Month: January 2021

January 22, 2021

Yesterday newly elected President Biden announced his plan for battling the Covid -19 virus.

Based on his announcement he would have us believe that he and his administration were left with no plan of action by the Trump Administration.  Of course this is patently false as was confirmed by Anthony Fauci at a White House Press Conference when he said “We’re certainly not starting from scratch, because there is activity going on in the distribution.” 

One only has to go to the CDC website and review the COVID-19 Vaccination Program Operational Guidance that is posted to confirm there was indeed a plan (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/covid19-vaccination-guidance.html) …one which provides a state by state operational strategy that was coordinated by the federal government with each state. So when Biden says there was no plan what he really means is that it is not his plan.

But is his plan really his plan?

Included in his announced plan was a pledge that among other things he would invoke the Defense Production Act to increase the supply of vaccine. Again, the Biden White House and the general mainstream media would have us believe that this is the first time the Defense Production Act was invoked during this crisis.  In fact, President Donald Trump used his executive authorities under the Act as early as April last year and in multiple other instances throughout the year to, among other things, generate N-95 respirators, ventilators, and boost testing resources, as well as other vital supplies.

An article in today’s New York Times, “Biden Inherits a Vaccine Supply Unlikely to Grow Before April,” further points out that the Trump Administration had already made arrangements and entered into contracts with various pharmaceutical companies to purchase ever increasing amounts of vaccine and that these companies had already ramped up production to maximum capacity.  

As quoted directly from the article, “The Trump Administration had already invoked the Defense Production Act to force suppliers to prioritize orders from Pfizer, Moderna, and other vaccine makers whose products are still in development.” The article goes on to say “Health officials said it was unclear how the new administration could use the law beyond that to boost production.” One should also note that these pharmaceutical companies are making vaccines for the world, not just the United States, and we have no claim on the totality of what they produce beyond the contracts we have entered into with them.

Another heralded initiative in the Biden plan is working to establish relationships and set up arrangements with retail pharmacies to administer vaccines at the local level. In fact, this was already being done.

As noted in Drug News (11/12/2020), an industry newsletter, “several leading pharmacy chains and independent pharmacy networks are working with the Department of Health and Human Services to expand access to future COVID-19 vaccines. The agency, via the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, announced the second phase of its Federal Pharmacy Partnership Strategy for COVID-19.  Pharmacies participating in the federal allocation program are: Albertsons, Costco, CPESN USA, CVS Pharmacy (including Long’s Drugs), Good Neighbor Pharmacy and AmerisourceBergen’s Elevate Provider Network, Health Mart, H-E-B, Hy-Vee, LeaderNet and Medicine Shoppe, Managed Health Care Associates, Meijer, Publix, Good Lion, Giant Food, Giant, Hannaford, Stop & Shop, Rite Aid, Kroger, Publix Super Markets, Topco Associates, Walgreens, Walmart, Winn Dixie, Harveys and Fresco y Mas. The chains involved in the partnership represent roughly 60% of the pharmacies in the 50 states, District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, according to HHS.“

So in reality Biden’s plan is just a repackaging and repurposing of all the work done by the previous administration. Some might even say plagiarizing.  But then again that is nothing new for Joe.

If American citizens are to get behind this new administration they at least deserve honesty which is supposedly what had been lacking in the prior administration.  They are not off to a good start.

January 21, 2021

It has been 42 days since the FDA authorized the first emergency use authorization for the Covid-19 vaccine (December 11, 2020) and 39 days since the first vaccine was administered to a United States citizen (December 14, 2020).

Since that time the federal government, through its partnership with pharmaceutical manufacturers, has delivered 36 million doses to states and territories of the United States, on average about 1 million doses a day.  Of that number, the CDC reports that some 14.3 million people have received one dose of the vaccine and 2.2 million have received the prescribed two doses – a total of 16.5 million doses administered, on average about 460,000 doses a day.

Why the lag?

With the need to provide two doses within a 21 or 28 day period to each individual and the fact that the vaccine has a limited shelf life, 5 or 30 days or so after thawing, there is a very delicate logistical balance that needs to be achieved between when vaccine is produced, distributed, opened and administered. Every step must be aligned and no one can get too far ahead of another in the chain of events before a person receives the vaccine in their arm.

Voices in the media as well as politicians criticize the federal government for a too slow rollout while the federal government criticizes states for inept distribution and administration of the vaccines that have been delivered. The states assert there is not enough vaccine being delivered (based on the problems some states have had to date in rolling out their appointment systems it is highly doubtful that they could efficiently administer a bigger supply anyway) and the federal government points to the fact they are dependent on the production capability of the pharmaceutical companies who in turn point to a lack in the supplies necessary to make the vaccine.

Some have criticized the federal government for not contracting with manufacturers for enough vaccine but that shows very little understanding (or willingness to accept the fact) that the manufacturers generating the vaccine approved under emergency use authorization are doing so for more than just the United States. 

In fact, there are only two messages that should be resonating within each of us right now, The first is that in only one year we have, through the miracle of science and the dedication of scientists and private industry working with our government, developed a vaccine in record time. The second is that patience is a virtue and that normalcy is on the relatively immediate horizon for all of us.  

Other than to score political points, finger pointing does no one any good and detracts from, if not outright contradicts, the mantra of unity that is the hallmark of our new administration.

January 20, 2021

Today Joseph R. Biden, Jr. ascended to the Presidency with a promise to work toward a renewed bipartisanship with the ultimate goal of a unified America.  We all look to his stated intentions with a hope and faith that his actions will mirror his words.

There is no doubt that Americans, Democrats and Republicans alike, are weary from the unrelenting controversies of the last four years and the inability of both sides to achieve compromise on the important issues of the day. That being said, compromise is important but not at the expense of conservative principles and values. 

In order to obtain widespread support and win over the majority of the 74 million people who voted for Donald Trump in the recent election, Biden must lead from the center…as a moderate who rejects the socialist objectives of the far left elements of his own party.  The latter include Bernie Sanders and Alexandra Ocasio Cortez and other members of “The Squad” who espouse democratic socialist ideals under the banner of progressivism.

Let there be no doubt about it…progressivism is a modern day Trojan horse trying to mask its pure socialist objectives. But no one should be fooled. Progressives, as we know them today, do not want to govern the United States within the context of the framework that has made us a country that is the envy of the world. Instead they want to remake the United States and tear down the very institutions and upend the philosophies that have made American great. If successful, they will undermine the United States’ political, economic and social structures. The end result will render the very fabric of the country, divide its people even further than they are today, and destroy the republic.

Promises of free health care and free college education as well as implicit support of open borders are designed to appeal to the mass social conscience and presumably our better angels. While these objectives may have a certain amount of appeal they cannot be achieved without compromising, and possibly eliminating, the very individual initiative that this country has nurtured since its beginnings. Democratic Socialism disguised as a progressive agenda will result in an America where mediocrity will take the place of excellence and motivation will give way to lethargy.

In their march to remake America progressives will only succeed in overwhelming the financial underpinnings of the country. Those who indiscriminately support a progressive agenda are myopic in their view. They wrap themselves in a blanket of good intentions, including social justice and income equality, as they march with naivety toward the dissolution of the key elements that have made this country great.

If Biden is to be successful, he must resist being co-opted by the insidious ideas of the far left elements of his party. If implemented, those ideas will effectively destroy America from within. He must govern based on a set of enduring principles that have been adopted by multiple generations of Americans.

Biden needs to govern in a way that reflects the fact that the promise of America will never be achieved through centralized government control. History has proved that it is only through individuals who take the initiative and responsibility to improve their own lives that the lives of those around them are improved.

He needs to put America first at the same time as being a good global neighbor that contributes to the world’s well-being but he also has to assert our political and economic sovereignty.

He needs to acknowledge climate change and our responsibility as temporary custodians of the planet and work toward common sense solutions in a deliberate and economically balanced manner. He must not give in to the hyperbolic ranting of the climate change doomsayers.

He needs to promote policies that show he understands America’s first and primary obligation is to the safety and security of its own citizens which includes strong and secure borders and fair and balanced trade policies.

He needs to promote and implement policies that show he is completely on the side of the victims of crime and does not excuse or protect the perpetrators.

He needs to promote and implement a merit-based immigration system and reject birthright citizenship at the same time as granting asylum to those who legitimately seek refuge from harmful criminal or political elements in their home country. He needs to provide a pathway to citizenship for children brought here by parents who flouted the laws of the United States by entering illegally.  At the same time, he should not reward those parents with their own pathway to citizenship until everyone who is waiting legally in line is granted citizenship.

He needs to promote equal opportunity not equal outcomes.

He needs to promote policies that reflect a belief that what someone earns is theirs to give, not for the government to take and redistribute to others; that each individual should pay their fair share of taxes but in no case should the level of tax be confiscatory, i.e., everybody, regardless of their income level, should keep the majority of every dollar they earn.

He needs to promote policies where, at the same time as insuring a basic living wage, people are paid based on the demands for the skills required by the position they hold, the supply of people who have those skills, the complexity of the work performed, the education required to perform it, the bottom line accountability of the position, and the individual’s performance and productivity.

He needs to support and promote policies that reflect the basic tenet that the wealth a person accumulates is rightfully theirs and not the governments; that such wealth  can rightfully be passed down to their families without infringement and that no one should be penalized for being successful nor should future generations of that person’s family be denied the benefits of the fruits of their labor and success.

He needs to promote policies that reflect the reality that the individual is the master of his or her own destiny; that preparation, hard work, and risk taking, whether in starting a venture or in taking advantage of opportunities when they are presented, is what determines success in life.

He needs to promote policies that reflect a belief that those who created and/or invested in a business has first claim on the profits of that business at the same time as that person is obligated to pay his or her workers a fair wage based on their level of contribution to the business.

He needs to implement and support policies that are based on a principle that society is responsible for taking care of those citizens who are, through no fault of their own, less fortunate or less able by providing a social welfare net that will help them to meet their basic needs of food and shelter. He needs to be compassionate but simultaneously demand that every able citizen take personal accountability for their own health and welfare.

He needs to promote the concept of America as a melting pot, not a patchwork quilt ruled by identity politics , with a goal of establishing a unique American identity that respects the various immigrant customs and cultures of a citizen’s country of origin but only draws on, incorporates and permits those values and beliefs to be practiced in the United States that are consistent with those that promote the unique American principles found in the Constitution, as amended.

He needs to show his support for all laws not just those that he or she agrees with ideologically; and pledge that he will not, through executive order or bureaucratic regulation, repudiate laws that are passed by our elected representatives; he needs to issue executive orders only in the absence of a law that deals with the issue at hand.

He needs to espouse through the policies he supports that each individual is responsible for his or her own actions and that society should not be scapegoated for an individual’s failure any more than government should be given credit for an individual’s success.

He needs to exhibit in his daily actions a belief that government’s authority comes from the consent of the governed and that its goal should be to, as much as possible, minimize its role in the everyday lives of its citizens.

Finally, he needs to show he has faith in the American people by acknowledging each individual citizen knows what is in his or her own best interest as opposed to being dictated to by the government bureaucracy as to what those interests should be.

January 19, 2021

There is no debating the need and justification for sending a stimulus check to individuals and families whose income has been interrupted through no fault of their own due to the pandemic.  Along with enhanced and extended unemployment benefits these combined payments could make all the difference in allowing these individuals to survive during this unprecedented time. Small business, the lifeblood of a community, has been particularly affected and deserves all the help we and the government can give them.

But the question remains as to why people on fixed incomes (retirees), those possibly receiving uninterrupted government support (welfare), or those who have not had their employment-based income interrupted by the pandemic would need to receive a stimulus check. The fact is that absolutely nothing has changed for these individuals from an income standpoint.  If anything they have experienced a crisis in not being able to spend their money as most venues for their spending have been locked down.

No doubt a $1200 check for each adult whose income falls below $75,000 and $500 for each child in a family is certainly justified for those whose income has been interrupted but for all others it serves as a windfall.

Alternatively, wouldn’t it be much more effective to further enhance the stimulus payments and unemployment benefits for those who need it the most rather than fritter it away on those who do not? In that regard, some have called for more targeted payments. Others have said that in the scheme of things these “over payments” to those who do not need them are inconsequential and do not warrant our concern.  As a taxpayer I would offer that this latter attitude is what has contributed to our country’s substantial deficit.

In fact, a recent study by the National Bureau of Economic Research supports a more targeted approach.  The study, published in August 2020 as a working paper ( http://www.nber.org/papers/w27693 ), was conducted in July 2020. It surveyed 46,000 people with a 26% response rate. It found that 60% of direct stimulus checks were either saved or used to pay down debt.  That means only 40% was spent to directly stimulate the economy.  The reason cited by individuals who responded to the study for not spending the money was that “there was no place to spend it”. The study points out another reason for the lack of spending…”the larger the check the less likely recipients are to spend it” …what is referred to in economics as the law of diminishing returns. 

Our representatives and the new President should learn from this study and refrain from just throwing money at the problem and focus, instead, on those who need our help the most.  But the temptation to provide a broad based salve to the general population for the inconvenience caused by the pandemic might prove too difficult to resist as they seek to garner political favor at the beginning of a new administration. A show of fiscal responsibility would, however, go a long way in winning over conservatives who see the largess by our more liberal politicians as nothing more than another step toward the goal of income redistribution within an overall socialist agenda.