Will the Feds Ever End the Public Health Emergency?

 

At the beginning of the pandemic, most of us were persuaded that the federal government’s enacting the Public Health Emergency was trying to keep us safe from an insidious disease. Locking us down and insisting that we wear masks were in our best interests. And the vaccine was going to protect us from infection and save lives, neither of which was true. For all intents and purposes, the government has failed miserably in its supposed efforts to protect us and to follow the science. In the meantime, they’ve given us no indication that they have criteria for taking down the emergency, or that they have any intention of doing so. I’m pretty much convinced that something catastrophic will need to happen to end this oppressive and destructive act.

We were almost convinced that it was all about to be over when Joe Biden slipped and said the pandemic was over during an interview on “60 Minutes,” but as usual, the White House walked it back. Even Joe knew it was time to bring the whole insidious action to a close. In fact, his statement raised a number of questions about who has the authority to end the pandemic and the many reasons why the end is not about to arrive any time soon.

One major question is who decides that a pandemic is even over. J. Alex Navarro, assistant director of the Center for the History of Medicine at the University of Michigan Medical School shared the following:

‘Declaring a pandemic over is a little different than declaring a local epidemic over,’ Navarro said. ‘To declare a pandemic over, you need to have various regions of the world having their epidemics over. So it looks a little bit different, I think.’

The world will probably have to reach a consensus, and that’s something that may come as a kind of acknowledgment from the World Health Organization – or it might not.

That conclusion is not an inspiring one. And how will anyone suggest that it’s time to move on?

Saying the pandemic is over might influence public perception, but it doesn’t materially change how the federal government or states are responding.

‘It’s separating out what is the formal legal definition versus what is just a popular discussion of saying, ‘hey, we kind of think this is over now, and hey, let’s move on,’ and there are implications for both,’ said Rebecca Katz, who directs the Center for Global Health Science and Security at Georgetown University.

Well, that observation certainly sheds more light on the issue, doesn’t it? And even more encouraging is this statement:

‘WHO does not have a mechanism for declaring or ending a ‘pandemic,’’ spokesman Tarik Jasarevik said in an email to CNN. Instead, he said, WHO will continue to assess the need for the public health emergency, and an expert committee meets every three months to do that.

Last week, Tedros said the end of the pandemic ‘is in sight,’ but he added that ‘we are not there yet.’

And it’s not clear what ‘there’ will look like.

In other words, no one seems to know who has the authority to end a pandemic, who, if anyone, needs to agree to the decision to end it, and how to move forward.

But that confusion is not the worst part on a national level. There are multiple stakeholders who not only are resisting declaring the pandemic over, but who are pushing back on the Federal Public Health Emergency, also known as PHE. Without providing 60-days notice on declaring the end of the emergency, which the CDC had promised, the PHE was extended into the first of 2023:

State and local public health officials — having not heard differently this week — are expecting the Biden administration to extend the Covid-19 public health emergency for another 90 days in mid-October.

An extension would ensure expanded Medicaid coverage, telehealth services, boosted payments to hospitals and other pandemic measures remain in place beyond the midterm elections even as public health experts and lawmakers debate the merits of a PHE that was first declared in January 2020.

Despite calls to end the PHE, there are calls to keep it in place:

House Energy and Commerce ranking member Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) and Health Subcommittee ranking member Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) argued last week the Biden administration ‘lacks any good justification’ to maintain the PHE without providing additional details on how the government will wind it down.

But Federation of American Hospitals CEO Chip Kahn argued now is not an appropriate time to end the PHE, given the ongoing impact of Covid-19 on the health care system.

‘Even though the public has turned the page, we have to deal with it every day,’ Kahn said. ‘The flu is coming, as well as the possibility of Covid spread that would lead to more hospitalizations. We’re just not ready to make a big shift.’

As usual, Republican lawmakers’ calls for accountability are being ignored, and one stakeholder that receives government funds while the PHE is in place protests ending it.

It’s becoming clear that there are people who realize that Biden’s emergency powers, particularly regarding forgiving student loans, must come to an end:

And as National Review‘s Charles C.W. Cooke noted in a recent piece, the Biden administration has already conceded that if it ever had such authority, that time is over. In May, the administration ceased using its Title 42 powers to expel immigrants based on COVID-19 fears. In its memo announcing the change in policy, the Department of Justice wrote: ‘The CDC has now determined, in its expert opinion, that continued reliance on this authority is no longer warranted in light of the current public-health circumstances.’

If it was true in May, it’s even truer now. The only difference between the federal government’s emergency Title 42 power and its emergency student loan deferment powers is that Biden didn’t really want to keep using the former, but he does want to keep using the latter. Too bad for him. The end of the COVID-19 national emergency means it is now crystal clear that the president cannot unilaterally forgive billions of dollars of student debt absent an act of Congress.

This is where we are today: No one seems to know who has the authority to end the PHE. There are no criteria in place to decide when it would be appropriate to end the PHE. Certainly, many citizens will be terrified at the idea of lifting the PHE before COVID-19 is eradicated. Many organizations that benefit from funding due to the PHE want to keep it in place. And the federal government is basking in its power to control all of us for the foreseeable future.

I get this strange feeling, too, that a “crisis” will emerge and the government will once again try to install lockdowns, mask mandates, and other insidious actions to keep us under its thumb.

The future is foreboding.

[photo courtesy of unsplash.com]

Published in Healthcare
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 121 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Old Bathos Member
    Old Bathos
    @OldBathos

    All kinds of executive powers kick in during a declared state of emergency.  They even tried to use emergency powers as the legal basis for the tuition debt giveaway. So there is a big disincentive to declare it over.

    The geniuses guiding health policy should have known that COVID-19 would never go away (other coronaviruses come back seasonally every year) but they did not seem to have a grasp of how respiratory viruses behave or even a rudimentary grasp of seasonality behavior.  And so the tacit assumption was that it would go away completely at some point and they could declare victory and take credit.

    Now, whatever they do to end the “emergency” will seem arbitrary and make it apparent there was never really a plan and that none of this stuff actually worked and they would also lose the joys of emergency authority.  So the goal for the enemies of the people who govern us will be to (a) somehow keep the new emergency power while at the same time (b) taking credit for saving us from the pandemic.  

    • #1
  2. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Old Bathos (View Comment):
    (b) taking credit for saving us from the pandemic.  

    They already do that.  EVERYBODY didn’t die, therefore their plans were correct.

    • #2
  3. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Old Bathos (View Comment):
    Now, whatever they do to end the “emergency” will seem arbitrary and make it apparent there was never really a plan and that none of this stuff actually worked and they would also lose the joys of emergency authority.  So the goal for the enemies of the people who govern us will be to (a) somehow keep the new emergency power while at the same time (b) taking credit for saving us from the pandemic.  

    That’s probably how they’ll roll. I wouldn’t doubt that they’ll create a new crisis, too, to justify even more inisidious actions. 

    That they didn’t explain the nature of viruses at the beginning to reassure the public rather than terrify them is mindboggling. But I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. Thanks, OB

    • #3
  4. Buckpasser Member
    Buckpasser
    @Buckpasser

    The government will never end the state of emergency.  That way they can do things that normally a democracy prevents.  Only we the people have the authority to end the state of emergency.

    • #4
  5. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Buckpasser (View Comment):

    The government will never end the state of emergency. That way they can do things that normally a democracy prevents. Only we the people have the authority to end the state of emergency.

    Okay…yyyyyy. And how would you suggest we do that, Buckpasser?

    • #5
  6. Chris O Coolidge
    Chris O
    @ChrisO

    Will the government continue to claim an elevated crisis level? I wonder…

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Yes, I suspect they will. 

    • #6
  7. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Chris O (View Comment):
    Yes, I suspect they will. 

    Indeed. In fact, if something devastating does happen, and that possibility always exists, they can say that they did everything they could to avoid a crisis. Like lockdowns, mask mandates . . . 

    • #7
  8. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    The Feds don’t seem inclined to end any “national emergency.” This Wiki page shows 42 current national emergencies, the earliest from the Carter administration.

    • #8
  9. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    The Feds don’t seem inclined to end any “national emergency.” This Wiki page shows 42 current national emergencies, the earliest from the Carter administration.

    The link doesn’t work, MWD, but I can just imagine. I just wonder how many of them had the totalitarian mandates that this last one had.

    • #9
  10. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    The Feds don’t seem inclined to end any “national emergency.” This Wiki page shows 42 current national emergencies, the earliest from the Carter administration.

    The link doesn’t work, MWD, but I can just imagine. I just wonder how many of them had the totalitarian mandates that this last one had.

    Thanks Susan. Fixed the link.

    • #10
  11. WillowSpring Member
    WillowSpring
    @WillowSpring

    My personal “pandemic” is not over and I can’t see it ending any time soon.  The symptom of my pandemic is a visceral distrust of the existing medical establishment. 

    It has been two  years and the vaccine is still under an “emergency” approval and the independent testing seems to show as many problems as solutions.  Just today, I heard testimony of a Pfizer executive to an EU committee where she said (laughingly, I thought) that they never tested their vaccine for its effectiveness in slowing the spread of Covid.  I thought that was the point!

    I am not anti-vaccine – I just had my flu shot and Shingles vaccine.  I also had the first two Covid shots and am definitely in the ‘risk’ category due to age.  It just seemed that the Covid vaccines have become a victim of a corrupt pharmaceutical industry and politicized medical bureaucracy .

    • #11
  12. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):
    Thanks Susan. Fixed the link.

    Um . . . not for me . . . Might just want to do it over again in your comment.

    • #12
  13. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    WillowSpring (View Comment):
    I am not anti-vaccine – I just had my flu shot and Shingles vaccine.  I also had the first two Covid shots and am definitely in the ‘risk’ category due to age.  It just seemed that the Covid vaccines have become a victim of a corrupt pharmaceutical industry and politicized medical bureaucracy .

    I think there’s going to be a lot of subterfuge going on by all of us. We’re just going to quietly resist. Or maybe someone from Congress will figure out how to cancel the action. I just know there are soon going to be a lot of unhappy people, WillowSpring.

    • #13
  14. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    WillowSpring (View Comment):
    I am not anti-vaccine – I just had my flu shot and Shingles vaccine. I also had the first two Covid shots and am definitely in the ‘risk’ category due to age. It just seemed that the Covid vaccines have become a victim of a corrupt pharmaceutical industry and politicized medical bureaucracy .

    I think there’s going to be a lot of subterfuge going on by all of us. We’re just going to quietly resist. Or maybe someone from Congress will figure out how to cancel the action. I just know there are soon going to be a lot of unhappy people, WillowSpring.

    But lots of people must enjoy being unhappy, or they wouldn’t be Democrats/liberals.

    • #14
  15. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):
    Thanks Susan. Fixed the link.

    Um . . . not for me . . . Might just want to do it over again in your comment.

    Works when I click it. Guess it’s one of the mysteries of the Internet why it’s not working for you. At any rate, here’s the link again:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_in_the_United_States

     

    • #15
  16. WillowSpring Member
    WillowSpring
    @WillowSpring

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    WillowSpring (View Comment):
    I am not anti-vaccine – I just had my flu shot and Shingles vaccine. I also had the first two Covid shots and am definitely in the ‘risk’ category due to age. It just seemed that the Covid vaccines have become a victim of a corrupt pharmaceutical industry and politicized medical bureaucracy .

    I think there’s going to be a lot of subterfuge going on by all of us. We’re just going to quietly resist. Or maybe someone from Congress will figure out how to cancel the action. I just know there are soon going to be a lot of unhappy people, WillowSpring.

    I probably should have pointed out that I am not a Doctor and don’t try to play one on TV. 

    My career was writing software for various devices.  This included defining and supporting tests that showed that not only did the design work, but the devices being built in production still met the requirements.  If I were to give my boss the sort of sloppy analysis and guesswork that seems to be involved in the Covid issues – from vaccines to masks to isolation- I would have had a much shorter career.

    • #16
  17. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):
    Or maybe someone from Congress will figure out how to cancel the action.

    Under the National Emergencies Act, Congress can pass a joint resolution ending the declared emergency. However, that must still still be signed by POTUS.

    • #17
  18. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):
    Thanks Susan. Fixed the link.

    Um . . . not for me . . . Might just want to do it over again in your comment.

    Works when I click it. Guess it’s one of the mysteries of the Internet why it’s not working for you. At any rate, here’s the link again:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_in_the_United_States

     

    Thanks so much, MWD! It’s an interesting list of sanctions–and none of them have the crippling effect on American citizens that the emergency action has had.

    • #18
  19. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):
    Thanks Susan. Fixed the link.

    Um . . . not for me . . . Might just want to do it over again in your comment.

    Works when I click it. Guess it’s one of the mysteries of the Internet why it’s not working for you. At any rate, here’s the link again:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_in_the_United_States

     

    Thanks so much, MWD! It’s an interesting list of sanctions–and none of them have the crippling effect on American citizens that the emergency action has had.

    Agreed. Though Congress can end the NE via a joint resolution, as I noted above.

    • #19
  20. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):
    Under the National Emergencies Act, Congress can pass a joint resolution ending the declared emergency. However, that must still still be signed by POTUS.

    Given the current state of our legislature and the executive, that provides just a few hurdles! But thanks for the information.

    • #20
  21. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):
    Agreed. Though Congress can end the NE via a joint resolution, as I noted above.

    Well, I vote for a miracle. Enough is enough.

    • #21
  22. Buckpasser Member
    Buckpasser
    @Buckpasser

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Buckpasser (View Comment):

    The government will never end the state of emergency. That way they can do things that normally a democracy prevents. Only we the people have the authority to end the state of emergency.

    Okay…yyyyyy. And how would you suggest we do that, Buckpasser?

    Refuse to wear a face diaper.

    Refuse to accept a vaccine mandate.

    Refuse to vote for anyone who supports or has ever voted for anything that Brandon has done.

    Among others.

    Let’s Go Brandon!

    • #22
  23. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Susan Quinn: ‘WHO does not have a mechanism for declaring or ending a ‘pandemic,’’ spokesman Tarik Jasarevik said in an email to CNN. Instead, he said, WHO will continue to assess the need for the public health emergency, and an expert committee meets every three months to do that.

    I say we assess the need for the WHO.

    Everyone in favor of bouncing these clowns, turn your head in their direction and cough.

    • #23
  24. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Percival (View Comment):
    Everyone in favor of bouncing these clowns, turn your head in their direction and cough.

    Hack! Hack! Could you hear that?! We should have left them years ago!

    • #24
  25. Full Size Tabby Member
    Full Size Tabby
    @FullSizeTabby

    Even before “15 days to slow the spread” hit its 15th day people were doubting that the “emergency” would ever end. No public health officials (nor anyone else) could articulate any criteria that might be used to determine whether the “emergency” was over. During those first several months of “15 days to slow the spread” public officials kept making up new goal posts every time the previously set goal post came into range.

    The powers officials claimed because of the “emergency” were too seductive. The officials could see no or few benefits personal to them to declaring the “emergency” over. The officials could see plenty of personal reputational risks if they prematurely declared the “emergency” over (they’d get blamed for anything “bad”).

    What do we do?  We ignore the “emergency” declaring officials as much as we can. We did this months ago by refusing to wear masks. Many are refusing getting the Covid vaccine (and/or the “boosters”). We point out that the “emergency” driven mono-focus on Covid is killing people, hurting people, making people sick, and stunting the growth of an entire generation of children. We go to work. We insist others go to work. We gather. We play sports. We sing. 

    A bit less than two weeks ago many of us from our church choir attended a large regional choir workshop and concert. About half of us who attended the workshop contracted Covid. For all but two people it was a mild to moderate cold symptoms accompanied by unusual fatigue. The two with slightly more serious symptoms still didn’t have a severe reaction, and Paxlovid fixed them right up. We all stayed home while sick and for several days after, like we would for any illness. No one in the choir or in the larger church (that I know of) is clamoring that it was a mistake to go to the workshop, or that we should stop gathering or singing. We all almost as likely could have gotten colds or a flu or any number of other illnesses that come from viruses and germs floating in the air. We are going to live life. 

    • #25
  26. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):
    Everyone in favor of bouncing these clowns, turn your head in their direction and cough.

    Hack! Hack! Could you hear that?! We should have left them years ago!

    Tedros is still running that clownshow. Yeah, it’s time to close ’em down.

    • #26
  27. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):
    We all almost as likely could have gotten colds or a flu or any number of other illnesses that come from viruses and germs floating in the air. We are going to live life. 

    How inspiring, FST! Yes, life must go on, and as one simple example, singing lifts the soul. Good for all of you, and I’m glad everyone recovered.

    I must say I resent having to defy the rules; I’m not one of those people who gets a charge out of it. But I am determined to normalize my life (and have for the most part) as much as possible.

    • #27
  28. Scott Wilmot Member
    Scott Wilmot
    @ScottWilmot

    Will the Feds ever end the public health emergency?

    Only when there is no more money to be made or no more necks to be trampled upon.

    The real public health emergency in this country is obesity. Have our public health officials made any attempt to tackle this problem? Pfizer probably has a pill or two that they can peddle.

    I’ve lost all faith in “public health” and their sycophants the “public servants”.

    This is how serious we are as a country with regards to public health: we have a deluded man who thinks he is a woman, play-acting as Admiral Rachel L. Levine, the 17th Assistant Secretary for Health for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. This man thinks transing the kids is a good thing to do.

    • #28
  29. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Scott Wilmot (View Comment):
    The real public health emergency in this country is obesity. Have our public health officials made any attempt to tackle this problem? Pfizer probably has a pill or two that they can peddle.

    But golly, Scott, didn’t Michelle Obama plant a garden in the White House to inspire our kids to eat healthier? Gee, I wonder how that ended up . . . 

    And then there was the Kennedy program for physical fitness–gosh, I hated that. I wasn’t fat, but I hated being bested by all the kids who had an ounce of agility.

    There’s a part of me that says, yes, obesity (along with diabetes often due to diet) are problems. But then we have to ask do we want the government involved in those issues. I say no.

    • #29
  30. Scott Wilmot Member
    Scott Wilmot
    @ScottWilmot

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):
    But then we have to ask do we want the government involved in those issues. I say no.

    Agree. They could at lest make mention of it. But it is easier to just push pills and shots.

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.