United States Politics and Government

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      A Bird Flu Pandemic Would Be One of the Most Foreseeable Catastrophes in History

      by

      Almost five years after Covid blew into our lives, the main thing standing between us and the next global pandemic is luck. And with the advent of flu season, that luck may well be running out.The H5N1 avian flu, having mutated its way across species, is raging out of control among the nation’s cattle, infecting roughly a third of the dairy herds in California alone. Farmworkers have so far avoided tragedy, as the virus has not yet acquired the genetic tools to spread among humans. But seasonal flu will vastly increase the chances of that outcome. As the colder weather drives us all indoors to our poorly ventilated houses and workplaces, we will be undertaking an extraordinary gamble that the nation is in no way prepared for.All that would be more than bad enough, but we face these threats gravely hobbled by the Biden administration’s failure — one might even say refusal — to respond adequately to this disease or to prepare us for viral outbreaks that may follow. And the United States just registered its first known case of an exceptionally severe strain of Mpox.As bad as the Biden administration has been on pandemic prevention, of course, it’s about to be replaced by something far worse. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Donald Trump’s pick to lead the nation’s vast public health agency, has already stated he would not prioritize research or vaccine distribution were we to face another pandemic. Kennedy may even be hastening its arrival through his advocacy for raw milk, which can carry high levels of the H5N1 virus and is considered a possible vector for its transmission.We might be fine. Viruses don’t always manage to adapt to new species, despite all the opportunities. But if there is a bird flu pandemic soon, it will be among the most foreseeable catastrophes in history.Devastating influenza pandemics arise throughout the ages because the virus is always looking for a way in, shape shifting to jump among species in ever novel forms. Flu viruses have a special trick: If two different types infect the same host — a farmworker with regular flu who also gets H5N1 from a cow — they can swap whole segments of their RNA, potentially creating an entirely new and deadly virus that has the ability to spread among humans. It’s likely that the 1918 influenza pandemic, for example, started as a flu virus of avian origin that passed through a pig in eastern Kansas. From there it likely infected its first human victim before circling the globe on a deadly journey that killed more people than World War I.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 63 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      The Inverted Morality of MAGA

      by

      I admire Mitt Romney. He is, by all accounts, an outstanding husband and father. He built a successful investment firm by supporting successful young businesses like Staples. He served the public as head of the 2002 Winter Olympics and as a governor. As a senator, he had the courage to vote to convict Donald Trump twice, in the two separate impeachment trials, when few other Republicans did.But as Noah Millman writes on Substack, people in the MAGA movement take a different view of Romney. In private life, Romney compliantly conformed to the bourgeois norms of those around him. In business he contributed to the bloating of the finance and consulting sector. As a politician he bent himself to the needs of the moment, moving from moderate Republican to “extreme conservative.” As a senator, he sought the approval of the Washington establishment.Millman’s underlying point is it’s not sufficient to say that Trump is leading a band of morally challenged people to power. It’s that Trumpism represents an alternative value system. The people I regard as upright and admirable MAGA regards as morally disgraceful, and the people I regard as corrupt and selfish MAGA regards as heroic.The crucial distinction is that some of us have an institutional mind-set while the MAGA mind-set is anti-institutional.In the former view, we are born into a world of institutions — families, schools, professions, the structures of our government. We are formed by these institutions. People develop good character as they live up to the standards of excellence passed down in their institutions — by displaying the civic virtues required by our Constitution, by living up to what it means to be a good teacher or nurse or, if they are Christians, by imitating the self-emptying love of Christ. Over the course of our lives, we inherit institutions, steward them and try to pass them along in better shape to the next generation. We know our institutions have flaws and need reform, but we regard them as fundamentally legitimate.MAGA morality is likely to regard people like me as lemmings. We climbed our way up through the meritocracy by shape shifting ourselves into whatever teachers, bosses and the system wanted us to be. Worse, we serve and preserve systems that are fundamentally corrupt and illegitimate — the financial institutions that created the financial crisis, the health authorities who closed schools during Covid, the mainstream media and federal bureaucracy that has led the nation to ruin.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Mexico’s President and Trump Describe a Positive Talk but Differ on Migration Details

      by

      Mexico’s president, Claudia Sheinbaum, spoke to President-elect Donald J. Trump on Wednesday afternoon, and both later characterized their discussion as positive while providing different descriptions of what Mexico is doing to stave off a potential tariff war.While Mr. Trump posted on social media that Mexico had agreed to stop migration to the United States through Mexico, “effectively closing our Southern Border,” Ms. Sheinbaum limited her description of the migration-related issues they had discussed to migrant caravans no longer reaching the border with the United States.Still, Ms. Sheinbaum, who earlier in the day had made clear that Mexico would impose retaliatory tariffs in response to similar measures threatened by Mr. Trump, seemed to ease tensions by saying the exchange was “excellent.”“I had an excellent conversation with President Donald Trump,” she wrote on social media. “We addressed Mexico’s strategy regarding the migration phenomenon, and I shared that caravans are no longer reaching the northern border as they are being addressed within Mexico.”That update from Ms. Sheinbaum came after Mr. Trump jolted trade relations with Mexico by saying earlier in the week that he would impose a 25 percent tariff on all goods from the country unless Mexican authorities stopped migrants and drugs, such as fentanyl, from coming across the border. The proposed move raised concerns over the potential impact on Mexico’s economy, which relies on trade with the United States.Mr. Trump also posted on social media about the conversation with Ms. Sheinbaum, calling it “wonderful” and “productive.”“She has agreed to stop Migration through Mexico, and into the United States, effectively closing our Southern Border,” Mr. Trump said, though Ms. Sheinbaum referred only to the caravans. “We also talked about what can be done to stop the massive drug inflow into the United States, and also, U.S. consumption of these drugs,” he added.Ms. Sheinbaum said earlier on Wednesday, “If there are U.S. tariffs, Mexico would also raise tariffs” — making clear her stance on Mexico’s potential response.Senior officials in her government and leading figures in Mexico’s governing party, Morena, also expressed support for retaliatory tariffs. Mexico’s economy minister, Marcelo Ebrard, said that about 400,000 jobs could be lost in the United States if Mr. Trump imposed the tariffs, calling the measure a “shot in the foot” while speaking alongside Ms. Sheinbaum at a morning news conference.Mexico’s president did not refer to tariffs, or trade tensions in general, in her post about her conversation with Mr. Trump. Instead, she said she and Mr. Trump had “discussed strengthening collaboration on security issues within the framework of our sovereignty and the campaign we are conducting in Mexico to prevent fentanyl consumption.” More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      ‘Excelente’: así fue la llamada de Sheinbaum y Trump tras la discusión arancelaria

      by

      La presidenta de México dijo que habló con el presidente electo de EE. UU. sobre temas como migración y seguridad.La presidenta de México, Claudia Sheinbaum, dijo el miércoles por la tarde que tuvo una “excelente conversación” con el presidente electo Donald Trump, aliviando las tensiones pocas horas después de dejar claro que México impondría aranceles de represalia en respuesta a medidas similares anunciadas por Trump.“Tuve una excelente conversación con el presidente Donald Trump”, escribió Sheinbaum en redes sociales. “Abordamos la estrategia mexicana sobre el fenómeno de la migración y compartí que no están llegando caravanas a la frontera norte, porque son atendidas en México”.La actualización de Sheinbaum se produce después de que Trump sacudió las relaciones comerciales con México al decir a principios de esta semana que impondría un arancel de 25 por ciento a todos los productos procedentes del país si las autoridades mexicanas no detenían a los migrantes y las drogas, como el fentanilo, que cruzan la frontera. La medida suscitó preocupación por el posible impacto en la economía de México, que depende del comercio con Estados Unidos.Trump también publicó en las redes sociales sobre la conversación con Sheinbaum, calificándola de “maravillosa” y “productiva.”“Ella ha accedido detener la migración a través de México, y hacia Estados Unidos, cerrando efectivamente nuestra frontera sur”, dijo Trump, aunque Sheinbaum se refirió solo a que las caravanas de migrantes ya no llegan a la frontera con Estados Unidos. “También hablamos de lo que se puede hacer para detener la entrada masiva de drogas a Estados Unidos, y también, el consumo estadounidense de estas drogas”, agregó.Sheinbaum dijo previamente el miércoles: “si llega a haber aranceles, México también subiría aranceles”, dejando clara su postura sobre la posible respuesta de México.Altos funcionarios de su gobierno y figuras destacadas del partido gobernante de México, Morena, también expresaron su apoyo a los aranceles de represalia. El secretario de Economía de México, Marcelo Ebrard, dijo que se podrían perder alrededor de 400.000 empleos en Estados Unidos si Donald Trump impone los aranceles, calificando la medida como un “tiro en el pie”, al participar junto a Sheinbaum en una conferencia de prensa matutina.La presidenta de México no se refirió a los aranceles, ni a las tensiones comerciales en general, en su mensaje sobre su conversación con Trump. En cambio, dijo que ella y Trump también “hablamos de reforzar la colaboración en temas de seguridad en el marco de nuestra soberanía y de la campaña que estamos realizando en el país para prevenir el consumo de fentanilo”. More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      How Will Trump’s Covid Contrarians Handle the Next Pandemic?

      by

      President-elect Donald J. Trump had already succeeded in rattling the nation’s public health and biomedical establishment by the time he announced on Tuesday that he had picked Dr. Jay Bhattacharya to run the National Institutes of Health. But amid growing fears of a deadly bird flu pandemic, perhaps no one was more rattled than experts in infectious disease.Dr. Bhattacharya, a Stanford University medical economist and outspoken opponent of lockdowns, masking, school closures and other Covid-19 mitigation measures, and Mr. Trump’s other health picks have one thing in common. They are all considered Covid contrarians whose views raise questions about how they would handle an infectious disease crisis.Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Mr. Trump’s choice for health secretary, has said he wants the N.I.H. to focus on chronic disease and “give infectious disease a break for about eight years.” Dr. Martin Makary, the president-elect’s choice to run the Food and Drug Administration, incorrectly predicted in 2021 that the nation was “racing toward an extremely low level of infection.”Dr. David Weldon, a Republican former congressman who is Mr. Trump’s choice to lead the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has espoused the debunked theory that thimerosal, a mercury compound in certain vaccines, causes autism. As a congressman, he introduced legislation that would strip the C.D.C. of its role in ensuring vaccine safety, saying the agency had a “conflict of interest” because it also promotes vaccination.And Dr. Mehmet Oz, the talk show host who has been picked by Mr. Trump to run Medicare and Medicaid, prodded officials in the first Trump administration to give emergency authorization for the malaria drug hydroxychloroquine to treat Covid-19. The F.D.A. later revoked the authorization when studies showed the drug carried risks, including serious heart issues, to coronavirus patients.Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has said he wants to focus on chronic diseases rather than infectious diseases as head of the Department of Health and Human Services. Haiyun Jiang for The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      3 Americans Are Said to Be Freed From China in Prisoner Swap

      by

      The three men, John Leung, Kai Li and Mark Swidan, are on planes heading to the United States, officials said.The Biden administration has negotiated a prisoner swap with China for the release of three American men, including one who had been an F.B.I. informant, according to senior U.S. officials.The three Americans — John Leung, Kai Li and Mark Swidan — were on planes heading to the United States on Wednesday morning.“Soon they will return and be reunited with their families for the first time in many years,” said Sean Savett, a National Security Council spokesman.Mr. Leung was outwardly pro-Beijing. He backed the country’s claim to Taiwan, organized groups that promoted American ties with China and frequently appeared with Chinese consular officials in Houston. He had also provided information to the F.B.I. for years, according to two of the American officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss details of the matter.His F.B.I. contacts discouraged him from traveling to China in 2021, one of the officials said. The Chinese authorities arrested him and took him to an undisclosed detention center. For over two years, his friends and family heard nothing. In 2023, a court in the city of Suzhou sentenced him to life in prison, a first for an American charged with espionage in China.The swap has been in the works for months. It involves the release of at least one Chinese prisoner in the United States, two of the officials said. A State Department official in Washington confirmed the names of the Americans being released but would not give further details.During the negotiations, multiple American officials said they were in discussions about releasing Xu Yanjun, a Chinese intelligence officer serving prison time in the United States. The terms of the swap were unclear on Wednesday morning, but Mr. Xu was listed in the Bureau of Prisons system as “Not in B.O.P. custody.”Mr. Xu was the first Chinese spy officer indicted and arrested overseas and brought to trial in the United States, according to the Justice Department.China does not typically do prisoner swaps, said John Kamm, the founder of the Dui Hua Foundation, a human rights group in San Francisco. “It suggests to me that they not only want to give a parting gift to Joe Biden, but they are signaling to Donald Trump the possibility of making important concessions,” he said.Both Mr. Li and Mr. Swidan have been ill, Mr. Kamm said.Edward Wong More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Inflation Concerns Loom as Trumponomics Revs Up

      by

      Investors are bracing for the latest data as the president-elect’s economic agenda of cutting immigration and taxes, while raising tariffs takes shape.Progress on tamping down inflation has stalled in recent months. Will today’s data show more of the same?David Zalubowski/Associated PressTrump puts inflation on the agenda The inflation risk stalking the markets eased over the summer, but it never really went away. It’s front and center again as investors contend with a Trumponomics crackdown on immigration, a rising trade-war risk and a potential bonanza of tax cuts.An important inflation measure comes out at 10 a.m. Eastern: the Personal Consumption Expenditures index report. It’s the Fed’s preferred inflation gauge and one of the last big data releases of the year that the central bank will consider as it ponders when to lower borrowing costs further. (Next week’s jobs report is another.)Donald Trump’s latest trade threats show how uncertain the outlook could be. Since the president-elect this week vowed to impose tariffs on Canada, China and Mexico — the United States’ three biggest trade partners — analysts have been gaming out the potential impact. Economists fear that it could add bottlenecks and costs to supply chains and reignite inflation, and that it could scramble the Fed’s policy on interest rates.A worst-case scenario from Deutsche Bank economists: that core P.C.E. next year would jump by an additional 1.1 percentage points if the Trump tariffs were fully enacted. Is the tariff talk an opening salvo for trade negotiations, or a fait accompli? That uncertainty can be felt in the $28 trillion market for U.S. Treasury notes and bonds: Yields hit a four-month high this month, though they are down on Wednesday. Yields climb when prices fall, and have been especially sensitive to concerns that fiscal policy could fuel inflation.Here’s what to watch for in Wednesday’s P.C.E.:Core P.C.E., which excludes volatile food and food prices, is forecast to come in at 2.8 percent on an annualized basis. That would be 0.29 percent above September’s reading.Such a rise would represent a second straight month of inflation trending higher, putting the level further above the Fed’s 2 percent target. The report “should show another ‘bump in the road’ on the path to 2 percent inflation,” Veronica Clark, an economist at Citigroup, wrote in an investor note this week.The culprits are thought to be shelter inflation — especially house prices, with mortgage rates soaring — and used car prices, as well as higher portfolio management fees.Futures traders on Wednesday were pricing in roughly 60 percent odds of a Fed rate cut next month. But their calculations have been volatile in recent months, and a surprisingly hot number could cause a shift in thinking once again.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Picks Stanford Physician Dr. Jay Bhattacharya to Head N.I.H.

      by

      President-elect Donald J. Trump said on Tuesday evening that he had selected Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a Stanford physician and economist whose authorship of an anti-lockdown treatise during the coronavirus pandemic made him a central figure in a bitter public health debate, to be the director of the National Institutes of Health.“Together, Jay and RFK Jr. will restore the NIH to a Gold Standard of Medical Research as they examine the underlying causes of, and solutions to, America’s biggest health challenges, including our Crisis of Chronic Illness and Disease,” Mr. Trump wrote on social media, referring to Robert F. Kennedy Jr., his choice to lead the N.I.H.’s parent agency, the Department of Health and Human Services.If confirmed by the Senate, Dr. Bhattacharya would lead the world’s premier medical research agency, with a $48 billion budget and 27 separate institutes and centers, each with its own research agenda, focusing on different diseases like cancer and heart disease.Dr. Bhattacharya is the latest in a series of Trump health picks who came to prominence during the coronavirus pandemic and who hold views on medicine and public health that are at times outside the mainstream. The president-elect’s health choices, experts agree, suggest a shake-up is coming to the nation’s public health and biomedical establishment.Dr. Bhattacharya is one of three lead authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, a manifesto issued in 2020 that contended that the virus should be allowed to spread among young healthy people who were “at minimal risk of death” and could thus develop natural immunity, while prevention efforts were targeted to older people and the vulnerable.Through a connection with a Stanford colleague, Dr. Scott Atlas, who was advising Mr. Trump during his first term, Dr. Bhattacharya presented his views to Alex M. Azar II, Mr. Trump’s health secretary. The condemnation from the public health establishment was swift. Dr. Bhattacharya and his fellow authors were promptly dismissed as cranks whose “fringe” policy prescriptions would lead to millions of unnecessary deaths.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More