A Different Perspective

Yes, Donald Trump is an encyclopedia of imperfections, which include his capacity to contradict himself with the speed of a NASCAR race car.  His ruminations about the COVID-19 pandemic have put on display a full array of misstatements, contradictory statements, hyperbolic statements of self-importance, and the like.  You can immerse yourself in an endless stream of them any day on CNN, MSNBC, NPR, or in the New York Times or Washington Post. But, I want to talk a little about the President’s actions and reasonable inferences we can draw about how the Democratic Party’s principal figures would have addressed the pandemic.

1. On January 31, 2020, President Trump issued a “Proclamation on Suspension of Entry as Immigrants and Nonimmigrants of Persons who Pose a Risk of Transmitting 2019 Novel Coronavirus.”  The Proclamation severely restricted the number of people who could travel from China to the US.  It has been referred to as a “travel ban” although it did not bar all travelers including returning US citizens. 

Passengers wearing masks at the waiting area for a train to Wuhan, China, on January 20
Photo credit: Reuters

At that time there were approximately 10,100 cases of COVID-19 in the world, all but 114 cases in China. There were 200 deaths worldwide, all in China.  There were 6 confirmed cases in the U.S.

2. The virus was discovered in China sometime in December, 2019, the best estimate being mid-December, although recent reconstructions suggest the Chinese government may have been aware in November.  It was initially stated by the Chinese government that the virus was transmitted from animals to humans. Later, Chinese officials reported human-to-human transmission.

3. The Proclamation points out that during Fiscal Year 2019 (which was the 12 month period ending on September 30, 2019) an average of more than 14,000 people traveled each day from China to the United States.  The Centers for Disease Control, The National Institutes of Health and the US government were, and are, completely unable to evaluate and monitor the many daily travelers for any infectious disease.

4. The day before the Proclamation, the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak “a public health emergency of international concern.”

5. On the day the Proclamation was issued, Joe Biden held a campaign rally in Iowa (the Iowa caucus was set for 3 days later, February 3).  He delivered a less than clear critique of President Trump’s approach to COVID-19, during which he said the following: “This is no time for Donald Trump’s record of hysteria and xenophobia – hysterical xenophobia – and fear mongering to lead the way instead of science.” (Here) 

Former Vice President Joe Biden at a campaign rally in Mason City, IA
Photo credit: AP/Charlie Neibergall

He certainly appeared to be addressing the travel ban, although his supporters now appear to be implying otherwise.  It was 4 days earlier on January 27, in an opinion piece appearing in USA Today that Mr. Biden made clear his distaste for travel bans when he  criticized Trump for “reactionary travel bans that would have only made things worse.” (Here)

6. On February 5, 2020, the New York Times ran an opinion piece by travel consultant Rosie Spinks titled: “Who Says It’s Not Safe to Travel to China?” subtitled: “The coronavirus travel ban is unjust and doesn’t work anyway.”  She argued the travel ban was motivated by xenophobia and racism and not sound policy.  I remember reading the piece at that time and thinking it was so much like the New York Times to give space to a writer with a globalist’s economic perspective, so willing to see xenophobia and racism behind an action of the Administration that impacts her economic interest.

7. On February 26, 2020, Elizabeth Warren, then still a presidential candidate, asserted at a CNN Town Hall: “I’m going to be introducing a plan tomorrow to take every dime that the President is now spending on his racist wall at our Southern Border and divert it to work on the coronavirus.”  She tweeted almost identical sentiments about the “racist wall” during the same time period.

8. On March 9, 2020, in a FOX Town Hall focused on COVID-19, presidential candidate Bernie Sanders answered this question by Brett Baier:

Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders at Fox News town hall, April 15, 2019
Photo credit: Mark Makela/Getty Images

Question: “If you had to, if you had to, would you close down the borders?”
Sanders: “No.  I mean what you don’t want to do right now–we have a president who has propagated xenophobic, anti-immigrant sentiment from before he was elected.  What we need to do is have scientists take a look …. Let’s not go back to the same old thing. Isn’t it interesting that a President who has been demagoging and demonizing immigrants, the first thing he can think about is closing down the border?”

Baier’s question actually contained the answer: “If you had to…”.  Said it twice. Mr. Sanders’ predisposition against any protective measure at the US border was so strong that he could not bring himself to accept any notion that protection might be necessary.  Hence he could not say “yes” to a question that answered itself. Maybe fifteen years ago, Bernie Sanders was largely a pro-labor New Deal liberal who, like the Democratic Party establishment of the time, opposed immigration because it is financially harmful to American workers.  At that time, the desire for increased immigration was the province of the US Chamber of Commerce, The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board, the Koch brothers, the National Association of Manufacturers and the Republican Party establishment, all of whom wished to internationalize the labor force to reduce payroll expenses within the US.  As Ezra Klein points out in his new book, Why We’re Polarized, President Bill Clinton’s position on immigration was essentially the same as Trump’s. That position is now routinely described by those calling themselves Progressive or Liberal as racist and xenophobic. The Democratic Party’s (and Bernie Sanders’) reversal on immigration is the most dramatic political change to occur in my lifetime. 

9. On March 15, 2020, during the final Democratic presidential debate, which was focused on the COVID-19 outbreak, the two remaining candidates, Biden and Sanders battled over who was more receptive to illegal immigration.

Biden: “I will send to the desk (sic) immediately a bill that requires the access to citizenship for 11 million undocumented folks, number one.  Number two, in the first 100 days of my administration, no one, no one will be deported at all. From that point on, the only deportations that will take place are the commission of felonies in the United States of America”
Calderon: “So to be clear, only felons get deported and everyone else gets to stay?”
Biden: “Period, yes.  …”

Of course, the absence of deportations constitutes an invitation to enter illegally – if you get here, we are not going to deport you. 

Regarding medical care, Sanders said: 

“I have been criticized because the proposal for Medicare for All that I introduced includes making sure undocumented people are covered.”…
“So one of the things that we have to do is make sure everybody feels comfortable getting the healthcare they need.  That should be a general principle above and beyond the coronavirus.”
“Second of all, we’ve got to end these terrible ICE raids which are terrorizing communities all over the country.”

The Biden-Sanders collective vision is a country which, if you get here illegally, you get to stay: don’t worry about ICE raids or deportations; and you will be provided with free medical care.  That vision, so much a product of raw identity politics, now dominates the Democratic Party, which has been running away from labor at an increasing rate.

10. With the pandering to people of color during the Biden – Sanders debate still in my head, I woke up the next morning, March 16 to a NYT opinion piece in the print edition (link to online version here) by two physicians, one of them Ezekiel Emanuel, and a law professor titled “Doctors May Face Impossible Decisions”.  The piece is a horror tale of possible medical rationing and triage in response to COVID-19:

“Hospitals, doctors and the American public must prepare, strategically and emotionally, for the real possibility that rationing will be necessary. Agonizing choices may be required to determine which patients get lifesaving treatments and which patients do not.”

The article struck me as a remarkable juxtaposition to the previous evening’s debate.  While the two leading candidates for the Democratic Party’s nomination invite people from other countries to come here illegally and receive free medical care, our medical community simultaneously prepares for the possibility of rationed care.  As someone who would be classified as a senior citizen (even though I don’t feel like one), who had a quadruple bypass and aortic valve replacement, and had two bouts with pneumonia over 20 years ago, I am not sure how much effort the medical community may care to invest in me.  I am certain that I know of no other time in history, anywhere, when those aspiring to lead a country were so committed to the interests of non residents over those of its citizens.

---

I think the so-called travel ban was the single most important government action in slowing the spread of the virus in the US.  For all his incessant buffoonery, Trump did it. The evidence suggests that none of the leading Democratic contenders would have halted travel with China.  It is hard for any of them to speak two paragraphs without the words “racist” and “xenophobic”. The remnants of what was once the respectable left (of which I was a part and would still be if it existed) are so quick to use those words that I do not take them seriously.  They are name-calling third graders. They are distorting what were once powerful and important words, such that being called “racist” or xenophobic” by those lightweights is on the verge of becoming a badge of honor in the way the some were able to feel comfortable, if not honored, by being labelled “communist” by Joe McCarthy or Roy Cohn.

We have all kinds of shut-downs, stay-at-home orders, executive orders closing non-essential businesses, and on and on.  All of those are designed to do one thing: prevent infected people from coming in contact with people who are not. That is all the China travel ban was.  That is all the European travel ban was. (My only wish is that they came earlier.) The Democratic Party is so captive to a narrow ideology preoccupied with race that it has rendered itself intellectually impotent – unable to recognize the obvious and unfit to lead.  There might still be time for a third party candidate….