Multiplici miraculo Deus gloriosum--The Text of HR 6201, “Families First Coronavirus Response Act” in the Wake of the Declaration of National Emergency

This morning one woke up, hours aftre President Trump declared a national emergency, to news that the House of Representatives (with the encouragement of both President Trump and Speaker Pelosi) passed HR 6201, the “Families First Coronavirus Response Act.”

A coronavirus economic aid bill was passed by 363 votes to 40 by the House of Representatives in the early hours of Saturday morning after receiving support from President Trump who declared a national emergency because of the coronavirus on Friday afternoon. The sweeping relief package includes two weeks of paid sick leave and up to three months of paid family and medical leave as the coronavirus is now confirmed in 49 states. West Virginia is the only state not to have a case by Friday evening.Trump threw his support behind the legislation which faced a vote in the House early Saturday morning, after announcing a national emergency over coronavirus and later designating this Sunday, March 15, a National Prayer Day. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Friday announced the deal with the Trump administration for an aid package from Congress that would provide free tests even for the uninsured, enhanced unemployment benefits by boosting food stamps, and federal funds for Medicaid. It will also bolster food programs with additional food aid. Additionally it will include two weeks of paid sick leave and up to three months of paid family and medical leave for Americans who work for businesses with less than 500 employees or the government and are infected by the virus. (House PASSES coronavirus bill by 363-40 in 1am vote as Trump and Pelosi back deal, Daily Mail).

For those with limited access, the text of HR 6201 follows.

COVID-19 in Cuba: The Current State of Affairs

We have been following the situation in Cuba with respect to the COVID-19 pandemic (Coronavirus in the Caribbean; Yuri Gonzalez-Hernandez, Report on the Status of COVID-19 Preparation in Cuba). At the time preparatory measures were being developed and Cuba remained free of the virus--at least to their knowledge.

COVID-19 has now reached Cuba. And it was not surprising how it reached the Island.  Tourism (a driving force in the economy and one the flow of which Cuba can ill afford to reduce) from Italy appears to have accounted for one vector (here; and El antes y el después de los tres primeros casos confirmados).  Another was returning Cuban nationals from trips abroad to places where the infections rates were already starting to grow quickly (e.g., Italy). The later was cause for more concern because of the possibility of transmission. But it is likley to early to determine the dispersion effects of these small number of cases for the moment.  Cuba has suspended its consular services in Italy at least through 3 April, making containment more difficult  (Cerró Cuba los servicios consulares presenciales en Italia por Covid-19).

And now, with the rise of COVID-19 containment measures in the United States, it is feared that air travel between the US and Cuba will be further and adversely affected. In the meantime, state authorities are dealing with potential panic as the population fears that a lack of medicine and medical facilities may overwhelm the state's ability to treat a quickly growing infected population. This fear has been countered by the state and Party news organs which now guarantee the availability of treatment drugs (Biocubafarma garantizará producción de los 22 medicamentos para el tratamiento del Covid-19). And now the state is faced with the possibility that COVID-19 infection rates may not be substantially affected by rising temperatures. 

At the same time, and like many other states, Cuban authorities have been circulating information on disinfecting objects that may carry substantial potential for spreading the virus (Breve guía sobre cómo desinfectar celulares y otros dispositivos electrónicos).  Cuban authorities have also been circulating informaiton on labor protection for empoyees who may become ill (¿Qué normas regularían la protección laboral ante presuntos impactos de Covid-19?). At the same time, Cuban authorities note that their medical professionals abroad have been able to avoid infection while performing their duties; "De los países con colaboración médica cubana . . .Qatar, Argelia, China, Sudáfrica y Kuwait tienen casos infectados en su población; no, obstante, «nuestro personal está protegido, y no ha tenido contacto con los pacientes enfermos" (Solidarios y precavidos: cooperantes cubanos sin Covid-19 (of the states with Cuban medical personnel, Qatar, Argelia, China, South Africa, and Kuwait, each with infected people, nonethelessCuban personnel have been protected and have no contact with infected patients)).


On the other hand, it is likely that current policy respecting Cuban sports teams will have to be revised as the suspension of sporting events becomes more common in the US and Europe (Deporte cubano toma medidas frente al Covid-19).  And unlike the actions taken elsewhere, Cuban authorities (at least for the moment) continue to declare an unwillingness to close schools (Solo en situación extrema se valorará cierre de las escuelas en Cuba, dice Ministra de Educación). Still, Cuban authorities have affirmed that they have plans in place to meet the treat of the virus and a potential infection of the population:

El Ministro de Salud ­Pública puntualizó que en Cuba se ha organizado la vigilancia epidemiológica a través de la pesquisa activa a viajeros y pacientes con síntomas respiratorios. Ya están habilitadas 1 322 camas en 11 hospitales y 824 en diez centros de aislamiento. Además, se ha establecido el proceso asistencial, según los protocolos, en las salas de hospitalización y en las terapias intensivas. (Ante el Covid-19, convoca Díaz-Canel a intensificar las medidas y a seguir trabajando con el pueblo) ("The Minister of Public Health pointed out that epidemiological surveillance has been organized in Cuba through active research on travelers and patients with respiratory symptoms. 1,322 beds are already enabled in 11 hospitals and 824 in ten isolation centers. In addition, the care process has been established, according to protocols, in hospital wards and in intensive care.")

These are the stories that have been circulating in the Cuban, and Cuban-American Press in recent days.  Links to some of the articles may be accessed below.

Text of President Trump's Remarks on a Declaration of National Emergency Responding to Effects of COVID-19 in the United States

While it ought not to have unexpected, on 13 March 2020, President Trump addressed the nation to declare a state of national emergency (media coverage here, here, here, and here).

"Speaking from the Rose Garden, Trump said, "I am officially declaring a national emergency." He said it would free up as much as $50 billion for state and local governments to respond to the outbreak. Trump also waived interest on federally held student loans and moved to prop up energy markets, by directing the Department of Energy to buy oil to fill the strategic petroleum reserve "'right up to the top." Trump said he was also giving Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar emergency authorities to waive federal regulations and laws to give doctors and hospitals "flexibility" in treating patients."  (Trump declares national state of emergency over coronavirus | LIVE).

As has become customary among plitical leaders in this generation, Mr. Trump delivered his remarks flanked by designated key officials. " With Dr. Anthony Fauci, Vice President Mike Pence, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar and other members of his coronavirus task force members standing behind him, Trump said, "No resource will be spared -- nothing whatsoever." (Government coronavirus response live updates: Trump declares national emergency).

The text of the remarks follow below (courtesy of Rev.com which just posted them).  Commentary and reflections to follow. Also posted is the text of the 11 March 2020 Remarks on travel to Europe.

Postscript: The White House posted the final version of the remarks, plus the remarks of Vice President Pence to the White House website.  They may be accessed HERE:

Shasha Li: Commentary on Dayuan Han, "The Relationship Between National Security and Human Rights in China's Constitution"

Over the course of the last several years, Chinese scholars have been engaging in a very interesting discussion about the way that constitutional sensitivities to human rights affects Chinese law and practice in a number f areas. The conversation intensified after 2004 when the State Constitution was amended to include a third paragraph in its Article 33 that provides: "The State respects and preserves human rights."

This year I have the great privilege of hosting a marvelous visiting scholar from China, Shasha Li. Professor Li is an Associate Professor of Law School of Dongbei University of Finance and Economics. She obtained her Bachelor of Law from Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, her Master of Law at Nankai University; ad her Doctor of Law at Jilin University. Professor Li may be contacted at fishsuncat [AT] 126.com.

I have prevailed on Professor Li to offer readers in English a glimpse at some of the rich discussion among academics who are considering the application of principles of human rights with Chinese characteristics and compatible with the Chinese political and normative system.

For her next  commentary, Professor Li has chosen the essay, "The Relationship Between National Security and Human Rights in China's Constitution," authored by Dayuan Han, Professor of Law at Renmin University and published in Academic Exchange (2019 (3)). Earlier Commentary may be accessed HERE. The article makes for interesting reading not just because of its object to align constitutionalism with anti-terrorism and de-radicalization measures, but for what it might suggest about the scope of state action in the context of epidemics like COVID-19.


Professor Li's English language reflections follows below along with the original article (Chinese language only; English language Abstract). 

习近平在湖北省考察新冠肺炎疫情防控工作 [Xi Jinping inspects new corona virus epidemic prevention work in Hubei Province]

(Pix: 习近平在湖北省考察新冠肺炎疫情防控工作  CAPTION--习近平在湖北省考察新冠肺炎疫情防控工作 [This is Xi Jinping's video link to the Infectious Diseases Ward in the Command Center of Vulcan Mountain Hospital, and he has a cordial exchange with patients and medical staff in the ward. Photo by Xinhua News Agency reporter Ju Peng])

After months of extraordinary effort, Chinese leaders appear to feel that the country is now on the path toward the successful containment of the COVID-19 epidemic.  To underline that emerging confidence, Xi Jinping made a highly publicized visit to the epidemic epicenter in Wuhan.

This post includes the Chine language report of Xi Jinping's visit ,习近平在湖北省考察新冠肺炎疫情防控工作 [Xi Jinping inspects new corona virus epidemic prevention work in Hubei Province], 10 March 2020, plus a summary of his remarks, along with a crude English translation. 

The Remarks are useful for a number of reasons.  They provide a crude measure of confidence by Chinese authorities respecting the success of their containment strategy. They suggest the contours of the narrative of epidemic control that is being developed and transmitted.  The remarks also suggest the value that the core leadership attached to various modalities of managing populations during the course of the most aggressive period of containment. The remarks are also notable for its suggestion that though things are getting better, it may be a while before things return to "normal." Xi Jinping was clear, however, in his assessment that the crisis did not fundamentally affect the soundness of the state or is political system.

习近平指出，这次疫情，短期内会给湖北经济社会发展带来阵痛，但不会影响经济稳中向好、长期向好的基本面。要在加强防控的前提下，采取差异化策略，适时启动分区分级、分类分时、有条件的复工复产。 . . . 习近平强调，这次新冠肺炎疫情防控，是对治理体系和治理能力的一次大考，既有经验，也有教训。 [Xi Jinping pointed out that this epidemic will bring pain to Hubei's economic and social development in the short term, but it will not affect the fundamentals of economic stability and long-term improvement. . . Xi Jinping pointed out that this epidemic will bring pain to Hubei's economic and social development in the short term, but it will not affect the fundamentals of economic stability and long-term improvement.] (习近平在湖北省考察新冠肺炎疫情防控工作 ).

Indeed, it may well be that what is normal after COVID-19 will not be the same as that before December 2019. By that measure one might expect to see much of this transposed to other states, but with national characteristics, in the coming weeks. Xi Jinping Theory itself suggest otherwise; the overcoming of the crisis necessarily requires the CCP and its Line to move with the times. And, indeed, the summary of the speech includes kernels of that change, of that forward movement in Marxist Leninist Theory in the post COVID-19 New Era.

Only time will tell whether the fundamental message of surviving crisis unchanged reflects reality; and the extent to which the COVID-19 epidemic will produce a further development of the CCP line and its application in times of crisis. These changes ought not to be understood as failures but rather might suggest a strength of the political model to grow through challenge. In that event, failure would be measured by an unwillingness to move theory forward to conform to evolving facts. It is far too early, yet for judgments of that sort. It is certainly too early for robust optimism where Chinese economic productivity is now being affected by the rise of COVID-19 infection rates and countermeasures elsewhere (Virus Going Global Means China’s Factories Will Get Hit Again).   It remains to be seen in what ways . And it remains to be seen whether

"Global Supply Chains, Forced Labor, and the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region"; The Congressional-Executive Commission on China (CECC), Economic Decoupling, and Supply Chains in the Shadow of COVID-19

It is by now well known that the so-called Trade War between the United States and the People's Republic of China was merely a nice way of packaging for popular consumption (and narrative management) of a large group of objectives, impulses and trajectories that followed from decisions taken by both American and Chinese elites (lamentable in the opinion of some) since around 2012 (in China) and 2016 (in the US). That trajectory is grounded on the fundamental premise (justified by core premises of liberal democracy and Marxist-Leninism in their own ways) that it is necessary (and inevitable) that the core leaders of the Marxist-Leninist and liberal democratic communities decouple their economies--and move forward from the great program of coupling that was at the heart of the great post 1945 project of multilateral globalization.  COVID-19 has only intensified an initiative already well established by December 2019 when the coronavirus epidemic first intruded on the narrative of ideological statecraft marked by America First and Belt and Road Initiatives.

This post considers the increasing intensity of that strategic de-coupling and the reconstruction of global production chains within the orbits of the great apex organizers of ideologically distinct market communities--one liberal democratic, and the other Marxist Leninist. To that end it considers the contemporary project of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China (CECC),  "Global Supply Chains, Forced Labor, and the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region", a program to be held 11 March 2020 in Washington, D.C. and its connection to the challenges to global trade across the US-China divide that the COVID-19 more clearly exposed.  The CECC  Concept Note and Program information also follow below.

Subsidizing the Free-Riding State and Enterprise Apparatus on the Backs of those Least Capable of bearing that Burden--The Micro Consequences of COVID-19 and Containment Measures

The realities of containment as a mitigation strategy against he spread of COVID-19 has become the basis for national measures across the Globe. This was emphasized by the American official, Dr Anthony Fauci, the head of the infectious diseases unit at the National Institutes of Health in an  explanation for transmission through global news media.

As the outbreak spreads, daily life has been increasingly disrupted, with concerts and conferences canceled and universities telling students to stay home and take classes online. To contain the outbreak in China, the government quarantined millions of people for weeks. Italy has announced similar measures, locking down 16 million people in the north of the country.  Fauci said he did not think the US would impose total shutdowns - but said 'anything is possible'. 'We have to be realistic. I don't think it would be as draconian as nobody in or nobody out,' he told Fox News Sunday. 'But if we continue to get cases like this, particularly at the community level, there will be what we call 'mitigation,' where we have to essentially do social distancing, keep people out of crowded places, take a look at seriousness, do you really need to travel, and I think it's particularly important among the most vulnerable.' (Top coronavirus expert Dr Fauci says four million tests should be available by end of the week, as he warns Americans to avoid crowds and brace for quarantines as death toll rises to 21 with two new victims reported at Washington nursing home)

This post briefly suggests the relevance of current work on linking human rights to private household indebtedness in the context of national macro-economic regulation to the question of the human rights effects of public and institutional free riding that occurs in the context of national measures to mitigate contagion in ways the costs of which may be disproportionally shifted to the most vulnerable national populations. It questions the need for or fairness of developing policy for the collective good, the costs of which are shifted down to individuals who thus effectively subsidize collective policy twice--first through the taxes they pay and the obedience they give to state and enterprise.  Second by having to bear personally the costs of that policy as it affects their livelihood and perhaps their health and well bring.

The Collapse of the 'Quarantine Hotel': Thoughts on Business, Legal, Political, and Societal Risk for State and Enterprise COVID-19 Strategies

One of the structures designated by the Chinese state authoritative as a place of containment for COVID-19 coronavirus infected individuals. As reported for the South China Morning Post by Mimi Lau: 

More than two dozen people have been rescued from the rubble of a multi-storey building reportedly converted into a coronavirus quarantine centre, after it collapsed in the southeastern Chinese province of Fujian on Saturday. The Xinjia Express Hotel in Quanzhou collapsed just after 7pm, according to Mnw.cn, an online news site operated by the official Fujian Daily. Authorities in Licheng district said about 70 people were in the building when it collapsed. The Quanzhou municipal government said 34 people had been rescued by about 10pm. The Beijing News quoted several local government officials as confirming the hotel had been turned into a quarantine centre and was one of two in the district. The exact number of people in the building at the time was unknown. People’s Daily reported that the hotel had been converted by the Licheng district government into a medical surveillance facility for people with close contact with coronavirus patients. (Mimi Lau, ‘Coronavirus quarantine hotel’ collapses in southeast China, South China Morning Post (7 March 2020))

Deutsche Welle reported that "The reason for the collapse has not yet been made public. Federal authorities have sent an emergency working team to the site" (China: 'Coronavirus quarantine' hotel collapses, trapping dozens). The collapse has become an important political , as well as a humanitarian event. High level officials from the State and CCP apparatus are involved.  "Huang Ming, the ministry’s Communist Party secretary, is overseeing the rescue mission from Beijing. Senior State Council officials are also on their way to Quanzhou" (Mimi Lau, ‘Coronavirus quarantine hotel’ collapses in southeast China). Indeed, state authorities have been quick to be transparent about their response to the collapse. "A video stream posted by the government-backed Beijing News site showed rescue workers in orange overalls clambering over rubble and twisted steelwork carrying people towards ambulances." (Rescuers race to save 30 people still trapped in collapsed five-star hotel in China being used to quarantine coronavirus victims).

But the damage, and its mitigation, now extends beyond the physical and emotional injuries of those within the collapsed building. People now are burdened with an additional worry--not just the state of their health, but also the conditions around which the state has a responsibility to protect their safety. "I'm under quarantine too [at another hotel] and I'm very worried, I don't know what to do. They were healthy, they took their temperatures every day, and the tests showed that everything was normal." (BBC News).

There will be much to learn after authorities and volunteers respond to the humanitarian needs of those trapped. Much of it, of course, will involve second guessing the authorities along a line of decisions and policies leading all the way back to the construction of the building itself and thereafter the determination to place people in it.

(Pix credit: China: 'Coronavirus quarantine' hotel collapses, trapping dozens)

 The collapse, however, serves as a reminder about the nexus of business, political, legal, and societal risks that converge around governmental (and private) decisions with respect to their responses to the (additional) risks posed by an epidemic of infectious diseases with more than a trivial mortality rates.  Like so many other areas, COVID-19 may well serve as the space within which the conventional premises around which the allocation of risk and responsibility, and the legal obligations with respect to both, may be transformed. Brief thoughts respecting potentially important vectors for change follow.  

Data Driven Management of COVID-19: The Case of Taiwan

COVID-19 has produced substantial challenges to states and other entities with responsibility for the well bring of people.  Much of the news about the way that states and other entities have been undertaking that responsibility has focused on medical measures to detect,control and eventually cure or prevent the disease. But states and other entities have also devoted substantial attention to the economic, societal, political, and cultural consequences of the disease. Especially difficult has been consideration of the measures that might be taken to meet the medical challenges posed by the disease without violating institutional or cultural taboos. Most of these measures revolve around the core strategy, implemented in infinite contextually specific variations--containment. 

Containment, however, is a strategy that does not lend itself well to law.  Except for constructing and devolving powers to contain (person, idea, speech, bodies, processes, and the like),  the space within which containment is to be situated (self-containment at home, hospitals, cruise ships, jail, student dorms, or the like),  and the conditions under which the power to determine and enforcement containment within designated spaces (or with respect to speech, suppressed) may be exercised, containment is by its nature an administrative act.  But it is more than that, containment strategies, including, choices about the holding of mass attendance events (like factory work, classroom instruction, cultural or sports events) do not lend themselves to the sort of discretionary decision making that is the hallmark of administrative practice by individuals. 

That insight suggests that a containment based approach to COVID-19 would have to be data driven to be successful.  But ore than that, it would have to be a data consumptive enterprise, the purpose of which would be to feed an analytics that would help development algorithms for judging  (1) disease risks of individuals and (2) likely consequences of such individual ratings given a variety of contexts in which that would be discovered.

A recent study considered the data based comprehensive approach undertaken by authorities in Taiwan  (C. Jason Wang, MD, PhD; Chun Y. Ng, MBA, MPH; Robert H. Brook, Response to COVID-19 in Taiwan: Big Data Analytics, New Technology, and Proactive Testing, JAMA. Published online March 3, 2020). This point considers that research study in the context of data driven governance within a rule of law state.

American University Responses to the COVID-19 Infection Threat: CDC "Interim Guidance for Administrators of US Institutions of Higher Education (IHE) to Plan, Prepare, and Respond to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)"

Universities in the United States are facing a novel threat to their operations, and a significant challenge to the governance structures that have given them legitimacy as something other than yet another fundamentally undifferentiated factory-production  sector of the economy. In many states, the response of the education sector to the threat of COVID-19 infection has been directed byt he state.  That assures both uniformity and a coordination between government policy in the economic as wel as the educational sectors. Policy coherence, of course, is an essential ingredient to any successful policy response to COVID-19.  That response, in turn, is built on a set of coordinated measures for containment

In the United States, however, post secondary education is a loosely regulated industrial sector.  It is managed, to some extent by the state, through systems of regulatory monitoring and assessment based on rating operations against a set of both principles and specific operational characteristics.   As a result, one would expect a certain coherence in responses.  That coherence is in part a reflection of the bureaucratization of post-secondary education, and of the rise of managerial institutions that now exercise much of the discretion in decision making that was once exercised by, through, or with the representative faculties.  Universities, however, also occupy a space at the nexus of industrial production, and the minding of youth.  The preservation of the well being of large concentrations of youths produce a regulatory dimension that overlaps the institutional administrative convergence overseen by education ministries in the United States, and, in situations of health crises, the administrative apparatus of health policy and management. That overlap is nicely operationalized in the U.S. CDC's Interim Guidance for Administrators of US Institutions of Higher Education (IHE) to Plan, Prepare, and Respond to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).

The response of universities to the challenges posed by COVID-19 in the U.S. show a set of common approaches that nicely suggest both the strengths and idiosyncrasies of American higher education as a n economic-societal organism. They may be summarized around a number of key elements that augment the strengths and weaknesses of the de-professionalization and corporatization of the "business" of universities. The CDC's Interim Guidance for Administrators of US Institutions of Higher Education (IHE) to Plan, Prepare, and Respond to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and brief analysis follows below.