US Politics

Joe Biden appears to insult Fox News reporter over inflation questionPresident caught on mic seemingly swearing at Peter Doocy as journalists left a news conference00:24Joe Biden was caught on a hot mic appearing to insult the Fox News journalist Peter Doocy, seemingly calling him a “stupid son of a bitch” after Doocy posed a question about US inflation.Biden calls Peter Doocy a “stupid son of a bitch” Appeared to forget the hot mic pic.twitter.com/FtelbODMO0— Alex Thompson (@AlexThomp) January 24, 2022
“Do you think inflation is a political liability in the midterms?” the reporter asked the president as journalists were leaving the room at the end of an event at the White House on Monday.Biden responded: “No, it’s a great asset – more inflation. What a stupid son of a bitch.”The mic was right in front of Biden, but it appeared as if he were making the remark to himself or that he might have thought the mic had been turned off.The remark came at the end of a White House Competition Council meeting where officials provided an update on efforts to combat inflation, which recently hit 7%. Biden, who was also fielding questions about the growing crisis in Ukraine, had said he only wanted to address questions on the topic of the council, which Doocy appeared to be covering in his inquiry. The White House has said this month that inflation will only be a temporary problem, but some Democrats have worried about the potential for longer-term political consequences.‘Enemy of the people’: Trump’s war on the media is a page from Nixon’s playbookRead moreThe clip of Biden’s remark quickly went viral on social media, with some pointing out that Biden days earlier had muttered, “What a stupid question,” in response to another Fox News reporter’s question about Russia. Doocy went live on Fox News soon after and joked about the insult, saying: “Nobody has factchecked him yet.”Last year, Biden apologized to a CNN reporter after snapping at one of her questions. As vice-president, Biden got caught on a hot mic telling Barack Obama, “This is a big fucking deal!” after he signed healthcare legislation.Despite Monday’s gaffe, Biden’s first year in office has marked a return to civility after a tumultuous four years under Donald Trump, who labelled the media the “enemy of the American people”. Biden has described journalists as “indispensable” to democracy, although press access to him has been limited. The president held fewer than 10 formal news conferences during his first year, far less than Trump or Obama. His press conference last week, however, was longer than any given by either predecessor.TopicsJoe BidenFox NewsTV newsUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

When Joe Biden was sworn in as the 46th US president in January 2021, 51.3% of American voters heaved a sigh of relief – along with much of the world. After four tumultuous and unscripted years of Donald Trump, restoration of calm via his experienced successor seemed welcome. And if Biden was known for a propensity to sometimes misspeak, it seemed little more than a quaint shortcoming, certainly compared with the previous occupant of the White House.

Fast forward to the first anniversary of the Biden administration, and international news headlines shout otherwise. Speaking on January 19 about the highly volatile situation in Ukraine, Biden referred to how America and allies might respond to a “minor incursion” by Russia. Both the president and his press secretary moved quickly to make a clarification, if not fully successfully, to clean up the fallout. A disunited western response to Russian aggression is not a diplomatic win for the administration.

Nor was the chaotic US departure from Afghanistan in August 2021. Long since planned, this move had the support of the voting public but the mishandling was both a humanitarian and PR disaster, and a political blow to the administration and to US primacy in the region. The grave consequences for Afghanistan are ongoing.

Other domestic challenges, notably rising inflation, have added to popular discontent. Furthermore, the administration has been stymied in its efforts to get Congress to enact the so-called Build Back Better and Voting Rights legislation.

In both cases the frustration is exacerbated by the fact that action has been thwarted because of the decisions of two Democratic Senators. The president’s Republican opponents, meanwhile, rejoice at his stalled agenda.

Hence, drawing a negative conclusion on this busy and difficult year seems reasonable. And yet, there has been progress and amidst the prevailing “peril”, there is promise. In fact, there are numerous good news stories and accomplishments by the administration which can get lost in the media vortex. The president has not excelled at accentuating these positives, something crucial to get right in this age of hyper-scrutiny.

On the plus side

So, what positives can be included on the Biden report card? Team Biden arrived at the White House with a 200-page plan to “beat” COVID-19. The delta and omicron variants complicated this picture and dealing with an evolving virus in a nation awash with fake news was always going to be fraught.

Nonetheless, 500 million vaccines were administered during Biden’s first year in office leading to 75% of US adults receiving at least one dose. While the administration cannot be blamed for slow take-up by those who have fallen prey to misinformation, its efforts effectively to force vaccinations on large companies were rebuked by the supreme court.

Biden with the vice-president, Kamala Harris, whose approval rating is as low as the president’s,
EPA-EFE/Erik S. Lesser

Crucially, the economic story is not just about inflation (which in any case is the Federal Reserve’s primary responsibility). Between January and December 2021, the unemployment rate fell from 6.3% to 3.9% and a record 6.4 million jobs have been added to the economy. This points to a sustained recovery. Such a good news story could be of benefit to the Democrat party and at least limit the electoral damage as they head towards what may be bruising mid-term elections later in 2021.

The need to ‘cut through’

So, whether it’s the economy or the pandemic which dominates voter priorities in November, there is a positive story to tell. The president himself acknowledged in his one-year speech that he needs to “get out of this place more often” and engage with the public.

He also has some other successes, which voters clearly approved of, not least legislative accomplishment in the shape of the US$1.9 trillion (£1.4 trillion) American Rescue Plan. There are further aspects of the Build Back Better agenda that have support among the public, particularly those relating to healthcare, despite the hefty price-tag that comes with the legislation. Here again, messaging is crucial. The president needs to focus on what is possible and deliver on his campaign promise of being a negotiator.

On some issues, notably voting rights legislation, he is caught between a rock and a hard place as he is denounced by progressives for not acting decisively enough, yet the legislative reality is that the votes are not there. There may yet be space for progress on Build Back Better and here is where Biden’s second year could move on from the “peril” and deliver on the “promise”.

The political landscape is scorched in many places but there are some areas of potential growth. In the words of former president Bill Clinton, “sometimes it’s best to get caught trying”. More

The US senate presents a long-term threat to US democracyThomas ZimmerThe so-called ‘world’s greatest deliberative body’ is deliberately and inherently undemocratic Enabled by Democratic senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, a united front of US Senate Republicans dealt American democracy a massive blow last week by blocking the Freedom to Vote: John R Lewis Act. The US Senate: a place where desperately needed federal voting rights legislation goes to die – a spectacle unworthy of what Democratic Representative Jamie Raskin called “the world’s greatest deliberative body”.Raskin was referring to the Senate’s reputation not necessarily in an affirmative, but in an aspirational way: he wanted to issue a challenge to the senators to live up to this glorious notion. Nevertheless, the mythical idea of the Senate as “the world’s greatest deliberative body” is widely held among the country’s political elite – the kind of American exceptionalism that still very much warps the perspective on US history and politics.What we really need to grapple with is the fact that the current situation is not just a disgraceful aberration from the Senate’s supposedly noble past and true character. In some fundamental ways, the Senate is working as intended. It has always been one of the most powerful undemocratic distortions in the political system – and not by accident, but because that’s what it was designed to be.So far, much of the attention has focused on the filibuster as the most blatantly undemocratic tool of obstruction. It is true that the frequency of filibuster use has increased dramatically in recent years. Still, what Republicans did last week was well in line with the longer-term historical norm. The filibuster has consistently been an instrument of white Christian domination: during the 20th century, it was used predominantly to block civil rights legislation and measures such as anti-lynching bills.Since the filibuster was not part of the Senate’s original design and only came to be by accident in the early 19th century, it is tempting to portray it as the real culprit – a stain on an otherwise admirable institution. Let’s remember, however, that just like the electoral college, the Senate was always intended to be a layer of insulation between those in power and the people – which is why senators were initially appointed by state legislatures. The senate was supposed to help stave off what many of the founders saw as the “threat” of too much democracy. So, what we see today is not just an institution hijacked by a radicalized Republican party (although it is that too) – but an institution badly in need of structural reform that should go well beyond getting rid of the filibuster.In the current political situation, reforming the Senate, just like protecting voting rights, is considered a “partisan” idea – and it is, but only because democracy itself has become a partisan issue. Of the two major parties, only the Democratic party is a democratic party.Let’s be specific about how undemocratic an institution this is – something that is best captured in numbers: in the current 50:50 Senate, Democratic senators represent 40 million more voters; by about 2040, 70% of the country will be represented by just 30 senators, while less than one-third of the electorate will get to determine 70 out of 100 members of the Senate.The issue of disproportionate representation is deeply intertwined with the problem of white Christian patriarchal rule. The Senate privileges conservative white voters who dominate in small, less populous states; it is biased towards white people, with or without the filibuster. Here are two more numbers everyone should know: out of about 2,000 US senators in the country’s history, 11 have been Black. More than 150 years since the civil war, more than half a century since the civil rights legislation of the 1960s – 11 Black senators. And to date, 58 women have served in the Senate. More than a century since Congress passed the 19th amendment, finally granting women the right to vote – 58 female senators. Whenever someone says the Senate is “the world’s greatest deliberative body”, remember that it is deliberately and inherently undemocratic – an anti-democratic distortion that stands in the way of America finally realizing the promise of multiracial, pluralistic democracy.The legislation Republicans are blocking in the Senate is the minimum needed to resist the state-level authoritarian onslaught on the system. But beyond such immediate measures, a more structural approach to democracy reform is required – and Congress’s upper chamber needs to be at the center of those debates. America can have the Senate in its present form or liberal democracy, but probably not both.The good news is that serious reform is eminently possible. There certainly is no filibuster requirement in the US constitution, and there are ways to alleviate the Senate’s anti-democratic character – by adding DC and Puerto Rico as states, for instance. The tension between white male elite rule and aspirations of true democracy has always shaped the American project – it is inherent in the nation’s founding documents and its political system. The existing institutional order is in conflict with the promise that all people deserve to participate as equals in a democratic polity – and that situation requires a decision.“The world’s greatest deliberative body”? If it were true, it would be quite the indictment of the world’s other deliberative chambers. Let’s abandon such vestiges of mythical exceptionalism that make it harder to acknowledge the anti-democratic threats and deficiencies in American politics and culture. The fact that a shrinking minority of white conservatives is consistently being enabled to hold on to power against the will of the majority of voters is destined to cause a massive legitimacy crisis. And unless the system is properly democratized, it is only going to get worse.
Thomas Zimmer is a historian and DAAD visiting professor at Georgetown University, where he focuses on the history of democracy and its discontents in the United States.
TopicsUS SenateOpinionUS politicscommentReuse this content More

The fight for federal voting rights legislation is far from overJared EvansThe Freedom to Vote: John R Lewis Act would restore key voting rights provisions and protect American democracy. We can’t give up American democracy is in a state of emergency. Without federal voting rights legislation, discriminatory voting laws will continue to pass unchallenged and harm millions in their wake. Following the US Senate’s recent failure to pass the Freedom to Vote: John R Lewis Act, civil rights leaders urged senators to continue pressing for the bill. But understanding how deeply the absence of its protections will continue to affect voters is key to the bill’s success.Arguably the most crucial measure of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was section 5’s pre-clearance requirement that states with a recent history of voter discrimination get approval from the justice department before implementing voting changes. However, the US supreme court’s 2013 decision in Shelby County v Holder struck down the pre-clearance requirement claiming that voting conditions for racial minorities had improved and that its use was outdated. Since then, numerous states passed laws they had previously abandoned due to the threat of pre-clearance. Other states continued to enact laws restricting voting that were already under way before Shelby. These statutes are so restrictive they would have never seen the light of day if pre-clearance was still intact. New voter suppression laws in Texas, Georgia and Florida are the most recent examples of these efforts.The Freedom to Vote: John R Lewis Act (FTV) – which combines two previous bills to defend voting rights and democracy more broadly – would restore the section 5 pre-clearance provisions and create protections against the most common obstacles faced by voters.Those of us on the frontlines in the fight for voting rights know the immediate impact these bills would have on our communities. Last year in Iberia parish, a rural community on the Louisiana Gulf coast that is one-third Black, election officials closed eight polling locations – five of which were in predominantly Black neighborhoods. Voters were not properly notified of this change and, even more troubling, the closures were implemented just weeks before an election. At least 20,000 voters were affected, many of whom did not discover their polling location had changed until they arrived at the location they had been voting at for years. Under FTV, election officials would be required to publicly announce all voting changes at least 180 days before an election, allowing voters adequate time to become familiar with their new polling location, secure child or adult care, and notify their employer, if necessary.In Texas, FTV would immediately reduce the challenges voters of colors face. Nearly all the population growth from 2010 to 2020 in Texas was from communities of color, yet the map that the state legislature enacted reduced the number of districts in which voters of color make up the majority of eligible voters. If FTV were enacted, the redrawing of districts would be the responsibility of a non-partisan redistricting commission that would prevent elected officials from choosing their own constituents. States would also not be able to enact racially discriminatory maps without first submitting them for approval to the DoJ.Mississippi, the state with the largest percentage of Black voters, offers no opportunity for early voting and voters must get documents notarized to vote by mail. When every voter is forced to vote in-person on election day, it often leads to long lines at polling sites and heavy traffic. When voters are forced to get signatures on both the application to vote by mail and the ballot itself, it is especially difficult for elderly voters who often live alone to have their ballot counted.In 2020, this requirement’s burden increased dramatically due to the pandemic, particularly for the elderly, whose increased vulnerability to Covid meant attaining these necessary signatures risked exposure. During the 2020 general election, elderly Mississippians were forced to risk their health to vote in person on election day, unless they met the standards for one of the limited qualifications that allowed someone to vote by mail. FTV would require all states to have at least 15 consecutive days of early in-person voting, including two weekends, giving voters in states like Mississippi another option to cast their ballot.Without pre-clearance, states and localities will continue to suppress votes by enacting restrictive voting changes that target voters of color. While we still have section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits voting practices that dilute minority voting strength, this measure is reactive, meaning advocates can only challenge a voting change after its implementation. However, section 2 was also weakened by the supreme court in 2021 by creating new and additional atextual burdens to the Voting Rights Act’s primary mechanism for challenging voting laws that have a discriminatory result. Until pre-clearance is restored, discriminatory changes will continue to be enacted – and will affect every election. The Senate must act to protect the fundamental right to vote and pass federal voting rights legislation by any means necessary – before it is too late.
Jared Evans is a policy counsel at NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund
TopicsUS voting rightsOpinionUS politicscommentReuse this content More

US conservatives linked to rich donors wage campaign to ban books from schools Experts say trend is accelerating as groups push for bans of works that often address race, LGBTQ issues and marginalized peopleConservative groups across the US, often linked to deep-pocketed rightwing donors, are carrying out a campaign to ban books from school libraries, often focused on works that address race, LGBTQ issues or marginalized communities.Literature has already been removed from schools in Texas, Pennsylvania, Utah, Virginia and Wyoming. Librarians and teachers warn the trend is on the increase, as groups backed by wealthy Republican donors use centrally drawn up tactics and messaging to harangue school districts into removing certain texts.In October, the Texas state representative Matt Krause sent a list of 850 books to school districts, asking that they report how many copies they have of each title and how much had been spent on those books.Michael Flynn allies allegedly plotted to lean on Republicans to back vote auditsRead moreThe Texas Tribune reported that the books included two by Ta-Nehisi Coates; LGBT Families by Leanne K Currie-McGhee; and ‘Pink is a Girl Color’ … and Other Silly Things People Say, a children’s book by Stacy and Erik Drageset. Krause’s list sparked panic in schools, and by December a district in San Antonio said it was reviewing 414 titles in its libraries.In Pennsylvania, the Central York school board banned a long list of books, almost entirely titles by, or about, people of color, including books by Jacqueline Woodson, Ijeoma Oluo and Ibram X Kendi, and children’s titles about Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr. “Let’s just call it what it is – every author on that list is a Black voice,” one teacher told the York Dispatch.Four high schools in Utah’s Canyons school district removed copies of at least nine books, the Deseret News reported, including Gender Queer by Maia Kobabe; the Bluest Eye, a book by the Pulitzer winner Toni Morrison that addresses racial and gender oppression; and Out of Darkness by Ashley Hope Perez, a story about romance in a racially divided 1930s Texas.Groups purporting to be “grassroots” efforts have frequently led the charge, petitioning school boards or elected officials to remove certain books. Though some of these organizations present themselves as a local effort that sprang up around groups of parents united behind a cause, many of the groups involved in banning books are in fact linked, and backed by influential conservative donors.Most of the books relate to race or gender equality, at a time when some Republicans are mounting an effort to prevent teaching on race in schools by launching a loud campaign against critical race theory, an academic discipline that examines the ways in which racism operates in US laws and society.Deborah Caldwell-Stone, director of the American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom, said the number of attempts to ban books had soared through 2021.“What’s unique is it appears to be an organized effort by a number of advocacy groups to activate members in local chapters to challenge books in school libraries and public libraries in the United States,” she said.“We’ve noted that there are a number of groups like Moms for Liberty, Parents Defending Education, No Left Turn in Education that have particular views on what is appropriate for young people, and they’re trying to implement their agenda – particularly in schools, but also taking their concerns to public libraries as well.”Caldwell-Stone said ALA received 156 book challenges – an attempt to remove or restrict one or more books – in 2020. In the last three months of 2021 alone, the organization saw 330 book challenges.In most incidents there is a common format. According to the conservative groups, one parent of a child at school has spotted an allegedly unsuitable book, and has raised the alarm. But the movement is far from organic.The name Moms for Liberty might suggest a homely, kitchen-table effort. In reality, Moms for Liberty is associated with other supposed grassroots groups backed by conservative donors, who appear to be driving the book-banning effort.Moms for Liberty groups are promoted on the website of Parents Defending Education (PDE), another conservative group, and in May Moms for Liberty joined with PDE to write a letter to Miguel Cardona, the US education secretary, expressing concerns over federal efforts to include teaching about the consequences of slavery and the contributions of Black Americans in US society.Moms for Liberty did not respond to a request for comment.Asra Nomani, PDE’s vice-president for strategy and investigations, has appeared on Fox News to rail against some books, including Woke Baby and Gender Queer, being in Virginia libraries, and PDE carries a list of books it deems problematic on its website.PDE, which launched in spring of 2021, has emerged as one of the key organizations in the conservative fight for influence in public schools. The group describes itself as a “grassroots organization”, but has ties to deep-pocket conservative money and influence.PDE’s president, Nicole Neilly, was previously the executive director of the Independent Women’s Forum and worked at the Cato Institute, a rightwing thinktank co-founded by Republican mega-donor Charles Koch. The Intercept reported that the IWF has received large donations from Republican donor Leonard Leo, a former vice-president of the Koch-funded Federalist Society who advised Donald Trump on judicial appointments.PDE’s website offers templates as to how aggrieved people can get involved. The group is behind an effort to create a web of coordinated Instagram pages that highlight perceived liberal bias at specific schools, and offers a step-by-step guide to doing the same, from how to create a specific gmail address to match the mission to how to describe the instagram account. The guide advises: “For the ‘full name’ field, use ‘Woke at [school name].’ For the ‘username’ field, use ‘wokeat[school name].’”PDE, which has also railed against critical race theory, even tells parents they should spy on teachers’ online activity to seek incriminating material.“Look at the social media pages of teachers and administrators at your school. They are often quite proud of what they’re doing and sometimes post incriminating statements or materials,” PDE’s website says.Another aim, beyond banning books, is exposed in PDE’s efforts to encourage conservative parents to run for school boards – an often ignored position that wields a considerable amount of power.PDE offers a guide on how parents can run, and while also describing how to gain influence on Parent Teacher Student Associations. It even offers specific questions disgruntled parents can pose to their school boards.PDE did not respond to a request for comment.No Left Turn in Education, whose chapters are promoted on PDE’s website, is another of the groups leading the charge. No Left Turn’s website contains a list of more than 60 books it deems inappropriate.Again, the group has links to deep-pocketed conservatives. The Milwaukee Journal reported that Elana Fishbein, No Left Turn in Education’s founder, has provided free legal representation for parents wishing to challenge school districts. According to Journal, most of those lawyers are affiliated with the Liberty Justice Center and Pacific Legal Foundation, which receive funding from the prominent GOP donor Dick Uihlein, a Wisconsin-based billionaire.No Left Turn in Education did not respond to requests for comment.The banning of books about race or LGBTQ issues does not just affect those communities, said Kim Anderson, executive director of the National Education Association. It also withholds the opportunity for all students to learn “an honest and accurate truth of our history”.“Censoring the full history of America impacts all of us as a country,” Anderson said.“If we’re not willing to embrace the beauty of America, which is that our diversity is our strength, then we weaken the core idea of America. So it’s offensive, certainly, to people of color and other Americans who have traditionally been marginalized, but ultimately we’re short-changing every single student if we don’t tell the truth.”In Texas, Krause, who was running for state attorney general when he released his list of 850 books – he has since dropped out of the race – did not respond to the Guardian’s questions about how he came up with his list of books.Krause told Education Week he chose to act after school boards began reviewing books of “an inappropriate nature”.“None of us wants grossly inappropriately material in our schools,” he said.As the conservative effort has grown, there has been pushback in many states, from authors, teachers, librarians and students. Carolyn Foote, a library advocate who co-founded the group FReadom Fighters to push back against banning efforts, said the conservative efforts represent a “danger to democracy”.“The supreme court protects young people’s right to choose library materials to read as a first amendment right. It also is growing to include more and more titles, which is concerning, and a minority of parents are impacting all students,” Foote said.The Pennsylvania ban was overturned in September 2021 after students protested outside their York County high school and outside school board meetings. In Virginia, high school students managed to overturn the Spotsylvania book ban in similar fashion, while Caldwell-Stone said the ALA will continue to highlight the book-banning efforts.“We don’t oppose the ability of parents to guide their children’s reading,” she said.“What we have deep concerns about is one parent, or one small group of parents, making decisions for an entire community about what is appropriate reading, based on their own moral and religious values.”TopicsUS newsRepublicansUS educationUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

Capitol attack committee has spoken to Trump AG William Barr, chairman says
Bennie Thompson reveals attorney general interviews
Trump complains panel is going after his children
’Walls closing in’: Trump reels from week of political setbacks
The chairman of the congressional committee investigating the US Capitol attack and Donald Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election revealed on Sunday that the panel has spoken to the former attorney general William Barr, a further indication that the inquiry has moved closer to the ex-president’s inner circle.‘House of Trump is crumbling’: why ex-president’s legal net is tighteningRead moreBennie Thompson told CBS’s Face the Nation that Barr, who was accused of making the justice department Trump’s tool but who resigned before Trump left office, had spoken more than once with the panel.“To be honest with you, we’ve had conversations with the former attorney general already,” Thompson said.His host, Margaret Brennan, asked if the panel would seek answers from Barr over the discovery of a draft executive order for the US military to seize voting machines in contested states.“We have talked to Department of Defense individuals,” Thompson said. “We are concerned that our military was part of this big lie on promoting that the election was false. If you are using the military to potentially seize voting machines, even though it’s a discussion, the public needs to know.”News of the interviews with Barr, who angered Trump by insisting there was no evidence to support his lies of a stolen election, dealt another blow to the former president, whose political and legal woes escalated significantly this week.Unlike other Trumpworld insiders who have refused to cooperate with the January 6 committee, such as the former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, strategist Steve Bannon and national security adviser Michael Flynn, Barr appears to have spoken willingly.It reflects moves by the House panel to focus more closely on Trump’s actions following the election, including his inciting of the deadly January 6 attack on the US Capitol.This week, the committee asked for the cooperation of Trump’s daughter Ivanka.“Our strategy is to get to all the facts and circumstances that brought about January 6,” Thompson said.“And obviously Ivanka Trump was a major adviser to the president all along, a number of items [are] attributed to what she’s been saying and so we asked her to come in voluntarily and give us the benefit of what she knows.”The inquiry has also subpoenaed phone records of Trump’s son Eric and Kimberly Guilfoyle, partner of Donald Jr.Trump is not pleased, complaining in an interview with the rightwing Washington Examiner that the committee was made up of “vicious people” who “go after children”.Donald Trump Jr is 44, Ivanka Trump is 40 and Eric Trump is 38.TopicsUS Capitol attackDonald TrumpWilliam BarrUS politicsRepublicansnewsReuse this content More

Fauci: US ‘confident’ Omicron will soon peak even as hospitals struggle
Biden chief medical adviser also predicts ‘a bit more pain’
Cloth or N95? Mask disputes pit employees against bosses
US authorities are confident most states will soon reach and pass a peak in coronavirus Omicron variant cases, even as hospitals struggle to cope with the current surge, Joe Biden’s chief medical adviser said on Sunday.Public health experts say schools are safe – but districts struggle to convince parents and teachersRead more“I think [we’re] as confident as you can be,” Anthony Fauci told ABC’s This Week. “You never want to be overconfident when you’re dealing with this virus, because it has certainly surprised us in the past.“But, if you look at the patterns that we have seen in South Africa, in the UK and in Israel, and in the [US] north-east and New England and upper midwest states, they have peaked and started to come down rather sharply.“There are still some southern states and western states that continue to go up but if the pattern follows the trend that we’re seeing in other places … I believe that you will start to see a turnaround throughout the entire country.”Fauci also predicted “a bit more pain and suffering with hospitalisations in those areas of the country that have not been fully vaccinated or have not gotten boosters”.But, he said, “we do know – and these are the recent data that have come out – that even with Omicron, boosting makes a major, major difference in protecting you from hospitalisation and severe outcomes.“So things are looking good. We don’t want to get overconfident. But they look like they’re going in the right direction right now.”More than 865,000 people have died in the US during the coronavirus pandemic.Fauci said Omicron “looks like” it is causing less severe disease than other variants, though “it’s by no means exempt from making people sick and putting them into the hospital, particularly those who are not vaccinated”.That relative lack of severity, he said, helped efforts to get Covid under control.“Control means you’re not eliminating it, you’re not eradicating it, but it gets down to such a low level that it’s essentially integrated into the general respiratory infections that we have learned to live with.“I mean, we would like them not to be present, but they’re there. But they don’t disrupt society. They don’t create a fear of severe outcomes that are broad. You will always get some severe outcomes with respiratory infections. Even in a good pre-Covid era, you have always had that. We’d like it to get down to that level where it doesn’t disrupt us, in the sense of getting back to a degree of normality.“That’s the best-case scenario. We have got to be prepared for the worst-case scenario. I’m not saying it’s going to happen, but we have to be prepared, which is, I think, that we get yet again another variant that has characteristics that would be problematic, like a high degree of transmissibility or a high degree of virulence.”According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 75.5% of eligible Americans have received at least one vaccination dose and 63.3% are considered fully vaccinated. However, only 39.7% (or 53.2% of those eligible) have had booster shots.Further boosters could be recommended, Fauci said, once it is known how long a third shot of an mRNA vaccine or a second of the single-shot Johnson&Johnson vaccine will last.“Certainly you are going to see the antibody levels go down,” he said. “That’s natural, but … it is quite conceivable, and I hope it’s true, that the third-shot boost will give a much greater durability of protection. We’re following that very carefully.“And when I say protection, I mean protection against severe disease. You are going to see breakthrough infections as we’ve seen now, even in boosted people, but for the very most part, they’re mild or even asymptomatic.”Virginia woman charged for threats to ‘bring every gun’ over school mask ruleRead moreFauci also said supplies of Covid tests still had to be improved. The Omicron surge has coincided with problems which the Biden administration is attempting to solve, including by offering free at-home tests.Fauci was asked if it was safe to send children to school without a mask, in states where mandates are being removed, often due to political pressures.“We want to get the children back to school,” he said. “And the way you do that, you … surround the children with people who are vaccinated. For the children who are eligible to be vaccinated, get them vaccinated, and provide masks … as well as ventilation to make sure that you can get a respiratory infection at its lowest level of infectivity.“All of those things go together and masking is a part of that.”TopicsAnthony FauciBiden administrationUS politicsCoronavirusOmicron variantnewsReuse this content More