�������ýҕ�l

Since June, the White House Coronavirus Task Force has been compiling detailed reports on how Covid-19 is spreading. It has put together a massive, granular, timely data set for tracking and containing the pandemic. These reports would be of enormous benefit to local public health officials, educators, employers, and the public. Yet the task force refuses to share them. (Ryan Panchadsaram, 9/21)

New chaos at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention over revised guidance on the spread of Covid-19 is a fresh sign of mixed messaging that long plagued the White House's failed pandemic response. The latest drama shows how President Donald Trump's erratic handling of the disaster has left Americans in the dark over which missteps are down to incompetence and which are the result of extreme politicization. (Stephen Collinson, 9/22)

Public health has been called the intersection of science and politics. In a normal world, that means scientists deliver factual information to government officials, who enact policies in the public interest — sometimes tempering the hard facts of science with their own political consideration for the soft and malleable opinions of the public. Ideally, they help shape those opinions to fit the science.Today, the president of the United States confronts science and contradicts it, almost on a daily basis, and doesn’t seem to suffer politically for it. How did that happen? (Al Cross, 9/18)

If not by the time you read this then shortly after, we will have crossed a grim marker: 200,000 Americans dead from covid-19.Large numbers representing human beings are difficult if not impossible to wrap your head around; if I said that it was as if the entire population of Salt Lake City had died, would that make it any easier to understand? Probably not. As Joseph Stalin may or may not have said, one death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic.We are surrounded by these statistics — 200,000 dead, 6.8 million people infected, 30 million out of work. But chances are you don’t need the numbers to tell you; you’ve seen the closed businesses, and you probably know someone who has gotten sick or even died. With so many families mourning and suffering, it has become inescapable. (Paul Waldman, 9/21)

America is in the midst of unprecedented public health and economic crises that have shaken the foundations of our nation. Nearly 200,000 Americans are dead because of COVID-19, millions have contracted the virus, and unemployment levels rival the Great Recession. And our national emergency isn’t likely to be over anytime soon. Yet, even amid a pandemic that has made access to healthcare more important than ever, President Donald Trump and Republican state attorneys general are moving forward with their lawsuit to strike down the Affordable Care Act in its entirety. This assault on the healthcare of millions, at this moment of crisis, is as inexplicable as it is unforgivable. (Chris Murphy. 9/19)

Four years ago, Donald Trump campaigned in part on a promise to get rid of Obamacare and replace it with something better. Then all he did in his first term was talk big about his plans while undermining Obamacare at every opportunity, threatening the health care of millions. Now in his fourth year, Trump still has no plan to replace it. Yet last week, he was once again promising he’ll “be doing a health care plan very strongly, and protect people with preexisting conditions” — as soon as he’s reelected. He fooled Americans once with false promises. He must not get away with it again. (9/21)

In the summer of 2008, the Obama-Biden presidential campaign ran the most-aired ad of the decade, “Unravel,” alleging that Sen. John McCain’s policy proposals would dismantle employer-based health coverage. Twelve years later, that ad takes on an ironic tone for President Obama’s vice president. As I outline in a new report, Joe Biden’s health plan could pull apart the system by which most Americans receive insurance. The collapse would come as a result of two interlinked provisions in the Democrat’s plan. Mr. Biden proposes to increase subsidies for ObamaCare exchange plans—decreasing the percentage of income households must pay in out-of-pocket premiums, and increasing the cost-sharing assistance provided for deductibles and copayments. He would also repeal an ObamaCare provision that prohibits households that are offered “affordable” health coverage by their employer from receiving exchange subsidies. (Chris Jacobs, 9/21)

A third Trump appointment to the court could spell the death knell for ObamaCare and a resurrection on the limits on the federal power to regulate everyday life. It could trigger a restoration of the rights of states to regulate social and moral issues. It could produce a long-awaited expansion of the Second Amendment right to bear arms and an advance of individual economic rights to own property and make a living. Justice Ginsburg took the leading part in a constitutional revolution on gender. Her passing may create the opportunity for the court to shift toward greater equal treatment of religious, color-blind and economic rights as well. (John Yoo, 9/21)

I was raised Catholic. As a teenager, I was 100% in the “Abortion is murder, ought to be completely illegal” camp. I attended a rally at the State Capitol and carried a gruesome sign, totally convinced we were in the right. I met some other pro-life teens and we picketed a Planned Parenthood the next weekend. ...I’m a pediatric emergency room doctor now, and I’m worried. I’m worried that I’m going to see teenage girls with sepsis, bleeding, and death from complications of illegal abortions. The best way to reduce the abortion rate is to improve access to birth control, health care for women, and child care.Please, when you think about this issue, think about the women you know. Trust them, and don’t judge. (Lydia Holm, 9/19)

In a floor speech in July, Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, issued an ultimatum on future Supreme Court fights. “I will vote only for those Supreme Court nominees who have explicitly acknowledged that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided,” Hawley said. He would require on-the-record evidence that the next Republican nominee “understands Roe to be the travesty that it is.” Absent that, he said, “I will not support the nomination.” The day after Ruth Bader Ginsburg died, Hawley reiterated this commitment, and called on his fellow Republican senators to do the same. (Michelle Goldberg, 9/21)