Understand that what the u. S. Supports the who to do is nothing that can be easily substituted to other organizations. The who is not like a nonprofit International Rescue committee that is implementing programs. They are providing Technical Advice to health around the world, setting strategy and in partnership with those. In the developing world. Role ins an integral advising for help crises like this one. They will not turn to an ngo for that. When the World Health Organization is not getting the money it needs from the United States government, it will have an effect on every developing country in the world that will be dealing with a weaker who office and will be less equipped to fight the outbreak. Host the criticism is the who was slow to react to this pandemic and even slower to hold china accountable. Are those fair charges . Guest they are not. Let me tell you why. The whos behavior in a situation like this is governed by an illegal document. That is an agreement between all of the who Member States, including the u. S. Framework that the who uses in a situation like this. What that framework says, basically, is that countries art response will to report to the who. The who has no power to compel them to do so. If they do not do so or if they derive information that is incomplete or misleading, the who is not empowered to enforce the regulations in any way and does not have any way to sanction the country if it provides an incomplete report. It was set up but the Member States set up by the Member States that way because they dont want and International Body that has power over them. If we were to send a report on our health data to the who and the who were to say we dont believe you, we will not publish this, the u. S. Would be upset about that. Every other country feels the same way. As aho was set up mechanism to share the information that it receives from Member States. Up an authority to secondguess the information. When secretary pompeo talks about the who failing to enforce the ihr, he is attacking the dub you ho for failing to use an authority it does not have. Use anfor failing to authority it does not have. Ultimately, think, the usa will continue to flow . It has been frozen but will it return . Guest i hope so. The things the who does are not just related to the coronavirus. On defeatinging the Ebola Outbreak in the eastern congo. The u. S. Has invested in the who over the years because it is important to have an International Organization that can do those things so that the u. S. Does not always have to. Experience working closely with the who was in 2014, when i was with usaid, running their disaster operation. Became involved with the Ebola Outbreak in west africa, which everyone remembers. Did a poor job on that. The fact that they had initially done a poor job and the u. S. Had to come in in a massive way and usaid tomilitary from stop the outbreak, we then invested in a major operation to build a brandnew Emergency Response capacity there. 2018, when ebola popped up in the eastern congo, the u. S. Did not have to do that. The who was able to deploy hundreds of their own personnel into an active war zone to file fight the Ebola Outbreak, successfully that meant less burden on the u. S. Government. We have a real interest in continuing to support and invest in these organizations. They do important work that, otherwise, would fall on the plate of the u. S. Government. The secretary appeared on Laura Ingrahams channel, defending the president s decision. Here is what he said. [video clip] there is an ongoing pandemic. We do not have the transparency we need in china. It is the World Health Organizations responsibility to achieve that transparency. They are not doing it. They need to be held accountable. The other countries around the world are beginning to recognize their failures as well. This is an opportunity for the United States to take a leadership role, given the closeness that the who has with china, which spends a fraction of the money we have been sending to the who. Given all of this, given everything that has happened, he be called on to resign . Look at theo take a who. This is in the first time we have had to deal with the shortcomings of this organization that sits inside of the united nations. We need a fix, a structural fix. If we are talking about accountability, the guy who is leading the organization, i dont see how he can be part of the solution. You are not ruling out that he might be one of the requirements. I think that is right. Even more than that. It may be the case that the United States can never return. We may need to have even bolder change than that. Host from fox news and the secretary of state, mike pompeo. Jeremy, your reaction . Guest i think the overwhelming impression is that he fundamentally misunderstands what the who is and what it is supposed to do. When he talks about the who enforcing or holding a member state accountable, the dub you ho is not authorized to do that. It is the who is not authorized to do that. It is ironic because any administration, particularly the republican administration, generally does not want to see a u. S. Member organization be more powerful than it is authorized to be. N. Generally want the u. Organization to stay firmly within the guidelines and protocols the Member States have laid out for them. In this case, that is the International Health regulations. He is basically saying that the who should have gone well beyond what Member States have given it permission to do. Really what i expect to see a republican secretary of state complained that it is far too double week and not powerful enough. Usually, their complaint is the opposite. Who fore is bashing the not exercising authority that it does not have. It simply does not have it. It is explicit in the ihr that the who has to consult with the Member States and take the information from the Member States to share that information. Is supposed to rapidly seek to support the Member States and conduct joint analysis with the Member States. The substance of the complaint the administration has made relates to the first couple of weeks of january. They said preliminary investigations by china had not confirmed evidence of human to human transmission. That is very different from saying there is no human to human transmission of this virus. We know that, with the benefit of hindsight, china knew more than that at the time. They were not sharing that with the who. For the guidance from the Member States to the who, that is what the who could share. A teamre working to get deployed to the city of wuhan, so they could take a firsthand look at the outbreak themselves. They did that on the toy first of january. On the 22nd of january, they confirmed there was human to human transmission. You have an eight day span between the 14th and the toy second when the who and firms human to human transmission. Confirmedhen the who human to human transmission. The ministration did not begin taking this seriously as a threat until march. Host harold is joining us from east alton, illinois. Good morning. Caller good morning, cspan. I hope you can afford me a little bit of time. I have a question that i hope that jeremy can help me out with. Or maybe one of your listeners. I have a couple of comments about how we have responded to this. My question is how do we understand the data when we dont have any good data to put in. How is misses burks coming up birx coming up with this when we dont have we dont know if you can get it again. And iot a statistician dont know how that works. How can you, with good facts if you dont have good facts going in . Response, i hope that nobody forgets at the beginning of this, they sold out their stocks and i would like that investigated. The guy that works with the stock exchange, i would like to have him investigated. Trumps responses at these briefings that he gives, that is so irresponsible, what he is doing. Can the people, the republican, are the people in his administration that started off to do the 25th amendment in the first place, cant they see the difference between pence and trump . You can get the same thing out of pence you can get out of trump. We need to get this crazy guy out of there. Host thank you for your call. You brought up a point about the models and the stats. Allie will be joining us on monday. We featured him in our prime time addition edition of the washington journal. From theet a response other callers points. Guest i understand the confusion. I totally understand the confusion. That is not unusual when we are talking about a virus that is brandnew. The world has never seen this virus before. It is full of surprises. We learn more as we see more cases. As we learn more about how the virus behaves, that is more of a chance to study it. There is a lot of uncertainty in the initial weeks of a new outbreak, the initial months of a new outbreak. That is what we are seeing here. As we get more chances to study the cases, we are understanding better how this virus operates and what needs to be done to address it. Question, i am more of a consumer of models than a producer of those models. Government, what is important to remember is no model is perfect and no model is 100 percent 100 predictive. Sometimes the models make more sense. Me ihme model the caller is referencing, the intent was to project the level of Hospital Capacity that would be needed at different phases of the outbreak, based on realtime data. That is different than trying to project the outbreak or the total number of deaths. One of the problems the outbreak has had is that they have been using that model for the wrong purpose in their own analysis. It is always important that you are not just relying heavily on one model and you are looking at a diverse set of models. Taking a collective picture of what they give you, because no one model will portray reality very well. Our guest is jeremy. I mentioned that because today of the firstrsary day of testing for the polio vaccine. One year later, it was shared around the country after it was proven safe. I am curious from your level of expertise, what you think we will see from the u. S. And around the world in the battle to get the vaccine sooner rather than later. Clearly think this will be the most aggressive and concerted push for a vaccine in human history. And the typical expectation is or eating a new vaccine expectation for creating a new 15cine or disease is a 10 to year period. There are some viruses for which we have never been able to create a bike scene a vaccine. I am confident we will create a vaccine. We can suppress the timeline substantially. There are groups like the epidemics which has been researching coronavirus vaccines for several years, using other corunna viruses that we have seen before like corona viruses that we have seen before like sars. A number of candidates that are moving their way into human trial. Those human trials take time. It is hard to compress a human trial. As dr. Fauci has laid out several times, when you start human trials, you have about a three month period from phase one to another safety trial. It is to make sure it does not hurt anyone. It does not tell you necessarily anything about whether it works. Once you know does not hurt anyone, you have a sixmonth month period of two trials. Those are trials to see if it actually works. You put all that together. Assuming we come out on the other end of that trial period ble vaccine, we are looking at a february to march period. Drop not like they will from the sky. It needs to be produced. That manufacturing capacity will have to be created. Once there are a significant number of doses, they need to be distributed around the world and administered. That not know how long production timeline will take. We do not know how long it will take to administer and distribute all of the doses. You start that clock in january, when we first began to learn about the virus, it will probably be a two to three year widespreadre we have availability of the vaccine around the world. We need to be calibrating our strategy on the expectation that if we succeed in the current physical distancing and shelter at home measures that we are undergoing, if we succeed in that, we have a lot of people left who can still get the disease and will not be safe until late get the vaccine until they get the vaccine. We will have some disruption to our society. Hopefully far less dramatic than what we are undergoing now. We will continue to live in a different world for two to three years. The Government Agencies that would take a role in this is the department of health. Politico is reporting that alex azar may be on his way out. The white house is weighing a plan to replace him. One name they have mentioned is dr. Deborah birx. Clyde is joining us from new mexico. Good morning. Caller good morning, cspan. A couple of questions about the World Health Organization. So much money, they have taken every year. I dont speak for the World Health Organization. I am on an independent oversight board. Their budget every year is about 2. 5 billion. Considerably less than the u. S. Cdc. U. S. Contribution is approximately how much . Caller i believe it is about 400 million dollars. Caller good morning, gentlemen. I would like the guest to comment on a point or two that i would like to make. To me, the globalists want two bites. Thinke health aside and about Climate Change. East africa, china is heavily invested in oil coming from that region. A lot of people dont know this. There is a 1000 mile pipeline coming out of sudan. This was built by the chinese, i believe. This oil goes to china. There are more plants plans for pipelines. One will go across ethiopia. Be exported, presumably to china. There is also natural gas coming out of ethiopia. We talk about Climate Change and what we need to do. Nobody addresses this issue. I can understand why the secretary of state, secretary pompeo would want an ethiopian general director to step down. Has an interest in this oil with his own country. I understand. This is natural. I see a conflict of interest. I would support secretary pompeos suggestion for the general director to step down. Host thanks for the call. Comment . To i guess not too the question there is has dr. Ros had bias . Is deferential. This is the way the member want thed u. S. U. S. To behave. They do not want a global Health Organization that can call them out on his on its own and is not responsive to their concerns. They want an organization that will be deferential to and support all of them. The who is that way toward every member state. People who are criticizing the who for not being more vocal or pushing back on china should has recognize that the who been muted of their characterization of what is going on in the u. S. We are managing the response more poorly than anyone else in the world. Has the who criticized or called us out on that . Of course they havent. The, had problems during the congo had problems with the Ebola Outbreak. The president of the democratic used that toongo cancel elections. They did not publicly attacked the government over that. That is not what they are set up to do. They are set up to work with Member States behind and not bash them in public. Certainly not to sanction them or anything like that. If Member States want to give them those powers, they can try to do so. Powers will use whatever they are given. To attack the organization for not using an authority that Member States explicitly have not chosen to give it is a little like, you know, it is like someone attacking you for attacking the cdc agriculture or Something Like that. It is not what the organization is set up to do. Host i want to give you a headline from bloomberg news. Sweden has said its controversial strategy has been proven effective. They have had lax rules compared to neighboring countries like denmark or the rest of europe in terms of restrictions. What is your view on that . Did sweden do the right or wrong thing . Dont think you can fully answer that question yet about any country. What we do know about sweden is that the they have had a higher death rate than any of their neighbors. Theiruggests that strategy has not been entirely successful. They are also seeing an increased death rate among their atrisk population. Swedens strategy was to try, among their younger population, to allow the disease to move forward and not put to double many restrictive measures in place and protect the older population and the more at risk population from getting it in the process. That does not appear to be working very well. Ability to shield the most at risk population. So, i think we will see how this continues to play out for sweden. The assumptions that they have built in from the front end are out entirely. E host catherine joining us from north conway, new hampshire. Caller good morning. I think the u. S. And the global coronavirus Pandemic Response has been good, considering that we are dealing with the unknown. I have a common. Three times i have tried to finish the plague by cam move camut and have not been able to. Virus and itthis is horrible, the deaf, sickness, job losses, there is one good. That we live in 2020 and not in 1918 or some past year from long ago. Guest i think we have a lot of advantages we did not have, even 10 or 20 years ago. To sequence the genome of this virus has been big in developing the diagnostics. The diagnostic is the ability to confirm whether someone is infected and it has moved quickly than at any time in the past. That ability means we can track the movement of the virus in innovative ways. There is work that is being done the Hutchins Institute in washington state, where they can trace the movement of the virus through the country and where it has come from and how it has moved. We know that in the west coast, most of those cases trade back trace back to travel from china. York wet in new know that in new york, it was able to travel from europe. Theworst of the outbreak on east coast is from european travel and not chinese travel. It is useful to be able to understand that. We did not have that capability. Guest is a graduate of calvin college. He is joining us from his home. He is now a senior policy fellow at the center for global development. Mark is next. Good morning. Caller good morning. Thank you. Trump said that we could not see this thing coming. This came out of nowhere. That was from the onset. Looking fort another scapegoat. All they want to do is bully and they dont want to take any responsibility for his administration. Didnt the chinese give the genetic code on Something Like january 22 or late january . One more thing. Understandably, the chinese probably were being they were not revealing as much who is to say the u. S. Has a real knowledge of how people died in the Nursing Homes and Everything Else . It is appalling to me and so many other americans that we have fivemile backups for food banks and you have farmers that are killing their crops because there is no way to get these crops to the people who need them. It is atrocious. Thank you very much. Host thank you. Guest on the World Health Organization, it certainly doesnt look like the itstration has certainly does look like the administration has used the who as a scapegoat. Most of the things the administration is attacking the our complaints with china. Complaints with the information china shared with the who. Go straight att china for that, they are going china who for going after for that. If the administration is us as upset as they seem to be, they should tell that to themselves back in january, when they were praising china for their openness. The president was praising the chinese leader. It was also the secretary of state. They were all very positive of china and the work china was doing. That did not change until march. They are criticizing the who for or failed to take at a time when the u. S. Administration, at least publicly, was expressing praise for china. And the work that china was doing. Earlyhared the genome in january. It was january 12. It was in early january. That enabled the move to develop graphic testing. Did not sharehina everything that they knew. China had reason to believe there was human to human transmission by early january. They did not confirm that until several weeks later. They had reason to believe that this was a transmissible virus. They did not confirm that until several weeks later. I think that china has quite a bit to answer for in their transparency during the first few weeks after they announced the outbreak on the 30th of december. But, that really does not explain the lack of preparedness of the United States. Moree 23rd of january, than three months ago now, the World Health Organization, with updated information from china, virus had a reproduction number of up to 2. 5. That means the number of infected people infected by each person is 2. 5. That is considerably higher than the seasonal flu which is also transmissible. About a mortality rate of 4 . That is a scary virus. That is a very scary virus. The numbers have fluctuated a bit as we have learned more. Characterizing a virus that the world has known of for just over three weeks, that is a picture that holds up pretty well. At that point, there were very few cases outside of china. There was plenty of time that we could have been preparing. We did not start to see the spike in the number of cases until 1. 5 months after that. They should have set off alarm bells. E had 1. 5 months host randy is next in greenville, indiana. Caller good morning. Thank you for my opportunity. Host certainly. Caller i have been listening to everyone on the tv. And i just this is unbelievable. If a person think straight on , what has happened in china is a catastrophe that people are not talking about. Three ways this virus could have gotten to the human population. Animals and humans, accidents in a lab or intentionally. Those three questions have to be answered. China, when they locked down the sick people in wuhan, they did not care about all those planes taking sick people all over the world. Host thanks for the point. We will get a response. ,uest on the origins of this it is possible that we will never know with total certainty how that initial jump from animals to humans occurred. The nature ofe in hasvirus itself is that it its origins in bats. It is not clear if it jumped straight from bats to humans or if there is a mediate animal. There is a similar existence of sars. It could be that it jumps from bats to penguins before it makes its way to people. You do not know that for sure until you know the virus in nature and understand what the host for it is. Reason toot a lot of believe it originated in a lab. You cannot rule it out. The science does not have a definitive way to say it did or did not occur in a lab. There are reasons to think it did not. In question in wuhan was generally not working on live viruses. You have to be culturing live. Iruses that was not the main thing they were doing there. There was no indication this particular virus was in that lab because we had never seen it before. The u. S. Scientists who have worked with that lab, and there , they have allw said that they think it is relatively unlikely that that happen. You cannot rule it out but it is not the likely course. What seems much more likely is that this virus emerged just like every other novel virus emergence we have ever seen. Hiv. Zika, sars, it moves from the animal population to the human population in one of the many, many different ways that humans and animals interact. That couldve been an animal trader who was trafficking in penguins and was interacting with a bat population. It could have happened in the market of wuhan. It could have happened by someone going to the market in wuhan. What we know is it is pretty common that viruses jump from animals to humans. It happens all the time. That happens a lot. Is an x placing here an explanation here is where the bulk of the information is coming from. Host richard. Caller yes, good morning. When the guest shows his hand immediately by ignoring the helped prepare this virus internationally. It was first discovered as your previous caller said. The chinese closed off their entire country. They allowed over 200,000 people to take flights and spread it throughout the world. T to say this is not a form of biowarfare tells me he does not know what he is talking about. We have not seen the initial strains of this virus. Why . The chinese destroyed the samples. They arrested eight doctors who tried to tell the world about it. To laud the who and make a comment the government reacted poorly shows you have another politically biased guest on your program. It is absolutely frustrating to see you all take that. Scientists have said, epidemiologists have said had our scientists been there when the source broker, we could have contained 95 of it to wuhan. Host we will get a response. Thank you for the call. Guest i think on the travel point, there has been some criticism from the u. S. Government of the who for not endorsing travel bans. Of the Public Health literature, all of the research over the years, a virus like be contained by travel ban. You can flow its spread but it is such a transmissible virus. It can be spread by someone who is not yet symptomatic who does not know that they have it. That makes it exceptionally difficult. Question on the travel from it is possible this,f china had shared and i think they should have, they have a lot to answer. If they had shared this, we would have seen a slower arrival around the world. Of the matter is there were very few cases outside of china. That was by the end of january. At the end of january, fewer than 100 detected cases were outside of china. There were probably more than that in reality. A manageable enough issue at that point. Countries that acted quickly at that stage, at the end of january, like south korea and singapore, they have had much greater success in controlling the virus. They have not had to completely shut down their economies the way that we have. They have had far fewer cases. The idea that, somehow, if u. S. Personnel had been there in china, this would have been 95 less severe, i dont buy it. I think it is important to remember that the u. S. Had a robust cdc presence in china. We had a u. S. Funded collaboration between the u. S. Labs and the labs in wuhan. All of that was scaled back by the trump administration. In funding for that expired 2019. The cdc presence in china was scaled down. Mored the ability to have of a presence there. Made ahat have difference, i think it could have made a difference. I think it couldve made a difference in helping us get a better understanding, earlier of what the virus did. Earlier, up at the virus did. By the end of january, we knew enough. We knew enough that we should have acted swiftly. The government spent the entire month of february focused on a travel ban that was not effective. With a virus like this, travel bans are not an effective tool. The best thing you can do is slow the arrival of the virus and you cant prevent it. The travel ban, you can debate whether they were a good idea. Inuspect that the lockdown china and restrictions of movement within china have played a significant role. We didger problem was not take advantage of the opening. The idea with the travel ban is you buy yourself time to get ready. What we saw from the u. S. Government was they bought time and then did not bother to get ready. Host let me get your reaction to another policy put in place by the trump administration, banning those with green cards from entering the u. S. For the next two months. What is the reasoning behind that . Public health. I can tell you that much. I think that is a political move. There is not a reason to say that people with green cards are any more or less likely to be carriers of the virus. , you could easily circumvent that by saying if you come into the country, you are under a mandatory 14 day quarantine. They are not doing this for a Public Health action for they are doing this for a political action. Host lets go to california. Good morning. Caller good morning. That lab in wuhan, i believe too many people in the world have been killed by the virus. If the chinese do not destroy their own lab, somebody will. If they try to build another one, they will do that too. 10 years ago, with sars and now it is coronavirus, that lab cannot stand any longer. One last point. This does not deal with that. All of the schoolchildren, the second semester in the u. S. , there is talk now of trying to make up,r school to partially, their second semester. There may not be a lot of virus during the summertime. This whole thing could come back again next christmas time. That is all. Host thank you. Let me follow up on the callers point. Caller point. s point. Senator tom cotton propose something that would allow the families who have lost loved ones to sue the chinese government. Could that happen . Guest we need to learn more about the origins of the virus. Toward ite is tilted not being a lab emergence. It has been anticipated for years. It is not a surprise for you we have always known that in countries of the world where there is significant interaction between animals and humans, particularly as human habitat pushes into animal habitat, these kinds of events can occur. If we set a precedent that anytime a natural spillover , again, we dont is 90 likelyt it it is natural. T is absurd to blame a country would we accept that if something somewhere happened in influenza ine an Poultry Farms spilled over to u. S. Farmers . It does not just apply to china. It applies to us. I think we need to tread with caution. Protection against spillovers is perfect. Onant to touch quickly education before we move on. I am a parent of two young children. We do not know a lot yet about how this virus behaves in children. We know that children have been have not been as heavily affected by it. There are a negligible number of severe cases in children. What we dont know is how transmissible it is and whether for the a major channel transmission of the virus. With the influenza, we know they are. Outbreak in the influenza, one of the recommendations is to close down schools. We have done that here, out of caution. That is something we need to test to begin to understand what we need to do. Host mark in washington, d. C. , you are on the air with jeremy, who is joining us from his home in maryland. Good morning. Caller thank. You. T wanted to thank i just wanted to, with regard to the who, one of the major questions i think people had on socials the focus distancing. It seems extreme. It is purely experimental to attempt to contain an airborne flu. Ithas never been done before did not happen this time. Host mark, you are breaking up. We got the part about physical or social distancing. We will get a response. Guest there is Science Behind it. It has not been tried on this scale before. Measured of distancing has been used in past outbreaks. Andof the definitive 1918anding lessons of the a of influenza was that canceling large gatherings had a Significant Impact of the trajectory of the outbreak. Example is between philadelphia and st. Louis, where philadelphia kept on a major parade and st. Louis, around the same time, began imposing social distancing measures. Philadelphia had a much more severe outbreak because they did not listen to Public Health officials and kept Public Health gatherings going. A more aggressive measure level than that. Because we have stayathome orders. That is because we have seen this in other countries. We are not doing this in a speculative way. That has been necessary in other countries that have had severe outbreaks before we did. Starting with china, but also italy and spain. Countries that have done this have been able to see a market downtrend in the transmission of the virus when these orders come into place. We can say we are working from evidence and not just speculation. The challenging thing is going beginjudging when to lifting them and how to safely do so. Host from florida, maria, good morning. Caller good morning. My question is we are sharing a lot about the monday morning quarterback things we should have done in the past. My question for him is what do we do in the future . I am a nurse. In one h1nh h1 1. Our hospital had to buy ppe for that. That was small compared to the coronavirus. What are we going to do in the future if the who currently wants our funding . How do we prepare . How do we hold the cdc accountable for following them . Host thank you. We will get a response. Guest i think the question of what do we do in the future is a really important one. One clear lesson from this outbreak is that both here in the u. S. And at the global level, we are under invested in Health Security and Public Health. We should never the u. S. E wasnal stockpile of pp not sufficient to the volume we needed here. Never thought the virus would get as much of a running start as it did in this country. Even with that aside, we knew congress had not traditionally provided enough funding to maintain it at a robust enough level. I think we need to treat this 9 11, aske we treated an awakening of the need to greatly strengthen our counterterrorism abilities and our ability to prevent terrorism. We need to view this as a moment of investment in the u. S. , and globally, in preventing disease outbreaks and preventing future pandemics. Even if Something Like this happens only every 25 years, the fact that this has been able to take trillions of dollars off of our economy, trillions of dollars from the stock market and trillions more in economics to keep the basics of the , and even with other colorsthe said we are seeing miles long. Ine food banks i think we need to begin investing in disease readiness and Health Security, just as seriously and just as robustly as we do unemployment secured. Host kathleen, good morning. Caller thank you for taking my call. I guess i want to get back to that china issue about trust. Of ourve stolen much intellectual property. That is history. How can we trust anything that china says or does with their history . I just dont understand that. I want to main point make. Thank you. Host thank you. We appreciate your call. Guest it is a really important point. We should not have taken at face value the reassurances we were getting from china. At least from what has been reported. It anymoreivy to prayed what has been reported u. S. Wasis that the taking the reports at face value. They determined that it probably was human to human transmission. Ngoing there have been reports about community, that it was far worse. Governments. Determines our posture on something, we are not just following orders. We are following guidance from an International Organization. We are taking chinas reassurances at face value. We should be making our own decisions and using the available information. This is why some of the recent attacks on the who ring hollow. Certainly in my time in government, we never looked at what the who said as the definitive word or the only thing we paid potential attention to. It was important. We looked at it as an important data point in a field of data points. We look at them all and make a decision. There is a reason we have our own cdc. There is a reason why we have our own Intelligence Committee and we do not take it value face value what other countries say to us. That now the administration was acting as if they had no other way of knowing that chinas data was incomplete. Host jeremy served as the foreign Disaster Assistance director during the obama white house. He is at the center for global development. He serves on a board for the World Health Organization. Cspan is what, live everyday. Washington journal, live every. Coming up on monday morning, a discussion of the Coronavirus Impact with Bipartisan Health policy project leader. We will talk about the world data and metrics in combating the coronavirus with university of washingtons ali. Join the discussion. Tonight, on q a, wall street trader turned photojournalist on his book, dignity about the plight of those living on the margins of society in america. It was a sunday morning. It was empty. In the industrial part. Intelligenceher came right through. Hour,. 5for about an hours or so. It is like a cliche of everything wrong that can happen to somebody. Eventually, i asked her what i. Sk everybody how do you want me to describe you . A prostitute, a mother of six and a child of god. While the coronavirus pandemic continues, members of congress are working from their home districts. 30 of them are ones in the automotive industry. The other majority are what i would call the frontline workers. Now they are considered essential workers. Thate people dont forget these are people who have been demanding 15 and among wage. I think it is really important to highlight that they are the ones who are keeping us afloat. This is a very similar serious issue. I have been telling people to listen to the federal authorities, the state authorities, local authorities, the state authorities. Just stay away from people right now. I see this as a war. The United States is at war with this virus. Using the trench congressional directory. It has all of the information you will need. Order your copy online today. A number of governors who were guest on the sunday news programs taking questions on the Coronavirus Response in their ,tates, restrictions in place we hear from governors Gretchen Whitmer of michigan. We will begin with larry hogan, the
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.