Archive for the ‘State News’ Category

Reflections On WCRI’s Recent Virtual Annual Conference: In A Word, It Was Excellent

Tuesday, March 30th, 2021

COVID-19 impact analysis

Last year, the Workers’ Compensation Research Institute held its Annual conference in Boston at the Westin Hotel on 5 and 6 March. The ballroom was full. COVID-19 was talked about in the conference and on the breaks, but it was too new to be on the Agenda. Everyone was doing elbow bumps instead of hand shaking. Four days after the conference wrapped, Governor Charley Baker declared a Massachusetts State of Emergency. The WCRI conference was likely the last one held in the City before everything shut down.

At that time, per the Johns Hopkins University COVID-19 Dashboard, the nation had seen ~139,000 cases and 2,425 deaths. In Massachusetts, where the conference was held, there had been 4,955 cases and 48 deaths.

The following month, the National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI) issued a Research Brief titled, COVID-19 and Workers’ Compensation: Modeling Potential Impacts. 

NCCI’s analysis projected a best case scenario, in which loss costs would increase $2 billion, and a worst case scenario, in which they would increase $81.5 billion, or 250% more than then current total loss costs. Willis Towers Watson also released a scenario-based analysis that suggested pretty much the same thing.

Also in April, the California Workers’ Compensation Insurance Rating Bureau (WCIRB) projected loss costs if conclusive (rebuttable) presumptions were provided to front line workers, something Governor Gavin Newsom actually did through Executive Order one month later, so the “if” became a “done.” The WCIRB report concluded costs would range “from $2.2 billion to $33.6 billion with an approximate mid-range estimate of $11.2 billion, or 61% of the annual estimated cost of the total workers’ compensation system prior to the impact of the pandemic.

A year later, at this week’s virtual annual conference, WCRI Economist Olesya Fomenko, Ph.D., reported results from her analysis of workers’ compensation claims in WCRI study states for Q1 and Q2, 2020. This period, ending 30 June, encompassed the pandemic’s first of what has been up to now three surges.*

Her data and presentation slides are preliminary, but more than likely will stand up to future scrutiny. Her findings confirmed what most students of COVID-19 were intuitively thinking. To wit, it does not appear that, at least through the study period of two quarters, COVID-19 would deal a death blow to the workers’ compensation industry. Claims in her analysis of 27 study states are plentiful, but relatively inexpensive. There is wide variation in the geographic distribution of claims, probably because COVID-19 surged at different times in different states. New York is not among the WCRI study states, but during the period of Fomenko’s analysis, it was the state with more COVID problems than any other. A lot more.

During the study period, Massachusetts, Connecticut and New Jersey had the most reported claims. Massachusetts claims were 42% of all reported claims in the study states and 59% of all lost time claims. Dr. Fomenko suggested that the presence of presumption laws, pay without prejudice (in the case of Massachusetts) and other compensability issues (in New Jersey) might is some way contribute to the high numbers in those states.

Looking at Massachusetts for a moment might be instructive.

At the top of this column we showed Massachusetts with relatively few cases as of early March, two-thirds of the way through Q1. Let’s look at Massachusetts now, at the end of Q1 a year later. The state has been hit hard, but has also rebounded. Here’s a look at the state by county:

As you can see, no county has had less than 3,000 infections, and three have had more than 10,000. But what came of those infections? How did the patients make out medically? Here is a look at cumulative cases from 9 March 2021 through yesterday, 29 March 2021.

There have been 17,130 total deaths since the beginning of the pandemic, but 97% of infected patients have recovered. Deaths are at 3%, which is less than the 5% predicted by the CDC one year ago. And this is the case for most of the country, and is one of the reasons Dr. Fomenko’s data shows claims to be relatively inexpensive.

NCCI Analysis

The WCRI studies define the concept of “early days.” So do those from the National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI). The point is, however, that analyses from both organizations appear to be congruent and complementary.

The lasting costs of COVID-19 to the workers’ compensation industry, aside from deaths, are going to come from permanent total and permanent partial disability awards. To that end, in October, 2020, NCCI published a Research Brief updating the Brief cited earlier in this column and titled, COVID-19 And Workers’ Compensation: Permanent Disability. These costs will be significant. NCCI’s analysis determined the average age of hospitalized COVID-19 patients at 49.5 years old. Average life expectancy allows for about 30 more years of benefits. The organization writes:

Given that severe cases are expected to have a higher likelihood of permanent disability, particularly PTD injuries, NCCI
assumed that all PTD claims would occur in this symptom grouping (infections and lung claims). Adjusting our PTD rate to between 0.0% and 1.5% to be applicable to only severe cases, we observe a PTD rate between 0% and 10% (= 1.5% / 15%) using the default Critical Care Rate from the NCCI Hypothetical Scenarios Tool.

Permanent Partial Disability cases are another matter. Here the frequency will be higher as well as the costs:

One interpretation of this assumption could be that moderate cases behave more like infection claims which tend to have a
near-zero PTD rate. If we compare the lung and infection PPD rates, we observe that lung claims have about twice the
likelihood of a PPD injury compared to infection claims. To the extent that moderate cases of COVID-19 behave like
infection claims and severe cases behave like lung claims, then a similar difference in the PPD rate may be expected. Under
this view, the Severe PPD rate would range between 40% and 50% with an implied Moderate PPD rate ranging between
20% and 25%.

With assumptions it clearly states contain wide variability, NCCI suggests the following COVI-19 benefits by injury type:

We’ll continue to follow the NCCI analyses as well as WCRI’s ongoing research.

Interview by John Ruser, PhD, with John Howard, MD, MPH, JD, LLM, MBA

John Howard is the longest serving Director of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, three terms and counting. He is a legend in the field, and WCRI attendees got a good look at why during this wonderful interview by John Ruser. Howard, who has more letters after his name than there are years in elementary and high school combined, put on quite a show.

Some people are one inch wide and ten miles deep; others ten miles wide and one inch deep. Howard seems to know no inch or mile boundaries.  His subject was The Future of Work, and he made a number of highly interesting and prescient points, even going so far as to describe Aristotle’s concerns about automation in the ancient world of 350 BCE.

Asked about fears of jobs disappearing because of Artificial Intelligence and automation, Dr. Howard pointed to a study showing that in 2018 there were 60% more jobs than existed in 1940. Jobs have always gone away, but they’ve been replaced, and then some, by new jobs.

He’s concerned about a safety ergonomic vacuum employers are going to have to manage somehow. He believes employers are facing a “real challenge” adjusting to the new Work From Home paradigm.

My question is: How do employers deal with, let alone manage, workers’ compensation claims bound to occur while working in the home. You’re at your desk or dining room table working, get up for lunch, fall down the stairs and break an arm. Is that compensable? Is your employer going to make you prove it actually happened while you were actually working, and not just taking Junior out to the back forty for a little tag football?

And what responsibility does an employer have with respect to OSHA’s General Duty Clause, the one about providing a safe and healthful workplace?

If anyone can figure this stuff out, my money’s on John Howard.

Conclusion

Under trying circumstances, WCRI did an admirable job of hosting its 2021 Annual Conference. I’m told attendees gave it high marks, as well they should have. At the end of the second day, Dr. Ruser announced next year’s conference as being back in Boston’s Copley Westin Hotel on 15 and 16 March 2022. And I have a suggestion: After this ridiculously stressful year, it would be helpful and probably appreciated to devote a session to the impact of COVID-19 on employee mental health. A lot has happened in the last year to the field of Behavioral Health. It seems to have fitted in quite well to the new paradigm called Telehealth. It would be interesting to learn about that.

 

* Yesterday, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said, “We do not have the luxury of inaction. For the health of our country, we must work together now to prevent a fourth surge. I so badly want to be done. I know you all so badly want to be done. We are just almost there, but not quite yet.” Walensky said she is now feeling a sense of “impending doom.”

**The Future of Work: The Economist is presenting a discussion on 8 April, at 4 pm, EST. To reserve a place, go here.

The Georgia Election Integrity Act: A Desperate Attempt By The Republican Party To Retain Power

Monday, March 29th, 2021

There was already a perfectly fine election statute in the state of Georgia. Perfectly fine. Chapter 2 of Title 21 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated had just completed governing the November election for President and the January election for two US Senate seats. The Presidential election had withstood lawsuits and multiple audits and been judged to have been exemplary on all counts. It was a perfectly fine statute, except for one thing: The wrong people won. And they were Democrats.

The Republican elites, who currently hold the key to the Governor’s office, as well as majorities in both the Georgia House of Representatives and Senate, could not abide that. Something had to be done. And something was. Senate Bill 202 amended the perfectly fine Chapter 2 of Title 21 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated. It became the Election Integrity Act.

The Election Integrity Act was signed into law last Friday by Governor Brian Kemp behind locked doors, no reporters allowed, in the presence of six other aging white guys (and a photographer, for whose presence and work we are grateful) and in front of a painting of the Calloway Plantation, where, in the mid-19th century, more than 100 Black Slaves toiled day and night to make the very white Calloway family ever so comfortable and rich.

As Governor Kemp, who, ironically, served as Georgia’s Secretary of State from 2010 to 2018, was getting ready to sign this obviously much-needed legislation, State Representative Park Cannon, who is Black, knocked on the locked door asking to be let in to observe. For her trouble, she was arrested by three burly state troopers and hauled off in handcuffs, and now faces two charges: willful obstruction of law enforcement officers by use of threats or violence and preventing or disrupting general assembly sessions. Video taken at the time showed none of that.

After the unfortunate interruption, Kemp signed the amended legislation, shook hands with the six aging white guys, and that was that.

That was that, that is, until certain people, including the current President of the United States, upset with the whole thing, noticed the wording in lines 1,872 through 1,881, which is this:

So, unless you have a 26 foot pole with a drink on the end of it, you’re not giving water to anyone standing in the Georgia Sun patiently waiting to cast a ballot. If you do, you’ll share Representative Cannon’s fate. In his nationally broadcast press conference, President Biden called this provision of the law, “sick.”

A new national study led by economist Keith Chen of the University of California, Los Angeles, found voters in predominantly black neighborhoods waited 29 percent longer, on average, than those in white neighborhoods. They were also about 74 percent more likely to wait for more than half an hour.

The new food and drink prohibition quite understandably got a lot of press attention. It oozes racism. But throughout the amended statute one will find other instances of intentional voter suppression. For example:

  • Drop boxes: Created by emergency rule due to the pandemic, these proved extremely popular during the two elections in question. In heavily democratic Fulton County, alone, 146,000 votes were made by absentee ballots placed in drop boxes. Republicans noticed immediately.

“As soon as we may constitutionally convene, we will reform our election laws to secure our electoral process by eliminating at-will absentee voting,” the Georgia Senate Republican Caucus wrote in an 8 December email. “We will require photo identification for absentee voting for cause, and we will crack down on ballot harvesting by outlawing drop boxes.”

The result in the Election Integrity Act: No more than one drop box per county. Officials, at their discretion, may place others, but no more than one per every 100,000 voters.

  • Voter challenges: In Georgia, voters are called “electors.” Prior to the new legislation, any elector could challenge the qualifications of anyone applying to register to vote or could challenge anyone whose name appeared on a list of registered electors. The Election Integrity Act added the following sentence: There shall not be a limit on the number of persons whose qualifications such elector may challenge. One can imagine an entire group of people being challenged.
  • Mobile Voting Buses: Under the old legislation, groups could use buses, approved by the Secretary of State, as mobile voting centers. Two were used in predominantly minority Fulton County (I cite Fulton County again, because in his infamous call with Secretary of State Raffensperger, President Trump mentioned the County 11 times in his quest to get Raffensperger to find him 11,780 votes). The Election Integrity Act prohibits Mobile Voting Buses.
  • Absentee Ballots: The Election Integrity Act, which is 2,427 lines long, devotes more than 1,450 to redesigning Georgia’s entire absentee ballot system. It is obvious Georgia’s Republican Party abhors the very thought of absentee ballots, even though a significant number of Republicans vote by absentee ballot. The law prohibits no-excuse absentee ballot application, as well as the universal sending of absentee ballot applications to all registered voters. Absentee ballot violations are considered felonies by the new legislation.
  • The Secretary of State: Until Brian Kemp signed the Election Integrity Act, the Secretary of State, as in most U.S. states, was responsible for conducting elections. But Raffensperger and those in his office angered many fellow Georgia Republicans during the presidential and senate races, because, after exhaustive audits, they found no fraud significant enough to change anything. The new law strips him of his authority by creating an Elections Board, whose chairperson will be elected by the legislature. The Secretary of State is now an ex-officio, non-voting member of the Board.

It is understandable why Georgia republicans are going to such lengths to suppress minority voting. Consider this from statistics from Georgia’s Secretary of State:

  • Since 2000, the percentage of white voters in Georgia has decreased from 68% to 58%. At the same time, the Black voting percentage has increased from 27% to 33% of total voters.
  • From 2000 through 2019, Georgia’s eligible voting population grew by 1.9 million; 48% were Black. White growth was only 26%.
  • The majority of single-race Blacks live in the South – 59%

As the proportion of white voters in the nation continues to shrink, the Republican Party is shrinking right along with it. It is unmovably the Party of Barry Goldwater and his small tent, Ronald Reagan and his “welfare queen,” and, of course, Donald Trump and his racist white supremacy. It is exhibiting all the characteristics of the self-cannibalistic rat snake that cannot stop itself from eating itself. Georgia’s Election Integrity Act is nothing more than a desperate attempt by the aforementioned aging white guys to blunt the impact of an irresistible demographic force.

In the end, it will fail.  Democracy will prevail.

Seven Days

Tuesday, October 27th, 2020

A diversion

How about a break from anything having to do with COVID-19 or the election? Would you like that? Then let me tell you a story.

Long ago, in a galaxy far away, a 23-year-old, newly-minted, Infantry 2nd Lieutenant airborne ranger with my name spent two-plus years in a little country in Southeast Asia called Vietnam. I think if Donald Trump had foregone the fake bone spurs and taken his chances over there he might have learned a lot.

But that’s another story, and not the point of this one. Couldn’t help myself.

Three months before rotating home to the U.S., I had been pulled from the field, that is, taken out of the jungle, and given a staff job on Firebase Vegel in northern South Vietnam.

With two months to go, I decided to begin keeping a Short-timer’s Calendar.

My Short-timer’s Calendar consisted of the centerfold of the June, 1971, Playboy magazine. My Battalion Commander, Lt. Colonel  Bulldog Carter (that’s right, Bulldog), and my partner, Buck Kernan (who went on to become a Lieutenant General, like his father before him), marked up the luscious photo into 60 puzzle-like areas numbered from 60 down to one. The trajectory of the progression became increasingly lascivious.

Thereafter we held a nightly, candle-lit ceremony in the bunker occupied by Buck and me.

But before I describe the ceremony, I have to tell you about the Macadamia nuts.

During Vietnam  the army  allowed soldiers a ten-day R&R (Rest and Relaxation) vacation. As a two-year guy I got two of them, which I spent in Honolulu, Hawaii, with my wife, Marilyn. One day, during the second R&R, we went to the PX (Post Exchange) at Scofield Army Barracks to pick up a couple of things. While we were there we bought a large bottle of Macadamia nuts for me to take back to Vietnam. In Vietnam, little things became luxurious delicacies.

Back to the ceremony.

Our bunker had a single bunk bed. There was only one bed, because Buck and I took 12-hour shifts in the Op Center keeping the world safe for democracy. One of us would end his shift, wave to the other and crash into the bed.

Every night, at 2000 hours, 8:00 pm to you, the three of us would gather in the bunker. There was a small table to the side of the bed.  I had pinned the centerfold to the wall above the table. At the appointed hour, I would light two candles and place them on each side of the table under the pin-up. I would open the bottle of Macadamia nuts, which occupied a special spot in the center of the table, and hand each of my comrades one nut, taking one for myself. We would then have a moment of quiet reflection, after which I would, with a red marker purloined from the Op Center, X-out the next descending number on Miss June.

We would then eat the nuts.

We did that all the way down to ONE! On that night, we held a special ceremony, inviting the Battalion XO, the other six staff officers and the Battalion Sgt. Major into the bunker, which became almost as crowded as the stateroom scene in Night at the Opera. We gave everyone a Macadamia nut that night, and, in a service worthy of priestly ordination, I passed the bottle of Macadamia nuts to Buck, who, because he still had six weeks to go, later on would replace my centerfold with his centerfold and continue the tradition. We retired my centerfold to a place of prominence on the side wall of the Op Center, where Bulldog could see it every day all day. Six weeks later, Buck’s would be hung beside it.

The next day, I choppered south, boarded a chartered Pan Am plane with about three-hundred other happy guys and flew home to what we called “the world.”

OK. Break’s over

If it weren’t so stupidly tragic and delusional, one might be forgiven for viewing Donald Trump’s campaign swan song as comical. “We’ve turned the corner.” “It will go away.” “On November 4th, you won’t hear about it anymore.” And the list goes on.

But if you really want to know how we’re doing, there are, actually, reliable places to look. Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center and the New York Times COVID Tracker, for example.

And now there is this website, which tracks the Rt factor for each state, daily. Rt represents the effective reproduction rate of the virus calculated for each locale. It lets us estimate how many secondary infections are likely to occur from a single infection in a specific area. Values over 1.0 mean we should expect more cases in that area, values under 1.0 mean we should expect fewer. As of today, only one state, Mississippi, of all places, is below 1. You can see what infection rates are like today, two weeks ago, one, two and three months ago. It confirms what all of us, except the aforementioned Mr. Trump, his minions and cult-like followers, know to be true.

If we’ve “turned the corner” it is only to enter Dante’s Ninth Circle of Hell. You remember that one, don’t you? It’s the final, deepest level of hell, reserved for traitors, betrayers and oath-breakers. Up until now, it’s most famous occupant had been Judas Iscariot.

Up until now.

And finally…

Seven days to go.

The number seven comes up a lot in Roman Catholicism. There are seven Cardinal Virtues, called by the church, “Gifts of the Holy Spirit.” They are wisdom, understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety, and fear of the Lord.

There are seven Corporal Works of Mercy. They are feed the hungry, shelter the homeless, clothe the naked, visit the sick and imprisoned, bury the dead, and give alms to the poor.

And there are seven Spiritual Works of Mercy. They are instruct, advise, console, comfort, forgive, and bear wrongs patiently.

Judge, now Justice, Amy Coney Barrett is a devout Roman Catholic. I’m sure she is also a very smart person and probably a pretty good lawyer, too.

But for a month now, I’ve been bothered by something about her, and with seven days to go, I’m bothered even more.

For the life of me I cannot get over that, at her super-spreader Rose Garden introduction and follow-on reception in the White House, she did not wear a mask to protect herself and others. I understand everyone else who attended had swallowed the Kool-Aid, but she should have known better. And last night, in the White House Blue Room and outside on its balcony, she was still unmasked.

There are only three possibilities for this behavior.

  1. She doesn’t believe masks protect us and others from the virus, which I don’t believe for a minute;
  2. She is ignorant about masks and doesn’t understand their importance, which I don’t believe for a second;
  3. She was influenced by Trump’s behavior, as well as that of everyone else’s, and just went along to get along.

I’m voting for door #3, and that is a scary thought for our future.

Seven days.

 

 

It’s Been Quite A Week — Here Are Some Things You Might Have Missed

Saturday, October 24th, 2020

From the Department of There’s No Accounting For Stupidity

Since 1980, the population of Idaho has grown from about one million to nearly 1.8 million, considerably outstripping the rate of growth of its neighbors Montana and Wyoming. Over the last 14 days, all three states have seen large spikes in Covid-19 cases, according to the New York Times’s Covid Map and Case Count. And they’re not alone. All the Midwest and Pacific region states are seeing similar surges. Their governors are faced with balancing increased restrictions with the personal freedom inherent in pioneering individualism.

Nowhere did this daunting task become more evident than Thursday in Idaho, a state that has seen a 55% rise in cases in the last two weeks and where, minutes after hearing local hospitals were approaching full capacity necessitating moving patients to Seattle, of all places, the regional health board voted to repeal the local mask mandate.

The regional board, composed of seven appointed members with no requirement to have any medical experience, voted 4-3 to end the mandate. Health District epidemiologist Jeff Lee had just finished describing how the state’s hospitals were becoming “overwhelmed” by the surge in cases. For example, even after doubling up patients in rooms and buying more hospital beds, the hospital in Coeur d’Alene had reached 99% capacity. But, not to worry, it’s just an eight hour, 493 mile ambulance ride from Boise to Seattle.

“We’re facing staff shortages, and we have a lot of physician fatigue. This has been going on for seven months — we’re tired,” Lee said.

He introduced several doctors who testified about the struggle COVID-19 patients face, the burden on hospitals and how masks reduce the spread of the virus. But that didn’t matter to the Board’s majority who just did not see the sense in masks, no matter what the experts said.

To put a period on the “Health” Board’s meeting, member Allen Banks got to the heart of the matter by denying the existence of Covid-19. Lecturing the medical professionals who testified, he said, “Something’s making these people sick, and I’m pretty sure that it’s not coronavirus, so the question that you should be asking is, ‘What’s making them sick?”

That penetrating question came from a gentleman with a Ph.D. in chemistry from the University of Colorado, who for 30 years has worked in medical research in biotechnology and pharmaceutical development.

Dr. Banks would make a wonderful addition to the White House Coronavirus Task Force.

How cold is cold enough?

Have you stopped to consider the logistics of delivering upwards of 200 million doses of a future Covid-19 vaccine? That’s a lot of syringes. If you laid them end to end they would stretch from the North Pole to the South Pole, about 13,000 miles.

And the vaccine would have to be kept cold, very cold. Just how cold you ask? Try minus 103 Fahrenheit. That’s nearly four times colder than your home freezer, colder even than Antarctica in the dead of winter.

This is a complex challenge. For months, manufacturers, federal and state governments, and large health care systems have been quietly planning how to navigate this ultra “cold chain” that stretches from vaccine manufacturers to hospitals, nursing homes, doctors’ offices, and many far-flung clinics. Now that Pfizer has announced it plans to apply for emergency-use authorization designation in late November for its vaccine currently in Phase 3 trials, solving the cold problem becomes more urgent.

The nation’s governors wrote the Trump Administration last Sunday expressing concerns about the supply of ultracold freezers and dry ice — already experiencing shortages. Pfizer says it has developed specially designed, temperature-controlled shipping packages, using dry ice, to keep its vials at roughly minus 103 below Fahrenheit for up to 10 days. But what happens if the doses are not used in ten days? This is what is confounding the governors.

This issue is even more difficult than it appears, because the vaccines of both Pfizer and Moderna, another leading vaccine developer in Phase 3 trials, require two shots within 21 and 28 days, respectively. The situation is eased somewhat, because Moderna’s vaccine, at around minus 4 Fahrenheit, does not require the same ultra-cold storage temperature as Pfizer’s.

Might be a good time to buy stock in a maker of dry ice.

High Deductibles: Another nail in the rural hospital coffin

Since 2010, more than 130 rural hospitals have closed, 15 thus far in 2020. One mostly overlooked reason is the health insurance deductible. Depending on the plan (employer-sponsored, ACA Marketplace, etc.) a family deductible can range from $0 (but the out-of-pockets are huge) to well over $8,000.

Families in rural communities often face deductibles in the $2,000 to $4,000 range. And when family members require hospitalization, it often happens they cannot pay the deductible. Rural hospitals are forced to eat this less than tasty bill, send it to a collections company, or set up a payment plan with the patient. They prefer the payment plan route, but this significantly delays getting the money, and the bill is often reduced because of the patient’s economic circumstances. So, the hospital goes further in the red and its patients go further in debt. The pandemic has only exacerbated this problem.

Just another example of our nation’s dysfunctional health care “system.”

How to get rid of an irritating federal employee

Despite a great swath of the public thinking otherwise, federal employees can be fired, although it is true that this happens rarely. Of the 2.1 million federal employees about 10,000 are terminated annually, according to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB).

Firing a federal worker is similar to what would occur in the private sector, with one twist. In both settings, best practice recommends, and the federal system requires, the three step verbal warning, written warning, termination process. The twist comes after that. Federal employees can appeal to the MSPB, and the appeals can take a long time to adjudicate.

This past week, the Trump administration threw an interesting log on the fire when the President issued an Executive Order stripping long-held civil service protections from employees whose work involves policymaking. This will affect tens of thousands of workers, and will reduce them to being, for all practical purposes, “at will” employees, meaning they can be fired for cause or not for cause at a moment’s notice.

Under this order, federal scientists, attorneys, regulators, public health experts and many others in senior roles would lose rights to due process and in some cases, union representation, at agencies across the government.

These are not politically appointed employees who require confirmation to their positions, whom the president can terminate or have terminated by whim. Rather, they are professionals who serve as a cadre of subject-matter experts for every administration. I will let you consider the possible ramifications of this Executive Order, which to me seem profound. The Order, while not affecting a majority of the government, could upend the foundation of the career workforce by imposing political loyalty tests.

It is possible, with less than two weeks before election day, this may be more symbolic than real, because the Order requires agencies to indicate employees who would be affected by 19 January 2021, a day before the next inauguration. If Joe Biden wins the election he would be unlikely to follow through on the president’s order. But if Donald Trump is re-elected, this tectonic Order will monumentally reshape the federal service.

Think about that. Please.

 

 

 

 

Sisyphus Must Have Felt Like This

Wednesday, September 16th, 2020

The COVID-19 boulder, full of facts, lies, information, misinformation, disinformation, and just plain delusional thinking keeps rolling back down the mountain. Try as we might, it’s certainly difficult to make sense of COVID-19. But we keep trying, anyway. As in:

Unions during COVID-19

I have written previously about the perplexing case of union participation in America. In 1960, about a third of hourly workers belonged to unions. In January of this year, the BLS reported that number had dropped to 10.3%. Yet, in the same press release, the BLS reports:

Nonunion workers had median weekly earnings that were 81 percent of earnings for workers who were union members ($892 versus $1,095).

Right now we won’t get into why this puzzling paradox exists, except to say we now have another log to throw on the pyre.

A new study authored by researchers at George Washington University, the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine and the Boston University School of Medicine, published in Health Affairs, found that having a unionized workforce at a nursing home greatly reduces the likelihood that residents or staff will die from COVID-19. From the study’s Abstract:

Health care worker unions were associated with a 1.29 percentage point mortality reduction, which represents a 30% relative decrease in the COVID-19 mortality rate compared to facilities without health care worker unions.

The study analyzed data from more than 300 nursing homes in New York from March 1 through May 31. The authors conclude the unionized health care workers in the nursing homes were able to negotiate for more PPE, higher pay, and better working conditions.

During the pandemic, New York has suffered nearly 7,000 nursing home deaths, more than any other state except New Jersey.

My take on this? If you have loved ones who may be headed for a nursing home, it might be a good idea to ask if the staff is unionized.

Avoiding medical care during COVID-19

Since early in COVID-19, we’ve known that many people, fearful of the disease, have put off getting routine, or, in some cases, emergency medical care. What we have not known is what demographic groups are doing that and to what degree. Now, the CDC has put a full stop period to that issue.

In its 11 September weekly Morbidity and Mortality Report, the CDC published a comprehensive analysis concluding 40.9% of U.S. adults delayed or avoided medical care as of June 30. This includes urgent or emergency care (12%) and routine care (32%). Regarding what population segments are doing this, the study had this to say:

The estimated prevalence of urgent or emergency care avoidance was significantly higher among the following groups: unpaid caregivers for adults versus non-caregivers (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] = 2.9); persons with two or more selected underlying medical conditions† versus those without those conditions (aPR = 1.9); persons with health insurance versus those without health insurance (aPR = 1.8); non-Hispanic Black (Black) adults (aPR = 1.6) and Hispanic or Latino (Hispanic) adults (aPR = 1.5) versus non-Hispanic White (White) adults; young adults aged 18–24 years versus adults aged 25–44 years (aPR = 1.5); and persons with disabilities§ versus those without disabilities (aPR = 1.3).*

So, Mary, taking care of her aged mother at home, foregoes either emergency or routine care at nearly three times the rate of Sarah, her next door neighbor who is not burdened with an aged relative, because she doesn’t want to bring COVID-19 home to Mom. Even more troubling is that people with two or more co-morbidities forego care at nearly two times the rate of people without such underlying conditions.

The CDC’s paper advises that, “… urgent efforts are warranted to ensure delivery of services that, if deferred, could result in patient harm.”

Enough said.

*By way of example for the statistically challenged, an adjusted prevalence ratio of 2 means that the prevalence of cases among a study group is 2 times higher than among the control subjects. It’s calculated through a series of regression analyses. There. Now you know.

U. S. life expectancy

COVID-19 has sucked all the air out of any national attempt at healthcare reform, while revealing in sharp detail the foundational flaws in the current system. Eventually, however, America is going to have to confront this issue in a meaningful manner. Healthcare cost in America is still twice the average of all 37 member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and Americans still have poorer health and lower life expectancy than the average of the member countries (78.7 versus 79.5)

In its latest Health At A Glance publication, the OECD updated its life expectancy data, as shown here:

There are many cracks in our healthcare house that Jack built. Ignoring them is not a strategically viable plan for improvement, improvement that all citizens deserve.

To quote the venerable A. E. Housman, “Terrence, this is stupid stuff.” Another example of our woebegone healthcare system.

Trump’s Nevada rally

Last night, during an ABC-TV Town Hall Meeting President Trump once again pilloried cities and states run by Democrats and blamed their leaders for any problems with the response to COVID-19.

A little contextual background is required here. On 14 April, Trump asserted “absolute authority” to control the nation’s response to the pandemic, saying, “When somebody is president of the United States, your authority is total.” He made it clear he would be in charge and the states would have to fall in line.

Two days later, he reversed himself on a call with all the governors, telling them, “I’ve gotten to know almost all of you, most of you I’ve known and some very well. You are all very capable people, I think in all cases, very capable people. And you’re going to be calling your shots.”

Since then, he has repeatedly repeated the “You’re on your own” line. The result, of course, has been that we have seen 51 different plans and approaches  with varying degrees of success.

Nevada, one of the “you’re on your own” states, is still in the midst of a tough fight against the disease with a Daily Positivity Rate of 7.1% and a Cumulative Positivity Rate of 10.2% as of 10 September.

On 24 June, Nevada Governor Steve Sisolak imposed certain restrictions, among them the requirements that all Nevada residents wear masks when in public and that no more than 50 people, socially distanced, congregate in one place.

Enter Donald Trump and his the-sky-is-the-limit indoor rally of last Sunday evening at Xtreme Manufacturing in Henderson, Nevada. Fire officials estimated the size of the crowd was 5,600 people, nearly all of whom were maskless (except for the people right behind Trump who were constantly on full TV view).

Just as we saw in Tulsa after his previous rally, we’ll probably see a spike in cases in Nevada in two to three weeks.

Beyond the nonchalant and willful endangerment to peoples’ lives, what bothers me most of all about this event is Donald Trump’s cavalier and metaphorical raising high of his two middle fingers to Nevada’s scientifically-based efforts to keep its citizens alive. After repeatedly telling the nation’s governors they should do what they think they need to do to combat COVID-19, this “law and order” president, without compunction of any kind, imperiously violates the law while telling his large crowd Nevada’s Governor Sisolak is “a hack” and “weak.”

Allow me to close with Joseph Welsh’s question to Senator Joe McCarthy on 9 June 1954: “Have you no decency, sir?”

 

Important COVID-19 Workers’ Compensation Questions

Wednesday, May 13th, 2020

Economic chickens are coming home to roost all over America. Except for the one percenters, and I may be wrong about them, everyone is feeling it, the pain. Biomedical devastation is leading us to places we have never imagined, let alone seen. In the quiet little room called workers’ compensation where I have sat for some number of years, there are questions that are going to need answering. Let’s look at a few of them.

But first, a little background. A week ago we wrote about a recent National Council on Workers’ Compensation (NCCI) analysis of workers’ compensation cost projections due to COVID-19. NCCI’s analysis projected a best case scenario, in which loss costs increase $2 billion, and a worst case scenario, in which they increase $81.5 billion, or 250% more than current total loss costs. Willis Towers Watson also released a scenario-based analysis that suggested pretty much the same thing.

On 8 April, the California State Assembly Insurance Committee asked the the California Workers’ Compensation Insurance Rating Bureau (WCIRB) to project loss costs if conclusive (rebuttable) presumptions were provided to front line workers, something Governor Gavin Newsom actually did through Executive Order one month later, so the “if” became a “done.” Later in April, the WCIRB released the requested report and concluded:

…the cost estimates in this Research Brief are presented as a range of potential impacts based on varying assumptions of the number of COVID-19 claims filed. On this basis, the WCIRB estimates that the annual cost of COVID-19 claims on ECI (Essential Critical Infrastructure) workers under a conclusive presumption ranges from $2.2 billion to $33.6 billion with an approximate mid-range estimate of $11.2 billion, or 61% of the annual estimated cost of the total workers’ compensation system prior to the impact of the pandemic.

Note two things. First, for perspective, if California were a country, it would have the fifth largest GDP in the world. Second, regardless, the WCIRB’s best case scenario is $.2 billion more than NCCI’s best case scenario for all 38 states where it provides ratemaking services.

Clearly, whatever scenario happens, workers’ compensation losses are going to be cataclysmic.

So, about those questions:

  1. Who’s going to pay for all of this? In normal times, the answer is obvious: Employers and insurers (when losses exceed an employer’s liability). But if we know one thing for sure, these are not normal times. So, who takes the hit?
  2. What about secondary chronic conditions the virus has been shown to cause in some people? Many survivors of SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) suffered crippling ailments for more than a decade. We’re already seeing COVID-19 survivors come home from hospital with severe, possibly persistent, chronic conditions. Are these conditions covered by the initial claim? I can see the plaintiff’s attorney now. “Your Honor, but for the COVID-19 occupational disease, poor John here would never have immediately lost kidney function requiring dialysis three times per week, and would be the picture of health.”
  3. How will COVID-19 claims impact experience modification, which affects an employer’s premium for three years? It is only logical that if loss costs increase by billions in one year, an employer of essential workers, say a hospital, will see its experience modification factor take off like a SpaceX rocket. That is a recipe for economic doom and disaster beyond what we’re already seeing.
  4. What happens when an essential worker who has contracted COVID-19 and filed a claim infects other family members, or the neighbor next door, for that matter? Would they be covered by the claim, or by health insurance if they happen to have it? Keep in mind, job losses due to COVID-19 are now in excess of 20.6 million. Many have lost not only a job, they have also lost the health insurance the job provided. The Kaiser Family Foundation has said, “26.8M would become uninsured after losing job-based coverage during the coronavirus if they don’t enroll in other coverage.” Consequently, this question is very important, because workers’ compensation health care is totally free, unlike employer-based and nearly all other insurance options that all come with deductibles and co-pays.

Meanwhile, back at the California Workers’ Compensation Insurance Rating Bureau, the organization has submitted a proposed rule to deal with number 2, above. It wants to exclude COVID-19 loss costs from the calculation of experience modification. Specifically, the proposed rule says:

Claims directly arising from a diagnosis of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), reported with a catastrophe Number 12 pursuant to the Uniform Statistical Reporting Plan, shall not be reflected in the computation of the experience modification.

The proposed rule would also reclassify workers now working remotely from home as clerical – 8810, which is the lowest premium rate possible.

Let’s suppose for just a moment that the WCIRB’s proposed rule is approved, and California’s employers are off the hook with respect to experience modification. This presents another question: Will other states do the same? All of them? Some of them? None? Whatever happens, it seems to me we need a nationally consistent approach. Wouldn’t you agree?

Finally, this all leads back to the first question: Who’s the guy at the end of the line left holding the bill for COVID-19 claim costs?

How Are States Handling Workers’ Compensation During COVID-19?

Monday, May 11th, 2020

Last week we wrote about Governor Gavin Newsom’s Executive Order implementing a workers’ compensation rebuttable presumption for all essential workers who contract COVID-19 in California.

To review, a rebuttable presumption means an essential worker who contracts COVID-19 does not have to prove work-relatedness. The burden is on the employer to prove the disease was not caused by work.

Writing that other states have also taken action, I noted those actions varied widely across the country. But the monumentality of COVID-19 requires more on this topic. Just what are other states doing? Specifically.

Thirty-nine have either done nothing or have legislation pending. That is, they have taken no action via Executive Order, as Newsom did, or have yet to enact legislation. The District of Columbia is also in this group. Neither, have any of these states declared COVID-19 an occupational disease, although it obviously can be one.

The other 12 states have taken the following actions:

Akaska: On 9 April, Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy signed legislation declaring a rebuttable presumption for first responders and other health care workers.

Arkansas: On 21 April Governor Asa Hutchinson issued an Executive Order creating a rebuttable presumption for first responders, other health care workers and National Guard personnel assigned to COVID-19 duties.

Florida: The state published a Memorandum saying first responders and health care workers “would be eligible for workers’ compensation benefits under Florida law.” Given the torment COVID-19 is causing throughout society, this is pretty wimpy, don’t you think?

Illinois: On 16 April, Governor J. B. Pritzker issued an Executive Order declaring a rebuttable presumption for first responders and other health care workers. Then, under intense pressure from the business and insurance communities, Pritzker, whose family owns the Hyatt hotel chain, rescinded the order. Obviously, a stand-up guy. So, I guess you could say Illinois now belongs in the camp of the other 38 states that have done nothing.

Kentucky: On 9 April, Governor Andy Beshear issued an Executive Order similar to Newsom’s, creating a rebuttable presumption for all essential workers who contract COVID-19. The business community isn’t happy, but, unlike Pritzker, Beshear has not changed his position.

Michigan: On 30 March, the Workers’ Disability Compensation Agency declared an Emergency Rule creating a rebuttable presumption for all First Response Employees, a term, as Michigan defines it, that includes just about everyone in health care.

Minnesota: On 7 April, Governor Tim Walz signed legislation establishing a rebuttable presumption for first responders, health care workers, correctional officers and child care workers.

Missouri: The Department of Labor and Industrial Relations issued an emergency rule, effective 22 April, declaring a rebuttable presumption for first responders, but, not, perplexingly, for other health care workers exposed to COVID-19. First responders are defined as “a law enforcement officer, firefighter or an emergency medical technician (EMT).”

New Mexico: On 23 April Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham issued an Executive Order creating a rebuttable presumption for state-employed first responders and volunteers to the health care system fighting the disease. Private sector employees are not covered.

North Dakota: On 25 March, Governor Doug Burgum issued an Executive Order creating a rebuttable presumption for all first responders and health care workers. On 16 April, he issued another one to cover funeral directors.

Utah: On 22 April, enacted legislation creating a rebuttable presumption for all first responders.

Washington: On 5 March, Governor Jay Inslee issued an Executive Order  creating a rebuttable presumption for first responders and other health care workers. The order also applies if the workers are merely quarantined.

The majority of states not listed here have some kind of legislation filed awaiting legislative action. But as anyone who has ever wandered the halls of a state capital watching the sausage being made knows, it doesn’t mean a thing until the Governor in the corner office signs it.

Time is wasting.

 

More COVID-19 Quick Takes

Thursday, May 7th, 2020

Workers’ compensation and the disease

COVID-19 is presenting some interesting and perplexing issues for workers’ compensation. Among them are:

  1. Claims adjusters and Nurse Case Managers are far more familiar with injury claims than disease claims. Occupational disease claims are fuzzy, and work-relatedness is often difficult to determine. A broken arm on the shop floor is ever so much more cut and dried. Yesterday, Governor Gavin Newsom made this moot for California by signing an Executive Order that will make it easier for essential workers who contract COVID-19 to obtain workers’ compensations benefits. His order is in effect for 60 days and is retroactive to 19 March. Note Bene – his order establishes a rebuttable presumption and covers all workers deemed essential during the crisis; e.g., grocery workers, among others, as well as first responders and all health care workers. A rebuttable presumption means an essential worker who contracts COVID-19 does not have to prove work-relatedness. The burden is on the employer to prove the disease could not have been caused by work. California is one of a number of states that have taken action addressing workers’ compensation coverage for essential workers.
  2. But not all states have taken action in the same way. In fact, approaches vary considerably. Two issues treated differently among the states are: first, whether to establish a rebuttable presumption as described above; and, second, just who is essential. Some states say that while a number of occupations have been determined to be “essential” during COVID-19 (see Grocery Workers, above), only first responders and health care workers are essential enough to qualify for workers’ compensation if they come down with the disease. Labor unions say this is an issue of fairness, but since when has workers’ compensation been equally fair in all states? Consider loss of function awards, which vary tremendously across the nation.
  3. NCCI has jumped into the COVID 19 what if debate and projected various loss cost scenarios for the workers’ compensation insurance industry. All scenarios show increased losses, and some of the them are downright grim. In the worst case, 50% of all workers are infected and 60% of all claims are paid, in which case losses increase $81.5 billion, or 250% more than current total loss costs. Ouch! In the best case NCCI presents, there is no rebuttable presumption, only first responders and health care workers are eligible for workers’ compensation benefits, only 5% of them become infected, and only 60% of the claims are paid, which results in an increase in loss costs of $2 billion. The best case scenario is is not going to happen. See 1, above.
  4. And what about the poor employers and insurers who are going to foot the bill? Specifically, what about experience modification? One can almost say COVID-19 comes under the heading: An Act Of God. But the claims are going to be paid, so how does a confused insurer account for that in  the premium it’s going to drop on the head of John Q. Employer with a loud and painful thud?

Update on Long Term Care Facilities

I’ve addressed LTCFs here, here  and here, pointing out that there is no coordinated national reporting of LTCF COVID-19 cases or deaths. “One would think this cries out for federal data tracking conducted in a consistent manner across the nation.” Doesn’t seem to have happened yet.

The logical entity to track this is the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and maybe it is. But, then again, maybe it isn’t, because it won’t say. Yesterday, two Senate Democrats — Ron Wyden of Oregon and Bob Casey of Pennsylvania — called on the Trump administration to close this gap and commit to a timeline to release the information.

“There have been no signs that the Trump administration has an effective plan to address the tragedy that is taking place in America’s nursing homes,” they said in a joint statement.

It’s logical to assume that a disproportionate number of deaths would occur in LTCFs. The vulnerable elderly, many, perhaps most, with a number of comorbid underlying conditions, are packed together and present a breeding ground for the virus. Early on, this should have been apparent to the CDC. Why its talented scientists didn’t dive into this from Day 1 is beyond me.

We’ll continue to follow this.

Are We Learning From History, Or Repeating It?

Throughout history, infectious diseases have crippled societies. They have stymied progress and, in the best cases delayed, in the worst reversed, economic development and prosperity.

How have societies handled infectious disease pandemics throughout history, and are our actions in the midst of COVID-19 any better?

It’s true that our science puts us a quantum leap ahead of historical societies in terms of searching for therapies and a vaccine. Oh, the vaccine will happen, but between now and then are we dealing with our current infectious disease problem better than our ancestors?

Actually, no. Societies have long known that when a killing disease strikes on a grand scale the best thing to do is stay far away from other people. Quite literally, head for the hills. Trouble was, that wasn’t always possible due to urban densities and economic privation. Today, densely packed areas, especially cities, are the immediate hot spots, the poor and African Americans are disproportionately infected, and our mitigation efforts are the same as time immemorial.

Tomorrow, we’ll take a look at the history of pandemics, their societal effects and how we can learn from them as we move through and, we fervently hope, leave behind the scourge of COVID-19.

 

 

Direct Care Workers: Health Care’s Essential Underbelly

Wednesday, April 29th, 2020

First, an update

Yesterday, we wrote about Long Term Care Facilities (LTCF) and the sad COVID-19 experience of Massachusetts’ nursing homes. As of this morning, 303 of the Commonwealth’s 386 nursing homes have had at least 2 cases, for a total of 10,031 cases statewide. Fifty-six percent, or 1,632, of all the Commonwealth’s COVID-19 deaths have happened to nursing home residents or staff.

Governor Charley Baker is a former CEO of Harvard Pilgrim health Care, one of the Commonwealth’s leading HMO  health care plans. So, it’s a given that Baker knows health care. But, even with that background, he, like all our governors, has been living through the tortures of Tantalus as they attempt to work with the administration in all things COVID-19.

Today, the governor announced he’s sending $130 million to help nursing homes deal with the crisis. He’s also enlisting 120 nurses to respond lickety split to nursing home emergencies. Moreover, his administration will be auditing LTCFs for compliance with new care criteria including mandatory testing of staff and residents, a 28 point infectious disease checklist, and PPE requirements. This is all good, but one hopes reality is not that this particular horse has escaped the barn and is now grazing four pastures over.

And what about those caregivers?

They call it “Direct Care.” The care that Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs), home health aides, and personal care attendants provide America’s elderly and disabled. You’ll find them in nursing homes, residential care homes, hospitals, and plain, ordinary, everyday homes, the kind you and I live in. And they are essential workers.

All told, there are more than 1.3 million of them in the U.S., and the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) projects the direct care industry will grow more than any other over the next decade, with a compound annual growth rate of 4.0. And they are essential workers.

They are also the least compensated workers, by far, in the health care sector. Here’s a graph from the BLS to illustrate the point:

The direct care workers are the pink dots. The isolated pink dot on the lower right refers to Certified Nurse Assistants. According to the Paraprofessional Health Institute (PHI):

The median hourly wage for home care workers in the U.S. is $10.49—a wage that, when adjusted for inflation, has remained virtually stagnant for the last 10 years. In turn, the median annual income for home care workers, most of whom work part-time or only during part of the year, is $13,800.[1]

Twenty-three percent of direct care workers live below the federal poverty line (FPL), as opposed to 7% of the rest of the population (which is abominable in its own right). Some of them might be caring for your parents or grandparents right now. Yes, they are essential workers.

Fifty-two percent of home care workers and 39 percent of nursing assistants rely on some form of public support, such as food and nutrition aid, Medicaid, or cash assistance. Moreover, because of low pay and irregular hours, it’s difficult for direct care workers to qualify or pay for employer-based or individual health coverage. Neither can they afford to stop working during COVID-19. They need the money, such as it is – and they are essential workers.

And what about direct care workers who are immigrants? Researchers from Harvard Medical School studied this in their June 2019 paper, “Care for America’s Elderly and Disabled People Relies on Immigrant Labor.” 

They wrote:

Using nationally representative data, we found that in 2017 immigrants accounted for 18.2 percent of health care workers and 23.5 percent of formal and nonformal long-term care sector workers. More than one-quarter (27.5 percent) of direct care workers and 30.3 percent of nursing home housekeeping and maintenance workers were immigrants. Although legal noncitizen immigrants accounted for 5.2 percent of the US population, they made up 9.0 percent of direct care workers. Naturalized citizens, 6.8 percent of the US population, accounted for 13.9 percent of direct care workers. In light of the current and projected shortage of health care and direct care workers, our finding that immigrants fill a disproportionate share of such jobs suggests that policies curtailing immigration will likely compromise the availability of care for elderly and disabled Americans. (emphasis added)

Nearly 15% percent (14.9%) of the foreign born workforce are college graduates, compared with 8.4% of the native born direct care workforce.

Many foreign born direct care workers are in the country with Temporary Protected Status (TPS), a status provided to nationals of certain countries, ten of them, experiencing problems that make it difficult or unsafe for their nationals to be deported there. In 2018, The Trump administration attempted to terminate the Temporary Protected Status for workers from a number of the designated countries, but courts have enjoined that for now. Nonetheless, that can’t be doing the workers’ mental health much good at the moment. And they are essential workers.

Nobody’s attacking direct care workers during COVID-19. They wouldn’t dare. After all, they are essential workers. But, if we ever get out of this healthcare fiasco, I don’t think it’s a wild stretch of the imagination to think if Donald Trump continues his  fervent anti-immigration polemic direct care workers will be marginalized even more than they already are.

They deserve better. They are essential.

 

At The Heart Of COVID 19: Fear

Thursday, April 16th, 2020

 

“One fear creates a dereliction, which brings a greater fear, and there comes a point where the fear is too great and the human spirit just gives up…” – Wolf Hall, by Hilary Mantel.

“We have to remember the enemy is the virus. Not one another.” – Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

The protests are ramping up. Over the last two days groups demanding governors reopen state economies have gathered to protest stay at home orders.

Protesters in Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio, Utah, North Carolina and Virginia have made their presence felt and voices heard. Timed to coincide with governors’ daily press briefings on COCVID 19, to varying degrees of success they tried to drown out the gubernatorial updates.

By far, the largest protest was yesterday in Lansing, Michigan where, for five miles, thousands of vehicles blocked traffic going into or out of the city. They also blocked all traffic heading to Sparrow Hospital, which meant hospital workers were denied access to the most important jobs in the nation: Treating COVID 19 victims. And, to make a bad situation worse, many, perhaps most, of the protesters were unmasked, standing around as if they’d never heard the term, “social distance.”

Here’s a pretty alarming photo from Ohio:

And this from Michigan:

Yes, those really are automatic weapons in the hands of angry protesters. People, this is a bad combination.

What in the name of Galen is going on here?

How about fear and insecurity?

When I was a commander in Vietnam, training, and lots of it, kept my unit alive. We trained for everything imaginable, and when bad things happened, we were scared, but prepared. Running toward danger is not an intuitive response. Training takes over in those situations. Here, in the midst of COVID 19, no one has any training, and that includes most of the health care workers on the front lines fighting this entirely new disease. Everyone is making it up as they go along, and our health care workers…excuse me, our health care heroes… are learning new things every day aimed at keeping people alive.

Americans have no training or experience to guide them through the stay at home period, however long it turns out to be. And so, they fearfully worry. About themselves, their kids, their parents and grandparents, and their jobs. Many of those jobs could be gone forever, and this scares them to their core. That, along with the open-ended nature of the stay at home orders, leads to fearing the worst.

People are looking for something to believe in, some hope, someone to blame, so, when right wing rabble rousers stoke their fears…

Defusing this growing powder keg starts at the top. The nation’s governors, with some notable exceptions, have stepped up and are doing all they can to keep their citizens alive. They have to, because Donald Trump and his administration have performed so poorly during the crisis. It is unfortunate, indeed, that the president cannot help himself from fanning the flames of his base. Yesterday’s protests were replete with Trump and MAGA hats, as well as, ironically, protesters calling the stay at home orders “tyranny.”

The protests without social distancing or masks are going to result in more infections and deaths. That is a terrible thing. And so unnecessary.