also argues that moving toward a risk-based model, rather than one based on gender, is not only more appropriate to address the population’s needs, but is also more in line with laws that protect against discrimination. A population-based policy singling out bisexual and gay men threatens the constitutional Equal Protection principles under the Fourteenth Amendment and Fifth Amendment. Over the long term, the FDA should instead look at risk behavior rather than sex for determining who should donate blood. A copy of the letter is available here. A copy of the letter is available here. April 22, 2020: California Governor Gavin Newsom posted a press release titled: “Governor Newsom Announces Plan to Resume Delayed Health Care that was Deferred as Hospitals Prepared for COVID-19 Surge”. From the press release: Today, California Governor Gavin Newsom announced plans to allow hospitals and health systems to resume delayed medical care for Californians – such as heart valve replacements, angioplasty and tumor removals, and key preventive care services, such as colonoscopies – which were deferred as the state’s health care delivery systems prepared for a surge of COVID-19 patients. The decision was based on progress toward preparing California hospitals and health systems for a surge in COVID-19 patients – one of the six critical indicators the governor unveiled last week as part of the state’s framework for gradually modifying California’s stay-at-home order.As part of the Western State’s Pact, California will work with Washington and Oregon to share best practices on how our states can allow hospitals and medical providers to resume delayed medical care in areas that have sufficient hospital capacity, while ensuring the safety and health of our health care workers and patients. The Western states had previously announced a shared, science-based vision for gradually reopening their economies and controlling COVID-19 into the future.“From the beginning, I have said California’s decisions will be guided by science, not politics, and that Californians’ health comes first,” said Governor Newsom. “Thanks to the work our health care delivery system has done expanding hospital capacity and reducing the rate of spread of COVID-19, hospitals and health systems can consider resuming medical care that residents have delayed during this crisis, such as heart valve replacements, angioplasty and tumor removals, when such care can be delivered safety and with appropriate protections for health care workers. It’s in the best interest of the overall health of our state to allow these procedures to resume when they can be done safely.”Last week, Governor Newsom announced six indicators that would drive California’s decision to gradually modify portions of the state’s stay-at-home order. They include: Expanding testing and contact tracing to be able to identify and isolate those with the virus;Preventing infection in people who are most at risk;Being able to handle surges in hospitals and the health care delivery system;Developing therapeutics to meet demand;Ensuring businesses, schools and child care facilities can support physical distancing; andDetermining when to reinstate certain measures like the stay-at-home order if need be. Also today, Governor Newsom announced that President Trump has personally committed to sending the state 100,000 testing swabs next week and 250,000 swabs the following week.Health officials also outlined progress toward the first indicator: expanding testing and contact tracing to be able to identify and isolate those with the virus.To that end, the state announced the expansion of community testing in underserved areas. The state is contracting with Verily, an Alphabet company, in partnership with Community Organized Relief Effort (CORE) and with support from Rockefeller Foundation and an anonymous donor, to establish six new community testing sites focused on underserved communities such as farmworkers and communities of color. Additionally, the state is contracting with OptumServe, to establish an additional 80 community testing sites, which too will be focused on underserved communities.“We know that communities of color are disproportionately affected by COVID-19,” said Governor Newsom. “We must ensure that we are deploying testing equitably in an effort to reduce the higher death rates we are seeing in African American and Latino communities.”In addition, the state is: Accelerating equitable COVID-19 testing by aiming to deploy 25,000 tests per day by April 30; establishing an additional 80-100 testing sites; and identifying five new high-throughput testing hubs.Establishing a contact tracing workforce by surveying counties on their capacity; developing a statewide training academy; and training 10,000 public health connectors to conduct contact tracing.Developing isolation protocols and supports by identifying regional alternate isolation sites and building private-public partnerships to support those who are isolated.Deploying data management system and tools by publishing a symptom-check app; deploying a data management platform; and establishing a data dashboard for the public. Now that testing has become more widely available across the state, California updated its testing guidance earlier this week to become the first state to recommend testing of some asymptomatic individuals such as health care workers, first responders and correctional workers. This action will better protect Californians and prevent COVID-19 spread in high-risk settings such as congregate living facilities and correctional facilities. April 23, 2020: California Governor Gavin Newsom posted a press release titled: “Governor Newsom Provides Flexibility to Medi-Cal Providers and the Department of Health Care Services for Continuity of Service Amidst COVID-19”. From the press release: Governor Gavin Newsom today issued an executive order that will give flexibility to the California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) and Medi-Cal providers on a variety of deadlines and requirements to ensure continuity of service to patients and customers is not impacted by the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.The executive order will allow fair hearings to continue for California Children’s Services on grievances and appeals to take place by phone or video conference. Additionally, the order will ensure flexibility for DHCS and the Department of Social Services to continue providing mental health care services and programs.Finally, the executive order will temporarily suspend requirements for in-person signatures for people to obtain certain prescription drugs covered by Medi-Cal, and will allow a 90-day extension for providers on cost reporting, change of scope of service and administrative hearings. The text of the Governor’s executive order can be found here and a copy can be found here. April 24, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a statement titled: “ACOG Statement on Federal Relief Funds for Obstetrician-Gynecologists”. From the statement: Maureen Phipps, MD, MPH, FACOG, CEO of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), released the following statement regarding the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) methodology for dispersing emergency relief funds: “Obstetrician-gynecologists across the country are on the front lines of responding to the COVID-19 pandemic and providing essential care to women in the midst of a public health crisis. At the same time, the health care system is in upheaval and many obstetrician-gynecologists are facing a financial crisis that threatens to shutter many women’s health practices. In order to ensure that women can continue to receive needed care today and in the months to come, it is vital that the Administration prioritize providing direct financial support to obstetrician-gynecologists and their practices. “The Administration has acknowledged that despite great need, congressionally designated relief funds distributed to date have largely excluded obstetrician-gynecologists, who are among the physicians who provide essential care to underserved patients and make up our nation’s safety net. Although ACOG has proactively and thoroughly outlined specific recommendations for how HHS could quickly disperse funds to obstetrician-gynecologists, the Administration has indicated that women’s health practices may have to wait at least two more weeks until they receive relief funds. For many practices, this two-week delay could be too much to absorb, forcing them to close. “Widespread closures will undoubtedly have a negative impact on the health and wellbeing of women and their families, particularly as our country continues to face a maternal mortality crisis. It is imperative that obstetrician-gynecologists and other women’s health practitioners continue to provide women with the lifelong care they need. “ACOG looks forward to partnering with HHS to ensure that women’s health physicians are prioritized as relief funds are distributed. Access to obstetric and gynecologic care is essential – today and in the future.” April 24, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitla James posted a press release titled: “Supreme Court Rules That Attorney General James Can Take Public Charge Back to Lower Court”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James tonight confirmed that she will lead a coalition of three states and New York City in asking the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York to halt implementation of the Trump Administration’s Public Charge Rule, after the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this evening chose not to act in the matter itself but ruled that the plaintiffs had this option. Last week, Attorney General James and the coalition filed a motion with the Supreme Court, asking the court to revisit the question of interim relief on Public Charge in light of the new and devastating effects that the rule has had on the nation’s public health and economy as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to spread across New York and the rest of the nation.“The Supreme Court’s order tonight allows us to continue the fight to halt the Public Charge Rule during the current public health crisis, and gives us the opportunity to make our case in a federal court in New York,” said Attorney General James. “We will soon file an emergency motion in the Southern District of New York because our country cannot afford to wait. The Public Charge Rule threatens the public’s health, our economy, and all New Yorkers — citizens and non-citizens alike. Every person who doesn’t get the health coverage they need today risks infecting another person with the coronavirus tomorrow.”The Public Charge Rule drives immigrants and their families away from accessing health and nutritional benefits to which they are entitled by threatening applicants’ eligibility for green cards and visa renewals. The Supreme Court issued an order in January that had been denied by the lower courts, allowing the rule to take effect while legal challenges to the rule are pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and through a possible petition to the Supreme Court.Last week, Attorney General James led a coalition in asking the Supreme Court to take emergency measures to temporarily halt its earlier order on the Public Charge Rule until the national pandemic is over, in light of the new and devastating effects that the rule has had on the nation’s public health and economy as COVID-19 has spread over the last six weeks and in an effort to prevent the rule from impeding efforts to slow the continued spread of the virus happening nationwide.While the Supreme Court did not halt its own order tonight, the court gave Attorney General James and the coalition permission to take the request back to the district court. In October 2019, after Attorney General James and the coalition filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the district court issued an order that stopped the rule from going into effect during the litigation. The Trump Administration then filed a motion to stay the order, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied the request. The Administration finally filed a motion in the U.S. Supreme Court, which issued a stay of the district court’s preliminary injunction, pending the Second Circuit’s decision in the case and any subsequent petition to the Supreme Court to hear the case.Last August, days after the Trump Administration initially issued the Public Charge Rule, Attorney General James and a coalition of states and New York City filed a lawsuit challenging Trump Administration rule, noting that the rule specifically targets immigrants of color, immigrants with disabilities, and low-income immigrants, while putting these communities at risk, and would have short- and long-term impacts on public health and the economy.The attorneys general of Connecticut and Vermont, as well as corporation counsel for New York City, will join Attorney General James in filing this new motion in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. April 24, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “Trump team moves to scrap protections for LGBTQ patients”. It was written by Dan Diamond. From the article: The Trump administration is moving to scrap an Obama-era policy that protected LGBTQ patients from discrimination, alarming health experts who warn that the regulatory rollback could harm vulnerable people during a pandemic.The health department is close to finalizing its long-developing rewrite of Obamacare’s Section 1557 provision, which barred health care discrimination based on sex and gender identity. The administration’s final rule on Thursday was circulated at DOJ, a step toward publicly releasing the regulation in the coming days, said two people with knowledge of the pending rule. The White House on Friday morning also updated a regulatory dashboard to indicate that the rule was under review. Advocates fear that it would allow hospitals and health workers to more easily discriminate against patients based on their gender or sexual orientation.The Obama administration moved to create its non-discrimination protections in response to advocates and health care experts who said that LGBTQ patients were being turned away from necessary care or intimidated from seeking it out. The broad rule also offered specific protections for transgender patients for the first time and extended protections for women who had abortions.But a federal judge in 2016 blocked those protections following a lawsuit from religious groups, and the Trump administration has steadily worked to weaken the rule before it could take full effect.In last year’s proposal, the health department also proposed changes that went further than simply rolling back the new Obama protections, moving to eliminate similar nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ patients that were contained in other regulations……Any rule issued by the Trump administration on LGBTQ protections could be short-lived. The Supreme Court is set to rule on whether the Civil Rights Act protects LGBTQ workers, which could create a new regulatory framework and force health officials to swiftly return to the drawing board.Meanwhile, advocates say they’re worried that LGBTQ patients could be deterred from seeking care during a public health crisis. The liberal-leaning Center for American Progress published findings that 8 percent of lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults and 29 percent of transgender adults said they had been turned away by a health care provider based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. April 25, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Appellate Court Allows Abortion Services to Continue in Tennessee During Pandemic”. From the press release: Last night, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a preliminary injunction granted by a lower court, allowing abortion clinics in Tennessee to continue providing time-sensitive abortion procedures during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The decision comes after Gov. Bill Lee issued a state order on April 8 banning all abortion services other than medication abortions (which involve taking pills and are only available until 11 weeks of pregnancy), despite leading national medical groups agreeing that abortion procedures are essential and time-sensitive. Tennessee is one of eight states where officials have exploited the COVID-19 pandemic to limit abortion access.In its decision, the court wrote, “The State has never, at any point in this litigation, attempted to support its policy choice with expert or medical evidence. This is unsurprising because, as far as we can tell, every serious medical or public health organization to have considered the issue has said the opposite.”“This decision sends a clear message to Tennessee: You cannot use a public health crisis to cut off abortion access,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “In the last month, courts across the country have ruled that states cannot use emergency powers to deny women the right to end a pregnancy. It’s time for states to stop exploiting this pandemic.” “We are so relieved that we can continue seeing patients and providing the essential abortion care they need,” said Rebecca Terrell, executive director of CHOICES Memphis Center for Reproductive Health. “It’s common sense that abortion is time-sensitive and cannot be delayed.” “Once again, it’s taken a court fight to stop another governor from exploiting this pandemic to score political points. Abortion is time-sensitive, essential health care that cannot wait for a pandemic to pass. Today’s ruling is a sigh of relief for patients,” said Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “We cannot forget that the essential workers on the front lines of this pandemic are the same people who are disproportionately harmed when access to health care is attacked. We’ll continue to fight these cruel attacks on abortion in Tennessee and across the country.” “This is a critical victory for Tennesseans who, on top of all the turmoil of this moment, are facing an unintended pregnancy and urgently need care,” said Julia Kaye, staff attorney at the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project. “We hope the state will now focus on protecting its citizens during the pandemic rather than exploiting the crisis to push an anti-abortion agenda.”Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, many state officials have attempted to ban or limit abortion. In addition to Tennessee, lawsuits are ongoing in Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Ohio, and Oklahoma. Leading medical organizations like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Medical Association (AMA) have opposed Tennessee’s order, stating: “Permitting abortion care — which is essential, time-sensitive health care — will not substantially increase the burdens hospitals face as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The vast majority of procedural abortions are performed in non-hospital settings, and they typically require only minimal PPE.”Tennessee also bans the use of telehealth for medication abortion — a method that could greatly expand access and reduce in-person contact. Other abortion restrictions in Tennessee include: a mandatory 48-hour waiting period (which includes a requirement that patients make an additional, medically unnecessary trip to the clinic to receive state-mandated information); limits on when state and public insurance can cover abortion services; and a requirement that minors obtain parental consent. This lawsuit was filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Tennessee, pro-bono counsel Kramer Levin, and local counsel Barrett Johnston Martin & Garrison, LLC. Plaintiffs in the case are CHOICES Memphis Center for Reproductive Health, Knoxville Center for Reproductive Health, Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi, Bristol Regional Women’s Center, and Dr. Kimberly Looney. The decision is available here. April 27, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Applauds Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear for Safeguarding Reproductive Freedom by Vetoing Extreme Anti-Choice Bill”. From the press release: Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear today vetoed an extreme anti-choice bill (SB 9) designed to expand Republican Attorney General Daniel Cameron’s power to roll back abortion access and promote political interference in deeply personal family decisions.Last week, in the midst of a major public health crisis, the Kentucky General Assembly dedicated the final hours of the state’s legislative session to passing SB 9 in a transparent attempt to circumvent the authority of pro-choice Democratic Gov. Beshear, who in 2019 defeated extreme anti-choice incumbent Matt Bevin in the governor’s race.In response to Governor Beshear vetoing this harmful bill, NARAL President Ilyse Hogue said:“Anti-choice Republicans in Kentucky cravenly pounced on the opportunity presented by the COVID-19 pandemic to advance their agenda of ending abortion access. Governor Beshear has been an advocate for women and families for many years and reaffirmed his commitment today by vetoing SB 9. Now more than ever, sound science and medical expertise should guide public policy, not political games and an extreme agenda. Governor Beshear joins the ranks of other governors, both Republican and Democratic, who have rejected measures designed to meddle in personal decision-making. We applaud him for doing the right thing.”Kentucky NARAL members also voiced their appreciation for Governor Beshear’s commitment to reproductive freedom and ensuring doctors are able to designate what healthcare is essential, not politicians looking to score points… April 28, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Appellate Court Says Oklahoma Abortion Clinics Can Stay Open During Pandemic”. From the press release: Last night, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of abortion providers, denying Oklahoma’s request to stay a lower court’s ruling from last week that blocked the state’s ban on abortion care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The decision means that abortion clinics can continue providing care as the case continues.Statement from Nancy Northup, president & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:“For the past month, Governor Stitt has exploited this pandemic to try to ban abortion, but the courts have repeatedly ruled against him. In the wake of this latest ruling, it’s past time for Oklahoma to respect the essential needs of women seeking abortion care. This attempt to ban abortion is an abuse of emergency powers. It has nothing to do with legitimate public health efforts to address the pandemic and everything to do with politics. There is no question that abortion care is time-sensitive and cannot be delayed.” April 28, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James and Pharmacy Executives Applaud New York’s Expansion of COVID-19 Testing to Pharmacies”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James and representatives from major nationwide pharmacies today responded to the State of New York’s expansion of COVID-19 tests to local pharmacies.“I am grateful that New York will begin to take advantage of its vast system of pharmacies to provide COVID-19 tests to more New Yorkers than ever before,” said Attorney General James. “It is critically important for us to increase the availably for testing in order to accurately capture the scope of the virus in our communities. I encourage all of those eligible to utilize these new testing opportunities.”“New York State has made a significant step in curbing the COVID-19 crisis by working with pharmacists to provide the increased testing needed at this critical time. Pharmacists play a key role in the health and wellbeing of this country, and they have routinely shown that they are able to step in when we need them most. We will continue to work closely with Attorney General James and other officials across the state to ensure that pharmacists have all the resources needed to support New Yorkers through amplified testing efforts,” said Steve Moore, president, Pharmacists Society of the State of New York (PSSNY). “PSSNY is the largest organization in NY state representing the profession of pharmacy to promote and optimize public health and wellness through patient centric pharmacist care in the diverse communities pharmacy serves.” “Approval for pharmacists to conduct COVID-19 tests is a recognition of the critical role that pharmacists play in our communities,” said Emmanuel Kolady, senior vice president, CVS Health. “This action will help us as we expand our testing capabilities in New York. Working together, we can help slow the spread of the virus.”“From the beginning of this crisis, we made it our mission to support our communities and associates and to move as quickly as we can to provide solutions,” said Heyward Donigan, president and chief executive officer, Rite Aid. “I’m incredibly proud of our pharmacy teams – it’s their hard work that has allowed Rite Aid to ramp up testing so quickly and enables us to expand testing criteria to include all adults exhibiting symptoms.” April 29, 2020: New York Attorney Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Continues Fight to Stop Public Charge Rule”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James last night led a coalition of three states and New York City in filing a motion asking the courts to temporarily halt implementation of the Trump Administration’s Public Charge Rule in light of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) public health crisis. A motion seeking a new preliminary injunction with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York was filed after the U.S. Supreme Court, on Friday evening, chose not to act in the matter, but ruled that the plaintiffs had the option to take their argument back to the lower court for a decision.“Unlike the Public Charge Rule, this disease does not discriminate — infecting both citizens and non-citizens alike,” said Attorney General James. “As our state and nation continue to suffer the devastating effects of COVID-19, it has become more and more clear that the Trump Administration’s Public Charge Rule will only further exacerbate the problem and punish New York and other immigrant-rich states by denying many the ability to obtain health care. We’re asking the district court to again take immediate action and suspend this rule and the threat it places on all of us. It’s time to end this national nightmare because every person who doesn’t get the health coverage they need today risks infecting another person with the coronavirus tomorrow.”Federal law allows lawful immigrants to apply for certain supplemental health and nutritional public benefits if they have been in the country for at least five years. But, last August, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security issued a Public Charge Rule that changed the established meaning of public charge, which had long been that immigrants who use basic, non-cash benefits are not considered public charges because they are not primarily dependent on the government for survival. This “bait-and-switch” consequently jeopardized immigrants’ chances of becoming legal permanent residents or renewing their visas if they used these supplemental benefits to which they are legally entitled……Despite the Supreme Court’s decision in January, two weeks ago, Attorney General James led a coalition in asking the Supreme Court to take emergency measures to temporarily halt its earlier order on the Public Charge Rule until the national coronavirus pandemic is over. While the Supreme Court did not halt its own order on Friday, the court gave Attorney General James and the coalition permission to take the request back to the district court, which issued the initial preliminary injunction and originally stopped the rule from going into effect.Since the initial preliminary injunction motion was argued in the district court, COVID-19 has fundamentally changed the national landscape. The United States went from not a single reported COVID-19 case to more than one million confirmed infections and more than 58,000 confirmed deaths, and is now the country with the most virus-related deaths in the world. More than 292,000 of those infections and more than 17,000 deaths have been reported in New York State alone.In the months since the outbreak began, New York City, and cities across the United States have issued states of emergency. New York State and every other state in the nation have issued states of emergency. President Donald Trump has declared a national state of emergency and has approved federal disaster declarations for all 50 states and almost all territories.In last night’s motion asking for a new preliminary injunction from the district court, Attorney General James leads the coalition in asking the court to now take into consideration the extraordinary events of the last two months and the new and devastating effects that the Public Charge Rule has had on the nation’s public-health and economy as COVID-19 has spread across the country, as well as how the rule continues to impede efforts to slow the continued spread of the virus happening nationwide. The motion asks the court to temporarily halt further implementation of the rule until the national emergency concerning COVID-19 is over.Of note in the motion is the fact that immigrants make up a large number of essential workers helping move our nation along during this crisis, and if they don’t have access to the proper health care today, they are more likely to spread the virus to all Americans, inadvertently, tomorrow — not only contributing to the exponential growth of infection rates, but of fatalities as well. In short, “the Rule is undermining efforts to slow the spread of the virus.”Further, the coalition argues that the nation’s economy cannot undergo further damage from the spread of COVID-19. In the five-week period ending April 23, more than 26 million residents across the nation lost their jobs and filed for unemployment, more than 1.4 million of which were New Yorkers. And according to estimates by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, between February and March 2020, the number of immigrant adults who are unemployed rose by 26 percent. As last night’s motion argues, “many workers who lose their jobs and employer-sponsored health insurance because of the pandemic are likely to need Medicaid coverage until they can find another job.”Attorney General James and the coalition end by arguing that while the district court had earlier halted the Public Charge Rule from taking effect, the harms of the rule at the time of COVID-19 have only intensified and exacerbated the reasons why the rule need to be halted.Joining Attorney General James in filing this new motion in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York are the attorneys general of Connecticut and Vermont, as well as corporation counsel for New York City.This matter is being handled by Deputy Bureau Chief of the Civil Rights Bureau Elena Goldstein, Civil Enforcement Section Chief of the Labor Bureau Ming-Qi Chu, and Assistant Attorneys General Abigail Rosner and Amanda Meyer, all under the supervision of Chief Counsel for Federal Initiatives Matthew Colangelo. Additional support was provided by Senior Assistant Solicitor General Judith N. Vale and Deputy Solicitor General Steven C. Wu. The Division for Federal Initiatives is overseen by First Deputy Attorney General Jennifer Levy. April 30, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorneys General Becerra and Healey Urge HHS Not to Finalize Rule That Would Permit Healthcare Discrimination During Global COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey today co-led a multistate coalition in sending a letter to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) urging it not to finalize its proposed regulation, “Nondiscrimination in Health and Health Education Programs or Activities” (Section 1557 Rule). Section 1557 is an anti-discrimination provision that prohibits discrimination in healthcare based on gender, race, ethnicity, sex, age or disability. If finalized, the proposed changes to this provision would seriously undermine the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) critical anti-discrimination protections at a time when they are most needed to help address the COVID-19 pandemic. “Authorizing discrimination in healthcare is not only illegal, it is incredibly dangerous, and doing so in the midst of this global pandemic is nothing short of deadly,” said Attorney General Becerra. “We urge HHS not to move forward with this foolish rule that would threaten communities that already struggle disproportionately to access needed care – communities of color, women, immigrants, LGBTQ individuals, and disabled Americans. We should devote all our resources to the COVID-19 response and recovery efforts, not make it harder on our healthcare professionals and Americans seeking life-saving healthcare.” The proposed rule would roll back anti-discrimination protections for communities of color, women, LGBTQ individuals, those with limited English proficiency, and people with disabilities by undermining critical legal protections that guarantee healthcare as a right. Data shows that the COVID-19 pandemic is already exacerbating racial and ethnic disparities in healthcare that the ACA attempted to address, particularly in states that have not expanded Medicaid. Communities of color have been disproportionately impacted, and recently more than 100 national and local organizations signed on to an open letter to the healthcare community about how COVID-19 may pose an increased risk to the LGBTQ population. HHS itself has long noted that discrimination within the healthcare system contributes to poor coverage and health outcomes, and exacerbates existing health disparities in underserved communities. Individuals who have experienced discrimination in healthcare often postpone or forgo needed healthcare, resulting in adverse health outcomes. In the letter, the attorneys general argue that moving forward with this rule in the midst of this unprecedented healthcare crisis will create unnecessary confusion and administrative burdens for state agencies, healthcare providers, and patients at a time when the healthcare system is battling to save lives. Data suggests that increased access to healthcare could assist with prompt COVID-19 detection and increase early treatment, which helps diminish spread of the disease. For these reasons, the attorneys general warn the Administration that making this major regulatory change in the midst of the current crisis is not only irresponsible, it is potentially deadly.Joining California Attorney General Becerra and Massachusetts Attorney General Healey in filing the comment letter are the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. Today’s letter is Attorney General Becerra’s latest effort in his fight to protect the ACA and ensure Californians have access to high quality affordable care. In August 2019, Attorney General Becerra and Attorney General Healey led a multistate comment letter opposing the 1557 proposed rule. Attorney General Becerra also called on the Trump Administration to open a Special Enrollment Period for the ACA due to the COVID-19 pandemic. He is also currently leading a coalition of 21 attorneys general in defending the ACA and the healthcare of millions of Americans in the Supreme Court. A copy of the letter can be found here. April 30, 2020: Arizona Central posted an article titled: “Shady campaign ad for Sen. Martha McSally uses former employee paid $381,000″. It was written by EJ Montini. From the article” For years Republican Sen. Martha McSally has had a problem trying to defend her many attempts to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, including its protections for those with pre-existing conditions.During her losing campaign against Democrat Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, McSally was constantly under fire, correctly so, for pushing to have the ACA dismantled. Not only did McSally vote for such a plan, she was quoted as urging her Republican colleagues to pass it with the fiery profane admonition: “Let’s get this f-ing thing done!”McSally attempts to defend herself by pointing to her vote for American Health Care Act, which prohibited insurance companies from denying people coverage for having pre-existing conditions.The problem is that the bill would have allowed states to eliminate a ban on high-priced premiums for people with preexisting conditions. A big jump in those premiums would have forced many to lose coverage. And the so-called “high-risk pools” that were to be created, and that the Republicans said would help such people, wouldn’t have had enough funding to do so… May May 1, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights, Human Rights Watch, and International Women’s Health Coalition sent a letter to the U.S. State Department Commission on Unalienable Rights. From the letter: Dear U.S. State Department Commission on Unalienable Rights:As human rights organizations, scholars, defenders and activists, we the 167undersigned, write to express our grave concern about the work of the U.S.State Department’s Commission on Unalienable Rights and any potential report or output that undermines the international human rights system and purports to reinterpret its respective treaties and monitoring bodies. In particular, we urge the Commission to reject the prioritization of freedom of religion as a cloak to permit violations of the human rights of women, girls, and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people.Now more than ever, countries worldwide should prioritize the rights to health and well-being of all their people without discrimination and recognize that reproductive rights are clearly established and articulated under international law. These rights are interrelated and indivisible from all human rights and cannot be subordinated within a hierarchy of rights.There is clear and unequivocal consensus by UN human rights treaty bodies and independent experts that reproductive rights are human rights, grounded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the core principles underlying the human rights treaties. The human rights treaty bodies have consistently recognized and protected reproductive rights as a component of and essential to the realization of fundamental human rights, including the rights to health, life, equality, information, education, privacy, non-discrimination and protection from torture and other ill-treatment.One of the great advances with respect to rights in the period since World War II was that, through the adoption of the Charter of the United Nations and of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it was recognized that rights are universal: they apply to everyone everywhere. In addition, these documents recognized that a core value undergirding the universal application of rights is dignity. The Charter of the United Nations provides: “We the peoples of the United Nations, determined ….to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women.” In keeping with the Charter, the UDHR begins with the assertion that: “Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world….”The concept of dignity carries with it a commitment to privacy and autonomy. Human rights advocates in the US and around the world know that rights are grounded in dignity and its embrace of privacy and autonomy. We submit that the values that are inherent in the concepts of dignity, privacy and autonomy do not permit the state to dictate that women must conceive or reproduce. Respect for dignity, privacy, and autonomy—the core values of universal rights—requires that these are matters for each and every person to decide on their own.For example, the UN Human Rights Committee—tasked with monitoring implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)—has consistently recognized that the right to privacy (article 17) obligates the state to ensure reproductive autonomy. It has also made clear that the right to life (article 6) includes the right to access comprehensive reproductive health care, including that state regulation of abortion should not put the lives of women or girls at risk, subject them to ill-treatment, discriminate against them, arbitrarily interfere with their privacy, or lead them to resort to unsafe abortion. The UN Committee Against Torture has found that denying or delaying safe abortion or post-abortion care, in particular, may amount to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Similarly, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has concluded that the right to the highest attainable standard of health, set forth in the UDHR and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, includes the right to sexual and reproductive health.These rights, like all human rights protections,attach at birth. The UDHR provides clear language in the first article that is unequivocal: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.”During the drafting of the declaration, the committee specifically considered, debated, and rejected an amendment that would have removed the specification that rights begin at birth. And while the American Convention on Human Rights (a regional treaty the United States has signed but not ratified) is the only human rights instrument that contemplates that the right to life may attach prenatally, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has clarified that in regulating abortion, the protection of prenatal life does not prevail over other rights. In the 2012 case of Artavia Murillo et al. (“in vitro fertilization”) v. Costa Rica, the Inter-American Court struck down Costa Rica’s ban on the use of in vitro fertilization, which Costa Rica attempted to justify as a measure to protect the right to life prior to birth. In that case, the Court determined that, under the American Convention, the “right to life should not be understood as an absolute right, the alleged protection of which can justify the total negation of other rights” and that disproportionate restrictions on the exercise of other human rights due to absolute protection of the right to life “would be contrary to the protection of human rights”(paras 259 and 264).Further, these rights are indivisible from other human rights. It is a tenet of human rights that all rights are universal, equal, interdependent, and interrelated. The preamble of UDHR begins by recognizing that the “equal and inalienable rights” of all members of humanity is the “foundation of freedom, justice, and peace.”The UDHR makes clear that each of the thirty articles in the declaration are equally important and that no state or individual can decide that some rights are more important than others. Indeed,the deprivation of rights in one area tends to create conditions for the deprivation of rights in others.Of course, it is of great concern if the exercise of one person’s fundamental right impedes upon the realization of another’s. The ICCPR itself recognizes that this tension may arise. Article 18(1) recognizes the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, which includes both the “freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance practice and teaching.”The Human Rights Committee in its General Comment No. 22 has emphasized that Article 18 “does not permit any limitations whatsoever on the freedom of thought and conscience or on the freedom to have or adopt a religion or belief of one’s choice,”but—recognizing that religious exercise may affect others—does permit limitations on the freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs.Further, the text of the treaty itself recognizes this. Under Article 18(3), states may regulate the manifestation of religion or belief if, and only if, such regulations “are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.” The Committee has consistently clarified that the freedom of thought, conscience, and religion does not protect religiously motivated discrimination against women, or racial and religious minorities.Thus, in order to protect and uphold the basic rights of all people, states may impose some limitations on acts manifesting religion or belief in order to protect the infringement of other people’s rights. These include limitations to ensure that health care providers do not impede access to reproductive health services. Yet, we continue to see in our work “conscientious objection” policies that allow providers to refuse to provide critical services to women and LGBT people, on the basis of conscience. In many instances, this increases discrimination in care and increased health disparities.Marginalized groups, including women, young people, and LGBT individuals, are particularly at risk. Such was the case for a fourteen-year-old girl in Poland who was denied access to a legal abortion, for a pregnancy resulting from a rape, under claims of “conscience” by providers and health systems. She was compelled to undergo non-fact-based counseling, had her personal information disclosed to the press, and was removed by the state from her mother, who supported her decision to have an abortion. In 2012, the European Court of Human Rights issued its decision in her case in P. and S. v. Poland and determined Poland had violated her right to be free from degrading treatment, as well as her right to privacy. The Court also found that states have the obligation to limit the use of ‘conscientious objections’ in order to guarantee people access to lawful reproductive health services. Despite this clear legal ruling, however, the intersection between religious freedom and reproductive rights has continued to be a flashpoint in Poland. Contraception, particularly emergency contraception, remains difficult to access.While this Commission has indicated an interest in prioritizing and ranking human rights, with a freedom of religion at the apex, as human rights defenders and activists we have seen firsthand how human rights are interdependent and indivisible. In recent years, we have often seen that authoritarian regimes may start by targeting reproductive rights, citing arguments of religion or “traditional values,” before expanding their attacks on other human rights.This has been starkly visible in Turkey, where women’s rights movements were quick to sound the alarm about the Turkish presidency and government’s regressive approach to women rights and role in society. Restrictive amendments have limited access to sexual and reproductive health and rights, reports of gender-based violence have more than doubled, and female employment has decreased in a political context that prioritizes “traditional families.” The presidency of Recep Tayyip Erdogan has overseen a purging of academia and the civil service, the jailing of journalists and opposition politicians, and a broad crack down on civil society. Should it prioritize freedom of religion and conscience over other rights, the Commission on Unalienable Rights will further fuel authoritarian regimes’ readiness to “sacrifice” reproductive rights in the name of “traditional values.”This same pattern has been displayed as well in Brazil. President Jair Bolsonarohas promoted extreme anti-choice religious views at the expense of gender and sexual and reproductive health and rights, stating that he would veto any bill to legalize abortion. Accusing advocates of sexual and reproductive health and rights of encouraging teens to have sex at a young age, Bolsonarois opposed to and has condemned comprehensive sexuality education (CSE). For example, as a member of congress he joined the evangelical caucus in labeling a proposed educational initiative to combat homophobia in schools a “gay kit” intended to “pervert” students. Bolsonaro appointed Damares Alves as Minister of Women, Family and Human Rights, who has promoted abstinence for adolescents and student programs developed by anti-reproductive rights groups. Increasing barriers to access to science-based health information puts at risk Brazil’s steadily decreasing teenage pregnancy rates and young people’s right to access sexual and reproductive health services.In times of crisis, human rights protections only become more important. Just recently, in response to the current pandemic, Hungary’s national government invoked a state of emergency law that allows the government to rule by decree indefinitely, which in reality means that Prime Minister Viktor Orban has absolute power to decide how long he can set aside and adopt laws without parliamentary or judicial scrutiny. Since consolidating his power in the name of fighting the spread of the illness, Orban has cracked down on the press and proposed a new law blocking access to legal recognition for transgender people. Advocates fear this new unbalanced power dynamic will increase assaults on asylum rights, women’s human rights, LGBT people’s rights, and democracy as a whole.We urge the United States to uphold and promote the international human rights framework contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in subsequent human rights treaties. Any attempt to undermine the international human rights system would put in jeopardy the rights and protections of the women, girls and all people for whom we stand alongside and fight for the realization of these universal rights. The letter includes several pages filled with organizational signers and individual signers. May 1, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “U.S. Unalienable Right Commission Shouldn’t Cherry-Pick Rights”. From the press release: The U.S. State Department’s Commission on Unalienable Rights should uphold international human rights commitments and not use freedom of religion as a cloak to permit violations of the rights of women, girls, and LGBTQ people, 167 leading human rights activists and groups from 28 countries said today in a letter to the Commission.The Commission on Unalienable Rights is an advisory body created by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in July 2019 to advise on human rights in U.S. foreign policy. It has sparked concern from experts that the United States seeks to unilaterally rewrite agreed-upon human rights obligations and create a hierarchy of rights.The Center for Reproductive Rights, Human Rights Watch, the International Women’s Health Coalition, and other organizations and activists from around the world said that the Commission should prioritize everyone’s rights to health and well-being, without discrimination, and recognize that reproductive rights are clearly established under international law. These rights are essential to people’s dignity and well-being and should not be treated as less worthy of protection than other human rights.“The Trump administration has routinely employed freedom of religion as a tool of discrimination against women, girls, and LGBTQ people,” said Françoise Girard, president of the International Women’s Health Coalition (IWHC). “The Commission on Unalienable Rights is a callous attempt to create a hierarchy of rights and deny the world’s most marginalized their fundamental rights. This politicization of international human rights sets a dangerous precedent and empowers regressive governments worldwide to pick-and-choose human rights obligations based on political ideology—a development with severe consequences for women and girls.”The Commission serves, in Secretary Pompeo’s own words, to distinguish between “unalienable” rights and so-called ad-hoc rights—a worrying sign of the Commission’s intent. These fears are supported by the appointment of commissioners with extensive records opposing access to sexual and reproductive health services, women’s human rights, and rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer people. The Commission’s public hearings have not allayed concerns as commissioners have repeatedly alluded to the primacy of freedom of religion over other rights.“The Commission was improperly established as yet another shameful attempt by this administration to erase protections in international human rights law for sexual and reproductive rights,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “Reproductive rights are human rights. These attempts by the U.S. State Department, through the Commission, to pick and choose which rights the United States will recognize and prioritize threatens to erode protections for women, LGBTQ people, and other marginalized and vulnerable communities around the world.”Human rights instruments and mechanisms, many ratified by the U.S., clearly lay out fundamental rights that are universal, interrelated, and indivisible. By casting doubt on decades of international human rights law, the Trump administration gives cover to those who seek to roll back essential protections for women, girls, LGBTQ people, and minority groups worldwide, the letter said, urging the United States to uphold all human rights, not only those that fit a narrow political ideology.Freedom of religion—while a fundamental human right—has increasingly been misused as an excuse to discriminate, with particularly severe consequences for women, girls, and LGBTQ people. For example, health care providers worldwide routinely refuse to provide critical health services—including abortion care, contraception, and gender-affirming services—arguing that it goes against their personal beliefs. To this end, the Trump administration has championed the right to freedom of religion at the United Nations and World Health Organization in an attempt to further restrict sexual and reproductive rights.“The Trump administration has a record of curtailing women’s human rights at every opportunity, and this Commission attempts to provide cover to insidious discrimination against women and girls around the world who seek to fulfill their human rights and access the health services they need,” said Amanda Klasing, acting women’s rights co-director at Human Rights Watch. “Redefining some rights, and by extension some people, as ‘less equal’ only increases inequality, insecurity, and injustice.” May 1, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “California and Nevada Co-Lead Multistate Amicus Brief Supporting Challenge to Harmful Trump-Pence Title X Rule”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford today filed a multistate amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, supporting the City of Baltimore in its lawsuit against the Trump-Pence Administration’s Title X rule. The new rule restricts access to critical preventative reproductive healthcare by prohibiting doctors from providing referrals for abortion or offering complete information to patients about their family planning options. In the brief, the state coalition explains that the new rule endangers the health, well-being, and economic security of their residents, leaving patients in entire regions and states nationwide without providers. The coalition urges the court to uphold a lower court ruling halting implementation of the Title X rule.“With this rule, the Trump-Pence Administration has upended the Title X program, which provides critical reproductive and preventative health services to low-income women and families across the nation,” said California Attorney General Xavier Becerra. “At a time when many Americans are facing uncertainty in both their health and finances due to the coronavirus, programs that provide low-cost healthcare, like Title X, are more critical than ever. Our coalition stands with the millions of women and families across the nation who rely on Title X for healthcare services in urging the court to halt this harmful rule.”“Politics has no place in the doctor’s office, and I’m proud to lead an effort to fight misguided attempts to prevent families from receiving accurate information and options about their healthcare,” said Nevada Attorney General Aaron D. Ford. “Millions of low-income and under-served families rely on Title X for access to a broad range of health services, and my office will use every means to ensure their rights are protected.” The Title X family planning program is instrumental in states’ efforts to deliver preventative and reproductive healthcare to low-income women and families. Over the last 50 years, Title X has created a strong network of medical providers committed to delivering high-quality, evidence-based preventive health services. Prior to 2019, the Title X program funded a wide array of critical public health services, including family planning counseling, access to FDA-approved contraceptive methods, pelvic exams, and crucial screenings for high blood pressure, anemia, diabetes, sexually transmitted diseases and infections, and cervical and breast cancer. The Trump-Pence Administration’s new Title X Rule, however, has harmed the Title X program nationwide.Since the new Title X rule went into effect, the states’ Title X programs have been upended, with many qualified providers leaving the program. In 13 states, more than 50 percent of Title X grantees have withdrawn from the program, and several states no longer have any Title X providers. Further, new providers have not filled the gap caused by the withdrawals. As a result, states have faced increased burdens to meet residents’ needs for essential healthcare. California alone has experienced a significant loss of Title X providers—going from 366 health centers in 38 counties to 229 health centers in only 18 counties. This leaves several rural counties with no Title X providers. As a result of these withdrawals, 38 percent fewer patients were served in 2019 compared to before the Trump-Pence Rule went into effect. And this year, California’s Title X network is projected to serve fewer patients still, a reduction of almost 72 percent since before the rule took effect.The coalition also notes that in light of the recent pandemic, clinic withdrawals from the Title X program place an additional strain on health systems nationwide. Due to COVID-19, many people have lost insurance coverage or are experiencing financial instability due to unemployment and could benefit from Title X’s low-cost services. Today’s brief is the latest step in Attorney General Becerra’s efforts to protect the Title X program. On July 30, 2018, he led a coalition of 13 attorneys general in filing a comment letter opposing the Trump-Pence Administration’s proposed rule. On March 4, 2019, he filed a lawsuit challenging the final rule in the Northern District Court of California, claiming the proposed restrictions to Title X disregard the rule of law and harm California’s healthcare providers and over one million women in our state who relied on Title X for healthcare services. That lawsuit is ongoing in the Ninth Circuit. Joining Attorneys General Becerra and Ford in filing the brief are the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the amicus brief is available here. May 2, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Trump Administration Assault on the Health of LGBTQ Americans”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi released the following statement on the Trump Administration’s proposed Health and Human Services Department rule that would end anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ Americans in health care:“The Trump Administration’s latest shameful rule is a shocking attack on the health and well being of the LGBTQ community at a time when access to quality health care is more important than ever.“Our nation is in the midst of a health and economic crisis of staggering proportions. Instead of working to ensure that every American, regardless of who they are or who they love, has access to the care they need to stay healthy and safe, the Administration is working on rolling back life-saving protections for some of the most vulnerable communities and enshrining discrimination into vital federal guideline. Religious freedom is no justification for hatred or bigotry, and every American has the right to seek and recieve care without intimidation or fear. The Administration must immediately abandon this outrageous, un-American plan and give LGBTQ individuals the reassurance that they will never be denied the health care they or their families need.“House Democrats will continue to hold this Administration accountable for their dangerous assault on our fundamental values of equality and justice, and we will never stop fighting to ensure all Americans are treated with the respect and dignity they deserve.” May 5, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Releases Statement as Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguements in Birth Control Case”. From the press release: Tomorrow, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguements in Trump v. Pennsylvania, a challenge to the Trump administration’s rules that would allow virtually any employer or university to declare itself exempt from the Affordable Care Act’s landmark requirement that health insurers cover birth control without co-pays. NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement:“The Trump administration’s push to undermine this essential part of the Affordable Care Act could rob countless people across this country of their dignity and ability to determine their own futures. These reckless attacks on birth control access are nothing more than another shameless effort by the radical right to advance their agenda of power and control, no matter the cost to women and families. Every body deserves birth control coverage, and your boss or school shouldn’t be allowed to interfere with what kind of coverage you can get. The Trump administration’s rules put ideology above our health and well-being — and thanks to Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court, even access to birth control is on the chopping block thanks to a fringe political agenda. We will never stop working to hold accountable all politicians who enabled Trump and his dangerous attacks on reproductive freedom—including the senators who greenlit Kavanaugh’s confirmation.” May 6, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Leads Coalition of 20 States and the District of Columbia Defending the ACA in U.S. Supreme Court”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, leading a coalition of 20 states and D.C., today filed a brief in the U.S. Supreme Court defending the Affordable Care Act (ACA) against efforts by the Trump Administration and the state of Texas to repeal the entire ACA, putting the healthcare of tens of millions of Americans at risk. The Court agreed to review a recent Fifth Circuit decision that held the ACA’s individual mandate unconstitutional and called into question whether the remaining provisions of the law could still stand—jeopardizing Medicaid expansion, critical public health programs that help fight COVID-19, and subsidies that help working families access care, among countless others. Critically, this decision threatens healthcare coverage protections for 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions, and would allow health insurance companies to deny individuals care or charge more based on their health status.“It’s unconscionable that the Trump Administration continues its attack on healthcare, just when many Americans across the country need it most. A global pandemic is the time to wake up and protect the lives of our loved ones, yet all we see from the President’s team is repeal without replace,” said Attorney General Becerra. “The ACA is the backbone of our healthcare system, making doctor’s visits and care possible for millions of people, while providing critical public health funds for our communities to fight infectious diseases like the coronavirus. Under this hallmark law, more than 133 million people have been guaranteed healthcare protections, who could have been denied coverage entirely pre-ACA. We can’t afford to return to those days, so we’re marching forward at the Supreme Court determined to save the ACA and American lives.”The lawsuit, originally filed by a Texas-led coalition, and later supported by the Trump Administration, argued that Congress rendered the ACA’s individual mandate unconstitutional when it reduced the penalty for forgoing coverage to $0. They further argued that the rest of the ACA should be held invalid as a result of that change. California’s coalition defended the ACA in its entirety, supported by a bipartisan group of amici including scholars, economists, public health experts, hospital and provider associations, patient groups, counties, cities, and more. While the Fifth Circuit held that the individual mandate is unconstitutional, it sidestepped the further question as to the validity of the ACA’s remaining provisions. Attorney General Becerra’s coalition petitioned the Supreme Court for review in order to protect Americans’ healthcare and resolve the uncertainty created by the Fifth Circuit decision.In today’s filing, California’s coalition makes clear that patients, doctors, hospitals, employers, workers, states, pharmaceutical companies and more will be negatively impacted if the ACA should fall. It also highlights important advancements in healthcare access made under the ACA, including: More than 12 million Americans receiving coverage through Medicaid expansion;Nearly 9 million individuals nationwide receiving tax credits to help afford health insurance coverage through individual marketplaces;Millions of working families relying on high-quality, employer-sponsored insurance plans; Important protections prohibiting insurers from denying health insurance to the 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions (like diabetes, cancer, or pregnancy) or from charging individuals higher premiums because of their health status; Improved payment reforms and increased access to Medicare for seniors and people disabilities; andNearly $1.3 trillion in federal funding being dedicated to keeping Americans healthy and covered, including Medicaid expansion and public health dollars. Joining Attorney General Becerra in defending the ACA are the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota (by and through its Department of Commerce), Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia, as well as the Governor of Kentucky. A copy of the brief is available here. May 6, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on House Brief to Defend Affordable Care Act at Supreme Court”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after the House filed a brief with the Supreme Court in the California v. Texas health care repeal lawsuit, to defend the Affordable Care Act from the Trump Administration’s assault in the courts:“The Affordable Care Act is a pillar of health and economic security in America, and its protections are more important than ever, as the coronavirus crisis shatters the lives and livelihoods of millions.“As our brief makes clear, the President’s insistence on doubling down on his senseless and cruel argument in court to destroy the ACA and every last one of its benefits and protections is unconscionable, particularly in the middle of a pandemic.“Access to affordable, quality health care is a matter of life and death. On Day One of this Congress, the House voted to throw our full legal weight into the fight to defeat this Republican lawsuit and we will continue to fight to defend the ACA, which is the law of the land, from the President’s attacks. The President must abandon his support for this suit and end his attacks on families’ health now.” May 6, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Fights to Defend ACA in Supreme Court”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James and a coalition of states today fought to defend the Affordable Care Act (ACA) against efforts by the Trump Administration and the State of Texas to repeal the law, putting the health care of tens of millions of Americans at risk. If the ACA is repealed, 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions could be denied coverage or charged more based on their health status. The ACA is also providing critical public health programs that are helping to fight the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), states’ decisions to expand Medicaid, and subsidies that are helping working families access the health coverage they need, among countless other benefits. Attorney General James and the coalition of 19 additional attorneys general and the governor of Kentucky, have now taken their fight to the U.S. Supreme Court, after the court agreed to review a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that held that the ACA’s individual mandate was unconstitutional and simultaneously called into question whether the remaining provisions of the law could still stand.“In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, it has never been more clear how important it is for Americans to have access to quality, affordable health coverage,” said Attorney General James. “Yet, President Trump continues to actively work to strip health coverage away from millions of individuals and families, including more than a million who have the coronavirus. We are asking the Supreme Court to stop the president from kicking Americans off their health plans and finally end his efforts to undo all the progress made over the last ten years.”The lawsuit — originally filed by a Texas-led coalition and later supported by the Trump Administration — argued that a Republican-led Congress rendered the ACA’s individual mandate unconstitutional when it reduced the penalty for forgoing coverage to $0. They further argued that the rest of the ACA should be held invalid as a result of that change. Attorney General James and a coalition of attorneys general defended the ACA in its entirety, supported by a bipartisan group of amici, including scholars, economists, public health experts, hospital and provider associations, patient groups, counties, cities, and more. While the Fifth Circuit held the individual mandate to be unconstitutional, it declined to further rule on the validity of the ACA’s remaining provisions. The court instead sent the case back to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas to determine whether the problem with the mandate requires striking down the whole law. In January, however, Attorney General James and the coalition petitioned the Supreme Court for expedited review to protect Americans’ health care and resolve the uncertainty created by the Fifth Circuit decision. The Supreme Court granted review of the case in March for the upcoming term.In today’s filing, Attorney General James and the coalition make clear that patients, doctors, hospitals, employers, workers, states, and more will be negatively impacted if the ACA is repealed. The brief also highlights important advancements in health care access made under the ACA, including: More than 12 million Americans now receive coverage through the ACA’s Medicaid expansion;Nearly nine million individuals nationwide receive tax credits to help subsidize their health insurance coverage through individual marketplaces;Millions of working families rely on high-quality, employer-sponsored insurance plans;Important protections prohibit insurers from denying health insurance to the 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions, like COVID-19, diabetes, cancer, or pregnancy, or from charging individuals higher premiums because of their health status; andNearly $1.3 trillion in federal funding has been dedicated to keeping Americans healthy and covered, which includes spending through Medicaid expansion and public health dollars. And in New York: The state uninsured rate reached its lowest point ever recorded in 2018 — 4.7-percent;More than 4.7 million New Yorkers now receive health coverage through the ACA, including nearly 3.3 million on Medicaid;58 percent of enrollees were expected to receive $636 million in tax credits to help subsidize the cost of health care in 2019 alone; andThe average monthly premium tax credit available to eligible Qualified Health Plan enrollees in 2019 was $335. Joining Attorney General James in filing today’s brief are the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota (by and through its Department of Commerce), Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia, as well as the governor of Kentucky. May 12, 2020: Military.com posted an article titled: “Tricare Drops Telehealth Copays, Adds Phone Call Coverage in Emergency Measure”. It was written by Patricia Kime. From the article: Tricare will now cover telephone services for some medical appointments and will eliminate copayments for beneficiaries who use telehealth services in place of an in-person visit to the doctor during the COVID-19 pandemic.Effective Wednesday, the Defense Department health program will cover audio-only remote services for office visits “when appropriate” and will not require copays for telemedicine, according to a notice in the Federal Register.The coverage will extend through the end or suspension of the national emergency as declared by President Donald Trump, according to the ruling.The ruling eliminates cost-sharing, including co-pays and deductibles, for in-network telehealth services for both Tricare Prime and Tricare Select beneficiaries in all geographic locations.It also lifts Tricare’s prohibition on medical services via telephone, allowing physicians or other providers to evaluate a patient’s symptoms by phone. While the ruling is clear that appointments via telehealth — with audio and video capability — are preferred, phone calls are acceptable for those who may not have access to high-speed internet or a computer with Wi-Fi access.The service applies to any illness or injury covered by Tricare, including COVID-19, but calls must be considered medically necessary and conducted by a network Tricare provider within the scope of his or her professional license.To be eligible for reimbursement for a telephone consult, providers should determine that a phone call is “appropriate for accomplishing the clinical goals of the encounter” and must document it, according to the ruling.Any visit requiring a physical exam would not be appropriate for a phone consultation and would not be covered, Tricare officials added.The ruling also lifts some restrictions on providers practicing medicine across state lines. Under normal circumstances, Tricare requires that providers must be licensed in the state where they are practicing, and they can treat patients only in that state.Under the temporary rule, providers will still be required to be licensed but can provide telehealth and audio medicine to patients across state lines. For example, in Washington, D.C., Tricare providers would be allowed to provide telemedicine to their patients who reside in Virginia. Previously, this was prohibited… May 13, 2020: California Attorney General Becerra and Senator Monning Announce That Legislation to Reduce Healthcare Costs, Increase Access to Affordable Care Passes Senate Health Committee”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and Senator Bill Monning today announced Senate Bill 977 (SB 977), legislation that would make healthcare more affordable and accessible by cracking down on anticompetitive behavior and consolidation in the healthcare market, passed out of Senate Health Committee. The bill would require the Attorney General’s Office to review and approve affiliations or acquisitions between healthcare systems, facilities, or provider groups to ensure transactions either improve care coordination or increase healthcare access for underserved populations. The bill also provides new enforcement tools to reduce anticompetitive behavior in the market that leads to higher costs.“The coronavirus pandemic has shone a light on the crucial importance of our healthcare system and ensuring that everyone has access to affordable, quality healthcare. When giant companies strangle competition in the healthcare market, patients and employers are left paying the price,” said Attorney General Becerra. “I’m grateful to be working with Senator Monning to champion SB 977, a bill that provides our office with new tools to combat anticompetitive behavior in the healthcare market. We must all work together to protect consumers and make healthcare more affordable for all Californians.” “As our state continues to face the devastating impacts COVID-19 has on our healthcare system, it is important to ensure costs remain affordable for patients,” said Senator Monning. “Physicians are facing severe financial pressures because of the current pandemic and data shows that prices skyrocket when providers consolidate and reduce competition in the marketplace. SB 977 will protect existing services for patients and address the issue of unfair business practices that increase healthcare costs for all Californians.”Anticompetitive behavior in the healthcare sector is a growing concern because large healthcare systems can flex their market power to raise prices for patients, employers, and insurers while limiting services and decreasing the quality of care offered to Californians. For example, average prices for hospital care are 35 percent higher in Northern California, where healthcare systems are more consolidated, than in Southern California. The impact of consolidation on prices was reinforced by a 2018 study by professor Richard Scheffler and the Petris Institute at the University of California, Berkeley, which found the percentage of physicians in practices owned by hospitals increased from about 25 percent in 2010 to more than 40 percent in 2016. This increased hospital ownership resulted in an estimated 12 percent increase in premiums from 2014 to 2016 and has led these physician groups to be less flexible and adaptable during the pandemic.SB 977 would work to improve healthcare affordability and limit anticompetitive behavior by requiring healthcare systems to gain approval from the Attorney General’s Office before moving forward with any planned affiliation agreement or acquisition. The Attorney General’s determination to approve or deny a transaction will rely on two factors: Whether the transaction would truly increase care coordination and/or increase access and affordability of care to an underserved population; andWhether the transaction is substantially likely to result in anticompetitive effects that outweigh any benefits. In addition, SB 977 would declare that healthcare systems that exercise substantial market power may not engage in behavior that has a significant likelihood of anticompetitive effects. These behaviors include: raising market prices, diminishing the quality of care, reducing choice, increasing the total cost of care, and diminishing access or availability of healthcare services. Under SB 977, the Attorney General’s Office would have the ability to file civil actions to recover damages and obtain civil penalties against those that abuse market power. May 14, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) tweeted: “It’s unconscionable that Trump and Republicans continue to support a lawsuit to dismantle the Affordable Care Act. Yet that’s exactly what they’re doing. In the middle of a pandemic.” May 14, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Bipartisan Coalition of Leaders and Experts Support Supreme Court Fight to Protect ACA”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today announced that a diverse group of bipartisan attorneys general, economists, patient groups, hospitals, healthcare providers, insurance companies, cities, counties, tribes, and more filed amicus briefs in the Supreme Court supporting California’s defense of the healthcare system and Affordable Care Act (ACA). The amici coalition also includes new partners in the attorneys general of Maryland, Maine, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.“As we confront a global pandemic of historic proportions, a bipartisan coalition of leaders, from bipartisan attorneys general to public health experts, stand with us before the Supreme Court in agreement: protecting the Affordable Care Act is critical to protecting the health of our nation and countless loved ones,” said Attorney General Becerra. “While the Trump Administration continues its attempt to destroy the ACA, state attorneys general, legal experts, economists, medical groups, and more know better: our nation’s hallmark healthcare law is lawful and we must do everything we can to protect it, for the sake of saving lives.”The Supreme Court agreed to review a recent Fifth Circuit decision that held the ACA’s individual mandate unconstitutional and called into question whether the remaining provisions of the law could still stand — jeopardizing Medicaid expansion, critical public health programs that help fight COVID-19, subsidies that help working families access care, and healthcare coverage protections for 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions. The amici support California’s fight to protect America’s healthcare system and the well-being of Americans across the nation.These amicus briefs support California’s defense of the ACA and highlight the importance of safeguarding our public health system – especially given the current COVID-19 pandemic. The briefs highlight not only the critical public health gains made under the ACA, but also crucial ways that the ACA aids the nation in its COVID-19 response, including: The ACA’s pre-existing condition protections keep the millions of Americans who have or may become infected by COVID-19 from being denied coverage based on COVID-19 exposure, or from having their benefits limited to exclude coverage for the ongoing health consequences caused by COVID-19;The ACA’s Prevention and Public Health Fund provides more than 12 percent of the program funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the agency at the forefront of the government’s efforts to contain the pandemic; The ACA’s multi-billion-dollar Community Health Center Fund, extended by the recent Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, provides as much as 70 percent of all grant funding for community health centers, which are on the front lines of the COVID-19 response;The ACA’s non-discrimination requirements ensure that access to medical resources may not be denied to COVID-19 patients because a patient is disabled;The ACA’s investment in health care innovation, including telehealth, has paid great dividends during the pandemic by allowing providers and patients to adapt as communities shelter in place;The ACA’s expanded Medicaid program and Special Enrollment Periods provide a backstop for workers who lose their jobs and health insurance coverage; andIn Medicaid expansion states, the ACA will provide financial assistance to anywhere from 66 to 75 percent of laid-off workers in the industries most vulnerable to pandemic-related unemployment. Amicus briefs in support of California’s coalition were filed by: the attorneys general of Maryland, Maine, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin; AARP et al.; Alliance of Community Health Plans and Association for Community Affiliated Plans; America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP); American Cancer Society et al.; American Association of People with Disabilities et al.; American Medical Association et al. (AMA); the American Thoracic Society; the Association for Accessible Medicines; Bipartisan Economic Scholars; Blue Cross Blue Shield Association; the Catholic Health Association of the United States; Constitutional Law Experts; Families USA et al.; First Focus on Children et al.; HCA Healthcare, Inc.; Health Care Policy Scholars; Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc.; Legal scholars; the National Association of Community Health Centers; National Health Law Program et al.; National Hospital Associations; National Women’s Law Center et al.; Small Business Majority Foundation; Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; Public Citizen, Inc.; Public Health Experts et al.; Service Employees International Union (SEIU) et al.; Tribes and Tribal Organizations; Washington and Lee University School of Law Black Lung Clinic; 47 members of the United States Senate; 44 counties, cities, and towns and the California State Association of Counties; 36 State Hospital Associations; and more. May 15, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris, Sanders, Gillibrand, Booker, Warren, Markey, Merkley Introduce Emergency Health Care Guarantee Act”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Friday joined Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and 5 of their colleagues in introducing the Health Care Emergency Guarantee Act to eliminate all out-of-pocket health costs for every person in America during the COVID-19 crisis. Along with Harris and Sanders, the legislation was cosponsored by Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Edward Markey (D-MA), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Cory Booker (D-NJ), and Jeff Merkley (D-OR).“The COVID-19 pandemic has placed Americans under tremendous stress,” said Harris. “On top of wondering how they will pay rent and put food on the table, paying for medical treatment if they get sick should not be another worry for families. I am proud to join my colleagues to introduce this legislation to protect patients from cost barriers to the medical care they need to stay healthy.”“During this public health crisis, we must make sure that everyone in America is able to receive all of the medical care they need, regardless of their income, immigration status or insurance coverage. No one in this country should be afraid to go to the doctor because of the cost—especially during a pandemic. The American people deserve an emergency health care response that is simple, straightforward, comprehensive, and cost-effective,” said Sanders. “We should empower Medicare to pay all of the medical bills of the uninsured and the under-insured—including prescription drugs—for the duration of the coronavirus pandemic. When so many people in this country are struggling economically and terrified at the thought of becoming sick, the federal government has a responsibility to take the burden of health care costs off of the backs of the American people. The legislation we are introducing today does just that.”New polling reveals overwhelming enthusiasm for this proposal. According to Data for Progress, 73 percent of American voters support Medicare covering all out-of-pocket health expenses during this emergency, including 58 percent of Republicans. In comparison, 55 percent backed a separate proposal to cover the cost of insurance premiums through COBRA, a federal program that allows those who have lost their jobs to temporarily retain their former employers’ health insurance coverage. When presented with evidence that the emergency Medicare proposal is significantly less expensive despite covering millions more people, 61 percent preferred this approach versus 14 percent who backed COBRA subsidies.The legislation would simply leverage the existing Medicare payment infrastructure to affordably and efficiently pay all costs of treatment for the uninsured, and cover all out-of-pocket costs such as copayments and deductibles for those who already have public or private insurance. The bill also halts medical debt collections, prohibits private insurance companies from increasing cost-sharing, and requires ongoing data collection and weekly reporting on health disparities related to COVID-19. The legislation would be effective until a COVID-19 vaccine is widely available to the public. The bill enjoys the endorsement of 32 national organizations and unions including the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA, International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, National Nurses United, Service Employees International Union (SEIU), United Electrical Radio and Machine Workers of America; Center for Popular Democracy, Indivisible, League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), MoveOn.Org, National Domestic Workers Alliance, People’s Action, Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Public Citizen, Social Security Works, Sunrise Movement, United We Dream, Working Families Party, Business for Medicare for All, Debs-Jones-Douglass Institute, Democracy for America, Democratic Socialists of America, Economic Opportunity Institute, Economic Policy Institute, Faith Action Network, Healthcare-NOW, Hometown Action, Jane Addams Senior Center, Labor Campaign for Single Payer, Legal Voice, Medicare for All Now, Partners for Dignity & Rights, Presente.org, and Progressive Democrats of America. To read a summary of the bill, click here. To read a section-by-section outline of the bill, click here.To read the text of the bill, click here.To read a polling memo on the bill, click here. May 15, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “Coalition of Progressive Groups Slam Rúben Díaz Sr. for his Anti-Abortion Anti-LGBTQ Record”. From the press release: As New York grapples with the COVID-19 pandemic, a broad coalition of progressive groups — including Planned Parenthood Action Fund, LGBTQ Victory Fund, NARAL Pro-Choice America, Latino Victory Fund, and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus BOLD PAC — announced their opposition to Rubén Díaz Sr. as a candidate to represent the 15th Congressional District in New York for his attacks on equal access to basic health care; the LGBTQ community; and the right to safe, legal abortion. Due to historic inequities in health care access for the Latinx community in the district, the Bronx has been one of the hardest hit areas by the COVID-19 pandemic. In the midst of this public health crisis, New York voters need to elect a leader who will fight for equality and their basic health care needs. And that leader is anybody but Díaz Sr. Every other leading Democratic candidate has demonstrated support for protecting and expanding abortion access and LGBTQ rights, and would be far more qualified to represent New Yorkers in Congress.It’s not just that Díaz Sr. is out of step with the values of New Yorkers, he doesn’t have the best interests or well being of those in the district at heart. The Bronx, where the 15th District is located, has the highest abortion rate in the state. Latinx voters — who make up the majority of the district — overwhelmingly support the right to access abortion. Latinx millenials are more likely to identify as LGBTQ than any other group and the New York City metropolitan area has the largest LGBTQ population in the country with more than 750,000. As time has passed, Díaz Sr.’s policies have never been more disconnected from the priorities of New Yorkers.It’s clear voters across the country are ready for candidates who will expand abortion access and LGBTQ rights. In April, Marie Newman beat incumbent Democratic Rep. Dan Lipinski after 15 years of representing the Chicago suburbs in a race where Lipinski’s anti-abortion position was a key issue……The full list of coalition groups includes: Planned Parenthood Action Fund, LGBTQ Victory Fund, NARAL Pro-Choice America, Latino Victory Fund, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus BOLD PAC, Bend the Arc Jewish Action, Congressional Progressive Caucus PAC, Human Rights Campaign, Equality PAC, and People for the American Way Here are just a few of the comments and actions that show how unqualified Rubén Díaz Sr. is to represent New York: Comparing abortion to the Holocaust: Díaz Sr. penned a newsletter piece comparing abortion to genocide, saying, “Hitler was pro-choice. He chose to send the Jews to Auschwitz. That was not their choice that was Hitler’s choice…Murderers, assassins and criminals are pro-choice. They choose to put a gun to your head and take your life.” Observer, 05/01/2012Standing steadfast against marriage equality: Two years after being the lone Democratic state senator to vote against New York’s Marriage Equality Act, Díaz Sr. addressed an anti-marriage equality rally in Washington, D.C., saying “The majority is not always right. 2,000 years ago the majority chose the rabbi and rejected Jesus. Now, the majority are rejecting the Bible and not choosing Jesus. I know my conviction and I know I will not change my view.” Observer, 04/05/2013Pushing homophobic stigma and policies: Díaz Sr. has been peddling misinformation and anti-LGBTQ stigma for decades, saying last year, “When I get to the City Council, I find that the City Council is controlled — most council members out of 51 council members — over there, everybody is controlled by the homosexual community,” New York Times, 02/11/2019Ignoring sexual harassment: Díaz Sr. showed his true colors when he claimed he would protect perpetrators of sexual harassment instead of taking complaints seriously. During a mandatory City Council training, he was asked hypothetically what he would do if he overheard a chief of staff sexually harassing another staffer in an elevator. He responded, “I’m not gonna rat my people out! This place is full of rats!” City & State New York, 05/09/2019Questioning support for abortion and LGBTQ rights: During his floor speech in opposition to the Marriage Equality Act, Díaz Sr. revealed his unfiltered views on support for reproductive and LGBTQ rights, saying, “All Democrats do is abortion and gay marriage, but the Republican party has always been the party that protects traditional values and family values.” LGBTQ Nation, 06/26/2011Supporting Sen. Ted Cruz who proudly attacked “New York values”: After then-presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz made his controversial comments about “New York values,” Díaz Sr. invited the Texas senator to his district, saying “Imagine Ted Cruz traveling to the Bronx where there is a grassroots army of Black and Hispanic Evangelical Christians who are just like him — and who have been ignored by every presidential candidate.” City & State New York, 07/17/2018 May 19, 2020: The U.S. Mission to International Organizations in Geneva posted a written statement titled: “U.S. Explanation of Position “COVID-19 Response” Resolution”. From the statement: The United States thanks the European Union and the other co-sponsors for their leadership in preparing the COVID-19 Response resolution for adoption at the virtual 73rd World Health Assembly (WHA). That we are meeting in virtual session, at a time when more than 300,000 people have lost their lives and the global economy has been deeply affected, is a testament to the need to come together in response to this pandemic. This resolution makes an important contribution to that global response, immediately calling for whole-of-government and whole-of-society approaches to fighting the pandemic with the best available evidence, and by urging the international community to come together around all aspects of the response.Most importantly, the terms of this resolution take the first critical steps necessary to ensure that, when we face the next pandemic, we will have a World Health Organization (WHO) and an international system capable of responding effectively and decisively to save lives and protect the vulnerable. We applaud the call for an impartial, independent, and comprehensive review of the WHO’s response, to be undertaken in consultation with Member States, and we urge that work to begin now. This will help ensure we have a complete and transparent understanding of the source of the virus, timeline of events, early discussions, and the decision-making process for the WHO’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We must reform the WHO and supporting entities to be fully capable of fulfilling their core and crucial mission moving forward. We further appreciate the mandate given by the resolution to the WHO to investigate the origins of the virus, and we are confident that through this knowledge, researchers and medical practitioners around the world will be empowered in the pursuit of vaccines and other countermeasures.Finally, we wholeheartedly endorse the call in the resolution for all Member States to provide the WHO with timely, accurate, and sufficiently-detailed public health information related to the COVID-19 pandemic, as required by the International Health Regulations (IHR 2005). We stand ready to work with all partners to implement this resolution. If we are to fully realize the promise contained in the IHRs of a safer world for everyone, changes must be made within the WHO to hold Member State accountable to address and reduce risks that threaten public health.Unfortunately, despite our best efforts at working toward consensus language in all areas of this resolution, we regret that the United States must disassociate itself from a few paragraphs due to the following issues:The United States dissociates from operative paragraphs 7.5 and 9.4. The United States strongly supports women reaching the highest attainable outcomes for health, life, dignity, and well-being throughout their lives. We champion access to high-quality health care for women and girls across the lifespan. However, we do not accept references to “sexual and reproductive health,” or other language that suggests or explicitly states that access to abortion is included in the provision of population and individual level health services. The United States believes in legal protections for the unborn, and rejects any interpretation of international human rights (such as General Comment 36 on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) to require any State Party to provide access to abortion. As President Trump has stated, “Americans will never tire of defending innocent life.” Each nation has the sovereign right to implement related programs and activities consistent with their laws and policies, free from external pressure. There is no international right to abortion, nor is there any duty on the part of States to finance or facilitate abortion. Further, consistent with the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development Programme of Action and the 1995 Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, we do not recognize abortion as a method of family planning, nor do we support abortion in our global health assistance.The United States must also disassociate from operative paragraphs 4, 8.2 and 9.8 because the language in these operative paragraphs does not adequately capture all of the carefully negotiated, and balanced, language in the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) and the Doha Declaration of 2001 and instead presents an unbalanced and incomplete picture of that language at a time where all actors need to come together to produce vaccines and other critical health products. The United States recognizes the importance of access to affordable, safe, high-quality, and effective health products and the critical role that intellectual property plays in incentivizing the development of new and improved health products. However, as currently drafted, paragraphs 4, 8.2 and 9.8 send the wrong message to innovators who will be essential to the solutions the whole world needs.We are concerned that a misinterpretation of international trade obligations in non-WTO multilateral fora may negatively affect countries’ abilities to incentivize new drug development and expand access to medicines. We would also like to clarify our understanding of the reference in 8.2 to “existing mechanisms for voluntary pooling … of patents.” The United States interprets this reference as limited to voluntary mechanisms existing before the COVID-19 pandemic, not new or proposed “patent pooling” mechanisms created in response to the pandemic. It is critical that any such voluntary mechanisms as applied to COVID-19 related technologies be narrowly tailored in scope and duration to the medical needs of the current crisis, and that the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), as the UN agency with technical expertise on intellectual property issues, play an appropriate role in their operation and evolution.The United States is leading global efforts for the development of vaccines, for therapies and treatments for COVID-19, including providing significant funding and leading other initiatives to accelerate innovation in this space, for example the ACTIV Partnership recently unveiled by the United States National Institutes of Health. We applaud other global efforts as well and are committed to supporting a collaborative approach to ensuring that all efforts support one another and that we are truly accelerating progress toward a vaccine.Going forward, given the need for innovation incentives in the development of new health products, the U.S. Government encourages member states to engage with innovators to find mutually-acceptable solutions that achieve increased access to affordable, safe, effective, and high quality COVID-19 health products. By taking an unbalanced and incomplete approach to the issue of access to medicines and TRIPS, this resolution misses an opportunity to galvanize the world, beyond bureaucracy and UN bodies, toward the critical goal of accelerating research, development, distribution and access to affordable, safe, quality and effective COVID-19 related products. We remain committed to working with all partners toward that goal. May 20, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted an article titled: “Amidst COVID-19 Talks at the World Health Assembly, the U.S. Government Inserts Anti-Repro Health, Anti-Abortion Agenda”. From the press release: Yesterday at the World Health Assembly, the administration further isolated the U.S. from other member nations with its refusal to accept references to “sexual and reproductive health” in the World Health Organization (WHO) resolution on the COVID-19 pandemic response. This move follows a letter sent yesterday by the USAID acting administrator to UN Secretary-General António Guterres, demanding the UN delete abortion and sexual and reproductive health as an essential service in guidance for the global COVID-19 response. The administration announced last month it would suspend funding to the WHO, a threat Trump repeated in a letter to the WHO director-general, shared via Twitter Monday night.Statement from Monica Kerrigan, Executive Director, Planned Parenthood Global: “The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated how interconnected the world is and how a threat to one is a threat to all. The World Health Organization member states came to the table yesterday to develop a critical response to the biggest global health crisis of our time. Yet, instead of working together with the global community, the U.S. government is once again exploiting the crisis to impose its extreme anti-reproductive health, anti-abortion ideology. Abortion is essential, reproductive health is essential, and Planned Parenthood will continue working to ensure that these services are accessible, no matter where you live.”This isn’t the first time the Trump administration has pushed its anti-reproductive health agenda on the global stage. Over the past three years, the administration has tried to undercut global consensus on sexual and reproductive health and rights at forums like the Commission on the Status of Women and the UN Security Council and advanced harmful policies like the expanded global gag rule, which weaken global health systems and erode access to critical health services around the world. The virus has placed a heavy burden on women as frontline workers and caregivers, and has increased rates of gender-based violence for women around the world. A study by the Guttmacher Institute projects that the COVID-19 pandemic will have a devastating impact on global sexual and reproductive health, including as many as 28,000 additional maternal deaths. May 20, 2020: American Academy of Pediatrics posted news titled: “Stay in the know: COVID-19 updates from the nation’s capital”. From the news: …Tucked into the $2 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act package — which became law — are two long-standing AAP advocacy priorities: over-the-counter (OTC) drug reform and reauthorization of the Pediatric Subspecialty Loan Repayment Program.Understandably, much of the attention paid to this sweeping legislation was on the critical provisions it included to address the pandemic. It also is important to recognize these priorities, which were included with little fanfare but will have a major impact on children’s health.Meaningful reform of the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) OTC drug regulatory system has been long overdue. Pediatric labeling on older drugs is outdated, as it is based on evidence that no longer meets current safety and efficacy standards or is based on incorrect assumptions about how adult data should inform the labeling of drugs for children.The new law will make it easier for the FDA to update labels based on the latest scientific developments, ensuring that OTC drugs are safe and effective for use in children. It also strengthens the agency’s ability to require packaging that keeps children safe from accidental ingestion.The CARES Act also reauthorized the Pediatric Subspecialty Loan Repayment Program for five years. The program helps address shortages of pediatric subspecialists in underserved areas. The Academy is urging Congress to provide $50 million in funding for the program for fiscal year 2021.Pediatric subspecialists provide care for children with complex medical conditions or who require long-term, coordinated care for chronic illnesses. Shortages of pediatric subspecialists force families to face long wait times for appointments or travel long distances.The program would provide up to $35,000 annually for a maximum of three years to pediatric subspecialists who agree to practice in an underserved area, helping to ensure children can receive care no matter where they live.After years of AAP and pediatrician advocacy on both of these issues, their inclusion in the broader coronavirus legislation represents a long-fought victory for children’s health… May 20, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Planned Parenthood Applauds Senate Introduction of HEAL Act”. From the press release: Today, Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) introduced the Health Equity and Access under the Law (HEAL) for Immigrant Women and Families Act, which removes politically motivated barriers to health insurance coverage so all immigrants, regardless of status, can fully participate in federal programs, including Medicaid, the Affordable Care Act’s Marketplace, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). Expanding access to health care is always critical but, as the nation struggles to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic, the need is even more urgent. The House version of this bill was introduced last fall. This is the first time the bill has been introduced in the Senate. Statement from Jacqueline Ayers, Vice President, Government Relations & Public Policy, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“Viruses do not discriminate, and everyone deserves access to health care, regardless of their immigration status. Planned Parenthood Federation of America applauds Sen. Booker for his leadership in introducing the HEAL Act in the Senate for the first time. As the Trump administration continues to attack and leave behind immigrant communities in its COVID-19 response, it is critical we work to remove barriers that prevent immigrants and their families from accessing the care they need. Planned Parenthood calls on Congress to pass the HEAL Act and protect everyone’s access to health care — no matter what.”The HEAL Act removes the five-year waiting period that prevents immigrants from fully participating in federal health care programs, and opens up the Affordable Care Act Marketplace so that all immigrants, including the undocumented and Deferred Action for Child Arrivals (DACA) recipients, can access the affordable health care they need. Additionally, the HEAL Act reinstates Medicaid eligibility for Compact of Free Association (COFA) migrants who lost access to the program in 1996. Facing many systemic barriers to basic health care and information, immigrants endure challenging and life-endangering health care disparities. Many women in immigrant communities are more likely to die from breast and cervical cancers, and some immigrant groups have high rates of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections. All of these diseases could be screened for, and in some cases prevented, with equal access to care. Planned Parenthood Federation of America joins 215 organizations in supporting the HEAL Act, and is committed to ensuring that all individuals, regardless of citizenship, have access to quality care, including reproductive health care. May 20, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “PPFA Denounces Political Attacks on Local Planned Parenthood Health Centers”. From the press release: Today, Planned Parenthood Federation of America released the following statement on the Trump administration’s latest attacks on Planned Parenthood and its patients by targeting independent Planned Parenthood 501(c)(3) organizations that recieved federal assistance under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act.Statement from Jacqueline Ayers, vice president of government relations & public policy, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“Like many other local nonprofits and health care providers, some independent Planned Parenthood 501(c)(3) organizations applied for and were awarded loans under the eligibility rules established by the CARES Act and the Small Business Administration (SBA), which they met. Planned Parenthood health centers play a core role in the social safety net, and there is no more critical time for the care they provide than during a public health crisis.“And just like other nonprofits and health care providers, this pandemic has had a significant impact on Planned Parenthood health centers’ ability to provide care. Paycheck Protection Program loans have ensured health centers can retain staff and continue to provide patients with essential, time-sensitive sexual and reproductive health care during this crisis.“This is a clear political attack on Planned Parenthood health centers and access to reproductive health care. It has nothing to do with Planned Parenthood health care organizations’ eligibility for COVID-19 relief efforts, and everything to do with the Trump administration using a public health crisis to advance a political agenda and distract from their own failures in protecting the American public from the spread of COVID-19. It is also just the latest salvo in the Trump administration’s long history of targeting Planned Parenthood, and trying to severely limit access to sexual and reproductive health care.“For many patients, local Planned Parenthood health centers are their only source of health care; the unfortunate reality is the pandemic has made existing barriers to care worse for many of the communities they serve. While local Planned Parenthood health centers are focused on providing critical health care for their communities during this pandemic, the Trump administration is focused on attacking critical safety net providers. This is not the time to play politics, and it is certainly not the time to reduce access to critical health care.” May 20, 2020: San Francisco Chronicle posted an article titled: “Nearly 124,000 sign up through Covered California; plans include free coronavirus testing”. It was written by Rusty Simmons. From the article: Nearly 124,000 people have signed up for medical insurance through Covered California since March 20 as the state grapples with the coronavirus pandemic and startling unemployment numbers.According to the state health care marketplace, 123,810 people have sought insurance during Covered California’s special open-enrollment period. The exchange is generally open from Oct. 15 to Jan. 31, but it extended the period amid the crisis……Medi-Cal, which covers 13 million Californians and is offered through Covered California, put a 90-day hold on renewal reviews last month, so people can automatically continue coverage.Under Covered California, people have access to private health insurance plans with monthly premiums that may be subsidized, and coverage begins the first of the month after a person chooses a plan.Californians previously could sign up for health insurance through the marketplace outside of the annual open-enrollment period because of a “qualifying life event,” such as losing coverage, moving, getting married or having a baby. The special enrollment period, which extends through the end of June, is available to people who were unaware of available premium subsidies or the new state penalty for not having health insurance……All Covered California and Medi-Cal health plans include no-charge telehealth options for COVID-19 screening, which allow people to speak to a medical professional via phone or video chat, so they don’t have to go to a doctor’s office or hospital. The coverage includes free coronavirus testing as well as visits to emergency rooms or urgent care for screening or testing… May 21, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris, Colleagues Praise Senate Passage of Resolution Marking National Minority Health Month”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Thursday joined Senators Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Tim Scott (R-SC) and 14 of their colleagues in applauding the passage of the resolution recognizing April as Minority Health Month. As in previous years, the Senators introduce this resolution to raise awareness of the disparities in health care and health outcomes faced by minority populations including American Indians, Alaska Natives, African Americans, Hispanics, Native Hawaiians, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. This year, the COVID-19 pandemic places an urgency on this issue, as preliminary data suggests that minority groups have been disproportionately impacted by the disease. Targeted solutions to help communities of color are critical to closing gaps in health outcomes and improving efforts to combat the COVID-19 crisis.“Communities of color have been plagued by health disparities for far too long,” said Harris. “The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated these inequities. We know that people of color are more likely to suffer from conditions such as heart disease, asthma, and lupus — conditions that could also put people at higher risk of complications or death from coronavirus. I’m proud to join my colleagues on this important resolution– it is vital that we take action to eradicate these disparities and improve access to care for minority communities across the nation.”In addition to Senators Harris, Cardin and Scott, the resolution is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), John Boozman (R-AR), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Kevin Cramer (D-ND), Ron Wyden (D-OR), James Lankford (R-OK), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Mike Braun (D-IN), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Ed Markey (D-MA) and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV). May 21, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs bid to halt Idaho trangender inmate’s surgery”. It was written by Andrew Chung. From the article: The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday allowed a transgender prison inmate in Idaho to go ahead with sex reassignment surgery, rejecting the state’s bid to put it on hold.The decision by the justices means that the surgery for the inmate, Adree Edmo, which is scheduled for July, will remain on the calendar while they consider whether to hear the state of Idaho’s appeal in the case.The brief court order noted that two of the nine justices, conservatives Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, would have granted the state’s request that the surgery be put on hold.Edmo, 32, is serving a sentence for a 2011 sexual assault of a 15-year-old boy. Edmo is scheduled to be released from prison next year.The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had found that prison officials denied Edmo access to the surgery “despite full knowledge of Edmo’s ongoing and extreme suffering and medical needs” in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.Idaho told the Supreme Court that the 9th Circuit failed to consider the professional opinions of a prison psychiatrist and other officials that Edmo was best served by a more conservative treatment regimen, rather than sex reassignment surgery.Edmo had been diagnosed with gender dysphoria, which the American Psychiatric Association defines as “clinically significant distress” due to a conflict between a person’s gender identity and their sex assigned at birth.Prison officials provided Edmo with hormone therapy. But Edmo continued to experience dysphoria primarily because of her male genitalia, according to court papers. Twice, in 2015 and 2016, Edmo attempted to self-castrate in order to eliminate testosterone from her body, court papers said.A federal judge in 2018 ordered the state to provide the surgery to Edmo, a ruling the 9th Circuit upheld. May 26, 2020: Missouri Governor Michael L. Parson (Republican) posted a press release on his official website titled: “Governor Parson Signs Proclamation Placing Medicaid Expansion on August Primary Ballot”. From the press release: During today’s COVID-19 briefing, Governor Mike Parson announced that Medicaid expansion will be placed on a ballot at the August 4, 2020, primary election.Citizens of Missouri filed an initiative petition with the Secretary of State to place Medicaid expansion on the ballot. Following the Secretary of State’s certification of the petition, Governor Parson today signed a proclamation to place the initiative on the August ballot. “I want to be clear that this is about policy, not politics,” Governor Parson said. “At a time when our state is undergoing a major health, economic, and budget crisis, we need to know exactly where we stand on what would be a massive spending initiative for Missouri.”According to research from Pew Charitable Trusts, Missouri is a top five state for general revenue spending on Medicaid. The state estimates it will need an additional $88 million in general revenue through Fiscal Year 2021 due to COVID-19.“Pass or fail, it is important that we understand the implications of Medicaid expansion as soon as possible,” Governor Parson said. “Placing the initiative on the August ballot will give us more time to prepare and account for the outcome in our state budget.”… May 27, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a press release titled: “ACOG Suit Petitions Court to Remove FDA’s Burdensome Barriers to Reproductive Care During COVID-19”. From the press release: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) took another step toward achieving equitable access to care for patients during the COVID-19 pandemic by asking a federal court to require the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to suspend a harmful FDA restriction on mifepristone. Joining ACOG as plaintiffs in today’s lawsuit are the Council of University Chairs of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the New York Academy of Family Physicians, and SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective.Mifepristone is an evidence-based treatment prescribed for management of early pregnancy loss as well as induced abortion. Although mifepristone has long been proven to be safe and effective when prescribed through telemedicine and can be safely taken in the comfort of a patient’s home, outdated FDA restrictions require mifepristone to be dispensed in a hospital, clinic, or medical office.“Of the more than 20,000 drugs regulated by the FDA, mifepristone is the only one that patients must receive in person at a hospital, clinic, or medical office, yet may self-administer, unsupervised, at a location of their choosing,” says the complaint, which was filed today by the American Civil Liberties Union and the international law firm Arnold & Porter.For years, the medical community has opposed these restrictions, which have no medical basis, provide no patient benefit, and unnecessarily restrict access to care.In the current COVID-19 pandemic, these burdensome requirements are especially harmful and must be lifted. The requirements disproportionately affect patients from underserved communities who are burdened by the need to travel, arrange childcare, and present to their chosen clinician in person for the dispensing of the medication. Forcing physicians to dispense this drug in person puts patients at increased risk of COVID-19 as a condition of obtaining abortion or miscarriage care and needlessly raises exposure risks for clinicians and other health care staff.“Our request in this case is simple: the federal government should permit patients seeking safe and effective reproductive health care, which includes care for miscarriage and termination of pregnancy, the same ability to access care and protect themselves from exposure as patients in other contexts are afforded,” said Eva Chalas, MD, FACOG, FACS, president of ACOG.People of color have been disproportionately impacted by infections, hospitalizations, and deaths from COVID-19, as well as by the nation’s maternal mortality crisis. The FDA’s restrictions on mifepristone only serve to increase the risk faced by the communities that are already inequitably facing harm from the pandemic.“During the COVID-19 pandemic, the health care community—from individual physicians togovernment agencies—has come together to identify safe, effective ways to provide patients with the care that they need, including through telemedicine. The FDA’s decision to maintain medically unnecessary restrictions on mifepristone is a glaring exception, which results in discrimination in access and threatens to harm patients and their clinicians during a time of national crisis. Lifting the barriers to mifepristone will allow women, including those from underserved communities that are disproportionately affected by both COVID-19 and the ongoing maternal health crisis, the ability to obtain necessary and essential evidence-based care without having to risk potential life-threatening exposure,” Dr. Chalas added.David Chelmow, MD, FACOG, president of the Council of University Chairs of Obstetrics and Gynecology, added, “The medical community must be able to use all the tools at our disposal, including telehealth care where appropriate, to meet patients’ essential medical needs while protecting them from coronavirus. The next generation of health care practitioners must be taught the most safe, effective, and patient-centered care, even during a public health emergency. The FDA’s unique restriction on mifepristone prevents clinicians from exercising their medical judgment during this pandemic, limits the ability to provide the optimal medication for miscarriage and abortion care, and needlessly jeopardizes the safety of patients.”Read the full complaintRead the motion for preliminary injunction May 29, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “BREAKING NEWS: – Victory for Missourians: Abortion Services Protected in Missouri”. From the press release: After a year-long battle with Missouri Gov. Mike Parson’s Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS), an administrative commission just ruled that the state wrongfully withheld Reproductive Health Services of Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region’s (RHS) license. Today, the Missouri Administrative Hearing Commission (AHC) renewed the abortion license for RHS, the last remaining healh center in Missouri with a license to provide abortion. RHS can continue providing abortion services at its St. Louis health center.The commissioner wrote in his decision:“Planned Parenthood has demonstrated that it provides safe and legal abortion care.” The physicians who perform abortions at Planned Parenthood through Washington University and are all exceptionally competent and well trained.”For far too many people, abortion is already inaccessible in Missouri. Data revealed nearly all Missourians already flee the state for abortion services. Many patients have told RHS the same thing: The long list of medically unnecessary abortion restrictions make it too difficult and burdensome to access the care they need in their home state. Statement of Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president & CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“Today’s decision is a hard-fought victory for Planned Parenthood patients — and for people across Missouri. This is how we fight for our patients: case by case, day by day, to ensure abortion remains safe and legal across the country. The data shows that many have already paid the price, with the vast majority of Missouri patients forced to cross state lines to get the care they need. This is what it looks like when abortion is a right in name only. There is much more work to be done to ensure patients can access safe, legal abortion inside their home state.“During a worldwide pandemic, every public health care provider including Planned Parenthood should have all the resources they need to care for the complex needs of their communities, including abortion. Planned Parenthood remains committed to helping every patient access the care they need, even if that means having to leave their home state. We know care is much more than the services we provide; it’s how we show up for each other and in the world. In these uncertain times, we’re in this together.”Statement from Yamelsie Rodríguez, president and CEO, Reproductive Health Services of Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region:“For more than a year, Missouri’s health department has targeted Planned Parenthood. Missouri’s health department director, Randall Williams made false allegations about the high-quality care we provide and the dedicated, expert medical staff who provide it — all the while failing to tackle the real public health crises ravaging the state, including the COVID-19 crisis, rising infant and maternal mortality rates and skyrocketing rates of sexually transmitted infections like syphilis. Today’s ruling is vindication for Planned Parenthood and our patients who rely on us. But the reality is, abortion has essentially become a right in name only in Missouri. Missouri’s medically unnecessary requirements, two in-person trips to the health center at least 72 hours apart, a ban on using telehealth for an abortion and a needless invasive pelvic exam for medication abortion still make it extraordinarily difficult for people to access care in Missouri.“An abortion license, while critical to our ability to provide care, still cannot undo the harm that medically unnecessary policies in our state inflict on patients. It does not have to be this way. Gov. Parson could eliminate these medically unnecessary restrictions using the authority granted in his emergency order. We continue to keep our doors open, and can continue to care for all patients who choose to access reproductive health care, including safe and legal abortion, in Missouri and across the region.”… June June 1, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “California Department of Justice Issues Final CURES Regulations to Protect Patient Privacy, Combat the Abuse of Controlled Substances”. From the press release: The California Department of Justice today unveiled final regulations pertaining to the Controlled Substance Utilization Review and Evaluation System (CURES). CURES is California’s prescription drug monitoring program, a tool that assists healthcare practitioners in their efforts to ensure appropriate prescribing and dispensing of controlled substances and aids law enforcement and regulatory agencies in their efforts to control the diversion and resultant abuse of controlled substances.“At the California Department of Justice, it’s our job to safeguard the rights and interests of nearly forty million Californians,” said Attorney General Becerra. “These regulations make commonsense protections for patient privacy a top priority, while balancing the need for critical enforcement tools to protect public health and safety by combatting the abuse of controlled substances and aiding in public health interventions. We’re grateful to all the stakeholders and members of the public who contributed to the regulation process.” Under Assembly Bill 1751 enacted in January 1, 2019, the Department of Justice is required to adopt regulations by July 1, 2020, regarding certain processes, purposes, and conditions involving access and use of information within CURES. After consulting with stakeholders, the Department released proposed regulations on October 4, 2019. The Department received comments from the public on the proposed regulations, including at two public hearings in November 2019. The Department then released revisions on January 16, 2020 and sought additional comments. Today’s final regulations will become effective on July 1, 2020. The regulations address: The process for approving, denying, and disapproving individuals or entities seeking access to information in CURES;The purposes for which a healthcare practitioner may access information in CURES;The conditions under which a warrant, subpoena, or court order is required for a law enforcement agency to obtain information from CURES as part of a criminal investigation; andThe process by which information in CURES may be provided for educational, peer review, statistical, or research purposes. A copy of the final regulations is available here. Please view https://oag.ca.gov/bciis/regs for additional information. June 3, 2020: American Academy of Pediatrics posted news titled: “AAP urges insurers to extend telehealth payments during COVID-19 pandemic”. From the news: The AAP is urging insurance companies and Medicaid programs to continue paying for telehealth services during the COVID-19 pandemic.With expanded coverage and increased payment, telehealth has become a vital way for pediatricians to care for patients, but some carriers plan to stop coverage later this month.“Telemedicine has played a critical role in expanding access to care for many patients, including those who live in rural areas or in areas without access to reliable public transportation during the pandemic,” said AAP President Sara “Sally” H. Goza, M.D., FAAP. “Those needs will not end in June. Nor will the needs of children with complex medical conditions, for whom the ability to interact with pediatric subspecialists and pediatric surgeons to guide their follow-up care is critical for their long-term health.”A recent Kaiser Family Foundation study found that nearly 50% of families have skipped or put off health care during the pandemic. As the need for health care services builds, there likely will be a surge of patients seeking care. Telehealth will serve as a critical expansion of the pediatrician’s office to support this influx.“Even though states are starting to open up, families are still frightened to come out,” said Sandy L. Chung, M.D., FAAP, a pediatrician in Fairfax, Va., and president of the AAP Virginia Chapter. “In our area, the coverage for telehealth visits will expire for several of the insurance companies we work with, and we’re afraid this will lead to many families delaying health care even longer.” The AAP is calling for private insurance and Medicaid payments to continue for at least 90 days after the public health emergency declaration expires.“It is urgent that insurance companies recognize this need and continue the expansion of telemedicine policies that were established during this crisis, so all children can have access to the health care they need now,” Dr. Goza said. June 4, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Files Amicus Brief Challenging FDA’s Unnecessary Barriers to Abortion Medication in Light of COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra joined a multistate amicus brief supporting the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists challenge to restrictions imposed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Mifepristone, the medication abortion prescription drug. Currently, due to FDA restrictions, Mifepristone can only be dispensed by certified providers at a hospital, clinic, or medical office — and not via pharmacy or mail — requiring women to go in person for a prescription. In the brief, the attorneys general argue that these restrictions interfere unjustifiably with the states’ efforts to minimize transmission of the COVID-19 virus while providing essential healthcare.“As communities across the country — and HHS itself — work to promote telehealth to prevent the spread of coronavirus, women’s healthcare must not be excluded,” said Attorney General Becerra. “The FDA’s restrictive policy on Mifepristone targets women — and only women — forcing them to go in person to a doctor’s office to retrieve their prescription. During this unprecedented pandemic and stay-at-home orders, the FDA unnecessarily and irresponsibly puts women’s lives at risk. This is 2020, not 1920.”In the brief, the coalition argues that the FDA’s Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) designation impedes women’s access to the medication abortion prescription drug despite the fact that it has been proven safe and effective. Mifepristone has been approved by the FDA since 2000, and it remains the only drug approved in the United States for pregnancy termination. Since its approval, about three million women in the United States have used the medication to terminate a pregnancy. Indeed, according to the FDA, this medication “has been increasingly used as its efficacy and safety have become well-established by both research and experience.” However, under REMS, the FDA requires that: Healthcare providers must be registered with the drug manufacturer; Patients must sign a “Patient Agreement” form confirming that they received counseling on the risks associated with the medication; and Patients must be handed the medication at a clinic, medical office, or hospital under the supervision of a healthcare provider if the medication is prescribed for the purpose of terminating a pregnancy – yet the drug can be dispensed by mail in higher doses if prescribed for other purposes, such as ulcer relief. During this unprecedented crisis, it is essential that women across the country have access to critical healthcare services. Many states have already taken steps to increase telehealth care, at the federal government’s request. Yet, the current FDA REMS creates unnecessary barriers for women to access abortion care. In the brief, the coalition argues that these onerous and medically unnecessary requirements limit healthcare providers’ ability to assist their female patients, particularly during this global healthcare crisis. Furthermore, these requirements impose significant burdens on women in rural and medically underserved communities who would be required to travel long distances — sometimes up to 200 miles — for time-sensitive, in-person care. Forcing women to travel at a time when many states and the federal government are urging people to stay home to curb the spread of COVID-19 puts women across the country in harm’s way.In March, Attorney General Becerra led a multistate coalition in sending a letter to the FDA, asking them to remove REMS restrictions or waive enforcement of these requirements in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and nationwide stay-at-home orders.In filing the amicus brief, Attorney General Becerra joins the attorneys general of New York, Maryland, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia. A copy of the brief is available here. June 4, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Responds to Iowa Legislature Advancing Anti-Choice Constitutional Amendment”. From the press release: As thousands of Iowans march to demand the state take action to confront structural racism and entrenched white supremacy, Republican state legislators remain laser-focused on attacking reproductive freedom.Amid ongoing protests in support of the Movement for Black Lives and while more than 20,000 Iowans have been diagnosed with COVID-19, anti-choice politicians consumed by an extreme ideological agenda are trying to rush a vote on an extreme constitutional amendment to roll back access to abortion in the state. If implemented, the amendment would nullify a 2018 Iowa Supreme Court decision upholding the fundamental right to access abortion in Iowa.NARAL Pro-Choice America National Communications Director Kristin Ford released the following statement:“It’s appalling to see anti-choice Republicans in the state legislature exploiting this moment of national grieving and crisis to advance their extreme ideological agenda. Hundreds of Iowans have lost their lives to COVID-19 and thousands more are peacefully filling the streets to protest the violence, trauma, and racism Black people in the U.S. face every day. Right now our leaders should be doing everything in their power to overhaul systems that perpetuate racial disparities and to provide relief to communities still reeling from an unprecedented pandemic. Instead, these legislators are using women as political props as they attempt to eliminate the state’s constitutional right to abortion. Their actions are shameful. Now more than ever, NARAL Iowa members are committed to holding politicians accountable for failing to protect our fundamental freedoms — enough is enough.” June 5, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Leads Coalition Fighting for Abortion Access During Coronavirus Pandemic”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James has led a multistate coalition of 23 attorneys general in taking legal action against the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for increasing the risk that women nationwide will contract the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as they seek abortions in their state. In an amicus brief filed in support of the plaintiffs in American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists et al. v. FDA et al. in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland,Attorney General James led the coalition in supporting the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction to halt an FDA requirement that forces women to appear in person in a clinical setting to receive a drug known as Mifepristone for an early abortion or for miscarriage care. The coalition argues that the drug should be readily accessible via telehealth, so as to not potentially expose women to COVID-19 by requiring unnecessary travel.“For years, the Trump Administration has done everything in its power to control women’s bodies,” said Attorney General James. “As much of the country continues to see the spread of the coronavirus and many residents are asked to stay at home or reduce travel, the federal government should be doing everything in its power to ensure women can maintain control of their reproductive choices without endangering their health and safety. Control over one’s reproductive freedom should not be limited to those who are able to leave their homes as we battle the coronavirus. We are fighting the Trump Administration’s continued assault on women’s reproductive freedoms and will fight to ensure Mifepristone is accessible via telehealth so that no woman is forced to risk her health while exercising her constitutional right to access an abortion.”Since the widespread onset of COVID-19 across the United States in March, nearly 1.9 million Americans have contracted the disease, resulting in more than 108,000 deaths, including more than 375,000 infections in New York and more than 24,000 deaths in the state. In response, legislators, officials, and agencies across the nation have been instituting various emergency measures to slow the spread of the virus by limiting face-to-face contact and reducing in-person social gatherings, such as by closing schools and requiring all nonessential employees to work from home, as limiting interpersonal contact is central to the ability to control the spread of the virus.But the FDA’s current policy requiring patients to appear in person in a clinical setting to receive Mifepristone heightens the risk of contracting and transmitting COVID-19 for everyone involved — including patients and health care providers. Forcing women to travel at a time when many states and the federal government are urging people to stay home to curb the spread of COVID-19 is shortsighted — not only putting women and their close contacts across the country in harm’s way, but also the public health more generally. Further, this policy undermines different states’ ability to effectively manage the pandemic.In the brief, Attorney General James and the coalition specifically argue that “many women will need to travel long distances in order to reach a clinic that dispenses” Mifepristone — sometimes up to 200 miles — “especially if they reside in rural and medically underserved locations.” Additionally, those women in more compact, urban cities may not have the option to practice social distancing outside the home, therefore increasing the likelihood of coming into contact with an individual who has contracted COVID-19. But “y using measures like telehealth to reduce unnecessary person-to-person contacts, can decrease their infection rate, as required to safely commence reopening even as the pandemic continues.” In fact, the coalition continues, “telehealth should be used wherever possible — even as phased reopening of the States occur — because it ‘maximize the number of capable health care workers’ providing necessary medical treatment, while protecting health care staff,” and “the counseling required prior to a medication abortion is routinely provided through telehealth in order to reduce in-clinic interactions.”Even another division of HHS and one of the FDA’s sister agencies — the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — has advocated for telehealth, stating, “everaging telemedicine whenever possible is the best way to protect patients and staff from COVID-19.” The coalition goes on to highlight that their states have already taken numerous steps to expand the use of telehealth during the current public health crisis, including the suspension “of existing statutes and regulations that limit the use of telehealth in order to allow the delivery of regulated services through telehealth to additional patient populations, including especially vulnerable ones. These suspension orders expand the types of practitioners who can use telehealth, the settings in which it can be provided, the modalities that can be used to deliver telehealth services, and the circumstances under which telehealth can be initiated.” Further, many states have also suspended existing rules that prohibit telehealth in the absence of an existing patient-provider relationship so that patients can receive care from new providers.The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has likewise championed telehealth as an effective substitute for in-clinic dispensing of Mifepristone that can improve patient safety and outcomes during the COVID-19 public health crisis. And even before the pandemic, in 2018, the American Medical Association passed a resolution urging the FDA to lift the requirement because it “impedes the provision of” Mifepristone and has no “demonstrated or even reasonably likely advantage.” … June 5, 2020: American college of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a press release titled: “ACOG Discourages the Administration from Severing ties with the World Health Organization”. From the press release: ACOG is committed to improving and protecting the health of women around the world. We are concerned about the recent announcement that the President plans to terminate the United States’s relationship with the World Health Organization (WHO). We encourage the Administration to position the United States as a steadfast leader in global health, especially as we confront the ongoing global health crisis of COVID-19.It is clear that a unified response from around the world is required for the containment and eradication of COVID-19, thus saving millions of lives. To that end, severing our relationship with the WHO at this time is reckless and would represent a large step backward in the fight to contain COVID-19 worldwide. Our efforts to support vaccine development; protect maternal and child health gains; and to work with other countries to improve containment, testing, and treatment of COVID-19 should be done in solidarity with the global health community. There are no borders to this virus, and the United States has a moral imperative to help support and contribute to the efforts to reduce the harm from COVID-19 around the world and, in so doing, to protect the lives of those here in America. We strongly urge the Administration to participate constructively in the WHO and in the effort to find worldwide solutions to the grave global pandemic. June 5, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a press release titled: “Fifteen Medical Organizations, 22 States, and the District of Columbia File Briefs in Support of ACOG’s Challenge to FDA Restrictions During the COVID-19 Pandemic”. From the press release: On Wednesday, two coalitions filed briefs in support of a suit filed by ACOG petitioning a federal court to lift requirements for in-person dispensing of mifepristone during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although mifepristone, which is used in miscarriage management and first trimester pregnancy termination, has been proven to be safe and effective when prescribed through telemedicine for patients to receive by mail and take at home, it is subject to an FDA requirement to be dispensed in-person at a hospital, clinic, or medical office. This requirement hinders access to this medical treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic and places both patients and medical staff at risk of unnecessary exposure during the pandemic.In a brief filed by a coalition of fifteen medical organizations (including, among others, the American Medical Association, American Academy of Family Physicians, and the American Academy of Pediatrics), the groups argued that FDA’s requirements for in-person dispensing are not only medically unnecessary, but do not allow clinicians to exercise their independent medical judgement. This lack of physician and clinician discretion harms patients and clinicians during the current public health emergency. As the brief states: “AMA policy provides that physicians individually and collectively share the obligation to ensure that the care patients receive is “safe, effective, patient centered, timely, efficient, and equitable.” Yet the REMS on mifepristone in the context of abortion and miscarriage care prevent physicians from carryingout this obligation. Rather than evaluating the concerns of each patient individually, clinicians are forced to schedule an in-person visit even when the clinician has determined that such a visit would be detrimental to the patient’s health and well-being. Because of SARS-CoV- 2, medically unnecessary in-person visits are particularly likely to negatively impact patients’ health and well-being.”Of particular concern, these negative impacts fall hardest on patients of color who as a result of systemic inequities already at higher risk of infection, hospitalization, and death from COVID-19, as well as by the nation’s maternal mortality crisis. The brief highlights for the court how the logistical burdens and risks inherent in the required travel to pick up these prescriptions fall inequitably on communities already facing disproportionate harm from the pandemic. “Due to lack of transportation, insufficient funds, and lack of childcare, low-income patients and patients of color are particularly likely to be exposed to unnecessary risks from the in-person dispensing requirement during the pandemic. Clinicians’ inability to exercise their judgment when providing miscarriage and abortion care thus particularly harms these populations.”In a brief filed by Attorneys General representing twenty-two states and the District of Columbia, the states argued that FDA’s restrictions erode states’ efforts to minimize transmission of COVID-19 through social distancing, while allowing access to essential reproductive health care. The brief states that using telehealth whenever medically appropriate helps limit social interaction which is “critical to maintaining health and safety and preventing a surge in infection rates… it is important for residents to avoid unnecessary travel and in-person contacts.” June 10, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a press release titled: “ACOG Urges Payers to Make Expanded COVID-19 Telehealth Policies Permanent”. From the press release: Eva Chalas, MD, FACOG, FACS, president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), released the following statement urging all health insurance carriers to continue broad coverage and payment parity of telehealth services through the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond:“As health care organizations across the country have quickly implemented changes to help meet the needs of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, increasing the availability of covered telehealth services is one positive change that should be made permanent.“ACOG applauds the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for its quick response to the need for telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic and for its recommendations that states lift restrictive policies, as these actions have improved patients’ access to telehealth and other remote management services. We also applaud national health plans that voluntarily made changes to policies, including coverage and payment parity of audio-only visits and remote patient monitoring. “ACOG now calls on all payers to maintain expanded telehealth coverage policies through 2020 and in all the plan years to come. We urge all payers to build upon recent successes by ensuring that patients can regularly access covered telehealth services.“The coverage and payment policies put in place during the COVID-19 pandemic have expanded access to evidence-based telehealth services and improved the ability of obstetrician–gynecologists to provide quality, patient-centered care. While states are in various stages of reopening, contracting COVID-19 remains a very real threat. Therefore, it is critical that insurance coverage policies allow patients to seek care in the safest possible way, including through telehealth and other remote services, and that payers inform enrollees about their telehealth coverage options. “ACOG requests that payers ensure coverage and payment parity for audio-only and audio-video visits so that patients across all communities can benefit from telehealth. Payers must also refrain from adding additional barriers that would limit patients’ ability to receive telehealth services from their typical in-network physician. “Additionally, the ability to receive durable medical equipment benefits by prescription should be expanded so that all patients can have the at-home equipment they need for remote prenatal and postpartum visits.“Research has shown the benefits of telehealth in obstetric and gynecologic care. In many cases, these visits are deemed to be as effective as, or without statistically significant differences in outcomes from, in-person visits. For certain conditions, telehealth helps address barriers to access, reduces the number of unscheduled office visits, decreases ER visits and readmissions to the hospital, and improves rates of adherence to treatment guidelines. Patients often prefer telehealth visits in place of some in-person visits.“Telehealth visits with in-network health care practitioners should be considered a standard benefit for all patients in perpetuity. We must maintain the progress we have made during this public health crisis and make telehealth more widely available, not just in times of national emergency.” June 11, 2020: WBEZ posted an article titled: “Undocumented, Low-Income Seniors in Illinois Can Soon Get Publicly Funded Health Coverage”. It was written by Odette Yousef. From the article: …As COVID-19 disproportionately harms communities of color in Illinois, the state has taken steps to increase access to testing and health care. On Wednesday, Gov. JB Pritzker put the ink on the latest of those, by signing the Fiscal Year 2021 budget that extends Medicaid-like health insurance coverage to low-income senior residents, regardless of immigration status. This makes Illinois the first state in the country to expand publicly funded health care coverage to undocumented seniors and seniors who have held green cards for less than five years, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Advocates of the measure say they expect it will impact up to 1,000 Illinois residents.“We’re thankful to the administration for that and are looking forward to aggressively working to figure out how we can quickly cover everyone else,” said Graciela Guzman, director at the Healthy Illinois Campaign, a coalition that seeks to extend health insurance access to all residents of the state. Guzman said her organization believes it will cost the state between $1.5 and $2.6 million to cover seniors in Fiscal Year 2021, which begins July 1.Guzman said her group and ally organizations initially pushed to extend access to state-funded health insurance to all adult Illinois residents below the federal poverty level, regardless of immigration status. She estimated this would capture 93,000 people, but said the state’s fiscal constraints forced proponents to winnow down the focus this year to a sliver of that group: just those aged 65 and older.“To even get our foot in the door on this was such a major win for us,” said Andrea Kovach, an attorney specializing in health care at the Shriver Center on Poverty Law. “And we have every intention of taking that foothold in the door and kicking it wide open for everyone.”According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, other states have considered expanding state-funded Medicaid-like coverage to seniors, though Illinois is the first to move forward. In 2019, California extended its public health eligibility to undocumented adults between 19 and 26 years of age and plans to expand it further to undocumented seniors in 2022… June 12, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Trump Administration Releases Final Rule Encouraging Health Care Discrimination Against LGBTQ+ People, Immigrants, Women, and More”. From the press release: Today, amid a global pandemic, and on the fourth anniversary of the mass shooting at Pulse nightclub, the Trump administration released a final rule intended to interpret the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) non-discrimination provision (Section 1557) in a way that scales back protections for transgender people, immigrants, and people who have had abortions — only compounding discrimination for those living at the intersections of these identities.Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“Regardless of your sexual orientation or gender identity, where you’re from, the language you speak, or whether you’ve had an abortion — every person deserves to access health care free from judgment and discrimination. But it seems that neither a global pandemic, nor national uprisings over racist violence, nor Pride month will stop the Trump administration from doing everything in its power to discriminate, divide, and reduce access to health care. This cruel and discriminatory rule will only make it harder for transgender people, immigrants, and people seeking sexual and reproductive services to get care, and could even prevent people from getting the care they need entirely. One in three transgender people have already faced discrimination with a health care provider, a rate even higher for people of color. We must confront and reduce the continued discrimination and systemic racism, transphobia, and homophobia that are so deeply rooted in our health care system. As we face the dual public health crises of the COVID-19 pandemic and systemic racism and violence, Planned Parenthood will continue fighting to break down the barriers keeping people from getting the health care they need.”Section 1557, the Health Care Rights Law, was a historic step toward achieving health equity for communities nationwide that have historically faced discrimination in access to health care services and coverage. Today’s rule strips that promise for people who already face discrimination in health care, including women, LGBTQ+ people, people who have had or will have abortions, those whose primary language is not English, and those at the intersections of these identities.The legal protections and coverage gained from the ACA have played a critical role in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, as it protects people who get the virus from losing health coverage, facing higher premiums, or paying higher out-of-pocket costs. The ACA has substantially reduced the rate of uninsured in communities of color, important now more than ever as COVID-19 is disproportionately upending the health and economic stability of the Black and Latinx communities.Despite that, the Trump administration has advanced policy after policy that has damaged the nation’s public health infrastructure and undermined health care rights and access. The administration has: Refused to allow people to sign up for ACA coverage during the COVID-19 pandemic;Supported a lawsuit that would repeal the ACA entirely, despite the global pandemic;Pushed for Medicaid work requirements, proven to kick tens of thousands of people off their health care. Women, particularly women of color, are significantly more likely to lose coverage as a result of these work requirements;Issued and continued to defend up to the Supreme Court rules that would allow employers to deny birth control coverage to their employees;Tried to block people from getting care at Planned Parenthood health centers;Finalized a rule that removes protections for sexual assault survivors on campus;Deployed military troops in Washington, D.C., and around the country, and encouraged violence against protesters. June 12, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Slams Rollback of Section 1557 Protections: Discrimination Has No Place in Our Public Health System”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today issued the following statement in response to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) decision to finalize its regulation, “Nondiscrimination in Health and Health Education Programs or Activities” (Section 1557 Rule). Section 1557 is an anti-discrimination law that prohibits discrimination in healthcare based on gender, race, ethnicity, sex, age, or disability. HHS’s changes to this rule would seriously undermine the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) critical anti-discrimination protections, hurt women and LGBTQ individuals, and come at a time when they are most needed to help address the COVID-19 pandemic.“In the midst of a pandemic, the Trump Administration chooses to make it more difficult for Americans to access lifesaving healthcare by weakening anti-discrimination provisions that protect equal access to care,” said Attorney General Becerra. “While HHS may be content to abandon its mission of protecting public health, California is not. Allowing discrimination against LGBTQ individuals, women and others goes against our public health goals and our values as a nation. We will do whatever is necessary to stand up for the Americans who would disproportionately bear the brunt of this foolish policy.” June 12, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Trump administration reverses health protections for transgender people”. From the article: The Trump administration has finalized a regulation rolling back Obama-era protections for transgender Americans against sex discrimination in health care.According to the new version of the policy, the Department of Health and Human Services will be “returning to the government’s interpretation of sex discrimination according to the plain meaning of the word ‘sex’ as male or female and as determined by biology”.The Obama regulation defined gender as a person’s internal sense of being male, female, neither or a combination.The policy shift, long sought by Donald Trump’s religious and socially conservative supporters, would allow healthcare providers and insurance companies that receive federal funding to refuse to provide or cover transition-related care for trans Americans.Several organizations have announced they will challenge the change. The Human Rights Campaign announced it would file a lawsuit. The ACLU has also said it would sue to overturn the Trump rule.Under the Obama-era federal rule, a hospital could be required to perform gender-transition procedures such as hysterectomies if the facility provided that kind of treatment for other medical conditions. The rule was meant to carry out the anti-discrimination section of the Affordable Care Act, which bars sex discrimination in healthcare but does not use the term “gender identity”.Roger Severino, head of the health department unit that enforces civil rights laws, has said trans people continue to be protected by other statutes that bar discrimination in healthcare on account of race, color, national origin, age, disability and other factors.But LGBTQ+ groups have long argued protections are needed for people seeking gender confirmation treatment, and for trans people who need medical care for common conditions such as diabetes or heart problems.Women’s groups say the new regulations also undermine access to abortion, which is a legal medical procedure.For the administration, it is the latest in a series of steps to revoke newly won protections for LGBTQ+ people in areas ranging from the military to housing and education.The administration also has moved to restrict military service by trans men and women, proposed allowing certain homeless shelters to take gender identity into account in offering someone a bed for the night, and concluded in a 2017 justice department memo that federal civil rights law does not protect trans people from discrimination at work. June 12, 2020: Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent – Vermont) tweeted: “It is outrageous that Trump, in the middle of a pandemic, is working to prevent LGBTQ+ Americans from getting health care they need. Discrimination of any kind has no place in our society. We must defeat Trump, guarantee health care as a right and protect all LGBTQ+ Americans.” June 12, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Assault on the Health of LGBTQ Women & Vulnerable Populations”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi released the following statement on the finalized Health and Human Services Department rule rolling back Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act to weaken anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ Americans, women, communities of color and other vulnerable populations in health care:“The Trump Administration’s latest shameful rule is a shocking attack on the health and well-being of countless vulnerable communities, including women, LGBTQ individuals and people of color, at a time when access to quality health care is more important than ever. Undermining the Affordable Care Act’s anti-discrimination protections is a direct assault on basic health care services, from comprehensive reproductive care for women and families to life-saving care for communities of color, seniors, the disabled and the LGBTQ community. It is particularly disgraceful that the Trump Administration issued this new rule during LGBTQ Pride Month and on the day marking four years since the tragic Pulse Nightclub shooting.“Our nation is in the midst of a health and economic crisis of staggering proportions. Instead of working to ensure that every American, regardless of who they are or who they love, has access to the care they need to stay healthy and safe, the Administration is rolling back life-saving protections for some of the most vulnerable communities and enshrining discrimination into vital federal guidelines. Religious freedom is no justification for hatred or bigotry, and every American has the right to seek and recieve care without intimidation or fear. The Administration must immediately abandon this outrageous decision and give all Americans the reassurance that they will never be denied the health care they or their families need.“House Democrats will continue to hold this Administration accountable for their dangerous assault on our fundamental values of equality and justice, and we will never stop fighting to ensure all Americans are treated with the respect and dignity they deserve.” June 12, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Condems Trump Administration’s Efforts to Roll Back Protections Against Discrimination in the Affordable Care Act”. From the press release: Today the Department of Health and Human Services gutted protections against healthcare discrimination provided by Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act.NARAL Pro-Choice America’s Chief Research and Communications Officer Adrienne Kimmell released the following statement in response:“It is unconscionable that this administration is attempting to strip away protections against healthcare discrimination for LGBTQ people, women, persons with disabilities, immigrants and non-native English speakers, and communities of color in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic. Trump and his allies never fail to show that their extreme ideology comes before people’s health, safety, and lives. This rule will hurt Americans and fall hardest on people who already face barriers to accessing healthcare. The cruelty of this administration knows no bounds.”Discrimination has no place in healthcare and it should never be allowed to determine the care a patient receives. This rule, finalized today by HHS, undermines protections for individuals and could give the green light for healthcare providers and insurance companies to discriminate against LGBTQ+ people, people who have sought or may in the future seek abortion care, people whose first language is not English, immigrants, people of color, and people with disabilities.This administration continues to prioritize political gain over the wellbeing of Americans, even in the midst of a public health emergency. This ideologically-motivated rule is dangerous and runs counter to the Affordable Care Act’s promise of expanding healthcare coverage, free from discrimination. June 15, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “U.S. Supreme Court’s LGBTQ Anti-Discrimination Ruling Comes Only Days After Federal Rule Strips Protections”. From the press release: Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark civil rights decision affirming that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects LGBTQ people from employment discrimination. This powerful ruling comes only four days after the Trump administration took a shameful and harmful step in the opposite direction – issuing a federal rule that restricts the rights of LGBTQ people to access health care services.In Bostock v. Clayton County, the Court affirmed that the Civil Rights Act’s prohibition on discrimination because of sex is both “straightforward” and “sweeping” and includes protections for LGBTQ people.In stark contrast, the rule issued by the Trump administration on June 12 weakens enforcement of key anti-discrimination protections advanced under the Affordable Care Act’s Health Care Rights Law (Section 1557), which specifically prohibits discrimination based on race, national origin, age, disability or sex, in health programs or in activities that recieve federal funding. The new rule defines discrimination on the bases of sex to eliminate explicit protections relating to termination of pregnancy, sex stereotyping, and gender identity.It is shamful that this cruel rule attempts to roll back protections against sex discrimination in health care. Health care is a human right and everyone deserves access to health care free from discrimination.Nancy Northup, President and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights June 15, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris Statement on Supreme Court Decision that Federal Civil Rights Law Protects LGBTQ Employees”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Monday released the following statement in response to the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court that federal non-discrimination law protects LGBTQ workers.“The Supreme Court’s ruling today sent a clear message to all Americans: our federal civil rights law protects LGBTQ workers and requires that they be treated with the dignity and respect every person deserves. The Court held that the Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Today’s decision will go a long way toward ensuring that LGBTQ people are protected in other critical areas, including education, health care, and housing.“Our work is far from over, but as we celebrate Pride Month, today’s ruling is a step in the right direction in the fight for full equality for the LGBTQ community in all of its diversity, and in every facet of life.” June 15, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Supreme Court Ruling on Anti-LGBTQ Workplace Discrimination”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi released this statement on the Supreme Cout’s 6-3 decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, ruling that federal employment non-discrimination laws protect all LGBTQ employees:“Today, the Supreme Court has unequivically affirmed that all Americans, regardless of who you are or whom you love, are protected from discrimination in the workplace under federal law. This momentous decision is a victory for the LGBTQ community, for our democracy and for our fundamental values of equality and justice for all.“Yet, the Trump Administration continues to advance an outrageous, hateful anti-LGBTQ agenda that risks the health and well-being of countless LGBTQ Americans and their families. And in too many places, LGBTQ individuals face continued persecution, harassment and violence, particularly trans women of color who face a disproportionately high rate of homelessness, HIV, sexual assault and murder. To finally and fully end LGBTQ discrimination, and not just in the workplace, but in every place, last year House Democrats passed the landmark Equality Act. Now, Leader McConnell must end his partisan obstruction and allow the Senate to vote on this critical legislation.“As we mark LGBTQ Pride Month and celebrate this great legal victory for freedom and equality, we take great pride in how far we’ve come. Now, we must rededicate ourselves to continue marching toward progress to combat the forces of hatred and bigotry that still undermine our communities and our nation. We will not rest until we have secured a brighter, more just and equal future for the LGBTQ community and all Americans.” June 15, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Lauds Supreme Court Decision Protecting LGBTQ+ Employees from Discrimination”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today applauded the United States Supreme Court for ruling, in a 6-3 decision, that employers cannot fire LGBTQ+ employees based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. The court ruled that employment discrimination against members of the LGBTQ+ population violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court’s decision resolved three cases considered together: Altitude Express v. Zarda; Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia; and R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes v. EEOC. Last summer, Attorney General James co-led a coalition of 22 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief with the Supreme Court arguing that federal anti-discrimination laws protect LGBTQ+ individuals in the workplace.“Whom you love or how you identify should have no impact on your employment,” said Attorney General James. “Today’s decision is a victory for millions of individuals who now can rest assured that they will not be fired or disciplined simply for being themselves. While we should celebrate this victory, the struggle is not over, so we will continue to fight for equal rights in every aspect of life for LGBTQ+ New Yorkers and Americans nationwide because no one should ever be singled out or discriminated against in this country — not for their race, their ethnicity, their religion, their gender identity, their sexual orientation, or any other reason.”In the amicus brief filed last year, Attorney General James and the coalition argued that the prohibition on discrimination based on sex in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination based on sexual orientation, sex stereotyping, or gender identity. June 15, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Responds to Iowa Legislature Passing Extreme Restrictions on Abortion Access”. From the press release: Late Saturday night the Iowa legislature surreptitiously passed an extreme measure that will force women to undergo a mandatory and medically unnecessary 24-hour delay prior to receiving abortion care.In a telling sign of misplaced priorities, Republicans in the Iowa House rushed to file the waiting period amendment prior to adjourning the legislative session early Sunday morning, prompting state Rep. Beth Wessel-Kroeschell to condemn her colleagues for “exploiting this moment of national pandemic to advance an ideological agenda that is out of touch with Iowans.”NARAL Pro-Choice America National Communications Director Kristin Ford released the following statement:“While the entire country grapples with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and courageous Iowans call for racial justice in the midst of a national reckoning about entrenched white supremacy, the GOP in the Iowa statehouse chose to instead focus on blocking access to abortion care. Forced waiting periods simply shame women and create more roadblocks to essential care people need. They are unnecessary and politically motivated restrictions, part of a broader agenda of control.In the midst of an ongoing public health crisis, this measure will disproportionately hurt people with low incomes who are less likely to have the resources to overcome these barriers to accessing abortion care, such as finding transportation, taking time off of work to travel, and securing child care. This measure is the farthest thing from what Iowans need right now, and Republicans in the legislature should be ashamed of themselves.” June 16, 2020: EMILY’s List posted a statement titled: “EMILY’s List Statement on Rep. Mike Garcia Cosponsoring Anti-Choice Legislation”. From the statement: Today, Rep. Mike Garcia cosponsored the anti-choice “LIfe at Conception Act”. Stephanie Schriock, president of EMILY’s List, the nation’s largest resource for women in politics, released the following statement:“Just one month into his term in office, Congressman Garcia has chosen to cosponsor his first piece of dangerous legislation aiming to criminalize abortion and strip women of their fundamental reproductive freedom. Mike has made it clear that he will blindly support the current administration’s dangerous agenda, regardless of what it costs his constituents. Californians deserve better than an inexperienced legislator who lacks the ability to fight for their interests, and EMILY’s List looks forward to helping Christy Smith defeat him in November.” June 16, 2020: Representative Ayanna Pressley (Democrat – Massachusetts) posted a press release on her official website titled: “Rep. Pressley, Colleagues Lead More than 100 Members of Congress in Urging FDA to Ease Restrictions on Medication Abortion Drug”. From the press release: While the Trump administration has encouraged the use of telemedicine across the health care industry during the pandemic, it has refused to relax rules around medication abortion drugs, a move that experts warn may put both patients and providers at greater risk of contracting the coronavirus.Today, Congresswomen Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), Chair of the Pro-Choice Caucus Abortion Rights & Access Task Force, Diana DeGette (D-CO), Barbara Lee (D-CA), and Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) led a group of 109 lawmakers in urging the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ease the dispensing restrictions on mifepristone – the first of two medications used in combination to safely and effectively induce an early abortion or treat an early miscarriage. While the pill has been used in the U.S. for more than 20 years, FDA has long subjected mifepristone, when used for early pregnancy termination, to a set of highly restrictive requirements, known as Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS). These requirements make it unnecessarily difficult for patients to access care.One of those policies – the “in-person dispensing requirement” – requires patients to make a potentially unnecessary trip to a hospital, clinic, or medical office just to pick up the mifepristone pill. Out of more than 20,000 FDA-approved drugs, mifepristone is the only drug that FDA requires to be dispensed only in clinical settings while permitting patients to self-administer it at home.“The REMS in its current form creates an illogical situation in which a patient can meet with her doctor by telehealth from the safety of her home, take the pills at home, safely have her abortion at home, and follow up with her doctor after the abortion by telehealth again, but must first travel in the midst of a global pandemic just to pick up the pills from a registered facility or provider,” the lawmakers wrote to Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Stephen Hahn. “For many patients, this requirement can mean taking public transportation, riding in someone else’s car, or traveling hundreds of miles away from home to another county or state — significantly increasing their risk of exposure to the virus. It also means that some providers and clinic staff are forced to have unnecessary in-person interactions that increase their own exposure risks.”The United Kingdom has already issued guidance authorizing physicians to mail mifepristone to pregnant patients during the pandemic following a telephone or video consultation, and FDA itself has already suspended enforcement of other types of REMS restrictions necessitating in-person visits, noting that “patients may need to avoid public places and patients suspected of having COVID-19 may be self-isolating and/or subject to quarantine.”The lawmakers are urging FDA to take immediate action to allow certified prescribers to mail mifepristone to patients during the pandemic… June 18, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Lawsuit Asks FDA to Remove Medically Unnecessary Barriers to Reproductive Health Care During COVID-19”. From the press release: Tomorrow (June 19), a federal court in Maryland will hear arguments in a lawsuit asking the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to temporarily ease restrictions on on the medication mifepristone, in order to ensure patients can safely access abortion and miscarriage care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The suit was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on behalf of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective, and other leading medical organizations and reproductive health, rights, and justice advocates.Mifepristone is one of two medications used in a medication abortion and managing an early miscarriage. Research has shown that mifepristone is safe and effective when prescribed through telehealth and self-administered at home; however, the FDA’s Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) restrictions unnecessarily require patients to get mifepristone directly from a doctor’s office, hospital, or other health center — rather than from a pharmacy or mail-order as they would for other equally safe medications.Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, Acting President, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“During a public health crisis, we should be doing everything we can to make sexual and reproductive health care more accessible, not less — especially for Black people, Indigenous people, and other people of color who have long faced systemic racism and are now being disproportionately affected by COVID-19. While Planned Parenthood and other providers have worked to ensure patients can still access essential, time-sensitive care during the pandemic — while minimizing the risk of COVID-19 exposure for both patients and health center staff — the FDA’s restrictions on mifepristone undermine these efforts for patients seeking abortion and miscarriage care.“At odds with expert medical consensus, these restrictions are just another example of how reproductive health care, especially abortion, is treated differently than other kinds of health care in ways that only put patients’ health and lives at risk. It is critical that the FDA ease the restrictions around mifepristone access during this pandemic so patients can get the care they need as safely as possible.”Out of 20,000 prescription medications regulated by the FDA, mifepristone is the only one for home use currently required to be dispensed in person. Requiring patients to travel to pick up the medication significantly increases the risk of COVID-19 exposure for patients, providers, and health center staff.In response to the pandemic, federal agencies have encouraged the use of telehealth and allowed providers to forgo unnecessary in-person visits in order to mitigate the risk of COVID-19 exposure, with the exception of mifepristone. Mifepristone is safe, effective, and has been used by more than four million people since the FDA approved it twenty years ago. Leading medical associations have maintained that the FDA’s REMS restrictions on the distribution of mifepristone are not based on evidence and do not benefit patients.PPFA joined the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), and other leading health care organizations in signing on to an amicus brief in support of the lawsuit. The brief highlights how removing the in-person requirement on mifepristone during the COVID-19 pandemic would especially benefit patients with low-incomes and patients of color, who already face heightened barriers to care.Planned Parenthood is proud to offer medication abortion via site-to-site telehealth in 18 states. As the nation’s leading sexual and reproductive health care provider, Planned Parenthood is committed to making sure all patients receive the high-quality health care they need, when they need it — including safe, legal abortion. By providing medication abortion safely and effectively via telehealth, we can keep patients, providers, and health center staff safer during the pandemic and expand access to abortion for people, no matter where they live. June 18, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on Supreme Court Ruling on DACA”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement on the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that the Trump Administration acted capriciously and illegally in its effort to terminate the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) initiative:“Eight years ago, our nation took a momentous step to advance equality and opportunity in America when President Obama launched the DACA initiative, empowering courageous young Dreamers to come out of the shadows and pursue their American Dream. Our Dreamers are the pride and the constant reinvigoration of our nation.“Today is a joyous and proud day for our country, as the Supreme Court has rejected the Trump Administration’s illegal, immoral assault on young immigrants who make America more American, which the Court rightfully found to be ‘arbitrary and capricious.’ The Court’s decision upholds our values, the law and the will of the American people. Dreamers have the overwhelming support of the public, with more than three out of four voters saying Dreamers should be allowed to stay – including more than two-thirds of Republicans.“Our Dreamers need and deserve real, permanent action by the Congress to ensure that they can continue to bless, enrich and strengthen our nation. The House will continue to be relentless in demanding that the Senate take up H.R. 6, the American Dream and Promise Act, to provide a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers and TPS and DED recipients.“House Democrats will always work to fix our broken immigration system and to fight for our Dreamers, to ensure that Americn remains a nation of hope, freedom, and opportunity for all. June 18, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James’ Statement on DACA Victory”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today released the following statement after the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Trump Administration’s attempts to cancel the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program violated the Administrative Procedure Act. Attorney General James and California Attorney General Becerra led a coalition arguing the case before the Supreme Court in November.“Today’s decision reaffirms that there is no question that home is here for more than 700,000 Dreamers across the country,” said Attorney General James. “The Supreme Court’s decision today sets aside an inhumane injustice by the Trump Administration and permits young people who go to school here, who work here, who pay taxes here, who raise families here, and who are vital members of our communities to continue to be able to live in their homes without fear of arrest or deportation. America is a country of immigrants; our culture made richer by their contributions and our economy made more prosperous because of their work. I am proud to have co-led the fight to protect this critical program and the more than 700,000 DACA recipients across the country, and more than 150,000 right here in New York. To our Dreamers, know that you are valued, that you are loved, and that we will always fight to protect you. Si se puede!“I want to thank Attorney General Becerra, the numerous additional state attorneys general, and all the other groups who fought by our side to tirelessly protect DACA.”The case was heard over the consolidated three cases of Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, Trump v. NAACP, and McAleenan v. Vidal. June 18, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris Applauds Supreme Court Decision Preserving DACA Program”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Thursday released the following statement after the U.S. Supreme Court blocked the Trump Administration’s decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. President Trump terminated the DACA program on September 5, 2017, throwing the lives of over 600,000 DREAMers into chaos.“DACA has allowed young immigrants who were brought here by their parents to live and work in this country without fear that they would be deported. Dreamers are part of our communities. They are our classmates, our work colleagues, our role models, and our friends and neighbors.“The administration’s decision to break our promise to these young people was cruel and inhumane. Since day one of his administration, this president has repeatedly attacked immigrant communities and used them as political bargaining chips instead of treating them like human beings. This administration has, time and time again, used anti-immigrant sentiment to drum up fear. They have shamelessly pushed for a border wall, erected barriers to citizenship, and restricted due process for those seeking refuge in our country. This is all part of a reckless and cruel push to remake the demographics of our country using an anti-immigrant agenda.“Today’s ruling was important, but it is not a lasting solution. The House of Representatives has put forth strong legislation, the American Dream and Promise Act, which the Senate should vote on today. Every day that passes without protections for DACA recipients set forth in our laws, is another day that these young people must live in fear of being taken away from their families and communities. These young people should not continue to live in fear of one day being turned away from the only country they know as home.” June 18, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Applauds Landmark Supreme Court Decision on DACA”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today applauded the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision upholding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy. In November of 2019, the California Department of Justice led a coalition of 21 attorneys general in defense of DACA before the Supreme Court. In today’s decision, the Supreme Court held that the Trump Administration acted illegally when it attempted to end DACA. As a result, the policy remains in effect for now, protecting hundreds of thousands of Dreamers across the country.“Today, justice prevailed for every Dreamer who has worked hard to help build our country — our neighbors, teachers, doctors, and first responders. Today, America told the Dreamers that this is their home,” said Attorney General Becerra. “The highest court in our land saw through the Trump Administration’s illegal, baseless excuses. The Court agreed: If you work hard and play by the rules, you deserve a chance to get ahead. However, our fight doesn’t end here: Congress can permanently fix our broken immigration system and secure a pathway to citizenship. As a former lawmaker who launched bipartisan immigration talks on Capitol Hill, I know first-hand that bipartisan support can — and must — exist. It will take all of us working together to get it done.”“Justice and the rule of law won the day,” said University of California President Janet Napolitano, who helped create DACA when she served as Secretary of Homeland Security under President Barack Obama. “The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the University of California and the California Attorney General’s challenge against the Trump Administration’s capricious action is a victory for hundreds of thousands of young people who are making vital contributions to their families, schools, employers, and the nation.”Currently, there are nearly 650,000 Dreamers who arrived in this country as children and were granted DACA protections. Dreamers come from almost every country in the world, but many have never known any home other than the United States. They are among our nation’s newest college graduates, soldiers, nurses, teachers, and first responders who are boosting the country’s economy and communities every day. For instance, there are approximately 29,000 doctors, nurses, dentists, physician assistants, and other healthcare workers who have benefitted from DACA and contribute to protecting the health of our communities across the country. In California alone, it is estimated that there are more than 8,500 DACA recipients who work in the healthcare industry. DACA recipients and their households are estimated to contribute nearly $9 billion in federal, state, and local taxes each year. Currently, more than a quarter of DACA recipients reside in California… June 18, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Remarks at Press Event Unveiling the Moving Forward Act”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi joined House Democrats for a press event unveiling H.R. 2, the Moving Forward Act, House Democrats’ bold legislation to rebuild America’s infrastructure. Below are the Speaker’s remarks:…”When we won in 2018, we said to the American people that, For The People, we would lower the cost of health care by lowering the cost of prescription drugs and preserving the pre-existing condition, lower health care costs. Bigger paychecks by building the infrastructre of America in a green and resiliant way. And third, we would have cleaner government. Cleaner government by improving, enhancing the voice of small donors and the grass roots political process.Between now and the Fourth of July, we will bring the ACA enhancement legislation to the Floor on June 29th. Next week, we will bring the Justice in Policing Act, part of our democratization bill – initiatives to the Floor. And then, before we leave for the Fourth of July, we’ll bring this imporant legislation we have, the Moving Forward Act……And, again, we have something for the Postal Service, the infrastructure piece of the Postal Service. Connective tissue of our country, the Postal Service. Over 90 percent of the medicines received by veterans are through the Postal Service. The list goes on… June 19, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Breaking: Tennessee Legislature Passes Sweeping Abortion Ban in the Middle of the Night”. From the press release: In an egregious move, the Tennessee legislature, in the dead of night and using police force to keep the public out of the Capitol building, passed a sweeping abortion ban. The bill, one of the most restrictive abortion bills in the country, bans abortion at nearly every stage of pregnancy, including before most people even know they’re pregnant. The bill also includes more medically unnecessary abortion restrictions and anti-science measures like forcing doctors to give patients the misinformation that they can reverse their abortion. It also bans abortion if the reason for the abortion is gender, race, or potential fetal diagnosis. Similar bans throughout the country have been struck down as unconstitutional.Just last week, the Iowa legislature pulled a similar move — waiting until the wee hours of the night to pass a harmful bill against abortion access. It’s becoming the new shameful playbook for anti-abortion politicians who are willfully ignoring police violence and COVID-19, both public health crises disproportionately killing Black people. Following suit, Tennessee politicians have now passed a deeply racist and discriminatory bill which preys upon inaccurate and offensive stereotypes of communities of color, including Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, in order to ban abortion.Furthermore, this bill will do nothing to address actual discrimination against women and girls, and instead would open the door to interfere with doctor-patient relationships, open and honest doctor-patient conversations, and a patient’s right to make private medical decisions. Each and every one of these bans are part of a coordinated strategy to overturn Roe v. Wade and ban abortion outright.Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“It is a disgrace that in the face of a true public health crisis, Tennessee politicians wasted their time with this last-minute move to attack abortion access before closing up shop this session. We know that the goal of the politicians behind this bill is simple: a total ban on safe, legal abortion. Politicians know that this bill is blatantly unconstitutional. And they don’t care. Amidst protests against police violence and fear around COVID-19, politicians are doubling down — pushing racist stereotypes and ignoring public health to ban abortion. But we won’t let them. We’re going to do everything in our power to fight back and stand up for reproductive freedom.”Statement from Ashley Coffield, president & CEO, Planned Parenthood Tennessee and North Mississippi:“What happened tonight flies in the face of democracy. In the dead of night, Tennessee politicians hellbent on chipping away at abortion access blocked citizens from entering the state Capitol while they used this draconian abortion ban to pass the state budget. While Tennesseans are concerned about their health and safety during a pandemic, politicians used women’s lives as a bargaining chip to push their political agenda. This comes after weeks of Senate leadership making public statements that they would not take up this bill.“Gov. Lee already failed at trying to exploit the COVID-19 pandemic by banning abortion through an executive order, and now he is trying to use every restriction he can think of to strip patients of their reproductive rights. Tennessee is already grappling with a botched response by Gov. Lee to the pandemic, and the deep racial divide in the state that’s finally getting the attention it deserves. We’ll continue fighting these egregious attacks on our patients’ rights — no matter what.” June 19, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release on her official website titled: “Pelosi Statement on Amicus Brief in District Court ACA Special Enrollment Case”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after the House of Representatives filed an amicus brief in the District Court for D.C. in the case of City of Chicago v. Azar, supporting a challenge by the city regarding the failure of the Trump Administration to provide a special Affordable Care Act enrollment period in light of the coronavirus pandemic:“Across the country, communities are being devastated by the staggering impact of the coronavirus on Americans’ lives and livelihoods. As the threat from this crisis grows, the Administration has ignored the advice of health experts and the law, and refused to reopen Affordable Care Act enrollment to ensure millions of uninsured workers and their families get the affordable, lifesaving coverage they need.“Even in the midst of an unprecedented health crisis, the Trump Administration is doubling down on the outrageous Republican lawsuit to dismantle the entirety of the ACA, including essential protections for 130 million Americans with pre-existing conditions. As we combat this deadly virus and the Administration’s dangerous agenda, House Democrats will always fight to uphold the law and ensure the ACA can continue to provide its vital protections for all Americans.”The Amicus Brief can be found here. June 19, 2020: Planned Parenthood posted a press release titled: “Tennessee Abortion Ban Immediately Challenged in Court by Planned Parenthood, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and ACLU”. From the press release: A bill passed by the Tennessee legislature late last night banning abortion as early as six weeks of pregnancy was challenged in court today by the Center for Reproductive Rights, the American Civil Liberties Union, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee. The bill also prevents patients from obtaining an abortion depending on their reason for seeking the procedure, including the potential for a Down syndrome diagnosis or the sex or race of the fetus. These types of “reason bans” insinuate that pregnant people cannot be trusted to make their own medical decisions, and do nothing to address racism, sexism, ableism, or the serious health disparities faced by marginalized communities.If Governor Bill Lee signs the bill into law, it will take effect immediately. The emergency lawsuit being filed today asks the court to block the bill immediately.As the bill was being debated into the early hours of the morning, police officers kept the public out of the Capitol building and arrested some protestors. The passage of these abortion bans come just two months after Governor Lee attempted to ban abortion procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic by labeling abortion care as non-essential, despite opposition from leading national medical groups. That attempt was blocked in court in April after a lawsuit was filed by the same organizations filing today’s case.Statement from Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:“Enough is enough. It is abhorrent that Gov. Lee and politicians in Tennessee are exploiting the fear and uncertainty of a global pandemic to push their cruel anti-abortion agenda. This opportunistic attack on our reproductive rights, passed in the middle of the night under the cover of darkness, will disproportionately impact Black Tennesseans due to systemic oppression and concerted efforts to stifle their most basic rights and freedoms. We won’t stand for this, and we are going to do everything possible to fight back against this extremely harmful law.”Statement from Ashley Coffield, president & CEO, Planned Parenthood Tennessee and North Mississippi:“This is blatantly unconstitutional, and I am confident that once challenged in court, this legislation will go on the same legal trash heap as the abortion bans that have been struck down in other states. Gov. Lee is wasting valuable taxpayer dollars to defend this unconstitutional law, while COVID-19 cases are rising and our state grapples with our history of systemic racism. Gov. Lee’s failed priorities will fall heaviest on people who already face systemic barriers to care including people of color, people with low incomes, and women. We’ll continue fighting these egregious attacks on our patients’ rights — no matter what.”… June 22, 2020: Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Xavier Becerra: California Will Restrict State-Funded Travel to Idaho”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today announced that, effective July 1, 2020, California will restrict state-funded travel to Idaho as a result of two discriminatory bills signed into law in Idaho this year despite significant concerns raised by the Idaho Attorney General. The laws, House Bills 500 and 509, directly authorize discrimination against the transgender community. House Bill 500 repeals protections that enabled transgender students to compete on athletic teams consistent with their gender identity and House Bill 509 prohibits the amendment of birth certificates to be consistent with gender identity. The new restrictions on travel to Idaho are prescribed by law in California pursuant to Assembly Bill 1887 (AB 1887), which passed in 2016.“Where states legislate discrimination, California unambiguously speaks out,” said Attorney General Becerra. “The State of Idaho has taken drastic steps to undermine the rights of the transgender community, preventing people from playing sports in school or having documentation that reflects their identity. Let’s not beat around the bush: these laws are plain and simple discrimination. That’s why Idaho joins the list of AB 1887 discriminating states.” Both Idaho laws take active steps to enforce discriminatory regimes against transgender Idahoans. House Bills 500 and 509 were signed into law by Idaho Governor Brad Little on March 30, 2020. Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden had raised concerns about the bills’ compliance with equal protection and privacy laws. House Bill 500, among other things, runs contrary to existing guidance by the National Collegiate Athletic Association that encourages equal opportunity for transgender students to participate in athletics. Dubiously named the “Fairness in Women’s Sports Act,” House Bill 500 overrules existing local school policies in Idaho and directly works to ban transgender girls and women from school sports. Similarly, House Bill 509 not only authorizes but actually requires discrimination by prohibiting the amendment of birth certificates consistent with gender identity, a right previously recognized by an Idaho federal court on equal protection grounds. The laws are currently set to go into effect in Idaho on July 1, 2020.AB 1887, which took effect beginning in 2017, restricts state-funded travel to states with laws that authorize or require discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression. AB 1887’s restriction on using state funds for travel applies to California state agencies, departments, boards, authorities, and commissions, including an agency, department, board, authority, or commission of the University of California, the Board of Regents of the University of California, and the California State University. Each applicable agency is responsible for consulting the AB 1887 list created by the California Department of Justice to comply with the travel and funding restrictions imposed by the law. For additional information on AB 1887, including the list of states subject to its provisions, visit: www.oag.ca.gov/ab1887. June 22, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “Attorney General Becerra Files Brief Challenging the Trump Administration’s Refusal to Open a Special Enrollment Period on HealthCare.Gov in Response to COVID-19”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel today led a coalition of 14 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in support of the City of Chicago’s lawsuit challenging U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) for failing to create a special enrollment period in response to COVID-19 for individuals in the 38 states that rely on the federal exchange, HealthCare.Gov, for health insurance. Millions of Americans have lost their job as a result of the pandemic. In the amicus brief, the coalition argues that there is both a critical need for and a legal obligation to create a special enrollment period on HealthCare.Gov to help these individuals obtain healthcare coverage. The 12 states that run their own exchanges, including California, have already instituted a special enrollment period in response to COVID-19, and thousands of individuals have benefited as a result.“As this country faces dueling economic and public health crises, HHS’s refusal to open enrollment on HealthCare.Gov is absolutely unconscionable,” said Attorney General Becerra. “This is a time when we need our leaders to step up. Yet the Trump Administration continues to ignore the realities of millions of Americans who find themselves without healthcare in the midst of a devastating pandemic — once again putting its animosity towards the ACA over people. Enough is enough. It‘s time to protect our communities from having to choose between their health and bankruptcy. It’s time to fight for their right to healthcare coverage.”The Affordable Care Act (ACA) provides HHS Secretary Alex Azar with the authority to create special enrollment periods outside of the normal enrollment period for hardships or special situations that may warrant it. HHS’s failure to open a special enrollment period means uninsured individuals in the 38 states that rely on the federal exchange for coverage may choose to avoid medical care or face massive bills as a result of seeking treatment. As a result of COVID-19, over 40 million Americans have lost their jobs, but under current regulations, only those Americans who already had health insurance with their job are eligible for a special enrollment period. Those Americans who did not have healthcare coverage through their employer, but experienced job loss, are left with no options. On April 3, 2020, Attorney General Becerra and North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein led a coalition of 22 attorneys general in sending a letter to HHS urging it to reconsider its shortsighted decision to deny a special enrollment period on HealthCare.Gov during the pandemic. HHS has also ignored repeated calls from Congress, the healthcare industry, and others to open a special enrollment period.In the amicus brief, the coalition argues that HHS’s failure to open a special enrollment period violates the Administrative Procedure Act and is contrary to the text of the ACA and its regulations for opening special enrollment periods. The coalition urges the court to find HHS’s inaction unlawful and compel the agency to open a special enrollment period.Attorneys General Becerra and Nessel are joined by the attorneys general of Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, and the District of Columbia in filing the brief. A copy of the brief can be found here. June 22, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL Pro-Choice America Denounces Overnight Passage of Extreme Anti-Choice, Anti-Freedom Bill in Tennessee”. From the press release: Just after midnight, anti-choice Republicans in Tennessee passed a sweeping set of anti-choice provisions meant to chip away at and ultimately end the right to abortion. Among the bill’s provisions were bans on abortion at almost every stage of pregnancy, including before many women even know they’re pregnant, a forced ultrasound mandate; a requirement to interrogate women about why they’re ending a pregnancy; and criminalizing doctors who provide abortion care.Rather than showing real leadership to address entrenched white supremacy and police violence or tackle the state’s public health crisis with over 32,000 reported cases of COVID-19, anti-choice Republicans in the legislature and Governor Bill Lee remain laser-focused on their dangerous agenda to ban abortion and roll back reproductive freedom.Kristin Ford, National Communications Director at NARAL Pro-Choice America, released the following statement in response:“Tennessee legislators jammed through this extreme bill under cover of darkness, making their priorities crystal-clear: control and punish women and families, rather than help them thrive at a time when our nation is reckoning with pernicious racial injustice and a crippling pandemic. This measure is a panoply of the cruelest restrictions designed to push abortion care out of reach and end the right to abortion once and for all. It is an affront to the values of the 7 in 10 Americans who believe everyone should be able to make their own decisions about pregnancy, without politicians meddling to impose an ideological agenda.”Anti-choice, anti-freedom politicians who introduced this legislation specifically said their goal was to give the state “multiple shots” at ending Roe v. Wade. Their objectives are clear: control women and restrict their freedom to make their own decisions about pregnancy, effectively outlawing abortion and threatening doctors who provide abortion care with criminal punishment. June 24, 2020: Center for American Progress posted an article titled: “The Health Care Repeal Lawsuit Could Strip Coverage from 23 Million Americans”. It was written by Nicole Rapfogel and Emily Gee. From the article: Tomorrow, the Trump administration and 18 Republican governors and attorneys general will file their opening briefs with the Supreme Court in California v. Texas—the health care repeal lawsuit. The lawsuit, criticized across the political spectrum as a “badly flawed” case, threatens to upend the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and strip 23.3 million Americans of their health coverage, according to new CAP analysis—about 3 million (15 percent) more than was forecast before the coronavirus pandemic. The anti-ACA agitators who initiated the health care repeal lawsuit, backed by the Trump administration, continue their attempts to dismantle the ACA, including its coverage expansions and consumer protections, amid the pandemic, during which comprehensive health coverage has never been more important. Millions of Americans who have lost their jobs and job-based insurance due to the current economic crisis are relying on the insurance options made possible by the ACA to keep themselves and their families covered…...Impact of the coronavirus pandemic on coverageAs the Trump administration and 18 Republican state leaders double down on their push to strip millions of their health coverage and encourage predatory insurance practices, a pandemic that has killed nearly 120,000 Americans and infected over 2.2 million continues to sweep the nation.Since the impact of the coronavirus pandemic began to unfold in mid-March, more than 44 million joblessness claims have been filed as of June 11. Millions of people have lost their employer-sponsored insurance (ESI)—millions of whom will be unable to replace it and will become uninsured. Thanks to the ACA, many of these newly unemployed Americans who previously were covered by employer-sponsored insurance are able to get health coverage, either through the ACA marketplaces, possibly with financial assistance to make their coverage more affordable, or via Medicaid expansion. The Urban Institute and the Kaiser Family Foundation have estimated that tens of millions of people could lose job-based coverage due to the economic crisis sparked by the pandemic and indicate that millions of people in this situation are eligible for the ACA coverage that is threatened by the health care repeal lawsuit.National and state level coverage lossesBecause the economic crisis stemming from the pandemic is driving millions of people onto coverage programs supported by the ACA, CAP estimates that approximately 3 million more people stand to lose coverage from the health care repeal lawsuit than the 20 million previously estimated. According to a March 2019 analysis by the Urban Institute, full repeal of the ACA would cause enrollment in Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) to fall by 22.4 percent and enrollment in individual market coverage, including for the ACA marketplaces and other insurance people purchase on their own, to drop by 35.4 percent.The economic stress of the pandemic has pushed the United States into a recession. The Congressional Budget Office projects that the unemployment rate in the second and third quarters of this year will average 15 percent — higher than it was during the Great Recession. At an unemployment rate of 15 percent, 17.7 million people would lose employment-based health insurance coverage, according to a recent report by the Urban Institute. With access to ACA coverage options, most of these people would find new forms of insurance. Urban estimates that 8.2 million would end up with Medicaid/CHIP coverage, and 4.3million would gain coverage through the ACA marketplaces or other private coverage. About 5.1 million would remain uninsured.If the ACA is repealed, however, many more people who lose job-based coverage will be without insurance. CAP estimates that because of the pandemic, about 3.4 million additional people are at risk of losing coverage because of the lawsuit. Combining two previous projections by the Urban Institute, CAP’s estimate assumes that 35.4 percent of the 4.3 million people who gain individual market insurance and 22.4 percent of the 8.2 million people who gain Medicaid/CHIP coverage would become uninsured under repeal.In total, 23.3 million people stand to lose coverage and become uninsured if the ACA is repealed during the pandemic. In Texas alone, the number of people without health coverage would rise by about 2 million……The Trump administration and its allied state leaders are attempting to undermine health care in the midst of one of the worst public health disasters in U.S. history. The ACA is crucial to helping families regain coverage and maintain some financial security against health care costs. A Supreme Court ruling against the ACA would take away health coverage from millions of Americans whose lives are already being disrupted by the economic distress and concerns about their health and well-being. June 24, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Remarks at Press Event Unveiling the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Enhancement Act”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi joined House Democrats for a press event unveiling the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Enhancement Act, House Democrats; For the People legislation to build on the Affordable Care Act to lower health costs and prescription drug prices. Below are the Speaker’s remarks:Speaker Pelosi: Good morning. Thank you all for being here and on time. My apologies. It is like the middle ofthe day, there is so much that has been going on already.But here we are to talk about something that is so important in the lives of the American people: their health. It is not only about their health, but about their financial health. And when we ran in 2018, we said we would do three things. For the People, we would lower the cost of health care by lowering the cost of prescription drugs and preserving the pre-existing condition . We would have – lower health care costs, bigger paychecks by building the infrastructure of America in a green way. And, cleaner government, with H.R. 1, which would make the first two possible by reducing the role of big, dark money in politics preventing us from accomplishing the other goals in the public interest, rather than the special interest.On the subject of health care, this was a reiteration of waht we had run on in 2006: ‘Six for ’06’. One of our six was to give the Secretary the authority to negotiate for lower prices. We knew then, right Frank? And we know now that was the only way we could take down these prices. Of those “Six for ’06’, five of them became law and one did not. And that was giving the Secretary authority to negotiate for lower prices. That is the heart of H.R. 3, which is very much part of the legislation you will hear very much about today.I am honored that we are here with Richie Neal by video; Mr. Pallone, whose Committee has so much jurisdiction in terms of health care; Mr. – Chairman of the Education and Labor Committee, Bobby Scott. These three were there from the start developing that, developing the Affordable Care Act. All of them were very much a part of shaping that. We want to enhance it so the leadership of these three committees are here today. Let me just say that we didn’t envision that when we were doing H.R. 3 in December, that we would be in the middle of a pandemic, but we are. All the more reason, all the more reason for us to remove all doubt of affordability of health care. This is about the lives, the livelihood of the American people……I could say a lot about each of the people who are here. Lauren underwood, Colin Allred, Andy Kim, Angie Craig; part of our Freshman class who, from day one – and that’s – where did he – from day one, have taken the lead on this and in terms of asserting Congress’s right to fight in court against the President’s repeal of the Affordable Care Act, repeal of the pre-existing benefits condition, the repeal of so many opportunities for people from day one and they will talk about their roles in that as they join our distinguished chairmen. In between it all, Mr. Ruiz, a physician, many degrees in public health and medicine, as well as a Member of Congress will speak to us about that juxtaposition of policy and good health in our country……Speaker Pelosi: …As Congressman Ruiz mentioned, and was alluded to, also, by Mr. Scott, tomorrow, the Supreme Court will hear the brief from the Administration as to taking down the Affordable Care Act, right in the heart of the time of the pandemic. It was wrong any time, now it is beyond stupid. Beyond stupid.I thank our colleagues and Freshman Members, each of whom has a piece of legislation from their own entrepreneurial thinking, from their experience, whether as a health care professional; the experience of New Jersey, as a person who had your family experience, but also works professionally; with Congresswoman Craig; and, of course, Mr. Allred who started all of this on the first day. That is tomorrow. Today, we will go to Rules Committee to make this legislation in order. Tomorrow, they will do their brief to take down the Affordable Care Act. And they will remove all, even semblance of reality when they say – I heard one on TV yesterday say, ‘We are all for the benefit of pre-existing condition not being an obstacle to health insurance and health care. We are all for that.’ Oh really? Then get off the case. Well, tell the President to get off the case. But nonetheless – that’s tomorrow – on Monday, this important legislation will come to the Floor of the House. We hope it will get bipartisan support. It certainly meets the needs of Democrats, Republicans, Independents and Decline To States, whatever they call themselves, across the country, because the issue of health care knows no party. And the issue of the pandemic certainly does not, as well……With that, I thank you all. Wash your hands, wear a mask, take care, keep your distance. Thank you all. June 24, 2020: House Committee on Energy & Commerce posted a press release titled: “Health Committee Chairs Unveil Legislative Package to Make Health Care & Prescription Drugs More Affordable”. From the press release: As Americans face both the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting severe economic downturn, Energy and Commerce Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), Ways and Means Chairman Richard E. Neal (D-MA) and Education and Labor Chairman Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (D-VA) today unveiled The Patient Protection and Affordable CareEnhancement Act, a legislative package that will provide much needed relief by making health care and prescription drugs more affordable. The legislation also expands access to health care, strengthens protections for people with pre-existing conditions, reduces racial and ethnic health coverage disparities and reverses the Trump Administration’s harmful actions to sabotage the Affordable Care Act (ACA).The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Enhancement Act makes health care more affordable by lowering health insurance premiums with strengthened and expanded affordability assistance. Specifically, the legislation expands eligibility for premium tax credits beyond 400 percent of the federal poverty line and increases the size of tax credits for all income brackets. The legislation creates a national reinsurance program to help cover the costs of consumers with expensive medical conditions, which helps lower premiums, and provides funds to states to help lower deductibles and out-of-pocket costs for everyone. It also offers funding to states to establish their own State-Based Marketplaces, which oftentimes have lower premiums.The legislation also makes prescription drugs more affordable by empowering Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices and making those prices available to Americans with private health insurance. It will stop drug companies from ripping off Americans and charging them more than other countries for the same drugs. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that drugs subject to negotiation will see price reductions of up to 55 percent. “The American people are anxious about their health and their economic future, and this legislation provides critical relief by making health care and prescription drugs more affordable,” Chairman Pallone said. “It’s commonsense legislation that takes the savings from lower prescription drug costs and invests it into lowering health care premiums and expanding access to affordable care. All around, that’s a win for the American people. We must take action to lower these soaring costs, expand access to health care, rein in the Trump Administration’s efforts to sabotage the ACA and protect people with pre-existing conditions.”“While Republicans continue their efforts to dismantle America’s health care system in the midst of a pandemic, Democrats are putting forward a plan to expand access to care and lower costs,” said Chairman Neal. “We slash prescription drug prices, create larger premium tax credits available to more people, and devote funding to reduce out-of-pocket costs for everyone. With this legislation, we also take important steps to ensure patients are protected. The bill encourages remaining states to expand Medicaid and support vulnerable Americans, puts an end to the expansion of ‘junk’ insurance plans, and prevents states from using federal waivers to allow discrimination against patients with pre-existing conditions. And importantly, we also address the inequities in care that COVID-19 has brought to the fore through targeted assistance for Hispanic, Black, and Native Americans. For the health and financial security of workers and families across the country, Congress needs to pass this legislation.”“This global health emergency is a stark reminder of our responsibility to expand access to affordable health care, and that is exactly what the Affordable Care Enhancement Act would achieve,” said Chairman Scott. “This proposal builds off the progress we made in the Affordable Care Act by lowering the cost of Marketplace plans, cutting the price of prescription drugs, and strengthening patient protections by reversing the expansion of junk health care plans. It is telling that in the middle of a public health emergency, House Democrats are proposing to strengthen and enhance the Affordable Care Act, while the Trump Administration is asking the Supreme Court to rip health coverage away from millions of Americans.”The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Enhancement Act also: encourages states that have not expanded their Medicaid programs to do so by renewing the ACA’s original expanded federal match. If all states expanded Medicaid, about 4.8 million more Americans would be eligible for Medicaid, including an estimated 2.3 million people who are uninsured;reverses the Trump Administration’s efforts to give states waivers to undermine pre-existing condition protections and weaken standards for essential health benefits;stops the expansion of junk insurance plans that allow insurance companies to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions, put consumers at financial risk, and drive up comprehensive insurance costs; restores critical outreach and enrollment funding that has been gutted by the Trump Administration and provide funding for navigators to assist consumers in signing up for health care; combats the maternal mortality epidemic, which continues to particularly impact Black and Native American people, by extending Medicaid or Children‘s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) coverage to new mothers from the current 60 days post-partum to one year;further reduces racial and ethnic health inequities by expanding coverage and premium assistance to more Black and Hispanic Americans; and protects vulnerable populations from losing health coverage by ensuring that Medicaid and CHIP beneficiaries receive a full 12 months of coverage once enrolled, protecting them from interruptions due to fluctuations in their income throughout the year. A one-page summary is available HERE. A section-by-section is available HERE. Text of the bill is available HERE. June 25, 2020: Representative Charlie Crist (Democrat – Florida) posed a press release on his official website titled: “Crist: Dismantling Affordable Care Act would leave 1.75 Million Floridians Without Coverage”. From the press release: U.S. Representative Charlie Crist (D-St. Petersburg) released the following statement after the Trump Administration filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court asking the justices to strike down the Affordable Care Act.Amid a global public health crisis and economic emergency caused by the outbreak of COVID-19, Congressman Crist cites a newly released report finding that the number of Americans who would lose health coverage if the Administration’s lawsuit succeeds has grown to more than 23 million, including 1.75 million Floridians. The House of Representatives filed its brief with the Supreme Court in support of the Affordable Care Act in early May, and oral arguments in the case are expected this fall. “As our country continues to face the largest and most unprecedented public health crisis in modern history, the Trump Administration continues its heartless attack on the Affordable Care Act that would leave millions across America without the access to care they need,” said Rep. Crist. “In Florida, which sadly has become a COVID hot spot, striking down the ACA would mean 1.75 million of our neighbors and loved ones would lose their coverage. That’s unconscionable. The People’s House remains steadfast in our commitment to lowering the cost of care in this country, not raising it, and expanding access to affordable health care for all Americans. I’m calling on the Trump administration to end this attack on Americans’ care, and put the people first.”This week, House Democrats introduced the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Enhancement Act, legislation that builds on the Affordable Care Act to lower health costs and prescription drug prices while reducing the ranks of the uninsured. The bill will cap premiums at 8.5 percent of income, reducing costs for everyone. Should the Trump Administration succeed in striking down the Affordable Care Act, the following protections, coverage, and programs are at risk: Protections for 135 million Americans with pre-existing conditions.Medicaid expansion, which covers 17 million people.Reopening the Medicare donut hole, raising prescription drugs for nearly 12 million seniors.2.3 million adult children will no longer be able to stay on their parents’ insurance.Insurance companies will be able to charge women 50 percent more than men.Repealing premium subsidies that make marketplace coverage affordable for 9 million people.Reinstate lifetime caps on coverage.Allow insurance companies to deny prescription drugs and maternity coverage. June 25, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release on his official website titled: “Attorney General Becrra Files Opposition to Sutter Health’s Delay of Landmark Settlement of Anticompetitive Practices”. From the press release: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra today filed opposition to a motion by Sutter Health (Sutter) to delay final approval of the groundbreaking preliminary settlement agreement reached in December 2019. The settlement agreement resolves allegations by the Attorney General, the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union and Employers Benefit Trust (UEBT), and class action plaintiffs, that Sutter’s anticompetitive practices led to higher healthcare costs for consumers in Northern California compared to other places in the state. When approved, the settlement will require Sutter to pay $575 million in compensation, prohibit Sutter from anticompetitive conduct, and require Sutter to follow certain practices to restore competition in California’s healthcare markets. On June 12, Sutter filed a motion for continuance, attempting to delay final approval of this landmark settlement. In today’s opposition filing, Attorney General Becerra highlights that prompt approval of the settlement is in the public’s best interest, particularly in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic……This litigation began in 2014 when the UEBT and numerous individual plaintiffs — later consolidated into a class action — filed their lawsuit challenging Sutter’s practices in rendering services and setting prices. They sought compensation for what they alleged were unlawful, anticompetitive business practices, which caused them to pay more than necessary for healthcare services and products. In March of 2018, Attorney General Becerra filed a similar lawsuit against Sutter on behalf of the people of California, principally seeking injunctive relief to compel Sutter to correct its anticompetitive business practices moving forward. The separate lawsuits were combined by the court into one case. In October of 2019, on the eve of trial, the parties reached an agreement to settle. The final settlement was filed with the court on December 19, 2019 together with an unopposed motion for its preliminary approval. Since then, three different hearing dates for the settlement’s approval have been scheduled, with the latest being set on June 22, 2020. Shortly before that hearing date, on June 12, Sutter filed a motion for continuance, attempting to further delay approval of the settlement and implementation of the critical injunctive relief provisions that benefit consumers.In his opposition, Attorney General Becerra argues that approval of the settlement, now months old, is in the best interest of Californians. Further, the opposition calls into question Sutter’s arguments for delay of the settlement approval, including use of COVID-19 to delay the process. Until the settlement receives final approval, Sutter can continue its anticompetitive practices, which harm healthcare consumers and our State’s economy. Attorney General Becerra asserts that emergencies such as COVID-19 are not an excuse for Sutter, or any other healthcare entity, to skirt their obligations under antitrust law. Moreover, the settlement itself contains mechanisms by which material changes in the healthcare environment may be used to seek appropriate modifications. Sutter has received more material financial aid related to the pandemic from taxpayers – and is in a far better financial position to weather any ill effects of COVID-19 – than many other providers in the state. Thus, Sutter’s issues regarding COVID-19’s financial impact are better directed to the federal and state governments and not to the Court in seeking to delay this settlement. When approved, the settlement will require Sutter to: Pay $575 million to compensate employers, unions, and others covered under the class action and to cover costs and fees associated with the legal efforts;Limit what it charges patients for out-of-network services, helping ensure that patients visiting an out-of-network hospital do not face outsized, surprise medical bills;Increase transparency by permitting insurers, employers, and self-funded payers to provide plan members with access to pricing, quality, and cost information, which helps patients make better care decisions;Halt measures that deny patients access to lower-cost plans, thus allowing health insurers, employers, and self-funded payers to offer and direct patients to more affordable health plan options for networks or products;Stop all-or-nothing contracting deals, thus allowing insurers, employers, and self-funded payers to include some but not necessarily all of Sutter’s hospitals, clinics, or other commercial products in their plans’ network.Cease anticompetitive bundling of services and products which forced insurers, employers, and self-funded payers to purchase for their plan offerings more services or products from Sutter than were needed. Sutter must now offer a stand-alone price that must be lower than any bundled package price to give insurers, employers, and self-funded payers more choice;Cooperate with a court-approved compliance monitor to ensure that Sutter is following the terms of the settlement for at least 10 years. The monitor will receive and investigate complaints and may present evidence to the court; andClearly set definitions on clinical integration and patient access considerations. The settlement makes clear that for Sutter to claim it has clinically integrated a system, it must meet strict standards beyond regional similarities or the mere sharing of an electronic health record, and must be integrating care in a manner that takes into consideration the quality of care to the patient population. This is important because clinical integration can be used to mask market consolidation efforts by hospital systems, when in fact there is no true integration of a patient’s care. For example, saying that hospitals are regionally close or that hospitals are sharing electronic health records is not enough, there must be close coordination that will lead to less costly, higher quality care for local communities. …A copy of the opposition is available here. A copy of the settlement provided to the Court is available here. Additional declarations supporting plaintiff’s opposition are available on the electronic version of this release here. June 25, 2020: SCOTUSblog (which is NOT run by the Supreme Court of the United States) posted a thread that started with this tweet: “The United States just filed its brief in the major constitutional challenge to the Affordable Care Act that will be argued next term. The government says the entire ACA is invalid but leaves room for the court to leave in place certain provisions that don’t harm the plaintiffs.” That tweet included a screenshot from the brief: III. The individual mandate cannot be severed from the remained of the ACA. Congressional findings incorporated into the ACA’s text clearly indicate that Congress would not have adopted the guaranteed-issue and community-rating provisions absent the individual mandate’s requirement to purchase insurance. This court recognized the interrelatedness of these three provisions in NFIB and King v Burwell, 135 S. Ct. 2480 (2015). And Congress’s 2017 amendment does not alter the severability analysis because it left it intact in the critical statutory findings about the interconnectedness of these provisions – findings that were and remain the functional equivilante of an inseverability clause.The ACA’s remaining provisions are likewise inseverable, because it is evident that Congress would not have enacted them without the individual mandate and the guaranteed-issue and community-rating provisions .The NFIB joint dissent would have so held, and that conclusion is still equally valid today. Nothing the 2017 Congress did demonstrates it would have intended the rest of the ACA to continue to operate in the absence of these three integral provisions. The entire ACA thus must fall with the individual mandate, through the scope of relief entered in this case should be limited to provisions shown to injure the plaintiffs. NOTE: In 2017, there was a Republican president, with a Republican majority Senate and a Republican majority House. The decision to reduce the penality for not buying health insurance – the individual mandate – to $0 was done by the Republicans. If the Supreme Court decides the ACA must fall because of Republican shenanigans – the Republicans are entirely to blame for it. June 25, 2020: SCOTUSblog continued the thread with this tweet: “The case, California v. Texas, is the third direct challenge to the ACA to reach the Supreme Court and will likely be the blockbuster case of the term that begins in October. June 25, 2020: SCOTUSblog continued the thread with this tweet: “The federal government’s full brief is here: A separate brief — from a group of red states asking the court to strike down the entirety of the ACA — was filed earlier in the day. That brief is here:” June 25, 2020: SCOTUSblog ended the thread with this tweet: “A group of blue states filed a brief defending the law back in May. That brief is here: June 25, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) tweeted: “20M more Americans have health insurance because of the Affordable Care Act. 135M people with pre-existing conditions are now protected. 12M seniors now pay lower prescription drug costs. Yet Trump continued to advance his lawsuit to repeal the ACA. During a pandemic. June 25, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release on her official website titled: “Pelosi Statement on Trump Brief Asking Supreme Court to Strike Down Affordable Care Act Amid Coronavirus”. From the press release: Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi released the following statement after the Trump Administration filed its brief in the health care lawsuit before the Supreme Court, asking the justices to strike down the entirety of the Affordable Care Act:“President Trump and the Republicans’ campaign to rip away the protections and benefits of the Affordable Care Act in the middle of the coronavirus crisis is an act of unfathomable cruelty.“If President Trump gets his way, 130 million Americans with pre-existing conditions will lose the ACA’s lifesaving protections and 23 million Americans will lose their health coverage entirely. There is no legal justification and no moral excuse for the Trump Administration’s disastrous efforts to take away Americans’ health care.“On Day One of this Congress, the House Democratic Majority voted to throw the full legal weight of the House of Representatives against this dangerous lawsuit. While President Trump tries to tear away protections for people with pre-existing conditions, Democrats are working to build on the Affordable Care Act to lower health costs and prescription drug prices For The People. Next week, the House will continue that effort by passing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Enhancement Act.” June 25, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “We’re in court today fighting the Trump Administration’s burdensome rule attacking safe, legal abortion care and threatening loss of health coverage over a $1 missed payment”. This tweet is the start of a thread. June 25, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “As we face a public health crisis, @HHSGov should be doing all it can to protect and streamline care, not fighting to take it away when we need it most.” June 25, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “The 1303 rule is a solution in search of a problem, and to finanize during #COVID19 shows this Admin’s prioritization of politics over people once again. Health policy should be based in science, not creating even more propaganda in the @RealDonaldTrump war on women’s health”. This tweet was the end of the thread. June 25, 2020: House Committee on Energy & Commerce posted a press release titled: “E&C Investigation Finds Millions of Americans Enrolled in Junk Health Insurance Plans That Are Bad For Consumers & Fly Under The Radar Of State Regulators”. From the press release: Energy and Commerce Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), Health Subcommittee Chairwoman Anna G. Eshoo (D-CA) and Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chair Diana DeGette (D-CO) today released a report on the Committee’s year-long investigation into the anti-consumer practices of Short-Term, Limited Duration Insurance (STLDI) health care plans and the insurance brokers who sell and sign people up for these junk plans.“The Committee’s investigation finds that the Trump Administration’s policy to expand unregulated and misleading plans is a threat to the health and financial well-being of American families, particularly during the COVID-19 crisis,” Pallone, Eshoo and DeGette said. “These plans are a bad deal for consumers and oftentimes leave patients saddled with thousands of dollars in medical debt. The heavy-handed tactics uncovered in this investigation demonstrate why Congress must reverse the Trump Administration’s expansion of these junk plans. It also shows how dangerous a post-ACA world would be if Republican Attorneys General and the Trump Administration are successful in striking down the law and its protections for coverage of pre-existing conditions.”The investigation found that enrollment in these plans, which offer bare bones health coverage and engage in heavy-handed tactics to avoid paying medical claims, increased significantly to approximately three million consumers in 2019, a 27 percent increase from 2018. The growth in enrollment came after the Trump Administration issued a final rule in August 2018 that extended the maximum duration of the plans and allowed them to be sold alongside plans that comply with the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) consumer protections. Earlier this week, Health Committee leaders unveiled The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Enhancement Act, which would reverse the Administration’s expansion of these junk plans. The Committee investigation finds these plans are bad for consumers: All eight insurers deny claims for medical care after putting consumers through an extensive and invasive claims review process. The insurers subject consumers to a post-claims review process to determine whether the medical condition for which the claim was submitted may have arisen from a pre-existing condition or whether the health condition should have been disclosed by the applicant in the plan application. All eight insurers deny a medical claim if a determination is made that the medical claim was due to a pre-existing condition and subject to the pre-existing condition exclusion, or that it resulted from a pre-existing condition. Claims are also denied if the STLDI insurers determine that there were risk factors present at time of enrollment, or the medical condition manifested itself in such a manner that would have caused an ordinary prudent person to seek medical advice or treatment. The investigation also found that some STLDI insurers sometimes refuse to pay for medical claims that are not due to pre-existing conditions or subject to any of the plan’s exclusions and limitations. The claims are processed only after consumers retain attorneys or file complaints with state regulators.Most STLDI insurers rescind coverage, leaving consumers uninsured and with large medical bills. Most STLDI insurers rescind the underlying policy if a determination is made that the enrollee had a prior health condition that should have been disclosed in the plan application, or if there were certain risk factors present at the time of enrollment that the individual failed to disclose. Some STLDI insurers disenroll consumers and deny claims for individuals who develop medical conditions after enrollment. These individuals often have their claims denied for medical conditions that they were not previously diagnosed with or sought treatment. In these instances, these companies assert that the consumer failed to disclose they had testing performed or were advised to have treatment or further medical evaluation. Some STLDI plans also rescind policies of cancer patients and deny claims related to cancer treatment.STLDI insurers systematically exclude coverage for most major medical conditions resulting from pre-existing conditions, as well as coverage of basic medical services that consumers would reasonably expect to be covered by health insurance. STLDI insurers exclude coverage for most common medical diagnoses resulting from pre-existing conditions, including diabetes, cancer, stroke, arthritis, heart disease, and substance use and mental health disorders. Some of these plans impose significant coverage limitations and exclusions on the limited benefits and services that are covered, including emergency services, hospitalization, substance use and mental health disorders, and prescription drugs. In a few cases, STLDI plans exclude coverage of routine care such as basic preventive care, wellness exams, pelvic exams, pap smears and birth control. STLDI plans impose limitations on the benefits covered. Many of these plans impose significant limitations on doctor’s office visits, hospitalization, emergency services, substance use and mental health disorders, and prescription drugs. For instance, some of these plans impose a maximum of $500 per policy period for doctor’s office visits, a maximum of $1,000 per day for hospitalization, $500 per visit for emergency services, and a maximum of $2,500 per surgery for surgeon services. Consumers who fall sick while enrolled in one of these plans may incur huge, potentially financially ruinous, medical costs.STLDI insurers screen consumers for health status and discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions and women. Most of the insurers under investigation require consumers seeking coverage to complete invasive and complex plan applications that require disclosure of medical history. These same insurers deny coverage altogether to individuals with pre-existing conditions. They also discriminate against women by denying women basic medical services and charging women more than men for the same coverage.On average, less than half of the premium dollars collected from consumers are spent on medical care. The investigation found that on average across the eight companies that offer STLDI products only 48 percent of premium dollars a consumer pays are paid out in the form of health care claims and medical benefits. This is in stark contrast to ACA-compliant individual market plans, which are required to spend at least 80 percent of all premium dollars on health care claims.Marketing materials provide consumers misleading information. The Committee finds that some marketing materials for the STLDI plans provide incomplete and often misleading information about a plan’s limitations and exclusions. Misleading and fraudulent marketing practices are particularly concerning amid the COVID-19 public health emergency. Many uninsured individuals may be seeking to enroll in health coverage, and given the Trump Administration’s refusal to allow for an Open Enrollment period on the ACA Marketplaces, uninsured individuals may turn to STLDI plans as an alternative form of coverage.Brokers receive up to ten times the compensation rate for STLDI plans than for ACA-compliant plans. The Committee reviewed 14 companies’ broker compensation rates and found that the average commission rate for STLDI plans was 23 percent. The commission rate for ACA-compliant plans was an average of 2 percent in 2018. As a result, brokers may be incentivized to engage in deceptive and fraudulent misleading marketing practices or led consumers to these plans instead of ACA-compliant plans. The Committee’s investigation also found millions of Americans are enrolled in these plans that fly under the radar of state regulators: STLDI plans represent a significant and growing proportion of the individual health care market. Approximately three million consumers enrolled in STLDI plans during the 2019 plan year across nine insurers, which was an increase of 600,000 over the 2018 plan year. Additionally, enrollment by brokers increased by approximately 60 percent in December 2018, and by over 120 percent in January 2019, compared to previous months. The increase in enrollment in December and January suggests that these plans are benefiting from, and possibly capitalizing on the marketing and advertising around the ACA’s open enrollment season.STLDI plans operate in a significant regulatory gap, with little oversight. The Committee finds that among states that allow these plans to be sold, some states have little information about the availability and type of STLDI plans sold in their states. State regulators also face challenges in taking disciplinary action and enforcement against insurers found to be in violation of their state laws. For example, insurers who offer STLDI plans through out-of-state associations can bypass state laws and regulations in states in which they do not file their products. As a result, states face significant challenges in monitoring and regulating STLDI plans. Currently, 24 states have banned or restricted the sale of STLDI plans. In March 2019, the Committee officially launched its investigation by sending letters to 14 companies that either sell or assist consumers in enrolling in STLDI plans, requesting documents and information about industry practices. The Committee also conducted phone calls with all of the companies and followed up over the past 12 months to request additional information and seek clarification as needed. Read the full Committee report HERE. June 26, 2020: ABC News posted an article titled: “Amid pandemic, Trump administration asks Supreme Court to overturn Obamacare”. It was written by Devin Dwyer. From the article: In the midst of a pandemic and without an alternative health plan of its own, the Trump administration formally called on the U.S. Supreme Court to completely strike down the Affordable Care Act.The administration makes the case in a legal brief filed late Thursday in the case brought by 20 Republican-led states that want to completely invalidate the law.The justices will hear oral arguments as soon as October, which is just weeks before the general election.Two lower federal courts have ruled that the ACA’s individual mandate is unconstitutional after the GOP Congress in 2017 zeroed out the penalty for going without health insurance. The Supreme Court had previously upheld the mandate on the grounds that it was a tax.The lower courts also called into question the viability of the entire law without the mandate.“The individual mandate cannot be severed from the remainder of the ACA,” writes Trump solicitor general Noel Francisco in his brief to the Supreme Court. “The entire ACA thus must fall with the individual mandate.”California and 19 other Democrat-led states are defending the law.“The ACA has been life-changing and now through this pandemic, we can all see the value in having greater access to quality healthcare at affordable prices,” said California attorney general Xavier Becerra who is leading the defense. “Now is not the time to rip away our best tool to address very real and very deadly health disparities in our communities.”Nearly half a million Americans have signed up for health plans through the ACA so far in 2020, according to the Department of Health and Human Services — a surge of enrollment, up 46% from this time last year, from workers who lost their jobs and employer-based insurance coverage in the coronavirus pandemic.“We intend to win this,” Becerra added… June 26, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris Condems Trump’s Latest Attempt to Strip Health Care Away from Millions of Americans”. From the press release: U.S Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) released a statement after the Trump administration demanded the Supreme Court to strike down the entire Affordable Health Care Act.“Donald Trump is trying to strip health coverage from millions of Americans just to spite President Obama. It’s cruel and dangerous,” said Harris. “People need health insurance that is affordable and covers what they need it to– especially during a pandemic.“By stalling COVID-19 testing and trying to rip health insurance away from people, the president is knowingly putting lives at risk for political gain. Republicans and Democrats have a moral responsibility to speak out against Trump’s unprecedented sabotage of Americans’ health,” Harris added. June 26, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Transcript of Pelosi Weekly Press Conference Today”. From the press release: Speaker Pelosi: Good morning……And what is really important about all of this right now is the health of the American people. Martin Luther King said, ‘Of all,’ he said exactly, ‘Of all forms of inequality, injustice in health is the most shocking and the most inhuman,’ he said, ‘and the most inhuman, because it also – it often results in physical death.’ Of all forms of injustice, inequality, health care, the most inhuman.So, it is unfathomable, unfathomable, that as we gathered here, late at night, last night, in the midst of a pandemic, the White House, the Administration, in the dark of night, filed their brief in the Supreme Court to overturn the Affordable Care Act, saying to the American people, million families, if you have a pre-existing condition, you will no longer have the benefit of access to quality care. And the list goes on of the benefits that it would overturn. Lifetime limits that they support, that we want to overturn; that, if you have a pre-existing condition, that there is no lifetime limit on the amount of coverage that you would receive. Midst of a pandemic, 130 million Americans with pre-existing conditions will lose ACA’s life‑saving protection, 23 million Americans will lose their health – access to quality, affordable health care. The ACA’s ban on annual lifetime limits, young people staying on other people’s – being a woman no longer a pre-existing condition. Forget about it. The Administration wants to do away with all of that. As bad as that is, they think they can get away with saying, ‘Oh, we support a benefit for a pre-existing condition,’ when they don’t. So, when they say that, understand they are in court to overturn that now. They continue to be, and now they have filed their briefs. And all of this as the ACA enrollment has increased by 46 percent by a similar period last year, showing an increased need during the coronavirus. So many people have lost their jobs, and, hence, in some cases, their insurance benefits. Therefore, they are turning to the Affordable Care Act. Again, in the middle of a pandemic, the President is saying, ‘We want to slow down the testing.’ The testing….…And, as I said, many more people are signing up for the Affordable Care Act. And, so, I am so pleased that on Monday we will be putting forth our Patient Protection and Affordable Care Enhancement Act. It will lower health care costs, negotiate lower prices, expand coverage and push hold-out states to adopt Medicaid expansion, combat inequity in health coverage, combat junk plans. The list goes on. Now, let me say this. As I said earlier, many people who have lost their jobs have turned to the Affordable Care Act because their job – their health care was tied to their job. So, hopefully, they will get their jobs back, but, in the meantime, they have that access. That’s what the President is trying to overturn in the courts. So, God-willing, the courts will do the right thing, but we just don’t know. So, we are getting prepared for what comes next in all of this – in all of this. But let me tell you this about the ACA enhancement. It has – why we have some things in it and some things aren’t that were saved for another day, because the President said he would support these things. He said he would support negotiating for lower prices. That is what he said during the campaign. That has been for years our – one of our priorities that we have never been able to get 60 votes in the Senate and get it passed into law. But the President said during the campaign he was going to, ‘Negotiate like crazy.’ Crazy, that is a good description of his actions throughout. But, ‘negotiate like crazy’ apparently means not negotiate at all. That is the only way you are going to get the prices – the lowered prices. And, in the bill – the Affordable Care Act – it brings down the cost of prescription drugs, which we are promising to the American people, and the savings to the Federal government from not having to pay those prices will go to expand, in a way – bigger expansion of Medicare since its inception. Benefits for hearing, for visual and for dental. It’s quite remarkable. It has other advantages for seniors in terms of cost of prescription drugs as well. But we are very, very proud of that aspect, very understandable about everyone… June 26, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra posted a press release titled: “State Senate Advances Legislation to Avert Anticompetitive Health System Consolidation Which Increases Costs for Patients”. From the press release: California State Senator Bill Monning (D-Carmel) and Attorney General Xavier Becerra today applauded the passage in the State Senate of Senate Bill 977 (SB 977), legislation to avert anticompetitive behavior and over-consolidation in the healthcare sector. Decreased competition is a known driver of increased prices for consumers. SB 977 calls for California Department of Justice oversight when large healthcare systems, hedge funds or private equity groups seek to acquire or affiliate with other healthcare facilities or providers. The oversight serves as a check to ensure that these transactions targeting health facilities of critical importance to local communities improve care coordination or increase healthcare access for those communities. The bill provides new enforcement tools to reduce anticompetitive behavior. SB 977 now moves to the State Assembly. “With our communities battling the coronavirus pandemic, our healthcare system must operate at peak performance. That means all hands on deck. But we’ve learned the hard way that too often “consolidation” really means higher prices and a reduction of services which the surrounding community relies on,” said Attorney General Becerra. “Communities deserve to know that their local hospital won’t be treated like a commodity that’s up for sale but, instead, like the provider of critical health services that families in the area depend on. Under SB 977, the Department of Justice will provide the independent set of eyes that our communities need for them to know that consolidations targeting local hospitals or providers won’t result in anticompetitive, monopolistic operations that force our families to swallow higher prices and diminished services.” “The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the disproportionate access to healthcare in California,” said Senator Monning. “SB 977 will hold unscrupulous healthcare systems accountable to ensure existing services are protected and patient health is the top priority of providers. We must do everything we can at the state level to guarantee Californians have access to affordable healthcare.”Anticompetitive behavior in the healthcare sector is a growing concern because large healthcare systems can flex their market power to raise prices for patients, employers, and insurers while limiting services and decreasing the quality of care offered to Californians. For example, average prices for hospital care are 35 percent higher in Northern California, where healthcare systems are more consolidated, than in Southern California. The impact of consolidation on prices was reinforced by a 2018 study by professor Richard Scheffler and the Petris Institute at the University of California, Berkeley, which found the percentage of physicians in practices owned by hospitals increased from about 25 percent in 2010 to more than 40 percent in 2016. This increased hospital ownership resulted in an estimated 12 percent increase in premiums from 2014 to 2016 and has led these physician groups to be less flexible and adaptable during the pandemic.SB 977 would work to improve healthcare affordability and limit anticompetitive behavior by requiring large healthcare systems to gain approval from the Attorney General’s Office before moving forward with any planned affiliation agreement or acquisition. The Attorney General’s determination to approve or deny a transaction will rely on two factors: Whether the transaction would truly increase care coordination and/or increase access and affordability of care to an underserved population; andWhether the transaction is substantially likely to result in anticompetitive effects that outweigh any benefits. In addition, SB 977 would declare that healthcare systems that exercise substantial market power may not engage in behavior that has a significant likelihood of anticompetitive effects. These behaviors include: raising market prices, diminishing the quality of care, reducing choice, increasing the total cost of care, and diminishing access or availability of healthcare services. Under SB 977, the Attorney General’s Office would have the ability to file civil actions to recover damages and obtain civil penalties against those that abuse market power. June 26, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “My bill w/Sen. Monning to crack down on anticompetitive behavior in the healthcare market & protect patients passed the Senate! With our communities battling the coronavirus pandemic, our healthcare must operate at peak performance.” This tweet was the start of a short thread. June 26, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “That means all hands on deck. But we’ve learned the hard way that too often “consolidation” reallly means higher prices and a reduction of services which the surrounding community relies on.” June 26, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted: “W/#SB977, CADOJ will provide the independent set of eyes that communities need to know that consolidations targeting local hospitals or providers won’t result in anticompetitive, monopolistic operations that force our families to swallow higher prices and diminished services.” This was the last tweet in the short thread. June 26, 2020: Los Angeles Times posted an opinion piece titled: “Opinion: Amid pandemic and recession, the Trump administration attacks 20 million Americans’ health coverage”. It was written by Los Angeles Times Deputy Editorial Editor Jon Healey. From the opinion piece: The COVID-19 pandemic caused a huge spike in layoffs, leaving tens of millions of Americans without the employer-sponsored health insurance that had protected their families. But the 2010 Affordable Care Act offered a safety net for them — laid-off workers can sign up for replacement coverage for themselves and their families through their state insurance exchanges. And according to the Kaiser Family Foundation’s estimates, nearly 80% of those who’d lost their coverage at work in the pandemic’s first two months were eligible for federal subsidies that lowered the cost of those new policies.Yet on Thursday, the Trump administration urged the Supreme Court to throw out the ACA because two self-employed Texans assert that the law injures them. In fact, the administration’s brief makes a wholly specious argument that the sections of the law it connects to the plaintiff’s injuries cannot be separated from the portions of the law that extend Medicaid to more poor Americans, improve the quality of care, cut prescription drug costs for the elderly, explore ways to slow the growth of healthcare costs, increase the supply of doctors and nurses, let young adults stay on their parents’ insurance policies, and make it cheaper for everyone to get preventive health services.Not to put too fine a point on it, but in the middle of a pandemic the administration is demanding the elimination of a law that has extended coverage to roughly 20 million Americans, and that protects some 50 million Americans with preexisting conditions from being gouged or dropped by their insurers……The notion that Obamacare does more harm than good has been central to the Republican argument against the law since the day it went into effect. And there’s no question that some people, like the two individual plaintiffs in California et al. vs. Texas et al., have been forced to pay more for coverage, even as millions of others benefited from the new federal subsidies. That’s because the law sought to rein in “junk” policies that didn’t cover many important forms of care and to spread individuals’ risks and costs more broadly. As a consequence, the comprehensive policies offered on the exchanges are costlier than the more limited ones that had typified the market for non-group coverage. And under the law’s individual mandate, every adult American was required to obtain healthcare coverage or pay a tax penalty (unless they qualify for an exemption, such as the one for financial hardship).The case before the Supreme Court uses that claim of injury to tee up a too clever by half attempt to kill the entire ACA, based on Congress’ decision to excise one small but important part of the law. Unable to repeal the entire act after they took complete control of Congress in 2017, Republicans settled for eliminating the widely disliked tax penalty for people who did not comply with the individual mandate, which remains on the books.That’s a problem, the plaintiffs in California vs. Texas argue, because the Supreme Court upheld the individual mandate in 2014 only as an exercise of Congress’ power to levy taxes. Removing the tax rendered the mandate unconstitutional, which upends the insurance reforms that are the heart and soul of the law. And if those insurance reforms are off the table, Congress wouldn’t have enacted any of the other provisions of the ACA. Or so the plaintiffs and the Trump administration argue.The administration is right about one thing here: Congress (and many analysts) viewed the individual mandate as an important stabilizing force for insurers once they were required to take all comers and ignore preexisting conditions. But it was hardly the only stabilizing force; as we’ve seen in the two years since the tax penalty was repealed, average insurance premiums have declined in the state exchanges. The facts on the ground are the strongest argument against the administration’s case.Oddly, the Trump brief argues most forcefully against the insurance reforms designed to protect people with preexisting conditions — the people Trump insists he cares about, despite Republicans’ multiple efforts to expose them to higher costs. Those provisions are the reason congressional Republicans ultimately abandoned their effort to repeal the ACA, which is why it makes no sense to argue, as the Trump brief does, that Congress wouldn’t want those protections to survive if the individual mandate dies. There’s no need for the court to guess lawmakers’ intent on that issue… June 27, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Now that the very expensive, unpopular and unfair Individual Mandate provision has been terminated by us, many States & the U.S. are asking the Supreme Court that Obamacare itself be terminated so that it can be replaced with a FAR BETTER AND MUCH LESS EXPENSIVE ALTERNATIVE…” June 27, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “…Obamacare is a joke! Deductible is far too high and the overall cost is ridiculous. My Administration has gone out of its way to manage OC much better than previous, but it is still no good. I will ALWAYS PROTECT PEOPLE WITH PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS,ALWAYS!!!” June 27, 2020: California Attorney General Xavier Becerra responded to President Trump’s second tweet with a tweet of his own: “Bogus: It was just 2 days ago that the Admin. told #SCOTUS they think the ACA “must fall.” Here’s what Trump doesn’t say: The ACA has protected 133+ million people W/PREEXISTING CONDITIONS. We intend to win this fight as we won DACA: w/the facts, law & American people on our side” June 27, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Covid-19 survivors could lose health insurance if Trump wins bid to repeal Obamacare”. It was written by Dominic Rushe and Amanda Holpuch. From the article: Millions of Americans who have survived Covid-19 or face future infections could lose their insurance or be barred from getting coverage should the Trump administration successfully repeal Obamacare.The Trump administration asked the supreme court late Thursday to overturn the Affordable Care Act – a move that, if successful, would bring a permanent end to the health insurance reform law popularly known as Obamacare.Under the ACA, insurance companies cannot deny coverage for pre-existing conditions. Its abolition would mean millions of Americans who have had or have cancer, multiple sclerosis or other diseases would struggle to find insurance.Anyone applying for insurance who subsequently contracts Covid-19 could also find their insurance invalidated or be denied coverage in the future. If they were allowed to keep their insurance, they could still be charged higher premiums or have future treatment for coronavirus turned down.“Abolishing the ACA would cause tremendous damage and cause chaos throughout the country,” said Karen Pollitz, senior fellow at the Henry J Kaiser Family Foundation.Anyone buying health insurance who subsequently contracted the coronavirus would face loss of coverage, she said. “If you bought the insurance and then caught the virus, you would be out of luck,” she said.The abolition of pre-existing condition coverage is especially difficult for those who have Covid-19, because so little is known about the long-term health impact of the disease. There is evidence that the respiratory illness causes permanent damage in some patients. Those who have had the disease and recovered would have to disclose their status to apply for insurance, and could be turned down for coverage.“We could see tens of millions of people thrown out of coverage,” said Pollitz. “There would be an onslaught of un-insurance.”……The supreme court has not scheduled a date for oral arguments in the case, but it is expected to take place in the autumn and a decision would likely not arrive until after the November election… June 29, 2020: NPR posted an article titled: “Supreme Court Hands Abortion-Rights Advocates A Victory In Louisiana Case”. It was written by Nina Totenberg and Brian Naylor. From the article: As sharply divided U.S. Supreme Court stood by its most recent abortion-rights precedent Monday, delivering a major defeat to abortion opponents who had hoped for a reversal of fortunes at the court with the addition of two new Trump-appointed justices.By a 5-4 vote, the court struck down a Louisiana law that was virtually identical to a Texas law it invalidated just four years ago. Chief Justice John Roberts cast the fifth and decisive vote.Four years ago, the chief justice was among the dissenters when the court struck down a Texas law that required doctors performing clinic abortions to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. But on Monday, Roberts joined the court’s liberals in striking down a nearly identical law in Louisiana, even as he stood by the reasoning in his earlier dissent.The chief justice justified the change in his vote by pointing to the doctrine of stare decisis, which says the court should usually stand by its precedents. It “instructs us to treat like cases alike,” he wrote, and “the Louisiana law burdens women seeking previability abortions to the same extent as the Texas law” did four years ago.The value of following precedent, he added, is that it “promotes the evenhanded, predictable, and consistent development of legal principles, fosters reliance on judicial principles, and contributes to the actual and perceived integrity of the judicial process.” While precedent is not an “inexorable demand,” simple disagreement with a previous decision is not enough to justify reversing course, he wrote.In this case, he observed, not only was the Louisiana law at issue virtually identical to the one the court struck down in 2016, but the District Court judge found after an extensive trial that if the law were to go into effect, at minimum two of the three abortion clinics in the state would be forced to close, women would have to wait longer and drive farther for abortions, and only one doctor would likely be left to fill the demand for 10,000 women seeking abortions in the state each year……The decision was also a particular repudiation of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which not only disregarded the Supreme Court’s earlier decision in the Texas case, but disregarded the factual findings of the District Court judge in the Louisiana case. As Roberts observed, the District Court judge, before his ruling, held a six-day trial in the case, and for 18 months monitored the attempts of clinic doctors, who, without success, sought in “good faith” to get the required admitting privileges.Leah Litman, a professor at the University of Michigan Law School, cautioned that Roberts’ opinion sets out a standard different from the one the court previously adopted.“The chief justice’s reasoning was actually quite permissive in what it would allow states do to restrict abortions,” she observed.That said, the decision does appear to send the signal that Roberts is not prepared to uphold state laws that, for instance, ban abortions at six, eight or 12 weeks, or any other time before fetal viability….…Meanwhile, former Vice President Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee for president, applauded the Supreme Court for ” that states cannot put in place laws that unduly burden a woman’s right to make her own health care decisions with her doctor.”… June 29, 2020: EMILY’s List posted a statement on U.S. Supreme Court Ruling in June Medical Services V. Russo”. From the statement: Today, Stephanie Schriock, president of EMILY’s List, the nation’s largest resource for women in politics, released the following statement on the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in June Medical Services v. Russo, which will protect access to abortion care in Louisiana.“Today’s Supreme Court decision is a victory for people in Louisiana, particularly communities of color and low-income people, and a blow to deceptive and political efforts to limit abortion access. Even though the Republican Party will stop at nothing to turn back the clock on our reproductive freedom, we’re proud to stand with our allies in the reproductive freedom and justice communities and the majority of Americans in supporting everyone’s ability to make their own health care decisions. While we are grateful for today’s decision, this case is yet another reminder how vital it is to have pro-choice majorities in the Senate and in state legislatures around the country. Voters will not forget that Senators like Susan Collins, John Cornyn, and Joni Ernst confirmed justices who put our reproductive freedom in danger. EMILY’s List won’t stop fighting to elect pro-choice Democratic women at every level of office who will protect essential abortion access.” June 29, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a statement titled: “ACOG Statement on June Medical Services v. Russo”. From the statement: The following is a statement from Maureen G. Phipps, MD, MPH, FACOG, chief executive officer of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, on today’s decision from the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of June Medical Services, LLC, v. Russo:“Today, obstetrician-gynecologists from around the country celebrate the Supreme Court’s decision that will help protect the ability of their patients to receive essential care and that affirms physicians’ roles in advocating for their patients. Once again, just as in 2016, the Court has declared that placing onerous, unreasonable requirements on physicians and clinicians who provide abortion creates an unconstitutional burden on patients in violation of the U.S. Constitution.“ACOG is grateful that the Court continues to consider the expert views of the nation’s medical community, citing the brief we led with 13 other major medical organizations in recognizing that ‘local admitting-privileges requirements for abortion providers offer no medical benefit and do not meaningfully advance continuity of care.’ We are also encouraged that the Court appreciates the patient-physician relationship, which includes for the ability of physicians to advocate in all ways for the health and well-being of their patients, including in the courts. “ACOG has long led the medical community in opposing burdensome requirements on clinicians who provide essential care, including abortion. Such restrictions do nothing to protect or advance patient safety. As our brief explained, abortion is a very safe medical procedure, and restricting access only makes our patients less safe by forcing them to delay needed abortions or forego them altogether. “Today’s decision once again affirms that abortion access is a constitutionally protected right. While we celebrate the decision, we also know that access to care continues to be delayed or denied for many women due to systemic inequities and inequalities. We therefore urge legislators to build on the Court’s decision and drive policy solutions that will advance equitable care across the country. ACOG and its members will continue to advocate at every level to enhance our patients’ ability to access quality, essential care.” June 29, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “Supreme Court Follows Precedent in Victory for Abortion Rights”. From the press release: Today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Center for Reproductive Rights, striking down a Louisiana law that would have closed all but one abortion clinic in the state. The medically unneccessary law would have banned doctors from providing abortion care unless they had admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles. The ruling in June Medical Services v. Russo–the first abortion rights case to be heard under the current makeup of the Supreme Court–allows the state’s three remaining clinics to stay open.Today’s ruling follows precedent from just four years ago in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt–a case also won by the Center–in which the Court struck down an identical law in Texas. In that case, the Court held that laws that create more burdens than benefits for people seeking abortion care are unconstitutional. Today’s ruling applies Whole Woman’s Health and reverses the lower court decision that would have upheld the law.Justice Breyer, delivering a plurality opinion, wrote, “Given the facts found, we must… uphold the District Court’s related factual and legal determinations. These include its determination that Louisiana’s law poses a ‘substantial obstacle’ to women seeking an abortion; its determination that the law offers no significant health-related benefits; and its determination that the law consequently imposes an ‘undue burden’ on a woman’s constitutional right to choose to have an abortion. We also agree with its ultimate legal conclusion that, in light of these findings and our precedents, Act 620 violates the Constitution.” Statement from Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, reacting to today’s pivotal ruling in favor of abortion providers:This is a big win that vindicates what we’ve said all along, which is that the Louisiana admitting privileges law is unconstitutional. This is a victory for the people of Louisiana and the rule of law, but this case never should have gotten this far. We won an identical case four years ago in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, and the fact that we had to fight so hard again goes to show that nothing should be taken for granted when it comes to protecting abortion rights. Indeed, the Court did not speak with a clear majority opinion which could muddy the waters when clarity is needed to protect abortion rights. As a result of this decision, the clinics in Louisiana can stay open to serve the one million women of reproductive age in the state. This is critical because access to abortion care has a profound impact on a person’s health and life. For this reason, the Constitution protects the most intimate decisions that a person makes about their body, their health, their life, and their future. Yet for decades, opponents of reproductive rights have relentlessly sought to deny the promise of Roe v. Wade with an avalanche of laws targeting providers, clinics, and patients. These laws disproportionately impact communities of color, young people, rural communities, and people living in poverty. In Louisiana, abortion restrictions disproportionately harm African Americans who already live under the weight of systemic racism that pervades every aspect of American life including housing, voting, education, employment, and health. Louisiana lawmakers should be addressing these ingrained inequities rather than taking people’s rights away. Unfortunately, the Court’s ruling today will not stop those hell-bent on banning abortion. We will be back in court tomorrow and will continue to fight state by state, law by law to protect our constitutional right to abortion. But we shouldn’t have to keep playing whack-a-mole. It’s time for Congress to pass The Women’s Health Protection Act, a federal bill that would ensure the promise of Roe v. Wade is realized in every state for every person. June 29, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris Statement on Supreme Court Striking Down Unconstitutional Restriction on Abortion”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Monday released the following statement in response to the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case June Medical Services LLC v. Russo.“Today’s Supreme Court decision preserved access to abortion. Thanks to this ruling, health clinics in Louisiana will be able to remain open and continue providing safe, legal abortion care. The Court struck down a Louisiana law designed to shutter reproductive health clinics and make abortion virtually impossible to access for people in the state. This ruling is especially important for low-income people and people of color whose health and financial security are more likely to be impacted by barriers to comprehensive reproductive health care.“While the Court reached the right result today, we must nonetheless keep up the fight to protect access to abortion. That is why it is incumbent upon Congress to pass the Women’s Health Protection Act, which would prohibit states from enacting laws that impose burdensome requirements on access to abortion.” June 29, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on June Medical Services v. Russo”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Louisiana’s draconian abortion restrictions:“Today, the Supreme Court issued a victory for women’s health and freedoms and for the Constitution. The highest court in the land has adhered to precedent as it maintains the constitutional right to women’s basic reproductive health care.“As Republicans continue their assault nationally on Roe v Wade, they are also fighting on a state by state basis. Louisiana’s draconian abortion ban was a clear and intentional violation of the Constitution, explicitely designed to permanently destroy women’s reproductive freedoms and dismantle their right to make their own decisions about their health, bodies and timing and size of their families. This ruling is a win for the people of Louisiana – but we must be ever-vigilant against the Republicans’ dangerous, nationwide assault against women’s reproductive health freedoms.“Democrats will continue to fight partisan attacks on women’s health and freedoms, as we defend the constitutional right to comprehensive health care and reproductive freedoms.” June 29, 2020: New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Helps Win Supreme Court Case Guaranteeing Women’s Access to Abortion Coverage”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today helped win a major victory at the U.S. Supreme Court that will protect the ability of women across the nation to maintain access to safe, legal abortions. Attorney General James led a coalition of 22 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs in the case of June Medical Services v. Gee, in which a medical provider sought to overturn a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that upheld a Louisiana law requiring abortion providers to maintain admitting privileges at local hospitals. The law at issue was identical to the Texas law that the Supreme Court invalidated in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellersedt, in 2016. The Supreme Court today reaffirmed its ruling in Whole Woman’s Health and held that the Louisiana law was unconstitutional, as it infringes on women’s reproductive freedoms and the right to access an abortion, enshrined in the landmark Supreme Court decision of Roe v. Wade in 1973.“More than 45 years after Roe v. Wade etched into law a woman’s right to access an abortion, states continue to look for ways to chip away at this constitutional guarantee and place burdensome restrictions on women’s reproductive freedoms,” said Attorney General James. “But today’s Supreme Court decision once again makes clear that this right and constitutional guarantee cannot be infringed upon and no roundabout law will push us back to a time of back alley abortions. Despite all the progress made in women’s freedoms over the last five decades, the state of Louisiana has continued to strive to regulate women’s bodies and deprive them of one of their most important constitutional rights. This law was simply about controlling women’s bodies, controlling their choices, and controlling their freedom, which is why we fought it every step of the way.”In 2014, Louisiana enacted a law that requires abortion providers to maintain admitting privileges at local hospitals. Had the Supreme Court not struck down this law today, Louisiana would be left with, at most, two physicians at only two clinics across the state who could provide abortion services, despite the fact that roughly 10,000 women obtain abortions in Louisiana each year. Louisiana’s admitting-privileges requirement was identical to a Texas statute that was invalidated and found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt. Earlier in the case, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana granted a permanent injunction against implementation of the Louisiana law, but, in 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed that decision. June Medical Services and two physicians appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, which granted an emergency application to stay the law from taking effect, pending the outcome of the appeal.In December, Attorney General James led a coalition of attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in the case because states have an interest in ensuring the availability of safe, medically sound abortion services and in protecting the health and safety of women seeking abortion services, as well as defending the long-recognized, substantive due process right to choose to terminate a pregnancy and the undue-burden standard that governs review of regulations implicating that right. In the brief, the attorneys general argued that Louisiana’s law is an unnecessary and onerous burden that fails to promote women’s health and would end up further limiting the number of abortion providers available to women in Louisiana.This case was handled by Assistant Solicitor General Ester Murdukhayeva, Deputy Solicitor General Andrea Oser, and Solicitor General Barbara D. Underwood — all of the Division of Appeals and Opinions. June 29, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Floor Speech in Support of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Enhancement Act”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi delivered remarks on the Floor of the House of Representatives in support of H.R. 1425, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Enhancement Act, House Democrats’ For the People legislation to build on the Affordable Care Act to lower health costs and prescription drug prices. Below are the Speaker’s remarks:…But here, today, we are focused on that first For The People priority. Access to affordable care is a matter of life and death. That’s so self-evident as we see every day in the COVID-19 crisis, which has killed more than 125,000 Americans, infecting 2.5 million Americans and that has left tens of millions of people without jobs.As Dr. King once said, ‘Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health is the most shocking and the most inhuman because it often results in physical death.’ Yes. As lives are shattered by the coronavirus, the protections of the Affordable Care Act are more important now, more than ever. And this is a health justice issue. Democrats, with this bill, will strengthen America’s health and financial security during this time of crisis and for years to come. It lowers Americans’ health care coverage, significantly increasing the Affordable Care Act’s affordability subsidies to be more generous and cover more middle-class families. It negotiates lower prescription drugs, drawing from our H.R. 3 legislation, to ensure that Americans no longer have to pay more for our medicines that big pharma charges for the same drugs overseas.This has been a long-term goal of Democrats in the Congress. In 2006, when we were running and won the Majority, our For The People agenda, that equivalent agenda was ‘A New Direction for America: Six for ’06,’ and we had six bills we said would pass immediately after obtaining the Majority. Well, we passed all six of them in the House of Representatives. Five of them became law. Only one of them did not: the law enabling the Secretary of HHS to negotiate for lower prescription drug prices.This has been a fight over the years that we continue to make it because it is central to not only to the health, but financial health and security of America’s working families. In addition, this legislation expands coverage and pushes hold-out states to adopt Medicaid expansion for the 4.8 million cruelly excluded from the coverage. It combats inequities in health coverage faced by communities of color, expanding more affordable coverage to vulnerable populations and fighting the maternal mortality epidemic. And it cuts down on junk plans. They are such a rip: ‘Let me just pay you every – all the time for my health insurance but you won’t be there for me when I need care.’ So, it cracks down on those junk plans and strengthens coverage for people with pre-existing conditions.What is interesting in this whole debate is to hear the President and Members on the other side of the aisle say, oh, they are all for protecting pre-existing conditions. Oh really? Then why are you in the United States Supreme Court to overturn them? And, now, just back to this bill, according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, our legislation that we have on the Floor today would help well over – would lower the costs for well over 17 million more Americans and safeguard the Affordable Care Act’s life-saving protections for the 130 million Americans with pre-existing conditions. When they say they are for allowing people with pre-existing conditions to get coverage, they don’t say at what costs. This is one of the biggest differences – well, with stiff competition – but one of the biggest differences between Democrats and Republicans, we guarantee affordability and protect the pre-existing medical condition as not being an obstacle to access. They are in court trying to overturn it. Sadly, and this is a stark contrast as I pointed out, as Democrats unveiled our legislation last week, President Trump went to the Court doubling down on his lawsuit to tear down the ACA and dismantle every one of its protections, including the pre-existing medical condition benefit. At a time when families need health care more than ever, the President is trying to strip protections from about 130 million Americans with pre-existing conditions and take coverage away from 23 million Americans. That does not even go into what he is trying to do to the enhanced benefit that all Americans with health care enjoy.We need to build on the progress of the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act to lower health costs and prescription drug costs, not rip Americans’ health care in the middle of a pandemic. What sense does that make? One day – on day one of this Congress, led by Representative Allred, the House voted to throw our legal weight in this lawsuit. Yet, 190 Republicans voted against that Resolution, choosing to be fully complicit in the President’s attempt to tear away health protections. We continue to call on the President to abandon his lawsuit to destroy the Affordable Care Act and urge him, instead, to call on the fourteen states who have refused to expand Medicaid, to do so. Doesn’t it just make sense at a time of a pandemic? It’s always important. It would have been amusing if this were not deadly serious to hear Senator Cornyn say, ‘Well, these people who’ve lost their jobs because of this pandemic can always sign up for the Affordable Care Act.’ Really, but you’re trying to take it down? The Administration has a responsibility to defend the law of the land, not to tear it down. Today, Members of Congress have the choice: to strengthen America’s health care protections and lower health care costs or be complicit, once again I use that word, in President Trump’s campaign to dismantle families’ health care. Make no mistake, a vote against this bill is a vote to weaken Americans’ health and financial security during a pandemic……With this bill, Democrats in the House are offering our salute to good health to the American people, and we hope the Republicans would join us in that salute to good health to the American people.With that, I urge a strong vote for the Patient Protection Affordable Care Enhancement Act, for the people, for the children, for the future. With that, I yield back. June 29, 2020: NARAL Pro-Choice America posted a press release titled: “NARAL President Ilyse Hogue Comments on Supreme Court Decision in June Medical Services v. Russo”. From the press release: The U.S. Supreme Court today issued its decision in June Medical Services LLC v. Russo, striking down a medically unnecessary clinic shutdown law in Louisiana as unconstitutional. The law threatened to decimate abortion access in Louisiana, where access is already extremely restricted. NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue released the following statement in response to the decision:“Today’s decision is a win for women in Louisiana who will continue to have access to the time-sensitive abortion care they need. It’s a win for truth and fact-based decision making, as even a Court tilted so far right couldn’t ignore the concrete arguments and data showing that public health is compromised by these burdensome restrictions on abortion. Finally, today’s decision shows that advocates can make a difference. Support for Roe v. Wade is at an all-time high in this country and so many made their voices heard through this process. The Court’s legitimacy in the eyes of the public will be threatened if they follow through on Trump’s promise to end legal abortion.This win, however, doesn’t change the simple fact that reproductive freedom in the United States remains on the line thanks to anti-choice extremists who have shown time and again that they will stop at nothing to advance their dangerous ideological agenda and a Court still looking for ways to accommodate them.In this moment of turmoil for our country, fighting for the fundamental rights of every body is more important than ever. That’s why we cannot and will not back down in the face of these relentless attacks on our ability to determine our own destinies. We will fight with everything we have to make sure the politicians like Senators Susan Collins, Joni Ernst, Thom Tillis, and Cory Gardner, who rubber-stamped Trump and Mitch McConnell’s efforts to stack our courts with radical right ideologues, are held accountable for putting our freedom at risk. Anti-choice politicians be warned: The 77% of Americans who support the legal right to abortion care won’t forget what you did—and you’ll be answering to us this November.”June Medical Services LLC v. Russo challenged a dangerous Louisiana law that would have gutted abortion access in the state by requiring doctors to have medically unnecessary admitting privileges at a local hospital. The clinic shutdown law at issue in the case was identical to one blocked in another case, Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, decided by the Supreme Court in 2016 before Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch joined the Court. These restrictions are based on disinformation pushed by the anti-choice, anti-freedom movement that falsely claims restrictions like this help women, though there is no medical benefit to mandating admitting privileges and they do nothing to make women safer. In truth, the evidence overwhelmingly shows that abortion care is extremely safe and leading medical experts oppose restrictions like the one the Supreme Court considered in this case because they block “access to quality, evidence-based medicine.”Reproductive freedom is under attack in the United States like never before. Since Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court tipped the balance of the bench to an anti-choice, anti-freedom majority, lawmakers hostile to abortion have launched an all-out assault on reproductive rights in hopes that a challenge will make its way to the Court and end Roe v. Wade. Since Kavanaugh’s confirmation, emboldened anti-choice politicians have pounced on any and every opportunity to gut the landmark abortion rights case. Extreme bans on abortion were introduced, passed, or signed in 31 states in 2019 alone, and more than two dozen cases are in the pipeline that could completely overturn Roe.As NARAL has said from the beginning, we can’t forget who put Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch on the Court in the first place. Donald Trump’s judicial nominees are beholden to the anti-choice movement and with a majority on the Court hostile to reproductive freedom, our fundamental rights remain on the line.As the Trump administration and anti-choice extremists across the country target reproductive rights in their quest to maintain white patriarchy and control women, NARAL has embarked on its multi-faceted, largest-ever electoral program for the 2020 election. Key to NARAL’s strategy is reaching, persuading, and mobilizing key voter segments including soft-partisan persuadable women voters, and low-propensity pro-choice voters who are motivated by Trump and Republicans’ commitment to ending Roe v. Wade, criminalizing abortion, and punishing women. These critical voting blocs value reproductive freedom and align with the 77% of Americans who support Roe v. Wade.The anti-choice movement has spent decades working overtime to destroy access to abortion, state by state, law by law. This Louisiana law was just one part of a coordinated effort by the anti-choice radical right to gut Roe v. Wade and advance their agenda of power and control. Since 2011, anti-choice politicians have pushed nearly 450 laws restricting reproductive freedom through state legislatures.This case underscores the need for federal protections for abortion rights. Passing the Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA) would guarantee the right to abortion and defend against the onslaught of abortion bans and restrictions from state legislatures across the country—even if the Supreme Court guts Roe or state governments pass legislation restricting reproductive freedom. June 29, 2020: Center for Reproductive Rights posted a press release titled: “STATEMENT: Supreme Court Rules in favor of Abortion Providers in June Medical v. Russo”. From the press release: Statement from Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, reacting to today’s pivotal ruling in favor of abortion providers:This is a big win that vindicates what we’ve said all along, which is that the Louisiana admitting privileges law is unconstitutional. This is a victory for the people of Louisiana and the rule of law, but this case never should have gotten this far. We won an identical case four years ago in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, and the fact that we had to fight so hard again goes to show that nothing should be taken for granted when it comes to protecting abortion rights. Indeed, the Court did not speak with a clear majority opinion which could muddy the waters when clarity is needed to protect abortion rights. As a result of this decision, the clinics in Louisiana can stay open to serve the one million women of reproductive age in the state. This is critical because access to abortion care has a profound impact on a person’s health and life. For this reason, the Constitution protects the most intimate decisions that a person makes about their body, their health, their life, and their future. Yet for decades, opponents of reproductive rights have relentlessly sought to deny the promise of Roe v. Wade with an avalanche of laws targeting providers, clinics, and patients. These laws disproportionately impact communities of color, young people, rural communities, and people living in poverty. In Louisiana, abortion restrictions disproportionately harm African Americans who already live under the weight of systemic racism that pervades every aspect of American life including housing, voting, education, employment, and health. Louisiana lawmakers should be addressing these ingrained inequities rather than taking people’s rights away. Unfortunately, the Court’s ruling today will not stop those hell-bent on banning abortion. We will be back in court tomorrow and will continue to fight state by state, law by law to protect our constitutional right to abortion. But we shouldn’t have to keep playing whack-a-mole. It’s time for Congress to pass The Women’s Health Protection Act, a federal bill that would ensure the promise of Roe v. Wade is realized in every state for every person. June 30, 2020: American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) posted news titled: “Study: Public charge rule having a chilling effect on immigrant families’ use of public programs”. It was written by Melissa Jenco. From the news: Nearly one-third of low-income immigrant families with children avoided using public benefits because of green card concerns, according to a new study.“Such chilling effects are very concerning given that access to nutritious food, affordable health insurance coverage and stable housing are essential to children’s healthy development and to families’ material well-being and psychological health, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic when the need for public assistance is high,” researchers from the Urban Institute wrote in their report.In 2018, the Trump administration proposed changing the public charge rule, expanding authorities’ ability to consider immigrants’ use or likely use of public programs when deciding whether they can enter the U.S. or advance through the immigration process. The rule went into effect earlier this year despite opposition from the Academy and other advocates who feared immigrant families would forgo essential health services.Urban Institute researchers measured this chilling effect through a nationally representative survey in December 2019 that included 949 adults from immigrant families living with children.They found 20% avoided a public health benefit such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, Medicaid or housing assistance that year. Among low-income families, 31.5% avoided these programs.Drilling down further, the data showed 11% of the families, including 17% of those who are low-income, avoided a nutrition program. Roughly 11% of the immigrant families and 16% of those who were low-income avoided a medical program. Authors said these figures may be even higher now that the rule has gone into effect.Some families avoided programs they may not have realized were not part of the public charge rule such as the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children and free or reduced-price school lunches. Many parents did not know the rule excludes benefits used by children.Some families avoided programs they may not have realized were not part of the public charge rule such as the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children and free or reduced-price school lunches. Many parents did not know the rule excludes benefits used by children.“Although the public charge rule excludes benefits used by children as a factor in their parents’ public charge determination, reluctance to participate in public programs out of fear or confusion about immigration consequences could make it even harder for immigrant families with children to address their basic needs,” authors wrote.The findings come just weeks after another Urban Institute report found the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated hardships for low-income and minority families. Authors said Congress should include immigrant families in pandemic relief efforts and that community organizations should be prepared to provide additional assistance. Advocates also should ensure families know they can seek testing and treatment for COVID-19 without it being counted against their green card or visa application. June 30, 2020: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) posted a statement titled: “ACOG Statement on New Florida Law Requiring Written Consent for Pelvic Examinations”. From the statement: The following is a statement from Maureen G. Phipps, MD, MPH, FACOG, chief executive officer of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and Guy I. Benrubi, MD, FACOG, chair of ACOG District XII:“Government serves a valuable role in the protection of public health and safety and the provision of essential health services. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) supports this proper role of government. Laws that veer from these functions and unduly interfere with patient–physician relationships are not appropriate. Absent a substantial public health justification, government should not interfere with individual patient–physician encounters. The patient–physician relationship is essential to the provision of safe and quality medical care and should be protected from unnecessary governmental intrusion.“Doctors and patients weigh a variety of factors when making joint care decisions. A patient’s medical needs, history, symptoms, and personal values and preferences are all part of shared decision-making. When legislators dictate specific medical practices, it represents a gross intrusion in the patient–physician relationship.“On June 18, 2020, Governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill into law that imposes burdensome requirements on women’s health care through requiring written consent for any pelvic examination, whether it be done in a hospital setting, physician’s office, by a nurse practitioner, or otherwise. This law takes effect on July 1, 2020. While the goal of this bill was initially to protect patients in certain training contexts, the legislation was amended to contain broad-sweeping language that means that in Florida any health care practitioner is prohibited from providing any pelvic examination on a patient—a common, medically appropriate procedure—without the written consent of the patient.“All too often, legislators single out women’s health for regulations and mandates. This is not only another specific example but could set a dangerous a precedent for further efforts to single out women’s health, particularly their sexual health.“The ethical principle of informed consent requires a process defined by individualized conversations based on individual patients’ needs. Patient autonomy and informed consent cannot be realized by a state-mandated form or scripted conversation. Rather, it is achieved through mutual sharing of information and individualized conversations between health care professionals and their patients based on each patient’s unique needs. This fundamental principle guides our practices.“While this legislation may have been well intended in its original form, it was changed very late in the legislative session to broaden the original intended scope. The actual impact will be to interfere in the patient–physician relationship and to hold women’s health care to a different standard than other care. ACOG opposes this intrusion in the patient–physician relationship and will be working with other allied groups who are impacted by this new law to repeal this requirement.” June 30, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Florida governor signs abortion bill requiring parental consent for minors”. It was written by J. Edward Moreno. From the article: Florida Gov. Ron De Santis (R) on Tuesday signed a bill that requires anyone under 18 to receive parental consent for abortions.The bill, which was passed by the legislature earlier this year and goes into effect on July 1, would prohibit doctors from performing the procedure on minors unless they first get a notarized letter from a parent or guardian. Under previous law, people under the age of 18 needed to inform a parent or legal guardian before undergoing the procedure.Doctors who perform abortions without parental consent will face third-degree felony penalties.A minor is able to petition their corresponding circuit court and receive a judicial waiver of parental consent……Planned Parenthood of Florida said that the law passed Tuesday could put minors experiencing abuse in danger.“Even as other states like Massachusetts and Illinois are realizing the damage these forced parental consent laws are doing and working to reverse them, Florida is moving full speed to endanger young people who, in many cases, have experienced abuse at the hands of their own parents or guardians,” the organization said in a statement. June 30, 2020: Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates posted a press release titled: “DeSantis signs bill opening door to all out abortion ban”. From the press release: In spite of Florida still being in the thick of a pandemic, today Gov. Ron DeSantis signed HB 265/SB 404, forced parental consent for abortion, into law.“This law will put already at-risk young people in even greater danger at the worst possible time,” said Stephanie Fraim, President and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida. “What’s worse, it could open the door to a reinterpretation of our constitutional right to privacy and the right to a safe and legal abortion in Florida.”Even as other states from Massachusetts to Illinois are realizing the damage these forced parental consent laws are doing and working to reverse them, Florida is moving full speed ahead to further endanger young people who, in many cases, have experienced abuse at the hands of their own parents and guardians.Throughout the legislative process, supporters of the bill argued it would keep young people safer but medical experts have concluded just the opposite.According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, in the best of times, “legislation mandating parental involvement does not achieve the intended benefit of promoting family communication, and it increases the risk of harm to the adolescent by delaying access to appropriate medical care.”The truth is, most young people already seek the advice of their parent or guardian in this situation. Too often, for the ones who don’t it’s because they fear retribution. It could even be that their parent or guardian is an abuser and the reason they’re pregnant in the first place.The bill sponsors point to a process where these young people can go to court to get a bypass allowing them to access abortion care without parental consent in certain cases. Unfortunately, research has shown more than half the county clerks of court in Florida could offer little to no information about this process when surveyed. And that was before the coronavirus pandemic that is overwhelming health care providers and has closed down not just hotels and restaurants, but many of our courts. Given the restricted access to our courts, we’re concerned this public health crisis may now make a difficult situation – accessing timely abortion care – nearly impossible for our most at risk young people, including Black and Latinx youth.Black and Latinx communities have had less access to health care and dramatic health care disparities. We see these results in the ravages of COVID-19.If Black and Latinx people do not have the right to bodily autonomy to live their daily lives — or protest the violence against their lives — without the fear of violence or murder, we can never achieve justice, let alone reproductive freedom.“We have opposed this legislation from the start as bad public policy,” said Lillian Tamayo, President and CEO of Planned Parenthood of South, East and North Florida. “But the truth is, it’s worse than that. When this law goes into effect on July 1 Florida will be a more dangerous place for our young people. And if this is used, as has been threatened, as a stepping stone to an all-out abortion ban, the last place in the southeast to access safe and legal abortion will be gone.” June 30, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris, Tester, Colleagues to Trump Administration: Don’t Rip Away Health Care for Millions During Public Health Crisis”. From the press release: As the Trump Administration moves full-steam ahead to dismantle the health care law that provides coverage for millions of Americans, U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Tuesday joined Senator Jon Tester (D-MT) and 46 of their colleagues in introducing a resolution putting in the official Senate record their condemnation of that “reckless” effort and demanding the Department of Justice (DOJ) to defend existing law in court and halt its efforts to repeal the health care protections for millions – including 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions— in the middle of a public health emergency.“The Trump administration’s latest attempt to rip health care away from millions of Americans in the midst of pandemic is cruel,” said Harris. “Without the Affordable Care Act, millions of people in California and across the nation would be denied quality health coverage. While the administration continues to attempt to dismantle the ACA, we must remain committed to ensuring that everyone has access to affordable health care.” “This reckless effort puts millions of Americans – and thousands of Montanans – at risk at a time when they can afford it least,” Tester said. “Ripping away health coverage during a public health crisis is as irresponsible as it is cruel, and jeopardizes lives, our economy, and the rural Montana hospitals that rely on it to keep their doors open. While the Affordable Care Act is not perfect, scrapping it with no replacement would mean putting millions out in the cold in the middle of a global health emergency, and I will keep fighting every day to make sure access to quality, affordable health care is there for the folks who rely on it most.”Last week, the DOJ and a group of Republican Attorneys General submitted a brief to the U.S. Supreme Court urging it to invalidate the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and pull the rug out from underneath the millions of Americans with pre-existing conditions who depend on the law for health care coverage. If the Supreme Court agrees and overturns the ACA, 112,000 Montanans could lose coverage, including the 85,000 Montanans enrolled through Medicaid expansion and 7,000 Montanans under the of age 26 who have stayed on their parents’ health coverage could lose their care.Additionally more than 425,000 Montanans who have a pre-existing conditions could once again face annual or lifetime caps, medical underwriting for their insurance coverage, or denials for the care they need. Across the board, the state would lose billions of dollars in federal funds, causing significant job losses and jeopardizing the viability of Montana’s rural and frontier hospitals. All of this would happen in the midst of a global health crisis that has already strapped providers across Montana.The resolution urges DOJ to reverse its position and instead protect the millions of people who rely on the ACA for health care coverage amid the COVID-19 pandemic that has infected more than 2.5 million Americans and killed more than 125,000.The resolution is also backed by Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Joe Manchin (D-WV), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Mark Warner (D-VA), Doug Jones (D-AL), Tina Smith (D-MN), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Jack Reed (D-RI), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Tom Carper (D-DE), Dick Blumenthal (D-CT), Ed Markey (D-MA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Patty Murray (D-WA), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Gary Peters (D-MI), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ), Angus King (I-ME), Tom Udall (D-NM), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Chris Coons (D-DE), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), and Bernie Sanders (I-VT). A copy of the resolution is available HERE. June 30, 2020: Planned Parenthood Advocates in Missouri posted a press release titled: “In the Midst of a Pandemic, Missouri Supreme Court Delivers a Victory for Patients Who Need Care”. From the press release: In a decision issued today, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the effort by politicians in the state legislature to prevent Medicaid patients from receiving care from Planned Parenthood was unlawful. The Missouri Legislature unlawfully used the budget to “defund” Planned Parenthood health centers, which provide thousands of Missouri safety-net patients with vital preventive care like birth control, cancer screenings, and STI testing and treatments. The decision came during a public health emergency amidst a worldwide pandemic. Despite this ruling, Gov. Parson today signed off on another unlawful budget that discriminates against patients.Statement from M’Evie Mead, director of policy and organizing at Planned Parenthood Advocates in Missouri:“Today is a victory for Planned Parenthood patients who rely on public health insurance programs to stay healthy. Planned Parenthood health centers across the state have protected our communities’ health care needs by providing preventive services to thousands of patients. It’s unconscionable for Gov. Parson to continue trying to defund safety-net providers like Planned Parenthood while Missouri is struggling to contain the COVID-19 pandemic.“At a time when our health care system is stretched to the brink and our state is in the middle of a public health crisis, Gov. Parson and the legislature should be doing everything they can to support safety-net providers and the patients they serve, not trying to score political points by cutting access to care.”This case underscores aggressive attacks from state lawmakers and Gov. Parson on all aspects of reproductive health care. Under Parson’s watch, public health outcomes are alarming. Maternal mortality rates in Missouri are more than one third higher than the national average. Black women are three to four times likelier than white women to die from pregnancy-related complications. A syphilis outbreak is sweeping the state. Gov. Parson says he values life, but his actions are endangering Missourians’ health and yes, their lives.Missouri’s 11 Planned Parenthood health centers are a crucial component of the safety net, providing comprehensive and accessible health care to thousands of patients each year. Planned Parenthood offers Pap tests and a full range of birth control options, including long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) — the most effective form of birth control. Additionally, each Planned Parenthood has evening or weekend hours, and offers patients same-day or next-day appointments in most cases. A report found that besides Planned Parenthood, only seven percent of more than 600 safety-net providers in the state offer comprehensive and accessible care. Missouri’s health care safety net is already strained — it needs more resources, not fewer providers. “Defunding” Planned Parenthood leaves many patients with nowhere to turn for the vital preventive care they need because the remaining health centers cannot absorb them. June 30, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Harris, Tester, Colleagues to Trump Administration: Don’t Rip Away Health Care for Millions During Public Health Crisis”. From the press release: As the Trump Administration moves full-steam ahead to dismantle the health care law that provides coverage for millions of Americans, U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Tuesday joined Senator Jon Tester (D-MT) and 46 of their colleagues in introducing a resolution putting in the official Senate record their condemnation of that “reckless” effort and demanding the Department of Justice (DOJ) to defend existing law in court and halt its efforts to repeal the health care protections for millions – including 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions— in the middle of a public health emergency.“The Trump administration’s latest attempt to rip health care away from millions of Americans in the midst of pandemic is cruel,” said Harris. “Without the Affordable Care Act, millions of people in California and across the nation would be denied quality health coverage. While the administration continues to attempt to dismantle the ACA, we must remain committed to ensuring that everyone has access to affordable health care.” “This reckless effort puts millions of Americans – and thousands of Montanans – at risk at a time when they can afford it least,” Tester said. “Ripping away health coverage during a public health crisis is as irresponsible as it is cruel, and jeopardizes lives, our economy, and the rural Montana hospitals that rely on it to keep their doors open. While the Affordable Care Act is not perfect, scrapping it with no replacement would mean putting millions out in the cold in the middle of a global health emergency, and I will keep fighting every day to make sure access to quality, affordable health care is there for the folks who rely on it most.”Last week, the DOJ and a group of Republican Attorneys General submitted a brief to the U.S. Supreme Court urging it to invalidate the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and pull the rug out from underneath the millions of Americans with pre-existing conditions who depend on the law for health care coverage. If the Supreme Court agrees and overturns the ACA, 112,000 Montanans could lose coverage, including the 85,000 Montanans enrolled through Medicaid expansion and 7,000 Montanans under the of age 26 who have stayed on their parents’ health coverage could lose their care.Additionally more than 425,000 Montanans who have a pre-existing conditions could once again face annual or lifetime caps, medical underwriting for their insurance coverage, or denials for the care they need. Across the board, the state would lose billions of dollars in federal funds, causing significant job losses and jeopardizing the viability of Montana’s rural and frontier hospitals. All of this would happen in the midst of a global health crisis that has already strapped providers across Montana.The resolution urges DOJ to reverse its position and instead protect the millions of people who rely on the ACA for health care coverage amid the COVID-19 pandemic that has infected more than 2.5 million Americans and killed more than 125,000.The resolution is also backed by Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Joe Manchin (D-WV), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Mark Warner (D-VA), Doug Jones (D-AL), Tina Smith (D-MN), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Jack Reed (D-RI), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Tom Carper (D-DE), Dick Blumenthal (D-CT), Ed Markey (D-MA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Patty Murray (D-WA), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Gary Peters (D-MI), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ), Angus King (I-ME), Tom Udall (D-NM), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Chris Coons (D-DE), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), and Bernie Sanders (I-VT). A copy of the resolution is available HERE. A Timeline of the GOP’s Attempts to Destroy Obamacare – Part Four: April, May, June is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... This is How it SpreadsJuly 8, 2020Out of Spoons / Public HealthImage by Adalhelma from Pixabay By now, everyone knows that COVID-19 can spread from person to person. There are ways to help stop the spread. Wash your hands often. Wear cloth masks when you are outside – especially in situations where social distancing isn’t possible. Stay home if you are sick. Failure to do so causes the virus to spread. To make that clear, I decided to track the rallies, conventions, and other large events that President Trump and/or Vice President Pence attended. Those events provided a vivid example of how COVID-19 spreads. February 28, 2020: WCBD News 2 tweeted: “Folks have been camped out here for over 24 hours at this point on the parking lot of the North Charleston Collosseum awaiting the Trump Rally.” The tweet included a wide-angle photo from behind a series of short barracades. Several tents are visible on the parking lot. February 28, 2020: Digital Reporter for @WCBD Count on 2 Cait Przetak tweeted: “People are continuing to join the crowd at the North Charleston Colosseum as they prepare for President Trump later today. The Rally begins at 7 but doors open a 3 p.m. Some individuals have been here camping out for over 24 hours! @WCBD”. February 28, 2020: US Editor of The Daily Telegraph Ben Riley Smith tweeted: “Sea of red hats in the queue for Trump’s rally at North Charleston, South Carolina”. The tweet included a photo that shows the backs of people, many of whom are wearing red hats, as they stand in line. February 28, 2020: North Charleston Coliseum and Performing Arts Center tweeted: “All on-site parking lots are full. If you are coming to the Trump rally tonight, use a rideshare service such as @Uber or @lift #NChasColiseum”. February 28, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Lindsey Graham thanks Trump, bemoans ‘never-ending bull—-‘ at South Carolina Rally”. It was written by J. Edward Moreno. From the article: Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C) on Friday praised President Trump for several accomplishments in his first term while bemoaning “bullshit” faced by the president.Graham made the remarks while appearing alongside Trump at a rally in his home state of South Carolina on the eve of Saturday’s Democratic primary in his state……Grahams remarks came moments after Trump lashed out at Democrats and the news media during the rally, accusing them of pursuing a “new hoax” with their criticism of his administration’s handling of the coronavirus… February 29, 2020: Heavy posted an article titled: “How Many Attended Trump’s South Carolina Rally? Crowd & Overflow Photos”. It was written by Stephanie Dube Dwilson. From the article: President Donald Trump visited North Charleston, South Carolina for a Friday night rally on February 28, 2020 – the day before the Democrats’ big primary for the 2020 Presidential nomination. The venue, which seats 13,295, was packed and overflow space was needed for a crowd that had to watch outside……Trump’s South Carolina “Keep America Great” rally started at 7 p.m. Eastern on February 28 at the North Charleston Coliseum & Performing Arts Center. This large venue has seating fro 13,000, according to the venue’s website. ABC 4 reported that the arena has a capacity of 13,295…. March 2, 2020: CBS News posted and article titled: “Trump rallies supporters in Charlotte, North Carolina.” From the article: …Earlier Monday, Mr. Trump said he had no qualms about attending a large stadium rally despite the coronavirus threat.“I think it’s very safe,” Mr. Trump said of campaign rallies, adding that the Democratic candidates are having plenty of rallies themselves.The threat of the virus didn’t deter fans of Mr. Trump from attending Monday’s rally in Charlotte, where people in the stands shared buckets of chicken fingers and dunked their hands into shared vats of popcorn while they awaited the president’s arrival.…The coronavirus outbreak has killed more than 3,000 globally and upended life for many around the globe. In the U.S., the number of infections has surpassed 100, with six dead. Federal officials have not advised against large gatherings in the U.S., leaving that to officials to address……Republicans have picked Charlotte to host the Republican National Convention. Mr. Trump also visited Charlotte last month as part of a series of revitalization and “opportunity now” summits, programs he and administrative officials have highlighted as he tries to chip away the Democrats’ electoral advantage in minority communities. March 7, 2020: Associated Press posted a live blog titled: “The Latest: US state of Missouri reports first virus case”. From the live blog: …Maryland officials say a person in New Jersey who tested positive for coronavirus attended the recent Conservative Political Action Conference in the Washington suburb of Oxon Hill, Maryland.That’s leading Maryland officials to warn that anyone who attended or worked at the conference may be at some risk for acquiring COVID-19.Among the political figures who attended CPAC converence were President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence. The White House says there is no indication that either Trump or Pence was in close proximity to the attendee who tested positive… March 7, 2020: ACU (the official Twitter account of the American Conservative Union) tweeted: “Important Health Notification for CPAC 2020 participants and attendees”. The tweet included a screenshot with the following text:“The American Conservative Union has learned that one of our CPAC attendees has unfortunately tested positive today for coronavirus. The exposure occurred before the conference. A New Jersey hospital tested the person, and the CDC confirmed the positive result. The individual is under the care of medical professionals in the state of New Jersey, and has been quarantined.ACU has been in contact with the Health Department of the State of Maryland, and we will explicitly follow the guidance from government health experts.This attendee had no interaction with the President or the Vice President and never attended the events in the main hall.The health and safety of our attendees and participants is our top priority. Any attendee who has questions can contact ACU or the Department of Health for the State of Maryland.Our children, spouses, extended family, and friends attended CPAC. During this time, we need to remain calm, listen to our health care professionals, and support each other. We send this message in that spirit.The Trump Administration is aware of the situation, and we will continue regular communication with all appropriate government officials.” March 8, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Trump ‘not concerned at all’ after CPAC guest tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Johanna Walters. From the article: Donald Trump said he isn’t concerned at all about the coronavirus getting closed to the White House after it was revealed that an attendee at grassroots conservative conference CPAC had tested positive.On a day when it also emerged that the nation’s capital had recorded its first case, the American Conservative Union said on Saturday that a participant at CPAC, which was attended by both Trump and the U.S. vice-president Mike Pence, had tested positive for coronavirus.The White House said there was no indication that either Trump or Pence had been close to the infected attendee.Asked if he was concerned about the virus getting closer, Trump said: No, I’m not concerned at all. No, I’m not. We’ve done a great job.”When asked whether his thousand-person campaign rallies would … continue in light of the CPAC case, the president replied: “We’ll have tremendous rallies…” March 8, 2020: Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said Sunday that he shook hands with a man now confirmed to be infected with the novel form of coronavirus during a recent interaction at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). In a news release Sunday evening, Cruz said that based on medical advice he had received, he did not believe there was any current risk of him developing the disease, that has already infected more than 100,000 people globally… …Nevertheless, Cruz said he will remain at his home in Texas this week “out of an abundance of caution”… …However, ACU chairman Matt Schlapp told the Washington Post he interacted with the patient at the event and that he then shook Trump’s hand on the stage on the last day of the conference. The organization did not provide any other details about the patient or what events at the conference they attended… The Hill March 8, 2020: Ted Cruz (Republican – Texas) tweeted: “Today I released the following statement.” The tweet included a screenshot of a statement. “Last night, I was informed that 10 days ago at CPAC I briefly interacted with an individual who is currently symptomatic and has tested positive for COVID-19. That interaction consisted of a brief conversation and a handshake.“I have consulted with medical authorities from the Houston Health Department, the Harris County Public Health Department, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Department of Health and Human Services, as well as my personal physician. I have also spoken with Vice President Pence, Leader McConnell, and Mark Meadows.“I’m not experiencing any symptoms, and I feel fine and health. Given that the interaction was 10 days ago, that the average incubation period is 5-6 days, that the interaction was for less than a minute, and that I have no current symptoms, the medical authorities have advised that the odds of transmission from the other individual to me were extremely low.“The physicians further advised that testing is not effective before symptoms manifest, and my brief interaction with the individual does not meet the CDC criteria for self-quarantine.“The medical authorities explicitly advised me that, given the above criteria, the people who have interacted with me in the 10 days since CPAC should not be concerned about potential transmission.“Nevertheless, out of an abundance of caution, and because of how frequently I interact with my constituents as a part of my job and to give everyone peace of mind, I have decided to remain at my home in Texas this week, until a full 14 days have passed since the CPAC interaction.“Everyone should continue to treat this outbreak seriously and be driven by facts and medical science. We need to continue to be proactive in mobilizing resources to combat this outbreak – including the $8.3 billion in emergency funding we provided last week – and I encourage everyone to follow the recommendations of the CDC and other health professionals in protecting their own health and welfare, as well as the health and welfare of those around them.” March 8, 2020: Paul Gosar (Republican – Arizona) posted a statement on his website titled: “Gosar Statement on COVID-19”. From the press release: Today, U.S. Congressman Paul A. Gosar, D.D.S (AZ-04) issued the following statement:“I have been informed that during the CPAC conference members of my staff and I came into contact with an individual who has since tested positive for, and is hospitalized for, COVID-19. I was with the individual for an extended period of time, and we shook hands several times.I am not currently experiencing any symptoms, nor is any member of my staff. However, in order to prevent any potential transmission, I will remain at my home in Arizona until the conclusion of the 14 day period following my interaction with this individual. Additionally, out of an abundance of caution, I am closing my office in Washington D.C. for the week and my team will follow the previously approved Tele-commute plan.As we learn more about COVID-19, it is imperative to heed the advice and guidance from the CDC and medical professionals. President Trump and Vice President Pence have assembled an incredible team and I have been in contact with the CDC and the House Office of the Attending Physician.” March 8, 2020: Paul Gosar tweeted: “1. I am announcing that I, along with 3 of my senior staff, are officially under self-quarantine after sustained contact at CPAC with a person who has since been hospitalized with the Wuhan Virus. My office will be closed for the week.” This tweet was part of a short thread. The thread ended with this tweet: “2. We are all asymptomatic and feel great. But we are being proactive and cautious.” March 9, 2020: Congresswoman Julia Brownley (Democrat – California) posted a statement on her website titled: “Brownley Statement On Coronavirus Exposure”. From the press release: “Yesterday I was informed that an individual I met with last week in DC tested positive for COVID-19. I am told that individual is self-quarantining and has informed local public health officials.“I consulted with the Office of Attending Physician, the CDC, Ventura County Public Health, and a personal physician experienced in infectious diseases, all of whom said that the risk of exposure to me and my staff is considered very low.“However, given the significant number of constituents and other individuals that my staff and I normally have contact with each day when Congress is in session, I have decided to close our DC office for the week. My staff and I are working remotely to continue to serve the residents of Ventura County, and my district offices in Thousand Oaks and Oxnard remain open.“Out of an abundance of absolute caution, my DC staff and I are self-monitoring and maintaining social distancing practices. Neither I, nor my staff, are experiencing any symptoms at this time.” March 9, 2020: Representative Doug Collins (Republican – Georgia) tweeted: “This afternoon, I was notified by CPAC that they discovered a photo of myself and the patient who has tested positive for #COVID19. While I am not experiencing any symptoms, I have decided to self-quarantine out of an abundance of caution. Full statement →” The statement was attached to the tweet said: “This afternoon, I was notified by CPAC that they discovered a photo of myself and the patient who has tested positive for coronavirus. While I feel completely healthy and I am not experiencing any symptoms, I have decided to self-quarantine at my home for the remainder of the 14-day period out of an abundance of caution. I will follow the recommendations of the House Physician and my office will provide updates as appropriate.” March 9, 2020: Congressman Louie Gohmert (Republican – Texas) tweeted: “Congressman Gohmert’s full statement on #COVID-19”. It included the following statement: “Saturday night, I got a call from the House physician advising that I had possibly been exposed to the COVID-19 virus at CPAC on February 27th, and that a top CDC physician in Atlanta would call me to discuss what should be done going forward. After CDC physician called me Sunday evening, and we discussed all the specific circumstances of which he was aware along with my circumstance, including that I was asymptomatic, he said that all things considered, I was cleared to return to Washington. He said he would return if he were me and advised that my staff and I should just be careful to observe proper hygiene protocols. I took the advice of the expert and returned to work. No one is panicking and we are observing the recommended precautions.” March 9, 2020: Representative Josh Harder (Democrat – California) tweeted: “Folks, I’m canceling my planned town hall for next week – don’t want to gather a large crowd on the advice of health experts. Will hold a #coronavirus telephone town hall instead. More info to come.” March 9, 2020: NPR posted an article titled: “Meadows, Other Members of Congress Self-Quarantine After CPAC Coronavirus Exposure”. It was written by Bobby Allyn. From the article: Reps. Mark Meadows, Doug Collins, and Matt Gaetz said Monday that they are self-quarantining after learning they came in contact with a person infected with coronavirus while attending a conservative conference in the Washington area last month.Rep. Mark Meadows, who is the incoming White House chief of staff, is one of several members who attended last month’s Conservative Political Action Conference. At least one attendee has tested positive for coronavirus. Meadows says he has no symptoms and tested negative. But, his spokesperson said, “out of an abundance of caution… he’ll remain at home until the 14 day period expires this Wednesday.”That brings the number of congressional lawmakers who are self-quarantining over coronavirus concerns to six.Both Collin and Gaetz have been in close contact with Trump in recent days. Reporters traveling with the president saw Gaetz board Air Force One on Monday… March 9, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Coronavirus, quarantined congressman flew with Trump on Air Force One”. From the article: Two Republican congressmen who were in close contact with Donald Trump in recent days have self-quarantined over concerns that they were also in contact in the same period with a known carrier of the coronavirus.Republicans Matt Gaetz of Florida and Doug Collins of Georgia announced on Monday that they had begun two weeks of self-imposed isolation, as recommended by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for anyone who has come into contact with the virus. Both congressmen said they were asymptomatic.Gaetz flew with Trump on Air Force One from Orlando to Washington on Monday and was informed en route that he had come into contact with a virus carrier at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Maryland last month.“While the congressman is not experiencing symptoms, he received testing today and expects results soon,” said a message posted to Gaetz’s Twitter account.Collins greeted Trump with a handshake at an airport in Atlanta on Friday before the two visited the CDC headquarters for an update on coronavirus. Collins subsequently learned that he also had been potentially exposed at the conservative conference, held each year in Maryland……Gaetz had worn an enormous gas mask last week during a House floor vote on an emergency funding package for the coronavirus response, but he later faced widespread condemnation when one of his own constituents died from the illness… March 9, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “Trump had contact with congressmen Collins and Gaetz before they self-quarantined over coronavirus concerns”. It was written by Dan Mangan and Kevin Breuninger. From the article: President Donald Trump had contact with two Republican congressmen before their announcements Monday that they were entering self-quarantine after learning they had been previously exposed to someone since diagnosed with coronavirus.Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia shook hands with Trump last Friday when the president traveled to Atlanta to visit the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, where officials there briefed him on their response to coronavirus.Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida flew on Air Force One with Trump on Monday on a flight from Orlando, Fla., to Joint Base Andrews in Maryland.The New York Times, citing two people with knowledge of the situation, reported that Gaetz learned shortly after the plane was airborne that he, like Collins, had been in contact with a person at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Maryland in late February who has since been diagnosed with coronavirus. Gaetz then sat in a section of the plane by himself, the newspaper reported.Gaetz publicly revealed he was entering self-quarantining about an hour after he got off the plane with Trump……The White House said later Monday that Trump had not been tested for coronavirus…. March 10, 2020: Matt Gaetz (Republican – Florida) tweeted: “I’ve just been informed that my COVID-19 lab test was negative. In an abundance of caution, I will remain under self-quarantine at the advice of medical professionals through Thursday at 2pm. I continue to feel fine and show no symptoms.” March 11, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Trump travel to Nevada, Colorado called off due to coronavirus”. It was written by Brett Samuels. From the article: President Trump canceled events scheduled for this week in Nevada and Colorado due to the coronavirus, the White House announced Wednesday.“Out of an abundance of caution from the Coronavirus outbreak, the President has decided to cancel his upcoming events in Colorado and Nevada,” White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said in a statement.The president was scheduled to fly to Nevada on Thursday to attend a fundraiser and speak at Saturday’s Republican Jewish Coalition conference in Las Vegas. He was expected to stop in Denver on Friday……The Trump campaign does not currently have any rallies scheduled… March 11, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Senate staffer tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Jordain Carney. From the article: A staffer in Sen. Maria Cantwell’s D.C. office has tested positive for the coronavirus, the Washington state Democratic senator announced on Wednesday night.The announcement marks the first known instance of a congressional staffer getting the virus and follows days of heightened anxiety on Capitol Hill.The staffer, according to a notice from Cantwell’s office, has been isolated since they started to have symptoms. Cantwell is closing her D.C. office for the remainder of the week for a deep cleaning.“The individual who tested positive for COVID-19 has had no known contact with the senator or other members of Congress. The senator is requesting that testing be done on any other staffers who have been in contact with the individual and show symptoms,” the notice continues.It marked the latest development in escalating stream of coronavirus news coming out of the nation’s Capitol on Wednesday, where Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser declared a state of emergency after six additional cases of COVID-19 were confirmed.The House and Senate sergeants-at-arms are also preparing to announce the suspension of all tours in the Capitol in an effort to limit the potential spread of the virus on the hill… March 12, 2020: Business Insider posted an article titled: “Trump won’t self-quarantine despite potential coronavirus exposure from Bolsonaro aide that caused 2 Republican senators to do so”. It was written by Kayla Epstein. From the article: President Donald Trump has not been tested for coronavirus and has not entered self-quarantine, even after Republican Senators who had similar exposure to a reported COVID-19 patient this weekend chose to take these protective measures.Trump was at his West Palm Beach club in Mar-a-Lago earlier this week along with a group that included several other administration officials, Republican politicians, Fox News personalities, and other conservatives, according to 1100 Pennsylvania, a watchdog blog dedicated to documenting possible conflicts of interest and high-profile comings and goings at Trump’s properties.Also in attendance: Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who was in Florida accompanied by a delegation this week. His spokesman Fabio Wajngarten, who accompanied the foreign leader on the trip and was at Mar-a-Lago, later tested positive for COVID-19 according to Brazilian media and CNN.Earlier this week, Wajngarten posted a photo of himself side by side with Trump and Vice President Mike Pence at Mar-a-Lago on Instagram. He sported a “Make Brazil Great Again” hat, a nod to the President’s own statement accessory.White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham said in a statement to Insider that “The White House is aware of public reports that a member of the Brazilian delegation’s visit to Mar-a-Lago last weekend tested positive for COVID-19; confirmatory testing is pending,”Despite concerns that Trump and Pence may have been subsequently exposed to the coronavirus by standing right next to Wajngarten, Grisham that they “had almost no interactions with the individual who tested positive and do not require being tested at this time.”… March 12, 2020: Senator Rick Scott (Republican – Florida) posted a press release titled: “Senator Rick Scott to Self-Quarantine Following Potential Contact with Brazilian Delegation Member Who Tested Positive for Coronavirus”. From the press release: Today, Senator Rick Scott released the following statement on his decision to self-quarantine following potential contact with a Brazilian delegation member who tested positive for Coronavirus.Senator Rick Scott said: “My office was altered today by the Brazilian Embassy that a member of President Bolsonaro’s delegation tested positive for Coronavirus. On Monday, I met with the President in Miami, and while I do not believe I interacted with the infected person, that individual was in the same room as me. The Embassy said the person had no symptoms leading up to or the day of the conference. After consulting with the Senate’s attending physician and my personal doctor, I have been told that my risk is low, and I don’t need to take a test or quarantine. However, the health and safety of the American people is my focus and I have made the decision to self-quarantine in an abundance of caution. I am feeling healthy and not experiencing any symptoms at this time. I will still be working on my plan to combat Coronavirus and protect American families, and my offices in D.C. and throughout the state will still be fully operational to help Floridians.”… March 12, 2020: Senator Lindsey Graham (Republican – South Carolina) tweeted: “Statement from the Office of Senator Lindsey Graham”. The tweet included a screenshot of the following statement: “Senator Graham was at Mar-a-Lago last weekend. He has no recollection of direct contact with the President of Brazil, who is awaiting results of a coronavirus test, or his spokesman who tested positive.“However, in an abundance of caution and upon advice from his doctor, Senator Graham has decided to self-quarantine awaiting the results of a coronavirus test. “This is a precautionary measure. He will continue to work from home.” Lindsey Graham’s self-quarantine comes almost two weeks after he attended the Trump rally in South Carolina on February 28, 2020. The CDC states that symptoms of COVID-19 may appear 2 to 4 days after exposure to the virus. It is unclear whether or not Lindsey Graham had symptoms. March 12, 2020: Eduardo Bolsonaro (third child of Jair Bolsonaro and Federal Deputy from São Paulo) posted a tweet in two languages. The English part said: “President @jairbolsonaro Bolsonaro has been tested for coronavirus and we are waiting for the results. However, he is not exhibiting any symptoms of the disease.” March 13, 2020: Business Insider posted an article titled: “Miami Mayor Francis Suarez confirms he tested positive for coronavius after meeting with Jair Bolsonaro’s delegation this week”. It was written by Kayla Epstein. From the article: Miami mayor Francis Suarez announced he has tested positive for the coronavirus, after he met with Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro and his delegation in Miami earlier this week.In a Friday video to supporters that appeared to be taken from isolation, Suarez confirmed the positive result for COVID-19, the disease cause by the coronavirus.“I feel completely healthy and strong,” Suarez said in the video. “However, I am doing the responsible thing by working with the county’s health department to take every precaution to ensure that not only my family’s healthy, but everyone I have come into contact with is healthy with as well.”Suarez urged anyone who had physical contact twith him to self-quarantine and said he could continue to work while recovering. “If we did not shake hands or you did not come into contact with me if I coughed or sneezed, there is no action you need to take whatsoever,” he said. “If we did, however, touch or shake hands, or if I sneezed or coughed near you since Monday, it is recommended that you self-isolate for 14 days, but you do not need to get tested. After speaking with medical professionals, I will continue to follow Department of Health protocol and remain isolated while I lead our government remotely.”Suarez told the Miami Herald in an interview on Friday that he was “concerned for people who have had some measure of contact with me.”……During Bolsonaro’s visit to Miami on Monday and Tuesday, Suarez said he was in the same room as the president and his infected staff member.Suarez said that he did not believe that he had personal contact with the infected individual, and was not experiecing symptoms. However, he chose to enter self-quarantine “out of an abundance of caution.” March 13, 2020: ABC News posted an article titled: “Donor recently at Mar-a-Lago tests positive for coronavirus, according to Trump Victory email”. It was written by Will Steakin. From the article: Trump Victory on Friday informed donors via email who attended a fundraiser at Mar-a-Lago on Sunday that a donor who also attended the event has tested positive for the coronavirus, according to an email obtained by ABC News.“We unfortunately write today to notify you that an attendee at the Trump Victory-sponsored event you attended at Mar-a-Lago on Sunday, March 8, has tested positive for the Coronavirus,” the joint committee between the Trump campaign and Republican National Committee wrote in an email sent today.The news was first reported by the New York Times.A senior campaign official tells ABC News the donor did not interact with the president. An RNC official told ABC News that the donor who tested positive for the coronavirus had “no direct contact with the first family” at the Mar-a-Lago event.“The attendee had no direct interaction with the president or the first family at this event and the VP did not attend this event,” RNC official said.A Trump campaign senior official also said “no known interaction with family.”The email adds that the group is “not aware if the individual had the virus. by the time of the event.”… March 13, 2020: Senator Ted Cruz posted a press release titled: “Sen. Cruz Announces Decision to Extend Self-Quarantine Until March 17 Out of Abundance of Caution”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) today issued the following statement: My self-quarantine ended yesterday afternoon. I still have no symptoms and feel fine, and I was looking forward to taking my family out to dinner tonight. “Unfortunately, last night I was informed I had a second interaction with an individual who yesterday tested positive for COVID-19. “On March 3, I met in my D.C. office with Santiago Abascal, the leader of the Vox Party in Spain. We met for about 20 minutes, sitting together at a conference table. We shook hands twice and took pictures together. “My understanding is that Mr. Abascal tested positive for COVID-19 last night. His staff have informed us that he was asymptomatic at the time of our meeting and that several days after our meeting he had extended interactions with another individual who has also tested positive. “I’m still not feeling any symptoms. I’m consulting with medical officials. But, for the same reasons I initially self-quarantined-out of an abundance of caution and to give everyone peace of mind-I am extending the self-quarantine to March 17, a full fourteen days from my meeting with Mr. Abascal. “COVID-19 is a serious public health hazard. All of us should resist panic, and we should listen to the doctors and the science. Medical professionals tell us social distancing is one of the most effective ways to prevent the spread of this virus, and we should take every step possible to protect our health and be safe.” March 18, 2020: NBC News posted an article titled: “Two members of House test positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Phil Helsel. From the article: Two members of the House of Representatives have tested positive for the coronavirus illness COVID-19 and are self-quarantining, the lawmakers said Wednesday.Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Fla., and Ben McAdams, D-Utah, are the first two members of Congress who have said they tested positive for COVID-19.Diaz-Balart was the first to make the announcement Wednesday. His office said in a statement that after votes on Friday, he self-quarantined in Washington, D.C., and decided not to return home because his wife has a pre-existing condition.Saturday evening, Diaz-Balart “developed symptoms, including a fever and a headache,” and on Wednesday, he learned he had tested positive for COVID-19, his office said.“I want everyone to know that I am feeling much better,” Diaz-Balart said in a statement. “However, it is important that everyone take this extremely seriously and follow CDC guidelines in order to avoid getting sick and mitigate the spread of this virus.”McAdams is quarantining at home in Utah. He said that after he returned home from Washington on Saturday evening, he developed mild cold-like symptoms and isolated himself at home.“My symptoms got worse and I developed a fever, a dry cough and labored breathing,” McAdams said in a statement. He was tested Tuesday and learned Wednesday that he was positive……President Donald Trump was tested, and the test came back as negative, his doctor said Saturday.At least seven lawmakers said they will self-quarantine as a precaution following the news of two representatives testing positive for the virus, although they said they are not experiencing any symptoms.Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., said in a statement Wednesday night that because he had an extended meeting with Diaz-Balart last week, he would self-quarantine. And on Thursday, Rep. Kendra Horn, D-Okla., tweeted that she will go into a “precautionary two-week self-quarantine” after having contact with McAdams last week.Rep. Drew Ferguson, R-Ga., also said that he will self-quarantine until March 27, after he was informed by the Attending Physician of the United States Congress that on March 13 he came into contact with a member who tested positive……Rep. Ann Wagner, R-Mo., said in a statement Wednesday night that she would self-quarantine because she participated in a small group meeting with a colleague who has since tested positive.Other House members who said Wednesday that they interacted with a person who tested positive and will self-quarantine include Reps. Kathleen Rice, D-N.Y., Matt Cartwright, D-Pa. and Stephanie Murphy, D-Fla. The lawmakers said that they are not experiencing symptoms but will stay at home for the next two weeks, which means they won’t be able to return to Washington when the House comes back into session next week… March 13, 2020: Embassy of Brazil in the USA tweeted: “Brazil’s Chargé d’Affaires Ambassador Nestor Forster has learned tonight that he has tested positive for COVID-19. Following medical advice, Amb. Forster will extend his self-quarantine, which he had already placed himself into as a precautionary measure, for another two weeks.” March 13, 2020: People posted an article titled: “Brazilian Diplomat Nestor Forster, Who Had Dinner with Donald Trump, Tests Positive for Coronavirus”. It was written by Gabrielle Chung. From the article: Brazilian diplomat Nestor Forster, who dined with Donald Trump last weekend, has tested positive for the coronavirus, according to a tweet from the Embassy of Brazil in Washington, D.C., on Friday……The ambassador dined with Trump, 73, and Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro during a visit to the Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida, on Saturday, according to the Palm Beach Daily News…. March 13, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Brazil’s Bolsonaro to be tested again for coronavirus: report”. It was written by Debora Moreira and Pedro Fonseca. From the article: Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who met with Donald Trump in the United States less than a week ago, will be retested for coronavirus following a negative test on Friday, Brazil’s Estado de S.Paulo newspaper reported.The test will be done early next week in order to rule out any chance the president has the virus, the newspaper said, without naming the source of the information. A representative for Bolsonaro’s press office declined to comment.Bolsonaro and a large Brazilian entourage, including cabinet ministers, met with Trump and other senior U.S. officials last weekend at Mar-a-Lago. One of the party, Bolsonaro’s communications secretary Fabio Wajngarten, tested positive for COVID-19 on Thursday and is in quarantine at his home.Charge d’Affairs Nestor Forster Jr. at the Brazilian Embassy in Washington, who was also present at the Trump dinner, has also now tested positive, GloboNews television channel reported late on Friday.Bolsonaro said earlier in the day that he had tested negative for coronavirus, in a post on his Facebook page.“Tests negative for COVID-19 Mr President of the Republic Jair Bolsonaro,” the post said, above an old image of Bolsonaro making an obscene local gesture in an apparent response to some media reports that a first test had been positive.Estado de S.Paulo said Bolsonaro would remain isolated in quarantine at his official residence until the beginning of next week, citing an unnamed member of the president’s medical staff who said Bolsonaro needed to be isolated for seven days from the time of being in contact with someone infected with the virus.Bolsonaro’s son Eduardo tweeted earlier on Friday that his test had come back negative. Defense Minister Fernando Azevedo e Silva tested negative as well, the ministry said in a statement.The results for others in the Brazilian delegation, including Bolsonaro’s wife Michelle and Foreign Minister Ernesto Araujo, have not yet been published.However, Bolsonaro’s lawyer, Karina Kufa, who was part of the delegation, tested positive, according to the O Globo newspaper. Senator Nelsinho Trad, who also formed part of the group, said late Friday that his test had also come back positive… March 14, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Trump tests negative for coronavirus, White House says”. It was written by Jason Hoffman and Veronica Stracqualursi. From the article: President Donald Trump has tested negative for the coronavirus, according to a statement from the White House.Trump took the test on Friday, he said during a Saturday news conference, after coming into recent contact with two individuals who have tested positive for the virus.“Last night after an in-depth discussion with the President regarding COVID-19 testing, he elected to proceed,” according to the statement about the results released by press secretary Stephanie Grisham with Trump’s permission. “One week after having dinner with the Brazilian delegation in Mar-a-Lago, the President remains symptom free. I have been in daily contact with the CDC and the White House Coronavirus Task Force, and we are encouraging the implementation of all their best practices for exposure reduction and transmission mitigation.”Trump said Saturday he also had his temperature taken Saturday before entering the White House briefing room. The President told reporters that his temperature was normal……Asked when he would announce the results of his coronavirus test, the President said that the test was sent to a lab and could take a day or two. Trump said he took the test “only because the press is going crazy.”… March 16, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Trump’s Mar-a-Lago getting a deep clean after confirmed coronavirus cases”. It was written by Betsy Klein. From the article: President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort is undergoing a deep clean after multiple cases of coronavirus were confirmed at the club, a member confirmed to CNN. Members were notified via email that the Palm Beach, Florida, club, including its grand ballroom, will be closed Monday for a cleaning, with the exception of the beach club, which is separate to the main area and will remain open. Members were told that dinner will be served as usual Tuesday through Saturday.The deep clean comes after multiple cases of the virus were reported by people who had been on the premises last week. The White House has said Trump has tested negative for the virus… March 15, 2020: Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.) tweeted: “I’m feeling much better. However, it’s important that everyone take this seriously and follow @CDCgov guidelines in order to avoid getting sick & mitigate the spread of this virus. We must continue to work together to emerge stronger as a country during these trying times.” The tweet included a screenshot of a press release titled: “Diaz-Balart Tests Positive for Coronavirus”. In an abundance of caution, after votes on Friday, March 13th, Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart decided to self-quarantine in Washington D.C., and not return to South Florida because of his wife Tia’s pre-existing conditions that put her at exceptionally high risk. On Saturday evening, Congressman Diaz-Balart developed symptoms, including a fever and a headache. Just a short while ago, he was notified that he has tested positive for COVID-19. While in quarantine, Diaz-Balart has been working from his apartment in Washington D.C.. The Congressman said in a statement:“I want everyone to know that I am feeling much better. However, it is important that everyone take this extremely seriously and follow CDC guidelines in order to avoid getting sick and mitigate the spread of this virus. We must continue to work together to emerge stronger as a country during these trying times.” March 18, 2020: Rep. Drew Ferguson (R-Ga.) tweeted: “(1/2) Today, the Attending Physician of the United States Congress informed me that I was in contact with a member of Congress on March 13th that has since tested positive for COVID-19. After heeding the advice of the President, Governor Kemp and at the direction of the House” Rep. Drew Ferguson followed that tweet with a second tweet: “(2/2) physician, I will self-quarantine until March 27th. I am asymptomatic and will continue to work from home in West Point, Ga.” March 18, 2020: Rep. Ben McAdams (D-Utah) tweeted: “Please read my statement on contracting #COVID19. I have self-quarantines since first having symptoms and consulted with my doctor. #utpol” The tweet includes a screenshot of Representative Ben McAdams statement: Mc Adams statement on COVID-19 illnessOn Saturday evening, after returning home from Washington, D.C., I developed mild cold-like symptoms. In consultation with my doctor on Sunday, I immediately isolated myself in my home. I have been conducting all meetings by telephone. My symptoms got worse and I developed a fever, a dry cough, and labored breathing and I remained self-quarantined. On Tuesday, my doctor instructed me to get tested for COVID-19 and following his referral, I went to the local testing clinic for the test. Today I learned that I tested positive. I am still working for Utahns and pursuing efforts to get Utahns the resources they need as I continue doing my job from home until I know it is safe to end my self-quarantine. I’m doing my part as all Americans are doing to contain the spread of the virus and mitigate the coronavirus outbreak. I urge Utahns to take this seriously and follow the health recommendations we’re getting from the CDC and other health experts so that we can recover from this public health threat. March 22, 2020: NBC News posted an article titled: “Rand Paul becomes first senator known to test positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Allan Smith. From the article: Rand Paul, R-Ky., on Sunday became the first senator known to have tested positive for COVID-19.“Senator Rand Paul has tested positive for COVID-19,” Paul’s account tweeted. “He is feeling fine and is in quarantine. He is asymptomatic and was tested out of an abundance of caution due to his extensive travel and events. He was not aware of any direct contact with any infected person.”“He expects to be back in the Senate after his quarantine period ends and will continue to work for the people of Kentucky at this difficult time,” the thread continued. “Ten days ago, our D.C. office began operating remotely, hence virtually no staff has had contact with Senator Rand Paul.”Paul’s chief of staff later clarified that he “decided to get tested after attending an event where two individuals subsequently tested positive for COVID-19, even though he wasn’t aware of any direct contact with either one of them.”……Paul’s diagnosis has triggered a discussion about whether senators, many of whom are in older age brackets, should go home immediately or self-quarantine, given their likely contact with Paul, who was on the Senate floor extensively over the last week.The news created fresh uncertainty about how Congress can finish and pass emergency coronavirus legislation, on which Democrats and Republicans are still struggling to reach a deal.Sens. Mike Lee and Mitt Romney, both Utah Republicans, were the first two lawmakers to say they would be self-quarantining for two weeks after having had “extended” interactions with Paul and would have to miss floor votes… March 24, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “White House press secretary to return to work after negative virus test”. It was written by Tal Axelrod. From the article: White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham will return to work on Wednesday after testing negative for the coronavirus, a spokesman said.“Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham, who has been quarantined since coming in contact with Brazilian officials almost two weeks ago and working from home, has received negative COVID-19 test results and will be back to work tomorrow,” White House spokesman Judd Deere said.Grisham, a top aide to President Trump, was with the president at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida earlier this month when he hosted a Brazilian delegation, including President Jair Bolsonaro. A press aide in the delegation later tested positive for the coronavirus.It was later announced that Grisham would self-quarantine out of an abundance of caution, joining a number of lawmakers and administration officials who have self-quarantined in recent weeks after coming in contact with someone who had tested positive for the virus.The president and his coronavirus task force headed by Vice President Pence have launched a public relations blitz to tout the White House’s response to the burgeoning virus outbreak, which has infected more than 53,000 people in the U.S. March 27, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “South Carolina congressman tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Marty Johnson. From the article: Rep. Joe Cunningham (D-S.C.) announced Friday that he has tested positive for the coronavirus. The freshman lawmaker went into self-quarantine starting March 19 after learning he had been in contact with a member of Congres who had tested positive for COVID-19. Cunningham got tested Thursday, with the positive result coming back Friday.“While my symptoms have begun to improve, I will remain at home until I know it is safe to leave self-quarantine,” Cunningham said in the statement, adding he will continue to tele-work from home…. March 27, 2020: Anchor at WBTV in Charlotte Jamie Boll tweeted: “New information: SC Congressman Joe Cunningham tests positive for coronavirus. He’s from the Charleston area”. The tweet included a screenshot of Joe Cunningham’s statement: Cunningham Statement on COVID-19 Test Mt. Pleasant, S.C. – Rep. Joe Cunningham released the following statement after learning he had tested positive for COVID-19:“On March 19th, 2020, I entered self-quarantine after I recieved word from the Attending Physician of the U.S. Congress that I had been in contact with a member of Congress who had since tested positive for COVID-19. While I otherwise feel fine, since March 17th I have been unable to smell or taste, which I learned this week is a potential symptom of COVID-19, I have been in contact with my doctor since I entered self-quarantine. Yesterday, my doctor instructed me to get tested for COVID-19 and following a virtual consultation on MUSC.care, I went to my local testing clinic. Today, I learned that I tested positive.“While my symptoms have begun to improve, I will remain at home until I know it is safe to leave self-quarantine. I will continue to tele-work from home as Congress conducts its ongoing response to this public health crisis and my office will continue its urgent work of serving the people of the Lowcounty. Just now, the House passed bipartisan legislation that includes provisions I fought for and secured to deliver much-needed relief for South Carolina families and small businesses. I am grateful that my family remains in good health and urge South Carolinians to follow the guidance and recommendations from the CDC and other health experts so that we can recover from this public health threat.” March 27, 2020: Rep. Mark Kelley (R-PA) posted a press release on his official website titled: “Representative Kelly Tests Positive for COVID-19”. From the press release: Earlier, this week, U.S. Representative Mike Kelly began experiencing flu-like symptoms and consulted his doctor, who ordered a test for COVID-19. His test came back positive this afternoon. From his home, in Butler, Pennsylvania, Representative Kelly issued this statement:“When I started experiencing flu-like symptoms earlier this week, I consulted my primary care physician. My doctor ordered a test for COVID-19, which I obtained at the drive-through testing site at Butler Memorial Hospital. My test came back positive this afternoon. My symptoms remain mild, and I will serve the 16th district from home until I fully recover. Additionally, my staff is tele-working and still available to constituents who need assistance.”While awaiting his test results, Kelly was not in Washington for the House vote on the third coronavirus relief package. Had he been present, he would have voted in favor of the CARES Act… March 29, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Capitol Police officer tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Scott Wong. From the article: A United States Capitol Police (USCP) employee has tested positive for the coronavirus, a spokesperson confirmed to The Hill.The USCP employee has been self-quarantined since March 18.“The USCP has contacted employees in order to identify individuals who may have been in close contact with the affected employee. The Department has taken, and will continue to take, all the necessary steps to ensure tha any affected work areas or facilities were properly cleaned,” USCP spokeswoman Eva Malecki said in an email Sunday to The Hill.“The USCP is working closely with the Office of Attending Physician, Congressional leadership, and the Architect of the Capitol, and our focuse is on the health and well-being of our employees.”Malecki did not provide any details about the USCP employee. A Capitol source familiar with the case said the employee is an officer who had been assigned to the House chamber… April 9, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Florida Republican becomes sixth member of Congress to test positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Cristina Marcos. From the article: Rep. Neal Dunn (R-Fla.) said Thursday that he has tested positive for the coronavirus, becoming the sixth member of Congress to have the disease. Dunn’s office said in a statement that he went to the emergency room on Monday not feeling well and later tested positive for the coronavirus.Dunn, a former surgeon, is now self-quarantining at home and “expects a full recovery soon.”“Congressman Dunn emphasizes that we must continue to do what we can to target vulnerable places and populations to slow the spread of this disease. He is keenly interested in new and faster testing to help everyone understand their risks,” the statement added, according to WCTV… May 1, 2020: Phoenix New Times posted an article titled: “Two Arizona County Sheriffs Are Refusing to Enforce Coronavirus Emergency Orders”. It was written by Ray Stern. From the article: Two Arizona county sheriffs say they refuse to cite or arrest business owners or individuals for violating the state’s emergency coronavirus restrictions. In doing so, Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb and Mohave County Douglas Schuster – both of them elected officials – are tapping into a growing, mostly conservative-led sentiment in the state that the lockdown has gone far enough.But their refusals are also in clear opposition to Governor Doug Ducey’s two-week expansion of the stay-at-home order, as well as the advice of health officials and other people who think opening businesses too early would create dangerous conditions for rapid spread of the infection……On Friday, Lamb told Phoenix New Times that if he got a call about a business violating reopening restrictions, he’d send a deputy out to “educate and advise” the owners about Ducey’s executive orders. But his deputies won’t be writing citations or arresting anyone from this point on.“In tough times, tough decisions have to be made,” said Lamb, a Republican elected to office in 2016. “I’m looking at two laws in each hand going with the one that’s 200 years old rather than two days old”……Lamb said he gives condolences to people who have lost friends or family members because of the coronavirus, but somebody “has to have the guts” to stand up to the unconstitutional policies, which have created an “unsustainable” economic situation for the vast majority of Arizonans who haven’t gotten sick… May 7, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “One of Trump’s personal valets has tested positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Kaitlan Collins and Peter Morris. From the article: A member of the US Navy who serves as one of President Trump’s personal valets has tested positive for coronavirus, CNN learned Thursday, raising concerns about the President’s possible exposure to the virus.The valets are members of an elite military unit dedicated to the White House and often work very close to the President and the first family. Trump was upset when he was informed Wednesday that the valet had tested positive, a source told CNN, and the President was subsequently tested again by the White House physician.In a statement, the White House confirmed CNN’s reporting that one of the President’s staffers had tested positive.“We were recently notified bu the White House Medical Unit that a member of the United States Military, who works on the White House campus, has tested positive for Coronavirus,” deputy White House press secretary Hogan Gidley said in a statement. “The President and the Vice President have since tested negative for the virus and they remain in great health.Valets assist the President and first family with a variety of personal tasks. They are responsible for the President’s food and beverage not only in the West Wing but also travel with him when he’s on the road or out of the country. Past presidents have relied on them not only for these matters, but also as confidants. The valets have an inside view to a president’s personal life like few others. A White House source said the valet, a man who has not been identified, exhibited “symptoms” Wednesday morning, and said the news that someone close to Trump had tested positive for coronavirus was “hitting the fan” in the West Wing……The White House is continuing to use the rapid Abbott Labs test, which provide results in about 15 minutes. Several officials who have received the test said it’s often administered in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, next door to the West Wing on the White House grounds. A medical official swabs the staffer’s nostrils and informs them that they’ll be notified within the next several minutes if it’s positive.Still, the White House has not enforced strict social distancing guidelines for staffers and few people inside the building wear masks during the day, including valets.Trump said before traveling aboard Air Force One earlier this week that he was not concerned about being in close quarters with other people since those around him are regularly tested… May 7, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “Trump says coronavirus tests are ‘overrated,’ but he will get tested daily”. It was written by Kevin Breuniger. From the article: President Donald Trump said Thursday that testing for the coronavirus is “somewhat overrated” shortly after announcing that he will be tested for the disease every single day.Daily tests will also be conducted for “everyone that comes into contact with the president,” Vice President Mike Pence added to reporters at the White House.The new daily testing policy for the president and those in his circle comes hours after the White House acknowledged that a personal valet for Trump tested positive for Covid-19.Trump and Pence have since been retested after coming into contact with the valet, who among things serves the president’s meals.Both Trump and Pence tested negative for the coronavirus, the White House said… May 7, 2020: CSPAN tweeted: “President Trump on White House military valet testing positive for COVID-19: “Testing is not a perfect art. So, we test once a week. Now we’re going to test once a day.. I’ve had very little contact, personal contect, with this gentleman”. The tweet included a video of President Donald Trump speaking. Next to him is Texas Governor Greg Abbot. May 8, 2020: USA Today posted an article titled: “White House staff to be tested daily for coronavirus after military aide tests positive”. It was written by David Jackson and Michael Collins. From the article: President Donald Trump’s his staff will be tested daily for coronavirus after a Navy valet who has been in close proximity to him tested positive for the disease.Trump told reporters on Thursday that he has had “very little contact” with the valet. But during an appearance Friday on the morning program “Fox & Friends,” Trump said the valet was in the same room with him on Tuesday, the day he began exhibiting symptoms.Trump said he doesn’t recall any direct contact with the ill employee, but that White House aides will be now tested daily for coronavirus instead of weekly. Officials would not say whether Trump himself will be tested daily……Both Trump and Vice President Mike Pence were given new tests after officials learned that the military aide had tested positive for the disease. Trump said he has been tested twice in recent days, with both tests coming back negative. Pence’s test also was negative, administration officials said. The White House did not identify the infected person.“We were recently notified by the White House Medical Unit that a member of the United States Military, who works on the White House campus, has tested positive for Coronavirus,” said White House spokesman Hogan Gidley in a statement. “The President and the Vice President have since tested negative for the virus and they remain in great health.”… May 8, 2020: Katie Miller, Vice President Pence’s spokesperson, tested positive for coronavirus. She is the wife of Stephen Miller, who works closely with President Trump. Politico May 8, 2020: Yahoo! News posted an article titled: “Document reveals Secret Service has 11 current virus cases, as concerns about Trump’s staff grow”. It was written by Jana Winter and Hunter Walker. From the article: Multiple members of the U.S. Secret Service have tested positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus, according to Department of Homeland Security documents reviewed by Yahoo News. In March, the Secret Service, which is responsible for the protection of President Trump and other leaders, acknowledged that a single employee tested positive in March. However the problem is currently far more widespread, with 11 active cases at the agency as of Thursday evening, according to a daily report compiled by the DHS. This report comes as a pair of cases among White House staffers close to Trump and Vice President Mike Pence have put the West Wing’s coronavirus security procedures in the spotlight.According to the DHS document, along with the 11 active cases there are 23 members of the Secret Service who have recovered from COVID-19 and an additional 60 employees who are self-quarantining. No details have been provided about which members of the Secret Service are infected or if any have recently been on detail with the president or vice president.The DHS, which oversees the agency, referred all requests for comment to the Secret Service, which in turn declined to comment on the number of coronavirus cases among its employees……On Monday, Yahoo News reported that there are regularly held large events with unmasked attendees in close quarters at the White House — including inside the Oval Office, which is the president’s inner sanctum. Many Secret Service employees on the White House grounds are among those who are not wearing masks. The agency did not respond to questions about why its employees are not wearing masks or whether personal protective equipment is being provided to members of the Secret Service who request it. Pence and Trump have also regularly opted not to wear masks… May 9, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “CDC director will self-quarantine after contact with COVID-19 positive case”. It was written by J. Edward Moreno. From the article: Robert Redfield, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), will self-quarantine for two weeks after coming in contact with a person who tested positive for COVID-19 at the White House.“CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield has been determined to have had a low risk exposure on May 6 to a person at the White House who has COVID-19. He is feeling fine, and has no symptoms. He will be teleworking for the next two weeks,” a CDC spokesperson told several media outlets. The spokesperson added that, “In the event Dr. Redfield must go to the White House to fulfill any responsibilities as part of White House Coronavirus Task Force work, he will follow the safety practices set out by the CDC for those who may have been exposed.”The CDC did not immediately respond to an inquiry from The Hill. Though the CDC did not specify who at the White House Redfield came into contact with, Katie Miller, Vice President Pence’s press secretary, tested positive for the virus on Friday, and one of President Trump’s personal valets tested positive on Thursday. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Stephen Hahn also said Saturday he will self-quarantine for the next two weeks after learning that he came in contact with someone who had tested positive for COVID-19.Like the CDC in the case of Redfield, the FDA did not disclose who Hahn came in contact with, but Politico, citing administration officials, reported that Hahn had come in contact with Miller. May 10, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Pence to work from White House after aide tests positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Brett Samuels. From the article: Vice President Pence will continue working from the White House this week after his press secretary tested positive for the coronavirus on Friday, a spokesman said Sunday.“Vice President Pence will continue to follow the advice of the White House Medical Unit and is not in quarantine. Additionally, Vice President Pence has tested negative every single day and plans to be at the White House tomorrow,” Pence spokesman Devin O’Malley said in a statement.Multiple news outlets reported that Pence was self-isolating after his press secretary, Katie Miller, tested positive for the coronavirus on Friday. One person familiar with the matter told The Hill that Pence may lay low for a few days and take extra precautions.Three of the government’s top health officials have since announced they are going into some form of self-quarantine after interacting with Miller in the days leading up to her positive test. Food and Drug Administration Administrator Stephen Hahn and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Robert Redfield both intend to self-quarantine, according to spokespeople. Anthony Fauci, the top infectious diseases expert at the National Institutes of Health, said he will go into a “modified” self-quarantine.All three are members of the White House coronavirus task force, which is led by Pence. Miller is said to have sat in on at least one of the group’s meetings last week.All three are members of the White House coronavirus task force, which is led by Pence. Miller is said to have sat in on at least one of the group’s meetings last week.The three health officials were also slated to testify before a Senate committee this week and will now do so via videoconference.Miller, who is married to senior White House adviser Stephen Miller, was one of two White House officials to test positive for the coronavirus last week. The other is a military member who works as a valet for President Trump.The two positive tests have raised concerns about the virus spreading within the building and forced officials to reckon with how best to protect the president and vice president.Trump and Pence have gone from being tested weekly to being tested daily, and officials have said they will institute additional procedures in the coming days to further limit their exposure to the virus. May 10, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Sen. Lamar Alexander to self-quarantine after staff member tests positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Jordain Carney. From the article: Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) will self-quarantine after a staff member tested positive for the coronavirus.David Cleary, Alexander’s chief of staff, said the GOP senator had no symptoms and had tested negative for the coronavirus on Thursday. The staff member, according to Cleary, tested positive for the coronavirus on Sunday.“After discussing this with the Senate’s attending physician, Senator Alexander, out of an abundance of caution, has decided not to return to Washington, D.C., and will self-quarantine in Tennessee for 14 days,” he said.No other staff in Alexander’s office is expected to self-quarantine and most of the GOP senator’s Washington, D.C., staff, like most offices on Capitol Hill, was already working remotely. Alexander is the latest senator who has had to self-quarantine after exposure to the virus. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is the only senator known to have tested positive but others, including Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Rick Scott (R-Fla.) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas), have also self-quarantined in recent months. Alexander, who chairs the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, is expected to keep working remotely, including overseeing a hearing scheduled for Tuesday on the virus… May 11, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “No quarantine for Mike Pence despite rash of Covid-19 cases in White House”. It was written by Tom McCarthy. From the article: Mike Pence will not enter quarantine despite a rash of coronavirus cases in the White House in recent days, including a positive test for the vice-president’s own press secretary.“Vice-President Pence has tested negative every single day and plans to be at the White House tomorrow,” Devin O’Malley, a backup spokesman for Pence, said on Sunday night.As the Trump administration urges Americans to return to workplaces and Donald Trump touts a “transition to greatness” ahead, the White House faces a delicate balancing act in projecting business as usual even as coronavirus cases spread through the halls of power.Three members of the White House coronavirus taskforce – Dr Anthony Fauci of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Dr Stephen Hahn, commissioner of the US Food and Drug Administration; and Dr Robert Redfield, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention – have entered two weeks of isolation, after having contact with someone who later tested positive.Senator Lamar Alexander, a Republican from Tennessee who chairs the health committee, is isolating himself after a member of staff tested positive. A senior admiral on Trump’s top military advisory committee, chief of naval operations Michael Gilday, is also isolating himself following contact with an infected relative, Bloomberg News reported. Gen Joseph Lengyel tested positive at the White House on Saturday in a spot check, before he was to meet Trump.A valet for Trump, who had served the president food without wearing a mask, also recently tested positive. The White House is considering new rules under which aides must maintain a distance of two metres (6ft) from the president, ABC News reported.Pence’s spokeswoman, Katie Miller, the wife of Stephen Miller, one of the president’s closest aides, who is in frequent close contact with the Trump family, tested positive last week. It was unclear if Stephen Miller had entered self-isolation……On Monday morning the number of recorded Covid-19 deaths in the US was close to 80,000, and while the rate of new cases appears to be slowing in the New York City area and other sites of major outbreaks, elsewhere new infections are rising.Nowhere is testing and contact-tracing for the virus as thoroughly as the White House, where aides and senior officials including Trump and Pence receive both spot checks and repeated testing in various forms, some on a daily basis. Without such testing, cases could go undetected, leading to a potentially wide outbreak… May 12, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Pence ‘maintaining distance’ from Trump ‘for the immediate future'”. It was written by Jeremy Diamond and Kevin Liptak. From the article: Vice President Mike Pence is taking some precautions, but stopping short of the recommended self-quarantine in the wake of his press secretary testing positive for coronavirus.Pence is “maintaining distance for the immediate future” from President Trump after consulting with the White House medical unit, a senior administration official said. It is not yet clear exactly how long Pence will stay away from Trump.Later, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said Pence had made the decision himself……Trump said Monday that he has not seen Pence since the vice president’s press secretary Katie Miller tested positive on Friday, a fact that was underscored by Pence’s absence from Trump’s news conference Monday. Trump said he could confer with Pence by telephone.Pence said during a call with governors on Monday that he was taking extra precautions, noting that he was “in a separate room on my own” during a videoconference while Dr. Deborah Birx was “in a situation room meeting with some staff,” according to audio of the call obtained by CNN’s Betsy Klein……While he arrived to the White House on Tuesday wearing a mask, Pence has shown up on other days without covering his face. And his very presence there — even if he is staying away from Trump — contravenes guidelines issued by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which advise those who have had “close contact” (within six feet of someone for a prolonged period of time) with someone who has tested positive to stay home for 14 days after their last interaction… June 6, 2020: Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms tweeted: “COVID-19 has literally hit home. I have had NO symptoms and have tested positive.” June 15, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “House GOP lawmaker tests positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Cristina Marcos. From the article: Rep. Tom Rice (R-S.C.) announced Monday that he and his family have tested positive for the coronavirus, becoming the eighth member of Congress to have a confirmed or presumed case of the disease.Rice said in a Facebook post that he, his wife, and his son had developed symptoms of COVID-19 – which he referred to as they “Wuhan flu” – in the last week but are now recovering.“We are all on the mend and doing fine,” Rice wrote. He noted that his son “had gotten really sick” with a fever and “really bad cough,” while his wife had a “slight” fever with a cough and aches.Rice said that he had milder symptoms but lamented that he had lost his sense of taste and smell – and expressed particular frustration that he is unable to enjoy bacon.“I was lucky, and it was not bad for me. I had a low fever and a mild cough. It was gone by Thursday. I never stopped eating or drinking or working or moving. The only bad thing is I have completely lost sense of taste and smell. CAN’T TASTE BACON!!!” Rice wrote.“We are finishing our quarantine and looking forward to seeing you all again. Friends, please wash your hands and take precautions,” Rice concluded… June 17, 2020: AZ Central posted an article titled: “Pinal County sheriff says he tested positive for COVID-19 before planned Trump meeting”. It was written by Perry Vandell. From the article: Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb announced on Wednesday afternoon that he tested positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by the new coronavirus.Lamb posted on the Pinal County Sheriff Office’s Facebook page that he had been invited on Tuesday to join President Donald Trump at the White House and was tested before the meeting as part of the protocol……Lamb said he believes he came into contact with an infected person during a campaign event he held on Saturday. Lamb didn’t say if he wore a mask or practiced social distancing at the event.“While still asymptomatic, I tested positive for the COVID-19,” Lamb wrote. “I will be self-quarantining for the next 14 days minimum. I alerted the Pinal County Public Health Dept. immediately after my positive test, and they are working to track all those I came in contact with following the Saturday event.”… June 18, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Oklahoma venue management asks Trump campaign for health plan ahead of rally”. It was written by Marina Pitofsky. From the article: The Bank of Oklahoma (BOK) Center in Tulsa, Okla., where President Trump is set to hold a campaign rally Saturday evening, requested Thursday that his campaign provide a plan for “health and safety” measures ahead of the event amid the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.“Given the Tulsa Health Department’s recent reports of increases in coronavirus cases and the State of Oklahoma’s encouragement for event organizers to follow CDC guidelines, we have requested that the Trump campaign, as the event organizer, provide BOK Center with a written plan detailing the steps the event will institute for health and safety, including those related to social distancing,” Meghan Blood, director of marketing for the BOK Center, said in a statement, CNN reported.“Once received, we will share the plan with local health officials.”The Trump campaign said that it will offer masks and temperature checks to all attendees.The statment from the facility said that all staffers will be tested for COVID-19, and the venue will be “cleaned and disinfected repeatedly throughout the event, with special emphasis on high-touch areas.”… June 19, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Trump to host 4th of July event despite pleas from lawmakers to cancel”. It was written by Tal Axelrod. From the article: President Trump will host a Fourth of July event despite pleas from lawmakers to cancel over concerns regarding the coronavirus pandemic.The White House announced Friday that Trump and first lady Melania Trump with the Interior Department, will host the “2020 Salute to America” on the South Lawn of the White House and Ellipse on July 4.The event will feature music, military demonstrations and flyovers to celebrate the nation’s service members and veterans, as well as an address from the president. The event comes despite pushback from lawmakers that holding a mass gathering could put people at risk of contracting the coronavirus… June 19, 2020: PBS posted an article titled: “Oklahoma Supreme Court says Trump rally attendees don’t have to wear masks”. From the article: The Oklahoma Supreme Court on Friday rejected a request to require everyone attending President Trump’s rally in Tulsa this weekend to wear a face mask and stay at least six feet apart from everyone else in the arena to guard against the spread of the coronavirus.The court ruled that the two local residents who asked that the thousands expected at the rally be required to take the precautions couldn’t establish that they have a clear legal right to the relief they sought. In a concurring opinion, two justices wrote that the state’s reopening plan is “permissive, suggestive and discretionary.”……The request was made by John Hope Franklin for Reconciliation, a nonprofit that promotes racial equality, and the Greenwood Centre, Ltd., which owns commercial real estate, and on behalf of the two locals, who are described as having compromised immune systems and being particularly vulnerable to COVID-19……Oklahoma has seen a recent spike in coronavirus cases, setting a daily high on Thursday of 450. Health officials on Friday reported 125 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in Tulsa County, which is the most of any country in Oklahoma. Statewide, there were 352 new cases and one new coronavirus death reported Friday, raising the state’s new total number of confirmed cases since the pandemic began to 9,706 and its death toll to 367… June 20, 2020: NBC News Correspondent Carol Lee tweeted: “NEW: six staffers working on Trump campaign rally in Tulsa have tested positive for coronavirus – campaign stmt says “quarantine procedures were immediately implemented. No COVID-positive staffers or anyone in immediate contact will be at today’s rally.” June 20, 2020: …Before the rally Trump’s campaign revealed that six staff members who were helping set up for the event had tested positive for the coronavirus. Campaign communications director Tim Murtaugh said neither the affected staffers nor anyone who was in immediate contact with them would attend the event. Associated Press June 20, 2020: Herman Cain tweeted: “Here’s just a few of the #BlackVoicesForTrump at tonight’s rally! Having a fantastic time!” #TulsaRally2020 #Trumptulsa #TulsaTrumprally #MAGA #Trump2020 #Trump2020Landslide”. The tweet includes a photo of Herman Cain siting with a group of people he has identified in the tweet as part of #BlackVoicesForTrump. Some people in the group are leaning on each other while seated close together. No one is wearing a mask. June 20, 2020: CBS News posted an article titled: “6 Trump campaign staffers in Tulsa test positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Grace Segers. From the article: Six Trump campaign staffers on the advance team for the president’s rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma on Saturday have tested positive for the coronavirus, the Trump campaign confirmed to CBS News. According to the campaign, the staffers were immediately quarantined and will not have contact with any rally attendees.“Per safety protocols, campaign staff are tested for COVID-19 before events. Six members of the advance team tested positive out of hundreds of tests performed, and quarantine procedures were immediately implemented,” Trump campaign communications director Tim Murtaugh said in a statement. “No COVID-positive staffers or anyone in immediate contact will be at today’s rally or near attendees and elected officials. As previously announced, all rally attendees are given temperature checks before going through security, at which point they are given wristbands, facemasks and hand sanitizer.”The rally, Mr. Trump’s first since March, is taking place at the Bank of Oklahoma Center, which holds 19,000 people, with an additional stage in the outdoor area adjacent to the venue that can hold several thousand more. Health experts have raised concerns about having so many people gathered in one place, particularly as the number of coronavirus cases continues to rise in Oklahoma and several other states.Although the campaign will be providing masks for rally attendees, it will not be mandatory to wear them. Several people waiting outside the Bank of Oklahoma Center ahead of the rally told CBS News they would not be wearing masks at the event. The online registration page for the rally included a legal disclaimer for attendees to acknowledge “that an inherent risk of exposure to COVID-19 exists in any public place where people are present.” June 22, 2020: Two members of a campaign advance team who attended President Donald Trump’s rally in Oklahoma on Saturday have tested positive for the coronavirus, the campaign said. The new test results bring the tally of advance team members for the Tulsa event who have tested positive for Covid-19 up to eight The six earlier positive tests of advance members occurred just before the event, and those people did not attend the rally as a result. At least two of the earlier positive tests were of Secret Service agents. CNBC June 23, 2020: NBC News reported the following: The Dream City Church in Phoenix, where President Donald Trump is scheduled to attend a rally Tuesday, made a surprising claim Sunday: Its building has an air filtration system that can neutralize the coronavirus. Many experts found this startling, because there is little evidence such systems can stop the spread of the virus.The claim came in a video in which the senior pastor, Luke Barnett, and Chief Operations Officer Brendon Zastrow discussed the presidential visit and the air purification system from a local company, IONaer, which echoes the claim of its system’s effect on the virus on its website. IONaer does business as CleanAir EXP.“It was a technology developed by some members of our church,” Zastrow said. “And we’ve installed these units. And it kills 99 percent of COVID within 10 minutes.”It’s the kind of claim that has little basis in reality, experts say. Both the ionization technology on which the system is based, as well as the way it works, are of limited effectiveness.“When it comes to COVID-19 transmission, person-to-person transmission between those within 6 feet of each other is driving the majority of transmission,” Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins University Center for Health Security, said. “Any ‘air cleaning’ type of device would not be able to have an impact on this close range transmission and the video could give attendees a false sense of security.”The videos with the claim about the air purification system have since been removed from the church’s social media accounts……Tim Bender, the CEO and co-founder of IONaer, which makes the air purification systems, stressed that they had only been tested on “surrogates,” which are viruses similar to the coronavirus……Bender also clarified that the system is ineffective if people come into close contact with one another.“There is nothing we can do with someone who coughs or sneezes,” Bender said. “The words we try to use is we add an additional layer of protection from passing viruses and bacteria through the area inside buildings. It’s just an additional layer of protection. If you’re taking the particulates out, you’re taking away the magic carpet that they’re traveling on.”……Trump is scheduled to begin a trip through Arizona on Tuesday, putting him in the middle of a state that is dealing with one of the worst outbreaks of the coronavirus. He will visit the church Tuesday afternoon, with organizers expecting about 3,000 attendees, according to The Arizona Republic.Experts and even scientists in Trump’s own administration have warned against such events…. June 23, 2020: Several reporters who attended the Trump rally at the Dream City Church in Phoenix posted tweets about it. Here are a few: White House reporter for AP, political analyist for MSNBC and NBC News, Jonathan Lemire, tweeted: “The scene of President Trump’s appearance at a Phoenix mega-church. No social distancing. And the only masks I am seeing are being worn by the White House travel pool.” The tweet included a photo that shows that the church was packed with people, all sitting very close to each other.Former Newspaperman Sam Pye tweeted: “VIDEO: Crowds await the arrival of President Trump in #Phoenix. #TrumpRally #Trump2020 #PhoenixRally #PhoenixTrumpRally #Trump[American flag emoji”. The video shows a packed church, with people standing or sitting very close together. There were one or two people who were wearing masks.White House Correspondent for Bloomberg News, Jordan Fabian tweeted: “Inside Phoenix mega church for President Trump’s Turning Point speech, full house, no distancing and very few masks being worn.” The tweet included a photo that shows that the church was packed with people who were not social distancing. CBSNews White House Correspondent Ben Tracy tweeted: “At a Trump event in Phoenix where there is no social distancing and hardly anyone is wearing a mask. Arizona has one of the worst #covid issue in the country right now.” The tweet included a photo from above the crowd that was seated nearest the stage. Two people are wearing masks. Students For Trump tweeted: “ABSOLUTELY PACKED HOUSE for @matggaetz and @RichardGrennel’s speech today leading up to @DonaldJTrumpJr, @kimguifoyle, and President @realDonaldTrump”. The tweet included a short video of some of the crowd. Many are wearing red hats. No one in the video is wearing a mask. June 23, 2020: U.S. House Candidate Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) tweeted a thread that started with: “Last night, I learned my campaign team was potentially exposed to Coronavirus last week. Out of an abundance of caution and concern for my children and my team, I was tested for COVID-19. Today, my physician administered the Abbott Sars-Cov-2 RNA ID now nasal swab rapid test.” The second tweet said: “I tested positive for COVID-19 a few minutes later. I was feeling a little fatigued with a body ache this weekend but that is kind of normal on the campaign trail. I have a slightly stuffy nose and mild body ache, but I do not have a fever or cough.” The third tweet said: “I am concerned for my two children, the rest of my team, and volunteers, all of whom are like family. In consultation with my physician, I have personally contacted every individual, to the best of my knowledge, who has been in close proximity to me over the last week.” The fourth tweet said: “I have asked for and paid for my staff and volunteers to get tested immediately. All of my campaign staff and volunteers have been instructed to self-quarantine and work remotely. My children and I will be in quarantine for the next two weeks or until I test negative for COVID.” The thread continues from there. June 25, 2020: Oklahoma Watch reporter Paul Monies tweeted: “This won’t be painful, but it will be uncomfortable. We have this big Q-Tip that we’ll put up your nose for 10 seconds. I’ll count out loud.” Got my post #TulsaTrumpRally #COVID19 test. Called Monday for appointment & got one this morning. Results in 2-3 business days.” The tweet includes a short video from his car. He was wearing a mask. June 25, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Dozens of Secret Service agents will be quarantined after Trump’s Tulsa rally”. It was written by Jim Acosta and Paul LeBlanc. From the article: Dozens of Secret Service agents will be quarantined as a precaution following President Donald Trump’s rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, a law enforcement official told CNN on Wednesday.The mass quarantine has led to the decision that Secret Service agents involved with presidential trips must be tested for coronavirus for the next couple of weeks, according to an email set to agency personnel. The email sent out Wednesday was confirmed by the law enforcement official. Agents must now be tested 24 to 48 hours before a presidential trip, the email said. The new testing mandate will be in place until July 4……Asked about the decision to test all agents on presidential trips for coronavirus, the Secret Service official said protecting agency personnel is critical during the COVID-19 pandemic……A US Secret Service source who worked advance for Saturday’s rally and is now quarantining told CNN that agents from Dallas and Houston worked the event as well, and they had been warned before the trip from those field offices that they would need quarantine when they got home.The steps come after two Secret Service agents who attended the rally tested positive for coronavirus, a person familiar with the matter previously told CNN……Still, news of the quarantined Secret Service staff will heighten scrutiny of the Tulsa rally, which has already been intensely watched after the Trump campaign announced that some advance team staffers who worked on the event had tested positive for the virus.Attendees were not required to wear masks or practice social distancing, despite the administration’s top health officials stressing the importance of both measures in preventing the spread of coronavirus.Several administration officials at the rally did not wear masks, though campaign manager Brad Parscale was seen in one.Those attending the rally had to agree not to sue the campaign if they contracted coronavirus, acknowledging the “inherent risk of exposure to COVID-19 exists in any public place where people are present.”… June 26, 2020: Oklahoma Watch reporter Paul Moines tweeted: “Friends, I tested positive for #COVID19. I’m pretty surprised. I have zero symptoms (so far) and I feel fine. In fact, I ran 5 miles this morning. I spent the last few hours calling people I know I’ve been in contact with in the last 14 days. Be safe out there.” June 26, 2020: President Donald Trump’s campaign manager, Brad Parscale, is “working from home” after Secret Service agents who attended last week’s campaign rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, tested positive for the coronavirus. Trump campaign spokesman Tim Murtaugh, in a conference call with reporters, confirmed to The Daily Beast that Parscale was among the officials working remotely, and would return to work only after being tested for COVID-19… Business Insider June 26, 2020: Billboard reported the following: Hours before President Donald Trump took the stage last Saturday at the BOK Center in Tulsa, Oklahoma, for his first rally in the COVID-19 era, arena workers were busy labeling thousands of seats with “Do Not Sit Here Please!” stickers to promote social distancing, part of a new safety protocol at the arena known as VenueShield.Campaign staff quickly radioed over to an executive at ASM Global and asked the arena to stop labeling the seats. In fact, “they also told us that they didn’t want any signs posted saying we should social distance in the venue,” says Doug Thornton, executive vp for ASM Global, who oversees nearly 100 arenas across five continents for the venue management company created by the 2019 merger of AEG and SMG……A video created by a third party and reviewed by Billboard shows Trump staffers methodically walking the aisles of the BOK Center and peeling the three-inch square stickers from thousands of campaign chairs ahead of the “Make America Great Again” rally. (Trump’s campaign did not respond to Billboard’s request for comment)… June 26, 2020: MSN posted an article from Green Bay Press Gazette titled: “Trump, in stop at Green Bay Austin Staubel airport, tells Hannity that Biden ‘can’t speak,’ blames Evers for Madison unrest”. It was written by Kent Tempus, Sammy Gibbons and Haley BeMiller. From the article: President Donald Trump visited northeastern Wisconsin Thursday for the first of what are expected to be multiple campaign visits to the state by the president and his opponent, former Vice President Joe Biden.Trump arrived at Green Bay Austin Straubel International Airport on Air Force One just before 1 p.m. and immediately got into a black SUV that took him to the nearby Jet Air Group facility for a town hall with Fox News host Sean Hannity and about 50 supporters.During the interview with Hannity, which aired at 8 p.m., Trump discussed protests held in the wake of George Floyd’s death at the hands of Minneapolis police and accused some of wanting “to destabilize our country”. He blamed unrest in Madison and the assault of a state senator this week on Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, contending it wouldn’t have happened under former Republican Gov. Scott Walker……The president also directed much of his attention to Biden.“I don’t want to be nice or un-nice, but the man can’t speak, and he’s going to be a president because some people don’t love me maybe,” he said.Afterward. Trump left the airport just before 3 p.m. on the Marine One helicopter to fly to Fincantieri Marinette Marine in Marinette, where he toured the shipbuilding yard and spoke about a $5.5 billion contract recently awarded to the company….…Attendance at the town hall was limited to 50 people due to coronavirus concerns. All audience members had their temperatures checked are were required to wear a face covering – either their own or one provided by Fox News. No media other than Fox News were allowed inside during the taping… June 27, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Mike Pence postpones Florida campaign tour as push to reopen US stalls”. It was written by Edward Helmore. From the article: As reopening plans went into a dramatic reverse or stalled across the US in the face of a resurgent virus, Mike Pence called off a planned campaign bus tour in Florida amid a surge in confirmed Covid-19 cases.The vice-president had been set to appear in Lake Wales at an event next week organized by pro-Trump group America First Policies. The event was billed as part of the “Great American Comeback tour.”The group announced: “Out of an abundance of caution at this time, we are postponing the Great American Comeback tour stop in Florida. We look forward to rescheduling soon.” Pence was still traveling to the state, the White House confirmed, saying he would meet with Governor Ron DeSantis and his healthcare teams… June 27, 2020: USA Today posted an article titled: “Pence cancels campaign events in Florida and Arizona as coronavirus cases spike”. It was written by Nicholas Wu. From the article: Vice President Mike Pence has canceled campaign events in Florida and Arizona as coronavirus cases spike in those states.A spokesperson for President Donald Trump’s campaign confirmed to USA TODAY the events, which included stops as part of Pence’s “Faith in America” tour were canceled “out of an abundance of caution” as cases climb in Florida and Arizona.A representative for the vice president said Pence would still travel to Texas, Arizona, and Florida this week to meet with governors.On Tuesday, Pence was scheduled to give remarks at a Faith in America event in Tuscon and to meet with Gov. Doug Ducey about the COVID-19 response.Pence had planned to travel to Florida on July 2 for a bus tour, meeting with Gov. Ron DeSantis about the coronavirus pandemic, and to deliver remarks both at a Faith in America event in Sarasota after touring Oakley Transport Inc. in Lake Wales……Florida announced 9,585 cases Saturday, and Arizona announced 3,591 cases. June 28, 2020: The Texas Tribune posted an article titled: “Pence visits Dallas as Texas grapples with coronavirus spike”. It was written by Patrick Svitek. From the article: Vice President Mike Pence, during a trip to Dallas on Sunday, promised Texas would bounce back from a recent surge in cases of the new coronavirus while urging Americans to turn to their faith during a tumultuous period for the nation.“Working with your governor, we will put the health of the people of the Lone Star State first, and every single day we’ll continue to reclaim our freedom and our way of life, as each day we are one day closer to the day we put this pandemic in the past,” Pence said during an event at First Baptist Dallas….…After the event, Pence – who chairs the White House Coronavirus Task Force – Gov. Greg Abbott and his coronavirus response advisers briefed Pence on the dire situation in Texas. Speaking with reporters afterward, Abbott said the virus has taken a “very swift and very dangerous turn in Texas over just the past few weeks,” while Pence praised Abbott for his leadership – which has come under heavy fire from Democrats – and pledged the full support of the federal government.The vice president also emphasized the importance of wearing a mask to reduce further spread.The talk was a last-minute addition to Pence’s agenda. For over a week, the vice president had been scheduled to appear at First Baptist for its annual Celebrate Freedom Sunday, but he added meeting with Abbott in recent days as the state confronted its worst week yet in the pandemic.The number of daily new cases hit a record high Thursday of nearly 6,000, and the number of hospitalizations has reached new highs every day for the past 16 days……Pence doubled down on his praise for Abbott later in the day, telling reporters after the briefing at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center that the governor demonstrated “decisive action” in reopening the state……Pence’s trip coincided with a growing debate in Texas over requiring people to wear masks. Abbott has resisted calls to fine individuals who do not wear masks but has allowed local governments to order businesses to require customers to do so.Speaking to reporters after their meeting, Abbott, Pence, and Birx all urged Texans to wear masks. Birx was particularly emphatic, saying she was “appealing to every Texas to wear a mask… Every single one of them.”Pence, Birx and his two other high-profile travel companions, Texas Sen. John Cornyn and U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson, all had face coverings on when they disembarked Air Force Two in Dallas on Sunday morning, as did their greeters; Abbott, Texas House Speaker Dennis Bonnen and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. All appeared to remain masked while seated at the church, according to video broadcast by the church.Pence has made headlines for not wearing a face covering at other public appearances during the pandemic. President Donald Trump has also refused to wear a mask in front of cameras.First Baptist Dallas, led by pastor and ardent Trump supporter Robert Jeffress, had “strongly encouraged” attendees to wear masks and also socially distance. But the video of the ceremony showed most attendees sitting close together in pews, with only some donning masks. Most of the over 100 people in the choir and band sections on the stage were not wearing masks… June 30, 2020: Axios posted the following information: South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R) told Fox News’ Laura Ingraham on Monday that attendees at a July 3 event at Mount Rushmore where President Trump is set to speak will not be required to practice social distancing. What she is saying: “We will have a large event on July 3. We told those folks that have concerns that they can stay home, but those who want to come and join us, we’ll be giving out free face masks, if they choose to wear one. But we won’t be social distancing.”… June 30, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Trump campaign scraps rally ahead of Session-Tuberville primary amid pandemic”. It was written by Kaitlan Collins and Kevin Liptak. From the article: President Donald Trump’s campaign has scrapped plans to hold a rally in Alabama next weekend amid concerns about coronavirus infections rising in the US, CNN has learned.Trump was slated to travel to the state ahead of the Senate race between his former attorney general Jeff Sessions and the former Auburn University football coach Tommy Tuberville, but plans were called off as state officials voiced concerns about a mass gathering and campaign officials ultimately decided against it. A person close to the campaign said there are currently no rallies on the horizon, but aids are scoping out possible venues for when they decided to host them again……On Tuesday, Alabama Republican Gov. Kay Ivey announced an amended order, which will extend the current rules until the end of July. The order encourages minimizing travel outside the home and wearing face coverings when doing so. The order also states that “all non-work related gatherings of any size, including drive-in gatherings, that cannot maintain a consistent six-foot distance between persons from different households are prohibited.”… July 1, 2020: BuzzFeed News reported the following: At least five members of the choir and orchestra at the Dallas megachurch visited by Vice President Mike Pence this weekend tested positive for the coronavirus in June, according to Facebook posts and internal church emails reviewed by BuzzFeed News. An additional orchestra member had symptoms several days after being exposed and was awaiting a test result in mid-June, according to a call for prayers sent to the church’s musicians.None of those six people were at the First Baptist church in Dallas during Pence’s hour-and-a-half-hour visit on Sunday, but it is unclear how many of the musicians who performed for Pence may have been exposed during previous practices and performances with those who were infected……The choir and orchestra performed for Pence without masks, according to a video of the event reviewed by BuzzFeed News.One of the church’s music directors – who himself has been quarantined after testing positive for the virus – wrote an email informing the church’s musicians that choir members would not wear masks while singing……The event came just one day before the Texas Department of State Health Services reported more than 5,900 COVID-19 hospitalizations, an all-time high for the state, and as Dallas reported a record high day for cases. Gov. Greg Abbott, who aggressively pushed to reopen the state in May but rolled back his plan last week after cases surged, sat alongside Pence in the church’s pews… The BuzzFeed News article includes a photo of Vice President Pence standing behind a podium at the First Baptist Church. In the photo, Pence is taking off his mask right before speaking. July 2, 2020: Multiple Secret Service agents tasked with planning Vice President Pence’s trip to Arizona this week were reportedly removed from the trip after showing signs of coronavirus infection. As many as 10 Secret Service and other law enforcement agents working on the trip were replaced after showing symptoms of the virus and at least one tested positive for the disease. The Hill (who got this information from The Washington Post). July 2, 2020: Someone posted a tweet on Herman Cain’s Twitter account on his behalf. The tweet said: “We are sorry to announce that Herman Cain has tested positive for COVID-19, and is currently receiving treatment in an Atlanta-area hospital. Please keep him and all who are battling this virus, in your prayers.” The tweet included a full statement. Part of the statement said: “On Monday, June 29, Herman Cain was informed that he had tested positive for COVID-19. By Wednesday, July 1, Mr. Cain had developed symptoms serious enough that he required hospitalization. He spent the past night in the hospital and as of today, Thursday July 2, he is resting comfortably in an Atlanta-area hospital. Mr. Cain did not require a respirator, and he is awake and alert….” July 3, 2020: Kimberly Guilfoyle, the girlfriend of President Trump’s oldest son, has contracted the coronavirus. Sergio Gor, chief of staff to the Trump campaign’s finance committee, says Guilfoyle was immediately isolated after the positive result to limit exposure. He says she will be retested to confirm the diagnosis because she isn’t showing any signs of COVID-19, the disease the virus causes. Gor says Guilfoyle is doing well and canceling her public events. Gor says Donald Trump Jr. tested negative but is self-isolating as a precaution. He is also canceling his public events. The couple was in South Dakota to hold fundraisers for Trump’s reelection. Trump is giving a pre-Fourth of July speech at Mount Rushmore in South Dakota. Associated Press July 3, 2020: HuffPost posted an article titled: “Pence’s Arizona Trip was Delayed After Secret Service Agents Contracted Virus: Reports”. It was writen by Sara Boboltz. From the article: Vice President Mike Pence delayed his trip to Arizona this week due to several Secret Service agents contracting COVID-19 or displaying symptoms of the disease, according to multiple reports.Pence was originally scheduled to visit the state on Tuesday, but went on Wednesday instead so that other, healthier, Secret Service agents could accompany him.An unnamed official with knowledge of the matter told The Washington Post that the agency urged the vice president to delay his trip on Monday night. Eight to 10 people from sister agencies who were also helping to prepare for the trip displayed signs of the illness, as well, according to the Post……Arizona is among several states that have seen an alarming surge in COVID-19 infections over the past month. Currently, Arizona has had more than 87,000 reported cases with only around 10,000 recoveries – a figure that indicates the number still battling the virus. More than 1,700 people have died of the coronavirus in the state……Meanwhile, the U.S. passed another grim milestone on Thursday, soaring past 55,000 new coronavirus cases reported in a single day. July 4, 2020: AZ Central posted an article titled: “Reports: Secret Service agents at Pence, Trump events in Phoenix test positive for virus”. It was written by Kathy Tulumello. From the article: Secret Service agents who were preparing for Vice President Mike Pence’s visit to Phoenix earlier this week fell ill with COVID-19, as did agents working at the president’s rally eight days before, according to media reports.CNN reported Friday that several agents working on the Pence visit got sick, as did several agents who became infected while getting ready for President Donald Trump’s June 23 event in Phoenix.The crowd for Trump was mostly unmasked.The Washington Post reported Thursday that Pence’s visit to Arizona, originally scheduled for Tuesday, was postponed a day so that healthy agents could be available for his visit. The trip, which originally had called for public events, became a quick drop-in to support state officials battling a surge in COVID-19 cases.Both news agencies cited unnamed sources. Secret Service agents are sworn to protect the president, vice president and other high-profile officials. Agents also were on the ground in South Dakota preparing for Trump’s speech Friday at Mount Rushmore……Trump’s June 23 visit to the state, his third in five months, underscored the state’s status as a battleground state in the presidential election. In Phoenix, he spent fewer than 10 minutes of his 1½ hour speech discussing the new coronavirus, and the crowd of about 3,000 supporters appeared similarly disinterested in dwelling on the pandemic. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends wearing face masks to prevent the spread of COVID-19. Both Maricopa County and Phoenix have enacted ordinances requiring masks in public places.Most of the attendees who packed into Dream City Church in north Phoenix did not wear face coverings. Nor did any of the event speakers, including the president. During his speech, the president repeatedly assured his crowd that the U.S. was at “the end of the pandemic.” ……Kimberly Guilfoyle, a Trump campaign official and the girlfriend of Donald Trump Jr., tested positive for the coronavirus ahead of the president’s event at Mount Rushmore.Guilfoyle attended the Trump event in Phoenix, which was 10 days before her positive test. The incubation period for COVID-19 can be up to 14 days.Before coming to Arizona, Trump spoke at a June 20 rally in Tulsa, where Secret Service agents also reportedly tested positive for the virus. July 4, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “National Park Service staff working Mount Rushmore event weren’t required to get tested, agency says.” It was written by Ali Main, Betsy Klein and Veronica Stracqualursi. From the article: The National Park Service says it did not require employees who worked the Independence Day celebration at Mount Rushmore on Friday to get tested for coronavirus, despite the record-high new cases in the US and President Donald Trump’s attendance at the event.“None of the Incident Management Team members for the event have reported exhibiting any symptoms or feeling unwell,” agency spokesperson Dana Soehn said in a statement Saturday. CNN reported that some Park Service staff were wearing masks and others were not at the Friday event in South Dakota. There was no social distancing at the event as attendees were clustered together in stadium seating. Soehn said face masks were available to all Park Service employees who worked the event and use was recommended at all times when social distancing could not be maintained.Soehn added that the agency is following US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance for health monitoring of the work force and that Department of Interior “employees are encouraged to conduct daily self-monitoring for symptoms of COVID-19 using the CDC symptom webpage or the CDC Self-Checker, and to not report to the workplace if they exhibit any symptoms or feeling unwell.”,,,…The CDC says that outdoor spaces are less risky than indoor areas for Covid-19 spread, but still encourages standing 6 feet apart from others and to avoid crowded parks… July 4, 2020: Bozeman Daily Chronicle posted an article titled: “Multiple Republican candidates self-quarantining after possible COVID-19 exposure”. It was written by Melissa Loveridge. From the article: A Donald Trump campaign fundraising event last week in Gallatin County potentially exposed multiple Montana Republicans to COVID-19, including the wife and running mate of gubernatorial candidate and congressman Greg Gianforte.Gianforte himself did not attend the event, but his wife Susan Gianforte and lieutenant governor candidate Kristen Juras did. Republican congressional candidate and state auditor Matt Rosendale and state auditor candidate Troy Downing were also there.On July 1, Juras posted a photo on her campaign Facebook page posing less than 6 feet away and without masks with Susan, Donald Trump Jr. and his girlfriend Kimberly Guilfoyle. In the photo’s caption, Juras wrote that the photo was taken the night before, on June 30.Guilfoyle tested positive for the coronavirus on July 3, as reported by the New York Times. The Times reported she was not experiencing symptoms.A Gianforte campaign spokesperson confirmed that Juras and Susan attended the event, but that Gianforte was in Washington, D.C., because Congress was in session.“Since learning of their potential exposure, Greg, Susan, and Kristen have adhered to recommended guidelines. Out of an abundance of caution and for the health and safety of others, they will self-quarantine, be tested for COVID-19, and suspend in-person campaign events pending test results,” the spokesperson said.Downing’s campaign manager Sam Loveridge confirmed Downing attended the event. Loveridge said in an email that neither Downing nor his staff were ever in “close proximity” with Guilfoyle“Out of an abundance of caution, Troy Downing will be tested as soon as possible and will avoid personal contact and all public functions until a negative test result can be confirmed,” Loveridge said in an email…Rosendale’s campaign manager Shelby DeMars confirmed he had attended the event. DeMars said Rosendale and his wife both quarantined immediately after learning that Guilfoyle tested positive and are waiting for test results.Elsie Arntzen, Montana’s Superintendent of Public Instruction, tweeted that she had also been exposed to the illness and is quarantining and awaiting test results. July 4, 2020: Congressional candidate and Montana State Auditor Matt Rosendale tweeted: “STATEMENT FROM THE ROSENDALE CAMPAIGN: “On Tuesday Matt and Jean Rosendale attended an event where they were in contact with Kimberly Guilfoyle, who has tested positive for COVID-19. Immediately upon learning of their potential exposure both Matt and Jean self isolated and… The next tweet in the short thread said: “…are awaiting their results. While neither Matt nor Jean are experiencing any symptoms, out of an abundance of caution, they are self-quarantining for 14 days and will be suspending in-person campaign events during that period.” #mtpol #mtal” July 5, 2020: Houston Chronicle posted the following information: If President Donald Trump decides to hold a campaign rally in Arkansas, the state will insist that all participants are socially distanced and wear masks to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, Gov. Asa Hutchinson said Sunday.Hutchinson’s comments on NBC’s “Meet the Press” follow Trump rallies in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and at an Arizona megachurch, as well as an Independence Day celebration at Mount Rushmore, where most of the thousands of participants flouted public safety guidelines on maintaining a safe distance and wearing masks.“You can’t stop every activity, but you have to be in a controlled environment in which you do protect yourself and others and take it seriously,” the governor said, adding that a lot of public celebrations for the July Fourth holiday were cancelled in his state “to minimize that exposure.”“Obviously, I would like to have seen more face coverings there in order to set an example,” he said of Friday’s event in South Dakota.And if the president wanted to host a rally in Arkansas?“There would have to be social distancing and wearing of masks if you can’t social distance,” Hutchinson said. “You have to follow our guidelines and that’s what we would insist upon.”… July 6, 2020: President Donald Trump is set to hold an outdoor rally Saturday in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, according to the president’s campaign. The campaign rally at Portsmouth International Airport will come three weeks after an indoor rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, the president’s first of the COVID-19 era, drew a smaller than expected crowd amid concerns of rising infections in the region. The Trump campaign’s announcement of the Portsmouth rally noted that “There will be ample hand sanitizer and all attendees will be provided a face mask that they are strongly encouraged to wear.” Many people at Trump’s rally in Tulsa skipped wearing masks, and relatively few masks were seen during his speech at South Dakota’s Mount Rushmore last Friday. Associated Press July 6, 2020: The Hill posted the following information: Mississippi House Speaker Philip Gunn (R) announced Sunday that he has tested positive for the coronavirus.Gunn said in a video posted on his Facebook page that he sought a test after coming into contact with another lawmaker who had also been diagnosed with the virus……The lawmaker, who did not identify the other House member who tested positive for the virus, said he had reached out to anyone he was in close contact with to tell them he had tested positive. He also called on anyone experiencing symptoms to also self-quarantine and notify anyone they’ve been in contact with if they test positive……Mississippi lawmakers met for much of June, sometimes wearing masks and sometimes not, and frequently sat together in close proximity in committee rooms while discussing the ultimately successful proposal to remove the Confederate battle flag from the state flag, The Associated Press reported… July 6, 2020: New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu posted a press release titled: “Governor Chris Sununu Statement on President Trump Rally”. From the press release: Today, Governor Chris Sununu issued the following statement regarding the President’s upcoming rally in Portsmouth, New Hampshire.“As Governor I will always welcome the President of the United States to New Hampshire,” said Governor Chris Sununu. “I am pleased to see the campaign will be handing out face masks and hand sanitizer to all attendees, as has been true at all public gatherings in NH where social distancing is hard to maintain. It is imperative that folks attending the rally wear masks.”From the outset of this pandemic, the State has not stopped or prevented individuals from peacefully assembling, including marches led by Black Lives Matter and protests from Reopen NH.The Governor’s schedule is still being finalized. In the past, the Governor has greeted the President upon arrival at the airport. If the Governor greets the President at the airport, he will be wearing a mask. July 6, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “South Dakota governor flew with Trump on Air Force One after being exposed to coronavirus: report”. It was written by Aris Folley. From the article: South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R) flew with President Trump on Air Force One on Friday after having close interactions with Kimberly Guilfoyle, a senior advisor for the president’s campaign and the girlfriend of Donald Trump Jr., who has tested positive for COVID-19, The Associated Press reported on Monday.According to the news agency, the governor interacted with Guilfoyle, who tested positive for COVID-19 on Friday, during a campaign fundraiser in South Dakota on Thursday. The two had also reportedly been seen hugging at one point during Guilfoyle’s visit to the state last week. Noem’s office told to The Hill on Monday that the governor tested negative for COVID-19 on Friday after interacting with Guilfoyle at the fundraiser on Thursday……While on the plane to Washington, D.C., with Trump on Friday, Noem did not wear a mask, a spokeswoman for her office, Maggie Seidel, told the AP. Seidel was also reportedly asked about potential risks to the president from Noem’s presence on the plane on Friday. July 6, 2020: Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms, who is reportedly in the running to become the running mate to presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, said Monday she has tested positive for the coronavirus… …She later said on CNN that one of her children has also tested positive. In the interview, Bottom said she had recently experienced symptoms similar to seasonal allergies, including a headache and a mild dry cough, and did not initially recognize them as signs of Covid-19″. “I don’t have any idea how we were exposed,” she said. “I’m stunned.”… CNBC July 6, 2020: Rep. Ben McAdams (D-Utah) tweeted: “I had to get a Covid test in advance of a medical checkup. I thought I’d share what it’s like. It’s been three months since I was in the hospital with Covid-19. As expected, the test was negative. If you have symptoms, please get tested. The test isn’t as bad as it looks #utpol”. The tweet included a video of Rep. Ben McAdams getting tested for coronavirus. July 7, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro tests positive for Covid-19 after months of dismissing the seriousness of the virus”. It was written by Marcia Reverdosa, Rodrigo Pedroso, and Tara John. From the article: Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro has tested positive for Covid-19, following months of downplaying the virus. Bolsonaro himself announced the result, speaking on Brazilian TV channels Tuesday. “Everyone knew that it would reach a considerable part of the population sooner or later. It was positive for me,” he said, referring to the Covid-19 test he took Monday.”“On Sunday, I wasn’t feeling very well. On Monday, it got worse when I started feeling tired and some muscle pain. I also had a 38-degree fever. Given those symptoms, the presidential doctor said there was suspicion of Covid-19,” Bolsonaro said, adding that he then went to hospital to receive a lung scan.He said that his wife, First Lady Michelle Bolsonaro was also tested.In an interview with CNN Brasil following his diagnosis, Bolsonaro said he would steer clear of in-person meetings in the near future. “I’m not going to see anyone for meetings. Everything will be done via video conference and I will rarely meet people if I need to deal with more reserved matter,” he said……More than 65,000 people have now died of the virus in Brazil, according to figures released by the country’s health ministry on Monday. So far, 1,623,284 cases have been confirmed. With coronavirus tests hard to come by in the country, some local experts say the real number of people infected could be 12 to 16 times higher… July 8, 2020: ABC News posted an article titled: “Trump rally likely contributed to surge in COVID-19 cases, Tulsa health official says”. It was written by Will Steakin and Olivia Rubin. From the article: President Donald Trump’s campaign rally in late June, as well as the accompanying counterprotests, likely contributed to the area’s recent spike in coronavirus cases, Tulsa City-County Health Department Director Dr. Bruce Dart said Wednesday.“In the past few days, we’ve seen almost 500 new cases, and we had several large events just over two weeks ago, so I guess we just connect the dots,” Dart said at a press conference.Dart, who said prior to the rally he’d recommended it be postponed over health concerns, added on Wednesday that “significant events in the past few weeks” had “more than likely contributed” to Tulsa County’s surge in cases.Tulsa County reported 261 new cases on Tuesday, a new record high. The state also broke records this week with 858 new cases on Tuesday and 673 on Wednesday……Hospitals in the area are also beginning to report strain. Hillcrest HealthCare System, a major provider in Oklahoma with two hospitals in Tulsa, is nearly at capacity.“We are running at 90-95% inpatient capacity in our Hillcrest Tulsa metro hospitals and ICUs,” Dr. Guy Sneed, the chief medical officer at Hillcrest HealthCare System, told ABC News. “Many of our COVID patients are very sick and require ICU services, including mechanical ventilator support. Some are also requiring ECMO services.”“So, the strain on our existing hospital resources remains high, as it does for the other Tulsa area acute care hospitals,” he added.In the lead-up to last month’s event, health experts raised concerns that the president’s rally could end up being a dangerous event in terms of possible infections. “I’m really very concerned about this event being a superspreader-type event where there will be potentially many people coming out of this who were exposed and could become sick from COVID-19,” Dr. Lena Wen, an emergency physician and public health professor at George Washington University told ABC News… July 8, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Kimberly Guilfoyle reports being asymptomatic and ‘feeling really pretty good’ after COVID-19 diagnosis”. It was written by Marina Pitofsky. From the article: Kimberly Guilfoyle, a top fundraiser for President Trump’s reelection campaign and the girlfriend of Donald Trump Jr., revealed Wednesday event that she is feeling “really pretty good” after she tested positive for COVID-19 earlier this month. Guilfoyle told the Trump campaign’s online show “The Right View” that “I’m doing my best and following my doctor’s orders.”… July 10, 2020: Bloomberg posted an article titled: “Snack Food Executive to Host Trump Fundraiser With Virus Spreading”. It was written by Justin Sink, Jennifer Jacobs, and Mario Parker. President Donald Trump is heading to coronavirus-stricken Florida for a high-dollar campaign fundraiser hosted in Hillsboro Beach by Troy Link, chief executive of Link Snacks, Inc.The event is expected to bring in about $10 million for the president’s re-election, according to a person familiar with the event. A spokeswoman for the snack food company, known for offbeat ads pitching its beef-jerky, didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.The fundraiser — with tickets setting supporters back $580,600 per couple, according to the Washington Post, — comes after Trump was outraised by Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden for two consecutive months. The former vice president banked $141 million in June, according to his campaign, besting Trump’s $131 million haul.But the President’s visit to Florida also coincides with a surge in coronavirus cases in the state, where Republicans will gather for their party convention next month. On Thursday, Florida’s Department of Health announced 8,935 new cases, bringing the state’s total to over 230,000. In Miami-Dade, County some 92% of intensive care hospitals are full……Trump’s visit will also include a stop at U.S. Southern Command in Doral, where he’ll be briefed on recent efforts to intensify drug interdiction in the Caribbean Sea and east Pacific Coast… July 14, 2020: The NSC Twitter account posted a tweet: “Very productive meeting with my #French, #German, #Italian, and #UK counterparts. We discussed the major threats and challenges facing the United States and #Europe, as well as new ways to work together in the post-#COVID19 world”. The tweet included a photo of five men in suits standing close together for the photo. None of them are wearing masks. July 14, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “House GOP lawmaker tests positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Cristina Marcos. From the article: Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.) revealed on Tuesday that he has tested positive for COVID-19, making him the ninth member of Congress with a confirmed or presumed case.Griffith’s office said in a statement that he took a coronavirus test over the weekend after “developing possible symptoms” and has since been self-isolating. “Although he does not currently have significant symptoms, he will continue to self-isolate as he performs his duties on behalf of Virginia’s Ninth Congressional District,” the statement said.Griffith’s diagnosis comes five days after he participated in a press conference on Capitol Hill with members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus to push for reopening schools in the fall amid the coronavirus pandemic despite safety concerns from educators and some parents.Griffith wore a mask for parts of the press conference, which was held outdoors, but took it off to speak before the cameras… July 14, 2020: Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.) posted a press release on his official website titled: “Griffith Tests Positive for Coronavirus”. From the press release: Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA) today was informed that he tested positive for COVID-19. Upon developing possible symptoms, he took the test and has since been self-isolating. Although he does not currently have significant symptoms, he will continue to self-isolate as he performs his duties on behalf of Virginia’s Ninth Congressional District. July 15, 2020: ABC News posted an article titled: “Brazil’s Bolsonaro gets new positive coronavirus test result”. It was written by Mauricio Savarese. From the article: Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro said Wednesday he has tested positive for the new coronavirus for a second time, following his July 7 announcement that he had COVID-19.“I did the test yesterday, and at night the result came back that I am still positive for coronavirus,” Bolsonaro said. “I hope that in the coming days I will do another test and, God willing, everything will be all right to return soon to activity.”The far-right leader said he hasn’t experienced serious symptoms of the disease as he isolates at the presidential residence in capital of Brasilia.According to the World Health Organization, the median time from onset to clinical recovery for mild cases is approximately two weeks.Before his diagnosis, Bolsonaro had spent many of his weekends since the beginning of the pandemic mingling in crowds, sometimes without wearing a mask. He is treating his COVID-19 with the anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine, although it has not been proven effective against the virus.Brazil, the world’s sixth most-populous nation and home to 210 million people, is one of the outbreak’s epicenters. More than 75,000 Brazilians have died from COVID-19, and almost 2 million have been infected, according to government statistics. Both numbers are the world’s second-highest totals, behind those of the U.S… July 16, 2020: Tulsa World posted an article titled: “Watch Now: Kevin Stitt ‘pretty shocked’ to be first governor to test positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Barbara Hoberock. From the article: Gov. Kevin Stitt said Wednesday that he has tested positive for COVID-19, becoming the first nation’s governor to contract the virus but remaining steadfast against a mask mandate.The news comes the same day the state recorded 1,075 new cases, a record for a single day. Wednesday marked the first day that Oklahoma’s daily new case count exceeded 1,000. There have been 22,813 confirmed cases of the disease since early March……Stitt said he got his positive test result around 12:30 p.m. on Tuesday.Stitt earlier that day had chaired a meeting of the Commissioners of the Land Office.Three of the five members and Rep. Mark McBride, R-Moore, met in executive session to discuss a new leader for the agency.The governor was asked Wednesday about the meeting, where Stitt did not wear a mask. McBride on Wednesday said he has canceled his upcoming events and plans to get tested.The other two members were Lt. Gov. Matt Pinnell and Agriculture Secretary Blayne Arthur.In a Facebook post, Pinnell said he would be retested for COVID-19 and would continue quarantining and working from home until he has results. He reported having no symptoms currently.“No one in Oklahoma can say they don’t know anyone who has had it,” Pinnell said in his post. “We all know someone now and it should absolutely be taken seriously.”Arthur was notified Tuesday during the contact tracing process and is quarantining and working remotely, according to the Governor’s Office.Stitt’s office was asked for his schedule for the last two weeks. Baylee Lakey, a spokeswoman, said the request would have to be processed under the Oklahoma Open Records Act. Stitt’s office has been slow to respond to requests under the act……Stitt said he was “not thinking about a mask mandate at all.”“I am just hesitant to mandate something that is problematic to enforce,” the governor said.He said his wife and six children have tested negative for the virus.Stitt said he will be quarantining at home and conducting more meetings by videoconference.He said he does not second-guess his personal choices not to wear a mask despite testing positive.Stitt on June 20 attended a campaign rally in Tulsa at the BOK Center for President Donald Trump.The event attracted at least 6,200 people to the facility, which has 19,000 seats.The majority of people in attendance were not wearing masks. The state’s Republican Congressional delegation, some of whom wore masks, attended……Stitt also attended the funeral service last week for Tulsa police Sgt. Craig Johnson, who died after being shot during a traffic stop on June 30.Stitt was asked Wednesday whether his exposure likely came from the Trump rally, where he did not wear a mask. Stitt and Health Commissioner Lance Frye said the event was too long ago, adding that the exposure could have been at any point in the past two weeks… June 18, 2020: Media Matters posted an article titled: “Vice President Mike Pence lied about Oklahoma’s coronavirus cases to defend Trump’s rally. Local TV newscasts mostly ignored it.” It was written by Zachary Pleat. From the article: News programs broadcast in Oklahoma from dozens of television stations failed to cover a lie Vice President Mike Pence told about the state’s rising rate of coronavirus infections to defend a decision by President Donald Trump’s campaign to hold a rally in Tulsa on Saturday.On June 15, Pence said at a televised White House roundtable that Oklahoma has “flattened the curve. And today their hospital capacity is abundant, the number of cases in Oklahoma has declined precipitously and we feel very confident going forward with the rally this coming weekend.” The Daily Beast, citing a tweet from CNN reporter Daniel Dale which showed a recent surge in new coronavirus cases reported in the state, quickly explained that Pence “blatantly lied to reporters about the trajectory of COVID-19 cases in Oklahoma, where President Trump is scheduled to hold a large campaign rally on Saturday.” July 20, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Two Brazilian ministers test positive for coronavirus in a day”. It was written by Rodrigo Pedroso. From the article: Two Brazilian ministers have tested positive for the coronavirus in one day, following in the footsteps of President Jair Bolsonaro and three other high-ranking government officials.Brazil’s Minister of Citizenship Onyx Lorenzoni announced that he had tested positive for Covid-19 just hours before Milton Ribiero, Minister of Education, revealed that he was also infected.In a series of tweets, Lorenzoni wrote that he was tested after he began to show symptoms last Friday. He said he had started the so-called “Covid kit” treatment, a cocktail of drugs promoted by some medical doctors who back Bolsonaro’s claim that it’s an effective treatment in the early stages of the novel coronavirus……The Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (SBI), in a report published Friday, urged medical professionals to stop using hydroxychloroquine to treat coronavirus, because it has been proved ineffective and can cause collateral damage. A week earlier, Brazil’s National Health Surveillance Agency ANVISA, which regulates pharmaceuticals, released a statement saying there is no conclusive proof that ivermectin is effective as Covid-19 treatment.The other minister, Ribeiro tweeted on Monday: “I’ve just received a positive Covid-19 result this morning. I am already medicated, and I’ll work remotely,” but did not specify which medication he is taking. He is working from a hotel in the capital Brasília, the minister’s press officer told CNN Brasil.Brazil has now recorded more than two million cases and almost 80,000 deaths, more than any country except the United States, according to figures from Johns Hopkins University……In March, after returning from a trip to the US for meetings between Bolsonaro and US President Donald Trump, Brazil’s Mines and Energy Minister Bento Albuquerque and Institutional Security Minister General Augusto Heleno both tested positive for the coronavirus, along with Bolsonaro’s communication secretary Fabio Wajngarten, and another 15 members of the Brazilian delegation… July 22, 2020: NBC News posted an article titled: “White House executive office cafeteria closed after positive coronavirus test”. It was written by Josh Lederman. From the article: The White House is conducting contact tracing after a cafeteria worker tested positive for coronavirus, three Trump administration officials tell NBC News.The cafeteria and an eatery in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, or EEOB, were both closed this week after the case was discovered, officials said. It was unclear how long the facility will remain closed, although some staffers were told it could remain shuttered for two weeks……Part of the White House complex, the Eisenhower Executive Office Building sits just across West Executive Ave. from the West Wing. It houses the offices of much of the senior White House staff, including officials from the coronavirus task force, the vice president’s office, the National Security Council and several economic policy shops.Unlike the White House Mess, which is located inside the West Wing and run by the U.S. Navy, the cafeteria and an Ike’s Eatery in the neighboring EEOB are run by a government contractor. The White House referred questions about the situation to the General Services Administration, which maintains the building.“All proper protocols were in place by the vendor including masks, gloves, plastic shielding at check out, and no dine-in service,” a GSA spokesperson said. “The White House Medical Unit has done contact tracing and determined that the risk of retransmission is low.”The GSA did not say how many staffers might have been potentially exposed at the commissary or how long it will remain closed……Several White House officials and others in close proximity to the president have previously tested positive for coronavirus, leading to contact tracing efforts by the White House in the past. Although the White House recently ended regular temperature checks for all those entering the White House grounds, those coming into close proximity to the president are still given COVID-19 rapid tests at the White House. July 23, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “DC investigator finds no Covid-related violations at Trump International Hotel”. It was written by Katelyn Polantz and Caroline Kelly. From the article: A Washington, DC, investigator inspected President Donald Trump’s Washington hotel on Wednesday and found no violations of Covid-related regulations after images emerged of the President and others not wearing masks in the hotel’s lobby earlier in the week.The agency says it will continue to monitor the Trump International Hotel’s compliance with Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser’s regulations, which include the mandatory wearing of masks when inside businesses or the common areas of hotels……Jared Powell, spokesman for DC’s Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration, which investigates complaints about businesses not following the Covid-19 protection policy, told CNN that “during the inspection, guests and staff were observed to be wearing face masks and coverings in compliance with the Mayor’s Order.”“Reports are only generated when violations are observed in person by an investigator,” Powell added. ABRA will continue to monitor the establishment for compliance.”……The President attended “a roundtable with supporters of a joint fundraising committee,” according to the White House, at the hotel on Monday night. Footage later surfaced of Trump not wearing a mask in the hotel’s lobby.”……Per a Republican National Committee spokesperson prior to the fundraiser, it was slated to raise $5 million for Trump Victory, his joint fundraising operation with the RNC and state party committees. July 23, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Two cafeterias used by White House staff closed after positive coronavirus test”. It was written by Justin Wise. From the article: A pair of cafeterias regularly used by White House staff members were reportedly closed this week after an employee tested positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus. An anonymous Trump administration official told The New York Times on Wednesday that the White House notified staffers about the closures, but said there wasn’t any reason for them to self-quarantine. The cafeterias were in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building and the New Executive Office Building, neither of which are located next to the West Wing. The worker who contracted the coronavirus is said to be a cafeteria employee, according to reports from NBC News and CNN. The White House did not immediately return a request for comment from The Hill. In addition to the closures, the White House reportedly conducted contact tracing for staffers who may have been in contact with the employee. Staff have reportedly been advised to monitor themselves for possible symptoms and remain home if they feel sick… July 27, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “Trump national security advisor Robert O’Brien tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Kevin Breuniger. From the article: President Donald Trump’s national security advisor, Robert O’Brien, has tested positive for coronavirus. O’Brien has “mild symptoms and has been self-isolating and working from a secure location off site,” the White House said in a statement Monday.“There is no risk of exposure to the President or the Vice President. The work of the National Security Council continues uninterrupted,” the White House said.O’Brien, 54, is among the highest-ranking members in Trump’s orbit reported to have come down with the virus……The White House has said that Trump is regularly tested, as are all officials who come into close contact with the president and vice president.O’Brien earlier this month had traveled to Europe to meet with officials from the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Italy. He was photographed on that trip in close proximity with his European counterparts, none of whom appeared to be wearing masks during meetings, photos from the NCS’s official Twitter account show… July 27, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Trump’s national security adviser tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Joan E. Greve, Julian Borger, and Ed Pilkington. From the article: The national security adviser, Robert O’Brien, has tested positive for the coronavirus, but the White House insisted there was “no risk” of Donald Trump being exposed.However, O’Brien recently returned from a trip to Europe where he was photographed without wearing a mask or social distancing, with several foreign officials, including his UK counterpart, Mark Sedwill; the UK ambassador to France, Edward Llewellyn; and the French national security adviser, Emmanuel Bonne… The photographs referred to in the article from The Guardian were posted on the NSC twitter account on July 15, 2020. The tweet said: “Great to see #UK NSA @marksedwill today. We discussed important bilateral and global topics, including #HongKong, #China, #5G security, and #Iran. The U.S.-UK Special Relationship endures”. The tweet included two photos. One was a group of eight people sitting around a table and having a meal together indoors. The other was a photo of standing close two four other people, some of whom appears to be in the photo with O’Brien that was posted by the NSC Twitter account on July 14, 2020. July 27 2020: Tulsa World posted an article titled: “Oklahoma Gov. Kivin Stitt says he has recovered from COVID-19”. It was written by Harrison Grimwood. From the article: Oklahoma’s chief executive reported Monday that he has returned to work about 12 days after testing positive for the new coronavirus.Gov. Kevin Stitt announced on July 15 that he tested positive for COVID-19……Stitt said he quickly quarantined and sought testing and recommended that Oklahomans react similarly should they see symptoms set in.He announced his positive test result on the same day Oklahoma first reported more than a thousand new cases of COVID-19 in any given day. And Stitt announced his return to work Monday, the highest day yet for case counts in Oklahoma at 1,401 new cases.The disease can be deadly, with 496 Oklahomans having died from it thus far, Stitt’s only symptoms, he said, were fatigue and achiness.Public health officials recommend that patients isolate for 10 days from the onset of symptoms and quarantine until they are without a fever for 24 hours without the use of fever-reducing medicines… July 29, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “Louie Gohmert, who refused to wear a mask, tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Jake Sherman. Rep. Louis Gohmert – a Texas Republican who has been walking around the Capitol without a mask – he tested positive for the coronavirus, according to multiple sources.Gohmert was scheduled to fly to Texas on Wednesday morning with President Donald Trump and tested positive in a pre-screen at the White House. The eight-term Republican told CNN last month that he was not wearing a mask because he was being tested regularly for the coronavirus.“f I get it,” he told CNN in June, “you’ll never see me without a mask.”……Gohmert attended Tuesday’s blockbuster House Judiciary Committee hearing with Attorney General William Barr in person, where lawmakers were seated at some distance from one another.But footage from before the hearing shows Gohmert and Barr walking together in close contact, with neither wearing a mask.Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said Barr will be tested for coronavirus on Wednesday.At one point in Tuesday’s hearing, Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) chastised several Republicans for taking off their masks, though Gohmert was not among those he scolded……Connie Hair, Gohmert’s chief of staff, declined comment. But after this article was published, Gohmert told his aides in person that he had been infected… July 29, 2020: Representative Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) tweeted: “I want to wish @replouiegohmert a full & speedy recovery. When individuals refuse to take the necessary precautions it puts everyone at risk. I’ve regularly instructed all Members to wear their masks had hope this is a lesson by all my colleagues.” The tweet included a link to the Politico article. July 29, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Multiple lawmakers self-quarantine after exposure to Gohmert”. From the article: At least two lawmakers said Wednesday that they will self-quarantine after recently being around Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), who has tested positive for COVID-19.Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas) said her decision to self-quarantine came after she sat next to Gohmert on a flight from their home state over the weekend. Rep Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, also said he will self quarantine after chairing a hearing that Gohmert attended on Tuesday.Gohmert tested positive for coronavirus while he was being screened at the White House ahead of a planned trip to Texas with President Trump on Wednesday.The Texas Republican had attended multiple hearings on Capitol Hill the previous day, including the Natural Resources Committee hearing about the Park Police’s handling of protesters at Lafayette Square last month and a Judiciary hearing with Attorney General William Barr……A spokesperson for Granger said she was “seated next to Representative Gohmert on a flight from Texas Sunday evening. At the direction of the Attending Physician, and out of an abundance of caution, she is self-quarantining.”..…A spokesperson for Barr said earlier Wednesday that the attorney general will be tested for COVID-19 after being near Gohmert.And at least one member of the Capitol press corps, a reporter for Bloomberg News, also got tested on Wednesday after an encounter with Gohmert… July 29, 2020: Reporter for Bloomberg Erik Wasson tweeted: “In line for covid testing after Gohmert encounter”. The tweet included a photo of himself outside, wearing a mask, and standing in a socially-distanced line of people who were all waiting for a coronavirus test. July 29, 2020: Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.) tweeted a thread that started with this tweet: “On Monday, I had dinner with my good friend, Rep. Gohmert. While I feel healthy, exhibit no symptoms, and have otherwise followed mask and social distancing guidelines, the attending physician has advised that I should self-quarantine for 14 days out of an abundance of caution.” The tweet included a three-minute and fourty-four second video from Fox News of Rep. Mike Johnson speaking at the House Judiciary Committee hearing on “Big Tech Executives on Alleged Bias Against Conservatives.” Rep. Mike Johnson is not wearing a mask in that video. The majority of the video is two other people talking about the hearing. The second tweet said: “Recognizing the seriousness of this virus & the danger it poses to high-risk individuals I began following the attending physician’s recommendation immediately. Should the attending physician recommend at any point that I take a COVID-19 test, I will follow that guideance as well.” The third tweet in the thread said: “In the meantime, I plan to continue my work on behalf of the people of Louisiana’s Fourth Congressional District while in isolation and, as always, I encourage constituents to reach out to my office if they need anything.” July 29, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “Turning Point USA co-founder dies of coronavirus-related complications”. It was written by Daniel Lippman and Tina Nguyen. From the article: The co-founder of conservative student group Turning Point USA, Bill Montgomery, has died from complications of the coronavirus, according to two friends of his.Montgomery, who started it in 2012 with young conservative star Charlie Kirk, died at the age of 80 on Tuesday from Covid-19, according to pro-Trump conservative strategist Caleb Hull, who posted about the death on Twitter and his personal Facebook page, and Chicago-based citizen journalist Vic Maggio……Montgomery is survived by his widow, Edie, a son and a daughter.Over the course of the pandemic, Turning Point USA representative have downplayed the impact of the coronavirus on public life……In late June, Trump spoke to a packed audience of young Turning Point supporters at a megachurch in Phoenix where he was introduced by Kirk. Few people in the audience practiced social distancing or wore masks, although the organization gave masks to everyone who wanted one and provided socially distanced seating in the upper tier of the church… June 29, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Tuberville breaks DC self-quarantine policy to campaign”. It was written by Rebecca Klar. From the article: Alabama Republican State candidate Tommy Tuberville appears to have broken the D.C. policy requiring visitors from states with high coronavirus case counts to self-quarantine for 14 days.Tuberville defied the District’s requirement during a fundraising trip in D.C. this week, The Washington Post reported Wednesday.The Post cited a photo Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.) posted to Facebook on Tuesday of the two men, neither in a mask, in the lobby of the Trump International Hotel……D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) last week announced visitors arriving to the District on nonessential business from hot spot areas will need to quarantine for 14 days. Alabama is one of more than two dozen states on the list……Tuberville, the former Auburn University football coach, beat Sessions in a runoff earlier this month. Sessions was running to reclaim his old seat.…Tuberville will face Sen. Doug Jones (D-Ala.) in November. Joes is considered the most vulnerable Democrat in facing reelection in 2020. The Cook Political Report rates the race as “Lean Republican”……The outlet noted that Tuberville wore a maks during his watch party early on the night of his win when he spoke to supporters but did not wear one when he gave his victory speech or when he went into the crowd and posed for photos and for hugs, handshakes and high-fives… July 29, 2020: Vice President Mike Pence tweeted: “Thank you to Mrs. Combs’ 4th Grade Class! We are so proud and happy to see you all back in school! @Thales_Academy has taken careful steps to keep everyone healthy and we are grateful for the countless hours put in to open the academy and get kids back in the classroom!” The tweet included four photos from the visit. In the first photo, the teacher is sitting at the front of the classroom with Mike Pence and Betsy DeVos each seated several feet away from each other. The teacher is wearing a mask. Mike Pence and Betsy DeVos are not. The second photo shows some of the students in the classroom. three are wearing masks. The photographer focused on a child who is incorrectly wearing a mask around his neck. Behind the students are a row of photographers all of whm are wearing masks. The third photo is very similar to the first one. The fourth photo is centered on Mike Pence, who is not wearing a mask. He is seated in front of a whiteboard that says “Welcome Vice President Pence!” July 30, 2020: CBS News posted an article titled: “Herman Cain, former presidential candidate, dies from coronavirus”. It was written by Grace Segers. From the article: Former Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain has died from coronavirus, according to a post on his website. The businessman and right-wing media personality was 74 years old……Cain was hospitalized with COVID-19 on June 29……Although perhaps most famous for his 2011 presidential campaign, Cain had a long career as a prominent businessman. Cain received his undergraduate degree from Morehouse College and his graduate degree from Purdue University, and worked as a ballistic analyst for the U.S. Department of the Navy. He was a business executive at Burger King before he served as chairman and CEO of Godfather’s Pizza from 1986 to 1996. He also served as president and CEO of the National Restaurant Association from 1996 to 1999……Cain attended President Trump’s rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, on June 20. The 2012 presidential candidate posted a photo of himself and other rally attendees, none of whom were wearing masks. Although masks were provided to attendees at the rally, wearing them was not mandatory.Trump campaign officials told CBS News that Cain sat with members of the president’s “Black Voices for Trump” advisory board, as seen in the photo he posted to Twitter, but he did not come in contact with Mr. Trump. The statement posted to Cain’s Twitter account upon his hospitalization said that “there is no way of knowing for sure how or where Mr. Cain contracted the coronavirus.” Calabrese also wrote in a column in early July that Cain had also traveled to Arizona, which is dealing with a serious outbreak, in the days after the rally… July 30, 2020: President Trump tweeted: “My friend Herman Cain, a Powerful Voice of Freedom and all that is good, passed away this morning. Herman had an incredible career and was adored by everyone that ever met him, especially me. He was a very special man, an American Patriot, and great friend. I just got off…” That tweet was followed by a second tweet: “….the phone with his amazing wife Gloria, daughter Melanie, and son Vincent to express my deepest condolences to the entire family. @FLOTUS Melania and I love Herman Cain, a great man. Herman, Rest In Peace!” August 3, 2020: WKYC Studios posted an article titled: “People attending President Trump’s fundraiser at Bratenahl’s Shoreby Club will get rapid COVID-19 test: Mark Nayamik Reports”. It was written by Mark Naymik. From the article: The Shorby Club, the private waterfront haven in Bratenahl, told its members in an email newsletter Sunday that anyone working or attending the fundraiser for President Trump on Aug. 6th will recieve a rapid COVID-19 test.They must test negative to attend the event, the email reads. The email did not specifically identify the event as the president’s fundraiser. But 3News and others reported last week that Trump is holding a fundraiser at the club on Thursday, though the exact time has not been revealed.The Shoreby Club email acknowledges members raised health safety concerns over holding such an event.Though rapid testing is not widely available, the White House has been using such tests to regularly screen those around the president, including the press. In March, Trump showed off a rapid-testing device made by Abbott Labs, which is about the size of a toaster and can produce results in about 15 minutes. It’s unclear what test will be used or what protocol is place for testing guests. The Shoreby Club, which features a large outdoor event space overlooking the water, has not returned a call for comment on the event.Thursday’s event is a joint fundraiser for Trump’s re-election campaign and the Republican National Committee. Tickets cost a minimum of $5,600. Guests who contribute $100,000 will have more exclusive access to the president and other GOP officials.RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel and RNC Co-Chairman Tommy Hicks are expected to attend the event. Among the Ohio business and civic leaders hosting the event are Debbie and Matt Crawford, Mike Gibbons, Catherine and James Kassouf, Kelly and Mel Kurtz, Lanee and Jason Lucarelli, Jenny and Tim Smucker, Pam and Bill Summers and Tim Timken, according to a copy of the invitation to the event. August 5, 2020: ABC News posted an article titled: “Students at school touted by Pence for reopening must quarantine due to COVID-19”. It was written by Ella Torres. From the article: Fourth graders at a school in North Carolina have been asked to quarantine for 14 days after a student there tested positive for COVID-19.The school, Thales Academy in Wake Forest, said it was notified on Monday that the student became infected after having contact with an infected family member. The student was asymptomatic and was last at school on Friday. Teachers who were exposed also will be quarantined.Thales Academy, a network of private non-sectarian community schools with eight locations in North Carolina, made the news last week after Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos visited a classroom and applauded the school for reopening.Pence and DeVos visited a campus in Apex, not Wake Forest……Thales welcomed students back July 20. It offered parents two options: fully online or fully in-person, according to ABC Durham affiliate WTVD. Students had their temperatures taken and completed a medical questionnaire after they were dropped off, according to WTVD. Staff and faculty also reminded students to wear masks.Because the school network is private, it doesn’t have to adhere to North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper’s school reopening guidelines… August 5, 2020: WKYC Studios posted an article titled: “Gov. Mike DeWine moves coronavirus briefing to Friday due to President Trump’s planned Ohio visit”. From the article: Governor Mike DeWine’s office announced the next coronavirus briefing has been delayed a day due to a visit by the president. President Donald J. Trump is scheduled to visit the Whirlpool plant in Clyde and hold a fundraiser in Bratenahl on Thursday. The Shoreby Club, the private waterfront haven in Bratenahl, told its members in an email newsletter Sunday that anyone working or attending the fundraiser for President Trump on Aug. 6th will receive a rapid COVID-19 test. They must test negative in order to attend the event. Thursday’s event is a joint fundraiser for Trump’s re-election campaign and the Republican National Committee. Tickets cost a minimum of $5,600. Guests who contribute $100,000 will have more exclusive access to the president and other GOP officials. RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel and RNC Co-Chairman Tommy Hicks are expected to attend the event. During his visit to the Whirlpool plant, President Trump will tour the plant and speak regarding his administration’s dedication to assist in supporting the manufacturing industry and American-made products. The governor will greet President Trump when he lands in Ohio… August 6, 2020: Ohio Governor Mike DeWine (Republican) tweeted: “As part of the standard protocal to greet President Trump on the tarmac in Cleveland, I took a COVID test. I tested positive. I have no symptoms at this time. I’m following protocal and will quarantine at home for the next 14 days”. The tweet was posted at 9:34 AM. August 6, 2020: Ohio Governor Mike DeWine (Republican) tweeted: “I tested negative in second test I took today for COVID-19. First Lady Fran DeWine and staff members have also all tested negative for COVID-19. Thanks to all for the well wishes.” This tweet was posted a 7:00 PM. August 7, 2020: Cleveland.com posted an article titled: “Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Andrew J. Tobias. From the article: Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine announced Thursday he has tested positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by the new coronavirus.DeWine was tested Thursday as part of a standard protocol as he prepared to greet President Donald Trump at the tarmac in at Burke Lakefront Airport in Cleveland, according to a news release issued Thursday afternoon by the governor’s office.Less than 10 hours after the initial announcement, DeWine announced he tested negative for coronavirus. The second round of testing was performed through a more sensitive test called a polymerase chain reaction, or PCR test, which detects genetic material from the new coronavirus, the governor’s office said. The earlier test delivers rapid results by testing the blood for antigens, but is a relatively unproven technology…Lt. Gov. Jon Husted, who also was in Cleveland to greet the president, tested negative, according to the governor’s office. Trump is in Ohio to visit the Whirlpool manufacturing plant in Sandusky County and has a fundraiser planned later in Bratenahl.DeWine has no symptoms, and is returning to Columbus where he will be tested again, as will Ohio First Lady Fran DeWine, the governor’s office said. He then will head to his home in Cedarville where he plans to self-quarantine for 14 days.Husted, meanwhile, continued with his plans to meet the president on the runway……DeWine becomes the second U.S. governor to test positive for COVID-19. Republican Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt tested positive on July 15. He reported to work 12 days later and has declared himself recovered, according to the Tulsa World.DeWine, a Republican, has become nationally prominent for his cautious approach to dealing with the coronavirus, including being an early advocate for the wearing of facial masks……Officials in the governor’s office said it’s unlikely that many other staffers will have to quarantine as a result of the governor’s positive test. DeWine heads to Columbus twice a week for his coronavirus briefings, but generally works from his home in Cedarville. Most of his staff also work from home. So the only other state officials DeWine likely would come in close contact with include Husted, his security detail and staffers who help with the briefings, Tierney said… August 7, 2020: Cleveland.com (via MSN.com) posted an article titled: “6 workers at Bratenahl club where Donald Trump appeared test positive for coronavirus, but didn’t encounter the president”. It was written by Robert Higgs. From the article: Six people who work at the Bratenahl club that hosted President Donald Trump on Thursday tested positive for COVID-19 coronavirus but were not at the clube to encounter the president.The Cuyahoga County Board of Health and the Shoreby Club each confirmed the positive tests on Friday and offered assurances that the workers posed no hazard to the president.Any food with which they might have come in contact was discarded, club General Manager Buddy Kane said in a letter to members. The club, meanwhile, was closed Friday and will be sanitized.The employees were tested Thursday morning off-site as part of preparations for the event. All were asymptomatic, Kane said in the letter to members.It is unclear yet, though, how many of the employees actually did contract the virus, Dr. Heidi Gullett, medical director for the county Board of Health, said during a Friday media briefing.The employees were given a rapid positive antigen test, which yields results quickly, but also can yield false positives.That was the case for Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, who was scheduled to welcome the president to Cleveland, but instead returned to his home in Cedarville after getting a positive result from that test… August 7, 2020: HuffPost posted an article titled: “Trump Calls Maskless Country Club Audience At Press Conference A “Peaceful Protest”. It was written by Sara Ruiz-Grossman. From the article: President Donald Trump had dozens of guests at a press conference at his club in New Jersey, most of whom didn’t socially distance and some who didn’t wear masks for a time — appearing to flout state rules limiting indoor gatherings amid the pandemic and putting at risk the health of members of the media. At the news conference held at Trump’s private golf club in Bedminster, which Trump announced late Friday, a reporter noted that Americans continue to die of COVID-19 nationwide, and yet, “in this room, you have dozens of people, you’re not following the guidelines of New Jersey.” New Jersey’s latest order limits indoor gatherings to 25 people in an effort to curb the spread of the virus. More than 40 people can be counted in photos from the news conference.As the guests booed the reporter, Trump responded: “This is a political activity. You’re wrong on that. They have exceptions, political activity. And it’s also a peaceful protest.” Under the state’s order, there are exceptions for funerals, religious services and political activity, which can have up to 100 people. Yet Trump had announced this as a news conference, not a campaign rally……As reporters waited for the news conference to start, photos showed guests standing close together, many of them without masks on. Later, staff apparently handed out masks to Trump’s guests. The guests reportedly had their temperatures taken prior to the event… August 7, 2020: White House Correspondent for Bloomberg, Justin Sink tweeted: “there’s currently dozens of unmasked bedminster patrons the president has invited to the bedminster ballroom where he’s scheduled to hold his press conference – a number drinking wine. btw here’s the NJ regulations for golf courses.” The tweet included a screenshot of the New Jersey regulations for golf courses. From the regulations: Limiting the number of patrons in any indoor premises to 25 percent capacity – excluding employeesRequiring workers and customers to wear cloth face coverings while indoors, except where doing so would inhibit that individual’s health or where the individual is under two years of ageIf a customer refuses to wear a cloth face covering for non-medical reasons then the business must decline the individual entry into the indoor premises August 7, 2020: White House Correspondent for Bloomberg, Justin Sink tweeted: “this is the scene”. The tweet showed a photo of a group of people, some of whom are children, standing behind a temporary barracade of chairs. They are all closely packed together. Four people in the crowd are wearing masks. The rest are not. August 7, 2020: White House Correspondent for Bloomberg, Justin Sink tweeted: “after the press corps’ tweets, staffers asked audience members to distance more and handed out masks” August 8, 2020: The Denver Channel posted an article titled: “President Trump signs 4 executive orders aimed at pandemic relief”. From the article: President Trump signed four executive orders Saturday at his golf resort in Bedminster, New Jersey aimed at helping both working and unemployed Americans during the ongoing pandemic……Saturday’s event had the feeling of a political rally by the end, as members of the president’s golf club were able to attend the press briefing. As the president answered some questions from the media, audience members cheered…. August 22, 2020: HuffPost posted an article titled: “QAnon Cultists, Emboldened by Trump, Rally in Hollywood To Spread Dangerous Conspiracies”. It was written by Sebastian Murdock and Jesselyn Cook. From the article: Hundreds of believers of the dangerous conspiracy theory QAnon rallied in Hollywood on Saturday, just days after President Donald Trump praised the cult-like group.The demonstration, purported to be about bringing awareness to child sex trafficking, was largely an opportunity for supporters of QAnon to spread various unfounded conspiracy theories; the group has co-opted anti-traffiking messaging to draw more people into its conspiratorial web. Most demonstrators did not wear masks as they marched through Los Angeles, where thousands of people have died from COVID-19……Protestors gathered next to an In-N-Out Burger on Sunset Boulevard, where they held a 20-second moment of silence, followed by a rendition of “Amazing Grace.”……Multiple protestors who declined to be interviewed by HuffPost later took part in a change of, “Where is the media?”……Days later, when asked by a reporter if he supports QAnon, Trump outright embraced the group.“I don’t know much about the movement, other than I understand they like me very much, which I appreciate,” Trump said on Wednesday. “I have heard that it is gaining in popularity… I’ve heard these are people who love our country.” August 26, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Melania Trump Rose Garden speech attendees not all required to get coronavirus tests”. It was written by Jeff Zeleny, Kate Sullivan and Kate Bennet. From the article: Those who attended first lady Melania Trump’s speech in the White House Rose Garden that capped the second night of the Republican National Convention were not required to get tested for coronavirus, a person who attended the speech told CNN. There were screening questions on the form to RSVP, but no coronavirus tests or temperature checks were done at the White House, the person said. The Trump campaign said earlier in the day that about 70 people would be attending the speech, which was the first one with an in-person audience at the Republican convention. Early Wednesday morning, the first lady’s chief of staff Stephanie Grisham told CNN that the audience members “in the rows near the President and vice president” were tested for coronavirus before the speech. Grisham said most of the guests were not tested, especially those “in the last five or six rows,” but she claims anyone who came into close contact with Trump or Pence — including senior aides, staffers and Melania Trump’s parents — were tested.The vast majority of those attending did not wear masks, and the chairs provided for attendees did not appear to be placed six feet apart. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advises keeping at least six feet apart from others if possible in order to prevent the spread of the virus, and the agency also advocates for face coverings, especially if it is difficult to keep six feet apart from another person……The first lady’s speech was attended by President Donald Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, second lady Karen Pence and members of Trump’s Cabinet, among others… August 26, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Democrats press Esper on ‘concerning’ rise in Pentagon’s COVID-19 cases”. It was written by Rebecca Kheel. From the article: A group of Senate Democrats is reviving its concerns about the Pentagon’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, citing a spike in cases in July.In a letter to Defense Secretary Mark Esper, the nine senators called reports of a rise in cases among service members “concerning”.“We are pleased to see that the department is taking some precautionary measures to address the spread of the virus, but are concerned that the department is still not properly prioritizing the health and well-being of our service members,” they wrote in the letter, dated Wednesday.As of Wednesday, the Pentagon has reported a total of 53,033 coronavirus cases connected to the department, including 36,600 cases on the military.There have been a total of 80 deaths reported across the department, including six service members. Of the troops who have died, one was an active-duty sailor, while the others were reservists or National Guardsmen.The senators specifically highlighted that the number of COVID-19 cases connected to the Pentagon gtrew by more than 21,000 in July, a more than 100 percent increase… August 27, 2020: Senator Thom Tillis (Republican – North Carolina) tweeted: “I am honored to be in Washington for President @realDonaldTrump’s acceptance speech for the @GOP nomination, where he will share with America our continued vision of freedom, prosperity, and opportunity to live the American Dream. #RNC2020”. The tweet included a photo of Senator Tillis looking directly into a camera, giving a “thumbs up” and wearing a face mask. Right behind him is a crowd of people, all sitting extremely close together. None of them appear to be wearing masks. A large sign that says “Trump Pence” is in the distance. August 28, 2020: The Charlotte Observer posted an article titled: “4 people at RNC in Charlotte test positive for COVID, as GOP defends safety measures”. It was written by Alison Kuznitz and Austin Weinstein. From the article: Two attendees and two local support staff at the Republican National Convention in Charlotte tested positive for COVID-19, Mecklenburg County and GOP officials announced Friday.The disclosures come after county health officials raised concerns about a lack of social distancing and mask wearing during the roll-call vote to renominate President Donald Trump for a second term on Monday – despite strict health protocols that were supposed to be followed. The GOP is defending the safety procedures it had in place.Local health officials said the county instructed those who were infected to isolate immediately, and people who came in close contact with them should also quarantine themselves. A county spokeswoman did not respond to questions on whether the orders were followed.It is not clear how many people at the RNC might have been exposed to the coronavirus. Almost 800 people were tested by the local hospital systems for the event.The two infected attendees drove themselves home while self-isolating, GOP spokeswoman Blair Ellis said. That action aligns with the joint guidelines from the RNC, the county and local hospitals……Ultimately, infections were to be expected when bring that many people together from across the country, according to Dana Rice, a public health professor at UNC Chapel Hill.“I’m not sure it could’ve been avoided, unless you didn’t bring people together in a room,” she said. “That was a decision that the RNC made not taking into consideration all of the public health warnings and messaging that has been out there.”The public may need to wait weeks for an “after-action” report detailing the true scope of infections linked to the RNC……The Charlotte region has been North Carolina’s epicenter for the novel coronavirus since March when the pandemic began.There have been almost 25,000 confirmed cases and 290 related deaths of county residents as of Thursday afternoon.When delegates arrived in Charlotte last week, they were tested for the virus upon registration and had regular symptom checks. Support staff from the surrounding community were also tested, Mecklenburg officials said.The RNC also used a rapid antigen testing system for other people at the convention, county spokeswoman Rebecca Carter said. “We did not manage those tests and the antigen tests do not confirm infection,” she said. Delegates also wore special badges that recorded who they came into contact with and for how long — making it easier for health officials to quell possible outbreaks.Once in town, attendees were free to move about the city, eating at restaurants and attending events. That opened up the possibility that the virus could be picked up after their Charlotte-based test, and before the convention in person. Additionally, delegates were free to travel between their test in Charlotte and when they received their results.Over the weekend ahead of the Monday renomination, delegates gathered for business meetings in a ballroom in the Westin Charlotte and mingled at a handful of events in the city, where mask wearing was not absolute……The delegates were seated at individual 6-foot tables for most of the official business of the convention.Midway through Monday’s events, Harris reached out to RNC organizers with concerns about adherence to public health guidelines. She said she was assured that RNC staff would enforce them.Shortly after, delegates swiftly converged near the stage of the Richardson Ballroom as President Donald Trump came to the podium for a surprise speech. Attendees, packed close to one another, danced the YMCA after the speech concluded — with many still not wearing face coverings.When asked why they allowed delegates to do this, an RNC staff member said that that was the purview of the U.S. Secret Service. The Secret Service did not reply to a request for comment… August 28, 2020: The News&Observer posted an article titled: “Maskless at Trump acceptance speech, Tillis says: ‘I fell short of my own standard'”. It was written by Brian Murphy. From the article: Throughout the coronavirus pandemic, U.S. Sen. Thom Tillis has been adamant about the need to wear face coverings and be socially distant from others, repeatedly highlighting those precautions as keys to defeating COVID-19.Tillis, a Republican facing re-election in 2020, attended President Donald Trump’s Republican National Convention acceptance speech Thursday night on the White House’s South lawn. More than 1,000 people were there, sitting shoulder to shoulder with few wearing face coverings. There was not universal testing for attendees.“I’ve stressed the importance of mask wearing throughout this pandemic and have tried to lead by example on this issue, but last night I fell short of my own standard,” Tillis said in a statement Friday.The speech originally was scheduled for Charlotte, but Trump moved the signature event after disagreements with Gov. Roy Cooper over social distancing and limited capacity in the arena. Four people at Monday’s limited RNC event tested positive for the coronavirus…Tillis posted a photo of himself wearing a face mask before Thursday’s event started, but was captured on camera not wearing a face mask in the middle of the crowd later on… November 25, 2020: CBS News posted an article titled: “Missouri Governor Mike Parson and his wife Teresa test positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Victoria Albert. From the article: Missouri Governor Mike Parson and First Lady Teresa Parson have tested positive for the coronavirus, the governor’s office announced Wednesday. The Republican governor has not shown any symptoms and his wife’s symptoms are mild, the governor said. Teresa was first tested Wednesday morning after displaying minor symptoms of the virus, and the governor was tested soon after. Teresa has taken a rapid test and a swab test that came back positive, and Parson is waiting on the results of a swab test after his rapid test came back positive, according to The Associated Press. All official and campaign events have been canceled, and the governor’s staff is also getting tested, the office said….…Parson has encouraged his state to wear masks and social distance — but he has also opposed a mask mandate, according to CBS affiliate KMOV. More than 116,000 people have tested positive for the virus in the state and nearly 2,000 have died, according to the most recent data from the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services. The AP reported that the state broke its single-day death toll record on both Tuesday and Wednesday. When asked by the outlet on Wednesday if it was time for a statewide mandate, the state’s health director told AP that it should be decided by local officials. September 25, 2020: CBS News posted an article titled: “Virginia Governor Ralph Northam and first lady test positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Sarah Lynch Baldwin. From the article: Virginia’s Democratic Governor Ralph Northam said Friday that he and the state’s first lady have tested positive for COVID-19. Northam said he is asymptomatic and that his wife Pam’s symptoms are mild.“We will isolate at home for 10 days and then reevaluate our symptoms,” he tweeted. “I am in constant contact with my cabinet and staff, and will continue working from the Executive Mansion.”The couple was notified Wednesday that a member of their official residence staff had developed coronavirus symptoms and tested positive. They were then tested for the virus, which has affected nearly 7 million Americans and killed more than 200,000 according to a tally from Johns Hopkins University… September 29, 2020: President Trump tweeted: “Just arrived in the Great State of Ohio. Real Polls have been leading by even more than 2016. With Biden being against Fracking (Energy & Jobs) & your Second Amendment, we should be in very good shape!” September 30, 2020: President Trump tweeted: “Just landed in Minnesota. Hasn’t been won by a Republican since 1972, and we saved Minneapolis. Also opened the massive and beautiful Iron Range, which Obama and Sleepy Joe closed. Thousands of jobs started back. They will close again. How can we lose?” September 30, 2020: President Trump tweeted: “Leaving Minneapolis for a quick stop in Duluth to celebrate the opening of the Obama CLOSED Iron Range. My great honor!!!” September 30, 2020: CBS Minnesota posted an article titled: “President Trump Returns to Minn. After Chaotic 1st Debate: “We Are Going To Win Minnesota”. It was written by Esme Murphy. From the article: …While Democratic challenger Joe Biden focused his attention back east, President Donald Trump held a big rally at the Duluth International Airport Wednesday night. He landed there at about 8 p.m. after attending a fundraiser in Shorewood, hosted by Cambria CEO Marty Davis.In Duluth, the president spoke for what is for him an unusually short rally speech of 45 minutes. He did mention several times how cold it was. He was greeted by a crowd of what looked like several thousand enthusiastic supporters……At a drive-in event in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, Biden doubled down as he focused on the pandemic.“He knew how serious this pandemic was. He knew how quickly it would spread. Thousands of people would get killed, but he forgot to say a single thing to us,” Biden said. “The man doesn’t deserve to be commander in chief.”……Republicans say they expect to see the president back in Minnesota before the election. Thursday, his son Eric Trump will campaign at a trucking company in Becker.Biden’s wife, Jill, will campaign in Minneapolis on Saturday. October 1, 2020: Star Tribune posted an article titled: “Trump claims credit for jobs, touts mining, pipelines, at rally in Duluth Minnesota”. It was written by Katie Galioto. From the article: Five weeks before the election, President Donald Trump was back in Minnesota on Wednesday, raising money and rallying a few thousand supporters on a cold, blustery night……It was Trump’s seventh visit to Minnesota since taking office, and his second to northern Minnesota since early voting started in the state Sept. 18, when he rallied supporters in Bemidji.Earlier in the evening, Trump attended a GOP fundraiser in Shorewood at the Lake Minnetonka home of Cambria President and CEO Marty Davis. He stayed about 90 minutes and made no public comments.According to a Republican National Committee official, the event was expected to bring in $7 million for Trump Victory, a joint fundraising committee run by and benefiting the Trump campaign and the party.Among those greeting Trump at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport were Minnesota Senate Republican Leader Paul Gazelka, House GOP Leader Kurt Daudt and U.S. Senate candidate Jason Lewis.Before Trump’s visit, Biden’s campaign released a list of endorsements from 45 leaders in Minnesota’s Iron Range.Biden, meanwhile, embarked on an eight-stop train tour through Ohio and Pennsylvania.Trump’s two-stop visit Wednesday marks the first of a series of campaign stops this week by the candidates and their surrogates.Former Second Lady Jill Biden is scheduled to campaign in Minnesota on Saturday, making her second stop in the state since her husband secured the Democratic nomination.Eric Trump, the president’s second son, will hold an event Thursday in Becker. And Biden’s running mate, California U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris, is scheduled to address a virtual gathering of the DFL’s annual Humphrey-Mondale Dinner on Thursday… October 1, 2020: Bloomberg posted an article titled: “Trump Says He Will Quarantine After Aide Falls Ill With Virus”. It was written by Jennifer Jacobs and Jordan Fabian. From the article: President Donald Trump said that he would begin self-quarantine while waiting for coronavirus test results after Hope Hicks, one of his closest aides, tested positive for Covid-19……The development is likely to inflame criticism of the Trump administration’s response to the coronavirus pandemic, as well as the president’s disregard for public health measures to combat it.Trump seldom wears a mask and has belittled his re-election challenger, Joe Biden, for routinely covering his face. The president has resumed holding large campaign rallies at which thousands of his supporters gather, shoulder to shoulder, few in masks.Most of the events are held outdoors at airports but two recent events in Arizona and Nevada were indoors, a setting that public health experts warn raises the risk of virus transmission.At the debate in Cleveland, Trump’s entourage entered the debate hall without face coverings — or removed them as they sat down — and refused an offer of masks from a doctor at the Cleveland Clinic, which was co-hosting the event. Hicks was not seen in the debate hall.Biden’s guests wore masks.Hicks was seen on Tuesday riding maskless in a staff van with White House senior adviser Stephen Miller, campaign adviser Jason Miller and others.When they returned to Washington on Tuesday, Stephen Miller and Hicks were seen sharing an umbrella as they exited Air Force One in the rain. Miller’s wife, Katie Miller — Vice President Mike Pence’s press secretary — recovered from Covid-19 earlier this year.After feeling ill in Minnesota, Hicks tested positive for the virus on Thursday.Trump’s staff wear masks when traveling with him aboard the presidential helicopter, Marine One, and Hicks observed that protocol this week.But his aides worry that Trump’s lack of sleep during the final stretch of the presidential campaign could leave him especially vulnerable to infection. The president did not return to the White House until after midnight following his Tuesday and Wednesday trips. The president’s age, 74, also puts him at greater risk for serious illness from the virus… October 1, 2020: Jennifer Jacobs, Senior White House reporter for Bloomberg News, tweeted: “NEWS: Hope Hicks, who traveled with Trump aboard Air Force One to and from the presidential debate on Tuesday, and to his Minnesota rally yesterday, has coronavirus, sources tell me.” October 1, 2020: President Trump tweeted: “Hope Hicks, who has been working so hard without even taking a small break, has just tested positive for COVID-19. Terrible! The First Lady and I are waiting for our test results. In the meantime, we will begin our quarantine process!” October 1, 2020: ABC News posted an article titled: “Hope Hicks, one of Trump’s closest advisers, tests positive for coronavirus, president to quarantine”. It was written by John Santucci and Katherine Faulders. From the article: Hope Hicks, one of President Trump’s closest advisers, has tested positive for the coronavirus, ABC News has confirmed. Hicks, who serves as counselor to the president and is among a tight group of advisers to the president, tested positive this week after traveling with the president on Tuesday to and from the first presidential debate on Air Force One. The president tweeted late Thursday he would go into quarantine, though it’s unclear how that will affect his upcoming schedule. The White House declined to comment late Thursday……Hicks was also on Marine One, the president’s helicopter, when it left the White House to fly to Joint Base Andrews on Wednesday. She was seen walking to the helicopter with fellow top presidential advisers, such as Stephen Miller, Dan Scavino and Jared Kushner. None of them were wearing masks……Sources told ABC News that Hicks is experiencing symptoms and that she tested positive on Wednesday……A White House official told ABC News that they did not anticipate the positive diagnosis impacting the president’s upcoming travel. He is scheduled to travel to a rally in Sanford, Florida, on Friday night. He has two on Saturday in Wisconsin and ones on Monday and Tuesday in Arizona as well. ABC News has reached out for comment on whether they will proceed……Hicks has been one of the closest advisers to Trump since the 2016 presidential campaign. She followed the president into the White House and rose to White House communications director before departing in March 2018. She took a job as head of communications for Fox Corporation, the parent company of Fox News, but the absence did not last long.She returned to the president’s side in February to be counselor to the president. She reports to Kushner, the president’s son-in-law and senior adviser… October 1, 2020: President Trump tweeted: “Tonight, @FLOTUS and I tested positive for COVID-19. We will begin our quarantine and recovery process immediately. We will get through this TOGETHER!” October 1, 2020: Representative Dean Phillips (Democrat – Minnesota) tweeted: “COVID-19 is a serious and unpredictiable disease, and I wish the President, First Lady, and Hope Hicks a speedy recovery. I also have those in my district in Minnesota who may have been exposed on my mind.” The tweet was in response to President Trump’s tweet. October 1, 2020: Shil Kapur, national political reporter for NBC News, tweeted: “After the president’s positive COVID test, the White House announces his trip to Florida (sent out just three hours ago) is canceled. His full new schedule for tomorrow “. The tweet included a screenshot of “Updated Daily Guidance and Press Schedule for Friday, October 2, 2020” from the Office of the Press Secretary. From the guidance and press schedule: In-Town Pool Wires: AP, Reuters, Bloomberg Wire Photos: AP, Reuters, AFP, NYT TV Corr & Crew: CNN Print: Washington Times Radio: BBC EDT 10:00AM In-House Pool Call Time 12:15PM: THE PRESIDENT hosts a phone call on COVID-19 support to vulnerable seniors The White House Closed Press October 1, 2020: Karin Caifa, reporter for CNN Newsource, Johns Hopkins, and Columbia Journal tweeted: “The White House has released this statement from President Trump’s physician, confirming that both the president and First Lady have tested positive for Covid-19.” The tweet included a screenshot of a memorandum that was sent to Kayleigh McEnanany, Assistant to the President, by Sean P. Conley, Physician to the President. The Memorandum said: I release the following information with permission of President Donald J. Trump and First Lady Melania Trump. This evening I received confirmation that both President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump have tested positive for the SARS-CoV-2 virus.The President and First Lady are both well at this time, and they plan to remain at home within the White House during their convalescence.The White House medical team and I will maintain a vigilant watch, and I appreciate the support provided by some of the country’s greatest medical professionals and institutions. Rest assured I expect the President to continue carrying out his duties without disruption while recovering, and I will keep you updated on any future developments. October 1, 2020: First Lady Melania Trump tweeted: “As too many Americans have done this year, @potus & I are quarantining at home after testing positive for COVID-19. We are feeling good & I have postponed all upcoming engagements. Please be sure you are staying safe & we will all get through this together.” October 1, 2020: Edward-Issac Dovere, staff writer for The Atlantic, tweeted: “The next Trump-Biden debate is scheduled for October 15. Trump would, if he has a full recovery, just be coming out of his 2 week quarantine. It’s not possible to put Biden, who is in the high risk group himself just as Trump is, in the same room with the president. October 1, 2020: Weija Jiang, CBS News White House correspondent, tweeted: “.@cbsnews has learned Hope Hicks tested negative for COVID-19 Wednesday morning, so she boarded AF1. She developed symptoms during the day and received a second test, which came back positive. The White House knew about this Wed. evening but Trump still had a fundraiser Thursday.” October 2, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Trump and first lady Melania test positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Maanvi Singh and Peter Beaumont. From the article: The US presidential election has been plunged into disarray after Donald Trump and his wife Melania tested positive for coronavirus following weeks in which the US president sought to suggest the worst of the pandemic was over.Trump announced his positive test in a dramatic tweet at 1am, prompting US television networks to go to live coverage of the 74-year old president’s health and his election campaign cancelled a planned event in the key battleground state of Florida.The president and his wife were tested after one of his closest aides, the White House counsellor Hope Hicks, began showing symptoms earlier this week as she travelled to campaign events around the country with Trump’s entourage, including several other family members……Although Hicks was tested on Thursday after showing symptoms requiring isolation, Trump still travelled to New Jersey to meet supporters at his Bedminster Golf Club, and delivered remarks at a fundraiser despite the high risk that his counsellor may have been infected……With only a month to go until polling day on 3 November, and with Trump consistently trailing his opponent, Joe Biden, in opinion polls, the president will be forced to stay in the White House, abandoning the rallies he has employed to try to galvanise his support base.Trump’s diagnosis, so close to the election, is a brutally ironic coda in an election seen by some as a referendum on his chaotic handling of the coronavirus pandemic, which has claimed 207,000 US lives and infected 7 million others.Even in the hours before he tested positive for the virus, Trump, as he has often done, claimed without evidence that the pandemic would subside soon. “I just want to say that the end of the pandemic is in sight,” he said in prerecorded remarks……Hicks, who accompanied Trump and members of his family to the presidential debate on Tuesday and to a Minnesota rally on Wednesday, fell ill during a flight home on Air Force One on Wednesday evening and was isolated from other passengers aboard the plane.Trump has in the last days met a number of prominent figures, some of who are in high-risk categories for coronavirus complications, including his Democratic rival, Biden, whom he faced, unmasked, during Tuesday’s debate, and the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell.He said he received confirmation of the positive tests on Thursday evening. Earlier, Trump confirmed in an interview with Sean Hannity of Fox News that Hicks had contracted the virus……It is unusual for Covid-19 patients to receive a positive PCR test result one day after exposure, public health experts say, and Trump may have been carrying the virus for longer – exposing those he interacted with this week… October 2, 2020: The New York Times posted an article titled: “Trump Tests Positive for the Coronavirus”. It was written by Peter Baker and Maggie Haberman. From the article: President Trump revealed early Friday morning that he and the first lady, Melania Trump, had tested positive for the coronavirus, throwing the nation’s leadership into uncertainty and escalating the crisis posed by a pandemic that has already killed more than 207,000 Americans and devastated the economy.Mr. Trump, who for months has played down the seriousness of the virus and hours earlier on Thursday night told an audience that “the end of the pandemic is in sight,” will quarantine in the White House for an unspecified period of time, forcing him to withdraw at least temporarily from the campaign trail only 32 days before the election on Nov. 3.The dramatic disclosure came in a Twitter message just before 1 a.m. after a suspenseful evening following reports that Mr. Trump’s close adviser Hope Hicks had tested positive. In her own tweet about 30 minutes later, Mrs. Trump wrote that the first couple were “feeling good,” but the White House did not say whether they were experiencing symptoms. The president’s physician said he could carry out his duties “without disruption” from the Executive Mansion……Mr. Trump’s positive test result posed immediate challenges for the future of his campaign against former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., the Democratic nominee, with barely a month until Election Day. Even if Mr. Trump, 74, remains asymptomatic, he will lose much of his remaining time on the campaign trail. If he becomes sick, it could raise questions about whether he should remain on the ballot at all.The White House did not say how long Mr. Trump would have to remain isolated, but it canceled his plans to fly to Florida for a campaign rally on Friday, stripping his public schedule for the day of everything except a midday telephone call “on Covid-19 support to vulnerable seniors.” Appearances at rallies in Wisconsin on Saturday and in Arizona on Monday also appear sure to be scrapped, and the next debate, scheduled for Oct. 15 in Miami, was left up in the air……For months, Mr. Trump has refused to wear a mask in public on all but a few occasions and has repeatedly questioned their effectiveness. And as recently as Tuesday, at their opening debate, he mocked Mr. Biden for wearing one. “I don’t wear masks like him,” the president said, his voice dripping with derision. “Every time you see him, he’s got a mask.”It was not immediately clear whether Mr. Trump might have been infected by the virus at the time of the debate with Mr. Biden, 77, although the two stood far across stage and never got within six feet of each other… October 2, 2020: First Lady Melania Trump tweeted: “Thank you all for the love you are sending our way. I have mild symptoms but overall feeling good. I am looking forward to a speedy recovery”. October 2, 2020: Associated Press posted an article titled: “Timeline of Trump’s activities in week coronavirus hit home”. From the article: MONDAYTrump surveys a truck produced by Lordstown Motors on the White House South lawn at an event attended by two members of Congress and three representatives from the Lordstown, Ohio, manufacturer.Trump holds a Rose Garden event to announce an administration effort to distribute millions of coronavirus test kits to states. The event is attended by administration officials including Vice President Mike Pence, members of Congress and state officials.TUESDAYTrump travels to Cleveland for a 90-minute presidential debate against Democratic rival Joe Biden. The two men are both tested ahead of the debate and stand behind lecterns positioned a good distance from one another. They do not wear masks during the faceoff….WEDNESDAYTrump travels to Minnesota for a fundraiser at a private home in suburban Minneapolis and an outdoor rally in Duluth…THURSDAYTrump flies to Bedminster resort in New Jersey for a private fundraiser. Several aids who were in proximity to Hicks scrap plans to accompany Trump… October 2, 2020: NPR posted an article titled: “President Trump Has ‘Mild Symptoms’ After Testing Positive For The Coronavirus”. It was written by Tamara Keith, Ayesha Rascoe, Mark Katkov, Alana Wise, and Franco Ordoñez. From the article: The country was put on edge overnight as President Trump announced that he and the first lady have tested positive for the coronavirus, a stunning announcement that raises concerns about their health and throws the final stretch of the presidential campaign — already upended by the pandemic — even further into unknown territory.Trump plans to continue carrying out his duties but is expected to remain home for two weeks, canceling campaign events as doctors watch him at the White House.Trump is 74, an age that makes him more vulnerable to the virus. White House chief of staff Mark Meadows told reporters Friday that the president has “mild symptoms.”He did not directly answer a question about the type of symptoms that Trump is experiencing. First Lady Melania Trump said on Twitter that she also has mild symptoms but is “overall feeling good.”… October 2, 2020: NBC News posted an article titled: “Vice President Pence tests negative for Covid after Trump’s diagnosis”. It was written by Lauren Egan. From the article: Vice President Mike Pence tested negative for the coronavirus Friday, following President Donald Trump’s announcement that he and first lady Melania Trump had become infected with the virus.Pence’s press secretary Devin O’Malley said that Pence underwent a routine Covid test Friay morning, and he and his wife Karen Pence had both tested negative. It is unclear whether or not Pence will enter isolation, as is recomended by health experts due to the incubation period of the virus……The last known public contact between Pence and Trump appeared to be an outdoor Rose Garden event on Monday. But at a campaign event in Litiz, Pennsylvania on Tuesday, ahead of the presidential debate, Pence told an indoor crowd of supporters that he had spoken with the president in the Oval Office earlier that day…“It’s gonna be a great night. I can tell you, I left the president earlier today in the Oval Office and he’s ready,” Pence said to a large crowd of mostly maskless supporters.Following Pence’s meeting with Trump Tuesday, the vice president continued to travel around the country hosting campaign events.On Wednesday Pence traveled to Atlanta where he attended a fundraiser lunch and delivered remarks at a faith conference. Pence was seen deplaning Air Force Two without a mask, later putting one on as he waved to cameras. Pence was greeted at the airport by Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, who gave the vice president a fist bump.On Thursday, the vice president hosted a campaign rally in Carter Lake, Iowa and spoke at a faith event in Des Moines.At many of these events, hundreds of supporters gathered indoors without masks and no social distancing. Pence was interacting with voters at the conclusion of his speeches in Atlanta and Carter Lake.Pence is scheduled to travel to Salt Lake City, Utah on Wednesday for the only vice presidential debate of the election cycle against Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif. It is unclear whether the debate can continue as planned… October 2, 2020: Maggie Haberman, White House correspondent for The New York Times, and analyst for CNN, tweeted: “BREAKING – Ronna McDaniel, the RNC chairwoman, tested positive for the coronavirus on Wednesday, multiple sources say. She has mild symptoms. She was last with POTUS last Friday and has been in Michigan since then.” October 2, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Trump campaign directing staffers exposed to coronavirus to quarantine immediately: CBS”. From the article: President Donald Trump’s presidential campaign has asked all staffers exposed to someone who tested positive for COVID-19 to self-quarantine immediately, according to a CBS reporter.Campaign manager Bill Stepian made the request in an email to staff and encouraged staff to wear masks, wash hands and socially distance, according to the email posted on Twitter by reporter Nicole Sganga. “While some public events will be taken down, the campaign office remains open,” he said in the email”. October 2, 2020: Senator Mike Lee (Republican – Utah) tweeted an image that had text that was inside a quote bubble. It said: Yesterday morning, I was experiencing symptoms consistent with longtime allergies. Out of an abundance of caution, I sought medical advice and was tested for Covid-19. Unlike the test I took just a few days ago while visiting the White House, yesterday’s test came back positive. On advice of the Senate attending physician, I will remain isolated for the next 10 days.Like so many other Utahns, I will now spend part of 2020 working from home. I have spoken with Leader McConnell and Chairman Graham and assured them I will be back to work in time to join my Judiciary Committee colleagues in advancing the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett in the Committee and then to the full Senate. October 2, 2020: SCOTUS blog (which is NOT run by anyone on the Supreme Court) tweeted a response to Senator Mike Lee’s tweet. “Senator Mike Lee met with Judge Amy Coney Barrett on Tuesday September 29. He has now tested positive for Covid-19.” October 2, 2020: Yamiche Alcindor, PBS NewsHour White House correspondent tweeted: “White House: Judge Amy Coney Barrett has tested NEGATIVE for COVID. She was with the President last on Saturday when she was nominated. She is following the CDC guidance and best practices, including social distancing, wearing face coverings, and frequently washes hands.” October 2, 2020: Former Vice President Joe Biden (Democrat) tweeted: “I’m happy to report that Jill and I have tested negative for COVID. Thank you to everyone for your messages of concern. I hope this serves as a reminder: wear a mask, keep social distance, and wash your hands.” October 2, 2020: Senator Kamala Harris (Democrat – California) tweeted: “Both @DouglasEmhoff and I were tested for COVID-19 this morning and thankfully we tested negative. This virus is still very much active across our country, please continue to wear a mask and maintain social distancing”. Douglas Emhoff is Kamala Harris’s husband. October 2, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “White House says Trump will be at Walter Reed for ‘the next few days'”. It was written by Nick Niedzwiadek, Quint Forgey and Matther Choi. From the article: President Donald Trump was taken to Walter Reed Military Medical Center early Friday evening and will spend “the next few days” there, the White House said after Trump announced earlier in the day that he had tested positive for Covid-19.The president was seen walking on the White House South lawn to Marine One under his own power around 6:15 p.m. and sporting a mask – notable given the president’s aversion to wearing one in public and his frequent mockery of his Democratic rival, Joe Biden, and others for doing so even when they are far from others. The president landed at 6:29 p.m., and he posted a video to his Twitter account of him assuring people that he was in good condition……In a memo released by the White House, Conley said that the president had completed an infusion of monoclonal antibodies produced by Regeneron, and was taking other medication, including aspirin, zinc and vitamin D. It made no mention of hydroxychloroquine, the anti-malarial that Trump frequently promoted — and took himself for two weeks as a precautionary measure earlier this year.First lady Melania Trump is displaying “only a mild cough and headache,” Conley’s memo says. The doctor also wrote that the rest of Trump’s family had tested negative on Friday and that the first couple were being advised by a team of experts about their next steps……The constellation of infections has quickly extended beyond just the president and those closest to him. The White House Correspondents Association revealed that at least three journalists have tested positive for Covid-19, as have president of the University of Notre Dame — who visited the White House last weekend for the nomination of alumna Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court — and 11 people involved with Tuesday’s debate in Cleveland… October 2, 2020: New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy (Democrat) tweeted: “We urge everyone who attended yesterday’s event in Bedminster to take full precautions, including self-quarantining and getting tested for #COVID19. Find your nearest testing location: http://covid19.nj.gov/testing.” October 2, 2020: Carolina Huxley, Special Assistant to the President and Associate Director for Economic Initiatives tweeted: “.@IvankaTrump and Jared Kushner were tested again today for COVID-19 and both are negative.” October 2, 2020: Kate Bennet, CNN correspondent, White House, tweeted: “New: Barron Trump, 14, has tested negative for the virus. @StephGrisham45 tells CNN, “Barron has tested negative and all precautions are taken to ensure he’s kept safe and healthy”. Stephanie Grisham is White House Chief of Staff for First Lady Melania Trump. October 2, 2020: NBC News tweeted: “President Trump has a low-grade fever after testing positive for coronavirus, according to 3 people familiar with his condition.” This tweet is the start of a short thread. October 2, 2020: NBC News tweeted an image of a memorandum from Sean Conoly, Physician to the President, to Kayleigh McEnany, Assistant to the President and White House Press Secretary. From the Memorandum: Health Update on President Donald J. TrumpI release the following information with the permission of President Donald J. Trump.Following PCR-confirmation of the President’s diagnosis, as a precautionary measure he received a single 8 gram dose of Regeneron’s polyclonal antibody cocktail. He completed the infusion without incident. In addition to the polyclonal antibodies, the President has been taking zinc, vitamin D, famotidine, melatonin and a daily aspirin.As of this afternoon the President remains fatigued but in good spirits. He’s being evaluated by a team of experts, and together we’ll be making recommendations to the President and First Lady in regards to next best steps.First Lady Melania Trump remains well with only a mild cough and headache, and the remainder of the First Family are well and tested negative for SARA-CoV-2 today. October 2, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “Here’s everything we know about the unapproved antibody drug Trump took to combat coronavirus”. It was written by Christina Farr and Kevin Stankiewicz. From the article: …Regeneron confirmed it provided a single, 8-gram dose of its REGN-COV2 treatment for use by the president, whose coronavirus diagnosis was announced just before 1 a.m. ET Friday. Regeneron’s antibody drug is still experimental and has not received emergency use approval from the FDA, but it was provided in response to a compassionate use request. CNBC’s Meg Tirrell on Friday reported that a “limited number of patients” had also received the drug on that basis after speaking with Regeneron’s chief scientific officer, Dr. George Yancopoulos. On Tuesday, Regeneron said its REGN-COV2 treatment improved symptoms and reduced viral loads in non-hospitalized patients who have mild to moderate Covid-19. That was based on results for the first 275 trial patients. At the time, the company indicated it plans to “rapidly” discuss the early results with regulatory agencies, including the FDA……Regeneron’s REGN-COV2 is an experimental shot of lab-generated antibodies that mimics how the body would mount a reaction to a foreign invader. The goal is to boost the immune system’s defenses, rather than to wait on human biology to do its job… October 2, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “GOP Sen. Thom Tillis tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Jordain Carney. From the article: Sen. Thom Tillis (N.C.) said on Friday that he has tested positive for the coronavirus, becoming the second GOP senator who was at the White House on Saturday to be diagnosed with the virus.“Over the last few months, I’ve been routinely tested for COVID-19, including testing negative last Saturday, but tonight my rapid antigen test came back positive,” Tillis said in a statement.The news of Tillis’s diagnosis comes as Washington was upended after President Trump disclosed that he had tested positive for the virus, jolting an already chaotic election year.Tillis, who said he is currently asymptomatic, is the fourth senator known to have tested positive, and the second member of the Judiciary Committee……”I will be following the recommendations of my doctor and will be self-isolating at home for 10 days and notifying those I’ve been in close contact with,” Tillis said.The diagnosis for Tillis and Lee is injecting fresh uncertainty into the GOP timeline for trying to confirm Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) both pledged earlier Friday that they would move ahead with Barrett’s nomination as planned, with a hearing set to start on Oct. 12… October 2, 2020: The Chronicle of Higher Education posted an article titled: “Days After Appearing Unmasked at White House, Notre Dame’s President Tests Positive for Covid-19”. It was written by Andy Thomason. From the article: The University of Notre Dame’s president, the Rev. John I. Jenkins, has tested positive for Covid-19 less than a week after appearing unmasked in the Rose Garden at the White House, the university announced on Friday.According to an email announcement quoted by multiple news outlets, Jenkins this week became aware that a colleague had tested positive, prompting him to seek a test, which also came back positive. “My symptoms are mild, and I will continue work from home,” Jenkins said in the message. “The positive test is a good reminder for me, and perhaps for all, of how vigilant we need to be.”The announcement came close on the heels of the bombshell revelation that President Trump had tested positive for Covid-19. Jenkins attended the Saturday ceremony in which Trump announced the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett, a Notre Dame law professor, to the Supreme Court. Jenkins was seen unmasked at the ceremony, for which he later apologized… October 2, 2020: Kellyanne Conway, former press secretary for President Donald Trump, tweeted: “Tonight I tested positive for COVID-19. My symptoms are mild (light cough) and I’m feeling fine. I have begun a quarantine process in consultation with physicians. As always, my heart is with everyone affected by this global pandemic. “ October 2, 2020: HuffPost posted an article titled: “Kellyanne Conway Tests Positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Mary Papenfuss. From the article: …Conway had attended a White House event last weekend announcing the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett for Supreme Court. Conway left the White House at the end of August, saying she needed time to focus on her family. October 2, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “Trump campaign manager tests positive for Covid-19”. It was written by Alex Isenstadt. From the article: Donald Trump’s campaign manager has tested positive for Covid-19, dealing another blow to his reelection effort on a day that saw the president and the head of the Republican National Committee report contracting the disease as well.Bill Stepien received his diagnosis Friday evening and was experiencing what one senior campaign official described as “mild flu-like symptoms.” People familiar with the situation said the 42-year-old Stepien plans to quarantine until he recovers.Deputy Campaign Manager Justin Clark is expected to oversee the Trump team’s Arlington, Va. headquarters while Stepien works remotely, though advisers stressed that he would maintain control of the campaign……Stepien traveled to and from Cleveland for Tuesday’s presidential debate. He joined Trump and Hicks aboard Air Force One. The campaign manager was also with the president in the White House on Monday……Stepien on Saturday is slated to hold separate conference calls with campaign staff and grass-roots leaders. Pence is expected to participate in one of the calls… October 2, 2020: WKYC Studios posted an article titled: “City of Cleveland announces 11 positive cases of COVID-19 stemming from preperations for presidential debate”. From the article: With the news that President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump have both tested positive for COVID-19, the city of Cleveland has issued a statement after the pair were among those in town for Tuesday’s presidential debate.According to the city, 11 positive cases of COVID-19 have stemmed from ‘pre-debate planning and set-up.’ The city adds that the majority of those 11 cases have occured among out of state residents. No city residents appear to have contracted coronavirus as a result of the debate, but that could still change.Cleveland Clinic issued a statement on Friday confirming that it was required maintain a safe environment during the debate that aligned with CDC guidelines- including social distancing, hand sanitizing, temperature checks and masking. The Clinic added that everyone permitted inside the debate hall tested negative for COVID-19 prior to entry.This evening, the Clinic released a second statement, saying those who tested positive did not have access to the debate space inside Samson Pavilion:“It’s important to clarify the 11 people who tested positive never accessed the debate hall. These individuals were either members of the media or were scheduled to work logistics/set-up the days prior to the event. Individuals did not receive credentials or tickets to enter the debate hall until they had a negative test, and all were advised to isolate while they awaited their test results.”Despite the statement by Cleveland Clinic, some members of the president’s family were seen seated in the audience without wearing a mask. Images show the family wearing masks when they entered the venue, other photos, however, show their facial coverings were removed while in physically distanced seats to watch the debate… October 2, 2020: Governor Mike DeWine (Republican – Ohio) tweeted: “This evening, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine, Ohio First Lady Fran DeWine, and Ohio Lt. Goernor Jon Husted all received their results from COVID-19 tests taken today, and all tested negative.” October 2, 2020: TIME posted an article titled: “Amy Coney Barrett had COVID-19 in Recent Months, Friends of Supreme Court Pick Say”. It was written by Tessa Berenson. From the article: Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, was believed to have COVID-19 earlier this year, according to multiple people close to her.Two friends of Barrett, who were granted anonymity because they did not feel comfortable discussing Barrett’s personal medical history on the record, confirmed to TIME that the judge had been sick in recent months and was thought to have contracted the virus. One said Barrett displayed mild symptoms and had quarantined. The other said she had received a positive test result.The Washington Post reported Friday that Barrett had been diagnosed with the virus over the summer and had recovered, citing three officials familiar with the diagnosis.The White House declined to comment. A member of Barrett’s family did not respond to a request for comment……According to the White House, Barrett is tested daily for COVID-19, and tested negative on Oct. 2… October 2, 2020: Drew Hammel, Deputy Chief of Staff for Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, tweeted: “Out of an abundance of caution, Speaker Pelosi was tested for COVID-19 this morning by the Capitol’s Office of the Attending Physician. Dr. Monahan just informed the Speaker that she tested negative.” October 2, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Pelosi tests negative for Covid after Mnuchin meeting”. It was written by Haley Bird and Lauren Fox. From the article: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tested negative for Covid-19 Friday, her deputy chief of staff tweeted.The announcement comes after the California Democrat was tested following her meeting earlier this week with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin to discuss a potential stimulus bill. Prior to their meeting, Mnuchin spoke with President Donald Trump, who has now tested positive for coronavirus, in the Oval Office……Pelosi is just one of several members of Congress who are being tested for the virus Friday — including Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, who flew on Air Force One with the President this week, and Sen. Rob Portman, who attended an outdoor event with Trump on Monday. Their moves to get tested highlight how the President’s positive coronavirus result has ricocheted across Washington, as White House aides and lawmakers begin retracing their steps over the last several days to identify whether they may have been exposed.Mnuchin, who announced he tested negative Friday morning, has been negotiating with Pelosi this week in an effort to strike agreement on an additional aid package to respond to the coronavirus pandemic. That effort has stalled, though Pelosi and Mnuchin continue to negotiate. House Democrats voted Thursday night to pass their own package, which has slim chances of being considered in the Republican Senate. In light of the President’s diagnosis, Pelosi called for a conclusion to those talks… October 2, 2020: WKYC Studios posted an article titled: “Grassley, in presidential succession line, doesn’t get COVID-19 test after meeting with infected senator”. From the article: Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the third in the line of succession to the presidency, reportedly has not gotten tested for the coronavirus after attending a meeting with another senator who announced a positive test result Friday.The line of succession has become top-of-mind for Americans now that President Donald Trump is in the hospital after being diagnosed with COVID-19 Friday. The White House said Trump is expected to be there for a “few days.” The president’s physician said in a memo that Trump “remains fatigued but in good spirits,” He is undergoing an experimental antibody regimen.The Des Moines Register reports Grassley attended a Senate Judiciary Meeting with Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, on Thursday. On Friday, Lee announced he had tested positive for COVID-19……”Sen. Grassley will continue to follow guidance from the Senate’s attending physician, the CDC and local health officials,” Grassley’s office said in a statement. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance says people should be tested if they have been within six feet of an infected person for at least 15 minutes. A spokesman for Grassley told the Register that the senators kept themselves at a greater distance……Grassley is president pro tempore of the Senate. He follows Vice President Mike Pence and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., in the presidential line of succession.Grassley is 87, putting him in the higher risk category for severe illness or death should he contract the virus.Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, the state’s other senator, was also in the meeting, according to the Register. She was reportedly tested for COVID-19 and it came back negative… October 3, 2020: President Trump tweeted: “Going well, I think! Thank you to all. LOVE!!!” October 3, 2020: Former Governor of New Jersey Chris Christie tweeted: “I just recieved word that I am positive for COVID-19. I want to thank all of my friends and colleagues who have reached out to ask how I was feeling in the last day or two. I will be receiving medical attention today and will keep the necessary folks apprised of my condition”. October 3, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Sen. Ron Johnson tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Jordain Carney. From the article: Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) has tested positive for the coronavirus, becoming the third senator to announce in the past two days that they had contracted the virus.Johnson’s office said in a statement on Saturday that he was exposed to an individual on Sept. 29 who has since tested positive for the virus.“After learning of this exposure, the senator was tested yesterday afternoon. This test came back positive,” his office said. “Senator Johnson feels healthy and is not experiencing symptoms. He will remain isolated until given the all-clear by his doctor.”……In addition to Johnson, Sens. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) both said on Friday that they had tested positive for COVID-19.Unlike Lee and Tillis, Johnson is not a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and was not at the White House on Saturday for Trump’s announcement that he was picking Judge Amy Coney Barrett as his Supreme Court nominee… October 3, 2020: CNN posted in their live blog “GOP senator with Covid-19 said he learned he tested positive after attending Oktoberfest dinner”. From the post: Sen. Ron Johnson said he learned he had tested positive for COVID-19 after he had spoken at the Ozaukee County Republican Party’s Oktoberfest Dinner on Friday night in Wisconsin. Johnson said he had no symptoms before the dinner but had decided to get tested as a precaution, after hearing that Utah Sen. Mike Lee had tested positive earlier on Friday.Johnson said he was able to get tested on Friday night before heading to the Oktoberfest dinner.At the dinner event, Johnson said he let the organizers know that he would not stick around or mingle with people, or take photographs with attendees. He said he maintained social distancing at the event and let people kbow why he was being safe.Johnson said he learned he tested positive after the event on his ride home. October 3, 2020: Associated Press posted an article titled: “Official: Next 48 hours ‘critical’ for Trump in virus fight”. It was written by Jonathan Lemire, Jill Colvin and Zeke Miller”. President Donald Trump went through a “very concerning” period Friday and the next 48 hours “will be critical” in his care as he battles the coronavirus at a hospital, White House chief of staff Mark Meadows said Saturday. Meadows’ comments contradicted the rosy assessment of Trump’s condition offered by his staff and doctors, who took pains not to reveal the president had received supplemental oxygen at the White House before his hospital admission.“We’re still not on a clear path yet to a full recovery,” said a weary Meadows.It was a dramatically different picture than the one painted by the White House staff since Trump revealed his diagnosis as well as by his doctors, who updated the public at a press conference at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center.The briefing by Navy Commander Dr. Sean Conley and other doctors raised more questions than it answered as Conley repeatedly refused to say whether the president ever needed supplemental oxygen, despite repeated questioning, and declined to discuss exactly when he fell ill. Conley also revealed that Trump began exhibiting “clinical indications” of COVID-19 on Thursday afternoon, earlier than previously known.“Thursday no oxygen. None at this moment. And yesterday with the team, while we were all here, he was not on oxygen,” Conley said.But according to a person familiar with Trump’s condition, Trump was administered oxygen at the White House on Friday before he was transported to the military hospital. The person was not authorized to speak publicly and spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity,..…And while Vice President Mike Pence is currently off the campaign trail preparing for the coming week’s vice presidential debate, he and his staff are operating under a “business as usual” approach. He’s still planning to travel to Arizona on Thursday, Indiana on Friday and Florida on Saturday for events instead of isolating himself after potential exposure and to protect himself from contracting the virus anywhere else. October 3, 2020: President Trump tweeted: “Doctors, Nurses and ALL at the GREAT Walter Reed Medical Center, and others from likewise incredible institutions who have joined them, are AMAZING!!!Tremendous progress has been made over the last 6 months in fighting this PLAGUE. With their help, I am feeling well!” October 3, 2020: Omaha World-Herald posted an article titled: “Sen. Sasse tests negative for COVID-19, Sen. Fischer awaiting results after attending White House event.” It was written by Joseph Morton. From the article: Sen. Ben Sasse has tested negative for the coronavirus, while Sen. Deb Fischer is awaiting her own test results.The two Nebraska Republicans attended a White House ceremony last weekend alongside a number of individuals who have since tested positive for the virus, including President Donald Trump.Sasse plans to work remotely from Nebraska for the next week or so despite the negative test.“After consulting with the Senate attending physician and Nebraska doctors, he will work remotely from his home in Nebraska, undergoing further testing,” according to a statement by a spokesperson. “He will return to Washington for in-person work beginning Oct. 12. Ben, Melissa and their kids are praying for the president, the first lady, and a nation continuing to battle this nasty virus.”.The testing and work-from-home decision were prompted by Sasse’s “close interaction with multiple infected individuals,” according to the statement… October 3, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “White House chief of staff says Trump is doing very well”. From the article: White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows said on Saturday that President Donald Trump is doing “very well” and that doctors are pleased with his vital signs.“The president is doing very well. He is up and about and asking for documents to review. The doctors are very pleased with his vital signs. I have met with him on multiple occassions today for a variety of issues,” Meadows told Reuters. October 3, 2020: Former Governor of New Jersey Chris Christie tweeted: “In consultation with my doctors, I checked myself into Morristown Medical Center this afternoon. While I am feeling good and only have mild symptoms, due to my history of asthma we decided this is an important precautionary measure. October 3, 2020: CNN posted in a live blog a short article titled: “Chris Christie says he checked himself into the hospital after testing positive with Covid-19”. It was written by Dana Bash. From the short article: Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie told CNN he checked himself into the hospital Saturday afternoon, as a precautionary measure, after announcing earlier in the day he had tested positive for Covid-19.Christie, who suffers from asthma, said in consultation with his doctor, he decided it was best to be monitored in the hospital. He said he has a slight fever and is achy but felt well enough to drive himself to the hospital.Christie told CNN by phone from the hospital that his breathing is fine, but after being admitted, he started a course of the Covid-19 treatment remdesivir.……Christie was part of the President’s debate prep team and sat close to the President, and others who have now tested positive for coronavirus.He was also in the audience for Trump’s Supreme Court announcement last weekend. October 3, 2020: CNN posted in their live blog: “GOP Sen. Thom Tillis “has mild symptoms,” his press secretary says”. It was written by Manu Raju and Ted Barrett. Republican Sen. Thom Tillis is continuing to self-isolate at his home in North Carolina while experiencing “mild symptoms, and he is in great spirits,” according to a statement from his press secretary Adam Webb.Tillis tested positive for the coronavirus on Friday, days after attending a White House event where President Trump nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.Multiple attendees of that event, including Trump, have tested positive in the days since the ceremony, which featured many people wearing masks and not observing social distancing protocols. October 3, 2020: Jennifer Jacobs, Senior White House Reporter for Bloomberg News, tweeted: “NEWS: One of Trump’s personal assistants has tested positive for coronavirus, sources tell me. Nick Luna, as bodyman, works in very close proximity to the president so it’s not surprising.” October 3, 2020: Jennifer Jacobs. Senior White House Reporter for Bloomber News tweeted: “Another factor that is unsettling White House aides tonight is Nick Luna is married to Cassidy Dumbauld, who is an aide to Jared Kushner. More people in the circle around Trump’s senior adviser diagnosed with coronavirus.” October 4, 2020: ABC News posted an article titled: “President did not disclose 1st positive test, sources say”. It was written by Matt Zarrell, Jon Harworth, Ivan Pereira and Marc Nathanson. From the article: President Donald Trump’s condition is continuing to improve as he fights a coronavirus infection, doctors say, and he may be able to leave Walter Reed Medical Center as early as Monday — even as details emerge that the president allegedly initially tested positive for COVID-19 earlier than he acknowledged.Doctors also reported that Trump, over the course of exhibiting coronavirus symptoms, had earlier experienced two episodes of “transient drops” in his oxygen saturation.Yet the president was feeling well enough Sunday evening to briefly leave Walter Reed for a surprise drive-by, waving to supporters outside the hospital.Meanwhile, numerous questions remain about how many people at the highest levels of government had been exposed to the virus after a week of events involving the president where social distancing and mask-wearing were lax in the White House and elsewhere. October 4, 2020: Josh Wingrove, White House reporter, Bloomberg, tweeted: “National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien says mask-wearing is now manditory for NSC staff. It has previously been voluntary.” October 4, 2020: NPR posted an article titled: “Despite Risks to Others, Trump Leaves Hospital To Greet Supporters”. It was written byBarbara Sprunt. From the article: Despite indications from doctors that he is still facing serious challenges from the coronavirus and could spread the disease to others, President Trump briefly left Walter Reed National Military Medical Center on Sunday evening to wave to supporters gathered outside.A masked Trump was seen waving to small crowds from a black SUV. Other images showed Secret Service personnel in the vehicle with personal protective equipment on to protect themselves from the high exposure risk of riding in an enclosed vehicle with someone who has tested positive for the virus.Right before the drive-by, the president tweeted a video in which he thanked the doctors and staff at Walter Reed for treating him for COVID-19 and said he was about to “make a little surprise visit” outside to greet supporters……Trump has been briefed extensively about the pandemic by members of his White House coronavirus task force and other advisers.Some experts swiftly characterized Trump’s drive-by greeting as reckless.Dr. James Phillips, an attending physician at Walter Reed who is also chief of disaster medicine at George Washington University, lambasted the move as being made for “political theater.”“That Presidential SUV is not only bulletproof, but hermetically sealed against chemical attack. The risk of COVID-19 transmission inside is as high as it gets outside of medical procedures. The irresponsibility is astounding. My thoughts are with the Secret Service forced to play,” he wrote on Twitter……His brief visit outside came hours after Trump’s medical team told reporters that the president experienced two drops in his oxygen levels over the course of his COVID-19 diagnosis, is being treated with a steroid, and could be discharged from Walter Reed as early as Monday. Medical experts raised skepticism about such a quick release given the other details shared by the president’s medical team. October 4, 2020: KSBY posted an article titled: “Attorney General William Bar to self-quarantine”. From the article: Attorney General William Barr will self-quarantine out of caution after President Donald Trump and several other lawmakers and aides tested positive for the coronavirus.Justice Department spokesperson Kerri Kupec said Sunday that Barr has had four COVID-19 tests since Friday, and all have come back negative. She says he will self-quarantine for several days out of an abundance of caution.Barr attended one meeting at Justice Department headquarters on Friday adn stayed home during the weekend, except to be tested. He plans to remain home for several days.Barr attended the White House event for Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett last weekend, and was seen on video having a conversation with former Trump aide Kellyanne Conway, who has tested positive for coronavirus. Neither was wearing a mask. October 4, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “DeWine says White House did not contact him about possible Covid-19 exposure to Ohioans after Trump diagnosis”. It was written by Chandelis Duster. From the article: Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine said Sunday that he has not been contacted by the White House about potential Covid-19 exposure in his state after President Donald Trump tested positive for the virus days after his Cleveland debate.“Well, they have not reached out to me. I know that I talked to the CEO of the Cleveland Clinic the other day who gave me an update, who gave me a report so I don’t know whether they have reached out to Cleveland Clinic or not. They have not talked to me about it, no,” the Republican governor told CNN’s Jake Tapper on “State of the Union.”The President participated in the first presidential debate against Democrat Joe Biden in Cleveland last week. DeWine said that he didn’t attend the debate, but conceded to Tapper that he wished the President wore a mask more often.”Do I wish — look do I wish the President had worn a mask all the time? Of course. You know, of course,” he said……DeWine and his wife announced Friday they tested negative for the virus… October 5, 2020: First Lady Melania Trump tweeted: “My family is greatful for all of the prayers & support! I am feeling good & will continue to rest at home. Thank you to medical staff & caretakers everywhere, & my continued prayers for those who are ill or have a family member impacted by the virus.” October 5, 2020: Kayleigh McEnany, White House Press Secretary, tweeted an image of a statement: After testing negative consistantly, including every day since Thursday, I tested positive for COVID-19 on Monday morning while experiencing no symptoms. No reporters, producers, or members of the press are listed as close contacts by the White House Medical Unit. Moreover, I definitely had no knowledge of Hope Hicks’ diagnoss prior to holding a White House press briefing on Thursday. As an essential worker, I have worked diligently to provide needed information to the American People at this time. With my recent positive test, I will begin the quarantine process and will continue working on behalf of the American People remotely. October 5, 2020: Jim Acosta, CNN’s Chief White House correspondent, tweeted: “She was not wearing a mask during a gaggle with reporters yesterday.” The tweet included a photo of Kayleigh McEnany wearing black and a necklace with a cross on it. She is not wearing a mask. October 5, 2020: Ben Siegel, ABC reporter/producer covering the 2020 campaign and Capitol Hill, tweeted: “McEnany did not wear a mask when she spoke to reporters at the White House yesterday”. The tweet is in response to Kayleigh McEnany’s tweet which included her statement. October 5, 2020: Representative Salud Carbajal (Democrat – California) posted a press release titled: “Carbajal issues Statement After Exposure to Individual with COVID-19”. From the press release: Congressman Carbajal issued the following statement after becoming exposed to an individual who tested positive for COVID-19:“No one is immune to contracting coronavirus and Congress is certainly no exception. Despite taking every precaution – including wearing a mask, social distancing, and hand-washing – I learned I was exposed to an individual who tested positivefor COVID-19. I immediately got tested, which thankfully came back negative and I will continue to consult with my doctor.“Given that symptoms may still appear up to two weeks after exposure to the virus, the House Attending Physician directed me to stay in Washington DC and quarantine for 14 days to self-monitor for symptoms. Accordingly, I will be carrying out my responsibilities virtually in order to protect the health and safety of others.” October 5, 2020: Olivia Nuzzi, Washington correspondent New York Magazine, tweeted: “NEWS: @NYMag has confirmed that Pastor Greg Laurie of Harvest Christian Fellowship in Riverside, California has tested POSITIVE for COVID-19. Pastor Laurie was at the Prayer March on the Mall with Mile Pence and Franklin Graham and the ABC Rose Garden event later that day.” This tweet was the start of a thread. October 5, 2020: Olivia Nuzzi tweeted: “A church official tells me that members of the church learned of Pastor Laurie’s positive test result on SUNDAY.” October 5, 2020: Olivia Nuzzi tweeted: “A church official tells me that Pastor Laurie “is experiencing mild symptoms and he and his family are quarantining at home.” October 5, 2020: Olivia Nuzzi tweeted: “The Prayer March on the National Mall that preceded the ABC Rose Garden event was attended by THOUSANDS, few of them wearing masks. Laurie, who is now positive, then went to the White House. When and where was he infected? How many others from the Prayer March are sick too?” This tweet was the end of the thread. October 5, 2020: Paula Reid, White House Correspondent CBS News tweeted: “I sat in close proximity to two maskless, now COVID positive, White House staffers at last Thursday’s briefing. So I am now working from home & getting regular COVID tests.” The tweet included a photo of herself, sitting in an empty row of seats at and wearing a mask. Behind her are several other reporters who are wearing masks and social distancing. Two arrows have been added to the photo, both of them starting with Paula Reid. One arrow points to Kayleigh McEnany, who is speaking at a podium. Another points to a man in a suit whi is not wearing a mask. He is sitting at the end of a row of seats separate from the press area. The tweet was the start of a thread. October 6, 2020: Paula Reid tweeted: “Noticing a sharp uptick in social media trolling from 1am – 6am lately. * Many * of the anti-mask/disinformation comments on this tweet started around the same time people in Moscow would be getting up. “ October 6, 2020: Paula Reid tweeted: “Working from home & getting tested (seen here this AM) is what responsible adults do when exposed to COVID. But it’s much easier for those of us who have access to rapid testing & still get paid when not at work. Tested negative at WH the morning of briefing & again today. ” This was the end of the thread. October 5, 2020: Desert Sun posted an article titled: “Riverside pastor Greg Laurie, who attended White House event, tests positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Nicole Hayden. From the article: A Southern California pastor who attended two high-profile Washington D.C. events on Sept. 26, including a prayer march that saw an appearance by Vice President Mike Pence as well as a ceremony to nominate Amy Coney Barrett for the Supreme Court, has tested positive for COVID-19.Pastor Greg Laurie of Harvest Christian Fellowship in Riverside – who has served as one of President Donald Trump’s key evangelical advisers – posted an Instagram video on Monday confirming his diagnosis.Laurie said he and his wife have been in quarantine since learning of his positive test. No other family members have tested positive, according to his post. Laurie recently participated in evanglist Franklin Graham’s Prayer March 2020, which drew thousands to prayer at the National Mall including Pence and his wife Karen. The event preceded Barrett’s nomination ceremony at the White House later that day……Laurie said Monday that his symptoms have been mild so far. He said his symptoms started with fatigue, aches and pains, a fever and loss of taste……Known for his large-scale evangelistic Christian events Harvest Crusades, Laurie did not mention his attendance at the Barrett nomination nor his participation in the Prayer March. However, in photos and videis that Laurie posted on his Twitter account, he can be seen without a mask and not social distancing among Prayer March attendees… October 6, 2020: Paula Reid tweeted: “Noticing a sharp uptick in social media trolling from 1am-6am lately. * Many * of the anti-mask/disinformation comments on this tweet started around the same time people in Moscow would be getting up “ October 6, 2020: Paul Reid tweeted: “Working from home & getting tested (seen here this AM) is what responsible adults do when exposed to #COVID. But it’s much easier for those of us who have access to rapid testing & still get paid when not at work. Tested negative at WH the morning of the briefing & again today. “ The tweet showed a photo of Paula Reid in her car with the window open. She has pushed her mask down to her chin so she can self-administer a rapid COVID-19 test. This was the end of a thread. October 6, 2020: Politico updated their article titled: “Riverside megachurch pastor who attended White House event contracts Covid-19”. It was written by Carla Marnucci. From the article: The evangelical pastor of a high-profile California megachurch with links to President Trump announced Monday he’s among those who have contracted Covid-19 following the White House event for Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett.Pastor Greg Laurie of Riverside’s Harvest Christian Fellowship confirmed on his Facebook page that he tested positive for the virus over the weekend.A week earlier, he attended the Sept. 26 Prayer March on the National Mall with Vice President Mike Pence and evangelist Franklin Graham. Laurie was also on hand for the White House Rose Garden ceremony for the nomination of Barrett……Coverage of the event show many of the attendees, including Laurie, were unmasked, shook hands and did not follow social distancing guidelines……Laurie, a resident of Newport Beach, is senior pastor of a number of large-scale evangelical churches in California – the Harvest Christian Fellowship in Riverside; Harvest Corona in Corona; Harvest Woodcrest in Riverside; Harvest Orange County in Irvine; and Harvest Kumulani in Kapalua, Hawaii. October 6, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Top White House aide Stephen Miller tests positive for Covid-19”. It was written by Kaitlan Collins and Jim Acosta. From the article: Stephen Miller, a top aide to President Donald Trump, has tested positive for coronavirus, he said Tuesday.“Over the last 5 days I have been working remotely and self-isolating, testing negative every day through yesterday. Today, I tested positive for COVID-19 and am in quarantine,” Miller said in a statement.He is the latest official caught up at the outbreak at the White House that seen at least 10 others positive… October 6, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “California congresman says he got coronavirus after Sen. Mike Lee Interaction”. It was written by Jeremy B. White. From the article: Rep. Salud Carbajal announced Tuesday he tested positive for the coronavirus and said it came after he interacted indoors with Sen. Mike Lee, who revealed he had Covid-19 hours after President Trump said he was diagnosed with the disease.Carbajal, a Central Coast Democrat, said in a statement that he began to experience “mild symptoms” and subsequently tested positive after being exposed to someone with the virus.His office later told POLITICO that Carbajal had interacted indoors with Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), who announced his positive diagnosis Friday – hours after Trump’s Covid-19 announcement. Since then, Lee’s appearance at a Rose Garden event to formally announce the Supreme Court nomination of Amy Coney Barett has been widely scrutinized, including video of Lee hugging attendees without a mask… October 6, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “Top military leaders in quarantine after Coast Guard admiral tests positive for Covid-19”. It was written by Sarah Cammarata, Lara Seligman and Jacqueline Feldscher. From the article: The nation’s top military leaders, including Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Mark Milley, are self-quarantining after coming into contact last week with the Coast Guard’s No. 2 officer, who tested positive for Covid-19 on Monday, according to administration officials.Senior military leaders who attended several meetings at the Pentagon last week with Adm. Charles Ray, the vice commandant of the Coast Guard, tested negative for Covid-19 on Tuesday but are self-quarantining as a precaution, a defense official said.Officials believe that a Friday meeting in the “tank” — the Pentagon’s secure conference room for senior military leaders — is where the virus could have spread to others, a second defense official said.Pentagon officials are conducting additional contact tracing and taking other precautions “to protect the force and the mission,” said Pentagon spokesperson Jonathan Hoffman.“Out of an abundance of caution, all potential close contacts from these meetings are self-quarantining and have been tested this morning,” Hoffman said Tuesday afternoon. “No Pentagon contacts have exhibited symptoms and we have no additional positive tests to report at this time.”Ray was among several military leaders who attended an event at the White House on Sept. 27 celebrating Gold Star families. A day earlier, the White House held an outdoor event as President Donald Trump officially nominated Amy Coney Barrett to be the next Supreme Court justice. Many people who attended have since tested positive, including Trump himself.The admiral felt “mild symptoms” this weekend and got tested Monday, according to a Coast Guard statement.Not all of the military’s leaders are under quarantine. Marine Commandant Gen. David Berger, Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Navy Secretary Kenneth Braithwaite were traveling last week and did not attend the Pentagon meetings with Ray.Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Karl Schultz has also been on travel and has not been in contact with Ray, spokesperson Jay Guyer said.The Joint Chiefs of Staff includes the chairman, vice chairman, and the four-star heads of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, National Guard and Space Force… October 6, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Top White House aide Stephen Miller tests positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Kaitlan Collins and Jim Acosta. From the article: Stephen Miller, a top policy advisor to President Donald Trump, has tested positive for coronavirus, he confirmed in a statement Tuesday.“Over the last 5 days I have been working remotely and self-isolating, testing negative every day through yesterday. Today, I tested positive for COVID-19 and am in quarantine,” Miller said in a statement. After working from home for several days, Miller showed up to work Tuesday and tested positive, a source familiar with what happened told CNN. He is the latest official caught up in an outbreak at the White House that has seen at least 10 others test positive. He’s also the latest member of the President’s team who prepped him for last week’s presidential debate to test positive……Miller also traveled aboard Air Force One on a Minnesota campaign trip woth Trump and Hicks. Officials have told CNN that Hicks began feeling sick while on the flight back to Washington after a fundraiser and campaign rally in the Land of 10,000 Lakes. She isolated in a separate cabin after she began displaying symptons.Miller’s wife, Katie Miller, is Vice President Mike Pence’s communications director. She already had coronavirus several months ago and tested negative again on Tuesday morning. She traveled with Pence to Salt Lake City ahead of the vice presidential debate scheduled for Wednesday, but left the trip Tuesday out of an abundance of caution… October 7, 2020: Bloomberg posted an article titled: “White House Security Official Contracted COVID-19 in September”. It was written by Jennifer Jacobs. From the article: A top White House security official, Crede Bailey, is gravely ill with COVID-19 and has been hospitalized since September, according to four people familiar with his condition.The White House has not publicaly disclosed Bailey’s illness. He became sick before the Sept. 26 Rose Garden event President Donald Trump held to announce his Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barett that has been connected to more than a dozen cases of the disease.A White House spokesman declined to comment on Bailey… October 7, 2020: ABC News posted an article titled: “34 people connected to White House, more than previously known, infected by coronavirus: Internal FEMA memo”. It was written by Josh Margolin and Lucien Bruggeman. From the article: The coronavirus outbreak has infected “34 White House staffers and other contacts” in recent days, according to an internal government memo, an indication that the disease has spread among more people than previously known in the seat of American government.Dated Wednesday and obtained by ABC News, the memo was distributed among senior leadership at FEMA, a branch of the Department of Homeland Security and the agency responsible for managing the continuing national response to the public health disaster. The memo also notes that a senior adviser to the president is among those infected. Hope Hicks and Stephen Miller, both senior aides ot the president, have tested positive in recent days……When President Donald Trump returned to the White House on Tuesday, he immediately removed his maks before entering the building — setting off concern that his behavior may put staffers, complex workers, and Secret Service agents at risk… October 7, 2020: Democracy Now posted a short article titled: “Two Presidential Valets Who Carry Nuclear Launch Codes Test Positive for Coronavirus”. From the article: Meanwhile, Bloomberg reports two of President Trump’s military aides tested positive. The aides act as valets who always travel with the president, carrying nuclear launch codes in a briefcase known as the “nuclear football.” Trump took the football with him to Water Reed hospital over the weekend, where he was administered the steroid dexamethasone, which has been linked to grandiose delusions and psychosis in some patients. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists wrote in response, “To state the obvious, we should not entrust nuclear launch authority to someone who is not fully lucid.” October 7, 2020: Senator Cory Booker (Democrat – New Jersey) posted a press release titled: “Booker Seeks Answers from Secret Service Director James Murray and White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows on White House-Linked Outbreak of COVID-19”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) sent two letters seeking answers on the White House-linked outbreak of COVID-19. In a letter to White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, Booker requested an overview of steps that are being taken to protect the health and safety of the individuals who work on the White House grounds. In a separate letter to the Director of U.S. Secret Service James Murray, Booker requested that a full list and contact information of all individuals who attended or worked at President’s October 1st political event in Bedminster, New Jersey, be sent to the New Jersey Department of Health (NJDOH) to assist with contact tracing efforts.“My concerns have only grown with recent reports that multiple support staff have contracted COVID-19, likely stemming from contact with President Trump, other White House staff, and non-essential visitors,” Senator Booker wrote in the letter to White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. The President of the United States and his senior aides have access to some of the best medical care in the world, but many White House workers may not. These workers, like many Americans, may have pre-existing conditions that place them at heightened risk of contracting COVID-19, or they may be caring for loved ones who are at greater risk of suffering serious illness or death should they contract the disease. While the President and senior staff have openly flaunted CDC guidelines designed to halt the spread of the virus and the disease, support staff should not be forced to risk exposure to the virus that causes COVID-19 in the course of carrying out their essential duties.”In the letter to Director of U.S. Secret Service James Murray, Senator Booker also wrote, “New Jersey was among the hardest hit areas of the country by the COVID-19 pandemic. The progress New Jersey has made in bringing infection rates down to the lowest in the country is a testament to the leadership of Governor Phil Murphy and the collective restraint and solidarity of New Jersey’s nearly nine million residents.”Senator Booker continued, “In order to prevent further transmission of COVID-19 in New Jersey and beyond, a full accounting and contact information of all individuals who attended, staffed, or were otherwise in close proximity to participants at the event is essential for timely contact tracing and testing.”The full text of the letter to White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows can be viewed here, and the full text of the letter to the Director of U.S. Secret Service James Murray can be viewed here. October 10, 2020: Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie tweeted: “I am happy to let you know that this morning I was released from Morristown Medical Center. I want to thank the extraordinary doctors & nurses who cared for me for the last week. Thanks to my family & friends for their prayers. I will have more to say about all of this next week.” October 10, 2020: The New York Times posted an article titled: “Trump Makes First Public Apperance Since Leaving Walter Reed”. It was written by Annie Karni and Maggie Haberman. From the article: The White House had not made public the results of President Trump’s latest coronavirus test, which he claims he took on Friday. But Mr. Trump, eager to prove he had fully recovered a week after being hospitalized for Covid-19, appeared briefly on Saturday afternoon in front of hundreds of chanting supporters gathered at the White House.“We’ve got to vote these people into obilivion,” Mr. Trump said, re-entering the arena with his signature bluster and without any acknowledgement that he might still be contageous to those around him. His short speech, delivered from the Blue Room balcony overlooking the South Lawn, was the first time he has been seen in public since leaving the hospital on Monday. (A television interview with Fox News that aired Friday night had been pretaped).Mr. Trump, who emerged wearing a white surgical mask, peeled it off as he began his remarks. His voice sounded strong and his aggressive message playing down the threat of the virus was unchanged. But the event that the White House had previewed as a huge “peaceful protest for law and order”, was uncharacteristically brief.White House officials said the president would speak for 30 minutes, but he kept his remarks to just 18 minutes in total. A typical Trump rally, in contrast, often runs for at least 90 minutes. A large bandage on top of his right hand was a reminder of the treatments and infusions he had recieved over the past week. And atypical for a president who usually keeps crowds waiting, Mr. Trump started right on time……One White House official said that about 2,000 invitations had been sent out. But the crowd on Saturday was made up of a few hundred attendees, many of whom were in town for a gathering of the so-called Blexit movement, started by the right wing firebrand Candace Owens, which encourages Black voters to leave the Democratic Party.Attendees were asked to fill out questionnaires and undergo temperature screenings before entering the White House complex. They were also advised to wear masks, although many in the audience did not follow those directions… October 10, 2020: The Guardian posted in their live blog “Trump supporters gather at White House – many without masks”. From the live blog: Trump supporters are starting to gather for his address at the White House later. White House officials have said attendees will be required to wear masks and have their temperature checked before entering. Early photos suggest that many of them are definitely not wearing masks before the address. Maybe they’re heeding the president’s workds when he said Americans shouldn’t be “afraid” of a virus that has killed more than 210,000 people in the US……If you’re wondering why the crowds are less white than the president’s usual events, it’s because it has partly been organized by conservative activist Candace Owens who is behind Blexit, a campaign to get Black voters to leave the Democratic party. There are reports that some of the attendees have been paid to travel to the event. The post included three photos of the crowd. Most people are wearing Trump hats and light blue shirts that say “We The Free”. Two people in the crowd is wearing a mask correctly. Several people were wearing a mask incorrectly – by pushing down to their chin, leaving their mouth and nose exposed. October 12, 2020: CBS News posted an article titled: “Trump’s physician says president tested negative for COVID-19”. It was written by Kathryn Watson. From the article: President Trump’s physician said the president has tested negative for COVID-19, according to a memo released by the White House on Monday afternoon, about 90 minutes before he is set to hold a rally in Florida. According to Dr. Sean Conley, the president’s physician, the president has tested negative “on consecutive days,” and is “not infectious to others.” Conley did not say on which days the president tested negative, and said rapid tests were used to determine the results, which are less accurate than PCR tests. “It is important to note that this test was not used in isolation for the determination of the president’s current negative status,” Conley said. “Repeatedly negative antigen tests, taken in context with additional clinical and laboratory data, including viral load, subgenomic RNA, and PCR cycle threshold measurements, as well as ongoing assessment of viral culture data, all indicate a lack of detectable viral replication. The comprehensive data, in concert with the CDC’s guidelines for removal of transmission-based precautions, have informed our medical team’s assessment that the president is not infectious to others.”Mr. Trump is set to take the stage in Sanford, Florida, at 7 p.m., for his first trip since his COVID-19 diagnosis and subsequent hospitalization… October 13, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Labor secretary’s wife tests positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Tal Axelrod. From the article: Labor Secretary Eugene Scalia’s wife tested positive for the coronavirus, the Labor Department announced Tuesday.Trish Scalia is currently experincing “mild symptoms but doing well,” the department said. Eugene Scalia tested negative for the virus……It was not immediately clear where Trish Scalia contracted the virus. Both Scalias attended the Rose Garden event where President Trump announced his nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, which has been linked to multiple COVID-19 cases within Trump’s circles… October 14, 2020: The U.S. Department of Labor posted a news release titled: “Statement from U.S. Department of Labor”. From the news release: This afternoon, doctors confirmed that U.S. Secretary of Labor Eugene Scalia’s wife, Trish, tested positive for the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Mrs. Scalia is experiencing mild symptoms but doing well. This evening, Secretary Scalia received a test and the results were negative; he has experienced no symptoms. The Secretary and Mrs. Scalia will follow the advice of health professionals for Trish’s recovery and the health of those around them. For the time being, the Secretary will work from home while continuing to carry out the mission of the Department and the President’s agenda. October 14, 2020: First Lady Melania Trump posted an essay titled: “First Lady Melania Trump: “My personal experience with COVID-19” on the White House website. From the essay: It was two weeks ago when I received the diagnosis that so many Americans across our country and the world had already received—I tested positive for COVID-19. To make matters worse, my husband, and our nation’s Commander-in-Chief, received the same news.Naturally my mind went immediately to our son. To our great relief he tested negative, but again, as so many parents have thought over the past several months, I couldn’t help but think “what about tomorrow or the next day?”. My fear came true when he was tested again and it came up positive. Luckily he is a strong teenager and exhibited no symptoms. In one way I was glad the three of us went through this at the same time so we could take care of one another and spend time together. He has since tested negative.I was very fortunate as my diagnosis came with minimal symptoms, though they hit me all at once and it seemed to be a roller coaster of symptoms in the days after. I experienced body aches, a cough and headaches, and felt extremely tired most of the time. I chose to go a more natural route in terms of medicine, opting more for vitamins and healthy food. We had wonderful caretakers around us and we will be forever grateful for the medical care and professional discretion we received from Dr. Conley and his team. It was an unfamiliar feeling for me to be the patient instead of a person trying to encourage our nation to stay healthy and safe. It was me being taken care of now, and getting first-hand experience with all that COVID-19 can do. As the patient, and the person benefitting from so much medical support, I found myself even more grateful and in awe of caretakers and first responders everywhere. To the medical staff and the residence staff who have been taking care of our family—thank you doesn’t say enough.Recovering from an illness gives you a lot of time to reflect. When my husband was taken to Walter Reed as a precaution, I spent much of my time reflecting on my family. I also thought about the hundreds of thousands of people across our country who have been impacted by this illness that infects people with no discrimination. We are in unprecedented times—and with the election fast approaching, it has been easy to get caught up in so much negative energy.It also cheered me to think of all the people I have met across our country and the world—and the goodness and compassion that exists if you seek it out. Our country has overcome many hardships and much adversity, and it is my hope COVID-19 will be another obstacle we will be able to tell future generations we overcame—and learned from in the process……I am happy to report that I have tested negative and hope to resume my duties as soon as I can. Along with this good news, I want people to know that I understand just how fortunate my family is to have received the kind of care that we did. If you are sick, or if you have a loved one who is sick—I am thinking of you and will be thinking of you every day. I pray for our country and I pray for everyone who is grappling with COVID-19 and any other illnesses or challenges… October 14, 2020: CBS News posted an article titled: “Barron Trump tested positive for COVID-19 earlier this month”. It was written by Kathryn Watson. From the article: Barron Trump tested positive for COVID-19 earlier this month, first lady Melania Trump announced in a a personal essay posted on the White House website. The 14-year-old has since tested negative, as have the first lady and the president, since the two contracted the virus earlier this month. Mr. Trump, has described his battle with the virus to supporters but has not said much about his family’s experience with COVID-19. Mrs. Trump said Barron exhibited no symptoms… October 14, 2020: Paso Robles Daily News posted an article titled: “Congressman Carbajal shares update on recovery from COVID-19”. It includes a video and a transcript of the video. From the transcript: Hi everyone, I wanted to take a minute to thank you for all the well-wishes you continue to send to me through my office and my staff.I also wanted to give you a brief update about my experience isolating, quarantining here as directed by my physician.For the most part, my symptoms have been mild – I’ve had fatigue, body aches, fever, loss of appetite, and chills. Oftentimes, the symptoms would come and go.For the most part, they’ve dissipated and the doctor’s told me that as soon as they completely dissipate I should be able to complete my quarantine and isolation.I’m very grateful for the care I’ve received from our physicians – although it’s been remotely and phone check-ins.As you can see, I’ve lost some weight since I last communicated with you via video. Certainly, not having an appetite it was difficult to eat anything.But now I’m on the mend and again just wanted to let you in on an update about my status and to again remind you to please wear masks and social distance.I’m lucky I’ve had more mild symptoms, but others have had real challenges with this virus. So, please, please follow our physicians and our medical providers’ suggestions, make sure you’re social distancing, make sure you’re wearing a mask.And I hope to see you all very soon. October 14, 2020: Representative Bill Huizenga (Republican – Michigan) tweeted: “Earlier today, I was expected to appear with the Vice President. While taking part in offsite testing protocols, I took a rapid test that came back positive for COVID-19. I am awaiting the results of a PCR test and I am self isolating until I have confirmed results”. October 15, 2020: Representative Bill Huizenga (Republican – Michigan) tweeted: “Quick update: I have recieved my results from the PCR test confirming that I am positive for COVID-19. I will continue to self-isolate through the duration and serve the people of West Michigan. Thank you to the medical professionals who deal with these cases on a daily basis.” This wa the start of a thread. October 15, 2020: Representative Bill Huizenga (Republican – Michigan) tweeted: “I deeply appreciate all those who have reached out and will continue to keep West Michigan updated on the status of my recovery.” This was the end of the thread. October 15, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Biden campaign halts Kamala Harris’ travel after two people in campaign’s orbit test positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Eric Bradner. From the article: Joe Biden’s campaign is halting the travel of his running mate, California Sen. Kamala Harris, through this weekend after two people — a flight crew member and Haris’ communication director, Liz Allen — tested positive for coronavirus.A staff member for the charter company that flies Biden also tested positive Thursday, his campaign said, but Biden’s travel schedule is not changing because the former vice president did not come within 50 feet of the person.Harris was not in what the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention define as close contact with either person, Biden campaign manager Jen O’Malley Dillon said in a statement. Still, Harris’ planned trip to North Carolina on Thursday was scrapped, and she will remain off the road until Monday, she said……Harris has taken two PCR tests for coronavirus since October 8, including a test Wednesday, and has tested negative, O’Malley Dillon said.The Biden campaign’s immediate disclosure of the positive results was in stark contrast with how Trump’s campaign and White House have handled positive coronavirus tests from Trump himself as well as top campaign officials and aides. Trump’s White House still has not disclosed when Trump had most recently tested negative for coronavirus prior to his positive test.The two people were with Harris on a flight on October 8, the day after her debate with Vice President Mike Pence……Before and after the flight, both Allen and the flight crew member tested negative, and all other staffers on the flight have tested negative, she said……Biden’s campaign also scrapped the plans of Harris’ husband, Doug Emhoff, to travel to Minnesota, where he’d planned to campaign with Jill Biden, on Thursday. But because he had not been in contact with either person, the campaign said, he will return to in-person campaigning on Friday.Hours after announcing the change to Harris’ schedule, Biden’s campaign said it had learned — through the process of contact tracing following the Harris flight crew member who tested positive — that an administrative staffer for the charter flight company that flies Biden also tested positive… October 20, 2020: Steve Holland, who covers the White House and U.S. politics for Reuters, tweeted: “From Melania Trump chief of staff Stephanie Grisham: “Mrs. Trump continues to feel better ever day following her recovery from COVID-19, but with a lingering cough, and out of an abundance of caution, she will not be traveling today.” October 24, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Two Loeffler staffers test positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Jordan Williams. From the article: Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R-Ga.) has tested negative for coronavirus after two of her staffers tested positive.Loeffler’s office said in a statement on Saturday that she was tested for COVID-19 on Friday after two of her staffers tested positive. It is unclear when the staffers were tested.“On Friday, Senator Loeffler was tested for COVID-19 after learning that two of her Senate staffers had tested positive,” the statement said. “Senator Loeffler tested negative.“Senator Loeffler is more than energized than ever to vote to confirm Amy Coney Barrett as the next Supreme Court Justice on Monday, returning home and traveling the state to meet with hardworking Georgians,” her office said… October 24, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Pence Adviser Marty Obst tests positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Mariana Pitofsky. From the article: One of Vice President Pence’s closest advisers, Marty Obst, tested positive for COVID-19 this week, according to multiple reports.The adviser tested positive on Wednesday, Bloomberg News first reported. It was not immediately confirmed whether Obst is experiencing symptoms from the virus. Obst is not a Trump administration employee, although he is frequently in contact with the vice president and visits the grounds of the White House, according to Bloomberg. He was last in contact with Pence about a week ago. Pence on Saturday traveled to Florida to give a speech at a campaign event… October 24, 2020: The Hill posted article titled: “Pence’s chief of staff tests positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Brett Samuels. From the article: Vice President Pence’s chief of staff tested positive for COVID-19 on Saturday, but the vice president intends to plow ahead with a busy campaign schedule, his office said.“Today, Marc Short, Chief of Staff to the Vice President, tested positive for COVID-19, began quarantine and assisting in the contact tracing process,” Pence’s press secretary Devin O’Malley said in a statement. “Vice President Pence and Mrs. Pence both tested negative for COVID-19 today, and remain in good health.”“While Vice President Pence is considered a close contact with Mr. Short, in consultation with the White House Medical Unit, the Vice President will maintain his schedule in accordance with the CDC guidelines for essential personnel,” O’Malley said.Short is the latest White House official to contract the virus, and he is the second person close to Pence whose case became public on Saturday. But Short is in regular contact with the vice president, increasing Pence’s risk of exposure.The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines urge individuals who are considered a close contact of someone with COVID-19 to stay home for 14 days from their last contact with that individual.Pence has maintained an aggressive travel schedule in recent weeks, and it is only expected to intensify in the final week of the campaign. He spent Saturday in Florida and will travel to North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Minnesota in the coming days, among other states… October 24, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Documents show Trump campaign ignored coronovirus guidelines at guidelines at Duluth rally: report”. It was written by Celine Castronuovo. From the article: President Trump’s reelection campaign seemingly ignored previously agreed upon health guidelines at its Sept. 30 rally in Duluth, Minn., just two days before the president was diagnosed with COVID-19, according to documents obtained by The Washington Post. The Post reported Saturday that in the days leading up to the Duluth rally, the Trump campaign signed an agreement with local officials to follow health guidelines aimed at limiting the spread of the virus, including capping rally attendance at 250 people. However, as Trump supporters arrived at the tarmac of Duluth International Airport hours ahead of the rally, with many not socially distancing or wearing face masks, an airport official contacted the campaign. “We have been notified that the 250 person limit has been exceeded,” an airport representative reportedly wrote in an email. “This email serves as our notice of a contract violation and we are requesting you remedy the situation.”According to the Post, the campaign did not respond to the email or take any actions to address the warning. Airport officials later estimated that more than 2,500 people attended the Duluth rally. The Post reported that additional emails and documents obtained through open-records requests showed that while local officials suspected the campaign would not adhere to the agreement, they resisted directly enforcing the guidelines due to fear of backlash.“We will not incite an incident by unilaterally taking physical action to close the event,” Tom Werner, the airport’s executive director, reportedly wrote to the airport’s appointed board members the morning before the rally.In a statement to the Post, the Duluth Airport Authority (DAA) said, “It was made clear to the Trump Campaign, in the lead up to the event, that compliance with the State of Minnesota’s current public health executive orders was an expectation of the DAA.” According to the Post, Minnesota public health officials have traced 19 coronavirus cases to a pair of Trump rallies in the state in September, with three tied to the Duluth event… October 25, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “At least 5 of Vice President Pence’s aides test positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Kaitlan Collins, Jeremy Diamond, Jim Acosta, Daniella Diaz, Kevin Liptak and Betsy Klein. From the article: At least five people in Vice President Mike Pence’s orbit have tested positive for coronavirus in recent days, including chief of staff Marc Short, close aide Zach Bauer and outside adviser Marty Obst, sources told CNN……Vice President Mike Pence and second lady Karen Pence each tested negative for coronavirus on Sunday, a White House official said. Despite contact with multiple people who recently tested positive, Mike Pence is refusing to quarantine in defiance of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines.Pence’s office announced Saturday evening that Short had been diagnosed with Covid-19. Sources told CNN that Obst, who is a senior political adviser to Pence but is not a government employee, and at least three staffers in Pence’s office have also tested positive for the virus. Bauer, one of the staffers who tested positive, according to two sources familiar with the matter, is Pence’s “body man,” meaning his job is to accompany Pence throughout the day and night helping him with a wide range of duties, putting him in close proximity to the vice president. A source familiar with the matter told CNN that Bauer has not been in the office since Tuesday, when he went home to quarantine after coming into contact with Obst. Bauer tested positive Saturday……Pence — who is the head of the White House’s coronavirus task force — plans to continue traveling and campaigning every day in the final stretch to Election Day, an official told CNN.After North Carolina later on Sunday, Pence is going to Minnesota on Monday and back to North and South Carolina on Tuesday. He’s also expected to return to the upper Midwest this week. The official said Pence would continue to be tested but, like Trump, still plans to be on the road every day for the next week. The developments raise new questions about safety protocols and transparency within the White House as the pandemic has killed at least 225,000 Americans……Pence, who is known to rarely wear a mask while flying on Air Force Two, traveled on Saturday to Florida for campaign rallies in Lakeland and Tallahassee. The vice president walked across the tarmac from Marine Two in a mask and boarded Air Force Two about an hour behind schedule……Short has been seen on the campaign trail actively eschewing the use of masks for months, including earlier this week traveling aboard Air Force Two. Neither Pence nor Short wore a mask on Pence’s trip on Thursday and Friday.As chief of staff to Pence, Short has been a key aide involved with the US coronavirus response. He has been reported to have advocated for an economy-first approach to the pandemic……The CDC has issued guidance that says people should stay home for 14 days after having contact with a person who has Covid-19… October 30, 2020: Governor Brian Kemp (Republican – Georgia) tweeted an image with the following statement: Statement from the Office of Gov. Brian P. Kemp“Following a negative COVID-19 PCR test result for both the Governor and the First Lady, the Governor is currently quarantining due to direct exposure within the last 48 hours to an individual who recently tested positive. At this time, the First Lady is not known to have been exposed to a confirmed case. The Governor is not currently experiencing any symptoms and will be quaranting, per Department of Public Health guidance. The Governor spoke with Dr. Toomey this afternoon and will continue to follow her expert guidance. We will provide futher updates at the appropriate time.” Governor Brian Kemp’s tweet was retweeted by First Lady Marty Kemp. October 30, 2020: Representative Drew Ferguson (Republican – Georgia) tweeted an image with the following statement: “Last night I began feeling mild symptoms consistent with a cold, with no fever. This morning when I began running a slight fever, I immediately took a COVID test which has come back positive. Following the advice of my physician, I will be self-quarantining and working from home. I have also notified the Office of the Attending Physician in Congress and asked for their guidance. While the vast majority of my recent schedule has been virtual, we are beginning the process of reaching out to anyone I have seen in recent days. I am eager to get back to work and will do so as soon as I have fully recovered.” October 30, 2020: The Hill reported: Ferguson attended a rally Tuesday with Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp (R) and Kemp’s wife, who both announced Friday that they are quarantining while awaiting test results. October 31, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “Trump campaign rallies led to more than 30,000 coronavirus cases, Stanford researchers say”. It was written by Berkley Lovelace Jr. From the article: President Donald Trump’s campaign rallies led to more than 30,000 coronavirus cases, according to a new paper posted by researchers at Stanford.Researchers looked at 18 Trump rallies held between June 20 and Sept. 22 and analyzed Covid-19 data the weeks following each event. They compared the counties where the events were held to other counties that had a similar trajectory of confirmed Covid-19 cases prior to the rally date. Out of the 18 rallies analyzed, only three were indoors, according to the research.The researchers found that the rallies ultimately resulted in more than 30,000 confirmed cases of Covid-19. They also concluded that the rallies likely led to more than 700 deaths, though not necessarily among attendees.The researchers said the findings support the warnings and recommendations of public health officials concerning the risk of Covid-19 transmission at large group gatherings, “particularly when the degree of compliance with guidelines concerning the use of masks and social distancing is low.”“The communities in which Trump rallies took place paid a high price in terms of disease and death,” said B. Douglas Bernheim, chairman of Stanford’s economics department and a lead author of the paper, wrote.The paper, which has not undergone a peer review yet, was published on open access preprint platform SSRN….…The researchers said they had to overcome “significant challenges,” acknowledging that the dynamics of Covid-19 are “complex,” and “even the most superficial examination of the data reveals that the process governing the spread of Covid-19 differs across counties.”The new research comes as the coronavirus continues to rapidly spread across the United States. The U.S. continued to set new highs for infections this week, with Friday marking a record 99,321 daily new cases, bringing the seven-day average of daily new cases to a new high at 78,738, a CNBC analysis of data from Johns Hopkins University showed… November 6, 2020: Bloomberg posted an article titled: “Trump’s Chief of Staff, Mark Meadows, Infected By Coronavirus”. It was written by Jennifer Jacobs, Tyler Page, and Mario Parker. From the article: President Donald Trump’s chief of staff, Mark Meadows, has told associates he has coronavirus, according to people familiar with the matter, adding to the outbreaks connected to the White House.It wasn’t immediately clear when Meadows learned that he had contracted the virus, or whether he had developed symptoms of Covid-19, the disease caused by the virus. He informed a close circle of advisers after Tuesday’s election, one of the people said……A Trump campaign aide, Nick Trainer, is also infected, according to two people familiar with the matter. He and campaign spokespeople declined to comment……Meadows was at Trump’s bedside when the president was hospitalized last month with Covid-19… November 6, 2020: Kaitlan Collins, CNN White House Correspondent, tweeted: “Worth noting that Mark Meadows was at the election night party at the White House Tuesday that hundreds of people attended. Officials said everyone would be tested beforehand.” November 6, 2020: Jennifer Jacobs, Senior White House reporter for Bloomberg News tweeted: “Meadows was at campaign HQ on Tuesday with Trump without a mask and again on Wednesday – also without a mask, aides tell me.” November 6, 2020: Jennifer Jacobs, Senior White House reported for Bloomberg News tweeted: “NEWS: Along with Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows, at least FOUR other White House aides currently have coronavirus, per sources. Pains where taken to keep Meadows’ illness a secret, I’m told. And people around him who knew him were told to keep quiet.” November 9, 2020: ABC 7 WABC-TV posted an article titled: “HUD Sec. Ben Carson tests positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Jeremy Diamond and Betsy Klein from CNN. From the article: Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson tested positive for coronavirus on Monday, his deputy chief of staff Coalter Baker confirmed to CNN.“Secretary Carson has tested positive for the coronavirus. He is in good spirits and feels fortunate to have access to effective therapeutics which aid and markedly speed his recovery.” Baker said in a statement.An aide added that Carson, 69, tested positive Monday morning at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center after experiencing symptoms. He is no longer at the hospital.Carson’s chief of staff Andrew Hughes disclosed the secretary’s positive diagnosis in an all-staff letter, writing: “He is resting at his house and is already beginning to feel better.”Hughes also said staff would be notified if they’d been in contact with Carson and that “all precautions are being taken.”……Carson attended an election night party where White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and nearly every other attendee was not wearing a mask. Meadows and four others in Trump’s orbit tested positive last week.Carson, a retired neurosurgeon and a member of the White House coronavirus task force, was spotted maskless at several Trump campaign events in the lead up to Election Day, including a Trump campaign rally in Waterford Township, Michigan, on October 30……Black Voices for Trump posts indicate that Carson and his wife, Candy, traveled to events in Florida and Georgia ahead of the election. Masks went largely unworn during the events. And the Carsons were photographed without masks, posing shoulder-to-shoulder with supporters… November 9, 2020: USA Today posted an article titled: “David Bossie, Trump campaign adviser overseeing campaign legal challenges, has COVID-19”. It was written by Savannah Behrmann. From the article: David Bossie, an adviser for President Donald Trump’s campaign, has tested positive for COVID-19, according to several outlets, becoming the latest in Trump’s orbit to contract the virus.Bossie was tapped just a few days ago to head the Trump campaign’s legal challenges in contesting the outcome of the presidential election, which the president is projected to have lost.According to ABC, Bossie tested positive on Sunday. He was in Phoenix, Arizona on Thursday to participate in a press conference with the state’s Republican party about the election, and has traveled to the Trump campaign’s headquarters in Virginia several times in the last week. He was often seen not wearing a mask.Bossie’s diagnosis was reported Monday, just a few hours after news broke that Ben Carson, the Housing and Urban Development secretary, also had tested positive for COVID-19… November 12, 2020: Representative Don Young (Republican – Alaska) tweeted: “I have tested positive for COVID-19. I am feeling strong, following proper protocols, working from home in Alaska, and ask for privacy at this time. May God Bless Alaska.” November 12: 2020: KTOO posted an article titled: “Alaska Rep. Don Young, 87, says he’s diagnosed with COVID-19”. It was written by Nathaniel Herz. From the article: U.S. Representative Don Young, 87, has tested positive for COVID-19, he announced in a tweet Thursday……Young, a Republican, was first elected in 1973 and is now the Dean of the House, meaning he’s the longest-serving member of Congress. He’s also the chamber’s oldest member.The Associated Press declared Wednesday that Young has won re-election over Democratic Party-endorsed independent Alyse Galvin. He was photographed at one of his fundraisers not wearing a mask and said he did not require them at this political events……Young made headlines early in the pandemic when he jokingly referred to COVID-19, a type of coronavirus, as the “beer virus.” He later said he didn’t fully grasp the severity of the virus and the associated public health crisis.” November 13, 2020: Nevada Governor Steve Sisolak (Democrat – Nevada) tweeted: “As part of a regular testing protocal, I underwent routine COVID-19 testing in Friday, November 13 in Carson City. A rapid test provided a positive result. I also recieved a diagnositc PCR test and those results are pending at this time”. The tweet included screenshots of a press release: As part of a regular testing protocol, Nevada Gov. Steve Sisolak underwent routine COVID-19 testing on Friday, November 13 in Carson City. A rapid test provided a positive result. The Governor also received a diagnostic PCR test and those results are pending at this time.At this time, the Governor is not experiencing any COVID-19 symptoms. Earlier this week, the Governor expressed feeling fatigue, however he attributed it to his demanding schedule. No other symptoms were experienced.“It was important to me to notify Nevadans as soon as possible of my positive COVID-19 test results. I am currently not experiencing any COVID-19 symptoms and I have returned to my residence to begin the quarantine and isolation process. Shortly after the test result came back, I underwent a disease investigation interview with Carson City Health and Human Services,” said Gov. Sisolak. “I want to thank the health officials who assisted me through this process. They serve as a strong reminder of how proud we should all be of our State’s public health workers. With my case, I want to underscore the importance of Nevadans to stay home as much as they possibly can at this time. There were more than 1,800 new cases identified in Nevada yesterday and cases are growing at a rate of 1.3 percent, or 1,402 new cases per day.”Prior to today’s test, the Governor has received negative results on all previous tests – including his last two regular COVID tests conducted on Monday, Nov. 2 and Friday, Nov. 6.Consistent with guidelines from the CDC and the Nevada Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), the Governor will isolate and continue to monitor his symptoms. He will receive daily monitoring provided by the Local Health Authority, in addition to regular check-ins from a local physician.The Governor has been interviewed by state and local public health officials and has also proactively reached out to those who may have been close contacts. Formal contact tracing efforts are underway to ensure all close contacts are notified and informed of next steps in accordance with public health guidelines.All public events have been cancelled at this time. The Governor remains in constant contact with his staff and his Cabinet and the work of the Governor’s Office will continue remotely.The Governor was last in the Carson City office on Thursday, November 12. Out of an abundance of caution, all staff in the Carson City office transitioned to work from home status today. Any staff members deemed close contacts through the contact tracing process will remain in quarantine for the full period in compliance with CDC guidelines and must receive a negative test result before returning to the office upon completion of their full quarantine period.All relevant staff members will continue to self-monitor for symptoms and quarantine at this time – including staying at home and separating themselves from others, in accordance with public health guidelines. Those staffers will be working from home and are able to conduct their regular business during this time. November 16, 2020: Representative Don Young (Republican – Alaska) posted a press release titled: “Health Update from Congressman Don Young”. From the press release: “There has been much speculation in the media on my current condition, and I want Alaskans to know that their Congressman is alive, feeling better, and on the road to recovery. As you know, last week, I tested positive for COVID-19. Over the weekend, I was admitted to Providence Hospital for treatment and monitoring. The team at Providence did an outstanding job, and their commitment to patient care is to be commended. I have been discharged and continue recovering and working from home in Alaska. Very frankly, I had not felt this sick in a very long time, and I am grateful to everyone who has kept me in their thoughts and prayers.Unfortunately, a lot of what you may have heard about my condition was based on speculation in the media that did not respect my privacy. This is irresponsible, and I do not want any Alaskans to be scared of seeking testing or treatment out of privacy concerns. COVID-19 is a serious virus, and its recent surge in our state has made this a critical moment. I encourage all Alaskans to continue following CDC guidelines: practice social distancing; use a mask; avoid crowds whenever possible.The economy, in both Alaska and our entire nation, has been devastated by this virus. This is not just a public health emergency, but an economic crisis as well. Today, we received encouraging news that a second COVID-19 vaccine candidate has shown to be successful. This development represents tremendous potential, but we must continue looking out for one another. Fighting the spread of this virus is crucial if we are to recover. We cannot hunker down forever, but I sincerely believe that we will be successful in fighting COVID-19, so that we can restore our economic health in the present, and secure a bright future for all Alaskans; our children and grandchildren are depending on us. Stay safe, and may God Bless Alaska and our frontline workers.” November 16, 2020: Representative Cheri Bustos (Democrat – Illinois) tweeted: “I have tested positive for the COVID virus. I am experiencing mild symptoms, but still feel well. I have been in contact with my medical provider and, per CDC guidance, am self-isolating”. This tweet was the start of a thread. November 16, 2020: Representative Cheri Bustos (Democrat – Illinois) tweeted: “Consistent with medical advice, I will be working remotely from my home in Illinois until cleared by my physician. All individuals that I had been in contact with have been notified. Across the country and the Congressional District I serve, COVID case numbers are skyrocketing.” November 16, 2020: Representative Cheri Bustos (Democrat – Illinois) tweeted: “We must all continue to be vigilant in following public health best practices: wear a mask, practice social distancing, get your flu shot and wash your hands. The only way we will get this pandemic under control is by working together”. This tweet was the end of the thread. November 16, 2020: Nevada Governor Steve Sisolak (Democrat – Nevada) tweeted: “Today, I wanted to provide an update on my #COVID19 diagnosis. I continue to remain in good spirits with only mild head congestion. I appreciate the ongoing outpouring of support and well wishes!” The tweet included two screenshots of a press release: Today, Nevada Gov. Steve Sisolak announced he continues to be in good spirits and has only experienced mild head congestion related to his positive COVID-19 diagnosis. As part of a regular testing protocol, Nevada Gov. Steve Sisolak underwent a routine COVID-19 testing on Friday, November 13 in Carson City. A rapid test provided a positive result. The Governor also recieved a diagnostic PCR test at that time, which has also returned a positive result.“I appreciate the outpouring of support and well wishes from Nevadans and those across the country who have taken time to check in on me,” said Gov. Sisolak. “I again want to thank the health officials who assisted me through this process. They serve as a strong reminder of how proud we should all be of our State’s health workers. My focus remains on addressing the record surge the State is currently experiencing and my administration continues to work around the clock to serve Nevadans through this ongoing pandemic.”The Governor continues to isolate and monitor symptoms. He is recieveing daily monitoring provided by the Local Health Authority, in addition to check-ins from a local physician.Prior to the positive results on Friday, the Governor has received negative results on all previous tests – including his last two regular COVID tests conducted on Monday, Nov. 2 and Friday, Nov. 6.The Governor remains in constant contact with his staff and his Cabinet and the work of the Governor’s Office will continue remotely.The Governor was last in the Carson City office on Thursday, November 12. Any staff members deemed close contacts through the contact tracing process will remain in quarantine for the full period of compliance with CDC guidelines and must receive a negative test result before returning to the office upon completion of their full quarantine period. Those staffers will be working from home and are able to conduct their regular business during this time.The Governor’s Office has followed all public health and safety protocols including temperature checks, wearing face coverings, social distancing and strict hygiene procedures. November 17, 2020: Senator Chuck Grassley (Republican – Iowa) posted a statement titled: “Statement from Sen. Grassley on Exposure to COVID-19”. From the statement: U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley today issued the following statement regarding exposure to COVID-19.“I learned today that I’ve been exposed to the coronavirus. I will follow my doctors’ orders and immediately quarantine as I await my test results. I’m testing well and not currently experiencing any symptoms, but it’s important we follow public health guidelines to keep each other healthy.”Grassley will continue his business for the people of Iowa virtually at home. November 17, 2020: CBC News posted an article titled: “Chuck Grassley, second oldest senator, tests positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Grace Segers. From the article: Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley, who at 87 is the second oldest member of the Senate, said in a statement that he had been tested positive for the coronavirus. Grassley announced that he had been exposed to someone with the virus earlier on Tuesday.“This morning, I learned that I had been exposed to the coronavirus. I received a COVID-19 test and immediately began to quarantine. While I still feel fine, the test came back positive for the coronavirus. I am continuing to follow my doctor’s orders and CDC guidelines,” Grassley said. He added that he would continue to work from home, and said his Senate offices would remain open…In his statement earlier on Tuesday, Grassleysaid he would “immediately quarantine” as he awaited test results……Grassley did not get tested for the coronavirus after Senator Mike Lee, a felow member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, tested positive last month… November 17, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Colorado Democrat Ed Perlmutter tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Tal Axelrod. From the article: Colorado Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D) announced Tuesday that he’s tested positive for COVID-19, becoming the latest House lawmaker to be diagnosed with the virus.Perlmutter said in a statement that he is currently asymptomatic and will isolate in his Washington apartment as he works remotely.“I’ve been taking precautions like so many other Coloradans over the past eight months. This serves as an important reminder that this virus is highly contageous and should be taken seriously. As we enter the holiday season, I encourage everyone to heed the warnings of no personal gatherings, social distancing and wearing a mask,” he said……Perlmutter’s diagnosis comes amid a spike in COVID-19 cases across the country. The Capitol’s attending physician launched a new testing program for members and staff on Monday amid the surge to try to ensure that a building that houses employees who travel between Washington, D.C., and their districts across the country is not ravaged by a related flood of infections. November 18, 2020: Representative Dan Newhouse (Republican – Washington) tweeted: “I began to feel a little run down yesterday, so I took a COVID-19 test. Last night, the results came back positive for the virus. My symptoms remain mild, and I am following CDC guidelines. I am quarantining and will continue to serve the people of Central Washington from home.” November 18, 2020: The Hill reported: Newhouse voted on the House floor Monday night with several other lawmakers. November 20, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Ben Carson says he’s ‘out of the woods’ after being ‘extremely sick’ with COVID-19”. It was written by Tal Axelrod. From the article: Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson said Friday that he is feeling better after what appeared to be a serious bout of the coronavirus.In a Facebook post, Carson, who is a medical doctor, said he believes he is “out of the woods” after being “extremely sick” with the highly infectious virus and that he believes an experimental treatment he took saved his life.“I was extremely sick and initially took Oleander 4X with dramatic improvement. However, I have several co-morbidities and after a brief period when I only experienced minor discomfort, the symptoms accelerated and I became desperately ill. President Trump was following my condition and cleared me for the monoclonal antibody therapy that he had previously received, which I am convinced saved my life,” he wrote, referring to a treatment that is not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or a proven COVID-19 therapeutic… …Carson, 69, first announced earlier this month that he’d tested positive for the coronavirus. It was not immediately clear which monoclonal antibody treatment Carson received or if he received Regeneron’s experimental antibody treatment that Trump received when he had his own battle with the coronavirus… November 20, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Florida Republican senator says he has Covid-19”. It was written by Daniella Diaz. From the article: Republican Sen. Rick Scott of Florida said in a statement Friday morning he has tested positive with Covid-19, adding to the number of lawmakers in recent days that have tested positive with the virus.“After several negative tests, I learned I was positive this morning,” he said in a statement. “I am feeling good and experiencing very mild symptoms. I will be working from home in Naples until it is safe for me to return to Washington D.C.”Scott, who is the chairman of the Senate Republicans’ campaign arm, had campaigned last week with Republican Sens. David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler who are both facing January runoff races for reelection in Georgia. Scott announced last Saturday that he had been possibly exposed to the virus and that he would isolate while awaiting test results……This case brings CNN’s tally to 26 House members and nine senators that have so far tested positive or been presumed positive since the start of the pandemic.The increased number in positive lawmakers from both parties and chambers of Congress coincides with the uptick of cases across the country. The House began offering Covid-19 testing for members this week, eight months after the pandemic began. November 20, 2020: The Associated Press posted an article titled: “Spokesman: Trump’s eldest son tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Jonathan Lemire. From the article: Donald Trump Jr., the eldest son of President Donald Trump, was quarantining Friday after learning he has been infected with the coronavirus, a spokesperson said.The younger Trump learned his diagnosis at the beginning of the week and has had no symptoms, said the spokesperson, who was granted anonymity to discuss private medical information.Trump Jr. is following all medically recommend guidelines for COVID-19, the disease caused by the virus, the spokesperson added.The 42-year-old is the latest member of the president’s family to become infected with a virus that has killed more than 250,000 Americans and infected nearly 12 million others… November 20, 2020: Andrew H. Giuliani (son of Rudy Guliani) tweeted: “This morning I tested positive for COVID-19. I am experiencing mild symptoms, and am following all appropriate protocals, including being in quarantine and conducting contact tracing.” November 20, 2020: Jenna Ellis, Senior Legal Advisor for Trump’s legal team, tweeted: “Mayor @RudyGiuliani and I have both tested negative for COVID-19. The entire legal team will continue to follow the advice and protocols of our doctors.” November 21, 2020: The New York Times posted an article titled: “Andrew Giuliani, a White House official, tests positive after attending a news conference with his father and other Trump lawyers”. It was written by Maggie Haberman and Katherine J. Wu. From the article: Andrew Giuliani, a White House official and son of President Trump’s personal lawyer, announced on Twitter on Friday that he had tested positive for the coronavirus. He is the latest in a string of administration officials, including Mr. Trump himself, to contract the virus……Mr. Giuliani, who is not known to wear a mask at the White House, attended a news conference on Thursday with his father, Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer who is leading efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.The news conference was held in a small room packed with dozens of people at the Republican National Committee in Washington. Three other lawyers that the elder Mr. Giuliani called the president’s “elite strike force” team were also at the lectern: Jenna Ellis, Joseph diGenova and Sidney Powell……The elder Mr. Giuliani and the younger Mr. Giuliani had spent most of the week together, according to a person familiar with their interactions, blurring the timeline during which the virus could have hopped from one to the other……Andrw Giuliani is only the latest case in what one White House official not authorized to speak publicly described on Friday as another outbreak at the complex. There are at least four other people who have tested positive in the recent days in addition to the younger Mr. Giuliani, said the official.Those test results have come as the small dining room near the West Wing, referred to as the Navy Mess, was reopened this week with limited seating, the official said… November 21, 2020: Stephen Lawson, a spokesperson for Kelly Loffler’s campaign, tweeted: “My statement on Senator Loeffler’s COVID testing. She has no symptoms and is in good spirits, and appreciates everyone’s well wishes and support.” The tweet included the statement: Loeffler Campaign Statement on COVID TestingToday, Loeffler campaign spokesperson Stephen Lawson issued the following statement:“Senator Loeffler took two COVID tests on Friday morning. Her rapid test results were negative and she was cleared to attend Friday’s events. She was informed later in the evening after public events on Friday that her PCR test came back positive, but she was retested Saturday morning after conferring with medical officials and those results came back inconclusive on Saturday evening. Senator Loeffler followed CDC guidelines by notifying those with whom she had sustained direct contact while she awaits further test results.She has no symptoms and she will continue to follow CDC guidelines by quaranting until retesting is conclusive and an update will be provided at that time.” November 21, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Loeffler isolating after possible COVID-19 infection”. It was written by Jordan Williams. From the article: Sen. Kelly Loffler (R-Ga.) is self isolating after a possible COVID-19 infection, her campaign said Saturday night.Stephen Lawson, a spokesperson for her campaign, said in a statement, that Loeffler, took two tets Friday morning, including a rapid test that was negative, and she was cleared to attend two campaign events with Vice President Pence.After her events, she was told that a polymerase chain reaction test (PCR) came back positive, the spokesman said. The senator was retested onSaturday and the results were “inconclusive,” Lawson said……Loeffler is facing reelection against Democratic challenger Rev. Raphael Warnock in a runoff on Jun. 5. The race is one of two that will determine which party controls the U.S. Senate.Recently, she’s held joint events with Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.), who is facing his own critical runoff against Jon Ossoff (D), and campaigned with Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.). He campaign events have drawn large crowds where not many people wear masks and socially distance, the Atlanta Journal Constitution reported. November 22, 2020: California Governor Gavin Newsom (Democrat – California) tweeted: “Late Friday evening, @JenSeibelNewsom and I learned that 3 of our children had been exposed to an officer from the California Highway Patrol who had tested positive for COVID-19”. This is the start of a short thread. November 22, 2020: California Governor Gavin Newsom (Democrat – California) tweeted: “Jen and I had no direct interaction with the officer and wish them a speedy recovery. Thankfully, the entire family tested negative today. However, consistent with local guidance, we will be quarantining for 14 days.” November 22, 2020: California Governor Gavin Newsom (Democrat – California) tweeted: “We are grateful for all the officers that keep our family safe and for every frontline worker who continues to go to work during this pandemic.” This is the end of the thread. November 25, 2020: Congresswoman Susie Lee (Democrat – Nevada) tweeted: “My statement on my mothers’ passing and my COVID-19 positivity”. The tweet included a screenshot of her statement, titled; “Rep. Lee Statement on Mother’s Passing, Congresswoman’s COVID-19 Positivity”. From the statement: U.S. Rep. Susie Lee (Nev.-03) released the following statement on the passing of her mother, Joan Kelley, and on the Congresswoman’s positive COVID-19 test result:“It is difficult for me to write this tonight, but I am heartbroken to share the news that my mother passed away yesterday evening after months of deteriorating health. This has been an extremely difficult couple of days for my family. I’m going to share more in the coming days about my mom and the pivotal role she played in shaping my life and the lives of my siblings.“I traveled to Ohio on Monday because my mother had begun to recieve in-home hospice care. I took precautions to maintain social distance and wear a mask, and out of an abundance of caution, took a COVID-19 test before arriving in Ohio and again today. While I tested negative as recently as Sunday, I unfortunately tested positive today for COVID-19. I am curently asymptomatic and plan to participate in remote memorial services for my mother over the weekend. Starting next week, I will continue my congressional work remotely while isolating until I know it is safe to exit isolation.” November 25, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “USAID administrator tests positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Justine Coleman. From the article: John Barsa, the acting administrator of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), tested positive for COVID-19, a spokesperson confirmed on Wednesday.Acting USAID spokesperson Pooja Jhunjhunwala told The Hill in a statement that Barsa tested positive on Wednesday for the coronavirus after a rapid diagnostic test.“The Acting Deputy Administrator has been isolating since he began exhibiting symptoms late Monday, November 23, and will continue to until a retest is conclusive,” Jhunjhunwala said.Barsa reportedly informed senior staff on Wednesday of his positive test, two sources familiar with the call told Axios. Staffers told the news outlet that Barsa rarely wears a mask in their office……The acting USAID administrator was scheduled to travel to Honduras this weekend after the country was hit by Hurricane Eta and Hurricane Iota, but administrators told Axios they believe the trip will be canceled after the test results… November 25, 2020: CBS News posted an article titled: “Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Jordan Freiman. From the article: Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon has tested positive for COVID-19, his office announced Wednesday.“Governor Mark Gordon received results today of a COVID-19 test that showed he is positive for the virus,” the governor’s office said in a statement. “He has only minor symptoms at this time and plans to continue working on behalf of Wyoming remotely.”Last Thursday, Gordon, a Republican, announced new restrictions in the state as COVID-19 infection rates surged there and throughout the country. Indoor gatherings are limited to 25% capacity with social distancing while outdoor gatherings are capped at 50% capacity with social distancing. No mask mandate was announced.The state has reported over 26,000 confirmed cases and 215 deaths, according to the Wyoming Department of Health… November 25, 2020: Colorado Governor Jared Polis (Democrat – Colorado) tweeted: “This evening, I learned that I was exposed to an individual who has tested positive for COVID-19. I took a test tonight and tested negative but will begin quarantine, per CDC and CDPHE guidance.” The tweet included an image of a statement from Governor Jared Polis. It provided information that was similar to what was in the tweet. November 28, 2020: Colorado Governor Jared Polis (Democrat) tweeted: “This evening I learned that First Gentleman Marlon Reis and I have tested positive for COVID-19. We are both asymptomatic, feeling well, and will continue to isolate at home.” The tweet included a screenshot of a statement: This evening, Governor Polis and First Gentleman Reis learned that they have tested positive for COVID-19. They are both asymptomatic, feeling well, and will continue to isolate in their home.“Marlon andI are feeling well so far, and are in good spirits. No person or family is immune to this virus. I urge every Coloradan to practice caution, limit public interactions, wear a mask in public, stay six feet from others, and wash your hands regularly,” said Governor Polis.The Governor will continue to be closely monitored. Gov. Polis will continue to fulfill his duties and responsibilities and continue to work remotely… December 6, 2020: Colorado Governor Jared Polis (Democrat) tweeted: “Tonight, First Gentleman Marlon Reis started experiencing slightly worsening cough and shortness of breath. I took him to the hospital for review and treatment”. The tweet included a screenshot of a statement: Over the last 24 hours, First Gentleman Marlon Reis started to experience a slightly worsening cough and shortness of breath on day eight after being diagnosed with COVID.As a precaution, the First Gentleman has been transported to the hospital for review and treatment. Governor Polis is not experiencing any additional symptoms at this time.The Governor drove the First Gentleman in his personal vehicle to the hospital. We will continue to update the general public as new information is available. December 6, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “.@RudyGiuliani, by far the greatest mayor in the history of NYC, and who has been working tirelessly exposing the most corrupt election (by far!) in the history of the USA, has tested positive for the China Virus. Get better soon, Rudy, we will carry on!!!” December 6, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Rudy Giuliani has coronavirus, Donald Trump says”. It was written by Amanda Holpuch. From the article: Donald Trump’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, has tested positive for COVID-19, the president tweeted on Sunday.Giuliani, 76 and a former mayor of New York City, has been leading Trump’s attempt to overturn his election defeat by Joe Biden, through lawsuits in battleground states.Trump did not specify when Giuliani tested positive or if he was experiencing symptoms. Giuliani did not immediately comment. Citing an anonymous source, the New York Times reported that Giuliani was being treated at Georgetown University Medical Center in Washington DC……Hours before Trump made the announcement, Giuliani was interviewed on Fox News. He appeared in good spirits while sharing baseless claims of election fraud during the 10-minute interview.Though Giuliani is a high risk of complications from the virus because of his age, he has been traveling frequently in the aftermath of the election, often appearing in public without a mask.Last week, he appeared maskless before state lawmakers in Michigan, to challenge votes in the state. On Thursday, he spoke at the Georgia capitol building in a crowded legislative session, again without a mask……Giuliani has repeatedly been exposed to be others who tested positive including after his son, Andrew……As Christmas approaches, the White House is hosting a string of holiday parties featuring large crowds indoors. Photos from a party on Tuesday showed people without masks engaging in the festivities… December 6, 2020: AZCentral posted an article titled: “Arizona Legislature shuts down after Rudy Guiliani possibly exposed lawmakers to COVID-19”. From the article: The Arizona Legislature will close for a week “out of an abundance of caution” after Rudy Giuiliani, Donald Trump’s personal attorney, possibly exposed several Republican lawmakers to COVID-19.The president announced Giuliani had tested positive for the virus Sunday, less than a week after the former New York City mayor visited Arizona as part of a multistate tour aimed at contesting 2020 election results. He was later admitted to Georgetown University Medical Center.Giuliani spent more than 10 hours discussing election concerns with Arizona Republicans – including two members of Congress and at least 10 current and future state lawmakers – at the Hyatt Regency Phoenix last Monday. The 76-year-old led the meeting maskless, flouting social distancing guidelines and posing for photos.He also met privately with Republican lawmakers and legislative leadership the next day, according to lawmakers’ social media posts….…U.S. Reps. Paul Gosar and Andy Biggs attended Giuliani’s Phoenix meeting, sitting behind Giuliani. State lawmakers Mark Finchem, Bret Roberts, Nancy Barto, Leo Biasiucci, David Cook, Kelly Townsend, David Gowan, Sonny Borrelli and Sylvia Allen sat together on a panel at the front of the room. A handful of other GOP legislators were in the audience.They spend hours listening to Giuliani question multiple “witnesses” – who were not placed under oath – about how elections can be infiltrated and why they thought Arizona’s election results may have been compromised.Some GOP lawmakers scheduled to take office next month, such as Representative-elect Judy Burges and Senator-elect Wendy Rogers, were in the audience. Attendees were spread out, but a photo posted by the Arizona Republican Party showed many participants, including Giuliani and Trump legal adviser Jenna Ellis, posing close together for a group photo.On Tuesday, Giuliani met with more Republican lawmakers, including House Speaker Rusty Bowers, House Majority Leader Warren Peteren, Senate President Karen Fann, Senate Majority Leader Rick Gray and Sens. Michelle Ugenti-Rita and Vince Leach, according to Leach and Peterson… December 6, 2020: Rudy W. Giuliani tweeted: “Thank you to all my friends and followers for all the prayers and kind wishes. I’m getting great care and feeling good. Recovering quickly and keeping up with everything.” December 7, 2020: Colorado Governor Jared Polis (Democrat) tweeted: “Update on First Gentleman Marlon Reis: He is in good spirits and looks forward to returning home soon. Marlon and I appreciate all your kind words and support.” The tweet included a screenshot of the following statement: First Gentleman Marlon Reis was diagnosed with COVID-19 nine days ago and last evening he was admitted to the hospital following shortness of breath and a worsening cough.The First Gentleman and Governor appreciate all of the kind words and support they have received during this time and continue to urge all Coloradans to do their part to slow the spread of this virus. That means wearing a mask in public, staying six feet from others, avoiding large gatherings, and washing your hands regularly.The First Gentleman has normal oxygen saturation, is in good spirits, and looks forward to returning home soon. He has received dexamethasone for inflammation and remdesivir and has not required oxygen. Governor Polis is not experiencing any symptoms at this time and will return to public as soon as doctors clear him to be around others. We will continue to provide updates as new information is available. December 7, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “Michigan, Arizona legislatures postpone work due to Covid diagnosis for Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani”. It was written by Dan Mangan. From the article: The legislatures of Arizona and Michigan said that they would postpone work as a result of a positive coronavirus test for President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, who appeared without a mask at information sessions hosted by Republican lawmakers from both states in the past week.Arizona’s Senate and House on Sunday are closing for a week “out of an abundance of caution for recent cases and concerns relating to covid-19,” according to a letter sent to lawmakers.In Michigan, state Speaker of the House Lee Chatfield said the House would be in session on Tuesday, “but no voting will take place and attendance will not be taken.”“Multiple representatives have requested time to receive results from recent COVID-19 tests before returning to session, out of an abundance of caution,” Chatfield said in a statement.The moves came in reaction to Trump’s announcement Sunday on Twitter that Giuliani, who had been leading the president’s last-ditch, long-shot efforts to reverse Joe Biden’s win in the presidential race, had tested positive for the coronavirus.The former New York City mayor and top federal prosecutor on Monday was at MedStar Georgetown University Hospital in Washington, D.C., with mild symptoms, according to a source who spoke to NBC News……In a statement issued Sunday night, the Trump campaign said, “Mayor Giuliani tested negative twice immediately preceding his trip to Arizona, Michigan, and Georgia.”“The Mayor did not experience any symptoms or test positive for COVID-19 until more than 48 hours after his return,” the campaign said. No legislators in any state or members of the press are on the contact tracing list, under current CDC Guidelines.”“Other team members who are defined as having had close contact will be following their physicians’ directives and CDC guidelines on self-isolation and testing.”… December 7, 2020: El Paso Times posted an article titled: “Lilian Blancas, election runoff candidate for El Paso municipal court, dies from COVID-19”. It was written by Aaron Martinez. From the article: El Paso County Magistrate Judge Lillian Blancas, who was in a runoff for the El Paso Municipal Court 4 judicial seat, died Monday from COVID-19.Blancas, 47, had been in the hospital since Nov. 9, according to family friends. This was her second time in the hospital because of COVID-19……Blancas finished first in the Nov. 3 election with about 40% of the vote, ahead of associate judge and private defense attorney Enrique Holguin……The runoff was triggered because no candidate received more than 50% of the vote…If Blancas wins the runoff election, the El Paso City Council will vote to appoint a candidate, according to Deputy City Clerk John Glendon. December 8, 2020: Colorado Governor Jared Polis (Democrat) tweeted: “First Gentleman Marlon Reis is back home from the hospital. Marlon and I are so thankful for the doctors, nurses, and staff who took care of him while he was there.” The tweet included a screenshot of a statement: First Gentleman Marlon Reis was diagnosed with COVID-19 ten days ago, and was admitted to the hospital for treatment this weekend and today he has been successfully discharged and returned home.“I am so thankful to the doctors, nurses, and staff and for the support and well wishes we have received from friends and neighbors, and Coloradans during this time,” said First Gentleman Reis. “I hold everyone who has been affected by this deadly virus in my heart. Jared and I continue to encourage our fellow Coloradans to remain vigilant, wear masks, stay six feet apart, avoid gatherings, and wash your hands regularly.”The First Gentleman is feeling well and his doctor advised him to take the steroids for two more days. The First Gentleman was treated at UCHealth at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus and the Governor drove him home this morning. Governor Polis continues to not experience any symptoms and will return to public activities as soon as doctors clear him to be around others. December 8, 2020: Axios posted an article titled: “Scoop: West Wing fears COVID spread after Trump lawyer Jenna Ellis attends WH party”. It was written by Jonathan Swan. From the article: President Trump’s lawyer Jenna Ellis has informed associates she tested positive for the coronavirus, multiple sources tell Axios, stirring West Wing fears after she attended a senior staff Christmas party on Friday….…The revelation follows Sunday’s news that Ellis’ legal sidekick Rudy Giuliani was hospitalized after testing positive……Ellis showed up to the White House senior staff party in the East Wing on Friday as the guest of Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro and was not seen wearing a mask, according to sources who attended the event… December 8, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Rudy Giuliani expects to leave hospital soon following Covid-19 diagnosis”. From the article: Donald Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani on Tuesday said he is feeling better after contracting Covid-19 and expects to leave the hospital on Wednesday.The 76-year old former New York City mayor, who is spearheading Trump’s flagging effort to overturn the Republican president’s election loss to Democrat Joe Biden, said he began to feel unusually tired on Friday.By Sunday, when his diagnosis was announced, Giuilani said he was showing other “mild symptoms” but that currently he has no fever and only a small cough.“I think they are going to let me out tomorrow morning,” Giuliani said in an interview with WABC Radio in New York. He was at Georgetown University hospital in Washington, two sources familiar with the situation said on Sunday.Giuilani plans to attend a virtual hearing this week with Georgia lawmakers, one of the sources said on Tuesday……In Georgia, state lawmakers are due to hold a virtual meeting on Thursday to discuss election issues, after a hearing last week in which Giuliani urged the lawmakers to intervene to overturn Biden’s victory in the state. Giuliani made similar pleas last week in Michigan and Arizona….…In his radio interview, Giuliani said he had tested negative just before his trip to the three states.He also confirmed that Jenna Ellis, an attorney with whom he has worked side-by-side on Trump’s legal challenges, also had contracted the coronavirus. December 8, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Giuliani from hospital calls COVID-19 ‘a curable disease'”. It was written by John Bowden. From the article: President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani said Tuesday from his hospital bed that COVID-19, which has infected more than 12 million Americans and killed more than a quarter million, was a “curable” disease.Giuliani, who was taken to the hosptial two days ago following his COVID-19 diagnosis, called in to his daily radio program on 77 WABC in New York to lament that restrictiosn around the country meant to control the spread of the deadly disease were “destroying American business,” according to The Associated Press.“This is a curable disease at this point,” Giuliani said……”I’d rather stay at risk than live in a basement all my life,” Giuliani added, an apparent reference to criticsm of President-elect Joe Biden by President Trump for holding campaign events and meetings from his home earlier this year while many states instituted bans on large public gatherings… December 9, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf tests positive for COVID-19”. It was written by Jessie Hellmann. From the article: Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf (D) has tested positive for COVID-19 but says that he is currently experiencing no symptoms.Wolf said in a statement that he tested positive Tuesday after a “routine” test.“I am continuing to serve the commonwealth and performing all of my duties remotely, as many are doing during the pandemic.” he said.“As this virus rages, my positive test is a reminder that no on is immune from COVID, that following all precautions as I have done is not a guarantee, but it is what we know to be vital to stopping the spread of the disease and so I ask all Pennsylvanians to wear a mask, stay home as much as possible, social distance yourself from those not in your household, and, most of all, take care of each other and stay safe.”His wife Frances Wolf is awaiting the results of her test, and both he and his wife will quarantine at home… December 30, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Friends and colleagues mourn loss of Louisiana Rep.-elect Luke Letlow”. It was written by Juliegrace Brufke. From the article: Lawmakers and senior staffers are mourning the loss of Rep.-elect Luke Letlow (R-La.), who died of complications from COVID-19 on Tuesday.The 41-year-old Louisian Republican was slated to succeed retiring Rep. Ralph Abraham (R-La.), whom he previously served as chief of staff.Letlow’s colleagues and friends described him as a loving father to his two young children and husband to his wife, Julua, and as somene who was committed to serving his community……Letlow’s death has led some Democrats pointing to the need to practice social distancing and wear masks……But Letlow’s campaign chairman and friend Scott Franklin told Business Insider that Letlow took precautions on the campaign trail during the pandemic.”…Letlow was first admitted to St. Francis Medical Center due to complications from the coronavirus on Dec. 19 before being transferred to the Ochsner LSU Health ICU on December 23. He suffered a heart attack following a procedure related to the virus… December 31, 2020: U.S. Candidate for Senate David Perdue (Republican – Georgia) tweeted: “Statement from our campaign:””. The tweet included a screenshot of the statement: “This morning, Senator Perdue was notified that he came in close contact with someone on the campaign who tested positive for COVID-19. Both Senator Perdue and his wife tested negative today, but following his doctor’s recommendations and in accordance with CDC guidelines, they will quarantine. The Senator and his wife have been tested regularly throughout the campaign, and the team will continue to follow CDC guidelines. Further information will be provided when available.” December 31 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Republican senator David Perdue to quarantine after Covid-19 exposure”. It was written by Lauren Gambino. From the article: The Republican senator David Perdue of Georgia will quarantine after being exposed to someone infected with Covid-19, taking him off the campaign trail just days before a fiercely-contested runoff election to keep his seat.The senator was notified on Thursday that he had come into “close contact with someone on the campaign who tested positive for Covid-19”, according to a statement released by his campaign.“Both Senator Perdue and his wife tested negative today, but following his doctor’s recommendations and in accordance with CDC guidelines, they will quarantine,” the statement said.The campaign did not specify how long the senator planned to quarantine. Donald Trump is expected to hold a rally in support of the Republican candidates in Georgia on Monday, the eve of the runoff elections that will determine control of the Senate.Perdue is being challenged by Jon Ossoff while the senator Kelly Loeffler, who was appointed to her seat last December, faces Raphael Warnock. Neither Perdue or Loeffler cleared the 50% threshold required to win their seats outright, triggering the runoffs on 5 January… December 31, 2020: NBC News posted an article titled: “New York restaurant loses liquor license after ‘Covid conga line’ party”. It was written by David K. Li and Ali Gostanian. From the article: New York state authorities yanked the liquor license of a restaurant that played host to a “Covid conga line” and might have led to at least one infection, officials said Tuesday……The Whitestone Republican Club threw its Christmas bash at Il Bacco on Northern Boulevard in the borough of Queens, and the group danced the night away without masks.In widely circulated video footage, nearly a dozen revelers – none of whom were wearing a mask – could be seen dancing and singing to the Bee Gees’ “You Should Be Dancing.” The head of the conga line appeared to be holding a flag in support of President Donald Trump.“After video surfaced of a potential superspreader holiday party at Il Bacco with maskless dancing, the SLA immediately launched an investigation,” the State Liquor Authority said in a statement.“During a follow-up inspection, investigators found flagrant violations of indoor dining regulations and existing health safety and Alcoholic Beverage Control laws, while verifying the maskless party depicted in the video did in fact occur.”At least one guest at that party has tested positive for coronavirus, the Whitestone Republican Club said Thursday… January 1, 2021: The Ronaoke Times posted an article titled: “State Sen. Ben Chafin, R-Russell, dies from complications of COVID-19”. It was written by Amy Freidenberger. From the article: State Sen. Ben Chafin, R-Russell, died Friday from complications related to COVID-19, according to his legislative office.Gov. Ralph Northam and the Virginia Senate Republican Caucus confirmed Chafin died Friday night. He represented a swath of far Southwest Virginia, including part of the New River Valley. He was 60……While several other Virginia lawmakers have been diagnosed with COVID-19 since March, Chafin is the first to die from complications related to the coronavirus……Chafin, an attorney who lived in Lebanon in far Southwest Virginia, and his family keept the information about the senator’s diagnosis private for weeks. Lawmakers and people in political circles heard about Chafin having the disease caused by the novel coronavirus in mid-December when he was hospitalized at VCU Medical Center in Richmond. His office did not responde to repeated requests from The Roanoke Times in December for information about his health.Towards the end of December, a member of his church posted in a Facebook group that he was “suffering from complications due to COVID-19” and that his family was asking for prayers… January 1, 2021: The Hill posted an article titled: “Giuliani, Trump Jr. among guests at Mar-a-Lago New Year’s party ditched by Trump: report”. It was written by Zack Budryk. From the article: President Trump’s two adult sons and his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani were reportedly among the guests at a New Year’s Eve party at the president’s Mar-a-Lago club, which the president himself did not attend despite previously planning to do so.The president returned to Washington from Florida early with no official explanation, but his Thursday arrival came days before Congress is set to certify the results of the Electoral College vote amid the president’s repeated attempts to overturn its results.Without the president, the highest-profile attendees included Giuliani and Trump’s sons Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, as well as Fox News host Jeanine Pirro and performers Berlin and Vanilla Ice, CNN reported Friday. The latter’s name trended on Twitter after a clip of his performance surfaced.A person familiar with preparations told CNN that numerous bookings were made when the buyers believed the president would be at the party, with some performers reluctant to commit to attending without knowing whether he would be there.Trump, who forewent his usual Thanksgiving visit to the club, was expected to ring in the new year in Florida as late as Wednesday before it became clear that evening that he and first lady Melania Trump would leave for Washington.The club set tables for 10 people with no social distancing measures, according to the network, and few party attendees wore masks. January 4, 2021: The Texas Tribune posted an article titled: “Texas Congresswoman Kay Granger tests positive for coronavirus”. It was written by Alex Samuels. From the article: U.S. Rep. Kay Granger, R-Fort Worth, a high ranking member of Texas’ congressional delegation, has tested positive for the coronavirus, her office announced Monday afternoon.Granger, who was on the U.S. House floor during swearing-in proceedings in Congress on Sunday, is a ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee. Granger tested positive for the respiratory disease after arriving in Washington D.C. and is “asymptomatic and feeling great,” her office said in a statement. Granger said she will remain under the care of her doctor and has been quarantining… January 5, 2021: Representative Kevin Brady (Republican – Texas) tweeted: “Tonite the Office of House Physician informed me that I’ve tested positive for Covid 19 & am quarantined. As recommended, I received a first dose of the Pfizer vaccine Dec 18 & also recently tested negative for Covid on New Years Day. Begin treatment tomorrow. Shld be fine “ January 5, 2021: Reuters posted an article titled: “U.S. House Republican Kevin Brady tests positive for COVID-19”. From the article: U.S. Representative Kevin Brady, the top Republican on the House of Representatives tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, said on Tuesday that he had tested positive for coronavirus weeks after receiving a first dose of the Pfizer Inc COVID-19 vaccine……Experts say a second dose of the vaccine is needed to ramp up protection against the virus… January 6, 2021: Representative Jake LaTurner (Republican – Kansas) tweeted: “Late Wednesday evening, Congressman Jake LaTurner received a positive test result for COVID-19. Congresman LaTurner took the test as part of Washington DC’s travel guidelines that require visitors be tested. He is not experiencing any symptoms at this time.” This tweet is the start of a short thread. January 6, 2021: Representative Jake LaTurner (Republican – Kansas) tweeted: “Congressman LaTurner is following the advice of the House physician and CDC guidelines and, therefore, does not plan to return to the House flor for votes until he is cleared to do so.” This tweet is the end of the thread. January 8, 2021: Representative Lisa Blunt Rochester (Democrat – Delaware) tweeted: “While I was disappointed in my colleagues who refused to wear a mask, I was encouraged by those who did. My goal, in the midst of what I feared was a super spreader event, was to make the room at least a little safer.” January 11, 2021: Representative Pramila Jayapal (Democrat – Washington) tweeted: “I just recieved a positive COVID-19 test result after being locked down in a secured room at the Capitol where several Republicans no only cruely refused to wear a mask but recklessly mocked colleagues and staff who offered them one.” The tweet included a link to Representative Jayapal’s statement on her website: United States Representative Pramily Jayapal (WA-07) recieved a positive COVID-19 test result tonight after being locked down in a secure room at the U.S. Capitol where numerous Republican lawmakers recklessly refused to wear masks in the moments after the January 6 attack. Dr. Brian Monahan, the Attending Physician of the United States Congress, advised representatives and Congressional staff on Sunday that those in the secured room could have, “been exposed to another occupant with coronavirus infection”. The duration in the room was multiple hours and several Republicans not only cruelly refused to wear a mask but mocked colleagues and staff who offered them one.“Too many Republicans have refused to take this pandemic and virus seriously, and in doing so, they endanger everyone around them. Only hours after President Trump incited a deadly assault on our Capitol, our country, and our democracy, many Republicans still refused to take the bare minimum COVID-19 precaution and simply wear a damn mask in a crowded room during a pandemic — creating a superspreader event on top of a domestic terrorist attack,” said Congresswoman Jayapal. “While I am isolating per the Capitol Physician’s instructions, I will continue to work to the best of my ability because the deep urgency of our many crises is paramount. I share the outrage and anger of my constituents and those across this country who have watched Donald Trump fail to combat this raging pandemic and refuse to take care of Americans who are suffering, dying, and devastated. Now, we have also watched him openly fuel and incite these insurrectionists who attacked the Capitol and our democracy on January 6—so I will not rest until I do everything in my power to remove this President from office.”“I am also calling for serious fines to be immediately levied on every single Member who refuses to wear a mask in the Capitol,” Jayapal continued. “Additionally, any Member who refuses to wear a mask should be immediately removed from the floor by the Sergeant at Arms. This is not a joke. Our lives and our livelihoods are at risk, and anyone who refuses to wear a mask should be fully held accountable for endangering our lives because of their selfish idiocy.”Jayapal began quarantining immediately after the attack on the U.S. Capitol, fearing and foreseeing exactly what would occur given the number of maskless lawmakers sitting in the same room as her and her colleagues. In an interview with The Cut on Thursday, she said, “I’m quarantining now because I am convinced that where we ended up, in the secured room — where there were over 100 people and many were Republicans not wearing masks — was a superspreader event.” January 11, 2021: Representative Bonnie Watson Coleman (Democrat – New Jersey) posted a press remease on her website titled: “WatsonColeman Recieves Positive Coronavirus Test Following January 6 Capitol Lockdown”. From the press release: Today, Congresswoman Bonnie Watson (NJ-12) received a rapid antigen test result for COVID-19. She believes she was exposed during protective isolation in the U.S. Capitol building as a result of insurrectionist riots. As reported by multiple news outlets, a number of members within the space ignored instructions to wear masks.“I received a positive test result for COVID-19, and am home resting at this time. While I am experiencing mild, cold-like symptoms, I remain in good spirits and will continue to work on behalf of my constituents.”Watson Coleman is isolating and awaiting the results of PCR testing: she previously received the first dose of the Pifzer/BioNTech COVID19 vaccine, which has been made available to members of Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Executive Branch agencies for the purposes of continuity of goverment operations. January 12, 2021: Representative Brad Schneider (Democrat – Illinois) tweeted: “Unfortunately, I received a positve COVID-19 test this morning following being tested yesterday on the advice of the House Attending Physician”. This tweet was the start of a thread. January 12, 2021: Representative Brad Schneider (Democrat – Illinois) tweeted: “Last Wednesday, after narrowly escaping a violent mob incited by the President of the United States to attack the Capitol and its occupants, I was forced to spend several hours in a secure but confined location with dozens of other Members of Congress.” January 12, 2021: Representative Brad Schneider (Democrat – Illinois) tweeted: “Several Republican lawmakers in the room adamantly refused to wear a mask, as demonstrated in the video from Punchbowl News, even when politely asked by their colleagues”. The tweet included a link to that video. January 12, 2021: Representative Brad Schneider (Democrat – Illinois) tweeted: “Today, I am now in strict isolation, worried that I have risked my wife’s health and angry at the selfishness and arrogance of the anti-maskers who put their own contempt and disregard for decency ahead of the health and safety of their colleagues and our staff. January 2021: Representative Brad Schneider (Democrat – Illinois) tweeted: “I am at least the third Member from that room paying the price, including Rep. Pramala Jayapal and Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, a 75-year-old cancer survivor”. January 12, 2021: Representative Brad Schneider (Democrat – Illinois) tweeted: “Wearing a mask is not a political statement, it is public health guidance, common courtesy, and simply what should be expected of all decent people.” January 12, 2021: Representative Brad Schneider (Democrat – Illinois) tweeted: “We can no longer tolerate Members coming to the floor or gathering in the halls of Congress without doing the bare minimum to protect those around them.” January 12, 2021: Representative Brad Schneider (Democrat – Illinois) tweeted: “Those that flout public health guidance should be sanctioned and immediately removed from the House floor by the Sergeant at Arms for their reckless endangerment of their colleagues.” January 12, 2021: Representative Brad Schneider (Democrat – Illinois) tweeted: “Thankfully, I have not yet experienced symptoms and am in the care of capable physicians”. January 12, 2021: Representative Brad Schneider (Democrat – Illinois) tweeted: “Since driving home to Deerfield from Washington, I have remained isolated as much as possible from my wife in our house and have not experienced other close contacts since my exposure on Wednesday.” January 12, 2021: Representative Brad Schneider (Democrat – Illinois) tweeted: “This week, the House is doing critical work to protect our national security, our democracy, and our Constitution, moving to remove the President from office after he incited this angry mob of domestic terrorists. I regret that I must make these votes by proxy.” This tweet is the end of the thread. January 12, 2021: Vox posted an article titled: “Lawmakers are testing positive for Covid-19 after the Capitol lockdown”. It was written by Sean Collins. From the article: A growing number of lawmakers have tested positive for the coronavirus since Trump supporters staged an insurrection on January 6 at the US Capitol. Currently, at least five lawmakers have said they are infected……All are self-isolating following their results. LaTurner said he is asymptomatic, while Fleischmann on Suday said, “I currently feel okay.” Watson Coleman’s office said she is “experiencing mild, cold-like symptoms.” Jayapal did not share whether she is experiencing symptoms in her announcement of her test results. And as of Tuesday, Schneider said, “I have not yet experienced symptoms.”These positive test are a reminder of the importance of taking preventative action to guard against the coronavirus, and mask-wearing alone in crowded, indoor spaces with limited airflow isn’t enough to prevent transmission – particularly if others who may be contagious refuse to wear masks. Research has suggested that mask-wearing by all parties in a given encounter could reduce the risk of spread by nearly 80 percent.LaTurner tested positive the evening of the storming of the Capitol, suggesting he was infected prior to the insurrection; Fleischmann announced his results Sunday. Watson Coleman’s results came Monday, while Jayapal and Schneider recieved theirs Tuesday. Fleischmann and all three Democrats discovered they’d been infected days after being sequestered with other lawmakers and Hill staffers in a crowded safe rom amid the attack.As Punchbowl News reported many Republican lawmakers in the safe room – including Reps. Marjorie Taylor Green, Andy Biggs, Scott Perry, Michael Cloud, and Markwayne Mullin – refused to wear masks despite the crowded conditions, even when Delaware Rep. Lisa Blunt Rochester offered them… January 12, 2021: BuzzFeed News posted an article titled: “Three Democrats Now Have COVID-19 After Republicans Refused To Wear Masks During The Capitol Attack”. It was written by Salvador Hernandez. From the article: …Among the members of Congress who were seen wearing no masks and refusing one when offered were Mullin and Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene.Greene is a new member of Congress who has openly supported and spread lies of the mass delusion QAnon and reportedly refused to wear a mask earlier this month on the floor of the House. She later did don a mask that read “Trump won,” propelling the lie that President Donald Trump won the election.Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona, Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, Rep. Michael Cloud of Texas, and Rep. Doug LaMalfa of California were also seen in the video without masks… THIS BLOG POST WILL BE UPDATED WHEN MORE INFORMATION IS FOUND. This is How it Spreads is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Dental Care During a PandemicJune 30, 2020Doctor Appointments / Out of SpoonsImage by LoveYouAll from Pixabay The COVID-19 pandemic has affected people in many ways. For me, the biggest problem wasn’t running out of toilet paper, or losing my job. What I needed, and could not immediately get, was a dental appointment. In February of 2020, I unexpectedly cracked a permanent cap. I wasn’t eating anything crunchy at the time. It didn’t hurt, because that particular tooth had a root canal done on it several years ago. Knowing that I had a dentist appointment – for a checkup and cleaning – scheduled in March, I decided to wait. The dental assistant could clean my teeth, and the dentist could take a look at the cracked permanent cap, on the same visit. About a week before my “check up and cleaning” dental appointment, I started getting what seemed like two of the three symptoms of COVID-19. I called the dentist’s office and explained the situation to the receptionist. We decided that it was best that I NOT go to my March appointment. The receptionist scheduled me a new appointment – in May. The symptoms I was experiencing turned out not to be COVID-19. The third one (of the three that were known at the time) never appeared. Meanwhile, the cracked permanent cap started separating. There was an obvious crack down the center of it that I could see when I looked in the mirror (and moved my head around enough to get some light cast on it). I was starting to get a bit nervous. Maybe this was more serious than I thought? But, I had a dentist appointment coming up at the beginning of May. I could wait until then. In the middle of March, my county issued “stay at home” orders, followed by my State doing the same. There was no information on when those orders would be lifted. It all depended on whether or not people followed the order, stayed home, and helped to stop the spread of COVID-19. On April 30, my dentist’s office sent me an email. They had decided to close “for now”. I wasn’t entirely surprised, because the “stay at home” order included the requirement that only “essential services” stay open. Dentists were not considered to be providing “essential services”, apparently. Based on the email, it was clear that all scheduled “checkup and cleaning” appointments had been canceled. The dentist’s office would reschedule patients whenever they were allowed to do that again. Those who felt that they were having a “dental emergency” could call the dentist himself (on a separate phone number), and he would determine whether or not it was really an emergency. The permanent cap I cracked was getting worse. It was now hard to eat on that side of my mouth. Of course, this tooth was a molar, which people need if they want to chew food. To me, it looked like the crack was widening. Eventually, I called the dentist’s office, and left a message in which I explained the situation. I left it up to the receptionist whether or not what I was experiencing was a dental emergency. This resulted in a dentist appointment on May 19th My hope was that the dentist would take a quick look at the broken permanent cap, perhaps remove it, and set me up with a temporary cap. My husband and I took a Lyft to the dentist’s office. Both of us wore masks, and the driver did, too. This was the first time I’d gone outside since March 5th. The front door of the dentist’s office was closed, which was confusing, because that’s the only entrance we knew about. The receptionist, who was wearing a mask, opened the door and came outside. She explained that they had closed off the waiting room, and that we could wait in our car until it was time for my appointment. We explained that we don’t have a car. The compromise was to go sit on a nearby bench and wait for the receptionist to appear at the back door and wave me over. It was very windy outside. I learned that the cloth mask I was wearing functioned quite well at filtering out dust and pollen. To my surprise, my mask was helping me to breathe better than before the pandemic started, when no one here was wearing masks. I’m going to start wearing masks on days when the pollen is too high for me to safely go outside. So far, this is the one incredibly positive thing I’ve had happen as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The receptionist came out the back door of the office and waved at me. She made it clear that my husband could not come inside. I was quickly escorted to one of the three “rooms” in the dentist office. It took less than a minute for the dentist to take a look at the cracked permanent cap – poke it with a dental tool – and listen to me make an unhappy noise. He informed me that not only did I crack the permanent cap, but I also had destroyed what was left of the tooth underneath it. I was going to need an extraction, something I was not at all prepared to experience that day. The dentist explained he would not do it today, but would schedule another appointment for it. “It was such a beautiful cap,” the dentist lamented. I vaguely remember trying to explain that when I first cracked the cap, I had an appointment scheduled. But, that appointment didn’t happen. It was shocking to realize how much damage I had done to myself. The dentist said that there was only a tiny percentage of a chance that what happened to me could happen. I was just unlucky. The dentist prescribed an antibiotic – since I had a gum/tooth infection that I wasn’t even aware of. He also prescribed a painkiller. The receptionist gave me the prescriptions, urged me to start taking the antibiotic right away – tonight. She gave me a new appointment for the extraction, and what I later realized was also for a bone graft. The receptionist also handed me a paper that itemized the amount of money each part of the upcoming procedures would cost. It was astounding. I’m not good with numbers, but even I could tell that this was going to wipe out all of our savings. This appointment, however, was free of charge. As my husband and I waited for another car to pick us up, I explained to him the situation. We needed to go to our regular pharmacy and get the prescriptions. The driver was wearing a mask, and was very nice. Even with the mask on, it was obvious that I had been through some sort of dental thing. He dropped us off right at the door of the pharmacy. Everyone in the pharmacy was wearing masks. Everyone seemed to be taking great care to engage in social distancing. Unfortunately, the pharmacist didn’t have what I needed. He explained that he could give me the antibiotic – they had plenty of it – but they were out of the painkiller I had been prescribed. He suggested we go to a different pharmacy – a different company – who might have the painkiller. This was disappointing. A second pharmacist joined the conversation, and recommended that we take these prescriptions to the pharmacy downtown (which was the same company as this one). She was certain they had everything I needed. This time, my husband and I took the bus. The buses were running for free while the “stay at home” order was in place. The purpose was to ensure that people who were working in “essential services” could get to and from work. The second pharmacy had everything I needed – but couldn’t get it for me immediately. We were told to come back in half an hour or so. This resulted in my husband and I aimlessly wandering around downtown, killing time. The weather was nice. Most of the people we passed by were wearing masks. Some were in groups of two, with their masks under their chin. They immediately put the masks back in place when they saw other people coming. We ended up sitting on a bench near a big Catholic church. I was exhausted both physically and mentally. My best guess was that the reason I’d been exceptionally tired lately was due to the infection. When the pharmacy called, we walked back over to pick it up. The antibiotic cost $2.00. The pain killer cost $1.27. I think we took another bus back home, but am not sure. I was “out of spoons” by then. As instructed, I took the first antibiotic immediately after I got home (and ate some food). The pain killer would wait until I needed it. The dentist said it was an opioid, and that made me not want to take it. The antibiotic kicked in, and I ended up taking a long nap. A decision needed be made. My options were to do a bridge – where a fake tooth is connected to two real teeth, or to have a titanium implant placed in my jaw (with a fake tooth on top of it). The dentist suggested the implant was better. “With a bridge, you have to damage two healthy teeth,” he explained. After my nap, I did some research, and decided I agreed with his assessment. The next day, I called the dentist’s office to let them know I wanted the implant. The cost for the next appointment was $715. My husband said we had the money for that part of the bill. The rest? Was going to be a struggle. The first step of the process would begin with an appointment two days from the quick one. I wasn’t especially worried about it because I have a really good dentist and a very high pain tolerance. The receptionist sent me a text that morning, asking if I could come in fifteen minutes earlier than the time the appointment was scheduled for. My husband and were able to summon an Uber, and I texted back and forth with the receptionist to let her know we were on the way. At the dentist appointment I was given novocaine. The dentist and I had a conversation about video games as we waited for it to kick in. Unfortunately, it quickly became apparent that the novocaine had epinephrine in it. It makes me shake. The dentist said the “cure” for this problem was to have something with sugar in it. The sugar stops the shaking. He left and returned with a sealed bottle of juice. The first two ingredients, I could tolerate. The third one was something I was allergic to, and I handed the bottle back to him. He did not seem to know what to do next. I suggested he hand me my purse, where I had a tin box of mints that had sugar in them. We talked more about video games as we waited for the mint to melt and take away the shaking. Without going into too many details, today’s appointment was specifically for the extraction of whatever was left of the tooth I destroyed. The cracked permanent cap was easily removed. I didn’t feel anything at all while the extraction was happening. I was too out of it to realize at the time, but this appointment was when a bone graft was placed in my jaw. I remember the dentist saying, “Don’t swallow, this is gonna taste real bad.” I assumed it was an antibiotic, but no. The dentist was able to “remove the infection” and reshape another tooth that I didn’t know had become infected. There were sutures done to put things back together, and that was that. I remember the dental assistant (not the one who does the checkups and cleanings) wiping off my face with a wet wipe before letting me move from the chair. I have borderline anemia, and it takes a while for me to clot. The dentist recommended that I take one painkiller after I go home and the novocaine wears off. He said to take one more before going to bed so I could get some good sleep. I was shown a video about what NOT to do, and given a handout with the same instructions. As before, Shawn could not come into the dentist’s office while I was there. The waiting room was still closed off. I remember texting him to say I was all done, and to ask which credit card to use. The bill for today’s work was $715. (That’s with dental insurance coverage, by the way). I was given an appointment for June 1st, to take the sutures out. There is a thing called “fibro fog”. It happens when a person who has fibromyalgia does too much or experiences trauma. Everything from this point on was a blur. My husband summoned a Uber while I explained what happened at this dental appointment and when the next one would be. For some reason, there weren’t any Lyft drivers available at that moment. While waiting, I tried to use my phone to post on social media that I was finished with the dental work of the day. Looking back upon those posts as I write this blog, I realize that I barely made any sense. This experience made me realize just how important a molar is. Now that one was missing, it had become difficult to eat food. Soft foods were recommended, and I think the first thing I tried to eat was a banana. The trick was to find ways to eat it without letting the food touch the newly placed sutures. The novocaine was starting to wear off, so I started doing some research about the opioid I had been prescribed. It turned out that I had been prescribed a generic form of the same pain killer I was prescribed years ago, when that tooth had a root canal. This eased my mind because it meant I was not a person who becomes addicted to this particular opioid. If I remember correctly, the previous time I was prescribed this particular pain killer for dental work, it was fine. The “worst” thing that happened as a result of taking this type of pain killer was that I spent hours playing World of Warcraft and leveling up my fishing skill. This time, when the novocaine wore off to the point where I was really uncomfortable – I took a pain killer. It helped. As directed, I took one more before going to sleep that night. The instructions I was given stated that I should sleep with extra pillows, so I would be propped up. The pain killer made falling asleep incredibly easy, and that’s coming from me, a person who is always exhausted due to chronic illnesses! Days went by, and I was starting to lose track of time passing. Between the antibiotics that made me super sleepy, and the pain killers that made the world more foggy than “fibro fog” does, things got surreal. One of the things I posted on social media that day was: “I am awake right now waiting for when I can take my next antibiotic. Could feel the previous one wearing off a while ago. This means I will have to eat again, which is difficult, due to dental surgery (part 1). Antibiotics make me super sleepy, and I will lose much of the day due to being asleep. Also, talking kinda hurts right now, due to dental surgery.” Later on, I posted this: “eight more antibiotics to go, eight hours apart from each other. social distancing antibiotics” And not long after that, I posted: “Antibiotic is kicking in. Gonna take a nap now.” Sometime the next day, I posted: “four more antibiotics to go!” followed by: “3 antibiotics left!” The next day, I posted: “2 antibiotics left” followed by: “one more antibiotic to go!” The day after that I posted: “Finished the antibiotics” The only one of these I vaguely remember posting was the one with the phrase “social distancing antibiotics”. On May 27th, I appeared to have had a moment of clarity. I mean, the thing I posted did include some information regarding the dental work that I’d already posted about on social media (probably more than once). But, I didn’t realize it at the time. The point of that post was to say that my next appointment was scheduled for June 1st. It would be a quick appointment where the dentist removes the sutures. That appointment was free of charge. After that appointment, I was told they would check up on me monthly, for four months, to see how I was healing. At some point, the dentist would declare that I had healed enough to get the titanium implant placed. This gave my husband and I some time to gather up enough money to at least pay for for part 2 of the dental work. On May 29th, I made what I think of as a “note to self” post on social media. The purpose was to keep track of how many opioids I had taken. “I have been prescribed a painkiller. Here’s how many I’ve taken: (as of May 21) 1 when the novocaine wore off (as directed by my dentist) 1 to sleep that night (as directed by my dentist) 1 to sleep the next night 1 a few days after that because it turns out having a bone graft in my jaw around the now extracted tooth can cause pain 1 right now – same reason (and I want to sleep) 5 total Next appointment June 1 – to get stitches removes On June 1st, I once again attempted to “live blog” on social media about my experience at the dentist. This time, the front door of the office was open, and the waiting room was accessible. Once again, I was wearing a mask, which I did not intend to remove until the dentist needed me to. I stood in front of the receptionist’s desk, and waited. She wasn’t there, and I figured that maybe she was on a break. I moved away from the desk, and kept typing into my phone. A man who looked to be about my age, came into the waiting room. He stood and stared at the empty receptionist desk for a while. This man was not wearing a mask, so I backed away from him. A little while later, the man leaned over the desk, and looked both ways. The receptionist wasn’t there. He then walked into the open door that separates the waiting room and the area where the dentistry happens. No one back there immediately responded to the man, so he turned around and looked at me. He asked if there was a receptionist today. I shrugged. The woman who does the cleaning and checkups – which the dentist office was once again able to offer, took a second to talk to the unmasked man. She explained that they were short handed today, and that he could wait in the waiting room. He pointed at her, and she raised her arms and nodded her head. The dental assistant was covered from head to toe in PPE. She even had a face shield. The man then went and sat in a chair. I picked a place to sit that looked about six feet away from him. He decided to talk to me. He asked if I was there for a checkup. He was there for a checkup. I explained that no, I was not here for a checkup. The man didn’t seem to be able to hear me, possibly because of the mask I was wearing. Instead of taking it off, I just used my voice-work skill to project my voice farther. I told him I was there to get sutures removed. He said he took out his own sutures. This was something he seemed proud of. I responded that I’d rather have the dentist do mine for me, and went back to looking at my phone. The dentist came to get me, and we went to the first “room” (when I had the extraction done). No novocaine was needed. It only took a couple of minutes for him to remove the sutures. The dentist said I was healing well, and there were no signs of infection. He was pleased. I’m writing this blog post on June 30th, 2020. In between then and now, I called the dentist’s office to see when they wanted to schedule me for my next appointment. No one has responded yet. Dental Care During a Pandemic is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... A Timeline of COVID-19 – February 2020June 16, 2020Out of Spoons / Public HealthImage by Pete Linforth from Pixabay The news cycle moves really fast, and can be difficult to keep up with. That’s why I decided to put together a timeline of COVID-19 (also called coronavirus). This blog post contains everything I could find about it from credible sources. NOTE: Some of the information provided in this blog post may be out of date by the time you read it. Before reading this blog post, you may want to read my previous blog post, A Timeline of COVID-19 – January 2020. January 3, 2020: The Washington Post was the first to report (in March of 2020) that U.S. Intelligence reports warned President Donald Trump about coronavirus in January and February. That article is locked behind a paywall. Vox posted an article on March 21, 2020, titled: “Intelligence reports warned about a pandemic in January. Trump reportedly ignored them.” It was written by Riley Beggin. Here is the portion of the article that is relevant to January 2020: US intelligence officials reportedly warned President Donald Trump and Congress about the threats posed by the novel coronavirus beginning in early January – weeks before the White House and lawmakers began implementing stringent public health measures and as the president minimized the threat posed by the virus in his tweets and public statements.The fact those warnings were largely disregarded – something first reported by the Washington Post’s Shane Harris, Greg Miller, Josh Dawsey, and Ellen Nakashima – suggests Trump administration officials failed to take action that could have prepared the health care system to handle an influx of patients, helped Americans avoid mass social distancing, and saved lives.Top health officials first learned of the virus’s spread in China on January 3, US Health and Human Services Secretary said Friday. Throughout January and February, intelligence officials’ warnings became more and more urgent, according to The Post – and by early February, much of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the CIA’s intelligence reports were dedicated to warnings about Covid-19… The World Health Organization (WHO) posted daily reports about the number of confirmed daily cases of COVID-19, the number of daily deaths, the number of confirmed cumulative cases, and the number of confirmed deaths. I have put that information into this blog post. I have left out the numbers of suspected cases because those cases had not yet been confirmed. You can click on the links to each WHO report if you want to see those numbers. February 2020 February 1, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: 8 February 1, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted a report titled: “Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Situation Report – 12”. From the report: The main driver of transmission, based on currently available data, is symptomatic cases. WHO is aware of possible transmission of 2019-nCoV from infected people before they developed symptoms. Detailed exposure histories are being taken to better understand the pre-clinical phase of infection and how transmission may have occurred in these few instances. Asymptomatic infection may be rare, and transmission from an asymptomatic person is very rare with other coronaviruses, as we have seen with Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus. Thus, transmission from asymptomatic cases is likely not a major driver of transmission. Persons who are symptomatic will spread the virus more readily through coughing and sneezing.In China, 60.5% of all cases since the start of the outbreak have been reported from Hubei Province……Additional instances of human-to-human transmission outside China were reported… Notable Epidemiological Events Reported in the Last 24 Hours: In France, the first time outside China, a healthcare worker was diagnosed as being ill with 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease. The health worker treated two patients who were later identified as probable cases.The first instance of third-generation human-to-human transmission outside China has been identified, in an individual who was exposed to a confirmed case from the cluster in Bavaria, Germany.For the first time, a case was reported from a country other than China: a patient was identified in South Korea following their exposure in Japan to a confirmed case.In the last 24 hours, additional instances of human-to-human transmission outside China were reported; in Japan, a tour guide who is part of the same cluster of Japanese cases who had contact with tourists from Wuhan; in Germany, a case that is part of the cluster in Bavaria; and in Thailand, a taxi driver who had no travel history to China. Countries, territories or areas with reported cases of 2019-nCoV. Data as of 1 February 2020: China (including cases confirmed in Hong Kong SAR (13 confirmed cases) Macau SAR (7 confirmed cases) and Taipei (10 confirmed cases): 11821Japan: 17Republic of Korea: 12Viet Nam: 6Singapore: 16Australia: 12Malaysia: 8Cambodia: 1Philippines: 1Thailand: 19Nepal: 1Sri Lanka: 1India: 1United States of America: 7Canada: 4France: 6Finland: 1Germany: 7Italy: 2Russian Federation: 2Spain: 1Sweden: 1United Kingdom: 2United Arab Emirates: 4TOTAL: 11953 February 1, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Getting a little exercise this morning!” The tweet included a photo of the president playing golf. February 1, 2020: Massachusetts Department of Public Health posted a press release titled: “Man returning from Wuhan, China is first case of 2019 Novel Coronavirus confirmed in Massachusetts”. From the press release: The first case of the 2019 novel coronavirus in Massachusetts has been confirmed by the Department of Public Health (DPH) and the Boston Public Health Commission (BPHC) were notified by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) of the positive reported in the United States. This is the eighth case of coronavirus reported in the United States. The risk to the public from the 2019 novel coronavirus remains low in Massachusetts.The man recently traveled to Wuhan, China, and sought medical care soon after his return to Massachusetts. He has been isolated since that time and will continue to remain isolated until cleared by public health officials. His few close contacts have been identified and are being monitored for any sign of symptoms…DPH and BPHC continue to work closely with the CDC to maintain vigilance during this virus outbreak… February 1, 2020: Prime Minister of Australia, The Honorable Scott Morrison MP, posted a transcript titled: “Press Conference – Sydney, NSW”. From the press conference: Prime Minister: Good afternoon, thank you for coming together. Of course I’m joined by the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Our Government is taking every step to keep Australians safe. And we’re taking further action in relation to coronavirus today which I’m going to run through with you and the Foreign Minister will make further comments on the action that we’re taking.…Earlier today, the Australian Health Protection Principals Committee, which is the chief medical officers of all the states and territories and the Commonwealth, met. They met on the advice of the Communicable Diseases Network Australia, and they considered the changes in the epidemiology of coronavirus in China. They noted the increasing, but still relatively small number of cases in provinces outside Hubei Province and the now resulting risk posed from travellers from all of mainland China. They agreed to the following to expand the case definition for the novel coronavirus infection from today, the 1st of February 2020 to apply to people from all of mainland China. It’s essentially addressing the issue of human to human transmission of coronavirus outside Hubei Province across the rest of mainland China. They recommend that DFAT now increase travel advice to level four, which is do not travel to all of mainland China. And the Australian government is putting that in place now. As of today, all travellers arriving out of mainland China, not just Hubei province, as has been the case up until now, being asked and required to self isolate for a period of 14 days from the time they leave mainland China, and that finally to substantially reduce the volume of travellers coming from mainland China they recommend additional border measures be implemented to deny entry to Australia for people who have left or transited through mainland China from the 1st February today, with the exception of Australian citizens, permanent residents and their immediate family, and aircrews who have been using appropriate personal protective equipment. And this applies to passengers transiting in Australia unless they are Australian citizens, permanent residents or their immediate families.I convened a meeting of the National Security Committee this afternoon to receive that advice and that recommendation. And the National Security Committee has adopted all of those recommendations. What that means is the travel advice is changing. What that means is that if you come from mainland China at any time after 1st of February. Then you will be required to isolate for a period of 14 days. And for anyone other than Australian-citizens, Australian residents, dependents, legal guardians or spouses, then you will not be permitted entry into Australia. And the arrangements have been put in place through our border authorities to ensure that can be actioned. In addition to that, there will be advanced screening and reception arrangements put into place at the major airports to facilitate, identifying and providing this information and ensuring appropriate precautions are being put in place. There’s half a million masks that will be provided to these airports to support those who are coming off these flights, as well as those who are interacting with those coming off these flights, there will also be thermometers which are being provided to those airports and we’re working with those airport authorities now to ensure that we can put those arrangements in place.That means there will be flights who will be arriving in the morning, the National Security Committee, with the support of the chief medical officer, has given discretion to the Border Force commissioner to deal with those flights in the morning. As they – it was his advice that they consider that the immediate threat is low. But we need to get these arrangements in place as soon as possible. So from the 1st of February, that’s the effective date that we’ll be seeking to determine whether someone has been in mainland China as opposed to more broadly in the Hubei province.So these are further steps that we are taking, up until today it has not been the advice of the Chief Medical Officer, and our medical experts that this has been necessary. This is a matter that was even considered yesterday at the National Security Committee. And the advice yesterday was that these measures did not need to be put in place. Their advice today is that it should. And our action today is to put them in place… February 1, 2020: Bloomberg News posted an article titled: “Coronavirus Death in Philippines is First Fatality Outside China”. It was written by Claire Jiao and Derek Wallbank. From the article: A 44-year-old Chinese man from Wuhan died in the Philippines on Feb. 1 from the novel coronavirus, the first death recorded outside of China, the World Health Organization said on Sunday.The man arrived in the Philippines on Jan. 21 accompanying the country’s first confirmed case, a 38-year-old woman, after they had traveled from Wuhan via Hong Kong, Health Secretary Francisco Duque said at a televised briefing in Manila. He was hospitalized on Jan. 25 after experiencing a fever, cough and sore throat, which developed into severe pneumonia……Earlier on Sunday, President Rodrigo Duerte widened his travel ban previously imposed on visitors from Hubei province to all of China, including Hong Kong and Macau, and also prohibited Filipinos from traveling to those areas, according to his spokesman, Salvador Panelo. Citizens returning from China and its spcial administrative regions must go into quarantine for 14 days, Panelo said……The 38-year-old woman is no longer showing symptoms for the coronavirus, the health secretary said. She had traveled with her companion to the central provinces of Cebu and Dumaguete after arriving from Hong Kong, and was hospitalized with him in Manila on Jan. 25… February 1, 2020: Scottish Government posted news titled: “Novel coronavirus testing”. From the news: Two Scottish facilities established.Two testing facilities for possible cases of novel coronavirus are being established in Scotland.From today (Monday) two laboratories, one in Glasgow and one in Edinburgh, will begin to process all tests from Scotland.The new Scottish facilities mean negative test results can be returned quicker. Previously, all samples have been sent to London for testing……BackgroundExisting NHS laboratories based at Glasgow Royal Infirmary and Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh are being equipped with the technology to test for novel coronavirus.Should a test result come back positive, the sample will be sent to Public Health England’s Colindale laboratory in London for a confirmatory test.Under the terms of International Health Reulations, high consequence infectious diseases like novel coronavirus are reportable to the World Health Organisation (WHO). Positive tests from new testing centres across the UK are in the process of continuous validation and this requires additional confirmatory testing to be undertaken in the WHO designated testing centre at Colindale… February 2, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 8 February 2, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted: “Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Situation Report-13”. From the report: Highlights: No new countries have reported cases of 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease in the last 24 hours.WHO is receiving information about cases from a number of countries. As additional details become known, WHO requests countries to share information in a timely manner as specified in the guidance on Global Surveillance for human infection with novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV).The first death has been reported outside China, in the Philippines. The patient was a close contact of the first patient confirmed in the Philippines.Due to the high demand for timely and trustworthy information about 2019-nCoV WHO technical risk communication and social media teams have been working closely to track and respond to myths and rumours. TECHNICAL FOCUS: Risk communication and community engagement: Managing the 2019-nCoV ‘Infodemic’ The 2019-nCoV outbreak and response has been accompanied by a massive ‘infodemic’ – an over-abundance of information – some accurate and some not – that makes it hard for people to find trustworthy sources and reliable guidance when they need it. Due to the high demand for timely and trustworthy information about 2019-nCoV, WHO technical risk communication and social media teams have been working closely to track and respond to myths and rumours. Through its headquarters in Geneva, its six regional offices and partners, the Organization is working 24 hours a day to identify the most prevalent rumors that can potentially harm the public’s health, such as false prevention measures or cures. These myths are then refuted with evidence-based information. WHO is making public health information and advice on the 2019-CoV, including myth busters, available on its social media channels…and website. County risk communications and community engagement (RCCE) preparedness and response Country risk communication and community engagement (RCCE) is a critical public health intervention in all countries. Countries should prepare existing public health communication networks, media and community engagement staff to be ready for a possible case, and for the appropriate response if this happens. Countries should coordinate communications with other response organizations and include the community in response operations. WHO stands ready to coordinate with partners to support countries in their communication and community engagement response. Ensuring a people-centered response to 2019-nCoV An expanding group of global response organization such as the United Nations Children’s Fund (IFRC) and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) are coordinating efforts with WHO to ensure that biomedical recommendations can be applied at the community level. These organizations are active at the global, regional, and country level to ensure that affected populations have a voice and are part of the response. Ensuring that global recommendations and communication are tested, adapted and localized will help countries better control 2019-nCoV outbreak. Situation in Numbers – total and new cases in the last 24 hours: Globally – 14557 confirmed (2604 new) China – 14411 confirmed (2590 new); 2110 severe (315 new); 304 deaths (45 new) Outside of China – 146 confirmed (14 new); 23 countries; 1 death WHO Risk Assessment: China – Very High; Regional Level – High; Global Level – High Confirmed cases of 2019-nCoV reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 2 February 2020: Hubei: 9074Zhejaing: 661Guangdong: 604Henan: 493Hunan: 463Anhui: 340Jiangxi: 333Chongqing: 262Sichuan: 236Jiangsu: 231Shandong: 225Beijing: 183Fuijan: 159Shaanxi: 116Guangxi: 111Hebei: 104Yunnan: 99Heliongijang: 95Liaoning: 64Hainan: 63Shanxi: 56Gansu: 45Tianjin: 40Guizhou: 38Ningxia: 28Inner Mongolia: 26Jilin: 21Hong Kong SAR: 14Taipei: 10Qinghai: 9Macau SAR: 7Xizang: 1TOTAL: 14411 Countries, territories or areas with reported confirmed cases of 2019-nCoV Data as of 2 February 2020: China: 14411Japan: 20Republic of Korea: 15Viet Nam: 7Australia: 12Malaysia: 8Cambodia: 1Philippines: 2Thailand: 19Nepal: 1Sri Lanka: 1India: 2United States of America: 8Canada: 4France: 6Finland: 1Germany: 8Italy: 2Russian Federation: 2Spain: 1Sweden: 1United Kingdom: 2United Arab Emirates: 5TOTAL: 14557 February 2, 2020: California Department of Public Health posted news release titled: “Six Confirmed Cases of Novel Coronavirus in California”. From the news release: The California Department of Public Health has been informed of a new case of confirmed novel coronavirus 2019 in Santa Clara County. In addition, two people in San Benito County have tested positive, bringing California’s number of confirmed cases to six. This information is confirmed by Santa Clara County Public Health Department, the San Benito County Public Health Department and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Laboratory.The two cases in San Benito County are spouses, one of whom traveled to China and one who did not. This marks the first instance of close household person-to-person transmission of novel coronavirus in California. There is no evidence of person-to-person transmission in the general public in California.Currently, the California Department of Public Health confirms a total of six cases of novel coronavirus in California: two people in Santa Clara County, two people in San Benito County, one person in Los Angeles County, and one person in Orange County have tested positive for novel coronavirus 2019……It is very important for people who have recently traveled and who become ill to notify their health care provider of their travel history. Those who have recently traveled to China or who have had contact with a person with possible novel coronavirus infection should contact their local health department or health care provider. The Department of Public Health has been prepared and is continuing with the following actions: Providing information about the outbreak and how to report suspect cases to local health departments and health care proiders in California.Coordinating with federal authorities who plan to quarantine passengers returning to the U.S. from Hubei Province, China, through SFO and LAX.Assuring that health care providers know how to safely manage persons with possible novel coronavirus 2019 infection.Supporting hospitals and local public health laboraties for collection and shipment of specimens for testing at CDC for novel coronavirus 2019.Activating the Department of Public Health’s Emergency Operations Center to coordinate response efforts across the state… February 2, 2020: Agency YG Entertainment posted on Facebook: “WINNER TOUR ENCORE IN SEOUL Cancellation Notice”. From the notice: Hello, this is YG Entertainment. Thank you for your love and support for ‘WINNER TOUR ENCORE IN SEOUL.’As the worldwide efforts in reducing the spread of Corona Virus (2019-nCoV) continues, YG is keeping a close watch on the situation, with the health and safety of the artist and fans at top priority.Due to this situation, we are deeply sorry to announce that the cancellation of ‘WINNER TOUR ENCORE IN SEOUL’ on February 14th (Fri) & 15th (Sat) is confirmed.We apologize for any inconvenience caused to everyone that made reservations. Those who have purchased tickets will recieve full refund through the original mode of payment. Full refund details will be available at the official booking websites. We wish for the quick recovery for all those diagnosed with the Corina Virus, and wish to send our encouragement and support to the medical teams and all those working hard for preventative measures.Thank you. February 2, 2020: Billboard reported that Agency YG Entertainment cancelled AKMU’s February 8th and 9th concert dates in Changwon. February 2, 2020: New York State website posted news titled: “Governor Cuomo Issues Update on Novel Coronavirus and Announces New Hotline Staffed by State Health Department Experts”. From the news: Governor Andrew M. Cuomo today announced an update on the status of testing for the novel coronavirus in New York State. As of today, samples from 12 New Yorkers have been sent to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for testing. Of those, 11 have come back negative. One sample, from New York City, is awaiting results from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. There are no confirmed cases of novel coronavirus in New York State.Additionally, today the Governor announced New Yorkers can call a hotline… where Department of Health experts will be available to answer questions regarding the Novel Coronavirus. The Department of Health has created a dedicated website as a resource for New Yorkers……The Department of Health continues to provide preparedness guidance to New York’s health care facilities and local health departments and are working closely with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to adhere to CDC-led airport entry protocals for travelers arriving from China — which will take effect Sunday evening……Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Executive Director Rick Cotton said, “The Port Authority is working closely with federal, state and local partners to implement the mandated screening of international passengers. Protecting the public health and ensuring smooth operation of our airports is our number one priority and we are taking all appropriate steps to do that.”… February 2, 2020: Billboard reported that GFriend decided to hold their February 3 showcase without an audience due to concerns about coronavirus. The event was streamed for fans on February 3, 2020. February 2, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “French plane brings home more than 250 foreign nationals from epidemic-hit Wuhan to France”. From the article: More than 250 people from 30 countries arrived in France on Sunday after being flown out of the Chinese city of Wuhan, the centre of an outbreak of coronavirus, French officials said.The French plane landed at a military airbase in Istres, southern France.Out of the 254 evacuees, 124 were returning to their home countries, French Health Minister Agnes Buzyn said.Sixtyfour French nationals will be quarantined either at a holiday resort at Carry-le-Rouet or at the French National Fire Officers’ Academy near Aix-en-Province. Sixty non-European nationals, including from Mexico, Brazil, Rwanda and Georgia, were staying in France for a 14-day quarantine. Twenty evacuees presented some coronavirus symptoms and stayed at the military airbase until tests show if they had the virus.Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said the plane carried nationals of 30 countries.The Czech Republic said it had five citizens onboard and that they would fly on to Bruzzles to be taken home on a Czech plane.Sweden said about 10 of its nationals were on the flight and would be taken to Sweden. Some British nationals were also onboard. February 2, 2020: Government of Canada posted a news release titled: “Government of Canada evacuating Canadians from Wuhan, China”. From the news release: The Honourable François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Honourable Patty Hajdu, Minister of Health, and the Honourable Harjit Sajjan, Minister of National Defence, today announced the Government of Canada’s plan to assist Canadians who have requested help in departing from Wuhan.Government officials have reached out to Canadians and are continuing to offer information and assistance. The Government of Canada has chartered a plane that is standing by. It will land in Hanoi, Vietnam, and deploy to Wuhan, where the airspace is currently closed, once the Government of China has given authorization to land. Work is also underway to comply with the Chinese requirements, including providing manifest details in advance of the flight departure and further documentation on the Canadians wishing to depart. Additionally, government officials and Canadian Armed Forces medical personnel are currently on their way to Hanoi and in the process of obtaining the necessary visas from the government of China to enter Wuhan.Canadian official are in constant contact with Canadians who have requested assistance to facilitate their departure from the affected region. Staff from the Embassy of Canada to China in Beijing, as well as members of Global Affairs Canada’s Standing Rapid Deployment Team, are now deployed to Wuhan to prepare for the departure of the flight.To protect the health and safety of Canadians – both those who are coming to and those who are already in Canada – the returning individuals will undergo a thorough health screening before boarding, during flight and upon arrival at CFB Trenton, Ontario.The Government of Canada is working with provincial, territorial and local health authorities to support Canadians who may require further medical attention to be safely transferred to the health-care system upon their arrival. All other returning Canadians, including staff and flight crew, will remain at CFB Trenton for 14 days for further medical assessment and observation, and be provided with all the necessary medical and other supports as needed to ensure the health and safety of all Canadians… February 2, 2020: The U.S. Department of State issued a China Travel Advisory – Level 4: Do Not Travel. From the Travel Advisory: Global Health Advisory: Do Not Travel. Avoid all international travel due to the impact of COVID-19.Do not travel to China due to the novel coronavirus first identified in Wuhan, China. On January 30, the World Health Organization (WHO) determined the rapidly spreading outbreak constitutes a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). Travelers should be prepared for the possibility of travel restrictions with little or no advance notice. Most commercial air carriers have reduced or suspended routes to and from China.Those currently in China should attempt to depart by commercial means. U.S. citizens remaining in China should follow the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Chinese health authorities’ guidance for prevention, signs and symptoms, and treatment. We strongly urge U.S. citizens remaining in China to stay home as much as possible and limit contact with others, including in large gatherings. Consider stocking up on food and other supplies to limit movement outside the home. In the event that the situation deteriorates further, the ability of the U.S. Embassy and Consulates to provide assistance to U.S. nationals within China may be limited.In an effort to contain the novel coronavirus, the Chinese authorities have suspended air, road, and rail travel in the area around Wuhan and placed restrictions on travel and other activities throughout the country. On January 22, 2020, the Department of State ordered the departure of all non-emergency U.S. personnel and their family members from Wuhan. On January 29, 2020, the Department of State allowed for the voluntary departure of non-emergency personnel and family members of U.S. government employees from China. On January 31, 2020, the Department of State ordered the departure of all family members under age 21 of U.S. personnel in China… February 2, 2020: NYC, The Official Website of the City of New York, posted a transcript titled: “Transcript: Mayor De Blasio Holds Media Availability To Discuss First Suspected Case of Coronavirus in New York City”. From the transcript: Mayor Bill de Blasio: About a week ago, I reported New Yorkers on the status of the coronavirus and I said at that point it was a question of not if but when. And now, we have our first case under investigation here in New York City. This individual, this patient who is being evaluated right now did exactly as they should have – followed the guidelines that the City of New York put out and they met these specific criteria: they had traveled to China, they did have the specific symptoms associated with coronavirus, and they did come to get medical care here at the hospital – exactly what we want anyone in a similar situation to do. We will in the next 48 hours, hopefully sooner, get results back from the testing of this individual. If this is a positive case, we’ll confirm that publicly right away. And the individual of course will be treated until they are at a point where they are no longer symptomatic and contageous. Also, if it turns out to be a positive case, the Department of Health will do the work that it is well known for in tracing back all substantial contacts the individual’s had to ensure that anyone else who may have been affected gets the potential medical treatment they need. That work would start immediately in the instance of a positive measure.What I would say as a non-doctor, and then you’ll hear from our Commissioner of Health, is there is still a lot we do not know aabout the coronavirus, a lot the global medical community does not know. What we do know, causes us a tremendous amount of concern and causes the City of new York to be in a high state of readiness. This is a disease now with over 12,000 cases worldwide. Eight of them here in the United States and 259 individuals have died so far globally. We take it very, very seriously and we will use all measures at our disposal to protect New Yorkers. And obviously we are working now with the guidance provided by the federal government and we’re going to work immediately to implement that guidance. There’s a lot we have to work through with the Centers for Disease Control. There are many outstanding issues, but what’s clear is we’re going to work immediately to keep all New Yorkers safe……With that, I’ll turn to our Health Commissioner, Dr. Oxiris Barbot……Commissioner Oxiris Barbot, Department of Health and Mental Hygiene: Good evening. So, as the Mayor says, we are confirming our first individual who has been designated as a patient under investigation. This individual did what we have been asking New Yorkers to do, which is if you have traveled to affected areas in China within the last 14 days and you have symptoms, fever, cough, shortness of breath, or you’re feeling unwell, to contact your doctor or to seek care in an emergency department. Additionally, this particular situation really highlights the fact that all of the measures that we have put in place with our partners are working the way that they should be working. So that when the patient presented here to Bellevue, they were appropriately evaluated, the appropriate first line tests were done to rule out a potentially common virus that could have been accounting for those symptoms, and they immediately called us when they had the information that indeed there was positive travel and a negative BioFire.Because of patient confidentiality, we’re not going to share any detailed information… February 2, 2020: South China Morning Post posted an article titled: “Coronavirus: Apple closes stores in China amid outbreak.” From the article: The ongoing outbreak of the novel coronavirus caused Apple to temporarily close its 42 stores in mainland China, one of its largest markets, on Saturday as the death toll in the country rose to 259.The iPhone maker said in a statement it was closing stores, corporate offices and contact centres in China until February 9 “out of an abundance of caution and based on the latest advice from leading health experts.”……Apple’s online store will remain open… February 2, 2020: U.S. Department of State posted a travel advisory titled: “China Travel Advisory”. From the travel advisory: Travel Advisory February 2, 2020China – Level 4: Do Not TravelGlobal Heath Advisory: Do Not Travel. Avoid all international travel due to the global impact of COVID-19.Do not travel to China due to the novel coronavirus first identified in Wuhan, China. On January 30, the World Health Organization (WHO) determined the rapidly spreading outbreak constitutes a Public Health Emergency of International Concerns (PHEIC). Travelers should be prepared for the possibility of travel restrictions with little or no advance notice. Most commercial air carriers have been reduced or suspended routes to and from China.Those currently in China should attempt to depart by commercial means. U.S. citizens remaining in China should follow the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Chinese health authorities’ guidance for prevention, signs and symptoms, and treatment. We strongly urge U.S. citizens remaining in China to stay home as much as possible and limit contact with others, including large gatherings. Consider stocking up on food and other supplies to limit movement outside the home. In the event that the situation deteriorates further, the ability of the U.S. Embassy and Consulates to provide assistance to U.S. nationals within China may be limited.In an effort to contain the novel coronavirus, the Chinese authorities have suspended air, road, and rail travel in the area around Wuhan and placed restrictions on travel and other activities throughout the country. On January 23, 2020, the Department of State ordered the departure of non-emergency U.S. personnel and their family members from Wuhan. On January 29, 2020, the Department of State allowed for the voluntary departure of non-emergency personnel and family members of the U.S. government employees from China. On January 31, 2020, the Department of State ordered the departure of all family members under age 21 of U.S. personnel in China… February 3, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: 11 February 3, 2020: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted a “Transcript for CDC Telebriefing: CDC Update on Novel Coronavirus”. From the transcript: …Benjamin Haynes: …We are joined by Dr. Nancy Messonnier, Director of CDC National Center for Respiratory Diseases. She wil be provding remarks. I’d like to now turn the call over.Dr. Nancy Messonnier: Thank you for joining us today. Since we last briefed you CDC has confirmed additional five infections with novel coronavirus in the United States bringing the total number of confirmed positives in the U.S. to 11. The new cases include one patient identified in Massachusetts and four more in California. Four of the five patients have travel history to Wuhan, China. One patient in California is a close household contact of another patient in California. This is the second instance of person-to-person spread in the United States. We expect to see more cases of person-to-person spread among close contacts. And we continue to expect this will happen given the explosive nature of this outbreak in China and our very aggressive public health response where we are putting a lot of resources into finding infections this virus.As of this morning, 167 persons under investigation, or PUIs as we call them, have tested negative for infection with the novel virus. We currently have testing pending on 82 PUIs. Some of the 82 that are pending include samples in transit to CDC. As we have reported earlier, CDC has developed a real-time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction or RTT-PCR test that can detect 2019 Novel Coronavirus and respiratory and serum specimins from clinical specimens. On January 24, CDC publicly posted the assay protocol for this test. CDC has isolated the virus, and this week it is being sent to the NIH resource repository for use by the broad scientific community. I’m pleased to report that, today CDC plans to submit an Emergency Use Authorization or EUA package to FDA. The EUA process expedites the use of potentially life-saving medical or diagnostic products during a public health emergency. Once approved, the EUA will allow public health labs across the United States to use the CDC developed diagnostic assay. This will greatly enhance our national capacity to test for this virus. In preparation for that approval, CDC has shipped the test to the International Reagent Resource so that States and international partners can begin ordering the test for their use.Also on the topic of the test, I want to clarify something I said on Friday in relation to the people quarantined at March Air Reserve Base, that even if an initial screening test comes back from CDC’s laboratory, it does not guarantee these people won’t get sick. There has been some confusion about that statement, and some people have taken it to mean the test doesn’t work. That is not the case at all. This is an accurate test. A negative test most likely means a person is not infected. However, it may mean that an infection has not developed enough to determine if someone is infected with this new virus has not yet been determined. When confirming infections, CDC asks for multiple different types of samples from patients, including from the nose and throat. On Friday, the U.S. government also took unprecedented steps in the area of travel in response to the growing public health threat posed by this new coronavirus……Now I want to talk you through the specifics of the travel policies announced late Friday afternoon. We have a presidential proclamation in palce that suspends entry of foreign nationals who have visited China within the past 14 days into the United States. There are some exceptions. Sorry, there are some exemptions including for immediate family members of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents. These people will be allowed into the United States……We are also putting into place measure to detect this virus among those who are allowed entry into the United States who are entering the country within 14 days of having been in Hubei province or the rest of mainland China. All of these passengers will be directed to one of 11 U.S. airports. At those airports, American citizens and exempted persons who have been in Hubei province in the previous 14 days will have an additional health assessment. They will be screened for fever, cough, difficulty breathing. If symptomatic, American citizens and those who are exempt will be transferred for further medical evaluation. They will not be able to complete their itinerary and will be isolated for 14 days. If asymptomatic, American citizens and those who are exempt will be subject to a mandatory 14-day quarantine at or near that location…Dr. Nancy Messonnier: I want to give you an update on another activity. The Department of State is bringing more people back from Wuhan. The first plane arrived last week. More are planned. Over the weekend CDC sent four additional teams to specific Department of Defense locations where those planes will arrive. These passengers, like the ones in March air reserve base, will be under Federal quarantine that will last 14 days from when the planes left Wuhan, China. Medical staff will monitor the health of these people, including temperature checks and observation for respiratory symptoms. Medical care will be readily available at the first onset of symptoms. We do not believe these people pose a risk to the communities where they are being temporarily housed as we are taking measures to minimize any exposure… February 3, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Situation Report – 14 – Erratum”. From the report: Highlights: No new countries reported cases of 2019-nCoV in the past 24 hours.WHO has developed a dashboard for Novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) with the number of confirmed cases globally, which includes in China by provinces, regions and cities, as well as confirmed cases outside China by country.WHO has prepared a list of Q&A to respond to queries WHO is receiving from various organizations and individuals. Working with technical experts in health operations, WHO operational support and logistics have developed a “2019-nCoV kit”, similar to prepared kits used for outbreaks of other high threat pathogens. In the coming days, the costing, procurement and assembly of these kits will be a priority. Confirmed cases of 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 3 February 2020: Hubei: 11177Zhejiang: 724Guangdong: 683Henan: 566Hunan: 521Anhui: 408Jiangxi: 391Chongqing: 300Jiangsu: 271Sichuan: 254Shandong: 246Beijing: 212Shanghai: 193Fujian: 179Shaanxi: 128Guangxi: 127Heilongijang: 118Hebei: 113Yunnan: 109Liaoning: 70Hainan: 70Shanxi: 66Gansu: 51Tianjun: 49Guizhou: 46Inner Mongolia: 33Jilin: 31Ningxia: 31Xinjaing: 24Hong Kong SAR: 15Qinghai: 13Taipei: 10Macao SAR: 8Xizang: 1TOTAL: 17238 Countries, territories or areas with reported confirmed 2019-nCoV cases and deaths: China: Confirmed new cases: 17238 (2831); Total (new) deaths: 361 (57) Confirmed cases in China include Hong Kong SAR (15 confirmed cases (1 new)), Macao SAR (8 confirmed cases (1 new)); and Taipei (10 confirmed cases.Japan: Confirmed new cases: 20; Total (new) deaths: 0Republic of Korea: Confirmed (new) cases: 15; Total (new) deaths: 0Viet Nam: Confirmed (new) cases: 8 (1); Total (new) deaths: 0Singapore: Confirmed (new) cases: 18; Total (new) deaths: 0Australia: Confirmed (new) cases: 12; Total (new) deaths: 0Malaysia: Confirmed (new) cases: 8; Total (new) deaths: 0Cambodia: Confirmed (new) cases: 1; Total (new) deaths: 0Philippines: Confirmed (new) cases: 2; Total (new) deaths: 0Thailand: Confirmed (new) cases: 12; Total (new) deaths: 0Nepal: Confirmed (new) cases 1; Total (new) deaths: 0Sri Lanka: Confirmed (new) cases 1; Total (new) deaths: 0India: Confirmed (new) cases: 3 (1); Total (new) deaths: 0United States of America: Confirmed (new) cases: 11 (3); Total (new) deaths 0Canada: Confirmed (new) cases: 4; Total (new) deaths: 0France: Confirmed (new) cases: 6; Total (new) deaths: 0Finland: Confirmed (new) cases: 1; Total (new) deaths: 0Germany: Confirmed (new) cases: 10 (2); Total (new) deaths: 0Italy: Confirmed (new) cases: 2; Total (new) deaths: 0Russian Federation: Confirmed (new) cases 2; Total (new) deaths: 0Spain: Confirmed (new) cases: 1; Total (new) deaths: 0Sweden: Confirmed (new) cases; 1; Total (new) deaths: 0United Kingdom: Confirmed (new) cases: 2; Total (new) deaths: 0United Arab Emirates: Confirmed (new) cases: 5; Total (new) deaths: 0TOTAL: Confirmed new cases 17391 (2838); Total (new) deaths: 362 (57) February 3, 2020: BBC posted an article titled: “Coronavirus: First death outside China reported in Philippines”. From the article: A man has died of the coronavirus in the Philippines, the first confirmed fatality outside China. The patient was a 44-year-old Chinese man from Wuhan, in Hubei province, where the virus was first detected.He appeared to have been infected before arriving in the Philippines, the World Health Organization (WHO) said.More than 300 have died in the outbreak, so far, but the vast majority from Hubei. More than 14,000 people have been infected…The US, Australia and an increasing number of other countries have barred the arrival of foreigners from China and are requiring their own citizens to be quarantined……The man traveled to the Philippines from Wuhan, via Hong Kong, with a 38-year-old Chinese woman who also tested positive last week, the Philippines Department of Health said.Officials said he was admitted to a hospital in the capital, Manila, where he developed severe pneumonia.The man is thought to have had other pre-existing health conditions.Rabindra Abeyasinghe, the WHO representative to the Philippines, urged people to remain calm: “This is the first reported death outside China. However, we need to take into mind that this is not a locally acquired case. This patient came from the epicentre of this outbreak.”The Department of Health was now trying to track down people who were on the same flight as the man so that they could be quarantined, he said, as well as any other people the man and woman may have come into contact with, such as hotel staff… February 3, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “I hope Republicans & the American people realize that the totally partisan Impeachment Hoax is exactly that, a Hoax. Read the Transcripts, listen to what the President & Foreign Minister of Ukraine said (“No Pressure”). Nothing will ever satisfy the Do Nothing, Radical Left Dems!” February 3, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Republicans in Iowa, go out and Caucus today. Your great Trade Deals with China, Mexico, Canada, Japan, South Korea and more, are DONE. Great times are coming, after waiting for decades, for our Farmers, Ranchers, Manufacturers and ALL. Nobody else could have pulled this off.” February 3, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!” February 3, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “KEEP AMERICA GREAT!” February 3, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Big WIN for us in Iowa tonight. Thank you! February 3, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Coronavirus: death toll passes Sars virus as dozens more die in Wuhan”. It was written by Lily Kuo. From the article: Dozens more people have died in the city at the centre of China’s coronavirus outbreak, where hospitals are severely understaffed and residents have been described as increasingly desperate conditions. Chinese state media reported 57 new deaths on Monday, all but one in Wuhan, the state capital of the central province of Hubei which has been under lockdown for almost two weeks as authorities try to contain the outbreak.The foreign ministry issued an urgent appeal for protective medical equipment as the total number of casualties reached 361, surpassing deaths in mainland China caused by the 2002-03 Sars virus. The number of infections also jumped, passing 17,200……Authorities in provinces that are home to more than 300 million people – including Guangdong, the country’s most populous – have ordered everyone to wear masks in public in an effort But factories capable of producing about 20 million masks a day are only operating at between 60 and 70% capacity, according to the ministry of industry……The state news agency Xinhua said 68 medical teams of 8,300 staff from across China had been sent to Hubei. One of two new emergency hospitals built in the last 10 days to house patients infected by the virus was due to open on Monday. State media said 1,400 military medics would be sent to run the facility……On Monday, hundreds of medical workers in Hong Kong walked out of their jobs to protest against the refusal by the chief executive, Carrie Lam, to shut the city’s border with China. Hong Kong, which is particularly vulnerable because of its proximity to China and constant flow of Chinese tourists, has confirmed 15 cases of the coronavirus.. February 3, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Far from virus epicentre, China’s Wenzhou city scrambles to curb outbreak”. From the article: …Wenzhou is more than 680 km (425 miles) from Wuhan, where the epidemic was first reported, but its problems underscore the challenges faced by China’s big cities as they grapple with the rapidly spreading disease. Wenzhou had 291 confirmed coronavirus cases as of Sunday, up 26 on the day and the most of any city outside Hubei province, where Wuhan city is located. Under restrictions implemented on Saturday, only one person per household is allowed to leave home at a time, and markets, shopping centres and entertainment venues have been closed.Wenzhou is used to large numbers of people flowing in and out. Its reputation as a centre of Chines and global manufacturing and commerce gave authorities little choice but to impose draconian restrictions on movement, residents said……Wenzhou began implementing “special measures” at the start of February. City officials told a briefing on Jan. 31 that most of the original confirmed cases had travelled back from Wuhan, but the virus had spread elsewhere.Of the 26 new cases reported in Wenzhou on Feb. 2, 23 had no links to Wuhan and 17 had direct contact with other confirmed coronavirus patients, according to official data……Wuhan itself reported 5,142 confirmed cases so far, with another 1,246 in neighbouring Huanggang..Wenzhou businesses will not be allowed to return to work until Feb. 18, and the city has also ordered schools to close until March 1, on of the longest suspensions in the country……Wenzhou has so far seen no fatalities. The total number of deaths in China from the epidemic rose to 361 as of Sunday, up 57 from the previous day, health authorities said… February 3, 2020: People’s Daily China (the largest newspaper in China) tweeted: A one-month-old infant has been confirmed as having been infected with the novel #coronavirus in Guizhou Province on Feb 3, according to the local health authority”. The tweet included a photo of a doctor who is covered by protective gear next to a bed. The infant is not shown. February 3, 2020: Gizmodo posted an article titled: “Uber Suspends 240 Accounts in Mexico Over User Suspected to Have Coronavirus”. It was written by Judy Serrano. From the article: As the coronavirus outbreak rages on, its effects are being felt around the world. In Mexico, Uber felt compelled to act when it learned that its drivers had possibly come into contact with a person suspected to have coronavirus. Consequently, it temporarily deactivated the accounts of 240 users who had also travelled with the drivers in Mexico City.Uber informed its users about the incident in a statement posted to Twitter this weekend. In the statement, the company said that it had received information about a rider suspected of being infected with coronavirus from Mexico City’s Health Department. Uber proceeded to provide the department with the contact information of two drivers that had possibly been in contact with that users. Nonetheless, it did not stop there. It explains in the statement that it temporarily deactivated the accounts of 240 users that had also travelled with the two drivers and informed them that they could contact Mexico’s Epidemiological Intelligence and Health Unit (UIES) for more information or to report symptoms……Mexico currently does not have any confirmed cases of coronavirus, according to the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Feb.2 Situation Report. There are 14,557 confirmed cases globally in 23 countries. As of Sunday, there have been 304 deaths, all of which except one have been in China.. February 3, 2020: South China Morning Post posted an article titled: “Coronavirus: Hong Kong faces escalated medical strike despite government move to expand border closures”. It was written by Tony Cheung, Sum Lok-kei, Chris Lau, and Chan Ho-him. From the article: Hong Kong’s embattled leader has buckled under intense public and political pressure to announce a further closure of the city’s borders with mainland China to keep out the coronavirus that originated in Wuhan, but still stopping short of the total shutdown demanded by public hospital workers who vowed to escalate a strike they began on Monday.Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor on Monday said all border crossings would be closed, except for the Hong Kong – Zhuhai- Macau Bridge, Shenzhen Bay Port and the international airport, even as the city confirmed its first case of human-to-human coronavirus infection.The Centre for Health Protection said the city’s 15th case, confirmed on Sunday night to be the mother of a 39-year-old coronavirus patient from Whampoa Garden in Hung Hom, had been infected through close contact with her son.The 72-year-old woman had not traveled in the 14 days before she fell ill and was quarantined at the Lei Yue Mun Park and Holiday Village.Appearing at a media briefing without wearing a face mask this time, Lam said major land crossings at Lo Wu and Lok Ma Chau would be closed at midnight, along with the Hong Kong – Macau Ferry Terminal – the three accounted for about 60 per cent of cross-border passenger traffic in 2018.The Kai Tak Cruise Terminal, with far lower traffic in comparison, would remain open……After the first six checkpoints were closed, the number of Hong Kong, mainland and other travellers entering the city had dropped by 57 per cent, 62 per cent and 49 per cent respectively, she said.But as more than 100,000 people had still crossed the border on Sunday, the additional closures were necessary… February 3, 2020: U.S. Senator Rick Scott (Republican – Florida) posted a press release on his official website titled: “Hong Kong Democracy Activist Nathan Law to Join Sen. Rick Scott as Guest at State of the Union”. From the press release: Today, Senator Rick Scott announced Nathan Law as his guest to Tuesday’s State of the Union Address. Nathan Law is the founding Chair of Demosistō, a youth activist group in Hong Kong that promotes freedom and democracy. Nathan was forcefully unseated as a Hong Kong lawmaker under suppression from Communist China, and is currently a Yale graduate student.Senator Rick Scott: “I am honored to have Nathan as my guest at the State of the Union. Nathan is an inspiration in the fight for freedom and democracy, and he has sent a powerful message to Communist China that the people of Hong Kong will not back down or be silenced. The United States will always stand with fighters like Nathan to rise up against injustice and fight for freedom. We cannot let Communist China and General Secretary Xi continue to silence the people of Hong Kong, and the world must stand together to present a unified front against Communist China’s aggression.” February 3, 2020: U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (Republican – Florida) posted a press release on his official website titled: “Rubio to Host Uyghur Human Rights Activist and Florida’s Lt. Governor as His Guests for State of the Union”. From the press release: U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) will host prominent Uyhgur human rights activist Rushan Abbas and Florida’s Lieutenant Governor, Jeanette Núñez, as his guests to President Trump’s State of the Union Address on Tuesday evening. Rubio has repeatedly condemned the mass internment of an estimated 1.8 million ethnic Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslim minorities in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. As the Senior Senator for the State of Florida, Rubio will also welcome and host Florida’s Lieutinent Governor as his guest… February 3, 2020: Reuters reported (via Yahoo! News) that the China Development Fourm, usually held in late-March, has been postponed until further notices. The source is listed as “Media Representative”. February 3, 2020: AFP News Agency tweeted: “#BREAKING Chinese city of Hangzhou locks down three districts over virus fears: authorities #coronavirus” February 3, 2020: AFP News Agency tweeted: “UPDATE: The city of Taizhou and three districts of the city of Hangzhou — including the area with the main office of Chinese tech giant Alibaba — will now only allow one person per household to go outside every two days to buy necessities, officials say.” February 3, 2020: William Yang (for DW News – a German news site) tweeted: “More on #coronavirus – In Guizhou, local health officials recorded a confirmed case, and the patient is a one-month-old infant. She is now receiving treating in quarantine and her conditions are stable.” February 3, 2020: BBC posted an article titled: “Cameroonian student in China contracts coronavirus”. From the article: A 21-year-old Cameroonian student in China has become the first African known to be diagnosed with the deadly coronavirus. In a statement, Yangtze University said the student was being treated in hospital in southern Jingzhou city after contracting the illness while on a visit to Wuhan city, the epicenter of the outbreak.He had returned to Jingzhou, where he lived, on 19 January, before a lockdown was imposed in Wuhan to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, which has killed more than 200 people……In a statement, the university said:“The university has provided psychological comfort to the student and has reported the situation to his parents and embassy.At present, the student is actively cooperating with the treatment at the hospital.His body temperature was normal for two consecutive days.He has a good spirit and a healthy appetite and his vital organs are stable.”… February 3, 2020: U.S. Department of Defense posted news titled: “Pentagon Spokesman Discusses Coronavirus Response Assistance”. It was written by Jim Garamone, DOD News. From the news: The Defense Department is standing by to provide assistance to the Department of Health and Human Services to combat the coronavirus, Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Rath Hoffman said today.Hoffman said DOD is housing 198 people at March Air Reserves Base, California, and has identified housing support for up to 1,000 people at four bases who may need to be quarantined upon arrival from oversees travel, he said during a Pentagon news conference.The department is not involved with treatment or observation of those at the facility; Health and Human Services is doing that. “DOD personnel will not be in direct contact with these individuals nor will these individuals have direct access to the bases beyond the housing,” Hoffman said……The four bases where people could be housed if they are quarantined are: the 168th Regiment, Regional Training Institute in Fort Carlson, Colorado; Travis Air Force Base, California; Lackland Air Force Base, Texas; and Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, California… February 3, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Hyundai to halt South Korea output as China virus disrupts parts supply”. It was written by Joyce Lee and Hyunjoo Jin. From the article: Hyundai Motor… will suspend production in South Korea because the coronavirus outbreak has disrupted the supply of parts, it said, becoming the first major carmaker to do so outside China.The flu-like virus has killed more than 400 people and its economic impact has spread beyond mainland China……Hyundai and Kia may be more affected as they tend to import more parts from China than other global automakers,” said Lee Hang-koo, senior researcher at the Korea Institute for industrial Economics & Trade……Hyundai has built huge production capacity in China over the past two decades.“South Korean parts makers followed and built their own facilities along with Hyundai,” Lee said……Most of Hyundai’s South Korean factories will be fully idled from Feb. 7, with some production lines expected to restart on Feb. 11 or Feb 12, a union official said, declining to be identified given the sensitivity of the matter.Schedules for suspension will vary by production line, a Hyundai spokeswoman said.The move follows a shortage of wiring harnesses, which Hyundai sources mainly in China, industry officials said.Two of the affected suppliers, Kyungshin and Yura Corporation, said they were trying to boost production at their factories in South Korea and Southeast Asia to compensate for the disrupted supply from China.Both plan to resume production at their Chinese factories after Feb. 9……Hyundai has seven factories in South Korea, catering for the local market and the United States, Europe, Middle East and other markets… February 3, 2020: Gov.UK posted a press release titled: “£20m announced to fund vaccines for coronavirus and other infectious diseases”. From the press release: The government has today pledged £20 million to develop new vaccines to combat the world’s deadliest diseases, amid concerns over the ongoing novel coronavirus outbreak in China.When visiting the Public Health England’s Porton Down laboratory last week, Health Secretary Matt Hancock announced the UK will ramp up efforts to fund ground-breaking research into vaccines, diagnostics and cures to fight against the threat of future viruses.The new funding will support work developing new vaccines for epidemics, including their three new programmes to develop vaccines against the novel coronavirus, 2019-nCoV. These projects aim to advance 2019-nCoV vaccine candidates into clinical testing as quickly as possible….…The £20 in funding will go to the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) – an innovative global partnership between public, private, philanthropic, and civil society organisations launched in Davos in 2017 to develop vaccines to stop future epidemics.CEPI was originally formed in response to the Ebola epidemic in West Africa……The Government is also in initial stages of talks between NIHR and UKRI regarding plans to run a rapid research call to support the global response to 2019-nCoV. February 4, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 11 February 4, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Situation Report – 15”. From the report. Highlights: No new countries reported cases of 2019-nCoV in the 24 hours since the previous situation report.The business sector is one audience to whom EPI-WIN is reaching out with tailored information. EPI-WIN colleagues co-hosted a call with a global communications firm whose clients include large multinationals. Over 50 multinationals were represented on the call, where WHO provided an update of the 2019-nCoV situation and responded to questions about improving communications with employees; the role of businesses in a public health crisis; and managing uncertainty through accessing accurate information. Confirmed cases of 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 4 February 2020: Hubei: 13522Zhejang: 849Guangdong: 797Henan: 675Hunan: 593Anhui: 480Jiangxi: 476Chongqing: 337Jiangsu: 308Sichuan: 282Beijing: 228Shanghai: 208Fujian: 194Heilongjiang: 155Shaaxi: 142Guangxi: 139Hebei: 126Yunnan: 117Hainan: 79Liaoning: 74Shanxi: 74Tianjin: 63Gansu: 56Guizhou: 56Jilin: 42Inner Mongolia: 37Ningxia: 34Xinjiang: 29Hong Kong SAR: 15Qinghai: 15Taipei: 10Macau SAR: 8Xizang: 1TOTAL: 20471 Countries, territories or areas with reported confirmed 2019-nCoV cases and deaths. Data as of 4 February 2020 China – including cases confirmed in Hong Kong SAR (15 confirmed cases), Macau SAR (8 confirmed cases), and Taipei (10 confirmed cases): 20471 cases (3235 new)/ 425 deaths (64 new).Japan: 20 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRepublic of Korea: 16 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 9 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsSingapore: 18 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 12 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 10 cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsCambodia: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 2 cases (0 new)/ 1 deathThailand: 19 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 11 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 4 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 6 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 12 cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Kingdom: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 5 cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths February 4, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Market up big today on very good economic news. JOBS, JOBS, JOBS!” February 4, 2020: South China Morning Post posted an article titled: “Coronavirus: two more cases confirmed in Hong Kong, suspected to have been transmitted locally, hours after city confirms first death.” It was written by Alvin Lum and Sum Lok-kei. From the article: Hong Kong has confirmed two more cases of the deadly new coronavirus, just hours after a 39-year-old man became the first to die in the city after being infected.Health officials said there was no obvious source of infection for the two most recent cases but it was suspected it had been transmitted locally. It took the total number of cases in the city to 17.Dr Chaung Skuk-kwan, head of the Centre for Health Protection’s communicable disease branch, said so far four confirmed cases presented “no obvious source of infection”, and warned of the possibility of outbreaks in the community.“It is highly probably the four cases were infected locally, so there could be invisible chains of infection happening within communities,” Chuang said. “We do not rule out a large spread in the future.”The Department of Health said neither patient had any recent travel history to mainland China nor family members who had crossed the border.The first of the new cases concerned a woman, 64, who went to work at a clothing store in Jordon, Kowloon while displaying symptoms on January 23.The department said they were not sure how many people had been in contact with the female patient, as she was in a deteriorating state and on a ventilator.The other, a 60 year-old male retiree, visited four private clinics before he was taken to hospital and later tested positive for the virus.Earlier on Tuesday morning, a man being treated for the virus at Princess Margaret Hospital in Kwai Chung, died after his condition deteriorated. He had suffered sudden heart failure, according to medical sources… February 4, 2020: Australian Government Department of Home Affairs posted a statement titled: “Statement on visa cancellations – enhanced border control measures”. From the statement: The health and welfare of the Australian community is the Australian Government’s highest priority. This includes all people in Australia of all nationalities, including citizens, permanent residents and temporary visa holders alike.On the 1st of February 2020, the Government announced border measures to reduce the risk to the Australian community posed by Novel Coronavirus.The National Security Committee agreed to give the Australian Border Force Commissioner discretionary powers to make decisions in relation to the arrival in Australia of persons who were in transit when the announcement was made.This arrangement was put in place in anticipation of the arrival of a limited number of flights carrying people who did not meet the new entry requirements, particularly during the initial period following the announcement.A number of visas were cancelled upon arrival in Australia, as they were assessed to be ineligible to enter Australia under Australia’s enhanced border control measures.The Australian Border Force Commissioner has used his discretionary powers to provide border clearance to a number of individuals to allow them to enter Australia. For most people, this occurred at the airport. Others were placed in an alternative place of detention – serviced apartments – while their case was assessed.All of these individuals undertook health screening and were counselled to self-isolate for a period of 14 days, in the same way as others who are exempt from the enhanced border control measures.The ABF and the Department is working with impacted individuals to discuss future visa options.The Commissioner will continue to exercise his discretion to ensure the enhanced border control measures are applied fairly and appropriately, in consultation with Australian Government and industry partners including the Departments of Education, Health and Agriculture. February 4, 2020: New York State website posted news titled: “Governor Cuomo Issues Update on Novel Coronavirus”. From the news: Governor Andrew M. Cuomo today announced an update on the status of testing for the novel coronavirus in New York State. As of today, samples from 17 New Yorkers have been sent to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for testing. Of those, 11 have come back negative. Three samples from New York City and three samples from New York State outside of New York City are pending, for six total pending samples. There are still no confirmed cases of novel coronavirus in New York State… February 4, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “First coronavirus death in Hong Kong as four more cities are locked down”. It was written by Lily Kuo and Emma Graham-Harrison. From the article: Hong Kong reported its first death from the coronavirus and four major Chinese cities hundreds of miles from the centre ordered lockdowns as concerns about the spread of the disease mounted.The country’s leadership admitted “shortcomings” in its handling of the outbreak, with the number of infections and deaths still mounting daily. The death toll inside China has passed 420 and Britain has advised its citizens to leave the country.A 39-year-old man with an underlying health condition died in Hong Kong on Tuesday morning, according to broadcaster RTHK.His death is the second outside mainland after a Chinese national from Wuhan was confirmed on Sunday to have died in the Philippines.China announced 64 more deaths on Tuesday – surpassing Monday’s record to confirm the biggest daily increase since the virus was detected late last year in the central province of Hubei.The Virus has killed at least 426 people, exceeding the 349 mainland deaths from the severe acute respiratory syndrome (Sars) outbreak of 2002-03, which killed nearly 800 globally……The vast majority of cases are still concentrated in and around Wuhan, the Hubei provincial capital, which has been on lockdown for nearly two weeks. But with increasing numbers of infections registered in other parts of China, some of the worst-hit areas are also bringing in radical measures.Several cities in Zhejiang, a coastal province with a strong trade and manufacturing heritage, have shut schools, businesses, markets and shopping centres, cut off most public transport and barred residents from leaving their homes except to buy necessities or seek medical treatment……The virus is taking an increasing economic toll, shutting businesses, curbing international travel and affecting production lines of global brands.China’s currency and stock markets steadied in choppy trade after anxiety over the virus hit the yuan on Monday and erased about £308bn in market value from Shanghai’s benchmark. Macau, the world’s biggest gambling hub, said it had asked all casino operators to suspend operations for two weeks to help curb the spread of the virus.Wuhan, a bustling industrial hub where the virus first infected humans, has been turned into a near ghost town as a de facto quarantine continues.Residents say they are unable to find hospitals to care for their sick relatives. Several hospitals require patients to first get a referral from local community health centres, many of which are also overwhelmed. As the city remains under lockdown, with public transport and roads shut, people are also struggling to get to health facilities..…France recommended its citizens – particularly those with families – should leave China “temporarily,” and recommended against all but “essential” travel to the country.”… February 4, 2020: US News posted an article titled: “National Symphony Cancels 3 China Concerts Due to Virus”. From the article: The National Symphony Orchestra has cancelled two concerts in Beijing and one in Shanghai next month following China’s virus outbreaks. Music director Gianadrea Noseda had been scheduled to lead performances in Beijing on March 13 and 14 followed by a concert in Shanghai on March 17, all with Chinese pianist Haochen Zhang. The orchestra said Tuesday the decision was made due to U.S. State Department travel restrictions and the cancellations of its scheduled flights.The orchestra’s first international tour under Noseda was shortened to five performances in Japan from March 6-11, with stops in Fukui, Sakai, Hiroshima and Tokyo… February 4, 2020: CGTN posted an article titled: “Huoshenshan Hospital starts operation”. From the article: Huoshenshan Hospital, a SARS treatment-model makeshift hospital in Wuhan, started admitting patients on Tuesday morning.The first batch of 50 patients from three hospitals, including Wuchang Hospital and Hankou Houspital, has been transferred to the newly built hospital and the patients are undergoing treatment.The hospital, built in 10 days, was formally delivered to military medics on Sunday morning.Covering an area of 34,000 square meters, the hospital provides 1,000 beds for coronavirus patients who are gradually transferred to the hospital… February 4, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Thailand evacuates 138 from virus-hit Wuhan”. It was written by Panarat Thepgumpanat and Patpicha Tanakasempipat. From the article: A plane brought 138 Thais home from China’s coronavirus epicenter of Wuhan on Tuesday and they waved from evacuation busses as they headed off to two weeks in quarantine to ensure they are free from the disease.Thailand, which has confirmed more cases of the new coronavirus than any country except China, announced a further six on Tuesday – bringing the total to 25.Six of the evacuees from Wuhan were sent to hospitals with high temperatures after they arrives at the U-Tapao airport abord a Thai AirAsia evacuation flight, public health minister Anutin Charnvirakul told reporters……The others will be quarantined for 14 days in a naval resort in Sattahip, 180 km (112 miles) east of Bangkok, monitored closely……Three other Thais were not allowed to leave Wuhan, which has been in lockdown to try to stop the spread of the disease that has killed more than 420 people since it emerged early last month.Thai authorities thanked China for helping the evacuation and said King Maha Vajiralongkorn and Queen Suthida had sent four tonnes of medical supplies to help Chinese authorities. February 4, 2020: CBS News posted an article titled: “Macau shutters casinos over coronavirus fears”. It was written by Aimee Picchi. From the article: Macau, the world’s largest gambling center, on Tuesday ordered casinos in the region to halt their operations for two weeks amid concerns about the deadly coronavirus spreading in China and other countries.Announced by the Macau government on Tuesday, the suspension will temporarily shutter 41 gambling and entertainment businesses, an official said at a news conference, according to the Wall Street Journal. Among the casinos impacted by the order are the Venetian Macao, which is partially owned by Las Vegas Sands, and Wynn Macau, owned by Wynn Resorts.Theaters, bars, clubs and other entertainment venues where people gather are also hit by the order… February 4, 2020: Belgium’s Health Agency posted a statement regarding coronavirus. The Guardian posted an explanation and translation of it in English. A Belgian woman who was on a repatriated flight from Wuhan on Sunday has tested positive for the coronavirus, Belgium’s health agency has announced.In a statement, it said:“The person tested who tested positive shows no signs of illness at the moment. She was transferred last night to Saint Pierre University hospital in Brussels, one of the two reference centers in our country. This hospital has all the expertise and support necessary to guarantee the best care.”The agency said all nine Belgian on the flight had undergone a series of tests in a military hospital in the capital, Brussels. Eight of them tested negative.A further person, from Denmark, who had not been able to return home on Sunday, had also tested negative, the agency said. February 4, 2020: Shine (Powered by Shanghai Daily, the largest English-language newspaper in East China), posted an article titled: “Officials offer details on 7-month-old coronavirus patient”. It was written by Cai Wenjun. From the article: Shanghai health officials released further information about the youngest coronavirus patient in the city, a 7-month-old girl, at a press conference on Tuesday.Zheng Jin from Shanghai Commission said the girl’s maternal grandparents arrived in Shanghai from Wuhan, in Hubei Province, the heart of the current epidemic, on January 20. They had dinner with other family members, none of whom had recent contact with Wuhan, on January 21 and 24.On January 25, the grandparents voluntarily disclosed their recent travel from Wuhan to a neighborhood health center. They were staying with the girl and her parents at that time.After the girl’s paternal grandfather was diagnosed with coronavirus infection on February 2, the girl, her parents, paternal grandmother and maternal grandparents were all ordered to stay at home for medical observation as close contacts. Some members of the family started to show fever that afternoon and were transferred to the hospital for quarantine and treatment. On Monday, nuceic acid tests confirmed that the girl, her mother and maternal grandfather were infected with coronavirus……Currently, the girl and other infected family members are all hospitalized at designated medical facilities and are in stable condition… February 4, 2020:The Guardian posted an article titled: “African students stranded in coronavirus heartland plead with embassies”. It was written by Jason Burke and Charles Pensulo. From the article: Thousands of African students in Wuhan, the centre of the coronavirus epidemic, face dwindling food supplies, limited information and lockdowns restricting them to their campuses or hostels.Two weeks after restrictions on movement were imposed, residents are running short of basic necessities, say students in the central Chinese city.Several people described profound anxiety, insufficient food and a lack of information. Many complained about the lack of assistance received from their own embassies, but refrained from criticizing Chinese authorities.There are more than 80,000 African students in China, often attracted by generous government scholarships. About 5,000 are thought to be in Wuhan, where there are scores of further education establishments offering qualifications that are prized in Africa….…The students have asked the Malawian government to airlift them out of the city and return them home, citing the example of other countries in Africa. However, Chinese authorities have asked local embassies to tell their citizens not to seek to return home to avoid further spread of the disease… February 4, 2020: The UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office posted Foreign Travel Advice for China. From the advice: COVID-19 Exceptional Travel Advisory Notice As countries respond to the COVID-19 pandemic, including travel and border restrictions, the FCO advises British nationals against all but essential international travel. Any country or area may restrict travel without notice. If you live in the UK and are currently travelling abroad, you are strongly advised to return now, where and while there are still commercial routes available. Many airlines are suspending flights and many airports are closing, preventing flights from leaving… February 4, 2020: The UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office posted a press release titled: “Coronavirus and travel to China: Foreign Secretary’s statement, 4 February 2020”. From the statement: Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab gave a statement following the update to FCO Travel Advice advising against ‘all but essential’ travel to China.In light of the ongoing coronavirus outbreak, the Foreign & Commonwealth Office advises against ‘all but essential’ travel to mainland China and now recommends that British Nationals who are able to leave China do so.Commercial airline options for departing China remain available throughout the country, except in the Hubei Province.The Foreign Office continues to work on arrangements to evacuate any remaining British nationals from Hubei Province who wish to leave.Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said:“The safety and security of the British people will always be our top priority. As such, we now advise British nationals in China to leave the country if they can, to minimise their risk of exposure to the virus. Where there are still British Nationals in Hubei Province who wish to be evacuated, we will continue to work around the clock to facilitate this.” February 4, 2020: The Guardian’s Andrew Roth reported (on the live blog) the following information: Russia has sent planes to China as it begins its evacuation of Russian citizens from Wuhan and Hubei province, the center of the coronavirus outbreak.More than 700 Russians are said to be living in the region, of which 132 had expressed a desire to return to Russia, the country’s embassy in Beijing has reported. They will be subjected to a two-week quarantine period, at a Russian military hospital. The quarantine site has not yet been made public… February 4, 2020: ABC News AU posted an article titled: “Queensland confirms third coronavirus case as eight-year-old child from Wuhan, China”. From the article: An eight-year-old boy has been confirmed as Queensland’s third case of the potentially deadly coronavirus. The child, who is Chinese and from the virus epicentre of Wuhan, was confirmed to have the virus by Queensland health officials on Tuesday night. He was traveling in the same tour group as the 44-year-old man and a 42-year-old woman who have been confirmed as Queensland’s other cases of coronavirus.The child remains in isolation at the Gold Coast University Hospital and is currently stable.The child is now the 13th person in Australia to be infected with the virus – there are four cases in NSW and Victoria and two cases in South Australia to go with the three in Queensland.The boy is the first child to be diagnosed with the virus in Australia and the youngest by a wide margin, with other confirmed cases mostly occurring in people other than 30, though two in their 20s are also confirmed cases.Two more Australians in China have also been infected with the virus… February 4, 2020: GSMA posted a “GSMA Statement on Coronavirus”. From the statement: London: The GSMA continues to monitor and assess the potential impact of the Coronavirus on its MWC20 events held annually in Barcelona, Shanghai and Los Angeles and as well as the Mobile 360 Series of regional conferences. The GSMA confirms that there is minimal impact on the event thus far. MWC Barcelona 24-27 February 2020, will proceed as planned, across all venues at Fira Gran Via Fira Montjuïc and La Farga L’Hospitalet, including YoMo and Four Years From Now (4YFN).As previously stated, the GSMA has implemented many measures to help to mitigate the spread of the virus and is continuing to add other actions regularly. Measures in place include; Increased cleaning and disinfection programme across all high-volume touchpoints, e.g. catering areas, surfaces, handrails, WCs, entrances/exits, public touch-screens, etc. along with the use of correct cleaning/sanitising materials and productsIncreased onsite medical supportAwareness campaign via online and onsite info-share and signageAvailability of sanitising and disinfection materials for public useAwareness and training to all staff and associates on standard personal preventative measures, e.g. personal hygiene, frequency of use of sanitising/disinfection products, etc.Advice to exhibitors on implementing effective cleaning and disinfection of stands, offices along with guidance on personal hygiene measures and common preventive behaviourPublic health guidelines and advice communication to Barcelona hotels, public and private transport, restaurants and catering outlets, retail, etc. Measures added this week include; Installing new signage onsite reminding attendees of hygiene recommendationsImplementing a mic change protocol in production for speakersCommunicating advice to all attendees to adopt a ‘no-handshake policy’ The GSMA is building on its existing plans to protect the health of our attendees, clients and staff at MWC Barcelona. GSMA colleagues around the world are taking strong measures to contain and lessen any further spread of the virus. These measures include adhering to advice from the WHO and other health authorities, respecting travel restrictions where they exist, arriving early in Spain to allow time for self-quarantine and ensuring access to masks… February 4, 2020: ZTE Corporation tweeted: “#ZTE will participate in #MWC20 Barcelona as planned, showcasing comprehensive #5G end-to-end solutions and a wide variety of 5G devices. ZTE’s booth is in 3F30, Hall 3, FIRA GRAN VIA.” February 4, 2020: U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) posted a news release titled: “FDA Takes Significant Step in Coronavirus Response Efforts, Issues Emergency Use Authorization for the First 2019 Novel Coronavirus Diagnostic”. Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued an emergency use autiorization (EUA) to enable emergency use of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) 2019-nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel. To date, this test has been limited to use at CDC laboratories; today’s authorization allows the use of the test at any CDC-qualified lab across the country……Under this EUA, the use of 2019-nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel is authorized for patients who meet the CDC criteria for 2019-nCoV testing. Testing is limited to qualified laboratories designated by the CDC and, in the U.S., those certified to perform high complexity tests. The diagnostic is a reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test that provides presumptive detection of 2019-nCoV from respiratory secretions, such as nasal or oral swabs. A positive test result indicates likely infection with 2019-nCoV and infected patients should work with their health care provider to manage their symptoms and determine how to best protect the people around them. Negative results do not preclude 2019-nCoV infection and should not be used as the sole bais for treatment or other patient management decisions. Negative result must be combined with clinical observations, patient history and epidemiological information.The FDA can issue an EUA to permit the use, based on scientific data, of certain medical products that may be effective in diagnosing, treating or preventing such disease or condition when there is a determination, by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), that there is a public health emergency or a significant potential for a public health emergency that has a significant potential to affect national security or the health and security of U.S. citizens, and a declaration that circumstances exist justifying the medical products’ emergency use… February 4, 2020: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) posted a press release titled: “HHS, Regeneron Collaborate to Develop 2019-nCoV Treatment”. From the press release: To develop therapeutics to treat the 2019 novel coronavirus, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of the Assistant Secretary for Prepardness and Response (ASPR) will expand an existing collaboration with Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. of Tarrytown, New York..…BARDA and Regeneron now will leverage their partnership agreement to develop multiple monoclonal antibodies that, individually or in combination, could be used to treat this emerging coronavirus, also known as 2019-nCoV.These monoclonal antibodies are produced by a single clone of cells or a cell line with identical antibody molecules. The antibodies bind to certain protiens of a virus, reducing the ability of the virus to infect human cells. Medicines developed for 2019-nCoV through the expanded BARDA-Regeneron partnership will leverage Regeneron’s monoclonal antibody discovery platform called Velocimmune, part of the company’s VelociSuite technology.VelociSuite was used to develop a promising investigational three- antibody therapeutic which was deployed to treat Ebola in the most recent outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and an investigational two-antibody therapeutic to treat Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV). The technology shortened multiple aspects of the product development timeline for therapeutics to treat MERS-CoV and Ebola from years to months. The technology helped shorten certain stages of drug development, including the process of antibody discovery and selection, preclinical-scale manufacturing and clinical-scale manufacturing.In addition to expanded collaboration with Regeneron, BARDA is working with counterparts across the government, including within HHS and with the Department of Defense. The team is reviewing potential vaccines, treatments and diagnostics from across the public and private sectors, particularly products in development for MERS or Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), to identify promising candidates for development to detect, protect against or treat 2019 nCoV… February 4, 2020: The LA Times posted an article titled: “Child under coronavirus quarantine in Riverside County is taken to hospital with fever.” It was written by Colleen Shelby. From the article: A child who has been quarantined and monitored for the novel coronavirus with 194 others at March Air Reserve Base has been taken to a hospital after developing a fever, Riverside County health officials said Tuesday.The child, accompanied by a parent, was taken by ambulance to Riverside University Health System Medical Center on Monday night. Both are undergoing testing and observation for the virus. Samples will be submitted to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and results are expected later this week, officials said.“The child has no other symptoms or issues other than the temperature,” Riverside County Department of Public Health spokesman Jose Arballo Jr. said……In a separate incident Monday, an individual who flew into Los Angeles International Airport from China has been transferred to the base and is also under quarantine, health officials said.“The individual has no symptoms of novel coronavirus but was moved to March out of an abundance of caution and because of their travel history,” Riverside County health officials said in a statement.The traveler will be isolated from the other people at the base for the next few days… February 5, 2020: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted a media statement titled: “HHS and CDC Receive Additional Flights Carrying Passengers from China”. From the media release: This week, several planes carrying passengers from Wuhan China will arrive in three states. These locations are Travis Air Force Base in Sacramento, CA, Marine Corps Air Station Miramar in San Diego, CA, and Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio TX, and Eppley Airfield in Omaha, NE.These planes will be met by a team of CDC personnel deployed there to assess the health of the passengers. The passengers have been screened, monitored and evaluated by medical and public health personnel every step of the way, including before takeoff and during the flight. CDC staff will conduct risk assessments to ensure the health of each traveler, including temperature checks and observing for respiratory symptoms.These passengers will be issued quarantine orders upon arrival at their designated quarantine location. This legal order is intended to protect the travelers, their families, and the community. This quarantine order will begin on the day the flight left Wuhan and will continue for up to 14 days. Medical care will be readily available at the first onset of symptoms.CDC will work with the state and local public health departments to transport any passenger exhibiting symptoms to a hospital for further evaluation.CDC is committed to protecting the health and safety of Americans. We continue to believe the immediate risk of coronavirus exposure to the general public is low, however, CDC is undertaking these measures to keep that risk low. CDC is taking these measures to fully assess and care for these passengers to protect them, their loved ones, and their communities. February 5, 2020: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted a transcript titled: “Transcript for CDC Telebriefing: CDC Update on Novel Coronavirus”. From the transcript: Mr. Benjamin Haynes: … We are joined today by Dr. Nancy Messonnier Director of CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases and rear admiral Denise Hinton from the food and drug administrations, she is the chief scientist. Dr. Messonnier and rear admiral Hinton will give opening remarks before taking your questions. At this time I’ll turn the call over to Dr. Messonnier.Dr Nancy Messonnier: …Today I would like to provide a few updates on important developments in the last couple days. SInce we briefed you last, there have been no new confirmed coronavirus infections. The total number of confirmed positives in the United States remains at 11. Right now, 206 persons under investigation, or PUIs have tested negative for infection with this Novel virus. And we currently have testing pending on 76 PUIs. Some of those PUIs that are pending include samples in transit.As we alluded to earlier this week and was reported by many of you last night, FDA signed the emergency use authorization or EUA for our diagnostic test. Today the test kits will start shipping to the over 100 public health labs, each of these labs is required to perform international verification for CLIAA compliance prior to reporting out. This process is expected to take a few days. Initially, 200 test kits will be distributed to US domestic laboratories and another 200 will be distributed to select international laboratories. Each test kit can perform 700 to 800 patient samples. What this means is that by the start of next week, we expect there to be much enhanced capacity for laboratory testing closer to our patients….…States will now start testing for confirming this virus and you may start hearing from states directly about confirmed cases. As always, their case count will be the most up-to-date. CDC will continue to report case counts on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays on our website……Rear Admiral Denise Hinton: My name is Denise Hinton, and I do serve as the FDA’s chief scientist and today I want to provide just a few updates on the work the FDA has been doing……Yesterday the FDA, as of February 4, 2020, issued an EUA to enable emergency use of the CDC’s 2019 Ncov diagnostic test. To date this test has been limited to use at CDC laboratories. Yesterday’s authorization allows the use of the test at any CDC qualified lab across the country as Dr. Messonnier had states. Additionally, FDA announced that it had developed an EUA review template to test and detect the novel coronavirus which outlines the data to be developed in a pre-EUA package with is available to developers upon request. As of February 5, 2020, today, FDA has sent the template to 35 diagnostic developers. The FDA is committed to expediting the development and availability of critical medical products to prevent, diagnose, and treat 2019 nCoV using all applicable regulatory authorities to respond to the outbreak….…NY POST: … My question is about the national stockpile. How well prepared is the U.S. to provide hospitals with masks, gowns, gloves, face shields and other protective equipment if in fact for at least one or two regions in the country there is a real demand for that? And secondly, is our reliance on China as the manufacturer of a lot of this equipment a weak link?Dr.Messonnier: … And one thing that I will say is as many of you know, the national stockpile is actually under ASPC now not under CDC, but in general you bring up an important point which is the current risk to the American public is low, but as we project outward with the potential for this to be a much longer situation, one of the things that we’re actively working on is projecting the long term needs of our health care system and certainly for our health care workers. So, it is something that we are very much working on with additional meetings today about it. And hopefully we’ll have more to say in the coming days.But it is also a good reminder for me to tell folks that as we anticipate the potential for this, we want to make sure that when those personal protective equipment, masks and especially masks but also gowns and gloves are being used, they are being used appropriately to keep our staff and health care workers safe, but not excessively. Because we may need to be preserving them for later when the risk is higher. So, as I said, we do not think that the American public should be going out and buying masks, we don’t think that normal U.S. citizens going about their day to day lives in the U.S. right now are at risk. And so, I would definitely caution people to be patient as we work through these longer-term issues, but to understand that our guideance to folks now is let’s make sure that we have enough of those personal protective equipment for the folks at highest risk and specifically our health care workers.And I would say that that is something that we’re actively working on and part of what we need to sort our is our expectations for how long this will last. If this is something that will be over quickly, obviously that projection looks a lot different than if it is something that will last a longer time. And as we’re learning more about the situation in China, about how transmission is happening, how it is being spread, it will help us to better do those projections in the United States which again is something that we’re actively working on… February 5, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Situation Report – 16 – Erratum”. From the report: Highlights: Belgium reported its first confirmed case of 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease.WHO and partners have developed a global strategic preparedness and response plan, which outlines the public health measures that the international community can provide to support all countries to prepare for and respond to the 2019-nCoV outbreak. The overall goal is to stop further transmission of 2019-nCoV within China and to other countries, and to mitigate the impact of the outbreak in all countries.WHO is working with the travel and tourism industry to discuss real and perceived risks experienced in the industry, measures put in place for customers and employees, and challenges faced regarding implementation of the Temporary Recommendations associated with the declaration of a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. In the coming days, WHO will work with the industry to identify solutions to these challenges, within the framework of the International Health Regulations (2005). Strategic Preparedness and Response Plan and Resource Requirements: …The overall goal of the strategic preparedness and response plan is to stop further transmission of 2019-nCoV within China and to other countries, and to mitigate the impact of the outbreak in all countries. The strategic objectives of the plan are: Limit human-to-human transmission, including reducing secondary infections among close contacts and healthcare workers, preventing transmission amplification events, and preventing further international spread from China;Identify, isolate, and care for patients early, providing optimized care for infected patients;Identify and reduce transmission from the animal source;Address crucial unknowns regarding clinical severity, extent of transmission and infection, treatment options, and accelerate the development of diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines;Communicate critical risk and event information to all communities, and counter misinformation;Minimize social and economic impact through multisectoral partnerships These objectives can be achieved by: A Rapidly establishing international coordination to deliver strategic, technical, and operational support through existing mechanisms and partnerships;B Scaling up country preparedness and response operations, including strengthening readiness to rapidly identify, diagnose and treat cases; identification of follow-up of contacts when feasible (with priority given to high-risk settings such as healthcare facilities); infection prevention and control in healthcare settings; implementation of health measures for travelers; and awareness raising in the population through risk communication and community engagementC Accelerating priority research and innovation to support a clear and transparent global process to set research and innovation priorities to fast track and scale-up research, development, and the equitable availability of candidate therapeutics, vaccines, and diagnostics. This will build a common platform for standardized processes, protocols and tools, to facilitate multidisciplinary and collaborative research integrated with the process.The total estimated resources required to be mobilized by the international community to implement priority public health measures in support of countries to prepare for and respond to 2019-nCoV for this plan is USD 675.5 million. The resource request for WHO as part of this plan is USD 61.5 million. The response requirement period is three months, from 1 February to 30 April 2020. Confirmed cases of 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 5 February 2020: Hubei: 16678Zhejaing: 895Guangdong: 870Henan: 764Hunan: 661Anhui: 530Jiangxi: 548Chongqing: 336Jiangsu: 341Sichuan: 301Shandong: 298Fujian: 205Heilongjiang: 190Shaanxi: 165Guangxi: 150Hebei: 122Hainan: 89Liaoning: 81Shanxi: 81Tianjin: 67Gansu: 57Guizhou: 64Jiln: 54Inner Mongolia: 42Ningxia: 34Xinjaing: 32Hong Kong SAR: 18Qinghai: 17Taipei and environs: 11Macao SAR: 10Xizang: 1TOTAL: 24363 Countries, territories, or areas with reported confirmed 2019-nCoV cases and deaths. Data as of 5 February 2020 China- including cases confirmed in Hong Kong SAR (18 confirmed cases, 1 death), Macao SAR (10 confirmed cases) and Taipei and environs (11 confirmed cases): 24363 cases (3893 new)/ 491 deaths (66 new)Japan: 33 cases (13 new)/ 0 deathsRepublic of Korea: 18 cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 10 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsSingapore: 24 cases (6 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 13 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 10 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsCambodia: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 cases (1 new) / 1 deathThailand: 25 cases (6 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 11 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 5 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 6 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 12 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Kingdom: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 case (1 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 5 cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths February 5, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “I will be making a public statement tomorrow at 12:00pm from the @WhiteHouse to discuss our Country’s VICTORY on the Impeachment Hoax!” February 5, 2020: The Victoria State Government (Australia) posted a press release titled: “Fourth novel coronavirus case in Victoria”. From the press release: A new case of coronavirus has been confirmed in Victoria. The total number of confirmed cases of novel coronavirus infection in Victoria now is four. There are currently 13 pending results and a total of 149 negative results.The latest case is a woman in her 20s, a resident of Melbourne, who is recovering at home with the respiratory illness. She was confirmed positive late yesterday following a series of tests. After spending time in Wuhan, Hubei Province, she returned home to Victoria January 25 and became unwell two days later.She was seen by doctors in a Melbourne hospital on January 30 in accordance with infection control procedures and was assessed as well enough to stay at home.The woman is not considered to have been infectious on her flight to Melbourne… February 5, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “Hundreds of millions of chickens at risk of being wiped out with much of China locked down due to virus”. It was written by Weizhen Tan. From the article: Following its pork crisis, China’s poultry farmers are now in dire straits because of the coronavirus outbreak. Millions of chickens may soon perish in the coming days as much-needed feed is not getting to them in time.The shutdowns in China’s provinces have hit supply chains, with transport restrictions preventing much needed animal feed such as soybean meal from getting delivered to poultry farms, according to analysts and Chinese state media.As the outbreak spread, Chinese authorities have shut roads and highways, and even halted long-distance buses.The supply of soybean meal is hort to begin with, said financial services company INTL FCStone in a note on Monday, adding that the extension of business shutdowns will exacerbate the shortage……The China Animal Agriculture Association asked feed producers to send 18,000 tons of corn and 12,000 tons of soybean meal to Hubei……The outlook for China’s poultry might be further affected, considering that authorities reported on Saturday an outbreak of H5N1 bird flu in Hunan, according to Reuters. Over 17,000 poultry had to be culled following the outbreak, the news service reported…. February 5, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) released a Strategic Preparedness and Response Plan (SPRP) for the new coronavirus. It focuses on rapidly establishing international coordination and operational support, scaling up country readiness and response operations, and accelerating priority research and innovation. The WHO stated that 25 countries have reported confirmed cases of the new coronavirus, including China, where 24,363 people had contracted the virus, or over 99% of all cases. In all other countries, 191 cases have contracted the virus. February 5, 2020: Billboard reported that the Philharmonic Society of Orange County in Southern California cancelled its February 5, 2020, Chinese New Year Celebration concert by the Shanghai Chinese Orchestra in light of the coronavirus epidemic citing “concerns expressed by community members.” February 5, 2020: LG Electronics posted a “Statement Regarding LG Electronics’ Participation in Mobile World Congress (MWC) 2020”. From the statement: LG Electronics is closely monitoring the situation related to the novel coronavirus outbreak, which was recently declared a global emergency by the World Health Organization as the virus continues to spread outside China.With the safety of its employees, partners and customers foremost in mind, LG has decided to withdraw from exhibiting and participating in MWC 2020 later this month in Barcelona, Spain.This decision removes the risk of exposing hundreds of LG employees to international travel which has already become more restrictive as the virus continues to spread across boarders.In lieu of its participation in MWC, LG will be holding separate events in the near future to announce its 2020 mobile products.LG Electronics thanks its supporters and the public for their understanding during these difficult and challenging times. February 5, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “Princess Cruises quarantines 3,700 for two weeks on ship after 10 aboard test positive for coronavirus”. It was written by William Feuer. From the article: Carnival’s Princess Cruises said it has placed 3,700 passengers and crew under mandatory quarantine for two weeks after 10 people aboard a cruise ship in Yokohama, Japan, tested positive for the new coronavirus.The company said a previous guest, who didn’t have any symptoms while aboard the ship, tested positive for the coronavirus on Saturday – six days after leaving the Diamond Princess. The ship was being held in Japan for 24 hours while Japanese health authorities assessed the 3,700 passengers and crew on board.“These 10 persons, who have been notified, will be taken ashore by Japanese Coast Guard watercraft and transported to local hospitals for care by shoreside Japanese medical professionals,” the company said.The ship will be quarantined for at least 14 days, the company said, as is required by the Japanese Ministry of Health……The company confirmed to CNBC that one of the passengers who tested positive for the coronavirus is from the United States. The others are two passengers from Australia, three from Japan and three from Hong Kong and one Filipino crew member.The company said it will continue to provide guests with complementary internet and phone service. The ship will go out to sea to “perform normal marine operations,” the company said, such as “the production of fresh water and ballast operations before proceeding alongside in Yokohama where food, provisions, and other supplies will be brought on board.”Princess Cruises said it will cancel its next two cruises leaving from Yokahama, which had been scheduled to depart on Feb. 4 and Feb. 12… February 5, 2020: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation posted a press release titled: “Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Dedicates Additional Funding to the Novel Coronavirus Response”. From the press release: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation today announced that it will immediately commit up to $100 million for the global response to the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). The funding will help strengthen detection, isolation and treatment efforts; protect at-risk populations; and develop vaccines, treatments and diagnostics. The new funding is inclusive of $10 million the foundation committed to the outbreak in late January……The Gates Foundation is contributing more resources – in close coordination with other donors – to assist the World Health Organization (WHO), Chinese frontline responders and others at the global and national levels. WHO declared the 2019-nCoV outbreak a public health emergency of international concern on January 30, citing the risks of the virus globally and the need for a worldwide coordinated effort to enhance preparedness, especially in fragile settings. The Government of China has also declared a national public health emergency and mobilized a nationwide effort to contain the virus and treat those who are infected.The foundation will immediately commit up to $20 million to accelerate the detection, isolation and treatment of people diagnosed with the virus with the goal of interrupting transmission and containing the disease. This funding will be diverted to multilateral organizations such as WHO and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Support will also be directed to national public health authorities in China and other countries that have reported confirmed cases. Current national-level partners include the National Health Commission of China and the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention.The release of fast and flexible funding is intended to help multinational organizations and national public health authorities rapidly scale up their virus detection capabilities and implement disease modeling analytics so that they can target resources where they can have the greatest impact in arresting disease spread. This funding is intended to help public health authorities cover the initial cost of labor and supplies while international agencies and national governments appropriate the resources necessary to fund ongoing operations… February 5, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “UPS pilot union reaches agreement with company to make China flying ‘voluntary’ amid coronavirus”. It was written by Leslie Josephs. From the article: The union that represents United Parcel Service pilots said Wednesday it has reached an agreement with the delivery giant to make flying to mainland China “voluntary” as the coronavirus spreads.“This joint effort addresses crewmember concerns over safety during the coronavirus health crisis,” the union said in a statement.Pilots who tell the company that they aren’t comfortable flying China routes because of coronavirus will be “temporarily replaced on those flights,” UPS said in a statement.If pilots opt out of trips to mainland China they will have to take an unpaid leave of absence, but they can also use paid sick leave if they aren’t rescheduled on another route, the union said.UPS said it is prioritizing health care and aid shipments for companies that send China supplies……More than a dozen airlines, including Delta, United, and American have suspended services to mainland China and to Hong Kong, citing a sharp drop in demand because of the outbreak. Others have significantly scaled back service. The cuts mean fewer passenger-plane bellies to fill with cargo, which would normally be a boon to cargo carriers, but concerns about the virus have led to more uncertainty for these air freight companies… February 5, 2020: New York State Department of Health posted a press release titled: “Statement from New York State Health Commissioner Dr. Howard Zucker on Coronavirus Testing”. From the press release: “As of today, samples from 21 New Yorkers have been sent to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for testing for the novel coronavirus. Of these, 12 have come back negative. Four samples from New York City and five samples from New York State outside of New York City are pending, for nine total pending samples. There are still no confirmed cases of novel coronavirus in New York State. While the risk to the general public is still low, we continue to urge New Yorkers to remain vigilant and take proper precautions to protect themselves and their families.”… February 5, 2020: Japan Airlines posted information titled: “(Between February 6 and March 28) Flight suspension, reduction of flight frequency and schedule change due to the impact of the Novel Coronavirus”. From the information: Thank you for your continuous support for JAL Group.Due to the coronavirus outbreak, each country updates its restrictions of entry to its country or quarantine measures from day to day and there has been a decrease in travel demand.For affected customers, we will contact you to offer an alternative flight option. However, we may not be able to offer alternative JL flight. For details, please follow the information below titled “Ticket Refund/Change”. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause you, and we appreciate your understanding and cooperation. February 5, 2020: ANA Group posted information titled “ANA to Temporarily Suspend Service on Select Routes Due to the Coronavirus as of Feb. 6, 2020”. From the information: All Nippon Airways (ANA) will temporarily decrease or suspend operations to and from selected cities starting on Feb. 10. Fights to the following will be affected: (Non affected flights are also inside the chart): February 5, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “China may delay annual meeting of parliament due to virus outbreak – sources”. From the article: China is considering delaying the annual meeting of its top legislative body, five people familiar with the matter said, as it grapples with a virus epidemic that has forced drastic curtailment of travel and other activity to curb its spread.The National People’s Congress (NPC), made up of about 3,000 delegates, typically gathers for a session lasting at least 10 days in Beijing, beginning on March 5, to pass legislation and unveil key economic targets for the year.A postponement would be the first since China adopted the current March schedule in 1995 for the meeting of parliament.“The focus remains on taking steps forward towards meeting on schedule, but we are discussing a range of options as the (virus) situation doesn’t look likely to be contained by March,” a senior government official told Reuters, declining to be identified given the sensitivity of the matter.“A delay is one of those options,” the official said. “It should come as no surprise given that we are in a very difficult time.”……The virus is also inflicting a growing toll on businesses and consumers in the world’s second-largest economy. Strict transport curbs have been imposed in many parts of the country and some cities are in virtual lockdown.To minimize job losses, China’s stability-obsessed leaders are likely to sign-off on more spending, tax relief and subsidies for virus-hit sectors, alongside further monetary easing to spur bank lending and lower borrowing costs for business, policy insiders have told Reuters……China has already postponed a high-level business event, the China Development Forum, which is usually held in late March, and the venue for the Caton Fair, a trade fair in the southern city of Guangzhou, has been suspended until further notice. The spring session of the trade fair was due to begin on April 15.The NPC gathering is crucial this year, as it is set to ratify China’ first-ever civil code, a key milestone in President Xi Jinping’s legal reform effort.The NPC is also widely expected to discuss the months-long protests in Hong Kong, and to announce the annual economic growth target along with China’s defense budget.Under China’s constitution, a full plenary session of the NPC must be held every year… February 5, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Taiwan bans international cruise ships from docking”. From the article: Taiwan’s health authority banned all international cruise ships from docking at the island from Thursday amid increasing threat of the coronavirus outbreak, after more than 10 people were tested positive for the virus on a quarantined cruise liner in Japan.Many tourists aboard the Japanese cruise ship entered Taiwan for a day-trip when the boat anchored at its northern port of Keelung on January 31, according to immigration authority, with local media saying they probably visited several popular tourist sites in Taipei. February 5, 2020: Bloomberg posted an article titled: “Philippines Central Bank Chief Says Better to Cut Rates Soon”. It was written by Benjamin Diokno. From the article: Philippine central bank Governor Benjamin Diokno said it would be better to cut interest rates sooner rather than later, a signal that policy makers will likely lower borrowing costs Thursday.Since monetary policy works with a lag and the central bank is mindful of risks to global growth from the coronavirus outbreak, it’s preferable to act the “sooner the better,” Diokno said in an interview Wednesday in Manila.Dioko chairs Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas’s seven-member rate-setting board, which is expected to lower its key interest rate Thursday by 25 basis points to 3.75%, according to 17 of 25 economists in a Bloomberg survey. The others expect no change… February 5, 2020: Amnesty International posted news titled: “Explainer: Seven ways the coronavirus affects human rights”. From the news: The outbreak of the coronavirus (2019-nCoV) that started in the Chinese city of Wuhan (Hubei province) in late 2019 has been declared a global human health emergency by the World Health Organization (WHO)……The response to an epidemic has the potential to affect the human rights of millions of people. First and foremost is the right to health, but there are several other rights at stake too.“Censorship, discrimination and arbitrary detention have no place in the fight against the coronavirus epidemic,” said Nicholas Bequelin, Regional Director at Amnesty International. “Human rights violations hinder, rather than facilitate, responses to public health emergencies, and undercut their efficiency”. Early CensorshipThe Chinese government has engaged in wide-ranging efforts to suppress information about the coronavirus and the dangers it posed to public health. In late December 2019, doctors in Wuhan shared with colleagues their fears about patients with symptoms similar to the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) that began in China in 2002. They were immediately silenced and punished by the local authorities for “spreading rumours”….…In an online post made a month later, the Supreme People’s Court questioned the decision made by Wuhan authorities. It was widely seen as vindication for the doctors. Yet the efforts to minimize the severity of the outbreak were shared at the highest level of the Chinese government, as evidenced by China’s aggressive lobbying of the World Health Organization not to declare a global health emergency.The right to healthThe Wuhan medical system is now overwhelmed, and medical facilities and health profesionals are struggling to cope with the scale of the outbreak.Many patients are being turned away from hospitals after hours of queueing. Facilities do not have access to the necessary diagnostic tests……Local media reported that people are unable to quickly get to hospitals because of a public transportation shutdown, and, in some cases, unable to remove bodies of the deceased from their homes.The right to health, as guaranteed under the Univeral Declaration of Human Rights, provides for the right to access healthcare, the right to access information, the prohibition of discrimination in the provision of medical services, the freedom from non-consentual medical treatment and other important guarantees.The censorship continues todayThe Chinese authorities’ insistence on controlling the news narrative and stuifling negative coverage has continued to drive censorship of sometimes legitimate information about the virus.Numerous articles have been censored since the beginning of the crisis, including those by mainstream media organizations such as a subsidiary of Beijing Youth Daily and Caijing…Activists harassed and intimidatedPeople attempting to share information about the coronavirus on social media have also been targeted by the Chinese government. For example, an outspoken lawyer and citizen journalist Chen Quishi reported being harassed by the authorities after posting footage from hospitals in Wuhan.Wuhan resident Fang Bin was also briefly taken away by authorities after posting a video proporting to show corpses of coronavirus victims.“While refuting false claims about the virus is crucial, shutting down legitimate journalistic and social media content on the issue serves no public health purpose,” said Nicholas Bequelin …Regional crackdown on “fake news”As the virus has spread from China to neighbouring countries in South-East Asia, so has the trend of states seeking to control coverage of the story.People have been arrested or fined in Malaysia, Thailand, and Viet Nam for posting “fake news” about the outbreak.“Governments must prevent disinformation and provide timely and accurate health guidance. However, any restrictions on freedom of expression must be proportionate, legitimate and necessary.” said Nicholas Bequelin…Discrimination and xenophobiaPeople from Wuhan – even those without symptoms – have been rejected from hotels, barricaded in their own flats and had their personal information leaked online in China, according to media reports.There also has been widespread reports of anti-Chinese or anti-Asian xenophobia in other countries. Some restaurants in South Korea, Japan, and Viet Nam have refused to accept Chinese customers, while Chinese guests were told by a group of protesters to leave a hotel in Indonesia. French and Australian newspapers have also been accused of racism in their reporting of the crisis.Asian communities around the world have pushed back, and the Twitter hashtag #JeNeSuisPasUnVirus (I am not a virus) has trended in France…Border controls and quarantines must be proportionateIn response to the virus, many countries have closed their doors to those travelling from China or other Asian countries, while others have imposted strict quarantine measures. The Australian government has sent hundreds of Australians to an immigration detention centre on Christmas Island, where treatment conditions were previously described as “inhumane” by the Australian Medical Association because of the mental and physical suffering that occured when refugees were detained there.Papua New Guinea has closed its borders to people from all other Asian countries, not limited to those with cases of the coronavirus. This has left some Papua New Guinean students stranded in the Philippines after they were blocked from boarding a flight home on the instruction of the Papua New Guinea authorities.Quarantines, which restrict the right to freedom of movement, may be justified under international law only if they are proportionate, time bound, undertaken for legitimate aims, strictly necessary, voluntary whenever possible, and applies in a non-discriminatory way. Quarantines must be imposed in a safe and respectful manner. The right of those under quarantine must be respected and protected, including ensuring access to health care, food and other necessities… February 6, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 11 February 6. 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted: “Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Situation Report – 17 – ERRATUM”. From the report: Highlights: No new countries reported cases of 2019-nCoV in the past 24 hours.WHO is working with partners to strenghten global diagnostic capacity for 2019-nCoV detection to improve surveillance and track the spread of disease. WHO and partners have activated a network of specialized referral laboratories with demonstrated expertise in the molecular detection of coronavirues. These international labs can support national labs to confirm new cases and troubleshoot their molecular assays.WHO is convening a global research and innovation forum to mobilize international action in response to the new coronavirus, covering a broad spectrum of research areas including epidemiology, clinical care, vaccines, therapeutics, diagnostics, animal health, social sciences, and other topics…. Establishing global/regional coordination and technical guidance: …Currently, there are 15 laboratories that have been identified to provide reference testing support for 2019-nCoV. These laboratories include: 1. Armed Forces Research of Medical Sciences, Thailand2. Erasmus Medical Center, The Netherlands3. Hong Kong University, Hong Kong SAR, China4. Institute of Tropical Medicine, Nagasaki University, Japan5. Institute of Virology, Charité, Robert Koch Institute, Germany6. National Institute for Communicable Diseases, South Africa7. National Institute of Health, Thailand8. National Institute of Virology, India9. National Public Health Laboratory, Singapore10. National Pasteur Dakar, Senagal11. Institut Pasteur, Paris12. Public Health England, UK13. State Research Center for Virology and Biotechnology, Vector Institute, Russia14. United States Center for Disease Control and Prevention, USA15. Victorian Infectious Diseases Reference Laboratory, Australia WHO is working to ensure 2019-nCoV test availability, including: a) screening of 2019-nCoV PCR protocals from academic laboratories for validation data, b) evaluation of the potential to use existing commercial coronavirus assays (e.g. SARS-CoV) to detect 2019-nCoV with high sensitivity, and c) working with commercial and non-commercial agencies with capacity to manufacture and distribute newly-developed 2019-nCoV PCR assays. To increase regional testing capacity, efforts to increase national capacity and provdie regional reference laboratory support is ongoing. WHO has made 250,000 tests available to WHO Regional Offices and national laboratories. These tests are being shipped to 159 laboratories across all WHO regions.WHO will also utilize the Shipping Fund Programme established by the Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System as a mechanism to send clinical samples from patients meeting the case definition of suspected 2019-nCoV infection to international referral laboratoriesNational capacity for detection of 2019-nCoV must be strengthened so that diagnostic testing can be performed rapidly without the need for oversees shipping. One way this will be achieved is by working with existing global networks for detection of respiratory pathogens, such as National Influenza Centres. Confirmed cases of 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions, and cities in China, 6 February 2020: Hubei: 19,665Zhejiang: 954Guangdong: 944Henan: 851Hunan: 711Anhui: 591Jiangxi: 600Chongqing: 389Jiangxi: 600Chongqing: 389Jiangsu: 373Sichuan: 321Shandong: 343Beijing: 274Shanghai: 254Fujian: 215Heilongjiang: 227Shaanxi: 173Guangxi: 168Hebei: 157Yunnan: 128Hainan: 100Liaoning: 89Shanxi: 90Tianjin: 70Gansu: 62Guizhou: 69Jilin: 59Inner Mongolia: 46Ningxia: 40Xinjiang: 36Hong Kong SAR: 18Qinghai: 18Taipei and environs: 11Macao SAR: 10Xizang: 1TOTAL: 28,060 Countries, territories or areas with reported confirmed 2019-nCoV cases and deaths. Data as of 6 February 2020: China – including cases confirmed in Hong Kong SAR (21 confirmed cases, 1 death), Macau SAR (10 confirmed cases) and Taipei and evirons (11 confirmed cases): 28,060 cases (3,697 new)/ 564 deaths (73 new)Singapore: 28 cases (4 new)/ 0 deathsJapan: 25 cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsRepublic of Korea: 23 cases (5 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 14 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 12 cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 cases (0 new)/ 1 deathCambodia: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 25 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 12 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 5 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 12 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 6 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsThe United Kingdom: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 5 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsCases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanese territorial waters: 20 cases (10 new)/ 0 deaths February 6, 2020: California Department of Public Health posted a news release titled: “The California Department of Public health and a Network of Labs Prepare to Begin Novel Coronavirus Testing in California”. From the news release: The California Department of Public Health announced today that 16 laboratories, including the state’s Viral and Rickettsial Disease Laboratory in Richmond, California, will soon be able to perform testing for the novel coronavirus. This service will provide more rapid results than currently available and help to inform public health action and medical care for people who may have been exposed to novel coronavirus. Results from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention currently take between two and seven days. The Public Health Department lab anticipates it will be able to conduct testing beginning Wednesday, February 12, and report results within two days of specimen recipt. Meanwhile, our local partners are also expected to be able to conduct tests within a couple of weeks……To date, based on testing carried out by CDC, the California Department of Public Health confirms six individuals have tested positive for novel coronavirus 2019 in California: two people in Santa Clara County, two people in San Benito County, one person in Los Angeles County and one person in Orange County… February 6, 2020: Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers posted a press release titled: “Gov. Evers’ Statement on 2019 Novel Coronavirus”. From the press release: In response to the first case of the 2019 novel coronavirus in Wisconsin, Governor Evers issued the following statement:“This morning I was briefed by the team handling the response at the Department of Health Services. While we now have a confirmed case of coronavirus in Wisconsin, the risk to the general public remains low. We are working together to prevent disease transmission by evaluating close contacts of the patient and health care personnel who care for the patient with the confirmed case.“Individuals who have been potentially exposed to the patient with the confirmed case are being contacted and advised on symptoms to watch for and steps to take if they experience symptoms. When someone is being evaluated for the virus or has been in close contact with a confirmed case, they are placed in isolation. I want to be very clear: ethnic background has no influence on risk of coronavirus. Only travel history or direct close contact with a case would put someone at risk of transmission. Our public health officials are responding with extreme caution.“I want to thank the Department of Health Services, the Centers for Disease Control and health departments who have been working around the clock to protect Wisconsonites. Any time we are faced with a new disease threat, it can be an anxious time, because there are many unknowns. I want to reinforce that Wisconsin has incredible health professionals who are up to this task, and that the risk to the general public remains low.” February 6, 2020: BBC posted an article titled: “The Chinese doctor who tried to warn others about coronavirus”. It was written by Stephanie Hegarty. From the article: Dr. Li Wenliang, who was hailed a hero for raising the alarm about the coronavirus in the early days of the outbreak, has died of the infection.His death was confirmed by the Wuhan hospital where he worked and was being treated, following conflicting reports on state media.Dr. Li, 34, tried to send a message to fellow medics about the outbreak at the end of December. Three days later, police paid him a visit and told him to stop. He returned to work and caught the virus from a patient. He had been in hospital for at least three weeks.He posted his story from his hospital bed last month on social media site Weibo……It was a stunning insight into the botched response by local authorities in Wuhan in the early weeks of the coronavirus outbreak.Dr Li was working at the centre of the outbreak in December when he noticed seven cases of a virus that he thought looked like Sars – the virus that led to a global epidemic in 2003. The cases were through to come from the Huanan Seafood market in Wuhan and the patients were in quarantine in his hospital.On 30 December, he sent a message to fellow doctors in a chat group to avoid warnning them about the outbreak and advising they wear protective clothing to avoid infection.What Dr. Li didn’t know then was that the disease that had been discovered was an entirely new coronavirus.Four days later he was summoned to the Public Security Bureau where he was told to sign a letter. In the letter he was accused of “making false comments” that had “severely disturbed the social order.”……He was one of eight people who police said were being investigated for “spreading rumours.”At the end of January, Dr. Li published a copy of the letter on Weibo and explained what happened. In the meantime, local authorities had apologized to him but that apology came too late……But just a week after his visit by police, Dr Li was treatimg a woman with glaucoma. He didn’t know that she had been infected with the new coronavirus.In his Weibo post he describes how on 10 January he started coughing, the next day he had a fever and two days later he was in hospital. His parents also fell ill and were taken to hospital.It was 10 days later – on 20 January – that China declared the outbreak an emergency……On 30 January he posted again: “Today nucleic acid testing came back with a positive result, the dust has settled, finally diagnosed.”… February 6, 2020: Taiwan’s Ministry of Health and Welfare posted news titled: “2 more imported cases confirmed in Taiwan; 13 cases are in stable condition”. From the news: The Central Epidemic Command Center (CECC) announced two more cases of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infection on February 6, 2020. The two cases reside in northern Taiwan. One of the cases is a male in his 40s while the other is a female in her 20s. The male patient went to Wuhan, China for work in December of 2019 and left from Wuhan for Liaoning, China on January 17, 2020. He returned to Taiwan from Dalian city, Liaoning province, China on February 2. He developed symptoms, including fever, cough and headache, on February 3 and was hospitalized on February 4. The female patient lived in Wuhan. On January 21, she left Wuhan, transferred in Shenzhen and returned to Taiwan. The female patient developed a productive cough and chest pain on February 1 and was hospitalized on February 4. The two cases were diagnosed with having pneumonia and tested positive for 2019 n-CoV after being reported. The patients are currently being treated in isolation wards and in a stable condition. The hospital and local health agencies have proceeded with prevention measures, including the investigation of the cases and contact tracing, according to relevant procedures. The cumulative total of confirmed cases in Taiwan is 13 as of writing. All confirmed cases are in stable condition, and one of the patients is recovering from the illness and expected to be discharged from the hospital soon. CECC continues to contain the coronavirus. As of now, there is no signs of community-acquired infection in Taiwan.According to the statistics collected by CECC, 55 additional cases of 2019-nCoV infection were reported in Taiwan on February 5, 2020. As of writing, a cumulative total of 1,290 cases have been reported, including 13 confirmed cases, 1,135 individuals removed from the follow-up list, and the remaining ones under quarantine for lab tests of who preliminary tests were negative in 98 and the others are awaiting tests. 13 confirmed cases are in a stable condition and being treated in isolation in the hospital. The contacts of the first confirmed cases have been removed from the tracing list, except that one contact tested positive for the coronavirus. The contacts of the two additional cases confirmed today (February 6) are being traced. The total number of the contacts of the other 10 confirmed cases is 493. Of 493, 12 contacts developed symptoms and were reported. Of 12 reported cases, 2019-nCoV has been ruled out in 10, and 2 are being tested. With respect to the Taiwanese businesspeople returning to Taiwan from Wuhan in the evening on February 3, as of now, five individuals are being treated in negative pressure isolation wards while 242 are under group quarantine and their health conditions are being monitored. The other five displayed symptoms, and two of five will be sent to the hospital for tests. February 6, 2020: South China Morning Post posted an article titled: “Coronavirus: Hongkongers in panic buying of rice, toilet paper and essentials as government stays mum on impending quarantine measures”. It was written by Zoe Low, Gary Gheung and Elizabeth Cheung. From the article: Anxious Hongkongers scrambled on Thursday to stock up on essentials over fears that border restrictions to contain the coronavirus would choke off supplies, while the government provided scant details on the manditory quarentine taking effect in less than 36 hours on arrivals from mainland China.As long queues formed at shops all over the city for the second straight day and people jostled to grab toilet and tissue paper, as well as rice and perishables, food suppliers sought to assure the public there was no need for hoarding……The fears, led by online rumours, mounted when the government announced on Wednesday it would impose a 14-day quarantine on anyone entering from mainland China, sparking concerns that supplies would also be held up……Even as they age assurances, representatives of rice, pork, egg, seafood, poultry and fruit-and-vegetable merchants urged the government to exempt cross-border truck drivers from the 14-day quarantine set to kick in on Saturday, to avert any delays in supplies reaching the city.Separately, amid a week-long strike by public hospital workers now in its fourth day, the Hospital Authority said about 5,000 employees, including some 220 doctors and 3,000 nurses, had not reported for duty……While the virus threat had triggered panic across much of Hong Kong for surgical masks, the anxiety extended midweek to other items being cleared from supermarket shelves.But Kenneth Chan Kin-nin, chairman of the Rice Merchants’ Association of Hong Kong, said rice was in ample supply, adding that 90 percent of it came from Thailand and Vietnam.“The supply of rice is regulated by the government and we still have 13,000 tonnes in storage, which are yet to be used,” he said……President of the Pork Traders General Association of Hong Kong Hui Wai-kin similarly vowed to ensure a stable supply of the meat.. February 6, 2020: The Sydney Morning Herald posted an article titled: “PM warns Australians they are running out of time to get out of China”. It was written by Eryk Bagshaw. From the article: Prime Minister Scott Morrison has urged Australians in China to get on the last commercial Quantas flights out of the country and warned the government may not be able to rescue them if they become stranded during a growing coronavirus lockdown.Two evacuation flights out of Wuhan, the epicenter of the epidemic in Hubei province, have now left the country, but Quantas is still running commercial flights out of Shanghai and Beijing until Sunday. Shanghai is more than 800 kilometers east of Wuhan, where the disease began in December; Beijing is 1500 kilometers north of Wuhan.“Australians who are in mainland China should not assume that Australia will be in a position to put flights as we have into Wuhan,” Mr Morrison said in Canberra on Wednesday.“I would simply say that Quantas are running flights until 9 February and they should avail themselves of those opportunities.”……In Wuhan, an exhibition centre, a convention centre and an indoor stadium have been converted into quarantine facilities to deal with the influx of patients, adding 3400 beds on top of two new hospitals built in a week.The health and economic contagion have also hit the major centers of Beijing and Shanghai. Following the lead of Ikea, Nike has closed half of its stores and mask shortages have been reported across the country as residents shelter in their apartments……Mr Morrison said those Australians who left China now would still be forced to self-isolate for the 14-day quarantine period. The government is aiming for a third flight to leave Wuhan over the weekend, but only the 350 Australians estimated to be trapped in Hubei are eligible for the evacuation to Christmas Island… February 6, 2020: Art Basel (Asia’s largest annual art fair) tweeted: A message from Art Basel regarding the cancellation of #ArtBaselHongKong 2020.” The tweet included an image with the following mesage: We regret to inform you tha Art Basel Hong Kong 2020 has been canceled due to the severe outbreak and spread of the new coronavirus, which has recently been declared a global health emergency by the World Health Organization.Our thoughts are with everyone who has been affected around the world.We remain committed to Hong Kong and look forward to welcoming you to the next edition of Art Basel Hong Kong, which will take place March 25 to March 27, 2021. February 6, 2020: Bangkock Post posted an article titled: “K-pop queen Taeyeon cancels Bangkok shows”. From the article: K-pop superstar Taeyeon has cancelled two concerts in Bangkok over health concerns as the world is battling the spread of the lethal coronavirus.SM True, which promoted her concerts in Bangkok, announced the decision to defer the concerts planned for Feb 22-23 to later dates due to concerns over the virus.“The safety and health of artists, audiences, and staff is our top priority and concern,” the organizers posted a Facebook message.Taeyeon, the former member of girl group Girls’ Generation, planned The Unseen concerts at Thunder Dome Muang Thong Thani… February 6, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Virgin Atlantic extends suspension of London-Shanghai flights until March 28.” From the article: Virgin Atlantic has extended its suspension of daily operations to Shanghai until March 28 due to the outbreak of coronavirus and increased travel restrictions to mainland China.It had previously suspended the flights from London Heathrow to Shanghai for two weeks from Feb 2. On Tuesday, Britain advised that its citizens in China should leave the country if they could.“Given this new FCO advice, the increasing entry restrictions on recent visitors to mainland China, and our rigorous focus on safety, Virgin Atlantic has opted to extend the suspension of Heathrow-Shanghai operations until March 28,” the airline said in a statement. February 6, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “Tesla temporarily closes China stores amid coronavirus fears”. It was written by Lora Kolodny and Evelyn Cheng. From the article: Tesla has temporarily closed its stores in Mainland China as of Sunday, Feb. 2, according to an online post from a company sales employee on that date.The move comes as more than half of China has shut down in an effort to control the spread of a new coronavirus that has killed more than 500 people in the country. Apple said over the weekend it has closed stores in the mainland, through Feb. 9. Many other foreign brands operating in China have also temporarily suspended or limited their local business operations… February 6, 2020: UK Chief Medical Officer Professor Chris Whitty posted a statement titled: “CMO confirms third case of coronavirus in England”. From the statement: A further patient has tested positive for coronavirus, bringing the total number of cases to the UK to 3. The individual did not acquire this in the UK.The patient is being transferred to a specialist NHS centre, and we are using robust infection control measures to prevent any possible further spread of the virus. The NHS is well prepared to manage these cases and we are now working quickly to identify any contacts the patient has had. February 6, 2020: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted a press release titled: “Shipping of CDC 2019 Novel Coronavirus Diagnostic Test Kits Begins”. From the press release: A CDC-developed laboratory test kit to detect 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) began shipping yesterday to select qualified U.S. international laboratories. Distribution of the tests will help improve the global capacity to detect and respond to the 2019 novel coronavirus.The test kit, called the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time Reverse Transcriptase (RT)-PCR Diagnostic Panel (CDC 2019-nCoV Real Time RT-PCR), is designed for use with an existing RT-PCR Testing instrument that is commonly used to test for seasonal influenza.The CDC 2019 novel coronavirus test is intended for use with upper and lower respiratory specimens collected from people who meet CDC criteria for 2019-nCoV testing. The test uses a technology that can provide results in four hours from initial sample processing to result……The test kit has not been FDA cleared or approved, however distribution and use of the test kits follows the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) February 4, 2020, issuance of an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). The tests are being shipped through the International Reagent Resource (IRR), a CDC-established mechanism that distributes laboratory reagents domestically and globally.Initially, about 200 test kits will be distributed to U.S. domestic laboratories and a similar amount will be distributed to select international laboratories. Each test kit can test approximately 700 to 800 patient specimens. Additional test kits will be made available for ordering in the future from the IRR. At this time, each laboratory that places an order will recieve one 2019-nCoV test kits.The IRR is accepting orders for 2019-nCoV tests from qualified laboratories. This includes 115 qualified U.S. laboratories, as well as 191 qualified international laboraties and Department of Defense (DoD) laboratories, as well as 191 qualified international laboratories, such as the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Influenza Surveillance Response System (GISRS) laboratories… February 6, 2020: Holand America Line posted a news (at 10 AM Pacific Time) titled: “Update 2/6/2020 10 AM Pacific Time”. From the news: Holland America Line has been notified that the Japanese Government will not permit Westerdam to call in Japanese ports. The ship had been scheduled to call to Ishigaki Island, Naha, Okinawa, Nagasaki and Fukuoka (Hakata), before its scheduled turn in Yokohama on Feb. 15, where the next cruise was scheduled to embark. The ship is not in quarantine and there are no known cases of coronavirus on board. We are quickly working to develop alternate plans and are keeping guests updated on board as information becomes available. As well, the latest updates will be posted under the Travel Advisory section on our website as soon as they are known. The next cruise that was scheduled to embark in Yokohama on Feb. 15 has been cancelled. Booked guests and their travel advisors will be notified.We are closely monitoring the evolving situation with respect to coronavirus that originated in mainland China and our medical experts are coordinating closely with global health authorities to implement enhanced screening, prevention and control measures for our ships globally. Measures we are implementing include: • Guests who have traveled from or through mainland China, Hong Kong, or Macau, or had contact with a suspected or confirmed case of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) or a person who is under monitoring for coronavirus in the last 14 days prior to sailing will not be permitted to board the ship. • Pre-Boarding medical evaluations, including temperature checks, for persons whom, for any reason, appear or identify as symptomatic (respiratory or fever symptoms); and • For all guests, our standard pre-boarding health reporting advising of their reporting obligations for any illness or symptoms of an illness. • Medical screening for Coronavirus on all guests who visit our onboard Medical Center with symptoms of any respiratory illness. • Reporting to local and national health authorities of all cases of fever and respiratory illness, and any patients with suspected Coronavirus infection. • Crew members from mainland China will be delayed from joining any ship until further notice. Crew members from other regions of the world who may have been scheduled to connect on flights through China have been rerouted. • Additional environmental disinfection onboard will be performed in addition to our regular stringent cleaning and sanitation protocols. The above is subject to change at any time based on the interests of health and safety of our guests and crew as well as any other requirements that may be imposed by local authorities.Westerdam is on a 14-day Taiwan & Japan cruise that departed Hong Kong on Feb. 1. There are 1,455 guests and 802 crew on board, of which 687 guests were continuing on the Feb. 1 sailing from the previous voyage. February 6, 2020: Holand America Line posted a news (at 10 PM Pacific Time) titled: “Updated Statement Regarding Westerdam”. From the news: Holand America Line has been notified that the Japanese Government will not permit Westerdam to call in Japanese ports. This ship had been scheduled to call to Ishigaki Island, Naha, Okinawa, Nagasaki and Fukuoka (Hakata), before its scheduled turn in Yokohama on Feb. 15, where the next cruise was scheduled to embark. The ship is not in quarantine and there are no known cases of coronavirus on board.We want to thank everyone on board Westerdam for their patience and understanding during this extraordinary situation.We also announced earlier today the cancellation of the Feb. 15 Westerdam cruise. Guests and theri travel advisors have been notified. We truly regret having to disappoint our guests.No additional cancellations of cruises beyond Feb. 15 have been announced at this time. However, we are assessing the impact of current port restrictions in Asia on Westerdam cruises departing Feb. 29 or later. We know booked guests are anxious to understand how theri booked cruise may be impacted and we will communicate as soon as new details become finalized… February 7, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 11 February 7, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Situation Report – 18”. From the report: Highlights: No new countries reported cases of 2019-nCoV in the past 24 hours.To date, a total of 72 States Parties were identified to be implementing travel restrictions through official reports, official statements and the media. Of these 72 States Parties, WHO received 23 (32%) official reports from States Parties about their travel restrictions.“The Pandemic Supply Chain Network (PSCN)” has commissioned a market assessment of the personal protective equipment market which will be distributed shortly to stakeholders of the PSCN as it continues to monitor the market. Additionally, senior management of WHO spoke with the stakeholders of the PSCN to ensure the private sector’s continued engagement to distribute supplies to those countries most in need. The PSCN will encourage manufacturers to increase production, commit supplies to frontline health emergency responders, and expand the number of stakeholders who are involved in the PSCN to gain a critical mass of suppliers to mitigate the operational risks within the market. WHO will continue to provide the technical guidance and coordination of supplies to those countries in most need. TECHNICAL FOCUS: Monitoring travel restrictions Since yesterday, 10 additional States Parties are implementing travel restrictions, according to the media and/or official reports to WHO. To date, a total of 72 States Parties were identified to be implementing travel restirctions through official reports, official statements, Of these 72 States Parties, WHO recieved 23 (32%) official reports form States Parties about their travel restrictions. Six other States Parties published official statements but have no yet formally communicated with WHO on their measures. Of note, the situation is subject to change, and some countries are currently in the process of implementing additional resources. Confirmed cases of 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions, and cities in China, 7 February 2020: Hubei: 22,112Zhejaing: 1,006Guangdong: 1,018Henan: 914Hunan: 772Anhui: 665Jiangxi: 661Chongqing: 441Jiangsu: 408Sichuan: 344Shandong: 379Beijing: 297Fuijan: 224Heilongjiang: 227Shaanxi: 184Guangxi: 172Hebei: 171Yunnan: 135Hainan: 111Shanxi: 96Liaoning: 94Tianjin: 79Guizhou: 77Gansu: 70Jilin: 65Inner Mongolia: 49Ningxia: 43Xinjaing: 39Hong Kong SAR: 24Qinghai: 18Taipei and environs: 16Macao SAR: 10Xizang: 1TOTAL: 31,211 Countries, territories or areas with reported confirmed 2019-nCoV cases and deaths as of 7 February 2020: China: including cases confirmed in Hong Kong SAR (24 confirmed cases, 1 death), Macao SAR (10 confirmed cases) and Taipei and environs (16 confirmed cases): 31,211 cases (3,151) new/ 637 deaths (73 new)Singapore: 30 cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsJapan: 25 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRepublic of Korea: 25 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 15 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 14 cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 12 cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Cambodia: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 25 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 12 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 7 cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 13 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 6 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 3 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsThe United Kingdom: 3 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 5 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsInternational conveyance (Japan): (cases identified on a cruise ship curently in Japanese territorial waters): 61 cases (41 new)/ 0 deaths February 7, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on 2010 novel coronavirus – 7 February 2020”. From the remarks: …First, an update on the latest numbers.As of 6am Geneva time today, there were 31,211 confirmed cases in China, and 637 deaths.For the last two days there have been fewer reported new infections in China, which is good news, but at the same time, we caution reading too much into that. The numbers could go up again. As you now, epi curves can zig-zag.Outside China, there are 270 cases in 24 countries, with 1 death.As I mentioned on Wednesday, WHO is sending testing kits, masks, gloves, respirators and gowns to countries in every region.However, the world is facing a severe disruption in the market for personal protective equipment.Demand is up to 100 times higher than normal and prices are up 20 times higher.The situation has been exacerated by widespread, inappropriate use of PPE outside of patient care.As a result, there are now depleted stockpiles and backlogs of 4 to 6 months.Global stocks of masks and respirators are now insufficient to meet the needs of WHO and our partners.WHO estimates that global frontline health emergency responders will require approximately 7% to 10% of market capacity. This percentage may be higher for other critical supplies.Frontline health workers in China require the bulk of PPE supplies.This afternoon I spoke to the Pandemic Supply Chain Network, which includes manufacturers, distributors and logistics providers, to ensure that PPE supplies get to those who need them. The network is focusing initially on surgical masks because of the extreme demand and market pressures.We are appreciative of companies that have taken the decision to only supply masks to medical professionals.There is limited stock of PPE, and we need to make sure we get it to the people who need it most, in the places who need it most.The first priority is health workers.The second priority is those who are sick or caring for someone who is sick.WHO discourages stockpiling of PPE in countries and areas where transmission is low.We call on countries and companies to work with WHO to ensure fair and rational use of supplies, and the rebalancing of the market… February 7, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Just had a long and very good conversation by phone with President Xi of China. He is strong, sharp, and powerfully focused on leading the counterattack on the Coronavirus. He feels they are doing very well, even building hospitals in a matter of only days. Nothing is easy, but… February 7, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “…he will be successful, especially as the weather starts to warm & the virus hopefully becomes weaker, and then gone. Great discipline is taking place in China, as President Xi strongly leads what will be a very successful operation. We are working closely with China to help! February 7, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Another win just in. Nervous Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats in Congress sued me, thrown out. This one unanimous, in the D.C. Circuit. Witch Hunt!” Senator Nancy Pelosi is the Speaker of the House of Representatives. February 7, 2020: New York State website posted news titled: “Governor Cuomo Updates New Yorkers on Novel Coronavirus” From the news: Governor Andrew M. Cuomo today announced an update on the status of testing for the novel coronavirus in New York State. As of today, samples from 22 New Yorkers have been sent to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for testing. Of those, 16 have come back negative. Two samples from New York City and four samples from New York State outside of New York City are pending, for six total pending samples. There are still no confirmed cases of novel coronavirus in New York State.The Governor also issued updates on the number of flu cases, which continues to rise and urged all New Yorkers to take recommended precautions as we approach the peak of flu season……The Department of Health is working closely with its partners at the federal, state and local level on this constantly evolving public health emergency. Now that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has authorized the State to use the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s diagnostic test, New York State Department of Health’s Wadsworth Center is working to implement the coronavirus testing. Wadsworth Center, which has been at the forefront of numerous public health emergencies such as vaping-associated illness, SARS and synthetic cannabinoids, must complete the proper verification protocols before testing can begin.The latest influenza surveillance report shows seasonal flu activity continues to increase across New York State with at least one lab-confirmed case in all 62 counties. The number of laboratory-confirmed flu cases and hospitalizations continue to be widespread since the flu season began in October. Flu season occurs primarily from October through May, and the 2019-20 sesaon has yet to peak.Last week, 1,889 New Yorkers were hospitalized with lab-confirmed influenza. This season, there have been 13,450 flu-related hospitalizations. In addition, last week 17,231 laboratory-confirmed flu cases were reported to the State Department of Health, a 15 percent increase in cases from the week prior. The most lab-confirmed influenza cases reported during a singel week in a flu season was 18,252 in 2017-18.There has been a total of 89,587 lab-confirmed cases reported in New York State this seaon, with three flu-associated pediatric deaths. Influenza activity data is available on the New York State Flu Tracker… February 7, 2020: The Business Times posted an article titled: “Toyota extends China plant closure over coronavirus”. From the article: Japanese audio giant Toyota said on Friday it would keep its Chinese factories shut until February 16, extending its suspension by a week amid the growing coronavirus crisis.“After considering various factors including guidelines from local and regional governments… we’ve decided to continue our suspension of production at all Toyota plants in China until February 16,” spokesman Aaron Fowles told AFP.The Japanese firm had previously said the plants would be mothballed until February 9… February 7, 2020: Amnesty International posted news titled: “China: Doctor’s death highlights human rights failings in coronavirus outbreak”. From the news: Responding to the death of Li Wenliang, the Chinese doctor who was reprimanded by Wuhan police after he tried to issue the first warnings about the novel coronavirus and was then diagnosed with the virus himself, Amnesty International’s Regional Director Nicholas Bequelin said:“The case of Li Wenliang is a tragic reminder of how the Chinese authorities’ preoccupation with maintaining ‘stability’ drives it to suppress vital information about matters of public interest.“China must learn the lesson from Li’s case and adopt a rights-respecting approach to combating the epidemic. Nobody should face harassment or sanctions for speaking out about public dangers, just because it may cause embarassment to the government.”BackgroundLi Wenliang contracted the novel coronavirus while working at Wuhan Central Hospital. He sent out a warning to fellow medics in late December 2019 about patients with symptoms simimar to the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak that began in southern China in 2002. He was immediately silenced and punished by the local authorities for “spreading rumours.”… February 7, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Hong Kong Airlines to cut 400 jobs, ask employees to take unpaid leave – SCMP” From the article: Hong Kong Airlines will slash 400 jobs as the coronavirus outbreak adds to financial troubles for the carrier, the South China Morning Post reported on Friday, citing two sources familiar with the plan.The airline, controlled by cash-strapped Chinese conglomerate HNA Group, will also ask its remaining staff to take at least two months of unpaid leave, SCMP said.The newspaper reported the majority of job cuts were set to fall on pilots and cabin crew and staff have also been warned of the possibility of more roles being cut as it shrinks operations.Hong Kong Airlines plans to cut its daily operations from 82 flights to just 30 from February 11 into March, SCMP reported……Earlier this week, Hong Kong Airlines’ larger rival, Cathay Pacific Airways asked its employees to take three weeks of unpaid leave, saying preserving cash was key and that conditions were grave as during the 2009 financial crisus due to the virus outbreak.Both Cathay and Hong Kong Airlines have already been grappling with a sharp fall in demand since the middle of last year due to widespread, sometimes violent anti-government protests in Hong Kong… February 7, 2020: Burberry Group posted news titled: “Update on the impact of coronavirus”. From the update: “The outbreak of the coronavirus in Mainland China is having a material negative effect on luxury demand. While we cannot currently predict how long this situation will last, we remain confident in our strategy. In the meantime, we are taking mitigaing actions and every precaution for the incredible effort of our teams and our immediate thoughts are with the people directly impacted by this global health emergency” – Marco Gobbetti, Chief Executive OfficerOur most recent guidance for the year ended March 2020 predates the impact of the coronavirus and we wanted to update the market.Currently 24 out of our 64 stores in Mainland China are closed with the remaining stores operating with reduced hours and seeking significant footfall declines. This is impacting retail sales in both mainland China and Hong Kong S.A.R. The spending patterns of Chinese customers in Europe and other tourist destinations have been less impacted to date but given widening travel restictions, we anticipate these to worsen over the coming weeks.We are taking mitigating actions but the benefit in the current year will be limited given the proximity to our March year end. We also intend to continue our key growth initiatives in preparation for a recovery in luxury demand. We will provide a retail trading update following our financial year end.We remain confident in our strategy and are very pleased with the positive response to our brand repositioning and new product. We will continue to focus on newness and fashion, and on inspiring and engaging our customers globally.We fully support the efforts the Chinese government is taking to contain the virus and we are working in close conjunction with local authorities and partners. February 7, 2020: Belfast Live posted an article titled: “Coronavirus Northern Ireland: Baby and mother test results come back”. It was written by Jilly Beattie. From the article: A baby and mother tested for Coronavirus while being cared for at Altnagelvin Hospital in Derry have tested negative, Belfast Live understands.The littel boy is believed to be no more than 13 weeks old.The baby and his mother arrived in Derry after flying into Hong Kong with his older sibling last Sunday.The new mum had contacted her GP on Thursday when her baby showed some symptoms and was told to attend A&E services at Altnagelvin Hospital.The hospital’s emergency protocol was triggered and the A&E was sealed off by police along with an area in the south wing of the hospital.It is understood that both mother and child were tested for the deadly Coronavirus because of their transition from Hong Kong.Staff at the Derry hospital dressed in protective hazmat gear and masks to escort the pair to an isolation area.The tests were carried out in Derry and sent to England for assessment and the results were returned this evening, it is understood.On Friday, the Department of Health said the public will be told when a patient tests positive for Coronavirus in Northern Ireland… February 7, 2020: Ericsson posted a press release titled: “Ericsson withdraws from MWC Barcelona 2020”. From the press release: Following the outbreak and continued spreading of the novel corona virus, Ericsson … has closely monitored the development and adhered to recommendations from relevant national authorities and international bodies, such as the WHO. The company has already taken a number of precautionary measures to ensure the health and safety of employees and to minimize the impact on the company’s operations.After an extensive internal risk assessment, Ericsson has decided to take further precautionary measures by withdrawing from MWC Barcelona 2020, the largest event in the telecom industry.Ericsson appreciates that GSMA have done everything they can to control the risk. However, as one of the largest exhibitors, Ericsson has thousands of visitors in its hall each day and even if the risk is low, the company cannot guarantee the health and safety of its employees and visitors.Börje Ekholm, President and CEO, Ericsson, says: “The health and safety of our employees, customers and other stakeholders are our highest priority. This is not a decision we have taken lightly. We were looking forward to showcasing our latest innovations at MWC in Barcelona. It is very unfortunate, but we strongly believe the most responsible business decision is to withdraw our participation from this year’s event.”To showcase the company’s portfolio and innovations, Ericsson will take the demos and content created for MWC Barcelona to customers in their home markets with local events called “Ericsson Unboxed”. February 7, 2020: Northern Ireland Department of Health posted a statement titled: “Department of Health statement on Coronavirus (Covid-19)”. From the statement: We would like to again assure the public that plans are in place to deal with a positive test for Covid-19 in Northern Ireland when it occurs.It is also inevitable that a number of people will continue to be tested on a precautionary basis in the weeks ahead and it is important to keep these tests in perspective. A test does not mean that a positive result is expected or likely.As of 6 February, a total of 566 tests were concluded across the UK, of which 563 were confirmed negative and 3 positive.Different precautionary measures are taken as part of the testing protocols. This can include protective clothing for health and social care staff — for their protection and protection of the wider public.Again, the use of protective clothing should not be taken as an indication that a positive test is expected.Northern Ireland health authorities do not intend to comment publicly on each case where a person is being tested. There are patient confidentiality issues to consider, particularly when small numbers of people are involved. There is also a need to avoid undue alarm or speculation. This situation will be kept under review.When a positive test for Covid-19 occurs in Northern Ireland, the Chief Medical Officer will make a statement confirming the result and reiterating advice to the general public.While there can be no room of complacency, it is important to stress that NIs health service is well-prepared and used to managing infections. We are working and liaising closely with colleagues in Great Britian and the Republic of Ireland and that co-operation will continue… February 7, 2020: Royal Caribbean tweeted: “(1/3) You may have seen news about Anthem today and may be wondering about our guests and upcoming cruise. None of the four guests being tested by CDC showed any clinical signs and symptoms of coronavirus. One tested positive for Influenza A.” February 7, 2020: Royal Caribbean tweeted: “(2/3) We’ve confirmed these guests had not been in China since January 26th. All other guests were permitted to disembark, and we have been cleared to continue with our next sailing.” February 7, 2020: Royal Caribbean tweeted: “(3/3) However, to reassure our guests, we have delayed our departure until tomorrow, and will be providing hourly updates here: http://royalcaribbean.com/AnthemUpdates February 7, 2020: The Guardian reported on its live blog a post titled “Cruise operator bans Chinese nationals from its ships”. From the post: The cruise line operator Royal Caribbean has said it will refuse any passengers with Chinese, Hong Kong or Macao passports, regardless of when they were last in China.The remarkable statement comes after reports that about two dozen passengers aboard a cruise ship that docted in Bayonne, New Jersey, on Friday morning were screened for coronavirus and four were sent to a local hospital for further screening.In a statement published on its website, Royal Caribbean said that none of the four passengers tested showed clinical signs or symptoms of coronavirus, although one tested positive onboard for flu. However, the company said it would be adopting a number of health screening protocols, including the following:“Regardless of nationality, any guest or crew membe traveling from, to, or through mainland China, Hong Kong, or Macau less than 15 days prior to their sailing will be unable to board any of our ships.Any guests holding a Chinese, Hong Kong or Macau passport, regardless of when they were there last, will not be allowed to board our ships.Any guest or crew member that has been in contact (which the CDC defines as 6 feet or 2 meters) with someone that has traveled from, to, or through mainland China, Hong Kong, or Macau less than 15 days.Additionally, there will be mandatory specialized health screenings performed on:Guests who are unsure if they have been in contact with individuals who have traveled from, to or through mainland China or Hong Kong in the past 15 days;Guests who report feeling unwell or demonstrate any flu-like symptoms;Any guest presenting with fever or low blood oximetry in the specialized health screening will be denied boarding.” February 7, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Coronavirus brings China’s surveillance state out of the shadows”. From the article: …Chinese have long been aware that they are tracked by the world’s most sophisticated system of electronic surveillance. The coronavirus emergency has brought some of that technology out of the shadows, providing the authorities with a justification for sweeping methods of high tech social control.Artificial intelligence and security camera companies boast that their systems can scan the streets for people with even low-grade fevers, recognize their faces even if they are wearing masks and report them to the authorities.If a coronavirus patient boards a train, the railway’s “real name” system can provide a list of people sitting nearby.Mobile apps can tell users if they have been on a flight or a train with a known coronavirus carrier, and maps can show them locations of building where infected patients live… February 7, 2020: Al Jazerra posted an article titled: “Mass wedding in South Korea despite coronavirus fear”. From the article: There has been a mass wedding in South Korea despite coronavirus fear. Many of the 6,000 couples wore face masks.Festivals, concerts and graduation ceremonies have been cancelled because of the risk.But the church says it went ahead with the weddings as it was the 100th anniversary of its leader’s birth.Followers from China were asked not to attend.Mass weddings with tens of thousands of couples have been a signature feature of the church since the 1960s. February 7, 2020: International Business Times posted an article titled: “China Coronavirus Update: Tesla Shuts Down Mainland Stores Over NCoV Outbreak”. It was written by Arthur Villasanta. From the article: Tesla’s production and physical sales presence in China is close to zero with the company closing its Gigafactory Shanghai last week and on Thursday revealing it closed all its sales outlets starting February 2. The sole reason for both drastic moves: prevent the raging Novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak from sweeping mainland China from spreading among Tesla employees and customers.Tesla earlier announced Giga Shanghai will re-open for business on February 10, but there are rumors this date might be reset to a later one due to the mounting toll being inflicted by the Wuhan coronavirus……The temporary closure of Gigafactory Shanghai a month after it began ramping-up production of Model 3s is a big hit to Tesla, which is counting on sales in China to keep its growth going. Tesla only began delivering its first MIC Model 3s to Chinese customers in early January.The delay in deliveries immediately ended Tesla’s fantastic two-day run on Wall Street Monday and Tuesday when its stock skyrocketed an amazing 34 percent. Tesla shares leapt nearly 20 percent on Monday and by 13.7 percent on Tuesday. The Monday boost was the stock’s biggest one-day jump since May, 2013……”The proposed delivery (of cars) in early February will be delayed,” said Tao Lin, vice president of Tesla Global, in a statement posted on Chinese microblogging service Weibo. “We will catch up the production line once the outbreak situation gets better.”… February 7, 2020: Ozy posted an article titled: “The Coronavirus’ next victim: China’s olympic dreams”. It was written by Ben Halder. From the article: …Less than six months out from the world’s most awaited sporting event, premier athletes are typically fine-tuning their traning routines. But many of China’s Olympic teams are instead grappling with the impact of the coronavirus that has already killed more than 600 people and brought disruption and uncertainty to a sporting machine renowned for its efficiency and ruthlessness. The virus, which has already hit China’s economy and crippled public life, now threatens to torpedo its dreams of reversing in Tokyo the ignominy of the 2016 Rio Games, where the second-most successful Olympic nation this mellennium fell third in the medals tally behind the much smaller Great Britain.Global worries over Chinese visitors spreading the virus are leading to restrictions on the country’s teams traning overseas. The Chinese rugby team was due to return to China from a scheduled winter training camp in New Zealand on Jan 27, but is still at its hotel in Tauranga. They now plan to stay in New Zealand until at least mid-March, before traveling to South Africa for another qualifying event – if they’re permitted there. China’s Olympic badmitton team, a factory of gold medals for the nation, were in Bangkok playing a qualifying event when measures to contain the virus were first announced. They’e been allowed back into China but have had to enter a period of quarantine.Teams within the country are also affected. The Chinese Olympic archery team has been sent to train in isolation at an academy in Sichuan. Members of the rifle shooting team seeking Olympic qualifications began an unplanned, isolated training camp in Beijing on Jan. 27, with some who recently returned from Germany sent into a separate quantine. A sports psychologist was brought in to work with the team and help them deal with the disruption.Several qualifying events have been cancelled. The Asian Olympic Wrestling Qualifying event, which was planned for March 27-29 in Xi’anm is set to be rescheduled for later this year. Olympic boxing qualifiers, scheduled for early February in Wuhan, have been postponed by a month and moved to Jordan. Women’s basketball qualification will now take place in Belgrade rather than Foshan in southern China……But as more countries restrict arrivals from China, and fears of a pandemic spread, this focus on the games will be further tested. Between February and April, Chinese athletes are scheduled to take part in over 100 Olympic qualifying events in foreign countries. This is in addition to countless training camps for Chinese athletes across Asia and beyond. It’s unclear ho these host nations – and ultimately Japan, come the Olmpics – will manage Chinese arrivals, and whether some athletes or entire teams might be barred from participating… February 7, 2020: Public Health England posted a news story titled: “PHE novel coronavirus diagnostic test rolled out across UK”. From the news: The novel coronavirus diagnostic test developed by Public Health England (PHE) is being rolled out to laboratories across the UK starting Monday 10 February 2020. The increase in diagnostic capacity from one laboratory in London to 12 labs over the coming weeks, will accelerate the country’s testing capabilities.The UK was one of the first countries outside China to have assured testing capability for the novel coronavirus. At PHE’s laboratories in London, it has the capacity to process samples from more than 100 people a day.Now, to ensure that the country is prepared for further cases and to speed up the time from a sample being taken to a result in the lab, the test will be carried out by trained scientists across England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. This increases testing capacity to more than 1,000 people a day for England……In addition to processing samples from suspected cases in this country, PHE is now working as a rference laboratory for WHO, testing samples from countries that do not have assured testing capabilities. The laboratories are in the following locations: Scotland (2 laboratories)Northern IrelandWalesLondonCambridgeBirminghamBristolManchesterLeedsNewcastleSouthampton February 7, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Shanghai to help Tesla resume production amid coronavirus spread”. It was written by Brenda Goh and Samuel Shen. From the article: U.S. electric carmaker Tesla’s … factory in China’s financial hub of Shanghai will resume production on Feb. 10 with assistance to help it cope with a spreading epidemic of coronavirus, a Shanghai government official said on Saturday……Tesla warned on Jan. 30 that it would see a 1-1.5 week delay in the ramp-up of Shanghai-built Model 3 cars as a result of the epidemic, which has severely disrupted communications and supply chains across China.Tesla Vice President Tao Lin said this week that production would restart on Feb. 10 and that car deliveries from the plant would be temporarily delayed.“In view of the practical difficulties key manufacturing firms including Tesla have faced in resuming production, we will coordinate to make all efforts to help companies resume production as soon as possible,” Shanghai municipal government spokesman Xu Wei said……The Shanghai government also said on Saturday it would ask banks to extend loans with preferential rates to small companies and exempt firms in hard-hit sectors like hospitality from value-added tax, among other measures to prop up businesses during the epidemic.Such assistance would also apply to foreign companies. February 7, 2020: Toyota posted an announcement titled: “Toyota Provides Additional Aid For Coronavirus-impacted China”. From the announcement: Previously, Toyota Motor Corporation (Toyota) President Akio Toyoda made clear the policy to “mindful of the feelings on those in the midst of this outbreak, reach conclusions more swiftly, make prompt decisions, and take immediate action faster than ever focusing on the safety and security as the highest priority.” Based on this policy, Toyota today announces that it will join Toyota and JVs with GAC and FAW. to provide additional aid for those in areas most impacted by the new coronavirus in China.The in-kind donation will include medical masks, protective medical clothing, and medical-use hats for health care providers, as well as other medical supplies, such as disinfectant, purchased through the companies’ global network. The procurement of these supplies will be done in a way to limit supply strains on local resources, and it is our combined hope that the items will be found helpful for the local population, especially the healthcare professionals who are on the front lines caring for and administering to the Chinese people.We offer these and the hope of all Toyota-related companies and our joint venture partners as well as the efforts of our team members, their families and our other stakeholders for the soonest possible recovery of those people in the affected areas. February 7, 2020: U.S. Department of State posted a travel advisory titled: “Thailand Travel Advisory”. From the travel advisory: Travel Advisory February 7, 2020Thailand – Level 1: Exercise Normal PrecautionsGlobal Health Adivisory: Do Not Travel. Avoid all international travel due to the global impact of COVID-19.Exercise normal precautions in Thailand. Some areas have increased risk. Read the entire Travel Advisory. Reconsider travel to: Yala, Pattanni, Narathiwaf, and Songkhla provinces due to civil unrest. Read the Safety and Security section on the country information page. If you decide to travel to Thailand: Enroll in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP) to receive Alerts and make it easier to locate you in an emergency.Follow the Department of State on Facebook and Twitter.Review the Crime and Safety Reports for Thailand.U.S. citizens who travel abroad should always have a contingency plan for emergency situations. Review the Traveler’s Checklist. Yala, Pattanni, Narathiwaf, and Songkhla Provinces – Level 3: Reconsider Travel Periodic violence directed mostly at Thai government interests by a domestic insurgency continues to affect security in the southernmost provinces of Yala, Pattani, Narathiwat, and Songkhla. U.S. citizens are at risk of death or injury due to the possibility of indiscriminate attacks in public places. Martial law is in force in this region.The U.S. government has limited ability to provide emergency services to U.S. citizens in these provinces as U.S. government employees must obtain special authorization to travel to these provinces. February 7, 2020: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) posted a press release titled: “Remarks at Briefing by Members of the President’s Coronavirus Task Force”. From the press release: The remarks were given by HHS Secretary Alex Azar. He was surrounded by other members of the Coronavirus Task Force. The website has a video. …This briefing from President Trump’s coronavirus task force aims to do two things: provide an update on the novel coronavirus, and provide the latest on the extensive, aggressive actions that the President has taken to keep Americans safe and respond to the outbreak.Following my remarks, you will hear from Dr. Robert Redfield, Director of the CDC; Dr. Tony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Deputy Secretary of State Stephen Biegun; Acting Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security Ken Cuccinelli; and Assistant Secretary of Transportation Joel Szabat.We’re also joined by HHS’s Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Dr. Robert Kadlec……As I said last week, we are working as quickly as possible on the many unanswered questions about the virus.That includes exactly how rapidly it spreads, how deadly it is, whether it is commonly transmitted by patients who are not yet displaying symptoms, and other issues.There have now been 12 confirmed cases of the novel coronavirus in the United States, including two cases of transmission to people who had not recently been to China.Right now, our scientists and public health experts are trying to learn more about the virus using the data we have from China and the cases we have here. In the very near future, we hope, they will be able to work with their Chinese counterparts and other international experts on the ground in China.Even as we endeavor to answer these important questions, our assessment of the immediate risk to the American public from this virus remains the same as last week.Although the virus represents a potentially very serious public health threat, and we expect to continue seeing more cases here, the immediate risk to the American public at this time is low……Since last week, we’ve notified healthcare providers that those billing Medicare and Medicaid are expected to follow CDC guidelines for infection control related to the novel coronavirus. Our Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, or BARDA, has expanded its work with a pharmaceutical company and found a candidate therapeutic for the coronavirus, while research on such countermeasures continues at NIH and elsewhere in the private sector.Our longstanding offer to send world-class experts to China to assist remains on the table, and this week the State Department helped deliver 17.8 tons of relief supplies to Hubei, the epicenter of the outbreak… February 7, 2020: Holand America Line posted “Update: 2/7/2020 1:00pm Pacific Time”. From the update: Westerdam is currently sailing on a southwesterly course off the coast of Taiwan to best position the ship to access potential port locations where we can disembark our guests. We are evaluating several options and working with different governments for a swift resolution.Guests on board continue to be safe and well cared for. The ship is not in quarantine and we have no reason to believe there are any cases of coronavirus on board despite media reports. The ship has sufficient fuel and food provisions to last until the end of the voyage. We are providing free internet and phone access for guests and crew to stay in contact with their loved ones. Guests have been provided a full refund and a future cruise credit.This is a very dynamic situation as we continue to manage around evolving and changing restrictions in the region. We sincerely thank our guests and crew on Westerdam — and their loved ones — for their patience during this extraordinary time.The latest information will continue to be posted under the News & Travel Advisory section of our website at hollandamerica.com.The Westerdam’s Feb. 15 cruise has been cancelled and guests have been notified. No cancellations beyond Feb. 15 have been announced at this time. However, we are assessing the impact of current port restrictions in Asia on cruises departing Feb. 29 or later. We will communicate details as they become finalized.For all of our cruises, we continue to monitor the evolving situation with respect to the coronavirus that originated in mainland China, and our medical experts are coordinating closely with global health authorities to implement enhanced screening, prevention and control measures for our ships globally. Measures we are implementing include: Guests who have traveled from or through mainland China, Hong Kong or Macau, or had contact with a suspected or confirmed case of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) or a person who is under monitoring for coronavirus in the last 14 days prior to sailing, will not be permitted to board the ship. Pre-boarding medical evaluations, including temperature checks, for persons who, for any reason, appear or identify as symptomatic (respiratory or fever symptoms).For all guests, our standard pre-boarding health form advising of their obligation to report any illness or symptoms of an illness.Medical screening for coronavirus of all guests who visit our onboard Medical Center with symptoms of any respiratory illness.Reporting to local and national health authorities of all cases of fever or respiratory illness, and any patients with suspected coronavirus infection.Crew members from mainland China will be delayed from joining any ship until further notice. Crew members from other regions of the world who may have been scheduled to connect on flights through China have been rerouted.Additional environmental disinfection on board will be performed in addition to our regular stringent cleaning and sanitation protocols. The above is subject to change at any time based on the interests of health and safety of our guests and crew as well as any other requirements that may be imposed by local authorities.Westerdam is on a 14-day Taiwan & Japan cruise that departed Hong Kong Feb.1. and was scheduled to end at Yokohama Feb. 15. There are 1,455 guests and 802 crew onboard, of which 687 guests continued on the Feb. 1 sailing from the previous voyage. February 8, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 11 February 8, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Situation Report – 18”. From the report: TECHNICAL FOCUS: Monitoring travel restrictions: Since yesterday, 10 additional States Parties are implementing travel restrictions, according to the media and/or official reports to the WHO. To date, a total of 72 States Parties were identified to be implementing travel restrictions through official reports, official statements and the media. Of these 72 States Parties, WHO recieved 23 (32%) official reports from states about their travel restrictions. Six other States Parties published official statements but have not yet formally communicated with WHO on their measures. Of note, the situation is subject to change, and some countries are currently in the process of implementing additional restrictions. Confirmed cases of 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions in cities in China, 7 February 2020: Hubei: 22,112Zhejaing: 1,006Guangdong: 1018Henan: 914Hunan: 772Anhui: 665Jiangxi: 661Chongqing: 411Jiangsu: 408Sichuan: 344Shangong: 379Beijing: 297Shanghai: 269Fujian: 224Heilongjiang: 227Shaanxi: 184Guangxi: 172Hebei: 171Yunnan: 135Shanxi: 96Liaoning: 94Tianjin: 79Guizhou: 77Gansu: 70Jilin: 65Inner Mongolia: 49Ningxia: 43Xinjang: 39Hong Kong SAR: 24Qinghai: 18Taipei and environs: 16Macao SAR: 10Xizang: 1TOTAL: 31,211 Countries, territories or areas with reported confirmed 2019-nCoV cases and deaths. Data as of 7 February 2020: China: including cases confirmed in Hong Kong SAR (24 confirmed cases, 1 death), Macao SAR (10 confirmed cases) and Taipei and environs (16 confirmed cases): 32,211 cases (3,151 new)/ 637 deaths (73 new)Singapore: 30 cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsJapan: 25 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRepublic of Korea: 24 cases (1 new)/0 deathsAustralia: 15 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 14 cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 12 cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Cambodia: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 25 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 12 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 7 cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 13 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 6 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 3 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsThe United Kingdom: 3 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 5 cases/ 0 deathsInternational conveyance (Japan): cases identified on a cruise ship curently in Japanese territorial waters: 61 cases (41 new)/ 0 deaths February 8, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “We will not be touching your Social Security or Medicare in Fiscal 2021 Budget. Only the Democrats will destroy them by destroying our country’s greatest economy Economy!” February 8, 2020: Government of Canada posted a news release titled: “Government of Canada Repatriates Canadians and their families from the Epicentre of the 2019-nCoV Outbreak in China”. From the news release: Yesterday, we welcomed home 174 Canadians and their family members travelling on a Government of Canada-chartered plane, as well as 39 who travelled on a second flight led by the United States from Wuhan, China.The repatriated Canadians and their family members were met at Canadian Forces Base Trenton by Canada Border Services Agency officers, and were thoroughly assessed by quarantine officers from the Public Health Agency of Canada.They will stay in isolation at CFB Trenton for 14 days, out of an abundance of caution, to reduce the risk of spread of the virus. Of the 213 returning Canadians and their family members, none have exhibited symptoms of the novel coronavirus.A second and final chartered flight is planned to transport Canadians from Wuhan to Canada.We welcome the leadership of the World Health Organization and continue to work with our international partners to support the global initiatives that are helping to strenghten health systems and to improve early detection of viruses such as the novel coronavirus. We will also continue working with provinces and territories in the days and weeks to come, as well as continuing to liaise with Canadian consular officials to assist other Canadians who may be affected.We would like to remind Canadians that the risk of the virus within Canada remains low at this time. We have measures in place to protect the health and safety of Canadians here at home and those who are returning. February 8. 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Volkswagen says restart of some China plants postponed until February 17”. From the article: Volkswagen … has postponed restarting production at most China plants in its joint venture with SAIC Motor… and the Tainjin plant in its JV with FAW Group until Feb. 17 amid the coronavirus epidemic.One car-manufacturing plant Volkswagen operates with SAIC in Shanghai and most of the plants in the FAW joint venture will restart on Feb. 10, the German automaker said in an emailed statement on Saturday.Volkswagen said it was facing supply chain challenges as China goes back to work after the extended Lunar New Year holiday, as well as limited travel options for its employees. February 8, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “China’s Tencent asks employees to keep working from home until Feb. 21”. From the article: Chinese gaming giant Tencent Holdings Ltd has asked its employees to continue working from home until Feb. 21, extending the period from Feb. 14 announced previously, to protect employees from the spread of coronavirus, the company said on its official WeChat account on Sunday… February 8, 2020: BBC posted an article titled: “Coronavirus: Five Britons in French ski chalet catch virus” From the article: Five Britons have tested positive for coronavirus in eastern France, the French health minister has confirmed.Four adults and a child were diagnosed with the virus after coming into contact with a British national who recently returned from Singapore.The man returned to the UK on 28 January before being diagnosed with the virus himself on Thursday……In France, the five Britons with the coronavirus – who were staying in the same ski chalet – are not in a serious condition, French officials said.But the authorities are closing two schools next week, both of which are attended by the child with the virus, a nine-year-old boy who lives in the ski resort of Contamines-Montjoie with his family……The Briton had stayed in Singapore on a business trip from 20 to 23 January, the French health ministry said.He arrived at Contamines-Montjoie in Haute-Savoie, on 24 January for a four-day stay, before returning to England on 28 January.On his return to the UK, he is thought to have isolated himself at his Brighton home and called the NHS 111 number. After a positive test, he was taken to St. Thomas’ Hospital in London where he is being treated… February 8, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “‘Enemy of mankind’: Corinavirus deaths top SARS as China returns to work”. It was written by Winni Zhou and Dominique Patton. From the article: China raised the death toll from its coronavirus outbreak to 811 on Sunday, passing the number killed globally by the SARS epidemic, as authorities made plans for millions of people returning to work after an extended Lunar New Year break.Many of China’s usually teeming cities have almost become ghost towns during the past two weeks as Communist Party rulers ordered virtual lockdowns, cancelled flights, closed factories and shut schools.Even on Monday, a large number of workplaces and schools will remain closed and many white-collar employees will work from home.The scale of the potential hit to an economy that has been the engine of global growth in recent years has taken a toll on financial markets, as shares slumped and investors switched to safe-havens such as gold, bonds and the Japanese yen.China’s ambassador to Britian described the newly identified virus as “the enemy of mankind” in a BBC interview on Sunday, but added, “it is controllable, is preventable, is curable.”……China’s cabinet said it would coordinate with transport authorities to ensure the smooth return of work of employees in key industries such as food and medicines.The State Council’s special coronavirus group also said workers should return in “batches”, rather than all at once, to reduce infection risks……As millions of Chinese prepared to go back to work, the public dismay and mistrust of official numbers was evident on Weibo, China’s equivalent of Twitter……Authorities had told businesses to tack up to 10 extra days on to holidays that has been due to finish at the end of January and some restrictions continued……Hebei province, which surrounds Beijing, will keep schools shut until March 1, the People’s Daily newspaper said. Several provinces have shut schools until the end of February… February 9, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 11 February 9, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Situation Report – 20” From the report: No new countries reported cases of 2019-nCoV in the past 24 hours.Update on the Cruise Ship Diamond Princess:On 9 February, Japanese National Health Authorities provided WHO with a detailed update on the situation of the Cruise Ship Diamond Princess, currently harboured in Yokohama, Japan. Following confirmation of a case of 2019-nCoV, all crew and passengers are being quarantines for a 14-day period on board the vessel, asked to stay in their cabins and to wear a mask when leaving their cabin. All crew and passengers are closely followed-up and are medically examined and tested for 2019-nCoV when displaying any signs or symptoms suggestive of 2019-nCoV disease. The quarantine period wil lcome to an end on 19 February. Epidemilogical and environmental investigations are ongoing.As of 8 February, 64 individuals were found to have been infected with 2019-nCoV among passengers and crew members. All individuals testing positive were disembarked and admitted for medical care in infectious disease hospitals in the Yokohama area. Close contacts of the infected passengers are asked to remain in quarantine for 14 days from last contact with a confirmed case. Thus, the quarantine period will be extended beyond the 19 Febrary as appropriate only for close contacts of newly confirmed cases. Confirmed cases of 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 9 February 2020: Hubei: 27,100Guangdong: 1,120Zhejiang: 1,075Henan: 1,033Hunan: 838Anhui: 779Jiangxi: 740Jiangsu: 468Chongqing: 446Shandong: 435Sichuan: 386Beijing: 326Heilongjiang: 307Shanghai: 292Fujian: 250Shaanxi: 208Hebei: 206Guangxi: 195Yunnan: 140Hainan: 128Shanxi: 115Liaoning: 105Guizhou: 96Tianjin: 88Gansu: 81Jilin: 78Inner Mongolia: 54Ningxia: 45Xinjiang: 45Hong Kong SAR: 26Qinghai: 18Taipei and environs: 17Macau SAR: 10Xizang: 1TOTAL: 37,251 Counties, territories or areas with reported confirmed 2019-nCoV cases and deaths. Data as of 9 February 2020: China: including cases confirmed in Hong Kong SAR (26 confirmed cases, 1 death), Macao SAR (10 confirmed cases) and Taipei and environs (17 confirmed cases): 37,251 cases (2657 new)/ 812 deaths (89 new)Singapore: 40 cases (7 new)/ 0 deathsRepublic of Korea: 27 cases (3 new)/ 0 deathsJapan: 26 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 17 cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 15 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 14 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Cambodia: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 32 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 12 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 7 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 14 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 11 cases (5 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 3 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsThe United Kingdom: 3 cases (0 new)/0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 7 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsInternational conveyance (Japan): cases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanes territorial waters: 64 cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths February 9, 2020: Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the World Health Organization, tweeted: “I’ve just been at the airport seeing off members of an advance team for the @WHO-led #2019nCoV international expert mission to #China, led by Dr. Bruce Aylward, veteran of past public health emergencies”. This was the start of a thread. February 9, 2020: Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the World Health Organization, tweeted: “As I told media yesterday, #2019nCoV spread outside #China appears to be slow now, but could accelerate. Containment remains our objective, but all countries must use the window of opportunity created by the containment strategy to prepare for the virus’s possible arrival.” February 9, 2020: Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the World Health Organization, tweeted: “There’ve been some concerning instances of onward #2019nCoV spread from people with no travel history to . The detection of a small number of cases may indicate more widespread transmission in other countries; in short, we may only be seeing the tip of the iceberg.” February 9, 2020: Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the World Health Organization, tweeted: “In an evolving public health emergency, all countries must step up efforts to prepare #2019nCoV’s possible arrival and do their utmost to contain it should it arrive. This means lab capacity for rapid diagnosis, contact tracing and other tools in the public arsenal.” February 9, 2020: Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the World Health Organization, tweeted: “I reiterate my call on all countries to share what they know about #2019nCoV in real time with @WHO. I reiterate my call for calm. I reiterate my call for solidarity – human, financial, and scientific solidarity. Any breach in solidarity is a victory for the virus.” February 9, 2020: Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the World Health Organization, tweeted: “In the spirit of solidarity, donors have been stepping up, but we have not reached our goal of US$675 million for @WHO and vulnerable countries. #2019nCoV”. February 9, 2020: Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the World Health Organization, tweeted: “In the spirit of scientific solidarity, 400 of the world’s leading experts will gather this week @WHO HQ Geneva to prioritize work on all the tools we need, including rapid diagnostics, a vaccine & effective treatments.” This tweet included a link to a WHO article. February 9, 2020: Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the World Health Organization, tweeted: “In the spirit of human solidarity, I salute the doctors, nurses, caregivers and public #healthworkers on the front lines who, at personal risk, are doing their utmost to stem the #2019nCoV outbreak. They are the true heroes of this outbreak.” February 9, 2020: Government of Canada posted a news release titled: “Canada supports China’s ongoing response to novel coronavirus outbreak”. From the news release: Canada is working with its partners and international organizations to control the spread of the novel coronavirus. This is vital to helping those affected and protecting the health and safety of people around the world. To support China’s ongoing response to the outbreak, Canada has deployed approximately 16 tonnes of personal protective equipment, such as clothing, face shields, masks, goggles and gloves to the country since February 4, 2020. This equipment has been provided in collaboration with the Canadian Red Cross and the Red Cross Society of China… February 9, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “DRAIN THE SWAMP!” February 9, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN and then, KEEP AMERICA GREAT!” February 9, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Hyundai, Kia to gradually resume South Korea output”. It was written by Joyce Lee. From the article: Hyundai Motor… and sister firm Kia Motors… will gradually increase production in South Korea from Feb. 11, the companies said in a statement.Hyundai last week became the first global automaker to suspend production outside China due to the coronavirus outbreak disrupting supply from China.Earlier on Monday, Hyundai Motor’s union spokesman said that suppliers had resumed production in China on Monday and most of the automaker’s plants in South Korea were expected to resume production between Feb 11 and Feb 17……A Kia official said earlier that the automaker had suspended most production at its three car plants in South Korea Monday due to a shortage of parts.Most of the production at Kia’s Gwangju and Sohari factories will be suspended on Monday and Tuesday, the official said, adding the company will monitor availability of auto parts in order to determine whether to resume production after that.Kia’s Hwaseong factory halted output on Monday and is expected to resume production on Tuesday, he said. February 9, 2020: HellokPop posted an article titled: “SEVENTEEN Cancels Upcoming “Ode To You” Stops Due to Ongoing Health Concerns”. It was written by Khriz Virgilo. From the article: Pledis Entertainment has issued a precautionary measure for the safety of Seventeen and their beloved carats!With the current health conditions worldwide, SEVENTEEN has decided not to push through with the upcoming stops of their ongoing world tour Ode to You.In an official statement recently released by Pledis Entertainment, the agency announced that their thirteen-member group will no longer perform oveseas for the rest of February and March.“Due to the on-going coronavirus outbreak, we have decided to cencel SEVENTEEN’s February and March world tour in consideration of the health and safety of both artist and fans,” the agency said.Making the health and safety of the artist, audience, and staff as their top priority, the company then added, “We made this dicision to prevent any potential harm. Thereby, we regret to announce the following tour dates will be cancelled.” February 22, 2020: Kuala LumpurFebruary 29, 2020: TaipeiMarch 3, 2020: MadridMarch 5, 2020: ParisMarch 8, 2020: LondonMarch 10, 2020: Berlin February 9, 2020: Government of Canada posted a statement titled: “Statement from the Chief Public Officer of Canada on the release of selected individuals from quarantine for 2019 novel coronavirus”. From the statement: On February 7, 2020, the Government of Canada repatriated Canadians and their families from Wuhan, China, which is the epicentre of the outbreak of novel coronavirus (referred to as 2019-nCoV). Repatriated Canadians and their family members are at Canadian Forces Base Trenton for 14 days for further health assessment and observation. This action is being taken to reduce the risk of spread of 2019-nCoV, based on our knowledge of the incubation period for the virus.Pursuant to an Emergency Order under the Quarantine Act, as the Chief Public Health Officer (CPHO), I have the discretion to determine, on a case-by-case basis, whether the quarantine can be for a shorter period based on an assessment of the risk of harm to public health. In exercising this discretion, I consider the risk of exposure – taking into account relevant factors such as the time spent in the epicentre of the outbreak, the use of personal protective equipment, and any contact with a person showing symptoms of the novel coronavirus.I have assessed each member of the Canadian Armed Forces medical staff who accompanied the returning travellers, and dtermined that they do not pose a risk of significant harm to public health, and consequently their continued quarantine is not required.These individuals are not at risk of exposure to 2019-nCoV as they did not spend time in the epicentre of the outbreak, followed appropriate infection prevention and control protocols (including the use of personal protective equipment), and did not have unprotected contact with passengers or persons at risk of having the virus. All passengers were asymptomatic during the flight, and to date, none of the returning Canadians or their family members have exhibited symptoms of 2019-nCoV.I will work closely with my provincial and territorial colleagues, as well as the World Health Organization and other international partners, to take the steps necessary to protect the health and safety of Canadians and to mitigate the risk of spread of the virus in Canada. February 9, 2020: TechCrunch posted an article titled: “Amazon withdraws from MWC over coronavirus-related concerns”. Ot was written by Catherine Shu. From the article: …In a statement emailed to TechCrunch, an Amazon spokesperson said “due to the outbreak and continued concerns about novel coronavirus, Amazon will withdraw from exhibiting and participating in Mobile World Congress 2020, scheduled for Feb. 24-27 in Barcelona, Spain.”… February 9, 2020: UK Chief Medical Officer Professor Chris Whitty posted a statement titled: “CMO confirms fourth case of coronavirus in England”. From the statement: A further patient has tested positive for novel coronavirus in England, bringing the total number of cases in the UK to 4.The new case is a known contact of a previously confirmed UK case, and the virus was passed on in France.Experts at Public Health England continue to work hard tracing patient contacts from the UK cases. They successfully identified this individual and ensured the appropriate support was provded.The patient has been transferred to a specialist NHS centre at The Royal Free Hospital, and we are now using robust infection control measures to prevent any possible further spread of the virus. The NHS is extremely well prepared to manage these cases and treat them, and we are working quickly to identify any further contacts the patient has had. This patient followed NHS advice by self-isolating rather than going to A&E. February 9, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “China’s producer prices break deflation spell but coronavirus risks grow”. From the article: China’s factory-gate prices snapped six months of year-on-year declines in January, although prolonged business closures from the coronavirus outbreak mean positive momentum is unlikely to persist.The virus has killed more than 900 in China and has also added to price pressures with consumer inflation hitting a more than eight-year high as government restrictions on movement drove residents to stock up on essentials……Analysts attributed the rise to improving activity in the industrial sector at the end of last year, buoyed by a trade truce with the United States and government stimuus, which finally appeared to gain traction.However, those gains are not expected to be sustained amid growing economic headwinds from the coronavirus… February 9, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: Airbnbsuspends bookings in Beijing for rest of February”. From the article: Airbnb said on Monday it has suspended bookings in Beijing until Feb. 29 as death toll from the coronavirus outbreak in China exceeded 900.“In light of the novel coronavirus outbreak and guidance from local authorities for the short-term rental industry during this public health emergency, bookings of all listings in Beijing with check-in from 7 February 2020 to 29 February 2020 have been suspended,” the short-term home rental company said in an email… February 10, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 11 February 10, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted: “Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Situation Report – 21”. From the report: No new countries reported cases of 2019-nCoV in the past 24 hours.The WHO R&D Blueprint is a global strategy and preparedness plan that allows the rapid activation of R&D activities during epidemics. On 11-12 February, WHO is convening a global research and innovation forum to mobilize international action and enable identification of key knowledge gaps and research priorities to contribute to the control of 2019n-CoV. The forum will include members of the scientific community, researchers from Member States’ public health agencies, regulatory experts, bioethicists with expertise in research in emergencies, and major funder of research related to 2019-nCoV. Confirmed cases of 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 10 February 2020: Hubei: 29,631Guangdong: 1,151Zhejiang: 1,104Henan: 1,073Hunan: 897Anhui: 830Jiangxi: 771Jiangsu: 492Chongqing: 468Shangong: 459Sichuan: 405Beijing: 337Heilongjiang: 331Shanghai: 295Fuijan: 261Hebei: 218Shaanxi: 213Guangxi: 210Yunnan: 141Hainan: 136Shanxi: 119Guizhou: 109Liaoning: 107Tianjin: 91Gansu: 85Jilin: 80Inner Mongolia: 58Ningxia: 49Xinjiang: 49Hong Kong SAR: 36Qinghai: 18Taipei and environs: 18Macao SAR: 10Xizang: 1TOTAL: 40,235 Countries, territories or areas with reported confirmed 2019-nCoV cases and deaths. Data as of 10 February 2020: China: including confirmed cases in Hong Kong SAR (36 confirmed cases, 1 death), Macao SAR (10 confirmed cases) and Taipei and environs (18 confirmed cases): 40,235 cases (3,073 new)/ 909 deaths (97 new)Singapore: 43 cases (3 new)/ 0 deathsRepublic of Korea: 27 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsJapan: 26 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 18 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 15 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 14 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Cambodia: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 32 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 12 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 7 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 14 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 11 cases (0 new) / 0 deathsThe United Kingdom: 4 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 3 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 7 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsInternational Conveyance (Japan): (Cases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanese territory waters) 70 cases (6 new)/ 0 deaths February 10: 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Will be in Manchester, New Hampshire, tonight for a Big Rally. Want to shake up the Dems a little bit – they have a really boring deal going on. Still waiting for the Iowa results, votes were fried. Big crowds in Manchester! February 10, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Hope the Fake News, which never discusses it, is talking about the big crowds forming for my New Hampshire Rally tonight. They won’t!” February 10, 2020: The White House posted news titled: “Remarks by President Trump at the White House Business Session with our Nation’s Governors”. There is a small portion of it that is relevant to this blog post: President Donald Trump: “… Now, the virus that we’re talking about having to do – you know, a lot of people think that goes away in April with the heat – as the heat comes in. Typically, that will go away in April. We’re in great shape, though. We have 12 cases – 11 cases, and many of them are in good shape now. So – but a very good question.” This response was part of a long answer to a question from Governor Ricketts, who asked: “Mr. President, you’ve had a lot of successes on trade – USMCA, China and Japan. What’s next on your agenda for trade?” February 10, 2020: C-SPAN posted a video titled: “President Trump Rally in Manchester, New Hampshire”. There is a small portion that is relevent to this blog post: President Donald Trump: “…and by the way… the virus!… They’re working hard. Looks like by April, you know in theory, when it gets a little warmer, it miraculously goes away – I hope that’s true. But we’re doing great in our country. China, I spoke with President Xi, and they’re working very, very hard. And I think it’s gonna all work out fine. Rough stuff, I tell ya, rough rough stuff. But I think it’s gonna work out good. We only have 11 cases, and they’re all getting better. February 10, 2020: New York State website posted news titled: “Governor Cuomo Updates New Yorkers on Novel Coronavirus”. From the news: Governor Andrew M. Cuomo today announced additional negative results for the novel coronavirus in New York State. The New York State Department of Health just learned of another negative test result, which brings the statewide total of samples that have come back negative up to 22. As of today, samples from 23 New Yorkers have been sent to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for testing. Of those, 22 have come back negative. One sample from New York City is still pending; there are no pending samples from New York State outside of New York City. There are still no confirmed cases of novel coronavirus in New York State.“We are continuing to take every precaution to protect New Yorkers from this virus,” Governor Cuomo said. “While there are still no confirmed cases of the virus in New York State, I urge everyone to continue to take commonsense precautions, such as regular hand washing and avoiding close contact with people who are sick.”… February 10, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “Factories in China remain shuttered as some regions extend shutdowns amid coronavirus quarantine efforts”. It was written by Weizhen Tan. From the article: Uncertainty about work resuming at factories in China is setting in with provinces or cities posting different dates for an extended shutdown as the coronavirus outbreak continues to spread.Authorities had initially said operations could pick up again on Monday, but the already-extended delay in reopening could be dragged out even further for many factories – including Apple’s largest manufacturer Foxconn.Even if businesses were up and running again, their workers would still have to fulfill quarantine requirements of around two weeks.With the further delay, analysts warned of a big hit not just to the Chinese economy, but globally.Last week, more than 30 provinces and other regions told businesses to not resume work before Feb. 10 at the earliest. In 2019, those parts of China accounted for more then 80% of national GDP, and 90% of exports, according to CNBC calculations of data accessed through Wind Information.Some provinces and districts have now told companies to not return to work until March 1, according to officials… February 10, 2020: CNN posted an article titled: “Kia Motors suspends production lines at all three of its factories in South Korea”. It was written by Sophie Jeong. From the article: Kia Motors suspended nearly all production lines at its three South Korea factories today, a Kia Motors spokesperson told CNN.The three plants, located in the cities of Gwangmyeong, Hwaesong and Gwangju, are suspended due to “the problem of wiring harness supplies from China,” said the spokesperson.Production lines at the Hwaseong factory will resume Tuesday, and the lines at the other two plants will resume Wednesday, Kia Motors said… February 10: 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Xi Jinping appears in public as China returns to work after holiday”. It was written by Lily Kuo. From the article: China’s president, Xi Jinping, has made his first public appearance in weeks, as some people began to return to work following the lunar new year holiday, which was extended as authorities grappled with the coronavirus outbreak.Xi, who has been absent from public view as the crisis worsened, visited a neighborhood in Beijing’s Chaoyang district. The president had his temperature taken and greeted residents and workers, according to a brief video posted by the state broadcaster CCTV……Around China, workers began trickling back to offices and factories as the government eased restrictions on work and travel. In Beijing, roads were busier than in recent weeks but normally packed trains remained virtually empty. The few commuters on the street or using public transport were wearing face masks. Many companies have asked their staff to work from home……The southern city of Guangzhou said it would resume public transport from Monday. Hubei province, hardest hit by the crisis, remained in lockdown, with train stations and airports shut and roads sealed off……Schools in provinces across the country will be shut until the end of February… February 10, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “China’s Xi Jinping has not been to Wuhan since the coronavirus outbreak. Why he may be keeping his distance”. It was written by Huileng Tan. From the article: Chinese President Xi Jinping has been visibly missing in action in Wuhan, the epicenter of the new coronavirus outbreak, spurring talk about his control from a distance in Beijing.Instead, Xi dispatched his second-in-command, premier Li Keqiang to Wuhan on Jan. 27, in a shot of confidence for the city which has been under lockdown.Since then, Xi has not been out much in front of the cameras, although he has been reported in state media as commanding efforts to contain the outbreak.Most recently, Xi emerged from the shadows on Feb. 5 to meet with Cambodian leader Hun Sen who was on a state visit to China. Before this, the Chinese president had been absent from the limelight for over a week since Jan. 28 when he met with Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyseus, the director-general at the World Health Organization.As the inner workings of the Chinese Communist Party are opaque, observers are weighing why Xi hasn’t been to ground zero or playing up his role in managing the crisis… February 10, 2020: Government of Canada posted: “Update: Statement from the Chief Public Health Officer on the release of selected individuals from quarantine for the 2019 novel coronavirus”. From the update: Further to my statement on February 9, 2020, as Chief Public Health Officer, I have assessed additional individuals in quarantine at Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Trenton pursuant to an Emergency Order under the Quarantine Act and determined that they do not pose a risk of significant harm to public health.I have authorized the release of 5 flight crew members who accompanied the returning travellers from Vancouver to CFB Trenton. I have also authorized the release of a Government of Canada employee who boarded the first repatriation flight in Hanoi to provide support on the flight from Wuhan to Trenton.In my assessment, I took into account the fact that they did not spend time in the epicenter of the outbreak, that they followed appropriate infection prevention and control protocols (including the use of personal protective equipment), and that they did not have unprotected contact with the passengers or persons at risk of having the novel coronavirus. As a result of this assessment, I have determined that their continued quarantine is not required. February 10, 2020: Government of Canada posted “Update #2: Statement from the Chief Public Health Officer on the release of selected individuals from quarantine for the 2019 novel coronavirus”. From the statement: Further to my previous statements, as Chief Public Health Officer, I have assessed additional individuals in quarantine at Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Trenton pursuant to an Emergency Order under the Quarantine Act and determined that they do not pose a risk of significant harm to public health.I have authorized the release of 25 flight crew members who accompanied the returning travellers on the flight from Wuhan to Vancouver to CFB Trenton. In my assessment, I took into account the fact that they did not spend time in the epicentre of the outbreak, that they followed appropriate infection prevention and control protocols (including the use of personal protective equipment), and that they did not have unprotected contact with passengers or persons at risk of having the novel coronavirus. As a result of this assessment, I have determined that their continued quarantine is not required. February 10, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Coronavirus: journalist missing in Wuhan as anger towards Chinese authorities grows”. It was written by Lily Kuo. From the article: A citizen journalist who has been reporting from the centre of the coronavirus outbreak has gone missing, promptimg claims that the Chinese authorities are silencing another whistleblower.Chen Qiushi, a human rights advocate, has been missing since Thursday – the same day Li Wenliang, a 34-year-old ophthalmologist who was punished by authorities for trying to warn colleagues and friends about a new Sars-like virus, was first reported to have died from the coronavirus.Chen went to visit a hospital on Thursday and friends and family have not been able to reach him since Thursday evening. According to Chen’s mother, he has been forcibly quarantined……Chen’s disappearance comes as the Chinese government struggles to contain public anger over its handling of the virus. That public anger has reached a new level in the wake of Li’s death.Chen, who has more than 200,000 followers on Twitter and more than 400,000 subscribers to his YouTube channel, had been posting regular updates from Wuhan, where he visited hospitals and spoke to patients and doctors. Like Li, he is seen by the public as a regular citizen trying to help others.Internet users rallying for Chen accused the government of trying to muzzle citizens attempting to tell the public the true conditions on the ground in Wuhan. Many of the comments about Chen appear to have been wiped from Weibo… February 10, 2020: UK Chief Medical Officer Professor Chris Whitty posted a statement titled: “Chief Medical Officer for England announces 4 further coronavirus cases”. From the statement: Four further patients in England have tested positive for novel coronavirus, bringing the total number of cases on the UK to 8.The new cases are all known contacts of a previously confirmed UK case, and the virus was passed on in France.Experts at Public Health England continue to work hard tracing patient contacts from the UK cases. They successfully identified these individuals and ensured the appropriate support was provided.The patients have been transferred to specialist NHS centres at Guy’s and St Thomas’ and The Royal Free hospitals, and we are now using robust infection control measures to prevent the further spread of the virus. The NHS is extremely well prepared to manage these cases and treat them, and we are working quickly to identify any further contacts these patients have had. February 10, 2020: UK Department of Health and Social Care posted a press release titled: “Health Secretary announces strengthened legal powers to bolster public health protections against coronavirus.” From the press release: The The Health Protection (Coronavirus) Regulations 2020 have been put in place with immediate effect to impose restrictions on any individual considered by health professionals to be at risk of spreading the virus.The regulations apply to any individuals seeking to leave supported isolation before the current quarantine period of 14 days is complete. It will also apply to future cases during the current coronavirus incident where an individual who may be infected or contaminated could present a risk to public health.Today’s announcement is not a result of a change in risk to the UK public, which remains moderate……The regulations have been put in place to reduce the risk of further human-to-human transmission in this country.The strengthened powers, effective immediately, will ensure that NHS staff dealing with possible cases can be confident the necessary powers are in place to keep individuals in isolation where the public health professionals believe there is a reasonable risk an individual may have the virus. This is in line with measures taken in other countries.Over the weekend, the latest government-chartered flight brought a further 100 individuals from the centre of the outbreak in Hubei province to stay in supported isolation in the UK.The individuals have been taken to the Kents Hill Park conference centre in Milton Keynes where they will remain for 14 days until the end of the inclubation period. This follows the same approach for those currently being housed in Arrowe Park NHS accommodation in Wirral.All passengers were asked to sign a consent form agreeing to stay in supported isolation for at least 14 days until the incubation period is over. In all cases so far, supported isolation has been effective in controlling the spread of the virus.These powers will give the public further confidence that the repatriation of British citizens back to the UK from Hubei does not increase the risk of further cases in this country… February 10, 2020: The Guardian posted a statement from an Easy Jet spokeswoman. From the statement: “EasyJet has been notified by the public health authority that a customer who had recently travelled on one of its flights has since been diagnosed with the coronavirus.Public Health England is contacting all passengers who were seated in the vicinity of the customer on flight EZ8481 from Geneva to London Gatwick on 28 January to provide guidance in line with procedures.As the customer was not experiencing any symptoms, the risk to others onboard the flight is very low. We remain in contact with the public health authorities and are following their guidance. The health and wellbeing of our passengers and crew is the airline’s highest priority.All of the crew who operated have been advised to monitor themselves for a 18-day period since the flight in line with Public Health England advice. Note this happened 12 days ago and none are displaying any symptoms.” February 10, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Factbox: Countries evacuating nationals from China coronavirus areas”. From the article: Canada, after evacuating 215 last week, flew back 185 Canadians from Wuhan on Feb. 11. All evacuees will be quarantined on the Trenton, Ontario base for two weeks.A second evacuation flight is bringing back another 174 Singaporeans and their family members from Wuhan to the city-state on Feb. 9, Singapore’s foreign ministry said.Thirty Filipinos returned to the Philippines on Feb. 9 from Wuhan, the Department of Foreign Affairs said. The returning passengers and a 10-member government team will be quarantined for 14-days.Britain’s final evacuation flight from Wuhan, carrying more than 200 people, landed at a Royal Air Force base in central England on Feb. 9. A plane carrying 83 British and 27 European Union nationals from Wuhan landed in Britian last week.Two planes with about 300 passengers, mostly U.S. citizens, took off from Wuhan on Feb. 6 bound for the United States – the third group of evacuees from the heart of the coronavirus outbreak, the U.S. State Department said.Uzbekistan has evacuated 251 people from China and quarantined them on arrival in Tashkent, the Central Asian nation’s state airline said on Feb. 6.A plane load of New Zealanders, Australians and Pacific Islanders evacuated from Wuhan arrived in Auckland, New Zealand on Feb. 5, officials said.Taiwan has evacuated the first batch of an estimated 500 Taiwanese stranded in Wuhan.The 34 Brazilians evacuated from Wuhan landed in Brazil on Feb. 9, where they will begin 18 days of quarantine.Italy flew back 56 nationals from Wuhan to Rome on Feb. 3. The group will spend two weeks in quarantine in a military hospital, the government said.Saudi Arabia has evacuated 10 students from Wuhan, Saudi state television reported on Feb 2.Indonesia’s government flew 234 Indonesians from Hubei on Feb. 2 and placed them under quarantine at a military base on an island northwest of Borneo.South Korea flew 368 people home on a charter flight that arrived on Jan. 31. A second chartered flight departed Seoul for Wuhan on Jan. 31. with plans to evacuate around 350 more South Korean citizens.Japan chartered a third flight to repatriate Japanes people, which arrived from Wuhan on Jan. 31, bringing the number of repatriated nationals to 565.France has evacuated some nationals from Wuhan and said it would place the passengers in quarantine. It said it would first evacuate nationals without symptoms and then those showing symptoms at a later, unspecified date.A plane brough 138 Thai nationals home from Wuhan last week. They will spend two weeks in quarantine. February 10, 2020: Daily Echo posted an article titled: “Southampton school closed over coronavirus fears”. From the article: A Southampton school is being evacuated after pupils were put in isolation over coronavirus fears.St Mary’s Independent School in Bitterne Park is currently on lockdown following the discovery.It comes after students at the school were struck down with symptoms similar to the virus.The students at the Midanbury Lane school have been put in isolation after being checked by medical professionals at Southampton General Hospital.The school will be closed…for deep cleaning to remove any potential traces of the virus.St Mary’s is in contact with Public Health England and monitoring the situation… February 10, 2020: Evening Standard posted an article titled: “British Airways cancels all flights to Beijing and Shanghai until April 1 amid coronavirus outbreak”. It was written by Rebecca Speare-Cole. From the article: British Airways has cancelled all of its flights to Beijing and Shanghai until April due to the coronavirus outbreak……In a statement on Monday, British Airways said: “Following the Foreign Office’s continued advice against all but essential travel to mainland China, we have cancelled all our flights to Beijing and Shanghai until 31 March 2020. All our flights travelling from Beijing and Shanghai have been cancelled until April 1, 2020.“Flights to and from Hong Kong remain unaffected.”“This situation will remain under review and we will continue to provide regular updates. If you have a booking with us, please make sure we have your contact details. We’ll do everything we can to help customers affected.”… February 10, 2020: Boarding Schools’ Association posted news titled: “Novel Coronavirus guidance update February 10, 2020”. From the news: This advice is a further update to that issued on February 3, and is on behalf of BSA and our partners, AEGIS and BAISIS.Once again, BSA and our partners remind members that we are NOT a medical authority, nor is this guidence intended as legal advice, and any decisions by a school in this area should involve its own medical staff in conjunction with local GPs. This is important if schools choose to quote the advice verbatum, as the BSA is not a statutory authority.Is there any change to BSA advice?Essentially our advice remains the same, with the following key elements: Schools must ensure that appropriate arrangements are in place to accommodate any pupils who need it over the forthcoming half-term break, either with guardians or by keeping school facilities open. Our advice, which most schools have followed, is to put this in place for all pupils from South-East Asia, as there is no way of knowing which countries will have travel restrictions in place in two weeks’ time.Schools must assess the risk of any visits by parents and carers taking any appropriate action and breifing relevant staff as fully as possible. Similar measures must be in place for any proposed visits by prospective parents, pupils and agents. Schools must consider the impact on those affected when deciding on postponing or canceling visits, but the safety of the school community must always be the primary concern.Whereas schools can put in place reasonable measures to protect the school community, they do not have the right to stop parents and carers taking their child out of school.Any restrictions imposed by schools must be clearly planned and communicated, and mut relate to the travel and risk profile of those concerned. Schools must avoid placing unnecesary restrictions on people who are clearly beyond the incubation period, which is currently 14 days.Schools must proactively plan ahead for Easter. It is highly likely that matters will be very different then. The risk from the virus might have completely abated, or the list of countries where travel is not advised might have increased considerably. Schools must expect that pupils living in South-East Asia might not be able to travel and must also consider that some other countries might also be affected. Anyone choosing to travel should be advised that restrictions could well be in place before they return.Schools must actively support all those whose plans have been compromised by the current situation, and be particularly aware of the impact of enforced separation on boarders and their families. Schools need to have appropriate conversations with parents and pupils about their plans so that the best advice can be given to each individual family.Schools must ensure that all boarders are protected both in school and outside school. There have been isolated reports of children being targeted outside school on the basis of their ethnicity, and a prcieved link to the virus. AEGIS advises that reasonable steps should be put in place to ensure that boarders are protected when outside school, which includes expecting them not to leave school on their own. Robust measures must also be taken to respond to any associated bullying within school. How has the situation developed?The Health Secretary has now put powers into place which would allow for individuals to be kept in “supported isolation” if necessary, and has described teh virus as a “serious and imminent threat” to the UK. However, the UK risk level remains moderate, and it has become clear that these powers are specifically designed to respond to a situation with those who have been repatriated. The powers will, however, also allow a speedy response should the virus spread more widely within the UK……How has travel been affected?The Foreign and Commonwealth Office continues to advise against all travel to Hubei Province and all but essential travel to mainland China. This advice does not yet extend to Hong Kong, Macao, and other countries in the region, but several countries have put additional screening measures and restrictions in place….The advice makes it clear that anyone travelling to certain countries in South-East Asia must be prepared for additional control measures and for the fact that travel is being curtailed or disrupted because of airline cancellations, particularly to and from Hong Kong. The picture is changing dynamically, so schools are advised to check FCO advice for any relevant information……What about pupils who travel oversees and then return to school?If a parent or carer still decides to require their child to travel, schools must make it clear that anyone returning from China will be required to spend a period of 14 days in the UK before returning to school, and should self-isolate during this time. BSA continues to advise similar action for Hong Kong, and it is very possible that this will need to be extended to other countries in the South-East Asia region. AEGIS has made it clear that their guardians are highly unlikely to be able to offer guardianship under such circumstances.Although this continues to exceed current FCO advice, schools must plan for what could happen, rather than what has happened.Schools have a right to take reasonable measures to protect their staff and pupils and can advise pupils not to leave and advise those from overseas not to visit, but schools do not have the right to prevent any parent from collecting theri child if they wish to do so. Any measures put in place must also be reasonable. If a parent visits their child for the whole Easter holiday and has displayed no symptoms before teh end of the holiday, current health protection guidance indicates that such a person is beyond the incubation period and does not represent a risk. It would not be reasonable, therefore, to impose additional restrictions at that point without good cause… February 10, 2020: Sony posted an announcement titled: “Sony’s Participation at MWC Barcelona 2020”. From the announcement: Sony has been closely monitoring the evolving situation following the novel coronavirus outbreak, which was declared a global emergency by the World Health Organization on January 30th, 2020.As we place the utmost importance on the safety and wellbeing of our customers, partners, media and employees, we have taken the difficult decision to withdraw from exhibiting and participating at MWC 2020 in Barcelona, Spain.The Sony press conference will now instead take place at the scheduled time of 8:30am (CET) on February 24, 2020 as a video via our official Xperia YouTube channel to share our exciting product news……Sony would like to thank everyone for their understanding and ongoing support during these challenging times. February 10, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “Automakers resume or prepare to restart car production in China amid coronavirus outbreak.” It was written by Michael Wayland. From the article: Several automakers on Monday reopened or are preparing to restart factories in China after an extended holiday shutdown due to the coronavirus, which is now responsible for more than 900 deaths in the country.Ford Motor resumed vehicle production at its plants in Chongqing and Hangzhou, according to Anderson Chan, a company spokesperson. It’s unclear when the facilities will fully reopen to their capacity before the shutdown, which started lat last month. The Dearborn, Michigan-based automaker operates six assembly plants in the country.“We are taking a gradual approach in ramping up production operations, based on market demands and without compromising the safety of our employees,” Chan said in an emailed statement to CNBC. “We are carefully monitoring the situation and working closely with relevant government authorities and stakeholders in planning and acting accordingly.”… February 10, 2020: National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China posted news titled: “China introduces novel coronavirus close contact detection app”. From the news: China has rolled out a mobile app “close contact detector,” enabling people to check whether they were at risk of catching the novel coronavirus.Following its release on the evening of Feb 8, users can scan a QR code via mobile aps like Alipay, WeChat or QQ to make an inquiry.After registering with a phone number, users need to enter their name and ID number to know whether they were in close contact with someone infected. Every registered phone number can be used to inquire for three ID numbers.Those who have been in close contact are advised to stay at home and get in touch with local health authorities.The app was developed by the General Office of the State Council, the National Health Commission and China Electronics Technology Group Corporations (CETC).The CETC said the app recieved support from several government agencies including the National Health Commission, the Ministry of Transport, China Railway and the Civil Aviation Administration of China to ensure accurate, reliable and authoritative data.According to the National Health Commissioner, close contact refers to someone who has come in close distance, with no effective protection, with confirmed cases, suspected cases or mild cases while the person was ill or showed asymptomatic cases in the following conditions:It includes people who work close together, share the same classroom or live in the same house; medical staff, family members or other people who have been in close contact with patients in a closed environment and other patients in the same room as their caregivers; as well as passengers and crew members who have been in the same transportation facility with patients (confirmed and suspected cases) and infected cases (mild cases and asymptomatic cases).On a flight, for instance, all passengers in the same row and three rows in front and back of the case seat, as well as the flight attendants who provide cabin services in the area, are regarded as being in close contact, while other passengers would be referred to as having general contactIn a fully enclosed air-conditioned train, all the passengers and crew members who are in the same compartment are regarded as being in close contact. February 10, 2020: Royal Caribbean Cruses posted a press release titled: “Travel Restriction Update”. From the press release: Royal Caribbean has ended its temporary general restriction on holders of passports from China, Hong Kong, and Macau. The general restriction was adopted last week in response to numerous ports and governments around the world restricting travel for Chinese passport holders, often with little advanced notice. Now that these governmental restrictions have been clarified, we are able to clarify our own policies. Our 15-day restriction on all individuals who have traveled from, to or through mainland China, Hong Kong, and Macau remains in effect, and so do restrictions on individuals who have been in close contact with persons who have traveled from, through or to China, Hong Kong, and Macau in the past 15 days. We maintain a list of our current boarding policies for all travelers, together with a list of current local travel restrictions at https://presscenter.rclcorporate.com/pressrelease/48/coronavius-updat. We encourage holders of China, Hong Kong and Macau passports to be aware of the potential disrupted vacation, and to contact us with any questions. February 10, 2020: U.S. Department of State posted a travel advisory titled: “Russia Travel Advisory”. From the travel advisory: Travel Advisory February 10, 2020Russia – Level 2: Exercise Increased CautionGlobal Health Advisory: Do Not Travel. Avoid all international travel due to the global impact of COVID-19.Exercise extreme caution in Russia due to terrorism, harassment, and the arbitrary enforcement of local laws. Some areas have increased risk. Read the entire Travel Advisory. Do Not Travel to: The North Caucasus, including Chechnya and Mount Elbrus, due to terrorism, kidnapping, and risk of civil unrest.Crimea due to Russia’s occupation of the Ukranian territory and abuses by its occupying authorities. Terrorist groups, transnational and local terrorist organizations, and individuals inspired by extreme ideology continue plotting possible attacks in Russia. Terrorists may attack with little or no warning, targeting tourist locations, transportation hubs, markets / shopping malls, local government facilities, hotels, clubs, restaurants, places of worship, parks, major sporting and cultural events, educational institutions, airports, and public areas.U.S. citizens, including former and current U.S. government and military personnel, who are visiting or residing in Russia have been arbitrarily interrogated or detained by Russian officials and may become victims of harassment, mistreatment and extortion. For this rason, the U.S. Embassy in Moscow has advised all U.S. government and Department of Defense personnel to consider carefully travel to Russia. Russian officials may unreasonably delay U.S. consular assistance to detained U.S. citizens. Russian authorities arbitrarily enforce the law against U.S. citizen religious workers and open questionable criminal investigations against U.S. citizens engaged in religious activity.Russia enforces special restrictions on dual U.S.-Russian nationals and may refuse to acknowledge dual U.S.-Russia nationals’ U.S. citizenship, including denying U.S. consular assistance to detained dual nationals, and preventing their departure from Russia.Due to the Russian government-imposed reduction on U.S. diplomatic personnel in Russia, the U.S. government may have delayed ability to provide service to U.S. citizens, especially in the Saint Petersburg area.Read the Safety and Security section on the country information page. If you decide to travel to Russia: Monitor local media for breaking events and adjust your plans based on news information.Stay alert in locations frequented by Westerners.Have travel documents up to date and easily accessible.Enroll in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP) to receive Alerts and make it easier to locate you in an emergency.Follow the Department of State on Facebook and Twitter.Review the Crime and Safety Reports for Russia.U.S. citizens who travel abroad should always have a contigency plan for emergency situations and a plan to contact family to let them know you are safe. Review the Traveler’s Checklist. North Caucuses (including Chechnya and Mount Elbrus) – Level 4: Do Not Travel Terrorist attacks and risk of civil unrest continue throughout the North Caucasus region including in Chechnya, North Ossetia, Ingushetia, Dagestan, Stavropol, Karachayevo-Cherkessiya and Kabardino-Balkariya. Local gangs have kidnapped U.S. citizens and other foreigners for ransom. There have been credible reports of arrest, torture, and extrajudicial killing of LGBTI persons in Chechnya allegedly conducted by Chechen regional authorities.Do not attempt to climb Mount Elbrus, as travelers must pass close to volitale and insecure areas of the North Caucasus region.The U.S. government is unable to provide emergency services to U.S. citizens traveling in the North Caucasus region, including Mount Elbrus, as U.S. government employees are prohibited from traveling to the region… Crimea – Level 4: Do Not Travel The international community, including the United States and Ukraine, does not recognize Russia’s purported annexation of Crimea. There is extensive Russian Federation military presence in Crimea. The Russian Federation is likely to take further military actions in Crimea as part of its occupation of this part of Ukraine. There are continuing abuses against foreigners and the local population by the occumation authorities in Crimea, particularly against those who are seen as challenging their authority on the pennisula.The U.S. government is unable to provide emergency services to U.S. citizens traveling in Crimea as U.S. government employees are prohibited from traveling to Crimea… February 10, 2020: Holand America Line posted: “Update: 2/10/2020 12:45am Pacific Time”. From the update: Westerdam is sailing for Laem Chabang (Bangkok), Thailand, where the current cruise that departed Feb. 1 will end on Thursday, February 13. Guests will be disembarking in Laem Chabang and transfer to Bangkok for their forward travel home. This new schedule has been communicated to guests on board. The cruise was previously scheduled to disembark Feb. 15 in Yokohama, Japan. All guests will receive a 100% refund for the 14-day sailing, as well as a 100% Future Cruise Credit.Following the disembarkation of guests, Westerdam will depart Laem Chabang. The Feb. 15 cruise scheduled to embark in Yokohama has been cancelled. No cancellations for cruises with departure dates beyond February 15 have been announced at this time. However, we are assessing the impact of current port restrictions in Asia on cruises departing Feb. 29 or later. We will communicate details as they become finalized in the next few days. The latest information will continue to be posted under the News & Travel Advisory section of hollandamerica.com. Again, we sincerely thank our guests and the crew on Westerdam — and their loved ones — for their patience during this extraordinary time. February 10, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Residents of evacuated Hong Kong apartments test negative for coronavirus”. From the article: Five Hong Kongers evacuated from a residential building where a man and woman confirmed with coronavirus live tested negative for the virus, health authorities said on Tuesday, easing concerns of a cluster of the outbreak in the Chinese-ruled city.The five people were exhibiting flu-like symptoms earlier. They remain in quarantine together with 200-plus residents who were evacuated from the building in Tsing Yi district in the New Territories in the early hours.The evacuation occurred after a 62-year-old woman became the second confirmed case in the building on Monday, after a 75-year-old man tested positive on Jan. 30. The two patients, currenty recieving treatment, live on different floors.Initial investigations into the drainage system in the building further reduced concerns that the virus may have spread through the pipes, the authoraties said.The flat where the latest infection was discovered had had an alteration to its drainage system, but the pipe network in the public building was in good condition, they said… February 11, 2020: Royal Caribbean Cruises posted a press release titled: “Quantum of the Seas Update”. From the press release: In light of current regional travel conditions, we have made the difficult decision to cancel two sailings on Quantum of the Seas, due to depart from Singapore on 2/15/20 and 2/24/20. We are sharing the news with our guests and are sorry for the disruption to their vacation. Guests will revieve full refunds.Royal Caribbean’s number one priority is ensuring the health and welfare of our guests and crew while delivering great vacations. We will continue to monitor conditions and will share other itinerary adjustments should they become necessary. The Singapore market remains of great importance to us and we look forward to returning there very soon. February 11, 2020: Holand American Line posted: “Update: 2/11/2020 12:03am Pacific Time”. From the update: We are aware of the reports regarding the status of Westerdam’s call to Laem Chabang (Bangkok), Thailand. We are actively working this matter and will provide an update when we are able. We know this is confusing for our guests and their families and we greatly appreciate their patience. We have no reason to believe there are any cases of coronavirus on board the ship despite media reports. February 11, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: 12 February 11, 2020: The World Health Organization (WHO) posted: “Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Situation Report – 22”. From the report: No new countries reported cases of 2019-nCoV in the past 24 hours.An advanced team is currently in Beijing to prepare an international mission and to determine the questions the international team will want to learn more about: from characteristics of the virus to public health response China put in place to try and contain the virus. The group of international experts, with a range of specializations, will work with Chinese counterparts on increaseing understanding of the outbreak to guide global response efforts. Since being notified of the outbreak on 31 December, the WHO Country Office in China, supported by the regional and international offices, has worked to support China, and indeed the world, to scale up the response. A small mission was sent to Wuhan mid-January, and the Director-General visited in January.Following WHO best practices for naming new human infectious diseases, which were developed in consultation with the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), WHO has named the disease COVID-19, short for “coronavirus disease 2019”. Technical Focus: Zoonotic component of 2019-nCoV and human-animal interface: Increasing evidences demonstrate the link between the 2019-nCoV and other similar known coronaviruses (CoV) circulating in bats, and more specifically those of the Rhinolophus bat sub-species. These sub-species are abundant and widely present in Southern China, and across Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Europe. Recent studies indicate that more than 500 CoVs have been identified in bats in China. To be noted tha serological studies conducted in rural population living close to bats natural habitat in caves revealed a 2.9% bat-CoV seroprevalence, demonstrating that humans exposure to bat-CoV’s might be common.However, the route of transmission to humans at the start of this event remains unclear. Bats are rare in markets in China but hunted and sold directly to restaurants for food. The current most likely hypothesis is that an intermediary host animal has played a role in the transmission.Both Chinese and external expert groups are working in trying to identify the animal source of this new virus. Identifying the animal source of the 2019-CoV would help to ensure that there will be no furrther future similar outbreaks with the same virus and will also help understanding the initial spread of the disease in the Wuhan area. It would also increase our understanding of the virus and help us understand how these viruses jump from animals to humans. Thus, providing critical market hygiene activities in live food market will be essential to protect people from similar and other zoonotic diseases. Confirmed cases of 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 11 February 2020: Hubei: 31,728Guangdong: 1,177Zhejiang: 1,117Henan: 1,105Hunan: 912Anhui: 860Jiangxi: 804Jiangsu: 515Chongqing: 486Shandong: 486Sichuan: 417Heilongjiang: 360Beijing: 342Shanghai: 302Fuijan: 267Hebei: 239Shaanxi: 219Guangxi: 215Yunnan: 149Hainan: 142Shanxi: 122Guizhou: 118Liaoning: 108Tianjin: 96Gansu: 86Jilin: 81Inner Mongolia: 58Xinjaing: 55Ningxia: 53Hong Kong SAR: 42Qinghai: 18Taipei and environs: 18Macao SAR: 10Xizang: 1TOTAL: 42,708 Countries, territories or areas with reported confirmed 2019-nCoV cases and deaths. Data as of 11 February 2020: China: including cases confirmed in Hong Kong SAR (42 confirmed cases, 1 death), Macao SAR (10 confirmed cases) and Taipei and environs (18 confirmed cases) 42,708 cases (2,484) new/ 1,017 deaths (108 new)Singapore: 45 cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsRepublic of Korea: 28 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsJapan: 26 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 18 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 15 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 15 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 cases (0 new)/ 1 deathsCambodia: 1 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 33 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 13 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 7 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 14 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 11 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsThe United Kingdom: 8 cases (4 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 3 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: (0 new)/ 0 deathsInternational Conveyance (Japan): (Cases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanese territory waters) 135 cases (65)/ 0 deaths February 11, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Great being in New Hampshire last night. I would say that was the biggest political Rally in New Hampshire history. Incredible evening!” February 11, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “New Stock Market RECORD. Congratulations, spend your money wisely. KEEP AMERICA GREAT !!!!!” February 11, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “The Fake News Media is looking hard for the Big Democrat Story, but there is nothing too fabulous. Wouldn’t a big story be that I got more New Hampshire Primary Votes than any incumbent president, in either party, in the history of the Great State? Not an insignificant fact! February 11, 2020: Bloomberg posted an article titled: “Chinese Firm Makes Gilead Drug in Virus Fight, Raising IP Fears”. From the article: A Chinese drugmaker said it has started mass-producing an experimental treatment from Gilead Sciences Inc. that has show potential to fight the novel coronavirus, adding to concerns that the U.S. pharma company is losing patent control in China’s accelerating effort to fight the outbreak.Suzhou-based BrightGene Bio-Medical Technology Co. said it has developed technology to synthesize the active pharmaceutical ingredients of Gilead’s remdesivir. A leading candidate to treat the virus that’s killed more than 1,000 people, the drug isn’t licensed or approved anywhere in the world. BrightGene rose 20% Wednesday in Shanghai.While BrightGene said it intends to license the drug from Gilead, its move to start manufacturing at this early stage is highly unusual and a potential challenge to the U.S. company’s intellectual property. Last week, Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology filed an application in China to patent the drug, which was developed for Ebola, to treat the new coronavirus.The aggressive moves to make and assume control of Gilead’s drug could revive concerns about the protection of intellectual property rights in China, long an area of concern for U.S. and European pharma companies, tech giants and others……Gilead said it’s aware of BrighGene’s announcement and that it remains “focused on rapidly determining the potential for remdesivir to treat COVID-19,” the name given by the World Health Organization to the new syndrome. The company has said that any discussion of licensing the investigational drug is “premature.”……Chinese researchers are now testing the drug on 761 patients in clinical trials in Wuhan… February 11, 2020: Government of Canada posted a news release titled: “Government of Canada repatriates more Canadians and their families from Wuhan”. From the news release: The Honourable François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Honourable Patty Hajdu, Minister of Health, and the Honorable Harjit Saijan, Minister of National Defense, today announced that Canada’s second chartered plane has arrived safely from Wuhan, in China.At 6:17 AM today, 130 Canadians and 56 accompanying family members travelling on the Government of Canada’s second chartered plane from Wuhan, China, arrived today at CFB Trenton. They join the 213 Canadians who returned from Wuhan on the first Canadian chartered flight and a U.S. flight that landed in Canada last week.Pasengers were met in Trenton by Canada Border Services Agency officers, and were thoroughly assessed upon arrival by quarantine officers from the Public Health Agency of Canada. None of the passengers have exhibited symptoms of the novel coronavirus upon arrival.They will stay in isolation for 14 days and undergo the same medical assessment and observation as those who were repatriated on the previous flights. The Government of Canada continues to work with provincial, territorial, and local health authorities to ensure that the returning Canadians and their family members receive all the medical and ongoing support necessary to protect their health and the health and safety of all Canadians.Canada has also provided approximately 16 tonnes of personal protective equipment, such as clothing, face shields, masks, goggles and gloves to China since February 4, 2020.Consular officials remain in contact with Canadians in China who have requested assistance. This was the last planned flight from Wuhan……Furthermore, to support global efforts to combat the 2019 novel coronavirus, the Honourable Karina Gould, Minister of International Development, today confirmed that Canada is providing $1 million to the World Health Organization to help vulnerable countries prepare and, if necessary, respond to coronavirus events. Canada continues to support other global initiatives that are helping to strengthen health systems and improve early detection of viruses such as the novel coronavirus. February 11, 2020: UK Department of Health and Social Care posted news titled: “Government to monitor impact of coronavirus on UK medicine supply”. From the news: The Chinese government continues to impose further restrictions on movement within China in response to the coronavirus outbreak, including on flight and rail travel.To relieve potential pressures on global supply chains, suppliers have been asked to carry out a risk assessment on the impact of coronavirus on their business.As an extra precaution, companies have also been asked to retain existing stockpiles of medical supplies, compiled as a contingency measure ahead of our exit from the EU, where possible.There are no current medicine shortages in the UK linked to the situation in China but the UK government is taking precautionary measures to help continue the uninterrupted supply of medicines to patients in the UK……The goverment will work closely with industry and partners to continually monitor the impact of coronavirus on the UK supply chain and put in place measures to protect UK patients.There is no need for the public or NHS to stockpile. This could aggrivate problems elsewhere in the supply chain if they emerge.The Department of Health and Social Care is also working with NHS Supply Chain to retain centralised stock of medical products… February 11, 2020: UK Department of Health and Social Care tweeted: “UPDATE on #coronavirus testing in the UK: As of 2 pm on Tuesday 11 February 2020, a total of 1,358 tests have concluded. 1,350 were confirmed negative 8 positive. Updates will be published at 2pm daily until further notice” February 11, 2020: U.S. Department of State posted a travel advisory titled: “Macau Travel Advisory”. From the Advisory: Travel Advisory February 11, 2020Macau – Level 2: Exercise Increased CautionGlobal Health Advisory: Do Not Travel. Avoid all international travel due to the global impact of COVID-19.A novel (new) coronavirus is causing an outbreak of respiratory illness that begain in the city of Wuhan, Hubei Province, China in December 2019. On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization determined the rapidly spreading outbreak constitutes a Public Health Emergency of International Concern.The Macau government has reported cases of the novel coronavirus in its special administrative region. In an effort to contain the novel coronavirus, the Macau government has placed restrictions on entry to its special administration region on individuals who have been to Hubei Province, China within the previous 14 days and may quarantine those they believe could have been exposed to the coronavirus.As of February 4, ferry services between Hong Kong and Macau have been suspended and flights from Macau International Airport have been reduced. Also, bus drivers may refuse passengers who do not wear face masks.On February 10, 2020 the Department of State allowed for the voluntary departure of non-emergency U.S. government employers and their family members due to the novel coronavirus and the impact to Mission personnel as schools and some public facilities have been closed until further notice.The Department of State has raised the Travel Advisory for China to Level 4: Do Not Travel due to the novel coronavirus first identified in Wuhan, China. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has issued a Level 3 Warning: Avoid all nonessential travel to China. If you must travel to Macau, you should: Monitor the Macau government’s website for further updates on the coronavirus infection.Avoid contact with sick people.Discuss travel to Macau with your healthcare provider. Older adults and travelers with underlying health issues may be at risk for more severe disease.Avoid animals (alive or dead), animal markets, and products that come from animals (such as uncooked meat).Wash hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds. Use an alcohol-based hand sanitizer if soap and water are not available.Maintain drainage pipes properly and add water to U-traps regularly.Put the toilet lid down before you flush to prevent the spread of germs. If you have traveled to Macau in the last 14 days and feel sick with fever, cough or difficulty breathing, you should: Seek medical care right away. Before you go to a doctor’s office or emergency room, call ahead and tell them about your recent travel and your symptoms.Avoid contact with others.Do not travel while sick.Cover your moth and nose with a tissue or your sleeve (not your hands) when coughing or sneezing.Wear a mask and seek medical advice promptly if unwell. February 11, 2020: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) posted a press release titled: “HHS, Janssen Join Forces On Coronavirus Vaccine”. From the press release: To expedite development of vaccines that protect against the 2019 coronavirus, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) will expand an existing partnership with New Jersey-based Janssen Research & Development, part of Johnson & Johnson.Jannsen and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), a component of ASPR, will share research and development costs and expertise to help accelerate Janssen’s investigational novel coronavirus vaccine into clinical evaluation……Janssen also will work on the scale-up of production and manufacturing capacities required to manufacture the candidate vaccine. This same approach was used to develop and manufacture Janssen’s investigational Ebola vaccine with BARDA support; that vaccine is being used in the Democratic Republic of the Congo as part of the current Ebola outbreak response……There is currently no approved vaccine, treatment, or diagnostic for novel coronavirus infections; however, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued an emergency use authorization (EUA) to enable emergency use of a diagnostic test developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.In addition to expanded collaboration with Janssen, BARDA is working with counterparts across the government, including within HHS and with the Department of Defense. The team is reviewing potential vaccines, treatments and diagnostics from across the public and private sectors, particularly products in development for Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) or Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), to identify promising candidates for development to detect, protect against or treat people with novel coronavirus infections.To obtain information about any potential products in development in the private sector that could be used in responding to the novel coronavirus outbreak, this task force launched a single point-of-entry website for innovators and product developers to submit brief descriptions of their relevant diagnostics, therapeutics, vaccines, and other products or technologies. The task force is particularly interested in identifying products and technologies that have progressed into or beyond non-clinical studies, have established large-scale commercial Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP) manufacturing capability, or utilize an FDA-cleared diagnostic platform… February 11, 2020: The Argus posted an article titled: “Coronavirus fears for person at Varndean School, Brighton”. It was written by Aidan Barlow. From the article: Another person has been told to go into isolation over fears of coronavirus at a city secondary school.The person from the “school community” at Varndean School has been advised to self-isolate by health chiefs.School headteacher William Deighan sent an email to parents about the possible case.It is the fifth school to report a possible case of coronavirus in Brighton and Hove.There were four more confirmed cases of coronavirus in the city yesterday… February 11, 2020: The Argus posted an article titled: “Coronavirus fears at two Eastbourne schools”. It was written by Charlotte Ikonen. From the article: Two more Sussex schools have been told staff are in “self-isolation” over coronavirus fears.Parents of children at Ocklynge School, in Victoria Drive, Eastbourne have been told a staff member had contact with an infected person and has been told to stay at home for 14 days.This comes after Ratton School, also in Eastbourne, released an almost identical statement today……The Argus previously reported several schools in Brighton have been told to place themselvs in quarantine……Varndeen School, which has around 1,300 pupils, told parents a “member of its community” was in quarantine becaue of suspected coronavirus contact.Varndean School, which has around 1,300 pupils, was one of the schools in the city to announce that somebody connected to it had been told to “self-isolate” for 14 days by Public Health England.Parents at Cottesmore St Mary’s Catholic Primary School in Hove told of their shock after learning two pupils… were in quarantine.Hangleton Primary School, PACA and Bevendean parents were also told members of staff were in quarantine.Five people have tested positive for the coronavirus in Brighton… February 11, 2020: CBS 46 posted an article titled: “200 people in Georgia self-monitoring for coronavirus”. It was written by Mea Watkins. From the article: The Georgia Department of Public Health confirmed Tuesday that approximately 200 people in Georgia are self-monitoring for symptoms of the new coronavirus, COVID-19.These individuals recently returned from China and are self-monitoring for symptoms of the virus from home. The DPH said they are showing no symptoms and there are no Georgia travelers who have returned from Wuhan or Hubei Province requiring quarantine.DPH epidemiologists contacted the individuals by phone to establish a plan for self-monitoring and gave them instructions on how to contact the agency before they seek health care if they develop fever, cough or shortness of breath.President Trump issued a federal proclamation in January that included a travel ban for non-U.S. citizens entering the country from China and funneling flights from China to one of 11 airports in the U.S., including Atlanta Hartsfield Jackson International Airport.In addition, the proclamation requires mandatory 14=day quarantine for returning travelers who have been in the Hubei Province and 14 days of supervised self-monitoring for returning travelers from anywhere else in China… February 11, 2020: North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper posted news titled: “Governor Cooper Directs Creation of Novel Coronavirus Task Force to Continue Protective Efforts.” From the news: Today, Governor Roy Cooper formalized the state’s ongoing effort to monitor, prepare for and respond to the 2019 novel coronavirus (CoVID-19) with a state Novel Coronavirus Task Force. The task force will continue to work with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and coordinate across state agencies to protect the health and wellbeing of North Carolinians.The task force will be chaired by Dr. Elizabeth Cuervo Tilson, North Carolina State Health Director and the Chief Medical Officer for the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and Mike Sprayberry, Director of North Carolina Emergency Management (NCEM), for the Department of Public Safety.“Though currently the risk to North Carolinians is low, we are taking a proactive approach and are prepared for potential scenarios,” said Governor Cooper. “This task force will continue coordination between our agencies and federal partners so we can keep the public informed and safe.”Currently, DHHS is working with local health departments and clinicians to evaluate any potential cases and coordinate care and testing as needed. Working closely with the CDC, the department is coordinating health information sharing as this situation continues to evolve. North Carolina has not had any confirmed cases of the virus.The task force agencies will continue coordinating communications with local entities through the Department of Public Safety and its NCEM division’s traditional channels as needed.The risk to the general public in North Carolina, especially without history of travel to China, is still considered very low at this time. Remember that the steps to take to prevent the spread of flu and the common cold could also help prevent the spread of other respiratory viruses like 2019-nCoV: Wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds. Use an alcohol-based hand sanitizer if soap and water are not available.Cover your mouth and nose with a tissue or your sleeve (not your hands) when coughing or sneezing.Avoid exposure to others who are sick.Stay home when you are ill. February 12, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 12 February 12, 2020: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted a transcript titled: “Transcript for CDC Telebriefing: CDC Update on Novel Coronavirus”. From the transcript: …Dr. Nancy Messonnier, Director of CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases: …First, I want to extend my condolences to the family of the American who died in China over the weekend. As far as we know, this is the first American to die from this new coronavirus. Though more than a thousand people in China have died. My sympathy and my thanks go to the people of China, for those who have lost loved ones and those who are on the front lines battling this virus. In China, they are taking aggressive measures just as we are in the United States.Since we briefed you last, there has been one new confirmed novel coronavirus infection detected in the United States. The new confirmed infection is an individual who returned from Wuhan and was quarantined at Marine Corps Air Station Miamar. This individual was given one of the last Department of State flights out of Wuhan, the epicenter of the outbreak in China. Given the spread of the virus in Wuhan, it is not surprising to see a positive case among people who recently returned from there. That is in fact the reason they are being quarantined. Currently the person has mild illness but is hospitalized. This brings the total number of confirmed positives in the United States to 13.I want to clarify some of the reports about this case. Last Thursday when one of the planes from Wuhan landed at Miramar, a few people were sick and transported to local hospitals for further evaluation. These people were placed in isolation and samples were taken for testing. When running laboratory diagnostics for any disease, anywhere in the world, the ability to match the individual to the specimen is key, and is part of normal procedures put in place to ensure that that matching is done correctly.But in this situation with this patient, it didn’t work correctly, and the patient was misidentified as negative. The issue was identified within 24 hours. The CDC tested the sample, the positive result was conveyed quickly to the local public health and CDC teams. The mishap was unfortunate, but we have corrected this from happening again in the future by adding addiitonal quality control. And its really important to emphasize that during this time appropriate infection control precautions were taken around everyone, including around this patient who, again, is doing well……Before I take questions, I want to give you a couple more updates. Since the airport screening began in mid-January, CDC and its partners have screened more than 30,000 passengers from China. With the temporary restrictions on travel, we are seeing fewer and fewer travelers from China, especially from Hubei provence. Passengers are being funneled through 11 airports, most of these people are coming from parts of mainland China outside of Hubei, show no symptoms, and have not been assessed as high risk. Those who passed the screening continue on to their final desitnation where they self-monitor their health for 14 days in cooperation with their state and local health departments. We’re asking these people to limit their daily activities and stay home during that 14-day period. Our gial is to be as least restrictive as possible while ensuring the safety and health of all Americans….…The goal of the measures we have taken to date are to slow the introduction and impact of this disease in the United States but at some point, we are likely to see community spread in the U.S. or other countries and this will trigger a change in our response strategy. This will require the effort of all levels of government, the public health system, and our communities as we face these challenges together. We are now focusing on preparing in other areas, including development of guidance for our health care practitioners and planning for increased demand on our health care system. One important aspect of this is taking steps to make sure there are enough supplies and appropriate guidance to prevent the spread of the disease, especially among health care personnel caring for patients. We understand the importance of providing guideance that health care facilities can implement given the availability of personal protective equipment or PPE supplies. CDC talks regularly with health care industry partners as well as PPE manufacturers and distributors to assess availability of PPE. At this time, some partners are reporting higher than usual demand for select N95 respirators and face masks. CDC does not currently recommend the use of face masks for the general public. The virus is not spreading in the community. If you are sick or a patient under investigation and not hospitalized, CDC recommends wearing a face mask when around other people and before entering a health care provider’s office, but when you are alone, in your home, you do not need to wear a mask….…Some good news this week is that yesterday, the first group of 195 people who returned from Wuhan on a State Department flight completed their 14-day quarantine. None of those people have this new virus, and all left March Air Reserve Bass successfully and happily returned along the way to their families and their communities. It’s imporant that people understand that these people being released from quarantine pose no threat to the surrounding communities or the community they will be returning to……I also want to say that CDC is working in close collaboration with Japanese health authorities to ensure precautions are being taken to prevent the spread of disease on the Diamond Princess cruise ship as well as making sure the American citizens on that cruise ship are safe. We recognize the uncertainty of the current situation. As always CDC public health experts strive to make the best recommendations based on the most up-to-date data… February 12, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted: “Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 23”. From the report: No new countries reported cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours.WHO has published key considerations for repatriation and quarantine of travellers in relation to COVID-19. More information can be found here.The UN activated a Crisis Management Team (CMT) on the COVID-19 outbreak, to be led by WHO. The WHO Director-General nominated Dr Mike Ryan, Executive Director of WHO Health Emergencies Programme as the Crisis Manager. The CMT brings together WHO, OCHA, IMO (International Maritime Organization), UNICEF, ICAO, WFP, FAO, the World Bank and several departments of the UN Secretariat. It held its first meeting yesterday via teleconferences. This mechanism will help WHO focus on the health response while other agencies will bring their expertise to bear on the wider social, economic and developmental implications of the outbreak. Additional members will be included depending on the evolution of the outbreak and its impact globally.WHO has prepared a list of Q&A on infection prevention and control for health care workers caring for patients with suspected or confirmed 2019-nCoV. Technical Focus: Internationally exported COVID-19 cases Excluding China, there are 24 countries reporting cases of COVID-19. Among these 24 countries, 23 report cases with an exposure in China. In addition, 11 of these 23 countries report cases attributed to local transmission inside the reporting country. Four of the 24 countries report cases where likely exposure occured outside the reporting country and outside China. Among these four reporting countries the most likely countries wehre exposure occured were France, Germany, Japan and Singapore… All transmissions occured within known defined clusters. Confirmed cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 12 February 2020 Hubei: 33,336 confirmed cases/ 1,068 total deathsGuangdong: 1,219 confirmed cases/ 1 total deathZhejiang: 1,131 confirmed cases/ 0 deathsHenan: 1,135 confirmed cases/ 8 deathsHunan: 946 confirmed cases/ 135 deathsAnhui: 889 confirmed cases/ 4 deathsJiangxi: 884 confirmed cases/ 1 deathJiangsu: 543 confirmed cases/ 0 deathsChongqing: 505 confirmed cases/ 3 deathsShandong: 497 confirmed cases/ 1 deathSichuan: 436 confirmed cases/ 1 deathHeilongjiang: confirmed cases/ 8 deathsBeijing: 352 confirmed cases/ 3 deathsShanghai: 306 confirmed cases/ 1 deathFujian: 272 confirmed cases/ 0 deathsHebei: 251 confirmed cases/ 2 deathsShaanxi: 225 confirmed cases/ 0 deathsGuangxi: 222 confirmed cases/ 1 deathYunnan: 154 confirmed cases/ 0 deathHainan: 145 confirmed cases/ 3 deathsShanxi: 124 confirmed cases/ 0 deathsGuizhou: 131 confirmed cases/ 1 deathLiaoning: 111 confirmed cases/ 0 deathTianjin: 106 confirmed cases/ 2 deathsGansu: 86 confirmed cases/ 2 deathsJilin: 83 confirmed cases/ 1 deathInner Mongolia: 11 confirmed cases/ 0 deathsXinjiang: 31 confirmed cases/ 0 deathsNingxia: 31 confirmed cases/ 0 deathsHong Kong SAR: confirmed cases/ 1 deathQinghai: 18 confirmed cases/ 0 deathsTaipei and environs: 18 confirmed cases/ 0 deathsMacao SAR: 10 confirmed cases/ 0 deathsXizang: 1 confirmed cases/ 0 deathsTOTAL: 44,730 confirmed cases/ 1,114 deaths Countries, territories or areas with reported confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Data as of 12 February 2020: China: including confirmed cases confirmed in Hong Kong SAR (49 confirmed cases, 1 death), Macao SAR (10 confirmed cases) and Taipei and environs (18 confirmed cases) 44,730 cases (2,022 new)/ 1,114 deaths (97 new)Singapore: 47 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsJapan: 28 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsRepublic of Korea: 28 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 18 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 15 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 15 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Cambodia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 33 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/0 deathsNepal: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 13 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 7 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 16 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 11 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsThe United Kingdom: 8 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 9 deathsSpain: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 8 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsInternational Conveyance (Japan): (cases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanese territorial waters): 175 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths February 12, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Fake News @CNN and MSDNC have not surprisingly refused to talk about my record setting number of voters in New Hampshire (and in Iowa). That’s why they are poorly rated Fake News! I will win both states in November.” February 12, 2020: GSMA posted news titled: “GSMA Statement on MWC Barcelona 2020 from John Hoffman, CEO GSMA Limited”. From the news: …Since the first edition of Mobile World Congress in Barcelona in 2006, the GSMA has convened the industry, governments, ministers, policymakers, operators, and industry leaders across the broader ecosystem.With due regard to the safe and healthy environment in Barcelona and the host country today, the GSMA has cancelled MWC Barcelona 2020 because the global concern regarding the coronavirus outbreak, travel concern and other circumstances, make it impossible for the GSMA to hold the event.The Host City Parties respect and understand this decision.The GSMA and the Host City parties will continue to be working in unison and supporting each other for MWC Barcelona 2021 and future editions.Our sympathies at this time are with those affected in China, and around the world… The GSMA represents the interests of mobile operators worldwide, uniting more than 750 operators with almost 400 companies in the broader mobile ecosystem, including handset and device makers, software companies, equipment providers and internet companies, as well as organisations in adjacent industry sectors. February 12, 2020: Yahoo! News posted an article titled: “COVID-19 Six-month-old infant ‘doing well’, too early to predict peak of virus here, says senior MOH official”. It was written by Wong Cassandra and Amir Hussain. From the article: The youngest confirmed case of the coronavirus here, a six-month-old Singaporean male infant, is doing well but is not among the six newly discharged cases on Wednesday (12 February), said a senior Ministry of Health (MOH) official.During a press conference led by the multi-ministry taskforce on the COVID-19 virus, Associate Professor Kenneth Mak, the ministry’s director of medical services, said the six cases who have fully recovered and discharged on Wednesday are adults.Among them are two Chinese nationals from Wuhan – a 36-year-old man and a 37-year-old-woman – and four Singaporeans.The locals are a 41-year-old man with no links to previous cases as well as the 40-year-old husband of a tour guide who brought Chinese tourists to health products shop Yong Thai Hang and the shop’s two workers, a 40-year-old woman and a 36-year-old man.This brings the number of fully-recovered cases in Singapore to 15 out of a total of 50 confirmed cases. Of the total, three new cases were announced at the conference on Wednesday – two Grace Assembly of God church workers and a DBS employee at Marina Bay Financial Centre.Most of the remaining 35 hospitalized cases are stable or improving, said Prof. Mak.Eight remain in critical condition in the intensive care unit, with no “clear pattern” among the critically ill, he added… February 12, 2020: CNN posted in their live blog an article titled: “Dalai Lama cancels all public engagements due to the coronavirus”. From the post: The Dalai Lama has cancelled all of his public engagements until further notice due to the “deteiorating outbreak” of the coronavirus, according to a statement from his office.“His Holiness will not be doing any public engagements for now until further notice due to coronavirus,” the Dalai Lama’s secretary, Tenzing Taklha, told CNN.Read the full statement from the Dalai Lama’s office:“An announcement was made recently regarding the ordination ceremony for monks. However due to the deteriorating outbreak of the viral disease (Coronavirus-2019 nCoV) that originated in China, His Holiness’ personal physician as well as consultants have advised a postponement of all public engagement for the time being, and His Holiness has duly agreed to further postpone his public schedule. Hence the ordination ceremony for the monks will be rescheduled and the announcement will be made shortly afterwards. We hope for your understanding in the matter…” February 12, 2020: Government of Canada posted an update titled: “Update #3: Statement from the Chief Public Health Officer on the release of selected individuals from quarantine for the 2019 novel coronavirus”. From the update: Further to my previous statements, as Chief Public Health Officer, I have assessed additional individuals in quarantine at Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Trenton pursuant to an Emergency Order under the Quarantine Act and determined that they do not pose a risk of significant harm to public health.I have authorized the release of 6 Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) medical staff who accompanied the returning travellers on the second Canada-chartered flight from Wuhan to Vancouver to CFB Trenton. In my assessment, I took into account the fact that they did not spend time in the epicentre of the outbreak, that they followed appropriate infection prevention and control protocols (including the use of personal protective equipment), and that they did not have unprotected contact with passengers or persons at risk of having the novel coronavirus. As a result of this assessment, I have determined that their continued quarantine is not required. February 12, 2020: UK Chief Medical Officer Professor Chris Whitty posted a statement titled: “CMO for England announces ninth case of novel coronavius”. From the statement: One further patient in England has tested positive for novel coronavirus (COVID-19), bringing the total number of cases in the UK to 9.This virus was passed on in China and the patient has now been transferred to a specialist NHS centre at Guy’s and St Thomas’ in London. February 12, 2020: Royal Caribbean Cruises posted a press release titled: “Celebrity Millennium and Constellation Update”. From the press release: In light of current regional travel conditions, we have made the difficult decision to cancel the remainder of the Celebrity Millennium’s season in Asia and reposition her to the West Coast of the United States earlier than planned. Guests will recieve a full refund. We are also adjusting our March 2nd and 17th itineraries for Celebrity Constellation, replacing both debarkation and embarkation in Singapore on March 17th with Dubei, UAE. We are working directly with our guests to assist with reaccommodation of flights and hotels. The Asia market remains of great importance to us, and we look forward to returning there very soon. February 12, 2020: Holand America Line posted: “Update: 2/12/2020 3:30am Pacific Time”. From the update: Westerdam is now sailing for Sihanoukville, Cambodia, where the current cruise will end. We will arrive at 7:00 a.m. local time on Thursday, Feb. 13 and will remain in port for several days for disembarkation. Guests will be able to go ashore. All approvals have been received and we are extremely grateful to the Cambodian authorities for their support. Guests will disembark in Sihanoukville over the next few days and transfer via charter flights to Phnom Penh for forward travel home. Holland America Line will arrange and pay for all flights home, in addition to the full cruise refund and 100% future cruise credit already communicated. Future Westerdam voyage plans are still being finalized. The Feb. 15 cruise scheduled to embark in Yokohama has been cancelled. No cancellations for cruises with departure dates beyond Feb. 15 have been announced at this time. However, we are assessing the impact of current port restrictions in Asia on cruises departing Feb. 29 or later. We will communicate details as they become finalized in the next few days.Westerdam was on a 14-day cruise that departed Hong Kong Feb.1. There are 1,455 guests and 802 crew on board. The cruise was previously scheduled to disembark Feb. 15 in Yokohama, Japan. All guests on board are healthy and despite erroneous reports there are no known or suspected cases of coronavirus on board, nor have their ever been… February 12, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Coronavirus: parents of Australian toddler stranded in Hubei province plead for her evacuation”. It was written by Naaman Zhou. From the article: The parents of an 18-month old Australian toddler stranded in the Hubei province of China have pleaded with the federal government to evacuate her from centre of the new coronavirus outbreak……But Chloe Luo, an Australian citizen, remains in the neighboring city of Suizhou – which has the world’s fourth-highest number of coronavirus cases, and has been under lockdown since 25 January.The toddler from Canberra was being looked after by her grandmother, but last week her grandmother was hospitalized with a cold, unrelated to coronavirus, leaving Chloe with her great-aunt.Her parents, Yufei Luo and Yi Zhao, who live in the Canberra suburb of Ngunnawal, said they were willing to fly into Suizhou, which is three hours drive from Wuhan, to be with Chloe and bring her back home. But the Australian government has said it is not planning on organising a third evacuation flight for citizens remaining in Wuhan and Hubei.Yufei told Guardian Australia they decided in early January that Chloe should visit China becaue they were worried that bushfire smoke in Canberra was damaging her health……On 1 January, Canberra’s air quality reached 1296 micrograms of PM2.5 particles per cubic metre, compared with 41 micrograms in Beijing……Yufei said the Australian government told him that they could not evacuate Chloe on any of the earlier flights… February 12, 2020: South China Morning Post posted an article titled: “Singapore bank DBS evacuates 300 staff after coronavirus case surfaces”. From the article: Singapore’s biggest bank DBS evacuated 300 staff from its head office at Marina Bay Financial Centre Tower 3 on Wednesday after one of its workers tested positive for the coronavirus.“I regret to inform you that there is one confirmed case of coronavirus at DBS Asia Central on level 43 today,” Singapore country head Tse Koon Shee said in an internal memo.“As a precautionary measure, all 300 colleagues on Level 43 at the Marina Bay Financial Centre (MBFC) have been evacuated and will work from home for the time being.”When contacted for comment, DBS said one of its employees who had been tested on Tuesday for the virus was confirmed as having the infection on Wednesday morning.“During this difficult time, the bank will be providing this employee and his family with all every support and guidance,” it said in a statement.” we are also currently conducting detailed contact tracing with all employees and other parties that the infected employee may have come into contact with.”……DBS said it has activated business continuity plans, with employees working from home or from split sites. It said staff will also recieve a care pack which includes face masks, a thermometer, hand sanitizer and vitamin C… February 12, 2020: Formula 1 posted an article titled: “Chinese Grand Prix postponed due to coronavirus outbreak”. From the article: The 2020 Chinese Grand Prix, which had been scheduled for April 17-19, has been postponed as a result of the novel coronavirus outbreak.The Chinese Grand Prix Promoter, Juss Sports Group, officially requested the postponement after ongoing discussions with the Federation of Automobile and Motorcycle Sports of People’s Republic of China (CAMF) and Shanghai Administration of Sports.Amid continued health concerns and with the World Health Organisation declaring the coronavirus as a global health emergency, Formula 1, together with governing body the FIA, jointly decided to accept the postponement request in order to ensure the health and safety of the travelling staff, championship participants and fans.Formula 1 and the FIA will continue to work closely with the teams, race promoter, CAMF and the local authorities to monitor the situation as it develops, with all parties studying the viability of potential alternative dates for the Grand Prix later in the year should the situation improve.“The Chinese Grand Prix has always been a very important part of the F1 calendar and the fans are always incredible,” Formula 1 said in a statement. “We all look forward to racing in China as soon as possible and wish everyone in the country the best during this difficult time.” February 12, 2020: South China Morning Post posted an article titled: “Coronavirus: Li Wenliang’s death prompts academics to challenge Beijing on freedom of speech”. It was written by Mimi Lau, Echo Xie, and Guo Rui. From the article: Hundreds of Chinese, led by academics, have signed an online petition calling on the national legislature to protect citizens’ right to freedom of speech, amid growing public discontent over the handling of the coronavirus outbreak.The petition on the highly sensitive issue in China comes as the ruling Communist Party has tightened its control over society in recent years. It also follows a massive outpouring of grief and anger over the death of Li Wenliang, a young doctor who was repremanded by police for “spreading rumours” when he tried to warn people about the virus outbreak when it began in the central Chinese city of Wuhan in December. Li’s death from the pneumonia-like illness on Friday has prompted calls for those who sought to silence him to be punished, and for greater freedom of expression in China.The new virus strain has so far infected more than 44,000 people and killed more than 1,000 in mainland China, with cases reported in more than 20 other countries.The petition, addressed to the National People’s Congress, lists five demands for Beijing: to protect people’s right to freedom of expression; to discuss the issue at NPC meetings; to make February 6, the day Li died, a national day for free speech; to ensure no one is punished, threatened, interrogated, censored or locked up for their speech, civil assembly, letters, or communications; and to give equitable treatment, such as medical care, to people from Wuhan and Hubei province. Many people from the outbreak epicentre have reported experiencing discrimination elsewhere in the country as the virus has spread,The petition is gaining momentum online, but some of the signatories have already come under pressure… February 12, 2020: BT posted a statement titled: “BT Group statement on Mobile World Congress attendance”. From the statement: After careful discussions and planning, BT has decided that we will not attend GSMA Mobile World Congress Barcelona 2020: We value our participation in important industry groups like GSMA and deeply respect the steps they have already taken to protect attendees. unfortunately, the most responsible decision is to withdraw our participation from the event to safeguard our employees and customers. February 12, 2020: Nokia posted a press release titled: “Nokia cancels participation at MWC 2020 in Barcelona”. From the press release: Press release Nokia has taken the decision to withdraw from MWC 2020 after a full assessment of the risks related to a fast-moving situation.Primary focus has been to safeguard the health and well-being of employees and others while also recognizing responsibility to the industry and customers.Nokia wants to thank the GSMA as well as the governments of China and Spain and Catalonia’s Generalitat. Espoo, Finland – Nokia has been carefully monitoring the situation following the outbreak of the novel coronavirus with the goal of making a fact-based decision related to our attendance at Mobile World Congress in 2020.While the health and safety of our employees is our absolute priority, we also recognize that we have a responsibility to the industry and our customers. In view of this, we have taken the necessary time to evaluate a fast-moving situation, engage with the GSMA and other stakeholders, regularly consult external experts and authorities, and plan to manage risks based on a wide range of scenarios.The conclusion of that process is that we believe the prudent decision is to cancel our participation at Mobile World Congress. We want to express our thanks to the GSMA, the governments of China and Spain as well as Catalonia’s Generalitat, and many others who have worked tirelessly to address the challenges resulting from the novel coronavirus, and they have our full support as they move forward. Rather than meeting customers and stakeholders in Barcelona, Nokia plans to go directly to customers with a series of “Nokia Live” events aimed at showcasing the industry-leading demos and launches scheduled for MWC. February 13, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: 13 February 13, 2020: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted a media statement titled: “CDC Confirms 15th Case of Coronavirus Disease (COVID-2019)”. From the media statement: CDC today confirmed another infection with Coronavirus Disease (COVID-2019) in the United States. The patient is among a group of people under a federal quarantine order at JBSA-Lackland in Texas because of their recent return to the U.S. on a State Department-chartered flight that arrived on February 7, 2020.All people who lived or travelled in Hubei Province, China, are considered at high risk of having been exposed to this virus and are subject to a temporary 14-day quarantine upon the entry into the United States. This is the first person under quarantine at JBSA-Lackland who had symptoms and tested positive for COVID-19. The individual is currently isolated and receiving medical care at a designated hospital nearby.This brings the tital number of COVID-19 cases in the United States to 15. There will likely be additional cases in the coming days and weeks, including among other people recently returned from Wuhan. While 195 people were discharged from quarantine on Tuesday, more than 600 people who returned on chartered flights from Wuhan remain under federal quarantine and are closely being monitored to contain the spread of the virus.., February 13, 2020: The World Health Organization (WHO) posted: “Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 24”. From the report: No new countries reported cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours.WHO has developed a database to collect the latest scientific findings and knowledge on Coronavirus disease. For more information, please see here.The two-day global research and innovation forum regarding COVID-19 was convened in line with the WHO R&D Bluepring this week. Leading health experts from around the world met at WHO to asses the current level of knowledge about the new COVID-19 disease, identify gaps and work together to accelerate and fund priority research needed to help stop this outbreak and prepare for any future outbreaks. For more details, please see here. Technical Focus: Investigation of COVID-19 cases outside of China: As of 10am CET 13 Feb 2020, a total of 170 cases of COVID-19 who had a travel history to China had been reported outside of China. The vast majority of these (151, 89%) do not appear to lead to further transmission of the virus, while the remaining 19 have been associated with onward transmission within 12 distinct groups of epidemiologically linked cases… …Among these, four groups have involved at least nine individuals. The largest involves 20 individuals in six countries thus far – United Kingdom (6), France (5), Malaysia (3), Singapore (3), Republic of Korea (2), Spain (1) – and has been linked to a conference in Singapore between 20 and 22 January 2020 and a subsequent ski trip to the French Alps… The next largest involves 15 cases and was linked to a conference in Bavaria, Germany. Among the attendees was an individual with an epidemiological link to confirmed cases in Wuhan, China. Additionally, one of the 15 cases was detected in, but did not involve transmission within, Spain.Sixteen cases have been reported in four countries for which there are no clearly established epidemiological links. For all these individuals, investigations are ongoing to establish the mechanism by which they were infected Summary of four events with linked cases and transmission out of China with number of confirmed cases larger than seven, as of 10 am 13 Feb 2020: Event Number 1 Countries reporting: France (5), Malaysia (3), Republic of Korea (2), Singapore (3), Spain (1), The United Kingdom (6)Number of confirmed cases: 20Date of report to WHO of last case: 10 Feb 2020 Event Number 2: Countries reporting: Germany (14), Spain (1)Number of confirmed cases: 15Date of report to WHO of last case: 11 Feb 2020 Event Number 3: Countries reporting: Viet Nam (9)Number of confirmed cases: 9Date of report to WHO of last case: 11 Feb 2020 Event Number 4: Countries reporting: Singapore (9)Number of confirmed cases: 9Date of report to WHO of last case: 8 Feb 2020 Confirmed cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 13 February 2020: Hubei: 34,874Guangdong: 1,241Zhejiang: 1,145Henan: 1,169Hunan: 968Anhui: 910Jiangxi: 872Jiangsu: 570Chongqing: 518Shandong: 506Sichuan: 451Heilongjiang: 395Beijing: 366Shanghai: 313Fujan: 279Hebei: 265Shaanxi: 229Guangxi: 222Yunnan: 155Hainan: 157Shanxi: 126Guizhou: 135Liaoning: 116Tianjin: 112Gansu: 87Jilin: 84Inner Mongolia: 61Xinjiang: 63Ningxia: 64Hong Kong SAR: 50 Qinghai: 18Taipei and environs: 18Macao SAR: 10Xizang: 1TOTAL: 46,550 Countries, territories or areas with reported confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Data as of 13 Febrary 2020: China: including confirmed cases in Hong Kong SAR (50 confirmed cases, 1 death), Macao SAR (10 confirmed cases) and Taipei and environs (18 confirmed cases) 46,550 confirmed cases (1820 new)Singapore: 50 confirmed cases (3 new)/ 0 deathsJapan: 29 cases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanes territorial waters (0 new)/ 0 deatsRepublic of Korea: 28 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 18 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 16 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 15 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 deathCambodia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 33 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 14 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 7 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 11 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsThe United Kingdom: 9 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 confirmed cases/ 0 deathsSpain: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 8 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsInternational Conveyance (Japan): (cases identifed on a cruise ship currently in Japanese territorial waters): 174 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths. One case originally includes in the international conveyance cases was reclassified as reported by Japan. February 13, 2020: President Trump tweeted: “DRAIN THE SWAMP! We want bad people out of our government!” February 13, 2020: Prime Minister of Australia Honorable Scott Morrison MP posted “Press Conference – Australian Parliament House ACT”. From the transcript: Prime Minister: Thank you. I’m joined of course, by the Minister for Health and the Chief Medical Officer Dr. Brendan Murphy. I thank you again, Brendan and all the senior medical officers, chief medical officers, of our states and territories, who have also met today and are providing very important advice to the government in relation to the coronavirus.The advice that we received this afternoon at the National Security Committee from that panel of the chief medical officers is that Australia’s arrangements to protect Australians from coronavirus here in Australia are working, they’re effective, they’re doing the job. And its important that we ensure that that continues to be the case. And that’s why this afternoon we’ve agreed to accept the recommendations that have been provided to us to maintain the ban and entry restriction on foreign nationals who have recently been in mainland China for a further week to protect Australians from the risk of coronavirus. So this is something we will continue to review on a weekly basis and consider all the medical evidence that has come forth. There’s an enormous amount of work that is taking place between Australia and many other nations who are working together to ensure we have the best information available to use to make the best possible decisions.The decision was made following the receipt of the medical advice and we did not take this decision lightly. We are very mindful also of the disruption and economic impacts of these arrangements. But I note Australia is one of 58 countries that has introduced some form of travel restrictions. And I jsut want to assure all Australians that we are doing everything we can to keep Australians safe at this time and ensure that we are mitigating everything that is possible to address any of the threats….…I’m very grateful for the constructive approach that the Chinese authorities have been participating with Australia. I’m very appreciative of the role of their embassy here also in Canberra and I’d like to thank the Chinese Australian community for the way they’ve been engaging, and respecting the quarantine arrangements and the self isolation. The Chinese Australian community has been absolutely fantastic.And I think its very important that all Australians reach out and support them at this time in particular, as we go into the weekend, I’d encourage you to go and support businesses. Particularly those Chinese Australian businesses, and to provide that support because they really have been doing a tremendous job under what have been very stressful and trying circumstances for that community. They are such an integral part of Australian life and it’s important at this difficult time, especially for the Chinese Australian community, that all Australians are putting their arms around them and supporting them in every way they can……But the key thing is, is that the decisions the government has taken, the way we’ve gone about that, how we’ve gathered the advice, made decisions, is keeping Australian safe when it comes to coronavirus… February 13, 2020: New York State website posted news titled: “Governor Cuomo Reminds New Yorkers That Flu Cases Continue to Increase, as Flu Season Expected to Set Record-High Levels”. From the news: Governor Andrew M. Cuomo today reminded all New Yorkers to take recommended precautions to protect themselves from the flu as new numbers released today show flu activity still has not reached its peak this flu season. Flu cases in New York this season are expected to set record-high level since the New York State Department of Health began tracking flu cases during the 1998-99 season.“As flu season has not peaked yet across New York, I urge everyone to remain vigilant and take simple precautions to protect themselves and their families,” Governor Cuomo said. “I encourage all New Yorkers older than six months to get their flu shot – it’s not too late.”The latest influenza surveilance report for the week ending February 8th show seasonal flu activity continues to be widespread across New York State for the eleventh consecutive week. As indicated in the report, there were 17,233 laboratory-confirmed flu cases reported to the State Department of Health, the second highest weekly total since the 1998-1999 flu season. The most lab-confirmed cases reported during a single week in a flu season was 18,252 in 2017-18. There have been a total of 106,824 lab-confirmed cases reported in New York State this season, with three flu-associated pediatric deaths. Last week, 1,993 New Yorkers were hospitalized with lab-confirmed influenza. So far this season, there have been 15,541 flu-related hospitalizations…I put this news into this blog post because it shows that the State of New York was dealing with influenza and coronavirus at the same time. February 13, 2020: Prime Minister of Australia Honorable Scott Morrison MP posted a Media Release titled: “Extension of Travel Ban to Protect Australians From the Coronavirus”. Here are some key points from the Media Release: The National Security Committee of Cabinet today has today agreed to extend the entry restrictions on foreign nationals who have recently been in mainland China for a further week from 15 February 2020 to protect Australians from the risk of coronavirus.This decision is underpinned by medical advice and recommendations from the Commonwealth’s Chief Medical Officer and chief medical officers from each state and territory, on the steps necessary to contain the spread of coronavirusThe Chief Medical Officer confirmed that our arrangements to protect Australians from coronavirus are working – there are no confirmed cases among Australian citizens and residents who have returned to Australia since the introduction of the border measures on 1 February 2020.The restrictions will be reviewed by the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee (AHPPC) in one week.The continuation of the travel restrictions means that fora further week, foreign nationals – excluding permanent residents – who have been in mainland China will not be allowed to enter Australia for 14 days from the time they left.As before, Australian citizens and permanent residents will still be able to enter, as will their immediate family members (spouses, legal guardians and dependents only.)We will continue to require Australian citizens, permanent residents and their families who have been in mainland China from 1 February 2020, and who return Australia, to self-isolate for 14 days from the time they left mainland China.The AHPPC has advised that the situation with Coronavirus in mainland China has not improved in the past two weeks.With help from Quantas and the cooperation of the Chinese authorities, we have assisted the departure of 532 Australians from Wuhan.On the advice of AHPPC, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trad will maintain its travel advice for mainland China at “do not travel” until there is a material change in the global situation.Border measures to screen passengers on flights and vessels from mainland China and for people who have been in, or transited through, mainland China in the past 14 days will also continue. February 13, 2020: NYC, the Official Website of New York City posted news titled: “Mayor de Blasio, Speaker Johnson and Queens Chamber of Commerce Encourage New Yorkers to Visit Asian-American Owned Small Businesses”. From the news: Mayor Bill de Blasio, Speaker Corey Johnson, the Queens Chamber of Commerce, the Flushing Chinese Business Association, Administration officials and community leaders joined together today to declare Flushing, Queens open for business. Together, they encouraged New Yorkers to visit an Asian-American owned small business in their neighborhood.“In hard times, New Yorkers know to stand by their neighbors,” said Mayor Bill de Blasio. “We’re in Flushing today to embrace Asian-American owned small businesses and say to all New Yorkers: New York City’s Chinatowns are open for business!”“It is important to support the Chinese community in New York City. Unfortunately, many businesses and restaurants in Chinatown, Flushing and Sunset Park are suffering because some customers are afraid of the coronavirus. But those fears are not based on facts and science. The risk of infection to New Yorkers is low. There is no need to avoid public spaces. I urge everyone to dine and shop as usual,” said Speaker Corey Johnson.The Mayor also met with business owners to hear about how fear of the Coronavirus has impacted them. The Flushing Chinese Business Association estimates that business is down up to 40 percent in the neighborhood, despite there being no known cases in New York City……”As one of the leading healthcare providers and doctors who serve a majority of New York’s immigrant Chinese and Chinese American population, SOMOS is working in coordination with the city’s health department and elected officials to ensure we are doing everything we can to prevent the spread of coronavirus,” said Dr. Henry Chen, President of SOMOS. “Risks of infection in New York remains low, but I am gravely concerned by the increased xenophobia against the Asian American population in our city, specifically the Chinese community. When people play off stereotypes, it distracts from the real risks and can lead to misperception and misinformation about the source of the virus. We are grateful to stand with the Mayor, city elected officials and community leaders to ensure we eliminate any stigma with the virus, continue public outreach efforts, and educate the public of the real risks.. February 13, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Stormzy postpones Asian tour due to coronavirus”. It was written by Ben Beaumont-Thomas. From the article: Stormzy has postponed the Asian leg of his Heavy Is the Head world tour due to coronavirus.The south London rap star wrote on Twitter: “I was seriously looking forward to bringing the #HITH world tour to Asia and playing some epic sold-out shows but due to the ongoing health and travel concerns surrounding the coronavirus, I’m regrettably having to reschedule this leg of the tour.”… February 13. 2020: Sony posted a statment on the PlayStation Blog about PAX East: Update: Today, Sony Interactive Entertainment made the decision to cancel its participation at PAX East in Boston this year due to increasing concerns related to COVID-19 (also known as “novel coronavirus”). We felt this was the safest option as the situation is changing daily. We are disappointed to cancel our participation in this event, but the health and safety of our global workforce is our highest concern. February 13, 2020: AEG posted information on Instagram about the Khalid Free Spirit World Tour: Khalid Free Spirit World Tour Asia 2020 Tour PostponedDue to the recent advisories and travel restrictions in several Asian countries, Khalid will be postponing his upcoming tour of Asia. Our highest priority remains the safety of Khalid’s fans, his team and everyone who has been working on these concerts.We are activly working on rescheduled concert dates, with more information to be announced soon on https://www.khalidofficial.com/.Customers who have purchased tickets will recieve refunds. Detailed refund methods, please stay tuned to ticketing websites.We apologize for any inconvenience this causes and thank everyone for their understanding. February 13, 2020: U.S. Department of State posted a travel advisory titled: “Guinea Travel Advisory”. From the travel advisory: Travel Advisory February 13, 2020Guinea – Level 2: Exercise Increased CautionGlobal Health Advisory: Do Not Travel. Avoid all international travel due to the global impact of COVID-19.Exercise increased caution in Guinea due to civil unrest.Country Summary: Demonstrations occur frequently throughout the country and are often sporatic and unplanned, making it difficult to predict the size, route, or level of violence or congestion that may occur. Recent demonstrations throughout Middle Guinea, which includes Labe, Mamou, Pita, and Dalaba, have been particulary violent.Any demonstration may turn violent, resulting in injuries and even fatalities. Demonstrators may attack vehicles that attempt to pass through or around the protests, resulting in serious injuries and vehicular damage. Criminals are known to take advantae of the resulting traffic congestion to rob drivers, passengers, and pedestrians. Uniformed security forces may also extort drivers and passengers during these incidents.Read the Safety and Security section on the country information page. If you decide to travel to Guinea: Avoid demonstrations and crowds.Be aware of your surroundings.Monitor local media for breaking events and be prepared to adjust your plans.Keep travel documents up to date and easily accessible.Have evacuation plans that do not rely on U.S. government assistance.Enroll in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP) to receive Alerts and make it easier to locate to locate you in an emergency.Follow the Department of State on Facebook and Twitter.Review the Crime and Safety Report for Guinea.Prepare a contingency plan for emergency situations. Review the Traveler’s Checklist. February 13, 2020: U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) posted a news release titled: “Remdesivir prevents MERS coronavirus disease in monkeys”. From the news release: …The experimental antiviral remdesivir successfully prevented disease in rhesus macaques infected with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), according to a new study from National Institutes of Health scientists. Remdesivr prevented disease when administered before infection and improved the condition of macaques when given after the animals were already infected.The new report from NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) appears in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.MERS-Cov is closely related to the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) that has grown to be a global public health emergency since cases were first detected in Wuhan, China, in December.Remdesivir has previously protected animals against a variety of viruses in lab experiments. The drug has been shown experimentally to effectively treat monkeys infected with Ebola and Nipah viruses. Remdesivir also has been investigated as a treatment for Ebola virus disease in people.The current study was conducted at NIAID’s Rocky Mountain Laboratories in Hamilton, Montana. The work involved three groups of animals: those treated with remdesivir 24 hours before infection with MERS-CoV; those treated 12 hours after infection (close to the peak time for MERS-CoV replication in these animals); and untreated control animals.The scientists observed the animals for six days. All control animals showed signs of respiratory disease. Animals treated before infection fared well: no signs of respiratory disease, significantly lower levels of virus replication in the lungs compared to control animals, and no lung damage. Animals treated after infection fared significantly better than the control animals: disease was less severe than in control animals, their lungs had lower levels of virus than the control animals, and the damage to the lungs was less severe.The scientists indicate that the promising study results support additional clinical trials of remdesivir for MERS-CoV and 2019-nCoV. At least two clinical trials of remdesivir for 2019-nCoV are under way in China, and other patients with 2019-nCoV infection have received the drug under a compassionate use protocol.The Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, also provided support for this study. Gilead Sciences, Inc., developed remdesivir, also known as GS-5734, and collaborated in the research.MERS-CoV emerged in Saudi Arabia in 2012. Through December 2019, the World Health Organization had confirmed 2,499 MERS-CoV cases and 861 deaths (or about 1 in 3). Because about one-third of MERS-CoV cases spread from infected people being treated in healthcare settings, the scientists suggest that remdesivir could effectively prevent disease in other patients, contacts of patients, and healthcare workers. They also note the drug might help patients who are diagnosed with MERS or 2019-nCoV if given soon after symptoms start. February 13, 2020: U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) posted a press release titled: “Public Health news Alert: CMS Develops New Code for Coronavirus Lab Test”. From the press release: Today, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) took further action to ensure America’s healthcare facilities and clinical laboratories are prepared to respond to the threat of the 2019-Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19). Specifically, CMS developed a new Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) code for providers and laboratories to test patients for SARS-CoV-2. This code will allow those labs conducting the tests to bill for the specific test instead of using an unspecified code, which means better tracking of the public health response for this particular strain of the coronavirus and to help protect people from the spread of this infectious disease.Healthcare providers who need to test patients for Coronavirus using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 2019 Novel Coronavirus Real Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Test Panel may bill for that test using the newly created HCPCS code (U0001). The Medicare claims processing system will be able to accept this code on April 1, 2020 for dates of service on or after February 4, 2020. HCPCS is a standardized coding system that Medicare and other health insurers use to submit claims for services provided to patients… February 13, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “Tesla asknowledges ‘health epidemics’ as new risk in financial filing amid coronavirus outbreak”. It was written by Lora Koldony. From the article: On Thursday, Tesla acknowledged in an annual financial filing that the COVID-19, or coronavirus outbreak may have a material adverse impact on its business.In the Risk Factors section of the 2019 10-K filing, Tesla included – for the first time ever – a mention of “health epidemics.”The filing also stated: “Beginning in late 2019, the media has reported a public health epidemic originating in China, prompting precautionary government-imposed closures of certain travel and business. Gigafactory Shanghai was closed for a brief time as a result, before it repoened in February 2020 and rejoined U.S. factories, which had continued to operate. It is unknown whether and how global supply chains, particularly for automotive parts, may be affected if such an epidemic persists for an extended period of time. We may incur expenses or delays relating to such events outside of our control, which could have a material adverse impact on our business, operating results and financial condition.”.. February 13, 2020: Holand America Line posted: “Update: 2/13/2020 11:15 am Pacific Time.” From the update: The Cambodian Health Ministry has announced that the 20 samples taken onboard Westerdam have all been confirmed as negative for coronavirus by the Pasteur Laboratory in Phnom Penh. As stated in previous communications, there were never any suspected cases of coronavirus on board.We sincerely thank all those in Cambodia who have demonstrated a willingness to welcome us with an open mind and make decisions based on facts.“We also extend our deepest gratitude to President Trump, Cambodia’s Honorable Prime Minister Hun Sen, Canadian Foreign Minister Champagne, elected officials across the country and governments around the world for providing support and being effective allies in bringing our guests home,” said Stein Kruse, Group CEO, Holland America Group and Carnival UK. “We are pleased with the successful resolution of this challenging journey that was complicated by unfounded fears stemming from erroneous information with respect to the medical condition of Westerdam’s guests and crew. This has all been a terrible and unfortunate misunderstanding that has impacted 2,257 people on board and hundreds of others shoreside who have worked 24/7 to get our guests home.”Cambodian authorities have granted clearance to Westerdam to begin disembarkation of guests the morning of Feb. 14, 2020, in Sihanoukville. Flight details are being communicated to guests as they are finalized, and it is expected that a full disembarkation will take a few days given the charter flight schedule. During this time, guests will remain comfortably on board with full service in operation.In addition to homeward travel provided by Holland America Line, guests have received a 100% refund of their cruise fare, plus an additional 100% future cruise credit. We hope that guests on this voyage will join us again and sincerely thank them for the many compliments we have received for our crew and the acknowledgements that this situation was out of our control. February 13, 2020: Crain’s Chicago Business posted an article titled: “Kraft Heinz and Pepsi closed Chinese plants on coronavirus.” It appears the article originated at Bloomberg. From the article: Kraft Heinz Co. Chief Executive Officer Miguel Patricio said the ketchup maker has closed some of its China plants following the outbreak of coronavirus. PepsiCo Inc. has done the same, closing one of its six manufacturing facilities recently.The maker of Jell-O and Planters peanuts only gets 2% of its sales from China, but buys products from suppliers that import raw materials from the country, Patricio said in an interview. He recommended companies look for alternative supplies of raw materials due to disruptions there……Of the Kraft Heinz’s eight manufacturing facilities in the country, some are open and others are closed, depending on the municipality, Patricio said.Pepsi kept one of its six plants closed after Chinese New Year, which began Jan. 25, Chief Financial Officer Hugh F. Johnston said in an interview. The plant is in Wuhan, and is expected to start up again “shortly.”Though disrupted, sales in China are a small piece of Pepsi’s overall business, Johnston said……One employee from Kraft Heinz’s small team in Wuhan has been diagnosed with the virus, but he is in stable condition, Patricio said. The company is closely following his status. February 13, 2020: CNBC reported on their live blog: “NYC small business chief: Chinatown hit hard because of fears over coronavirus”. From the post: Small businesses located in New York’s Chinatown are losing customers over unsubstantiated fears of coronavirus, the city’s small business chief told CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “Business owners are telling us revenues are down 40% in Chinatown.” said Gregg Bishop, commissioner of the Department of Small Business Services. “And it’s unfounded.” The city on Wednesday confirmed that the seven people suspected of having the virus in the city tested negative. February 13, 2020: CNBC posted an article titled: “UC San Diego health experts provide updates on coronavirus patients”. It was written by William Feuer. From the article: UC San Diego health experts held a press conference Thursday to update the public on the status of coronavirus patients at one of its facilities.Clinical director of infection prevention at UC San Diego Health Dr. Randy Taplitz said that UCSD Health currently has three patients, two of whom have tested positive for the new covoronavirus, now called COVID-19. The third is a person under investigation, Taplitz said.The two patients who tested positive for the virus are under isolation, Taplitz said, adding that visitors are being limited. Both patients who tested positive for the virus are in “fair condition,” Taplitz said.Taplitz said the hospital is communicating regularly with Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, where more than 200 Americans evacuated from the epicenter of the outbreak in Wuhan, are currently quarantined. She said the hospital expects to receive more patients from the base.UC San Diego Health said it received several evacuees for testing last week. One tested positive for the virus and has remained in isolation at one of the hospital’s facilities since then. The other was returned to the Miramar base accidentally after a testing error, but has since been returned to the hospital “for observation and isolation until cleared by the CDC for release,” according to UC San Diego Health… February 13, 2020: 27 members of the U.S. Senate sent a letter to The Honorable Robert O’Brien, Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. From the letter: Dear Mr. O’Brien,As the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak that begain in December in Wuhan, China continues to accelerate, we strongly urge you to appoint a qualified, dedicated, senior global health security expert to coordinate the United States’ global health security work, including the response to, and containment of this and other global health emergencies. This action is long overdue. According to reports, in May of 2018, “the head of global health security on the White House’s National Security Council left the Trump Administration.” Almost two years later, this position on the National Security Council (NSC) remains vacant. We urge immediate action, as well as your response to questions regarding the NSC’s readiness.In May of 2018, some of us wrote to then-National Security Advisor John Bolton regarding our concerns about this vacancy, noting “he threat of a pandemic is serious, and its important families know we have a vigilant and experienced team in place and woring to protect us against such public health threats.” We asked a series of questions about how the NSC would handle global health security threats. But we recieved no answers to our questions.These questions are even more salient today. Over 44,600 people have contracted the novel coronavirus, and it has killed more than 1,113 people; Chinese officials have placed travel restrictions on tens of millions of citizens. The virus has spread to over 20 countries. While according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), “for the general American public, who are unlikely to be exposed to this virus, immediate health risk from 2019-nCoV is considered low at this time,” there have been thirteen confirmed cases in the United States.The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the CDC play a critical leadership role in the current response; the NSC’s coordination can and should complement this leadership.The World Health Organization has declared the outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern and on January 31, 2020, HHS Secretary Alex Azar declared a public health emergency in the United States. President Trump has also established the President’s Coronavirus Task Force, of which you are a member. But you are not a public health expert, and it is not clear if the NSC has such an expert in position to effectively advise or coordinate its global public health work on the Task Force and in other areas. Families concerned about the novel coronavirus threat need to know the NSC has a dedicated, senior official with appropriate expertise and authority to address the domestic and global health threats from the virus. It is of paramount importance that this person approaches the role through a public health lens. We, therefore, ask you to provide answers to the following questions:1 Is NSC working to hire a dedicated, senior global health security expert?a If so, please describe the qualifications this expert will have.b if so, please describe the responsibilities they will have.2 Who is the top official at the NSC responsible for global health security?a To what extent and how often does this person meet with key leaders from the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institutes of Health, Good and Drug Administration, and other public health agencies with regard to global health security?b To what extent does this person coordinate efforts between public health agencies and other federal agencies involved in global health security and public health responses, including the Department of Defense, the Department of Defense, the Department of State, and the U.S. Agency for International Development with regard to global health security?c To what extent does this person communicate with relevant international public health organizations and foreign agencies and officials with regard to global health security?3 Who is the top official at the NSC responsible for managing the United States’ response to novel coronavirus?a What role, if any, does this person play on the President’s Coronavirus Task Force?b To what extent and how often does this person meet with key leaders from the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institutes ofHealth, Food and Drug Administration, and other public health agencies with regard to the response to novel coronavirus? What are the primary roles and rsponsibilities of this individual with regard to the federal government’s coordinated response to the virus?c To what extent does this person coordinate efforts between public health agencies and other federal agencies involved in global health security and public health responses, including the Department of Defense, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of State, and the U.S. Agency for International Development with regard to the response to novel coronavirus?d To what extent does this person communicate with relevant international public health organizations and foreign agencies and officials (including members of the the Chinese government) to responde to novel coronavirus.Thank you for your attention to this matter. We ask that you provide answers to our questions no later than February 27, 2020. The Democratic members of the U.S. Senate who signed the letter are: California: Kamala HarrisColorado: Michael BennetConnecticut: Richard Blumenthal, Chris MurphyHawai’i: Brian Schatz, Mazie K. HironoIllinois: Tammy DuckworthMassachusetts: Elizabeth WarrenMichigan: Debbie Stabenow, Gary PetersMinnesota: Amy Klobuchar, Tina SmithNevada: Jacky RosenNew Hampshire: Jeanne ShaheenNew Jersey: Robert Menendez, Cory BookerNew Mexico: Martin Heinrich, Tom UdallNew York: U.S. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer. Kristen GillibrandOhio: Sherrod Brown. Jeff MerkleyPennsylvania: Bob CaseyRhode Island: Jack ReedWashington: Patty Murray, Maria CantwellWisconsin: Tammy Baldwin February 14, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 13 February 14, 2020: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted a transcript titled: “Transcript for CDC Media Telebriefing: Update on COVID-19”. From the transcript: …Dr. Messonnier, Director of CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases: …Since we briefed you last there’s one more confirmed case of COVID-19 in a person who had been under quarantine facilitated by the State Department at Joint Base Lackland. There are more than 600 people still under quarantine in the United States because of their recent return from the epicenter of this outbreak in China.In general our guidance is based on risk assessments and other people or groups may have different risks. And these people are going through difficult circumstances right now. Being quarantined can be disruptive, frustrating, and feel scary, especially when the reason for the quarantine is exposure to a new disease for which there may be limited information. Quarantine is an unusual situation for public health responders too. The last time we had to quarantine large groups of people was more than 50 years ago. So while we are doing the best we can, there are going to be bumps along the way……CDC did test all of the initial 195 people who returned from Wuhan on January 29th. But since that time, we have learned more about how the virus behaves in people and when is the optimal time to test them to best inform our public health response. CDC may do testing of all people again if the risk warrants it. But right now, CDC Staff at each base are checking temperatures twice daily and monitoring people for any new symptoms. If someone has symptoms compatible with this new virus they’re medically evaluated and they’re tested.Another question I want to address is how this virus spreads. Based on what we know now, we believe the virus spreads mainly from person to person among close contacts. Which is defined about six feet. Through respiratory droplets produced when an infected person coughs or sneezes. People are thought to be most contageous when they’re most symptomatic. That’s when they’re the sickest. Some spread may happen by touching the contaminated surface and touching the eyes, nose, and mouth. But remember this does not last long on surfaces. Some spread may happen before people show symptoms. There have been a few reports of this coronavirus and it is compatible with what we know about other respiratory viruses including seasonal flu. But right now, we do not believe these last two forms of transmission are the main driver of spread……Last night, the Vice Minister of China’s National Health Commission announced there are more than 1,700 health car workers who are ill with this new virus in China. This is concerning, and we saw that transmission can be amplified in health care settings if infection control practices are not carefully followed. Health care workers are on the front line, supporting the physical and mental health of thsoe who are infected. As we learn more about how this virus is spread, keeping health care workers safe is a high priority. CDC has published guidance for health care workers on how to protect themselves as they care for patients and I’m happy to report so far no health care workers in the U.S. have become infected in the line of duty… February 14, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 25” From the report: No new countries reported cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours.The second death has been reported outside of China, in Japan. This individual did not have known travel history to China.In China, health care workers account for 1716 confirmed cases of COVID-19 including six deaths. Confirmed and suspected cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 14 February 2020: Hubei: 4,823 total daily cases/ 116 total daily deaths/ 51,986 total cumulative cases/ 1,318 total cumulative deathsGuangdong: 20 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 1,261 total cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsHenan: 15 total daily cases/ 1 total daily death/ 1,184 total cumulative cases/ 11 total cumulative deathsZhejiang: 10 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 1,155 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative daily deathsHunan: 20 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 998 total cumulative cases/ 2 total cumulative deathsAnhui: 24 total daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 934 total cumulative cases/ 6 total cumulative deathsJiangxi: 28 total daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 900 total cumulative cases/ 1 total cumulative deathJiangsu: 23 total daily cases/ o daily deaths/ 593 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative daily deathsChongqing: 11 total daily cases/ 1 daily total death/ 529 total cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative daily deathsShandong: 13 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 519 total cumulative cases/ 2 total cumulative deathsSichuan: 12 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths. 463 total cumulative daily cases/ 1 total cumulative deathHeilongjiang: 23 total daily cases/ 2 total daily deaths/ 418 total cumulative cases/ 11 total cumulative deathsBeijing: 6 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 372 total cumulative cases/ 3 total cumulative deathsShanghai: 5 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 318 total cumulative cases/ 1 total cumulative deathHebei: 18 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 283 total cumulative cases/ 3 total cumulative deathsFujian: 2 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 281 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsShaanxi: 1 total daily case/ 0 total daily deaths/ 230 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsGuangxi: 4 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 226 total cumulative cases/ 2 total cumulative deathsYunnan: 7 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 162 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsHainan: 0 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 157 total cumulative cases/ 4 total cumulative deathsGuizhou: 5 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 140 total cumulative cases/ 1 total cumulative deathShanxi: 0 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 126 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsTianjin: 7 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 119 total cumulative cases/ 3 total cumulative deathsLiaoning: 1 total daily case/ 0 total daily deaths/ 117 total cumulative cases/ 1 total cumulative deathGansu: 3 total daily cases/ 0 total deaths/ 90 total cumulative daily cases/ 2 total cumulative deathsJilin: 2 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 86 total cumulative cases/ 1 total cumulative deathNingxia: 3 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 67 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsXinjiang: 2 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 65 total cumumative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsInner Mongolia: 2 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths: 63 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsHong Kong Sar: 3 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 53 total cumulative cases/ 1 total cumulative deathsQinghai: 0 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 18 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsTaipei and environs: 0 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 18 total cumulutive cass/ 0 total cumulative deathsMacao Sar: 0 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 10 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsXizang: 0 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 1 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsTOTAL: 3,095 total daily cases/ 2,450 daily deaths/ 63,932 total cumulative cases/ 1,381 total cumulative deaths Countries, territories or areas outside China with reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Data as of 14 February 2020 Singapore: 58 confirmed cases (8 new)/ 0 deathsJapan: 33 confirmed cases (4 new)/ 1 death (1 new)Republic of Korea: 28 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 19 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 15 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Cambodia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 33 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 15 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 7 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 16 confirmed cass (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 11 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsThe United Kingdom: 9 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 8 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsInternational Conveyance (Japan): (cases identified on a cruise ship currently in international waters) 218 confirmed cases (44 new)/ 0 deaths February 14, 2020: President Trump tweeted: “I look forward to attending the Daytona 500 on Sunday with lots of my great friends from Florida, including the France family and @RepMichaelWaltz from #FL6. See you there, good luck to everyone! @NASCAR @SenRickScott @marcorubio @GovRonDeSantis”. The tweet included a screenshot of tweet from the Daytona International Speedway. The tweet said: “Statement from Daytona International Speedway President Chip Wile regarding the visit of the President of the United States for DAYTONA 2020: Statement from Daytona International Speedway President Chip Wile. The DAYTONA 500 is one of the greatest events in sports and the NASCAR Cup Series. Daytona International Speedway has been privileged to have hosted several sitting Presidents of the United States over our history. We’re honored that the President of the United States has chosen to experience the pageantry and excitement of ‘The Great American Race’ by attending Sunday’s 62nd annual DAYTONA 500 February 14, 2020: Camera & Imaging Products Association announced that CP+ 2020 (Camera and Photo Imaging Show) was cancelled due to the risk of spreading the novel coronavirus. People come to this event to handle the newest cameras and related equipment. The event would have taken place over 4 days at PACIFICO Yokohama from February 27. February 14, 2020: Nikon posted a press release stating that it planned to participate in CP+2020, but cannot because the event was cancelled due to the novel coronavirus outbreak. The company hoped their loyal customers would understand. February 14, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Fiat Chrysler halts production in Serbia over China disruption”. From the article: Fiat Chrysler… said on Friday it had temporarily halted production at its Serbian plant, the first such suspension by an automaker in Europe in response to the coronavirus outbreak in China.Planned downtime at the Kragujevac plant in Serbia, where FCA builds its Fiat 500L car, has been rescheduled “due to availability of certain components in China”, a spokesman for the Italian American automaker said.He said the supply of audio system parts had been disrupted.Chief Executive Mike Manley said last week that disruptions to auto parts production in China could threaten output at one of FCA’s European plants within two to four weeks.The next few weeks will be critical for automakers.Parts made in China are used in millions of vehicles assembled around the world. China’s Hubei province, epicenter of the coronavirus outbreak, is a major hub for vehicle parts production and shipments… February 14, 2020: Royal Caribbean Cruises posted a press release titled: “Spectrum of the Seas Update”. From the press release: In light of current regional travel conditions, we’ve decided to cancel Spectrum of the Seas March 5th and 13th sailings. We are sharing the news with our guests and are sorry for the disruption to their vacations. Guests will recieve full refunds. February 14, 2020: Royal Caribbean Cruises posted a press release titled: “RCL Deploys Ships in Support of Humanitarian Efforts”. From the press release: At a time when it feels line there are too many disasters around the world and not enough relief, Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. … announced it will dedicate two ships to humanitarian efforts in Australia and California to support some of the people affected by recent crises.Spectrum of the Seas, Celebrity Millennium and their crews are ready to thank those who step up for others; company sends 1,000,000 masks to China efforts.The coronavirus outbreak has caused pain and disruption around the world. It is a stark reminder of the hurt that these terrible events can bring – and now fortunate we are that such traumatic events are not more frequent. “When things go wrong, this is a company that wants to find a way to help,” said Richard Fain, chairman and CEO of Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. “At Royal Caribbean, we consider ourselves fortunate to be able to use our ships in a positive way during difficult times.”Fain said Royal Caribbean was working with its suppliers to deliver one million N-95 protective masks into China for government distribution into affected areas. “We admire the all-out efforts of the Chinese government and people to address this crisis, and we want to bring our resources to bear to help their efforts,” Fain said.Spectrum of the Seas will travel to Australia and be deployed on complimentary cruises sailing from Sydney in support of Australia’s first responder community, who worked tirelessly over many weeks of the bush fire crisis…… Bayley noted that the ship and its crew have not been to China for more than two weeks, exceeding public health guidelines……In addition, Celebrity Millennium is repositioning to the west coast of the US earlier than previoysly scheduled and will offer a series of “Cruising for Heroes” sailings in support of California firefighters, other first responders, and veterans throughout March and April. A variety of three-, four-, and five-night sailings have been added to the brands’s offerings to travel the breathtaking Pacific Coast. The sailings will leave Los Angeles and details will be announced soon… February 14, 2020: U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) posted a press announcement titled: “FDA’s Actions in Response to 2019 Novel Coronavirus at Home and Abroad.” From the press announcement: …Active Supply Chain Surveillance We are keenly aware that the outbreak will likely impact the medical product supply chain, including potential disruptions to supply or shortages of critical medical products in the U.S. We are not waiting for drug and device manufacturers to report shortages to us – we are proactively reaching out to manufacturers as part of our vigilant and forward-leaning approach to identifying potential disruptions or shortages. The FDA has dedicated additional resources to review and corrdinate data to better identify any potential vulnerabilities to the U.S. medical product sector, specifically from this outbreak.We have been in contact with hundreds of manufacturers of human and animal drugs and medical devices, as well as syncing up with global regulators, like the European Medicines Agency, to assess and monitor for indications and early warning signs of potential manufacturing discontinuances or interruptions due to the outbreak……This remains an evolving and very dynamic situation with respect to potential shortages. We are tracking reports of increased ordering of some essential medical devices through distributors, such as personal protective equipment (PPE) (e.g. respirators and surgical gowns, gloves and masks).If a potential shortage or disruption of medical products is identified by the FDA, we will use all available tools to react swiftly and mitigate the impact to U.S. patients and health care professionals. These tools include closely working with manufacturers and expediting review of alternate supply to prevent shortages, among other measures, with the common goal of minimizing any negative impact to public health in America.The FDA will continue to closely monitor the domestic and global supply chain during this evolving situation. Should the Agency be alerted to a potential shortage of a critical medical product, we will be as transparent as possible in sharing updates as they develop. FDA Inspections and Monitoring Compliance of FDA Products Manufactured Overseas …In general, the FDA conducts approximately 500 inspections per year in China with the majority of these inspections being for drugs, foods and medical devices. The FDA is not currently conducting inspections in China due to the State Department warning advising against travel to China. For the month of February, the FDA identified all scheduled inspections in China, and they were either postponed or the agency was able to utilize other information to inform decisions allowing the products to enter our U.S. market. Of these inspections, approximately 90% were routine surveillance inspections in China and the remaining for-cause inspections scheduled for February were able to be postponed after reviewing all available information and analyzing on a case-by- case basis……While the outbreak is impacting our ability to conduct inspections in China, it’s important to underscore that the FDA’s risk-based process of surveillance testing of imported products, including those from China, which is based on a number of factors, continues. Fortnately, at this time, we are not seeing the impacts of this outbreak resulting in an increased risk for American consumers from imported products. Furthermore, the FDA Fraud Team monitors on-line (or coronavirus, in general). We will continue to assess the need for additional examinations or analytical testing on FDA-regulated products from China as a result of the outbreak, and we will continue to look at inspections on a case-by-case basis… …The Safety of Consumer Products… …At this time, the FDA continues to review products imported from China using our routine process and has not determined that additional measures are needed to protect public health… Again, we want to reassure the public that at this time there is no evidence that food or food packaging have been associated with transmission and no reason to be concerned. Further, there is no evidence to support transmission of COVID-19 associated with imported goods, including food and drugs for humans and pets, and there have not been any cases of COVID-19 in the U.S. associated with imported goods.We have established a cross-agency task force dedicated to closely monitoring for fraudulent products and false product claims related to COVID-19 and we have already reached out to major retailers to ask for their help in monitoring their online marketplaces for fraudulent products with coronavirus and other pathogen claims. Products sold are subject to FDA investigation and potential enforcement action if they claim to prevent, treat, or cure COVID-19 and have not been evaluated by the agency for that intended use. The task force has already worked with retailers to remove more than a dozen of these types of product listings online. Several have already responded that they plan to monitor for coronavirus claims. The Agency is committed to taking action to prevent unscrupulous actors from marketing unlawful products related to this outbreak… February 14, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Coronavirus outbreak: senior US official accuses China of lack of transparency”. It was written by Lily Kuo. From the article: A senior White House official has called on Beijing to be more transparent over its handling of the coronavirus outbreak as Chinese authorities expanded “wartime” measures to limit its spread.“We are a little dissapointed that we haven’t been invited in and we’re a little disappointed in the lack of transparency coming from the Chinese,” said Larry Kudlow, the director of the US National Economic Council.His comments came after Chinese authorities said they had altered how they count cases, resulting in confusion and dramatic changes to the reported figures for two days in a row, and dampening hopes that the outbreak may peak later this month.On Thursday, Hubei officials reported a large spike in cases after including those confirmed by CT scans, not just lab tests. The revision added 254 deaths to the overall Chinese toll.The on Friday, China added 121 new deaths – but also removed 108 fatalities from the total, due to what China’s National Health Commision said were “duplicate statistics.”In its latest update, the commission reported 121 new deaths and 5,090 new coronavirus cases, bringing the total number of people infected to more than 64,000 worldwide, with 63,851 of the cases in China.The death toll stands at 1,383 – with three of those deaths outside of mainland China, one in Hong Kong, one in Japan and one in the Philippines.The commission did not give further explanation of the double-counted cases on Friday… February 15, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 13 February 15, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 26”. From the report: Egypt reported its first confirmed case of COVID-19. This is the second country in the WHO EMRO region to confirm a case, and the first reported case from the African continent. WHO was informed by the Egyptian Ministry of Health and Population……In a speech to the Munich Security Conference, the WHO Director-General, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, described aspects of the COVID-19 outbreak situation that WHO finds encouraging, and areas of concern. Details can be found here.WHO regional offices continue to support countries with their COVID-19 readiness efforts. More information can be found about the efforts in each of the regions here: Africa; Americas; South-East Asia; Europe; Eastern Mediterranean; and Western Pacific. Confirmed and suspected cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 15 February 2020: Hubei: 2,420 total daily cases/139 total daily deaths/ 54,406 total cumulative cases/ 1,467 cumulative total deathsGuangdong: 33 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 1,294 total cumulative cases/ 2 total cumulative deathsHenan: 28 total daily cases/ 2 total daily deaths/ 1,212 total cumulative cases/ 13 total cumulative deathsZhejaing: 7 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 1,163 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsHunan: 13 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 1,001 total cumulative cases/ 2 total cumulative deathsAnhui: 16 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 950 total cumulative cases/ 6 total cumulative daily deathsJiangsu: 11 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 604 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsChongqing: 8 total daily cases/ 1 total daily death/ 537 total cumulative cases/ 5 total cumulative deathsShandong: 11 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 530 total cumulative cases/ 2 total cumulative deathsSichuan: 7 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 470 total cumulative cases/ 1 total cumulative daily deathHeilongijang: 7 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 425 total cumulative cases/ 11 total cumulative deathsBeijing: 3 total daily cases/ 1 total daily death/ 375 total cumulative cases/ 4 total cumulative deathsShanghai: 8 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 326 total cumulative cases/ 1 total cumulative deathHebei: 8 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 291 total cumulative cases/ 3 total cumulative deathsFujian: 4 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 285 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsGuangxi: 9 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 235 total cumulative cases/ 2 total cumulative deathsShaanxi: 2 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 232 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsYunnan: 6 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 168 total cumulative cases/ 0 total daily deathsHainan: 5 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 162 total cumulative cases/ 4 total cumulative deathsGuizhou: 3 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 143 total cumulative cases/ 1 total cumulative daily deathShanxi: 1 total daily case/ 0 total daily deaths/ 127 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsTianjin: 1 total daily case/ 0 total daily deaths/ 120 total cumulative cases/ 3 total cumilative deathsLiaoning: 2 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 119 total cumulative cases/ 1 total cumulative daily deathsGansu: 0 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 90 total cumulative cases/ 2 total cumulative deathsJilin: 2 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 88 total cumulative cases/ 2 total cumulative deathsNingxia: 3 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 70 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsXinjiang: 5 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 70 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsInner Mongolia: 5 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 68 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsHong Kong Sar: 3 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 56 total cumulative cases/ 1 total cumulative deathsTaipei and environs: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 18 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsQinghai: 0 total daily cases/ 0 total daily tests/ 18 total cumulative cases/0 total cumulative deathsMacao Sar: 0 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 10 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsXizang: 0 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 1 total cumulative case/ 0 total cumulative deathsTOTAL: 2,644 daily cases/ 143 total daily deaths/ 66,576 total cumulative cases/ 1,524 cumulative deaths Countries, territories or areas outside China with reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Data as of 15 February 2020: Singapore: 67 confirmed cases (9 new)/ 0 deathsJapan: 42 confirmed cases (8 new)/1 death (0 new)Republic of Korea: 28 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 21 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 15 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 deaths)Cambodia: 1 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 34 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 15 (0 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 7 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 11 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsThe United Kingdom: 9 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 8 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsEgypt: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deathsInternational Conveyance (Japan): (cases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanese territorial waters) 218 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths February 15, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Remember, will be at Daytona 500 tomorrow!” February 15, 2020: Government of Canada posted an update titled: “Update #4: Statement from the Chief Public Health Officer on the release of selected individuals from quarantine for the 2019 novel coronavirus”. From the update: Further to my previous statements, as Chief Public Health Officer, I have assessed additional individuals in quarantine at Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Trenton pursuant to an Emergency Order under the Quarantine Act and determined that they do not pose a risk of significant harm to public health.I have authorized the release of 23 flight crew members who accompanied the returning travellers on the second Canada-chartered flight from Wuhan to Vancouver to CFB Trenton. In my assessment, I took into account the fact that they did not spend time in the epicentre of the outbreak, that they followed appropriate infection prevention and control protocols (including the use of personal protective equipment), and that they did not have unprotected contact with passengers or persons at risk of having the novel coronavirus. As a result of this assesment, I have determined that their continued quarantine is not required. February 15, 2020: Government of Canada posted a news release titled: “Government of Canada evacuating Canadians on board Diamond Princess cruise ship”. From the news release: Ensuring the health and safety of Canadians is our top priority. The Honourable François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Nonorable Patty Hajdu, Minister of Health, and the Honorable Harjit Sajjan, Minister of National Defense, today announced that the Government of Canada has chartered a plane to repatriate Canadians aboard the Diamond Princess cruise ship docked in Yokohama, Japan.This decision was taken because of the extraordinary circumstances faced by passengers on the Diamond Princess and to lighten the burden on the Japanese health-care system. We are working closely with Carnival Cruise Lines and the Government of Japan to assist in this evacuation.The aircraft will bring passengers from Japan to Canadian Forces Base Trenton, after which they will be assessed and transported to the NAV Canada Training Institute in Cornwall, Ontario, to undergo a further 14-day period of quarantine. Before boarding in Japan, passengers will be screened for symptoms. Those who exhibit symptoms of COVID-19 will not be permitted to bard and will instead be transferred to the Japanese health system to recieve appropriate care.Those who remain in Japan will continue to receive full consular services from the Government of Canada.In addition to experts in the Public Health Agency of Canada and Canadian Armed Forces medical personnel, four members of the Standing Rapid Deployment Team (SRDT) are on the ground in Tokyo to assist Canadians during this diffcult time. We will continue to provide more information on travel plans for returning to Canada as it becomes available. In the meantime, we ask all Canadians aboard the Diamond Princess to continue to follow recommendations for protecting their health and the health of others while under Japanese quarantine… February 15, 2020: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted a media statement titled: “Diamond Princess Repatriation”. From the Media Statement: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is supporting the Department of State-led mission to repatriate U.S. citizens who want to return to the United States from Japan, currently aboard the Diamond Princess cruise ship. HHS is committed to protecting the health and safety of all Americans. To fulfill our responsibilities to U.S. citizens, as well as to reduce the burden on the Japanese healthcare system, the U.S. government recommends that U.S. citizens disembark and return to the United States for further monitoring. These measures are consistent with the careful policies we have instituted to limit the potential spread of the disease.There are approximately 400 U.S. citizens onboard the Diamond Princess cruise ship. Due to the dynamic nature of the outbreak, the U.S. government recommends that U.S. citizens disembark and return to the United States. Americans returned by flights chartered by the State Department will be subject to a 14-day, federal quarantine and be housed at two existing federal quarantine sites for repatriated travelers: Travis Air Force Base in CaliforniaJoint Base San Antonio-Lackland in Texas Those passengers returning from Japan will be housed separately from individuals already in quarantine from previous Wuhan repatriation flights. All travelers from Japan will be screened before boarding the State Department-chartered aircraft to prevent symptomatic travelers from departing Japan. These planes will be met by a team of U.S. Government personnel deployed there to assess the health of the passengers. The passengers will be screened before leaving the ship and monitored and evaluated by medical and public health personnel every step of the way, including before takeoff, during the flight, and after arrival. U.S. Government staff will conduct risk assessments to ensure the health of each traveler, including temperature checks and observation for respiratory symptoms.Travelers will be monitored during the flight to Travis Air Force Base where all travelers will be screened again. Any passengers taken onward to Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland will be monitored during that flight as well and screened upon arrival in Texas… February 15, 2020: Holland American Line posted: “Update: 2/15/2020 6 am Pacific Time”. From the update: We are aware of flight delays and are making alternate arrangements for all impacted guests. Hotel accommodations have been provided and our team on the ground is assisting our guests getting food and services. We will continue to work with them on booking onward flights home. Westerdam is alongside in Sihanoukville, Cambodia, with 236 guests and 747 crew on board. The remainder of guests from the voyage departed Sihanoukville via charter flights to Phnom Penh and onward yesterday and today.Westerdam was on a 14-day cruise that departed Hong Kong Feb.1, 2020, and was scheduled to end Feb. 15 in Yokohama, Japan. There were originally 1,455 guests and 802 crew on board during the cruise. February 15, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Chinese tourist in France becomes Europe’s first coronavirus fatality.” It was written by Kim Willsher and Simon Murphy.” From the article: Europe has confirmed its first coronavirus fatality, a Chinese tourist in France, it has been confirmed. The death of the 80-year-old man, who was visiting Paris with his daughter when he was taken to the hospital three weeks ago after falling ill, also marks the first coronavirus mortality outside Asia since the start of the outbreak.His 50-year-old daughter also tested positive for the virus and is being treated in hospital, where she is said to be making a good recovery.The pair, who are from Hubei, the province at the heart of the Chines epidemic, are among 11 confirmed coronavirus cases in France. Six of thsoe who contracted the disease in the country remain in hospital, while four have been discharged after recovering.The man died at Bichat hospital on Friday evening of a lung infection caused by the Covid-19 virus, France’s health minister, Agnès Buzyn said on Saturday. He had arrived in France on 16 January and was taken to hospital nine days later and put into strict isolation……Of the 11 confirmed cases in France, six remain in hospital – including the Chinese patient’s daughter – where their conditions remain stable. French health authorities say four have recovered. Buzyn said the man’s daughter should be able to leave hospital soon… February 15, 2020: Holand American Line posted: “Update: 2/15/2020 10:40 am Pacific Time”. From the update: While the first results have been reported, they are preliminary at this point and we are awaiting secondary testing for confirmation. We are working with officials in Malaysia, Cambodia and the U.S. CDC as is standard.On Feb. 10 all 2,257 passengers and crew on board Westerdam were temperature-tested and not one person had an elevated temperature. Disembarking guests also completed a written health questionnaire and the passports of everyone on board were reviewed to ensure no one had traveled through mainland China in the prior 14 days. During the voyage there was no indication of Covid-19 on the ship. Westerdam is alongside in Sihanoukville, Cambodia, with 236 guests and 747 crew on board. The remainder of guests from the voyage departed Sihanoukville via charter flights to Phnom Penh yesterday and today and are in various stages of transit home. February 16, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 13 February 16, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Getting ready to go to the Daytona 500. Will be GREAT!” February 16, 2020: The World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situatuon Report – 27” From the report: Highlights: No new countries reported cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours.A third death of a COVID-19 patient has been reported outside of China. This individual was a tourist from China visiting France.Studies to assess the epidemioloy and clinical characteristics of COVID-19 cases in different settings are therefore critical to furthering our understanding of this virus and associated disease. Several early investigation master protocols or master forms are available for countris to use… Confirmed and suspected cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 16 February 2020 Hubei: 1,833 total daily cases/ 139 total daily deaths/ 15,249 total cumulative deaths/ 1,596 total cumulative deathsGuangdong: 22 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 1,316 total cumulative cases/ 2 total cumulative deathsHenan: 19 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 1,231 total cumulative cases/ 13 total cumulative deathsZhejaing: 5 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 1,167 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsHunan: 3 total daily cases/ 1 total daily death/ 1,004 total cumulative cases/ 3 total cumulative deathsAnhui: 12 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 962 total cumulative cases/ 6 total cumulative deathsJiangxi: 13 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 925 total cumulative cases/ 1 total cumulative deathsJiangsu: 13 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 617 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsChongqing: 7 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 544 total cumulative cases/ 5 total cumulative deathsShandong: 7 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 537 total cumulative cases/ 5 total cumulative deathsSichuan: 11 total daily cases/ 2 total daily deaths/ 481 total cumulative cases/ 3 total cumulative deathsHeilongjiang: 20 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 445 total cumulative cases/ 3 total cumulative deathsBeijing: 5 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 328 total cumulative deaths/ 4 total cumulative deathsShanghai: 2 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 328 total cumulative cases/ 1 total cumulative deathHebei: 9 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 300 total cumulative cases/ 3 total cumulative deathsFuijan: 2 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 287 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsGuangxi: 2 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 237 total cumulative cases/ 2 total cumulative deathsShaanxi: 4 total daily cases / 0 total daily deaths/ 236 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsYunnan: 1 total daily case/ 0 total daily deaths/ 169 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsHainan: 0 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 162 total cumulative cases/ 4 total cumulative deathsGuizhou: 1 total daily case/ 0 total daily deaths/ 144 total cumulative cases/ 1 total cumulative deathShanxi: 1 total daily case/ 0 total daily deaths/ 128 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsTianjin: 2 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 122 total cumulative cases/ 3 total daily deathsLiaoning: 1 total daily case/ 0 total daily deaths/ 120 total cumulative cases/ 1 total cumulative deathGansu: 0 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 90 total cumulative cases/ 2 total cumulative deathsJilin: 1 total daily case/ 0 total daily deaths/ 89 total cumulative cases/ 1 total cumulative deathXinjiang: 1 total daily case/ 0 total daily deaths/ 71 total cumulative cases/ 1 total cumulative deathsNingxia: 0 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 70 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsInner Mongolia: 2 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 70 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsHong Kong Sar: 0 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 56 total cumulative cases/ 1 total cumulative deathsTaipei and environs: 0 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 18 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsQinghai: 0 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 18 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsMacao Sar: 0 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 10 total cumulative cases/ 0 total cumulative deathsXizang: 0 total daily cases/ 0 total daily deaths/ 1 total cumulative case/ 0 total cumulative deathsTOTALS: 2,009 total daily cases/ 142 total daily deaths/ 68,584 total cumulative cases/ 1,666 total cumulative deaths Countries, territories or areas outside China with reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Data as of 16 February 2020: Singapore: 72 cases (5 new)/ total deaths 0Japan: 53 cases (12 new)/ total deaths 1 (0 new)Republic of Korea: 29 cases (1 new)/ 0 deaths Malaysia: 22 cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 16 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 15 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Cambodia: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 34 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 15 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 7 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 16 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 12 cases (1 new)/ 1 death (1 new)The United Kingdom: 9 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 3 cases (0 new): 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 2 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 8 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsEgypt: 1 case (0 new): 0 deathsInternational Conveyance (Japan): cases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanese territorial waters: 335 cases (137 new)/ 0 deaths February 16, 2020: Holand American Line posted: “Update: 2/16/2020 5:24 am Pacific Time”. From the update: Testing done in Malaysia on a Westerdam guest who disembarked the ship to fly home was reported positive for COVID-19, as confirmed by a statement by Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister Dr. Wan Azizah Wan Ismail at a press conference. The guest departed Westerdam February 14 and later reported feeling ill at the Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia airport. The guest was taken to the hospital and is reported to be in stable condition. The guest’s traveling companion tested negative for COVID-19. Holland America Line is working closely with government and health officials in Malaysia and Cambodia and experts in the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO). At this time, no other guests or crew, either on board or on their way home, have reported any symptoms of the illness. Guests who have already returned home will be contacted by their local health department and be provided further information. “We are in close coordination with some of the leading health experts from around the world,” said Dr. Grant Tarling, Chief Medical Officer for Holland America Line. “These experts are working with the appropriate national health authorities to investigate and follow-up with individuals who may have come in contact with the guest.”On Feb. 10, 2020, all 2,257 passengers and crew on board Westerdam were screened for illness including the taking of individual temperatures. No individual was identified with an elevated temperature. Also during disembarkation in Cambodia guests underwent an additional health screening including the completion of a written health questionnaire. Furthermore, the passports of everyone on board were reviewed to ensure no one had traveled through mainland China in the 14 days prior to the cruise. During the voyage there was no indication of COVID-19 on the ship. The guest who tested positive did not visit the ship’s medical center to report any symptoms of illness. An additional 20 guests who reported to the medical center during the cruise were tested by health officials for COVID-19, and all results were confirmed negative.Westerdam is alongside at Sihanoukville, Cambodia, with 747 crew and 233 guests who are awaiting their final travel arrangements. The remainder of guests from the voyage departed Sihanoukville via charter flights to Phnom Penh and are in various stages of transit home. February 16, 2020: Holland America Line posted: “Update: 2/16/2020 2:50 pm Pacific Time”. From the update: Out of an abundance of caution, Holland America Line has decided to cancel the Feb. 29 cruise of Westerdam. The ship was due to depart Yokohame for a 14-day round trip cruise visiting mostly Japanese ports.Holland America Line has been closely monitoring the very fluid and evolving situation with respect to the new Covid-19 that originated in mainland China. The difficult decision to cancel this cruise comes after carefully considering the highly dynamic and unpredictable changes seen the past couple of weeks in travel restrictions and port operations that could affect the cruise. All guests will receive a full refund. Each guest will also receive a 50% future cruise credit and reimbursement of cancellation fees. While this decision will be disappointing for our guests, we feel they will understand the commitment to looking after the safety and well-being of our guests, crew and the places we visit. Guests on impacted cruises or their travel advisors may call 1-800-577-1729 or 206-626-7385 Monday through Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Pacific time. No cancellations for cruises with departure dates beyond Feb. 29 have been announced at this time. However, we are assessing future cruise itineraries and will communicate details as soon as plans are finalized. February 16, 2020: San Luis Obispo County (California) Public Health Department posted: a public health response titled: “Officials Prepare for Possibility of Coronavirus Isolation at Camp Roberts”. From the response: The County of San Luis Obispo Public Health Officer says there is no certainty at this time that passengers with novel coronavirus (COVID-19) from the Diamond Princess cruise ship will be arriving at Camp Roberts.However, local health officials have been advised by state and federal authorities to prepare for the possibility of passengers who test positive for COVID-19 but no longer require hospitalization may be sent to Camp Roberts for the remainder of their isolation period. The County is actively involved in coordinating with state, federal and local partners – including the County of Monterey – to protect the health and well-being of local residents.“We understand that a federal team will provide the staffing, food, and medical care at Camp Roberts,” said County of San Luis Obispo Health Officer Dr. Penny Borenstein. “The County of San Luis Obispo Public Health Department is working to ensure that we protect the health and well-being of San Luis Obispo County residents.”There are currently no cases of COVID-19 in San Luis Obispo County and the risk to residents remains low.Camp Roberts is a military training base in central California, located in both San Luis Obispo and Monterey Counties.The County of San Luis Obispo will provide updates as more information becomes available. February 17, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 13 February 17, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “HAPPY PRESIDENT’S DAY!” February 17, 2020: U.S. Department of State posted a Special Briefing titled: “On the Repatriation of U.S. Citizens from the Princess Diamond Cruise Ship”. From the Special Briefing: Mr. Brown: Good afternoon, everyone and thank you for joining today’s call with senior administration officials on the repatration of U.S. citizens from the Diamond Princess cruise ship. I am deputy spokesperson for the United States Department of State, Cale Brown, and I will be moderating this call.We are joined today by Dr. Robert Kadlec, Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; Dr. William Walters, Executive Director and Managing Director for Operational Medicine for the Bureau of Medical Services at the U.S. Department of State; and Carl Risch, Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of Consular Affairs at the Department of State……Assistant Secretary Kadlec: Thank you very much, everyone. I’m Dr. Bob Kadlec, the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response at HHS. I want to just give you a brief overview of the joint ASPR-State operational medicine operation that was conducted to bring thsoe individuals back from the Diamond Princess.I also want to thank the Japanese Government and the Ministry of Health for their extraordinary help in facilitating the deployment of my disaster assistance teams and infectious disease experts to work along with their national disaster medical teams at the Diamond Princess, and facilitated our ability to provide care to the Americans on the boat and also assist them, as required, once the decision for repatriation was made.This culminates about 18 months of work we have done with the Ministry of Health in Japan. We were scheduled to do an exercise in March on this very kind of scenario: How do you repatriate Americans from Japan in the event of a disaster or an emergency? And much of that work paid off in spades with our ability to safely and effectively recover those Americans off of that ship.I will turn now to Dr. Walters to explain some of the particulars as it relates to the air operations and State’s vital contributions to this activity.Dr. Walters: Thank you, Dr. Kadlec. Dr. Walters from the State Department.So the Directorate of Operational Medicine within the Bureau of Medical Services is responsible for the avaiation missions to repatriate these individuals. We work very closely with ASPR. This is our sixth flight over the past several days. We managed the flights out of Wuhan, China, and obviously, this one……The aircraft departed – the aircraft are on contract through Kalitta Air group. This is a standing contract that we have through Phoenix Air group out of Cartersville, Georgia, and we have exercised that contract over the past several years for the management of patients infected with highly contageous pathogens.The aircraft departed out of Atlanta Hartsfield, routed direct to Haneda Airport in Tokyo, and then there was a hand-off of patients and process between ASPR and their personnel on the ground and the State Department personnel from the embassy, and then, of course, State Department personnel on the aircraft.The aircraft departed Haneda. Aircraft one went to Travis Air Force Base, with close coordination amongst NORTHCOM from DOD, obviously, HHS-ASPR, HHS-CDC, and State Department all playing a critical role.Aircraft two went direct from Haneda to Lackland Air Force Base in Texas. Passengers were deplaned in those two locations, and then a select number of high-risk patients were transported onward from both locations, using those same aircraft to Omaha, Nebraska, for care at the University of Nebraska. The aircraft are currently on their way back to Atlanta for decontamination and the aircraft will be placed back in service for the vendor.Back to Dr. Kadlec for a sort of what happens next for those passengers, once they are on the ground.Assistant Secretary Kaldec: Thank you, Dr. Walters. And very briefly, the individuals recieved multiple screenings while they were transitioned from the ship to the bus to the plane. And then, once they arrived at the two destinations, Travis and Lackland, they went – more extensive medical assessment, as well as a questionnaire concerning their baseline health and their current symptoms.These individuals were processed and put into quarantine at those bases. Three individuals that arrived at Travis experienced an elevation of temperature, and were taken to the hospital and being evaluated, and evaluated for what may be the causation or (inaudible) of that event.These individuals will spend the next 14 days under the joint supervision and oversight of CDC and ASPR to monitor their health, and at which point in time, after 14 days, they’ll be cleared to return to their home of record.With that I’ll stop and pause and just comment that, additionally, several patients – 10 passengers, excuse me – and their spouses were transported to University of Nebraska in Omaha for isolation, as well……Question from Jennifer Hansler from CNN: …Could you go into a little more detail about how the passengers who were infected with coronavirus were kept isolated from their fellow passengers on these flights back? And then, more broadly, how many Americans still remain on the Diamond Princess? How many remain from the Westerdam in Cambodia, and, I guess, just any message to them?Dr. Walters: …So the way – the use of the aircraft, and the movement of patients exposed to, in this case, coronavirus is very specific, very deliberate, and is sort of the culmination of a lot of interagency work over the years.The 747 is large, obviously, and is broken up into sections. The airflow within the aircraft is nose to tail, and so our crew aboard kind of owns the nose area of the aircraft, and we call that a safe area. Then there’s passenger seating. And then, at the tail of the aircraft we take 18 seats, and that will become an isolation area. Because it’s a cargo aircraft we’ve got tremendous latitude in the way that we set up both the seats and the ability to drop plastic on all four sides of that block of seats. That plastic is, like, 10 feet tall and has one enterance, one exit at the back of that isolation area. And so that – that both protects the rest of the passengers and the rest of the crew from any spread. Every interaction with passengers that are inside the isolation area is very deliberate, its very – it’s planned, and it’s done very carefully……When the bus – and it was a direct like. When the bust arrived at the aircraft, those people that were identified during that process as being coronavirus-positive but asymptomatic with no symptoms of disease were taken off the bus, were moved onto the aircraft into that dedicated isolation area, which was the safest place for them to get them away from the rest of the passengers and give us time to make some decisions…Dr. Walters:… With regard to the rest of your question, we’re currently tracking roughly 60 American citizens, U.S. persons that are still in Japan. And we are tracking a little over 200 American citizens that remain in Cambodia pending onward travel, with 92 remaining on board the ship there in Cambodia, the Westerdam……Shawn Donovan: …If I could just drill down a bit more on the situation on the Westerdam in Cambodia, when you say you are tracking a little over 200 American citizens that remain in Cambodia, are they in one location? Are they spreading about?We had the reports coming out of Asia overnight of a woman who was diagnosed with the virus when she arrived in Malaysia by plane. Are you worried at all that some of these cases may have left Cambodia? We are just trying to understand the situation a bit more there in Cambodia.Dr. Walters: Right. So we’re tracking, again, 92 American citizens that remain on board the Westerdam, another 260 that remain in hotels in Phnom Penh. Roughly 300 American citizens have departed Cambodia, but only after testing by the Government of Cambodia’s Ministry of Health.The one couple that remains in hospital in Kuala Lumpur is the only – really, only individual that has tested positive coming off the Westerdam.Obviously, everyone is very concerned about the safety of all the American citizens and all of the other passengers on the Westerdam, and every step is being taken on an international basis to collaborate on contact tracing and staying in very close contact with the passengers on that ship… February 17, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 28” From the report: Highlights: No new countries reported cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours.From today, WHO will be reporting all confirmed cases, including both laboratory-confirmed as previously reported, and those reported as clinically diagnosed (currently only applicable to Hubei province, China). From 13 February through 16 February, we reported only laboratory confirmed cases for Hubei province as mentioned in the situation report published on 13 February. The change in reporting is now shown in the figures. This accounts for the large increase in cases compared to prior situation reports.Based on the evidence currently available about COVID-19, WHO has developed guidance documents for managing public health events at Points of Entry and mass gatherings. These are posted on WHO COVID-19 Points of Entry and Mass Gatherings website. See Technical Focus for more details.WHO Eastern Mediterranean office has updated information on COVID-19 cases. For more information please see here. Confirmed and suspected cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease by provinces, regions and cities in China, 17 February 2020: Hubei: 1,933 daily confirmed cases/ 100 daily deaths/ 5,8182 cumulative confirmed cases/ 1,696 cumulative confirmed deathsGuangdong: 6 daily cases/ 2 daily deaths/ 1,322 cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsHenan: 15 daily cases/ 3 daily deaths/ 1,246 cumulative cases/ 16 cumulative deathsZhejiang: 4 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,171 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsHunan: 2 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,006 cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsAnhui: 11 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 973 cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsJiangxi: 5 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 930 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathJiangsu: 9 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 626 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsChongqing: 7 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 551 cumulative cases/ 5 cumulative deathsShandong: 4 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 541 cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsSichuan: 14 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 495 cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHeilongjiang: 12 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 457 cumulative cases/ 11 cumulative deathsBeijing: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 381 cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsShanghai: 3 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 331 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathHebei: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 301 cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsFujian: 3 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 290 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsShaanxi: 4 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 240 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsGuangxi: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 238 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsYunnan: 2 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 171 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsHainan: 934 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 162 cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsGuizhou: 2 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 146 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathsShanxi: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 129 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsTianjin: 2 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 124 cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsLiaoning: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 121 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathGansu: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 91 cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsJilin: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 89 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathXinjiang: 2 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 73 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathInner Mongolia: 2 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 72 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsNingxia: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 70 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsHong Kong SAR: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 57 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathsTaipei and environs: 2 daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 20 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathQinghai: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 18 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsMacao SAR: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 10 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsXizang: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1 cumulative case/ 0 cumulative deathsTOTAL: 2,051 daily cases/ 106 daily deaths/ 70,635 cumulative cases/ 1,772 cumulative deaths Countries, territories or areas outside China with reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Data as of 17 February 2020: Singapore: 73 confirmed cases (3 new)/ 0 deathsJapan: 59 confirmed cases (6 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Republic of Korea: 30 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 22 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 15 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhillippines: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Cambodia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 35 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 15 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 7 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 12 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)The United Kingdom: 9 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 9 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsEgypt: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsInternational Conveyance (Japan): Cases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanese territorial waters: 454 confirmed cases (99 new)/ 0 deaths February 17, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) Eastern Mediterranean Office posted: “Update on COVID-19 in the Eastern Mediterranean Region”. From the update: The World Health Organization announces a total of nine confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the Eastern Mediterranean Region as of 16 February 2020. Eight cases were reported in the United Arab Emirates Ministry of Health and Prevention between 29 January and 9 February, and one case was reported from hospital on 9 and 14 February.The confirmed case in Egypt is asymptomatic and was identified through contact screening of an index case who travelled to Cairo between 21 January and 4 February on a business trip and tested positive for COVID-19 on 11 February in China. The confirmed case in Egypt is currently isolated in a referral hospital. Other contacts of the confirmed case are being traced, and so far, all have tested negative, but will be actively followed up on for 14 days. WHO is coordinating with national IHR focal points in China and Egypt in order to support the investigation in Egypt.Confirmed cases in Egypt and United Arab Emirates are currently being managed as per standard protocal.Countries in the Region have scaled up their preparedness and operational readiness measures to ensure early detection and rapid response to potential cases of COVID-19. Information about suspected and confirmed cases in the Region are shared with WHO in accordance with the International Health Regulations. Countries have developed and implemented national preparedness and response plans to activate intensified measures and actions (and related Standard Operating Procedures), in coordination with WHO… February 17, 2020: Prime Minister of Australia Honorable Scott Morrison MP posted a transcript titled: “Press Conference – Melbourne, VIC”. From the transcript: Prime Minister: Good afternoon everyone. In the past two weeks it has been a terrible ordeal for those more than 200 Australians and so many other passengers who have been on the Diamond Princess in Yokohama. The National Security Committee of Cabinet has met again today, as we did over the weekend, to consider how we might be able to best support those Australians who have been caught up in this very difficult situation. We want to thank the Japanese government for the great care and support and assistance they’ve provided to those Australians who are onboard that vessel, many of them, some quite elderly. And we want to thank them for that great care they have shown. What we have agreed to do today is to take action, by providing a direct assistance to those who are on that vessel by providing an assisted departure flight from Japan to Australia this Wednesday. This flight will be made possible by Quantas and we want to thank Quantas once again for answering the call of the Australian people and for those who will be supporting that flight, going up to Japan and bringing Australians home, we want to thank you very much for your great cooperation and to Alan Joyce and the entire team at Quantas, we thank you very much for your tremendous support in assisting Australians at this time of great need.We are taking this action on clear advice, once again, of our medical experts, in particular, the Chief Medical Officer, Dr Brendan Murphy, who joins me again here today, along with the Foreign Minister and the Health Minister. But as well, Professor Paul Armstrong. Professor Paul Armstrong is in Yokohama. He was sent there to assess the situation and to provide us advice in terms of decisions that we needed to make to provide this assisted departure back to Australia.At this stage, it is not clear how further cases of infection have occurred onboard that vessel and Dr Murphy will be able to take you through in more detail the situation on board that vessel. But because of the nature of the quarantine not being able to be assured, for those more than 200 Australians who will be returning to Australia we are going to have to require a further 14 day quarantine period to be put in place on their return to Darwin, where they will be accommodated at the Howard Springs facility.Now, I understand that those who are onboard will feel very frustrated about this, as will their family members. Indeed, I’m very frustrated about it. I wish it were not possible. But our first responsibility is, I’m sure all Australians would agree, is that we have to protect the health and safety of Australians here in Australia. And today, we have Australians who are leaving Christmas Island, having been part of that initial quarantine period of 14 days, returning back home, including returning back home to Melbourne. I was at Box Hill today with members of the Chinese Australian community, and they’re looking forward to welcoming some of their family back here later this evening. It’s frustrating and it’s unfortunate, but it is absolutely necessary to ensure that we put measures in place that have been so effective in containing the spread of this virus and ensuring that Australians here can go about their lives on a daily basis without any concern about the impact of this virus on their health. And this has been made possible by the strong and very clear and very early measures that the Government took to protect Australians from the impact of the virus.So, we greatly appreciate, again, the support and cooperation of the Japanese government who we have been working with to ensure that they are able to facilitate this assisted departure. I also need to make it clear that the decision that has been taken by the National Security Committee that any person who was onboard that ship, regardless of their nationality, if they seek to enter Australia within the next 14 days, they won’t be granted entry to Australia. And that arrangement will also be put in place with airlines as well. So we are making direct contact with all the passengers on board that ship now. We’ll also be providing spaces on our flight to New Zealanders and I have been in contact with Prime Minister Ardern and they welcome that arrangement as well. New Zealand passengers will be transferred from Darwin back to their quarantine arrangements in New Zealand and the balance of those passengers who will be Australians and Australian residents will be accommodated at the Howard Springs facility… February 17, 2020: Holland American Line posted: “Update: 2/17/2020 3:45 am Pacific Time”. From the update: Westerdam remains alongside in Sihanoukville, Cambodia, where officials from the Cambodian Health Ministry are on board today to complete testing for COVID-19 on the 255 guests and 747 crew that are awaiting clearance. We anticipate this will take several days and greatly appreciate the thoroughness of all authorities involved in resolving this situation.Guests at a hotel in Phnom Penh have all completed the COVID-19 screening. Results are being returned when completed, with the first batch of 406 all being negative. Cleared guests may travel home, and arrangements are being made for those guests.Guests in both locations are being very well cared for, including assistance with any medications needed. A full team is on the ground in both Sihanoukville and Phnom Penh, including Holland America Line’s President Orlando Ashford. We are communicating updates regularly as new information becomes available. A special hotline has been established for families.One female guest remains in a hospital in Malaysia with a reported positive result for COVID-19 according to Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister Dr. Wan Azizah Wan Ismail. She is currently in stable condition. Her traveling companion tested negative for COVID-19.“We are in close coordination with some of the leading health experts from around the world,” said Dr. Grant Tarling, Chief Medical Officer for Holland America Line. “These experts are working with the appropriate national health authorities to investigate and follow-up with any individuals who may have come in contact with the guest.”Holland America Line continues to work closely and in compliance with government and health officials in Malaysia and Cambodia, as well as experts in the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO). At this time, no other guests or crew on board or at the hotel have reported any symptoms of the illness. Guests who have already returned home will be contacted by their local health department and provided further information.Prior to arrival in Sihanoukville, Cambodia, Holland America Line undertook significant precautions to ensure the health and safety of our guests and crew. On Feb. 10, 2020, all 2,257 passengers and crew were screened for illness including the taking of individual temperatures. No individual at that time was identified with an elevated temperature. Guests who were able to disembark in Cambodia underwent additional health screening and temperature checks. Furthermore, the passports of everyone on board were reviewed to ensure no one had traveled through mainland China in the 14 days prior to the cruise.During the voyage there was no indication of COVID-19 on the ship. The guest who tested positive did not visit the ship’s medical center to report any symptoms of illness. An additional 20 guests who reported to the medical center during the cruise were tested by health officials for COVID-19, and all results were confirmed negative.Holland America Line will provide a further update once we have more information. February 17, 2020: Holand American Line posted: “Update: 2/17/2020 9:30 am Pacific Time”. From the update: As we are still working through the extremely complex factors and decisions of itinerary planning, no cancellations for cruises with departure dates beyond Feb. 29 have been announced at this time. We understand that our guests are eager to learn more about their departures, and we are assessing future cruise itineraries as quickly as possible. We will announce an update as soon as plans are finalized. Thank you for your understanding and patience. February 17, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Coronavirus: Russian court orders woman who fled quarantine back to hospital”. It was written by Andrew Roth. From the article: A St. Petersburg court has ordered a Russian woman to be forcibly confined to hospital after she dramatically broke out of coronavirus quarantine and blogged about her escape.Alla Ilyina, 32, was escorted by bailiffs and medical staff back to the Botkin infectious diseases hospital, where she had been held under quarantine, before short-circuiting the electronic lock to her hospital door and sneaking past doctors to an elevator.The escape, which took place on 7 February, went unreported for days until Ilyina herself told journalists she had broken out, posting a detailed video of her getaway on Instagram.Ilyina fell ill after returning from the Chinese resort island of Hainan last month and was put under quarantine by doctors. But after she tested negative for the virus on 6 February, she was told she would be held under quarantine for two weeks regardless……The story went viral and led to a police search for Ilyina who had locked herself in her apartment. The court on Monday ordered her to be admitted to hospital until at least Wednesday, in order to recieve new test results… February 17, 2020: The County of San Luis Obispo (California) Public Health Department posted a public health response titled: “Feds Back Off Coronavirus Isolation at Camp Roberts”. From the public health response: San Luis Obispo, CA—The County of San Luis Obispo Public Health Officer received notice last evening that federal authorities no longer consider Camp Roberts a potential site to house any returning travelers who may or may not be infected with novel coronavirus (COVID-19). Health Officer Dr. Penny Borenstein said “We remain prepared to work with federal and state partners should future decisions turn back to Camp Roberts as a resource.” Dr. Borenstein also expressed her appreciation and admiration for “the prompt and professional response shown by our local hospitals, EMS providers, and County personnel.” February 18, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 13 February 18, 2020: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted a media statement titled: “Update on the Diamond Princess Cruise Ship in Japan.” From the media statement: We commend the extraordinary efforts by the Government of Japan to institute quarantine measures onboard the Diamond Princess. While the quarantine potentially conferred a significant public health benefit in slowing transmission, CDC’s assessment is that it may not have been sufficient to prevent transmission among individuals on the ship. CDC believes the rate of positives new on board, especially among those without symptoms, highlights the high burden of infection on the ship and the potential for ongoing risk. Therefore, to protect the health of the American public, all passengers and crew of the ship have been placed under travel restrictions, preventing them from returning to the United States for at least 14 days after they had left the Diamond Princess.Currently, there are more than 100 U.S, citizens still onboard the Diamond Princess cruise ship or in hospitals in Japan. These citizens have been placed under the restrictions, as have the ship’s other passengers and crew.After disembarkation from the Diamond Princess, these passengers and crew will be required to wait 14 days without having symptoms or a positive coronavirus test result before they are permitted to board flights to the United States.If an individual from this cruise arrives in the United States before the 14-day period ends, they will still be subject to a mandatory quarantine until they have completed the 14-day period with no symptoms or positive coronavirus test results.Because of their high-risk exposure, CDC expects there will be additional confirmed cases of COVID-19 among the remaining passengers on board the Diamond Princess.CDC is committed to protecting the health and safety of all Americans. We continue to believe that the risk of exposure to COVID-19 to the general public in the United States is currently low. The U.S.Government is taking these measures to protect the Diamond Princess passengers and crew, their loved ones, the traveling public, and communities within the United States. February 18, 2020: President Trump tweeted: “I hope the Federal Judges Association will discuss the tremendous FISA Court abuse that has taken place with respect to the Mueller Investigation Scam, including the forging of documents and knowingly using the fake and totally discredited Dossier before the Court. Thank you!” February 18, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted: “Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) Situation Report – 29”. From the report: Highlights: No new countries reported cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours.WHO Operations Support and Logistics (OSL) continues to gather and assess the needs of Member States for critical items such as Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). On 14 February, OSL started the dispatch of laboratory COVID-19 testing kits for 56 countries. As of 17 February, 37 shipments have been dispatched to 34 countires and three regional offices.Health care workers are on the front line of the response to the COVID-19 outbreak. WHO has developed guidance on the Rights, Roles and Responsibilities Of Health Workers, Including Key Considerations For Occupational Safety and Health. TECHNICAL FOCUS: Operations Support and Logistics WHO Operations Support and Logistics (OSL) continues to gather and assess the needs of Member States for critical items such as personal protective equipment (PPE). The country-level perspective is aggregated to obtain a global view on the overall demand for PPE necessary for frontline healthcare workers. Due to the growing demand and consumption of PPE, OSL is collaborating with WHO disease specialists to develop and disseminate a guiding document on the rational use of PPE.In the meantime, OSL continues to accelerate the work of the Pandemic Supply Chain Network (PSCN), which includes manufacturers of medical products and medicines, medical distributors, and logistics providers.Since the activation of the PSCN, the market for PPE continues to experience unprcedented demand. Government export restrictions have continued to limit the supply of products across borders. The PSCN is continuously exploring options with its stakeholders to alleviate the demand and increase the supply to ensure access to PPE for those countries most vulnerable and most in need. This includes working with WHO technical specialists to advocate via the PSCN on the proper use of PPE, understanding the potential for manufacturing expansion outside China (a makor source of crucial commodities), and working with stakeholders to support the prioritization of PPE for frontline healthcare workers. The PSCN will also prepare for any bottlenecks in the market for other supplies as listed in the Disease Commodity Package. On 14 February, OSL started the dispatch of COVID-19 laboratory testing kits for 56 countries. As of 17 February, 37 shipments have been dispatched to 34 countries and three regional offices.The WHO global supply team had already dispatched 28 PPE shipments totalling more than 12 000 kg to priority countries in the Western Pacific, South-East Asia and African regions. Another 24 shipments are being processed this week to cover other priority countries.With the Technical support of the WHO Infection Prevention & Control (IPC) team, OSL continues to update the Disease Commodity Package (DCP) for COVID-19. This document provides the technical guidance and specification on the critical supplies necessary to fight COVID-19. Responding organizations and countries preparing and responding to COVID-19 are able to use the DCP to secure the correct supplies in the areas of surveillance, prevention and control, and case management. Confirmed and suspected cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions, and cities in China, 18 February 2020: Hubei: 1,807 daily confirmed cases/ 93 daily deaths/ 59,989 cumulative confirmed cases/ 1,789 cumulative deathsGuangdong: 1,1346 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,328 cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deaths:Henan: 11 daily cases/ 3 daily deaths/ 1,257 cumulative cases/ 19 cumulative deathsZhejiang: 1 daily case/ 0 daily confirmed deaths/ 1,172 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsHunan: 1 daily case/ 1 daily death/ 1,007 cumulative confirmed cases/ 4 cumulative deathsAnhui: 9 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 982 cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsJiangxi: 3 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 933 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathJiangsu: 3 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 629 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsChongqing: 2 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 553 cumulative cases/ 5 cumulative deathsShandong: 2 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 543 cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsSichuan: 13 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 508 cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHeilongjaing: 7 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 464 cumulative cases/ 11 cumulative deathsBeijing: 6 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 387 cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsShanghai: 2 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 333 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathsHebei: 1 daily case/ 1 daily death/ 302 cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsFujian: 2 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 292 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsGuangxi: 4 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 242 cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsShaanxi: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 240 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsYunnan: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 172 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsHainan: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 163 cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsGuizhou: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 146 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathShanxi: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 130 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsTianjin: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 125 cumulative cases/ 3 daily deathsLiaoning: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 121 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathGansu: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 91 cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsJlin: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 89 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathXinjiang: 1 daily case/ 1 daily death/ 76 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathInner Mongolia: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 73 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsNingxia: 0 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 70 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsHong Kong SAR: 3 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 60 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathTaipei and environs: 2 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 22 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathQuinghai: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 18 cumumative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsMacao SAR: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 10 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsXizang: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1 cumulative case/ 0 cumulative deathsTOTAL: 1,891 daily cases/ 98 daily deaths/ 72,528 cumulative cases/ 1,870 cumulative deaths Countries, territories or areas outside China with reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Data as of February 18, 2020: Singapore: 77 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsJapan: 65 confirmed cases (6 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Republic of Korea: 31 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 22 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 15 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhillippines: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Cambodia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 35 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 15 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 8 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 12 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)The United Kingdom: 9 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 2 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 9 cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsEgypt: 1 case (0 new)/ 0 deathsInternational Conveyance (Japan): cases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanese territorial waters: 454 cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths February 18, 2020: Prime Minister of Australia Honorable Scott Morrison MP posted a Media Release titled: “Backing Important Coronavirus Research”. From the Media Release: The Morrison Government is fast tracking $2 million in funding to support Australia’s best researchers as they work to understand and respond to the outbreak of novel coronavirus, now known as COVID-19.Our government’s priority is to keep Australians safe and this $2 million investment will help develop a coronavirus vaccine.Following a meeting of leading Australian researchers last week, the Government is provideing the funding from the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) for an open and competitive Grant Opportunity to develop a coronavirus vaccine.This Grant Opportunity will complement the world-leading work already undertaken by the Doherty Institute, CSIRO and University of Queensland and their collaboration.The ability to swiftly react to emerging health issues is a key strength of the MRFF, which was established in 2015 to support health and medical research and innovation for the benefit of Australians. Research plays a critical role in ensuring Australia maintains its world-class health system and is particularly important as the world responds to coronavirus.Last week’s meeting, chaired by Deputy Chief Medical Officer Professor Paul Kelly, included eminent experts from across Australia including the three centers of research excellence working in epidemic preparedness, the WHO Collaborating Centre on Influenze, th CISRO and states and territories… February 18, 2020: UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office posted a press release titled: “British nationals on the Diamond Princess: Foreign Office Statement”. From the press release: THE FCO is working to organise a flight back to the UK for British nationals on the Diamond Princess in Japan, following the outbreak of coronavirus.A Foreign Office spokesperson said:“Given the conditions on board, we are working to organize a flight back to the UK for British nationals on the Diamond Princess as soon as possible.“Our staff are contacting British nationals on board to make necessary arrangements, We urge all those who have not yet responded to get in touch immediately.” February 18, 2020: Live Nation TV posted an article titled: “Ari Lennox Show Cancellation Notice”. It was written by Live Nation Japan. From the article: Due to travel restrictions in several Asian countries, Ari Lennox will be postponing her upcoming tour of Asia. As a result, the Tokyo show scheduled for March 3 (Tues) 2020 at WWW X Tokyo has been cancelled. We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience caused.Ticket refund will be available betwen February 19 (Wed) to March 19 (Thu) from each ticketing agency. Please check “LIVENATION.CO.JP” for ticket refund instructions.If you have already been issued a ticket, please ensure you do NOT lose your ticket as you will require this during refund processing… February 18, 2020: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) posted a press release titled: “HHS Engages Sanofi’s Recombinant Technology for 2019 Novel Coronavirus Vaccine”. From the press release: Racing to develop a vaccine against the 2019 novel coronavirus, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of the Assistant for Preparedness and Response has engaged Sanofi Pasteur, the vaccines global business unit of Sanofi.The Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), a component of ASPR, will provide expertise and reallocated funds to support the vaccine’s development. Sanofi will use its egg-free, recombinant DNA platform to produce a recombinant 2019 novel coronavirus vaccine candidate.The technology produces an exact genetic match to proteins of the virus. The protein’s DNA will be combined with DNA from a virus harmless to humans, and used to rapidly produce large quantities of antigen which stimulate the immune system to protect against the virus. The antigens will be separated and collected from these cells and purified to create working stocks of vaccine for advanced development……This expanded collaboration with Sanofi is BARDA’s second program to focus on developing a novel coronavirus vaccine candidate in the past few weeks. There is currently no approved vaccine, treatment, or diagnostic for novel coronavirus infections; however, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has issued an emergency use authorization (EUA) to enable emergency use of a diagnostic test developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.BARDA also is working with counterparts across the government, including within HHS and with the Department of Defense. The team is reviewing potential vaccines, treatments and diagnostics from across the public and private sectors, particularly products in development for Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) or Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), to identify promising candidates for development and licensure to detect, protect against or treat novel coronavirus infections… February 17, 2020: Holand America Line posted: “Update 2/18/2020 2:30 pm Pacific Time. From the update: We know that guests booked on Westerdam Asia sailings March 14 and beyond have questions and would like an answer soon. We appreciate the many perspectives on this issue. Please know this is high on our priority list, and we fully appreciate the questions around timing given the announcements of others. There are many factors that go into these decisions, including what other options might be. We kindly request your understanding of this extremely complex situation. Thank you. February 18, 2020: Holland America Line posted: “Update 1/18/2020 2:30 pm Pacific Time”. From the update: The Cambodian Ministry of Health has issued a press release confirming that 781 Westerdam guests have tested negative for COVID-19. This completes the guests’ testing.These results provide the required clearance for remaining guests in Cambodia to begin their onward journey home. The company is working to finalize arrangements for everyone. Those who travelled home previously will be contacted by their local health department and provided further information. Westerdam will remain alongside in Sihanoukville, Cambodia, for at least a few more days until testing is complete on the 747 crewmembers on board. February 18, 2020: UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson tweeted: “This morning I spoke to Chinese President Xi to express my sympathy and support for those affected by the coronavirus outbreak. The UK government has donated vital medical dquipment to the region and we will continue to offer our assistance. (1/2)” February 18, 2020: UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson tweeted: “We also agreed on the need to work together to tackle climate change, and resolved to strengthen our economic partmership. (2/2)” February 19, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 13 February 19, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Highest Stock Market in History, By Far!” February 19, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 30”. From the report: Highlights: No new countries reported cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours.WHO is working with an international network of statisticians and mathmatical modelers to estimate key epidemiologic parameters of COVID-19, such as the incubation period (the time between infection and symptom onset), case fatality ratio (CFR, the proportion of cases that die), and the serial interval (the time between symptom onset of a primary and secondary case). Reports of current analyses that have estimated these paramaters are provided in this Situation Report as a summary of currently available evidence. These values should be considered preliminary and paramaters will likely be updated as more information becomes available. Modeling can support decision-making but needs to be combined with rigorous data collection and a comprehensive analysis of the situation. Please see the Subject in Focus section for more information… SUBJECT IN FOCUS: Advanced Analytics and Mathematical Modeling: In order to mount an appropriate public health response for any epidemic pathogen, information and analyses of transmission dynamics, severity of disease and the impact of control and mitigation measures are needed. In addition to descriptive analyses of available epidemiologic and clinical data, mathematical modeling and advanced analytics are helpful tools that can be used to estimate key transmission and severity parameters……To calculate these parameters, statisticians and modelers use case-based data from COVID-19 surveillance activities, and data captured from early investigations, such as those studies which evaluate transmission within clusters of cases in households or other closed settings. Preliminary estimates of median incubation period are 5-6 days (ranging from 0-14 days) and estimates for the serial interview range from 4.4 to 7.5 days. Several estimates have been shared in pre-print and information will be updated as more information becomes available.The confirmed case fatality ratio, or CFR, is the total number of deaths divided by the total number of confirmed cases at one point in time. Within China, the confirmed CFR, as reported by the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, is 2.3%. This is based on 1,023 deaths amongst 44,415 laboratory-confirmed cases as of 11 February. This CFR does not include the number of more mild infections that may be missed from current surveillance, which has largely focused on patients with pneumonia requiring hospitalization; nor does it account for the fact that recently confirmed cases may yet develop severe disease, and some may die. As the oubreak continues, the confirmed CFR may change. Outside of China, CFR estimates among confirmed cases reported is lower than reported from within China. However, it is too early to draw conclusions as to whether there are real differences in the CFR inside and outside China, as final outcome data (that is, who will recover and who will die) for the majority of cases reported from outside China.Modeling is a helpful tool to try to account for missed cases, such as those that are mild cases potentially missed in current surveillance activities, and the time lag between onset and death. Using an estimated number of total infections, the infection Fatality Ratio can be calculated. This represents the fraction of all infections (both diagnosed and undiagnosed) that result in death. Based on these available analyses, current IFR estimates range from 0.3 % to 1%. Without population-based seriologic studies, it is not yet possible to know what proportion of the population has been infected with COVID-19.Modeling has been used to estimate the impact of the 23 January, 2020 Wuhan travel ban on reducing transmission both inside and outside of China. According to these models, travel restrictiosn alone are projected to only have a modest effect on the progression of the outbreak; they would need to be combined with other public health interventions, such as early case insolation, other forms of mobility restrictions, social distancing and population-level behavioral changes to be effective. This is in line with several studies on travel restrictions during past influenza pandemics, including H1N1, reported in the recently published paper on “Nonpharmaceutical Measures for Pandemic Influenza in Nonhealthcare Settings – International Travel-Related Measures”… Confirmed and suspected cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 19 February 2020: Hubei: 1,693 confirmed daily cases/ 132 daily deaths/ 61,682 cumumative cases/ 1,921 cumulative deathsGuangdong: 3 daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 1,331 cumulative cases/ 5 cumulative deathsHenan: 5 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,262 cumulative cases/ 19 cumulative deathsZhejiang: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,173 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsHunan: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,008 cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsAnhui: 4 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 986 cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsJiangxi: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 934 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathJiangsu: 2 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 631 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsChongqing: 2 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 555 cumulative cases/ 5 cumulative deathsShandong: 1 daily case/ 1 daily death/ 554 cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsSichuan: 6 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 514 cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHeilongjiang: 6 daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 470 cumulative cases/ 12 cumulative deathsBeijing: 6 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 393 cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsShanghai: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths. 333 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathHebei: 4 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 306 cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsFujian: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 293 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsGuangxi: 2 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 244 cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsShaanxi: 2 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 242 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsYunnan: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 173 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsHainan: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 163 cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsGuizhou: 0 daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 146 cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsShanxi: 3 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 131 cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsTianjin: 3 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 128 cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsLiaoning: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 121 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathGansu: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 91 cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsJilin: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 90 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathXinjiang: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 76 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulaive deathInner Mongolia: 2 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 75 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsNingxia: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 71 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsHong Kong SAR: 2 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 62 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathTaipei and environs: 1 daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 23 cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathQinguai: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 18 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsMacao SAR: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 10 cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsXizang: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1 cumulative case/ 0 cumulative deathsTOTAL: 1,752 daily cases/ 136 daily deaths/ 74,280 cumulative cases/ 2,006 cumulative deaths Countries, territories or areas outside China with reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Data as of 19 February 2020: Singapore: 81 confirmed cases (4 new)/ 0 deathsJapan: 73 confirmed cases (8 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Republic of Korea: 51 confirmed cases (20 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 22 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 15 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Cambodia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 35 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 15 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 8 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 12 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 deathThe United Kingdom: 9 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 confirmed case (0 new) / 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 9 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsEgypt: 1 confirmed case/ 0 deathsInternational Conveyance (Diamond Princess): Cases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanese territorial waters: 542 confirmed cases (88 new)/ 0 deaths February 19, 2020: The Hong Kong Philharmonic Orchestra posted a press release titled: “Postponment of the HK Phil Japan and Korea Tour March 2020”. From the press release: In view of current developments related to the coronavirus outbreak, along with discussions with our tour presenters, performing venues and related partners, the Hong Kong Philharmonic Orchestra’s (HK Phil) tour to Japan and Korea has been postponed to a later time of the year. The tour was originaly schedulled for 5 March to 13 March 2020 in Osaka Symphony Hall, Tokyo Suntory Hall, Deajeon Arts Center, Seoul Arts Center, Chuncheon Culture & Art Center, and Gwangju Culture & Art Center. New dates for the tour will be announced on relevant performing venues’ websites shortly.Mr Benedikt Fohr, Chief Executive of the HK Phil, says, “We are disappointed with the postponement. As a cultural ambassador for Hong Kong, the orchestra and its Music Director Jaap van Zweden were really looking forward to performing for audiences in Japan and Korea. However, we also put the health and well-being of our players, staff, and audiences at the forefront of our priorities. We sincerely hope that the orchestra’s home city, as well as the HK Phil Team is making every effort to schedule new dats for this tour and is committed to touring in Japan and Korea in the near future.The HK Phil would like to thank presenters in Japan and Korea, our performing venue partners, as well as sponsors, for their ongoing support.Ticket holders for the affected concerts, please visit websites of relevant performing venues for ticketing assistance. February 19, 2020: The Motley Fool posted an article titled: “Macao Casinos to Reopen After 2-Week Shutdown” It was written by Rich Duprey. From the article: After a forced 15-day closure due to the coronavirus outbreak, casino operators in Macao are scheduled to open their doors again on Feb. 20. MGM Resorts said it was losing $1.5 million a day during the shutdown while Wynn Resorts said it was losing $2.5 million a day.The peninsula, which is the only place in China where it is legal to gamble, derives 80% of its revenue from tourism, but during the crisis visitations plunged by 98% with visits tumbling to about just 2,000 people a day.In allowing the casinos to open, however, gaming regulators are imposing strict conditions, such as requiring them to take temperature checks of guests and staff, and ensure people are wearing masks. It’s not likely there will be a large influx of tourists immediately after the business restrictions are lifted… February 19, 2020: Scottish Government posted news titled: “Coronavirus testing”. From the news: Scottish facilities deliver quicker results.Coronavirus screening laboratories in Glasgow and Edinburgh have tested 202 possible cases in the first 10 days since testing began in Scotland.Combined with the previous tests at the Public Health England Facility in Colindale, London, it brings the total number of tests from Scotland to 290 at close of play yesterday.Public Health Minister Joe FitzPatrick observed the testing process during a visit to the laboratory at the Glasgow Royal Infirmary (GRI).When a clinician suspects a new coronavirus infection, they take nose, throat and deeper respiratory samples, and send them to the facilities at the GRI and Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh.The Scottish facilities, which started operating on 10 February, mean test results can be returned quicker……BackgroundAfter the esperience of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003, a series of diagnostic tests were developed in the UK to detect any member of the family of coronaviruses.When the first reported publication of the genome sequence of this new coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 which causes COVID-19, working with the WHO and a global network of laboratories, further specific tests for this virus were rapidly developed.The efficient roll-out of this testing regime in Scotland is the result of the close co-operation between Scottish laboratories staff and staff in Public Health England. This forms an important part of our joint efforts to combat the threat from this new virus SARS-CoV-2.Health boards are also exploring the ability to undertake community-based testing where this is appropriate rather than require people to travel to a clinical setting. February 19, 2020: RUEL posted a tweet that included two screenshots of text. From the screenshots: Hey guys,I’m really sad to have to do this but due to the numerous travel restrictions being put in place as a result of the coronavirus, my team and I have made the tough decision to postpone the remaining dates of my Free Time World Tour to September this year. Thank you so much to everyone that bought tickets already and I’m looking forward to coming back in September! Pls stay safe and I can’t wait to see u all soon.Due to overwhelming demand, Singapore and Seoul venues have been upgraded, see updated Free Time World Tour dates below: 09 – Sep- Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia – The Bee10 – Sep – Singapore – Capitol Theatre 12 – Sep – Bangkok, Thailand – GMM16 – Sep – Taipei, Taiwan – Legacy Taipei18 – Sep – Seoul, Taiwan – Yes24 Live Hall {VENUE UPGRADED]20 – Sep – Hong Kong – Music Zone25 – Sep – Manila, Philippines – Music Museum29 – Sep – Osaka, Japan – TRAD30 – Sep – Tokyo, Japan – Duo Music Exchange Due to scheduling complications the originally scheduled Beijing show on March 2, 2020 at Omni Space has been cancelled. Tickets will be fully refunded through all official ticketing outlets. I promise to get to Beijing as soon as possible.Shanghai, originally schedulled on March 4, 2020 at BUDX VAS, has been postponed to a later date that is to be announced asap. Current ticket holders will be able to use theri tickets for the rescheduled Shanghai date.Current tickets purchased will remain valid for the rescheduled dates, and for those who are unable to attend the rescheduled date, a full refund can be requested through all official ticketing outlets… February 19, 2020: Royal Caribbean Cruises posted a press release titled: “Spectrum of the Seas Update”. From the press release: In light of current regional travel conditions, we’ve decided to cancel Spectrum of the Seas March 5, 13, 17, and 21 sailings. We are sharing the news with our guests and are sorry for the disruption to their vacations. Guests will recieve full refunds. February 19, 2020: U.S. Department of State posted a travel advisory titled: “Ukraine Travel Advisory”. From the travel advisory: Travel Advisory February 19, 2020Ukraine – Level 2: Exercise Increased CautionGlobal Health Advisory: Do Not Travel. Avoid all international travel due to the global impact of COVID-19.Exercise increased caution in Ukraine due to crime and civil unrest. Some areas have increased risk. Read the entire Travel Advisory. Do not travel to: Crimea due to arbitrary detentions and other abuses by Russian occupation authorities.The eastern parts of the Donetsk and Luhanks oblasts, especially the non-government-controlled areas, due to armed conflict. Crime targeting foreigners and property is common. Demonstrations, which have turned violent at times, regularly occur throughout Ukraine, including in Kyiv. Politically targeted assassinations and bombings have also occured. There are reports of violence by extreme nationalist groups.The Federal Aviation Admnistration (FAA) prohibits U.S. civil aviation from flying in the Ukranian Simferopol (UKFV) and Dniporpetrovsk (UKDV) Flight Information Regions. For more information, U.S. citizens should consult the Federal Aviation Administration’s Prohibitions, Restrictions, and Notices.Read the Safety and Security section on the country information page. If you decide to travel to Ukraine: Avoid demonstrations and crowds.Expect increased police presence.Do not physically resist any robbery attempt.Monitor local media for breaking events and adjust your plans based on new information.Enroll in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP) to recieve Alerts and make it easier to locate you in an emergency.Follow the Department of State on Facebook and Twitter.Review the Crime and Safety Report for Ukraine.Prepare a contingency plan for emergency situation. Review the Traveler’s Checklist. Crimea – Level 4: Do Not TravelThere is extensive Russian Federation military presence in Crimea as part of Russia’s occupation and attempted annexation of this part of Ukraine. Occupation authorities continue to abuse and arbitrarily imprison foreigners and the local population, particularly individuals who are seen as challenging Russian authority on the penninsula.The U.S. government prohibits its employees from traveling to Crimea and is unable to provide emergency to U.S. citizens in Crimea……Donetsk and Luhansk – Level 4: Do Not TravelRussia-led forces continue to control areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, where the ongoing-armed conflict has resulted in more than 10,000 deaths. Individuals, including U.S. citizens, have been threatened, detained, or kidnapped for hours or days after being stopped at checkpoints controlled by Russia-led forces. The U.S. government restricts U.S. government employees from traveling to the eastern parts of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts and adjacent regions, which limits the ability to provide emergency services to U.S. citizen in these areas… February 19, 2020: Holland America Line posted: “Update: 2/19/2020 9 am Pacific Time”. From the update: Holland America Line will be making a decision on all of Westerdam’s remaining Asia sailings by the end of the week. We would like to thank everyone for their extreme patience and understanding during this unprecedented situation. February 19, 2020: Al Jazeera posted an article titled: “Two die of coronavirus in Iran, first fatalities in Middle East”. It was written by Arwa Ibrahim. Two elderly people have died in Iran after testing positive for the new coronavirus according to health officials.The deaths on Wednesday were the outbreak’s first fatalities in the Middle East.“Two elderly people have died due to coronavirus in the city of Qom, south of Tehran,” Alireza Vahabzadeh, an adviser to Iran’s health minister, told Al Jazeera on Wednesday.“The two victims had suffered acut lung infections due to their infection with the coronavirus,” he added.Earlier in the day, Kianoush Jahanpour, spokesman for Iran’s ministry of health, said the two people had tested positive for the virus in preliminary results and died due to immune deficiencies and old age.There was no immediate information about the gender and the exact age of the victims……Meanwhile, during a visit earlier on Wednesday to Qom to assess the situation, Qasem Jan-Babaei, Iran’s deputy health minister, told local news agencies that the ministry had set up emergency units for the treatment of contagious diseases in the holy city. “We urge people to avoid shaking hands and kissing, to observe personal hygiene and preferably avoid crowded places,” said Babaei, adding that there was no reason to panic. “There have been no reports of coronavirus in other cities so far, but there is a possibility that cases may also arise in other cities.” Ali Gholizadeh, an Iranian public health policy researcher at the University of Science and Technology of China, said Iran’s health ministry was prepared to manage the virus, but added that the victims’ relatives should be quarantined “until we are sure they are not infected”… February 20, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 13 February 20, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Internal REAL Polls show I am beating all of the Dem candidates. The Fake News Polls (here we go again, just like in 2016) show losing or tied. Their polls will be proven corrupt on November 3rd, just like the Fake News is corrupt! February 20, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Could somebody at @foxnews please explain to Trump hater A.B. Stoddard (zero talent!) and @TeamCavuto, that I won every one of my debates, from beginning to end. Check the polls taken immediately after the debates. The debates got me elected. Must be Fox Board Member Paul Ryan!” February 20, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “I was thrilled to be back in Colorado Springs tonight, beneath the majestic peaks of the Rocky Mountains, with thousands of terrific, hardworking American Patriots. With your help, this November, we are going to defeat the Radical Socialist Dems, and we are going to WIN Colorado!” The tweet included four photos. The photos show a large crowd of people, all packed together. February 20, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation report – 31”. From the report: Highlights: One new country (Islamic Republic of Iran) reported cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours.China has revised their guidance on case classification for COVID-19, removing the classification of “clinically diagnosed” previously used for Hubei province, and retaining only “suspected” and “confirmed” for all areas, the latter requiring laboratory confirmetion. Some previously reported “clinically diagnosed” cases are thus expected to be discarded over the coming days as laboratory testing is conducted and some are found to be COVID-19 negative.In early January, following the notification of the occurance of cases of COVID-19 among travelers from Wuhan, China, WHO established a Global Surveilance System to collect and organize essential information to describe and monitor COVID-19. All WHO regions have implemented the reporting of COVID-19 cases either through existing or newly-established data collection systems. Please see the Subject in Focus section for more information. SUBJECT IN FOCUS: WHO Global Surveillance for Human Infection with COVID-19 Occurring Outside China: Following the notification of the occurance of cases of COVID-19 among travelers from Wuhan, China in early January, WHO set up a Global Surveilance System to collect and organize essential information to describe and monitor the extent of the global outbreak. The goals of global surveillance are to: 1) Monitor the global extent of the epidemic; 2) Provide early epidemilogical information to support risk assessment at the national, regional and global levels; 3) Rapidely detect new cases in countries where the virus was not previously circulating; 4) Monitor trends of the disease after a first case is imported and; 5) Provide epidemilogical information to guide response measures. In line with the international Health Regulations (2005), all Member States’ IHR National Focal Points were requested to immediately report any new confirmed case of COVID-19 and, within 48 hours, provide information related to clinical, epidemilogical, and travel history using the WHO standardized case reporting form……WHO regions implemented immediate reporting of COVID-19 through systems already in place – such as The European Surveillance System in the European Region, EMFLU in the Eastern Mediterranean Region, and FluNet in the Americas Region; or by setting up a new electronic data collection system (South-East Asia region). The flow of the data from WHO Regional Offices to WHO HQ was organized using the existing Global Influenza Surveillance system, allowing regions to rapidly transfer information. A Global Surveillance COVID-19 database centralizing all COVID-19 cases reported from outside China is maintained at WHO HQ, and data analysis is conducted daily to: follow the transmission of the disease between countries; describe the characteristics of human-to-human transmission within clusters of cases; describe the characteristics of affected persons and their exposure history; and support the evaluation of public health measures implemented in response to the epidemic. SUBJECT IN FOCUS (UPDATE): Advanced Analytics and Mathematical Modeling: Since the publication of modeling estimates in yesterday’s ‘Subject in Focus’, one research group (Ref. 12) has provided a correction of their estimate of the Infection-Fatality Ratio (IFR), with the new estimate being 0.94% (95% confidence interval 0.37-2.9). This replaces the lowest estimate of IFR of 0.33% but remains below the highest estimate of 1.0% (Ref.11). Confirmed and suspected cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 20 February 2020: Hubei: 349 confirmed daily cases/ 108 deaths/ 62,031 cumulative confirmed cases/ 2,209 cumulative deathsGuangdong: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,332 cumulative confirmed cases/ 5 cumulative deathsHenan: 4 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,265 cumulative confirmed cases/ 19 cumulative deathsZhejiang: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,175 cumulative confrmed cases/ 0 cumulative deathsHunan: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,010 cumulative confirmed cases/ 4 cumulative confirmed deathsAnhui: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 987 cumulative confirmed cases/ 6 cumulative deathsJiangxi: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 934 cumulative confirmed cases/ 1 cumulative daily deathJiangsu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 631 cumulative confirmed cases/ 0 cumulative deathsChongqing: 5 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 560 cumulative confirmed cases/ 5 cumulative deathsShandong: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 546 cumulative confirmed cases/ 4 cumulative deathsSichuan: 6 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 520 cumulative confirmed cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHeilongjaing: 6 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 476 cumulative confirmed cases/ 12 cumulative deathsBeijing: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 395 cumulative confirmed cases/ 4 cumulative deathsShanghai: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 333 cumulative confiirmed cases/ 2 cumulative deathsHebei: 1 confirmed daily case/ 1 daily death/ 307 cumulative confirmed cases/ 5 cumulative deathsFujian: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 293 cumulative confirmed cases/ 1 cumulative deathGuangxi: 1 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 245 cumulative confirmed cases/ 2 cumulative deathsShaanxi: 3 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 245 cumulative confirmed cases/ 1 cumulative deathYunnan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 172 cumulative confirmed cases/ 1 cumulative deathHainan: 5 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 168 cumulative confirmed cases/ 4 cumulative deathsGuizhou: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 146 cumulative confirmed cases/ 2 cumulative deathsShanxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 131 cumulative confirmed cases/ 0 cumulative deathsTianjin: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 130 cumulative confirmed cases/ 3 cumulative deathsLiaoning: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 121 cumulative confirmed cases/ 1 cumulative deathGansu: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 91 cumulative confirmed cases/ 1 cumulative deathJilin: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 91 cumulative confirmed cases/ 2 cumulative deathsXinjiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 76 cumulative confirmed cases/ 1 cumulative deathInner Mongolia: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 75 cumulative confirmed cases/ 0 cumulative deathsNingxia: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 71 cumulative confirmed cases/ 0 cumulative deathsHong Kong SAR: 3 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 65 cumulative confirmed cases/ 2 cumulative deathsTaipei and environs: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 24 cumulative confirmed cases/ 1 cumulative deathQinghai: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 18 cumulative confirmed cases/ 0 cumulative deathsMacao SAR: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 10 cumulative confirmed cases/ 0 cumulative deathsXizang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1 cumulative confirmed case/ 0 cumulative deathsTOTAL: 399 confirmed daily cases/ 115 daily deaths/ 74,675 cumulative confirmed cases/ 2,121 cumulative deaths Countries, territories or areas outside China with reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Data as of 20 February 2020: Republic of Korea: 104 confirmed cases (53 new)/ 1 death (1 new)Japan: 85 confirmed cases (12 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Singapore: 84 confirmed cases (3 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 22 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 12 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Cambodia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 35 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 15 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 8 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 12 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)The United Kingdom: 9 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 9 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIran (Islamic Republic of): 2 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 2 deaths (2 new)Egypt: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsInternational Conveyance (Diamond Princess): Cases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanese territorial waters: 621 confirmed cases (79 new)/ 2 deaths (2 new) February 20, 2020: Prime Minister of Australia Honorable Scott Morrison MP posted a Media Release titled: “Continuing Travel Ban to Protect Australians From the Coronavirus”. From the Media Release: The protection and safety of Australians is our highest priority.The National Security Committee of Cabinet has today decided that the continuing coronavirus infections in mainland China make it necessary to continue the travel restrictions on foreign nationals entering Australia for a further week to 29 February.This decision, as with all decisions taken by the Government with respect to the coronavirus outbreak, has been guided by the expert medical advice of the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee, made up of the Commonwealth’s Chief Medical Officer and chief medical officers from each state and territory.The committee has advised that there are signs of the spread of the coronavirus in Chinese provinces outside Hubei provience is slowing. We will need to watch closely whether this positive trend continues as people return to work after the holidays.Unfortunately, the number of infections and deaths in Hubei province itself continues to grow.The AHPPC has also advised that the number of cases in Australia remains at 15, indicating the Government’s precautionary approach to preventing the spread of coronavirus on our shores continue to be successful.The continuation of the travel restrictions means that for a further week, foreign nationals – excluding permanent residents – who have been in mainland China will not be allowed to enter Australia for 14 days from the time they left mainland China.As before, Australian citizens and permanent residents will still be able to enter, as will their immediate family members (spouses, legal guardians and dependents only).We continue to require Australian citizens, permanent residents and their families who have been in mainland China from 1 February 2020, and who return Australia, to self-isolate for 14 days from the time they left mainland China.People who have been in contact with someone confirmed to have coronavirus must also self-isolate for 14 days from the time they were in contact with that person.We will continue to consider developments in China and advice from the AHPPC as they meet and review health and travel arrangements on an ongoing basis.Our government continues to work closely with state and territory authorities as well as our international partners to ensure we keep Australians safe. February 20, 2020: UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office and The Rt Hon Dominic Raab MP posted a press release titled: “Diamond Princess evacuation flight organised: Foreign Secretary’s statement”. From the statement: Dominic Raab has confirmed the evacuation flight back to the UK for British people on the Diamond Princess in Japan, following the coronavirus outbreak.The Foreign Secretary, Dominic Raab, said:“We’ve organised an evacuation flight for British nationals on board the Diamond Princess cruise ship to depart Tokyp on Friday.“Details have been sent to those who have registered for the flight. We urge other British nationals still seeking to leave to contact us.“We will continue to support British nationals who wish to stay in Japan.” February 20, 2020: U.S. Department of State posted a travel advisory titled: “Hong Kong Travel Advisory”. From the travel advisory: Travel Advisory February 20, 2020Hong Kong – Level 2: Exercise Increased CautionGlobal Health Advisory: Do Not Travel. Avoid all international travel due to the global impact of COVID-19A novel (new) coronavirus officially known as COVID-19 is causing an outbreak of respiratory illness that began in the city of Wuhan, Hubei Province, China in December 2019. On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization determined the rapidly spreading outbreak constitutes a Public Health Emergency of International Concern.The Hong Kong government has reported cases of the novel coronavirus in its special administrative region, has upgraded its response level to emergency, its highest response level, and is taking other steps to manage the novel coronavirus outbreak. On February 8, the Hong Kong government began enforcing a compulsory 14-day quarantine for anyone, regardless of nationality, arriving in Hong Kong who has visited mainland China within a 14-day period. This quarantine does not apply to individuals transiting Hong Kong International Airport and certain exempted groups such as flight crews. However, health screening measures are in place at all of Hong Kong’s borders and the Hong Kong authorities will quarantine individual travelers, including passengers transiting the Hong Kong International Airport, if the Hong Kong authorities determine the traveler to be a health risk. Please refer to the Hong Kong government’s press release for further details.On January 30, the Hong Kong government closed certain transportation links and border checkpoints connecting Hong Kong with mainland China until further notice, and on February 3, suspended ferry services from Macau.On February 10, 2020, the Department of State allowed for the voluntary departure of non-emergency U.S. Government employees and their family members due to the novel coronavirus and the effect to Mission personnel as schools and some public facilities have been closed until further notice.On February 19, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued a Level 1 Warning: Practice Usual Precautions in Hong Kong for COVID-19.The Department of State has raised the Travel Advisory for mainland China to Level 4: Do Not Travel due to the novel coronavirus first identified in Wuhan, China. The CDC has issued a Level 3 Warning for China: Avoid all nonessential travel. At this time, CDC does not recommend canceling or postponing travel to Hong Kong. If you travel to Hong Kong, take the following steps: Avoid contact with sick people.Avoid touching your eyes, nose, or mouth with unwashed hands.Clean your hands often by washing them with soap and water for at least 20 seconds or using an alcohol-based hand sanitizer that contains at 60%-95% alcohol. Soap and water should be used if hands are visibly dirty.It is especially important to clean hands after going to the bathroom/ before eating and after coughing, sneezing or blowing your nose. If you spent time in Hong Kong during the past 14 days and feel sick with fever, cough, or difficulty breathing: Seek medical advice. Call ahead before going to a doctor’s office or emergency room. Tell them about your recent travel to Hong Kong, an area with community spread of coronavirus, and your symptoms.Avoid contact with others.Do not travel while sick.Cover your mouth and nose with a tissue or your sleeve (not your hands) when coughing or sneezing.Clean your hands by washing them with soap and water for at least 20 seconds or using an alcohol-based sanitizer that contains 60%-95% alcohol immediately after coughing, sneezing, or blowing your nose. Soap and water should be used if hands are visibly dirty… Continue to exercise increased caution in Hong Kong due to civil unrest.Country Summary: Since June 2019, lage scale and smaller political demonstrations have taken place in various areas of Hong Kong, including MTR stations, shopping malls, universities, and at Hong Kong International airport. While many demonstrations have been peaceful, some have resulted in violent demonstrations between protesters and police – or between protesters and people who oppose the demonstrations – leading to serious injuries. Police have used a variety of crowd control measures, including tear gas, pepper spray, rubber bullets, and water cannons. Some protesters have lit fires, built barricades, and thrown Molotov cocktails (petrol bombs). Police have identified and seized weapons and explosive materials linked to ongoing protest activity. Any protests that take place without a permit are considered illegal.Protests, which can take place with little or no notice at any time of the week, are likely to continue and are often accompanied by vandalism and/or violence.U.S. citizens, as well as U.S. Consolate General employees, have been subject to a People’s Republic of China propaganda campaign falsely accusing the United States of fomenting unrest in Hong Kong… If you decide to travel to Hong Kong: Monitor local media, local transportation sites and apps like MTR Mobile or CitybusNWFB, and the Hong Kong International Airport website for updates.Avoid the areas of the demonstrations.Exercise caution if you are in the vicinity of large gatherings or protests.Avoid taking photographs of protesters or police without permission.Be aware of your surroundings.Keep a low profile.Review your flight status with your airline or at the Hong Kong International Airport website.Follow U.S. Consolate General Hong Kong on Facebook and TwitterEnroll in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP) to receive Alerts and make it easier to locate you in an emergency.Follow the Department of State on Facebook and Twitter.Review the Crime and Safety Report for Hong Kong.U.S. citizens who travel abroad should always have a contingency plan for emergency situations. Review the Traveler’s Checklist. February 20, 2020: Holland America Line posted: “Update 2/20/2020 2 am Pacific Time”. From the update: The Cambodian Ministry of Health has issued a statement confirming that all 747 crew on board Westerdam have tested negative for COVID-19. This in addition to the announcement yesterday that 781 guests in Cambodia tested negative and were cleared to begin their travels home. All testing was conducted by the Pasteur Institute in Phnom Penh.Twenty-five crew members were originally scheduled to disembark the ship on Feb. 15 at the end of their work contracts. They will now begin their travels home. The rest of the crew will remain on Westerdam to continue their work contracts. This completes the testing ordered by the Cambodian Ministry of Health related to Westerdam. It is anticipated the ship will remain alongside in Sihanoukville, Cambodia, for a few more days until its future itinerary is finalized. The next scheduled cruise on Feb. 29 was previously cancelled.Holland America Line sincerely thanks Cambodia’s Honorable Prime Minister Hun, the Cambodian Ministry of Health and all those in Cambodia who have worked so hard to get our guests home and help clear our crew. Our sincere gratitude also goes to the U.S. Embassy in Cambodia for all of its hard work and support. We also appreciate the embassies from several other nations that provided their vital assistance and our flag state of the Netherlands for its many efforts.We would also like to thank the regional authorities from the World Health Organization (WHO) and U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for their guidance. February 20, 2020: Holand America Line posted: “Update 2/20/2020 5 pm Pacific Time”. From the update: Due to the uncertainty of ports accepting cruise ships in Asia, Holland America Line has decided to cancel Westerdam’s four March and April 2020 Asia cruises. The cancelled cruises include: • March 14–28, 14-day South Korea and Japan, sailing roundtrip Yokohama, Japan. • March 28–April 11, 14-day Japan Explorer, sailing roundtrip Yokohama. • April 11–25, 14-day Japan and Russia, sailing roundtrip Yokohama. • April 25–May 10, 16-day North Pacific Crossing, sailing Yokohama to Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Details and itineraries regarding Westerdam deployment through early May will be provided in the coming days. Holland America Line has been closely monitoring the very fluid and evolving situation with respect to the ability to successfully operate cruise itineraries in Asia due to the regional concerns surrounding COVID-19. We never want to disappoint our guests, however we are not confident that we could deliver a cruise experience that meets their expectations. All guests will receive a full refund of the cruise fare paid. Each guest will also receive a future cruise credit of 25-50% of fare paid depending on the departure date and reimbursement of any travel cancellation fees… February 21, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: 15 February 21, 2020: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted a transcript titled: “Transcript for CDC Telebriefing: Update on COVID-19”. From the transcript: Mr. Paul Fulton: Thank you for joining us on the briefing of the COVID-19 response. We’re joined by secretary for consular affairs for the department of state, Ian G. Brownlee, and Nancy Messonnier, the Director for the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, who will give opening remarks before taking your questions……Ian G. Brownlee: Good morning. I’d like to say a word about the cruise ship travel alert that the State Department posted yesterday afternoon. U.S. Department of State has no higher priority than the safety and welfare of U.S. citizens overseas. February 20th, the department advised all citizens to reconsider travel by cruise ships with Asia. Many countries implemented strict screening procedures to prevent the spread of COVID-19 virus. This is a dynamic situation, and U.S. citizens traveling by ship may be impacted by restrictions affecting their itineraries or may be subject to quarantine procedures implemented by local authorities. While the U.S. government has successfully evacuated hundreds of our citizens in recent weeks, such repatriation flights do not reflect our standard practice and should not be relied upon as an option for U.S. citizens under potential risk of quarantine by local authorities. We urge U.S. citizens to evaluate the risks associated with choosing to remain in an area that may be subject to quarantine and to take all appropriate proactive measures. People who plan to travel by cruise ship should contact their cruise line companies for further information on the current rules and restrictions, and should continue to monitor the travel.state.gov website for updated information. We encourage all U.S.citizens traveling oversees to enroll their travel plans in the smart traveler enrollment program, step.state.gov. They can recieve important messages about their destination, including timely alerts and updates to travel advisories. Finally, you can find the text of the travel alert on that same website, travel.state.gov. Thank you very much.Dr. Messonier: …I want to start with how we will be reporting our cases of COVID-19 beginning today and going forward. We are making our case counts in two tables. One only tracks people who were repatriated by the state department, and the second tracks all other cases picked up through U.S. public health network. CDC will continue to update these numbers every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. We are keeping track of cases resulting from repatration efforts separately because we don’t believe those numbers accurately represent the picture of what is happening in the community in the Unites States at this time.As of this morning, when you break things up this way, we have 13 U.S. cases versus 21 cases among people who were repatriated. The repatriated cases include 18 passengers from the “Diamond Princess” and three from the Wuhan repatriation flights. I want to update you on the status of the repatriation efforts. Yesterday, nearly all of the remaining people who returned from Wuhan, China, via State Department chartered flights, who have been quarantined at four Department of Defense installations across the U.S. have completed their 14-day quarantine. We are truly thankful to those released from quarantine for their cooperation and patience and wish them well as they return to home, work, and school.I want to be clear that someone who has been released from quarantine is not at risk for spreading the virus to others. Specifically, they are not infected. Additionally, I want to extend my thanks to the men and women on all of the DOD bases and their families for their graciousness while hosting these guests. We are also thankful that Travis Air Force Base and Joint Base San Antonio-lackland opened their doors to the recently returned passengers from the Diamond Princess cruise ship.Now, the Diamond Princess. 329 U.S. citizens earlier this week returned to the United States aboard two state department chartered flights. So far, 18 have tested positive at CDC. Another 10 were reportedly positive in Japan. 11 are recieving care at the University of Nebraska medical center. Five are recieving care around Travis. Two are recieving care around lakland. Because the passengers on the Diamond Princess were in a close setting, where there has been a significant spread of COVID-19, they are considered at high risk for infection. We do expect to see additional confirmed cases of COVID-19 among the passengers. Additionally, since many of these people are over the age of 60, we are also prepared for other medical issues to arise that will require hospitalization. We’re going to do everything we can to make their quarantine as easy as possible while monitoring them to see if they develop illness. Our goal for these people who have been repatriated is to be sure that each and every person is properly cared for and that those who are in need of medical care recieve it. To ensure this, we are working closely with local hospitals as well as other facilities across the country who are prepared to provide this care……As I said, the number of cases detected through the recent U.S. surveillance systems has increased to 13. The most recent patient was announced last night by Humbolt county in California. This patient had traveled to mainland China. The fact that we have been able to keep this number low is good news, especially given what we are seeing among some countries in Asia that are beginning to experience community spread. This is being reported in Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam, as well as in Hong Kong and Japan. The last two countries we issued level one travel notices for earlier this week. We are working in close coordination with the State Department to keep travelers informed up-to-the-minute guidance, including on cruise ship travel, as discused by Mr. Brownlee… February 21, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “THANK YOU Las Vegas, Nevada! I was delighted to be back in a state I love, with proud, hardworking PATRIOTS. With your help, this November, we are going to defeat the Radical Socialist Democrats, and we are going to win in Nevada in a landslide! #KAG2020” The tweet includes a periscope video. February 21, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 32”. From the report: Highlights: No new countries reported cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours.Through the International Food Safety Authorities Network (INFOSAN), national food safety authorities are seeking more information on the potential for persistence of SARS-Cov-2, which causes COVID-19, in foods traded internationally as well as the potential role of food in the transmission of the virus. Currently, there are investigations conducted to evaluate the viability and survival time of SARA-CoV-1. As a general rule, the consumption of raw or undercooked animal products should be avoided. Raw meat, raw milk, or raw animal organs should be handled with care to avoid cross-contamination with uncooked foods. SUBJECT IN FOCUS: Food related considerations: The new COVID-19 is caused by the virus SARS-COV-2. The most likely ecological resrvoirs for SARS-CoV-2 are bats, but it is believed that the virus jumped the species barrier to humans from another intermediate animal host. The intermediate animal host could be a domestic food animal, a wild animal, or a domesticated wild animal which has not yet been identified.WHO continues to collaborate with experts, Member States and other partners to identify gaps and research priorites for the control of COVID-19, and provide advice to countries and individuals on prevention measures. National food safety authorities have been following this event with the International Food Safety Authorities Network (INFOSAN) Secretariat to seek more information in the transmission of the virus. Experiences from previous outbreaks of related coronaviruses, such as the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) show that transmission through food consumption did not occur. To date, there have not been any reports of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 virus through food. However, concerns were expressed about the potential for these viruses to persist on raw foods of animal origin.Currently, there are investigations conducted to evaluate the viability and survival time of SARS-CoV-2. In general, coronaviruses are very stable in a frozen state according to studies of other coronaviruses, which have shown survival for up to two years at -20°C. Studies conducted on SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV indicate that these viruses can persist on different surfaces for up to a few days depending on a combination of parameters such as temperature, humidity and light. For example, at refrigeration temperature (4°C), MERS-CoV can remain viable for up to 72 hours. Current evidence on other coronavirus strains shows that while coronaviruses appear to be stable at low and freezing temperatures for a certain period, food hygiene and good food safety practices can prevent their transmission through food. Specifically, coronaviruses are thermolabile, which means that they are susceptible to normal cooking temperatures (70°C). Therefore, as a general rule, the consumption of raw or undercooked animal products should be avoided. Raw meat, raw milk or raw animal organs should be handled with care to avoid cross-contamination with uncooked foods.SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV are susceptible to the most common cleaning and disinfection protocols and there is no indication so far that SARS-Cov-2 behaves differently…. Confirmed and suspected cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease by provinces, regions and cities in China, 21 February 2020: Hubei: 631 confirmed daily cases/ 115 daily deaths/ 62,662 cumulative confirmed cases/ 2,144 cumulative deathsGuangdong: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,333 cumulative confirmed cases/ 5 cumulative deathsHenan: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,267 cumulative confirmed cases/ 19 cumulative deathsZhejiang: 28 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 1,203 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathHunan: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,011 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsAnhui: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 988 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsJiangxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 934 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathShandong: 202 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 748 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsJiangsu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 631 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 daily deathsChongqing: 7 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 567 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsSichuan: 5 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 525 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHeilongjiang: 3 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 479 confirmed cumulative cases/ 12 cumulative deathsBeijing: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 396 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsShanghai: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 334 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsHebei: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 308 confirmed cumulative cases/ 5 cumulative deathsFujian: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 246 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsGuangxi: 1 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 246 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsShaanxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 245 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathsYunnan: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 174 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsHainan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 168 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsGuizhou: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 146 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsShanxi: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 132 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsTianjin: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 131 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsLiaoning: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 121 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathJilin: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 91 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathGansu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 91 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsXinjiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 76 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathInner Mongolia: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 75 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsNingxia: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 71 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsHong Kong SAR: 3 daily confirmed cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 68 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsTaipei and environs: 2 daily confirmed cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 26 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathQinghai: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 18 confirmed cumulative daily cases/ 0 cumulative deathsMacao SAR: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 10 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsXizang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1 confirmed cumulative case/ 0 cumulative deathsTOTAL: 894 confirmed daily cases/ 118 daily deaths/ 75,569 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2,239 cumulative deaths Countries, territories or areas outside China with reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Data as of 21 February 2020: Republic of Korea: 204 confirmed cases (100 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Japan: 93 confirmed cases (8 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Singapore: 85 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 22 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 17 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Cambodia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 35 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 15 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 8 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 12 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)The United Kingdom: 9 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 3 confirmed cases/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 9 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIran (Islamic Republic of): 5 confirmed cases (3 new)/ 2 deaths (0 new)Egypt: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSUBTOTAL FOR ALL REGIONS: 556 confirmed cases (114 new)/ 6 deaths (0 new)International Conveyance (Diamond Princess): Cases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanese territorial waters: 634 confirmed cases (13 new)/ 2 deaths (0 new)GRAND TOTAL: 1,200 confirmed cases (127 new)/ 8 deaths (0 new) February 21, 2020: Government of Canada posted a statement titled: “Statement from the Chief Public Health Officer on the release of repatriated Canadians from quarantine following 14-day stay at CFB Trenton”. From the statement: On February 7, 2020, the Government of Canada repatriated individuals and their families from Wuhan, China, which is the epicenter of the outbreak of novel coronavirus (COVID-19). Out of an abundance of caution, and to reduce the risk of spread of COVID-19 within Canada, these Canadians were transported to Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Trenton for a 14-day quarantine.This action was taken in the interest of the health and safety of all Canadians – both those we brought home from China and those in Canada. I woild like to thank the repatriated Canadians and their family members for their patience, cooperation and contribution to public health.Today, I can confirm that the 180 Canadians from the first Government of Canada-chartered flight from Wuhan, as well as the 39 Canadians who returned to Canada on a separate flight chartered by the United States, have been released from quarantine.The Government of Canada has worked with provincial and territorial partners, as well as local public health authorities and non-governmental organizations, to ensure that social services are in place to support these Canadians and their family members after they leave CFB Trenton. The Government of Canada is also helping to facilitate their return home by providing transportation to Toronto before they continue onward to their final destination. To respect the privacy of the individuals leaving quarantine, we will not be releasing further details of their travel plans.I want to assure Canadians that the risk of spread of the novel coronavirus within Canada remains low, including in those communities where repatriated Canadians will retirn following the quarantine at CFB Trenton. All of the quarantined individuals being released today remained asymptomatic for the novel coronavirus throughout the 14-day quarantine period and, as a result, pose no risk to others and can return to their usual activities.I urge everone to treat these repatriated Canadians with respect and compassion. Before they were able to return home, they dealth with an uncertain and stressful period living within the epicenter of this outbreak.For the Canadians who arrived on February 11 aboard the second Government of Canada-chartered flight and remain at CFB Trenton, the quarantine is anticipated to end on February 25, 2020. February 21, 2020: Government of Canada posted a news release titled: “Government of Canada repariates Canadians and their families from Diamond Princess cruise ship in Japan”. From the news release: The Honourable François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Honourable Patty Hajdu, Minister of Health, and the Honourable Harjit Sajjan, Minister of National Defence, today announced that the plane chartered by the Government of Canada to repatriate Canadians who were on board the Diamond Princess cruise ship has arrived in Canada from Tokyo, Japan.At 2:01 (EST) today, 129 Canadians and accompanying family members travelling on the chartered plane arrived at Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Trenton. None of the passengers exhibited symptoms of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) upon arrival.Upon landing, the returning passengers were screened at CFB Trenton by quarantine officers and then met by officers from the Canada Border Services Agency. They were then transported to the NAV CENTRE in Cornwall, Ontario where they will be subject to a 14 day quarantine period. They will undergo the same medical assessment and observation as those who were repatriated earlier this month from Wuhan, China.The Government of Canada continues to work with provincial, territorial and local health authorities to ensure that the returning Canadians and their family members receive all the medical and ongoing support necessary to protect their health and the health and safety of all Canadians… February 21, 2020: Royal Caribbean Cruises posted a press release titled: “Statement Regarding U.S. State Department Travel Advisory”. From the press release: U.S. guests on Cruises in Asia departing before March 23, 2020, who want to change their plans will be allowed to rebook without penalty at a later date.We have cancelled or modified most sailings in Asia through mid-March, with no sailings departing from mainland China or Hong Kong. We are unaware of any significant travel restrictions, delays or quarantines anywhere else in the world. Accordingly, we look forward to welcoming our guests who are booked on itineraries outside Asia onto their cruises as schedulled. February 22, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 15 February 22, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Democrats in the Great State of Nevada (Which, because of the Economy, Jobs, the Military & Vets, I will win in November), be careful of Russia, Russia, Russia. According to Corrupt politician Adam “Shifty” Schiff, they are pushing for Crazy Bernie Sanders to win. Vote!” Senator Adam Schiff is a Democrat who led the impeachment investigation of President Donald Trump. Senator Bernie Sanders is an Independant who was running for President as a Democrat. February 22, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 33”. From the report: Highlights: Two new countries (Lebanon and Israel) reported cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours.The role of environmental contamination in the transmission of COVID-19 is not yet clear. On 18 February, a new protocol entitled “Surface sampling of coronavirus disease (COVID-19): A practical “how to” protocal for health care and public health professionals” was published. This protocol was designed to determine viable virus presence and persistance on fomites in various locations where a COVID-19 patient is receiving care or isolated, and to understand how fomites may play a role in the transmission of the virus.The WHO Director-General briefed the emergency ministerial meeting on COVID-19 organized by the African Union and the Africa Centres for Disease Control or Prevention. Details can be found here. Confirmed and suspected cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 22 February 2020: Hubei: 366 confirmed daily cases/ 106 daily deaths/ 63,454 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2,250 cumulative deathsGuangdong: 6 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,339 confirmed cumulative cases/ 5 cumulative deathsHenan: 3 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,270 confirmed cumulative cases/ 19 cumulative deathsZhejiang: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,205 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathHunan: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/1,013 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsAnhui: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 989 confirmed cumulative deathsJiangxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 934 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathShangdong: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 750 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsJiangsu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 631 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsChongqing: 5 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 572 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsSichuan: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 526 confirmed cumulative daily cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHeilonjiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 479 confirmed cumulative cases/ 12 cumulative deathsBeijing: 3 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 399 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsShanghai: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 344 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHebei: 1 confirmed daily case/ 1 daily death/ 309 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsFujian: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 293 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathGuangxi: 3 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 249 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsShaanxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 245 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathsYunnan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 174 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsHainan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 168 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsGuizhou: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 146 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsTianjin: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 133 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsShanxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths. 132 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsLiaoning: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 121 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathJilin: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 91 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathGansu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 91 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsXinjaing: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 76 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsInner Mongolia: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily deaths/ 75 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsNingxia: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 71 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsHong Kong SAR: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 68 confirmed cumulative cases (Subject to change due to discrepant information)/ 2 cumulative deathsTaipei and environs: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 26 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathQinghai: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 18 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsMacao SAR: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 10 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsXizang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsTOTAL: 387 confirmed daily cases/ 109 daily deaths/ 76,392 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2,348 cumulative deaths Countries, territories or areas outside China with reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Data as of 22 February 2020: Republic of Korea: 346 confirmed cases (142 new)/ 2 deaths (1 new)Japan: 105 confirmed cases (12 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Singapore: 86 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deaths Malaysia: 22 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 21 confirmed cases (4 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Cambodia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 35 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 35 confirmed cases (20 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 8 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsGermany: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 12 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 deaths (0 new)Italy: 9 confirmed cases (6 new)/ 0 deaths The United Kingdom: 9 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsIsrael: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deathsIran (Islamic Republic of): 18 confirmed cases (13 new)/ 4 deaths (2 new)United Arab Emirates: 11 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsEgypt: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsLebanon: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deathsSUBTOTAL FOR ALL REGIONS: 768 confirmed cases (202 new)/ 9 deaths (0 new)International Conveyance (Diamond Princess): Cases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanese territorial waters: 634 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 11 deaths (3 new)GRAND TOTAL: 1,402 confirmed cases (202 new)/ 11 deaths (3 new) February 22, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Samsung Electronics confirms coronavirus case at phone factory complex in South Korea”. From the article: Samsung Electronics … said on Saturday that one coronavirus case had been confirmed at its mobile device factory complex in the southeastern city of Gumi, causing a shutdown of its entire facility there until Monday morning.Samsung Electronics, the world’s top smartphone maker, said the floor where the infected employee worked would be shut down until the morning of Feb. 25.“The company has placed colleagues who came in contact with the infected employee in self-quarantine and taken steps to have them tested for possible infection,” Samsung said in a news release……Gumi is close to the city of Daegu, home to a church at the center of South Korea’s largest coronavirus outbreak.South Korea said on Saturday that the number of people infected with the coronavirus in the country had more than doubled to 433… February 22, 2020: UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office and The RT Hon Dominic Raab MP posted a press release titled: “Diamond Princess evacuation flight lands in the UK: Foreign Secretary’s statement”. From the press release: Dominic Raab confirms that 32 British and European citizens have been brought safely home from Japan, following the coronavirus outbreak.Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said:“We have brought 32 British and European citizens safely home from Japan. The FCO worked hard to get them back to the UK securely.“Our number one priority has consistently been the health and safety of UK nationals.” February 22, 2020: Scottish Government posted news titled: “Coronavirus becomes notifiable disease in Scotland”. From the article: Public Health regulations updated.Public health regulations have been amended in Scotland to make coronavirus (COVID-19) a notifiable disease.The changes to the Public Health (Scotland) Act 2008 mean that medical practitioners are now required to share patient information with health boards if they have reasonable grounds to suspect a person they are attending has coronavirus.The Chief Medical Officer has written to NHS Boards, medical practitioners and directors of diagnostic laboratories to make them aware of the changes.There have been no positive test results for coronavirus in Scotland to date……BackgroundThe new regulations will come into effect from Saturday 22 February 2020… February 22, 2020: U.S. Department of State posted a travel advisory titled: “Japan Travel Advisory”. From the travel advisory: Travel Advisory February 22, 2020Japan – Level 2: Exercise Increased CautionGlobal Health Advisory: Do Not Travel. Avoid all international travel due to the global impact of COVID-19.A novel (new) coronavirus disease, recently designated as COVID-19, is causing an outbreak of respiratory illness. The first cases of COVID-19 were reported in China in December 2019. On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization determined the rapidly spreading outbreak constitutes a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. Many cases of COVID-19 have been associated with travel to or from mainland China or close contact with a travel-related case, but sustained community spread has been reported in Japan. Sustained community spread means that people in Japan have been infected with the virus, but how or where they became infected is not known, and the spread is ongoing. The CDC has issued a Level 2 Travel Health Notice.Because older adults and those with chronic medical conditions may be at higher risk for severe disease, people in these groups should discuss travel with a healthcare provider and consider postponing nonessential travel. Travelers should review and follow the Centers for Disease Control’s guidelines for the prevention of coronavirus if they decided to travel to Japan. If suspected to have Coronavirus in Japan, you may face travel delays, quarantine, and extremely expensive medical costs. If you travel to Japan, you should: Avoid contact with sick people.Discuss travel to Japan with your healtcare provider. Older adults and travelers with underlying health issues may be at risk for more severe disease.Avoid touching your eyes, nose, or mouth with unwashed handsClean your hands often by washing them with soap and water for at least 20 seconds or using an alcohol-based hand sanitizer that contains at 60% – 95% alcohol. Soap and water should be used if hands are visibly dirty.Enroll in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP) to receive Alerts and make it easier to locate you in an emergency.Follow the Department of State on Facebook and Twitter.Review the Crime and Safety Report for Japan.Prepare a contingency plan for emergency situations. Review the Traveler’s Checklist. February 22, 2020: USA Today posted an article titled: “A dozen towns in northern Italy are locked down after coronavirus deaths”. It was written by Doug Stanglin. From the article: Schools, businesses and restaurant were closed in a dozen northern Italian towns Saturday following reports of two deaths tied to an outbreak of the coronavirus in the region.A female resident in the Lombardy region died only hours after a 77-year-old man succumbed near Padua, in the Veneto region, the ANSA news agency reported, citing health care sources.Italy reports a total of 62 cases, many of them representing the first infections in the country via secondary contagion, that is, not directly from a visitor to China.The deaths come a day after health officials at the World Health Organization warned that attempts to contain the virus that erupted in China in December were at a crisis point……Local authorities in Lombardy and Veneto ordered the lockdown, including the cancellation of sporting events, while the mayor of Milan, the business capital of Italy, shuttered public offices. In Veneto, civil protection crews set up a tent camp outside a closed hospital, where several confirmed cases were being held in isolation, to screen medical staff for the virus.In hard-hit Codogno, where the first patient in the north to fall ill was in critical condition, the main street was practically a ghost town Saturday. The few people out on the streets wore hard-to-get face masks… February 23, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 15 February 23, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Look forward to being with all of my friends and supporters @CPAC on Saturday, February 29th! #KAG2020”. The tweet includes a photo of President Trump on a stage at CPAC 2019. He is hugging a flagpoll upon which an American flag on it. February 23, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted: “Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 34”. From the report: Highlights: No new countries reported cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours. Confirmed and suspected cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 23 February 2020: Hubei: 630 confirmed daily cases/ 96 daily deaths/ 64,084 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2,346 deathsGuangdong: 3 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 1,342 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsHenan: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,271 confirmed cumulative cases/ 19 cumulative deathsZhejiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,205 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathHunan: 3 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,016 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsAnhui: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 989 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsJiangxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 934 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathShandong: 4 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 754 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsJiangsu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 631 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsChongqing: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 573 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsSichuan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 526 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHeilongjiang: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 480 confirmed cumulative cases/ 12 cumulative deathsBeijing: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 399 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsShanghai: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 335 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHeibi: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 311 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsFujian: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 293 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathGuangxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 confirmed deaths/ 249 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsShaanxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 245 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathYunnan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 174 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsHainan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 168 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsGuizhou: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 146 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsTianjin: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 135 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsShanxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 132 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsLiaoning: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 122 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathJilin: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 91 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathGansu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 91 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsXinjiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 76 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsInner Mongolia: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 75 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsNingxia: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 71 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsHong Kong SAR: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 70 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsTaipei and environs: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 26 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathQinghai: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 18 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsMacao SAR: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 10 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsXiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1 confirmed cumulative case/ 0 cumulative deathsTOTAL: 650 confirmed daily cases/ 97 daily deaths/ 77,042 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2,445 cumulative deaths Countries, territories or areas outside China with reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Data as of 23 February 2020: Republic of Korea: 602 confirmed cases (256 new)/ 5 total deaths (3 new)Japan: 132 confirmed cases (27 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Singapore: 89 confirmed cases (3 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 22 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 22 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Cambodia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 35 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States: 35 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 9 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 76 confirmed cases (67 new)/ 2 deaths (2 new)Germany: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 12 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)The United Kingdom: 9 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsIsrael: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsIran (Islamic Republic of): 28 confirmed cases (10 new)/ 5 deaths (1 new)United Arab Emirates: 13 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsEgypt: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsLebanon: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSUBTOTAL FOR ALL REGIONS: 1,135 confirmed cases (367 new)/ 15 deaths (0 new)International Conveyance (Diamond Princess): cases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanese territorial water: 634 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 2 deaths (0 new)GRAND TOTAL: 1,769 confirmed cases (367 new)/ 17 deaths (6 new) February 23, 2020: Government of Canada posted an update titled: “Update #5: Statement from the Chief Public Health Officer on the release of selected individuals from quarantine for the 2019 novel coronavirus.” From the update: Further to my previous statements, as Chief Public Health Officer, I have assessed individuals in quarantine at the NAV CENTRE pursuant to an Emergency Order under the Quarantine Act and determined that they do not pose a risk of significant harm to public health.I have authorized the release of six Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) medical staff and one Government of Canada employee who accompanied the returning travellers on the third Canada-chartered flight from Japan to CFB Trenton to the NAV CENTRE in Cornwall, Ontario. In my assessment, I took into account the fact that they followed appropriate infection prevention and control protocols (including the use of personal protective equipment), and that they did not have unprotected contact with passengers or persons at risk of having the novel coronavirus. As a result of this assessment, I have determined that their continued quarantine is not required. February 23, 2020: UK Department of Health and Social Care posted a news story titled: “CMO for England announces 4 new cases of novel coronavirus”. From the news release: Chief Medical Officer Professor Chris Whitty statement on 4 new cases of COVID-19 from the Diamond Princess.Four further patients in England have tested positive for COVID-19, bringing the total number of cases in the UK to 13.The virus was passed on in the Diamond Princess cruise ship and the patients are being transferred from Arrowe Park to specialist NHS infection centres. February 23, 2020: Mabel tweeted: ” but safety first ” The tweet included a screenshot of text that said: Due to recent events concerning the Coronavirus in Italy, we’ve been advised by the Minister of Health and the President of the Lombardy region not to go ahead with tomorrow’s show in Milan. So sad to have to write this, but safety is the absolute priority here! Hoping to reschedule soon. Love Mx. This tweet is in regards to Mabel’s February 24 concert at the Magazzini Generali venue in Milan. February 23, 2020: Royal Caribbean Cruises posted a press release titled: “Quantum of the Seas Update”. From the press release: In light of current regional travel conditions, we’ve decided to cancel Quantum of the Seas March 4th and 8th sailings. We are sharing the news with our guests and are sorry for the disruption to their vacations. Guests will revieve full refunds. February 23, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Trains between Italy and Austria resume after passengers test negative for coronavirus.” It was written by Kirsti Knolle. From the article: Austria suspended train services ove the Alps to Italy for about four hours late on Sunday before restarting them after two travellers tested negative for coronavirus.A train carrying about 300 passengers from Venice, Italy, to Munich in Germany was halted on the Italian side of the Brenner Pass before being allowed to continue its journey after the two tested negative, authorities said.“We can give the all-clear,” Austria’s interior ministry said in a statement. As a precaution, it added, all passengers disembarking in Austria would have their identities checked. The Brenner Pass is an important and frequently congested passenger train route between Italy, Austria and Germany. The train, which media reports said was carrying mostly Austrians and Germans, was stopped after Italian State Railways told Austria’s OBB train operator there were two people with fever symptoms on board, the interior ministry said earlier. It left the station on the Italian side of the pass shortly before midnight local time (2300 GMT), according to a Reuters witness. Italy is battling with an explosion of coronavirus cases, which rose on Saturday to more than 150, with three deaths. The government has closed off the worst-hit areas in the northern regions of Lombardy and Veneto… February 24, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 15 February 24, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “The Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA. We are in contact with everyone and all relevant countries. CDC & World Health have been working hard and very smart. Stock Market starting to look very good to me!” February 24, 2020: The Guardian posted a live blog titled: “Wall Street plummets as coronavirus spreads in Europe – as it happend”. Here is a small part of the live blog: Shares on Wall Street have plummeted at the opening bell and European markets are also in a sea of red, with the Italian market the worst hit, amid reports of rising deaths from the coronavirus in the country. Dow Jones down 848 points, or 2.83%, at 28,143S&P 500 down 91 points, or 2.75%, at 3,245Nasdaq down 334 points, or 3.49%, at 9,242UK’s FTSE 100 down 262 points, or 3.56%, at 7,140Germany’s Dax down 544 points, or 4%, at 13,035France’s CAC down 243 points, or 4%, at 5,786Italy’s FTSE MIB down 1,407, or 5.68%, at 23,368 In addition, The Guardian also posted the following the same live blog: Oil prices have taken another tumble, with Brent crude now down 4.8% or $2.86 per barrel at $55.64.More than £63bn has been wiped off th FTSE 100 so far today, though we still have about 20 minutes of trading to go. February 24, 2020: U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Remarks at Media Availability Following Visit to San Francisco’s Chinatown and Meetings with Local Business Owners”. From the press release: …Good afternoon, everyone. I’m so glad to see so many of you in Chinatown today……I’m here today, particularly, to say thank you to the community for the sense of family values and sense of community they provide.But also to say to everyone: we should come to Chinatown. Precautions have been taken by our city. We know that thre is concern surrounding tourism, travelling all throughout the world, but we think it’s very safe to be in Chinatown and Hope that others will come.It’s lovely here. The food is delicious, the shops are prospering, the parade was great. Walking tours continue. Please come and visit Chinatown.Q: Madam Speaker, is the federal government doing enough to control this virus and to get out this kind of message?Speaker Pelosi: Well. we’ll see. They just cut $1.3 – something like that – billion out of the Centers for Disease Control. So, I don’t know if that’s enough, but let’s see what the focus is. Prevention, prevention, prevention. We want people to be concerned and vigilant. However, we don’t want them to be afraid… February 24, 2020: Xinhua Net News posted an article titled: “China’s legislature adopts decision on banning illegal trade, consumption of wildlife”. From the article: The Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, or China’s top legislature, during a session Monday adopted a decision on thoroughly banning the illegal trading of wildlife and eliminating the consumption of wild animals to safeguard people’s lives and health.The move aims to safeguard biological and ecological security and effectively prevent major public health risks, among other purposes.The consumption of terrestrial wild animals “of important ecological, scientific, and social value” that are under state protection, as well as other terrestrial animals, including those that are bred or reared in captivity, shall be thoroughly prohibited, according to the decision.The hunting, trading, and transportation of terrestrial wild animals that naturally grow and breed in the wild for the purpose of consumption shall also be completely prohibited.The decision stipulates that illegal consumption and trade of wildlife shall be severely punished… February 24, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 35”. From the report: Highlights: One new Member State (Kuwait) reported cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours.Since the emergence of COVID-19 we have seen instances of public stigmatization among specific populations, and the rise of harmful stereotypes. Stigmatization could potentially contribute to more severe health problems, ongoing transmission, and difficulties controlling infectious diseases during an epidemic. Please see the Subject in Focus section for more information on how to counter stigmatizing attitudes. SUBJECT IN FOCUS: Risk Communications to Address Stigma Stigma occurs when people negatively associate an infectious disease, such as COVID-19, with a specific population. In the case of COVID-19, there are an increasing number of reports of public stigmatization against people from areas affected by the epidemic. Unfortunately, this means that people are being labelled, stereotyped, separated, and/or experience loss of status and discrimination because of a potential negative affiliation with the disease. Stigma can: Drive people to hide the illness to avoid discriminationPrevent people from seeking health care immediatelyDiscourage them from adopting healthy behaviors Such barriers could potentially contribute to more severe health problems, ongoing transmission, and difficulties controlling infectious diseases during an infectious disease outbreak. The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), UNICEF and the WHO are developing community-based guides and global campaigns to thwart the effects of stigma on people and the COVID-19 response.Do your part. Governments, citizens, media, key influencers and communities have an important role to play in preventing and stopping stigma. We all need to be intentional and thoughtful when communicating on social media and other communication platforms, showing supportive behaviors around COVID-19. Here are some examples and tips on possible actions to cover stigmatizing attitudes: Spreading the facts: Stigma can be heightened by insufficient knowledge about how the new coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is transmitted and treated, and how to prevent infection.Engaging social influencers such as religious leaders on promptimg reflection about people who are stigmatized and how to support them, or respected celebrities to amplify messages that reduce stigma.Amplify the voices, stories and images of local people who have experienced COVID-19 and have recovered or who have supported a loved one through recovery to emphasize that most people do recover from COVID-19.Make sure you portray different ethnic groups. Materials should show diverse communities that are being affected, and show communities working together to prevent the spread of COVID-19.Balanced reporting. Media reporting should be balanced and contextualized, disseminating evidence-based information and helping combat rumour and misinformation that could lead to stigmatisation.Link up. There are a number of initiatives to address stigma and stereotyping. It is key to link up to these activities to create a movement and a positive environment that shows care and empathy for all… Confirmed and suspected cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions, and cities in China, 24 February 2020: Hubei: 398 confirmed daily cases/ 149 deaths/ 64,287 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2,485 cumulative deathsGuangdong: 3 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,345 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsHenan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,271 confirmed cumulative cases/ 19 cumulative deathsZhejiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,205 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathHunan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,016 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsAnhui: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 989 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsJiangxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 934 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathShandong: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 755 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsJiangsu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 631 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsChongqing: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 575 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsSichuan: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 525 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsHeilongjiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 480 confirmed cumulative cases/ 12 cumulative deathsBeijing: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 399 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsShanghai: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 335 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHebei: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 311 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsFujian: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 293 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathGuangxi: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 251 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsShaanxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 245 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathsYunnan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 174 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsHainan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 168 confirmed cumulative cases/ 5 cumulative deathsGuizhou: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 146 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsTianjin: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 135 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsShanxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 132 confirmed cumulative caes/ 0 cumulative deathsLiaoning: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 121 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathJilin: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 93 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathsGansu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 91 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsXinjiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 76 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative daily casesInner Mongolia: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 75 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsHong Kong: 4 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 74 confirmed cumulative cases / 2 cumulative deathsNingxia: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 71 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsTaipei and environs: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 28 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative casesQinghai: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 18 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsMacao SAR: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 10 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsXizang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1 confirmed cumulative daily cases/ 0 cumulative deathsTOTAL: 415 confirmed daily cases/ 150 daily deaths/ 77,262 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2,595 cumulative cases Countries, territories or areas outside China with reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Data as of 24 February 2020: Republic of Korea: 763 confirmed case (161 new)/ 7 deaths (2 new)Japan: 114 confirmed cases (12 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Singapore: 89 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 22 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 22 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Cambodia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 35 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 35 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 9 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 124 confirmed cases (48 new)/ 2 deaths (0 new)Germany: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 12 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)The United Kingdom: 9 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsIsrael: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsIran (Islamic Republic of): 43 confirmed cases (15 new)/ 8 deaths (3 new)United Arab Emirates: 13 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsKuwait: 3 confirmed cases (3 new)/ 0 deathsEgypt: 1 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsLebanon: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSUBTOTAL FOR ALL REGIONS: 1,374 confirmed cases (239 new)/ 20 deaths (5 new)International conveyance (Diamond Princess): Cases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanese territorial waters: 695 confirmed cases (61 new)/ 3 deaths (1 new)GRAND TOTAL: 2,069 confirmed cases (300 new)/ 23 deaths (6 new) February 24, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) Europe posted news titled: “Joint WHO and ECDC mission in Italy to support COVID-19 control and prevention efforts.” From the article: Italy has reported a rapid increase in cases of laboratory-confirmed coronavirus (COVID-19) since 21 February 2020. An initial investigation by Italian authorities has found several clusters of cases in different regions of northern Italy, with evidence of local transmission of COVID-19.A WHO-led team of experts from WHO and the European Centere for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) arrived in Italy on Monday 24 February to support Italian authorities in understanding the situation. WHO experts are providing support in the areas of clinical management, infection prevention and control, surveilance and risk clinical management infection prevention and control, surveillance and risk communication. At this stage the focus is on limiting further human-to-human transmission.While limited person-to-person transmission of COVID-19 in countries outside of China was expected, the rapid increase in reported cases (4 out of 5) people experience mild or no symptoms……Health authorities in Italy are implmenting measures to prevent onward transmission, including closing of schools and bars and cancelling of sports events and other mass gatherings in the areas affected. This aligns with the containment strategy being implemented globally in an effort to stop the spread of COVID-19……Countries across the European Region continue to prepare for and respond to cases of COVID-19. This includes establishing how to promptly detect sick people, testing samples from suspect cases, ensuring appropriate infection control and case management to minimize the risk of the virus spreading, and maintaining communication with the public. February 24, 2020: Bloomberg posted an article title: “Apple Reopens More Than Half of Its Retail Stores in China”. It was written by mark Gurman. From the article: Apple Inc. is reopening more than half of its retail stores in China, trying to rebound from a sales hit tied to the coronavirus.As of Monday, 29 of 42 Apple stores in the country are opening, according to a review of the company’s retail websites. Most of these locations are still operating on shortened hours. Some outlets will be open for fewer than 8 hours. That compares with a typical 12-hour day, depending on location……Apple’s retail footprint in China is critical to the company’s sales. The store closures were one of two main reasons for Apple saying it wouldn’t meet its revenue target of at least $63 billion in the current quarter ending in March… February 24, 2020: The Guardian posted a short post in its live blog titled: “South Korea’s catholic church suspends services in capital”. From the short post: Catholic churches in the South Korean capital have suspended all masses and events until 10 March.“All churches of the archdiocese of Seoul will stop holding masses and all indoor and outdoor events for the next 14 days from 26 February through 10 March,” the archbishop of Seoul, Cardinal Andrew Yeom Soo-Jung, said in a statement.This includes the city’s Myeongdong cathedral. Seoul’s archdiocese has 232 chapels and churches under its jurisdiction.Earlier, the Seoul city goverment banned all gatherings of the Shincheonji Church of Jesus, a minor Christian sect believed to be responsible for a surge in the number of coronavirus infections in the country. February 24, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted a transcript titled: “WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 – 24 February 2020”. From the transcript: Good afternoon everyone.Let me start, as always, with the latest numbers. As of 6am Geneva time this morning, China has reported a total of 77,362 cases of COVID-19 to WHO, including 2,618 deaths. In the past 24 hours, China has reported 416 new confirmed cases, and 150 deaths.We’re encouraged by the continued decline in cases in China.As you know, the team has traveled to several different provinces, including Wuhan. The team has made a range of findings about the transmissibility of the virus, the severity of the disease and the impact of the measures taken.They found that the epidemic peaked and plateaued between the 23rd of January and the 2nd of February, and has been declining steadily since then.They have found that there has been no siginificant change in the genetic makeup of the virus.They have found that the fatality rate is between 2% and 4% in Wuhan, and 0.7% outside Wuhan. They found that for people with mild disease, recovery time is about two weeks, while people with severe or critical disease recover within three to six weeks. The team also estimate that the measures taken in China have averted a significant number of cases.The report contains a wealth of other information, highlights questions for which we still don’t have answers, and includes 22 recommendations……Outside China, there are now 2,704 cases in 28 countries, and 23 deaths.The sudden increases of cases in Italy, the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Republic of Korea are deeply concerning. There is a lot of speculation about whether these increases mean that this epidemic has now become a pandemic. We understand why people ask that question.WHO has already declared a public health emergency of international concern – our highest level of alarm – when there were less than 100 cases outside China, and 8 cases of human-to-human transmission. Our decision about whether to use the world “pandemic” to describe an epidemic is based on an ongoing assessment of the geographical spread of the virus, the severity of disease it causes and the impact it has on the whole of society.For the moment, we are not witnessing the uncontained global spread of this virus, and we are not witnessing the large-scale severe disease or death.Does this virus have pandemic potential? Absolutely, it has. Are we there yet? From our assessment, not yet……There is no one-size-fits-all approach. Every country must make its own risk assessment for its own context. WHO is also continuing to do its own risk assessment and its monitoring the evolution of the epidemic around the clock.But there are at least three priorities.First, all countries must prioritize protecting health workers.Second, we must engage communities to protect people who are most at risk of severe disease, particularly the elderly and people with underlying health conditions.And third, we must protect countries that are the most vulnerable, by doing our utmost to contain epidemics in countries with the capacity to do it… February 24, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Canadian families ‘plead urgently’ for third evacuation flight from Wuhan”. It was written by Moira Warburton. From the article: Canadian citizens and permanent residents who remain in Wuhan, China, the center of the coronavirus outbreak, need to be brought home on a third evacuation plane, a group of families urged the federal government. In a letter sent to Global Affairs Canada on Saturday, 44 families said that poor communication and misinformation meant their relatives did not board either of the previous government-chartered flights. The families represent about 100 Canadian citizens and PRs who want to leave Wuhan.The families gave examples of language barriers, limited internet access and personal isolation as reasons why people did not board the flights, as well as general confusion about who was permitted to board the planes.“We are pleading urgently with the government to have compassion to bring our families and loved ones home,” the letter said……”The longer this ordeal carries on, and the longer the lockdown continues for these unfortunate individuals, the more danger it will impose on Canadians stuck there,” the letter read.Federal Health Minister Patty Hajdu told reporters in Ottawa the government’s attention was turning inward “as the window closes in terms of stopping global spread,” and it would have to be “very thoughtful” on how to proceed with any further repatriations.“We really do need to focus our efforts now on our domestic preparedness,” Haijdu said. February 24, 2020: The Guardian posted on its live blog a short post titled: “Japan postpones J-League football games”. From the short post: Japan’s J-League says it has postponed seven Levian Cup matches scheduled for Wednesday due to concerns about the coronavirus outbreak and is considering postponing all domestic soccer games through the first half of March.The J-League said the decision to postpone Wednesday’s matches was part of efforts to contain the spread of the virus. “The J-League will make maximum efforts to prevent infection and prevent its spread,” it said in a statement… February 24, 2020: U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi posted a press release titled: “Pelosi Statement on President Trump’s Budget Request on Coronavirus Response.” From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement on the Trump Administration’s request for supplemental funds to combat the coronavirus crisis:“Americans need a coordinated, fully=funded, whole-of-the-government response to keep them and their loved ones safe. The President’s request for coronavirus response funding is long overdue and completely inadequate to the scale of this emergency.“For almost two years, the Trump Administration has left critical positions in charge of managing pandemics at the National Security Council and the Department of Homeland Security vacant. His most recent budget called for slashing funding for the Centers for Disease Control, which is on the frontlines of this emergency. And now, the President is compounding our vulnerabilities by seeking to ransack funds still needed to keep Ebola in check.“Weeks after the Trump Budget called for slashing the CDC budget during this coronavirus epidemic, this undersized funding request shows an ongoing failure to understand urgent public health needs. “Our state and local governments need serious funding to be ready to respond effectively to any outbreak in the U.S. The President should not be raiding money that Congress has appropriated for other life-or-death public health priorities.“The House will swiftly advance a strong, strategic funding package that fully addresses the scale and seriousness of this public health crisis.” February 24, 2020: Kojima Productions tweeted: “Kojima Productions has made the difficult decision to cancel our participation at the 2020 Game Developers Conference due to increasing concerns related to coronavirus. (1/2)” February 24, 2020: Kojima Productions tweeted: “Although much-anticipated, unfortunately this cancellation also includes Hideo Kojima’s session on the 19th and Eric Johnson’s session on the 16th. (2/2)” February 24, 2020: The Guardian reported, in a short post on its live blog: “Mission Impossible film halts production over virus fears”. From the short post: Filming on the latest Mission Impossible film has been stopped over… fears of the coronavirus outbreak in Italy, Press Association reports.“The action movie, which stars Tom Cruise, was scheduled for a three-week shoot in Venice, but that has now been stopped after more than 200 people tested positive for the virus in Italy.It is the largest number of confirmed cases of the disease outside Asia.In a statement, Paramount Pictures said it was following the advice of the Venetian government and using an “abundance of caution” in halting production.“During this hiatus we want to be mindful of the concerns of the crew and are allowing them to return home until production starts. We will continue to monitor this situation, and work alongside health and government officials as it evolves,” the studio said.It is understood Hollywood star Cruise, 57, was not in Italy for the filming. February 24, 2020: UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency posted a news story titled: “MHRA update on novel coronavirus (COVID-19)”. From the news story: …We are working closely with the Department of Health & Social Care (DHSC) and other healthcare partners, contributing to the essential work needed to protect public health in the UK.We are prioritising work to support and authorise the development of vaccines, clinical trials of new medicines, and helping to manage the supply of medicines and other healthcare products. We also provide information to patients, manufacturers and healthcare professionals through our established information channels and alert systems.NIBSCThe MHRA includes the National Institute for Biological Standards and Control (NIBSC), which plays a major role in assuring the quality of biological medicines, worldwide. NIBSC is drawing on its expertise gained through work on previous virus outbreaks such as Zika, Ebola and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), to support the public health response.NIBSC is developing biological reference materials which are needed to support a quick and reliable diagnosis of infection, evaluate vaccines and the effectiveness of treatments, all of which will assist public health research.NIBSC works closely with the World Health Organization (WHO) and Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI): a global partnership that facilitates the development of vaccines for emerging viruses. NIBSC acts as an implementing partner to produce reference material which supports these activities. Workinbg with CEPI and other partners will ensure the rapid availability of biological materials needed to contribute towards global response efforts to COVID-19… February 24, 2020: Testament posted an official press release on their Facebook page. From the statement: OFFICIAL PRESS RELEASE – ITALY, PLEASE READENGLISH: Following the order signed by the President of the Lombardy Region, we are forced all the events scheduled at the Trezzo Live Club. It is a precautionary measure valid unless corrections are made until March 1, 2020.We will shortly communicate the recovery date and the refund modalities.We want to clarify to all those who have followed us for years and also to those who have never come to us, who we have tried in all ways, expected and hoped with you, to be able to go ahead with our events and provide you with services and offer for which you have always appreciated us.The cancellation of an event causes economic damage and serious inconvenience to everyone, especially you and the public, who often make sacrifices in terms of time and money to make sure you participate in an event or concert of the band you love: booking travel, accommodation, taking leave and vacation days. It is economic damage also for the club, obviously, for the intermediary agencies, for the companies and workers involved, up to the artists themselves. They are therefore choices that must be carefully considered, in order to also evaluate possible recoveries in the case of international tours in particular.Regarding the epidemic situation, our personal conviction is that the infection does not stop by stopping entertainment, sport and culture, instead leaving free access to shopping centers, supermarkets, banks, public transport and officies. It is a virus that has reached every corner of the globe and is transmitted even just by walking, but which fortunately has a very limited incidence of danger.If you want to tackle the problem seriously, healthcare must be structured above all to treat serious cases.We hope to see you all as soon as possible with more and more desire to be and have fun together. The statement is also written in Italian. Billboard reported that this was The Bay Strike’s Back show at the Trezzo Live Club in Milan, Italy. It included Testament, Exodus, and Death’s Angel. February 24, 2020: Royal Caribbean Cruises posted a press release titled: “Quantum of the Seas Update”. From the press release: In light of current travel conditions, we’ve decided to cancel Quantum of the Seas March 13, 18, 22, 27, and 31 sailings. We are sharing the news with our guests and are sorry for the disruption to their vacations. Guests will recieve full refunds. February 24, 2020: U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) posted a statement titled: “Coronavirus Update: FDA steps to ensure quality of foreign products”. From the statement: …Today, we are providing updated and more detailed information about the status of FDA inspections in China and the agency’s oversight of imported products from China, which have been impacted by this outbreak. While we are not able to conduct inspections in China right now, this is not hindering our efforts to monitor medical products and food safety. We have additional tools we are utilizing to monitor the safety of products from China, and in the meantime, we continue monitoring the global drug supply chain by prioritizing risk-based inspections in other parts of the world. The FDA is not currently conducting inspections in China in response to the U.S. Department of State’s Travel Advisory to not travel to China due to the novel coronavirus outbreak. We will continue to closely monitor the situation in China so that, when the travel advisory is changed, we will be prepared to resume routine inspections as soon as feasible……It is important to reiterate that inspections are one of many tools that the agency uses to inform our risk strategy for imported FDA-regulated products and to help prevent products that do not meet the FDA’s standards from entering the U.S. market. A wide variety of FDA-regulated products are imported from China, which makes it important to assure the public of the quality of these products. At this time, over 60% of FDA-regulated products imported from China are medical devices and 20% are housewares (like food packaging). In response to the COVID-19 outbreak, the FDA will utilize, where appropriate, our authority to request records from firms “in advance or in lieu of” drug surveillance inspections in China. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the FDA Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA) of 2012, gives the FDA authority to request records “in advance of or in lieu of” on-site drug inspections. Congress enacted this provision to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of inspections, given the increasing globalization of drug production. Along with other FDASIA provisions, this inspection record request authority was viewed as a way to “level the playing field” between foreign and domestic drug inspections by allowing the FDA to review records ahead of time and take a more risk-based approach to conducting both domestic and foreign inspections. These records will help the agency when we resume drug inspections in China. By applying the use of paper records in our risk-based inspection framework, we can prioritize our early inspections on those deemed most needed, based on the records. By doing so, we hope to rapidly assess what could become a backlog number of on-the-ground surveillance inspections this fiscal year if travel restrictions persist.In addition to records requests, the FDA will continue working with U.S. Customs and Border Protection to target products intended for importation into the U.S. that violate applicable legal requirements for FDA-regulated products, which may come from a variety of sources, such as first time importers unfamiliar with regulatory requirements or repeat offenders trying to skirt the law. FDA has the ability through our risk-based import screening tool (PREDICT) to focus our examinations and sample collections based on heightened concerns of specific products being entered into U.S. commerce. The PREDICT screening continues to adjust risk scores as necessary throughout the COVID-19 outbreak. We are keeping a close eye out for indications of port shopping or cargo diversion and will continue our oversight of shipments through potentially higher-risk venues such as International Mail Facilities. We can refuse admission of products that fail sample testing or may violate other applicable legal requirements.Fortunately, currently, we are not seeing the impacts of this outbreak resulting in an increased public health risk for American consumers from imported products. There is no evidence to support transmission of COVID-19 associated with imported goods and there have not been any cases of COVID-19 in the United States associated with imported goods. As noted, this remains a dynamic situation and we will continue to assess, and update guidance as needed. We also continue to aggressively monitor the market for any firms marketing products with fraudulent COVID-19 prevention and treatment claims. The FDA can and will use every authority at our disposal to protect consumers from bad actors who would take advantage of a crisis to deceive the public, including pursuing warning letters, seizures, or injunctions against products on the market that are not in compliance with the law, or against firms or individuals who violate the law… February 24, 2020: The Guardian posted a short post in their live blog titled: “Italy moves Serie A and Europa League games to stop virus spread” From the short post: Italy has moved all Serie A football games and Europa League games behind closed doors to help stop the spread of the coronavirus.“Following the demands of the sport world and knowing that the ban on sporting events open to the public remains in force in six regions of northern Italy, we have agreed to the holding of the matches behind closed doors,” said sports minister Vincenzo Spadafora after a meeting with the Council of Ministers.Italy reported its seventh death from the virus on Monday and it has the most confirmed cases in Europe.Inter Milan announced their Europa League match with Ludogorets on Thursday would be played with no fans present. “In agreement with UEFA, the Lombardy regional health authorities, and Milan city council, our return game with Ludogorets will be played behind closed doors,” an Inter statement said.The sports minister did not specify which Serie A matches at the weekend would be included in the ban.There are six games in the regions mentioned, including the clash on Sunday evening between leader Juventus and third-place Inter. February 24, 2020: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted a weekly report titled: “Update: Public Health Response to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Outbreak – United States, February 24, 2020”. From the weekly report: Summary:What is already known about this topic?An outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread throughout China and to 31 other countries and territories, including the United States.What is added by this report?Fourteen cases have been diagnosed in the United States, in addition to 39 cases among repatriated persons from high-risk settings, for a current total 53 cases within the United States. The U.S. government and public health partners are implementing aggressive measures to slow and contain transmission of COVID-19 in the United States……COVID-19 Cases in the United StatesAs of February 23, 14 COVID-19 cases had been diagnosed in the following six states: Arizona (one case), California (eight), Illinois (two), Massachusetts (one), Washington (one), and Wisconsin (one). Twelve of these 14 cases were related to travel to China, and two cases occurred through person-to-person transmission to close household contacts of a person with confirmed COVID-19. An additional 39 cases were reported among repatriated U.S. citizens, residents, and their families returning from Hubei province, China (three), and from the Diamond Princess cruise ship that was docked in Yokohama, Japan (36). Thus, there have been 53 cases within the United States. No deaths have been reported in the United States.CDC Public Health ResponseAs of February 24, 2020, a total of 1,336 CDC staff members have been involved in the COVID-19 response, including clinicians (i.e., physicians, nurses, and pharmacists), epidemiologists, veterinarians, laboratorians, communicators, data scientists and modelers, and coordination staff members. Of these CDC staff members, 497 (37%) have been deployed to 39 locations in the United States and internationally, including CDC quarantine stations at U.S. ports of entry, state and local health departments, hospitals, and U.S. military bases that are housing quarantined persons, as well as WHO and ministries of health around the world. CDC staff members are working with state, local, tribal, and territorial health departments and other public health authorities to assist with case identification, contact tracing, evaluation of persons under investigation (PUI) for COVID-19,* and medical management of cases; and with academic partners to understand the virulence, risk for transmission, and other characteristics of this novel virus.CDC teams are working with the Department of Homeland Security at 11 airports where all flights from China are being directed to screen travelers returning to the United States, and to refer them to U.S. health departments for oversight of self-monitoring. CDC is also working with other agencies of the U.S. government including the U.S. Department of Defense; multiple operational divisions with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, including the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response and the Administration for Children and Families; and the U.S. Department of State to safely evacuate U.S. citizens, residents, and their families to the United States from international locations where there is substantial, sustained transmission of COVID-19, and to house them and monitor their health during a 14-day quarantine period……Laboratory testing. As part of laboratory surge capacity for the response, CDC laboratories are testing for SARS-CoV-2 to assist with diagnosis of COVID-19. During January 18–February 23, CDC laboratories used real-time reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) to test 2,620 specimens from 1,007 persons for SARS-CoV-2. Some additional testing is performed at selected state and other public health laboratories, with confirmatory testing at CDC. CDC is developing a serologic test to assist with surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 circulation in the U.S. population. The test detects antibodies (immunoglobulin G, IgA, and IgM) indicating SARS-COV-2 virus exposure or past infection. In addition, CDC laboratories are developing assays to detect SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA and antigens in tissue specimens. Finally, following CDC’s establishment of SARS-CoV-2 in cell culture, CDC shared virus isolates with the Biodefense and Emerging Infections Research Resources Repository to securely distribute isolates to U.S. public health and academic institutions for additional research, including vaccine development… February 24, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “Austria to stop those suspected of carrying coronavirus at border”. It was written by Jennifer Rankin. From the article: Austria has said it will stop people suspected of carrying the coronavirus from crossing its border, after parts of northern Italy were put into lockdown over the weekend following a surge of cases.The Austrian government released a travel warning for affected places in Lombardy and Veneto, following a meeting of the government’s coronavirus taskforce that included the chancellor, Sebastian Kurtz……Austria suspended train services to and from Italy for about four hours on Sunday evening to test two passengers for the coronavirus. The train, carrying about 300 passengers from Venice to Munich, was stopped on the Italian side of the Brenner pass before being allowed to continue its journey after the two passengers tested negative……Austrian travelers in affected parts of northern Italy are being advised to avoid crowds and follow instructions of local authorities.Italian authorities have said they will impose fines on anyone entering or leeaving restricted areas. By Monday, the number of cases of the virus in Italy had risen to 229 and six people had died.Health ministers from Austria, France, Germany, Switzerland, Slovenia and Croatia are due to attend a meeting in Rome on Tuesday to discuss containing the virus. Italy’s government is urging its neighbors not to impose border controls, which it argues would be ineffective……The European commission announced on Monday that it would send experts to Italy from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, in a joint mission with the World Health Organization. February 24, 2020: The Guardian posted a short article on its live blog titled: “Australian Olympic team doctor wanrs of ‘significant challenge’ posed by virus”. From the short article: We heard in that news conference questions about the impact of the virus on the Olympics. Brendan Murphy, the country’s chief medical officer said it was too early to tell, but the Australian Olympic team’s medical director, David Hughes, has told the Sydney Morning Herald that human-to-human transmission of Covid-19 in Japan was a “far from ideal” situation.He has warned that the next two weeks will be “the real tests” in assessing what risk the coronavirus poses to this year’s event in Tokyo, and says the Australian team has begun drawing up contingencies for training in “safe areas”.Dr. Hughes told the news outlet the virus was a “significan challenge that we would rather not have” but was proceeding on the basis the Games would go ahead.“The next couple of weeks is going to be the real test in seeing whether this local transmission can be brought under control,” he said.Japan has 851 confirmed cases of the virus. Of those, 691 were passengers on the Diamond Princess cruise ship.The Tokyo Olympics are due to be held from 24 Jul to 9 August. February 24, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) tweeted: “Americans need a coordinated, fully-funded, whole-of-government response to keep them and their loved ones safe. The President’s request for coronavirus response funding is long overdue and completely inadequate to the scale of this emergency.” This was the start of a thread. February 24, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) tweeted: “For almost two years, the Trump Administration has left critical positions in charge of managing pandemics at the National Security Council and the Department of Homeland Security vacant.” February 24, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) tweeted: “The President’s most recent budget called for slashing funding for the Centers for Disease Control, which is on the frontlines of this emergency. And now, he is compounding our vulnerabilities by seeking to ransack funds still needed to keep Ebola in check.” February 24, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) tweeted: “Weeks after the #TrumpBudget called for shashing the CDC budget during this coronavirus epidemic, this undersized funding request shows an ongoing failure to understand urgent public health needs.” February 24, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) tweeted: “Our state and local governments need serious funding to be ready to respond effectively to any outbreak in th U.S. The President should not be raiding money that Congress has appropriated for other life-or-death public health priorities.” February 24, 2020: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California) tweeted: “The House will swiftly advance a strong, strategic funding package that fully addresses the scale and seriousness of this public health crisis.” This tweet was the end of the thread. February 25, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 15 Febrary 25, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Cryin’ Chuck Schumer is complaining, for publicity purposes only, that I shouldn’t be asking for more money than $2.5 Billion to prepare for Coronavirus. If I asked for more he would say it is too much. He didn’t like my early travel closings. I was right. He was incompetent!” February 25, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “CDC and my Administration are doing a GREAT job of handling Coronavirus, including the very early closing of our borders to certain areas of the world. It was opposed by the Dems, “too soon”, but turned out to be the correct decision. No matter how well we do, however, the….” February 25, 2020: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) posted a speech presented by Secretary of HHS Alex Azar. The post included a video. From the speech: …This HHS briefing on the China coronavirus aims to do two things: provide the American public with an update on the risks presented by the virus, and provide the latest on the actions that President Trump’s administration is taking to respond to the outbreak and keep Americans safe.I am joined by Dr. Anne Schuchat, Principal Deputy Director of CDC; Dr. Tony Fauci of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Dr. Robert Kadlec, HHS’s Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response; and Dr. Stephen Hahn, Commissioner of Food and Drugs.As of this morning, we still have only 14 cases of the China coronavirus detected in the United States, involving travel to China or close contacts with travelers; 3 cases among Americans repatriated from Wuhan; and 40 cases among American passengers repatriated from the Diamond Princess.I want to thank the responders and communities that have worked with HHS and the administration to provide these Americans with the treatment they need. I’m also grateful to the governors and other state and local leaders who have worked with us in close partnership so far.The immediate risk to the general American public remains low. But, as we have warned, that has the potential to change quickly. There is now community transmission in a number of countries, including outside of Asia.That is deeply concerning, and community spread in other countries will make successful containment at our borders harder and harder. That is why we have already been working closely with state, local, and private sector partners to prepare for mitigating the virus’s potential spread in the United States, because we will likely see more cases here……This preparation has been possible in part because of how aggressively President Trump has responded to this outbreak. As soon as we knew of the threat presented by the novel virus, public health leaders were monitoring it and beginning to prepare.The travel restrictions that the President put in place at around the beginning of this month have given our country valuable time to prepare, and that is precisely what they were designed to do.That includes working with Congress. Yesterday, the White House sent a request to Congress to make at least $2.5 billion in funding available for preparedness and response.There are five major priorities within the supplemental, which I underscored this morning before the Senate appropriations committee.First, we need to expand our surveillance work, building on an existing system we have within CDC’s influenza surveillance network.Second, we will need funds to support public health preparedness and response for state and local governments for what could be a very large-scale response. This support complements the significant funds that these partners have received from CDC for preparedness—about two-thirds of a billion dollars a year in recent years.Third and fourth, we need to support development of therapeutics and fourth, we need to support development of vaccines.Given the scale of this outbreak, the private sector sees a real market for both kinds of countermeasures, as well as for diagnostics, but federal funding and guidance can help accelerate this work. Dr. Fauci will address the current status of that work in more depth.Fifth and finally, we need funds for the purchase of personal protective equipment for the Strategic National Stockpile, a topic that Dr. Kadlec can address.I’ll conclude by noting that, though scheduling conflicts prevented this briefing from including other members of the President’s Coronavirus Task Force, we will be providing a new update from interagency leaders soon, and we expect to continue doing so regularly… February 25, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Corinavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 36”. From the report: Highlights: Four new Member States (Afghanistan, Bahrain, Iraq, and Oman) reported cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours……The WHO-China joint mission concluded on 24 February. The team has made a range of findings about the transmissibility of the virus, the severity of disease and the impact of the measures taken.A joint WHO and European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) mission arrived in Italy on 24 February to support Italian authorities on the COVID-19 situation. Confirmed and suspected cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 25 February 2020: Hubei: 499 confirmed daily cases/ 68 daily deaths/ 64,786 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2,563 cumulative deathsGuangdong: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 1,347 confirmed cumulative cases/ 7 cumulative deathsHenan: 0 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,271 confirmed cumulative cases/ 19 cumulative deathsZhejiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,205 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathHunan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,016 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsAnhui: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 989 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsJiangxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 934 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathShandong: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 2 daily deaths/ 755 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsJiangsu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 631 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsChongqiing: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 576 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsSichuan: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 529 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHeilongjiang: 0 daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 480 confirmed cumulaive cases/ 12 cumulative deathsBeijing: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 400 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsShanghai: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 335 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHebei: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 311 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsFujian: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 284 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathsGuangxi: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 252 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsShaanxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 245 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathYunnan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 174 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsHainan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 168 confirmed cumulative cases/ 5 cumulative deathsGuizhou: 0 confirmed cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 146 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsTianjin: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 135 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsShanxi: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 133 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsLiaoning: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 121 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathJilin: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 93 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathsGansu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 91 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsHong Kong SAR: 7 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 81 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsXingjiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 76 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsInner Mongolia: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 75 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsNingxia: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 71 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsTaipei and environs: 3 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 31 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathQinghai: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 18 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsMacao SAR: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 10 cumulative confirmed cases/ 0 cumulative deathsXizang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1 cumulative confirmed case/ 0 cumulative deathsTOTAL: 518 confirmed daily cases/ 71 daily deaths/ 77,780 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2,666 cumulative deaths Countries, territories or areas outside China with reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Data as of 25 February 2020: Republic of Korea: 997 confirmed cases (214 new)/ 10 deaths (3 new)Japan: 157 confirmed cases (13 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Singapore: 90 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 22 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 22 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Cambodia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 37 confirmed daily cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 53 confirmed cases (18 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 10 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 229 confirmed cases (105 new)/ 6 deaths (4 new)Germany: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 12 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)The United Kingdom: 13 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths * Four UK cases from yesterday were incuded under the international conveyance. Based on the practice of categorizing cases based on reporting country, the four cases are re-catagorized under UK cases.Israel: 2 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsIran (Islamic Republic of ): 61 confirmed cases (18 new)/ 12 deaths (4 new)United Arab Emirates: 13 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBahrain: 8 confirmed cases (8 new)/ 0 deathsKuwait: 8 confirmed cases (5 new)/ 0 deathsOman: 2 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsAfghanistan: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deathsEgypt: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsIraq: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deathsLebanon: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSUBTOTAL FOR ALL REGIONS: 1,768 confirmed cases (390 new)/ 31 deaths (11 new)International Conveyance (Diamond Princess): 691 confirmed cases (0 new/ 3 deaths (0 new)GRAND TOTAL: 2,459 confirmed cases (390 new)/ 34 deaths (11 new) February 25, 2020: Prime Minister of Australia Honorable Scott Morrison MP posted “Press Conference – Parliament House”. From the Transcript: Prime Minister: As each week passes, the impact of the coronavirus, COVID-19 is becoming more apparent to everyone, not only here in Australia but all around the world. But the assurance I can give Australians is this, we are not immune to the coronavirus and its impacts, but we are as best prepared as any country in the world today. And evidence of that has been demonstrated in these many weeks now that have passed since the coronavirus has become an even more significant issue as each week has passed. We are learning more an more about the virus, and the government’s decisions from the outset have been exercising an abundance of caution. And that abundance of caution, I think, has been rewarded in the outcomes that we have so far been able to achieve. But we’re not complacent going forward.So far, our measures have proved to be effective. I can confirm that the 15 cases that had previously been identified here in Australia that were sourced from Wuhan, all 15 of those patients have now been discharged and have overcome the virus. There are, as you know, 7 other, what the Chief Medical Officer advises me, are mild cases from those passengers on the Diamond Princess. And they are the only remaining cases that we have in Australia today.I’d note that there are some 30,000 Australians and more, and Australian residents, and close family members and others who have arrived under the existing travel ban since the 1st of February of this year. As you know, there were exemptions put in place for those Australians and those other groups. There has been no human-to-human transmission of the virus outside of the groups that I mentioned before from the Diamond Princess and those of the group that came in from Wuhan. So outside of those groups, there has been no human-to-human transmission in Australia. Now, what that says is, is the self-isolation that we put in place for those more than 30,000 Australians to date has proved to be very effective. And I want to thank all of those Australians for their cooperation and for their diligence in following through and acting on the advice that we provided to them when they returned home to Australia.We have had three successful flights, including the Air New Zealand flight, and there’s been the additional flight for the Diamond Princess, of those first three flights they have now all cleared quarantine and the arrangements we put in place in both Christmas Island and Howard Springs in the Northern Territory. And I want to thank all those who have been involved in the delivery of those quarantine services in both of those locations. And I want to thank those who had to go through the inconvenience of taking part in those quarantine arrangements and for the good spirit and good faith in which they did that. We understand the disruption to their routines and daily lives and particularly the concern that other family members would have had being separated from their family members. And that continues for those who are still subject to quarantine in relation to the Diamond Princess, in the Northern Territory today. I want to thank particularly the Territory government in the Northern Territory for their great assistance in managing this issue as we’ve been pursuing those quarantine arrangements.So Australia has not been complacent. In fact, Australia has been proactive with the measures that we have put in place in relation to the coronavirus. And that has been to address the health risk. And that swift action means that we can report to you what I’ve just outlined to you today… February 25, 2020: U.S. National Institutes of Health posted a news release titled: “NIH clinical trial of remdesivir to treat COVID-19 begins”. From the news release: A randomized, controlled clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the investigational antiviral remdesivir in hospitalized adults diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has begun at the University of Nebraska Medical Center (UNMC) in Omaha. The regulatory sponsor is the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health. This is the first clinical trial in the United States to evaluate an experimental treatment for COVID-19, the respiratory disease first detected in December 2019 in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China.The first trial participant is an American who was repatriated after being quarantined on the Diamond Princess cruise ship that docked in Yokohama, Japan and volunteered to participate in the study. The study can be adapted to evaluate additional investigative treatments and to enroll participants at other sites in the U.S. and worldwide.There are no specific therapeutics approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat people with COVID-19, the disease caused by the newly emergent SARS-CoV-2 virus (formerly known as 2019-nCoV)……Remdesivir, developed by Gilead Sciences, Inc., is an investigational broad-spectrum antiviral treatment. It was previously tested in humans with Ebola virus disease and has shown promise in animal models for treating Middle East respiratory (MERS) and severe accute respiratory syndrome (SARS), which are caused by other coronaviruses.“We urgently need a safe and effective treatment for COVID-19. Although remdesivir has been administered to some patients with COVID-19, we do not have solid data to indicate it can improve clinical outcomes,” said NIAID Director and U.S. Coronavirus Task Force member Anthony S. Fauci, M.D. “A randomized, placebo-controlled trial is the gold standard for determining if an experimental treatment can benefit patients.”Clinical trials of remdesivir are also ongoing in China. NIAID developed the current study taking those designs into account, and in accordance with consultations convened by the WHO on the development of a therapeutic trial for patients with COVID-19.Participants in the NIH-sponsored trial must have laboratory-confirmed SARS-COV-2 infection and evidence of lung involvement, including rattling sounds when breathing (rales) with a need for supplemental oxygen or abnormal chest X-rays, or illness rewuiring medical ventilation. Individuals with confirmed infection who have mild, cold-like symptoms or no apparent symptoms will not be included in the study. In accordance with standard clinical research protocals, eligible patients will provide informed consent to participate in the trial.All potential participants will undergo a baseline physical exam before receiving treatment. Eligible study participants will then be randomly assigned either to the investigational treatment group or the placebo group. The study is double-blind, meaning trial investigators and participants would not know who is recieving remdesivir or placebo. Participants in the investigational treatment group will recieve 200 milligrams (mg) of remdesivir intraveniously on the first day of enrollment to the study. They will recieve another 100 mg each day for the duration of hospitalization, for up to 10 days total. The placebo group will recieve, at an equal volume, a solution that resembles remdesivir but contains only inactive ingredients……An independent data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) will monitor ongoing results to ensure patient well-being and safety as well as study integrity. The DSMB will recommend the study be halted if there is clear and substantial evidence of a treatment difference between drug and placebo.Andre Kalil, M.D., professor of internal medicine at UNMC and an infectious diseases physician at Nebraska Medicine, is leading the trial at UNMC. Thirteen people repatriated by the U.S. State Department from the Diamond Princess cruise ship were transported to the National Quarantine Unit, located within the Training, Simulation and Quarantine Center on the UNMC/Nebraska Medicine campus in Omaha on February 17, 2020. The passengers were in a close setting where there had been significant spread of COVID-19 and were sent to the unit for continued isolation and possibly further care. The CDC has since reported that 11 people in the UNMC unit have confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection… February 25, 2020: Government of Canada posted an update titled: “Update: Statement from the Chief Public Health Officer on the release of repatriated Canadians from quarantine following 14-day stay at CFB Trenton”. From the update: Further to my previous statement today, I can confirm that the remaining 195 individuals at Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Trenton have been released from quarantine. These individuals arrived aboard the second Government of Canada-chartered flight from Wuhan, China, on February 11.These repatriated individuals are recieving the same level of support a the previous repatriated Canadians who were released from quarantint on February 21. The Government of Canada is helping to facilitate their onward travel by providing transportation to Toronto before they continue to their final destination. To respect the privacy of the individuals leaving quarantine, we will not release further details of their travel plans.The Government of Canada has worked with provincial and territorial partners, as well as local public health authorities and non-governmental organizations, to ensure that social services are in place to support these Canadians and their family members after they leave CFB Trenton.I want to take this opportunity to reiterate to Canadians that the risk of spread of the novel coronavirus within Canada remains low, including in those communities where repatriated Canadians are returning following quarantine at CFB Trenton. All of the quarantined individuals being released today and those who departed on February 21 remained asymptomatic for the novel coronavirus throughout the 14-day quarantine period and, as a result, they pose no risk to others and can return to their usual activities.I would like to thank the repatriated Canadians and theri families for their patience, cooperation and contribution to public health. They have been through a stressful experience and I urge everyone to treat them with respect and compassion. February 25, 2020: UK Department of Health and Social Care posted a news story titled: “Secretary of State makes new regulations on coronavirus”. From the news story: New regulations made by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to delay or prevent further transmission of the virus.In light of the recent public health emergency from the novel Coronavirus originating from Wuhan, the Secretary of State has made regulations to ensure that the public are protected as far as possible from the transmission of the virus.In accordance with Regulation 3, the Secretary of State declares that the incidence or transmission of novel Coronavirus constitutes a serious threat to publich health, and the measures outlined in these regulations are considered as an effective means of delaying or preventing further transmission of the virus.In accordance with Regulation 2, the Secretary of State designates Arrowe Park Hospital, Kents Hill Park, and Heathrow Ariel Hotel as an “isolation” facility and Wuhan and Hubei province as an “infected area”. February 25, 2020: Scottish Government posted news titled: “Coronavirus travel advice updated”. From the news: New guidance for travellers returning from overseas.The four UK Chief Medical Officers (CMOs) have agreed to update health advice for travellers returning from certain countries.Anyone who has arrived in the UK from these areas since 19 February is advised to stay indoors and avoid contact with other people, even if they do not have symptoms, and phone their GP or NHS24 on 111 out of hours. Iranspecific lockdown areas in Northern Italy as designated by the Government of Italyspecial care zones in South Korea as designated by the Government of the Republic of South Koreathe Hubei province in China For South Korea, anyone who visited the two cities at the centre of the outbreak, Daegu and Cheongdo, is advised to self-isolate for 14 days, even if they do not have symptoms.For Iran, all returning travellers are requested to self-isolate, even if they do not have symptoms.For northern Italy, all travellers returning from specific lockdown areas identified by the Italian Government are advised to self-isolate, even if they do not have symptoms.Any other travellers returning from parts of Italy north of Pisa, Florence and Rimini in the past week are asked to monitor their health, and self-isolate if they develop symptoms… February 25, 2020: Billboard posted an article titled: “K-Pop Music Festival in LA Postponed Over Coronavirus Fears”. From the article: The Korea Times Music Festival at the Hollywood Bowl was set to feature performances by MOMOLAND, Ha Sungwoon and more in April.Growing concerns over the spread of coronavirus has led to the postponement of one of the biggest annual K-pop concerts in the U.S.The Korea Times Music Festival announced that its concert scheduled for April 25 at the Hollywood Bowl in Los Angeles “has provisionally been postponed due to the increasing uncertainty threat of coronavirus.” The annual music festival, which is in its 18th year, had already announced the likes of K-pop girl group MOMOLAND, solo singer and former Wanna One member Ha Sungwoon and rock band No Brain, with the addition of more acts expected in the coming weeks.The festival says, “Concert goers can opt for a refund or keep the existing tickets”, noting that further tickets “will remain valid and transferable to the rescheduled concert date.”.. February 25, 2020: The Guardian posted a short post on its live blog titled: “Canary Islands: hundreds of tourists tested after case in hotel”. From the short post: Spanish health authorities are carrying out tests on hundreds of tourists in a Canary Islands hotel after a coronavirus case has been identified.Holidaymakers have reportedly been quarantined inside a complex in Tenerife, and local reports have named the hotel as the H10 Costa Adeje Palace in Adaje, in the south of the island. It’s a region that is extremely popular with British tourists at this time of the year. Spanish health authorities could not immediately confirm the lockdown but said hundreds of tourists and staff in the hotel were being tested for the virus. “We are checking people who had contact with the patient including the people in the hotel,” said a spokeswoman for Canary Island’s health department. February 25, 2020: Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted: “Update: Public Health Response to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Outbreak – United States, February 24, 2020”. From the update: …An outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-COV-2) began in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China in December 2019, and has spread throughout China and to 31 other countries and territories, including the United States. As of February 23, 2020, there were 76,936 reported cases in mainland China and 1,875 cases in locations outside mainland China. There have been 2,462 associated deaths worldwide; no deaths have been reported in the United States. Fourteen cases have been diagnosed in the United States, and an additional 39 cases have occurred among repatriated persons from high risk-settings, for a current total of 53 cases within the United States……Person-to-person spread of COVID-19 appears to occur mainly by respiratory transmission. How easuly the virus is transmitted between persons is currently unclear. Signs and symptoms of COVID-19 include fever, cough, and shortness of breath. Based on the incubation period of illness for Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronaviruses, as well as obversationa data from reports of travel-related COVID-19, CDC estimates that symptoms of COVID-19 occur within 2-14 days after exposure. Preliminary data suggest that older adults and persons with underlying health conditions or compromised immune systems might be at greater risk for severe illness from this virus. COVID-19 Cases in the United States As of February 23, 14 COVID-19 cases had been diagnosed in the following six states: Arizona (one case), California (eight), Illinois (two), Massachusetts (one), Washington (one) and Wisconsin (one). Twelve of these cases were related to China, and two cases occurred through person-to-person transmission to close household contacts with a person with confirmed COVIC-19. An additional 39 cases were reported among repatriated U.S. citizens, residents, and their families returning from Hubei province, China (three), and from the Diamond Princess cruise ship that was docked in Yokohama, Japan (36). Thus, there have been 53 cases within the united States. No deaths have been reported in the United States… …Discussion COVID-19 is a serious public health threat. Cases of COVID-19 have been diagnosed in the United States, primarily in travelers from China and quarantined repatriates, and also in two close contacts of COVID-19 patients. Currently, COVID-19 is not recognized to be spreading in U.S. communities. If sustained transmission in U.S. communities is identified, the U.S. response strategy will enhance implementation of actions to slow spread in communities (2,6). Implementation of basic precautions of infection control and prevention, including staying home when ill and practicing respiratory and hand hygiene will become increasingly important.Community-level nonpharmaceutical intervention might include school dismissals and social distancing in other settings (e.g., postponement or cancellation of mass gatherings and telework and remote-meeting options in workplaces). These measures can be disruptive and might have societal and economic impact on individual persons and communities… However, studies have shown that early layered implementation of these interventions can reduce the community spread and impact of infectious pathogens such as pandemic influenza, even when specific pharmaceutical treatments and vaccines are not available… These measures might be critical to avert widespread COVID-19 transmission in U.S. communities… Mitigation measures implemented in China have included the closing of major transport hubs and preventing exit from certain cities with widespread transmission, cancellation of Chinese New Year celebrations, and prohibition of attendance at school and work… However, the impact of these measures in China has not yet been evaluated.In the United States, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and their collaborators are working on development of candidate vaccines and therapeutics for COVID-19. In China, multiple clinical trials of investigational therapeutics have been implemented, including two clinical trials of remdesivir, an investigational antiviral drug. An NIH randomized controlled clinical trial of investigational therapeutics for hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the United States was approved by the Food and Drug Administration; the first investigational therapeutic to be studied is remdesivir. In the absence of a vaccine or therapeutic, community mitigation measures are the primary method to respond to widespread transmission and supportive care is the current medical treatment.COVID-19 symptoms are similar to those of influenza (e.g., fever, cough, and shortness of breath), and the current outbreak is occurring during a time of year when respiratory illnesses from influenza and other viruses, including other coronaviruses that cause the “common cold,” are highly prevalent. To prevent influenza and possible unnecessary evaluation for COVID-19, all persons aged ≥6 months should receive an annual influenza vaccine; vaccination is still available and effective in helping to prevent influenza (9). To decrease risk for respiratory disease, persons can practice recommended preventive measures… Persons ill with symptoms of COVID-19 who have had contact with a person with COVID-19 or recent travel to countries with apparent community spread… should communicate with their health care provider. Before seeking medical care, they should consult with their provider to make arrangements to prevent possible transmission in the health care setting. In a medical emergency, they should inform emergency medical personnel about possible COVID-19 exposure. Areas for additional COVID-19 investigation include 1) further clarifying the incubation period and duration of virus shedding, which have implications for duration of quarantine and other mitigation measures; 2) studying the relative importance of various modes of transmission, including the role of droplets, aerosols, and fomites; understanding these transmission modes has major implications for infection control and prevention, including the use of personal protective equipment; 3) determining the severity and case-fatality rate of COVD-19 among cases in the U.S. health care system, as well as more fully describing the spectrum of illness and risk factors for infection and severe disease; 4) determining the role of asymptomatic infection in ongoing transmission; and 5) assessing the immunologic response to infection to aid in the development of vaccines and therapeutics. Public health authorities are monitoring the situation closely. As more is learned about this novel virus and this outbreak, CDC will rapidly incorporate new knowledge into guidance for action. February 25, 2020: The Guardian posted a short post on their live blog. It was untitled, and written by Sam Jones. From the short post: Health authorities in the Canary Islands have activated their coronavirus protocal after an Italian man staying in Tenerife tested positive for the virus.In a statement issued late on Monday night, they said “an Italian citizen has tested positive during the initial tests at the University hospital of Our Lady of Candelaria” in Tenerfie, adding that samples would now be sent to the National Microbiology Centre near Madrid for definitive tests.“The man is in isolation and under medical supervision,” the statement said. “The Canary Islands have, in coordination with the national health ministry, activated the same protocol undertaken in other parts of the country where other suspected cases of the disease has been detected.”If the tests are positive, Spain will have three confirmed cases of the coronavirus – one on the remote Canary island of La Gomera and another on the Baleric island of Mallorca. February 25, 2020: South China Morning Post posted an article titled: “Coronavirus: Hong Kong schools to remain closed until after Easter but university exams set to go ahead as planned in March”. It was written by Chan Ho-him. From the article: After being shut for more than three weeks, Hong Kong schools are to remain closed until after Easter even as university entrance exams will go ahead as planned, education officials said on Tuesday, and four more cases of the coronavirus infection were reported, taking the total to 85.Announcing the further school closure, Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung Yun-hung said all classes at all kindergartens, primary and secondary schools would be suspended until April 20 at the earliest, confirming an earlier Post report.Due to the Covid-19 outbreak, classes were first suspended after the Lunar New Year holiday, which ended February 3. The Education Bureau had already extended the suspension for two more weeks until March 16.“The World Health Organization and virologists have already predicted that the epidemic will last for a longer period of time, so further extending the suspension of classes is the safest option,” Yeung said.He believed the scenarios faced by students returning to classes and candidates taking the public examinations for universities – the Diploma of Secondary Education (DSE) – were different……Yeung said that when classes did resume, the government was inclined to do so in phases to make it smoother for schools, but there was no detailed plan yet… February 25, 2020: The Guardian posted a short post on their live blog titled: “Iran’s deputy health minister tests positive for coronavirus – reports”. From the short post: In Iran, it is being reported that the deputy health minister has tested positive for coronavirus. According to the semi-official news agency ILNA, the spokesman for Iran’s health ministry confirmed in an interview with state television that Deputy Minister Iraj Harirchi has been infected and is now under quarantine.Iraj Harirchi had been working as normal on Monday, and gave a news conference with journalists in Tehran about the virus during which he reportedly had been sweating and looking uncomfortable. February 25, 2020: The Guardian posted a short post on its live blog that was written by Richard Adams. From the post: Schools across the UK are sending pupils home as they struggle to comply with the latest official advice on Covid-19 for students and staff who spent last week’s half-term holiday in northern Italy.Penair School in Truro this morning told parents to collect children who had been on a skiing trip to Ponte di Legno, which is near the Swiss border and well away from the towns currently under lockdown by the Italian authorities.In a message sent to parents the Truro school said: “Following an announcement at 8am this morning, regarding the coronavirus, by the health secretary and having sought guidance from Public Health England (PHE) we are required to send all children and staff home who attended the ski trip, to self-quarantine for 14 days. Please be assured this is a precautionary measure.”Meanwhile, Brine Leas Academy in Natwich said it was temporarily closing its sixth form after teachers and students also returned from a half-term trip to Italy. Cransley School, an independent school also in Cheshire, announced it would close for a week after some pupils reported feeling ill after a skiing trip to Bormio in Lombardy.The decisions followed today’s updated advice from PHE for travellers returning from northern Italy – defined as north of Pisa, Florence and Rimini – to self-isolate if they felt symptoms of Covid-19, including fever or shortness of breath. PHE also said any travellers who had visited the 11 “specific lockdown areas” in northern Italy since 19 February should call 111 and avoid contact with others.Other parents report being told to keep their children home from school after returning from family holidays in northern Italy over half-term break. February 25, 2020: The Guardian posted a short post on its live blog that was written by Nazia Parveen. From the short post: A school in Cheshire has been forced to close amid concerns that students returning to the UK from a ski trip to Italy could be infected with coronavirus.Cransley School, in Northwich, took the decision to close the school after NHS clinical services advised any staff or pupils who went on the trip to Bormio to self-isolate.A number of students are believed to be experiencing symptoms of the virus after visiting the area in the Lombardy region, where hundreds of residents have contracted the deadly infection.The school has closed to all pupils to undergo a “deep-clean” and has advised those returning from the excursion to self-contain regardless of whether they are showing symptoms.The headteacher, Richard Pollock, used the school’s official Facebook page to share his decision to close the school, adding that he would visit Warrington General hospital tomorrow.He said: “Regardless of the current Public Health England advice (that the school should remain open to all other pupils) I have decided, in discussion with the SMT and the chair and vice-chair of governors, to completely minimise possible spread of infection and close the school for the remainder of the week.“During this time, the school will be able to conduct a deep clean, and monitor the results of tests amongst those pupils who are currently showing flu-like symptoms.“I understand that there will be a variety of reactions to this decision amongst parents, and hope that all families will understand the developing situation and the changing and inconsistent advice given to the school. The staff, pupils and families of Cransley are our highest concern.”A second school in Cheshire, Brine Leas Academy in Nantwich, has also been affected by travel to Italy. The school said on Twitter it would remain open but that the sixth form college would close due to “staff shortages”. February 25, 2020: The Guardian posted a short post on its live blog. From the short post: About 50 pupils and staff at a school in County Antrim have been sent home as a precaution against coronavirus after they went on a ski trip to northern Italy.The Cambridge House grammar school group are showing no symptoms and did not visit any of the affected towns – but they were in the Lombardy region and were sent home as a “precautionary” measure, the principal, Elma Lutton, said.Two schools in Cheshire have also taken precautionary steps after half-term ski trips to Italy, with Cransley school in Northwich completely closing and Brine Leas academy in Nantwich closing its sixth form due to staff shortages as a result of teachers self-isolating. February 25, 2020: NBC News posted an article titled: “Trump says U.S. in ‘very good shape” on coronavirus. Health officials aren’t so confident”. It was written by Phil Helsel, Peter Alexander and Dareh Gregorian. From the article: President Donald Trump said Tuesday said that the United States was in “very good shape” when it comes to preparing for the deadly coronavirus illness known as COVID-19, while the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warned that only it’s a matter of when — not if — it will spread across communities in the U.S.“Ultimately we expect we will see community spread in this country,” Dr. Nancy Messonier, director of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, told reporters on a conference call. While the CDC has been preparing for a possible outbreak, Messonier said hospitals and schools should be doing the same.“These are things that people need to start thinking about now,” Messonier said. “We are asking the American public to prepare for the expectation that this might be bad.”Her comments came hours after Trump spoke about the coronavirus at a news conference in India, saying it is “very well under control in our country.”……The White House requested the money as key government accounts are running low. The Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, had already tapped into an emergency infectious disease rapid-response fund and was seeking to transfer more than $130 million from other HHS accounts to combat the virus, but it is pressing for more.The administration is requesting $1.25 billion in new funding and wants to transfer $535 million more from an Ebola preparedness account, which has been a top priority of Democrats. The White House anticipates shifting money from other HHS accounts and other agencies to complete the $2.5 billion response plan.The White House request includes more than $1 billion to develop a vaccine, as well as money for therapeutics and stockpiles of protective equipment like masks… February 26, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 15 February 26, 2020: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention posted a transcript titled: “Transcript for the CDC Telebriefing Update on COVID-19”. From the transcript: …Director of CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases Dr. Nancy Messonier: …The global novel coronavirus situation is rapidly evolving and expanding. There are still a lot of news coverage about community spread in a few countries since the last time we talked. This means that cases of COVID-19 are appearing without a known source of exposure. Communities include Hong Kong, Italy, Iran, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand. Community spread is often a trigger to begin implementing new strategies tailored to local circumstances that blunt the impact of disease and can slow the spread of virus. The fact this virus has caused illness – including illnesses resulting in death, and sustained person-to-person spread is concerning. These factors meet two of the criteria of the pandemic.The world moves closer to the third criteria: worldwide spread of the new virus. The U.S. has been implementing an aggressive containment strategy that requires detecting, tracking, and isolating all cases as much as possible and preventing more introduction of disease notably at points of entry. We’ve restricted travel into the United States while also issuing extensive travel advisories for countries currently experiencing community spread. Our travel notices are changing almost daily. We’ve also enacted the first quarantine of this scale in the U.S., and are supporting the State Department and HHS in repatriating citizens from high-risk areas.We are doing this with the goal of slowing the introduction of this new virus into the U.S. and buying us more time to prepare. To date, our containment strategies have been largely successful. As a result, we have very few cases in the United States and no spread in the community. But as more and more countries experience community spread, successful containment at our borders becomes harder and harder. Ultimately, we expect we will see community spread in this country. It’s not so much a question of if this will heppen anymore but rather more a question of exactly when this will happen and how many people in this country will have severe illness. We will maintain for as long as practical a dual approach where we continue measures to contain this disease but also employ strategies to minimize the impact on our communities.At this time, there is no vaccine to protect against this new virus and no medications approved to treat it. Non-pharmaceutical inventions or NPIs will be the most important tools in our response to this virus. What these interventions look like at the community level will vary depending on local conditions. What is appropriate for one community level will vary depending on local conditions. What is appropriate for one community seeing local transmission won’t necessarily be appropriate for a community where no local transmission has occured. This parallel, proactive approach of containment and mitigation will delay the emergence of community spread in the United States while simultaneously reducing its ultimate impact……Based on what is known now, we would implement these NPI measures in a very aggressive, proactive way as we have been doing with our containment efforts. There are three categories of NPIs. Personal NPIs which include personal protective measures you can take every day and personal protective measures reserved for pandemics. Community NPIs which include social distancing measures designed to keep people who are sick away from others. And school closures and dismissals. And environmental NPIs which include surface cleaning measures. These are preventative measures we recommend during influenza season. These NPIs are recommended during a pandemic regardless of the severity level of the respiratory illness. Personal protective measures reserved for pandemics include voluntary home quarantine of household members who have been exposed to someone they live with who is sick. Now I’d like to talk through some examples of what these NPIs look like. These are practical measures that can help limit exposure by reducing exposure in community settings. Students in smaller groups or in a severe pandemic, closing schools and using internet-based teleschooling to continue education. For adults, businesses can replace in-person meetings with video or telephone conferences and increase teleworking options. On a larger scale, communities may need to modify, postpone, or cancel mass gatherings. Looking at how to increase telehealth services and delying elective surgery.The implementation of environmental NPIs would require everyoen to consistently clean frequently touched surfaces and objects at home, at school, at work, and at large gatherings. Local communities will need to look at which NPIs to implement and when based on how transmission and disease is and what can be done locally. This will require flexibility and adaptations as disease progresses and new information becomes available.Some of these measures are better than none. But the maximum benefit occurs when the elements are layered upon each other.Some community level interventions that may be most effective in reducing the spread of a new virus like school closures are also the most likely to be associated with unwanted consequences and further disruptions. Secondary consequnces of some of these measures might include missed work and loss of income. I understand this whole situation may seem overwhelming and that disruption to everyday life may be severe. But these are things that people need to start thinking about now……Brittany: … And our final question comes from Ben from CNN. Your line is open.Ben from CNN: Hi, thanks so much for taking my question. This morning while he was traveling in India, President Trump said that he thinks that the coronavirus is a problem that is going to go away. He seems very optimistic about thsi and we’re trying to figure out exactly why he believes so strongly that to be the case. And my question for you is what information is your agency specifically giving the president and the White House about the current state of the coronavirus outbreak?Dr. Nancy Messonier: As you imagine, we brief the Secretary daily and the Secretary is the lead of the White House task force. And Ddr. Redfield the CDC director is briefing them daily. In terms of the course of this illness, we have a — again, a team of mathematical modelers working with us to try to predict the trajectory. One hypothesis is that we could be hopeful that this could potentially be seasonal. Other viral respiratory diseases are seasonal including influenza and therefore in many viral respiratory diseases, we do see a decrease in disease in spring and summer. And so we could certainly be optimistic that this disease will follow suit. But we’re not going to know that until time keeps ticking forward. We’re going to be, again, preparing as if this is going to continue, preparing as if we’re going to see community spread in the near term. But I’m always going to be hopeful that that disease will decline either for the summer or that, you know, we’ll be over-prepared and we won’t see the high levels of transmission here in the U.S… February 26, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Just landed. India was great, trip very successful. Heading to the White House. Meetings and calls scheduled today. @CDCgov, @SecAzar and all doing a great job with respect to Coronavirus! Briefing this afternoon.” February 26, 2020: President Trump tweeted: “Low Ratings Fake News MSDNC (Comcast) & @CNN are doing everything possible to make the Caronavirus look as bad as possible, including panicking markets, if possible. Likewise their incompetent Do Nothing Democrat comrades are all talk, no action. USA is in great shape! @CDCgov…” February 26, 2020: President Trump tweeted: “Big Rally in the Great State of South Carolina on Friday. See you there!” February 26, 2020: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted a media statement titled: “CDC Confirms Possible Instance of Community Spread of COVID-19 in U.S.” From the media statement: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has confirmed an infection with the virus that causes COVID-19 in California in a person who reportedly did not have the relevant travel history or exposure to another known patient with COVID-19. At thsi time, the patient’s exposure is unknown. It’s possible this could be an instance of community spread of COVID-19, which would be the first time this has happened in the United States. Community spread means spread of an illness for which the source of infection is unknown. It’s also possible, however, that the patient may have been exposed to a returned traveler who was infected.This case was detected through the U.S. public health system – picked up by astute clinicians. This brings the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States to 15.The federal government has been working closelu with state, local, tribal and territorial partners, as well as public health partners, to responde to this public health threat. Unprecedented, aggressive efforts have been taken to contain the spread and mitigate the impact of this virus.This is a rapidly evolving situation. CDC will continue to update the public as circumstances warrant… February 26, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 37”. From the report: Highlights: Four new Member States (Algeria, Austria, Croatia, and Switzerland) reported cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours. Algeria is the first Member State of the AFRO Region to report a case of COVID-19.The WHO Director-General provided opening remarks at the weekly Member State briefing on COVID-19 regarding ongoing and future WHO missions along with priorities for control of the outbreak. Confirmed and suspected cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 26 February 2020: Hubei: 401 confirmed daily cases/ 52 daily deaths/ 65,187 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2,615 cumulative deathsGuangdong: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,347 confirmed cumulative cases/ 7 cumulative deathsHenan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,271 confirmed cumulative cases/ 19 cumulative deathsZhejiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,205 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathHunan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,016 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsAnhui: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 989 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsJiangxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 934 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathShandong: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 756 cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsJiangsu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 631 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsChongqing: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 576 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsSichuan: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 531 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHeilongjiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 480 confirmed cumulative cases/ 12 cumulative deathsBeijing: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 400 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsShanghai: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 336 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHebei: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 312 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsFijian: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 294 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathGuangxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 253 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsShaanxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 245 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathYunnan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 174 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsHainan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 168 confirmed cumulative cases/ 5 cumulative deathsGuizhou: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 146 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsTianjin: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 135 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsShanxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 133 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsLiaoning: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 121 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathJilin: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 93 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathGansu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 91 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsHong Kong SAR: 4 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 85 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsXinjaing: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 76 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsInner Mongolia: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 75 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsNingxia: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 71 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsTaipei and environs: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 32 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathQinghai: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 18 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsXizang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1 confirmed cumulative case/ 0 cumulative deathsTOTAL: 412 confirmed daily cases/ 52 daily deaths/ 78,191 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2,718 cumulative deaths Countries, territories or areas outside China with reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Data as of 26 February 2020: Republic of Korea: 1,261 confirmed cases (284 new)/ 12 deaths (2 new)Japan: 164 confirmed cases (7 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Singapore: 91 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 23 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 22 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 deaths (0 new)Cambodia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 40 confirmed cases (3 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 53 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 10 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 322 confirmed cases (93 new)/ 11 deaths (5 new)Germany: 18 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsThe United Kingdom: 13 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 12 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Austria: 2 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsCroatia: 2 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsIsrael: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSwitzerland: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deathsIran (Islamic Republic of): 95 confirmed cases (34 new)/ 15 deaths (3 new)Bahrain: 26 confirmed cases (18 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 13 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsKuwait: 12 confirmed cases (4 new)/ 0 deathsIraq: 5 confirmed cases (4 new)/ 0 deathsOman: 4 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsAfghanistan: 1 confirmed case (0 new) / 0 deathsEgypt: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsLebanon: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsAlgeria: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSUBTOTAL FOR ALL REGIONS: 2,227 confirmed cases (459 new)/ 41 deaths (10 new)International Conveyance (Diamond Princess): Cases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanese territorial waters: 691 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 3 deaths (0 new)GRAND TOTAL: 2,918 confirmed cases (459 new)/ 44 deaths (10 new) February 26, 2020: New York State website posted news titled: “Governor Cuomo Announces $40 Million Emergency Appropriation to Support DOH Staffing and Equipment to Respond to Potential Novel Coronavirus Pandemic”. From the news: Governor Andrew M. Cuomo today announced a $40 million appropriation for the New York State Department of Health to hire additional staff, procure equipment and any other resources necessary to respond to the potential novel coronavirus pandemic. The Governor will also propose legislation to grant authority to DOH Commissioner Dr. Howard Zucker to ensure local health departments and public and private hospitals statewide take certain actions and measures in response to the novel coronavirus outbreak as needed. DOH will convene local health departments and hospitals statewide to review protocols, best practices and procedures to help ensure they are prepared to combat the spread of the novel coronavirus.The Governor is also calling on the federal government to authorize the Wadsworth Center and NYC Public Health Lab to test for the virus, allowing for expanding testing capacity and expedited test results. New York State has independently worked to develop and validate a test using the CDC protocol. Upon FDA approval, Wadsworth can immediately begin testing to support New York State and other states in the northeast region if necessary.Additionally, DOH will work with the MTA, Port Authority and its airport operators, and the authorities’ respective workforces to ensure workers have the necessary training and access to supplies, including cleaning and protective equipment, they need to continue to operate mass transit systems and airports. The State is also coordinating with all state agencies to help ensure they are prepared to respond to the potential novel coronavirus pandemic……As of today, samples from 27 New Yorkers have been sent to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for testing, 26 have come back negative with one result still pending. There are still no confirmed cases of novel coronavirus… February 26, 2020: Yamaha Motor posted a press release titled: “Yamaha Motor: Support for Coronavirus (COVID-19) Countermeasures in China”. From the press release: Our thoughts and prayers go out to those who have been affected by the novel coronavirus (COVID-19), particularly in Wuhan, Hubei Provence, China. Yamaha Motor Co. Ltd, with our group of companies in China, have together provided a donation of 1.5 million yuan through the Shanghai Charity Foundation as part of efforts to help and prevent further spread of the infection.. February 26, 2020: California Department of Public Health posted a news release titled: “CDC Confirms Possible First Instance of COVID-19 Community Transmission in California”. From the news release: The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention today confirmed a possible first case of person-to-person transmission of COVID-19 in California in the general public. The individual is a resident of Solano County and is receiving medical care in Sacramento County. The individual had no known exposure to the virus through travel or close contact with a known infected individual.California has a strong health care system and public health infrastructure. California has prepared for the potential spread of diseases, such as H1N1, in the past is is prepared and actively responding to the potential community spread of COVID-19. Contact tracing in this case has already begun.The health risk from novel coronavirus to the general public remains low at this time. While COVID-19 has a high transmission rate, it has a low mortality rate. From the international data we have, of those who have tested positive for COVID-19, approximately 80 percent do not exhibit symptoms that would require hospitalization. There have been no confirmed deaths related to COVID-19 in the United States to date. California is carefully assessing the situation as it evolves……As in any public health emergency, the Department of Public Health’s Emergency Operations Center has been actively coordinating response efforts across the state and preparing for possible community transmission. California continues to prepare and respond in coordination with federal and local partners.This would be the first known instance of person-to-person transmission in the general public in the United States. Previously known instances of person-to-person transmission in the United States include one instance in Chicago, Illinois, and one in San Benito County, California. Both cases were after close, prolonged interaction with a family member who returned from Wuhan, China and had tested positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus. As of today, including this case, California has had 7 travel-related cases, one close contact case, and now one community transmission… February 26, 2020: NYC, The Official Website of the City of New York, posted a transcript titled: “Transcript: Mayor de Blasio Holds Media Availability on Coronavirus Preparedness”. From the transcript: Mayor Bill de Blasio: On behalf of the City of New York, I want to respond to the Centers for Disease Control warning that was issued yesterday and I want to commend the CDC for acknowleging the reality and saying very clearly that it’s not a question of if, but when the coronavirus affects the United States in a much more profound manner. I welcome that acknowledgement by the CDC and the federal government.I will say very plainly that on January 24th with my colleagues, I made the exact same statement about the City of New York. So, it has been clear for weeks now that was not a question of if, but when it is important that the federal government is accepting that reality and acting more agressively and I’m going to talk about things I think need to be done additionally by our federal partners to address this crisis……We all ask ourselves the question after seeing the CDC guidance yesterday, what would we be able to do if this became a much deeper crisis? What kind of capacity could the city of New York bring to bear immediately? I want to give you a couple of updates. Right now we have 1,200 hospital beds that we can make available immediately for any individual in the testing process or who tests positive and needs isolation in a hospital setting, 1,200 beds that can be brought online immediately. That is a very, very substantial capacity given what we’re seeing playing out even in some of the countries that are dealing with this crisis in a much deeper manner. Already, our public health officials have distributed 1.5 million masks in the City of New York. That is a very good start, but we need more. We have requests out for an additional minimum of 300,000 surgical masks to guarantee that these arrive in New York City promptly. We will need federal assistance, so I’m calling on the federal government to help us and all other localities to get the masks we need. Working with the private sector… February 26, 2020: Gilead posted a press release titled: “Gilead Sciences Initiates Phase 3 Studies of Investigational Antiviral Remdesivir for the Treatment of COVID-19”. From the press release: Gilead Sciences Inc… today announced the initiation of two Phase 3 clinical studies to evaluate the safety and effiicacy of remdesivir in adults diagnosed with COVID-19 (novel coronavirus). These randomized, open-label, multicenter studies will enroll approximately 1,000 patients at medical centers primarily across Asian countries, as well as other countries globally with high numbers of diagnosed cases, beginning in March. The studies will assess two dosing durations of remdesivir, administered intravenously. The initiation of these studies follows the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) rapid review and acceptance of Gilead’s investigational new drug (IND) filing for remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19.The new clinical studies expand the ongoing research into remdesivir, which includes two clinical trials in China’s Hubei province led by the China-Japan Friendship Hospital as well as the recently initiated clinical trial in the United States led by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). Giliad has donated drug and provided scientific input for these studies, wih results from those in China expected in April……The Gilead studies will evaluate two durations of remdesivir. One study will randomize approximately 400 patients with severe clinical manifestations of COVID-19 to recieve either five or 10 days of remdesivir. The second study will randomize approximately 600 patients with moderate clinical manifestations of disease to recieve five or 10 days of remdesivir or standard of care alone. The primary endpoint of both studies is clinical improvement, as described below.Remdesivir is not yet licensed or approved anywhere globally and has not been demonstrated to be safe or effictive for any use. Working with government agencies, non-government organizations and local regulatory authorities, Gilead is providing remdesivir to qualified patients with COVID-19 on a compassionate use basis for emergency treatment outside of ongoing clinical studies. February 26, 2020: Government of Canada posted “Update #6: Statement from the Chief Public Health Officer on the release of selected individuals from quarantine for the 2019 novel coronavirus”. From the update: Further to my previous statements, as Chief Public Health Officer, I have assessed individuals in quarantine at the NAV CENTRE pursuant to an Emergency Order under the Quarantine Act and determined that they do not pose a risk of significant harm to public health.I have authorized the release of 15 flight crew members who accompanied the returning travellers on the third Canada-chartered flight from Japan to CFB Trenton to the NAV CENTRE in Cornwall, Ontario. In my assessment, I took into account the fact that they followed appropriate infection prevention and control protocols (including the use of personal protective equipment), and that they did not have unprotected contact with passengers or persons at risk of having the novel coronavirus. As a result of this assessment, I have determined that their continued quarantine is not required. February 26, 2020: UK Department of Health and Social Care and The Rt Hon Matt Hancock MP posted an oral statement to Parliment titled: “COVID-19: Health Secretary’s statement to Parliament”. From the statement: Mr Speaker, with your permission, I’d like to update the House on COVID-19 coronavirus.As of this morning, 7,132 people in the UK have been tested for the virus. So far 13 people in the UK have tested positive, of whom 8 now have been discharged from the hospital. We expect more cases here.As planned, 115 people left supported isolation at Kents Hill Park in Milton Keynes on 23 February. All tested negative for COVID-19. On Saturday, 32 people from the Diamond Princess cruise ship were repatriated and taken to Arrowe Park, where they will remain in supported isolation. And 4 of those have tested positive and been transferred to specialist centres.British tourists are currently being quarantined in a hotel in Tenerife and the Foreign Office is in contact with them.Mr Speaker, we have a clear, 4-part plan to respond to the outbreak of this disease: Contain. Delay. Research and Mitigate.We are taking all necessary measures to minimise the risk to the public.We have put in place enhanced monitoring measures at UK airports, and health information is available at all international airports, ports and international train stations. We have established a supported isolation facility at Heathrow, to cater for international passengers who are tested, and to maximise infection control and free up NHS resources.The NHS is testing a very large number of people who travel back from affected countries, the vast majority of whom test negative.In the past few days we have published quidance for schools, for employers, for first responders, for social care and the travel industry on how to handle suspected cases.If anyone has been in contact with a suspected case in a childcare or educational setting, no special measures are required while test results are awaited. There is no need to close the school or send other students or staff home.Once the results arrive, those who test negative will be advised individually about returning to education.In most cases, cosure of the childcare or education setting will be unnecessary, but this will be a local decision based on various factors including professional advice. Schools should be guided by the advice of the GOV.UK website and contact their regional school commissioner in cases of queries……Yesterday, we updated our advice to returning travellers from northern Italy, defined as anywhere north of, but not including, Pisa and Florence, as well as Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar. Those returning from Iran, from the lockdown areas in northern Italy, and special care zone in South Korea should self-isolate and call NHS 111, even if they have no symptoms… February 26, 2020: Public Health England posted a news story titled: “New surveillance system for early detection of COVID-19”. From the news story: Public Health England (PHE) and the NHS establish a new surveillance system to detect cases of COVID-19.A new surveillance system to detect cases of COVID-19 in England has been established by Public Health England (PHE) and the NHS to strengthen existing systems and to prepare for and prevent wider transmission of the virus.There is no current evidence to show that the virus is circulating in the community in England, but internationally there is evidence of wider transmission of the virus in areas outside of China, and most recently Italy and South Korea.This new surveillance strategy will enable PHE to identify early evidence of spread within England, if this occurs.Some NHS hospitals have been asked to take part, which would see them implementing the new surveillance at their intensive care units (ICU) and Severe Respiratory Failure (ECMO) Centres.Samples will be tested from patients with severe respiratory infections who do not meet the current case definition for COVID-19. Depending on the results, patients will be given the support they need and rapid public health actions will be taken.A programme of testing with a network of around 100 primary care sites across England will also complement the detection system in hospitals, so that both mild and more unwell cases can be found……This process will not apply to patients meeting the current COVID-19 case definition, who will continue to be isolated and tested as appropriate, and test result times will not be affected.PHE and NHS have tried and tested surveillance systems in place to monitor and manage the spread of community transmission of seasonal influenza each year. February 26, 2020: U.S. Department of State posted a travel advisory titled: “Iran Travel Advisory” From the travel advisory: Travel Advisory February 26, 2020Iran – Level 4: Do Not TravelGlobal Health Advisory: Do Not Travel. Avoid all international travel due to the global impact of COVID-19.Do not travel to Iran due to the risk of kidnapping and the arbitrary arrest and detention of U.S. ciizens. Those present in Iran should exercise increased caution due to an outbreak of COVID-19.Country Summary: U.S. citizens visiting or residing in Iran have been kidnapped, arrested, and detained on spurious charges. Iranian authorities continue to unjustly detain and imprison U.S. citizens, particularly dual national Iranian-Americans – including students, journalists, business travelers, and academics – on charges including espionage and posing a threat to national security. Iranian authorities routinely delay consular access to detained U.S. citizens and consistently deny consular access to dual U.S.-Iranian citizens.A novel (new) coronavirus disease, recently designated as COVID-19 and also known as the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2, is causing an outbreak of respiratory illness in several countries around the world. The first cases of COVID-19 were reported in China in December 2019. On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization determined the rapidly spreading outbreak constitutes a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. Iran is experiencing sustained community spread of COVID-19. The virus can spread from person to person. Older adults and those with chronic medical conditions should consider postponing nonessential travel. U.S. citizens residing in or traveling to Iran should review and follow the Centers for Disease Control’s guidelines for the prevention of coronavirus. Individuals suspected of having COVID-19 may face travel delays, quarantine, and high medical costs. Several countries have closed their borders with Iran and/or suspended air traffic to and from Iran. As a result, commercial travel to and from Iran may become severely limited with little or no notice.The U.S. government does not have diplomatic or consular relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran. The U.S. government is unable to provide emergency services to U.S. citizens in Iran.Due to the risks of operating civilian aircraft within or in the vicinity of Iran, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has issued a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) and/or a Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR). For more information U.S. citizens should consult the Federal Aviation Administration’s Prohibitions, Restrictions and Notices.Read the Safety and Security section on the country information page. If you are currently in Iran: Consider the risks involved in possessing dual U.S. Iranian nationality.Review your personal security plan and visit our website for Travel to High Risk Areas.Draft a will and designate appropriate insurance beneficiaries and/or power of attorney.Discuss a plan with loved ones regarding care/custody of children, pets, property, belongings, non-liquid assets (collections, artwork, etc), funeral wishes, etc.Establish your own personal security plan in coordination with your employer or host organization, or consider consulting with a professional security organization.Have a plan for departing Iran that does not rely on U.S. government assistance.Avoid contact with sick people.Avoid touching your eyes, nose, or mouth with unwashed hands.Clean your hands often by washing them with soap and water for at least 20 seconds or using an alcohol-based hand sanitizer that contains at 60% – 95% alcohol. Soap and water should be used if hands are visibly dirty.Enroll in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP) to receive Alerts and to make it easier to locate you in an emergency.Follow the Department of State on Facebook and Twitter.Prepare a contingency plan for emergency situations. Review the Traveler’s Checklist. February 26, 2020: Royal Caribbean Cruises posted a press release titled: “Spectrum and Jewel of the Seas Updates”. From the press release: In light of current travel conditions, we have made the difficult decision to cancel our Spectrum of the Seas March 28th sailing. We are also making an itineary change for our Jewel of the Seas Feb. 24th sailing, replacing visits to Khasab and Muscat, Oman, with a visit to Doha, Qatar. February 26, 2020: U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi posted a press release titled: ” Pelosi Statement on President Trump’s Coronavirus Press Conference.” From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement on Congressional action to combat coronavirus:“The American people need a well-coordinated, whole-of-government, fully-funded response to keep them safe from the coronavrirus threat. Unfortunately, the Trump Administration has mounted an opaque and chaotic response to this outbreak.“The Trump Administration has left critical positions in charge of managing pandemics at the National Security Council and the Department of Homeland Security vacant. The Trump Budget called for slashing almost $700 million from the Centers for Disease Control. And even now, the Administration continues to devalue Americans’ health security by ransacking funding from other vital public health care needs.“The House will be advancing a strong, strategic funding package with transparency and accountability that fully addresses the scale and seriousness of this public health crisis.” February 27, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: 16 February 27, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Congratulations and thank you to our great Vice President & all of the many professionals doing such a fine job at CDC & all other agencies on the Coronavirus situation. Only a very small number in U.S., & China numbers look to be going down. All countries working well together!” February 27, 2029: President Donald Trump tweeted: “”Anti-Trump Network @CNN doing whatever it can to stoke a national Coronavirus panic. The far left Network pretty much ignoring anyone who they interview who doesn’t blame President Trump.” @trish_regan @FoxNews Media refuses to discuss the great job our professionals are doing!” February 27, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Diagnosis positive: @CNN is infected with Trump Derangement Syndrome. I’m calling out CNN for irresponsibly politicizing what should be a unifying battle against a virus that doesn’t choose sides!.” @trish_regan @FoxNews Like I say, they are Fake News!” Trump Derangement Syndrome does not exist. February 27, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “So, the Coronavirus, which started in China and spread to various countries throughout the world, but very slowly in the U.S. because President Trump closed our border, and ended flights, VERY EARLY is now being blamed by the Do Nothing Democrats, to be the fault of “Trump”.” February 27, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “The Do Nothing Democrats were busy wasting time on the Immigration Hoax & anything else they could do to make the Republican Party look bad, while I was busy calling early BORDER & FLIGHT closings, putting us way ahead in our battle with Coronavirus. Dems got it VERY wrong!” February 27, 2020: U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi posted a press release titled: “Pelosi, Schumer Joint Statement on Congressional Action to Combat the Coronavirus”. From the press release: Speaker Nancy Pelosit and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer today issued the following statement regarding Congressional action to combat the coronavirus:“The United States government must do more to address the spread of the deadly coronavirus in a smart, strategic, and serious way and we stand ready to work in a bipartisan fashion in Congress and with the administration to achieve this necessary goal. Lives are at stake – this is not the time for name-calling or playing politcs.“The first step the Congress must take is to ensure the government has the resources needed to combat this deadly virus and keep Americans safe.“Any emergency funding supplemental the Congress approves must be entirely new funding – not stolen from other accounts p and include , at a minimum, strong provisions that ensure that:1 The president cannot transfer these new funds to anything other than the coronavirus and fighting infectious diseases;2 Vaccines are affordable and available to all who need it;3 interest-free loans are made available for small businesses impacted by the outbreak; and4 The state and local governments are reimbursed for costs incurred while assisting the federal response to the coronavirus outbreak” February 27, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted: “Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 38”. From the report: Highlights: Nine new Member States (Brazil, Denmark, Estonia, Georgia, Greece, Norway, Pakistan, Romania, and North Macedonia) reported cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours.WHO and the World Tourism Organization released a joint statement regarding responsibility and coordination on tourism and COVID-19……WHO is utilizing an international network of expert laboratories to provide support in the detection of the COVID-19 virus globally. For more information, please see the Subject in Focus below. SITUATION IN FOCUS: Laboratory Network and Detection: On 9 January 2020, WHO published interim laboratory guidelines for detection of the novel coronavirus. This guideance is continually updated as more data becomes available and includes advice on sample collection, diagnostic testing, and pathogen characterization. Specific interim guidance on biosafety in the laboratory has also been published. An update to the guidance for the international shipment of specimens will follow soon. WHO is utilizing an international network of expert laboratories to provide support in the detection of the COVID-19 virus globally.The diagnostic landscape of this outbreak is changing quickly. The first COVID-19 cases were detected using genomic sequencing, but multiple RT-PCR commercial and non-commercial assays have since been developed. As the international case load increases, there is an urgent need to rapidly scale up the diagnostic capacity for the COVID-19 virus:1 Developing a WHO network of 15 COVID-19 reference laboratories with demonstrated expertise in the molecular detection of coronaviruses. These international laboratories can support national labs to confirm the COVID-19 virus and troubleshoot their molecular assays.2 Strenghtening national capacity for detection of the COVID-19 virus so that diagnostic testing can be performed rapidly without the need for overseas shipping. Existing global networks for detection of respiratory pathogens are being utilized including. notably. the National Influenza Centers that support the Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System.3 Ensuring ongoing test availability. WHO has procured a commercial assay (manufactured under ISO:13485) with strong performance data and shipped to over 150 laboratories globally as an interum measure for Member States requesting support. The main goal is to strengthen global diagnostic capacity for detection of the COVID-19 virus. Support is now also provided to ensure the quality of testing through the implementation of an External Quality Assurance mechanism.Public health efforts are targeted at both interrupting further transmission and monitoring the spread of COVID-19. As reports of asymptomatic cases increase, the need for reliable serology testing is becoming more urgent. There are a number of groups working on this and developments are being monitored. Confirmed and suspected cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, 27 February 2020: Hubei: 409 confirmed daily cases/ 25 daily deaths/ 65,596 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2,541 cumulative deathsGuangdong: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,347 confirmed cumulative cases/ 7 cumulative deathsHenan: 1 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 1,272 confirmed cumulative cases/ 20 cumulative deathsZhejiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,205 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathHunan: 1 confirmed daily case / 0 daily deaths/ 1,017 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsAnhui: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 989 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative daily deathsJiangxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 934 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathShandong: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 756 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsJiangsu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 631 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsChongqing: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 576 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsSichuan: 3 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 534 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHeilongjiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 480 confirmed cumulative cases/ 13 cumulative deathsBeijing: 10 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 410 confirmed cumulative cases/ 5 cumulative deathsShanghai: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 337 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHebei: 5 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 317 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsFujian: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 296 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathGuangxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 252 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsShaanxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 245 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathsYunnan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 174 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsHainan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 168 confirmed cumulative cases/ 5 cumulative deathsGuizhou: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 146 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsTianjin: 0 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 135 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsShanxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 133 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsLiaoning: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 122 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathsJilin: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 93 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathsGansu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 91 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsHong Kong SAR: 6 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 91 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsXinjiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 76 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsInner Mongolia: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 75 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsNingxia: 1 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 71 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsTaipei and environs: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 32 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathQinghai: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 18 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsMacao SAR: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 10 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsXizang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1 confirmed cumulative case/ 0 cumulative deathsTOTAL: 439 confirmed daily cases/ 29 daily deaths/ 78,630 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2,747 cumulative deaths Countries, territories, or areas outside China with reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Data as of 27 February 2020: Republic of Korea: 1,766 confirmed cases (505 new)/ 13 deaths (1 new)Japan: 185 confirmed cases (22 new)/ 3 deaths (2 new)Singapore: 93 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsAustralia: 23 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsMalaysia: 22 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsViet Nam: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsPhilippines: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)Cambodia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsThailand: 40 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIndia: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsNepal: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSri Lanka: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsUnited States of America: 59 confirmed cases (6 new)/ 0 deathsCanada: 11 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsBrazil: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deathsItaly: 400 confirmed cases (78 new)/ 12 deaths (1 new)Germany: 21 confirmed cases (3 new)/ 0 deathsFrance: 18 confirmed cases (6 new)/ 2 deaths (1 new)The United Kingdom: 13 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSpain: 12 confirmed cases (10 new)/ 0 deathsCroatia: 3 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsAustria: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsFinland: 2 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsIsrael: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsRussian Federation: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsSweden: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsBelgium: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deathsDenmark: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deathsEstonia: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deathsGeorgia: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deathsGreece: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deathsNorth Macedonia: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deathsNorway: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deathsRomania: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deathsSwitzerland: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsIran (Islamic Republic of): 141 confirmed cases (46 new)/ 22 deaths (7 new)Kuwait: 43 confirmed cases (31 new)/ 0 deathsBahrain: 33 confirmed cases (7 new)/ 0 deathsUnited Arab Emirates: 13 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsIraq: 6 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsOman: 4 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deathsLebanon: 2 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deathsPakistan: 2 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deathsAfghanistan: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsEgypt: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsAlgeria: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deathsSUBTOTAL FOR ALL REGIONS: 2,959 confirmed cases (732 new)/ 53 deaths (12 new)International Conveyance (Diamond Princess): Cases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanese territorial waters: 705 confirmed cases (14 new)/ 4 deaths (1 new)GRAND TOTAL: 3,664 confirmed cases (746 new)/ 57 deaths (13 new) February 27, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted a statement titled: “A Joint Statement on Tourism and COVID-19 – UNWTO and WHO Call for Responsibility and Coordination”. From the statement: As the current outbreak of the Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) continues to develop, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) are committed to working together in guiding travel and tourism sectors’ response to COVID-19.On 30 January 2020, the Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the outbreak of COVID-19 to be a Public Health Emerency of International Concern and issued a set of Temporary Recommendations. WHO did not recommend any travel or trade restriction based on the current information available. WHO is working closely with global experts, governments and partners to rapidly expand scientific knowledge on this new virus, to track the spread and virulance of the virus, and to provide advice to countries and the global community on measures to protect heath and prevent the spread of this outbreak.Cooperation is keyThe tourism sector is fully committed to putting people and their well-being first. International cooperation is vital for ensuring the sector can effectively contribute to the containment of COVID-19. UNWTO and WHO are working in close consultation and with other partners to assist States in ensuring that health measures be implemented in ways that minimize unnecessary interference with international traffic and trade.Tourism’s response needs to be measured and consistent, proportionate to the public health threat and based on local risk assessment, involving every part of the tourism value chain – public bodies, private companies and tourists, in line with WHO’s overall guideance and recommendations.UNTWO and WHO stand ready to work closely with all thsoe communities and countries affected by the current health emergency, to build for a better and more resilient future. Travel restrictions going beyond these may cause unnecessary interference with international traffic, including negative repercussions on the tourism sector.At this challenging time, UNWTO and WHO join the international community in standing in solidarity with affected countries. February 27, 2020: Marin County, California, posted a press release titled: “Coronavirus Patient from Travis Isolated at Local Hospital”. From the press release: The Marin County Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) today confirmed the transfer of one patient with laboratory-confirmed novel coronavirus (COVID-19) from Travis Air Force Base in Solano County to a Marin County hospital. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) agreement with the Department of Defense requires any evacuee who tests positive to be moved to the base. Marin County and other Bay Area counties are accepting the patients to reduce the burden on the Solano County health care system.An asymptomatic patient – meaning the patient does not show symptoms of the virus, such as fever or difficulty breathing – was transported to a Marin hospital on Wednesday night. The patient who tested positive for COVID-19 is one of the evacuees from the quarantined Diamond Princess cruise ship in Japan… February 27, 2020: U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi posted a press release titled: “Transcript of Pelosi Weekly Press Conference Today”. From the press release: …Earlier this week, yesterday actually, I said that ‘the American people need a coordinated, whole-of-government, fully-funded response to keep us safe from the coronavirus threat. Unfortunately – and this is the purpose of my telling this – ‘unfortunately, up until now the Trump Administration has mounted an opaque and often chaitic response to this outbreak.’They left critical positions vacant in charge of managing pandemics at the National Security Council and the Department of Homeland Security. They left them vacant. They dismissed the people and never filled the slots. They were there from the precious Administration.The Trump budget calls for slashing almost $700 million from the Centers for Disease Control. And this was the budget which came out after we knew about the coronavirus threat. And now it continues to devalue our health needs by ransacking other public health needs, whether it’s the Ebola fund or others. So that was up until now. Now, we are trying to work in a bipartisan way, and that’s one of the reasons that I was delayed in meeting with you this morning. We’re trying to – we’re coming close to a bipartisan agreement in the Congress as to how we can go forward with a number that is a good start. We don’t know how much we will need. Hopefully, not so much more because prevention will work. But, nonetheless, we have to be ready to do what we need to do. And in that regard, we want to make sure that the President cannot transfer any of these new funds – this is part of the statement from Chuck and me, from Leader Schumer and me, the President cannot transfer any of these new funds to anything other than use for the coronavirus threat. That we perhaps will have interest‑free loans made available to small businesses which are suffering from the coronavirus. Some will maybe have to shut down because of that. Vaccines. We want to make sure that the vaccines are affordable. Affordable. And we think it’s important to make that point because of what Secretary Azar said yesterday, ‘We would want to ensure that we can work to make it affordable, but we can’t control the price, because we need the private sector to invest.’Really? This would be a vaccine that is developed with taxpayer dollars to, again, prevent, and we think that should be available to everyone, not dependent on Big Pharma. I guess yesterday when the Secretary made that ill‑advised statement he was wearing his Pharma hat, which he wore before he came here. And then we want to be sure that state and local governments are reimbursed for costs incurred while assisting the federal response to the coronavirus outbreak. Again, I met with – I spoke with the Vice President this morning, made some of these concerns known to him. We have always had a very candid relationship, and I expressed to him the concern that I had of his being in this position, while I look forward to working with him, about his, when he was Governor of Indiana, slashing the public health budget and having some clinics – one, especially a Planned Parenthood clinic, closed, which was the only place in Scott County where you could get tested for HIV and AIDS. There was an outbreak.Again, he will have his side of that story. But the fact is, is that the health professional, the director of the health in Indiana at the time, Jerome Adams, was the Vice President, then-Governor Pence’s . He is now the Surgeon General of the United States……Q: How concerned are you about the stock market drops that we saw this week in response to coronavirus fears? And how much do you think those market jitters should be taken into account both here on the Hill and in the White House when you are delivering messages about coronavirus?Speaker Pelosi: Well, we are hoping to work in a bipartisan way to stop the spread, to have serious prevention, science‑based, evidence‑based decision-making with professionals who know the territory of science and epidemiology to do the job. The market drop – now, it’s what, 3,000, 2,500, as of last night, 3,000 – is disturbing. But, again, we want to instill confidence. We want to prevent without panicking people about this. But the market will do what it does, with the invisible hand that it always does. It does show some fragility on the part of the market that it would drop so much. But, again, it can’t affect what we do if what we’re there to do is to prevent and not panic people on the subject. The President said something so strange that you really have to wonder. He said the reason the market dropped is because of the debate the other night. Well, the market had dropped 1,800 points before the debate the other night. The market dropped while he was speaking yesterday in his press conference. So, you know, let’s not – let’s not be silly about what that is. Clearly, the lack of ability to get some of the product to sell and the rest has an impact on the bottom line of some of these companies. We don’t like seeing the market drop, that’s for sure. We hope that this will have a turnaround. But it cannot affect how we address the issue. Our issue is public health. Our issue is prevention. And we would hope that that would not lower the market but raise the market, because we want to show that decisions have been made to put this in good hands now… February 27, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Hyundai Motor halts work at factory after worker tests positive for coronavirus”. From the article: Hyundai Motor … shut down a factory in South Korea on Friday after a worker tested positive for the new coronavirus, disrupting production of popular models such as Palisade sport utility vehicle.Shares of the automaker ended down more than 5% after the news, while the wider market KS11 wsas down 3.3%. The closing dealt a fresh setback to Hyundai Motor, which has gradually resumed production at local plants hit by a Chinese parts shortage in the wake of the virus outbreak.South Korea has the most infected people outside China, affecting companies like Samsung and Hyundai. South Korea reported 256 new cases, bringing the total number of infected to 2,022, ad the world prepared for a global recession.“The company has also placed colleagues who came in close contact with the infected employee in self-quarantine and taken steps to have them tested for possible infection,” Hyundai Motor said in a news release.The company added that it was disinfecting the factory. It did not say when productuon would resume… February 27, 2020: Microsoft posted information titled: “GDC and the wellbeing of our teams & community” on their Game Slack Blog. From the information: After a close review of guidance by global health authorities and out of an abundance of caution, we’ve made the difficult decision to withdraw from participating at Game Developers Conference 2020 in San Francisco. The health and safety of players, developers, employees, and our partners around the world is our top priority. Especially as the world is experiencing growing public health risks associated with coronavirus (COVID-19).In light of this, we plan to move our presence to a digital-only event March 16-18th held on www.microsoft.com/gamestack. This event will feature the majority of our planned game developer sessions and experiences, which will be streamed live and available on demand……GDC has long been a moment for us to come together and celebrate Gaming for Everyone with our many vibrant communities. While we won’t be able to bring our G4E events online, we remain committed to celebrating and amplyfying our diverse communities in gaming throughout the year… February 27, 2020: Unreal Engine tweeted: “Here at Epic we were excited about participating in GDC 2020. Regrettably, uncertainty around health concerns has made it unviable to send our employees, and so we have made the difficult decision to withdraw attendance. Stay tuned for Epic news and more through other channels.” February 27, 2020: UK Department of Health and Social Care and Professor Chris Whitty posted a news story titled: “CMO for England announces 2 new cases of novel coronavirus”. From the news story: Two further patients in England have tested positive for COVID-19, bringing the total number of UK cases to 15.The virus was passed on in Italy and Tenerife and the patients have been transferred to specialist NHS infection centres in Royal Liverpool Hospital and the Royal Free Hospital, London. February 27, 2020: Scottish Government posted news titled: “Coronavirus guidance issued for education providers”. From the news: Specific advice for students and staff.New guidance on coronavirus (COVID-19) has been published for education providers.The guidance, published by Health Protection Scotland (HPS), includes advice on preventing the spread of infection, what to do if staff or students become unwell, web links to teaching resources on good hygiene practices, and contact details for local health protection teams.It also covers what pupils or members of staff should do if they have retirned from a higher risk area as part of a school trip. This advice is consistent with the advice being given to individuals, and there is no need to manage returning groups of pupils, students or staff any differently……BackgroundThis guidance has been circulated to all local authority Directors of Education for dissemination to schools and early learning and childcare settings/providers in Scotland, and it has also been circulated to independent schools via Education Scotland. and grant aided special schools.It has also been circulated to all colleges and universities by the Scottish Funding Council and independent schools via Education Scotland, and grant aided special schools… February 27, 2020: Variety posted an article titled: “BTS Cancels Korea Concerts Due to Coronavirus”. It was written by Kristine Kwak. From the article: BTS has canceled concerts planned for Korea, the group announced on Thursday, Feb. 27, due to concernsabout the worldwide coronavirus pandemic.According to an official BTS Twitter (@bts_bighit), “Map of the Soul” tour shows scheduled for April 11, 12, 18 and 19 at Seoul’s Jamsil Olympic Stadium have been called off, with ticket buyers being autimatically refunded the price of their purchase.“It is unavoidable that the concert must be canceled without further delay,” reads an announce,ent in Korean. “Please understand that this decision was made after extensive and careful consideration.”… February 27, 2020: Green Day tweeted: “We have unfortunately made the difficult decision to postpone our upcoming shows in Asia due to the health + travel concerns with coronavirus. We know it sucks, as we were looking forward to seeing you all, but hold on to your tickets we’ll be announcing the new dates very soon.” February 27, 2020: Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear posted news titled: “Governor Beshear, Kentucky Health Officials Announce Efforts to Prevent 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19)”. From the news: Governor Andy Beshear was joined by officials from the Kentucky Department for Public Health (DPH), within the Cabinet for Health and Family Services (CHFS), to announce that Kentucky continues to closely monitor the international situation concerning the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19).Gov. Beshear emphasized that though there are currently no COVID-19 cases in the state, public health officials have been monitoring individuals who meet certain criteria and are also preparing for the possibility of the virus spreading within the Commonwealth.“It’s important for the public to know that even though Kentuckians are at low risk for this virus, our state and local health experts have been working hard to ensure the public is educated and that reports of patients that meet criteria for COVID-19 are being properly tested and treated to reduce potential harm,” Gov. Beshear said. “The best advice for Kentuckians to follow is not new advice – get your flu shot, stay home if you are not feeling well and practice good hygiene by washing your hands thoroughly.”This week, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advised that the United States should prepare for the possibility of COVID-19 spreading within local communities.CHFS Acting Secretary Eric Friedlander said that his team has developed several resources to support local health departments, clinicians and the general public, including a Kentucky-specific website, kycovid19.ky.gov.“While there is a low immediate health risk, we know that because Kentucky is part of the global health community, we may see positive cases here,” he said. “I am proud that our local and state health experts are prepared to respond quickly, calmly and thoroughly.”Dr. Steven Stack, Department of Public Health (DPH) commissioner, said that federal guidelines emphasize rapid response for monitoring individuals who develop symptoms and are identified as “at risk.”“The Kentucky Department for Public Health is working closely with the CDC and local partners to address the COVID-19 response and remains vigilant with active surveillance measures in place,” he said. “This virus is a serious public health concern, however the risk to the general public at this time in Kentucky remains low and we have no confirmed cases and no persons under investigation. If the situation changes and we start seeing person-to-person transmission in Kentucky, we have plans in place to help reduce the impact of diseases like novel coronavirus.”“We understand that some people are worried about this virus and how it may impact Kentuckians,” Dr. Stack said. “We are carefully monitoring the evolving situation and taking necessary precautions. Kentucky has a strong disease surveillance system in place that includes partnerships with hospital and clinic systems as well as local health departments and we are committed to this mission of protecting the health and safety of all Kentuckians.”……DPH is working closely with clinicians to make sure providers are aware of and informed about the illness. In addition, DPH wants to ensure providers there is a process in place to determine whether testing is warranted, including consulting with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as needed. ..DPH is contacting and monitoring anyone they are aware of who has travelled in the last 14 days from China, the primary country of concern, to assess if they develop any symptoms.To reduce potential risk, we have asked these travelers to self-isolate, to avoid public gatherings and report their temperatures and any symptoms daily.We have monitored over 100 people up to this point, and the majority of these travelers have already passed the 14-day monitoring period. All but one have been illness-free, and that person tested negative for COVID-19.We are reminding the public through all our means of communication and network of local health departments to follow the general respiratory illness and flu prevention tips that are crucial in preventing viral exposure and the spread of germs… February 28, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: still 16 February 28, 2020: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted a media statement titled: “CDC Announces Additional COVID-19 Presumptive Positive Cases”. From the media statement: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is aware of four new presumptive positive cases of COVID-19 announced by state public health authorities who are currently conducting investigations. California has announced a second possible instance of community spread.Oregon has announced its first possible instance of community spread.The state of Washington has announced two presumptive cases. One is likely travel related. The other is the state’s first possible instance of community spread. Community spread means spread of an illness for which the source of infection is unknown. One previous possible instance of community spread was announced in California on February 26…The four patients tested positive for the virus that causes COVID-19 in their respective states using the CDC-developed rRT-PCR. They are considered presumptive positive cases pending CDC confirmatory testing. However, CDC and State and local public health authorities are proceeding with public health infestigations and response activities as if these were confirmed cases.…These four cases bring the total number of COVID-19 cases detected through the U.S. public health system to 19…. February 28, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Will be in the Great State of South Carolina tonight, 7:00 P.M., for a really BIG Rally. Best place to be is a Trump Rally. See you later! February 28, 2020: Journalist for Vox, Aaron Rupar, tweeted: “Here’s Trump at his rally tonight in South Carolina dismissing worries about the coronavirus as the “new hoax”. The tweet included a short clip of a CSPAN video of Trump’s South Carolina rally at the North Charleston Collseum. In it, Trump says: “Now, the Democrats are…politicizing… the coronavirus. (crowd boos) Coronavirus. You know that, right? (crowd coninues booing). They’re politicizing it. We did one of the great jobs, you see.”(Trump alters his voice a bit deeper.) “How’s President Drr… Trump doing?” (Back to his normal voice) “They go, (Trump alters his voice to sound weaker, and shakes his head no) “Oh, not good. not good.” (Crowd laughs.) “They have no clue. They don’t have any clue. They can’t even count their votes in Iowa. (Trump waves his hands back and fourth to match the timing of those words.) They can’t even count… (Crowd roars with laughter.) …No, they can’t. (Trump gives the crowd more time to laugh, then yells. “THEY CAN”T COUNT THEIR VOTES!”“ONE OF MY PEOPLE CAME UP TO ME AND SAID, ‘Mr. President. They tried to beat you on Russia, Russia, Russia. Uh, that didn’t work out too well.’ (Crowd laughs softly). ‘They couldn’t do it. They tried the Impeachment Hoax. (crowd starts booing again), That was on a perfect conversation. (Crowd continues to boo). “THEY TRIED ANYTHING. THEY TRIED IT OVER AND OVER. THEY’VE BEEN doing it since you got in. I’ts all turning, they lost. It’s all turning. Think of it.” (Crowd makes a mixture of noises). “Think of it.”“AND THIS IS THEIR NEW HOAX. But ya know, we did something that’s been pretty amazing. We have fifteen people in this massive country. And because of the fact that we went early. We went early. We coulda had a lot more than that. We’re doing great. Our country is doing so great. (Crowd roars). We are so unified. (Crowd roars louder). We are so unified.” That is where the clip ends. For clarification, Trump just coached his crowd to believe that the coronavirus was “a new hoax”, which he tried to connect to the Democratic party. The crowd appeared to believe that, which is not surprising, considering that he had already convinced them that the impeachment hearings were a hoax, and that his ties to Russia before and during the 2016 election were a hoax. Trump said “We have fifteen people in this massive country.” He was referring to the CDC’s tracking of the number of confirmed cases of coronavirus in the United States. There were 15 people with the virus on February 26 that had been confirmed as having COVID-19. That number grew to 16 on February 27, and remained at 16 on February 28, when Trump was speaking at his South Carolina rally. February 28, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “South Carolina was GREAT. A BIG & REALLY ENTHUSIASTIC CROWD!” February 28, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “Thank you to all of the incredible Law Enforcement Officers in South Carolina tonight. We love you!” The tweet includes a six-second video from that night. It shows a row of police cars with their lights on. February 28, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 39”. From the report: Highlights: Five new Member States (Belarus, Lithuania, Netherlands, New Zealand, and Nigeria) reported cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours).WHO has increased the assessment of the risk and spread and risk impact of COVID-19 to very high at the global level……The WHO-China Joint Mission, which was conducted from 16 through 24 February, has published its findings. The full report can be found here.WHO has updated the guidance on Global Surveillance for human infection with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). This document includes revised surveillance case definitions for COVID-19. It is accompanied by a revised Case Reporting Form, line listing template, and data directory.Table 2 in this Situation Report, “Countries, territories or areas outside China with reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths”, has been simplified and now includes transmission classification. See Table 2 footnotes for additional information.As of 27 February, there are 36 117 (26 403 in Hubei and 15 826 in Wuhan) case who have recovered from COVID-19 in China.Under the International Health Regulations (2005), States Parties implementing additional health measures that significantly interfere with international traffic shall notify WHO of the public health rationale of those measures within 48 hours of their implementation. As of 27 February, 41 States Parties are officially reporting additional health measures. More inforamtion can be found in the Subject in Focus. SUBJECT IN FOCUS: UPDATE ON ADDITIONAL HEALTH MEASURES As of 27 February 2020, 41 States Parties have provided to WHO official reports on additional health measures that significantly interfere with international traffic under Article 43 of the International Health Regulations (2005), of which 14 are small island developing states Seven States Parties provided updates on the measures they have previously reported on. Eleven of the 41 States Parties are now reporting such measures against countries other than China. No trade restrictions have been reported to date……The majority of these measures are related to denial of entry of travelers originating from China or from countries reporting on-going transmission of COVID-19, quarantine requirements for foreigners, self-isolation of returning nationals, and visa restrictions. The public health rationale for these additional heatlh measures is mainly linked to vulnerabilities (e.g. lack of capacity for diagnostic and response, small island states context) in receiving countries, and the uncertainties about the virus transmission and disease severity.Preliminary analysis of countries reporting cases that have imposed restrictive measures suggest that such measures may have delayed the importation of new cases, but did not prevent the importation of the disease. WHO has emphasized to Member States that additional measures should be proportionate to the public health risk, short in duration, and reconsidered in light of the evolution of the outbreak and the constant advancements of knowledge about the virus and the disease.WHO has published updated advice for international traffic, and continues to recommend against the application of any travel or trade restrictions in relation to the current COVID-19 outbreak.WHO continues to engage with travel and tourism international organizations and industry associations to enable compliance with the IHR on avoidance of unnecessary interference with international traffic. Joint statements have been issued by WHO in collaboration with the International Maritime Organization (IMO), and UN World Tourism Organization (UNWTO), and will shortly be issues in collaboration with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). Confirmed and suspected cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, Data as of 28 February 2020: Hubei: 318 confirmed daily cases/ 41 daily deaths/ 65,914 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2,682 cumulative deathsGuangdong: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,348 confirmed cumulative cases/ 7 cumulative deathsHenan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,273 confirmed cumulative cases/ 20 cumulative deathsZhejaing: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,205 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathHunan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,017 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsAnhui: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 990 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsJiangxi: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 935 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathShandong: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 756 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsJiangsu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 631 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsChongqing: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 576 confirmed cumlative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsSichuan: 4 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 538 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHeilongjiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 480 confirmed cumulative cases/ 13 cumulative deathsBeijing: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 2 daily deaths/ 410 confirmed cumulative cases/ 7 cumulative deathsShanghai: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 337 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHebei: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 318 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsFujian: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 296 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathGuangxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 252 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsShaanxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 245 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathYunnan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 174 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsHainan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 168 confirmed cumulative cases/ 5 cumulative deathsGuizhou: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 146 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsTianjin: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 136 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsShanxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 133 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsLiaoning: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 121 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathJilin: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 93 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathHong Kong SAR: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 93 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsGansu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 91 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsXinjang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 76 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsInner Mongolia: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 75 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsNingxia: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 72 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsTaipei and environs: 2 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 34 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathQinghai: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 18 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsMacao SAR: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 10 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsXizang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1 confirmed cumulative case/ 0 cumulative deathsTOTAL: 331 confirmed daily cases/ 44 daily deaths/ 78,961 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2,791 cumulative deaths Countries, territories or areas outside China with reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Data as of 28 February 2020: Republic of Korea: 2,337 confirmed cases (571 new)/ 13 deaths (0 new)/ 0 days since last reported caseJapan: 210 confirmed cases (24 new)/ 4 deaths (1 new)/ 0 days since last reported caseSingapore: 96 confirmed cases (3 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseMalaysia: 24 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseAustralia: 23 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 3 days since last reported caseViet Nam: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 15 days since last reported casePhilippines: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)/ 24 days since last reported caseCambodia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 32 days since last reported caseNew Zealand: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseItaly: 650 confirmed cases (250 new)/ 17 deaths (5 new)/ 0 days since last reported caseFrance: 38 confirmed cases (20 new)/ 2 deaths (0 new)/ 0 days since last reported caseGermany: 26 confirmed cases (5 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseSpain: 25 confirmed cases (13 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseThe United Kingdom: 16 confirmed cases (3 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseSweden: 7 confirmed cases (5 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseSwitzerland: 6 confirmed cases (5 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseAustria: 4 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseNorway: 4 confirmed cases (3 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseGreece: 3 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseIsrael: 3 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseCroatia: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths / 0 days since last reported case Finland: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 2 days since last reported caseRussian Federation: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 28 days since last reported caseBelarus: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseLithuania: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported case Netherlands: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseNorth Macedonia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 2 days since last reported caseRomania: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 1 day since last reported caseBelgium: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 24 days since last reported caseDenmark: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 1 days since last reported caseEstonia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 1 day since last reported caseGeorgia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 1 day since last reported caseThailand: 40 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 2 days since last reported caseIndia: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 25 days since last reported case Nepal: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 46 days since last reported caseSri Lanka: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 32 days since last reported caseIran (Islamic Republic of): 245 cases (104 new)/ 26 deaths (4 new)/ 1 day since last reported caseKuwait: 43 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 1 day since last reported caseBahrain: 33 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 1 day since last reported caseUnited Arab Emirates: 19 confirmed cases (6 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseIraq: 7 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseOman: 6 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseLebanon: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 2 days since last reported casePakistan: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 2 days since last reported caseAfghanistan: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 4 days since last reported caseEgypt: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 14 days since last reported caseUnited States of America: 59 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 2 days since last reported caseCanada: 11 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 2 days since last reported caseBrazil: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 2 days since last reported caseAlgeria: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 3 days since last reported caseNigeria: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseSUBTOTAL FOR ALL REGIONS: 3,986 confirmed cases (1,027 new)/ 63 deaths (10 new)International Conveyance (Diamond Princess): Cases identified on a cruis ship currently in Japanese territorial waters: 705 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 4 deaths (0 new)/ 2 days since last reported caseGRAND TOTAL: 4,691 confirmed cases (1,027 new)/ 67 deaths (10 new) February 28, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted a media briefing titled: “WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 -28 February 2020”. From the media briefing: …In the past 24 hours, China reported 329 cases – the lowest in more than a month.As of 6am Geneva time this morning, China has reported a total of 78,959 cases of COVID-19 to WHO, including 2791 deaths.Outside China, there are now 4,351 cases in 49 countries, and 67 deaths.Since yesterday, Denmark, Estonia, Lithuania, Netherlands and Nigeria have all reported their first cases. All these cases have links to Italy.24 cases have been exported from Italy to 14 countries, and 97 cases have been exported from Iran to 11 countries.The continued increase in the number of cases, and the number of affected countries over the last few days, are clearly of concern.Our epidemiologists have been monitoring these developments continuously, we have now increased our assessment of the risk of spread and the risk of impact of COVID-19 to very high at a global level.What we see at the moment are linked epidemics of COVID-19 in several countries, but most cases can be still be traced to known contacts or clusters of cases. We do not see evidence as yet that the virus is spreading freely in communities.As long as that’s the case, we still have a chance of containing thsi virus, if robust action is taken to detect cases early, isolate and care for patients and trace contacts.As I said yesterday, there are different scenarios in different countries, and different scenarios within the same country.The key to containing this virus is to break the chains of transmission.Yesterday, I spoke about the things countries must do to prepare for cases and prevent onward transmission.The report of the WHO-China Joint Mission has now published its report, which is available in English on the WHO website, and will also be posted in Chinese on the National Health Commission website.The report includes a wealth of information, and 22 recommendations for China, for affected and unaffected countries, for the international community, and the general public.It calls for all countries to educate their populations, to expand surveillance, to find, to isolate and care for every case, to trace every contact, and to take an all-of-government and all-of-society approach – this is not a job for the health ministry alone.At the same time, work is also progressing on vaccines and therapeutics.More than 20 vaccines are in development globally, and several therapeutics are in clinical trials. We expect the first results in a few weeks.But we don’t need to wait for vaccines and therapeutics. There are things every individual can do to protect themselves and others today……But there are 10 basic things that you should know.First, as we keep saying, clean your hands regularly with an alcohol-based hand rub, or wash them with soap and water.Touching your face after touching contaminated surfaces or sick people is one of the ways the virus can be transmitted. By cleaning your hands, you can reduce your risk.Second, clean surfaces regularly with disinfectant – for example kitchen benches and work desks.Third, educate yourself about COVID-19. Make sure your information comes from reliable sources – your local or national public health agency, the WHO website, or your local health professional. Everyone should know the symptoms – for most people it starts with a fever and a dry cough, not a runny nose. Most people will ahve mild disease and get better without needing any special care.Fourth, avoid traveling if you have a fever or cough, and if you become sick while on a flight, inform the crew immediately. Once you get home, make contact with a health professional and tell them about where you have been.Fifth, if you cough or sneeze, do it into your sleeve, or use a tissue. Dispose of the tissue immediately into a closed rubbish bin, and then clean your hands.Sixth, if you are over 60 years old, or if you have an underlying condition like cardiovascular disease, a respiratory condition or diabetes, you have a higher risk of developing severe disease. You may wish to take extra precautions to avoid crowded areas, or places where you might interact with people who are sick.Seventh, for everyone, if you feel unwell, stay at home and call your doctor or local health professional. He or she will ask some questions about your symptoms, where you have been and who you have had contact with.This will help you to make sure you get the right advice, are directed to the right health facility, and will prevent you from infecting others.Eighth, if you are sick, stay at home, and eat and sleep separately from your family, use different utensils and cutlery to eat.Ninth, if you develop shortness of breath, call your doctor and seek care immediately.And tenth, it’s normal and understandable to feel anxious, especially if you live in a country or community that has been affected. Find out what you can do in your community. Discuss how to stay safe with your workplace, school, or place of worship.Together, we are powerful. Containment starts with you.Our greatest enemy right now is not the virus itself, its fear, rumors and stigma.And our greatest assests are facts, reason, and solidarity… February 28, 2020: California Department of Public Health posted a news release titled: “COVID-19 Testing Kits Arrive at State Public Health Laboratories”. From the news release. The California Department of Public Health announced today that new CDC test kits used to detect Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) now available in California can be used to do diagnostic testing in the community. California will immediately receive an additional shipment of kits to test up to 1,200 people. “These new testing protocals and resources will help California medical experts identify and treat COVID-19 cases, trace potential exposures and better protect public health,” said Governor Newsom. “I am grateful to the CDC and federal government for quickly heeding our state’s requests and assisting California’s response to this evolving situation.”……If a person develops symptoms of COVID-19 including fever, cough or shortness of breath, and has reason to believe they may have been exposed, they should call their health care provider or local health department before seeking care. Contacting them in advance will make sure that people can get the care they need without putting others at risk… February 28, 2020: California Department of Public Health posted a news release titled: “Santa Clara County Announces Positive Test for COVID-19”. From the news release: State and Local Public Health Officials are already on the ground tracing contacts and providing testing for this case. Also today, additional COVID-19 testing kits arrived at state public health laboratories as the CDC committed to send even more to state. Federal government announces Fairview Developmental Center no longer under immediate consideration as isolation site.Today, local health officials in Santa Clara County announced an individual tested positive for COVID-19.The individual had no known exposure to the virus through travel or close contact with a known infected individual, making it the second possible instance of COVID-19 community transmission in California. Earlier today the California Department of Public Health announced that CDC test kits used to detect COVID-19 had arrived in California. The CDC committed to the state today to send more kits to California — enough to conduct more than 1,000 tests……This could be the second known instance of person-to-person transmission in the general public in the United States. Yesterday, the California Department of Public Health announced a possible first case of person-to-person transmission of COVID-19 in California in the general public.Previously know instances of person-to-person transmission in the United States include one instance in Chicago, Illinois, and one in Santa Benito County, California. Both cases were after close, prolonged interaction with a family member who returned from Wuhan, China and had tested positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by novel coronavirus. As of today, including this case, California has had seven travel-related cases, one close contact case, and now two possible community transmissions… Fairview Developmental Center Also today, the federal government informed the state that it has determined it does not need the Fairview Development Center site for the isolations of passengers from the Diamond Princess Cruise Ship given the imminent end of the isolation of those passengers and the small number of persons who ended up testing positive for COVID-19.The initial estimates the CDC had provided were that as many as 50% of the passengers would test positive within the isolation period but the actual results have been substantially lower, changing current needs for isolation. The temporary restraining order prevented Fairview from being availale at a time when it was critically needed.Having people who are not sick occupying available hospital beds placed a burden on the health care system and limits critical access for patients in a time of great need. February 28, 2020: Massachusetts Department of Public Health posted a press release titled: “Statement on the state of testing by the Massachusetts State Public Health Laboratory for COVID-19”. From the press release: “We are pleased that the US Food and Drug Administration has now given approval to the Massachusetts State Public Health Laboratory to begin testing patients for COVID-19, in accordance with guidance from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. This means clinicians who have patients they think may have symptoms consistent with COVID-19 who meet the current CDC definition of a Person Under Investigation can contact the Massachusetts Department of Public Health to discuss their patients and receive authorization to submit specimens for testing. This change is good news for Massachusetts as testing at the State Public Health Laboratory will sped up obtaining test results for Persons Under Investigation and expedite ongoing testing of any confirmed case in recovery.” – Public Health Commissioner Monica Bharel, MD, MPH February 28, 2020: Washington State Department of Health posted a news release titled: “Additional Cases of COVID-19 in Washington State”. From the news release: The Washington State Department of Health, Public Health – Seattle & King County, and Snohomish Health District, are announcing two new cases of COVID-19, currently classified as “presumptive positives.” A presumptive positive is a test that comes back positive at the Public Health Laboratory and is pending confirmation at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).The individuals reside in both King and Snohomish Counties. In King County, a woman in her 50s with confirmed travel to Daegu, South Korea is a presumptive positive. She is currently in home isolation.In Snohomish County, a person under the age of 18 with no travel history is also a presumptive positive. He is currently in isolation as well. That patient visited Seattle Children’s North Clinic on Monday, Feb. 24. Snohomish County Health District is working alongside the Everett Public Schools to ensure the safety of students and staff at Jackson High School, where this student attends. Everett Public Schools is taking this very seriously and in an abundance of caution, the superintendent has decided to close Jackson High School on Monday to allow three days for deep cleaning.While the King County case is believed to be travel-related, we don’t know how or where the new Snohomish County case was infected. We are working hard to identify how the patients were exposed as well as tracing people who might have been exposed to this patient….…COVID-19 has the potential to be a serious risk in our country. Health departments at the federal, state, and local level are working together and with other partners to prepare. Healthcare systems are getting ready to potentially see more patients than usual. Schools are receiving updated guideance on what to do to stay safe if they have cases, and what preventative measures they should take if they do now… February 28, 2020: Prime Minister of Australia Honorable Scott Morrison MP posted a transcript titled: “Press Conference – Australian Parliament House”. From the transcript: Prime Minister: Good afternoon. Keeping Australians safe – that is the priority of our Government as we deal with what has been an emerging situation with the coronavirus. Each and every day there are new developments in relation to the coronavirus and I want to thank Dr Kelly, I want to thank Dr Murphy, I want to thank those who have been getting involved in providing advice to the Government, also at the state and territory level with the medical offices there. Earlier today, the National Security Committee met for three hours to consider the next round of advice and the information we are receiving in relation to the coronavirus. What has occurred, in particular, in the last 24 hours or so as the data has come in is that the rate of transmissions of the virus outside China is fundamentally changing the way we need to look at how this issue is being managed here in Australia. Now, I want to reassure Australians that as we speak here and now we have had 15 cases that have come from Wuhan and all 15 of those cases have been cleared and are now back in the community, having been able to move on from the virus. There are 8 other cases that are imported from those who came on the Diamond Princess. There are no other cases here in Australia and there has been no community transmission, as Dr Murphy would say, here in Australia.So the actions that the Australian government have taken and that included getting out well ahead of the World Health Organization at Dr Murphy’s, I think, very insightful advice with the measures that we initially took at a time when the WHO had not even declared it in the context that it has now been declared by them. The advice we received today is very similar to that. And that is based on the expert medical advice we’ve received, there is every indication that the world will soon enter a pandemic phase of the coronavirus and as a result, we have agreed today and initiated the implementation of the Coronavirus Emergency Response Plan. As you can see, it’s a very comprehensive document and I want to commend the Department of Health and all of those who have been involved in ensuring that this plan is in place and ready to go.So while the WHO is yet to declare the nature of the coronavirus and it’s moved towards a pandemic phase, we believe that the risk of a global pandemic is very much upon us and as a result, as a government, we need to take the steps necessary to prepare for such a pandemic. And so earlier today, I instructed through the NSC the Minister for Health to be engaging with the state and territory ministers to be bringing back the plan to identify any gaps in capabilities at the various stages or levels at which a pandemic may proceed to. I want to stress that these actions are being taken in an abundance of caution. We have always acted with an abundance of caution on this issue and that has put Australia in the strong position we are in to this time in being able to contain the impact of this virus. So the actions we’re now taking in being prepared even further is to ensure that we can respond immediately when the virus moves to the next level. We’ve also asked the Commissioner of Border Force to be reporting to us as quickly as possible on additional measures that would be required at our various ports of entry to ensure we’re able to identify any persons coming from wherever in the world that may require additional information in terms of being self-quarantined or other forms of quarantine that may be necessary as this issue continues to roll on. In relation to schools, I’ve tasked the Minister for Education to engage with the education ministers from the states and territories. I want to stress, and I’m sure Dr Kelly will reinforce this point, there is no evidence before us that children are in any greater risk as a result of what has occurred more recently, but we do believe to take care of our kids, that we need an even greater abundance of caution to ensure that should the coronavirus move to a very extreme level or there is any particular risk that is associated with children, particularly those attending school, that we have the preparedness and the arrangements in place with states and territories. And I want to thank all of the state and territories for their engagement, whether it’s on this issue on schools or the many other issues, the health issues, that are associated……There is no need for us to be moving towards not having mass gatherings of people. You can still go to the football, you can still go to the cricket, you can still go and play with your friends down the street, you can go off to the concert, and you can go out for a Chinese meal. You can do all of these things because Australia has acted quickly, Australia has got ahead of this at this point in time. But to stay ahead of it, we need to now elevate our response to this next phase. I said the other day, this is a health crisis, not a financial crisis. But it is a health crisis with very significant economic implications… February 28, 2020: Department of Health Northern Ireland posted news titled: “New coronavirus advice service provision”. From the news: Northern Ireland now has full access to the NHS 111 helpline service on coronavirus.This NHS 111 advice line on coronavirus will replace the localized helpline number with immediate effect.The service has been put in place by the Department of Health in consultation with the Public Health Agency… February 28, 2020: Department of Health Northern Ireland posted news titled: “Testing of a patient in Northern Ireland has resulted in a presumptive positive test for coronavirus (Covid-19)”. From the news: In line with established protocols, this Northern Ireland test outcome has been sent to Public Health England laboratories for verification.The patient is receiving specialist care and Public Health Agency personnel are working rapidly to identify any contacts the patient had, with the aim of preventing further spread.Northern Ireland’s Chief Medical Officer Dr. Michael McBride stated: “We have been planning for the first positive case in Northern Ireland and have made it clear that it was a question of when not if.“We have robust infection control measures in place which enable us to respond immediately. Our health service is used to managing infections and would assure the public that we are prepared.“Our advice to the public remains the same. Members of the public who have visited affected regions and have symptoms are advised to self-isolate at home and contact their GP in the first instance. Advice will then be given on the next steps, including testing if required…” February 28, 2020: GDC posted an update titled: “Important GDC 2020 Update”. From the update: After close consultation with our partners in the game development industry and community around the world, we’ve made the difficult decision to postpone the Game Developers Conference this March.Having spent the past year preparing for the show with our advisory boards, speakers, exhibitors, and event partners, we’re genuinely upset and disappointed not to be able to host you at this time.We want to thank all our customers and partners for their support, open discussions and encouragement. As everyone has been reminding us, great things happen when the community comes together and connects at GDC. For this reason, we fully intend to host a GDC event later in the summer. We will be working with our partners to finalize the details and will share more information about our plans in the coming weeks…. February 28, 2020: Epic Games posted an update titled: “Unreal Fest Europe Update” on their Unreal Engine blog. From the update: Here at Epic, we were excited about hosting Unreal Fest Europe 2020 in Prague. Due to uncertainty around health concerns and travel, we have made the decision to cancel this year’s event.We are working with this year’s speakers to bring select presentations to other conferences and virtual events, so stay tuned to our channels for more information. We are also making plans for Unreal Fest Europe 2021 and look forward to sharing details at a later date. February 28, 2020: UK Department of Health and Social Care posted a news story titled: “CMO for England announces 2 new cases of novel coronavirus: 28 February 2020”. From the news story: Chief Medical Officer Professor Chris Whitty statement on 2 new cases of COVID-19 passed on in Iran.Two further patients in England have tested positive for COVID-19.The virus was passed on in Iran and the patients have been tranferred to specialist NHS infection centres at the Royal Free Hospital.The total number of cases in England is now 17. Following confirmed cases in Norther Ireland and Wales, the total number of UK cases is 19. February 28, 2020: UK Department of Health and Social Care posted a press release titled: “CMO for England announces a new case of novel coronavirus: 28 February 2020”. From the press release: Chief Medical Officer Professor Whitty statement on a new case of COVID-19 passed on in the UK.One further patient in England has tested positive for COVID-19.The virus was passed on in the UK. It is not yet clear whether they contracted it directly or indirectly from an individual who had recently returned from abroad. This is being investigated and contact tracing has begun. The patient has been transferred to a specialist NHS infection centre at Guy’s and St Thomas’.The total number of cases in England is now 18. Following confirmed cases in Northern Ireland and Wales, the total number of UK cases is 20. February 28, 2020: Scottish Government posted news titled: “Testing arrangements expanded for coronavirus”. From the news: ‘Drive through’ testing introduced for HNS Lothian.Testing arrangements for coronavirus are being expanded across Scotland.Health boards are implementing a range of different methods for people in their areas to access coronavirus testing.This ranges from testing in contained areas at local health centres, to community testing in the home, and ‘drive-through” testing in some areas.NHS Lothian is the latest health board to introduce ‘drive through’ testing, where patients with mild symptoms drive themselves to a contained area of the hospital for testing, enabling them to avoid public transport or walking.Other boards are running community testing, which allows people to be tested in their own homes where appropriate. This involves staff from public health teams attending people’s homes in protective suites to provide testing, and offer advice to anyone displaying symptoms. It follows the introduction of specialised coronavirus screening laboratories in Glasgow and Edinburgh… February 28, 2020: Ben Harper (and The Innocent Criminals) tweeted: “Due to the ongoing situation in the region, we have unfortunately had to cancel the upcoming BHIC Tour of Japan. Most importantly we are wishing well to all those affected. We apologize to our fans in Japan for this inconvenience and we hope to reschedule soon. BHIC” February 28, 2020: Avril Lavigne tweeted: “IMPORTANT TOUR ANNOUNCEMENT” The tweet included an image that said SWITZERLAND, art connected to her tour, and the following announcement: Following the decision this morning of the Swiss government to cancel all events with more than 1,000 people in attendance from today till march 15th it means that my show on march 13th has been cancelled. I am really sorry about this but the decision is completely out of my control. I was really looking forward to come and see you all and very disappointed that the show can now not proceed. We have tried to reschedule the date but sadly that is not possible on this tour. You can get a full refund from your point of purchase. I hope to get back to switzerland as soon as i can! February 28, 2020: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted “Transcript for the CDC Telebriefing Update on COVID-19”. From the transcript: … Dr. Nancy Messonnier: …Since I last briefed you, There has been one new case of COVID-19 detected through the U.S. public health system. as has been widely reported, at this time we don’t know how or where this person became infected. The brings the number of confirmed cases of person-to-person spread in the United States to 3.We also have confirmed 2 more people who have tested positive for the virus that causes COVID-19 among U.S. citizens repatriated from the Diamond Princess cruise ship. That brings the total number of people with COVID-19 to 44 among this group of people.I’d like to share with you some additional information about the U.S. case CDC confirmed on Wednesday. CDC officials first heard from public health colleagues in California about this patient last Sunday, February 23rd. California reported a severely ill person who had not recently traveled abroad or had contact with a known case of COVID-19. CDC recommended testing for COVID-19 that day. We received samples on February 25th and confirmed the results with public health officials in California the day they were finalized, on February 26th. As I said, the patient’s exposure is unknown. It’s possible this could be the first instance of community spread – meaning the illness was acquired through an unknown exposure in the community. It’s also possible, however, that a thorough investigation may show that the patient had exposure through contact to a returned traveler who was infected.CDC has sent a team to support the California Department of Health and the local health departments in investigating this case. We are working hard to find and identify how the patient was exposed as well as tracing back people who were exposed or might have been exposed to this patient. Like you, we are thinking about the wellbeing of this patient, this family, and this community. People who were exposed to this person during their infection are at some level of risk depending on their exposure. Based on what we know about how this virus behaves, we expect that we will find additional people who have had contact with this patient, especially those who have had close, prolonged contact. This of course includes family members and potentially among healthcare workers who cared for the patient.There has been some confusion about whether this person met CDC’s criteria for testing of COVID-19……CDC’s definition of a person under investigation, or PUI, from the beginning has been broad, for travelers especially, because this was a disease that was being introduced from another part of the world. We have been looking for people with fever, cough, or trouble breathing. Fever and cough are pretty broad parameters, especially during flu season, and we’ve had to rule out many people who had other respiratory illnesses. At this point in our investigation, we are most focused on symptomatic people who are closely linked to confirmed cases or had travel history. But our criteria also allows for clinical discretion……We have been working simultaneously on a couple of possible solutions and I’m happy to say today that both have delivered.Right now, labs can start testing with existing CDC test kits. States that were able to validate their kits should continue to test in this manner. States that were able to validate only the two components specific to novel coronavirus can test using only these two using revised instructions developed at CDC. We have established that the third component, which was the cause of the inconclusive results, can be excluded from testing without affecting accuracy. We have been working with FDA and they agree with our approach. While we’re working to amend the existing EUA, we have discretionary authority from FDA to proceed in this manner. This will increase testing capacity at state and local health departments. All positive test results will continue to be confirmed by CDC for some time.Additionally, CDC has manufactured brand new test kits that will only include the two components that are specific to novel coronavirus. Those test kits are at the International Reagent Resource, where orders can be placed. We are working as quickly as we can to get CDC test kits to state and local public health authorities. However, during any infectious disease response there is a great need for test manufacturers to rapidly make testing available in clinics, in hospitals, and at the bedside. This is part of a huge effort within the US government led by HHS.States will now start testing for this virus. You may start hearing from states directly. As always, their case counts will be the most up-to-date. CDC will continue to report case counts on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. Our priority continues to be getting accurate diagnostic capacity—and doing so quickly—because we know public health surveillance is critical to our fight against this novel coronavirus. To date, our strategies have been largely successful. As a result, we have very few cases in the United States. And while we may be confronting the first instance of community spread, we are working very hard with our state and local public health partners to find out more…… Haynes: We’re ready to open up for questions…Helen Branswell: Now that test kits — state and local labs can test more broadly, how soon will you be able to get the surveillance project that you were talking about earlier with the six cities up and running?Dr. Messonnier: Thank you for that question. It is increasingly important to be able to do not just surveillance focused on the PUIs, but broader community level surveillance. And we’re moving rapidly to go from those six sights to national surveillance. We expect the first site to do testing by next week and we hope to be able to rapidly move from six to all 50 states. This is part of a layered approach with that first component that you’re talking about but multiple other systems that we’re modifying. We can modify them to be able to also test for this coronavirus.Haynes: Next question, please.Operator: Our next question comes from Rob Stein at NPR.Rob Stein: Could you be a little more specific on the testing? How many states are testing now? How many states do you think will be testing let’s say next week, and sort of what is the timeline that you’re projecting for that?Dr. Messonnier: I’m not going to give a specific number because throughout the day today we expect additional states to stand up and we expect that to be happening for the next week. Our goal is to have every state and local health department online doing their own testing by the end of next weekend and doing everything we can to continue that……Reporter Issam Ahmed at AFP: Hi, thank you for this. About what you were saying about the California patient, it seems to be at odds with what Representative Berra (?) said in Congress yesterday, he said the patient was brought in on the 19th of February, and it wasn’t until five days – and doctors immediately asked for a test, and it wasn’t until Sunday the 23rd that federal authorities agreed to do that test. I was wondering if you could speak to that? And another question is that given the US situation with its public health system with 27.5 million people uninsured, do you think that this could be a problem if it takes root in this community and spread and people will be reluctant to approach their health care providers because of the cost involved? Thank you.Dr. Messonnier: According to CDC records, the first call we got about this patient was on Sunday, February 23rd. The second question is we need to remember that right now the case count in the United States is really low and that is a reflection of the aggressive containment efforts of the US government. There is certainly the possibility of additional cases. We will continue to work aggressively to try to keep that number low. The spread we hope will be limited, and any disease in the U.S. will be mild, our focus on public health is on those issues.Haynes: Next question, please?Operator: Our next question comes from Craig at KNX CBS. Your line is now open.Reporter: You talk about the case count being low, how do we reconcile that with the fact that here in California the most populous state, the governor yesterday said only a couple hundred testing kits. The case count will be low because it sounds like there is not enough tests that could reflect it. It seems like the issue the math on that seems to be a low count.Dr. Messonnier: Yes, thank you for the opportunity to talk about that. We need to remember that this situation is taken place rapidly. By far the majority of cases have been in California. A few weeks ago we found an increase in cases around the world. And again this week we have seen an increase in cases globally. Because of the aggressive U.S. efforts at our border strategy the number of cases have been low. And we have been able to focus our efforts on travelers and their close contact based on our evaluation of who is at highest risk. We will continue to modify our approach. In terms of diagnostic testing, additional labs are coming on-line and additional test kits are on their way now… February 28, 2020: MyLondon posted an article titled: “Heathrow Airport Holiday Inn used as coronavirus quarantine centre breaks silence”. It was written by Ellie McKinnell. From the article: The Holiday Inn in Harlington, near Heathrow Airport, has been designated a quarantine site for patients who suspect they may have coronavirus.On Thursday (February 27) an eyewitness told MyLondon that new wooden hoardings, like those around construction sites, were being installed and that security officers were being placed at the hotel on Bath road.They also reported seeing ambulances at the hotel, which is closed to the public, and security officers were turning cars away at the entrance.A spokesperson for the InterContinental Hotel Group had previously said the hotel had been block booked out but could not comment further, and The Department of Health and Social Care declined to comment.However, this morning MyLondon spoke to a member of staff on the reception desk and he told us that “it’s a non-operational hotel and not open to the public… February 28, 2020: Oregon Governor Kate Brown posted news titled: “Governor Kate Brown Convenes Coronavirus Response Team”. From the news: Governor Kate Brown today convened a Coronavirus Response Team tasked with coordinating state and local agencies and health authorities in preparation for response to the coronavirus, also known as COVID-19. The team will build on the work of the Oregon Health Authority’s (OHA) coronavirus incident management team to prepare Oregon to respond to any potential outbreaks of the disease. “Let me be clear, as of today there are zero confirmed cases of coronavirus in Oregon, and the risk to Oregonians of contracting the coronavirus remains low,” said Governor Brown. “However, in an escalating global health crisis, we must make sure we are as ready and informed as we can be. The purpose of the Coronavirus Response Team is to ensure we are taking every precaution necessary, in coordination with local health authorities, hospitals, community health partners, and school districts, to make sure that Oregon is fully prepared to respond to any outbreaks of the coronavirus and that Oregonians know how they can keep their families safe.” The Coronavirus Response Team will meet regularly to coordinate coronavirus response and preparation, to update the Governor as the international situation develops, and make recommendations to the Governor to safeguard public health. Since the first reported cases of COVID-19 overseas, state agencies have taken a number of actions to prepare in Oregon: State agencies are reviewing readiness plans to ensure state government is able to maintain a continuity of operations and services in the event that coronavirus impacts agency operations.State, county, and tribal health officials are monitoring people who may have come into contact with the disease or traveled to mainland China for symptoms like coughing or fever during the two weeks after they return, providing health education, and are prepared to link people appropriate health care if symptoms develop.Starting this week, OHA is providing weekly updates about how many people are being monitored in Oregon, as well as sharing updates about how Oregon families can help prevent the spread of coronavirus on OHA’s COVID-19 website. Oregon hospitals and health providers have scaled up their preparedness efforts, and OHA is conducting ongoing outreach to health facilities to support training and preparedness, as well as monitoring health care availability and needs… …Public awareness is key to preventing the spread of coronavirus. Just as with flu season, containing coronavirus starts with everyone –– at home, in the workplace, and at school –– practicing good hygiene through regular handwashing, proper covering of coughs and sneezes, routine cleaning of workspaces, kitchens, and bathrooms, and staying home when sick or symptomatic… …The Coronavirus Response Team includes agency directors or their representatives from: • Department of Administrative Services • Oregon Health Authority • Department of Human Services • Oregon State Police • Oregon Department of Transportation • Office of Emergency Management • Oregon Military Department • Oregon Department of Education • Department of Corrections • Oregon Youth Authority • Secretary of State • Oregon State Treasurer February 29, 2020: Washington Governor Jay Inslee posted a statement titled: “Inslee statement on death in Washington state from COVID-19”. From the statement: Gov. Jay Inslee released a statement today on the death of a Washington state individual from the coronavirus (COVID-19).“It is a sad day in our state as we learn that a Washingtonian has died from COVID-19. Our hearts go out to their family and friends. We will continue to work toward a day where no one dies from this virus.”“In partnership with the Washington State Department of Health, the Washington State Department of Emergency Management and local and community health partners, we are strengthening our preparedness and response efforts. I am committed to keeping Washingtonians healthy, safe and informed.” February 29, 2020: The CDC reported that the total number of COVID-19 cases in the United States by this date was: 24 February 29, 2020: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted a media statement titled: “CDC, Washington State Report First COVID-19 Death”. From the media statement: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and public health officials in the state of Washington have reported three hospitalized patients who have tested presumptive-positive for the virus that causes COVID-19, including one patient who died. Two of the patients are from a long-term care facility (LTCF) where one is a health care worker. Additional residents and staff of the LTCF who have no yet been tested for COVID-19 are reportedly either ill with respiratory symptoms or hospitalized with pneumonia of unknown cause.The patient who died, a male in his 50s, was being treated tat the same hospital. He was not a resident of the LTCF. CDC erroneously identified the patient as female in a briefing earlier today with the President and Vice President. While there is an ongoing investigation, the source of these infections is currently unknown. Circumstances suggest person-to-person spread in the community, including in the LTCF……This is the first reported death in the United States from COVID-19, as well as the first reported case in a health care worker and the first possible outbreak in a LTCF. These reports from Washington follow others of community spread in Oregon and two places in California earlier this week. While there is still much to learn about the unfolding situations in California, Oregon and Washington, preliminary information raises the level of concern about the immediate threat for COVID-19 for certain communities in the United States. Most people in the United States will have little immediate risk of exposure to this virus, but some people will be at increased risk depending on their exposures. The greatest risk is to those who have been in close contact with people with COVID-19. People with suspected or confirmed exposure should reach out to their state or local public health department……These three cases bring the total number of COVID-19 cases detected through the U.S. public health system to 22. The federal government will continue to respond aggressively to this rapidly evolving situation.Testing for the virus that causes COVID-19 was conducted in Washington state using the CDC rRT-PCR. Results will be confirmed at CDC, but a presumptive positive result using the CDC test is treated as a positive for public health response purposes and a coordinated public health response has begun. February 29, 2020: Journalist for Vox, Aaron Rupar tweeted: “Here’s Trump last night noting that ‘so far we have lost nobody to coronavirus in the United States” and adding “you wonder — the press is in hysteria mode. CNN, fake news.” (Since then, the first American has died from coronavirus.)” The tweet included a short video from CSPAN of President Trump speaking at his rally in South Carolina the night before. President Trump: …and goes up to a hundred-thousand people a year die. (makes a face showing his teeth and a sound of breathing in through his teeth). And so far… we have lost… nobody! (Crowd begins to cheer). To coronavirus (Crowd roars) in the United States.” Trump pauses to let the crowd cheer and clap some more.“Nobody.” Trump pauses again to allow the crowd to continue to loudly clap and cheer.“And it doesn’t mean we won’t. And we are (he waves his hand back and forth) totally prepared. It doesn’t mean we won’t. (Crowd is silent.) But think of it.” “You hear thirty-five and fourty thousand people… and…. we’ve lost nobody. And you wonder the is in hysteria mode. (Someone in the crowd giggles.) (Trump points directly at the camera.) “CNN, fake news, and the camera just went off!” (Trump puts his hand down and the crowd loudly cheers and boos at the same time.) Trump quietly says, “The camera just…”Trump gives the crowd more time to loudly boo. He stands behind the podium smiling. Trump yells, “THE CAMERA JUST WENT OFF!” (Trump taps on the podium.) “TURN IT BACK ON! HEY, BY THE WAY!” (Trump holds up both his hands, palms toward the CSPAN camera, and waves them back and forth.) “Hold it! Look. Look at this… and honestly, “(One person cheers a “wooo” sound). “All events are like this. Its about us. Its all about us. (Trump points at CNN’s camera again.) I wish they’d take the camera (Trump waves his pointing hand around in a circle) Show the arena please. Show the arena. (Crowd cheers again). They never show the arena. (Cheering gets louder) They never do. THEY NEVER DO. (Trump gives the crowd more time to cheer.) They never do.” Feburary 29, 2020: President Trump tweeted: “I will be having a 1:30 P.M. Press Conference at the White House to discuss the latest CoronaVirus developments. Thank you!” February 29, 2020: New York State website posted news titled: “Statement from Governor Andrew M. Cuomo on Coronavirus”. From the news: “When I spoke to Vice President Pence, I urged him to approve New York State’s Coronavirus test – we just recieved word that our test has been approved by the FDA. New York State will begin testing immediately at Wadsworth Lab.”“This approval will expedite wait time and improve New York’s ability to more effectively manage the Coronavirus situation as it unfolds.” February 29, 2020: Washington Governor Jay Inslee posted a news release titled: “Inslee issues COVID-19 emergency proclamation”. From the proclamation: Gov. Jay Inslee today declared a state of emergency in response to new cases of COVID-19, directing state agencies to use all resources necessary to prepare for and respond to the outbreak.“This will allow us to get the resources we need,” Inslee said. “This is a time to take common-sense, proactive measures to ensure the health and safety of those who live in Washington state. Our state agency directors have been actively preparing since the nation’s first case appeared in Snohomish County. Washingtonians can be assured we’ve taken this threat seriously and have been working in collaboration with our health care partners to develop plans and procedures to prepare for what could likely be a world-wide pandemic.”He issued a proclamation that directs state agencies and departments to utilize state resources and do everything reasonably possible to assist affected communities responding to and recovering from COVID-19 cases. It also allows the use of the Washington National Guard, if necessary. In January, the Washington Military Department activated the State Emergency Operations Center at Level 1, the highest level, to help coordinate a statewide response.Today, Public Health – Seattle & King County announced the death of an individual with COVID-19, the first in the United States.The nation’s first case of COVID-19 was found in a Snohomish County man in January. He had traveled to Wuhan, China and has now recovered. On Feb. 28, the State Department of Health announced two additional cases – a King County woman who had recently traveled to South Korea, and a Snohomish County teenager with no travel history. Both are recovering at home and remain in home isolation.The Department of Health also announced last week that the Public Health Lab in Shorline now has the capacity to test for cases of COVID-29, expediting results… February 29, 2020: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) posted a media statement titled: “CDC, Washington State Report First COVID-19 Death”. From the media statement: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and public health officials in the state of Washington have reported three hospitalized patients who have tested presumptive-positive for the virus that causes COVID-19, including one patient who died. Two of the patients are from a long-term care facility (LTCF) where one is a health care worker. Additional residents and staff of the LTCF who have not yet been tested for COVID-19 are reportedly either ill with respiratory symptoms or hospitalized with pneumonia of unknown cause.The patient who died, a male in his 50s, was being treated at the same hospital. He was not a resident of the LTCF, CDC erroneously identified the patient as female in a briefing earlier today with the President and Vice President. While there is an ongoing investigation, the source of these infections is currently unknown. Circumstances suggest person-to-person spread in the community, including in the LTCF……This is the first reported death in the United States from COVID-19, as well as the first reported case in a health care worker and the first possible outbreak in a LTCF. These reports from Washington follow others of community spread in Oregon and two places in California earlier this week. While there is still much to learn about the unfolding situations in California, Oregon and Washington, preliminary information raises the level of concern about the immediate threat for COVID-19 for certain communities in the United States. Most people in the United States will have little immediate risk of exposure to this virus, but some people will be at increased risk depending on their exposures. The greatest risk is to those who have been in close contact with people with COVID-19. People with suspected or confirmed exposure should reach out to their state or local public health department……These three cases bring the total number of COVID-19 cases detected through the U.S. public health system to 22. The federal government will continue to respond aggressively to this rapidly evolving situationTesting for the virus that causes COVID-19 was conducted in Washington state using the CDC rRT-PCR. Results will be confirmed at CDC, but a presumptive positive result using the CDC test is treated as a positive for public health response purposes and a coordinated public health response has begun. February 29, 2020: U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi posted a press release titled: “Dear Colleague to All Members on Coronavirus Preparedness”. From the press release: Dear Colleague,Sadly and prayerfully, today, we learned of the first death from the coronavirus in the United States. The American people expect and deserve a well-coordinated, whole-of-government, fully-funded response to the coronavirus threat that addresses this public health crisis in a smart, scientific and strategic way.An important step that Congress must take is to ensure the government has the resources needed to combat this deadly virus and keep Americans safe. To that end, House appropriators are working to advance a strong emergency funding supplemental package that fully addresses the scale and seriousness of this public health crisis, which we hope to bring to the Floor next week.Any emergency funding supplemental the Congress approves must be entirely new funding, not stolen from other accounts. This package must also ensure that the President cannot use these new funds for anything other than fighting coronavirus and infectious diseases.The supplemental must also ensure that vaccines are affordable and available to all who need them, that SBA loans are made available for small businesses impacted by the outbreak and that state and local governments are reimbursed for costs incurred while assisting the federal response to the coronavirus outbreak……As this public health emergency develops, the House will continue to take strong, strategic action to keep Americans safe and ensure the functioning of Congressional operations. Updates will be ongoing. February 29, 2020: World Health Organization (WHO) posted “Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 40”. From the report: Highlights: Two new Member States (Mexico and San Marino) reported cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours.WHO has published the Rational use of personal protective equipment for COVID-19. This document summarizes WHO recommendations for the appropriate use of personal protective equipment (PPE) in health care and community settings, including the handling of cargo. More information on Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) activities can be found in the Subject in Focus. SUBJECT IN FOCUS: UPDATE ON INFECTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL Infection prevention and control (IPC) is a major factor in preventative and mitigation measures for COVID-19. To ensure evidence-based quality guidance and prompt response to global demand for personal protective equipment (PPE), WHO has convened the IPC expert global network of specialists from around the world since the beginning of the outbreak. Experts are members of the Global Infection Prevention and Control Network (GIPCN) or members of relevant institutions caring for COVID-19 patients. This network discusses technical aspects of IPC measures, and shares epidemiological updates and experiences across affected countries. In consultation with this global IPC expert network, WHO has released three key IPC interim guidance materials… Confirmed and suspected cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China, Data as of 29 February, 2020: Hubei: 423 confirmed daily cases/ 45 daily deaths/ 66,337 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2,727 cumulative deathsGuangdong: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,349 confirmed cumulative cases/ 7 cumulative deathsHenan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 1 daily death/ 1,272 confirmed cumulative cases/ 21 cumulative deathsZhejiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,205 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathHunan: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 1,018 confirmed cumulative cases/ 4 cumulative deathsAnhui: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 990 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsJiangxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ daily deaths/ 935 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathShandong: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 756 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsJiangsu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 631 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsChongqing: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 576 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsSichuan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 538 confirmed cumulative cases/ 13 cumulative deathsHeilongjiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 480 confirmed cumulative cases/ 13 cumulative deathsBeijing: 1 confirmed daily case/ 1 daily deaths/ 411 confirmed cumulative cases/ 8 cumulative deathsShanghai: 0 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 337 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsHebei: 0 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 318 confirmed cumulative cases/ 6 cumulative deathsFujian: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 296 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathsGuangxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 252 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsShaanxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 245 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathYunnan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 174 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsHainan: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 168 confirmed cumulative cases/ 5 cumulative deathsGuizhou: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 146 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsTianjin: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 136 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsShanxi: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 133 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsLiaoning: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 121 confirmed cumulative deaths/ 1 cumulative deathsHong Kong SAR: 1 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 94 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsJilin: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 93 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathGansu: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 91 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2 cumulative deathsXinjiang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 76 confirmed cumulative cases/ 3 cumulative deathsInner Mongolia: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 75 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsNingxia: 1 confirmed daily case/ 0 daily deaths/ 73 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsTaipei and environs: 7 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 38 confirmed cumulative cases/ 1 cumulative deathQinghai: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 18 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsMacao SAR: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 10 confirmed cumulative cases/ 0 cumulative deathsXizang: 0 confirmed daily cases/ 0 daily deaths/ 1 confirmed cumulative case/ 0 cumulative deathsTOTAL: 435 confirmed daily cases/ 47 daily deaths/ 79,394 confirmed cumulative cases/ 2,838 cumulative cases Countries, territories or areas outside China with reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths. Data as of 29 February 2020: Republic of Korea: 3,150 confirmed cases (813 new)/ 17 deaths (4 new)/ 0 days since last reported caseJapan: 230 confirmed cases (20 new)/ 5 deaths (1 new)/ 0 days since last reported caseSingapore: 98 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseAustralia: 24 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseMalaysia: 24 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 1 day since last reported caseViet Nam: 16 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 16 days since last reported casePhilippines: 3 confirmed case (0 new)/ 1 death (0 new)/ 25 days since last reported caseCambodia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 33 days since last reported caseNew Zealand: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 1 day since last reported caseItaly: 888 confirmed cases (238 new)/ 21 deaths (4 new)/ 0 days since last reported caseGermany: 57 confirmed cases (31 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseFrance: 57 confirmed cases (19 new)/ 2 deaths (0 new)/ 0 days since last reported caseSpain: 32 confirmed cases (7 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseThe United Kingdom: 20 confirmed cases (4 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseSweden: 12 confirmed cases (5 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseSwitzerland: 10 confirmed cases (4 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseNorway: 6 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseCroatia: 5 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseIsrael: 5 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseAustria: 5 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reportedRomania: 3 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseGreece: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 1 day since last reported caseDenmark: 2 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseGeorgia: 2 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseNetherlands: 2 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseFinland: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 3 days since last reported caseRussian Federation: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 29 days since last reported caseSan Marino: 1 confirmed case (1 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseNorth Macedonia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 3 days since last reported caseEstonia: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 2 days since last reported caseLithuania: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 1 day since last reported caseBelarus: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 1 day since last reported caseBelgium: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 25 days since last reported caseThailand: 42 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseIndia: 3 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 26 days since last reported caseNepal: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 47 days since last reported caseSri Lanka: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 33 days since last reported caseIran (Islamic Republic of): 388 confirmed cases (143 new)/ 34 deaths (8 new)/ 0 days since last reported caseKuwait: 45 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseBahrain: 38 confirmed cases (5 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseUnited Arab Emirates: 19 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 1 day since last reported caseIraq: 8 confirmed cases (1 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseOman: 6 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 1 day since last reported caseLebanon: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 3 days since last reported casePakistan: 2 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 3 days since last reported caseAfghanistan: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 5 days since last reported caseEgypt: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 15 days since last reported caseUnited States of America: 62 confirmed cases (3 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseCanada: 14 confirmed cases (3 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseMexico: 2 confirmed cases (2 new)/ 0 deaths/ 0 days since last reported caseBrazil: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 3 days since last reported caseAlgeria: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 4 days since last reported caseNigeria: 1 confirmed case (0 new)/ 0 deaths/ 1 day since last reported caseSUBTOTAL FOR ALL REGIONS: 5,304 confirmed cases (1,318 new)/ 80 deaths (17 new)International Conveyance (Diamond Princess): Cases identified on a cruise ship currently in Japanese territorial waters: 705 confirmed cases (0 new)/ 6 deaths (2 new)/ 3 days since last reported caseGRAND TOTAL: 6,009 confirmed cases (1,318 new)/ 86 deaths (19 new) February 29, 2020: U.S. Department of State posted a travel advisory titled: “Italy Travel Advisory”. From the travel advisory: Travel Advisory February 29, 2020Italy – Level 3: Reconsider TravelGlobal Health Advisory: Do Not Travel. Avoid all international travel due to the global impact of COVID-19Level 4 – Do Not Travel to:Lombardy and Veneto die to the level of community transmission of the virus and imposition of local quarantine proceduresThere is a widespread ongoing outbreak of respiratory illness (COVID-19) caused by a novel (new) coronavirus that can be spread from person to person. Many cases of COVID-19 have been associated with travel to or from mainland China or close contact with a travel-related case, but widespread sustained community spread has been reported in Italy. The CDC has issued a Level 3 Travel Health Notice for Italy. At this time, CDC recommends that travelers avoid all nonessential travel to Italy. Travelers should review and follow the Centers for Disease Control’s guidelines for the prevention of coronavirus if they decide to travel to Italy. Italy has a longstanding risk presented by terrorist groups, who continue plotting possible attacks in Italy. Terrorists may attack with little or no warning, targeting tourist locations, transportation hubs, markets/shopping malls, local government facilities, hotels, clubs, restaurants, places of worship, parks major sporting and cultural events, educational institutions, airports, and other public areas. Read the Safety and Security section on the country information page. If you decide to travel to Italy: Read the Centers for Disease Control’s and Prevention guidelines for the prevention of COVID-19 and information on health conditions in Italy.Review the Embassy’s latest alerts and the embassy’s webpage on COVID=19 in Italy for additional information. Follow Italian health official guidance and avoid government-designated affected areas.Have a plan to depart from Italy that does not rely on U.S. government assistance.Be aware of your surroundings when traveling to tourist locations and crowded public venues.Follow the instructions of local authorities.Monitor local media for breaking events and adjust your plans based on new information.Enroll in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP) to recieve Alerts and make it easier to locate you in an emergency.Follow the Department of State on Facebook and TwitterReview the Crime and Safety Reports for Italy.Prepare a contingency plan for emergency situations. Review the Traveler’s Checklist. February 29, 2020: Prime Minister of Australia Honorable Scott Morrison MP posted a Media Release titled: “Update on Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) In Australia”. From the Media Release: Joint Media Release – The Hon. Scott Morrison MP, The Hon. Greg Hunt MP, Minister for Health and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service and Cabinet and Senator the Hon. Marise Payne, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and Minister for Women.The National Security Committee of Cabinet has agreed today to introduce new travel restrictions and update the travel advice for Iran as part of the Government’s coordinated measures to protect Australians from COVID-19.From 1 March, 2020, the Australian Government will implement changes to travel arrangements for people travelling to, or returning from Iran, following expert medical advice today from the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee (AHPPC) and the Australian Government’s Chief Medical Officer on the Outbreak of COVID-19.These measures are part of our ongoing strategy of containment and minimising risk to the Australian community as detailed in our pandemic preparedness plan.As of 1 March 2020: The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade will raise the level of the travel advisory for Iran from level 3 to level 4 – do not travel;Foreign nationals (excluding foreign permanent residents of Australia) who are in Iran on or after 1 March 2020, will not be allowed to enter Australia for 14 days, from the time they have left or transited through Iran;Australian citizens and permanent residents will still be able to enter, as will their immediate family members (spouses, legal guardians, or dependants only). They will be required to self-isolate at home for 14 days from the day they left Iran. These actions are based on advice from the AHPPC that noted the following evidence suggesting the COVID-19 outbreak in Iran may be one of the largest outside of Hubei province in China; Iran has the largest reported number of deaths outside of Hubei province;There are already cases of COVID-19 from Iran to a number of countries including Australia and New Zealand, despite the absence of direct flights and relatively low travel volumes from Iran to these countriesIt is almost certain tha the reported case numbers are underestimated The travel restrictions for Iran will now be consistent with those in place for China.The Australian Government favours measures that could materially slow the importation of COVID-19 cases into Australia to enable preparatory measures to continue and to enable a public health response to the initial cases.We believe that travellers from Iran represent, at this time, a materially greater risk of COVID-19 importation than any other country outside China.The current travel restrictions regarding mainland China continue to be successful in reducing the volume of travel from mainland China and will continue.This is a specific temporising measure for an unusually high-risk country and further travel restrictions are unlikely to be effective at reducing importation.Since 22 February 2020, 25 cases of COVID-19 have been confirmed in Australia, including: 15 cases with direct or indirect link to Wuhan, Hubei province, China, who are all reported to have now recovered from their infections.9 cases associated with the Diamond Princess repatration flight from Japan to the Northern Territory are in isolation in their home state in a stable conditionAn additional case in Queensland with a recent travel history to Iran which was confirmed on 28 February 2020. The case is currently in isolation at a hospital in Queensland and contact tracing by Queensland Health is underway. Across the world there are currently 85,153 cases and 2,922 deaths reported across 58 countries from the outbreak of COVID-19.New countries with confirmed cases include New Zealand and Mexico.While we are not immune as a country we are as prepared as we could possibly be.The Australian Government contiunues to monitor and respond to the COVID-19 outbreak as it evolves.We will work in close cooperation with state Government authorities and our international partners to coordinate our response and keep Australians safe. February 29, 2020: NBC News posted an article titled: “Washington state man becomes first U.S. death from coronavirus”. It was written by Nicole Acevedo. From the article: Health officials in Washington state said on Saturday a coronavirus patient has died, marking the first death in the U.S. from COVID-19, the illness associated with the virus.The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said it’s responding to “the first possible outbreak” of the respiratory illness in a long-term care center in Washington. The death was not associated with that facility.Health officials in Washington said 27 patients and 25 staff members at the center have symptoms associated with COVID-19.The Life Care Center of Kirkland said in a statement that new patients and visitors were being turned away, and patients and staff “with symptoms or who were potentially exposed are quarantined.”The person who died was a man in his 50s with underlying health conditions, and there was no evidence he contracted the virus through travel, health officials said. They suspect domestic “community spread” of the disease, a new phase for the United States that began this week on the West Coast……The patient who died was among new cases reported Friday in Washington state, as well as Oregon and California. Among the new confirmed or presumptive cases, three were contracted from an unknown source, bringing the total number of what could be community spread cases in the United States to four……The patients from these four cases have no known travel history or exposure to someone who had traveled or been infected. Not all four have been confirmed by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention testing, but they tested positive locally.The CDC adjusted its testing guidelines this week to include people with symptoms but with no identified source of exposure.The first case of COVID-19 in the United States that may involve community spread was confirmed by a CDC test on Wednesday. That patient is at UC Davis Medical Center in Sacramento, California, and is a woman from Solano County, officials said.President Donald Trump said a the news conference Saturday that “there’s no reason to panic” and the American public does not need to change their daily routines… February 29, 2020: NYC, The Official Website of the City of New York, posted a statement titled: “Statement from Mayor Bill de Blasio And Commissioner Barbot On Coronavirus Testing”. From the statement: Statement from Mayor de Blasio:“Today, the FDA approved our application to develop our own test for the Coronavirus. That is not the only good news: after asking the CDC for weeks, they have finally sent us new kits that will allow us to run the CDC’s test locally. This means we will soon, within the coming week, have the ability to get results back in a matter of hours, not days. Quick detection is vital to stopping the spread of the virus, and this development will help the experts to do their job to protect New Yorkers.”Statement from Health Commissioner Barbot:“We are pleased to learn our advocacy efforts on behalf of new Yorkers have paid off and that we will soon be able to test for COVID-19 here in New York City. Having tests available will significantly reduce the amount of time we have to wait to know whether someone has the virus that causes COVID-19. This is a big step and one that was possible through our strong partnership with the State Health Laboratory.” February 29, 2020: New York State website posted news titled: “Video, Audio & Rush Transcript: Governor Cuomo Delivers Update on Coronavirus”. From the rushed transcript: Governor Cuomo: Yeah President Trump put Vice President Pence in charge of a taskforce on the federal level. I spoke to the Vice President – obviously the State is working in coordination with the federal government. My concern was, in many ways the first step of this process, the step that we need to get right, we need to get results quickly, and you want to be able to handle the volume of tests that we may be faced with.The current system was we had to send every test to Washington to the CDC and then wait a couple days to get the test back, and CDC was having an issue dealing with the volume that they were getting from all across the country.Here in New York we have the capacity to run our own tests, and we have the sophistication in terms of research facilities to run our own tests, so we had been asking CDC, “Let us run our own tests in New York.” It will take a burden off the CDC and get us answers faster. I spoke to the Vice President abotu that the other day. He said he’d look into it. CDC informed us today our test is approved, we can do our own testing. That is a big step forward… February 29, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted a periscope link. The image in the tweet shows him on a stage at CPAC 2020. February 29, 2020: President Donald Trump tweeted: “THANK YOU @CPAC! #CPAC2020”. The tweet included four photos of President Trump at CPAC2020. One is a close-up. The other three show the crowd of people seated around the stage. February 29, 2020: The White House posted a proclamation titled: “Proclamation on the Suspension of Entry as Immigrants and Nonimmigrants of Certain Additional Persons Who Pose a Risk of Transmitting Coronavirus”. From the proclamation: On January 31, 2020, I issued Proclamation 9984 (Suspension of Entry as Immigrants and Nonimmigrants of Persons Who Pose a Risk of Transmitting 2019 Novel Coronavirus and Other Appropriate Measures to Address This Risk). I found that the potential for widespread transmission of a novel (new) coronavirus (which has since been renamed “SARS-CoV2” and causes the disease COVID-19)… by infected individuals seeking to enter the United States threatens the security of our transportation system and infrastructure and the national security. Because the outbreak of the virus was (and is) centered in the People’s Republic of China, I suspended and limited the entry of all aliens who were physically present within the People’s Republic of China, excluding the Special Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macau, during the 14-day period preceding their entry or attempted entry into the United States, subject to certain exceptions.The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a component of the Department of Health and Human Services, has determined that the virus presents a serious public health threat and continues to take steps to prevent its spread. But CDC, along with State and local health departments, has limited resources, and the public health system could be overwhelmed if sustained human-to-human transmission of the virus occurred in the United States. Sustained human-to-human transmission has the potential to have cascading public health, economic, national security, and societal consequences.CDC has determined that the Islamic Republic of Iran (Iran) is experiencing sustained person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2. As of February 28, 2020, Iran had 388 cases of COVID-19, a significant increase from prior days. In response to that increase, on February 28, 2020, CDC raised its infectious disease alert to level 3, its highest level, which recommends that travelers avoid all nonessential travel to Iran. According to the World Health Organization, as of February 28, 2020, 97 COVID-19 cases have been exported from Iran to 11 other countries……The potential for undetected transmission of the virus by infected individuals seeking to enter the United States from Iran threatens the security of our transportation system and infrastructure and the national security. Given the importance of protecting persons within the United States from the threat of this harmful communicable disease, I have determined that it is in the interests of the United States to take action to restrict and suspend the entry into the United States, as immigrants or nonimmigrants, of all aliens who were physically present within Iran during the 14-day period preceding their entry or attempted entry into the United States.Now, therefore, I, Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, bu the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America… hereby find that the unrestricted entry into the United States of persons described in section 1 of this proclamation would, except as provided for in section 2 of this proclamation, be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and that their entry should be subject to certain restrictions, limitations, and exceptions. I therefore hereby proclaim the following: Here is who this proclamation does NOT affect: Any lawful permanent resident of the United StatesAny alien who is the spouse of a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident;Any alien who is the parent or legal guardian of a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident, provided that the U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident is unmarried and under the age of 21;Any alien who is the sibling of a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident, provided that both are unmarried and under the age of 21;Any alien who is the child, foster child, or ward of a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident, or who is a prospective adoptee seeking to enter the United States pursuant to the IR-4 or IH-4 visa classifications;Any alien traveling at the invitation of the United States Government for a purpose related to containment or mitigation of the virusAny alien traveling as a nonimmigrant pursuant to a C-1, D, or C-1/D nonimmigrant visa as a crewmember or any alien otherwise traveling to the United States as air or sea crew;Any alien seeking entry into the United States pursuant to one of (a bunch of different types of) visas;Any alien whose travel falls within the scope of section 11 of the United Nations Headquarters Agreement;Any alien whose entry would not pose a significant risk of introducing, transmitting, or spreading the virus, as determined by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, through the CDC director or his designee;Any alien whose entry would further important United States law enforcement objectives, as determined by the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or their respective designees, based on a recommendation of the Attorney General or his designee;Members of the U.S. Armed Forces and spouses and children of members of the U.S. Armed Forces Here are some more key points from the proclamation: Nothing in this proclamation shall be construed to affect any individual’s eligibility for asylum, withholding of removal, or protection under the regulations issued pursuant to the legislation implementing the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, consistent with the laws and regulations of the United States. Consistent with applicable law, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Transportation, and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall ensure that any alien subject to this proclamation does not board an aircraft traveling to the United States.The Secretary of Homeland Security may establish standards and procedures to ensure the application of this proclamation at and between all United States ports of entry.Any alien who circumvents the application of this proclamation through fraud, willful misrepresentation of a material fact, or illegal entry shall be a priority for removal by the Department of Homeland Security.This proclamation will remain in effect until terminated by the President. The Secretary of Health and Human Services, shall, as circumstances warrant and no more than 15 days after the date of this proclamation and thereafter on the first and fifteenth day of each calendar month, recommend that the President continue, modify, or terminate this proclamation and any other proclamation suspending or limiting the entry of foreign nationals into the United States as immigrants because of the threat posed by the virus. February 29, 2020: Avril Lavigne tweeted: “IMPORTANT TOUR ANNOUNCEMENT”. The tweet included an image with the word ASIA, art from her tour, and the following information: I am so sad to announce that we are unable to tour the Asian markets due to the continuous outbreak of coronavirus. My band, crew and I have been working so hard to bring this tour worldwide and are completely bummed out. Please everybody take care of yourselves and stay healthy. You’re in my thoughts and prayers and we are hoping to announce rescheduled shows soon. February 29, 2020: U.S. Department of State posted a South Korea Travel Advisory. From the travel advisory: Travel Advisory February 29, 2020South Korea – Level 3: Reconsider TravelGlobal Health Advisory: Do Not Travel. Avoid all international travel due to the global impact of COVID-19.Level 4 – Do Not Travel to:Daegu due to the level of community transmission of the virus and imposition of local quarantine procedures.A novel coronavirus is causing an outbreak of COVID-19 in South Korea. On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization determined the COVID-19 outbreak constitutes a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). The South Korean government has reported cases of the COVID-19 in the country and has upgraded its response level to “grave”, Its highest response level. On February 24, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued a Level 3 Travel Warning Avoid Non-essential Travel for South Korea. Travelers should review and follow the Centers for Disease Control’s guidelines for theprevention of coronavirus if they decide to travel to South Korea. if suspected to have COVID-19 (coronavirus) in South Korea, you may face travel delays, quarantine, and extremely expensive medical costs. If you travel to South Korea, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends individuals take the following steps: Avoid contact with sick people.Avoid touching your eyes, nose, or mouth with unwashed hands.Discuss travel to South Korea with your healthcare provider. Older adults and travelers with chronic medical conditions may be at risk for more severe disease.Clean your hands often for at least 20 seconds or using alcohol-based hand sanitizer that contains 60%-95% alcohol. Soap and water should be used if hands are visibly dirty.It is especially important to clean hands after going to the bathroom; before eating; and after coughing, sneezing or blowing your nose. If you spent time in South Korea during the past 14 days and feel sick with fever, cough, or difficulty breathing the Center for Disease Control and Prevention recommends individuals: Seek medical advice. Call ahead before going to a doctor’s office or emergency room. Tell them about your recent travel to South Korea, and your symptoms. Avoid contact with others.Do not travel while sick.Cover your mouth and nose with a tissue or your sleeve (not your hands) when coughing or sneezing.Clean your hands often for at least 20 seconds or using alcohol-based hand sanitizer that contains 60%-95% alcohol. Soap and water should be used if hands are visibly dirty… February 29, 2020: U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) posted a news release titled: “Coronavirus (COVID-19) Update: FDA Issues New Policy to Help Expedite Availability of Diagnostics”. From the news release: Today, as part of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s ongoing and aggressive commitment to address the coronavirus outbreak, the agency issued a new policy for certain laboratories seeking to develop diagnostic tests for coronavirus in order to achieve more rapid testing capacity in the U.S……The new policy is for certain laboratories that develop and begin to use validated COVID-19 diagnostics before the FDA has completed review of their Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) requests. The FDA can issue an EUA to permit the use, based on scientific data, of certain medical products that may be effective in diagnosing, treating or preventing a disease or condition when there is a determination, by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), that there is a public health emergency or a significant potential for a public health emergency that has a significant potential to affect national security or the health and security of U.S. citizens, and a declaration that circumstances exist justifying the medical products’ emergency use……The guidance issued today describes a policy enabling laboratories to immediately use tests they developed and validated in order to achieve more rapid testing capacity in the U.S……The immediately in effect guidance issued today describes the circumstances where the FDA does not intend to object to the use of these tests for clinical testing while the laboratories are pursuing an EUA with the FDA. Importantly, this policy only applies to laboratories that are certified to perform high-complexity testing consistent with requirements under Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments……The FDA guidance provides recommendations for test developers, including information regarding test validation, FDA notification and interim confirmatory clinical testing.Following the completion of their test validation, laboratories should communicate with the FDA, via email, in order to notify the agency that the test has been validated. Laboratories should submit a completed EUA request within 15 business days of notification… February 29, 2020: BBC posted an article titled: “Coronavirus: Three more people test positive in England”. From the article: Three more people from England have tested positive for coronavirus, taking the total number of UK cases to 23.Two of the patients had recently returned from Italy, while the other had come back from Asia, chief medical officer Prof Chris Whitty said.The cases are from Gloucestershire, Hertfordshire and Berkshire.An infant school in Berkshire has issued a statement saying one of its members of its staff had tested positive for the virus……It comes as health officials try to discover how a man from Surry caught the virus, after he became the first person to be infected within the UK.The man, who is being treated at Guy’s and St. Thomas’ Hospital in central London, had not been abroad recently – unlike the other cases in the UK.Officials are trying to trace people who had contact with him. Haslemere Health Centre, which he had attended, has now repoened after “deep cleaning”.A pub in Haslemere, called the Prince of Wales, also closed for a deep clean as “a precautionary measure”. A sign outside the pub said that “a customer who visited us has tested positive for coronavirus.” February 29, 2020: Willow Bank Infant School tweeted: “We have issued a message to all of our parents as per the attached picture. We are following advice from Public Health England and Wokingham Borough Council at this time.” The tweet included a picture with the following : Whole School – Important information regarding the Coronavirus Covid 19Dear Parents,We regret to inform you that we were told today that one of our members of staff has tested positive for the Coronavirus Covid 19.We understand that this will worry many of you, and can reassure you that we have taken advice from Public Health England, who have released the attached statements. We have also attached some FAQs which will hopefully answer some of the questions you may have.We apologise that it has taken some time to officially inform you, however we have first had to preform the necessary checks and procedures that follow such an incident, which has taken most of today. Please can we ask that you remain calm and follow the recommended hygeine procedures. The school will be shut for some days to allow for a deep clean and to ensure the risks of infection remain low. We will be in contact to ensure that you are kept updated.I am sure you will join me to wish the affected member of staff all the very best for a speedy recovery… THIS BLOG POST WILL BE UPDATED WHEN ADDITIONAL CREDIBLE INFORMATION IS FOUND. A Timeline of COVID-19 – February 2020 is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Other Video GamesAnimal Crossing Pocket Camp: Holiday 2017 Reissued ItemsDecember 29, 2020Animal Crossing Pocket Camp / Other Video GamesAnimal Crossing Pocket Camp reissued tons of previously released holiday items. The ones that caught my attention were the Holiday 2017 items. I did not have time (or materials) to make them all, but I did get a fair amount of them done. These screenshots were taken in December of 2020. Some of items in the Holiday 2017 collection have “Jingle” in the name. Jingle is the name of the reindeer animal friend that leads the 2020 holiday events in Animal Crossing Pocket Camp. As you might expect, all of these items are crafted for the player by Cyrus. Jingle checked rug Jingle checked sofa Jingle checked bed Jingle snow globe festive bow tree mountain of presents Jingle fence The festive fireplace required 60,000 Bells and took about 24 hours to craft. festive fireplace festive streetlight Here is how I arranged my Holiday 2017 items. The arch in the back is not part of the collection. It is from the 2020 holiday events. The golden ornament tree in a pot is also not part of the Holiday 2017 items. It was a gift from Animal Crossing Pocket Camp. The animal friends at my campsite seems to like these holiday items. Animal Crossing Pocket Camp: Holiday 2017 Reissued Items is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Animal Crossing Pocket Camp: Jingle’s Floral FestivitiesDecember 28, 2020Animal Crossing Pocket Camp / Other Video GamesJingle’s Floral Festivities required players to earn Poinsettia Ornaments by completing specific tasks during the event. To me, the biggest prize was a camper “skin” that had Christmas lights and a pile of presents on top of it. The screenshots in this blog post were taken in December 2020. The first thing I did was have Mabel from Able Sisters make me a red sweater dress. It looked like it would be really comfortable, and I love that you can see the knitting on the dress. The red sweater dress is part of the Toy Day Clothing collection. Here is my Pocket Camp character wearing the red sweater dress. My Pocket Camp character is about to eat a Fortune Cookie called Egbert’s cozy cookie. It’s always a good sign when your character starts singing before eating the cookie! cozy cardigan There were Season’s Greetings Gift that players obtained by logging in to Animal Crossing Pocket Camp. One of the rewards was an Egbert’s cozy cookie. What is inside this Fortune Cookie? cozy-lodge knickknacks There was a brief fishing event that was not connected to a Fishing Tourney. It was called Diving Light Goals. Players needed to catch a certain number of comb jelly and a certain number of northern comb jelly. They glow! Players that completed all the goals in the Diving Light quests received an Egbert’s cozy cookie. cozy-lodge lamp Jingle’s Floral Festivities required players to collect festive gyroidites. There were two ways to do it. Players could go to different locations in the game and hunt for the festive gyroidites. Or, they could go to their campsite where some of their animal friends would give the player a gift of some festive gyroidites. Each of the Toy Day Party items was part of a scavenger hunt. Players scavenged for the right amount of festive gyroidites, and then used them to craft the required items. Each one the player finished crafting gave them some poinsettia ornaments, which were used to finish quests. Labelle of Able Sisters crafted Toy Day party hat B for me. It was one of the items in the scavenger hunt. I gave Bluebear Toy Day party hat B to wear. Labelle of Able Sisters crafted Toy Day party hat A for me. It was also one of the items in the scavenger hunt. I gave Goldie the Toy Day party hat A to wear. Mabel of Able Sisters crafted the festive dress for me. It is not part of the items in the scavenger hunt. I gave Rosie the festive dress. She is one of the animal friends who frequently wants me to pick out a new outfit for her. The festive dress is not part of the reissued Holiday 2017 items. I don’t remember what collection it belongs in. Cyrus crafted the festive chair for me. It is part of the Toy Day Party scavenger hunt items. The Merrymaking at Home class is one that involves a reindeer named Erik. This series of classes are about celebrating the holidays at home. In the real world, people were warned not to travel during the winter holidays, in an effort to stop the spread of COVID-19. The recommended items for the Merrymaking at Home class are: Toy Day party hat A, festive chair, festive dress. Here is the start of the Merrymaking at Home class. I finished the Merrymaking at Home class! Merrymaking at Home class – success! Another way to gather festive gyrodites is to visit Shovelstrike Quarry. If you go by yourself, it costs 20 Leaf Tickets. There is a way to go with five friends, but I’ve never tried that. I went to Shovelstrike Quarry twice during the 2020 holiday quests, and got a little over 30 festive gyroidites each time. Cyrus crafted the festive table for me. It is part of the Toy Day scavenger hunt items. I hit Level 70 in Animal Crossing Pocket Camp! I completed enough of the Jingle’s Floral Festivities to earn the Toy Day travel camper. Normally, I wouldn’t be at all interested in this. Something about being under “stay at home” orders – again – made me more open to ridiculously decorated holiday stuff in video games. Jingle: Thanks to you and all of your hard work, I’ve collected sooo many ornaments. It makes me so happy! Jingle: Let’s get everything decked out with lights, and finally start the Toy Day celebrations! Goal complete! Jingle: Did you have fun at the party? It’s always so nice gathering with friends around Toy Day, isn’t it? Jingle: But the event isn’t over yet! You’ve still got time to enjoy the festivities! When the holiday quests started, I decided to design my camper with blue and white colors that reminded me of ice and show. Now, I had the opportunity to turn my camper into the Toy Day travel camper. The Toy Day travel camper is red, with red and green plaid trim. It has a ring of Christmas lights, embedded in what looks like pine branches, going around the top. The sides have wreaths with colored Christmas lights in them. The top of the camper has a pile of wrapped presents that are sitting on a platform that has a railing around it. Here is my Animal Crossing Pocket Camp character standing in front of the newly decorated Toy Day travel camper. Animal Crossing Pocket Camp sent everyone a Toy Day gift. It is a small gold tree with white ornaments on it. The tree is in a little pot. The small tree is not so easy to spot in my campsite, but you can see what it looks like in the image above. Cyrus crafted the stocking-stuffer lamp for me. It is part of the Toy Day scavenger hunt items. Cyrus crafted the Toy Day sweets for me. It is part of the Toy Day scavenger hunt items. There is a chocolate Yule log, a white layer cake with tree decorations on it, and a group of decorated cupcakes guarded by gingerbread people. I hit Level 71 in Animal Crossing Pocket Camp! Cyrus crafted the Toy Day hors d’ oeuvres for me. It was part of the Toy Day scavenger hunt items. There are trays of little sandwiches (with the crusts cut off) that are held together by fancy toothpicks. There are star shaped pizzas. There is a bowl that might be mac ‘n’ cheese with star shaped meat in it, decorated by a green and red Christmas tree. Merrymaking at Home 2 required some of the Toy Day scavenger hunt items that I had collected. It included the Toy Day party hat B, festive chair, festive table, Toy Day hors d’oeuvers, cypress plant, and more. Merrymaking at Home 2 takes place in a different room. I finished the Merrymaking at Home 2 class! Merrymaking at Home 2 – Success! The Toy Day spread was the last item I needed to craft in order to complete the scavenger hunt. It required the player to collect 300 festive gyrodites. Each of the Toy Day Party items required a certain number of them – but the Toy Day spread required the most. Once the player collects 300 festive gyrodites they must wait 24 hours – in real time – for the item to be crafted. Cyrus crafted the Toy Day spread. I had now completed all of the quests that went along with the Toy Day scavenger hunt. The Toy Day spread includes: a gingerbread house; a tree-shaped tiered tray that has cupcakes, cookies, and chocolates; thick slices of ham, a veggie plate with some kind of dip in the center; a plate with some bread-like pastries; and a small tray of decorated cookies. Immediately after the Toy Day spread was completed, the game let me know that I had enough items to do will in the Merrymaking at Home 3 class. I was missing the festive screen. It cost 100 Leaf Tickets. I didn’t have enough, and did not want to use real-world money to buy more. Merrymaking at Home 3 takes place in what looks like a fancy restaurant. Maybe it is a catered event that takes place in a mansion. I finished the Merrymaking at Home 3 class! Merrymaking at Home 3 class – success! I put all the food related holiday items together and made a buffet for the animal friends that are at my campsite. Animal Crossing Pocket Camp: Jingle’s Floral Festivities is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Animal Crossing Pocket Camp: Fishing Tourney (Do, Re, Me)December 26, 2020Animal Crossing Pocket Camp / Other Video GamesThe Fishing Tourney (Do, Re, Me) started shortly after the Jingle’s Glowing Garden event ended. I enjoy fishing in video games because it is relaxing. The main prizes for this Fishing Tourney included solfège bells. These screenshots were taken in December of 2020. One way to start the Fishing Tourney is by talking to C.J. C.J.: What up, fishionista! Did you hear? The Fishing Tourney (Do, Re, Me) is full speed ahead! C.J.: I’m C.J.! I’ll be your judge and emsea for this fishing tourney. Anywave, enough about me. C.J.: You wanna hear the rules, or do ya feel like you’re ready to heave off and get your feet wet? C.J.: Here are the total-size rewards you can reel in. These are just a few of the rewards that players can earn during this fishing tourney. The main focus is on the solfège bells. The potions are essences that the player must use to craft certain items. I’ve no idea why a white faux-fur rug is part of the rewards. These are a few of the Challenges. Each one can be completed when the player catches a certain amount of Fishing Tourney fish. C.J.: If ya really wanna hit the fishing rudderlode, you oughta try using a tourney throw net! The tourney throw net has a one-time use. It will only pick up fish that are part of a fishing tourney. Players can purchase more tourney throw nets if they want to. I caught two green lumpfish on my first try. The game directs the player to show those fish to C.J. C.J.: You caught that tourney fish in, like, NO TIME! Fintastic! Here hit me with ’em. You’ve earned a trophy! Collect it from your mailbox after the tourney. do-note solfège bell. red lumpfish white lumpfish green lumpfish C.J. : Clutch casting, fishionista! I’ll, um, get to measurin’ There is a limit to the amount of Tourney fish that a player can catch. Eventually, the Tourney fish run out. The player character suddenly realizes that they have caught all the Tourney fish and should bring what they caught to C.J. C.J. will measure all the Tourney fish the player brings him. If the player reaches a size goal, they get a prize. This entire process repeats, over and over, until a Fishing Tourney ends. white faux-fur rug I’m not really sure why this item was included as a prize in the Fishing Tourney (Do, Re, Mi). It certainly isn’t a solfège bell, and the rug is too small to fit the completed collection of bells on it. I hit Level 68 in Animal Crossing Pocket Camp. two green lumpfish The reward for catching 5 green lumpfish is sparkle stones. I bought an Eric’s workshop cookie with Leaf Tickets. snowy glass partition re-note solfège bell mi-note solfège bell The reward for collecting 15 red lumpfish is sparkle stones. The reward for collecting 15 green lumpfish is three Leaf Tickets. The reward for collecting 10 white lumpfish is sparkle stones. I earned the bronze fish trophy in the Fishing Tourney (Do, Re, Mi). The Chorus of Bells class uses items players can obtain from the Fishing Tourney (Do, Re, Mi) event. The recommended items include: do-note solfège bell, re-note solfège bell and the mi-note solfège bell. The Chorus of Bells class looks like it takes place in a church. The recommended solfège bells make it look like a concert is about to start. I successfully completed the Chorus of Bells class. fa-note solfège bell This Fortune Cookie is called Carrie’s Apple Cookie. pie-cooling window The reward for catching 10 green lumpfish is a sparkle stone. The reward for catching 20 white lumpfish is three Leaf Tickets. The reward for catching 10 white lumpfish of at least 8.0 cm is a sparkle stone. I used the Tourney Throw net and got ten green lumpfish, eight red lumpfish and eight white lumpfish. I earned the silver fish trophy in the Fishing Tourney (Do, Re, Mi). la-note solfège bell The reward for catching 35 red lumpfish is three Leaf Tickets. The reward for catching 20 red lumpfish of at least 5.0 cm. is a sparkle stone. so-note solfège bell. I was now ready to try the Chorus of Bells 2 class. The recommended items include: mi-note solfège bell, la-note solfège bell, so-note solfège bell and fa-note solfège bell. The Chorus of Bells 2 class looks like it is happening in an outside chapel. The Chorus of Bells 2 class started off with two bells already placed. It is really easy to put the rest of them into their spaces. I successfully completed the Chorus of Bells 2 class. The animal friends at my campsite seem to like the solfège bells! I was not able to collect all of the sofège bells yet, but that didn’t seem to matter to the animal friends at my campsite. I hit Level 69 in Animal Crossing Pocket Camp. ti-note solfège bell I earned a gold fish trophy in the Fishing Tourney (Do, Re, Mi). The Chorus of Bells 3 class is the last one in the series. I decided to wait to give it a try until after I obtained the last of the solfège bells. Unfortunately, the event ended before I was able to get it. I caught a total of 1,023.2 cm of Fishing Tourney (Do, Re, Me) fish. I earned the gold fish trophy. The game automatically takes away whatever amount of Tourney fish that the player still has when the event ends. Animal Crossing Pocket Camp: Fishing Tourney (Do, Re, Me) is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Neko Atsume: Gift BoxesDecember 25, 2020Neko Atsume / Other Video GamesNeko Atsume is a game where you collect cute cartoon cats. The way to do it is to put fun things into your home and backyard and wait for the cats to use them. The Gift Boxes start out empty until a cat sits in one of them. These screenshots were taken in December of 2020. The description of Gift Box (Red) says: An opened gift box with its wrapping paper miraculously intact. It costs 5 gold fish in the Neko Atsume Shop. Snowball Spots Pumpkin Cocoa Tabitha Chocola Bolt Breezy Spooky Maple The description of Gift Box (Green) says: A present box adorned with a cute ribbon. It’s empty, but doesn’t its presence make you feel excited? It costs 5 gold fish in the Neko Atsume Store. Bolt Snowball Spooky Breezy Pumpkin Tabitha Neko Atsume: Gift Boxes is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Animal Crossing Pocket Camp: Jingle’s Glowing GardenDecember 25, 2020Animal Crossing Pocket Camp / Other Video GamesThe first “Toy Day” event in Animal Crossing Pocket Camp was called Jingle’s Glowing Garden. It required players to grow Christmas trees and catch bugs that looked like wrapped presents. The screenshots in this blog post were taken in December 2020. I’m not usually a fan of the Christmas related stuff in video games. This year, for reasons I do not understand, I decided to try them anyway. Blame it on the pandemic. Jingle: Ho ho hello! Happy holidays, kid! I’m Jingle, the black-nosed reindeer and I come bearing great news… Jingle: The best day of the year is almost nearly here! Ready your joy, and ready your cheer… for… Jingle: TOY DAY! Jingle: Nothing gives me the holiday spirit like seeing festive lights twinkling in wreaths and tree branches. It appears that Nintendo was very careful about the wording in this year’s holiday events. It is called Toy Day – not Christmas. I think this was a smart choice because it is my understanding that people in Japan celebrate Christmas differently than do people in countries where there are a lot of Christians. The decision to call the holiday Toy Day amuses me. In a way, it sounds like how children see Christmas (as the day they hope to get new toys). It also makes me think of the capitalism that Christmas is wrapped in. Nintendo also made it clear that Jingle is a “black-nosed reindeer”. That’s a good way to avoid any copyright issues that might have come if Jingle had red nose (like Rudolph). Jingle: Ho HO! I just had a thought… This campsite would rival the north pole if we decked it out with lights. Jingle: The greatest give we can give folks here is enhancing the extra-magical mood of Toy Day, right? Jingle: That and picking out our gifts with thought and care. Jingle: Speaking of gifts… this little hoofed helper is gonna share some holiday know-how: lights attract presents! Jingle: That is, there are little elf-like critters known as peppy presents that flock to holiday displays. Jingle: So, what do you say, kid? Toy Day needs you! I need you! You’ll help out, right? Jingle: Ho ho hurray! That news is caroling to my ears. Now, here are the rules of the reindeer. Ahem. Jingle: First, plant these decked-out trees in your garden – the more, the merrier, we in the cheer business like to say. The process Jingle is describing is the exactly the same as all of the Animal Crossing Pocket Camp events that involve planting specific plants in the player’s garden. Each one has its own, unique, critters to catch. No matter what those critters are – the way to catch them is always the same. Jingle: Thing is, peppy presents loooove ornament trees. You plant those and they’ll be sure to gather! Jingle: Second – and this is the important part – fire up your sleigh and catch them. It’s that easy! Jingle: Lastly, the rules of the reindeer also state that you need to know HOW to catch peppy presents. Do you? Jingle: That’s the spirit! I know you could tell your candy canes from your gingerbreads. Let’s get to planting! Jingle gives the player some green decked-out tree seeds+, and some green decked-out tree seeds. The red peppy presents and the green peppy presents are attracted to green ornament trees. These four trees grew faster than the rest of them. Jingle’s Glowing Garden event included prizes for completing tasks and for finishing parts of the holiday quests. merry glowing gifts poinsettia ornament Players must collect poinsettia ornaments in order to make progress in some of the quests. Jingle: Ho ho hooray! You already finished your first task! Joy is filling the air – this is wonderful! I ordered a waffle shirt from Mabel of Able Sisters. I paired the waffle shirt with some green pants. Task complete! Jingle: That task was about as big as the pile of presents in Santa’s sleigh on Toy Day! Take this as my thanks. glowing Toy Day hedge I ended up with more than one of the glowing Toy Day hedges. I hit level 65 in Animal Crossing Pocket Camp. This fortune cookie is called Erik’s workshop cookie. The fortune cookie gave me handheld gift boxes. bright glowing gifts poinsettia planter I ended up with more than one of these. The Night Full of Lights class is one that features Jingle and some Toy Day related items. The merry glowing gifts were a reward from Jingle for completing a garden task. I got the waffle shirt from Mabel from Able sisters. The green decked-out tree is a very small plant that players can get by trading some of the regular-sized green decked-out trees. This is what the Night Full of Lights room looked like after I added the necessary items to it. Here is another view of the Night Full of Lights room after I completed it. I got holly from Cyrus. The more green peppy presents and red peppy presents you capture, the closer you get to completing the Jingle’s Glowing Garden quests. I hit level 66 in Animal Crossing Pocket Camp. glowing Toy Day arch This is my favorite of all the prizes in the Jingle’s Glowing Garden event. This is what the golden peppy presents, and the silver peppy presents look like. They are attracted to the white ornament trees. Task complete! Toy Day path corner Toy Day path glowing snow friend Night Full of Lights 2 is another limited-time Happy Homeroom class. I collected all of the required items for the Night Full of Lights 2 class. My Pocket Camp character is ready for this class to start! This is where each of the required objects goes. Night of Lights 2 – Success! golden Toy Day gazebo poinsettia hairpin I decided to place some of the holiday items in my campsite. There is a swing inside golden Toy Day gazebo. I hit Level 67 in Animal Crossing Pocket Camp! glowing Toy Day tree Jingle: Ho ho hold up! I should contact the workshop and get our festive committee to come check this out. Jingle: It’s… wonderful! The lights! The joy! Are my eyes extra twinkly? I bet they are! Fantastic work, kid! Jingle: Did you have fun this year? The lights sure made the mood merry and bright, didn’t they? Ho ho ho! Jingle: Thanks to you and your generosity, all of your friends now get to feel the full enjoyment of Toy Day. I completed all the tasks in the Jingle’s Glowing Garden event. Jingle: And since it’s the season of giving… I have a few extra tasks I’d be happy to give you! I gave the Hard Tasks a try, but was unable to complete all them before the event ended. Night Full of Lights 3 is the last class that goes along with the Jingle’s Glowing Garden event. Most of the furniture that is recommended for the Night Full of Lights 3 class come from the Jingle’s Glowing Garden event. The folk shirt comes from Flurry (and possibly other Animal Crossing Pocket Camp friends). I was all ready to start the third, and final, class that was part of the Jingle’s Glowing Garden event. This is where the recommended items go in the Night Full of Lights 3 class. I successfully completed the Night of Lights 3 class. Some of the Animal friends at my campsite used the holiday items I added. Bud has a unique perspective about Santa and his reindeer: Bud: The way I see it, the reindeer pulling Santa’s sleigh have to be totally RIPPED. Bud: I mean, they’re hauling that sleigh through the freezing cold all over the world, right? Gotta be tough. Bud: What a way to show off your max strength! I gotta find a way to flex my muscles for the holidays, too! Jingle: Hey kid! With Toy Day just around the corner, I have to report back to the big man in red and lend a hoof. Jingle: Hold the sleigh! There’s no use holding onto peppy presents and trees. I’ll just take those. Jingle: Once I leave, the magic leaves too. Sad, I know, but I’ll send you a gift in the mail to make up for it. Jingle: Well, it’s time for this reindeer to hoof it. Have an excellent Toy Day, kid! Jingle’s Glowing Garden event ended before I could complete some of the hard quests. I’m happy with the items that I got from this event. Christmas is not usually my thing, but some of the Animal Crossing Pocket Camp holiday stuff was really nice. There was still time to strike a pose in front of the glowing Toy Day tree. Animal Crossing Pocket Camp: Jingle’s Glowing Garden is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Seekers Notes: Holiday Symbol CollectionDecember 23, 2020Other Video Games / Seekers NotesSeekers Notes is a game where the player becomes the Seeker and finds hidden objects for the people of Darkwood. The Holiday Symbol Collection series of quests is unlocked after the player completes the Gingerbread Antoine Collection. The Holiday Symbol Collection quests are the last ones in the Gingerbread Adventure. These screenshots were taken in December of 2020. At the end of the Gingerbread Antoine series of quests, a talisman was used in an effort to turn Antoine back into himself. Unfortunately, the talisman made everything worse. Ben and Amy decided to ask the Fortune Teller for help. Fortune Teller: The spirits punished the confectioner for disrespecting holiday fun, and by touching their talisman, you’ve only infuriated them even more. Alas, salvation is now almost unattainable… Unless you can find a recipe for a holiday symbol. I found the recipe for a holiday symbol! Fortune Teller: The stars favor us! This recipe was lost in the storms and woes of centuries past, but you managed to find it. This means the fire of hope has not yet died out. Fortune Teller: Potions and talismans are just tools in the hands of sorcerers. The real magic is in people’s hearts. To save the confectioner, you have to catch four kinds of feelings, and the first of them is respect. I caught the feeling of respect! Fortune Teller: I can feel that the townspeople esteem the confectioner. The warmth of their respect could even melt ice, but turn a gingerbread man into a person? Alas, it cannot. Fortune Teller: There’s a reason why the recipe for the holiday symbol calls for friendship: after all, any holiday is merrier when you’re with your friends. How many real friends does the confectioner have? Can they give the poor man the strong wings of friendship? I found the wings of friendship! Fortune Teller: Wings woven from friendship are the lightest and strongest in the world. I see that many townspeople have shared their friendship with the confectioner. And you did too! Fortune Teller: Cheerful lights are lighting up the city brighter than ever! But the real decoration for this season is heartfelt gratitude. Will a gratitude flower bloom in honor of the confectioner? I found the gratitude flower! Fortune Teller: This beautiful flower told me the confectioner’s friends are grateful to him just for being who he is. This means the feeling of celebration and the desire to help loved ones has been revived in people’s hearts. I hope its not too late for the confectioner… Fortune Teller: The fourth feeling is true selfless love. It’s unmistakable light rids you of fear and loneliness. But remember that love has many faces. I found the feeling of love! Fortune Teller: What a warm and bright light! It must be the light of a mother’s love – the most infinite and powerful love in the world. Aww, that’s what works real magic, Seeker! Fortune Teller: The feelings have been collected, but not yet combined. Only a person with a kind heart and pure soul can weave them into the holiday symbol. Will you help me, Seeker? The Holiday Symbol collection is different from the previous collections in the Gingerbread Adventure. This time, the player collects each of the required items by completing quests. There is no need for the “extra” items that come from placating the holiday creatures. Instead, the Seeker helps the Fortune Teller to combine the four feelings into the final item in the collection. To do this, the player must order the item at the Fortune Teller location… and wait 45 minutes for it to be created. This screenshot was taken shortly before the Holiday Symbol was finished. I hit Level 72 in Seekers Notes! Fortune Teller: The holiday symbol is ready! Put it on the gingerbread confectioner, and his gingery heart will be rekindled with delight, fun, gratitude, and the hope for miracles – all faithful companions of the holiday. Good luck! Antoine: It feels so nice to be human again! Thanks, everyone! Let’s forget all our worries and have a celebration in the Sweet House. Together we’ll complete all the preparations in a jiffy and have fun along the way! Awesome! You’ve completed all 36 quests and received the Long-Awaited Surprise chest and the wonderful Snowy Fairy Tale jewelry box as a reward! This is what the Snowy Fairy Tale jewelry box looks like. Fairy-Tale Transformation: It all started like a fairy tale. Wanting to present the townspeople with a winter miracle, Antoine built the Sweet House. But before long, his sweet dreams turned into bitter disappointment. The confectioner angered the holiday spirits with his behaviour, because the house was more important to him than the holiday itself, and so they decided to turn him into a gingerbread man! However, despite this moment of weakness, Antoine wasn’t a callous man: he had brought a lot of good to the townspeople, and his kindness was returned to him. The gratitude, friendship, respect, and love of his friends turned him back into a human. And with friends like these, any holiday becomes truly magical! The game gives the player a little note that announces that they have been awarded a jewelry box for completing the Gingerbread Adventure. I completed all of the quests in the Gingerbread Adventure! This is the first time I’ve been able to complete all the quests that go with a holiday story-line. I could stop here and feel satisfied with my progress. Or, I could attempt to level the Sweet House location to Virtuoso. At the time I am putting together this blog – I’m about halfway there. I will update this blog post if I hit Virtuoso. The process is tedious and time consuming, and the Gingerbread Adventure will end soon. Seekers Notes: Holiday Symbol Collection is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Seekers Notes: Gingerbread Antoine CollectionDecember 20, 2020Other Video Games / Seekers NotesSeekers Notes is a game where the player becomes the Seeker and finds hidden objects. The quests in the Gingerbread Antoine Collection are unlocked after the player completes the Five Greeting Cards Collection. These screenshots were taken in December 2020. Previously, Antoine failed to obtain five greeting cards with sincere greetings from friends. The holiday spirits, whom Antoine angered, threatened to turn him into a gingerbread man if he failed to complete all of their tasks. Adrian Bloom: Here I am! I see Antoine’s away, huh? Then I’m in luck! The problem is, I dropped the box with my gift and greeting card on my way here. But I spent so much time making incense sticks for my friend! I found the box and greeting card! Adrian Bloom: Thank you! The cinnamon and ginger scent of this incense will attract all the townspeople to the Sweet House. And then everyone will see how talented my friend is. But where’s Antoine? Amy: We failed to collect five cards with sincere wishes for him … So the holiday spirits have turned him into a gingerbread man. Here he is … Adrian Bloom: This is all my fault! If only I’d known my friend was in danger … I’ve heard stories about cheerful but wayward holiday spirits before. They say they can make your wishes come true if you leave them a treat. I found a treat! Adrian Bloom: Hot chocolate and cinnamon cookies are the best treat for the holiday spirits. But I doubt they will give us Antoine back in exchange for such a small offering. Nicholas: Has Antoine really turned into a gingerbread man? Oh, I can’t believe that holiday spirits truly exist. I’ve only read about them in children’s fairy tales. You completed the quest and get two Celebration Symbol talismans and a unique picture of holiday creatures! The way to earn those rewards is to placate a total of 100 holiday creatures. Players can find the items that placate the creatures by successfully finding all the hidden objects in the Sweet House location. Placating 100 holiday creatures unlocks a leader-board. Players will still need to placate more holiday creatures, and the leader-board shows who has placated the most of them. This is what the unique picture of holiday creatures looks like. Celebration Symbol – Increases your chances of receiving collection items and fixers by 100%, also increases the experience you earn for exploring locations and solving puzzles for 100% for 2 hours. I hit Level 70 in Seekers Notes! I found the book of fairy tales! Nicholas: A fairy-tale hero was able to come to an agreement with the holiday spirits by finding their greatest treasure: a fun talisman. He learned about it from a guardian who wore a green dress in both winter and summer. Hmm, what a strange riddle. Woodsman: Isn’t the guardian in a green dress a spruce tree? When the whole forest loses its foliage, only spruces stay thick and green, heh. But there are hundreds of spruces in Darkwood! Is it possible the city’s main Christmas tree is the one we need? I found the heart of ice! Woodsman: Look, there’s something sparkling among the Christmas tree branches. A heart of ice! There’s a note hidden inside it: “The sound of fun will show the way.” Should we laugh? Violinist: The sound of fun isn’t just laughter, but festive music too. Fanfare trumpets, pipes … Eureka! During the holiday season, people often use colorful party horns that unroll when you blow into them. I found the festive party horn! Violinist: The sound of this instrument isn’t the most melodic, but when the party horn unrolled, a piece of paper fell out of it. “Fun is where it should be. It’s near but far at the same time.” Adrian Bloom: I don’t even remember the last time I had a lot of fun. When did preparing for the holiday turn into work? Oh, we all need to remember how to enjoy life in order to save Antoine from the spirits’ spell. The Seeker responds: “You’re right.” Ben: I think the real fun should’ve been at the Sweet House. After all, it’s such a wonderful place! But fun is now far off, out of reach … What if this is the answer, and the talisman is somewhere in the house? I have collected all of the main items in the Gingerbread Antoine collection. In order to complete it, I must obtain one more rocking horse from the holiday creatures. It is a tedious process that involves completing the Sweet House location and appeasing each creature – multiple times – in order to get the rocking horse item to drop. I hit Level 71 while trying to obtain one more rocking horse. Eventually, I obtained the rocking horse item that I was missing. I completed the Gingerbread Antoine Collection. You’ve assembled this collection: Gingerbread Antoine. Ben: The fun talisman has been so close this whole time! Seeker, let’s bring the talisman to gingerbread Antoine and ask the spirits to lift the spell from him. Amy: Oh no! The talisman made it even worse! Cracks have appeared on gingerbread Antoine’s frosting apron! What do we do now? The Seeker suggests: “Let’s ask the Fortune Teller”. You completed the stage challenge and get Warlord’s Armor as a reward! I have assembled 5 event collections in the Gingerbread Adventure. There was one more to complete! The story isn’t over yet. Seekers Notes: Gingerbread Antoine Collection: is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Seekers Notes: Five Greeting Cards CollectionDecember 16, 2020Other Video Games / Seekers NotesSeekers Notes is a game where the player becomes the Seeker and must find lost and hidden objects. The Five Greeting Cards Collection is part of the Gingerbread Adventure. It unlocks after players complete the Three Challenges Collection. The screenshots in this blog post were taken in December 2020. Previously, Antoine was certain that he would not be able to complete a task that required him to get five cards with sincere greetings from friends. Failure would cause the holiday spirits to turn him into a gingerbread man. Pete: Don’t worry, we’ll collect five greeting cards for the confectioner in no time! I already have everything planned out: I’ll give Dad a fairy-tale snow globe that I made at school and tell him it’s now customary to wish each other a happy holiday in advance. I found the fairy-tale snow globe! Pete: If you shake the globe, the snowflakes will swirl around inside! Beautiful, isn’t it? Well, I have to go. On my way, I need to buy cards to make it easier for Dad to send his greetings. Pete: Dad praised my globe, but said he didn’t have time to get gifts for his friends. So I decided to help him pack orders. The sooner Dad is free, the sooner he’ll sign a card, right? I found the ribbons! Pete: I never would’ve imagined that I could tie so many bows! But as soon as Dad and I finished the orders, we immediately received a ton of new ones! Looks like Dad will never be free… Amy: Why are adults so weird? I asked Grandpa if he would sign a card for Monsieur Antoine, but he replied that adults don’t need “extra wastepaper.” And instead of a card, he sent… a grater. I hit Level 68! I found the grater! Amy: I had no idea it would be so difficult to collect cards. What should we do? I don’t want Monsieur Antoine to turn into a gingerbread man… Ben: Don’t give up! Let’s visit Mr. Bloom. The perfumer and Monsieur Antoine are good friends: they could talk about flavors and scents for hours. Surely he won’t refuse to make his friend a simple card! The Seeker responds: “Let’s go!” Adrian Bloom: Do you smell something burning? That’s my plans going up in flames! A small bottle of fragrant cinnamon oil has disappeared, causing all work in my shop to stall. You completed the stage challenge and get a Marble Chest as a reward! I have now placated enough holiday creatures to earn four out of the five prizes that this part of the Gingerbread Adventures offers. I found the cinnamon oil! Adrian Bloom: Mmm, the scent of comfort and warmth envelops me like a friendly embrace… Thank you, Seeker! Don’t worry about the greeting card for Antoine. Give me some time. Ben: I called on all of Monsieur Antoine’s friends, but they are too busy preparing for the holiday… But then I decided our confectioner would receive at least one card – from me! I found four greeting cards! Ben: Seeker, Amy, and Pete, have you also written your holiday wishes for Monsieur Antoine? That’s great! But we still have only four cards in all… Antoine: Seeker, kids, don’t lose heart. You did your best. To thank you, I’d like to treat you to my most delicious confections, which I was saving for the holiday. I had collected all of the main items that are required for the Five Greeting Cards quest. Unfortunately, I lacked two of the extra items. The only way to get them was to play through locations and successfully complete them. After collecting enough Candy Canes, I would get another chance to try and complete the Sweet House location. It is the only way to get the items that placate holiday creatures. This involves doing the same things, over and over again, until the needed item drops. It becomes tedious after a while. I kept playing because I want to see how this part of the Gingerbread Adventure story ends. I hit Detective Rank in the Sweet House! You completed the stage challenge and get Treasure of the Dawn as a reward! I have hit Detective Rank in the Sweet House. To complete the entire Gingerbread Adventure, I need to hit the Virtuoso Rank. I hit Level 69 in Seekers Notes! Eventually, I managed to gather up the right amount of items that drop when the player placates the holiday creatures. The main items are consumed (and so are some of the extra items) in order to complete the Five Greeting Cards collection. It reveals a sleigh. You’ve assembled this collection: Five Greeting Cards. Antoine: I guarded this gingerbread sleigh and the whole Sweet House so zealously that I completely forgot about my dream. After all, I dreamed of building a gingerbread house to bring joy to people. Forgive me for everything, and please come visit here more often… You completed the stage challenge and get Eye of Luck as a reward! I have now completed four out of the five required event collections in the Gingerbread Adventure. The story is not over yet, and I am hoping to complete the next part before the time runs out. Seekers Notes: Five Greeting Cards Collection is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Seekers Notes: Three Challenges CollectionDecember 15, 2020Other Video Games / Seekers NotesSeekers Notes is a game where the player becomes the Seeker and finds hidden objects. The Three Challenges Collection is one players can work on after completing the Call for Help Collection. The screenshots in this blog post were taken in December of 2020. After completing the Call for Help Collection, Ben and the Seeker heard Antoine scream. Antoine: No! I didn’t mean to! Oh, it’s you, Seeker. What a nightmare! I was guarding the house when I heard a crunching sound – someone was chewing on my fruit icicles. I grabbed my snow cannon right away. But where did it go? I found the snow cannon! Antoine: The colonel lent me his cannon for defense. I fired it, but I missed because it’s the holiday spirits who’ve been munching on the Sweet House all this time! What have I done! Antoine: The holiday spirits are angry at me. I could see it in their eyes, shining like sugar crystals! They said if the Sweet House is more important to me than the holiday, I should live forever in it as a gingerbread man! The Seeker responds: “I can’t believe it!” Antoine: There’s still a chance to reverse their spell: the holiday spirits challenged me with three tasks. If I don’t complete them before the time in the ice hourglass runs out, then I’ll be a gingerbread man! You completed the stage challenge and get Gingerbread Cupcakes as a reward! I have now completed three of the five parts of the Gingerbread Adventure that involve placating holiday creatures. I found the ice hourglass. Antoine: Oh no, the ice is already trickling through the hourglass, and I don’t know what to do about these tasks. I feel dizzy. Where do I start? No, I’ll never finish them in time! Peter: Oh no, Monsieur Antoine, don’t worry. We won’t let you turn into a gingerbread man! If we complete the tasks together, we’ll finish in time. Let us help you! The Seeker says: “I’ll help too!” Antoine: Thank you, kids, and I’m sorry I was so hard on you. The first task is to prepare a festive table. This reminds me of my grandmother, who used to throw feasts with roasted turkey, jelly, and pudding! I hit Level 67 in Seekers Notes! Your rank in the Sweet House location is Sleuth! Increase your rank and get more rewards! You completed the stage challenge and get Fruit Christmas Tree as a reward! I reached the Sleuth Rank in the Sweet House. I found the feast! Antoine: How beautiful! Preparing a festive table with this gang of little cooks wasn’t a problem. The kids made excellent pudding and jelly, and my grandmother would’ve been so proud of our turkey. Antoine: But that’s not all! The second task is to decorate a Christmas tree, and it has to be a real one. Right now, I only have a gingerbread tree with sugar frosting. I found a real tree! Antoine: Miracles do happen! Seeker, where did you find this beautiful, thick, and bristly tree? Hurry and place it by the window. Antoine: All my Christmas tree ornaments are at home, but that’s no reason to despair. Hurry, let’s start making chocolate balls and ornaments! I found the edible ornaments! Antoine: The kids are covered in frosting and chocolate, but the Christmas tree ornaments turned out really well. And they’re much more useful, I’d say, because chocolate ornaments aren’t just a feast for the eyes, but one for the stomach, too! Amy: Monsieur Antoine, Seeker, we totally forgot about the Christmas tree’s star on top! And that’s the most important thing. Without it, the spirits won’t consider the task complete. We have lots of beautiful candy wrappers. We can make a star out of them. I obtained all of the main items in the Three Challenges Collection. But, I didn’t have enough of the items that can only be obtained by placating holiday creatures. To get the last one I needed, I had to complete several locations. Doing so was the only way to obtain Candy Canes, which is the currency players must use to play the Sweet House location. After that, I had to placate all three holiday creatures, over and over, until I got one more rocking horse. The items combine to make the Candy Wrapper Star. You’ve assembled this collection: Three Challenges. Amy: Hooray! What an interesting star we’ve made! It’s completely unique. The candy wrappers are so shiny, and they still smell like chocolate! Antoine: Thank you, kids, from the bottom of my heart. However, I don’t think we’ll be able to complete the third task, because it requires receiving at least five cards with sincere greetings from friends. The Seeker asks: “What makes you think that?” Antione: It gets harder for people to be sincere as they get older. The holidays turn into endless to-do lists, people keep score with gifts, and greetings become a formality. And we’re running out of time… You completed a stage challenge and get Festive Cake Roll as a reward! I have now completed three out of the five event collections required. Seekers Notes: Three Challenges Collection is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Seekers Notes: Call for Help CollectionDecember 14, 2020Other Video Games / Seekers NotesSeekers Notes is a game where the player becomes the Seeker and finds hidden objects. The Call for Help Collection is one the player can work on after completing the Gingerbread Repairs Collection. These screenshots were taken in December 2020. At the end of the Gingerbread Repairs Collection, Antoine was worried about the damage done to his Gingerbread House. The Seeker advised him “Don’t worry”. Antoine: But, Seeker, I’m very worried! I have no idea how to protect my house. I’ve already contacted the colonel, but he just suggested making gingerbread guards. I found the Gingerbread Guard. Antoine: As you can see, the gingerbread guards are useless. The first guard’s arm got chewed off along with the waffle spear it was holding, and I never even found the second guard. Antoine: There are so many intolerable pests around! Every one of them wants to steal a piece of my beautiful house. I’m afraid we can’t do this alone. I need the help of my friends! The Seeker suggests: “Let’s call them.” Adrian Bloom: Seeker, Antoine, I’m happy to see you. But I can tell you’re not in the holiday spirit. Please try my new fragrance: it will cheer you up at once. It’s a festive mood in a bottle. I found the fragrance! Adrian Bloom: The aroma of hot chocolate, knitted sweaters, spruce twigs… Hmm, do you think it came out too strong? Well, I have to keep working on it then. Unfortunately, I won’t be able to help you. Nicholas: Antoine, you smell like cinnamon and clove, just like a gingerbread man! Be careful: my place is a mess when I’m in the middle of a project. I lost a whole herd of plush deer in it. I found plush deer! Nicholas: Here are the deer! But now I have to make bears, rabbits, and a battalion of soldiers next. I’m afraid Antoine will have to defend the house by himself. Maybe he should make a gingerbread guard? Haha! Antoine: If someone kept a better eye on his son, I wouldn’t have to look for security. Pete and his friends broke my candy pillar! While I’m wasting my time talking, there may be only crumbs left of the house! The Seeker responds: “Don’t get yourself worked up.” Nicholas: It’s strange: Pete knows how much love and energy goes into any creative process. He wouldn’t intentionally damage the house. I would have talked to him, but I’m so busy, and I don’t want anyone to be left without a toy. Pete: I’m sorry, Seeker. My friends and I snuck into the park to take a peek at the house. But when we got there, the pillar was already broken! I wanted to melt it a bit with a candle to glue it back. Your rank in the Sweet House location is Connoisseur! Increase your rank and get more rewards! I found the candle! Pete: Monsieur Antoine believes we broke his house. I think the holiday spirits are to blame for everything! I’ve heard they’re attracted to bright lights and candy. You completed the stage challenge and get Wheels of the Wind as a reward! I have reached the Virtuoso Rank in the Sweet House Gingerbread Adventure. Amy: Pete’s telling the truth! We just wanted to admire the house because it’s so magical and beautiful. It looks like a picture in a book of fairy tales! I found the book of fairy tales! Amy: I didn’t even know it was possible to build such a big gingerbread house. We would never touch it! Pete: This isn’t fair! We just want to say we have nothing to do with this. I’m sure it’s the gremlins’ doing! But Monsieur Antoine won’t let us go to the Sweet House. Maybe we should give him a present? I had everything I needed in order to complete the Call for Help Collection. I completed the Call for Help Collection. Congratulations! You’ve assembled this collection: Call for Help. Peter: If you come with us, Seeker, and we bring a gift, Monsieur Antoine will surely listen to us. If he let us, we would even help him banish the gremlin pranksters! Ben: Knock knock! Monsieur Antoine, pardon us, but we’d like to say that we didn’t break the pillar. Hmm, nobody seems to be home. Oh no, did you hear someone scream? The Seeker says: “It was Antoine!” Congratulations! You completed the stage challenge and get Moon Brooch as a reward! I have completed two of the event collections in the Gingerbread Adventure. Seekers Notes: Call for Help Collection is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... CockatielsPinky on the CouchJanuary 26, 2021CockatielsPinky cannot get on top of the couch by himself. He’s not very good at flying. If a human puts him on the couch, he is quite happy to sit there. Look at how tall his crest is! Photo by Shawn Thorpe on September 11, 2020. Pinky on the Couch is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... FriendshipNovember 12, 2020CockatielsPepper and Marvin have been good buddies for a long time. In September of 2020, they started preening each other. When birds do this, it is a sign of affection. Photo by Shawn Thorpe Friendship is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Orange SkyOctober 2, 2020CockatielsEvery morning, Pinky, Marvin, and Pepper wake up on the long perch that is in the back of the cage. They were ready for fresh food and water. There have been a lot of fires in California. None are near us, but the smoke from the fires had been drifting here. Our cockatiels did not know what to think of the strangely colored sky. Orange Sky is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Hot BirdSeptember 22, 2020CockatielsCalifornia had a heat wave. Cockatiels are tropical birds, so they usually enjoy that kind of weather. But, then it got a bit too hot for them. Marvin is doing what we call “hot bird”. He is sticking out his folded wings, in an effort to cool his body. Technically, he’s doing “warm bird”. Birds that get too hot become very skinny and they push their folded wings out a lot farther. They also pant. Don’t worry. Our birds always have access to plenty of nice, clean, cool water. Marvin (and Pepper and Pinky) were not in any danger. Photo by Shawn Thorpe. Hot Bird is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Pinky Climbed to the TopSeptember 18, 2020CockatielsAfter sharing the top of the cage with Marvin the other day, Pinky decided to climb up to the top of the cage all by himself. Marvin and Pepper were not yet ready to start the day. Pinky Climbed to the Top is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Two Birds On Top of CageSeptember 16, 2020CockatielsThe cockatiels decided to be active. Pinky climbed up to the top of the cage for the first time. Marvin climbed up there, too. Pepper is looking out the window. Pinky and Marvin were happy to share the top of the cage together. Their very tall head crests show how they feel. Meanwhile, Pepper is inside the cage and picking at the blanket that covers it. Cockatiels find joy in destroying things when they think the humans aren’t looking. It’s ok. He can’t do much harm to the blanket. Two Birds On Top of Cage is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Marvin Climbed to the TopSeptember 11, 2020CockatielsMarvin figured out how to climb to the top of the cage. He spent a lot of time up there looking out the windows. His very tall crest and smiling eyes shows how happy he is! Marvin Climbed to the Top is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Marvin ExploresAugust 25, 2020CockatielsWe give our birds the opportunity to come out of the cage nearly every day. Some days, they all decide to stay in the cage. This time, Marvin decided to sit on the open cage door for a while. After sitting on the door for a while, Marvin decided to start exploring. He figured out how to get on top of the cage. He looks very happy with his accomplishment! Marvin Explores is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Best Nap EverAugust 22, 2020CockatielsPepper is taking a nap on the couch. He sits on the blanket that used to be on the big cage before we moved the cockatiels into a smaller one. Maybe he missed the blanket a little bit? Fluffy birds are happy birds. I imagine that Pepper is having the most wonderful dreams. Just look at his crest of contentment! Photo by Shawn Thorpe. Best Nap Ever is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Three Relaxed CockatielsAugust 17, 2020CockatielsOur cockatiels really like this cage! They have learned how to spread out. It also helps that California is having a heat wave now, which is the preferred weather of these tropical birds. Marvin is sitting on a one-bird perch. Pepper is sitting at the highest part of the long perch, under the blanket for some shade. Pinky is on the other end of the large perch, looking out a nearby window. Three Relaxed Cockatiels is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... TV & Movie ReviewsMy Favorite Star Wars AntagonistsAugust 29, 2020TV and Movie ReviewsIn a galaxy far, far, away, there are two paths that force-sensitive people can choose from: the light side, or the dark side. While there are many wonderful reasons for fans to favor the protagonists, I find that the antagonists can also be very complex and interesting. I am participating in Promptapalooza, this year’s version of Blaugust. Each blogger is assigned one prompt to respond to – and an additional one to pass on to the next blogger. Participating bloggers can also write about any or all of the other prompts. The prompt I’m responding to in this post is: “Tell us about some of your favorite antagonists and explain why.” It was originally assigned to Naithin on the Time to Loot blog. Thrawn The most impressive thing about Thrawn is his ability to carefully calculate every step in his plans. He is a brilliant strategist who is able to make quick changes as the situation allows. Thrawn is the type of person who has the ability to always be several steps ahead of his opponents. Thrawn finds the art and culture of other species interesting. The more he learns about them, the more he can use that information to his advantage. He is the rare Star Wars antagonist who not only understands why that knowledge is useful, but also appears to enjoy the scholarly aspect of learning such things. Unlike several other Star Wars antagonists, Thrawn is able to keep his cool when a situation goes differently than he had planned. This gives him the ability to seem very reasonable to whomever he is trying to persuade. An example of Thrawn’s ability to change tactics and adopt an alternate strategy are in what has been called “The Thrawn Trilogy” by Timothy Zahn. This trilogy is no longer considered to be canon, so I’m thrilled that Timothy Zahn has written new Thrawn books that are canon. In the first book in the original “Thrawn Trilogy”, Grand Admiral Thrawn seeks out the strange and powerful Jedi Master Joruus C’baoth. It becomes clear that C’baoth believes he is the last Jedi (until Thrawn mentions Luke and Leia). Thrawn convinces C’baoth to work with him by striking a bargain. Thrawn makes C’baoth believe that he would be in charge of a quest that C’baoth is intensely interested in. C’baoth insists that Thrawn is the one who should be in charge, and agrees to go with him. This relationship eventually unravels, as it becomes clear that C’baoth has lost his mind. Thrawn switches tactics to make things go in his favor. Timothy Zahn puts the reader inside many of the character’s heads in this trilogy, and that allows the reader to experience what Thrawn is thinking. Ben Solo / Kylo Ren I am well aware that Ben Solo / Kylo Ren is a character that has evoked a lot of emotion from Star Wars fans. Some dislike him because he throws tantrums. Others seem to have fallen in love with Kylo Ren for reasons I do not understand. Both groups are missing the complexity of this character. Adam Driver did a fantastic job of bringing out both sides of this broken, force-sensitive, person. Ben Solo is the child of Han Solo and Leia Skywalker Organa Solo. Two parents with strong personalities and plenty of resources with which to raise a child. Things should have gone well. Unfortunately, it was not enough. Something was very wrong with Ben Solo. After learning who his grandfather was, Ben Solo became obsessed with him. There are scenes in the movies where he is talking to the crushed and burned helmet that Darth Vader used to wear. Han and Leia decided that the best thing to do would be to send Ben to train with Luke, who had begun training Jedi. The hope was that the experience would move Ben Solo towards the light side of the force. While training, Luke realizes that he could feel the darkness within Ben Solo, and feared that Snoke had already corrupted him. He decided to speak with Ben about it, but found him sleeping. Using the force, Luke reached out and saw the death and destruction that Ben Solo would eventually bring to everything Luke loved. He learned that his nephew had already been turned by Snoke. It was too late. On instinct, Luke drew his lightsaber, briefly intending to kill his nephew, but stopping himself from doing so. Ben woke up, saw his uncle with his lightsaber raised, and believed Luke was about to kill him. In short, Ben Solo used the force to drop the ceiling on his uncle. He then killed the rest of Luke Skywalker’s students. After Han Solo and Leia Skywalker Organa Solo learned what happened, they decided to separate. Each blamed themselves for what their son had done. Eventually, Ben Solo realizes that Snoke had been “the voices in his head” since early childhood. Snoke saw Ben as “a focal point between the light side and the dark side” and wanted him for an apprentice. Ben Solo eventually decided to drop his name in favor of a new one that didn’t connect him to his parents. He was now Kylo Ren, and became part of the Knights of Ren. Later, he moved up the ranks of the Empire. And through all of this is a very confused young man who feels torn between the light and the dark. He feels betrayed by his uncle Luke, and has become convinced that his parents don’t love him anymore. All that is left is Snoke. In other words, Ben Solo / Kylo Ren never really had the opportunity to make his own decisions. He doesn’t understand why he behaves the way he does. There is a scene in one of the movies where Han Solo confronts his son. He calls him by name, Ben Solo, and asks him to remove his mask so he could see his son’s face. Ben takes off the mask, but insists that he “destroyed Ben.” Han insists that his son, Ben, was very much alive. He pleads with his son to come home to his true family, and insists that Snoke is only using him. Ben starts crying. “I’m being torn apart. I want to be free of this pain. And I know what I have to do, but I don’t know if I have the strength to do it. Will you help me?” Ben asks his father. Han replies, “Yes. anything.” In that moment, Han Solo may have believed that he was about to get his son back. Instead, Ben Solo / Kylo Ren murders his father. He probably thought that killing his father would make him stronger. It did not. Instead, it made him weaker and more unbalanced. So, why do I like Ben Solo / Kylo Ren? Part of it is the “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” aspect of this character. He has a split personality, with dueling motivations and interests. The viewer cannot know, for certain, what he will do next and that makes the story more intense and exciting. Ben Solo / Kylo Ren is a character who believes that he is doing the right thing. He doesn’t see himself as the “bad guy”. He is able to find reasons to justify the things he has done. Kylo Ren identifies as the protagonist in his own story – which makes him a complex and interesting character. My Favorite Star Wars Antagonists is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... They Started Out FriendsAugust 10, 2020TV and Movie ReviewsI recently watched Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace for the second time. The first time was in the theater when it was released. There’s a lot going on in this movie that I missed the first time around. What I want to focus on in this blog post (and the upcoming ones) is the relationship between Padmé Amidala and Anakin Skywalker. They started out as friends, despite their age difference and the imbalance of power between them. Anakin Skywaker lives with his mother, Shmi Skywalker. Both of them are slaves on Tatooine. They are owned by Watto, a cantankerous Toydarian junk dealer with a gambling problem. When Anakin and Padmé first meet, he asks her if she is an angel. He tells her she is one of the most beautiful beings he has ever seen. This question immediately catches Padmé’s attention, and the two have a conversation. Anakin reveals that he and his mother are slaves. Padmé is shocked by this. “I can’t believe there is slavery out here! The Republic banned slavery some time ago.” She learns that the Republic pretty much doesn’t exist on Tatooine. Anakin vehemently responds that he is not a slave. “I’m a person!”, he shouts. It is a show of defiance and refusal to accept his current status and reality. From there, Anakin tells Padmé that he is a Pod Racer, something he obviously is excited about. His thought process is pretty typical for a nine-year-old, quickly changing subjects in an effort to talk about something he is intensely interested in. Padmé asks Anakin how long he has lived there. He thinks about it for a minute, trying to remember, then says he was “just a little kid” when his mom brought him here. About three-years-old, he figures. Anakin has lived the majority of his life as a slave. Anakin tells Padmé that he had a dream that he was a Jedi who came back to free the slaves. This moment of vulnerability is not unusual for kids his age who believe they are talking with a friend. It also shows that Anakin is very innocent, and genuinely wants to make life better for those who are in bad situations. Padmé arrived on Tatooine under a false persona. She is actually Queen Amidala, but has been disguised as one of her handmaidens. In her place, pretending to be Queen, is Padmé’s bodyguard. Padmé is fourteen-years-old and one of the youngest queens Naboo has elected. When Qui-Gon Gin and Obi-Won Kenobi are preparing to leave Naboo, they are told that the Queen insists that her handmaiden accompany them. The two Jedi are not at all interested in taking her along, but eventually give in to the Queen’s demands. They have no idea who she really is, and neither does Anakin. I think the reason why Padmé finds this nine-year-old interesting is because he is someone she can be herself with. When she talks with Anakin, she doesn’t have to be super careful about what she says – for fear of starting a war. I’m not sure how Naboo elects its queens, but it says something that Padmé is one of the youngest. I suspect that those who want to become queen must go through some kind of instruction and training before they run for that office. She is only fourteen-years-old as queen, which means she likely spent years of her childhood practicing the skills she would need to use if she is elected. There is no doubt in my mind that it is the daughters of the elite and wealthy who are considered eligible to become queen, because that’s how it goes in the real world. Padmé has a group of handmaidens, and a bodyguard, who surround her. They appear to be about the same age as she is. But, they cannot truly be friends because a queen has more power than her handmaidens do. There is no room for any of them to paint each other’s nails while talking about whomever they have a crush on. Anakin, however, doesn’t know he is talking to the Queen of Naboo. He starts a conversation with her as though she’s just a regular person. This must be refreshing for Padmé, who doesn’t have to carefully calculate her responses to Anakin. She can simply be herself. Right before the Pod Race, Anakin and Padmé ride in on a large lizard, alongside Shmi and a friend of Anakin’s who are riding another lizard. Anakin and Padmé are laughing and having fun. They get a moment to be kids – despite their age difference. Qui-Gon Gin made a bet with Watto before the race started. Under the pretense that the Pod Racer Anakin had been building belonged to Qui-Gon, he makes a deal. If Anakin wins the race, Watto gets the profits – minus the cost of the parts that Qui-Gon needs to fix his ship. If Anakin loses the race, Watto gets to keep both the Pod Racer and Qui-Gon’s ship. Watto accepts. Shortly before the race begins, a second bet is made. If Anakin wins, Qui-Gon wants the boy and his mother. Watto refuses, saying he won’t give both of them. Watto throws a chance dice that has red and blue sides. If it lands on blue, its the boy. If it lands on red, its his mother. Qui-Gon uses the force to make sure the chance dies lands on blue. Anakin wins the Pod Race, in part because of Qui-Gon Gin’s instructions to use his emotions to solve problems while racing. By this point, Qui-Gon is aware that Anakin doesn’t have a father and that he is unusually strong with the force. The bets are settled, and Anakin happily returns home to his mother, with Qui-Gon accompanying him. Anakin thought that both he and his mother were now free, and becomes upset when he learns that he has been freed – but she is still a slave. This entire scene is heartbreaking. Anakin wants to become a Jedi, and Qui-Gon Gin is willing train him (if the Jedi Council allows it). But, Anakin also doesn’t want things to change. His mother gently talks him into following his heart. Anakin leaves, with his mother standing in the doorway of their home. All of a sudden, he rushes back to her arms. “I can’t do it,” he says. He asks if he will ever see her again. “What does your heart tell you?”, Shmi asks. Anakin focuses for a moment, and responds, “I hope so. Yes. I guess so”. He promises to come back to Tatooine to free his mother. This scene emphasizes that Anakin is still just a little boy. He still needs his mother. He is about to embark upon a journey with people he doesn’t know very well to places he’s never been. It makes sense that he is scared. Qui-Gon Gin’s ship takes off, and Anakin becomes uncomfortably cold. He sits in a corner, shivering and looking miserable. Padmé doesn’t notice him at first because she is making a call to Naboo to learn about what is happening there. “You seem sad,” Anakin says after she finishes her call. Padmé walks over to Anakin and covers him with the cloak she had been wearing, as if it was a blanket. She explains that space is cold, and that he is used to being on a very warm planet. “The Queen is worried because people are dying. Suffering.” Padmé explains. “She must convince the Senate to intervene. I’m not sure what will happen.” Padmé intentionally does not tell Anakin that she is Queen Amidala. Anakin hands her a bead he carved, to remember him by. She accepts the bead, smiles, and tells him she doesn’t need a bead to remember him. Padmé tries to prepare Anakin for what might be coming. She tells him that a lot of things are going to change, but her caring about him is not one of them. Anakin says, “I care about you, too. It’s just…” “You miss your mother,” Padmé responds. He nods. To me, it looks like the two of them have begun seeing each other as siblings. She is mothering him, making sure he stays warm, and trying to prepare him for things to come. He lets her know that he sees that she seems sad, and hands her something he made by hand so she won’t forget about him. Their age difference, and differences in power, prevent them from truly becoming friends. Instead, they sort of adopt each other as family. Upon landing, Padmé returns to her handmaidens. Anakin is questioned by the Jedi Council, who think he is too old to start training as a Jedi. Typically, Jedi are taken from their families (hopefully with the parent’s permission) when they are toddlers. Eventually, the council allows Qui-Gon Gin to train Anakin. Anakin tries to visit Padmé to let her know he is going away to become a Jedi. He asks Queen Amidala where Padmé is. Queen Amidala tells Anakin that Padmé is not there now, and pretty much implies that she will be given his message when she comes back. It is unclear if the Queen Amidala Anakin was speaking to was Padmé or her bodyguard. Based on later events in the movie, I suspect it was the bodyguard, who did not seem prepared to have a nine-year-old come by and ask for the real Queen Amidala by her first name. Anakin simply trusts that his message will be sent to Padmé. He leaves the room and walks away, presumably to begin training. There are a lot of other plot points weaving through The Phantom Menace, and an entire blog post could be written about several of them. I’ve left out large pieces of the story specifically so I could focus on this part of it. They Started Out Friends is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Grace and Frankie – Season OneJune 2, 2017TV and Movie ReviewsGrace and Frankie is a show on Netflix. It is a Netflix Original. Grace (Jane Fonda) is married to Robert (Martin Sheen). Frankie (Lilly Tomlin) is married to Sol (Sam Waterson). In the very first episode, right at the start, the husbands announce they want to divorce their wives. The reasons why the men want divorces is because they have fallen in love… with each other. And they want to get married. Warning: There are tons of spoilers. Episode 1: The husbands announce they want to divorce their wives because they have fallen in love with each other and want to get married. Robert: “We can do that now.” When Robert married Grace, and Sol married Frankie, same-sex marriage wasn’t legal anywhere in the United States. Robert and Sol have been having a secret love affair for the past 20 years. Later, Sol and Frankie are alone back at their home. Frankie asks Sol if that is why he got Cialis. Sol answers: “Everyone gets Cialis at my age.” Robert and Grace are alone at their home. She is sad. Robert tries to console her. “Were you ever really happy with me?” he asks. Grace thinks about it. She says they didn’t have the most romantic life. “But I thought we were normal”. This indicates that Grace and Robert hadn’t had a sex life together in a very long time. Grace thought the end of their sex life was a normal part of being a couple, or maybe because of their age. Now, she discovers that wasn’t so. She DOES NOT say she was happy with Robert. Robert says that he “wanted more.” The implication is that he wasn’t happy in his marriage with Grace, and found what he needed with Sol. * Both couples have children who are now adults. Sol and Frankie’s sons (Coyote and Nwabudike) try and console their mother. They repeat a lot of the positive encouraging phrases she must have told them. She tells them all that is “bullshit”. Grace and Robert’s daughters, (Brianna and Mallory) are angry about what happened. They immediately take their mother’s side, and don’t want to talk to their father right then. Mallory has kids. She asks “How am I going to explain this to my kids?” I don’t think this question is entirely about her father’s relationship with Sol. It’s also about the sudden divorce. * A chair is delivered to Robert and Grace’s house. She opens the box, and finds a chair that has a photo of Ryan Gosling’s face on the seat. Robert is delighted that the chair arrived so quickly and explains it is a joke between him and Sol. * For the first time, Grace notices that Robert’s office has a framed drawing of a nude man. She notices a small frame on the shelf that contains a old photo of two men, one of whom has taken the arm of the other (as a man might do with a woman). She sees books on the shelf, one of which is called “The Male Member”. And suddenly, she realizes she’s missed all these signs. * Grace and Frankie get into an argument over which one of them is more upset. Frankie says “I lost my best friend. You never liked Robert.” * Robert says he can finally breathe again – now that he’s divorcing Grace to be with Sol. Sol says he feels really guilty because he devastated someone he loves very much. It’s clear that Sol and Frankie were not just spouses, but also good friends. Grace and Robert were not friends. * Grace freaks out about the divorce. “I did everything right. I played by the rules.” She is angry. Grace asks Frankie why she isn’t angry. Frankie says she is heartbroken. * Later, Frankie acknowledges that there were times she “knew” but ignored it. She says Sol once asked her to wear a dildo. She and Grace think that could only mean that Sol was gay. Episode 2: * Sol and Robert spent the night together and are still snuggling in bed. Sol says he wants to go up on the roof and shout: “I am a homosexual and I am in love with Robert Hanson, who is also a homosexual.” Robert smiles, and jokingly talks him out of it. * As the men are getting ready to go to work, Robert says “Just because we’re out now doesn’t mean we’re gonna be gay with a vengeance.” * Two of Frankie’s friends come over to console her and take her to lunch. One of the friends is gay. Sol and Robert aren’t the only gay men in Frankie’s life. Sol sent the two friends over because Frankie won’t answer her phone when he calls her and he was worried about her. * Robert cuts off Grace’s credit card (which she discovers while trying to pay for lunch). It turns out Sol cut off Frankie’s credit card, too. Robert feels absolutely nothing about doing this to Grace – citing that he and Sol are divorce lawyers and that’s what people who are divorcing are supposed to do. Sol feels terrible about it and is upset that he knows Frankie will be upset when she finds out. * Robert asks Sol, “Which is better, feeling terrible with me, or without me.” Sal says “with you.” * Grace sends her daughters to her (and Robert’s) home to get some of her things. (She’s staying at the beach house). The daughters notice the remains of breakfast on the table and realize that Sol spent the night there. They look sad. * Frankie has a fight with Sol and kicks him out of their house. She tells him to go live with Robert. Sol says they weren’t ready to move in together yet. * Later, Frankie asks: “Was any of it real?” That’s a normal question people ask after a breakup. But, Frankie is also asking if her marriage to Sol, who had been having an affair with Robert for 20 years, was ever real. Episode 3: * Robert and Sol are having their children over for dinner. Sol is nervous. Robert tries to calm him by saying they’ve already had lots of dinners together. Sol responds: “That was before I became their new stepmother.” * Mallory and Brianna arrive together for dinner. They wait at the door of the house they grew up in. Brianna wants to just walk in. Mallory stops her and says they can’t do that because it’s not their house anymore. Brianna responds “I’ve lost both of my virginities in that house” and proceeds to just walk right in. * During dinner, Robert and Sol hold hands for a brief moment. Robert’s daughters and Sol’s sons stare at them – not really knowing how to feel about that. * Coyote tells Mallory (who is mad at him) “We’re step people now.” * Brianna and Bud have a conversation in the kitchen. Bud is preparing a cake. Brianna mentions something about how Bud seems fine with what their dad’s are doing. She asks “Would you be cool with it if they had cheated with women?” * After returning to the table, after everyone starts eating cake, an argument ensues where the kids let out some of their anger and frustration. Bud says he is “not allowed to be mad”. When Sol asks why not, Bud answers “because you’re gay.” Episode 4: * Someone who worked with Robert and Sol has died. They are going to the funeral. Sol says that this will be the first time people see him without his wife by his side. Robert says the funeral “is not our coming out party.” * Meanwhile, Grace is pushing Frankie to get ready to go to the funeral early – so they can leave before it becomes Robert and Sol’s coming out party. * Grace and Frankie see Robert and Sol – as a couple – for the first time at the funeral reception. It makes Grace and Frankie sad. * Grace notices that Sol is wearing a tie that she gave to Robert as a Father’s Day present. This makes her angry. Frankie is angry too. “They can’t leave us AND share clothes!” * Robert and Sol haven’t decided what to call each other. Robert think’s they’re too old for boyfriend. “Soulmate?” Sol asks. Robert responds, “No! I don’t even like that one with straight people.” At the funeral reception, Sol tries to use the word partner, but then awkwardly explains that they are business partners at the law firm, but also partners with each other. He confuses the people he was speaking to. * A very old man who must have worked at the same company as the deceased tells Robert and Sol that he knows they are a couple – and that they are brave. He then asks: “When did you know you were attracted to men?” He goes on to say that he had “an experience” when he was in Korea. Sol kindly walks away with him and answers the man’s question. * Robert’s sister tells Grace that she had no idea that her brother was gay. * Later, Robert’s sister accidentally mentions that her daughter is having a baby shower. It becomes clear that Grace was not invited. Robert’s sister explains that the aunties would be there (Robert’s family is Irish) and that there would be drama and it was the daughter’s day. She asks if Grace understands. Grace says of course she understands, it’s for family. After Robert’s sister walks away, Grace looks sad. * Robert gets frustrated with Sol and yells at him for talking to the widow for too long. He yells at Sol about his shoes (that Robert doesn’t like). Robert yells “You’re just not doing anything right.” Sol responds: “Oh my god. You’re angry that I’m not Grace.” Robert sits down and starts to sob. It’s probably the first time he’s cried about the divorce. Sol consoles him, saying something like he “has one, too”. Robert apologizes, and they start using the word “boyfriend”. * Frankie speaks with the widow. The widow says to her: “Oh, I think your situation is much worse than mine.” The widow points out that Frankie might live another 20 years. The implication is that Frankie will be spending those 20 years alone. * As they are leaving the funeral reception, Grace tells Robert she is so mad at him. “I’ve lost everything,” she says. She lost her husband, her house, her family… * Frankie, upset by what the widow said, and by an unfortunate comment Grace said to Robert about Frankie when Grace was expressing her anger at Robert, leaves the funeral with Grace trailing behind her. Sol drives up in his car – to pick up Robert. Frankie gets into the passenger seat out of habit. She quickly realizes what she has done, gets out, and tells Robert “I think this is for you.” Episode 5: * Brianna tells her mother, Grace, that Grace needs a boyfriend. Grace tells her daughter, Brianna “I’m sending that sentence right back to you.” Brianna is single. Her sister, Mallory, is married with two kids. * Brianna shows Grace a profile of a handsome doctor on a dating website, in an effort to convince Grace to make a profile there. Brianna says she has used dating websites and has met some “passable” guys. Brianna mentions that one of the guys had a micropenis. Apparently, Brianna still considered him “passable”. * Grace tries to make a profile on the dating site. She struggles to describe herself. Brianna sees that Grace listed her age as 70 – which is her age. Brianna argues that Grace should say she is 65, because she looks 65. Grace says that wouldn’t be honest. Brianna says it is honest because that’s the age Grace looks. * Grace doesn’t know what to put in the section of the profile marked “turn-ons”. Frankie walks past the couch Grace and Brianna are sitting on and suggests: “That he’s NOT gay!” Brianna tells her mother to say she is “open minded”. Grace hesitates, concerned that it might mean some “weird sex thing”. * Later in the episode, Grace apologizes for saying something unkind about Frankie at the funeral. Frankie accepts her apology, but wants Grace to treat her better. Frankie points out that she is Grace’s friend. Frankie also says “I’m the other person this happened to” – meaning both she and Grace are going through divorces because their husbands are gay and their husbands want to marry each other. * Grace eventually finished filling out her dating profile and posting it. * During the episode, Grace drives Brianna and Frankie to the frozen yogurt shop (at their request). Both Brianna and Frankie are high. Brianna notices that the cashier is named Brian, and that he and her have the same name – except for the “na”. Later, Brianna tells Grace and Frankie that Brian sent her friend request on Facebook. She says “That must have taken a lot of stalking,” followed by “That was sweet.” She smiles. Episode 6: * Someone on the dating website wants to have lunch with Grace. The two of them have been briefly talking on the website for a while. The man wants to have lunch with Grace today – and she doesn’t want to go because she thinks she isn’t ready for that yet. She tells Frankie she likes the attention she gets on the dating website – and likes that she can get that attention and stay home. Frankie encourages her to go to lunch with the man from the dating website. Grace says she doesn’t know him. Frankie informs her that this is what going to lunch is for – to get to know him and to get laid. * Grace realizes that this will be her first date in 40 years. * Frankie gives Grace some condoms. Grace says she doesn’t need them because she’s well past being able to get pregnant. Frankie tells Grace that because of the “penis drugs”, older people are having sex and aren’t using condoms – and are spreading STDs. Frankie says she read that in an AARP article. There is, in fact, an AARP article from 2010 that explains why older people should use condoms. The article is written by Dr. Pepper Schwartz. * An earthquake happens, and Frankie freaks out. Robert and Sol had just made plans for dinner. (They plan to order paella from a restaurant). Immediately after the earthquake is over, Sol tells Robert that Frankie is terrified of earthquakes and that he needs to go help her calm down. Sol says: “It’s her first quake alone, and she only has Grace to comfort her.” Robert immediately responds: “Go!” * Coyote rides his bike over to Mallory’s house to deliver a children’s book called And Tango Makes Three. The book was written by Justin Richardson and Peter Parnell and was published in 2005. The story is about three Chinstrap penguins at the Central Park Zoo, and is based on something that really happened. Roy and Silo were two male penguins in the zoo’s penguin exhibit. Roy and Silo liked to do everything together. A zookeeper noticed that they built a nest together, just like the other penguins couples do. But, Roy and Silo could not lay an egg. One day, the zoo had an extra Chinstrap penguin egg that was produced by another penguin couple who could not care for it. The zookeeper gave the egg to Roy and Silo, who took turns keeping it warm until the egg hatched. The zookeeper named the baby penguin Tango because “it takes two to tango”. Tango is a girl. Coyote takes the book to Mallory because he remembered that Mallory said that her kids were having a difficult time understanding what was happening with their grandfather and Sol. Coyote is working as a substitute teacher, so it makes sense that he had heard of this children’s book. * Grace’s date does not go well. After they are seated, she asks Charles if he’s “done it a lot”. He gives her a funny look. She clarifies that she means “this” and gestures at the table. She wanted to know if he goes to lunch with women he met on the dating website a lot. He obviously thought she was asking him if he had a lot of sex. * Charles tells Grace to watch out for liars on the dating website. It’s an odd comment to start out a new (potential) relationship with. He gives the example of someone who said she loved to play tennis – but he later learned that she was in a wheelchair. It’s hard to know if Charles was making up that example, or if he met someone like that. As the lunch date goes on, Charles gets stranger and stranger. He doesn’t seem to understand the subtle social cues Grace gives him indicating she doesn’t think he’s funny. He tells her if he’s too much to say: “Charlie it’s too much.” Grace immediate responds: “Charlie, it’s too much.” Charlie laughs and doesn’t take her seriously. Not long after that, Charlie starts making inappropriate, and gross, comments about Grace’s mouth and the steak she is eating, and this makes Grace so uncomfortable that she quickly ends the lunch date. * After helping Frankie calm down, Sol asks if she would like to get a bite to eat. They go to lunch. Sol texts Robert that he is going to be late (which leads to a misunderstanding – more on that in a bit). During lunch, Frankie asks Sol how it started with Robert. Sol is a bit taken aback. He didn’t expect to be sharing that today. Frankie honestly wants to know, so Sol tells her. Robert and Sol were at a law conference together, and later got drunk together at the hotel bar. They rode the elevator together. Sol says Robert gave him this look that scared him. The look gave him a feeling. Robert kissed Sol. Frankie asked if it was a big kiss. Sol says they kept kissing until the elevator stopped at their floor – the 26th floor. Sol says his whole body became alive. Frankie asks if that’s when their relationship started. Sol says no, that he and Robert didn’t talk about what happened. Frankie asks: “Why not?” Sol says they couldn’t talk about it – they didn’t know how to talk about it. The relationship between Robert and Sol evolved from sex to love. Sol didn’t want to tell Frankie about it because he loved her, and he loved their family, and he didn’t want to hurt them or lose them. * Grace returns home after the awful lunch date and finds one of Frankie’s art students in the kitchen, eating a ham sandwich. Grace has seen all three of Frankie’s students once before, the day she was trying to rush Frankie to get ready for the funeral. Grace knows the men in Frankie’s art class are all “ex-cons.” Grace is surprised and asks how he got in there. She tells him Frankie wasn’t home. The man says he found the studio empty so he went inside the house to make sure Frankie was ok. The man starts flirting with Grace. She is so surprised, she drops her purse. The condoms Frankie gave her fall out, and the man sees them. He makes a comment, and Grace clarifies that Frankie put those into her purse. It is clear that Grace is attracted to the man. She is a bit flustered. He tells her that he knows about her husband and Frankie’s husband. He says: “Please tell me that if he wasn’t fucking you somebody else was.” Another earthquake tremor happens, and Grace and the man end up passionately kissing in the kitchen (which leads to them making out for a little while before Grace stops it). The man leaves. Grace is smiling. * Later, Grace tells Frankie that one of her students was in the kitchen, eating a ham sandwich. Frankie says “That must be Byron. He loves ham.” Grace doesn’t mention the kissing. * Sol comes home to Robert three hours late. Robert invited some friends over (Al and Eddie, who are a couple). They are eating Paella. Robert and Sol start bickering, and Al and Eddie run away. Robert and Sol have an argument. Robert asks “Why did we blow up our lives if you are just going to go running back to her?” Sol said he texted Robert that he would be late, and thought Robert said it was ok. It turned out there was a miscommunication. The two make up. Robert goes to get some food for Sol. While he isn’t looking, Sol texts Frankie “goodnight”. Episode 7: * Grace comes home from an awful date. Grace tells Frankie that she took her anecdote (about saving a little bird). Frankie isn’t thrilled with that. Grace goes on to say that her date’s anecdote was about his fatty lipoma. He had a tumor that he named Farley – and it had teeth. A lipoma is a slow-growing fatty lump that’s most often situated between your skin and the underlying muscle tissue. It can feel doughy. It is not cancer. * Grace says she has another date tomorrow. Frankie points out that would be three dates in one week. * Brianna is cooking because she has a date coming over. She calls Bud to help her. Bud points out that she destroyed the Brisket, so he’s going to help her make stew out if it. Brianna says stew isn’t a second date food. Bud infers her date is with “Racist Dave”. Brianna corrects Bud – “Border Patrol Dave”. Dave sends Brianna a text, in which he cancels the date. Brianna now calls him “Racist Dave”. Brianna says that she doesn’t know what she wants (meaning in a relationship). Bud says she wants what everyone wants “Someone you can come home to at the end of the day who is happy to see you.” Brianna says she is getting a dog. * A big part of this episode focuses on the Spelling Bee, which is televised. Frankie and Sol watch it every year (it’s one of their rituals). Frankie can’t get Grace interested in the Spelling Bee, and Sol can’t get Robert interested in it. Sol unexpectedly brings Frankie a bread maker and some laser discs. Frankie sees that as an excuse to come over. Sol asks her to come over and watch the Spelling Bee with him. Frankie hesitates, unsure if that’s a good idea now that they are getting a divorce. Sol wants to continue their rituals, like watching the Spelling Bee together. Frankie says that she will be strong and say “no”. * Brianna adopts a foster dog she saw on the internet. The man who is fostering the dog brings him over. The man is cute and near Brianna’s age. She flirts with him – badly. He doesn’t appear to be interested in her, but is excited to give this great dog a forever home. Brianna is not so enthused about the dog. The dog is shy, at first. Brianna says the dog is ugly, and asks if it is the dog she saw on the internet. The foster dog “dad” gives Brianna the food the dog has been eating, and his toys. He makes a joke (about the dog leaving his patio furniture and grill so the other dogs could use it) – which Brianna doesn’t get. Foster dog man says she can call him if she has any trouble. Brianna spends hours trying to get the dog to love her. She fails at it. So, she calls the Foster dog guy, who comes over. He doesn’t see any problem with the dog (who is happily waltzing down the hallway and checking out other rooms.). The Foster dog guy makes a comment implying he thinks Brianna called to get HIM to come over. She basically agrees. They have sex. He leaves right after. Brianna is sad – until the dog leaps into her arms and starts loving her. * Frankie ends up going over to Sol and Robert’s to watch the Spelling Bee with Sol. She brought popcorn and tea. He is thrilled! They have a great time until Robert comes home and looks upset. Frankie leaves. Robert is miffed about Sol hanging out with Frankie. Robert admits that he is scared about Sol’s relationship with Frankie. He didn’t like that Sol didn’t tell him Frankie was coming over. Sol said he didn’t know she was coming over. Sol tells Robert that Frankie will always be part of his life, and that Robert has nothing to worry about. Robert agrees to watch the Spelling Bee with Sol – and they both have fun! * Grace goes on date three (of the week). It is with a man who owns a yacht and is an architect. His “name” on the dating website is “yachtcatect”. Grace thinks that is clever. She gets a table where they are supposed to meet. Unexpectedly, she sees a friend whom she hasn’t seen in years. His name is Guy, and he is a world traveler. But now, he wants to settle down. The yacht guy shows up, but hasn’t seen Grace yet. He is dressed like a television captain – hat, coat, and all. Guy asks Grace if she wants to meet that man. She doesn’t. Guy offers to sneak her out of the restaurant if she will have ice cream with him. They have ice cream together. Guy says he thinks there has always been a spark between them. They slowly start a relationship. He takes Grace to her door, and Grace kisses him. Neither expected that. Frankie sees Grace kiss Guy through the window. She leaves the television on – and the Spelling Bee – and goes upstairs. Episode 8: * Grace lets Frankie know that Guy is coming over for dinner (and she wants Frankie to either leave or stay in her room). Frankie says that Grace and Guy are gonna have sex. Frankie asks Grace if she is worried “because it’s the first time a straight man has seen you naked in 40 years.” Grace says she isn’t worried because she will turn the lights out (and he won’t see her naked). Frankie asks Grace if she is worried about vaginal dryness. Grace responds: “I am now.” * Frankie gives Grace something Frankie refers to as her “secret weapon”. It is a jar of “Frankie’s homemade yam lube.” Frankie calls it “Vag-a-kadabra.” She keeps it in the refrigerator. Grace is disturbed because she’s been eating the yam lube on toast. Frankie reassures Grace that that is good, and that her gynecologist says “You shouldn’t put anything in your vagina that you wouldn’t put in your mouth.” Overall, this advice is not a bad idea. * Grace doesn’t want to hear about the yam lube. Frankie says “It’s not a dildo. It’s a facilitator!” Frankie also says that she makes dildos. * Grace tells Frankie that men and women cannot be friends. Frankie disagrees. She is friends with Sol, and several other men, including Jacob (who grows the yams Frankie uses in her lube). Grace later informs Frankie that Jacob was flirting with Frankie. This takes Frankie by surprise. * Guy comes over for dinner with Grace. They sit on the couch afterward making boring small talk. Eventually, Grace asks: “Do you want to have sex?” Guy responds: “Oh boy yes.” Grace does, in fact, keep the lights out and does not let Guy see her naked. * The next day, Frankie asks Grace how the sex was, and wants to hear details. Grace says Guy “was no slouch in the boudoir.” Cut scenes make it clear that Grace and Guy had sex, but it was far from being good sex. Frankie asks if the sex was bad. Grace doesn’t really answer. Frankie asks Grace if she had an orgasm. Grace angrily responds: “You’re a child!” Frankie concludes, “So, that’s a no.” * Later, Frankie tries to encourage Grace to tell Guy what she likes in bed. She asks if he knows that clitoral stimulation is important. Grace is mortified – and it’s only her and Frankie who can hear this conversation. Grace says she has never talked about her clitoris. * The next day, Grace gets off the phone and tells Frankie “Well, Guy and I made plans for him to have another orgasm tonight.” * Frankie realizes that Jacob is flirting with her. She tells Grace, who gives Frankie some advice – but Frankie isn’t skilled at flirting. Eventually, she let’s Jacob know that Grace thought he was flirting with her, and so she tried to flirt with him – but is bad at it. Jacob says he thought Frankie was having a heart attack. The two of them smoke pot together. Right before Jacob leaves, he tells Frankie that he WAS flirting with her. * Guy comes over. He says he brought a flashlight. (He injured himself trying to find the bed in the dark the other night). He wants to take Grace upstairs. She stops, plays some music, and guides Guy through dancing with her. This is the closest Grace has probably ever gotten to telling a sexual partner what she likes. The dance becomes a metaphor for sex. Episode 9: * Grace got an invite to Robert and Sol’s wedding. She and Frankie make fun of the script (which is florid and loopy and overdone). Frankie asks: “I wonder how they decided whose name goes on top.” That conversation quickly ends. Typically, wedding invitations go one of two ways: (1) The parents who are hosting the wedding are listed, followed by the parents who are not hosting the wedding – and then it states that the parents are inviting people to the wedding. (2) If the couple us hosting the wedding themselves, the name of the bride always appears first (or “on top”). Neither Grace nor Frankie want to consider which of their husbands is “on top” in the bedroom, or to wonder if the order of names on the invitation match that situation. * Frankie, after seeing the wedding invitation, asks Grace to pull her finger, which Grace refuses. Frankie was asking for help – because she tried to remove her wedding ring the day of the funeral but it was stuck on her hand. Grace helps Frankie take off the wedding ring. * Frankie is making another batch of her “Vag-a-kadabra” homemade yam lube. Brianna comes over (to pick up her dog that Frankie was babysitting). Brianna asks what Frankie is making, and Frankie tells her. Brianna responds: “Mom, Frankie verbally molested me!” Surprisingly, it is Grace who explains the virtues of the lube that Frankie is making. The reason is because Brianna took over Grace’s company when she retired. Grace thinks Brianna could sell the lube because it works, and cites a statistic of how many women have dry vaginas (especially older women). This, of course, grosses out Brianna. Grace says: “It’s all natural – from farm to vagina.” Frankie says: “Personal lubricant is for everyone.” Grace makes Brianna take a jar of the lube with her to work. * Frankie calls out Grace for lying. Guy likes golf, and hoagies, and Grace is pretending to like those things too – but she really doesn’t like those things. Frankie keeps insisting that Grace needs to tell Guy the truth. Eventually, Grace says that when you are in a new relationship you lie and pretend to like things that you don’t like. Grace is worried that Guy will break up with her if he learns that they don’t like the same things. Grace is afraid of losing Guy if she is honest with him. Frankie encourages her to be honest with Guy, anyway. * Grace takes a small revenge on Robert by asking him to come over while Guy is there. Robert is coming over to borrow Grace’s wedding book – a huge binder that apparently has tons of information that is useful for people who are planning huge weddings. Grace wants Robert to know that she has a boyfriend. Robert comes over to get the wedding book and sees that Guy is there – and is overjoyed! They are friends. They are happy to see one another. Grace makes it clear that she and Guy are in a relationship. Robert is surprised, but seems ok with that. Guy says that he and Robert should get together – and Robert agrees and says he will call Guy. Grace says the she will attend Robert’s wedding – with Guy as her date. Later, Grace goes golfing with Guy, and Robert shows up. Guy says he invited Robert. The three go golfing, with Grace trying to quietly tell Robert that she doesn’t want him there. She accuses him of trying to flirt with Guy. Guy hits the ball very far, and Robert congratulates him. The two men put their arms around each other, and Guy recites part of a poem (written by Rumi) It turns out that Robert said he had no one to officiate the wedding, and Guy, who is an officiant, volunteered. He hoped Robert liked the poem so he could use it at the wedding. Robert later tells Grace that he thought having Guy officiate was perfect because Sol wanted a multicultural wedding and Guy has been around the world. * Brianna takes the yam lube to work and repeats what Grace said about it, and the “personal lubricant is for everyone” statement that Frankie told her. She puts some yam lube into small containers and asks her team to try it for themselves, and then come back the next day to talk about it how it made them feel. Brianna wants to move the company in a new direction with this product. Brianna mentions dry vaginas a lot – grossing out one of her team members. The team is made up of a woman (who just broke up with her boyfriend) a guy who is straight and may or may not be single, and a guy who is gay. The guy who is gay does not want to hear about vaginas. Brianna ends up using the yam lube with a co-worker – Barry, who is an accountant. She has sex with someone she not only works with but also is one of her employees. The next day, when the team is sharing their experiences with the yam lube, Brianna insists she used the lube “with herself”. * Frankie gets upset because Grace got an invitation to Robert and Sol’s wedding, but she did not. She makes an unexpected visit to Sol, who is living with Robert. Frankie brings him a chip and dip plate shaped like a sombrero. She also used the bread maker Sol brought her to make bread – which she brought to Sol – along with “better” (a non-dairy form of butter she hand made.) Sol asks why she brought him those things. She said she was there to remind him to get a flu shot – and that this is the last time she will remind him – because they need to have boundaries. He agrees, and the two try and work on that. Before she leaves, she tells Sol she is upset that Grace got an invite and she did not. Sol insists that Robert mailed Frankie an invite. This leads to a big, confusing, fight between Sol and Robert about why Frankie’s invite didn’t arrive. (Which gets resolved later.) Later, Sol visits Frankie (who is still living at the beach house with Grace). Frankie is in her studio, working on some art. Sol hands Frankie her invitation. She sets it aside – with a pile of mail, which has Frankie’s invitation. She made some art on the envelope, and forgot about it. Sol and Frankie get serious and ask their subconsciouses (which they have given names to) if Frankie really wants to go to Sol’s wedding. She discovers that she doesn’t want to go because it would be too painful. Sol is sad, but understands. They start acknowledging that they need to work on “divorce stuff”. * Frankie got so caught up with Sol that she accidentally blows off Jacob (the yam man). She stands him up on a lunch date, and he sends her a text. They reschedule, and she stands him up again (before rushing over to meet with him.) Jacob gently breaks up with her. She’s not ready to date yet. * Eventually, Grace starts being honest. She tells Guy that she doesn’t like golf, or hoagies (and adds some other things she doesn’t like). He accepts it. She tells him she was afraid that he would walk away if she told him, and that was scary, especially since she really likes him. Being honest solidified their relationship. Grace them goes over to Robert’s to tell him that Guy can’t be his officiant because Guy is her boyfriend. Robert shrugs that off and accepts. He tells Grace that he and Sol are getting into big fights about planning the wedding and maybe they should just elope like Sol wanted. Sol didn’t want a big wedding. Grace asks Robert what he wants. Robert wants the big wedding. He wants to tell the world that he loves Sol. Grace encourages Robert to keep planning the wedding, and points out that wedding planning is stressful. Grace says Robert would know that if he helped plan their wedding or the wedding of his daughter. There is a moment where they wonder if things would have gone differently if they had both been honest with each other about how they were feeling years ago. They decide that things would have gone the way they did anyway, but might have been less bad. Episode 10: * The episode starts with Robert and Sol, and Grace, and Frankie, and Bud in an elevator. They had just signed divorce papers. The elevator gets stuck, and Grace freaks out because she is claustrophobic. The episode is a “flashback” episode to events that took place long before the events in Episode 1 did. * The “flashback” takes place at the beach house where Grace and Robert, and Frankie and Sol, are spending the Labor Day weekend. Bud, Coyote, and Brianna are also there. Robert and Sol planned to tell their wives that they had become a couple and wanted a divorce. * Robert and Sol start trying to tell Grace and Frankie – when Mallory walks in with her husband. Mallory is super pregnant, and therefore, was not expected to arrive at all. This interrupts what Robert and Sol were trying to say – so it doesn’t get said. * Frankie is over the moon about Mallory’s pregnancy. Mallory’s husband says he sees pregnant women at work all the time, but none of them are as excited as Frankie is. Sol explains that Frankie “never got to do it herself.” Both Coyote and Bud are adopted. It has been established before this episode that Sol and Frankie are both Jewish. This makes me wonder if they chose not have biological children because they both carry a recessive gene for Tay-Sachs. * Mallory spends a lot of time in the pool. She asks Coyote to come over so she could talk to him. She asks Coyote how much cocaine he is on. He says he is naturally energetic. (Shortly before that, Coyote and Mallory’s husband smoked pot together, and Coyote snorted cocaine.) They talk a little about her pregnancy. Coyote starts to say something, that Mallory stops him from saying. She says something about “the thing we agreed never to talk about.” Coyote says “Imagine me with a 9 year old.” I think this means that Mallory and Coyote were a couple nine years ago and they either had a pregnancy scare (that turned out not to be a pregnancy) or Mallory had an abortion. Based on the timeline – Coyote and Mallory probably were in high school when the pregnancy (or pregnancy scare) happened. * Grace makes a mean comment about Frankie not knowing anything about pregnancy because she hasn’t been pregnant. Later, after Mallory unexpectedly gives birth at the beach house, fully clothed, while the family watches, Grace apologizes. She tells Frankie something like that she didn’t feel like a mother until she held her baby in her arms. Frankie says “Me too.” * Grace, who has been on the phone handling work related things for most of the day, later tells Robert that she wants to retire and give the business to Brianna. Grace says she hopes that her retiring will rekindle the relationship between her and Robert. * Fast forward to them all stuck in the elevator, and Robert explains why he stayed with Grace. “My heart broke for you, and I had to give you what you wanted.” * Bud reveals something he feels guilty about. That weekend in the beach house, he was sleeping on the couch. Robert and Sol were on the porch outside that room. Bud woke up and saw Robert and Sol kissing. Bud felt guilty about not telling his mom about that. Frankie and Grace reassure Bud that even if he had told – they wouldn’t have believed him. Frankie says “You gave me five more years with your father.” Episode 11: * Guy has been spending a lot of time at the beach house. Today, he admits that he “ambien eats” after Frankie notices more food missing from the refrigerator. Guy goes shopping to replace what he ate while he was asleep. He also says he “ambian orders” on Amazon, and has purchased the same pair of shoes, while sleeping, four times. * Frankie tells Grace she thinks Grace is going too fast with Guy. Grace says she is lucky to have him. She points out most men their age date younger women “who don’t have sagging breasts and chin hair.” * Frankie’s art student, (the one that kissed Grace during the earthquake), comes in the house to say goodbye. He is going to Mexico. (All of Frankie’s art students are ex-cons and all are adults.) Grace is flustered. He kisses her. Frankie comes in with the student’s painting – and sees them kiss. Grace says it was a goodbye kiss, to which Frankie points out that means there was a hello. Grace ends up telling Frankie about the day of the earthquake when the student first kissed Grace. * Robert and Sol are tasting food so they can pick a caterer for their wedding. The caterers have come over and are preparing food. Frankie calls Sol and tells him “Grace kissed a convict”. When Sol gets off the phone, he tells Robert about Grace kissing a convict. Robert smiles and says: “Good. She deserves some fun.” Sol is surprised by that response, and points out “but Grace is dating your friend Guy.” Robert says something like “but they aren’t married”. Long story short, Sol asks Robert if he kissed anyone else while they were together. Robert does not immediately respond – and Sol gets very upset. Later, Robert admits he slept with someone. Sol demands to know who. This conversation is happening while the caterers (who are a gay couple) are there. Sol says “We know five gay people in the world and two are in the kitchen.” It turns out Robert slept with one of the caterers, 12 years ago, when Robert and Sol were broken up. The caterer tries to console Sol by saying that he and Robert were incompatible. This does not make Sol feel any better. The caterer mentions something about how gay couples don’t have to fit into heterosexual norms. Later, Sol asks Robert “Are we doing this wrong?” He is referring to their upcoming wedding. He is worried they are getting out of one box and going into another. Eventually, Robert and Sol make up after talking things out. They end up choosing these caterers because their food is delicious. * Grace discovers that Frankie told Sol about her “kissing a convict” – and that Sol told Robert. She is absolutely livid! She tells Frankie that she is a private person and expected her to keep what she shared a secret. They argue, and Frankie tries to apologize. At this moment, Guy returns with the food he bought for Frankie. He overhears that Grace kissed a convict – that day – shortly after he left. Guy leaves, but comes back hours later. When Guy returns, he tells Grace that he is in love with her. Grace gives him a hug, but doesn’t say anything. She looks troubled by this news. * Later, Frankie tries to make amends by giving Grace one of her most embarrassing secrets. It is a VHS tape. The tape is a sex tape that she and Sol recorded in the 80′s, while wearing gladiator costumes. Frankie tells Grace she can watch it, laugh at it, tell the kids, put it on the six-o’clock news, do whatever she wants with it. Grace asks: “Can I burn it?” Frankie responds: “Please do.” Frankie says that the idea of watching yourself have sex is much better than actually watching yourself have sex. Frankie offers to give Grace $50 and another one of her secrets. Grace accepts. Frankie says: “I once made out with a monkey.” It turns out she made out with Mickey Dolenz from The Monkees. Episode 12: * Frankie makes a video on her phone saying she is moving on from Sol. She takes off her wedding ring (forever) and puts it into a box. * Bud and Coyote are tasked with throwing their father, and Brianna and Mallory’s father, a bachelor party. Bud and Coyote don’t know what to do. Mallory quickly puts together ideas for food and drinks, gets supplies, etc. Brianna thinks the Dads need to have a tacky bachelor party with jokes about balls. Bud and Coyote think the Dads want a classy party. Coyote sent invitations that had a cowboy in “assless chaps” on them. A friend of the Dads, named Nelson, arrives unexpectedly. Nelson is from Utah and doesn’t really approve of same-sex marriage. This makes the Dads feel like they HAVE TO keep the party very classy. The party is boring, so Bud and Coyote call Brianna for help. She orders a huge, pink, penis – that functions like a mechanical bull – and has it placed on the front lawn of the Dad’s home. Robert and Sol freak out. Nelson gets mean – telling Robert and Sol he doesn’t mind that they are homosexuals, but doesn’t want them to “throw it” into his face. Robert nearly punches Nelson, but Sol stops him. Meanwhile, the rest of the guests – all men (most of whom are heterosexual) are lined up around the penis/mechanical bull, waiting for their turn. Brianna’s idea made the party fun. Robert and Sol choose to stay inside – and do not want to ride the mechanical penis that is on their front lawn. * Frankie is sad – and Grace tries to cheer her up. They end up doing a “Say Yes” night. It is something that Frankie and Sol used to do. You have to say “yes” to everything that is offered the whole night – until you go home or get arrested. Frankie and Grace end up having fun. The fun includes accepting whiskey flights from two men at the bar Frankie selected. The two men are around the same age as Frankie and Grace. Frankie and Grace end up dancing on the bar and get kicked out. Meanwhile, Frankie’s car got towed. Frankie decides that, for those reasons, this “Say Yes” night is at least in “the top five”. * Grace admits to Frankie that when Guy told her that he was falling in love with her, Grace didn’t say it back. Episode 13: * Inside Frankie’s studio, near the door, there is a bumper sticker that has been posted sideways. It says “Viva Gore Lieberman 2000”. It is a political bumper sticker that was promoting Al Gore for President and Joe Lieberman for Vice President. The bumper sticker was for the 2000 election. * Grace wants to break up with Guy, but has been avoiding it. She says she is afraid that if she breaks up with him she might be alone forever. Frankie says that Grace needs to vlog about it. That evening, Grace had dinner with Guy and they watched two movies together. Grace didn’t break up with Guy, but still wants to. Guy comes downstairs and starts eating lasagna. Grace breaks up with him, and he takes it quite well. He offers to leave, but Grace insists that he stay because it was the middle of the night. She sleeps on the couch. The next morning, Frankie finds Grace on the couch and asks about Guy. Grace says she broke up with him. Guy comes downstairs and, based on his mood and words, doesn’t seem to be aware that Grace broke up with him. Frankie figures out the problem. “It was an Ambien breakup”. Guy was sleep-eating when Grace broke up with him. Grace eventually takes Frankie’s advice and vlogs (using FaceTime). She mentions Guy, and Robert, and then unexpectedly mentions a man named Phil whom she was in a relationship with. She discovers what she wants in a relationship, and that she isn’t getting it with Guy. Later, Grace tells Frankie that she has broken up with Guy (for real this time). * Robert is trying to write his vows but is having difficulty. It is important to Sol that they both write their own vows. Sol has already written his. Robert’s daughters find them and feel all kinds of emotions – so what Sol wrote must have been really good. Robert eventually writes a ridiculously long thing that was supposed to be vows but sounds like something written for a court case. Brianna asks her dad “Are you suing Sol for his love?” Brianna and Mallory take away the legal brief and edit it into something beautiful (and very appropriate as wedding vows). * Frankie goes to the home she and Sol once shared because it is moving day. They sold the house and need to pack up things and take them away. Frankie, Sol, Coyote, and Bud are going through boxes and sharing memories. They have a big, family hug. Sol says they should light the Shabbat candles one more time. The family agrees. Sol lights the candles and begins a prayer, but then gets too emotional and starts crying. Frankie sends their sons to go do the plans they had that night, and consoles Sol. Sol says “I have so much love for all of you my heart….” Frankie finishes “Hurts?” Sol nods. Frankie and Sol kiss, and they end up having sex. Both of them look quite distressed about that afterwards. * Grace comes home and finds Sol in the beach house. Frankie is not there. Sol looks extremely upset, and he’s not making a lot of sense. He says he wanted to make sure Frankie was ok. Grace eventually figures out that they slept together. She yells at Sol and tells him to go away, and that she will take care of Frankie. Sol is afraid to go home. To summarize, Grace convinces Sol that he has to tell Robert about what happened between him and Frankie, “or live the rest of your life the way you spent the past 20 years.” Sol goes home, still visibly upset. The viewer can hear Robert practicing his vows by reading them out loud as Sol stands at the front door, gathering courage to go inside. It doesn’t appear that Sol can hear Robert. Frankie was out on the beach. Frankie says something about not realizing it was over until now, and that Grace figured out it was over right away. Frankie says that sleeping with Sol “didn’t feel right”. She explains, “It felt like we don’t go together anymore.” This review of Grace and Frankie – Season One is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on Patreon or at PayPal.me. Thank you!... Notes About Things in Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt – Season 1April 24, 2017TV and Movie ReviewsUnbreakable Kimmy Schmidt is a Netflix Original TV series that is about a woman who is rescued from a doomsday cult. Kimmy is trying to make a new life. The show is goofy and weird. I put together some notes about things that stuck in my mind after watching each episode. Warning: There are spoilers. Episode 1: * Kimmy and her “sisters” were taken into a bunker by the Reverend Richard Wayne Gary Wayne. He told the girls that the world had ended at Y2K (2000) and that nothing was left outside. People really did believe that something would end at Y2K, but it wasn’t the end of the world – it was the end of computer networks. Computer analysts speculated that the all the computer networks would crash at midnight on January 1, 2000. This would, they said, cause mass dysfunction because of how many things relied on those computer networks (including banking, satellites, etc). Way back in the 1970s, computer programs included a date code that started with 1900. Every year, the computers would automatically go up one year. By 1999, people started realizing that the computers would not be able to go to 2000, because they hadn’t been programmed that way. One speculation was that the computers would just roll the year over to 1900 – which would obviously screw up a lot of things. Of course, the world didn’t end at Y2K, and the computers somehow managed not to revert back to 1900. So, it makes sense that Kimmy and her “sisters” would believe that the world ended at Y2K. * Bunkers exist. President Kennedy urged Americans to build bomb shelters to protect them from nuclear fallout in the event of a nuclear war. A year later, the Cuban Missile Crisis happened, and some people built bomb shelters – just in case. Today, people who call themselves “Preppers” build or purchase bunkers (or bomb shelters) for their families to live in – just in case the world ends or anarchy happens. So, what I’m trying to say is it would be plausible that Reverend Richard Wayne Gary Wayne had a bunker. * Doomsday cults also exist, but I couldn’t find any that held people in an underground bunker. * Kimmy had a Baby-Sitter’s Club book when she was in the bunker. That series was published in 1986. It was a series designed for middle-school aged girls to read. That fits the timeframe of when Kimmy would have been kidnapped and taken to the bunker. * Kimmy and her “sisters” were on TV (as “the mole women”). Her “sister” Gretchen says that she met Reverend Richard Wayne Gary Wayne after he bought some of her hair on Craigslist. Apparently, it is possible to buy human hair on Craigslist. Episode 2: * Titus mentions something about needing to pay Columbia House or his tapes wouldn’t be sent to him. Columbia House would let people buy 11 cassette tapes for a penny. Then, they would sign you up for membership in a club or service, and you would start getting monthly shipments of cassette tapes – which you would be billed for. The process is called “negative billing” and (may not be legal anymore). Columbia House originally sold record albums, and later sold compact discs. * Kimmy realizes that Xanthippe, the bratty stepdaughter of Jacqueline (the woman who hired Kimmy) has been telling her friends a lie. Xanthippe said she had a boyfriend who was a surfer and that they had sex on the beach, and they only meet at night. Kimmy figures out that the story that Xanthippe is telling matches the story in The Baby-Sitter’s club Mystery #12. She threatens to tell Xanthippe’s friends. This would, of course, embarrass the stepdaughter who was trying to look cool to her friends. Those books are made for middle schoolers, and the stepdaughter is a high schooler. * The Baby-Sitter’s Club Mystery #12 includes a surfer named Thrash, who meets Dawn (one of the Baby-Sitters Club girls who has moved to California). Thrash calls Dawn “kelea” (after a Hawaiian goddess). Thrash is about 20, and Dawn thinks he’s too old for her (but she has a crush on him.) Thrash fakes his death and disguises himself, but Dawn figures that out. He then tampers with another surfer’s board (because that guy tampered with his) – and there’s some kind of surfing competition going on. The book does not involve any characters having sex on the beach. Episode 3: * Titus shows Kimmy an old photo of himself. He is wearing a t-shirt that says Dole – Kemp – ‘96. Bob Dole (Republican) was running for president. His running mate was Jack Kemp. They lost to Democrats Bill Clinton and Al Gore. * In the same photo, Titus had a “flat top” haircut, that was really tall. It was probably inspired by the “flat top” worn by Kid (of Kid ‘n Play). * Kimmy is given a smartphone to use. She flips it over and asks: “Is that a Macintosh?” People used to call computers made by Apple “Macintosh” computers, or “a Macintosh”. That changed to “Mac” later – but Kimmy would have been in the bunker when that happened. Episode 4: * Kimmy drags a huge tube television into the apartment. She says she can’t believe people throw away good TVs. Titus insists the TV must be broken and won’t work. Somehow, when Kimmy plugs it in – the TV works. * Jacqueline (whom Kimmy calls Mrs. Voorhees) tells Kimmy she needs to send a photo of herself to Buckley’s school. One of Kimmy’s jobs is to pick him up from school. Kimmy asks where there is a Sears Portrait Studio. The last of the Sears Portrait Studios closed in 2013. Jacqueline teaches Kimmy how to take a selfie (after explaining what a selfie was.) * Titus and Kimmy go to a video arcade because Titus needs to use the photo booth to make headshots for his audition. Kimmy comes back from the arcade and says she didn’t like how she looked in the selfie, and wants to use a different photo. The photo she wants to use is a “Baby-o-matic” photo that shows what Kimmy and Titus’s baby would look like. It is hideous. Today, there are several apps for that. Episode 5: * Kimmy invites her mole woman “sister” Cyndee to visit her in New York. Cyndee brings with her a boyfriend that Titus is convinced is gay. Later, it turns out that Cyndee knows Brandon is gay, but doesn’t care. He was her middle school crush and after leaving the bunker, she set out to achieve all of the plans she made when she was in the bunker. The reason I put this into this post is because I’m also watching Grace and Frankie (another Netflix original series) at the same time. Two completely different shows that handle the concept of a woman dating/married to a gay man in very different ways. Episode 6: * Kimmy is trying to get her GED. She is attending an adult education class in a public school. The teacher has totally given up and plays VHS movies instead of teaching math. The teacher has tenure, which he believes means he can never be fired no matter what he does. In reality, tenure gives a teacher the right to due process. It means that a tenured teacher cannot be fired without a school presenting evidence that the teacher is incompetent or behaves unprofessionally. Or, they have to prove that there is no funding for whatever class, course, or subject the teacher teaches. In this case, Kimmy’s teacher could be fired because he is clearly incompetent. Kimmy talks to the school secretary, who makes it clear that this teacher has been incompetent for years. Teachers do not automatically get tenure. There is a probationary period of three or four years before a teacher can get tenure. Once they have tenure, it is possible for a teacher to be laid off (which happened to a lot of teachers in 2008-2009 during the recession.). A union cannot prevent an incompetent teacher from being fired or competent one from being laid off. In short, the room that Kimmy’s teacher showed her, that looked like a teacher’s lounge where all the teachers were sitting and reading magazines – and getting paid to do it – doesn’t exist. * Somewhere in this episode, The Expos baseball team is mentioned. This team started as the Montreal Expos. They moved to Washington D.C. in 2005. Kimmy is surprised to hear that the Expos moved. She would have been in the bunker by the time the Expos played their first game as the Washington Nationals. The Washington Nationals used a red cap that had a curly W on it – which was originally used by the Washington Senators. Episode 7: * Jacqueline went to China and returned with her husband. Kimmy asks “Was everything there upside down?” This is an another example of Kimmy’s limited education before she was kidnapped and put in the bunker. In an earlier episode, it is revealed she never finished eight grade. In the previous episode, Kimmy tries to enroll in a Middle School, but is told she cannot do that – and that she should get her GED instead. * Jacqueline tells Kimmy that she thinks her husband is having an affair. She says that he is on the phone, and laughing, and she wants to know who he is talking to. Kimmy suggests “Maybe Gallagher?” Gallagher is a comedian best known for his Sledge-O-Matic sketch (in which he smashes a watermelon with a sledgehammer). He is still touring today. * Jacqueline decides to hold a fancy party and invite the person she thinks her husband is having an affair with. She has a plan to catch him cheating on her. Kimmy is working at the party, and needs to look fancy (which Titus helps her with). Kimmy was able to hire Titus to sing at the party. Before the party starts, Kimmy tells Jacqueline that she feels like she’s on Bravo. “They still show operas, right?”, Kimmy asks. Bravo is an American basic cable and satellite television network and flagship channel. It launched on December 1, 1980. Bravo originally focused on programming related to the fine arts and film. In the early 2000s, Bravo changed its format and started focusing on reality shows, fashion and makeover shows, and celebrities. Kimmy would have been in the bunker when Bravo changed its format. * At the party, an attractive man with an accent starts talking to Kimmy. He is a guest, and he makes an excuse about why he ended up arriving to the party early. The man assumes that Kimmy is also a guest, so she decides to pretend that she is a guest. The man notes that Kimmy has arrived early, too. Kimmy tells him that her assistant put the wrong time into her PalmPilot. The PalmPilot 1000 was introduced by U.S. Robotics in 1996. It cost $299, had 128k of memory and a monochrome, touch-screen display. 3Com acquired U.S. Robotics in 1997. In 1998, 3Com had to stop using the name “Pilot” because of a legal dispute with the Pilot Pen company. The PalmPilot became the Palm. The Palm III organizer was based on the Palm 3.0 OS. It cost $399. By 1999, more than five million PalmPilots had been sold. 3Com started selling the first Palm device with a wireless antenna, the Palm VII, for $599. Today, Palm and the PalmPilot are no longer used because people use smartphones instead. Kimmy has a iPhone (which Jacqueline gave to her earlier in this season). It seems that Kimmy doesn’t quite understand that the status of having an iPhone would be much greater than having a PalmPilot. When Kimmy was a kid, having a PalmPilot meant you were rich and important. This is likely why she told the man that she had a PalmPilot when she was pretending to be a guest. Episode 8: * Kimmy uses Titus’s Walkman. It plays cassette tapes. It runs out of batteries while she was using it. Kimmy was singing “Unbelievable” by EMF. When the batteries die, she says “Unbelievable!” The song topped the Hot 100 Chart in 1991. * Kimmy tried to have her GED classmates meet together as a study group in the library. Almost all of them stopped coming. Kimmy goes down the list of classmates, noting what happened to them. “Fatima got deported,” Kimmy says. * Jacqueline tells Kimmy that she is getting a divorce. She tells Kimmy about friends of hers who got divorced. One friend’s ex-husband “died on top of his girlfriend”. Kimmy asks, “You mean… like bunk beds?” * Titus starts his new job at a themed bar and grill. To make a long story short, he is dressed as a werewolf. Kimmy is excited. “You’re a werewolf! Just like in the Bible!” * Kimmy finally tells Jacqueline that she was a “mole woman”. Kimmy tells her this because she is trying to show Jacqueline that women can be strong (so Jacqueline will go through with her divorce). To paraphrase, Kimmy tells Jacqueline that she and her “sisters” ate bags of dirt and passed it into a kiddy pool to survive. Jacqueline says she hopes that was a metaphor. Kimmy says it wasn’t a metaphor – they needed the iron. Scientific American posted an article in 2012 about geophagia (people and animals eating dirt and/or clay). The article noted that dirt can contain iron. it also noted that dirt can also contain parasites. Episode 9: * Kimmy has turned 30. She says she hit the big 30-oh. She probably meant the big three-oh. * Kimmy throws herself a birthday party and invites friends. Somehow, the detective that found her (when she was in the bunker) arrives at her apartment with his teenage daughter. He wants to give Kimmy her birthday present. Kimmy is not happy to see them. The detective (Randy) married her mother while Kimmy was in the bunker. Her mom and the detective had a baby girl (the teenager that the detective has brought with him). Then, her mom disappeared. Kimmy tells them to leave. (They do, but then appear at the party later.) The daughter (who is named Kymmi “Kee- Me”) is played by Kiernan Shipka – who played Sally Draper on Mad Men. I find this interesting because I finished watching all seven seasons of Mad Men right before I started watching Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt. * Kimmy asks Titus to select the playlist for her birthday party. She says “I haven’t been to a Sam Goody since 1988.” The last Sam Goody store closed in 2012. It was in San Diego. Kimmy is in New York City. * During the party, the detective (Kimmy’s stepfather) gives Kimmy a necklace that has a locket on it. Later, she takes it off and her stepsister, Kymmi, grabs it, saying it is hers and that it belonged to her mother. Kimmy points out that they have the same mother. The heart shaped locket on the necklace holds a photo of Kimmy and a photo of Kymmi. * Kymmi says she wants to go to the Olive Garden in New York City that has three floors. It exists. Episode 10: * Kimmy’s boyfriend, Logan (who she met at Jacqueline’s party) wants Kimmy to stop being friends with Dong (who she met at the GED class). Logan and Dong got into a physical fight at Kimmy’s birthday party. * Logan apologizes to Kimmy for the fight, and says he overreacted because he is not used to obstacles. Kimmy asks “What would the Care Bears say” about how Logan has been acting. He responds: “It would depend on the Care Bear.” Kimmy accepts this response. * Kimmy tells Titus that she decided to stay with Logan, and that she will have to say goodbye to Dong. Titus responds: “Oh no! Am I gonna teach you about birth control?” He seems appalled by the idea. Kimmy says “not yet.” In another scene, it becomes clear that Kimmy understands kissing but doesn’t have a clue what making out or sex is supposed to be like. * Xanthippe calls Kimmy a bitch. Kimmy responds: “You mean, the thing that makes puppies? Thanks!” * Kimmy goes to the restaurant that Dong delivers food from to say she can’t see him anymore. She discovers that immigration came and took almost everyone who worked there away while Dong was out making deliveries. Now, he needs to find someplace else to live because immigration is after him. Season One of Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt was released in 2015. I’m watching it in 2017. What may have been an uncomfortable joke in 2015 has become reality for undocumented immigrants in the United States in 2017. Kimmy brings Dong to her apartment (which she shares with Titus) and tells Dong he can sleep on her couch. After they get there, she tells Dong that Logan is her boyfriend and she can only be friends with Dong. * Long story short, Xanthippe creates this ridiculous scene in an effort to encourage her mother to decide to let Xanthippe live with her father. Kimmy ends up kissing Dong. He leaves, saying he will find a new place to live. There is chemistry between them. * Logan later tells Kimmy that he was the one that called immigration. He thinks he’s hilarious. Kimmy breaks up with him, and rushes to find Dong before he gets on a bus. They become a couple. Dong says that he is still worried about immigration coming for him – and says it would be safer if he and Kimmy got married. Again, what was a dramatic moment in the 2015 TV show is something that has become reality for some people in the United States in 2017. That being said, the rules have changed, and American citizens who were married to undocumented immigrants have actually had their spouse deported (or prevented from entering the country.) Episode 11: * Kimmy gets summoned to testify at a trial against Reverend Richard Wayne Gary Wayne. She doesn’t want to go. * Kimmy talks to Jacqueline about all the things she’s worried about. Kimmy worries about getting Jacqueline through her divorce. She is worried about maybe marrying Dong. And now, she’s worried about the trial. Jacqueline takes Kimmy to a spin class called “Spiritual Spinning.” Jacqueline says it gets her mind off of everything except herself. * This is the episode where it is revealed that Jon Hamm is playing Reverend Wayne Gary Wayne. Jon Hamm played Don Draper on Mad Men. So, that’s two people from Mad Men (which I finished watching before I started watching this) who have appeared in Season 1 of Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt. * The trial is a farce. Kimmy’s “sister” Cyndee keeps calling Kimmy, leaving messages and texts, in the hopes that she will come to the trial. Kimmy and Cyndee have smartphones and know how to use them. Gretchen arrives at the trial still dressed like she was in the bunker. * Titus helps Kimmy see that the Spiritual Spinning class is basically a cult. It’s run by an (apparently) charismatic man, who tells them what to think (and what NOT to think about) and who rewards some of them with extra attention. Kimmy eventually gets what Titus is saying. She agrees it is a cult, and asks “Why does this keep happening?” This realization makes Kimmy decide to go to the trial and testify against the Reverend. But first, Kimmy shows the entire spin class that the guy running it is a fraud. Episode 12: * Kimmy and Titus ride a bus to Indiana so Kimmy can testify at the trial against Reverend Richard Wayne Gary Wayne. Titus is reading a magazine called “Land Mall”. It appears to be the bus version of Sky Mall, a magazine that people find on airplanes. Sky Mall is filled with stuff for people to buy (most of which are things that no one really needs). Land Mall doesn’t exist. * Later in the episode, Titus is wearing a t-shirt that has Z 101 FM on it. He got the t-shirt because he was on the air (probably talking about the trial Kimmy is testifying at). The Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt aired in 2015. I am watching it in 2017. Right now, Z 101 FM is a Spanish language radio station from Santo Domingo in the Dominican Republic. * This episode reveals what the real purpose of the “Mystery Crank” in the bunker was. Episode 13: * Part of this episode, and the previous one, mentions viral videos. The man who sings in the intro of the show warns Titus that having a video go viral isn’t necessarily a good thing. The viewer can assume that the intro of the show was a remixed viral video that included an interview he gave to a TV crew as the “mole women” were being rescued from the bunker. Titus, who gave a hysterically bad interview on TV in the previous episode, had become the star of a viral video (when someone else remixed it). He is certain that the video will make him famous – and that being famous will solve all his problems. The first season of Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt takes place on 2015. If I remember correctly, at that time, videos that went viral made the news (and made it onto multiple news channels and websites). That doesn’t really happen anymore. * The trial against Reverend Richard Wayne Gary Wayne takes an unexpected turn when Kimmy introduces a video tape that … oddly enough… is sort of a remix of its own. Each clip had the date and time it was taken right there on the screen. * The first season of Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt wraps up the main storyline of the show. It also starts some new storylines that will probably be picked up in the next Season. Notes About Things in Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt – Season 1 is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on Patreon or at PayPal.me. Thank you!... Where did the Children Come From in “The Lobster”?April 13, 2017TV and Movie ReviewsThe Lobster is a bizarre dystopia where everyone must be part of a couple. Those who become single are sent to The Hotel where they have 45 days to “fall in love” with a new partner (who, ideally, also falls in love with them.) Those who do not manage to pair up with someone are turned into animals. It’s a very dark and disturbing film, and you probably shouldn’t watch this one if you have recently had a romantic relationship come to an end. Warning: There are spoilers in this post. I’m not revealing why the movie is called “The Lobster.” And, I’m leaving out a whole lot of things that happen in the movie. The movie focuses on David (played by Colin Farrell), who has come to The Hotel. His wife of 11 years left him, which means he is now single. There is no indication that they had children. The check-in process at The Hotel is depressing. David arrives with his brother, who has been turned into a dog. He is allowed to keep his-brother-the-dog, but must keep him in the hotel room. People who arrive at The Hotel have almost all of their belongings taken from them, including their clothing. The Hotel gives everyone identical outfits to wear. The men are given some slacks (of two different colors) and some shirts. Women are given multiple, identical, blue dresses and multiple flowered dresses. Everyone is given just enough clothes to get through their stay (including socks and underwear.) My guess is the purpose of this is to make everyone look as much like everyone else as possible. There is a moment when the camera focuses on a group of the saddest looking people, most of whom look depressed and unattractive, sitting in their underwear, waiting to be assigned a room. At first glance, I found it difficult to believe that any of these people had a good chance of finding a new partner. David is asked the same question all guests are asked: Are you heterosexual or homosexual? At first, he answers: “heterosexual”. But then, he recalls that there was a man… so he declares himself “bisexual”. The Hotel does not allow that. If I remember correctly, the person checking David in says that he is not allowed to be bisexual. They tried that, and it messed up their system. So, David thinks about it a little while, and decides to declare himself heterosexual. I thought it was interesting that The Hotel placed no stigma at all upon a person’s sexual orientation. Being heterosexual was accepted. Being homosexual was accepted. Being bisexual was acceptable, too (and would still be if The Hotel could work that orientation into their system.) Later, David finds himself as part of a group that includes both men and women. Presumably, there are other groups: one made up entirely of men, and the other made up entirely of women. We never see those groups in the movie. Each person is asked by The Manager what animal they want to be turned into if they are unable to find a partner. The idea is that a person who cannot find a human partner might have better luck finding a partner after they have been turned into an animal. The Hotel doesn’t place any sigma upon a person’s sexual orientation – but they do have some very strange rules regarding sex and masturbation. No one is allowed to masturbate while they are at The Hotel. There is a scene that involves David and The Maid. She is kind of grinding on him, but in a way that seems very mechanical and unappealing. It’s a service that is being provided. The Maid stops before David reaches orgasm. It appears that the purpose of this is to… encourage the male guests to find a woman to become a couple with? There is a severe punishment for the men who masturbate in The Hotel. It is disturbing, but not as disturbing as the punishments that The Loners have for those who kiss or have sex. The Loners are a group of people who escaped from The Hotel and are living in the forest. The point I’m trying to make is that the people who are in The Hotel aren’t allowed to have sex with anyone else – until after they have become a couple. The Loners are not allowed to have sex with anyone, ever (but they are allowed to masturbate – so long as they are doing it alone.) So, where are the children in “The Lobster” coming from? There is a point in the movie where two people have officially declared that they are in love. The new couple is removed from the group and given a hotel room to share. If that works out, the couple will spend some time together on one of the small yachts that is owned by the hotel. The new relationship is closely monitored by the staff of The Hotel, as well as by the Hotel Manager and her husband. They want to make sure the couple is really a couple before releasing them from The Hotel. The Manager tells the new couple that if they have any tensions, any arguing, that they cannot resolve themselves, they will be assigned children. She says that usually helps a lot. People don’t want to argue around children. Things do no go super smoothly with this couple, and we see them later with a daughter that looks to be about eight years old. Where did this child come from? The couple could not be the child’s biological parents because not enough time has passed for them to have an eight-year-old daughter. Without giving too much away, there are scenes from The City. It seems to be the place where couples live. Everyone there is a couple. The police stop a few single people and basically ask for their papers. There aren’t any children present. Now, I suppose it’s possible that The City is a place that is only for adults, and that children aren’t allowed there. Maybe the kids are in school (or daycare) when the parents go to The City. It’s also possible that all of these couples have relationships that are smooth enough that they didn’t end up being assigned children. Later in the movie, there is a part where one of The Loners introduces a few other Loners to her parents. She doesn’t look anything like her parents, so one can assume she was an assigned child. “The Lobster” is a movie that gives the viewer just enough story, and leaves them to imagine the parts that aren’t specifically laid out for them. The movie didn’t give me any answers about where the assigned children come from. Here are my best guesses about that: 1. The children are “orphans”. A couple that has been assigned a child (or more than one child) breaks up. The parents become singles. In this world, people cannot be single. So, someone – maybe The Hotel – takes the children away from both parents. This allows each parent to find a new partner, or to be turned into an animal if they are unable to find a new partner. The former parent can focus all of their attention on finding a new partner without worrying about what happened to their assigned children. There must be a large orphanage somewhere (and it probably isn’t located in The City). The children become “orphans”. They might get assigned to new parents one day. 2. The children are from accidental pregnancies. Two people at The Hotel become a couple. They have lots of sex. They are either not using any kind of birth control, or their birth control of choice fails. The woman gets pregnant. There are no examples in the movie of a couple that is raising their biological child together. Maybe this accidentally produced child is automatically sent to the orphanage after he or she is born. This child would one day be assigned to another couple (who need a child because they cannot resolve their differences and are arguing too much.) It is possible that all of the adults in the movie were raised in an orphanage (until they were assigned parents). If so, then the couple with the accidental pregnancy would consider it quite normal to send their newborn to the orphanage. This society highly values couples, and places a huge stigma on single people. The society doesn’t seem to give much thought to children (or who raises them). 3. The children are “test tube babies” or clones or are produced in some way that doesn’t involve a typical pregnancy. Viewers must accept the premise that The Hotel is quite capable of turning a person into an animal. From there, it doesn’t seem too difficult to imagine that The Hotel collects DNA from the guests, and sends that DNA to a lab for the purpose of making babies. 4. The children are coming from an entirely different society that has an abundance of children and not nearly enough parents to raise them. Maybe the other society doesn’t care if people are single, or part of a couple, and also doesn’t care who decides to have sex with whom. Sometimes, a pregnancy occurs. Parents can decide for themselves if they want to raise the child or send it away for someone else to raise. 5. The children are coming from a situation that I haven’t thought of. Where did the Children Come From in “The Lobster”? is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Things from Mad Men that are Different from Today – Season SevenApril 8, 2017TV and Movie ReviewsSeason Seven was the final season of Mad Men. I was kind of sad to have reached the end of the story, but I liked how it ended. I can always re-watch it if I want to. My husband and I watched the entire series of Mad Men on Netflix. I took notes on the things in Mad Men that are different from today. Before you read this post, you might want to read what I wrote about previous Seasons: Mad Men Season One Mad Men Season Two Mad Men Season Three Mad Men Season Four Mad Men Season Five Mad Men Season Six Warning: There are spoilers. Episode 1: Don flies to California where his wife, Megan, is living. She has a tiny black and white television. He buys her a huge console television. The thing is so heavy that it requires two big men to carry it inside. It looks like a cabinet with the television embedded in it, and I think it had built in speakers on either side of the TV. This was a top-of-the-line, expensive, color television…. that Megan didn’t want. Episode 2: * Don wakes up to a buzzing noise. It is coming from his alarm clock, which can be described as an analog electric alarm clock. The numbers flip over. * Don and his daughter, Sally, are at a diner. She wants to call her friends. Don put two quarters on the table. Sally takes the quarters, gets up, walks across the diner, and puts the quarters into the payphone that is on the wall. Today, Sally would have picked up her smartphone and made the call (or would have borrowed her dad’s smartphone to make the call). Episode 3: * Harry finally tells one of the other partners that he’s been lying – for a long time – about there being a computer that he uses to figure out the best ad placement for television ads. He’s been lying to the customers about it, too. There is no computer. This revelation sparks a conversation about the company needing to invest in a computer. Today, its hard to imagine an entire office without computers. * Betty goes on a field trip with her son, Bobby. She is a chaperone. Betty and Bobby ride on the school bus with his classmates, teacher, and a few other moms. Betty smokes a cigarette on the way, and ashes out the window. Episode 4: * The creative’s lounge is taken away from them because the office is going to put a computer there. It takes up that entire space. The only thing this computer could do was “crunch numbers” – literally computing. * The computer is an IBM 360. It is a mainframe computer that was accessed by remote terminals. It had 8,000,000 characters in bulk core storage. Monthly rentals ranged from $27,000 for a basic configuration to $115,000 for a typical large multi system configuration. * The “System/360″ became available for delivery in 1965. The office in Mad Men is getting it installed in 1969. Today, most offices do not invest in computers that are four years old. * Harry asks the IBM guy who is overseeing the computer installation to tell him where to find a keypunch service. The IBM 360 ran on punch cards. A keypunch service had people (often women) whose job it was to put a deck of blank cards into a hopper. The worker would type an operator command, and the hopper machine would feed one card at a time into a punch station. A series of dies punched holes into an individual card. Harry needed a service to make those cards for the office’s computer. * In order to operate the mainframe, a person needed to – by hand – put the stack of punchcards, in a specific order, into the mainframe one by one. * I have personally done that a few times when I was a little kid (because my dad sometimes took me to work with him.). Dropping the punch cards on the floor was a complete disaster. It meant you had to stop entering the cards, stop the computer, take the time to put the cards back in order, and start putting them into the computer again. If you accidentally put one card into the computer in the wrong order – the computer wouldn’t work. Once all the punchcards were correctly entered, you had to wait around for the mainframe to process them before you could start working from a terminal. * Don uses a typewriter at his desk to get some work done. He has a piece of white paper, then a sheet of carbon, then another piece of white paper sandwiched together. The purpose of this was so Don could make two copies of what he was typing at the same time. Episode 5: * There is now a secretary who sits at the terminal inside the room the giant computer is in. She appears to be typing something into the terminal. Behind her is a computer with a magnetic reel tape drive. * The giant mainframe computer makes a constant humming noise. The computer room always has the doors closed because it needs to be in an air conditioned room. Episode 6: * Peggy is working on an ad campaign for Burger Chef. She and Don decide to come up with a new idea rather than what they originally planned. Peggy mentions something about the ad including a mother who is picking up Burger Chef for her family on the way home from work. Don says “Mothers who work is too sad for an ad.” Peggy points out that he is surrounded by mothers who work. This doesn’t change Don’s mind. They end up going with a completely different idea. Episode 7: * This episode focuses on the Moon Landing. Everyone watches the rocket lifting off on television. Then, they watched the first space walk on television. * Peggy is in Indiana with Don, Pete, and Harry because they are pitching to Burger Chef the next day. Peggy went out to get alcohol, but Indiana was dry on Sundays – meaning stores could not sell alcohol. She ends up having to buy two cans of beer from the hotel clerk. Indiana was dry on Sundays until July 1, 2016. The laws changed on that date to allow distilleries, breweries, and wineries to sell alcohol on Sundays. The laws still did not allow people to buy alcohol and bring it home with them on a Sunday. Episode 8: * Don has an answering service. He calls and a female worker answers and tells him who called him and when. The service is not work related – it is taking calls from women in Don’s social life. * Joan and Peggy are talking to their client, Topaz pantyhose, about a problem. L’Eggs pantyhose – a competitor – is a lower price and is selling more than Topaz. L’Eggs pantyhose came in a plastic egg shaped container. Episode 9: * I didn’t see anything new in this episode, that you don’t see today (that hadn’t already been mentioned in this post or in posts about previous seasons.) Episode 10: * Sally’s friend Glenn comes to visit. He is now 18 years old. Glenn, and a female friend he brought with, ask Sally to go to Playland with them. Glenn reveals that he has joined the military and will be going to Vietnam. Sally gets very upset about this and rushes to her room. Later, Glenn returns, knowing that Sally is not there. (She was on a class trip.). Glenn came to see Betty. Betty gives Glenn a beer. The legal drinking age in New York was 18 until 1982 – when it went up to 19. On December 1, 1985, the legal drinking age in New York moved up to age 21. * Don was running late for work, so he shaves at his desk in his office while his secretary fills him in about what is scheduled for the day. He uses a battery powered electric razor. Those types of razors increased in popularity in the 1960s. * The office has a darkroom which Stan (one of the creatives) uses to develop film – usually for ad campaigns. People have to knock on the door before coming in because opening the door lets light into the room. Doing that at the wrong time can completely destroy film. Episode 11: * Peggy and Stan are working with children for an ad campaign. There is a table of toys in front of the kids. One of the toys is a metal slinky. Episode 12: * The office gets absorbed by McCann. They lose the computer that took over the creative’s lounge. Harry says that McCann has a team of people who do statistics – so they don’t need the computer. * McCann has an informal “ladies club”. The women who work there get together to complain about work (and drink). * Peggy’s last remaining creative guy chooses not to go to McCann. He is still at the old office. He says he is still being paid, so he thought he’d “make some long distance calls”. Long distance calls were very expensive at the time. Episode 13: * Don has gone on an impromptu road trip. He doesn’t carry luggage. Instead, he has a large paper bag with a change of clothes in it. The bag says Sears. Today, a lot of Sears stores are closing. Episode 14: * Don’s road trip continues. This time he is carrying a bag from Penney’s. The bag probably came from JC Penney’s (which, today, is also closing a lot of stores.) Things from Mad Men that are Different from Today – Season Seven is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on Patreon or at PayPal.me. Thank you!... Things from Mad Men that are Different from Today – Season SixApril 7, 2017TV and Movie ReviewsAs my husband and I watched our way through Mad Men, I took notes about things that are in the show that are different from today. This post is about Mad Men Season Six. We watched the entire series on Netflix. Before you read this, you might want to read what I wrote about previous Seasons: Mad Men Season One Mad Men Season Two Mad Men Season Three Mad Men Season Four Mad Men Season Five Warning: There are spoilers. Episode 1: * Megan uses a Kodak Instamatic camera to take a photo of Don while they are on a work/vacation in Hawaii. The Kodak Instamatic was launched in 1963. It used a 126 film cartridge. The Kodak Instamatic 104 was released in 1968. It had a holder for a single flashbulb on the top of the camera. Take a photo with the flashcube, and cock the camera for the next exposure (meaning – roll the film for the next photo). The flashcube would turn 90 degrees to bring the next flashbulb into position automatically. * The maid was vacuuming while Don was watching TV. The television had two squiggly lines of interference across it – one near the top of the screen and one near the bottom. It was not a common problem, and the TV went back to normal when after the vacuum was shut off. Episode 2: I did not see anything in this episode that was different from today (and that wasn’t already mentioned in this list or the lists about previous seasons.) Episode 3: * The news in the background on televisions in various scenes discuss the Vietnam War. It has been said that Vietnam was the first “television war”, or the first “living-room war” (the room people watched television in.) Being able to sit in your home, in front of your TV, and watch what was happening in a war far away had an effect on people. At first, TV stations were trying to be upbeat – providing wire reports or a battlefield roundup. Later, things got darker and some “horror of war” was televised. The ability to watch the war on TV had an effect on people’s opinion about the war. In 1968, the Tet Offensive happened. It appears that this is what the television news is talking about in this episode of Mad Men. Episode 4: * Joan and her friend Kate go to a restaurant where there is a telephone at every table. The name of the restaurant is “Ma Bells”. The name is a play on The Bell Telephone Company. Ma Bells was the creation of Restaurant Associates. The restaurant actually existed. Every table had a telephone on it. People called their order into the kitchen. The telephones could also be used to call someone who was sitting at another table. * Megan and Don go out to dinner with Megan’s coworker and boss (who are a married couple.). During the dinner, it is revealed that the couple are “Swingers” who are interested in swinging with Megan and Don. Swingers were people who had open relationships. Some were heterosexual, and some were bisexual. Being a swinger became popular in the late 1960s, when the “free love” movement was taking place and casual sex was becoming an accepted thing among some people. Swingers felt it was natural to have sexual desires outside of your relationship, and to act on those desires (if the desired person was consenting.) Episode 5: * This episode focused on when Martin Luther King Jr. was shot and killed. * Someone (I forgot who) turns on a black and white television. A bright dot appears in the center of the screen, which becomes a horizontal line, that eventually spread out over the screen. This was how televisions at the time warmed up if they had not been turned on in a while. * Don takes Bobby to watch a movie. They see “The Planet of the Apes.” At the end of the movie, it’s clear that Bobby liked it. Don asked “Do you want to see it again?” Bobby does, so they stay in their seats and watch the movie again. This wasn’t unusual and was allowed at the time. Episode 6: * I didn’t see anything in this episode that hasn’t already been mentioned in this list (or the lists I put together about previous episode) Episode 7: * Pete’s mother comes to his apartment. The handyman calls Pete to let him know she is there. Pete tells the handyman to fix his mother a drink. The ice cube tray is made out of aluminum. It has a quick release handle on it that you pull up to crack the ice cubes. Today, ice cube trays are plastic and you twist them to crack the ice. Episode 8: * The office is visited by a “doctor” (brought in by one of the partners of the company that Don’s company merged with). The man is not really a doctor. He was brought to “fix everyone up.” Don agrees to see the “doctor” because he is suffering from a bad cough. The “doctor” injects several of the men in the office with an unknown concoction. Based on the actions of the men who took this injection – it appears that at least some of it is amphetamine. The “doctor” appears to be somewhat based on a real person named Max Jacobson who was known as “Dr. Feelgood”. Jacobson did have a background as a doctor – but was known for mixing up unknown ingredients (along with amphetamine) and injecting that into the (often famous) people who came to him for help. Jacobson “treated” JFK, Marylin Monroe, Eddie Fisher, and others. Episode 9: * Don stops at a gas station and tries to get the gas station attendant’s attention. It was a full service gas station (which was standard at the time). People did not pump their own gas – the attendant did it for them. The gas station attendant would fill the tank, check the tire pressure, check the oil, and wash the cars windows. People paid for the gas, but the other services were provided for free. Gas stations used to hand out trinkets as well – for travelers to collect. (drinking glasses, key chains, calendars, road maps, etc). There are some places in the United States today where people are required by law to allow a gas station attendant to pump their gas for them. It is no longer a common practice – and does not come with the extra services. Episode 10: * Joan tells a potential client that Harry works on figuring out where to place television ads “with a computer as big as this room”. The first personal computer wasn’t introduced until 1975 – and they were kits that people had to put together themselves. * This episode focused on the 1968 Democratic National Convention that took place in Chicago. * Megan watches the violence that took place outside the DNC. She calls Don, who is watching it, too, (while away on business). Megan says she can’t vote – but still cares about what’s going on. Megan is Canadian. She was from Quebec. * There is a lava lamp on the desk in the Creatives Office. The lava lamp was created by Edward Craven Walker (who was a British accountant). He sold the U.S. manufacturing rights in 1965 to a company named Lava Lite. In 1968, lava lamps were marketed to executives. Episode 11: * The office, which is in New York, receives fresh oranges from California from Sunkist (who is a client). In a previous episode, Roger’s daughter told him that her husband had this great idea about investing in refrigerated trucks that ship produce. This indicates that it was not easy to obtain fresh oranges from California if you lived in New York. Those oranges were a big deal. * Sylvia and Arnold (Don’s neighbors) have a son, Mitchell, who is 18. He returned his draft card as a form of protest of the Vietnam War. After Mitchell dropped out of school, the military re-classified him 1-A. This designation meant that it was extremely likely that Mitchell would be drafted and sent to Vietnam. Mitchell tells his problem to Megan (who relays the problem to Don). Megan said that Mitchell was “going to run”. This meant that Mitchell was going to leave the United States and go to Canada in order to avoid being drafted. Megan considers helping Mitchell because she has family in Canada. Much of this episode is about how to solve Mitchell’s problem. Episode 12: * I didn’t notice anything new in this episode (that wasn’t already mentioned in this post or in posts from previous seasons.) Episode 13: * Sally get suspended from boarding school because she used a fake ID with her mother’s name on it and bought alcohol for herself and the other girls. Betty calls Don, all upset. Betty tells Don that the reason why “nothing is working” and “the bad is beating the good” is because Sally is “from a broken home.” That’s not a phrase people use today in regards to a child from a family where the parents got divorced and remarried. Things from Mad Men that are Different from Today – Season Six is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on Patreon or at PayPal.me. Thank you!... Things from Mad Men that are Different from Today – Season FiveApril 3, 2017TV and Movie ReviewsMy husband and I watched the entire Mad Men series together, one season after the other. I decided to make a list of the things that were in Mad Men that are different today. This post is about Mad Men Season Five. Before you read this, you might want to read what I wrote about previous Seasons: Mad Men Season One Mad Men Season Two Mad Men Season Three Mad Men Season Four Warning: There are spoilers. Episode 1: * The Campbells have a fancy stove/oven in the kitchen of their new home. It has a range that can be pushed into a drawer when not in use, a cabinet under the range for pots and pans, and on oven at the top (behind the range). It was called the Frigidaire Flare and was a luxury item in the 1960s. The oven was at eye level of the woman who was using the range and oven to cook dinner. Glass doors on the oven made it easy for her to check on the food. Episode 2: * The telephones now have push buttons instead of rotary dials. They still have a handset that is attached to the base by a long, curly, cord. * Don and Megan have a color television. * Betty has gained weight. Her mother-in-law suggests that Betty start taking diet pills. Betty asks her doctor for diet pills, and he refuses to prescribe them without doing a checkup to rule out other causes for weight gain. * Betty and Henry have two separate phone lines – with two separate telephone numbers – in their home. Episode 3: * Craig comes home from Vietnam and wants a bologna sandwich instead of a steak dinner. He had steak in Vietnam – but missed bologna sandwiches. * Joan’s mom goes out to get the afternoon paper. * Sally watches television and sees an ad for the Mystery Date board game. The game was first released in 1965. * The Francis’s have a remote control for their television. Episode 4: * Lane and Pete get into a fist fight (called for by Lane). It’s clear that Lane has had some training – and he “knocked the crap out of Pete.” (To borrow a phrase from Peggy). No one calls for security. No one calls the police. No one is fired and escorted from the office. No one sues. Episode 5: Don asks for change so he can use the payphone. There is a telephone booth outside of the restaurant he got the change from. Each call costs a dime. He needed to make several calls, and used the payphone for all of them. Episode 6: * Sally pulls the phone into her room and stretches the phone cord across the hallway. Her grandmother trips over the phone cord and breaks her ankle. Episode 7: * Pete rides the train with a man who sells life insurance. Later in the episode, we see that this man has a car with power windows. It’s the first example of that in the show. Previous to power windows, people had to use a crank to manually make their window go up or down. Episode 8: * I didn’t notice anything in this episode that you don’t see today that wasn’t already mentioned in this list (or in the lists for previous Seasons). Episode 9: * Don buys a brand new, top of the line, fancy Jaguar car. He hands the salesman a check for $6,000. The salesman accepts it – without even bothering to ask for any identification. Don tells the salesman that if he doesn’t bring it back – consider the car sold. He later brings the car back (and presumably picks up his check.) Episode 10: * I didn’t notice anything in this episode that you don’t see today that wasn’t already mentioned in this list (or in the lists for previous Seasons). Episode 11: * Sally goes with Megan, and Megan’s friend from her acting class, to a restaurant. Megan orders coffee. Sally, who is about 12 years old, tells the waiter that she will have coffee, too. Megan informs Sally that the waiter won’t bring her a coffee. The waiter brings Sally a coffee, and Sally immediately dumps a ton of sugar into it. Today, a 12 year old can go into Starbucks and order a drink that contains coffee and society sees that as normal. * Sally is staying with her father, Don, and Megan, for the weekend. It was a surprise visit. Sally has school on Monday, and neither Megan nor Don can drive her to school because both have work (meetings/auditions). Don decides to let Sally stay in the apartment by herself, and says he will drive her home (to Betty and Henry’s home) later that day. Sally is watching television when Megan is about to leave Sally there by herself. Megan says “The first thing I’m going to do when I get home is feel that TV.” She was letting Sally know that she isn’t allowed to watch TV all day long. The TV is a color TV, something only 3.1 percent of households had in 1964. Televisions at that time had used three picture tubes – red, green, and blue – and filters and mirrors to project one color image. The TV was inside a cabinet housing and had a glass, tube-like, screen. Televisions that were on for several hours in a row would heat up. So, Megan would be able to tell if Sally had been watching TV all day just by feeling the TV and determining how hot it was. Episode 12: * Peggy’s new boss asks her: “Do you smoke?” She says she doesn’t really smoke. New boss throws a carton of cigarettes at her that are in a blank, white, box, and basically tells her it is her job to smoke them and think of a name for them. Their client is the company that made the cigarettes, which they want to market to women. Episode 13: * I didn’t notice anything in this episode that you don’t see today that wasn’t already mentioned in this list (or in the lists for previous Seasons). Things from Mad Men that are Different from Today – Season Five is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on Patreon or at PayPal.me. Thank you!... Things from Mad Men that are Different from Today – Season FourMarch 19, 2017TV and Movie ReviewsThis post is a continuation of the posts I made listing the things that are seen in Mad Men that are different from today. My husband and I watched the entire series on Netflix, one season after the other. You might want to start with my lists from Mad Men Season One, Mad Men Season Two, and Mad Men Season Three before reading this one, which is about Mad Men Season Four. Warning: There are spoilers. Episode 1: * A reporter interviews Don. The reporter takes notes on a pad of paper with a pen and writes in shorthand. * A television in the background of one scene shows a football game. The commentator says something about a particular football player who weighs 200 pounds – as if this is significant. The NFL website has a photo of two football players. One is Hall of Fame Wilber “Pete” Henry, a.k.a. “Fats” who weighed 245 pounds in 1920. The other photo is of New Orleans guard Jahri Evans who weighs 318 pounds. Episode 2: * The office has a Christmas party. People are selecting what music to play by sorting through 45″ records and putting their selection on a record player. * Joan leads a long conga line through the office. She clearly knows how to do this dance – and so do several of the people in the conga line behind her. Episode 3: I didn’t notice anything in this episode that was different from today (and that had not already been mentioned in this list or in the lists I wrote about previous Sessions.) Episode 4: Don and Roger are having a conference call with someone from Lucky Strike. Don is using one of of the rotary phones, holding the handset (that is attached to the phone with a long, curly, cord) to his head. Roger and Don’s secretary are using the other rotary phone – which has two handsets (each attached to the phone with a long, curly, cord). The secretary is whispering, and is informed by Roger that she doesn’t need to whisper because the Lucky Strike guy can’t hear her. The second handset apparently has the ability to be muted. Episode 5: * The office has the opportunity to work with Honda. Roger Sterling freaks out and nearly ruins the opportunity. Roger was in World War II and refuses to work with the Japanese. Roger isn’t over what happened when he was in the war and, decades later, still sees Japanese people as the enemy. * The creative team is fascinated by a “Dippy Bird” toy. Episode 6: I didn’t notice anything in this episode that was different from today (and that had not already been mentioned in this list or in the lists I wrote about previous Seasons.) Episode 7: * Several of the people from the office are going to see the boxing match between Cassius Clay and Sonny Liston. (Clay later changed his name to Muhammad Ali). They went to a theater to watch it. Peggy doesn’t go, but tells her boyfriend over the phone that he could watch the fight on closed circuit tv. The fight was not broadcast on over-the-air television. It was on the radio. Episode 8: * In this episode, it is revealed that Don never finished high school. And yet, he’s got a well-paying job in advertising – which was considered to be glamorous at the time. * The office has a malfunctioning candy machine. It looks a lot like the cigarette machines from then. To use it, you put in change and then pull a lever beneath the candy you wanted to buy. The candy drops into a bin in the lower part of the machine. * Betty was at a fancy restaurant and went into the lady’s room. The stall she is in has an ashtray attached to the inside wall of the stall. Episode 9: * Don tells Sally that he will take her to see The Beatles. Sally screams and keeps screaming, confusing her mother, Betty. * Price takes his father and Don to dinner at a Playboy Club. Price is a key holder. Episode 10: * Roger was sent to speak with Lucky Strike (who was taking their business elsewhere – long story short). Instead of going to speak with Lucky Strike – by getting on a plane and flying to where their offices were – Roger goes to a nearby hotel. He calls the office from the hotel and says he is calling from Lucky Strike (and using their receptionist’s phone). The rotary phones, with handsets that connect to the base with a curly cord, were a few years away from having the earliest form of Caller ID. Episode 11: I didn’t notice anything in this episode that was different from today (and that had not already been mentioned in this list or in the lists I wrote about previous Seasons.) Episode 12: I didn’t notice anything in this episode that was different from today (and that had not already been mentioned in this list or in the lists I wrote about previous Seasons.) Episode 13: I didn’t notice anything in this episode that was different from today (and that had not already been mentioned in this list or in the lists I wrote about previous Seasons.) Things from Mad Men that are Different from Today – Season Four is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on Patreon or at PayPal.me. Thank you!... Things from Mad Men that are Different from Today – Season ThreeMarch 10, 2017TV and Movie ReviewsMy husband and I watched the entire Mad Men series together, one season after the next. In nearly every episode, I noticed some things that were very different from today. This list covers the things there were different in Season Three. You might want to start with the list I made for Season One of Mad Men and the list I made for Season Two of Mad Men before reading the Season Three list. Warning: There are spoilers. Episode 1: * Roger brings Don a box of Cuban cigars and a bottle of Stolichnaya vodka. Roger said these items “came through Greece”. In 1960, the United States had an embargo on Cuba. Today, Americans can visit Cuba (under certain circumstances). * Joan puts the British male secretary into an office. The office has a large ant farm on display. There are ants in it, digging tunnels. Episode 2: * Don comes home late at night. Someone left the black and white console tube television on. The TV stations had stopped broadcasting for the night, so the screen was filled with static – and a scratchy sound – often referred to as “snow”. Episode 3: * Roger has a big party. He sings to his wife while wearing blackface. Most of the people at the party think this is acceptable and amusing. * Don meets a man at the party who says he was from New Mexico “before it was a state.” Episode 4: * Don breaks the ant farm that was in one of the offices. Joan covers her mouth and nose with a thin scarf that she held with one hand while spraying the ant farm, the table it was on, and everything else near it with an aerosol can of RAID. The windows in the office do not open. Episode 5: * Betty gives birth to their third baby at the hospital. The nurse injected her with something referred to as “twilight”. It was a mixture of morphine and scopolamine. This drug combination did not prevent pain. Instead, it created retroactive memory loss – so a woman wouldn’t remember the pain involved in childbirth. Many of the women who had the drug combination administered had to be physically restrained. Some would try to hurt themselves or leave. This was part of the reason why husbands were not allowed to be present during the birth of their child. Previous to using an injectable combination of morphine and scopolamine, the nurses would use chloroform on women who were going into labor. The drugs were considered to be a better alternative. Betty ends up hallucinating while under the influence of the drugs, and fighting the nurses because she doesn’t know what is happening to her. * Don drives Betty home from the hospital when she and their new son are ready to come home. Betty sits in the front seat and holds the baby in her arms all the way home. There were no seat belts in the cars, and there was no such thing as a baby rear-facing carseat at the time. Episode 6: * The soda vending machine in the emergency room waiting room at the hospital dispensed glass bottles of Dr. Pepper soda. Episode 7: * Betty calls the office of a man who is an advisor to the Governor. He’s not available, so she gives his secretary her phone number. Her phone number starts with Wilson. In the middle of the 20th century, phone numbers started with a letter that was then pronounced as a specific word. A few numbers followed that letter. When a person wanted to make a call, they actually had to call the operator and tell her what phone number they wanted to be connected to. They called a telephone exchange. Each telephone exchange could facilitate about 10,000 subscribers. Full words were used in order to help customers remember the telephone exchange name, and to help switchboard operators connect calls. Episode 8: * I didn’t see anything in this episode that you wouldn’t see today (that wasn’t already mentioned in this list or on the lists I put together about previous Seasons.) Episode 9: * Betty brings the laundry downstairs in an actual laundry basket – not the kind made of plastic that we use today. Episode 10: * Peggy and Paul are asked to work on an ad campaign for Western Union’s telegram. It is no longer possible to send a Western Union telegram. The company stopped offering telegrams as part of its services in 2006. Episode 11: * Betty speaks with her family’s lawyer about selling her father’s house. Betty privately asks the lawyer about if she should get a divorce. The lawyer basically says she can’t because she wouldn’t be able to prove to the court that Don had an affair. * Halloween is coming, and Betty and Don’s kids want their parents to buy them costumes from the store. Don says no because those costumes are plastic. He thinks they are garbage. * Betty sews hand-made costumes for her two oldest kids. (The baby is too young to trick-or-treat.). Sally was a gypsy. Bobby was a hobo. Episode 12: * This episode was focused on the Kennedy Assassination. Episode 13: * Don, Roger Sterling, and Bertram Cooper stage a coop and start their own business (with a few select others). They have to locate the paperwork connected with the accounts they are taking with them. They go through rolodexes to find phone numbers. Today, all of that would be digital. * Betty wants to divorce Don. She can’t do it in New York state because she can’t prove Don committed adultery. The only way to get the divorce is for her to move to Reno, Nevada, for six weeks to establish residency, and then file for divorce there. Don agrees not to contest the divorce. Things from Mad Men that are Different from Today – Season Three is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on Patreon or at PayPal.me. Thank you!... ColoringJohanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – DecemberJanuary 17, 2020ColoringI was able to complete all of the December coloring pages in the Johanna Basford 2019 coloring calendar. The last few were finished in January of 2020, but I’m ok with that. The world moves too fast for me, due to my chronic illnesses. In general, I’m not a big fan of Christmas. That said, I had fun coloring these pages. Some were extremely detailed, and I enjoyed the challenge. As you may have noticed, I was unable to finish coloring some of the months in 2019. I did start all of them… and then either got too busy with work or too sick to care. My plan is to get back to them when I can. November 30 and December 1 December 2 December 3 December 4 December 5 December 6 December 7 and 8 December 9 December 10 December 11 December 12 December 13 December 14 and 15 December 16 December 17 December 18 December 19 December 20 December 21 and 22 December 23 December 24 December 25 December 26 December 27 December 28 and 29 December 30 December 31 A friend of mine gave me the Johanna Basford 2020 coloring calendar as a Christmas gift. I have started coloring its pages, and hope to be able to create a blog post of the finished month of January 2020 as soon as I can. Johanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – December is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Johanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – SeptemberNovember 21, 2019ColoringI have learned that my chronic illnesses make it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to complete a “do one every day” project. I end up finishing some, but not all, of the pages in a month before the calendar flips. As such, I have fallen behind. That said, I did manage to complete all of the coloring pages for September 2019, so here they are! August 31 and September 1 September 2 September 3 September 4 September 5 September 6 September 7 and 8 September 9 September 10 September 11 September 12 September 13 September 14 and 15 September 16 September 17 September 18 September 19 September 20 September 21 and 22 September 23 September 24 September 25 September 26 September 27 September 28 and 29 September 30 Johanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – September is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Johanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – MayJune 27, 2019ColoringI’ve been coloring through the 2019 Johanna Basford coloring calendar. It is fun and relaxing. I fell a little bit behind in May because it was a busy month. Still got it done, though. May 1 May 2 May 3 May 4 and 5 May 6 May 7 May 8 May 9 May 10 May 11 and 12 May 13 May 14 May 15 May 16 May 17 May 18 and 19 May 20 May 21 May 22 May 23 May 24 May 25 and 26 May 27 May 28 May 29 May 30 May 31 Johanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – May is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Johanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – AprilMay 2, 2019ColoringColoring is relaxing, and good for my rheumatoid arthritis (which is in my hands). A friend gave me the Johanna Basford 2019 coloring calendar as a gift. I’ve been having a great time coloring the pages! April 1 April 2 April 3 April 4 April 5 April 6 and 7 April 8 April 9 April 10 April 11 April 12 April 13 and 14 April 15 April 16 April 17 April 18 April 19 April 20 and 21 April 22 April 23 April 24 April 25 April 26 April 27 and 28 April 29 April 30 Johanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – April is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Johanna Basford Coloring Calendar – MayApril 23, 2019ColoringI’ve been slowly working my way through the Johanna Basford 2018 coloring calendar. It has been a very relaxing experience, and good for my rheumatoid arthritis (which is in my hands, among other places). My chronic health issues make it difficult for me to keep up with the “do one of these every day” type of projects. I will be done whenever I get there. In this blog, I have the coloring pages from the May 2018 part of the calendar. May 1 May 2 May 3 May 4 May 5 and 6 May 7 May 8 May 9 May 10 May 11 May 12 and 13 May 14 May 15 May 16 May 17 May 18 May 19 and 20 May 21 May 22 May 23 May 24 May 25 May 26 and 27 May 28 May 29 May 30 May 31 Johanna Basford Coloring Calendar – May is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Johanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – MarchApril 17, 2019ColoringI’m working my way through the 2019 Johanna Basford coloring calendar. A friend gave it to me as a Christmas gift. My goal is to try not to fall too far behind. Coloring is a good for my health. It reduces stress (which is bad for my fibromyalgia). I also color to keep my hands active, which is good for my rheumatoid arthritis. March 1 March 2 and 3 March 4 March 5 March 6 March 7 March 8 March 9 and 10 March 11 March 12 March 13 March 14 March 15 March 16 and 17 March 18 March 19 March 20 March 21 March 22 March 23 and 24 March 25 March 26 March 27 March 28 March 29 March 30 and 31 Johanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – March is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Johanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – FebruaryMarch 1, 2019ColoringColoring is relaxing. A friend gave me the Johanna Basford 2019 coloring calendar as a Christmas present. I am really enjoying it! I have rheumatoid arthritis in my hands (among other places). I’ve heard it is good to keep my hands and fingers active. Coloring is a good way to do that. February 1 February 2 and 3 February 4 February 5 February 6 February 7 February 8 February 9 and 10 February 11 February 12 February 13 February 14 February 15 February 16 and 17 February 18 February 19 February 20 February 21 February 22 February 23 and 24 February 25 February 26 February 27 February 28 Johanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – February is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Johanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – JanuaryFebruary 9, 2019ColoringA friend gave me the Johanna Basford 2019 coloring calendar as a Christmas present. My goal this year is to try and keep up with it as best I can. Coloring is relaxing and fun. It is also good for my rheumatoid arthritis (which is in my hands). January 1 January 2 January 3 January 4 January 5 and 6 January 7 January 8 January 9 January 10 January 11 January 12 and 13 January 14 January 15 January 16 January 17 January 18 January 19 and 20 January 21 January 22 January 23 January 24 January 25 January 26 and 27 January 28 January 29 January 30 January 31 Johanna Basford 2019 Coloring Calendar – January is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Johanna Basford Coloring Calendar – DecemberDecember 31, 2018ColoringI’ve been having a fun time coloring all the pages in the Johanna Basford 2018 coloring calendar. Unfortunately, due to my chronic illnesses, I was entirely unable to keep up with it. As such, I stopped somewhere in the middle of May, and skipped ahead to the December pages. My hope was that I would get through those before 2018 ended. After that, I will go back and color the pages I missed because, as I said, coloring is fun. December 1 and 2 December 3 December 4 December 5 December 6 December 7 December 8 and 9 December 10 December 11 December 12 December 13 December 14 December 15 and 16 December 17 December 18 December 19 December 20 December 21 December 22 and 23 December 24 December 25 December 26 December 27 December 28 December 29 and 30 December 31 Johanna Basford Coloring Calendar – December is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Johanna Basford Coloring Calendar – AprilOctober 2, 2018ColoringI am slowly working my way through the pages of the 2018 Johanna Basford Coloring Calendar. A friend of mine gave it to me as a Christmas gift, and I’m really enjoying it. Coloring is a good way to reduce stress. It also helps my rheumatoid arthritis because it keeps my hands and fingers moving. I’m not healthy enough to keep up with coloring one page every day, but I was able to complete the month of April. March 31 and April 1 April 2 April 3 April 4 April 5 April 6 April 7 and 8 April 9 April 10 April 11 April 12 April 13 April 14 and 15 April 16 April 17 April 18 April 19 April 20 April 21 and 22 April 23 April 24 April 25 April 26 April 27 April 28 and 29 April 30 Johanna Basford Coloring Calendar – April is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... MediumNRA Declares Bankruptcy and Wants to Move to TexasJanuary 18, 2021MediumPhoto by Bill Oxford on Unsplash Running away will not magically prevent the NRA from facing legal consequences. On January 15, 2021, the Associated Press reported that the National Rifle Association announced that it has filed for bankruptcy protection and will seek to incorporate in Texas. The Associated Press also reported that that the NRA filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in federal court in Dallas and said it planned to incorporate in Texas, where records show it formed a limited liability corporation, Sea Girt LLC, in November of 2020. Sea Girt LLC made a separate bankruptcy filing Friday, listing few assets and fewer than $100,000 in liabilities. This news isn’t surprising, considering the number of lawsuits that the NRA has been involved in recently. In February of 2020, The New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS) charged that the NRA acted as an unlicensed insurance producer and deceived its members with misleading marketing practices. DFS sought civil monetary penalties and injunctive relief. …The Department alleges that the NRA, which does not have a license to conduct insurance business in New York, violated various New York State Insurance Laws, among other things, by acting as an insurance producer without a license in endorsing and marketing insurance programs, including “Carry Guard”…. In addition, DFS alleges that the Carry Guard program “was primarily offered to firearms owners, in particular those with concealed carry permits, to provide insurance coverage that is unlawful in New York State. Carry Guard offered coverage for losses and costs associated with the aftermath of the purposeful use of a firearm, including defense costs in a criminal prosecution. Under New York law, such intentional acts cannot be insured.” The DFS also alleged that the NRA misrepresented the cost of the Carry Guard insurance. It told members that the insurance was being offered at the lowest possible cost. Instead, “the NRA was taking for itself substantial royalties, sometimes more than 20 percent of the premiums paid.” As a result, the NRA faced civil monetary penalties of up to $500 for each of the 28,000 Carry Guard policies – with respect to each of the three charges that carry such penalties. On April 3, 2020, Bloomberg reported that the NRA sued New York State Governor Cuomo for closing gun shops during the coronavirus pandemic. There were many different types of shops and restaurants that had to close down during the pandemic. The NRA only cared about the gun shops. The excuse for the lawsuit that the NRA came up with, according to Bloomberg, was that the restriction “is unconstitutional and leaves citizens defenseless while prisoners are being released early as a result of the crisis”. Why were prisoners being released? Law360 posted a blog post in January of 2021 that provides answers to that question. In March of 2020, U.S. Attorney General William Barr issued a memorandum directing the bureau to prioritize “statutory authorities to grant home confinement for inmates seeking transfer in connection with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.” That decision was made during the coronavirus pandemic, when the virus was rapidly spreading through the prison population. Law360 also pointed out that on April 3, 2020, U.S. Attorney General William Barr released another memorandum. This one directed bureau officials to “immediately maximize appropriate home transfers to home confinement” and consider “all at-risk inmates – not only those previously eligible for transfer.” You may have noticed that the memorandums called for home confinement. That means the prisoners would be sent home. It did not mean, as the NRA tried to imply, that prisoners would be released from prison and allowed to go wherever they wanted to and commit crimes. The NRA was using the release of prisoners – in an effort to prevent the spread of COVID-19 through the prison system – as a scare tactic. On April 14, 2020, Bloomberg reported: A federal judge threw out a National Rifle Association lawsuit against New York Governor Andrew Cuomo for refusing to label gun shops as essential businesses allowed to stay open during the coronavirus lockdown he ordered in March. According to Bloomberg, U.S. District Judge Mae D’Agostino in Albany, New York, ruled that the NRA did not have legal standing to sue on behalf of its members. The judge also denied the NRA’s request to once again amend its complaint to try to show it had been injured by Cuomo’s actions because it had to answer phone calls about the closure of gun shops in the state. A copy of U.S. District Judge Mae D’Aguostino’s decision was posted on ABC News 10. From the decision: The NRA claimed that Governor Cuomo’s actions violated the Second, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution.The NRA asked for the following relief: (1) a declaration that firearm and ammunition product manufacturers, retailers, distributors, and shooting ranges constitute essential businesses and services, and that Governor Cuomo’s prohibition of the operation of firearm and ammunition products manufacturers, retailers, importers, distributors, and shooting ranges violates the Second, Third and Fourteenth Amendments.(2) A temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction and permanent injunction restraining Governor Cuomo and his officers, agents, servants, employees and all others from enforcing the Executive Order to prohibit the operation of the same group mentioned in (1)(3) Nominal damages against Defendants on behalf of members of the NRA who are consumers that have been prevented by Defendants’ from purchasing ammunition or firearms.Attorney’s fees (for the costs of this lawsuit). Here are some key points from the judge’s decision: Standing “An association has standing to bring suit on behalf of its members when (a) its members would otherwise have standing to sue in their own right; (b) the interests it seeks to protect are germane to the organization’s purpose; and (c) neither the claim asserted nor the relief requested requires the participation of the individual members in the lawsuit”… …In the present matter, the first amended complaint alleges as follows: As to all claims made in a representative capacity herein, there are common questions of law and fact that substantially affect the rights, duties, and liabilities of many similarly-situated New York residents and visitors who knowingly or unknowingly are subject to the New York orders, statutes, regulations, policies, practices, and customs in question. The relief sought in this action is declaratory and injunctive in nature, and the action involves matters of substantial public interest. Considerations of necessity, convenience, and justice justify according relief to Plaintiff in our presentative capacity. Further, to the extent it becomes necessary or appropriate, the NRA is uniquely able to communicate with and provide notice to its hundreds of thousands of New York members and constituents who are or would be party to any identifiable class of individuals for whose benefit this Court may grant such relief …Based on these allegations, it is clear that Plaintiff brought this suit in its representational capacity… …The Court agrees with Defendants that Plaintiff cannot succeed in asserting associational standing… The judge decided that the NRA’s attempt to amend its complaint three months after the case had started was acceptable under law. The judge also decided that the NRA did not bring the case in bad faith. Futility “In addition to undue delay, bad faith, and undue prejudice, a court may exercise its discretion to deny a party’s motion to amend a pleading when the proposed amendment would be futile.”… To survive such a motion, a party need only plead “a short and plain statement of the claim.”… Plaintiff seeks leave to file a second amended complaint to include additional allegations, “which form an independent basis for standing in this case.” Plaintiff seeks to add facts it contends will support an organizational standing theory. Defendants oppose this proposed amendment, alleging it is futile because the proposed additional facts do not support organizational standing theory… …Plaintiff’s proposed second amended complaint adds facts that Plaintiff alleges supports an organizational standing claim. The injuries allegedly suffered by Plaintiff as an organization are that Defendants’ conduct forced Plaintiff “to dedicate staff and resources to fielding … calls and providing advice to its members.”… … Plaintiff further alleges that “he time and resources dedicated to these efforts was diverted from the NRA’s core functions of advocacy, safety and training” and that Plaintiff had to “cancel firearm education and training events in the State of New York and therefore preventing from conducting its core functions and responsibilities… …The relief Plaintiff seeks includes nominal damages, as well as injunctive and declaratory relief… …Based on the facts before the Court in Plaintiff’s proposed second amended complaint, the alleged dedication of staff and resources to field phone calls and provide advice to Plaintiff’s members, as well as allegedly cancelling events, is “insufficient to establish organizational standing to pursue a claim for injunctive or declaratory relief.”… …The proposed second amended complaint is completely devoid of any allegation detailing how the general support that was purportedly provided by Plaintiff, which consisted of fielding phone calls and providing advice to its members, was inconsistent with Plaintiff’s ordinary operations of advocating its members’ rights… …Plaintiff also provided no specific facts to allege that Defendants’ conduct burdened Plaintiff’s ability to carry out its usual activities. Furthermore, while Plaintiff alleges that it was forced to cancel firearms education and training events… …Plaintiff does not reference how many events were cancelled because of the Executive Order. Additionally, Plaintiff did indeed organize an online training program… …In sum, having failed to establish that the alleged conduct by Defendants caused any “perceptible impairment” to its ordinary advocacy operations, Plaintiff has failed to satisfy its burden to affirmatively show an injury-in-fact requisite for organizational standing… CONCLUSION After carefully reviewing the entire record in this matter, the parties’ submissions and the applicable law, and for the above stated reasons, the Court hereby ORDERS that Defendants’ motion for judgement on the pleadings is GRANTED; and the Court further ORDERS that Plaintiff’s cross motion for leave to amend the first amended complaint is DENIED; and the Court further ORDERS that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgement in Defendants’ favor and close this case; and the Court further ORDERS that the Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this Memorandum-Decision and Order on the parties in accordance with the Local Rules. As you may recall, on August 6, 2020, New York Attorney General Letitia James filed a lawsuit against the National Rifle Association (NRA). The lawsuit has nothing to do with guns. Instead, it is about the inappropriate uses of money that the NRA received as donations. In short, the NRA registered as a 501(c)(4) not-for-profit charitable organization. The lawsuit alleges mismanagement led to the waste and loss of millions of assets and contributed to the NRA reaching a deteriorated financial state. The lawsuit also alleges that the NRA’s board’s audit committee was negligent in its duty to ensure appropriate, competent and judicious stewardship of assets by the NRA leadership. Part of the lawsuit alleges that four men “overrode and evaded internal controls to allow themselves, favored board members, employees, and vendors to benefit through reimbursed expenses, related party transactions, excess compensation, side deals, and waste of charitable assets without regard to the NRA’s best interests”. The four men named in the lawsuit were: Executive Vice-President Wayne LaPierre, Former Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer Wilson “Woody” Phillips, Former Chief of Staff and Executive Director of General Operations Joshua Powell, and Corporate Secretary and General Counsel John Frazer. The NRA’s Public Relations and Advertising Firm Ackerman McQueen was also named. Attorney General James seeks to dissolve the NRA and asked the court to order LaPierre, Phillips, Powell, and Frazer: to make full restitution for funds they unlawfully profited and salaries earned while employees; pay penalties; recover illegal and unauthorized payments from the four individuals; and remove LaPierre and Frazer from the NRA’s leadership. (Phillips and Powell were no longer part of the NRA at the time this lawsuit was filed). In addition, Attorney General James wanted the court “to ensure that the four individual defendants can never again serve on the board of a charity in New York.” Also on August 6, 2020, Fox News reported that the NRA “is fighting back against a lawsuit filed Thursday by New York’s attorney general by submitting its own civil suit against the state official, accusing her of defamation and violating its rights to free speech.” Again, the lawsuit filed by New York Attorney General Letitia James has absolutely nothing to do with free speech. The lawsuit is about the inappropriate use of money that the NRA, which is a charitable organization, received from donations. Fox News also reported that President Trump called Attorney General Letitia James’s lawsuit against the NRA “a very terrible thing.” Fox News included this quote from President Trump: “I think the NRA should move to Texas and lead a very good and beautiful life. And I’ve told them that for a long time. I think they should move to Texas – Texas would be a great state or to another state of their choosing – but I would say that Texas would be a great place and an appropriate place for the NRA” The quote makes it clear that the reason the NRA chose to leave New York and move to Texas was because President Trump suggested it. The NRA filed their lawsuit against New York Attorney General Letitia James in the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York. That is a different venue than the lawsuit New York Attorney General Letitia James filed against the NRA. She chose the Supreme Court of the State of New York. The NRA sued New York Attorney General Letitia James “both individually and in her official capacity”. In short, the NRA’s lawsuit appears to try and mislead the court about the purpose of lawsuit against it that was filed by Attorney General Letitia James. There is no mention of the four people in the NRA who took donations and used the money for their own personal gain. Most of the lawsuit is a personal attack on New York Attorney General Letitia James. After making comments that are completely unrelated to the lawsuit filed by Attorney General Letitia James, the NRA tried to persuade the Court that the New York Attorney General’s lawsuit against the NRA was actually a violation of the NRA’s first and fourteenth amendment rights. In addition, the NRA also decided to use their lawsuit to complain about New York Governor Andrew Cuomo. The Governor has nothing to do with the lawsuit filed by New York Attorney General Letitia James against the NRA. Governor Cuomo was involved in an entirely unrelated lawsuit against the NRA. Again, the lawsuit filed by New York Attorney General Letitia James is focused on the misuse of funds by four members of the NRA. There is nothing in her lawsuit that has anything to do with freedom of speech. In its countersuit, the NRA claimed that New York Attorney General Letitia James called the NRA a terrorist organization. In October of 2018, Ebony posted an article titled: “Letitia ‘Tish’ James on Becoming New York’s Next Attorney General”. It was written by Teddy Grant. The article was written when Letitia James was running to be elected as the next New York Attorney General. If she won, she would become the the first Black woman to hold a statewide elected office in New York state. Here is the full quote from Letitia James that the NRA shortened in their countersuit. She was asked by Ebony, “What is the most important issue you’ve heard from prospective voters?” Letitia James answered: President Donald Trump and the threat to our democracy and our values. The fact that his policies have reversed all the progress that we made under President Barack Obama and others. There’s an issue of public corruption in New York state; I will seek to restore confidence and integrity in public service. The foreclosure crisis is not behind us, students debt is a major issue, health care is a challenge since they repealed the individual mandate, people are having a difficult time with premiums that have increased and are often times deciding to go without medicine because of the costs, resulting in premature death and gun violence. The NRA holds out as a charitable organization, but in fact, really a terrorist organization. Women’s rights . . . in New York, we have not codified Roe v. Wade, and last but not least, equal pay for equal work. We can address the feminization of poverty in the state. Letitia James was asked what prospective voters thought were important issues. She listed them out. It appears some prospective voters identified the NRA as a terrorist organization. When you see the full quote, it is obvious that the NRA “cherry picked” a tiny piece of it, took it out of context, and used it as a way to anger NRA members. The Free Dictionary defines “terrorist organization” as: a political movement that uses terror as a weapon to achieve its goals. It is clear that the NRA is a political movement. The vast majority of its political funding goes to Republican politicians, according to OpenSecrets.org. In 2019-2020, the NRA spent $589,200 on federal candidates. $583,250 (98.99%) went to Republicans. $4,950 (0.84%) went to Democrats. The NRA spent $5,000 on Donald Trump in 2019-2020. On December 24, 2020, the NRA tweeted: “NRA invests at least $4.5 million in Georgia runoff elections”. It included a link to a Fox Business article featuring a photo of Republican candidates Kelly Loffler and David Perdue. (Both of those candidates lost their seats.) The NRA also uses terror as a weapon to achieve its goals. For example, its Twitter account contains several tweets that appear to be designed to make people feel afraid or unsafe. These tweets are likely to designed to help the NRA to achieve its goals of recruiting new members. People who don’t buy guns aren’t going to be interested in becoming a member of the NRA. A few examples: January 14, 2021: ‘CRIMINALS DO NOT FOLLOW GUN CONTROL LAWS! It’s really that simple”. January 10, 2021: “On Friday, Biden pledged to DEFEAT THE NRA. Biden wants to ban our semi-auto rifles, tax our guns/mags & more. He knows the only thing standing in his way to DISMANTLE THE 2ND AMENDMENT is NRA. Gun owners must stay vigilant & be engaged in elections and the legislative process.” November 28, 2020: “.22 .300 .9MM .40 .45 All faster than dialing 911!” November 27, 2020: “The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun IS A GOOD GUY WITH A GUN.” November 23, 2020: “19.48 million Americans carry concealed handguns – up 34% since 2016! That’s 19.48 million more Americans who REFUSE to be victims.” November 8, 2020: “Making good people HELPLESS will NOT make bad people HARMLESS.” November 2, 2020: “VOTE TOMORROW like your guns, and your lives, depend on it. Because they do.” October 7, 2020: “Vote like your gun and your life depend on it. Because THEY DO! #VPDebates2020” September 29, 2020: “Vote like your gun and your life depend on it. Because THEY DO!” September 13, 2020: “Vote like your gun and your life depend on it. Because THEY DO!” On August 7, 2020, New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “Attorney General James Refuses to Back Down in Fight Against NRA”. From the press release: AG James Bats Down Notion NRA Can Pick Up and Move to Another StateNew York Attorney General Letitia James today released the following statement in response to a National Rifle Association (NRA) countersuit that seeks to distract from illegal conduct to divert millions of dollars away from the organization’s charitable mission to personally benefit senior leadership, as well as to claims by President Donald Trump and others that the NRA should relocate to another state:“While President Trump and others have suggested that the NRA should simply pick up and leave New York in an effort to evade responsibility, I’d remind them that we shut down the president’s own foundation, recouped millions in diverted funds after unearthing the illegal use of charitable funds, and directed those funds to lawful organizations for legitimate charitable purposes. We intend to do the same with the NRA. To be clear, no charity registered in New York state, including the NRA, can dissolve and relocate to another state without approval from my office or the Supreme Court of New York. As long as our lawsuit continues, the NRA must stay right where it is and answer for their deep-rooted fraud. The facts speak for themselves and our lawsuit will continue undeterred… On November 18, 2020, DFS Superintendent of Financial Services Linda A. Lacewell announced that the New York State Department of Financial Services has entered into a consent order with the NRA. This is in reference to the February 5, 2020, lawsuit. The case was resolved by a consent order that included a civil monetary penalty of $2.5 million for violations of New York insurance laws. In addition, the NRA was banned from marketing insurance in the state of New York or receiving compensation in connection with any newly issued New York insurance policies for five years – irrespective of whether the NRA obtains a license. DFS Superintendent of Financial Services Linda A. Lacewell noted that this brought to a close a three-year investigation. “The NRA operated as an unlicensed producer and broke the New York Insurance Law by soliciting insurance products and receiving compensation,” said Superintendent Lacewell. “Even worse, the NRA violated the New York Insurance Law by soliciting dangerous and impermissible insurance products, including those within its Carry Guard program that purported to insure intentional acts and criminal defense costs. The Department will continue to protect the integrity of the insurance market for the purposes of safety and soundness and the good of all customers.” The same day, Democrat & Chronicle reported that New York was one of several regulators investigating the NRA’s Carry Guard program after the NRA launched it in 2018. The insurance program promised to cover the legal fees and civil liability costs of policy holders involved in incidents in which they claimed they acted in self defense. New York State’s investigation expanded to examining a variety of insurance products, which were offered by licensed insurers Lockton Affinity and AGIA. The NRA marketed those policies to its New York members through advertisements, including YouTube videos, and received compensation for every sale. State regulators found that the NRA was illegally acting as an insurance provider in part because it was compensated for sales. According to Democrat & Chronicle, part of the agreement prevents the NRA from allowing licensed insurers to use its logo for the next five years in New York. The NRA was also not allowed to collect compensation from any insurance sales. The NRA had to pay a $2.5 million penalty, as part of the consent decree. The consent order did not require the NRA to admit fault. However, it does prevent the organization from disputing any of the facts contained in it. On November 25, 2020, The Wall Street Journal posted an article titled: “NRA Acknowledges Improper Executive Benefits in New Tax Filing”. It was written by Mark Maremont. From the article: The National Rifle Association disclosed that current and former top executives received at least $1.4 million in improper or excessive benefits from the organization in violation of nonprofit rules, the first time the group has publicly admitted the lapses. The NRA, in its tax filing covering 2019, also reported a $12.2 million deficit and 34% decline in member dues in 2019, as the gun-rights organization grappled with internal turmoil and external legal probes related to alleged expense abuses by its top officials.Wayne LaPierre, the NRA’s chief executive, repaid the NRA $300,000 related to travel expenses from 2015 to 2019 that the nonprofit group originally paid for him but has now determined to be an “excess benefit” under tax rules, according to the filing. Mr. LaPierre is estimated to owe a special excise tax of about $75,000 on the extra income, the NRA said.“The vast majority of Mr. LaPierre’s travel was undertaken in strict compliance with NRA policy,” an NRA spokesperson said in a statement Wednesday. “To the extent here were any questions about certain travel expenditures, Mr. LaPierre reimbursed the NRA.”… On December 22, 2020, The Hill (and other news sites) reported that a coalition of 16 Republican attorneys general were backing the NRA in its legal challenge against New York Attorney General Letitia James. The group of attorneys general is led by Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge. He filed an amicus brief supporting the NRA in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York. Republican Attorneys General from Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia also joined in on the amicus brief. I’ve read the amicus brief, and it sounds like the attorneys general do not understand what New York Attorney General Letitia James’s lawsuit against the NRA is about. Attorney General Letitia James’s lawsuit against the NRA is about the money the charitable organization received which was used for the personal gain of four members of the NRA. The attorneys general appear to be under the incorrect impression that the lawsuit is about the first amendment and the second amendment. Neither the first, nor the second, amendment allows people to misuse the money that was given to a charitable organization. The attorneys generals are also asking the Court to dismiss Attorney General Letitia James’s lawsuit against the NRA. In a statement to The Hill, Attorney General Letitia James said the NRA “went unchecked for years while executives funneled millions into their own pockets to fund lavish lifestyles filled with private jets, pricey vacations, expensive meals, and no-show contracts.”“The NRA has been a breeding ground of fraud, abuse, and brazen illegality,” she said. “Simply put, the rot runs deep, which is why our lawsuit to dissolve the organization will continue undeterred.” On January 15, 2021, The National Rifle Association (NRA) posted a press release titled: “NRA Leaves New York To Reincorporate in Texas, Announces New Strategic Plan”. Here is a little bit of the press release: The National Rifle Association of America (“NRA”) today announced it will restructure the Association as a Texas nonprofit to exit what it believes is a corrupt political and regulatory environment in New York. The move will enable long-term, sustainable growth and ensure the NRA’s continued success as the nation’s leading advocate for constitutional freedom – free from the toxic political environment of New York.The NRA plan, which involves the protection of the bankruptcy court, has the Association dumping New York and organizing its legal and regulatory matters in an efficient forum. The move comes at a time when the NRA is in its strongest financial condition in years… The rest of the press release mentions the second amendment (several times) and is incredibly vague about exactly what their plan is. It appears the NRA is unaware that it cannot move itself to Texas without the permission of New York Attorney General’s office or the Supreme Court of New York. It is incomprehensible why the NRA stated that the move to Texas “comes at a time when the NRA is in its strongest financial condition in years” in the same press release where it points out that it is seeking the protection of the bankruptcy court. Both things cannot possibly be true at the same time. On January 15, 2021, New York Attorney General Letitia James posted a press release titled: “NRA’s Financial Status Finally Matches Moral Status: Bankrupt”. From the press release: New York Attorney General Letitia James today released the following statement after the National Rifle Association (NRA) declared it would seek bankruptcy protections in federal court, as well as sought to reincorporate its nonprofit status in the state of Texas:“The NRA’s claimed financial status has finally met its moral status; bankrupt. While we review this filing, we will not allow the NRA to use this or any other tactic to evade accountability and my office’s oversight.” UPDATE: On January 16, 2021, The Guardian posted an article titled: “Major NRA donor to challenge gun group’s bankruptcy over alleged fraud”. It was written by Ed Pilkington. From the article: A major donor to the National Rifle Association is poised to challenge key aspects of the gun group’s bankruptcy filing, in an attempt to hold executives accountable for allegedly having defrauded their members of millions of dollars to support their own lavish lifestyles.Dave Dell’Aquila, a former tech company boss who has donated more than $100,000 to the NRA, told The Guardian on Saturday he was preparing to lodge a complaint in US bankruptcy court in Dallas, Texas. If successful, it could stop top NRA executives discharging a substantial portion of the organization’s debts.It could also stop Wayne LaPierre, the NRA’s controversial longtime chief executive, avoiding ongoing lawsuits that allege he defrauded the pro-gun group’s members to pay for luxury travel to the Bahamas and Europe and high-end Zegna suits… NRA Declares Bankruptcy and Wants to Move to Texas is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Ice Cream DeliveryNovember 22, 2020MediumImage by BRRT from Pixabay This piece of writing was originally posted on social media on September 11, 2020. It is a true story about what happens when an order of ice cream is delivered to the wrong house during the COVID-19 pandemic. I read “Ice Cream Delivery” on episode 065 of Words of Jen. Last night, my husband ordered Thai food from a family-owned restaurant that is located within walking distance. We try to support it whenever we can. Very nice people. Fantastic food. It even has one thing I can safely eat because it doesn’t include any of the foods that I am allergic to. I was only vaguely aware that my husband was going out to get Thai food because I was taking a nap when he asked if I wanted food from that restaurant. I remember saying “Yes”. Wasn’t quite awake yet, but working on that, when someone knocked on the door. I got out of bed, figuring my husband had forgotten something or had returned but lacked keys. My plan was to unlock the door and let my husband in. This takes about two seconds, so I didn’t bother to put on a mask first. Instead, it was the son of the next door neighbor who constantly builds things. Still not quite awake, I opened the door, but not the screen door. “Are you Breonna?” he asked, holding up a brown paper bag with a handle on it. The bag had some writing on it, but I couldn’t see it clearly enough to read it. “No.” I responded, in a questioning manner. The next door neighbor’s kid explained that someone ordered food that was mistakenly left on his porch by a delivery driver. Since they didn’t place any orders for delivery, he figured out that the food must have been intended for someone else. He pointed to the writing on the bag. A sloppy scribble probably said “Breonna.” “My name is Jen, not Breonna,” I explained, “And my husband’s name is Shawn. No one named Breonna lives here.” The neighbor’s kid introduced himself. Then looked down at the paper bag in his hand, somewhat disappointed. He said something about not knowing anyone named Breonna, and deciding to see if the delivery was supposed to go to our mobile home. “What’s in the bag?” I asked. “Ice cream!”, he responded, holding up the brown paper bag once again. It was a hot day, during a heat wave, where the air did not cool down as the sun set. We live in a place that has little humidity – except during this kind of weather. It was entirely understandable that someone would have ice cream delivered under these conditions. Suddenly, I realized the bigger problem. “Oh, no! That’s gonna melt!” I explained. The neighbor’s kid nodded his head, and shrugged. Then, he looked at another neighbor’s house, the first one people see when they enter our mobile home park. “Do you know the people in that one?” I shook my head no. “I don’t. I hardly leave the house anymore since … well, the pandemic”. The kid nodded his head, as if he understood my decision. He decided to go to the first house from the street and see if Breonna was there. I told him it was good of him to try and do that. He smiled. I figure he might be a high-school student. And maybe he doesn’t get much praise for trying to do the right thing. After I closed the door, I realized neither one of us had been wearing a mask. His father, whom I’ve never seen wear a mask, walks around outside without one. This high-school-kid seems to have been influenced by his father’s risky decision. Even so, the kid knew enough to back up several feet from the door, after watching me back away from him after opening it. There was a screen door in between us, which provided a bit of a barrier He seems like a good kid, with more compassion and less selfishness than his father. I’ve no idea if Breonna got her ice cream delivery before it melted away. Ice Cream Delivery is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... The Can of Tuna Rolled AwayNovember 19, 2020MediumI wrote this blog in not one, but two, posts on a website that no longer exists. The website format was ideal for very short blog posts, and writers got paid by the page click. After the website closed, I put the two parts of this story together in one piece. I read “The Can of Tuna Rolled Away” on episode 064 of my Words of Jen podcast. Few things are more mundane than grocery shopping. Eventually though, you have to do it. Putting the groceries away after you return home can be a tedious chore. Over all, its a boring task. This time, however, things went differently than planned. My husband Shawn was putting the groceries away when something completely unexpected happened. He accidentally dropped one of the cans of tuna fish that we bought, and it rolled behind the stove. It was a random thing that has never happened before. It seems the can landed, and rolled, just right. We used a flashlight to check and see where the can of tuna went. At first, we could see the edge of the can. It was standing on its side, wedged between the wall behind the stove and the cabinet next to the stove. What to do? First, we each tried using a really long pair of barbecue tongs to see if we could grab the can of tuna. That didn’t work. Instead, this caused the can to get nudged just enough for it to roll completely behind the stove. Next, we tried using a shop vac in the hopes of removing the can of tuna by suction. That didn’t work either. The hose of the shop vac didn’t reach far enough and there was no way to get it to go around the corner at the back of the stove (where the tuna can had rolled to). We were now out of ideas as to how to get the can of tuna out from behind the stove. It just seemed like a bad idea to leave it there, and neither of us felt confident about trying to move the stove ourselves. Fortunately, Shawn has a friend who seems to know how to fix just about everything. If anyone could retrieve the runaway can of tuna, without requiring the removal of the stove first, it would be him. Or, worst case scenario, the friend would probably know how to safely move the stove. A few days later, the helpful friend came over to see what he could do. The stove is a gas stove. My concern was that if my husband and his friend moved the stove to get the can of tuna they would accidentally bump the gas line and cause a gas leak. The stove is situated in a way that prevents us from seeing how the gas line is connected to it. That’s just one of the “quirks” about our mobile home. I’m not entirely sure how this stove got hooked up in the first place, since a person would pretty much have to be standing between it and the wall to do that. How did that person get out? Did he climb over the stove? It’s one of the many mysteries about this place that will never be fully explained. My concern was that moving the stove, even just a little bit, could cause a gas leak. Now, a small gas leak, quickly turned off, would probably not cause much harm to me, my husband or his friend. However, it would likely kill our cockatiels who were in a large cage in the living room, not incredibly far from the stove. The kitchen and the living room share the same space in our small mobile home. The bird cage is on the opposite end of the room. It isn’t siting right next to the stove, or refrigerator, or anything. But, since the mobile home is small – nothing is that far away from anything else. Ever heard the phrase “canaries in a coal mine”? That was my fear. The cockatiels could die from a small gas leak, long before the humans in the room would feel any strange side effects as a result of it. This was not something I was willing to risk. The plan was that I would put the birds into two pet crates before the stove was moved – just in case. Each crate could easily fit a large cat inside it. We use the crates to take the birds to the vet. Obviously, this meant that as soon as they saw the crates, the birds were going to start getting upset. Once inside the crates, I could safely take the birds into our backyard. This should get them fresh air in case of a gas leak. Fortunately, that particular drama did not have to happen. My husband’s friend came over with one of those “grabber” devices. It is a long pole with a claw like thing on the end. To use it, you aim it at the thing you want to reach and press something to make the claw close around it. I’ve seen this tool used in clothing stores where racks of clothing are attached so high up the wall that they may as well be on the ceiling. They only had to move the stove an inch or two, and were able to accomplish that with no difficulty. The friend used the “grabber” and pulled out the can of tuna. The two of them moved the stove back into place. Problem solved! Since then, we have blocked off the small area between the stove and the cabinet with an old pair of shoes that barely got worn. For reasons only they can understand, the cockatiels took a sudden interest in that little space. One of them would walk over and stick his head in there – ready to do some exploring. We definitely didn’t want to try and coax a frightened cockatiel, who put himself in an unfamiliar environment, out from behind the stove! So, that space got blocked off for safety. It is now impossible for cockatiels, or cans of tuna, to end up behind the stove. The Can of Tuna Rolled Away is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me at PayPal.me. Thank you!... Mind EraserNovember 11, 2020MediumBlue Swirls by Daniele Levis Pelusi on Unsplash My dentist insisted that I needed “sedation medication” for a root canal. I was told that it would make me feel very relaxed. Instead, it functioned as a mind eraser. I read “Mind Eraser” on Episode 061 of “Words of Jen”. My husband and I got into a car so I could get to my dentist appointment. This was not my regular dentist (who is in town, and easily accessible by bus or rideshare). This new dentist was in another town. It was made very clear to me that I wouldn’t be able to drive myself home after the procedure. The rideshare driver was one we had hired before, when I made my first visit to the office of the person I think of as “second dentist”. Technically, he specialized in endodontics. “Second dentist” confirmed “first dentist’s” suspicion. I needed a root canal. I brought with me a bag that included the “sedation medication” that “second dentist” insisted that I have right before the root canal. I was to bring it to the office, and take it there, where I could be monitored. The bag also held my sunglasses (which I didn’t end up using), the credit card I would use to pay for the root canal, and a plastic, resealable, box that held some extremely soft, gluten-free, animal crackers. They will melt in your mouth if you let them, so you don’t have to chew. When I made this dentist appointment, I was told that I could not have anything to eat or drink six hours before the appointment. I figured I would come out of the dentist’s office starving – and made sure I had food I could safely eat. We arrived a bit early, and the office was having lunch. Shortly before my appointment, the receptionist appeared at the door. She took my temperature with one of those things that people aim at someone’s forehead to check for fever. I was offered hand sanitizer, which I used. The receptionist smartly had me fill out some paperwork, and pay for the root canal, before I took the medication. She then asked me if I remembered to bring my “sedation medication”. I pulled the prescription bottle out of my bag and showed it to her. The receptionist gave me a small cup of water to drink. The prescription bottle contained two pills. I was expecting one. “Am I to take both of these?, I asked. She said yes. So, I took them both. The receptionist then pointed me to the bathroom. I remembered a call from “second dentist’s” office, a few days ago, in which I was reminded not to eat or drink anything six hours before the appointment. The reason was simple. They expected I’d be in “second dentist’s” office for three hours. After I returned from bathroom the dentist’s assistant walked me to a room and pointed to where I could hang up my bag. I was told to sit down in the dental chair. She put a video on the big screen TV that was hanging on the wall. National Geographic’s “Deep Sea” started playing. It was narrated by David Attenborough. I started to feel a bit more relaxed as I watched whales eating krill. A large swarm of tiny fish followed the whale. The dentist’s assistant moved around the room, setting up for the procedure I was about to have. “Let me know when you start to feel something,” she told me. “What should I feel?” I asked. “Very relaxed.” A little while later, I got cold. She kindly brought me a blanket, and tucked me in. She said they keep the room cold because they all have to wear PPE, and it makes them warm. I vaguely remember saying that I felt sleepy. I think I heard the dentist’s assistant ask me something. She sounded very far away. I remember having a brace of some kind pushed into my mouth, to keep my jaw open during the root canal. When I woke up, I wasn’t aware that any time had passed. I must have looked confused. The dentist’s assistant was talking to me, but I wasn’t able to focus on what she said. The next thing I remember was sitting on a bench outside “second dentist’s” office, with my husband. I tried to make a post on social media to let my friends know that the root canal was over, and that I was okay. I don’t really remember getting into the rental car. Everything was still a blur after we returned home. To the best of my knowledge, I changed back into pajamas and went to sleep. The next day, or maybe it was later that evening, I was scrolling through social media. There was not one, but two, incoherent posts that I made while under the influence of “sedation medication”. I have absolutely no memory of making the second one. One of my friends sent me a very kind response. That was nice. What else happened that I was unaware of? My husband told me that the dentist’s assistant came to the door of the office and gave him a lot of information about aftercare. I don’t remember that happening. He also said I fell asleep on the way home in the rental car. The next day, “second dentist” called me. I had been sleeping, but was coherent enough to answer the phone. “Second dentist” informed me that the tooth that I had a root canal on had three roots. “This is why your other dentist didn’t want to do the root canal”, he informed me. “Second dentist” said he removed two of the roots, but could not remove the third one. He also said a tiny piece of one of the dental tools broke off in my gum. It was made of titanium, like the titanium screw that “first dentist” had placed in my jaw after an extraction not long ago. This was nothing to worry about. I figure my body will go ahead and push out the little piece of titanium as soon as possible. That’s what it did years ago, when I had a root canal on a completely different tooth, and a little chunk of the tooth broke off and stuck out of my gums. That procedure did not require “sedation medication”. Overall, I think taking the “sedation medication” was a good idea. It gave me the opportunity to have a much needed root canal without having to consciously experience any of it. My expectation was that I would feel “very relaxed”. It wasn’t until after all was said and done that I learned it was a mind eraser. Mind Eraser is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Dreaming of BuffetsNovember 3, 2020MediumPhoto by Rosie Fraser on Unsplash I read “Dreaming of Buffets” on episode 058 of Words of Jen. My husband and I are at a pizza place that we used to frequent before we moved halfway across the country. It has a small buffet in the corner that includes slices of pizza with a variety of toppings. There is a salad bar, baked chicken, and a small selection of desserts. I’m standing there, plate in hand, trying to decide what to eat. The delicious smell of pizza fills the air, and I reach out to pick up a few slices. And then I wake up. I’ve been having very vivid dreams about buffets. This is quite unexpected considering that I suffer from food intolerance and allergies and don’t really enjoy eating. Based on what I’ve read on the internet, it appears that many people are having memorable dreams during the COVID-19 pandemic. In another dream, we are at a local Chinese buffet. There is a wide selection of food to choose from. I fill up a plate with egg rolls, fried rice, and steamed vegetables. Everything smells and tastes delicious. When I wake up, it dawns on me that this Chinese Buffet no longer exists. It closed years ago, and a fancy coffee shop moved in and remodeled the location. The coffee shop did well until the COVID-19 restrictions caused it to close. I’ve also dreamed about standing in line at Panda Express, which my sleeping mind has decided counts as a buffet. In this dream, I am starving, and starring at the piles of food behind the plexiglass. It is unclear what kind of food I ordered. The worker hands me a to-go container, which warms my hands as I walk away. More than once, I’ve dreamed about the local Hometown Buffet. My choice of food this time is a plate of fresh vegetables from the salad bar. Spinach leaves, cherry tomatoes, peas, shredded carrots, and some brightly colored pickled beets go on the plate. There is room for a little bit of ranch dressing. I wake up before I get to eat any of it. Once again, this is a buffet that went out of business several years ago. My subconscious mind is trying to feed me, but most of the buffets it selects are long gone. Maybe these dreams are a metaphor for 2020. The things that used to sustain us before the pandemic are disappearing, and some may never return. Dreaming of Buffets is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Changes to California’s AB5 Protect Freelance WorkersSeptember 6, 2020MediumPhoto by Kaitlyn Baker on Unsplash AB5 went into effect in California on January 1, 2020. The purpose was to require employers to provide “gig workers” the same benefits that they offer to their employees. At first glance, it sounded like it had the potential to provide protections to freelance writers. Unfortunately, there were some problems with this law. On September 4, 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB2257 to fix some of the problems with AB5. The changes made by AB2257 took effect immediately. I am a freelance writer who lives in California. When AB5 went into affect, I was scared. The law placed a limit of 35 “content submissions” per year. It was unclear to me whether that meant 35 submissions to one client – or 35 submissions total for the year. I’ve been working as a freelance writer since 2010. It is how I make my living. It felt like AB5 was going to take away my ability to continue working as a freelance writer. Fortunately, as I read more about what AB5 included, I realized my fears were unfounded. The reason is because the law makes it clear the conditions in which an employer must classify a “gig worker” as an employee. 1. The worker is free to perform services without the control or direction of the company. 2. The worker is performing work tasks that are outside the usual course of the company’s business activities. 3. The worker is customarily engaged in an independent established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as that involved in the work performed. Based on these rules, the freelance writing work I did was exempt from the effects of AB5. All of my clients could, if required to, prove that I was “performing work tasks that are outside of the usual course of the company’s business activities.” I was one of the lucky ones who was able to continue to earn a living despite AB5. That wasn’t true for all California writers who are freelancers or contract workers, though. SB Nation wrote that it would end contracts with most of their California-based writers because of the 35 written content submissions part of AB5. A few of those contractors were going to be offered full or part-time employment, but the rest were let go. The American Society of Journalists and Authors sued the State of California in federal court in an effort to stop AB5 from “violating the Constitution and devastating the careers of freelance journalists such as writers and photographers”. The National Press Photographers Association joined this lawsuit. On September 4, 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB2257 into law. It took effect immediately. The main purpose of this law was to function as a cleanup measure to address criticisms about how AB5 treated contractors and freelancers. Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, a Democrat who represents California’s District 80, authored AB2257. A quote by her was posted in an press release on her official website about AB2257 becoming a law: “Workers shouldn’t have to be tied up in litigation for years on end before they can access their basic labor rights,” Assemblywoman Gonzales said. “AB 2257 strikes a balance and continues to provide protections for workers against misclassification that had previously gone unchecked for decades under the old rules.” AB2257 passed the California Senate floor with 39 AYES and 0 NAYS. It passed the Assembly Floor with 74 AYES and 0 NAYS. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, AB2557 includes major exemptions (from AB5) for the music industry, as well as freelance writers and photographers. The new law eliminates the “35 submissions a year” cap for any publication. In addition, the new law protects musicians (with some exceptions), translators and interpreters, still photographers, photojournalists, videographers (with some exceptions), photo editors, graphic designers, web designers, tutors, consultants, youth sports coaches, caddies, wedding or event planners and vendors, handypeople, movers, dog walkers and groomers, pool cleaners, insurance underwriters, manufactured housing salespeople, competition judges, landscape architects, performers teaching master classes, foresters, real estate appraisers and home inspectors, and feedback aggregators. As for me, I’m happy that AB2257 has become a law. I no longer have to worry that my freelance gigs could suddenly end through no fault of my own – but due to the restrictions in AB5. Some of you, who are also freelance workers in California might feel the same way. Changes to California’s AB5 Protect Freelance Workers is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Trump Must Pay $44,100 to Stormy DanielsAugust 28, 2020MediumImage by succo from Pixabay Judge Robert Broadbelt III, of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County in California, has ordered Donald Trump to pay Stormy Daniels $44,100 to cover legal fees in the battle over her nondisclosure (NDA) agreement. This was reported by The Guardian, as well as several other news outlets. Former Governor of California, Jerry Brown, appointed Judge Robert Broadbelt III to the Superior Court of Los Angeles in 2012. Judge Broadbelt III ran for re-election for judge of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County in 2014. No one decided to run against him, so he was automatically re-elected. In 2020, Judge Broadbelt III was the only candidate to file. He won the position by default when the election was canceled. His current term ends in 2027. Stormy Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, is a pornographic film producer, director, and actor. She has claimed that she had an affair with Donald Trump from 2006 until 2007. To put this in perspective, Donald Trump married his third wife, Melania Knauss, in January of 2005. Melania gave birth to Barron Trump (the only child of Donald and Melania) in March of 2006. Donald Trump’s affair with Stormy Daniels reportedly started four months later, in July of 2006. She has claimed the affair continued into 2007. Donald Trump denies it. This most recent court battle is, in part, about the non-disclosure agreement that Stormy Daniels signed in October of 2016. It was titled: “Confidential Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release; Assignment of Copyright and Non-Disparagement Agreement” in Judge Broadbelt III’s ruling. Strangely, Stormy Daniels is referred to by the pseudonym “Peggy Peterson” in the NDA, but the person referred to by the pseudonym “David Dennison” is redacted in the copy the judge was given. The ruling clarifies that Stormy Daniels alleges that “David Dennison” is Donald Trump. This appears to be backed up by Michael Cohen, who was Trump’s personal attorney at the time. Both Stormy Daniels and Michael Cohen signed the NDA. But, “David Dennison” did not. Judge Broadbelt III wrote that there was a large amount of evidence showing that Michael Cohen chose “David Dennison” as a pseudonym for Trump. This case has gone back and forth in court for a while. On August 14, 2020, the Superior Court of Los Angeles held a hearing on Stormy Daniels’ motion for an award of attorney’s fees and costs in the amount of $64,440.65, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1717 and 28 United States Code section 1447, subdivision (c). Defendant Donald Trump, and his lawyers, opposed that motion. In short, Judge Broadbelt III reviewed the claims made by Stormy Daniels, and the claims made by Donald Trump, and came to a conclusion. He ruled that Plaintiff Stormy Daniels achieved her main litigation objective when Defendant Donald Trump (and presumably his lawyers) filed their Covenants Not to Sue. Judge Broadbelt III noted that the District Court also stated that Plantiff Stormy Daniels “primarily sought declaratory relief stating that the Agreement should be declared unenforceable against her”. It also declared that “Because Plaintiff received this relief through Defendants’ Covenants, there is no further controversy for the Court to address.” There is a lengthy explanation by Judge Broadbelt III that can be summarized in a few sentences. First, the judge stated that Defendant Donald Trump would have to be either a party to the Agreement, or a third party beneficiary of the Agreement. Second, the judge determined that there is support that the parties to the agreement intended Defendant Donald Trump to be the person referred to as “David Dennison” in the agreement. “Based on the evidence discussed above and the reasonable inferences the court has drawn from that evidence, the court finds that Defendant is the intended third-party beneficiary of the Agreement.” On August 17, 2020, Judge Broadbelt III ruled that Plaintiff Stormy Daniels (Stephanie Clifford) would be granted her motion for attorney’s fees – but not for her request for costs. In addition, Judge Broadbelt III ordered that Plaintiff Stormy Daniels “shall recover $44,100 in attorney’s fees against defendant Donald J. Trump in this action.” All of this could have been avoided if Donald Trump simply chose not to have an affair with Stormy Daniels. It is clear that Trump did not want that affair to become public knowledge. He brought this problem upon himself, and it makes sense that the court decided he is financially obligated to pay $44,100 to Stormy Daniels. Trump Must Pay $44,100 to Stormy Daniels is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... The NRA is in TroubleAugust 24, 2020MediumImage by 3D Animation Production Company from Pixabay New York Attorney General Letitia James has filed a lawsuit against the National Rifle Association (NRA). The lawsuit has absolutely nothing to do with the second amendment. This isn’t about taking away people’s guns. Instead, the NRA is in trouble because, according to Attorney General James, the charitable organization has been diverting the money it receives from donations to personal use by senior leadership of the NRA. James also states that the organization used that money for the financial gain of close associations and family. The lawsuit is called People of the State of New York, by Letitia James, Attorney General of the State of New York v The National Rifle Association of America, Inc., Wayne LaPierre, Wilson Phillips, John Frazer, and Joshua Powell. A copy of a summons, and the complaint, can be found here. (PDF) “The NRA’s influence has been so powerful that the organization went unchecked for decades while top executives funneled millions into their own pockets,” said Attorney General James. “The NRA is fraught with fraud and abuse, which is why today, we seek to dissolve the NRA, because no organization is above the law.” One of the reasons why the NRA is in trouble is because it is registered as a 501(c)(4) not-for-profit charitable organization. The lawsuit alleges that mismanagement led to the waste and loss of millions of assets and contributed to the NRA reaching a deteriorated financial state. In addition, the lawsuit alleges that NRA board’s audit committee was negligent in its duty to ensure appropriate, competent, and judicious stewardship of assets by NRA leadership. In short, the lawsuit alleges that four men “overrode and evaded internal controls to allow themselves, their families, favored board members, employees, and vendors to benefit through reimbursed expenses, related party transactions, excess compensation, side deals, and waste of charitable assets without regard to the NRA’s best interests”. Wayne LaPierre was Executive Vice-President of the NRA for about three decades. Here are some of the things he allegedly did: Spent hundreds of thousands of dollars of the NRA’s charitable assets for private plane trips for himself and his family, including extended family when he was not present. He and his family allegedly also took trips to the Bahamas by private air charter during a three-year period. This cost the NRA $500,000. On many of those trips, LaPierre and his family were allegedly gifted the use of a 107-foot yacht owned by an NRA vendor. LaPierre also allegedly traveled to Africa with his wife for all-expense paid safaris, gifted by an NRA vendor. LaPierre allegedly secured a post-employment contract for himself with the NRA, without board approval. The contract, according to Attorney General James, is currently valued at more than $17 million. He also allegedly received more than $1.2 million in expense reimbursements in a four-year period for expenditures that “included gifts for favored friends and vendors; travel expenses for himself and his family; and membership fees at golf clubs, hotels, and other member clubs.” Wilson “Woody” Phillips was the former treasurer and CFO and managed the books and financial operations of the NRA. He allegedly lied on financial disclosure forms, and set up a deal worth more than $1 million that benefited his girlfriend. Phillips also allegedly obtained a contract for himself worth $1.8 million, “purportedly for monthly consulting services to the incoming treasurer.” (The current treasurer knew nothing about the contract and said that Phillips never consulted for him). Joshua Powell was former Chief of Staff and Executive Director of General Operations of the NRA. He was terminated after 3.5 years for “misappropriating NRA funds during his tenure” (among other things). He allegedly had his salary doubled retroactively to the beginning of his tenure with the NRA to $500,000. It increased again to $650,000 less than a year later. After two years on the job his salary was $800,000. He also allegedly “abused the NRA’s policy on housing and relocation reimbursements, pocketing excess of $100,000 more than NRA rules allowed.” John Frazer was chosen by LaPierre to serve as general counsel and corporate secretary at the NRA. Between 2014 and 2018, he allegedly “failed to comply with governance procedures, make necessary changes, or advise others that governance changes had to be made.” He also allegedly “failed to ensure the NRA was in compliance with laws and policies governing whistleblowers.” Ackerman McQueen was the NRA’s Public Relations and Advertising firm. The lawsuit alleges that a practice began between LaPierre and Ackerman McQueen’s co-founder. What it was being used for is shocking. Ackerman McQueen allegedly paid for a variety of non-contractual, out-of-pocket expenses for LaPierre and other NRA executives, and passed those expenses to the NRA. This appears to be a way to hide the payment of personal expensive for NRA executives from the NRA itself. After this lawsuit was announced, it appears that President Donald Trump (and others) suggested that the NRA could get out of trouble if it relocated to another state. Attorney General James responded by reminding the NRA and President Trump that her office “shut down the president’s own foundation, recouped millions in diverted funds after unearthing the illegal use of charitable funds, and directed those funds to lawful organizations for legitimate charity purposes.” She also stated: “…To be clear, no charity registered in New York state, including the NRA, can dissolve and relocate to another state without approval from my office or from the Supreme Court of New York. As long as our lawsuit continues, the NRA must stay right where it is and answer for their deep-rooted fraud. The facts speak for themselves and our lawsuit will continue undeterred.” Attorney General James has a proposed resolution of this case. It involves dissolving the NRA, and asking the court to order LaPierre, Phillips, Powell and Frazier to “make full resolutions for the funds they unlawfully profited and salaries earned while employees”. Personally, I don’t like the NRA. To me, it feels like the organization uses scare tactics as a means of influencing people to donate money to it. I expect that people who donated money to the NRA would be upset to learn that the money they donated wasn’t used in the way it was supposed to. It is worth noting that there are plenty of gun owners who don’t like the National Rifle Association. In 2018, HuffPost posted the results of a HuffPost/YouGov poll in which nearly half of the gun owners who took the poll said they didn’t think NRA membership would benefit them personally. The poll showed that one in four respondents indicated that a reason they chose not to join the NRA was because the disagreed with the NRA’s political beliefs. Another 22 percent said they didn’t feel the NRA represented people like them. A total of 23 percent of respondents said NRA membership was “too expensive”. On August 6, 2020, Attorney General Karl A. Racine tweeted: “#BREAKING: We are suing the NRA Foundation for misusing charitable funds. Donors gave money to fund firearms safety, firearms education and marksmanship training. Instead, that money was diverted to support wasteful spending by the NRA and its executives.” The District of Columbia Attorney General Karl A. Racine. has also filed a lawsuit against the NRA for misusing charitable funds to support wasteful spending by the NRA and its executives. This lawsuit alleges that the NRA Foundation violated District laws by allowing charitable funds to be used for non charitable purposes, failing to operate independently, and placing the NRA’s interests ahead of its own charitable purposes. The part about failing to operate independently refers to the NRA Foundation’s Board of Directors, which was allegedly controlled by the NRA. That’s not supposed to happen because the Board of Directors was supposed to provide oversight. Instead, the Board allegedly allowed the NRA to exploit the NRA Foundation through multi-million-dollar loans. One of those loans was $5 million – that the NRA has never paid back to the NRA Foundation. A copy of the complaint can be found here. (PDF) It will be interesting to see what happens as a result of these lawsuits. Do not expect that the outcome will be revealed soon. These lawsuits could end up working their way though the system and to the Supreme Court. I’m unconvinced the NRA and/or the NRA Foundation will have the money to fight against these lawsuits for that long. The NRA is in Trouble is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Twitter Finally Took Action Against “QAnon” ActivityJuly 22, 2020MediumImage by Marlon Romanelli from Pixabay Twitter recently started taking action against “QAnon” accounts – and I am absolutely thrilled about it! In a thread on @TwitterSafety, Twitter stated that the company “will take strong enforcement action on behavior that has the potential to lead to offline harm.” On December 4, 2016, Edgar Maddison Welch, a 28-year-old man from Salisbury, North Carolina, went to a pizza place called Comet Ping Pong. He wasn’t there to eat pizza. Welch brought what police described as an “assault rifle” with him and fired it, multiple times, inside the restaurant. Luckily, no one was hurt. The police also recovered two firearms from inside the restaurant and an additional weapon from Welch’s vehicle. Edgar Maddison Welch was charged with assault with a dangerous weapon. Why did Welch do this? Welch said he came to the pizza place to investigate “Pizza Gate” (a conspiracy theory that is spread by followers of “QAnon”). Welch had become convinced that the Comet Ping Pong was allowing Bill and Hillary Clinton, and her former campaign manager, to “run a child sex slave ring” in the basement of the restaurant. Comet Ping Pong does not have a basement. On March 24, 2017, that Edgar Maddison Welch pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court to a federal charge of interstate transportation of a firearm with intent to commit an offense and a local charge of assault with a dangerous weapon. On June 22, 2017, Welch was sentenced to 48 months in prison. Michael Hari, Michael McWhorter, and Joe Morris, three members of the “White Rabbit Three Percent Illinois Patriot Freedom Fighters Militia”, rented a truck in August of 2017, and drove 500 miles from Illinois to fire bomb the Dar al-Farooq Islamic Center in Bloomington, Minnesota. The Southern Poverty Law Center points out that “white rabbit” is a phrase connected to “QAnon”, whose followers encourage one another to “follow the white rabbit”. Michael Hari published “The White Rabbit Handbook” on Amazon in the same month that “QAnon” appeared. Michael Hari picked the Dar al-Farooq Islamic Center because it was far enough away from the White Rabbits’ central Illinois hometown that he he thought they would not be suspected. He also believed it was a focal point for terror recruiting. There is no evidence that that the mosque was engaging in that. Michael McWhorter, 29, and Joe Morris, 23, pleaded guilty to federal charges that originated in both the District of Minnesota and the Central District of Illinois. McWhorter, Morris, and Michael Hari, 47, were federally indicted on possession of a machine gun; conspiracy by threats and violence, and attempted arson. According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office District of Minnesota, Hari built the bomb, but did not tell McWhorter and Morris about it until after the three had rented the truck and started driving to Minnesota. Morris broke a window on the mosque, and McWhorter lit the fuse on the bomb and threw it inside. Hari waited for them in the truck. In addition McWhorter and Morris, along with Hari, attempted to set the Women’s Health Practice in Champaign, Illinois, on fire, on November 7, 2017. Morris broke a window and placed an incendiary device inside, and attempted to light a strip of magnesium that was used as the fuse. The device failed to explode. On January 24, 2019, both McWhorter and Morris were convicted of: intentionally obstructing and attempting to obstruct by force and the threat of force the free exercise of religious beliefs; carrying and using a destructive device during and in relation to crimes of violence; possession of a machine gun; conspiracy to interfere with commerce by threats of violence; and attempted arson. Hari was convicted of: Intentionally defacing, damaging, and destroying any religious real property because of the religious character of that property; intentionally obstructing and attempting to obstruct by force and the threat of force the free exercise of religious beliefs; conspiracy to commit federal felonies by means of fire and explosives; carrying and using a destructive device and in relation to crimes of violence; and possession of an unregistered destructive device. In July of 2018, Matthew P. Wright, a 30-year-old ex-Marine from Henderson Nevada, drove his homemade armored vehicle onto the Mike O’Callaghan-Pat Tillman Memorial Bridge leading to the Hoover Dam. He blocked traffic for almost two hours. Previous to doing this, Wright sent letters to President Trump, members of Nevada’s congressional delegation, the FBI and CIA, and other federal agencies. The letters included the phrase “For where we go one, we go all”, a phrase used by followers of “QAnon”. (They tend to abbreviate it on social media to just the first letters of each of those words, and often put a # in front of it). Wright then drove his vehicle across the bridge, where his tires were flattened by spike strips. He ended up stuck on a dirt road where he surrendered. Authorities found a military-style AR-15 rifle, a handgun, multiple magazines of ammunition and a flash-bang explosive device inside Wright’s vehicle. Matthew Wright pleaded guilty to a charges of terrorism, aggravated assault, and fleeing from law enforcement. Under state sentencing guidelines, he could spend less than a decade in prison. In a letter he wrote from jail, Wright stated that he held up a sign that said “Release the OIG report” during the standoff because he wanted to bring out what he thought were hidden truths to the public. One of “QAnon’s” conspiracy theories centers on a supposedly government insider who “QAnon” follower believe is releasing revelations with cryptic language. One thing “QAnon” followers believe is that the investigation led by Robert Muller was to expose crimes involving Obama administration officials. In reality, The Muller Report centered on collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, and situations where Trump possibly obstructed justice. There is nothing in the Muller Report that a rational person would consider to have anything to do with the Obama administration. In January of 2019, a video was posted to a YouTube account run by Paul and Chrissy Jaselskis at 8:07 p.m. ET. It was called “Melissa Video”, and it included nonsense pushed by “QAnon”. The video alleged that the world is run by a Satanic global pedophile ring that is fronted by celebrities and Hillary Clinton. The YouTube account belonged to Paul and Chrissy, who were parents of Ryan Jaselskis, (22), who also used the account. He was the one who reposted the “Melissa Video” onto that YouTube account. That same night, about an hour after the video was posted, a fire broke out at Comet Ping Pong (the same pizza place Edgar Maddison Welch entered with a gun in 2016). Security footage showed Ryan Jaslskis walking into Comet Ping Pong carrying a bag with lighter fluid inside. The footage showed that Jaselskis “doused the curtains inside the restaurant with lighter fluid and set them on fire.” A customer at the restaurant and two employees attempted to put out the fire as Jaselskis left the building. The customer and employees were able to put out the fire before firefighters arrived. A police camera captured footage of Jaselskis walking out of the pizza restaurant around the time of the fire. A witness also identified him as he left the restaurant. On December 17, 2019, Ryan Jaselskis pleaded guilty to one count of arson and one count of assaulting a federal law enforcement officer. He was sentenced on April 26, 2020, to four years in prison and three years of supervised release. Anthony Comello was arrested after he shot and killed Francesco “Franky Boy” Cali, a Gambino crime family underboss. At first, this was believed to be a mob hit. But, Anthony Comello is not part of the mob. Instead, he is a follower of “QAnon”. Comello believed that Francesco Cali was part of the “deep state”, and decided to take it upon himself to enact a citizen’s arrest on Cali. His plan was to take Cali into custody. “QAnon” supporters believe in a “deep state” conspiracy theory. They believe that President Trump is “leading a winning battle against” the deep state forces. It has become common for “QAnon” supporters to attend Trump rallies. He ended up killing Cali. Reportedly, Comello believed that President Trump would support what he had done. Comello was charged with second-degree murder. At a court hearing shortly after his arrest, Anthony Comello held up his palms, which had ink scribbling of MAGA (for Make America Great Again) and the letter Q (a “QAnon” symbol). In December of 2019, Anthony Comello refused to cooperate with a state mental exam. Judge William E. Garnett stated that he wanted a mental examination of Comello from the prosecution and defense by January 3, 2020. On June 3, 2020, Anthony Comello had been deemed mentally unfit for trial. Both the prosecutors and the defense confirmed that finding during a remote conference. Judge William E. Garnett order Comello (now 25), transferred to a state Office of Mental Health facility for further evaluation. Comello is charged with murder and criminal weapon possession. It is clear that Twitter had plenty of examples “QAnon” supporters engaging in offline harm. The FBI identified “QAnon” as a domestic terrorism threat in 2019. In addition to permanently suspending accounts that tweeting about “QAnon” topics, Twitter will also permanently suspend accounts that have engaged in violations of the platform’s multiple-account policy. Twitter will also permanently suspend accounts coordinating abuse around individual victims, and accounts of those that are attempting to evade a previous suspension. Twitter noted that they have seen more of that in recent weeks. In addition, Twitter will no longer serve content and accounts associated with “QAnon” in Trends and recommendations. It will work to ensure Twitter is not highlighting “QAnon” related activity in search and conversations. And, it will block URLs associated with “QAnon” from being shared on Twitter. According to NBC News, Twitter has taken down more than 7,000 “QAnon” accounts in the last few weeks for breaking the rules about targeted harassment. The action being taken by Twitter will definitely reduce the amount of hate, misinformation, and harassment on the platform. Twitter Finally Took Action Against “QAnon” Activity is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... It Ain’t Gonna WorkJuly 7, 2020Mediumimage by vonpics on Pixabay My neighbor who loudly and frequently builds stuff, has wheeled a kayak holder to the back of his pickup. I’m fairly certain he built the holder himself. A familiar rattling and squealing noise was my first clue that the kayaks were coming out. Of course, I decided to look out the window to see what was happening. Neighbor puts his two kayaks into the back of his red pickup truck. One falls out, squeaking its way to the ground. Neighbor stands and stares at it, momentarily dumbfounded. He picks up the escaping yellow kayak and places inside the back of his red pickup, next to the blue kayak that was already in there. They are side by side now, and filling up the entire back of the truck. Neighbor attempts to shut the tail gate on the back of the pickup. The blue kayak is too long for the truck, and it is sticking out past the end of it. Neighbor cannot close the the tail gate. He fiddles with the kayaks for a while, and eventually realizes there is no possible way to make the blue kayak fit inside the bed of the pickup truck. He leaves the tail gate open, and begins an attempt to find some way to secure the kayaks. I predict that both kayaks will fly out of the pickup bed when the truck reached speed. Neighbor walks away for a moment. When he returns, he stacks the yellow kayak on top of the blue one. A small, square, red flag-like piece of fabric has been attacked to the end of the blue kayak. Next, he begins filling up the rest of the truck bed with all manner of things. Some folding chairs go in, along with a small cooler, possibly some fishing gear, and what might be a small grill. This pickup truck, unlike some others, lacks the part that looks something like a net. It is the part that stretches across the end of the truck bed, just before the spot where the tail gate is supposed to close. All of the things he put into the truck bed are going to fall right out the back – which he cannot close due to the length of the blue kayak. A fishing pole is now leaning against the back of the pickup truck. It is tall. No idea how he’s gonna fit that in the truck bed. It looks like he is planning on spending Memorial Day at one of the nearby bodies of water. In the past, what he is currently attempting would be a perfectly normal thing to do on a three day weekend. But, this is 2020, and COVID-19 is still out there. There is no vaccine, and the virus doesn’t take vacations. My neighbor is outside a lot, but never wears a mask of any kind. I figure he’s not gonna social distance at whatever body of water he is about to drive to. And he just coughed a very dry cough. Parks in my county are open with restrictions. Social distancing is required. No group gatherings are allowed. It is ok to have a picnic or BBQ with household members, only. I think masks are strongly suggested, but no one seems to be enforcing that. I figure I’m gonna see this neighbor on one of those videos where a bunch of idiots get in the water in big groups, without masks or social distancing, sometime later tonight. Neighbor has decided to bend the tall fishing pole into the opening of the blue kayak (the one that has a red flag hanging from it). That cannot possibly be good for the fishing pole. Neighbor has curved the pole into the shape of a letter U. The kayaks are still not secured. Neither is anything else that he has placed into the truck bed. Neighbor takes a moment to get a cloth and wipe off the condensation that has collected on the side mirrors of his red pickup truck. When finished, he stows the cloth inside the truck somewhere. Then, he stands next to the pickup bed, intently staring at it, trying to solve the puzzle of his own making. Suddenly, he pounces! Neighbor is now making a half-assed attempt to secure all the non-kayak objects that are in the back of the pickup. He seems to have realized that there is a good chance that some of this stuff will fall out after he starts driving to his destination. Neighbor places some of the stuff into the back of the truck, behind the driver’s seat. The cooler gets securely stowed. Next, he unbends the U shaped fishing pole as he slides it out of the kayak. Neighbor tries to find a way to get the fishing pole into the back seat of the truck. He turns it this way… he turns it that way. He even tries bending it into a somewhat larger U shape. The fishing pole ends up right back inside the blue kayak. He takes another moment to stare at the back of the truck again, pondering his options. It ain’t gonna work! Two white plastic bags, of the kind you get from a grocery store, have been added to the truck bed. The bags have taken on that round shape that indicates they have been filled with something. Neighbor takes a minute to try and determine whether the bags should have their handles propped up, or if it is better to shove the handles inside the now rounded part of the bags. I think the bags will be equally aerodynamic no matter what way the handles are placed. I expect the bags, and whatever they are holding, to be the first to fly out when he starts driving. The neighbor now appears to be having some second thoughts. It is as though he has acknowledged to himself that being unable to close the tail gate could perhaps be a problem. I imagine him picturing the contents of the truck bed slowly floating out and away as he drives, like white dandelion seeds catching the wind when the summer is over. Unlike the fluffy seeds, these objects are very likely to cause destruction. Neighbor walks away once more, and returns with what looks like an elastic rope of some kind. Neighbor begins attaching it to end of the truck bed, where the tail gate hangs open. The elastic rope stretches across the truck bed in a skinny, straight, line. It goes across the tip of end of the blue kayak, which is hanging several inches out of the truck bed. Neighbor fiddles with the red flag he attached to the blue kayak. It ain’t gonna work. The elastic string is not securing the yellow kayak that has been placed on top of the blue one. Not at all. The string won’t help if the blue kayak below the yellow one falls out of the back of the pickup. Neighbor just pulled out a bright orange, thick, string. Or is it a cable? He stretches this across the open tail gate, and it reaches… right over the top of the blue kayak. He has now unsuccessfully secured both of his kayaks. The woman who lives next door, and who I hardly ever see, walks out the door of the house and gets into passenger seat of the pick up. Her hair is wet, and she might be still in the process of waking up. Neighbor woman gets out of the pick up. She returns with her adorable pug dog, whom I love. The dog makes the cutest “wuf wuf” sounds when it thinks that there might be a human on the other side of the tall fence his owner built and installed shortly after moving in. The pug dog is on a leash that is connected to the halter that the dog is wearing. Neighbor woman picks up the pug, and it happily gets itself into the back seat of the pickup. The pug dog is more secured than anything that is in the truck bed. The neighbor gets into the pickup and slowly, very slowly, drives down the alleyway a little bit. He stops. He wipes the condensation of the side mirrors once again. Neighbor climbs into the pick up bed and starts moving around some of the items. The two folding chairs that were in the truck bed are removed and placed into the back seat of the truck. The pug dog is likely back there somewhere, and I hope he has enough room to be comfy on this poorly planned road trip. And.. they’re off! I watch as the neighbor drives extremely slowly up the ramp that leads out of the mobile home park and onto the street. The incline is a feature, not a bug, and was put in place when a crew came to repair and replace the roads in the mobile home park a while back. Neighbor is probably going to have to drive faster than that once he gets onto a highway. I can neither predict exactly what items he will lose on the way, nor how many he will return home with. I watch as the neighbor’s truck turns onto the road, and drives away. They are on their way to gather with a bunch of other people who won’t wear masks, and who don’t practice social distancing. Whatever body of water they are heading for might become the next COVID-19 hotspot. I remain inside my home, windows closed and air conditioning on, with every intention of staying put this entire three day weekend. It Ain’t Gonna Work is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... 2020 Presidential CampaignResults of the 2020 Senate ElectionsJanuary 26, 20212020 Presidential CampaignPhoto by Alejandro Barba on Unsplash U.S. Senators serve six-year terms and elections to the Senate are staggered over even years so that only about 1/3 of the Senate is up for reelection during any election. The New York Times noted that 35 Senate Democrats, and 30 Senate Republicans, were not up for reelection in 2020. In order to hold a majority in the Senate, a party must have more than 50 Senators. Typically, Independent candidates vote with the Democratic party. The 2020 Senate election resulted in 50 Democratic Senators – including the Democratic Senators who were not up for reelection, and the two Independent Senators, (Senator Bernie Sanders – Vermont, and Senator Angus King – Maine.) The Democratic Party flipped 4 seats. The 2020 Senate election also resulted in 50 Republican Senators – including the Republican Senators who were not up for reelection. The Republican Party flipped one seat. It appears to be a tie, but that’s not entirely accurate. The Democrats flipped more seats than the Republicans did, which means the Democrats now have the majority in the Senate, and in the House, with Democratic president Joe Biden. The rules for the Senate state that if a piece of legislation results in votes that cause a tie, the Vice-President is to cast their vote and break the 50-50 tie. The President and the Vice-President are from the same party. Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris will be the person who gets to break a tie in the current Senate. The Guardian has details about the 2020 Senate races. They get their information from The Associated Press. Here are the results: Alabama: Tommy Tuberville: (Republican): 1,392,076 votes (50.2%) – WINNER, flipped seatIncumbent Doug Jones (Democrat): 920,487 votes (39.8%) Alaska: Incumbent Dan Sullivan (Republican): 191,112 votes (54%) – WINNERAl Gross (Democrat): 146.068 votes (41.3%)John Wayne Howe (Libertarian): 16,806 votes (4.7%) Arizona: Mark Kelly (Democrat): 1,716,467 votes (51.2%) – WINNER, flipped seat Incumbent Martha McSally (Republican): 1,637,661 votes (48.8%) Mark Kelly is married to Gabrielle Giffords, a former Arizona congresswoman who made headlines when she became the victim of an assassination attempt, from which she later recovered. Jared Lee Loughner, who was 22 years old, shot Giffords in the head at her event at a grocery store called “Congress On Your Corner”. Jared Lee Loughner also wounded several other people and killed six people. HE was later sentenced to seven life terms plus 140 years in prison. Mark Kelly became an astronaut in 1996, in the same class as his twin brother Scott. He spent 340 days on the International Space Station gathering data about himself, while his brother Scott carried out identical tests on earth. The two were compared after Mark Kelly returned home. Arkansas: Incumbent Tom Cotton (Republican): 793,871 votes (66.5%) – WINNERRicky Harrington (Libertarian): 399,390 votes (33.5%) Colorado: John Hickenlooper (Democrat): 1,731,114 votes (53.5%) – WINNER, flipped seatIncumbent Cory Gardner (Republican): 1,429,492 votes (44.2%)Raymone Doane (Libertarian): 56,262 votes (1.7%) John Hickenlooper is a former Democratic governor of Colorado. He was the mayor of Denver, Colorado, from 2011-2019. He announced that he was running for president of the United States on March 4, 2019. On August 15, 2019, he suspended his presidential campaign. Delaware: Christopher Coons (Democrat): 291,804 votes (59.4%) – WINNER Lauren Witzke (Republican): 186,054 votes (37.9%)Mark Turley (Libertarian): 7,833 votes (1.6%) Georgia: The Senate elections in Georgia were contentious. Georgia Senator David Perdue was up for reelection. Georgia Senator Kelly Loeffler had been appointed by the Georgia Governor Brian Kemp after Georgia Senator Johnny Isakson (Republican) retired. This meant that Senator Kelly Loeffler had to run in a Special election in order to keep her seat. The Guardian reported the results of the first set of Georgia elections: David Perdue (Republican): 2,462,617 votes (49.7%)Jon Ossoff (Democrat): 2,374,519 votes (47.9%)Shane Hazel (Libertarian): 115,039 votes (2.3%) There were two separate Senate elections happening: one between Raphael Warnock and incumbent Kelly Loffler, and the other between Jon Ossoff and incumbent David Perdue. None of the candidates reached 50%, so it went to a runoff with the top two candidates: Perdue and Ossoff. Raphael Warnock (Democrat): 1,617,035 votes (32.9%)Kelly Loeffler (Republican): 1,273,214 votes (25.9%)Doug Collins (Republican): 980,454 votes (20%) None of the candidates reached 50%, so it went to a runoff with the top two candidates: Warnock and Loeffler. The Washington Post reported that these two runoffs happened because no candidate got more than 50 percent of the vote in November. When that happens, Georgia election law says the top two vote-getters must go to a runoff. Georgia is also in a unique position by having both Senate seats up right now. One is a regular election, as Sen. David Perdue (R) finishes his first six-year term and runs for reelection. The other is a special election after a Republican senator retired last year. Georgia’s governor appointed Sen. Kelly Loeffer (R) to the seat, and she’s now running in her first election for a full term. David Perdue is a Republican. In 2014, he entered the U.S. Senate race (despite having no direct political experience). He defeated his Democratic opponent Michelle Nunn, and officially took office in the Senate. In 2016, David Perdue became one of Donald Trump’s greatest allies. Britannica included the following information about David Perdue: …Shortly thereafter the United States faced the COVID-19 global pandemic. Although Perdue initially downplayed the seriousness of the virus, it was later revealed that he made several advantageous stock trades that resulted in allegations of insider trading. These developments came as he faced a tough reelection bid… The New York Times posted an article on December 2, 2020, titled: “2,596 Trades in One Term: Inside Senator Perdue’s Stock Portfolio”. It was written by Stephanie Saul, Kate Kelly, and Michael LaForgia. From the article: …Last week, The New York Times reported that the Justice Department had investigated the senator for possible insider trading in his sale of more than $1 million worth of stock in a financial-analysis firm, Cardlytics. Ultimately, prosecutors declined to bring charges. Other media outlets have revealed several trades in companies whose business dealings fall under the jurisdiction of Mr. Perdue’s committees……The Times analyzed data compiled by Senate Stock Watcher, a nonpartisan website that aggregates publicly available information on lawmakers’ trading, and found that Mr. Perdue’s transactions accounted for nearly a third of all senators’ trades reported in the past six years. His 2,596 trades, mostly in stocks but also in bonds and funds, roughly equal the combined trading volume of the next five most active traders in the Senate……Nearly half of Mr. Perdue’s FireEye trades, for example, occurred while he sat on the cybersecurity panel, a role that potentially could have provided him with nonpublic information about companies like FireEye. During that period, FireEye landed a subcontract worth more than $30 million with the Army Cyber Command, which had operations at Fort Gordon, in Mr. Perdue’s home state. In 2018, Mr. Perdue reported capital gains of up to $15,000 from FireEye trades.And as a member of the Senate banking, housing, and urban affairs committee since 2017, Mr. Perdue bought and sold shares of a number of financial companies his panel oversaw, including JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and Regions Financial……Mr. Perdue’s decision to sell off his stock holdings this past April followed criticism of trades made by several senators in coronavirus-sensitive stocks just after they had attended a Senate briefing on Jan. 24.In the aftermath of those sales, the Justice Department opened investigations into trading by Ms. Loeffler; Senator Richard M. Burr of North Carolina; his Republican colleague James M. Inhofe of Oklahoma; and Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat. All have since been closed except the Burr inquiry, which is also nearing an end, according to a person with knowledge of the matter. A Justice Department spokesman declined to comment.Mr. Perdue, whose office has said he did not attend that briefing, was among those who bought and sold some of those stocks, including Pfizer, in the weeks that followed.Mr. Perdue purchased up to $260,000 worth of Pfizer stock between Feb. 26 and Feb. 28, in the early days of a market downturn. On the 28th, he issued a news release reporting that he had regularly attended briefings led by the coronavirus task force; records subsequently showed that he had bought the third tranche of Pfizer shares that same day.The news release also emphasized that the U.S. government was expediting the development of a coronavirus vaccine. And in March, Pfizer announced its partnership with a German biotechnology company, BioNTech, to develop a coronavirus vaccine.Mr. Perdue had frequently traded Pfizer stock before this year. He had rarely traded another stock he bought in the early stages of the U.S. outbreak, DuPont, which, as a manufacturer of personal protective equipment, also stood to benefit from the coronavirus response. (Mr. Perdue purchased some shares in DuPont on Jan. 24, the day of the Senate briefing, and additional shares later.)In late February and early March, Mr. Perdue sold stock in Caesars, an entertainment company whose casino business would be hard-hit by the pandemic, but purchased shares of Disney and Delta, additions to his portfolio that seem to run counter to any suggestion that he was trading on insider information about the virus… On June 20, 2017, CNN posted an article titled: “Who is Jon Ossoff?” It was written by Madison Park and Eric Bradner. From the article: …Born in Atlanta, Ossoff grew up in the Northlake area. He attended Georgetown University where he got a bachelor’s degree in foreign service and then worked as an aide to Democratic Rep. Hank Johnson.He got his master’s in international political economy at the London School of Economics and Political Science. In 2013, Ossoff began working with former BBC journalist Ron McCullagh. He used money from an inheritance to buy a stake in McCullagh’s investigative film company and renamed it Insight TMI, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution……Earlier this year, after Tom Price vacated his seat in Georgia’s sixth district to join the Trump administration as the new Health and Human Services secretary, Ossoff decided to join the race……Ossoff gained key endorsements from Johnson and civil rights legend Rep. John Lewis… The New York Times posted the result of the runoff between Ossoff and Perdue: John Ossoff (Democrat): 2,269,738 votes (50.6%) – WINNER – flipped seatDavid Perdue (Republican): 2,214,506 votes (49.4%) On August 28, 2019, Georgia Senator Johnny Isakson (Republican) announced that he would retire at the end of 2019 due to his declining health. When a Senator leaves their position – due to retirement, death, or moving up to a cabinet or secretary position, the governor of their state can appoint someone else to temporarily take that seat. The appointed person must be from the same party as the senator who is leaving. On December 4, 2019, Governor Brian Kemp (Republican) posted a press release on his website titled: “Kemp Appoints Loeffler to U.S. Senate”. From the press release: Today Governor Brian P. Kemp announced his appointment of successful businesswoman Kelly Loeffler to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Senator Johnny Isakson, effective December 31, 2019.“From the farm to the New York Stock Exchange, Kelly Loeffler has lived the American Dream. I’m confident that she will work every single day to keep that same dream alive for our children, grandchildren, and generations to come. Kelly Loeffler will stand with the President, Senator Perdue, and their allies in the U.S. House and Senate,” said Governor Kemp. “I’m excited to appoint Georgia’s first female Senator in nearly 100 years – but, more importantly, I’m excited to appoint a life-long Republican who shares our conservative values and vision for a safer, stronger, Georgia… On December 4, 2019, NPR posted an article titled: “Against Trump’s Wishes, Georgia Gov. Appoints Kelly Loeffler To Fill Senate Seat”. It was written by Brakkton Booker. From the article: …While Kemp’s selection of Loeffler was widely expected, it nonetheless is a controversial choice in Republican circles. It has also touched off an intraparty fight waged by allies of President Trump, who reportedly wanted Kemp to go in another direction.The president, who stumped for Kemp ahead of his narrow victory in Georgia’s gubernatorial race last year, reportedly wanted him to appoint Rep. Doug Collins, a staunch Trump ally and the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee.Loeffler is the wealthy CEO of the financial platform Bakkt, a subsidiary of Intercontinental Exchange, as well as a co-owner of the Atlanta Dream WNBA franchise.She will be just the second woman to represent Georgia in the U.S. Senate, reports Georgia Public Broadcasting’s Stephen Fowler, who adds, “if she wins a special election next fall, she will be the first Georgia woman elected to the Senate.”……Loeffler has never held elective office. But once she’s sworn in, she will have to run for the Senate seat in each of the next two election cycles: a special election in 2020 and again for a full six-year Senate term in 2022, when Isakson would have been up for reelection…Ahead of her appointment, Loeffler faced resistance from conservatives both inside and outside Georgia… On April 13, 2020, NPR posted an article titled: “Stock Trades After Coronavirus Briefing Complicate Loeffler’s Reelection Bid”. It was written by Claudio Grisales. From the article: A new U.S. senator from Georgia has come under fire for selling $20 million in stock after a briefing in the weeks building up to the coronavirus pandemic.Republican Kelly Loeffler was appointed to her seat against President Trump’s wishes. Now, just three months into the appointment, Loeffler is fighting for her political life ahead of elections in November……Just a few months later, that trust and support hang in the balance. Loeffler is part of a group of senators – both Democrat and Republican – whose recent stock transactions are under new scrutiny.Loeffler and her husband, who is the CEO of a company that owns the New York Stock Exchange, dumped millions of dollars in shares after she attended a closed-door Senate briefing on the coronavirus in January. The couple also picked up investments in companies that have benefited in the pandemic.The details were shared as part of a 2012 law called the STOCK Act.……The STOCK Act stands for “Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge.” Columbia University law professor John Coffee Jr. says Congress approved the law in the wake of studies showing lawmakers financially benefiting from their government work……Loeffler has vigorously defended herself in a round of interviews. She said the trades were made without the couple’s knowledge because they use a blind trust and a third party handles their transactions… On June 16, 2020, Politico posted an article titled: “Senate Ethics Committee drops probe of Loeffler stock trades”. It was written by Marianne Levine. From the article: The Senate Ethics Committee has ended its investigation into Sen. Kelly Loeffler’s stock trades, according to a letter sent Tuesday to the Georgia Republican.The news comes three weeks after Loffler’s office said the Justice Department had also dropped its probe into her stock trades.Deborah Sue Mayer, the Ethics Committee’s chief counsel and staff director wrote in the letter that the panel examined stock transactions made by both Loeffler and her husband Jeffrey Sprecher, chairman of the New York Stock Exchange,“Based on all the information before it, the Committee did not find evidence that your actions violated federal law, Senate Rules, or standards of conduct,” Mayer said. “Accordingly, consistent with its precedent, the Committee has dismissed the matter.”… Information about Reverend Raphael Warnock is on his Warnock for Georgia page. Reverend Raphael Warnock grew up in Kayton Homes public housing in Savannah… He and his eleven brothers and sisters were taught the meaning of hard work.His father was a veteran, a small businessman, and a preacher. He spent the week hauling old cars to the local steel yard, and on Sundays he preached at a local church. Reverend Warmock’s mother grew up in Waycross, where she spent summers picking tobacco and cotton, and still lives in Savannah today. She worked hard to raise Raphael and his siblings to know that they could do anything they put their mind to.Reverend Warnock enrolled at Morehouse College, and graduated with the help of low-interest student loans and Pell Grants. He earned a PhD. and was ordained in the ministry. Fifteen years ago, he was chosen to serve as the Senior Pastor at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, the former pulpit of Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. He was the youngest pastor selected to serve in that leadership role at the historic church…. On March 9, 2020, AJC (Atlantic Journal-Constitution) posted an article titled: “Warnock, wife involved in dispute”. It was written by Stephen Deere and Greg Bluestein. From the article: The Rev. Raphael Warnock, a Democrat running for the U.S. Senate, was accused by his wife of running over her foot with his car in a heated argument days before he filed paperwork to officially seek office, according to a police report obtained by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.Warnock, the senior pastor of Atlanta’s Ebenezer Baptist Church, was not charged with a crime by Atlanta police and an officer said in the report that medical officials didn’t find visible signs of injury in the foot that his wife said was struck by the vehicle. He flatly denied the allegation that he harmed his estranged wife, telling the AJC in an interview that “it didn’t happen.”……In a Saturday interview at his Decatur campaign office, Raphael Warnock said he and his wife separated in November and three weeks ago signed documents that aimed to resolve their divorce. But he said the two got into a sharp disagreement on Sunday night about her desire to take their two young children to visit relatives in Senegal.“The divorce settlement secured in legal terms my parental rights in the case of international travel. I felt we needed to have that resolved before traveling internationally. It’s literally a mater of signing a form. That’s where a dispute arose.”……According to the report, shortly after Warnock arrived at his wife’s home on Monday, they began arguing about whether Raphael Warnock would allow his wife to apply for passports so that she could take their children to West Africa for her grandfather’s funeral.Warnock told police that he had previously denied the request and that he didn’t have time to talk about it again, according to the report.He told police that his wife refused to close the right rear passenger door of his car so that he could leave. He told authorities he began to “slowly” drive forward – and then heard his wife accuse him of driving over her foot.The report said Ouleye Warnock was able to wiggle her toes and that Grady Hospital first-responders were “not able to locate any swelling, redness, or bruising or broken bones.”… The New York Times posted the results of Georgia’s Special Election runoff between Loeffler and Warnock: Raphael Warnock (Democrat): 2,288,923 votes (51.0%) – WINNER – flipped seatKelly Loeffler (Republican): 2,195,373 votes (49.0%) On January 6, 2020, Reuters posted an article titled: “Georgia delivers Senate to Democrats with Warnock, Ossoff, wins”. It was written by Rich McKay and Nathan Layne. From the article: Democrats on Wednesday completed a sweep of the two U.S. Senate seats up for grabs in runoff elections in the state of Georgia, giving the party control of the chamber and boosting the prospects for President-elect Joe Biden’s ambitious legislative agenda.Raphael Warnock, a Baptist preacher from Martin Luther King Jr.’s former church, beat Republican incumbent Kelly Loeffler to become the first Black senator in the deep South state’s history while Democrat Jon Ossoff, a documentary filmmaker who at 33 would become the Senate’s youngest member, beat Republican David Perdue.The results would give Democrats narrow control of both chambers of Congress, making it easier to appoint liberal-leaning judges and advance legislative priorities from coronavirus relief to climate change when Biden takes office on Jan. 20… On January 24, 2021, WABE posted an article from the Associated Press titled: “Warnock and Ossoff Carry John Lewis’ Legacy Into the U.S. Senate”. From the article: …Most associated with the pursuit to secure and protect voting rights, Lewis led protesters in the 1965 Bloody Sunday march across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama, where he had his skull fractured by police, and was a driving force behind voting rights laws in the U.S. for decades.Lewis was a parishioner of Warnock’s for years at the historic Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta where the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. preached and Warnock remains pastor. Warnock was called to Lewis’ bedside days before his death and presided over his funeral service.Ossoff first met Lewis when, as a teenager, he was inspired by Lewis’ book “Walking With the Wind” and wrote him a letter. “I was inspired by how a person so young had taken a leadership role in the pursuit of justice and confronting the abuse of power, and was just in awe of his life,” Ossoff said in an interview with the Associated Press in December. Lewis wrote back and invited Ossoff to come work in his office for a few months, spawning a yearslong relationship between the two… Idaho: Jim Risch (Republican): 538,446 votes (62.6%) – WINNERPaulette Jordan (Democrat): 285,864 votes (33.2%)Natalie Flemming (Libertarian): 25,747 votes (2.9%) Illinois: Richard Durbin (Democrat): 3,278,930 votes (54.9%) – WINNERMark Curran (Republican): 2,319,870 votes (38.9%)Willie Wilson (Libertarian): 237,699 votes (4%) Iowa: Joni Ernst (Republican): 864,997 votes (51.8%) – WINNERTheresa Greenfield (Democrat): 754,859 votes (45.2%)Rick Stewart (Libertarian): 36,961 votes (2.2%) Kansas: Roger Marshall (Republican): 727,962 votes (53.2%) – WINNERBarbara Bollier (Democrat): 571,530 votes (41.8%)Jason Buckley (Libertarian): 68,263 votes (5%) Kentucky: Mitch McConnell (Republican): 1,233,315 votes (57.8%) – WINNERAmy McGrath: (Democrat): 816,257 votes (38.2%)Brad Barron: (Libertarian): 85,386 votes (4%) Louisiana: Bill Cassidy (Republican): 1,228,908 votes (59.3%) – WINNERAdrian Perkins (Democrat): 394,049 votes (19%)Derrick Edwards (Democrat): 229,814 votes (11.1%) Maine: Susan Collins (Republican): 417,645 votes (51%) – WINNERSara Gideon (Democrat): 347,645 votes (42.4%)Lisa Savage (Libertarian): 40,597 votes (5%) Massachusetts: Edward Markey (Democrat): 2,357,809 votes (66.7%) – WINNERKevin O’Conner (Republican): 1,777,765 votes (33.3%) Michigan: Gary Peters (Democrat): 2,734,568 votes (49.9%) – WINNERJohn James (Republican): 2,642,233 votes (48.2%)Valerie Willis (Libertarian): 50,597 votes (0.9%) Minnesota: Tina Smith (Democrat): 1,556,522 (48.8%) – WINNERJason Lewis (Republican): 1,398,145 (43.5%) Kevin O’Connor (Libertarian): 190,154 (5.9%) Mississippi: Cindy Hyde-Smith (Republican): 709,551 votes (54.1%) – WINNERMike Epsy (Democrat): 578,691 votes (44.1%)Jimmy Edwards (Libertarian): 23,152 votes (1.8%) Montana: Steve Daines (Republican): 333,174 votes (55%) – WINNERSteve Bullock (Democrat): 272,463 votes (45%) Nebraska: Ben Sasse (Republican): 503,587 votes (67.4%) – WINNERChris Janicek (Democrat): 277,191 votes (26.2%)Gene Siadek (Libertarian): 55,115 votes (6.4%) New Hampshire: Jeanne Shaheen (Democrat): 450,780 votes (56.7%) – WINNERCorky Messner (Republican): 326,229 votes (41%)Justin O’Donnell (Libertarian): 18,421 votes (2.3%) New Jersey: Cory Booker (Democrat): 2,541,178 votes (57.2%) – WINNERRikin Mehta (Republican): 1,817,052 votes (40.9%)Madelyn Hoffman (Libertarian): 38,288 votes (0.9%) New Mexico: Ben Ray Lujan (Democrat): 474,483 votes (51.7%) – WINNERMark Ronchetti (Republican): 418,483 votes (45.6%)Bob Walsh (Libertarian): 24,271 votes (2.5%) North Carolina: Thom Tillis (Republican): 2,665,598 votes (48.7%) – WINNERCal Cunningham (Democrat): 2,569,965 votes (46.9%)Shannon Bray (Libertarian): 171,571 votes (3.1%) Oklahoma: Jim Inhofe (Republican): 979,140 votes (62.9%) – WINNERAbby Broyles (Democrat): 509,763 votes (32.8%)Robert Murphy (Libertarian): 34,435 votes (2.2%) Oregon: Jeff Merkley (Democrat): 1,321,047 votes (57%) – WINNERJo Rae Perkins (Republican): 912,814 votes (39.4%) She is a follower of the QAnon conspiracy theories.Gary Dye (Libertarian): 42,747 votes (1.8%) Rhode Island: John Reed (Democrat): 328,574 votes (66.6%) – WINNERAllen Waters (Republican): 164,855 votes (33.4%) South Carolina: Lindsey Graham (Republican): 1,369,598 (48.7%) – WINNERJamie Harrison (Democrat): 1,110,829 (44.2%)Bill Bledsoe (Libertarian): 32,845 (1.3%) South Dakota: Mike Rounds (Republican): 276,232 votes (65.7%) – WINNERDan Ahlers (Democrat): 143,987 votes (34.3%) Tennessee: Bill Hagerty (Republican): 1,840,926 votes (62.2%) – WINNERMarquita Bradshaw (Democrat): 1,040,691 votes (35.2%)Elizabeth McLeod (Libertarian): 16,652 votes (0.6%) Texas: John Cornyn (Republican): 5,962,983 votes (53.5%) – WINNERMary Hegar (Democrat): 4,888,764 votes (43.9%)Kerry McKennon (Libertarian): 209,722 votes (1.9%) Virginia: Mark Warner (Democrat): 2,466,500 votes (56%) – WINNERDaniel Gade (Republican): 1,934,199 votes (44%) West Virginia: Shelley Moore Capito (Republican): 547,454 votes (79.3%) – WINNERPaul Jean Swearengin (Democrat): 210,309 votes (27%)David Moran (Libertarian): 21,155 votes (2.7%) Wyoming: Cynthia Lummis (Republican): 198,100 votes (73.1%) – WINNERMerav Ben-David (Democrat): 72,776 votes (26.9%) Results of the 2020 Senate Elections is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Members of the 117th CongressJanuary 25, 20212020 Presidential CampaignPhoto by Clay Banks on Unsplash Joe Biden (Democrat) won the 2020 Presidential Election. The Democratic party now has the Presidency, the majority in the House, and the majority in the Senate. The Members of the 117th Congress were sworn into office on January 3, 2021. They were sworn in as members of the U.S. House of Representatives by Representative Nancy Pelosi (Democrat – California), who was re-elected as Speaker of the House. Representative Steny Hoyer (Democrat – Maryland) was elected as Majority Leader in the House. Representative Kevin McCarthy (Republican – California) was elected Minority Leader in the House. The 117th Congress included a “record shattering” 122 women. There were 59 new freshman Members. The first day of the 117th Congress was modified to accommodate guidelines from the Office of the Attending Physician, such as social distancing, reducing the number of guests and staff allowed in the chamber, and mask wearing. According to Representative Tim Walberg (Republican – Michigan): Members of the House of Representatives serve two-year terms and are considered for reelection every even year. Senators, however, serve six-year terms and elections to the Senate are staggered over even years so that only about 1/3 of the Senate is up for reelection during any election. The result of the 2020 election gave the Democratic Party 222 seats, and the Republican Party 212 seats. In order to be the majority, a Party must obtain 218 seats. The Democratic Party now has the majority in the U.S. House of Representatives. That said, at the time I am writing this blog post, there is still one seat where the winner has not been determined – New York’s District 22. The House of Representatives: Alabama: Jerry Carl (Republican) – District 1Barry Moore (Republican) – District 2Incumbent Mike Rogers (Republican) – District 3Incumbent Robert Aderholt (Republican) – District 4Uncontested Mo Brooks (Republican) – District 5Incumbent Gary Palmer (Republican) – District 6Uncontested Incumbent Terri Sewell (Democrat) District 7 Alaska Don Young (Republican) – At Large Arizona: Incumbent Tim O’Halleran (Democrat) – District 1Incumbent Ann Kirkpatrick (Democrat) – District 2Incumbent Raul Griljava (Democrat) – District 3Incumbent Paul Gosar (Republican) District 4 Arkansas: Uncontested Rick Crawford (Republican) – District 1Incumbent French Hill (Republican) – District 2Incumbent Steve Womack (Republican) – District 3Incumbent Bruce Westerman (Republican) District 4 California: Incumbent Doug LaMalfa (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Jared Huffman (Democrat) – District 2Incumbent John Garamendi (Democrat) – District 3Incumbent Tom McClintock (Republican) – District 4Incumbent Mike Thompson (Democrat) – District 5Incumbent Doris Matusi (Democrat) – District 6Incumbent Ami Bera (Democrat) – District 7Jay Obernolte (Republican) – District 8Incumbent Jerry McNerney (Democrat) – District 9Incumbent Josh Harder (Democrat) – District 10Incumbent Mark DeSaulnier (Democrat) – District 11Incumbent Nancy Pelosi (Democrat) – District 12Incumbent Barbara Lee (Democrat) – District 13Incumbent Jackie Speier (Democrat) – District 14Incumbent Eric Swalwell (Democrat) – District 15Incumbent Jim Costa (Democrat) – District 16Incumbent Ro Khanna (Democrat) – District 17Incumbent Anna Eshoo (Democrat) – District 18Incumbent Zoe Lofgren (Democrat) – District 19Incumbent Jimmy Panetta (Democrat) – District 20Incumbent Dave Valadao (Republican) – District 21Incumbent Devin Nunes (Republican) – District 22Incumbent Kevin McCarthy (Republican) – District 23Incumbent Salud Carbajal (Democrat) – District 24Incumbent Mike Garcia (Republican) District 25Incumbent Julia Brownley (Democrat) – District 26Incumbent Judy Chu (Democrat) – District 27Incumbent Adam Schiff (Democrat) – District 28Incumbent Tony Cardenas (Democrat) – District 29Incumbent Brad Sherman (Democrat) – District 30Incumbent Pete Aguilar (Democrat) – District 31Incumbent Grace Napoiltano (Democrat) – District 32Incumbent Ted Lieu (Democrat) – District 33Incumbent Jimmy Gomez (Democrat) – District 34Incumbent Norma Torres (Democrat) – District 35Incumbent Raul Ruiz (Democrat) – District 36Incumbent Karen Bass (Democrat) – District 37Incumbent Linda Sanchez (Democrat) – District 38Young Kim (Republican) – District 39Incumbent Lucille Roybal-Allard (Democrat) – District 40Incumbent Mark Takano (Democrat) – District 41Incumbent Ken Calvert (Republican) – District 42Incumbent Maxine Water (Democrat) – District 43Incumbent Nanette Barrigan (Democrat) – District 44Incumbent Katie Porter (Democrat) – District 45Incumbent Lou Korea (Democrat) – District 46Incumbent Allen Lowenthal (Democrat) – District 47Michelle Steel (Republican) – District 48Incumbent Mike Levin (Democrat) – District 49Darrell Issa (Republican) – District 50Incumbent Juan Vargas (Democrat) – District 51Incumbent Scott Peters (Democrat) – District 52Sara Jacobs (Democrat) – District 53 Colorado: Incumbent Diana DeGette (Democrat) – District 1Incumbent Joe Neguse (Democrat) – District 2Lauren Bobert (Republican) – District 3 – She is a follower of the QAnon conspiracy theories.Incumbent Ken Buck (Republican) – District 4Incumbent Doug Lamborn (Republican) District 5Incumbent Jason Crow (Democrat) – District 6Incumbent Ed Perlmutter (Democrat) – District 7 Connecticut: Incumbent John Lansen (Democrat) – District 1Incumbent Joe Courtney (Democrat) – District 2Incumbent Rosa DeLauro (Democrat) – District 3Incumbent Jim Himes (Democrat) – District 4Incumbent Jahana Hayes – District 5 Delaware: Incumbent Lisa Blunt Rochester (Democrat) At-Large Florida: Incumbent Matt Gaetz (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Neal Dunn (Republican) – District 2Kat Cammack (Republican) – District 3Incumbent John Rutherford (Republican) – District 4Incumbent Al Larson (Democrat) – District 5Incumbent Michael Waltz (Republican) – District 6Incumbent Stephanie Murphy (Democrat) – District 7Incumbent Bill Posey (Republican) – District 8Incumbent Darren Soto (Democrat) – District 9Incumbent Val Demmings (Democrat) – District 10Incumbent Daniel Webster (Republican) – District 11Incumbent Gus Bilirakis (Republican) – District 12Incumbent Charlie Crist (Democrat) – District 13Incumbent Kathy Caster (Democrat) – District 14Scott Franklin (Republican) – District 15Incumbent Vern Buchanan (Republican) – District 16Incumbent Greg Stube (Republican) – District 17Incumbent Brian Mast (Republican) – District 18Byron Donalds (Republican) – District 19Incumbent Alcee Hastings (Democrat) – District 20Incumbent Lois Frankel (Democrat) – District 21Incumbent Ted Deutch (Democrat) – District 22Incumbent Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Democrat) – District 23Incumbent Fred Wilson (Democrat) – District 24Incumbent Mario-Diaz Balart (Republican) – District 25Carlos Gimenez (Republican) – District 26 Georgia: Incumbent Buddy Carter (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Sanford Bishop (Democrat) – District 2Incumbent Drew Ferguson (Republican) – District 3Incumbent Hank Johnson (Democrat) – District 4Nikema Williams (Democrat) – District 5Incumbent Lily McBath (Democrat) – District 6Carolyn Bourdeaux (Democrat) – District 7Incumbent Allen Scott (Republican) – District 8Andrew Clyde (Republican) – District 9Incumbent Jody Hice (Republican) – District 10Incumbent Barry Loudermilk (Republican) – District 11Incumbent Rick Allen (Republican) – District 12Incumbent David Scott (Democrat) – District 13Incumbent Marjory Taylor Greene (Republican) – District 14 – She is a follower of the QAnon conspiracy theories. Hawaii: Incumbent Ed Case (Democrat) – District 1Kaiali’i Kahele (Democrat) – District 2 Idaho: Incumbent Russ Fulcher (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Mike Simpson (Republican) – District 2 Illinois: Incumbent Bobby Rush (Democrat) – District 1Incumbent Robin Kelly (Democrat) – District 2Marie Newman (Democrat) – District 3Incumbent Jesús G. García (Democrat) – District 4Incumbent Mike Quigley (Democrat) – District 5Incumbent Sean Castin (Democrat) – District 6Incumbent Danny Davis (Democrat) – District 7Incumbent Raja Krishnamoorthi (Democrat) – District 8Incumbent Jan Shakowsky (Democrat) – District 9Incumbent Brad Schneider (Democrat) – District 10Incumbent Bill Foster (Democrat) – District 11Incumbent Mike Bost (Republican) – District 12Incumbent Rodney Davis (Republican) – District 13Incumbent Lauren Underwood (Democrat) – District 14Mary Miller (Republican) – District 15Incumbent Adam Kinzinger (Republican) – District 16Incumbent Cheri Bustos (Democrat) – District 17Incumbent Darin LaHood (Democrat) – District 18 Indiana: Frank Myran (Democrat) – District 1Incumbent Jackie Walorski (Republican) – District 2Incumbent Jim Banks (Republican) – District 3Incumbent Jim Baird (Republican) – District 4Victoria Spartz (Republican) – District 5Incumbent Greg Pence (Republican) – District 6 – Greg Pence is the brother of former Vice-President Mike Pence.Incumbent Andre Carson (Democrat) – District 7Incumbent Larry Buchon (Republican) – District 8Incumbent Trey Hollingsworth (Republican) – District 9 Iowa: Ashley Hinson (Republican) – District 1Mariannette Miller Meeks (Republican) – District 2Incumbent Cindy Axne (Democrat) – District 3Randy Feenstra (Republican) – District 4 Kansas: Tracy Mann (Republican) – District 1Jake LaTurner (Republican) – District 2Incumbent Sharice Davis (Democrat) – District 3Incumbent Ron Estes (Republican) – District 4 Kentucky: Incumbent James Comer (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Brett Guthrie (Republican) – District 2Incumbent John Yarmuth (Democrat) – District 3Incumbent Thomas Massie (Republican) – District 4Incumbent Harold Rogers (Republican) – District 5Incumbent Andy Barr (Republican) – District 6 Louisiana: Incumbent Steve Scalise (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Cedric Richmond (Democrat) – District 2Incumbent Clay Higgins (Republican) – District 3Incumbent Mike Johnson (Republican) – District 4Luke Letlow (Republican) – District 5Incumbent Garrett Graves (Republican) – District 6 Maine: Incumbent Chelle Pingree (Democrat) – District 1Incumbent Jared Golden (Democrat) – District 2 Maryland: Incumbent Andy Harris (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Dutch Ruppersburger (Democrat) – District 2Incumbent John Sarbanes (Democrat) – District 3Incumbent Anthony Brown (Democrat) – District 4Incumbent Steny Hoyer (Democrat) – District 5David Trone (Democrat) – District 6Incumbent Kwesi Mfume (Democrat) – District 7Incumbent Jamie Raskin (Democrat) – District 8 Massachusetts: Incumbent Richard Neal (Democrat) – District 1Incumbent Jim McGovern (Democrat) – District 2Incumbent Laurie Trahan (Democrat) – District 3Jake Auchincloss (Democrat) – District 4Incumbent Kathrine Clark (Democrat) – District 5Incumbent Seth Moulton (Democrat) – District 6Incumbent Ayanna Pressley (Democrat) – District 7Incumbent Stephen Lynch (Democrat) – District 8Incumbent Bill Keating (Democrat) – District 9 Michigan: Incumbent Jack Bergman (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Bill Huizenga (Republican) – District 2Pete Meijer (Republican) – District 3Incumbent John Moolenaar (Republican) – District 4Daniel Kildee (Democrat) – District 5Incumbent Fred Upton (Republican) – District 6Incumbent Tim Walburg (Republican) – District 7Incumbent Elissa Slotkin (Democrat) – District 8Incumbent Andy Levin (Democrat) – District 9Lisa McClain (Republican) – District 10Incumbent Haley Stephens (Democrat) – District 11Incumbent Debbie Dingell (Democrat) – District 12Incumbent Rashida Tlaib (Democrat) – District 13Incumbent Brenda Lawrence (Democrat) – District 14 Minnesota: Incumbent Jim Hagedorn (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Angie Craig (Democrat) – District 2Incumbent Dean Phillips (Democrat) – District 3Incumbent Betty McCollum (Democrat) – District 4Incumbent Ilhan Omar (Democrat) – District 5Incumbent Tom Emmer (Republican) – District 6Michelle Fischbach (Republican) – District 7Incumbent Pete Stauber (Republican) – District 8 Mississippi: Incumbent Trent Kelly (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Bernie Thompson (Democrat) – District 2Incumbent Michael Grant (Republican) – District 3Incumbent Stephen Pallazo (Republican) – District 4 Missouri: Cory Bush (Democrat) – District 1Incumbent Ann Wagner – District 2Incumbent Blaine Luetkemeyer – District 3Incumbent Vicky Hartzler – District 4Incumbent Emanuel Cleaver (Democrat) – District 5Incumbent Sam Graves (Republican) – District 6Incumbent Billy Long (Republican) – District 7Incumbent Jason Smith (Republican) – District 8 Montana: Matt Rosendale (Republican) – At Large Nebraska: Incumbent Jeff Fortenberry (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Don Bacon (Republican) District 2Incumbent Adrian Smith (Republican) – District 3 Nevada: Incumbent Dina Titus (Democrat) – District 1Incumbent Mark Amodi (Republican) – District 2Incumbent Susie Lee (Democrat) – District 3Incumbent Steven Horsford (Democrat) – District 4 New Hampshire: Incumbent Greg Passas (Democrat) – District 1Incumbent Ann McLaine Kuster (Democrat) – District 2 New Jersey: Incumbent Donald Norcross (Democrat) – District 1Incumbent Jeff Van Drew (Republican) – District 2Incumbent Andy Kim (Democrat) – District 3Incumbent Christopher H. Smith – District 4Incumbent Josh Gottheimer (Democrat) – District 5Incumbent Frank Pallone (Democrat) – District 6Incumbent Tom Malinowski (Democrat) – District 7Incumbent Albio Sires (Democrat) – District 8Incumbent Bill Pascrell (Democrat) – District 9Incumbent Donald M. Payne (Democrat) – District 10Incumbent Mike Sherrill (Democrat) – District 11Incumbent Bonnie Watson Coleman (Democrat) – District 12 New Mexico: Incumbent Deb Haaland (Democrat) – District 1Yvette Herrell (Republican) – District 2Teresa Leger Fernandez (Democrat) – District 3 New York: Incumbent Lee Zeldin (Republican) – District 1Andrew Garabino (Republican) – District 2Incumbent Thomas Suozzi (Democrat) – District 3Incumbent Kathleen Rice (Democrat) – District 4Incumbent Gregory Meeks (Democrat) – District 5Incumbent Grace Meng (Democrat) – District 6Incumbent Nydia Velazquez (Democrat) – District 7Incumbent Hakeem Jefferies (Democrat) – District 8Incumbent Yvette Clark (Democrat) – District 9Incumbent Jerrold Nadler (Democrat) – District 10Nicole Malliotakis (Republican) – District 11Incumbent Carolyn Maloney (Democrat) – District 12Incumbent Adriano Espaillat (Democrat) – District 13Incumbent Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (Democrat) – District 14Ritchie Torres (Democrat) – District 15Jamaal Bowman (Democrat) – District 16Mondaire Jones (Democrat) – District 17Incumbent Sean Patrick Maloney (Democrat) – District 18Incumbent Antonio Delgado (Democrat) – District 19Incumbent Paul Tonko (Democrat) – District 20Incumbent Elise Stefanik (Republican) – District 21There has not yet been a winner declared in District 22Incumbent Tom Reed (Republican) – District 23Incumbent Tom Falko (Republican) – District 24Incumbent Joseph Morelle (Democrat) – District 25Incumbent Brian Higgins (Democrat) – District 26Incumbent Chris Jacobs (Republican) – District 27 North Carolina: Incumbent G.K. Butterfield (Democrat) – District 1Debra Ross (Democrat) – District 2Incumbent Greg Murphy (Republican) – District 3Incumbent David Price (Democrat) – District 4Incumbent Virginia Fox (Republican) – District 5Kathy Manning (Democrat) – District 6Incumbent David Rouzer (Republican) – District 7Incumbent Richard Hudson (Republican) – District 8Incumbent Dan Bishop (Republican) – District 9Incumbent Patrick McHenry (Republican) – District 10Madison Carthorne (Republican) – District 11Incumbent Alma Adams (Democrat) – District 12Incumbent Ted Budd (Republican) – District 13 North Dakota: Kelly Armstrong (Republican) – At Large Ohio: Incumbent Steve Chabot (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Brad Wenstrup (Republican) – District 2Incumbent Joyce Beatty (Democrat) – District 3Incumbent Jim Jordan (Republican) – District 4Incumbent Bob Laffa (Republican) – District 5Incumbent Bill Johnson (Republican) – District 6Incumbent Bob Gibbs (Republican) – District 7Incumbent Warren Davidson (Republican) – District 8Incumbent Marcy Kaptur (Democrat) – District 9Incumbent Mike Turner (Republican) – District 10Incumbent Marcia Fudge (Democrat) – District 11Incumbent Troy Balderson (Republican) – District 12Incumbent Tim Ryan (Democrat) – District 13Incumbent David Joyce (Republican) – District 14Incumbent Steve Stivers (Republican) – District 15Incumbent Anthony Gonzalez (Republican) District 16 Oklahoma: Incumbent Kevin Hern (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Markwayne Mullen (Republican) – District 2Incumbent Frank Lucas (Republican) – District 3Incumbent Tom Cole (Republican) – District 4Stephanie Bice (Republican) – District 5 Oregon: Incumbent Suzanne Bonamici (Democrat) – District 1Cliff Bentz (Republican) – District 2Incumbent Earl Blumenauer (Democrat) – District 3Incumbent Peter DeFazio (Democrat) – District 4Incumbent Kurt Schrader (Democrat) – District 5 Pennsylvania: Incumbent Brian Fitzpatrick (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Brendan Boyle (Democrat) – District 2Incumbent Dwight Evans (Democrat) – District 3Incumbent Madeline Dean (Democrat) – District 4Incumbent Mary Gay Scanlon (Democrat) – District 5Incumbent Chrissy Houlahan (Democrat) – District 6Incumbent Susan Wild (Democrat) – District 7Incumbent Matt Cartwright (Democrat) – District 8Incumbent Dan Meuser (Republican) – District 9Incumbent Scott Perry (Republican) – District 10Incumbent Lloyd Smucker (Republican) – District 11Incumbent Fred Keller (Republican) – District 12Incumbent John Joyce (Republican) – District 13Incumbent Guy Reschenthaler (Republican) – District 14Incumbent Glenn Thompson (Republican) – District 15Incumbent Mike Kelly (Republican) – District 16Incumbent Connor Lamb (Democrat) – District 17Incumbent Mike Doyle (Democrat) – District 18 Rhode Island: Incumbent David Cicilline (Democrat) – District 1Incumbent Jim Langevin (Democrat) – District 2 South Carolina: Nancy Mace (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Joe Wilson (Republican) – District 2Incumbent Jeff Duncan (Republican) – District 3Incumbent William Timmons (Republican) – District 4Incumbent Ralph Norman (Republican) – District 5Incumbent Jim Clyburn (Democrat) – District 6Incumbent Tom Rice (Republican) – District 7 South Dakota: Incumbent Dusty Johnson (Republican) – At Large Tennessee: Diana Harshbarger (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Tim Burchett (Republican) – District 2Incumbent Chuck Fleishmann (Republican) – District 3Incumbent Scott DesJarlias (Republican) – District 4Uncontested Incumbent Jim Cooper (Democrat) – District 5Incumbent John Rose (Republican) – District 6Incumbent Mark Green (Republican) – District 7Incumbent David Kustoff (Republican) – District 8Incumbent Steve Cohen (Democrat) – District 9 Texas: Incumbent Louie Gohmert (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Dan Crenshaw (Republican) – District 2Incumbent Van Taylor (Republican) – District 3Pat Fallon (Republican) – District 4Incumbent Lance Gooden (Republican) – District 5Ron Wright (Republican) – District 6Lizzie Fletcher (Democrat) – District 7Incumbent Ken Brady (Republican) – District 8Incumbent Al Green (Democrat) – District 9Incumbent Michael McCaul (Republican) – District 10August Pfluger (Republican) – District 11Incumbent Kay Granger (Republican) – District 12Ronny Jackson (Republican) – District 13Incumbent Randy Weber (Republican) – District 14Incumbent Vicente Gonzalez (Democrat) – District 15Veronica Escobar (Democrat) – District 16Pete Sessions (Republican) – District 17Incumbent Shelia Jackson Lee (Democrat) – District 18Incumbent Jodey Arrington (Republican) – District 19Incumbent Joaquin Castro (Democrat) – District 20Incumbent Chip Roy (Republican) – District 21Troy Nehls (Republican) – District 22Tony Gonzalez (Republican) – District 23Beth Van Duyne (Republican) – District 24Incumbent Roger Williams (Republican) – District 25Incumbent Michael Burgess (Republican) – District 26Incumbent Michael Cloud (Republican) – District 27Incumbent Henry Cuellar (Democrat) – District 28Incumbent Sylvia Garcia (Democrat) – District 29Incumbent Eddie Bernice Johnson (Democrat) – District 30Incumbent John Carter (Republican) – District 31Incumbent Colin Allred (Democrat) – District 32Incumbent Mark Veasey (Democrat) – District 33Filemon Vela (Democrat) – District 34Incumbent Lloyd Doggett (Democrat) – District 35Brian Babin (Republican) – District 36 Utah: Blake Moore (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Chris Stewart (Republican) – District 2Incumbent John Curtis (Republican) – District 3Burgess Owens (Republican) – District 4 Vermont: Incumbent Peter Welch (Democrat) – At Large Virginia: Incumbent Rob Whitman (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Elane Luria (Democrat) – District 2Incumbent Bobby Scott (Democrat) – District 3Incumbent Donald McEachin (Democrat) – District 4Bob Good (Republican) – District 5Incumbent Ben Cline (Republican) – District 6Incumbent Abigail Spanberger (Democrat) – District 7Incumbent Donald Beyer (Democrat) – District 8Uncontested Incumbent Morgan Griffith (Republican) – District 9Incumbent Jennifer Wexton (Democrat) – District 10Incumbent Gerry Connolly (Democrat) – District 11 Washington: Incumbent Suzan DelBene (Democrat) – District 1Incumbent Rick Larson (Democrat) – District 2Incumbent Jamie Herrera Beutler (Republican) – District 3Incumbent Dan Newhouse (Republican) – District 4Incumbent Cathy McMorris Rogers (Republican) – District 5Incumbent Derek Kilmer (Democrat) – District 6Incumbent Pramila Jayapal (Democrat) – District 7Incumbent Kim Schrier (Democrat) – District 8Incumbent Adam Smith (Democrat) – District 9Marilyn Strickland (Democrat) – District 10 West Virginia: Incumbent David McKinley (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Alex Mooney (Republican) – District 2Incumbent Carol Miller (Republican) – District 3 Wisconsin: Incumbent Brian Stell (Republican) – District 1Incumbent Mark Pocan (Democrat) – District 2Incumbent Ron Kind (Democrat) – District 3Incumbent Gwen Moore (Democrat) – District 4Scott Fitzgerald (Republican) – District 5Incumbent Glen Grothman (Republican) – District 6Incumbent Tom Tiffany (Republican) – District 7Incumbent Mike Gallagher (Republican) – District 8 Wyoming: Incumbent Liz Cheney (Republican) – At Large What Happened in New York’s District 22? There were two candidates running for New York’s District 22. Democratic Representative Anthony Brindisi is the incumbent. Republican Claudia Tenney was running against him. On December 3, 2020, Politico reported that on Election Night (November 3, 2020), Republican Claudia Tenney showed a lead of about 28,000 votes. That lead shrank as the absentee ballots poured in – weighing heavily for Democrat Anthony Brindisi. There was a bizarre dispute over a ballot that had a stain on it. Was it a bloodstain? Was it chocolate? Apparently, this mattered because someone presumed that the blood could be an identifying factor (meaning it could identify the who the voter was). Here is a portion of the Politico article that was posted on December 3, 2020: …So, on Wednesday, nearly a month after Election Night, the two campaigns submitted proposals for a fair remedy of the situation and how to move forward with between 1,000 and 2,000 affidavit or contested ballots that remain under court purview.The Tenney campaign wants the current results to be certified as they stand – she leads by 12 votes in the unofficial tallies. She clinched that lead after Herkimer County discovered tabulation errors and revised its count last weekend. It’s clear the individual boards of elections faltered in their own specific ways, the Tenney campaign argues, so it’s hard to give the court broad jurisdiction over hundreds more ballots that may or may not have already been counted.Brindisi, on the other hand, argues that the issues with the outstanding ballots should be individually fixed to align the counts. He also supports including the Chenango ballots, which would appear to favor Tenney, but could lay precedent for other inclusions. On Thursday both campaigns submitted filings asserting their opponent’s suggestion was not entirely legal… On January 4, 2021, Politico reported that a state court began its review of at least 800 outstanding ballots challenged by either of the two candidates. District 22 was now without a representative – and would be until the counting was concluded. It was the only House race in the country in which no winner has been seated in the new Congress. Politico reported that on December 29, Tenney declared a 27-vote lead. Here is part of the January 4, 2020, article by Politico: …That lead later changed to 29 votes, with the unofficial totals at 155,862 to 155,833.Brindisi’s campaign says his team expects the numbers to keep wobbling as state Supreme Court Justice Scott DelConte reviews the contested ballots, but Brindisi also expects to emerge victorious. Spokesman Luke Jackson said the ballots have not been counted twice as Tenney said in her statement – the process aims to certify a first tally, and both campaigns have indicated they are prepared to call for a recount… On January 22, 2021, The Associated Press posted an article titled: “Judge in still-undecided House race to rule on 1,200 ballots”. It was written by Marina Villeneuve. From the article: …Former U.S. Rep. Claudia Tenney, a Republican, had a 29-vote lead over the incumbent Democrat, U.S. Rep. Anthony Brindisi, entering the new year. The seat representing New York’s 22nd Congressional District is empty for now.The candidates have sparred in court over disputed affidavit and absentee ballots and ever-shifting tallies of votes cast in their district in central New York for months. State Judge Scott DelConte said Friday he plans to issue his final decision on the 1,100 challenged affidavit ballots by the end of next week……DelConte has criticized county boards of elections for mishaps that led to confusion over whether some contested ballots were officially thrown out or not. And he’s chastised candidates’ lawyers for only wanting to count some challenged ballots and not others.The candidate’s lawyers offered their final oral arguments in court Friday. It’s unclear exactly when the process will wrap up.It’ll be up to the court system to figure out which ballot errors can be fixed, and which can’t……The latest twist came in early January, when Oneida County disclosed that it failed to process over 2,400 timely filed voter registration applications from the state Department of Motor Vehicles, despite state and federal law.The county’s board of elections had rejected affidavit ballots that it claimed were cast by voters who were not “registered.”The judge said that at least 68 registered voters had their affidavit ballots “improperly and unlawfully rejected by the board.”He ordered the county to canvass those ballots and provide the court with an official tally by Jan. 27. Eventually, New York Supreme Court Justice Scott DelConte will make a decision about who won the election in New York’s District 22. I will update this blog post when that information is known. Member of the 117th Congress is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Results of the 2020 Presidential ElectionJanuary 21, 20212020 Presidential CampaignHere are the results of the 2020 Presidential election, as reported by The Guardian. They got their data from the Associated Press. Joe Biden (Democrat) was the Vice-President during the Obama-Biden administration. Donald Trump (Republican) was the incumbent who was hoping to win a second term. There was also a Libertarian named Jo Jorgensen who won some votes. Washington: Joe Biden: 2,369,612 popular votes (58.4%)Donald Trump: 1,584,651 popular votes (39%)Jo Jorgensen: 80,500 popular votes (2%) Oregon: Joe Biden: 1,340,383 popular votes (56.9%)Donald Trump: 958,448 popular votes (40.7%)Jo Jorgensen: 41,582 popular votes (1.8%) California: Joe Biden: 11,110,250 popular votes (63.5%)Donald Trump: 6.006,429 popular votes (34.3%)Jo Jorgensen: 187,895 popular votes (1.1%) Nevada: Joe Biden: 703,486 popular votes (50.1%)Donald Trump: 669,890 popular votes (47.4%)Jo Jorgensen: 14,783 popular votes (1.1%) Idaho: Donald Trump: 554,119 popular votes (63.9%)Joe Biden: 287,021 popular votes (33.1%)Jo Jorgensen: 16,404 popular votes (1.9%) Utah: Donald Trump: 865,140 popular votes (58.2%)Joe Biden: 560,282 popular votes (37.7%)Jo Jorgensen: 38,447 popular votes (2.6%) Arizona: Joe Biden: 1,672,143 popular votes (49.4%)Donald Trump: 1,661,686 popular votes (49.1%)Jo Jorgensen: 51,465 popular votes (1.5%) Montana: Donald Trump: 343,602 popular votes (56.9%)Joe Biden: 244,786 popular votes (40.6%)Jo Jorgensen: 15,252 popular votes (2.5%) Wyoming: Donald Trump: 193,559 popular votes (70.4%)Joe Biden: 73,491 popular votes (26.7%)Jo Jorgensen: 5,768 popular votes (2.1%) Colorado: Joe Biden: 1,804,607 popular votes (55.4%)Donald Trump: 1,364,607 popular votes (41.9%)Jo Jorgensen: 52,460 popular votes (1.6%) New Mexico: Joe Biden: 501,614 popular votes (54.3%)Donald Trump: 401, 894 popular votes (43.5%)Jo Jorgensen: 12,585 popular votes (1.4%) North Dakota: Donald Trump: 235.595 popular votes (65.5%)Joe Biden: 114,902 popular votes (31.9%)Jo Jorgensen: 9,393 popular votes (2.6%) South Dakota: Donald Trump: 216,043 popular votes (61.8%)Joe Biden: 150,471 popular votes (35.6%)Jo Jorgensen: 11,095 popular votes (2.6%) Nebraska: Donald Trump: 555,846 popular votes (58.5%)Joe Biden: 347,583 popular votes (39.4%)Jo Jorgensen: 20,283 popular votes (2.1%) Kansas: Donald Trump: 771,406 popular votes (56.2%)Joe Biden: 570,323 popular votes (41.6%)Jo Jorgensen: 30,574 popular votes (2.2%) Oklahoma: Donald Trump: 1,020,280 popular votes (65.4%)Joe Biden: 503,890 popular votes (32.3%)Jo Jorgensen: 24,731 popular votes (1.6%) Texas: Donald Trump: 5,890,347 popular votes (52.1%)Joe Biden: 5,259,126 popular votes (46.5%)Jo Jorgensen: 126,243 popular votes (1.1%) Minnesota: Joe Biden: 1,717, 077 popular votes (52.6%)Donald Trump: 1,484,065 popular votes (45.4%)Jo Jorgensen: 34,976 popular votes (1.1%) Iowa: Donald Trump: 897,672 popular votes (53.2%)Joe Biden: 759,061 popular votes (45%)Jo Jorgensen: 19,637 popular votes (1.2%) Missouri Donald Trump: 1,718,736 popular votes (56.8%)Joe Biden: 1,253,014 popular votes (41.4%)Jo Jorgensen: 41,205 popular votes (1.4%) Arkansas Donald Trump: 760,647 popular votes (62.4%)Joe Biden: 423,932 popular votes (34.8%)Jo Jorgensen: 13,133 popular votes (1.1%) Louisiana Donald Trump: 1,225,776 popular votes (58.5%)Joe Biden: 856,034 popular votes (39.9%)Jo Jorgensen: 21.645 popular votes (1%) Wisconsin Joe Biden: 1,630,866 popular votes (49.6%)Donald Trump: 1,610,184 popular votes (49.8%)Jo Jorgensen: 38,491 popular votes (1.2%) Michigan Joe Biden: 2,804,040 popular votes (50.6%)Donald Trump: 2,649,582 popular votes (47.8%)Jo Jorgensen: 60,381 popular votes (1.1%) Illinois Joe Biden: 3,471,915 popular votes (57.5%)Donald Trump: 2,446,891 popular votes (40.6%)Jo Jorgensen: 66,544 popular votes (1.1%) Indiana Donald Trump: 1,729,516 popular votes (57.1%)Joe Biden: 1,242,413 popular votes (41%)Jo Jorgensen: 59,323 popular votes (2%) Ohio Donald Trump: 3,154,834 popular votes (53.3%)Joe Biden: 2,679,165 popular votes (45.3%)Jo Jorgensen: 67,569 popular votes (1.1%) Kentucky Donald Trump: 1,326,646 popular votes (62.1%)Joe Biden: 772,474 popular votes (36.2%)Jo Jorgensen: 26,234 popular votes (1.2%) Tennessee Donald Trump: 1,852,475 popular votes (60.7%)Joe Biden: 1,143,711 popular votes (37.5%)Jo Jorgensen: 29,877 popular votes (1%) Mississippi Donald Trump: 756,764 popular votes (57.6%)Joe Biden: 539,398 popular votes (41.1%)Jo Jorgensen: 8,026 popular votes (0.6%) Alabama Donald Trump: 1,441,170 popular votes (62.2%)Joe Biden: 849,624 popular votes (36.7%)Jo Jorgensen: 25,167 popular votes (1,1%) Maine Joe Biden: 435,072 popular votes (53.1%)Donald Trump: 369,737 popular votes (44%)Jo Jorgensen: 14,152 popular votes (1.7%) New Hampshire Joe Biden: 424,937 popular votes (52.9%)Donald Trump: 365,660 popular votes (45.5%)Jo Jorgensen: 13,236 popular votes (1.6%) Vermont Joe Biden: 242,820 popular votes (66.4%)Donald Trump: 112,704 popular votes (30.8%)Jo Jorgensen: 3,608 popular votes (1%) Massachusetts Joe Biden: 2,382,202 popular votes (65.9%)Donald Trump: 1,167,202 popular votes (32.3%)Jo Jorgensen: 47,013 popular votes (1.3%) Rhode Island Joe Biden: 307,486 popular votes (59.7%)Donald Trump: 199,922 popular votes (38.8%)Jo Jorgensen: 5,053 popular votes (1%) Connecticut Joe Biden: 1,080,680 popular votes (59.3%)Donald Trump: 715,291 popular votes (39.2%)Jo Jorgensen: 20,227 popular votes (1.1%) New York Joe Biden: 5,244,103 popular votes (60.9%)Donald Trump: 3,251,326 popular votes (37.8%)Jo Jorgensen: 60,371 popular votes (0.7%) New Jersey Joe Biden: 2,608,335 popular votes (57.3%)Donald Trump: 1,883,247 popular votes (41.4%)Jo Jorgensen: 31,677 popular votes (0.7%) Pennsylvania Joe Biden: 3,458,220 popular votes (50%)Donald Trump: 3,377,674 popular votes (48.8%)Jo Jorgensen: 79,380 popular votes (1.1%) Delaware Joe Biden: 296,268 popular votes (58.8%)Donald Trump: 200,603 popular votes (39.8%)Jo Jorgensen: 5,000 popular votes (1.1%) Maryland Joe Biden: 1,985,023 popular votes (65.8%)Donald Trump: 976,414 popular votes (32.4%)Jo Jorgensen: 33,488 popular votes (1.1%) West Virginia Donald Trump: 545,382 popular votes (68.6%)Joe Biden: 235,984 popular votes (29.7%)Jo Jorgensen: 10,687 popular votes (1.3%) Virginia Joe Biden: 2,413,568 popular votes (54.4%)Donald Trump: 1,962,430 popular votes (44.2%)Jo Jorgensen: 64,761 popular votes (1.5%) North Carolina Donald Trump: 2,758,773 popular votes (50.1%)Joe Biden: 2,684,292 popular votes (48.7%)Jo Jorgensen: 48,292 popular votes (0.9%) South Carolina Donald Trump: 1,385,103 popular votes (55.1%)Joe Biden: 1,091,541 popular votes (43.4%)Jo Jorgensen: 27,915 popular votes (1.1%) Georgia Joe Biden: 2,473,633 popular votes (49.5%)Donald Trump: 2,461,842 popular votes (49.3%)Jo Jorgensen: 62,229 popular votes (1.2%) Florida Donald Trump: 5.668,731 popular votes (51.2%)Joe Biden: 5,297,045 popular votes (47.9%)Jo Jorgensen: 70,324 popular votes (0.6%) Alaska Donald Trump: 189,951 popular votes (53.1%)Joe Biden: 153,778 popular votes (43%)Jo Jorgensen: 8,897 popular votes (2.5%) Hawaii Joe Biden: 366,130 popular votes (63.7%)Donald Trump: 196,864 popular votes (34.3%)Jo Jorgensen: 5,539 popular votes (1%) In order to become President of the United States, a candidate needs to earn 270 Electoral College votes. Most of the states give all of their Electoral College votes to the candidate who won the state. Maine and Nebraska split their Electoral College votes between the top two candidates. Joe Biden’s Electoral College votes: Washington – 12Oregon – 7California – 55Nevada – 6Arizona – 11Colorado – 9New Mexico – 5Minnesota – 10Wisconsin – 10Michigan – 16Illinois – 20Maine – 3New Hampshire – 4Vermont – 3Massachusetts – 11Rhode Island – 4Connecticut – 7New York – 29Pennsylvania – 20New Jersey – 14Maryland – 10Delaware – 3Virginia – 13Georgia – 16Hawaii – 4District of Columbia – 3Nebraska – 1 The total comes to 306 Electoral College votes for Joe Biden. He is the winner of the 2020 Presidential Election, and was sworn in on January 20, 2021. Donald Trump’s Electoral College votes: Maine – 1West Virginia – 5Ohio -18North Carolina – 15South Carolina – 9Florida – 29Indiana – 11Kentucky – 8Tennessee – 11Alabama – 9Mississippi – 6Louisiana – 8Arkansas – 6Missouri – 10Iowa – 6North Dakota – 3South Dakota – 3Nebraska – 4Oklahoma – 7Texas – 38Montana – 3Wyoming – 3Idaho – 4Utah – 6Alaska – 3Kansas – 6 The total comes to 232 Electoral College votes. He failed to reach 270 Electoral College votes, and lost the 2020 Presidential Election. Results of the 2020 Presidential Election is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... When the Piggy Bank is EmptyNovember 1, 20202020 Presidential CampaignPhoto by Fabian Blank on Unsplash The year 2020 has weighed heavily upon us all – and there are still two months to go before it ends. I’m writing this blog post a few days before the U.S. Presidential Election. My concern is that things are going to get dangerously ugly, no matter who wins. Like many of you, I’m tired. There are plenty of reasons to feel this way. We are bombarded with hourly news on social media about the COVID-19 pandemic. We worry about the health of our friends and loved ones. It seems like everyone knows someone who has gotten sick from the virus. There is constant “background noise” in my mind as I worry about catching it, too. For me, this is more than simple paranoia. My immune system is weak, and I’m sick more often than most people. The best I can do – that any of us can do – is wear a mask when leaving home and staying home as much as possible. We deserve better than this. This election news cycle started early and never stopped. We’ve been bombarded with news about the primaries, the special elections, the elections that determine who wins a Senate or House seat, and now the presidential election. Despite my best efforts, I cannot keep up with it all. The tsunami of news, and noise, and misinformation is exhausting. It drains my energy, even if I break it into tiny pieces. Humans aren’t meant to sift through a mountain of bad news for months on end. Emotionally, I’ve reached the point when the piggy bank is empty. The well has run dry. I’ve no more fucks to give and have completely run out of “spoons”. 2020 is the year that feels as though it stretched into a decade. The outcome of the presidential election determines our future. My hope is that our collective nightmare will come to an end soon. When the Piggy Bank is Empty is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... How I Voted on the Propositions in the 2020 California General ElectionOctober 15, 20202020 Presidential CampaignImage by Wokandapix from Pixabay There are 12 propositions on the 2020 Presidential General Election Ballot. In addition, there is a local tax initiative. By the time I got to this part of the ballot, I was out of “spoons”. Honestly needed a break before embarking on the research required to figure all of this out. Proposition 14 This one is “Stem Cell Research Institute Bond Initiative (2020)”. I have no problem with stem cells being used in order to keep people healthy or help those who have currently incurable health conditions to live a healthier life. The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) wants $5.5 billion in general obligation bonds. I see some problems with this proposition. First of all, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine received billions of dollars in 2019. It doesn’t make sense to give them more money during the COVID-19 pandemic. The thing that really bothers me, though, is CIRM wants to use stem cell research for treatments for autism. Something about that seems wrong. People who have autism don’t need to be “cured”. Instead, we need society to be more accepting of people who have autism. Proposition 14 feels really icky, and I voted NO. Proposition 15 This one is controversial, and there has been a lot of misinformation spread about it. Some politicians used this proposition to frighten people. Proposition 15 would amend the California State Constitution to require commercial and industrial properties (except those zoned as commercial agriculture) to be taxed on their market value. Right now, they are being taxed based on their purchase price. Obviously, this means that a commercial or industrial property that was purchased decades ago is getting away with not paying the amount of taxes that they should be. That’s a big problem, and it affects California’s economy. Let me make one thing clear: Proposition 15 DOES NOT AFFECT HOMES. It does affect commercial and industrial properties with combined values of $3 million or more. The change from the purchase price level of taxes to the market value level of taxes would be phased in beginning in fiscal year 2022-2023. If Proposition 15 passes, the money would go public schools, community colleges, and local government services. As a former teacher, I believe we need more money placed in public schools, community colleges, and local government services. I voted YES on Proposition 15. Proposition 16 In my opinion, Proposition 16 is a mess because people are intentionally obfuscating what it does and does not do. Don’t attempt to research this one by looking for it on Twitter or Facebook. I tried that, and found way too much misinformation about it. I recommend looking at Ballotpedia instead. In short, Proposition 16 is an attempt to put back the Affirmative Action Amendment, which was repealed in 1996 when Proposition 209 passed. This changed the California Constitution’s Declaration of Rights with Section 31 which states: “The State shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.” Here is some information about Affirmative Action from Britannica: Affirmative Action is an active effort to improve employment or educational opportunities for members of minority groups and for women. It began as a remedy to the effects of long-standing discrimination against such groups and has consisted of policies, programs, and procedures that give limited preferences to minorities and women in job hiring, admission to institutions of higher education, the awarding of government contracts, and other social benefits. The typical criteria for affirmative action are race, disability, gender, ethnic origin, and age.Affirmative action was initiated by the administration of President Lyndon Johnson in order to improve opportunities for African Americans while civil rights legislation was dismantling the legal basis for discrimination. The federal government began to institute affirmative action policies under the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 and an executive order in 1965. Businesses receiving federal funds were prohibited from using aptitude tests and other criteria that tended to discriminate against African Americans.Affirmative action programs were monitored by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Subsequently, affirmative action was broadened to cover women and Native Americans, Hispanics, and other minorities and was extended to colleges and universities and state and federal agencies.By the late 1970s the use of racial quotas and minority set-asides led to court challenges of affirmative action as a form of “reverse discrimination.” The first major challenge was Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled (5–4) that quotas may not be used to reserve places for minority applicants if white applicants are denied a chance to compete for those places. Although the court outlawed quota programs, it allowed colleges to use race as a factor in making admissions decisions. Two years later a fragmented court upheld a 1977 federal law requiring that 10 percent of funds for public works be allotted to qualified minority contractors… According to Ballotpedia, Ward Connerly, a member of the University of California Board of Regents, led the campaign behind Proposition 209. “Affirmative Action was meant to be temporary,” wrote Connerly, “It was meant to be a stronger dose of equal opportunity for individuals, and the prescription was intended to expire when the body politic had developed sufficient immunity to the virus of prejudice and discrimination.” In 2020, Ward Connerly is listed on the official information about the propositions that are on the 2020 Presidential Election ballot as being against Proposition 16. He is involved with a group called Californians for Equal Rights. Ballotpedia explains what type of Affirmative Action would be allowed if Proposition 16 passed: Proposition 16 would remove the ban on affirmative action involving race-based or sex-based preferences from the California Constitution. Therefore, federal law would define the parameters of affirmative action. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that race-based affirmative action in higher education and government contracting must be reviewed under strict scrutiny. In the U.S., strict scrutiny is a form of judicial review that requires a law, policy, or program to serve a compelling state interest and be narrowly tailored to address that interest. Courts have ruled that strict racial quotas and racial point systems in higher education admissions are unconstitutional but that individualized, holistic reviews that consider race, when tailored to serve a compelling interest (such as educational diversity), are constitutional. The group that is for Proposition 16 is called Yes on 16. Here is why they support this proposition: Our shared values and communities are under attack in America today. White supremacists are on the march, Black people are being shot, Latino immigrants are demonized on a daily basis, COVID-19 is ravaging Native communities, hate crimes against Asian Americans are on the rise, and many of us fear for our safety because of who we are.There is something we can do. By supporting Proposition 16, we can push back against Trump and the racism he promotes and build a better future in California. There has never been a more critical time to reinstate affirmative action in California – as we chart a path forward to a stronger economic future for women and communities of color, and to a California where Black lives matter and our systems are just According to SFGate, those who are in favor of Proposition 16 include: The University of California Board of Regents, Senators Kamala Harris and Diane Feinstein, and various Black Lives Matter-related advocacy groups. SFGate also reported that those who are against Proposition 16 include: A number of Asian American groups and Republicans in the California state Assembly. I find the argument from Yes on 16 to be way more compelling than the argument from Californians for Equal Rights. Based on the multitude of news articles I have read, and the videos I’ve seen, we definitely do need Affirmative Action. I voted YES on Proposition 16. Proposition 17 Proposition 17 is the Voting Rights Restoration for Persons on Parole Amendment. The information in the Voters Guide describes it this way: Restores voting rights upon completion of a prison term to persons who have been disqualified from voting while serving a prison term. Annual county costs: likely in the hundreds of thousands of dollars statewide for voter registration and ballot materials. One time state costs: likely in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for voter registration cards and system. Ballotpedia explains that Proposition 17 is a constitutional amendment that would allow people on parole for felony convictions to vote in California. Currently, the California Constitution disqualifies people with felonies from voting until their imprisonment and parole are completed. The ballot measure would amend the state constitution to allow people with felonies who are on parole to vote; therefore, the ballot measure would keep imprisonment as a disqualification for voting but remove parole status. A YES vote means people on state parole who are U.S. citizens, residents of California, and at least 18 years of age would be able to vote, if they register to vote. A NO vote means people on state parole would continue to be unable to vote in California. Those who support Proposition 17 include: Free the Vote CAU.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D)State Senators Steven Bradford (D), Holly Mitchell (D), and Scott Weiner (D)Assemblymembers Rob Bonta (D), Wendy Carrillo (D), Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher (D), Mike Gipson (D), Ash Kaira (D), Kevin McCarty (D), Kevin Mullin (D), Mark Stone (D), Shirley Weber (D)Secretary of State Alex Padilla (D)California Democratic PartyACLU of California, ACLU of Northern California, ACLU of Southern California, Brennan Center for Justice, League of Women Voters of California Here is an argument for Proposition 17 from Free The Vote CA: Nearly 50,000 Californians who have returned home from prison can’t vote even though they are raising families, holding jobs, paying taxes, and contributing to society in every other way. They should be encouraged to reenter society and have a stake in their community, not be punished by having their voting rights denied. Prop 17 will right this injustice and restore voting rights to Californians returning home from prison. I believe that everyone who is an American citizen, who lives in California, who is age 18 (or older) and who registers to vote should have the right to vote. I voted YES on Proposition 17. Proposition 18 Proposition 18 “Amends California Constitution to Permit 17-Year-Olds to Vote in Primary and Special Elections if They Will Turn 18 by the Next General Election and be Otherwise Eligible to Vote”. It is a Legislative Constitutional Amendment. A YES vote supports this constitutional amendment to allow 17-year-olds who will be 18 at the time of the next general election to vote in primary elections and special elections. A NO vote opposes this constitutional amendment, thereby continuing to prohibit 17-year-olds who will be 18 at the time of the next general election to vote in primary elections and special elections. Ballotpedia states that as of June 2020, 18 states, along with Washington, D.C., allowed 17-year-olds who will be 18 by the time of the general election to vote in primary elections. The Official Voter Information Guide says: Proposition 18 will allow those who will be 18 years of age by the time of the general election to participate in the primary election of that year if they are 17 at the time of the primary. This important election reform will not only allow first-time voters to participate in the full election cycle, but also has the potential to boost youth participation in our elections. We need youth voices to be represented at the ballot box. Allowing some 17-year-olds to vote in primary elections if, and only if, they will be 18 by the time of the general election is a simple way to amplify the voices of young voters throughout California and will lead to a more inclusive election process for our state overall.California is behind the curve when it comes to this issue. Nearly half of all states in the U.S. already allow 17-year-olds to participate in primaries and caucuses. If an individual plans to participate in a general election as a first-time voter, it is only reasonable that they be afforded the opportunity to shape the choices that appear on the general election ballot by participating in the primary.Proposition 18 links this 17-year-old participation to the age of majority by requiring that the individual be 18 by the time of the general election. According to research conducted by the California Civic Engagement Project, in the 2020 primary election in California, youth voters (those between 18 and 24) made up 14.5% of the population eligible to vote, however only about 6% of those who actually voted in the election. Youth are extremely underrepresented in our electoral process despite the fact that they are heavily impacted by the policies created by those elected.Not only does research indicate that the youth population has the lowest turnout levels of any age demographic, but studies show that voting is habit forming – once an individual votes in an election, they are more likely to do so again. Early involvement in the electoral process for first-time voters should be a high priority for this reason… People who are 17-years-old are not legally considered to be adults. But, that doesn’t mean they should be treated as though they were five years old. Here’s a quick list of thing that 17-year-olds can do in California without parental consent: No parental involvement required in order to get an abortionAre explicitly allowed to consent to contraceptive servicesCalifornia law permits minors 12 years and older to consent to confidential medical services for the prevention of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) without parental consent (including the HPV vaccine for the prevention of human papillomavirus)California minors can consent to the hepatitis B vaccineA pregnant minor in California can consent to placing their child up for adoption. Can take the GED test if they are within 60 days of their 18th birthday; are within 60 days of when they would have graduated from high school if they remained in school and followed the usual course of study; or are 17 years of age and have been out of school for at least 60 consecutive days, and provide a letter of request for the test from the military, a postsecondary education institution or a prospective employer.Can get a work permit from their school and can work four hours on school days and eight hours on non-school days or days preceding a non-school day.Can legally sign a lease as a college student without parental permission (but many landlords will require a parent or guardian to guarantee the lease). From this, it is clear that 17-year-olds are considered able to do plenty of important things in California without parental consent. It makes sense for the 17-year-olds who will turn 18 before the next general election to cast a vote in a primary or special election. I voted YES on Proposition 18. Proposition 19 Proposition 19 “Allows homeowners who are over 55, disabled, or wildfire/disaster victims to transfer primary residence’s tax base to replacement residence. Changes taxation of family property transfers. Establishes fire protection services fund. “Fiscal impact: Local governments could gain tens of millions of dollars of property tax revenue per year, probably growing over time to a few hundred million dollars per year. Schools could receive similar property tax gains.” As you may recall, California had a ton of wildfires this year. Some were sparked by lighting. Others were sparked by power lines, equipment failures, car accidents and campfires. There was a “firenado”. Most of the fires were sparked by humans. Many families lost their homes (and everything in them) and had to start all over again. Ballotpedia provided the following information: The ballot measure would change the rules for tax assessment transfers. In California, eligible homeowners can transfer their tax assessments to a different home of the same of lesser market value, which allows them to move without paying higher taxes. Homeowners who are eligible for tax assessment transfers are persons over 55 years old, persons with severe disabilities, and victims of natural disasters and hazardous waste contamination. How would this ballot measure affect inherited properties? In California, parents or grandparents can transfer primary residential properties to their children or grandchildren without the property tax assessment resetting to market value. Other types of properties, such as vacation homes and business properties, can also be transferred from parent to child or grandparent to grandchild with the first $1 million exempt from re-assessment when transferred.The ballot measure would eliminate the parent-to-child and grandparent-to-grandchild exemption in cases where the child or grandchild does not use the inherited property as their principle residence, such as using a property as rental house or a second home. When the inherited property is used as the recipient’s principle residence but is sold for $1 million more than the property’s taxable value, an upward adjustment in assessed value would occur. The ballot measure would also apply these rules to certain farms. Beginning on February 16, 2023, the taxable value of an inherited principle residential property would be adjusted each year at a rate equal to the change in the California House Price index. If this ballot measure passes, the money that comes from it would create the California Fire Response Fund (CFRF) and County Revenue Protection Fund (CRPF). It would require the California Director of Finance to calculate additional revenues and net savings resulting from the ballot measure. The California State Controller would be required to deposit 75 percent of the calculated revenue to the Fire Response Fund and 15 percent to the County Revenue Protection Fund. The County Revenue Protection Fund would be used to reimburse counties for revenue losses related to the measure’s property tax changes. The Fire Response Fund would be used to fund fire suppression staffing and full-time station-based personnel. The way I see it, this is a “take from the rich and give to the poor” kind of proposition. It gives people who lost their homes in a fire the ability to transfer their tax assessments to a different home of the same or lesser market value. That means the person or family would be able to buy a home without struggling to pay for a higher tax assessment. It gives them time to rebuild. The proposition also takes away a “loophole” that rich people are using to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. A parent or grandparent who transfers ownership of a home to a child or grandchild – who does not and will not live in that transferred home – is not about making sure the younger person will avoid being homeless. It is simply so the parent or grandparent can pay a lower amount of taxes on that home. We live in a society, and that means that rich people need to pay their fair share of taxes, too. I voted YES on Proposition 19. Proposition 20 According to SFGate, Proposition 20 adds several crimes to the list of violent felonies for which early parole is restricted. It would undo a series of reforms enacted in 2011 and 2016 aimed at reducing California’s prison population. Ballotpedia explains a YES vote supports this initiative to add crimes to the list of violent felonies for which early parole is restricted; recategorize certain types of theft and fraud crimes as wobblers (chargeable as misdemeanors or felonies); and require DNA collection for certain misdemeanors. A NO vote opposes this initiative to add crimes to the list of violent felonies for which early parole is restricted; recategorize certain types of theft and fraud crimes as wobblers (chargeable as misdemeanors or felonies); and require DNA collection for certain misdemeanors. Here’s a summary of what sentencing laws this proposition would change (if it passes): Would make specific types of theft and fraud crimes, including firearm theft, vehicle theft, and unlawful use of a credit card, chargeable as misdemeanors OR felonies, rather than misdemeanors.Would establish two additional types of crime in state code – serial crime and organized retail crime – and charge them as wobblers (chargeable as misdemeanors OR felonies)Would require persons convicted of certain misdemeanors that were classified as wobblers before 2014, such as shoplifting, grand theft, and drug possession, along with several other crimes, including domestic violence and prostitution with a minor, to submit to the collection of DNA samples for state and federal databases. Proposition 20 is scary. I really don’t like the idea of making people who convicted of a crime before 2014 to now have to submit their DNA to state and federal databases. I also hate the idea that a person who was convicted of something as non-violent as shoplifting and charged with a misdemeanor before 2014, to suddenly have that charge increased to a felony all these years later. It seems incredibly unfair. The new categories of crimes that this proposition would add (if it passes) “serial crime” and “organized retail crime” seem to be designed to target protestors who may or may not have “looted” stores during a protest. Put all of this together, and it sounds like the police in California want to use Proposition 20 to get around the state legislature – who might or might not enact laws that would curtail some of the worst behaviors that (some) police officers have been doing. It also sounds like it gives police more ability to target people that (some police) are already enacting violence on or outright murdering. The part that would make drug possession a felony is also disturbing. Many people who are convicted of drug possession had a small amount of marijuana on them. In 2016, California voters passed Proposition 64 which legalized recreational pot. The people who are currently convicted of having a small amount of marijuana on them before Proposition 64 passed should be released. They should not suddenly have their status changed from misdemeanor to felony. Another really frightening thing about Proposition 20 is that the police are trying to use it to overturn several existing laws that the state legislature is not willing to overturn. It would also overturn a Supreme Court decision. The police don’t have the power to do that. In 2011, NPR posted an article titled: “High Court Rules Calif. Must Cut Prison Population”. It was written by Nina Totenberg. From the article: A bitterly divided U.S. Supreme Court ordered California on Monday to reduce its prison population by some 33,000 prisoners within the next two years.By a 5-to-4 vote, the high court ruled that severe overcrowding in state prisons has resulted in extreme suffering and even death, a deprivation of the inmates’ rights that violates the Constitution and the 1995 federal Prison Litigation Reform Act, as well.California’s 33 prisons, designed to house 80,000 inmates, housed twice that many prisoners by 2009.“The California state prison system is the worst overcrowded system I have seen in my experience,” says Wayne Scott, who headed the Texas prison system under then-Gov. George W. Bush.Scott was one of many expert witnesses called in to look at the California system after 20 years of litigation and failure by the state to achieve reforms that it had agreed upon. Scott and other prison experts told a special three-judge court that overcrowding was the primary cause of the state prison’s problems. The court then ordered the state to reduce the prison population to 137 percent of capacity, more than the 130 percent recommended by the Federal Bureau of Prisons…The state appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, and it lost on Monday. Writing for the five-member court majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy noted that the court has long held that prisoners are, in essence, wards of the state since they cannot provide for themselves. “Just as a prisoner may starve if not fed, he or she may suffer or die if not provided adequate medical care.” Moreover, said Kennedy, a prison system that fails to provide basic medical care is “incompatible with the concept of human dignity and has no place in a civilized society.” California, he said, by virtue of its overcrowding, violates the Constitution’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment, and the courts “must not shrink from their constitutional obligation to ‘enforce the rights of all persons, including prisoners.’ “In a 48-page opinion, Kennedy laid out some of the facts of the case. Prisoners are not only doubled and tripled up in 6-by-9 cells but are stacked in bunks in areas meant to be gymnasiums, classrooms and even clinics. As many as 54 prisoners use one toilet, breeding disease, and medical care is so deficient that one prisoner dies needlessly every six to seven days. On the mental health side, prisoners awaiting care are often housed in “tiny, phone-booth sized cages,” with some inmates falling into hallucinations and catatonic states, and suicides well above national norms.Justice Kennedy pointed out that the state had repeatedly agreed to fix these conditions by building more prisons, but the Legislature didn’t provide the money, and the overcrowding just grew worse. Given California’s ongoing budgetary crisis, Kennedy observed, there is no possibility the state can “build itself out of” its overcrowding problem, so the state will have to choose a combination of other methods, even perhaps release of nonviolent prisoners to reduce the state prison population. Joining Kennedy in the majority were Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Dissenters were Justices Antonin Scalia, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas in one dissenting opinion, and Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts in another. Ballotpedia provides context to Proposition 20: The ballot initiative was designed to make changes to AB 109 (2011), Proposition 47 (2014) and Proposition 57 (2016) – three measures that were intended to reduce the state’s prison inmate population. According to Assemblyman Jim Cooper (D-9), the goal of the initiative is to “reform the unintended consequences of reforms to better protect the public. Former Gov. Jerry Brown (D) disagreed with Cooper’s assessment, saying the initiative is the “latest scare tactic on criminal justice reform”.Before Proposition 47 and Proposition 57, and a month after the passage of AB 109, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that overcrowding in the state’s prisons resulted in cruel and unusual punishment and affirmed a lower court’s order to reduce the prison population. AB 109 shifted the imprisonment of non-serious, non-violent, and non-sexual offenders, as defined in state law, from state prisons to local jails. AB 109 also made counties, rather than the state, responsible for supervising certain felons on parole. Proposition 47, which voters approved in 2014, changed several crimes, which the measure considered non-serious and non-violent, from felonies or wobblers to misdemeanors. Former Gov. Brown (D) developed Proposition 57, which voters approved in 2016. Proposition 57 increased parole chances for felons convicted of nonviolent crimes, as defined in state law, and gave them more opportunities to earn sentence-reduction credits for good behavior. It is worth noting that U.S. Representative Devin Nunes (R-California) is among the supporters of Proposition 20. He makes bad decisions. Here is one example: Los Angeles Times reported in 2019 that Rep. Devin Nunes sued Twitter, demanding $250 million in damages, for Twitter failing to police the accounts of parody accounts @DevinCow and @DevinNunes Mom, and also a political activist named Liz Mair. …In a lawsuit filed Tuesday in Virginia, Nunes complained that all three defamed him in hundreds of tweets over several months last year. It also seeks $350,000 in punitive damages, through legal experts say the suit has little chance of moving forward.Nunes, a close ally of President Trump says in his complaint that he endured what “no human should ever have to bear and suffer in their whole life.”… There is no good reason for the police, who already have a lot of power, weaponry, and military gear, to have the power to change people’s sentencing years after the sentence was given. There is absolutely no good reason to allow police to overturn a Supreme Court decision. I voted NO on Proposition 20. I really hope it does not pass. Proposition 21 Proposition 21 is the Local Rent Control Initiative. SFGate reported that this proposition would allow local governments to enact rent control on housing that was first occupied over 15 years ago. The information in the Quick Reference Guide says: Allows local governments to establish rent control on residential properties over 15 years old. Local limits on rate increases may differ from statewide limits. Fiscal Impact: Overall, a potential reduction in state and local revenues in the high tens of millions of dollars per year over time. Depending on actions by local communities, revenue losses could be less or more. A YES vote supports this ballot initiative to allow local governments to enact rent control on housing that was first occupied over 15 years ago, with an exception for landlords who own no more than two homes with distinct titles or subdivided interests. A NO vote opposes this ballot initiative, thereby continuing to prohibit rent control on housing that was first occupied after February 1, 1995, and housing units with distinct titles, such as single-family homes. Ballotpedia provides the following context about what this ballot measure would change about rent control in California: The ballot measure would replace the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act (Costa-Hawkins), which was passed in 1995. Prior to the enactment of Costa-Hawkins, local governments were permitted to enact rent control, provided that landlords would receive just and reasonable returns on their rental properties. Costa-Hawkins continued to allow local governments to use rent control, except on (a) housing that was first occupied after February 1, 1995, and (b) housing units with distinct titles, such as condos, townhouses, and single-family homes.The ballot measure would allow local governments to adopt rent control on housing units, except on (a) housing that was first occupied within the last 15 years and (b) units owned by natural persons who own no more than two housing units with separate titles, such as single-family homes, condos, and some duplexes, or subdivided interests, such as stock cooperatives and community apartment projects.Under Costa-Hawkins, landlords are allowed to increase rent prices to market rates when a tenant moves out (a policy known as vacancy decontrol). The ballot measure would require local governments that adopt rent control to allow landlords to increase rental rates by 15 percent during the first three years following a vacancy. Supporters of Proposition 21 include: Renters and Homeowners United to Keep Families in Their Homes (also known as Yes on 21)Vermont U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent) and U.S. Representative Maxine Waters (Democrat)California Democratic PartyDelores Huerta, Co-Founder of the United Farm Workers and Michael Weinstein, President of the AIDS Healthcare FoundationAFSCME California, California Nurses Association, and SEIU California State CouncilACCE Action, ACLU of Southern California, AIDS Healthcare Foundation, Democratic Socialists of America, Los Angeles, Eviction Defense Network, National Lawyers Guild, Los Angeles Business Wire posted a press release on September 17, 2020, titled: “Bernie Sanders Backs Rent Control, Slams Greedy Landlords in New ‘Yes on 21’ Spot”. From the press release: The ‘Yes on 21’ campaign is releasing a new :15 second video spot featuring United States Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), one of the most most-trusted voices for the rights and needs of working families, reiterating his support for rent control and slamming greedy landlords. The spot will be deployed on ‘Yes on 21’ social media platforms and air later on cable and broadcast TV outlets.In the spot, Sanders, who officially endorsed Proposition 21 in November 2019, says “… rent control is an appropriate tool to tell landlords that they cannot jack up their rents to any rate that they want.”“The No on 21 campaign will try to convince voters that they are the ones fighting against homeless and for affordable housing. But Bernie knows that the billionaires who are funding the ‘No’ campaign are greedy billionaires who care nothing about the people, but only about their enormous profit margins,” said Susie Shannon, director of policy for the Yes on 21 campaign and former California political director for Senator Sanders’ 2020 presidential campaign. “Proposition 21 is a practical measure that will help keep families in their homes.”.. Yes on 21 points out that Proposition 21 will limit rent increases and preserve affordable housing to keep CA families in their homes. If passed, the measure would allow local communities to: Limit Annual Rent IncreasesPreserve Currently Affordable HousingIncentivize the Construction of New HousingExempt Single-Family HomeownersGuarantee Landlords a Fair Profit Yes on 21 also points out the following information: More than half of all renters statewide – more than 3 million households – spend more than 30% of their income on rent, meeting the federal government’s definition of “rent-burdened.” Worse still, nearly a third of renters spend at least half of their income on rent.Prop 21 was written to target corporate landlord billionaires, not mom and pop landlords who are a staple of our communities. Prop 21 codifies the right of landlords to make a fair return on their investment.Prop 21 also protects groups of people who have historically (and today) are discriminated against when it comes to renting. This group includes Black Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, Transgender individuals, LGBTQ Youth, LGBTQ Seniors, Veterans, people with disabilities, and the unhoused. Those who oppose Prop 21 include: The No on Prop 21 website, which was paid for by Californians to Protect Affordable Housing – a coalition of housing advocates, renters, businesses, taxpayers and veterans. Committee major funding from California Business Roundtable, California Association of Realtors, Apartment Association of Orange County.California Governor Gavin Newsom and the Republican Party of CaliforniaCalifornia Conference of Carpenters, California District of Iron Workers, California State Association of Electrical Workers, California State Pipe Trades Council, State Building and Construction Trades Council of CaliforniaAlavonbay Communities, Inc., Equity Residential, Essex Property Trust, Inc., Invitation Homes, Prometheus Real Estate GroupAMVETS Department of California, American Legion, Department of California, California Asian Pacific Chamber of Commerce, California Chamber of Commerce, California Council of Affordable Housing, California NAACP State Conference, California Seniors Advocates League, California Taxpayers Association, Congress of California Seniors, Howard Jarvis Taxyapers Association Most of the groups listed as opposed the Prop 21 are those who are making their living by building or selling homes/rentals. This strikes me as very suspicious and self-serving. The Republican Party, who has a history of putting the amount of money they can make over the well-being of their constituents, also opposes Prop 21. Curbed San Francisco posted an article in October of 2019 titled: “California governor to sign statewide rent control bill in Oakland”. It was written by Adam Brinklow. From the article: At a ceremony in Oakland today, Gov. Gavin Newsom will sign into law California’s “anti-rent gouging” bill, Assembly Bill 1482, which, starting next year, will cap annual rent increases and extend de facto rent control protections across the state.The governor calls AB 1482 the “nation’s strongest statewide renter protections.”Newsom, Assemblymember David Chiu, who authored the bill, and Senate President pro Tempore Toni Atkins will appear at the West Oakland Senior Center for today’s signing. The appearance marks the beginning of what the Governor’s office calls a “statewide rent and housing tour,” with stops in multiple California cities to sign bills that the administration hopes will address the escalating state housing crisis.The new law will restrict landlords from raising rents more than five percent in one year, plus the local cost of inflation, a formula that comes out to approximately seven percent in most cities.The bill also seeks to help tenants by requiring landlords to have “just cause,” such as failure to pay rent, when terminating a lease.AB 1482 does not override SF’s current, more aggressive rent control laws. However, it does apply to thousands of units not covered under existing local rent control protections; starting in 2020, units built in 2005 or before will fall under the purview of the rent cap.In 2021, circa 2006 homes will also be affected, and so on. The law will sunset in 2030.Before today’s signing, the California Rental Housing Association, a group representing over 22,000 rental property owners, sent out a missive stating its opposition to the bill… My best guess is that Governor Gavin Newsom is opposed to Prop 21 because he prefers the rent control bill he signed in 2019? I don’t understand why he isn’t taking the same side as the Democratic Party is on this proposition. I voted YES on Proposition 21. Proposition 22 Proposition 22 is extremely controversial and a huge mess. There has been a lot of misinformation spread about what it is and what it will do. In short, this proposition is opposed by two big ride share companies, Uber and Lyft, who refuse to provide their workers with the pay and benefits of full employees. To fully understand what this proposition is about, you need to know about AB5. It went into affect in California on January 1, 2020 (which feels like at least ten years ago). It required employers to provide “gig workers” with the same benefits that they offer to their employees. The conditions in which an employer must classify a “gig worker” as an employee included: The worker is free to perform services without the control or direction of the company.The worker is performing work tasks that are outside the usual course of the company’s business activities.The worker is customarily engaged in an independent established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as that involved in the work performed. On September 4, 2020, AB2257 passed the California Senate floor and became a law. It made changes to AB5 that would protect several groups of freelancers from the limitations that were imposed by AB5. For example, freelance writers were limited to a total of 35 paid articles per year. That limitation was removed by AB2257. Proposition 22 is the App-Based Drivers as Contractors and Labor Policies Initiative (2020) proposition. A YES vote supports this ballot initiative to define app-based transportation (rideshare) and delivery drivers as independent contractors and adopt labor and wage policies specific to app-based drivers and other companies. A NO vote opposes this ballot initiative, meaning California Assembly Bill 5 (2019) could be used to decide whether app-based drivers are employees or independent contractors. It is important to know that Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash have been fighting against having to give their workers – who do the primary tasks that those companies are built on – as employees. On August 10, 2020, The Guardian posted an article titled: “Uber and Lyft must classify driers as employees, judge rules, in blow to gig economy”. It was written by Kari Paul. From the article: A California judge has issued a preliminary injunction that would block Uber and Lyft from classifying their drivers as independent contractors rather than employees.The move on Monday came in response to a May lawsuit filed by the state of California against the companies, which alleged they are misclassifying their drivers under the state’s new labor law.That law, known as AB5, took effect on 1 January. The strictest of its kind in the US, it makes it more difficult for companies to classify workers as independent contractors instead of employees who are entitled to minimum wage and benefits. The lack of workers’ compensation and unemployment benefits for drivers has become increasingly urgent during the coronavirus pandemic, as ridership plunges and workers struggle to protect themselves.California is the largest market in the US for Uber and Lyft and the state where both companies were founded.The lawsuit, and Monday’s injunction, are the most significant challenges to the ride-hailing companies’ business model thus far. Judge Ethan Schulman of the San Francisco superior court delayed enforcing his order by 10 days to give the companies a chance to appeal.The court has provided a 10-day stay during which Uber can file an appeal – which the company plans to do immediately, a spokesman told the Guardian. This means the injunction will not have effects on Uber or Lyft’s services, for now… On August 22, 2020, Business Insider posted an article titled: “Uber and Lyft have poured millions of dollars into a November ballot measure to keep California driver paid as independent contractors”. It was written by Katie Canales. From the article: A California court in August granted Uber and Lyft a stay in their appeal of a court ruling that said drivers must be classified as employees, not contractors. If they weren’t given the extra time, the companies were threatening to shut down their business throughout California. And if the companies had shut down, riders would have been cut off from booking rides on the apps – which likely would have incentivized Californians to back Proposition 22, a measure that will appear on the ballot in the November election.Prop 22 strives to exempt ride-sharing and food-delivery companies from Assembly Bill 5 (AB5) gig worker law that was passed in September 2019, meaning Uber and Lyft could continue classifying – and paying – drivers as contractors, not employees. Uber and Lyft have built their business models around doing so, reserving full-time employee status for corporate roles to keep costs low. Uber, Lyft, Doordash, Postmates and Instacart have poured a total of $110 million into support for the measure, according to the San Francisco Chronicle… It should be noted that the same San Francisco Chronicle article says: …Uber, Lyft and DoorDash have each put up $30 million to promote the measure; Postmates and Instacart each put up $10 million… Here is who supports Proposition 22: Yes on 22 – Save App Based Jobs & ServicesRepublican Party of CaliforniaCalifornia Peace Officers Association, California Police Chiefs Association, California State Sheriffs’ AssociationDoorDash, InstaCart, Lyft, Postmates, UberCalAsian Chamber of Commerce, California Black Chamber of Commerce, California Chamber of Commerce, California Farm Bureau Federation, California NAACP State Conference, California Small Business Association, California State National Action Network, California Taxpayers Association, Crime Victims United of California, Mothers Against Drunk Driving, National Black Chamber of Commerce, National Taxpayers Union Here is who opposes Proposition 22: No on Prop 22U.S. Senators Kamala D. Harris (D), Vermont U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (I), Massachusetts U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D)U.S. Representative Barbara Lee (D)State Senators Marie Elena Durazo (D), Nancy Skinner (D), Scott Weiner (D)Assemblyperson Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher (D)Speaker of the State Assembly Anthony Rendon (D)State Assemblyperson Buffy Wicks (D)Stockton Mayor Michael Tubbs (Nonpartisan)State Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara (D)State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond (Nonpartisan)State Controller Betty Yee (D)Former Vice President Joe Biden (D)Former U.S. Secretary of Labor Robert ReichCalifornia Democratic PartyAmerican Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, California Labor Federation, California Professional Firefighters, California State Council of Laborers, California Teachers Association, SEIU California State Council, State Building and Construction Trades Council of California, Transport Workers Union of America, Unite HERE, United Food and Commercial Workers Westerns States CouncilACLU of Southern California, California Alliance for Retired Americans, California League of Conservation Voters, Gig Workers Rising I am always inclined to vote against the wishes of large companies that spend $30 million (or more) on Propositions that would benefit them, save them money, and cause harm to their gig workers. That $30 million could have been used to pay their workers like they do the rest of their employees and to give them the proper benefits. I voted NO on Proposition 22 because I oppose this ballot measure. Proposition 23 Proposition 23 is the Dialysis Clinic Requirements Initiative. There has been some misinformation spread around about this proposition. If you live in California, then you probably got some propaganda about it in your mailbox. A YES vote supports this ballot initiative to require chronic dialysis clinics to have an on-site physician while patients are being treated; report data on dialysis-related infections; obtain consent from the state health department before closing a clinic; and not discriminate against patients based on the source of payment for care. A NO vote opposes this ballot initiative. Voting NO means you think it is fine for dialysis clinics to NOT have an on-site physician while patients are being treated; to NOT report data on dialysis-related infections; to NOT obtain consent from the state health department before closing a clinic; and to go ahead and discriminate against patients based on the source of payment for care. It really is that simple. But the misinformation about what Proposition 22 is about has obscured how simple it truly is. Ballotpedia provides the following information about Proposition 22: The ballot measure would require chronic dialysis clinics to: Have a minimum of one licensed physician present at the clinic while patients are being treated, with an exception for when there is a bona fide shortage of physicians;Report data on dialysis-related infections to the state health department and National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN);Require the principal officer of the clinic to certify under penalty of perjury that he or she is satisfied, after review, that the submitted report is accurate and complete; andProvide a written notice to the state health department and obtain consent from the state health department before closing a dialysis clinic.Prohibits chronic dialysis clinics from discriminating with respect to offering or providing care or refusing to offer to provide care, on the basis of who is responsible for paying for a patient’s treatment. Ballotpedia also provided this background: In 2018, 59.9 percent of voters rejected California Proposition 8, which would have required dialysis clinics to issue refunds to patients (or patients’ insurers) for profits above 115 percent of the costs of direct patient care and healthcare improvements. Proposition 8 (2018) and the Dialysis Clinic Requirements Initiative (2020) were designed to enact policies related to dialysis clinics, but the specific policies are different. Proposition 8 would have capped profits and required refunds, whereas this year’s initiative would address minimum physician staffing, data reporting, and clinic closures.Proposition 8, like this year’s dialysis-related ballot initiative, had the support of the SEIU-UHW West, a labor union for healthcare workers. Proposition 8 established a new front in the conflict between the SEIU-UHW West and the state’s two largest dialysis businesses, DaVita and Fresenius Medical Care. The SEIU-UHW West said workers at dialysis clinics have been attempting to unionize since 2016, but that their employers were retaliating against pro-union employees. Kent Thiry, CEO of DaVita, argued that “Proposition 8 puts California patients at risk in an effort to force unionization of employees.” Sean Wherley, a spokesperson for the SEIU-UHW West, contended that dialysis workers “want these reforms regardless of what happens with their union efforts.” Supporters of Proposition 23 include: California Democratic Party, and SEIU-UHW West Opponents of Proposition 23 include: Republican Party of CaliforniaDaVita, Inc.,and Fresenius Medical CareAMVETS Department of California, American Legion, Department of California, California Medical Association, California NAACP State Conference. It seems to me that DaVita and Fresenius Medical Care are motivated to convince people to vote NO on Proposition 23 because doing so will enable them to keep making a profit in the way that they currently are. That’s awfully suspicious, and makes me concerned about how they have been treating their dialysis patients. Yes on 23 posted this on their website: The two corporations that dominate the industry — DaVita and Fresenius — have done everything possible to keep their huge profits flowing by stopping patients and workers from making improvements to dialysis care. In 2018 the “Big Dialysis” corporations spent $111 million just to defeat Proposition 8, which would have required dialysis clinics to invest more of their revenues into improving direct patient care. Those same corporations are fighting Prop 23 and have already put $100 million into defeating the initiative. I voted YES on Proposition 23 because I want dialysis patients to have really good care, from actual physicians, in a clean environment. I want them to not have to worry that the dialysis center will refuse to treat them because they are using Medicaid or Medicare. Proposition 24 Proposition 24 is the Consumer Personal Information Law and Agency Initiative (2020). A YES vote supports this ballot initiative to expand the state’s consumer data privacy laws, including provisions to allow consumers to direct businesses not to share their personal information, remove the time period in which businesses can fix violations before being penalized; and create the Privacy Protection Agency to enforce the state’s consumer data privacy laws. A NO vote opposes this ballot initiative to expand the state’s consumer data privacy laws or create the Privacy Protection Agency to enforce the state’s consumer data privacy laws. Ballotpedia provides the following overview: Proposition 24, also known as the California Privacy Rights and Enforcement Act of 2020, would expand and amend the provisions of the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA), create the California Privacy Protection Agency, and remove the ability of businesses to fix violations before being penalized for violations. The ballot initiative would require businesses to do the following: not share a consumer’s personal information upon the consumer’s requestprovide consumers with an opt-out option for having their sensitive personal information, as defined in law, used or disclosed for advertising or marketingobtain permission before collecting data from consumers who are younger than 16obtain permission from a parent or guardian before collecting data from consumers who are younger than 13 andcorrect a consumer’s inaccurate personal information upon the consumer’s request Those who support Proposition 24 include: Yes on 24U.S. Representative Ro Khanna (D)State Senator Ben Allen (D), State Senator Robert Hertzberg (D) State Senator Nancy SkinnerAssemblymember David Chiu (D)State Controller Betty Yee (D)Andrew Yang (D) – Former 2020 presidential candidateAFSCME California, California Professional Firefighters, State Building and Construction Trades Council of CaliforniaCalifornia NAACP State Conference, Common Sense, Consumer Watchdog Those who oppose Proposition 24 include: No on Prop 24Green Party of California, Libertarian Party of California, Republican Party of CaliforniaDolores Huerta – Co-Founder of the United Farm WorkersCalifornia Nurses AssociationACLU of California, ACLU of Northern California, ACLU of Southern California, California Alliance for Retired Americans, California Small Business Associations, Center for Digital Democracy, Color of Change, Consumer Action, Consumer Federation of California, Council on Islamic American Relations – California, League of Women Voters in California, Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce, Media Alliance To me, the most compelling argument about why voters should support Proposition 24 comes from Andrew Yang: “Other proposals simply do not match the strength and thoughtfulness of Prop 24. Alternatives would require all online businesses to offer their services for “free,” even if the business doesn’t have any alternative model to create revenue. This is unsustainable. As we’ve seen for years, if a service is free, the user is the product. Requiring this type of digital system would further marginalize privacy and data rights and make it nearly impossible to provide consumers with meaningful control over their information… But most importantly, Prop 24 provides Californians greater control over their data: If they don’t like a business or don’t trust its privacy protections, consumers can tell it that it can’t sell their personal information, and businesses are prohibited from unfairly punishing consumers for exercising these rights. This is a strong new protection, and puts control where it belongs: with the consumer.” During the primaries, I spent a lot of time reading about Andrew Yang’s policies and ideas. He is a very smart man. He is in favor of Prop 24, and explained exactly why that is so. I voted YES on Proposition 24. Proposition 25 Proposition 25 is the “Replace Cash Bail with Risk Assessments Referendum (2020)” Proposition. A YES vote is to uphold the contested legislation, Senate Bill 10 (SB 10), which would replace cash bail with risk assessments for detained suspects awaiting trials. A NO vote is to repeal the contested legislation, Senate Bill 10 (SB 10), thus keeping in place the use of cash bail for detained suspects awaiting trials. Personally, I don’t understand why this is on the on the 2020 ballot at all. SB 10 was signed into law by (then Governor) Jerry Brown in 2018. That was two years ago! It seems very strange that someone felt the need to get this two-year-old law on the 2020 ballot. Ballotpedia provided information titled: “How did the veto referendum get on the ballot?” In the California State Legislature, most Democrats (67 of 81) supported SB 10, while one (of 39) Republican supported the legislation. California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed SB 10 on August 28, 2018, and the veto referendum to overturn the bill was filed on August 29. Sen. Robert Hertzberg (D-18), the bill’s lead sponsor, described SB 10 as a “transformational shift away from valuing private wealth and toward protecting public safety.” He also said that upholding the legislation “is ground zero in the fight over criminal justice reform.”The American Bail Coalition, a nonprofit trade association, organized the political action committee Californians Against the Reckless Bail Scheme to lead the effort to repeal SB 10 through a veto referendum. Jeff Clayton, the coalition’s executive director, stated, “The only debate we’re having right now is: Is the current system worse than the alternative? And the answer is, no, it’s not.” The top ten donors to the committee were bail bond businesses, owners of bail bond businesses, or companies that provided services or insurance to bail bond businesses. David Quintana, a California Bail Agents Association lobbyist, said, “You don’t eliminate an industry and expect those people to go down quietly.”California’s three ACLU affiliates opposed SB 10, issuing a joint statement that said: “SB 10 is not the model for pretrial justice and racial equity that California should strive for.” The statement called for new legislation to “address racial bias in risk assessment tools.” ACLU of North California executive director Abdi Soltani said the group would not, however, align with bail bond businesses to overturn SB 10. Soltani stated, “Make no mistake, the bail industry is not interested in equal justice or equal protection under the law, they are seeking to turn back the clock to protect their bottom line. How does bail work in California? As of 2019, California utilized a cash bail system to release detained criminal suspects before their trials. Suspects paid a cash bond to be released from jail pending trial with the promise to return to court for trial and hearings. The cash bond was repaid to suspects after their criminal trials were completed, no matter the outcome. The Judicial Council of California, which is the rule-making department of the state’s judicial system, described bail as a tool to “ensure the presence of the defendant before the court.” The state’s countywide superior courts were responsible for setting cash bail amounts for crimes, and judges were permitted to adjust the cash bail amounts upward or downward. Suspects could post bail with their own money or through a commercial bail bond agent, who pays the full bail amount in exchange for a non-refundable premium from suspects. In California, there was no law setting or capping premiums on bail bonds. According to the California Department of Insurance, agents typically charged around 10 percent. Those in support of Proposition 25 include: Yes on Prop 25U.S. Representative Karen Bass (D) and U.S. Representative Ted Lieu (D)Governor Gavin Newsom (D)State Senate President Toni Atkins (D)State Senator James Beall Jr. (D), Senator Bill Dodd (D), Senator Maria Elena Durazo (D), Senator Steve Glazer (D), Senator Robert Hertzberg (D), Senator Gerald Hill (D), Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson (D), Senator Connie Leyva (D, Senator Holly Mitchell (D), Senator Bill Monning (D), Senator Bob Wieckowski (D), and Senator Scott WeinerAssemblymembers David Chiu (D), Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher (D), Todd Gloria (D), Reginald Jones-Sawyer (D), and Sydney Kamlager (D)Speaker of the Assembly Anthony Rendon (D)Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg (Nonpartisan)Former State Senate President Kevin de Leon (D)California Democratic PartyCalifornia Teachers Union, SEIU California State CouncilAction Now Initiative, California Medical Association, League of Women Voters of California, NextGen California Here is a quote from the Orange County Register Editorial Board showing support for Proposition 25: “The problem with the current system is that people who are innocent can suffer life-destroying consequences if they are arrested and eligible for bail, but lack the financial resources to pay thousands of dollars for a bail bond. While locked up for months before a trial, people can lose their jobs, fall behind on payments for housing, and plunge into an even deeper financial hole. Those who are able to borrow money for a bail bond can suffer ongoing harm from the added debt burden. Poverty is not a crime, but for people who are arrested and can’t afford bail, it is punished as if it were.” Those opposed to Proposition 25 include: No on Prop 25 (also known as Californians Against the Reckless Bail Scheme)Republican Party of CaliforniaOrange County Board of SupervisorsACLU of Southern California, American Bail Coalition, California Asian Pacific Chamber of Commerce, California Bail Agents Association, California Black Chamber of Commerce, California Business Roundtable, California Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, California NAACP State Conference, California Small Business Association, Crime Victims United of California, Golden State Bail Agent’s Association, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association Personally, I’ve always believed it is unfair and unjust to lock people up who have not yet been convicted of a crime. The rich people can afford to pay their way out of jail, but poor people cannot and so they are stuck there. Some of them are likely innocent. I also don’t like propositions that appear to be put on the ballot simply to line the pockets of businesses who benefit by preying on poor people. I voted YES on Proposition 25. You may want to read How I Voted in the Presidential General Election 2020. How I Voted on the Propositions in the 2020 California General Election is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... How I Voted in the Presidential General Election 2020October 15, 20202020 Presidential CampaignPhoto by Tiffany Tertipes on Unsplash My husband and I both have mail-in ballots sent to us for every election. We are both disabled, and that makes it nearly impossible for us to vote in person. I think it is wonderful that California makes it so easy for people like us to cast their vote. Background My husband is legally blind, which means he would not be able to see the tiny little screen on electronic, in-person, voting machines. The mail-in ballot has larger font, and he can take as long as he likes to fill it out at home. I have fibromyalgia, which is a neurological pain disorder that can cause exhaustion and muscle cramps that lead to incredibly painful spasms. There’s no possible way I could stand in line, for hours, waiting to cast my vote. Fibromyalgia also causes “brain fog” which can lead to confusion and cloudy thoughts. I prefer to fill out my ballot while clearheaded – which I am right now. In addition, I have allergies, which is an auto-immune disorder. The 2020 Presidential General Election is taking place during the COVID-19 pandemic. I only leave the house when I absolutely have to (for doctor/dentist appointments). My chances of catching COVID-19, from some selfish super-spreader who refuses to wear a mask or social distance, is greater than that of most people. Opening the Envelope The envelope contained my ballot, a small voter information guide, and an envelope to put the completed ballot into. There was also a yellow piece of paper with instructions about how to fill out the ballot. The yellow paper has an “I Voted”. sticker attached to it. The voter information guide has a page on the back that explains why my ballot may not be counted. In short, it gives voters clear information about important parts of filling out the ballot and a reminder to turn in the completed ballot before the deadline. Those who forget to sign their envelope will get a letter telling them about it. So will those whose signatures did not match their signatures on file. The point is to get these voters to come to the County Clerk’s Office to fix those errors. The 2020 Presidential General Election officially happens for in-person voting in November 3, 2020. Filling out my ballot today means I have plenty of time to go to the County Clerk’s Office – masked up and without touching anything with my hands – to turn in my ballot. How I Voted I cast my vote for Joe Biden (President) and Kamala Harris (Vice President). People like me, and my husband, who have pre-existing conditions, need to vote for the candidates that are NOT trying to destroy the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”). I hope the people reading this blog are healthy. I hope their families are healthy. Keep in mind that if you, or any of your loved ones, tested positive for COVID-19, you have a pre-existing condition. You could lose your health care coverage if the Trump administration gets a second term, especially if the Supreme Court decides to abolish the Affordable Care Act. To be honest, Joe Biden wasn’t my first choice for president. I found myself leaning towards both Bernie Sanders and Andrew Yang because they both want single-payer insurance. We aren’t going to get that (at least, not immediately) with Joe Biden. That said, I honestly believe Joe Biden will be motivated not only to protect “Obamacare”, but also will work with congress to improve it. Of course, that would mean the Democrats kept majority in the House and flipped the Senate. I believe this is possible. To my surprise, there were a total of six options to vote for in the “President and Vice President” part of the ballot. The Republicans have Trump and Pence. There were also candidates from: the Green Party, the Libertarian Party, the Peace and Freedom Party, and the American Independent Party. In the “United States Representative” category, I voted for Salud Carbajal. He is a Democratic member of Congress, and the Representative for my district. His values match mine. He believes everyone has a right to accessible and affordable health care. In the “State Senator” category, I voted for John Laird, a Democrat who served as Secretary for Natural Resources, wants to tackle climate change, and is interested in establishing universal healthcare coverage. The Republican who is running against him started her statement with: “I’m running for State Senate because our state control is out of control”. She then went on to pick on our Governor Gavin Newsom. I’m not a fan of bullies, so I won’t vote for her. The next part is “Member of the State Assembly”. Here’s where things get volatile. My husband and I received 11 pieces of propaganda mail that either uplifts one of these candidates or attacks them. Here are my choices: Dawn Addis is a Democrat. She is interested in protecting our climate, combating and preventing wildfires, supporting students and teachers, helping businesses recover, and supports a medical science-based approach to public health and responding to COVID-19. She also will protect women’s rights and ensure access to reproductive healthcare freedom. She is also a teacher. She has taught special education and bilingual education in local public schools since 2001, and has a bachelors degrees in art education and Spanish and a masters degree in special education from San Francisco State University. She holds four different teaching credentials. She and I have some things in common. I’m a former teacher who has a bachelors degree in education (focusing on art) and have spent a lot of time teaching in special education and bilingual education classrooms. Few people are cut out to meet the challenges of those groups of students, and I believe this means she will do well as a state senator. I voted for Dawn Addis. What did the propaganda from Republican Jordan Cunningham say? He really wants to stop teenagers from vaping, and he likes to spread lies about Dawn Addis. The next category is for the local school board. One person in the list does not appear in the little informational thing that came with the ballot, and I couldn’t find anything about him online. The other two are teachers (or former teachers). One worked as a certified bilingual education teacher for twenty-five years. Again, she and I have something in common – I also worked in bilingual classrooms when I was teaching. I voted for Eve Dobler-Drew. For Mayor, I voted for the woman who is the incumbent. I’ve always been very impressed by Heidi Harmon, and I like the decisions she has made as Mayor. She can often be seen riding a bicycle around town, which to me shows some commitment to considering the effects of climate change. The first time I met Heidi Harmon was before she became Mayor. She helped organize a Bernie Sanders march at the Farmers’ Market. I remember how well she explained what we were about to do, while answering questions and remaining calm. These are good qualities for a Mayor to have. The next section is for “Councilmember”. I can vote for “no more than two” of these people. My choices are: an event coordinator, a business consultant/coach, a retired educator/administrator, a historian/business owner, an incumbent, an entrepreneur, a dean/professor/lawyer, and a restaurant/hospitality manager. Fortunately, all of them had a little “blurb” about themselves in the Voter Information Guide. Some of them mentioned their websites, which I looked up online and read. One of the people I voted for was James Papp (Historian/Business Owner). From what I read, he appears to be the guy that wants to cut through the crap and actually get stuff done that matters to the people the city counsel represents. He has stopped a developer’s plan to destroy the Chumach aqueduct. He is also big on affordable housing, which we desperately need. He also advocated for mask mandates (while the city council refused to do that). I think he is going to do great things on the city council. The other person I voted for was Andrea “Andy” Pease (Incumbent). Her website has brief descriptions of the issues she has, and will continue to, focus on. Topics include climate action, equality and inclusion, housing affordability and more. These are all very important. What made me decide to vote for her, however, was the people who have endorsed her. They include: my U.S. Representative Salud Carbajal (who I voted for on this ballot), Mayor Heidi Harmon (who I voted for on this ballot), and Planned Parenthood (who helped me get affordable birth control – Implanon/Nexplanon- when I needed it). The next section is for “Commissioner of the Port San Luis Harbor”. My choices are between: a biologist, a retired chief business officer (CEO), a retired project manager/professional, a business owner/contractor/realtor/local school district employee, and an incumbent civil engineer. I am allowed to vote for three of them. I chose to vote for two people. I voted for Robert Vessley (incumbent/civil engineer) who has been working as commissioner for the past 3 1/2 years and appears to know what he’s doing. “Engineers are problem solvers”, he states. He also gave his business tenants a rent reduction during the COVID-19 shutdown. I also voted for Scott R. Lathrop (retired – chief business officer). He is native to here with a ytt Northern Chumach ancestral connection to the Port. Personally, I think we need more indigenous people in charge of waterways and ports, because I believe they care more about it than old, rich, white men do. You may want to read How I Voted on the Propositions in the 2020 California General Election. How I Voted in the Presidential General Election 2020 is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... What Happened in the 2020 Texas PrimaryOctober 12, 20202020 Presidential CampaignImage by Clker-Free-Vector-Images from Pixabay Texas is one of the many states (and one territory) that voted on Super Tuesday. ABC News reported that there is no national primary voting day, but Super Tuesday is as close as it comes. The following states and territories participated in Super Tuesday 2020: Alabama, American Samoa, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, and Virginia. Texas Voting Information The Texas Secretary of State website provides plenty of information about voting requirements in Texas: To register to vote in Texas, you need to complete a voter registration application and return it to your county election office at least 30 days before the upcoming election date. This process can be done online or by visiting your local Voter Registrar. You are eligible to vote in Texas if: You are a United States citizen;You are a resident of the county where you submit your voter registration application;You are at least 17 years and 10 months old, and you are at 18 years on Election Day.You are not a convicted felon (you may be eligible to vote if you have completed your sentence, probation, and parole); andYou have not been declared by a court exercising probate jurisdiction to be either totally mentally incapacitated or partially mentally incapacitated without the right to vote. In order to vote in Texas, you need to bring one of these seven acceptable forms of ID to the ballot when you vote in person: Texas Driver LicenseTexas Handgun LicenseTexas Election ID CertificateU.S. Citizenship Certificate with photoTexas Personal ID CardU.S. Military ID Card with photoU.S. Passport (Book or Card) You may have noticed that a Student ID is not on that list. March 2, 2020: News Tribune posted an article titled: “Some states make it harder for college students to vote”. From the article: …In Texas, Democrats have sued over a law requiring early voting locations to be open for the entire voting period of 12 days. The law is geared to stopping “rolling polling”, which allowed local governments to use temporary mobile voting sites at college campuses, nursing homes, and other locations.Supporters said it’s a response to placement of temporary voting locations at high school events during elections that feature local bond measures requiring tax increases. The Texas Public Policy Foundation, a conservative think tank, calls rolling polling a “predatory practice” that causes taxpayers to suffer…… Quintero said the new law allows polling places to be open on campuses for all 12 days of early voting. However, Democrats have pointed to the timing of the law, which was passed months after a dramatic spike in voter turnout in 2018. Glen Maxey, legislative affairs director for the Texas Democratic Party, said the law hurts certain voting groups, such seniors and students.“It was very clear they were trying to stop college student voting, “Maxey said.Texas and Tennessee are among seven states where college identification cards are not allowed at polling places, with laws enacted by Republican-controlled legislatures from 2008-18. The others are Arizona, Iowa, North Dakota, Ohio and South Carolina – all states won by Donald Trump in 2016… Ballotpedia provided the following information about voting in Texas: Texas primaries are open, meaning a voter does not have to be registered as a member of a party to participate in its primary. Voters in Texas must sign a pledge when voting to declare that they will not vote in another party’s primary in the same year.Winners in primary elections in Texas are determined by majority vote. In the case that no candidate receives more than 50 percent of votes cast, the top two candidates proceed to a runoff election. Texas has a total of 261 delegates. How those delegates are selected is a little bit different in Texas than in other states. February 4, 2020: The Texas Tribune posted an article titled: “Here’s how Texas Democrats dole out their 261 delegates in the presidential primary”. It was written by Megan Menchaca. From the article: …The state will send 261 delegates to the Democratic National Convention from July 13-16 in Milwaukee. With one of the largest delegations and a large Hispanic population, experts say Texas could play a large role in selecting the nominee……What makes Texas different from other states?There are two major differences between how Texas Democrats allocate delegates compared to other state. States generally allocate delegates to certain congressional districts or counties, but Texas assigns delegates to each of its 31 Senate districts instead.“In Texas, in a sort of archaic way, we get an exemption to do it by Senate districts, and that’s only because we organize political parties in Texas by Senate district,” Maxey said.Texas is also one of a handful of states to allocate delegates to districts by how Democrats have voted in past elections and not on voter registration. The Democratic Party gives states a few options on how to allocate delegates, and most states choose to allocate based on party registration, Maxey said. So, if a congressional district in a state has a larger number of registered Democrats, the district will be allocated more delegates.“Almost every other state has, when people register to vote, they say ‘I’m a Democrat,’ or ‘I’m a Republican,'” Maxey said. “So you can look and say, ‘Ok, what is the party registration in CD-1 versus the party registration in CD-5.” and allocate the number of delegates based on how many Democrats. Texas doesn’t have party registration, so we don’t have that opportunity.”Instead, the party determines the number of “real Democrats” in each district based on the Democratic turnout in the previous gubernatorial and presidential race. Texas Endorsements Joe Biden November 7, 2019: Politico posted an article titled: “Biden picks up endorsement of a 9th black member of Congress”. It was written by Nolan McCaskill. From the article: Rep. Marc Veasey of Texas endorsed Joe Biden for president on Thursday, giving the former vice president his ninth endorsement from a black member of congress.Veasey, who represents a majority-minority district that includes part of Dallas and Fort Worth, said his constituents overwhelmingly support Biden.“They want more of a kind of meat-and-potatoes type candidate, someone who can beat Trump,” Veasey told POLITICO in a phone interview. “That’s really their No. 1 concern: Their No. 1 concern is that Trump can no longer be president after the November 2020 election, and they think that Biden is the best candidate.The Biden campaign later forwarded a statement from Veasey expanding on that message.“At a time when Washington is ripping our nation apart, we need a good man and steady hand to not only defeat Donald Trump, but to stitch ups back together and stand up for working families nationwide,” Veasey said in the statement. “That’s why I’m supporting Joe Biden for President.”… March 2, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “Moderate Democrats close ranks as Buttigieg, Klobuchar endorse Biden”. It was written by Trevor Hunnicutt. From the article: Former rivals Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar endorsed Joe Biden’s presidential candidacy on Monday on the eve of Super Tuesday voting, as moderate Democrats rallied around the former vice president to strengthen his challenge to front-runner Bernie Sanders.Buttigieg threw his support to Biden at an emotional appearance at a Dallas restaurant, while Klobuchar delivered a barnstorm of a speech at a rally, reminiscent of the types politicians give at their party conventions when anointing their presidential nominees.“Joe Biden has dedicated his life to fighting for people,” Klobuchar said, before introducing Biden at the rally in Dallas on Monday night.“Not for the rich and powerful, but for the mom, for the farmer, for the dreamer, for the veteran. He can bring our country together.”Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend Indiana, and the first openly gay presidential candidate, said earlier in Dallas that he was “delighted to endorse and support Joe Biden.”.“He is somebody of such extraordinary grace and kindness and empathy.”Biden, 77, in turn, told reporters that Butigeig, 38, “reminds me of my son Beau,” who died in 2015, adding: “To me, it is the highest compliment you can give any man or woman.”Former U.S. Representative Beto O’Rourke, another former candidate for the Democratic nomination, also endorsed Biden, appearing to cheers as a surprise guest at the rally in Dallas… NOTE: Beto O’Rourke is a Texan who represented Texas’s 16th congressional district in the United States House of Representatives from 2013 to 2019. He ran against Republican Ted Cruz in 2018 for United States Senate, but narrowly lost. March 3, 2020: Reuters posted an article titled: “In a Texas chicken joint, Biden and onetime rival Buttigieg unite to stop Sanders”. It was written by Trevor Hunnicutt and Tim Reid. From the article: Joe Biden, 77, and until Sunday his rival for the Democratic presidential nomination Pete Buttigeig, 38, appeared together before a tiny crowd in the Chicken Scratch restaurant in Dallas, where Buttigeig endorsed the former vice president.Fighting back tears, Biden compared the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, to his late son Beau, saying it was the highest compliment he could offer any person.Having ditched his own bid for the nomination, Buttigieg, who had spent months calling for generational change, said Biden would “bring back dignity to the White House.”Buttigieg’s endorsement was the most eye-catching among the over 100 that flooded in for Biden from mostly moderate Democrats after his dominant South Carolina win on Saturday… Elizabeth Warren January 6, 2020: NPR posted an article titled: “Julián Castro Endorses Elizabeth Warren, Days After Ending His Campaign”. It was written by Scott Detrow. From the article: Just days after ending his campaign for president, former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro is endorsing Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren.The two will hold a rally together Tuesday evening in Brooklyn. Castro’s endorsement is the most high-profile yet from a onetime 2020 candidate……”There’s one candidate I see who’s unafraid to fight like hell to make sure America’s promise will be there for everyone,” Castro says in a glossy video that shows him driving up to Warren’s Cambridge home, knocking on her door, then sitting down in her kitchen for an extended conversation as Warren serves tea.“Nobody is working harder than you are, not only meeting people but listening to people,” Castro tells Warren in the video……Castro decided to endorse so quickly after dropping out, in contrast to most of the other candidates who’ve left the race, in order to have time to campaign for Warren ahead of the Iowa caucuses, which are in less than a month… NOTE: Julián Castro is a Texan who was the former mayor of San Antonio, Texas. Controversies January 6, 2020: The Texas Tribune posted an article titled: “National Democrats jump into new lawsuit over Texas voter registration requirements”. It was written by Alex Ura. From the article: …In a federal lawsuit filed Monday in San Antonio, the Texas Democratic Party and the campaign arms for Democrats in the U.S. House and Senate allege that Texas is violating the U.S. Constitution and federal and state law by rejecting voter registration applications without an original signature.The legal challenge springs from a 2018 electoral kerfuffle over the Texas secretary of state’s rejection of more than 2,400 registration applications filled out by voters using Vote.org, a website run by a California nonprofit. That online application asked Texans to provide personal information and a picture of their signature to auto-populate a paper voter registration form that was then mailed to county registrars.Days before a registration deadline that year, the secretary of state’s office indicated that applications submitted through the website should be considered invalid because they contain electronic signatures, not physical ones.In the lawsuit, the Democrats argue the secretary of state’s signature requirements are unconstitutional and impose “an arbitrary requirement that limits access to the franchise.” While the state allows eligible Texans to submit registration applications in person, by mail, or fax, Texas law “makes no reference” to requiring an original signature, they argue in the legal challenge.Citing violations of the First and 14th Amendments and the federal Civil Rights Act, the state and national Democrats want a judge to block the state from enforcing the original signature rule and keep the county registrars from rejecting voter registration applications……Texas’ Republican leadership has long shot down efforts to enact online voter registration in the state. As of October, Texas was one of 13 states that didn’t allow for online registration……Bolstered by Republicans’ narrowing margins of victory and polls showing that Texas might be at least slipping from the GOP, Democrats have signaled they see voting rights litigation – and the voters that might be helped through it – as part of their long-term strategy in the state… March 4, 2020: San Antonio Express-News posted an article titled: “Texans forced to wait to vote on Super Tuesday”. It was written by Brian Chasnoff, Taylor Goldenstein and Scott Huddleston. From the article: Across Texas, patience was required to vote on election day, as long lines led to long waits at the polls.In Bexar County, officials attributed the delays to technical glitches and confusion over voting rules.“We had people going back to the polls and wanting to cancel their early voting ballot because the candidate they voted for in early voting had just dropped out,” Bexar County Elections Administrator Jacque Callanen said. “That occurred in a number of poll sites. That threw judges for a loop.”This week, former Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind., and Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota both left the Democratic presidential race within a day of one another. Changing early votes after a candidate drops out is not allowed in Texas.Another source of delay: people who tried to register to vote on election day. That’s also not allowed.In addition, mix-ups with new printers caused snarls of voter traffic at about 50 polling sites……Under state law, anyone who has gotten in line by the time the polls close must be allowed to vote, no matter how long it takes. In extreme cases, such as Texas Southern University in Harris County, voting didn’t wrap up until 1 a.m……Election officials and voting rights advocates are trying to determine what caused the excessive waits. Large turnout might have been one cause.As of the latest report, Texas saw hundreds of thousands more voters this election – with 1.8 million in the Democratic presidential primary alone, up from 1.4 million in 2016. That’s a 26 percent increase in voters……Four out of five of the state’s largest counties, including Bexar, moved to allow countywide voting centers in 2019. The centers allow voters to cast ballots at any polling location, no matter where they live. The sites are intended to increase turnout by making voting more convenient.The consolidation has contributed to the loss of 750 polling places statewide since 2012, a 2019 report states. There’s also a learning curve as voters grow accustomed to the new locations and shed old habits……In several large counties, including Harris and Tarrant, primaries were not held jointly by the two major parties. The two must agree whether to run their elections together and use the same check-in tables and machines – or conduct separate primaries.With such high turnout on the Democratic side yet equal numbers of machines in both parties’ primaries, it meant Democratic voters often were stuck waiting in line. Republican voters had little to no wait, and machines on their side wen unused… March 4, 2020: The Guardian posted an article titled: “California and Texas voters faced hours-long lines on Super Tuesday”. It was written by Oliver Laughland and Sam Levine. From the article: Voters in Texas and California faced long lines at the polls on Super Tuesday with some waiting several hours or longer to cast their ballots in the vital primary elections: a phenomenon that has triggered renewed concern over the running of America’s elections.In Texas, voters in multiple cities waited in line long into the night after the polls officially closed….The last voter at Texas Southern University cast his ballot in the early hours of Wednesday morning after waiting nearly seven hours in line.Experts say a combination of factors are responsible for the long lines, but it was an alarming reminder of the extreme barriers Americans can face if they want to cast a ballot on election day.In Texas, advocates said the long lines disproportionately appeared in minority and student neighborhoods, areas most likely to vote Democrat in the general election in November.Each additional hour people wait to vote decreases the probability they will vote by 1%, according to a 2017 study. People who have to wait a long time to vote are also less confident their votes will be counted, according to a different study.In Austin, Texas’ capital city, lines at polling stations at the University of Texas snaked around buildings as student voters, many casting a ballot in a presidential primary for the first time, waited up to two hours and 45 minutes at some locations.At a polling station at the University of Texas’s Perry-Castenada library, the Guardian witnessed two students being turned away after polls had closed at 7pm.Fernando Miranda, a 19-year-old finance major, had queued for an hour and half earlier in the afternoon but had to leave the line to attend class. He returned shortly after 7pm, waited in line again for two hours more before being told by an election official he would not be able to cast a vote……Texas allows residents to vote early, but a higher percentage of people than expected chose to case their ballot on election day, said Robert Stein, a political science professor at Rice university. Many of those new voters, Stein speculated, were African American voters driven by a competitive senate primary and Joe Biden’s victory in the South Carolina primary. Harris county also uses aging voting equipment, he said, making it difficult to accommodate for the surge of voters……Madeline Pelzel, a student at Rice University, attempted to vote several times and finally waited in line for more than three hours at Texas Southern university before casting her ballot. She said she tried to vote at another location Tuesday morning, but left after realizing she would miss class because the wait there was so long.Pezel said the long lines were voter suppression……Anthony Guiterrez, executive director of the Texas chapter of Common Cause, a government reform system, also said the lines were linked to a recent Republican-backed law that prohibits local election officials form opening temporary polling stations on college campuses and other places where it’s difficult to get to the polls… Results 2020 Texas Democratic Presidential Primary March 3, 2020: USA Today posted an article titled: “Joe Biden wins Texas, taking Super Tuesday’s second-biggest prize and nine states overall”. It was written by William Cummings, Bart Jansen, Maureen Groppe, and Nicholas Wu. From the article: Texas completes Biden’s transformation of Democratic raceFormer Vice President Joe Biden capped a transformational Super Tuesday by winning Texas, the third-largest overall prize in the Democratic primaries, and at least eight other states.The win came after Biden swept other southern states including Virginia, North Carolina, Alabama, Tennessee and Arkansas. Biden also won Oklahoma and the home state of Amy Klobuchar, D-Mass., who dropped out Monday and endorsed Biden, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., who won no states……Texas has 228 delegates, the largest of the day behind California with 415 delegates, which Sen. Bernie Sanders won. Sanders also won Colorado, Utah and his home state of Vermont… The Guardian posted the following results for the Democratic primary: Joe Biden: 716,030 votes – 34.49%Bernie Sanders: 622,360 votes – 29.98%Michael Bloomberg: 298,262 votes – 14.37%Elizabeth Warren: 237,028 votes – 11.42%Pete Buttigeig: 82,221 votes – 3.96%Amy Klobuchar: 43,027 votes – 2.07%Julian Castro: 16,844 votes – 0.81%Tom Steyer: 13,801 votes – 0.66%Michael Bennett: 10,408 votes – 0.55%Tulsi Gabbard: 8,695 votes – 0.50%Andrew Yang: 6,673 votes – 0.32%Roque De La Fuente III: 5,590 votes – 0.27%Cory Booker: 4,914 votes – 0.24%Marianne Williamson: 3,902 votes – 0.19%John Delaney: 3,277 votes – 0.16%Robby Wells: 1,514 votes – 0.07%Deval Patrick: 1,316 votes – 0.06% 2020 Texas Republican Presidential Primary USA Today posted a short piece titled: “Trump sweeps Republican primary contests”. It is part of the same article posted above. From the piece: In unsurprising results, President Donald Trump won every state that held a Republican presidential primary on Super Tuesday.Thirteen states held Republican primaries. Meanwhile, after Virginia’s Republican party voted to cancel their Super Tuesday earlier in the fall, voters in the state only participated in a Democratic presidential primary.Trump’s remaining notable opponent, former governor of Massachusetts Bill Weld, has just one delegate to his name after months of campaigning against Trump. The president won Weld’s state of Massachusetts. His lone delegate is from the Iowa caucuses, not from any of the Super Tuesday contests.GOP Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel stated Trump’s “record of results has fueled the momentum for our movement” and no “Democratic presidential candidate can compete with President Trump in November.”… The Guardian posted the following result for the Republican Texas Primary: Donald Trump: 1,889,006 votes – 94.11%Uncommitted: 71,555 votes – 3.56%Bill Weld: 15,738 votes – 0.78%Joe Walsh: 14,769 votes – 0.74%Roque De La Fuente: 7,668 votes – 0.38%Bob Ely: 3,565 votes – 0.18%Matthew Matern: 3,535 votes – 0.18%Zoltan Istvan: 1,488 votes – 0.07% What Happened in the 2020 Texas Primary is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... Things You Can Do To Save Our DemocracySeptember 28, 20202020 Presidential CampaignPhoto by Element5 Digital on Unsplash Things are pretty scary right now in the United States. Many of us are still mourning the loss of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who consistently fought for equality and women’s rights. Days before her death, she dictated a statement to her granddaughter, Clara Spera: “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.” President Trump (who was impeached on December 18, 2019, for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress) has rushed to nominate Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. She is conservative, has shown interest in overturning Roe v. Wade, and eliminating the Affordable Care Act (also known as Obamacare). Now is not the time to give up hope. It is time to fight back! There are several things you can do – right now – to save our democracy, protect our ability to get the health care we need, and end this national nightmare that has been imposed upon us by the Trump Administration and several spineless Republicans. Vote for Health Care The 2020 election started out with lots of people who were running for President as a Democrat. Joe Biden has been officially nominated as the Democratic candidate for President. He might not be your favorite of the candidates who were running. To be honest, he wasn’t my first choice either. That said, there are several reasons why he will make a much better President than Trump did. Joe Biden was Vice President of the United States when the Affordable Care Act was being created and when President Obama signed it into law. During his campaign, Biden made it clear that his health care plan as President will be the Affordable Care Act. He plans to improve upon it by doing things like giving lower-income people more tax credits so they can afford a good health insurance plan. What you may not know is that Joe Biden also has a plan for a public health insurance option for those who want it. People will be able to purchase a Medicare-like plan that will reduce costs for patients by negotiating lower prices from hospitals and other health care providers. It will cover primary care without co-payments. In short, you get a choice between Obamacare and the public option. Trump and the GOP don’t have a health care plan, which seems unwise considering that they are pushing a lawsuit through the Supreme Court that they hope will nullify the Affordable Care Act. You may have heard that President Trump signed an executive order in which he stated: “It has been and will continue to be the policy of the United States to give Americans seeking healthcare more choices, lower costs, and better care and to ensure that Americans with pre-existing conditions can obtain the insurance of their choice at affordable rates.” At first glance, that might sound great. The thing to keep in mind, though, is that there is absolutely zero concrete information about how that’s going to work. Trump’s “America First Healthcare Plan” is symbolic. The Hill reported that experts noted the lack of details in Trump’s comments about the “America First Healthcare Plan”, and pointed out that executive orders lack the legal authority of legislation. Only Congress can create, and vote on, legislation. On September 22, 2020, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi posted a statement in which she pointed out that 200,000 Americans have died from the coronavirus. It is a shocking number. That number doesn’t include the people who caught COVID-19 and survived – with unknown damage done to their bodies because of the disease. If the Supreme Court chooses to eliminate the Affordable Care Act, it means that every one of the people who caught COVID-19 and survived now has a pre-existing condition. Insurance companies would be allowed to refuse to cover them. It is vitally important that you vote for Democrats in the 2020 election. We all need to vote for Biden in order to protect our loved ones who have pre-existing conditions. The Affordable Care Act provides protections for people who have pre-existing conditions. Biden’s Medicare-like plan would, too. Vote for Democrats In addition, you need to vote for Democrats who are running for the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives. In 2017, when President Trump first took office, the Senate and the House were both majority Republican. This enabled the Republicans to zero out the individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act. The Republicans were able to push that through because they had the majority in the House, the Senate, and a Republican President. After reducing the penalty of not buying health insurance (which the individual mandate required) Republicans filed the lawsuit that will be heard by the Supreme Court shortly after the election. Their argument is that without the individual mandate, the Affordable Care Act cannot stand. The 2018 midterm election brought great changes. The Democrats gained majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, and that change went into effect in 2019. This stopped the Republicans from getting what they wanted all the time. We can do that again in the 2020 election. Make sure to vote for Democrats who are running for seats in the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. Doing this can make it easier for Democrats to hold onto their majority in the House, and could make it possible for Democrats to gain a majority in the Senate. If Trump wins the presidential election, we are going to need a congress with a majority of Democrats to protect the American people from harm. We can make our democracy stronger by voting for Democrats who are running for Governor, state government, county seats, judges, and more. Please take a few minutes to find out how a judge has ruled on cases in the past before casting your vote! Talk to Your Relatives For many people, talking to their relatives about politics is frustrating. You might be able to persuade some of your more reasonable relatives to vote for Democrats this election. (This is assuming that your relatives have not already cast their vote). Let your relative know that you care about them, and want them to be healthy. Explain what will happen if the Supreme Court takes away the Obamacare coverage that your relative currently has. Point out that anyone with COVID-19 could be considered to have a pre-existing condition, and be refused coverage from insurance companies. Starting a calm conversation can be very effective, especially if you have a close relationship with them (or, used to have one). Don’t yell. Try to de-escalate things if your relative gets defensive. If it turns out your relative just wants to scream, it’s best to end the conversation. Call Your Senators and Representatives I realize that most people do not like to make phone calls. It is important to at least give it a try. Your Senators, and your Representatives, need to hear from the people they represent. It is one way for them to understand what the people want them to do. If you look around on the internet, you can find pre-written scripts that you can read to the person who answers the phone (who will likely be a staff member, not the Senator or Representative themselves). A script can be helpful for those who get very nervous when talking to strangers on their phone. Those who can should try and put things in their own words. Make it simple. Tell them why you need the protections that are in the Affordable Care Act – or why your family needs it. Ask your Senators to oppose (or vote no) on Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination. Briefly tell them at least one reason why you don’t want her to be a Justice of the Supreme Court. Don’t bother calling Senators or Representatives that do not represent you. They know you can’t vote for them if you don’t live in their state, county, or district. As such, they may decide to ignore your opinions. We can do this. If we all stick together, we can save our democracy. Imagine how nice things could be if we weren’t constantly at risk of losing our health care coverage due to Republicans who keep trying to take it away from us. Things You Can Do To Save Our Democracy is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!... What Happened in the 2020 California PrimaryJuly 29, 20202020 Presidential CampaignImage by OpenClipart-Vectors from Pixabay For the first time ever, California participated in Super Tuesday. It is the date when the largest number of states and territories hold a presidential preference primary or caucus. In 2020, Super Tuesday was held on March 3. The following states and territories participated in Super Tuesday 2020: Alabama, American Samoa, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, and Virginia. Why did California vote on Super Tuesday? On September, 27, 2017, The Hill reported that California Governor Jerry Brown signed a measure moving California’s presidential primary to March. The Hill reported that this was “a move likely to give the nation’s most populous state more sway in the nominating contest”. California has typically held its primary in June, often weeks after the eventual Republican and Democratic presidential nominees have rounded up the delegates to secure their party’s nomination. But under the legislation signed Wednesday, California’s primary would fall on Super Tuesday, when several other states hold their primaries, forcing candidates to compete more aggressively in the Golden State.Brown did not issue a statement with his signature. But California Secretary of State Alex Padilla, who backed the move, said that the new date would prompt candidates to focus on issues relevant to his state’s voters……State lawmakers passed their primary measure earlier this month in the final hours of their legislative session.They also approved a bill that would require presidential candidates to release their income tax returns before they can appear on the ballot in the state. Voting Information The California Secretary of State website has plenty of information about voting and elections. Qualifications to register to vote in California require a person to: Be a United States citizen and resident of California18-years-old on Election DayNot currently in a federal prison or on parole for the conviction of a felonyNot currently found mentally incompetent to vote by a court California has made it easier for eligible voters to vote. Here is a quick look at some of those opportunities: People who are 16-years-old, or 17-years-old, can pre-register to vote. They still cannot vote until they turn 18-years-old. When they reach that age, they are automatically eligible to vote.California allows same day voter registration. It is a safety net for Californian’s who miss the deadline to register to vote or update their voter registration information for an election. Eligible citizens who need to register or re-register to vote within 14-days of an election can complete the process at their county elections office, polling place, or vote center. Their ballots will be processed and counted once the county elections office has completed the voter registration verification process.College students, and Californians who are living abroad, can vote. Students need to choose if they want to register to vote using their “home away from home” address that they use at school, or if they want to register at their traditional home address. They must pick one or the other – not both. California voters who are living abroad can vote by mail.The California Motor Voter program makes registering to vote at the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) more convenient. Eligible applicants who complete a drivers license, identification (ID) card or change of address transaction online, by mail, or in person at the DMV will automatically be registered to vote.All eligible California voters can register to vote online.California allows eligible voters to vote early. Or, a voter can choose to vote on Election Day.All eligible voters can request a paper ballot that will be sent to them by mail – and that can be mailed to the County Clerk’s office by mail (without requiring a stamp). It is also acceptable to bring your completed ballot to the County Clerk’s office and return it in person. California does not limit voting by mail to those who can show proof of disability, or those who are past a certain age.In California, individuals convicted of a felony have their right to vote automatically restored once they have completed prison time and parole. Individuals serving sentences in state or federal prisons cannot vote, while those in county jail, as a condition of probation and those serving a felony jail sentence retain the right to vote as of 2016. California has 415 pledged delegates in California’s Democratic presidential primary vote on Super Tuesday, more than any other state, The Guardian reported. March 3, 2020: California correspondent for California Healthline and Kaiser Health News Angela Hart tweeted: “.@GavinNewsom & @JenSeibelNewsom voting today. The governor has not endorsed again since @KamalaHarris dropped out. The first partner has endorsed @ewarren”. The tweet included a photo of Governor Gavin Newsom and First Partner Jen Seibel Newsom surrounded by reporters holding cameras, lights, microphones, and phones. California Endorsements Bernie Sanders American Federation of Musicians Local 47 Endorses Bernie Sanders for President Los Angeles, CA (February 12, 2020) – The American Federation of Musicians Local 47 is proud to endorse Bernie Sanders for President of the United States in the 2020 Primary Election.Members of the Los Angeles musicians union’s political action committee voted unanimously to recommend that the AFM Local 47 executive board – the elected leadership body of the 7,000-member union – endorse Sen. Sanders as the candidate who best represents the interests of musicians. On Tuesday, the board in turn voted unanimously to endorse Sanders in an unprecedented move for a union historically removed from taking official stances in presidential elections.“Today, more than ever, unions and workers are under attack by exploitative forces that are eroding our middle class. Immediately action and activism is crucial,” said AFL Local 47 President John Acosta. “Bernie Sanders is the best presidential candidate to defend musicians and all workers by protecting jobs and workers’ rights.”AFM Local 47 is the first musicians union in the country to take a position in the 2020 Democratic Primary. The decision to support Sen. Sanders arrived from a member-driven process in which AFM Local 47 musicians organized a political forum to hear from and speak directly with senior campaign officials. Musicians found Sanders to be the candidate best able to champion the priorities and values of the musicians union: Protecting Pensions: Sanders has committed to halt further cuts to workers’ pensions and to make whole those workers whose pension benefits have been cut, while working toward a long-term solution to restore troubled pension plans to solvency.Union Support: Sanders has supported working people throughout his career, which has garnered him the most union endorsements of all candidates, and Local 47 is proud to join some of our closest allies with its support.Tax Credit Accountability: Sanders supports our calls to ensure that tax credit dollars are promoting good jobs for musicians in the U.S., not allowing taxpayer-subsidized music jobs to be sent overseas.Labor Rights/Worker Power: Sanders has committed to doubling union membership, allowing sectoral bargaining, requiring worker representation on corporate boards, and repealing harmful provisions of the Taft-Hartley Act. Additionally, Sanders’ strong and unwavering support of union workers throughout his political career and his ambitious plan for strengthening labor power throughout the nation fully aligns with AFM Local 47’s commitment to building a national movement for real and lasting change… Kamala Harris February 14, 2020: The Hill posted an article titled: “Barbara Lee endorses Kamala Harris’s 2020 bid”. It was written by Michael Burke. From the article: Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) on Thursday endorsed Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) for president, saying that Harris will be a “president truly of the people, by the people, and for the people.”“As just the third African American woman from a major party to run for President, I am so proud to endorse her candidacy as she continues to fight for equality, fairness, and dignity for all Americans,” the former head of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) said in a statement.“Watching Kamala’s career in the East Bay and San Francisco for 20 years, I’ve witnessed her deep passion for justice and opportunity, and I know she will be a president truly of the people, by the people, and for the people,” Lee added.With the endorsement, Lee became the first member of the CBC to pick a side in the 2020 race, according to CNN… February 15, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “Gavin Newsom endorses Kamala Harris for president”. It was written by Christopher Cadelago. From the article: Kamala Harris won the endorsement of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who announced to a national television audience on Friday that hew as backing his home-state senator for president.“I’m very enthusiastic about Kamala Harris,” Newsom said in an interview with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes. “I’ve known her for decades, not only as district attorney where she did an extraordinary job with a very progressive record, but I watched her up close as lieutenant governor, when she served as attorney general, and I have the privilege of working with her as a U.S. senator.”“I think the American people could not do better,” Newsom added… Elizabeth Warren February 28, 2020: San Francisco Chronicle posted an article titled: “Jennifer Seibel Newsom endorses Elizabeth Warren for president”. It was written by Alexi Koseff. From the article: Jennifer Seibel Newsom, wife of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, endorsed Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren for president on Friday.In a video posted to social media, Seibel Newsom, a documentary filmmaker who has adopted the gender-neutral title of “first partner” and established a public agenda around issues like pay equity, asked voters to make Warren the first woman president.“Sen. Elizabeth Warren is the brightest person in the room and she actually cares about each and every one of you, especially our women, our children, and the nation’s most vulnerable,” Seibel Newsom said. “She knows you can’t live a good life in an unjust society, and she will revive the American dream for all of you who call this country home.”……”Please think about your wives, your mothers, your sisters and your daughters,” Seibel Newsom said. “Vote your conscience, not what the pundits and the billionaires are telling you to do. Because Sen. Elizabeth Warren is electable.” Joe Biden January 9, 2020: Times of San Diego posted an article titled: “Mayors of LA, Long Beach Endorse Biden During Southern Carolina Visit”. It was written by Chris Jennewein. From the article: As he returned to Southern California for a presidential fundraiser, former Vice President Joe Biden picked up endorsements Thursday from the mayors of Los Angeles and Long Beach.“Joe Biden is a close personal friend who has been an incredible partner in delivering progress for L.A.,” Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said in a statement released by the Biden campaign. “He came to L.A., and stood shoulder-to-shoulder with me to make us the first big city to enact a $15 minimum wage, and he brought leaders from all over the world to our city to forge the most sweeping climate agreement prior to the Paris accords.”……Long Beach Mayor Robert Garcia, who had supported the candidacy of California Sen. Kamala Harris until she dropped out of the race, also issued a statement Thursday endorsing Biden.“As the mayor of a growing, vibrant and diverse city, Donald Trump’s reckless attacks on immigrants, health care and the LGBTQ community are deeply personal,” Garcia said. “Joe is a candidate that has both the experience an the ability to build a broad-based coalition needed to beat Donald Trump – not just here in California, but across the country. We’ve seen Joe bring people together time and time again to deliver results for working families, including right her in California”… May 8, 2020: Politico posted an article titled: “Newsom finally endorses Biden at virtual campaign event for top-dollar donors”. It was written by Carla Marinucci. From the article: Saying America is desperately in need of healing and “a sense of hopefulness” during the Covid-19 pandemic, California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Friday formally endorsed Joe Biden as the Democratic candidate who can “bring people together and unite this nation.”“I’m so honored to be here with you and supporting your presidency,” Newsom told Biden as he starred at a virtual campaign event for the former vice president where tickets went for as high as $100,000. “I just couldn’t be more proud of you, and the prospect of your presidency.”“You’re willing to reach out to people — never talk down to people, regardless of their political stripes regardless, their lot in life,’’ Newsom told Biden on the Zoom call with hundreds of deep-pocketed Democratic donors. “That’s about character. It’s about decency. It’s about honor.”“You get it, and you’ve gotten it done over the course of decades,’’ Newsom told Biden. “You’ve been on the front lines of fighting against poverty, ignorance and disease. You have a deep compassion and empathy, you see the world from other people’s eyes.’’Biden appeared emotional at the end of Newsom’s address. “Gov, if I get elected, I’m going to need you badly,” Biden responded……Until Friday, Newsom – who had earlier endorsed Sen. Kamala Harris for president – hadn’t yet formally endorsed the former vice president. And he recently sidestepped questions from reporters about whether he would make a formal endorsement of Biden, saying he has been focused on his response to the Covid-19 crisis… Controversies January 23, 2020: The City of Beverly Hills posted a press release titled: “City of Beverly Hills Files Lawsuit Regarding LA County’s Ballot Marking Devices”. From the press release: The City of Beverly Hills has filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court over concerns regarding Los Angeles County’s new VSAP (Voting Solutions for All People) touchscreen electronic voting system.As voters prepare to cast their ballots in-person at the new Vote Centers countywide, only four candidates will appear on the first screen of the ballot marking device. To view additional candidates, the voter must select the MORE button. However, if the voter instead presses the NEXT button, they will not see all the candidates in that particular race.“We are deeply troubled that voters will be disenfranchised by the new VSAP system,” said Beverly Hills City Attorney Laurence S. Wiener. “All candidates should be presented in an equitable and transparent way to the voters. As the system is currently designed, a voter may not realize they are bypassing additional candidates. We believe this issue can be easily resolved.”The City is asking LA County to gray out the NEXT button until the voter has moved to the last page of that individual race and viewed all candidates. Alternatively, the City is asking that instructions be included on the first screen indicating there may be additional candidates than the first four names listed and to select MORE to view all choices. February 4, 2020: U.S. Representative Ted Lieu (Democrat – CA-33) tweeted: “There is a big ballot flaw in LA County ballots. Half the voters in my district won’t see my name or other candidates unless they hit “more” button because only 4 names are shown. Voters could skip to the next race without knowing there are more candidates”. Ted Lieu’s tweet included a link to an Los Angeles Times article. February 28, 2020: Representative Jimmy Gomez posted a press release titled: “Reps Roybal-Allard, Gomez, and Lieu Joint Statement On Flawed Electronic Ballot Design”. From the joint statement: Today, Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.) and Rep Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-Calif.) issued the following statement regarding the flawed electronic ballot design in Los Angeles County:“As a result of a faulty electronic ballot design, many voters in Los Angeles County, including in parts of our congressional districts, will not see our names or the names of other candidates unless they specifically hit the ‘more’ button when voting. The electronic ballot only shows four candidates on each page regardless of the number of candidates listed without knowing there are additional candidates, and then skip to the next race on the ballot. We urge all voters who vote electronically to always hit the ‘more’ button before they finish voting in any particular race.The current situation is not acceptable and inadequate measures have been taken to remedy this serious flaw. We call on Los Angeles Registrar-Recorder Dean Logan to (1) take whatever steps are necessary to ensure voters are educated fully about the ‘more’ button, and (2) to fix this situation for future primary elections.” March 4, 2020: ABC 8 News posted an article about the Super Tuesday elections. Part of the article included information about California. From the article: …Voter file databases were down or excruciatingly slow in some counties in California and Texas. In Los Angeles County, electronic pollbooks that are connected to the state’s voter database were operating slowly because of the high number of voters, County Registrar-Recorder spokesman Mike Sanchez said. The county brought in technicians and added devices in some polling places to move lines along.Even so, delays were two hours or longer in some locations. Beverly Hills City Councilman Julian Gold said waiting times there were 2 1/2 to 3 hours. He said he was told the delays were related to voter check-in……At a vote center in Silver Lake, near downtown Los Angeles, poll workers said computer network issues slowed the voter check-in process and made some machines unusable. About one-third of the approximately 40 machines were being used, and some had “out of order” signs taped to them. The resulting line meant it took about an hour for voters to cast their ballots… March 4, 2020: Vox’s Recode posted an article titled: “Voters struggled with LA’s fancy new voting machines on Super Tuesday”. It was written by Rebecca Heilweil. From the article: …On Tuesday, the Los Angeles Times reported election officials were having issues with their systems linking up with California’s voter database, which meant that the registration information. The is a big problem, since California passed a law last year that allows for voter registration on Election Day in an effort to enfranchise more voters.Meanwhile, many voters complained on Twitter that their voting machines weren’t working, with some reaching out to election officials on the platform for help. There were also complaints that the machines were not taking voters’ paper ballots, which need to be inserted back into the machine. Several people also said that the e-poll books weren’t working.Dale Robinson, a Los Angeles voter, confirmed to Recode in an email that one voting machine was “down completely” and the other was working “very slowly” at the first voting center he visited in Highland Park. A volunteer recommended he vote at a nearby location, which he did. Similarly, voter Michael Connor told Recode that when he inserted his printed ballot into the machine’s scanner at the voting center he visited in Reseda, it displayed a loading, swirling icon for five minutes. A technician ultimately helped him insert the ballot into another machine……The reported failures are especially discouraging because they represent a $280 million effort to modernize LA’s elections. The new voting machines are part of LA’s Voting Solutions for All People (VSAP) and come equipped with touchscreens and futuristic-looking yellow-and-black stands. The system even allows voters to fill out their ballots ahead of time on other devices and then send that information to the voting machines through a QR code. Importantly, all votes are meant to be backed up with a paper record, which is designed to be a fail-safe should something go technically awry with the system.VSAP is publicly owned and was designed to use open-source technology, making the program the first of its kind in the nation. The machines themselves arrive with another new change in LA: Instead of local polling stations, people can now vote from anywhere in the county, thanks to a centralized voter database. Some voting machines are even being moved around the Los Angeles area, which should make it easier for less-mobile populations to vote… March 26, 2020: Smartmatic, creator of the Voting Solutions for All People (VSAP) electronic voting machines, posted a blog titled: “Early Takeaways from Los Angeles”. From the blog: …The election event in LA was hugely beneficial to the citizens of Los Angeles. VSAP is an incredible step forward, but its rollout was not without challenges. County Registrar Dean Logan acknowledged this in his Election Night press conference. That the election was imperfect shouldn’t surprise anyone given the scope of the changes. Implementing the new system meant engaging and collaborating with a vast number of organizations, departments, service providers and groups from the state level all the way to the local level. There were also multiple outside providers.Let’s not forget that voters, vote center workers, and County officials were learning a whole new voting system that bears little resemblance to the obsolete system, launched in the late 60s, they just abandoned.As stated by Logan, vote centers had to be strategically sized and located based on population densities and travel patterns. This election saw most in-person voting occur on the last two days of the voting period at sites near residents’ homes. The County will examine voter-turnout patterns and work to better ensure adequate coverage at vote centers for future elections. The number of poll workers can be increased with little effort. As voters become acclimated to the new system, their behavior will also change. More voters will take advantage of the geographic and time conveniences available to them over the full 11-day voting period.Training for all vote center workers will be expanded and the lessons learned during the rollout will enable them to manage all aspects of the system more confidently, including onsite troubleshooting. All involved will, no doubt, be more comfortable with the new system when the general election rolls around in November… April 27, 2020: Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk posted its findings about the March 2020 primary. Here are key points from the executive summary: During the Presidential Primary Election in March, Los Angeles County introduced a new voting system that served nearly 1 million voters at more than 970 vote centers throughout the County.Post-election surveys and voter exit polls indicate that most voters (70%) had a positive experience, while 20% reported a negative experience. Overall, 15% of voters reported waiting more than 2 hours to vote. RR/CC acknowledges that not all voters were properly supported on Election Day, resulting in long waits and great frustration for many voters.At the request of the Board of Supervisors, the RR/CC, with a team of experts, examined the issues and analyzed the causes behind those failures, which relate primarily to technology, training, and capacity issues.As a result, RR/CC already has started to improve training and procedures and to refinine its systems to ensure a better experience for ALL voters in future elections.Los Angeles County introduced new Ballot Marking Devices (BMDs) in the March 2020 Presidential Primary Election. Voters reported that their experience with BMDs was positive. The BMDs are new and, as with anything new, it will take some time for voters to become accustomed to using them, including features that ensure ballot security and voter privacy.RR/CC looked carefully into the root causes of the issues experienced by voters. Here are some key findings: Vote Centers were open for 10 days before Election Day. 27% of voters cast ballots in the first 10 days: 73% on Election Day. RR/CC also received and processed 1,141,594 Vote By Mail (VBM) ballots.Longer wait times primarily resulted from technical issues with the electronic pollbooks (PollPads) that are used to check-in voters as they arrive at the Vote Centers. Even though ample network bandwidth was available, the PollPads had issues synchronizing data with the voter database and the voter search function was too limited for the size of the County’s electorate. This resulted in delays as voters checked in. Also, some Vote Centers had fewer PollPads than needed to handle voter turnout on Election Day.While there was a perception among voters and the media that BMDs were not operable and contributed to wait times, generally this was not the case. Based on the data, BMD availability did not contribute to wait times, but some BMDs were unavailable for two reasons: 1 While not intended, Election Workers did not make all BMDs available at the Vote Centers. Some BMDs were not turned on in larger Vote Centers because they were not identified as necessary to meet voter needs during the election. Had all BMDs been needed, Election Workers would have powered them on.2 There was a known issue with a printer gear that affected more BMDs than originally identified, causing 1,297 to be taken out of service because of paper jams. This affected 5.6% of the BMDs in the field. Network bandwidth between the PollPads and the voter database was sufficient and was not a constraint on Election Day.While RR/CC recruited the overall number of Election Workers needed, delays in Vote Center selection and late assignment of Election Workers caused some Vote Centers to be overstaffed and some to be understaffed because either too many Election Workers were assigned to a Vote Center or the Election Workers did not report as scheduled or at all. In most cases, multilingual Election Workers were stationed where needed, but the under/overstaffing issue applied to them as well. The need to have Vote Center Leads work 11 consecutive days proved to create difficulties for Vote Center Lead attendance and also caused difficulties filling those critical roles.Election Worker training started while many elements were still charging – procedures being finalized and new legislation being passed (Senate Bill 207) – which caused differences between training conducted earlier vs. later in the cycle. This represented a lot of change – new technology and procedures – for Election Workers to absorb.There were challenges and constraints in gaining access to and setting up Vote Centers, with some closing early or opening late, and some not opening at all on some days.The Help Desks where Election Workers and voters call to get help did not have adequate staff needed to respond to incoming call volume promptly. Technical issues with the telephone system also led to excessive wait times… …ConclusionThese results – and the findings derived from the Board’s motion – will assist the Department in continuing to improve the voter experience for Los Angeles County voters. RR/CC is engaged with the Secretary of State and a broad range of community stakeholders to prepare for the November 2020 Presidential General Election considering the effects of COVID-19 on the voting experience. July 13, 2020: CBS Sacramento posted an article titled: “100,000 Mail-In Votes Went Uncounted In California’s Primary”. From the article: More than 100,000 mail-in ballots were rejected by California election officials during the March presidential primary, according to data obtained by The Associated Press that highlights a glaring gap in the state’s effort to ensure every vote is counted……The California secretary of state’s election data obtained by the AP showed that 102,428 mail-in-ballots were disqualified in the state’s 58 counties, about 1.5% of the nearly 7 million mail-in ballots returned. That percentage is the highest in a primary since 2014, and the overall number is the highest in a statewide election since 2010.Two years ago, the national average of rejected mail ballots in the general election was about 1.4% and in the 2016 presidential election year it was 1%, according to a U.S. Election Assistance Commission study.The most common problem, by far, in California was missing the deadline for the ballot to be mailed and arrive. To count in the election, ballots must be postmarked on or before Election Day and received within three days afterward. Statewide, 70,330 ballots missed those marks.Another 27,525 either didn’t have a signature, or the signature didn’t match the one on record for the voter……The data didn’t break down the uncounted ballots by party registration. While the overall number was large in March, if it’s the same in November it’s unlikely to affect the presidential race — Trump lost to Democrat Hillary Clinton in 2016 by 4.3 million votes.But there are expected to be at least several tightly contested U.S. House races where a relatively few votes could tip the balance. In 2018, Democrat TJ Cox upset Republican David Valadao by less than 1,000 votes in a Central Valley district. They have a rematch in November.Local races sometimes are decided by a handful of votes.California traditionally has offered mail-in voting only to those who request ballots. Over time the number has grown to represent more than half of all cast ballots. In response to the coronavirus outbreak, Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom in June signed a law requiring county election officials to mail a ballot to all the state’s nearly 21 million registered voters for the November election.He called mail-in voting safe and secure, pointing to a series of studies that found no evidence of significant fraud. States across the political spectrum rely solely on mail ballots, including Colorado, Utah and Washington.In preparation for November, the state is launching a ballot-tracking tool that will quickly alert voters if they need to take action, such as adding a missing signature. Another change: The state is extending the window for mail ballots to arrive to 17 days after Election Day…Last March, the highest rejection rate in California was in San Francisco, where 9,407 ballots, or nearly 5% of the total, were set aside, mostly because they did not arrive on time. By contrast, in rural Plumas County northeast of Sacramento, all of the 8,207 mail-in ballots received were accepted.…In Los Angeles County, nearly 2,800 ballots were nullified because the voter forgot to sign it, then couldn’t be found to fix the error. Statewide, that careless mistake spiked nearly 13,000 ballots.More than 1,000 ballots were disqualified in Fresno County because the signature didn’t match the one on file with election officials. The same problem nixed over 1,300 ballots in San Diego County — and over 14,000 statewide. In some of those cases, voting experts say, a family member might have signed for others in the household, which is illegal.Some voters apparently filled out their ballots then left them on the kitchen table: In more than 800 instances, envelopes were returned to election officials without the marked ballot inside. Results 2020 California Democratic Presidential Preference Primary On March 3, 2020, the Associated Press tweeted: “BREAKING: Bernie Sanders wins Democratic presidential primary in California, claiming biggest prize on Super Tuesday”. The tweet includes a graphic that said “ELECTION 2020”. The Guardian posted the following results (updated March 30, 2020): Bernie Sanders: 2,002,521 votes – 35.54%Joe Biden: 1,575,886 votes – 27.97%Elizabeth Warren: 748,687 votes – 13.29%Michael Bloomberg: 689,713 votes – 12.24%Pete Buttigieg: 247,382 votes – 4.39%Amy Klobuchar: 126,031 votes – 2.24%Tom Steyer: 111,707 votes – 1.98%Andrew Yang: 42,816 votes – 0.76%Tulsi Gabbard: 33,027 votes – 0.59%Julian Castro: 13,449 votes – 0.24%Michael Bennet: 7,113 votes – 0.13%Marianne Williamson: 6,093 votes – 0.12%Roque De La Fuente III: 6,011 votes – 0.11%Cory Booker: 5,853 votes – 0.10%John Delaney: 4,484 votes – 0.08%Michael Ellinger: 3,319 votes – 0.06%Joe Sestak: 3,178 votes – 0.06%Mark Greenstein: 3,082 votes – 0.05%Deval Patrick: 1,977 votes – 0.04%Moise Boyd: 1,592 votes – 0.03% 2020 California Republican Presidential Preference Primary The Guardian posted the following results (updated March 30, 2020): Donald Trump: 2,241,786 votes – 92.19%Bill Weld: 66,267 votes – 2.71%Joe Walsh: 63,881 votes – 2.64%Roque De La Fuente: 23,944 votes – 0.98%Matthew Matern: 15,235 votes – 0.63%Robert Ardini: 12,691 votes – 0.52%Zoltan Istvan: 8,013 votes – 0.33%... What Happened in the 2020 Tennessee PrimaryMarch 15, 20202020 Presidential CampaignImage by Clker-Free-Vector-Images from Pixabay Tennessee is one of the states (and one territory) that voted on “Super Tuesday”. This was the state the endured tornadoes the night before the primary. Voting Information Be a citizen of the United StatesBe 18 years of age or older on or before the date of the next electionMust be a resident of Tennessee The Tennessee Secretary of State’s website has information about voting in Tennessee. In order to be eligible to vote in Tennessee, you must: There are some guidelines for determining residency: The residence of a person is the place where the person’s habitation is fixed and is where, during periods of absence, the person definitely intends to return.A person can have only one residenceA change of residence is made not only by relocation, but also by intent to remain in the new location permanently, and by demonstrating actions consistent with that intention.The place where a married person’s spouse and family live is presumed to be that person’s residence, unless that person takes up or continues to abode with the intention of remaining in a place other than where the spouse and family live.No person gains or loses residency solely by presence in or absence from the state, or while a student at an institution of higher learning, or while kept in an institution at public expense. If I’m understanding that last part correctly, it means that the State of Tennessee does not consider college or university students to be residents. I’m assuming this means the student must register to vote at their home address (which is likely their parent’s house). Students who came to Tennessee from out of state might not be eligible to vote in Tennessee. Tennessee requires voters to present federal or Tennessee state ID containing the voter’s name and photograph when voting at the polls. The following IDs may be used, even if expired: Tennessee driver license with your photoUnited States PassportPhoto ID issued by the Tennessee Department of Safety and Homeland SecurityPhoto ID issued by the federal or Tennessee state governmentUnited States Military photo IDTennessee handgun carry permit with your photo What IDs are not acceptable? College student IDs and photo IDs not issued by the federal of Tennessee state government are NOT acceptable. This includes county or city issued photo IDs, such as library cards and photo IDs issued by other states. Put that together with the residency requirements, and I’m getting the feeling that the State of Tennessee really doesn’t want college or university students to be able to vote. College IDs are not acceptable. A Tennessee handgun carry permit with your photo is acceptable – even if that permit has expired. Tennessee has guidelines regarding Homeless Persons Residency. In order to vote in Tennessee, a person does not have to live in a building. Instead, a person who finds himself or herself homeless must describe where the person usually stays or returns to when absent. This location may be the address of a shelter where the person stays or frequents, or it may be the description of a street corner where the person may often rest. A physical description of the location must be given so that the election commission knows in which voting precinct to place the person… There is a potential problem that homeless people in Tennessee may face when trying to register to vote: The election commission must mail voter registration cards to people who register to vote by mail. Therefore, if a homeless person tries to register by mail using an address where the person does not get the mail, the person will have to give a mailing address where he or she can receive mail. For example, a homeless voter may be able to use a shelter as a mailing address or the address of a family member or friend who agrees to receive the mail. Another option is to use General Delivery as a mailing address. However, please not that absentee ballot materials may not be mailed to “general delivery.”… If a voter registration card is returned as undeliverable to the election commission, the voter will be mailed a confirmation notice and be placed on inactive status. Fortunately, Tennessee gives residents who are eligible voters several ways to fill out a voter registration card. These options include: online voter registrationdownload and complete the Voter Registration Application and mail the application to your county election commissionPick up voter registration applications in person at: County Election Commission Offices, County Clerk’s Offices, Public Libraries, or Register of Deeds OfficesRegister with one of the following agencies: Department of Health (WIC program); Department of Health and Human Services; Department of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities; Department of Mental Health; Department of Safety (motor vehicles division); Department of Veteran’s Affairs. The Tennessee Secretary of State website also provides very detailed information about whether or not a person who has a felony conviction can vote: The Tennessee Constitution provides that the Tennessee legislation may deny the right to vote to persons who are convicted of “infamous” crimes. Pursuant to this provision in the Tennessee Constitution, the Tennessee legislature has excluded individuals convicted of various felonies from the right of suffrage.However, the legislature has also established conditions with procedures through which individuals who have lost their voting rights may regain them. The manner in which a person may restore a lost voting right depends upon the crime committed and the year in which the conviction occurred. If your conviction has been expunged, you may answer “No” when asked if you have a felony conviction on the voter registration form. The GoVoteTN App enables Tennessee voters to find their Election Day polling locations, view and mark sample ballots, see their elected officials, districts, and county election commission information as well as access online election results through the GoVoteTN app. It can be downloaded for free. It is not possible to actually cast a vote through the app. Eligible voters in Tennessee have the option to vote early. For the 2020 Presidential Preference Primary, early voting started on Wednesday, February 12, 2020 to Tuesday, February 25, 2020. Unexpected Things On March 3, 2020, The Weather Channel posted an article titled: “Tennessee Tornado Death Toll Jumps to 19; Widespread Damage in Nashville, Middle Tennessee”. It was written by Roy Brackett. From the article: At least 19 people have been killed and more than 20 hospitalized after multiple tornadoes touched down early Tuesday in Middle Tennessee, including one that shredded 40 buildings near downtown Nashville.Tennessee Emergency Management Community Relations Officer Maggie Hannan confirmed that 19 people are dead across four countries, The Tennessean reported.Nearly 20,000 homes and businesses remained without power as of 7:45 a.m. local time, according to poweroutage.us. That number was about 50,000 earlier. Nashville Electric tweeted that four substations and 15 primary distribution lines were damaged.Overturned tractor-trailers blocked stretches of Interstate 24 near Antioch, Tennessee, and Interstate 40 near Mt. Juliet, Tennessee……At the news conference later with the governor, Cooper said the city had responded to 400 calls for help overnight and treated 156 people at the hospital, WTVF reported. Almost 50 buildings collapsed, but many more are damaged……The Nashville Fire Department said it was responding to reports of about 50 collapsed structures in and around Nashville.Some of the hardest-hit areas in the storm include West Nashville where there were reports of damage to planes as well as overturned tractor-trailers, according to ABC affiliate WKRN……A gas leak was reported in Germantown forcing an evacuation… In addition, the tornadoes affected Wilson County, Putnam County, and Benton County. The Weather Channel has more information about that, and 108 photos of the damage the tornadoes caused. How the Tornadoes Affected Voting The Tennessee Republican Party had nothing to say about the tornadoes. The blog and press releases sections on its website had not been updated since 2019, with the exception of a press release posted on January 3, 2020, about Dr. Phil Roe’s retirement. On March 3, 2020, the Tennessee Democratic Party posted information on its website titled: “Update and Specifics on Primary Voting in Wake of Middle Tennessee Tornado Tragedy”. From the information: Last night was devastating for our Middle Tennessee communities, and the devastation will continue for hours and days to come. Our hearts and thoughts are with all those affected, responders as they survey the damage, and the entire community.Many communities in Middle Tennessee have had polling location damage. Polls opened at 8AM and will stay open until 7PM. Some voters will need to change poling locations in Putnam, Davidson, and Wilson Counties. Please find voting locations changes below… Later on March 3, 2020, the Tennessee Democratic Party posted press release titled: “Tennessee Democratic Party files lawsuit against Davidson County Election Commission and Secretary of State”. From the press release: Following the destruction of the Middle Tennessee Tornado in the early morning hours of Super Tuesday, hundreds of voters’ ability to cast their vote across Davidson County was obstructed. More than 15 polling stations suffered electrical and structural damages and many polls were delayed from opening until 8:00 AM. Hundreds of voters arrived at 7:00 AM and were not able to cast their vote, and furthermore, many arriving throughout the day found their polling place closed.The Tennessee Democratic Party has filed a lawsuit seeking legal injunction against the Davidson County Election Commission and Tennessee Secretary of State, Tre Hargett, to extend the time polling locations are open by 3 hours. Extending the poll close time from 7:00 PM to 10:00 PM would provide sufficient time for voters across the county to exercise their right and cast their vote. Failing to extend polling hours would cause irreparable harm to our democratic process. Later on March 3, 2020, The Tennessee Democratic Party tweeted: “A victory for voters – Judge says all polling sites in Nashville can remain open until 8 pm CT & 5 “super sites” will remain open until 10 pm: Cleveland Community, Pearl Cohn, Donelson Presbyterian, Howard School & Davidson County Election Commission.” On March 3, 2020, The Hill posted an article titled: “Democrats successfully sue to extend voting hours in areas affected by Tennessee tornadoes”. It was written by Justin Wise. From the article: A Tennessee county judge has ruled that several polling sites in areas that were hit by deadly tornadoes in the state can remain open longer than previously permitted during Super Tuesday.Davidson County Chancellor Ellen Hobbs Lyle ruled that five polling sites in areas surrounding Nashville would be allowed to remain open until 10 p.m. CT and that other places would be permitted to accept ballots until 8 p.m. CT.The ruling came after the Tennessee Democratic Party and four Democratic presidential campaigns filed a lawsuit in Davidson County seeking a legal injunction to extend the time polling locations remained open, The Tennessean reported.The candidates – Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), former Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg – reportedly argued that voters’ constitutional rights would have been violated if they weren’t granted more time to vote after the tornadoes… March 3, 2020: Tennessean posted an article titled: “Judge rules Nashville polls open until 8. p.m. at all Davidson County locations, five sites open until 10 p.m.”. It was written by Adam Tamburin, Brett Kelman, and Natalie Allison. From the article: As Tennessee reeled from a deadly tornado that has claimed lives and crushed buildings, a Nashville judge issued an eleventh-hour order extending all Davidson County polling sites to ensure that storm-ravaged families have a chance to vote. Polls that were initially planned to close at 7 p.m. will now stay open until at least 8 p.m. CT, ordered Davidson County Chancellor Ellen Hobbs Lyle. Five large polling sites will remain open until 10 p.m. CT.Those five sites are: Election commission office, 1417 Murfreesboro PikeHoward Office Building, 700 Second Ave. S.Cleveland Community Center, 610 Vernon Winfrey Ave.Donelson Presbyterian Church, 2305 Lebanon PikePearl Cohn High School, 904 26th Ave. N. The ruling came at the request of four of the top Democratic presidential campaigns, along with the Tennessee Democratic Party. The groups filed suit in a Nashville court on Tuesday to extend poll times amid heavy tornado damage throughout the city.On Super Tuesday afternoon, lawyers representing the campaigns of Joe Biden, Mike Bloomberg, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren filed for a temporary restraining order in Davidson County Chancery Court, said attorney Stephen Zralek.The lawsuit was against Tennessee Secretary of State Tre Hargett and the Davidson County Election Commission, said attorney Dave Garrison, working on behalf of the state Democratic Party… Controversies On February 12, 2020, WREG News Channel 3 posted an article titled: “Tennessee Rep. files resolution to declare CNN, Washington Post ‘fake news'” It was written by Mitchell Koch. From the article: A Tennessee representative proposed legislation to designate CNN and The Washington Post as “fake news” in the state.Resolution HJR 0079, proposed by Rep. Micah Van Huss (R-Jonesborough) calls for the state “to recognize CNN and The Washington Post as fake news and condemn them for denigrating our citizens.”The resolution recalls incidents from each news outlet in 2019 where a host or editor referred to supporters of President of Donald Trump as “belonging to a cult” or “cult-like”.“To describe the entire Republican Party as a cult led by President Trump is problematic: If journalists are going to refer to the party as a cult and its supporters as cultists, they must define what “cult” means; otherwise, they are assuming that a cult is some obvious phenomenon and everyone knows what that word means,” reads a portion of the resolution.It also calls for recognizing both outlets as “part of the media wing of the Democratic Party”.“We condemn them for denigrating our citizens and implying that they are weak-minded followers instead of people exercising their rights that our veterans paid for with their blood,” another portion says.The resolution currently does not have a co-sponsor. It was introduced in the House on Wednesday… The full text of HJ 779 is here. On February 12, 2020, The Guardian posted an article titled: “Tennessee Republican bids to classify CNN and Washington Post as ‘fake news’. It was written by Kenya Evelyn. From the article. A Tennessee lawmaker has introduced an amendment to a resolution that would recognize CNN and the Washington Post as “fake news” that is “part of the media wing of the Democratic party.” The amendment read: “We recognize that fake news outlets suggest ideas without directly making accusations so that they can claim innocence from their ivory towers.”Republican state representative Micah Van Huss of Jonesboro introduced the measure Tuesday at the state’s capital. According to local station WREG, it amends a previous joint house resolution filed last month……Lawmakers behind the resolution also criticized the notion of “a spell Trump has cast on the Republican party” as Washington Post editor, Marc Fisher, suggested in an October editorial.The resolution will now be debated within the state house’s subcommittee on sentencing and protections before a vote is scheduled……While the resolution currently has 13 co-sponsors, some fellow Republican lawmakers have called it “unnecessary” and questioned its purpose… A quick internet search revealed that Tennessee has a long history of controversies that appear to be designed to cause voter suppression. On October 25, 2018, The Daily Memphian posted an article titled: “Jenkins rules against election commission, orders immediate voter registration remedies”. It was written by Bill Dries. From the article: Shelby County Chancellor JoeDae Jenkins ruled Thursday in favor of the Memphis Branch NAACP and the Tennessee Black Voters Project in a lawsuit that will require the Shelby County Election Commission to give potential voters a chance to fix their voter registration applications so they can cast ballots on the Nov. 6 election day.Jenkins ordered the election commission to keep in place a system it is using now during early voting for rectifying voter registration application problems through Election Day. He also ordered election officials to immediately notify potential voters whose applications are incomplete of problems with their applications, giving them a chance to rectify the problems, and to begin providing daily updates of its progress on the backlog of 4,000 to 6,000 potential voters whose forms remain unprocessed since the Oct. 9 deadline to register to vote.The Memphis Branch NAACP and the Tennessee Black Voters Project lawsuit argued that voters should be notified of problems with their registration applications and given a chance to correct them and participate as voters. Election commission attorney John Ryder said he will appeal the ruling immediately including seeking a stay on the ruling taking effect……The ruling is the second by Jenkins since July affecting the conduct of elections in Shelby County. In July, Jenkins ordered the election commission to add early voting sites and change the hours so that more sites were open from the outset of the early voting period in advance of the Aug. 2 election day. On November 5, 2018, The Tennessean posted an article titled: “College students are running into problems voting absentee. Two lawmakers plan to address it.” It was written by Natalie Allison. From the article: …Ben Stocksdale, who is taking a gap year to work for YMCA of the Rockies in Granby, Colorado, opened his mail from the Hamilton County Election Commission – what he assumed to be his absentee ballot – but found notice that his request to vote by mail had been denied.Since the 18-year-old had never before voted in person, the rejection letter stated, he was ineligible to vote in Tennessee by absentee ballot.It’s a problem that college-aged students moving away from home are facing in light of state law, which requires a voter to have previously cast a ballot in person or register in the presence of an election commission official – not merely online, by mail or at a registration drive – in order to request an absentee ballot.“The result of the law is that it makes it really difficult for college students, ” said Lisa Quigley, chief of staff for U.S. Rep. Jim Cooper, D-Nashville, who has made voting rights her area of expertise.Despite the Secretary of State’s website providing information on requirements for absentee voting, new voters like Ben Stocksdale are often unaware of the requirement when they attempt to request an absentee ballot.Tennessee passed its Voter Identification Act in 2011, requiring voters to show a photo ID at the time of voting, though it must be a Tennessee driver’s license or state government photo ID, military photo ID, state handgun carry permit with a photo or a U.S. passport..…Sen. Steve Dickerson, R-Nashville, has spent the last few years focusing on improving voter registration numbers in Tennessee through Project Register, a nonpartisan voter participation initiative started by him and Cooper.He believes voters should have to produce some form of photo identification, but also wants to improve Tennessee’s voting system “so that there is a minimal identification component without it being punitive or overly restrictive.”Sen. Jeff Yarbro, D-Nashville, said “it’s critical that people establish that they are who they say they are to vote,” but that the current requirements are too restrictive….…This year, Yarbro and Rep. John Ray Clemmons, D-Nashville, sponsored legislation to allow Tennesseans to vote by absentee ballot for any reason, to certify their identity on a form from the Secretary of State’s office submitted with the absentee ballot.The bill failed in a subcommittee… On September 12, 2019, The League of Women Voters of the US (LWVUS) posted an article titled: “Washington Post: Judge Blocks Tennessee law restricting voter registration drives”. It was originally published by The Washington Post. From the article: A federal judge has blocked a Tennessee law that sought to restrict paid voter registration drives, ruling it an “onerous and intrusive regulatory structure” that would have inhibited free speech and intimidated drive organizers with the threat of financial penalties.U.S. District Judge Aleta A. Trauger ruled Thursday that state officials offered “simply no basis” for the new legislation, which was signed into law in May and scheduled to go into effect Oct. 1. The law would have imposed penalties of up to $10,000 for turning in inaccurate or incomplete forms, which its backers said was necessary in response to a flood of error-riddled and fraudulent forms last year.Trauger said it was “unrefuted” that the law would have required registration drives to curtail and perhaps even discontinue their activities, harming Tennesseans “who merely wish to exercise their core constitutional rights of participating in the political process by encouraging voter registration.”..…Trauger’s preliminary injunction will remain in place as litigation on the case continues; its timing means that even if the law is ultimately upheld it is not likely to apply to upcoming local elections or the state’s presidential primary next March……The case’s plaintiffs celebrated the decision as a victory for voting rights. Marian Ott, president of the Tennessee chapter of the League of Women Voters, said the law was so vague that it was unclear whether it would apply to her organization, which sometimes receives grants to run registration drives in targeted communities……The law arose after the Tennessee Black Voter Project led an unprecedented effort in 2018 to register new voters, particularly African Americans, in a state with one of the lowest registration rates in the country……The new law would have imposed penalties of up to $2,000 for each county where an organization with paid workers submitted more than 100 deficient forms. The fine would have grown much steeper – up to $10,000 per county – where the number of deficient forms exceeded 500… A copy of the lawsuit, and U.S. District Judge Aleta A. Trauger’s decision, here. On March 2, 2020, Courthouse News Service posted an article titled: “States Make It Hard for College Students to Vote”. From the article: Vanderbilt University student Will Newell wishes it was easier for college students like him to vote in Tennessee, one of 14 stats holding a presidential primary on Super Tuesday.The campus has no locations for early voting, so students must visit an off-campus polling place to cast a ballot on Election Day. Newell drives but worries that many students who don’t have their own transportation won’t make it to a precinct. He said some campus groups offer rides to students, but the university itself does not provide a shuttle.He supports a bill introduced in the Tennessee Legislature that would require early voting locations at large colleges and universities in the state.That’s not the only restriction working against college students in the state. Tennessee, where overall voter turnout is low, is among several states that does not allow a college student ID to be used to vote. But it does allow a handgun license……As Democratic candidates seek a boost from young voters in 2020, their impact at the polls could be blunted in a number of states that make voting more difficult for college students. Those include laws related to voter IDs, residency requirements and on-campus polling stations. Critics say many of those laws are designed to dampen turnout among voters who typically lean Democratic……Texas and Tennessee are among seven states where college identification cards are not allowed at polling places, with laws enacted by Republican-controlled legislatures between 2008 and 2018. The others are Arizona, Iowa, North Dakota, Ohio and South Carolina – all are states won by Trump in 2016……In Tennessee, Democratic state Rep. London Lamar has proposed a law that would require county election commissions to place early voting locations at colleges or universities with at least 8,000 students.In Lamar’s hometown of Memphis, Landon Shelby has to vote off-campus. Shelby, a University of Memphis junior and a Republican, said he would like to see campus polling places so students don’t have to drive or hitch a ride to a precinct……The chances of that happening any time soon aren’t great. Lamar’s early voting legislation will face an uphill fight in the Republican-dominated General Assembly, especially in an election year.But the bill has a Republican co-sponsor, and Lamar hopes her Republican colleagues agree that it’s important to simplify the voting process for college students… Results 2020 Tennessee Democratic Presidential Preference Primary On March 3, 2020, NBC News tweeted: “BREAKING: Joe Biden wins Tennessee Democratic Primary, NBC News projects.” The tweet included a link to the NBC website. It also had a photo of Joe Biden with the word Tennessee over his head and a yellow box with a checkmark in it next to the photo. The Tennessee Secretary of State website posted Unofficial Election Results for the 2020 Democratic Primary: Joseph R. Biden: 215,229 votes – 41.74%Bernie Sanders: 128,922 votes – 25.00%Michael R. Bloomberg: 79,746 votes – 15.47%Elizabeth Warren: 53,626 votes – 10.40%Pete Buttigeig: 17,078 votes – 3.31%Amy Klobuchar: 10,667 votes – 2.07%Tulsi Gabbard: 2,276 votes – 0.44%Tom Steyer: 1,932 votes – 0.32%Michael Bennet: 1,648 votes – 0.23%Uncommitted: 1,190 votes – 0.23%Andrew Yang: 1,092 votes – 0.21%Cory Booker: 953 votes – 0.18%Marianne Williamson: 497 votes – 0.10%John K. Delaney: 379 votes – 0.07%Julián Castro: 239 votes – 0.05%Deval Patrick: 181 votes – 0.04% The Guardian posted results of the Tennessee 2020 Democratic Presidential Preference Primary, with 100% of precincts reporting. Their data comes from The Associated Press. The Guardian reported that Tennessee has 64 pledged delegates. Joe Biden: 215,005 votes – 41.71%Bernie Sanders: 128,688 votes – 24.97%Michael Bloomberg: 79,638 votes – 15.45%Elizabeth Warren: 53,555 votes – 10.39%Pete Buttigieg: 17,051 votes – 3.31%Amy Klobuchar: 10,645 votes – 2.07%Tulsi Gabbard: 2,292 votes – 0.44%Tom Steyer: 1,980 votes – 0.38%Michael Bennet: 1,882 votes – 0.37%Uncommitted: 1,182 votes – 0.23%Andrew Yang: 1,097 votes – 0.21%Cory Booker: 978 votes – 0.19%Marianne Williamson: 498 votes – 0.10%John Delaney: 379 votes – 0.07%Deval Patrick: 326 votes – 0.06%Julian Castro: 239 votes – 0.05% The Tennessee Secretary of State website posted Unofficial Election Results for the 2020 Republican Primary: Donald J. Trump: 384,116 votes – 96.47%Uncommitted: 5,946 votes – 1.48%Joe Walsh: 4,172 votes – 1.05%Bill Weld: 3,921 votes: 0.97% The Guardian posted results of the Tennessee 2020 Republican Presidential Preference Primary, with 100% of precincts reporting. Their data comes from The Associated Press. The Guardian reported that Tennessee has 64 pledged delegates. Donald Trump: 380,276 votes – 96.52%Uncommitted: 5,665 votes – 1.44%Joe Walsh: 4,135 votes – 1.05%Bill Weld: 3,893 votes – 0.99% The Tennessee Secretary of State website posted its own results of the Tennessee primary elections: Democratic Presidential Preference Primary Candidates for President of the United States: (Statewide totals): Michael Bennet: 1,650Joseph R. Biden: 215,390Michael R. Bloomberg: 79,789Cory Booker: 953Pete Buttigeig: 17,102Julián Castro: 239John K. Delaney: 378Tulsi Gabbard: 2,278Amy Klobuchar: 10,671Deval Patrick: 182Bernie Sanders: 129,168Tom Steyer: 1,932Elizabeth Warren: 53,732Marianne Williamson: 498Andrew Yang: 1,097Uncommitted: 1,191 Republican Presidential Preference Primary Candidates for President of the United States (Statewide totals): Donald J. Trump: 384,226Joe Walsh: 4,178Bill Weld: 3,922Uncommitted: 5,948Total votes: 398,314 What Happened in the 2020 Tennessee Primary is a post written by Jen Thorpe on Book of Jen and is not allowed to be copied to other sites. If you enjoyed this blog post please consider supporting me on PayPal.me. Thank you!...