House Passes the Equality Act

On Thursday, February 25th, with a vote of 224 to 206, the House of Representatives again passed the Equality Act, a piece of legislation aiming to ensure the end of discriminatory laws against Americans based upon gender identity and sexual orientation. Propelled by the Biden-Harris administration and Congressional Democrats, it would “ensure protections for LGBTQ Americans in employment, education, housing, credit, jury service and other areas.” However, though perhaps unsurprisingly, this bill “was passed almost entirely on party lines,” totaling in “the support of all Democrats and just three Republicans.” While Democrats argue for this “explicit inclusion of basic, broadly accepted tenets of the Civil Rights Act,” many Republicans cite “infringe[ment] on the religious beliefs of individuals,” as well as a “violat[ion] of women’s right to privacy and safety in [women’s sports].” In the words of Republican Representative Randy Weber of Texas, many Republicans view the bill as “anti-life, anti family, [and] anti-faith.” 

But this is nothing new. In 2019, under the Trump administration, the bill had also passed in the House, but a then Republican-led Senate “refused to hold a vote.” Now, with a Democrat-led House, Senate and White House, the opportunity to pass this legislation appears more open and significant than ever. As the bill has moved on to the Senate, a member of the Human Rights Campaign organization commented on the division between parties in this initial House vote, highlighting a need for “[a] substantial amount of education and outreach to members of the Senate that are operating under, in some instances, fear and misinformation.” 

This video displays a press conference held by Democratic leaders in an effort to articulate their perspectives on the bill. It's a bit long, so I recommend pausing around 3:54, or listening for about another minute or two to hear a summarized explanation of the history of the bill.

Image Source

Dating back to the Stonewall Riots of 1969, an incident that helped fuel the creation of LGBTQ activist groups, the history behind the Equality Act is one that increasingly demonstrates a strong "shift in public opinion" towards support of LGBTQ rights. In a 2020 Public Religion Research Institute survey,“more than eight in ten Americans (83%) favor[ed] laws that would protect gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people against discrimination in jobs, public accommodations, and housing, compared to only 16% of Americans who oppos[ed] such laws.” The Equality Act both expands and incorporates upon the provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, adding “federally funded programs and public accommodations” to the areas of discrimination deemed unconstitutional. Across the nation, businesses would be prohibited from denying services to consumers solely due to their gender identity and sexual orientation, in addition to past explicitly stated factors, such as religion and race. The Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020) similarly pursues the extension of sexual orientation and gender identity to laws of discrimination in the workplace, also under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

President Biden continues to reiterate the passage of this bill as a “policy priority,” emphasizing that "every person should be treated with dignity and respect, and [that] this bill represents a critical step toward ensuring that America lives up to our foundational values of equality and freedom for all.” However, with 60 votes needed to avoid a filibuster in the evenly split Senate, it seems the early turmoil in the House could signal further division and conflict.

CBS on "House passes Equality Act..." 

NYT on "House Passes Sweeping.."

NPR on "Here's What It Would Do..."

Washington Post on "House votes to pass..." 

Washington Post on "Equality Act introduced in..."

Political Ad Bans Unintentionally Block Pro-Vaccine Messages

Since the January 6 riot on Capitol Hill, Google banned political ads on its platform, aiming to halt the spread of political misinformation and conspiracy theories. Facebook joined Google in this ban, reimposing it after the Georgia Senate runoffs. While the ad bans worked to combat the spread of harmful false information in ads, it has had several drawbacks. For example, it has caused blockages in communication between political campaigns and voters during times before state and local elections. 

Perhaps one of the most relevant impacts of political ad bans during this period of time is Facebook’s blockage of pro-vaccine messages. While healthcare providers work to promote the vaccines to the public, these messages of awareness are getting flagged and categorized as a “political message,” needing to be sent into review. While the sponsors of the ad have the option to appeal, they state that this process is tedious, and that there are more pressing issues to focus on, like the new strains of the virus and the rapid distribution of vaccines. One of the sponsors of these blocked ads state that Facebook has “made it very difficult for the township in our efforts to inform our residents about important information regarding Covid-19 registration and updates.” The California Medical Association, posts from European Union institutions, and the CDC have also been subject to the mis-labeling of pro-vaccine posts. 

Facebook responded, saying that “While we have temporarily paused ads about social issues, elections or politics, we continue to allow ads about Covid-19 that promote vaccine efficacy, and have made our guidance to advertisers on how to run them publicly available.” However, public officials continue to show that their routine messages regarding the effectiveness and phases of availability of the vaccine are blocked. Researchers at Northwestern University cite that targeting individuals who are more vaccine hesitant with personalized pro-vaccine ads is extremely important, and Facebook’s system needs to work to achieve this goal. 

Misinformation or even the lack of scientific, pro-vaccine messages have significant effects on people’s decisions of getting vaccinated or not. For example, many Army units are seeing that only ⅓ of their service members are agreeing to get the vaccine, prompting concern because they live and work closely in high-risk environments. Much of this hesitancy is rooted in harmful conspiracy theories and a lack of access to accurate scientific information. In the midst of scrambling to put out pro-vaccine messages and convincing their members to trust the vaccine through information sessions, town halls, scientific data, videos of service leaders getting vaccinated, etc., generals share theories many hesitant individuals used as excuses: “I heard that this thing is actually a tracking device.” General David Doyle says “They tell me they don’t have high confidence in the vaccine because they believe it was done too quickly.” Sentiments like these demonstrate how influential, yet dangerous the media can be. In relation to our Gov lessons about the vast influence that the government and large corporations have on the media, we are able to see the adverse effects of the spread of false information in serious times, and there are some implications towards free speech and its possible harm to society. The conspiracy theory that the vaccine is a tracking device is a form of fear mongering that can be combatted by the spread of information debunking this ridiculous statement. Additionally, a common sentiment amongst not only service members but also the general public is that the vaccine isn’t trustworthy due to the speed at which it was developed. However, one must note that because COVID-19 is so similar to other coronaviruses like SARS and MERS, scientists were able to build off of past research of these viruses, especially the SARS vaccine. Additionally, the coronavirus vaccine was developed quickly due to its rapid, tremendous financial support, a factor that typically causes other vaccines to take almost a decade to develop. Other reasons for its quick development include differences in testing/experimentation processes, mRNA technology, and global participation. Reassuring information like this is imperative to debunk uninformed statements like the ones above; thus, it is crucial for large platforms whose ad bans are unintentionally blocking pro-vaccine information to help control this pandemic and guide us toward herd immunity by tracking and targeting hesitant groups in order to convince them of the efficacy and safety of the vaccine. In the meantime, service leaders and generals are working to make vaccination mandatory, and are setting up incentives, like shorter quarantine time if a certain percentage of a unit is vaccinated. What other strategies do you think leaders can use to encourage service members and the general public to take the vaccine?

Google recently lifted their political ad ban, on February 24th, 2021, in hopes of minimizing interference with 2022 midterm election messages and fundraising campaigns. They will be regaining a large percentage of their revenue from their advertisements. How might this affect the spread of pro-vaccine messages, assuming that large platforms like Facebook will follow suit?

Politico- Facebook 

Politico- Google

Forbes

ABC News

Houston Methodist

Divides Over the $15 Minimum Wage Proposal

Yesterday, the Senate Parliamentarian, “the keeper of the rules in the Senate,” determined the rules of budget reconciliation of the $15 minimum wage proposal by 2025— Democrats choosing to use federal budget reconciliation in an effort to avoid a filibuster. As part of President Biden’s $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill, the Senate Parliamentarian had to make a decision on whether the $15 minimum wage proposal was primarily budget-related, eventually ruling that it could not be included in the final bill as it has an impact on businesses and individuals, and not primarily the federal budget.

Naturally, reactions to this decision varied between parties. Republicans were pleased by this news and essentially “framed the decision as the Parliamentarian protecting the rules of the Senate.” Democrats generally expressed disappointment and specifically Chuck Schumer, the Senate majority leader, stated that he would pursue other legislation that would increase the national minimum wage. Biden was also disappointed and “will work with leaders in Congress to determine the best path forward because no one in this country should work full time and live in poverty” but noted that he respects the Senate Parliamentarian’s decision and the Senate process. Biden is now focusing on the other elements that are included in the COVID-19 relief bill such as $1,400 stimulus checks, money for schools, money for virus containment, and also pushing the vaccine distribution. As increasing the minimum wage was one of his major priorities, Bernie Sanders, the Budget Committee Chairman, claimed that he is going to work on an amendment to take tax deductions away from large profitable corporations that do not pay their workers at least $15 an hour. And, wants to somehow provide small businesses with incentives to raise their wages. 

Aside from the major disappointment of many Democrats and progressives, this decision relieves pressure from Democratic party leaders who want to rally support for the overall bill, even if that means prioritizing its other elements — the $15 minimum wage standalone bill has fewer than 40 co-sponsors in the Senate, making it difficult to prioritize at the moment. 

Raising the minimum wage has been a Democratic priority for years. The Covid economy has hurt low-wage workers much more than those that can work from home. In raising the minimum wage, small businesses could be forced to close as many are already struggling for sales. Not only that, but it also decreases the economic freedom of corporations, restricting their spending to compensate for the output of money that would need to be spent on labor. Some lawmakers and opponents feel that now is not the right time to raise operating costs for businesses. Republican Senator Elizabeth Ann Van Duyne of Texas notes that “a federal mandate to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour will put us right back to where we were months ago — American jobs destroyed, small businesses forced to close their doors and life savings gone to waste.” 

NPR

CNN

CNBC

NYT

Trump's Tax Returns: Fraud or Not?

In August 2019, a grand jury subpoena was issued by Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. to Mazars, Trump’s accounting firm, requesting eight years of Trump’s tax records. Trump refuses to comply with the subpoena, and takes to the Supreme Court to dispute it, arguing that “the president is immune from investigation while he holds office” and “a prosecutor must show a greater need than normal to obtain the tax records.” In July 2020, the US Supreme Court, in a 7-2 vote, rejected Trump’s attempts to stop the subpoena. Trump and his lawyers then returned to the lower courts to argue that “the subpoena was overly broad and politically motivated,” where he was again rejected. On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled, a second time, that Trump could not further withhold his financial records. Both Supreme Court rulings were made without any noted dissent.

Only a few hours after the ruling on Monday, Vance confirms that Trump has finally turned over his tax documents. Due to grand jury secrecy rules, the tax documents will not be made public. The Manhattan District Attorney initially requested the tax documents for an investigation of possible tax or insurance fraud as well as hush-money payments to two women who Trump allegedly had an affair with. Now that Trump finally complied to the subpoena, many analysts are searching through the thousands of pages in order to find any inconsistencies in his tax documents or the intent to defraud. Any cases of fraud can lead to indictment for financial crimes.

Not only does Trump deny any wrongdoing, Trump also stated that the case was a "political persecution," "fishing expedition," and "a continuation of the witch hunt." He adds: "This is something which has never happened to a President before, it is all Democrat-inspired in a totally Democrat location."

According to the New York Times, Trump's long-lasting “battle" with this issue "had tested the scope and limits of presidential power.” For 18 months, Trump was able to delay in complying to the subpoena with his defense that he was President, which protected him from any charges other than impeachment. Since Trump is no longer in office, he now has no choice but to provide the tax documents to Vance. Otherwise, if Trump delayed any longer, he could face much worse consequences for refusing to comply with the subpoena -- in which he could be held in contempt of court.  

But now, Trump is at risk for critical backlash and serious consequences due to the many pending investigations against him. Because Trump is no longer a member of the executive branch, he is subject to the state judiciary just like any other citizen, even to a criminal trial. This issue has demonstrated the separation of powers in terms of crimes -- Congress has power over the President, but the judiciary has power over private citizens and still makes rulings about disputes between different groups.

nytimes.com

washingtonpost.com

npr.org

foxnews.com

cnn.com

Democrats Aim to Finalize $1.9 Trillion COVID-19 Relief Bill

Congressional Democrats are quickening their pace, planning to use budget reconciliation to pass the “American Rescue Plan” for President Biden’s approval before March 14th, the expiration date of unemployment insurance provided through current relief packages. However, though this bill appears to have exceeded expectations of bipartisanship on national polls, it is currently set to move through Congress backed solely by Democratic votes. Scrutiny from Republicans arises amidst claims of possible “intensified inflation and concerns with growing national debt,” as “falling infection rates and unspent funds from previous relief packages [serve] as a reason to wait on any further stimulus.” Democrats counter that “missing this March 14th deadline would cost 10 million people necessary assistance.”

On Monday, the House Budget Committee released details of this bill, voting for its progression to the House Rules Committee. It allocates billions towards “unemployment benefits, small businesses and stimulus checks,” specifically including “$1,400-per-person relief checks for Americans earning less than $75,000,” a point taken from former President Trump’s notes of Senator Mitch McConnell’s $900 billion relief bill (which allocated $600 per individual earning less than $75,000) in December. Other critical benefits include: “$422 billion for stimulus checks to individuals, $246 billion for supplemental unemployment insurance, $350 billion for state and local governments, $160 billion to combat virus[es], including vaccines, testing [and] tracing, $130 billion to reopen K-12 schools, [and] $7.25 billion for small business[es] via [the] Paycheck Protection Program.” The passage of this bill would up the U.S. federal government’s current spending on COVID-19 relief to about $6 trillion.

Image Source

As one of the first attempts of major economic legislation under a uniform, Democrat-controlled House and Senate, the passage of this bill sets forth “implications” for future legislative challenges taken on by the Biden-Harris administration. Up until today, included within the bill’s provisions was a controversial increase of the national minimum wage to $15 an hour, which had remained a sticking point for some Democratic Senators, including West Virginia’s Joe Manchin and Arizona’s Kyrsten Sinema, whose votes are necessary to achieve the simple majority needed for this bill to pass. With a House floor vote scheduled for tomorrow, action from the Senate, based on this decision from Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough, who “[acts] as the nonpartisan referee in deciding whether certain provisions can be included in bills lawmakers are trying to pass under [this] special [reconciliation] process tied to the budget,” will likely call for further compromise from both sides. 

This video briefly touches upon the standing of the current American economy, perhaps most notably on the sense of security Americans may be beginning to experience in spending, related to a “steady vaccine rollout and lowered virus numbers.” Christopher Smarts, Chief Global Strategist of Barings Investment Institute, emphasizes the increasing possibility of 2021 being “a year where we’re going to see both the effects of the stimulus and the effects of the vaccine coming through… with markets reacting to the data.” Smarts mentions that “last week’s retail sales number [were] a blowout… reflecting the fact that the stimulus passed in December was having an effect,” coupled by a “good earnings season.” In terms of economic growth, it seems that stimulus packages designed to bolster consumer trust and spending currently pave the way to recovery, aiming to not only boost the markets, but also to protect the economic security of many who have been unemployed or experienced job loss. As we learned in class, based on the circular flow model, if households are financially stable and spending, then firms are spending, enabling goods and services fueled by a need to hire, and resulting in a greater number of households having more money to spend. However, if households are spending less money, then firms have less revenue and need for labor. For the future, Smarts continues to emphasize that “talk of spending will continue to be very strong this year… and that a lot of momentum [can be achieved] if President Biden can push through this first stimulus package to come back again with a much more ambitious program that includes tax increases, infrastructure and the like… [adding up to] a number of about $3 trillion.”  

CNN on "Biden faces the $1.9 trillion..."

WSJ on "Stimulus Package..."

NBC on "Senate ruling says..."

NPR on "Here's What's In..."

NYT on "Republicans Struggle to Derail..."

Forbes on "Democrats Await Key Ruling..."

Bloomberg on "Senate Panel Starts..."

Bloomberg on "Biden’s $1.9 Trillion Stimulus..."

COVID-19 Vaccine Reserved for California Teachers

As more California residents are getting vaccinated and positive COVID-19 cases are slowly starting to dwindle, California has begun its process of vaccinating more than just our frontline healthcare workers. With one-third of residents above the age of 65 already receiving their two sets of vaccinations, 35 California counties have agreed that starting March 1st, they will set aside 10% of vaccines for teachers and school employees, beginning Phase 1B. Governor Gavin Newsom articulates that “We want to operationalize that as the standard for all 58 counties in the state.” San Mateo County began expanding its vaccination line to eligible essential workers starting on February 22nd, opening up vaccine appointments to teachers, along with child care providers, first responders, and food and agricultural workers.

California COVID-19 Vaccine Tracker

Gavin Newsom acknowledged and strongly emphasized in this video that quickly reopening schools is extremely important, which can be implied as one of his top priorities. Though the vaccine is currently limited in supply in most California counties, the government is planning to speed up production. Based on this, Governor Newsom will begin to reserve 75,000 vaccine doses per week for school staff, hoping to increase that number as vaccine production speeds up.

Aside from reserving vaccines for teachers, the California Teachers Association has demanded vaccinations as a requirement for returning back to in-person instruction. Just last week, the CTA launched TV ads stressing more regulations for the reopening of schools. Along with the CTA, many teachers’ unions do not want to go back to in-person instruction at the moment, despite the CDC’s current plan for reopening schools. However, the CDC's new reopening plan for schools specifies that vaccinations are not a requirement for teachers to partake in in-person instruction. 

Governor Newsom also expressed support for Democrats in the legislature who proposed a fast-track bill that covers school reopening costs, summer school costs, and other necessities to compensate for disruptions in student learning. This bill will include billions of dollars in federal and in-state funding. However, Newsom believes that it does not help open schools fast enough, stating, “April 15th! That’s almost the end of the school year.” With all that is going on, it is difficult for some to decide whether to go back to school or not if the situation has a chance to present itself soon. This multi-billion dollar plan to supplement the reopening of schools in California, however, presents opportunity costs such as time, the possibility of spending the money on other in-state priorities that are more likely to happen and giving the vaccines that are being put aside at the moment to other eligible workers that have contact with more people on a daily basis. The pros and cons of hybrid and in-person learning force families to weigh their priorities: mental health and sanity or safety and precaution. Not only that, but teachers are also put in a particularly challenging position as the CDC does not require vaccinations to be given to teachers in order for schools to reopen.

San Mateo County

NYT Article

NYT Video: Newsom's Report on School Reopening

Office of Governor Gavin Newsom

ABC7 News

California Teachers Association Video (AD)

CDC

Landing of Mars rover "Perseverance" & Trump's lasting impact on NASA's climate missions

On Thursday, February 18th, scientists and engineers waited anxiously at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, as their rover, Perseverance, lifted off from Florida’s Space Coast to embark on its journey to Mars. 

Because the air on Mars is only 1% as thick as Earth’s, scientists and engineers employed a sky crane powered by rockets in place of a chute. In comparison to other Mars rover Curiosity, Perseverance is larger, heavier, and has more advanced search and landing technology. At 3:55 ET, the rover landed safely on Mars, and passed all initial health checks. Perseverance has already begun to provide audio recordings, take pictures, and work to bring rocks and other samples back to Earth. Simultaneously, Perseverance will begin searching for signs of microbial life in the deltas where water once flowed. This is really exciting news, because with these collections, scientists will be able to examine the climate and history of Mars, possibly bringing humanity one step closer to being able to step on the planet. 

NASA is an agency of the U.S. federal government, specializing in aeronautics and space research/exploration. NASA not only generates billions of dollars in economic output per year, but also creates hundreds of thousands of jobs nationwide. Their investment in basic research and engagement in engineering challenges has resulted in positive externalities, which refer to when the production or consumption of a good brings benefit to a third party. In this case, these positive externalities lead to market failure, because the benefits are captured by private businesses in the form of a price, and there are side benefits an individual is getting, but not paying for. Historically, there has also been controversy over NASA versus the private sector, as private entrepreneurs encourage the eradication of governmental intervention, stating that “there are untold riches to be found in space; just unleash the profit motive and get the government out of the way.”

Additionally, because NASA is a government agency, presidential administrations play a large role in their ventures. For example, the culture of NASA greatly changed under the Trump administration. In 2018, the Trump administration put an end to NASA’s greenhouse gas monitoring system, and the Carbon Monitoring system (which measured the world’s flow of carbon dioxide) lost their funding. This not only compromised the ability to verify national emission cuts, but also posed a threat to the Paris Climate agreement. Many employees chose to work at NASA over a private sector for the good of the public, however, the threats that Trump posed to their budget on earth science and other climate missions compromised the quality of their work life, and many expressed disappointment during those years. A senior science editor who had been working at NASA's JPL for a decade, stated that 3 weeks into the Trump administration, after the EPA was shutting down climate communications, “It caused NASA management to panic. Scott Pruitt had been appointed to head the EPA and promptly removed the EPA’s climate-change website. NASA management seemed to fear a similar fate.” Additionally, he described his experiences working with NASA’s social media: “NASA Climate’s social media pages used to be vital mechanisms for keeping the public updated with factual information. During the Obama presidency, I live-tweeted and posted on Facebook in real time from science events, conferences, satellite launches and field campaigns. I posted up-to-date information on global climate events such as cyclones, floods, tornadoes and storms on evenings and weekends. Our satellite images showed up in art galleries and museums; our graphs and data were used at science events all over the world. But by the end of Trump’s term, NASA Climate’s social media presence had dwindled to almost nonexistent.” This experience, out of many, reveals to us just another example of how the Trump administration disregarded not only climate change, but also the broader field of science in general. While some say that the space exploration branch is one of the branches not left in shambles after the Trump administration, others say that Trump has left a mess behind for Biden to clean up (described as “uncertain plans, unproven cost assumptions, and limited oversight”). Shifts in NASA priorities and culture are still up in the air under the Biden administration, as we are not sure about his stances on the focus on space exploration versus earth science, as well as if he will be continuing the National Space Council (NSC), an executive branch advisory board that handles space policy matters. Thus, how do you think NASA’s culture might change from under Trump’s administration to Biden’s?  Based on Biden’s previous interactions with NASA as a Delaware Senator, do you anticipate that he will prioritize space during his presidency? Also, should NASA remain a government agency, or should they transition to a private enterprise?

Bloomberg

BBC

Time- NASA under Trump

Time- Biden & NASA

NASA v. Private Enterprise

NYTimes- Perseverance Landing

NASA

Uncontained Engine Failure is Only One of Boeing's Many Problems

United Airlines Flight 328, a Boeing 777-200 bound for Honolulu suffered from a right engine failure shortly after takeoff on Saturday. When the passenger set reached an altitude of 13,000 feet, passengers reported a loud boom coming from outside the airplane. After noticing the engine failure, the passenger jet turned around and landed safely in Denver International Airport. However, in a residential area of Broomfield, Colorado, debris began raining down onto fields, streets, and front yards. Thankfully, no injuries were reported neither from the passengers nor the residents on the ground.

Following this incident, the FAA is now conducting investigations of 128 Boeing 777 aircraft with Pratt & Whitney 4000-112 engines. Boeing also recommends the grounding of all these jets, which are now suspended and awaiting inspections. This includes 69 in-service aircraft as well as 59 aircraft that were already in storage from lack of demand. This grounding affected airlines in the US, South Korea, and Japan: United Airlines, Korean Air, Asiana Airlines, All Nippon Airways and Japan Airlines.

Analysts have described the incident as an "uncontained engine failure," a very rare, but very dangerous, occurrence. The engine failure could spread the damage onto the rest of the plane, which could lead to very disastrous consequences, although that fortunately did not happen in this recent incident. However, analysts have still noticed disturbing similarities between the recent engine failure and a different engine failure of a Boeing 777 on a United Airlines flight in February 2018.

Boeing had recently been recovering from a 18-month grounding of the 737 Max due to two tragic accidents only 5 months apart. Additionally, safety regulations and travel restrictions in response to the pandemic have led to the struggle of the airline industry. And now, according to cnn.com, Boeing is facing a "more serious long-term threat to the company than the Max grounding," Richard Aboulafia, a Teal Group aerospace analyst, says. Airbus, a Europe-based aerospace company, is competing with Boeing in a heightening rivalry in the single-aisle plane market. The rising demand for single-aisle planes rather than widebody jets are posing as an issue of concern" to the "widebody market."

In my opinion, this series of events for Boeing are slightly indicating another potential bailout by Congress. Do you agree that there is this possibility? And is this bailout for Boeing justified, especially due to the effect of Covid-19 on airline industries? Is Boeing in need of help, or should the company suffer the consequences?

Is the grounding of Boeing 777 aircraft with the same type as engine as the recent Denver incident justified?

cnn.com

bbc.com

usatoday.com

Confusion and Vaccine Alarmism

The U.S. has seen more than 498,650 COVID-19-related deaths as of Sunday, 2/21. About a year since the COVID-19 pandemic hit America, many have observed and experienced its impacts— ranging from devastating unemployment and job losses to its detrimental effects on public health and enormous death toll around the globe. Yet, the narrative surrounding vaccines has remained slightly disheartening, with caution in much of the media, fueled by public health officials and scientists, offering sentiments similar to this: “The coronavirus vaccines aren’t 100 percent effective. Vaccinated people may still be contagious. And the virus variants may make everything worse. So don’t change your behavior even if you get a shot.”

Image Source

 

Questions regarding the effectiveness, longevity and other “unknowns” related to the COVID-19 vaccine help to explain the careful and meticulous statements issued by public health officials and scientists. However, Johns Hopkins’ epidemiologist Dr. Kate Grabowski makes the claim that this “lack of certainty or strong empirical evidence is often interpreted to mean that we have something that is not true.” And, while prudent communication has led to “increased skepticism around vaccination,” Dr. Grabowski emphasizes that “even if vaccines’ effects on COVID-19 transmission are imperfect and temporary, vaccination will still lead to massive decreases in the number of cases if—and only if—there is wide uptake of vaccines in the general population.” 

Currently, “about a third of the military has refused the opportunity to receive vaccinations,” with some citing unease in the “vaccine’s development process or timeline” in a Blue Star Families’ survey. The Pentagon has reinforced the notion of educating service members, likely in hopes of increasing the two-thirds of service personnel who have voluntarily received vaccinations. 

With this being said, it’s important to note the large disparities on the impact of COVID-19 across America. Low income families, as well as racial and ethnic minority groups, have suffered disproportionately from the virus’ effects. In fact, the NBA, aiming to issue “PSAs” to promote a greater sense of trust in the science behind vaccinations, has been met with “player apprehension… consistent with those that also exist in Black communities throughout the country.”  As discussed in our Civil Rights and Public Policy units, the history of institutionalized racism has long perpetuated American government, the American “healthcare system,” and American society. To quote Edwards and Wattenberg, certain groups of people have faced consistent discrimination— in terms of race, ethnicity, age, gender identity, sexual identity, among other factors, culminating in a “struggle for equality [that] has been a persistent theme throughout our nation’s history.” It makes sense that people of color are more hesitant, faced by government institutions who created legislation that their predecessors fought long and hard against in the courts, while only slowly seeing positive change. Indeed, “in cities across the country, Black health professionals were among the first to get vaccinated, in some cases publicly, at events open to the press.”

Can messaging be altered to influence public opinion surrounding vaccinations? Should the government play a role in targeting this outreach of communication?

NYT on "Underselling the Vaccine"

NYT on "Vaccine Alarmism"

NPR on "Race And The Roots..."

Washington Post on "Half of the US troops..." 

Washington Post on "A third of service members..."

The Daily Beast on "Anti-Vaxxers Aren’t..."

ESPN on "Sources: Many top NBA players..."

Asian and Black Communities Come Together in Oakland Rally

In the midst of the rise of many racially motivated attacks in the past year, the Asian and Black Communities in Oakland came together last Saturday, February 13th at the start of Lunar New Year to support each other through the tough fight against violence, mainly prompted by the presence of COVID-19 and fueled by the Trump administration’s reference to it as the “Chinese Virus.” Along with this, advanced technology including the media and various social networking platforms have contributed to the rapid spread of many false statements and conspiracy theories, causing the public to give into confirmation bias as they listen and watch news outlets that have the same views and opinions as them, disregarding other points of view like CNN vs. Fox. Additionally, Trump’s Twitter and the influence of politicians/public figures have greatly influenced public opinion and therefore political polarization. With at least 18 hate crimes in just two weeks, many spoke out to acknowledge the crippling need for the halt to violence and a movement of cross-cultural education, safety, and accountability for everyone. 

In this rally, leaders of the Black community made it a point to address the “unfair stereotype”— that members of the city’s black community have been targeting their Asian neighbors. Leaders of both groups rallied together in Madison Park, showing solidarity and discussed the importance of cross-cultural unity to promote multicultural healing. A line of speakers from both minority groups ranging from community members to the Mayor of Oakland, Libby Schaaf, presented stories of their own incidents dealing with racially motivated assaults and discussed ways to prioritize public safety and protection of their communities from both verbal and physical attacks, especially following the recent brutality towards the elderly and vulnerable.

Some community members showed their support by holding signs saying “Asian Americans save lives as your doctors, nurses, grocers, farmers, and teachers — we are not the enemy” and “We are not the enemy — end white supremacy” as well as wearing t-shirts declaring “Black-Asian unity.” An article published by Stanford Daily analyzes the history and struggles of Asian and Black communities in terms of their unity, police violence, police support, how many Asians across the country are not able to recognize racial inequalities, and how the “model minority” myth plays a role in the unintentional upholding of white supremacy. 

In referencing the Black Lives Matter movement, it is clear that hefty publicity and attention across many social media platforms, news outlets, and even casual conversation was present towards the rallies that were held. Though this is one of the first rallies and acknowledgments of the Asian community’s inequalities and struggles, there has not been nearly as much media coverage, publicity, and attention towards the Asian community’s attempts to speak out for justice. Asian culture tends to push uncomfortable sentiments aside and internalize feelings for convenience, straying away from stirring commotion; however, this must change in order for social activism to make its way into the mainstream news. Let’s start getting comfortable with talking about uncomfortable topics.

NBC Bay Area

San Francisco Chronicle

Nextshark

Stanford Daily