A very COVID Christmas: Why pandemic guidelines are not an assault on religious liberty

 It’s beginning to look a lot like Christmas is going to be a dud this year. The Coronavirus is surging around the country and the US is setting records on an almost daily basis for new cases, hospitalizations, and deaths. State and local governments are issuing new public health restrictions and guidelines that will be in place over the holiday. For many Americans, such as those in California, that means that Christmas will be celebrated under shelter-in-place orders.

I’m seeing a lot of posts in my social media feeds from friends and politicians who believe that the COVID guidelines represent an assault on religious freedom or a resumption of the War on Christmas. Nothing could be further from the truth.

What Rep. Jordan and many others fail to acknowledge is that the Coronavirus pandemic is a real public health threat and that the illness is spread from person-to-person. Travel and public gatherings – Christmas or otherwise – represent an opportunity for infected people to spread the virus around the country and quite possibly end up killing their loved ones.

It isn’t a matter of Dr. Fauci and others simply being grinches who want to destroy Christmas, it is a question of the health and lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans.

A few weeks ago, I described how the Supreme Court upheld the validity of the idea of emergency public regulations in Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn, New York v. Andrew M. Cuomo. While the Court prevented New York from instituting onerous regulations that singled out religious services, it did not say that all restrictions on religious groups were unconstitutional. Rather, the Court agreed that “stemming the spread of COVID–19 is unquestionably a compelling interest.”

In the decision, the Court laid out a test for whether such restrictions were permissible under the First Amendment. To be constitutional, the regulations must first address a legitimate local problem such as COVID clusters in local churches. Second, religious institutions cannot be singled out for more restrictive regulation than secular organizations. However, there is a loophole here. Rules can be narrowly tailored if the government can show that there is a compelling state interest. Temporarily closing the doors of churches that ignore all health guidelines and host superspreader events could be such a compelling interest.

I’ve always believed that freedom must be tempered with responsibility. When people act irresponsibly with their freedoms, those rights often tend to get restricted and limited. It is no different in a pandemic.

Yes, you have the right to go to church and to Christmas gatherings, but you also have the civic duty to act responsibly and not act as an agent of infection to your family and community. Choosing to exercise your rights in a responsible manner helps us to keep our freedoms as well as showing Christian love to your neighbors.

The Coronavirus pandemic does not mean that Christmas is canceled. It does mean that we need to find alternative ways to celebrate. In the 21st century, we have the ability to celebrate the birth of Christ while minimizing the risk to our high-risk friends and family.

What would Jesus do?

Originally published on The First TV

The good, the bad, and the ugly of COVID-19

 Coronavirus continues to surge around the country. At this point, most Americans probably know someone who has had COVID-19 and many of us know people who have died from the disease. Both numbers are going to increase over the next few months.

While my immediate family has not yet been hit with the virus, there have been many cases among my extended family and friends. So far, I’ve known two people who have died from COVID-19.

Over the past few weeks, I’ve followed the case of my childhood neighbors. I won’t mention their names, but the entire family was infected shortly before Thanksgiving. When I say the entire family, I mean the parents, who still live next door to my parents, as well as their two middle-aged sons and their families.

The most serious case was the oldest son’s wife, Kelley, who is in her mid-40s. After developing breathing problems at home earlier this week on about the tenth day of her infection, she was taken by ambulance to a nearby hospital, where she sat in the emergency room for five hours without being admitted. Her family hadn’t come with her because they were all under Coronavirus quarantines, but her husband eventually drove to pick her up and took her to a different hospital where she could be seen immediately.

She initially improved in the hospital, but about two days ago, her oxygen levels started dropping dangerously low and her husband posted that she was “tired from struggling to breathe.” If you’ve read much about the medical aspects of Coronavirus, you know her case has followed a common pattern. After giving her oxygen, she was moved into the ICU last night. Kelley and her family could use your prayers.

“COVID is no joke,” her husband posted on Facebook four days into his own illness and a week before his wife went to the hospital.

If there is any good news from the Coronavirus pandemic, it is that the end is in sight. Several vaccines are nearing approval and, with their widespread distribution, herd immunity will become a reality. Hundreds of thousands of lives will be saved by their unprecedented quick development and deployment.

Unfortunately, even with vaccines on the horizon, the bad news seems to outweigh the good. The US is setting records almost daily for new infections, hospitalizations, and deaths. The seven-day average for new cases in the US is nearing 200,000 per day while daily deaths are close to an average of 2,000 per day. For all but the first day of December, we have lost more Americans to Coronavirus than we lost in the World Trade Center on September 11.

The ugly truth is that those numbers are all getting worse as the wave of Thanksgiving infections comes in and will continue to do so as Christmas celebrations continue. Another ugly truth is that many of them will have been preventable deaths.

The ugliest of truths is that America has not handled the pandemic well. Rather than pulling together as the greatest generation did in World War II, we have devolved into political infighting, finger-pointing, and conspiracy theories.

Neither side can brag about their reaction to the crisis. On the left, demonstrators took to the streets, often ignoring social distancing and mask guidelines while the right denounced any restrictions as unconstitutional tyranny in the name of fake or overblown threat. Both sides were wrong.

Both sides were also right. Whether they intended it as a club to bludgeon President Trump with or not, Democrats were right to take the virus threat seriously. Republicans were correct that the country cannot stay shut down indefinitely.

The problem has been made worse by hypocrites who believe that Coronavirus guidelines are for thee and not for me. Again, this applies to both sides. The White House superspreader event in the Rose Garden is an infamous example of the predictable consequences of flouting medical advice, but what are people to think when mayors, governors, and congressmen preach mitigations and restrictions for the little people but then go out to their favorite restaurants or jet off to Cabo for the holiday? Whatever happened to leading by example?

We must also acknowledge that President Trump’s leadership on the issue has been lacking. Many conservatives have complained about the fact that “15 days to slow the spread” has turned into 263+ days, but the truth is that the 15-day plan originated with Donald Trump at a time when the medical experts were saying that the crisis would last months, a year, or more. Much of Trump’s advice on the pandemic has been bad and he is also guilty of setting a poor example for the country.

Here is the truth: Coronavirus is a real and deadly threat. That some people are hypocrites doesn’t make it any less dangerous. Regardless of what the elites do, it is your responsibility to protect yourself and your family.

The economic reality that businesses cannot stay closed indefinitely and that most people cannot stay home for long periods. This reality must be balanced with the need to isolate the virus to slow its spread. Congress should have acted months ago to pass more pandemic relief for American families and businesses. People who have been exposed should be compensated for their time in quarantine and businesses who comply with guidelines should be rewarded rather than punished.

I’m a fiscal conservative and deficit hawk, but the pandemic is the rarest of occasions in which throwing federal money at the problem is the right solution. If we can afford to run up the debt for a border wall or a Green New Deal or tax relief or more entitlements, we can afford to compensate Americans for following guidelines to slow the spread of a deadly virus. This would be the federal government acting for the general welfare of the country when Americans need it most.

Christians should be taking the lead on helping the sick and the financially distressed rather than embracing conspiracy theories and rejecting medical science. We believers should be at the forefront of efforts to keep our fellow Americans safe and healthy. People who are pro-life should be willing, even eager, to take simple steps to save lives. Rondell Treviño said it best on Twitter:

Don’t tell me you can’t wear a mask or social distance because it’s “too uncomfortable” when Jesus, our King, got on His knees to wash the disciples dirty feet and then shortly after died on a rugged cross for our sin.

Being uncomfortable is part of serving our neighbors.

— Rondell Treviño (@Rondell_Trevino) December 3, 2020

The bottom line is that to get the country back to normal, we must end the pandemic rather than pretending that the pandemic does not exist. The economy will recover when the virus is gone, not before. Churches and businesses will reopen at full capacity when it is safe. Forgoing gatherings in the meantime is not tyranny or fear but rather an acceptance of medical reality and common sense. Warning against Christmas gatherings is not a veiled attack on religion.

The end of the pandemic is in sight, but we still have difficult months ahead. With the virus spreading at unprecedented levels, now is not the time to abandon masks and social distancing. Doing so means that many more Americans across the country will face the same anguish as Kelley’s family.

“COVID is no joke.”

Originally published on The First TV

The stock market is surging. The economy is not.

 All eyes are on the stock market. The Dow topped 30,000 last week for the first time in history before slipping back and is on track for its best month since 1987, more than three decades ago. The bull market is powered by good news about Coronavirus vaccines and the prospect of an end to the trade wars, but so far that optimism is not reflected in the greater economy.

COVID-19 is still raging and despite the fact that the election is over, some jurisdictions are enacting new restrictions to combat the winter wave of infections. If you live in California, New Jersey, or even red states like Oklahoma and Texas, you may have been subject to new social distancing guidelines aimed at slowing the spread of Coronavirus over the Thanksgiving holiday.

While your 401k is probably looking really good these days, you may have taken a pay cut or lost hours due to the pandemic. You may also be on the cusp of a layoff as many parts of the economy slow once again. Conversely, you may be one of the many unemployed or underemployed Americans watching the stock market enviously, having already cashed in your retirement accounts to make ends meet.

The viral surge that is spawning these new restrictions is also responsible for economic data that indicates a slowing economy. For example, personal disposable income fell by a whopping $134.8 billion (0.8 percent) while personal expenditures rose by $70.9 billion (0.5 percent) per the Bureau of Economic Analysis‘s report last Wednesday. Similarly, a Department of Labor release from the same day indicated that unemployment filings have risen for the past two weeks. This is the first time since July that unemployment has increased over consecutive weeks. Although unemployment is down from the highs of last spring, the reports indicate that the jobs recovery is losing steam.

The slowing jobs market can be blamed on both the surging virus and the expiration of the CARES Act. Passed in March, many aspects of the COVID relief bill expired in September. The popular Paycheck Protection Program, which provided federal funding of payrolls for companies that did not lay off workers, was one of the first programs to lapse. Many of my friends who work in the airline industry got their furlough notices shortly after and are now being laid off.

Unless Congress acts to pass a new relief bill, there are several other federal programs that will expire at the end of the year, just as more workers are likely to be finding themselves unemployed as seasonal jobs come to an end and the winter virus surge forces more shutdowns. These include:

• An extra $300 added to weekly payments by presidential Executive Order expires Dec. 27
• An extra 13 weeks of unemployment benefits (for a total of 39 weeks) under the CARES Act expires Jan. 1
• Pandemic Unemployment Assistance for people who wouldn’t normally qualify for unemployment benefits expires Dec. 31
• A CDC moratorium on evictions for renters expires Dec. 31
• A federal student loan deferment under the CARES Act and extended by President Trump expires Dec. 31

You may notice that I use the term “relief” instead of “stimulus.” That’s because the CARES Act and any follow-on bill would be designed to prevent an economic crash by providing relief to affected Americans rather than trying to stimulate the economy. For example, if Americans become unemployed due to the COVID crisis and burn through their savings, it may lead to a real estate crisis as they get behind in rent and mortgage payments. If you remember 2008, you remember how a collapsing real estate bubble can cascade throughout the economy.

Further, the middle of a pandemic is not a good time to lose a job that provides your medical insurance. While many COVID patients are asymptomatic, about 15 percent require hospitalization. Patients with health insurance can be faced with bills totaling thousands of dollars. Patients without insurance could face financial disaster. COBRA insurance is available for people who lose their jobs but the cost is often prohibitive.

To be fair, not all of the economic news is bad. Like the stock market, consumer confidence is still high, owing largely to good news about upcoming vaccines.

And therein lies the rub. As I’ve said from the beginning, repairing the economy depends on defeating COVID. We won’t get back to normal until the virus is defeated.

We are getting very close to a victory over the Coronavirus, but it will take several months before a vaccine can be fully deployed. Until that time, we need to maintain social distancing and other mitigations such as staying home when you display symptoms and quarantining if you’ve been exposed.

In order to make that financially possible, many American businesses and citizens are going to need assistance to make it through the winter. The difference in having a relief package and going without may be the difference between the status quo and a much deeper recession with many more failed businesses and unemployed Americans.

Originally published on The First TV

Christian ethicists ‘bless’ two leading COVID vaccines (but not the third)

 After eight months of pandemic, it now seems that not one, but three, vaccines are nearing approval. The question is how many Americans will be willing to take the vaccines. There seems to be a growing anti-vaccination movement, but even people who don’t oppose vaccines in general might be skeptical about the COVID vaccines for political reasons. At least one objection, the question of whether the vaccines used stem cells from aborted babies, is now being addressed by Christian ethicists.

Anti-vaccination activists have a variety of rationales for their position, but one that I have heard frequently from Christians is that some vaccines were made using fetal tissue from surgically aborted babies. This presents an ethical dilemma for those of us who oppose abortion on moral grounds.

The good news is that this objection does not apply to all vaccines. Further good news is that two of the three leading vaccines are ethically sourced and do not use fetal tissue from elective abortions.

Doctors at the pro-life Charlotte Lozier Institute have investigated the most advanced vaccine research efforts and categorized them as ethical or unethical.

“While some may see no ethical problem, for many a straight line can be drawn from the ending of a human life in an abortion to a vaccine or drug created using cells derived from the harvesting of the fetal tissue,” the author’s of the institute’s assessment state. “Even if the cells have been propagated for years in the laboratory far removed from the abortion, that connection line remains.  Thus, use of such cells for vaccine production raises problems of conscience for anyone who might be offered that vaccine and is aware of its lineage.  Moreover, the possibility of conscientious objection by those to whom a vaccine is offered creates ethical demands on the policymakers, healthcare officials, scientists, vaccine creators and funders, whether or not they themselves have an ethical concern, because of the question of access to the vaccine by the entire citizenry in good conscience.”

Of the three most promising vaccines, Pfizer, Moderna, and AstraZeneca, two are rated by the institute as “ethically uncontroversial.” These are the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, both of which are more than 90 percent effective. However, the AstraZeneca vaccine, which is being developed in partnership with the University of Oxford, is considered unethical because it uses the HEK293 line of embryonic kidney cells, which may have come from an elective abortion in the 1960s. The identity of the unborn baby and the circumstances of its abortion are not publicly known.

While some other vaccines may also use fetal stem cells, points out that not all use of fetal tissue is ethically questionable. The Bioethics Observatory points out that fetal tissue that was obtained from spontaneous miscarriages or medically necessary abortions can be ethically used provided there is “consent from the parents and the fetus should be treated with the utmost respect.”

In a recent memo reported in America Magazine, Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades and Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann the US Council of Catholic Bishops point out, “Neither the Pfizer nor the Moderna vaccine involved the use of cell lines that originated in fetal tissue taken from the body of an aborted baby at any level of design, development, or production.”

The memo explains that the Catholic Church’s view is that Christians should not use stem cells obtained from aborted babies, but the Church understands that there are different levels of responsibility at different points in the chain that brings vaccines to market. Vaccine creators have different culpability from patients who will receive the vaccine.

The bishops take the practical view that “it is morally permissible to accept vaccination when there are no alternatives and there is a serious risk to health.”

In other words, unethically-produced medicines can still be used to save lives in emergencies. This loophole is not needed for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, however.

“In terms of the moral principles of being concerned about the use of any pharmaceuticals that were developed from aborted fetuses, that is certainly an issue that we all want to be cognizant of and try to avoid their use,” said Brian Kane, the senior director of ethics for the Catholic Health Association of the United States. “With that in mind, the Pfizer and Moderna Covid vaccines that are coming out are not even tainted with that moral problem.”

Others, such as Megan Best of the Gospel Coalition, argue that even using fetal tissue from elective abortions is not unethical provided that the abortion was not carried out for the specific purpose of harvesting the cells.

If “the abortion was carried out for other reasons, and the tissue was acquired after the child’s death for the purpose medical research,” she writes, “The use of the vaccine now will not promote further abortions for this particular purpose. It can therefore be argued that we are not morally complicit with the original abortion.”

“While never condoning evil acts so that good may result, the Bible teaches of a loving God who seeks to make good out of evil,” Best continues. “Though linked, participation in the good does not endorse the evil.”

Regardless of which view you take on fetal tissue research, the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines present no ethical problems. However, even knowing that Coronavirus vaccines were not based on aborted fetal tissue, many people still will not want to take one. That brings up another ethical quandary, the question of whether refusing to take a vaccine that will enable us to end a pandemic that has already resulted in more than a million deaths around the world reflects the love that God wants us to show for our fellow man.

Originally published on The First TV

SCOTUS gets it right on COVID restrictions for churches

 The Supreme Court decision invalidating portions of an Executive Order by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo earlier this week was a triumph for religious liberty. It is also a good example of why fears that pandemic restrictions will lead to broader tyranny are unfounded.

The ruling in the case of Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn, New York v. Andrew M. Cuomo came the day before Thanksgiving and was a response to two requests for relief by the Roman Catholic Diocese and Agudath Israel of America. At issue was Gov. Cuomo’s Executive Order that established “red” and “orange” zones where attendance at religious services was limited to no more than 10 and 25 people respectively.

One problem with Cuomo’s Order was that businesses deemed “essential” had no limit on crowd sizes. Additionally, the definition of “essential” included “acupuncture facilities, campgrounds, garages, as well as many whose services are not limited to those that can be regarded as essential, such as all plants manufacturing chemicals and microelectronics and all transportation facilities.”

Further, both religious groups had complied with public health guidelines as well as implementing additional preventive measures. Both groups noted that they had conducted services at 25 to 33 percent capacity for months and had no outbreaks.

In a 5-4 decision, the majority concurred with the unsigned order that ruled in favor of the religious groups. Justices Neal Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Chief Justice John Roberts wrote separate concurring opinions while Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan joined in a dissent.

The opinion is brief and strikes a balanced tone, first establishing the rules on which the relief was ordered. The ruling states that ” because the challenged restrictions are not ‘neutral’ and of ‘general applicability,’ they must satisfy ‘strict scrutiny,’ and this means that they must be ‘narrowly tailored’ to serve a ‘compelling’ state interest.”

The Court agreed that “stemming the spread of COVID–19 is unquestionably a compelling interest,” but noted that the Executive Order was “far more restrictive than any COVID–related regulations that have previously come before the Court, much tighter than those adopted by many other jurisdictions hard-hit by the pandemic, and far more severe than has been shown to be required to prevent the spread of the virus at the applicants’ services.”

The Court further noted that New York admitted that department stores, which were not subject to the crowd-size restrictions could “literally
have hundreds of people shopping there on any given day” and that “the Governor has stated that factories and schools have contributed to the spread of COVID–19 but they are treated less harshly” than religious organizations.

Unlike many churches around the country, the Court found that the Diocese and Agudath Israel had taken more stringent safety measures than were required by the state. These precautions gave both groups an admirable safety record and helped to sway the Court that Cuomo’s Order was too restrictive.

“Not only is there no evidence that the applicants have
contributed to the spread of COVID–19 but there are many
other less restrictive rules that could be adopted to minimize the risk to those attending religious services,” the decision stated.

The majority found that Cuomo’s restrictions on churches would result in irreparable harm to the First Amendment and were not in the public interest, quoting precedent that held, “The loss of First Amendment freedoms, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury.”

However, the Court did not give religious groups carte blanche to claim persecution when their activities are restricted. The ruling pointed out that pandemic restrictions are not unconstitutional on their face, but rather that health and the public interest must be balanced with the Constitution.

“Members of this Court are not public health experts, and we should respect the judgment of those with special expertise and responsibility in this area,” the decision stated. “But even in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away and forgotten. The restrictions at issue here, by effectively barring many from attending religious services, strike at the very heart of the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious liberty. Before allowing this to occur, we have a duty to conduct a serious examination of the need for such a drastic measure.”

So what should we, as church members and constitutionalists take from this ruling? The most important takeaway is that temporary public health restrictions in a pandemic are not unconstitutional but they must be evenhanded and defensible based on the local situation. The Court will allow emergency orders to combat the spread of the virus but it will strike down broad overreach. This is good news for those who have worried for the past eight months that Coronavirus restrictions would usher in permanent tyranny.

Second, governments cannot single out religious organizations for stricter limitations than secular businesses and groups unless the rules are narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest. The First Amendment offers protection for the exercise of religion, but this protection is not unlimited.

I believe that if the New York churches had been shown to be superspreaders in the community that the Court might have handed down a very different ruling. Unfortunately, many churches around the country are not able to meet the safety standards of the Brooklyn Diocese and Agudath Israel. Many religious organizations around the country have been shown to be hotspots for viral outbreaks. These churches might find that targeted restrictions on their services would be upheld by courts that look at the facts of the situation and find a compelling public interest in slowing the outbreak.

If you’re are a pastor or are on the governing body of your church, you should absolutely take the Coronavirus pandemic seriously. You should exercise caution to protect both your members and your community. If your local government places draconian restrictions on your church, you can challenge those restrictions in court and you’ll have a better chance of winning if your church has not been the source of a COVID cluster.

Originally published on The First TV

Giving thanks in a pandemic year

 This holiday season is going to be unlike most of us have ever experienced. No matter what your opinion on politics and the virus, the fact remains that America is undergoing more adversity this year than at any other time in many of our lives. Even 2001 after the terrorist attacks and 2008 amid the financial crisis pale in comparison to what we’ve experienced this year. For many of us, it is hard to be thankful in the midst of such strife, but, for those of us who are Christian, that is exactly what we are commanded to do. Despite all the bad news, when I look around me I can see a lot of things to be thankful for.

In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you.

1 Thessalonians 5:18

The most obvious is that, if you are alive and able to read this, you should be thankful. As the old saying goes, any day above the ground is a good one. Whether you haven’t contracted COVID or you’ve survived it, you have a great reason to be thankful.

We should also be thankful for the health of our friends and families. The Coronavirus has not touched my immediate family. I’ve had numerous friends and more distant family members contract the disease but most have recovered.

For those who haven’t recovered, I am thankful that we have a forgiving God. I am hopeful that they are removed from their pain and suffering and that we will be reunited in a better place someday.

My mom told me this week that their pastor, the man who performed my wedding, and his wife both have Coronavirus. Their church closed for two weeks in an attempt to limit the outbreak. My dad has respiratory issues and my mom is a cancer and chemotherapy survivor so I’m very thankful that they elected to continue attending church virtually rather than going to in-person services where they could have been exposed.

I’m thankful for the technology that makes social-distancing bearable. We can order groceries, meals, and toilet paper online and have them delivered or ready for pickup without putting our health at risk. I’m very thankful that toilet paper exists in general.

I’m thankful that we decided to put our children in virtual school this year and thankful that our school district offered the option. With several Coronavirus cases being announced in our local schools each week, that decision seems to have been validated. Even if my kids weren’t infected, I’m thankful that we don’t have to deal with a quarantine. On that score, I’m also thankful that virtual school means I get to sleep until 8 a.m. rather than waking up at six to get the kids ready to go to brick-and-mortar school.

I’m thankful for the time with my family that the pandemic has given me. We have seen much more of each other this year than we would have if we were going our separate ways to work and school. With my kids getting older, that extra time has been a precious gift.

I’m also thankful for the frontline medical workers and researchers who have spent the past several months fighting the virus. These people have risked their own health and lives for their neighbors. Many have died or lost their own health as a result.

Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

John 15:13

We should also be thankful for medical knowledge. Hundreds of years of accumulated expertise as well as more recent research have shown us that protecting ourselves and our families is as simple as:

• Maintaining a six-foot distance
• Avoiding crowds
• Avoiding confined spaces
• Wearing a mask if you can’t follow the first three rules
• Washing and/or sanitizing your hands frequently

I’m thankful for people around the country who will practice self-sacrifice on Thanksgiving and throughout the holiday season to protect the lives of their loved ones. Sometimes love is better expressed by staying away than by holding someone close.

The simplicity of protecting ourselves reminds me of the story of Naaman in the Bible, who was instructed by Elisha to wash in the Jordan River seven times to cure his leprosy. Naaman became angry at the simple and seemingly senseless command. Naaman almost didn’t do as he was told, but in the end, his servants convinced him to follow Elisha’s simple advice and he was healed. Sometimes following simple instructions leads to great rewards.

I’m thankful for our advanced medical research. It hit me last night that we had never heard of COVID-19 at this time last year. The virus has been a factor in our lives for less than a year, but we have already been able to create at least three very effective vaccines that are almost ready for mass distribution. That is an unprecedented accomplishment. I’m extremely thankful for the brilliant minds that chose to spend their lives researching and curing diseases.

Previous pandemics often lasted three years or longer. As bad as Coronavirus has been, the introduction of vaccines will cut this pandemic short, saving hundreds of thousands of lives and billions of dollars. That is truly something to be thankful for.

Those of us who still have jobs should be thankful for the steady paychecks that are still coming, even if they might be at a reduced level. We should be thankful that the CARES Act reduced the number of layoffs in the first months of the pandemic recession.

It can be difficult to thankful in the midst of unemployment and pay cuts. I know because I’ve been there. But those people can be thankful for safety net programs, for charities, and for other people who lend a hand in their moment of need.

I get by with a little help from my friends.

The Beatles

I’m thankful that, despite the angst about public health restrictions, Americans really don’t know what tyranny is. Some jurisdictions have gone too far in anti-virus regulation. Others haven’t gone far enough. None reach the level of tyranny, however. It isn’t tyranny to say “no shirt, no shoes, no service” and it isn’t tyranny to ask folks to wear a mask and social distance in the midst of a pandemic caused by a dangerous virus that is spread through the air by close contact.

Tyranny is the killing and imprisonment of dissidents and journalists in Russia, North Korea, Iran, and Saudi Arabia. Tyranny is the confiscation of private land in Zimbabwe and Venezuela. Tyranny is the Chinese government imprisoning pro-democracy demonstrators in Hong Kong.

America has problems but we don’t have tyranny. I’ll get pushback for saying that, but we should really be thankful that our freedom has survived 200 years of encroaching government rather than making our problems seem worse than they are. We can also be thankful that the restrictions made necessary by the pandemic will be going away in a few months as vaccines are distributed.

Finally, and this will also be controversial, I’m thankful that a peaceful transfer of power looks more and more likely. If Joe Biden had lost, I am sure that there would have been violence. I’m thankful that did not happen.

However, as I wrote before the election, I’ve long been concerned that President Trump’s allegations of election fraud could lead to violence from the right. I’m thankful that has not happened and hopeful that it won’t.

Most of all, I’m thankful that this too shall pass. Our adversity is temporary. We can look forward to a return to normalcy next year as vaccines end the pandemic and the economy surges back. Next year at Thanksgiving, masks and social distancing will be a distant memory. We just have to stay healthy until then.

Have a safe and happy Thanksgiving.

Originally published on The First TV

The best news of the week arrived on Monday morning

 It’s before noon on Monday and we have probably already hit a high point for the week. I’m speaking of the announcement by Pfizer that the company’s Coronavirus vaccine has been found to be 90 percent effective in an interim analysis. The stock market cheered the news with a rally of more than 1,000 points.

The world still has a long way to go to end the pandemic but the news of Pfizer’s accomplishment is encouraging. The interim analysis of 94 Coronavirus cases in the study found that fewer than 10 percent of patients who had been given the vaccine were infected by COVID-19 while more than 90 percent of the cases were in people who received a placebo.

This does not mean that the pandemic is over but it does represent a huge step forward. The study, which includes more than 43,000 people, has so far not revealed any serious safety concerns, but the trial is not yet over and the vaccine has not been approved. The company expects to submit the vaccine for emergency FDA approval after a required safety milestone is reached in the third week of November.

Pfizer hopes to manufacture and distribute 50 million vaccine doses in 2020 and up to 1.3 billion doses in 2021. The company is not part of the Trump Administration’s Operation Warp Speed, but did partner with the federal government in July for the distribution of 100 million doses of a future vaccine.

The Pfizer vaccine is taken in two doses and uses a completely new technology called messenger RNA, or mRNA, to produce an immune response in people who are vaccinated. It is likely that the vaccine will require boosters every few years once it is administered.

The downside is that we are months away from approval and widespread distribution of the vaccine. We don’t need to let down our guard because COVID-19 kills in about three weeks and there is still no cure. Today’s announcement is not the end of the pandemic, but it is the beginning of the end.

Regardless of which side of the political debate you are one, we should celebrate being one step closer to an end to the pandemic with herd immunity reached through a vaccine rather than through a cataclysmic death rate. The end of the emergency and a return to normalcy is in sight.

Originally published on The First TV

About those street celebrations for Biden...

 Since the remaining networks called the election for Joe Biden over the weekend, there have been spontaneous outpourings of happiness in the streets of American cities. Trump supporters have pointed out that the Coronavirus pandemic isn’t over and that the gatherings demonstrate hypocrisy on the part of Democrats, who have argued for months – with the notable exception of BLM demonstrations over the summer – that mass gatherings are a bad idea. The Trump supporters are absolutely right.

The rub is that many on the right want to take the wrong lesson from the street gatherings. For many, the argument is that if liberals are able to gather then everyone should be able to gather and we should get back to normal. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Many Republicans told me that COVID would disappear after the election. Well, it’s after the election and we are setting repeated daily records for Coronavirus case counts. On Friday, the US reported more than 130,000 new cases and the curve shows no signs of flattening. Deaths are starting to tick upwards again as well. Almost every day last week, more than 1,000 Americans died from COVID-19. The virus has not disappeared or been beaten and we should not pretend that it has.

A better response to the demonstrations is to remind people that a deadly pandemic is underway. Whether they are happy or unhappy with the election results, they have a responsibility to mask up and social distance to protect the health and lives of their friends, neighbors, and family. It would be helpful for President-elect Biden and other prominent Democrats to call for people to temper their enthusiasm.

Having said that, there are some positive sides to the gatherings. First, they are outside. Open air is believed to help disperse the virus as opposed to being in a closed room. Second, many of the celebrants are wearing masks. Masks are beneficial but they definitely don’t make the wearer invulnerable.

Shifting gears, the street celebrations undercut another Republican argument that I’ve seen a lot of on social media for the past few weeks, namely that Biden couldn’t win legitimately because he could not fill rallies. The meme typically shows a Biden event superimposed with a phrase like “Common sense people are never going to believe that this guy,” and then a second photo of Trump rally is superimposed with the last part of the sentence, “beat this guy.”

The problem with the meme is that it is a false equivalence. The two campaigns pursued different strategies. The Trump campaign took the traditional route of mass rallies and knocking on doors while the Biden campaign held very few public events and didn’t try to hold mass rallies. To be more accurate, the Biden campaign actively tried not to hold mass rallies. The meme was an apples and oranges comparison.

Late in the campaign, Joe Biden came to my town in Georgia and the event was totally closed to the public. By chance, my wife and I were on hand at the airport when Biden’s motorcade returned to his chartered jet but his departure was not announced, he made no remarks, and few people were on hand to watch. (The video is on my Facebook page.)

But Biden could draw crowds when he wanted. The day after I caught a glimpse of the candidate, he held his largest event of the campaign in Atlanta. the socially distant drive-up rally drew more than 700 people and 300 cars. It was smaller than Trump’s rallies in Georgia but, as now seems apparent, rally size does not directly translate into more votes, especially in a pandemic election year.

Trump supporters have a point that the spontaneous pro-Biden demonstrations are not a good idea in a pandemic, but they should also consider that the people dancing in the streets are the same people who would have filled Biden rallies… if he had held them.

Originally published on The First TV

Is the Trump campaign a victim of Coronavirus?

When the history of the 2020 presidential campaign is written, the Coronavirus pandemic will no doubt play a prominent role. President Trump has not yet lost the election, but if he does, the pandemic and his reaction to it will take a lot of the blame.

Much of the discussion about Donald Trump’s handling of the pandemic focuses on the early months. Yes, the president restricted travel from China, but the policy had gaps and there were many missed opportunities as well. After the sort-of travel ban was imposed, the Trump Administration seemed to do little for the next two months until mid-March when the president shifted abruptly from “all is well” to a national emergency (this one far more justified than his national emergency on the Southern border). In September, Bob Woodward showed us that Trump had been aware of the Coronavirus threat all along but had been “playing it down.”

At the same time that Trump was downplaying the viral threat, his Administration was apparently ignoring the federal playbook for pandemics. The errors included not placing orders for emergency medical equipment until the middle of March despite having known since January that the Coronavirus was a deadly threat to Americans.

For the first few months, President Trump was the face of the White House Coronavirus Task Force. Rather than boosting the president’s favorability, the face time with American audiences led to a decline in Trump’s approval rating. One of the most memorable moments from the daily press briefings was Mr. Trump riffing on the possibility of injecting disinfectants to combat the virus.

At a time when Americans needed to trust the president for life-and-death advice, Mr. Trump was a veritable fountain of misinformation. The president had a long and committed love affair with hydroxychloroquine. Even after it became apparent that the drug was ineffective against COVID-19, the benefits of hydroxychloroquine were an article of faith for Trump supporters. Likewise, the president told us that the virus could go away in the summer (spoiler alert: it did not), that it was like the flu (it is not), that children cannot catch the Coronavirus (they can), and that the virus would magically disappear (it has not done so yet).

Of all the former Trump staffers who have warned against re-electing the president, Olivia Troye is one of the most damning. The former aide to Vice President Pence and member of the Coronavirus Task Force said in a Twitter video, “It was shocking to see the president saying that the virus was a hoax, saying everything was okay when we know that it’s not.”

“The truth is that he doesn’t actually care about anyone else but himself,” she added.

Now, some of the Trump strategy is explained by a new recording from Bob Woodward in which Jared Kushner said last April that Donald Trump was taking control back from “the doctors.”

“We’ve now put out rules to get back to work,” Kushner said. “Trump’s now back in charge. It’s not the doctors. They’ve kind of – we have, like, a negotiated settlement.”

So now there is evidence of what many of us have said all along. President Trump was substituting his own “very, very large brain” for the medical expertise of America’s best doctors. The result was not only that the United States became one of the worst-hit countries of the pandemic, but the looming disaster was so transparent that Trump’s poll numbers were impacted very early on.

As far back as April, older voters, a core Republican constituency and the highest-risk group for the virus, were deserting President Trump in droves. A variety of polls from the swing states showed Trump’s support among seniors collapsing and the pandemic was undoubtedly a major reason why. The trend apparently started before the Coronavirus hit the US, but the pandemic accelerated the movement away from Trump.

The pandemic also erased much of Trump’s advantage on his signature issue: The economy. Fox News polling from the swing states in September found Biden and Trump almost equal on the economy while voters strongly preferred Biden to handle the pandemic. In truth, the president’s trade war pushed the economy into a recession in February, a month prior to the widespread outbreak of the virus in the US, but the economy would be much stronger without the added impact of the virus.

Mr. Trump’s reticence about masks and social distancing ultimately led to an outbreak in the White House that extended to his own family. In all, at least 36 people were infected in the White House outbreak. No deaths have been linked to the outbreak, but several, including the president, were hospitalized. Chris Christie spent seven days in intensive care.

Even contracting the disease himself, President Trump has not learned to take the pandemic seriously. The White House resisted contact tracing to limit the spread of the outbreak and on Sunday Chief of Staff Mark Meadows said on CNN’s “State of the Union” that the Trump Administration had essentially given up on containing the virus and was going to concentrate on treatment at virtually the same time that the White House claimed that “ending the COVID-19 pandemic” was one of President Trump’s major first-term accomplishments. After being exposed to the virus by his chief of staff, Vice President Pence continued jetting around the country and making campaign stops rather than submitting to quarantine.

The mixed messaging comes as COVID-19 cases are spiking once again just prior to the election. New cases have surpassed the records set last summer. Even as the president says that the country is “rounding the turn,” the virus is spreading faster than ever before. The prospect of a long, deadly surge this winter and its associated effect on the economy seems to have ended the optimistic summer stock market rally.

Which brings us to what may be the final nail in the coffin of the Trump campaign. Last March, Congress passed and President Trump signed the CARES Act. The bill provided one-time checks to Americans and six months of relief for qualified American companies. Those programs expired in September.

After spending like drunken sailors (sometimes without congressional authorization) for four years, Republicans and the Trump Administration suddenly rediscovered fiscal conservatism when it came time to pass another pandemic relief package. Although talks with congressional Democrats have continued sporadically since July, the Senate has now adjourned until Nov. 9, ensuring that no relief bill will pass before the election. The failure to reach an agreement means that thousands of American businesses are at risk of failure and tens -if not hundreds- of thousands of American workers may lose their jobs. Right before an election.

There are many reasons that Americans are not voting for Donald Trump. The president has never been popular outside his own party. Rasmussen, a Trump-friendly pollster, found in September 2019 that 52 percent planned to vote against Trump. Still, the Trump Administration’s many failures in response to the pandemic did not win over many voters, if any.

The election is not over yet. Donald Trump may ultimately squeak out a victory and stay in office for another four years. If he does manage another fluke, it will be despite his handling of the pandemic rather than because of it.

President Trump took a gamble on pushing to reopen the country and ignoring medical advice about the Coronavirus so that he could be, in the words of Jared Kushner to Bob Woodward, the “open-up president.” In terms of the pandemic, the president lost his bet. The gamble cost many Americans their lives and their health. It may cost President Trump re-election as well.

Originally published on The First TV