Nuns with the Little Sisters of The Poor, including Sister Celestine, left, and Sister Jeanne Veronique, center, rally outside the Supreme Court in Washington on March 23, 2016.; Credit: Jacquelyn Martin/AP

The birth-control wars return to the Supreme Court Wednesday, and it is likely that the five-justice conservative majority will make it more difficult for women to get birth control if they work for religiously affiliated institutions like hospitals, charities and universities.

At issue in the case is a Trump administration rule that significantly cuts back on access to birth control under the Affordable Care Act. Obamacare, the massive overhaul of the health care system, sought to equalize preventive health care coverage for women and men by requiring employers to include free birth control in their health care plans.

Listen to the arguments live beginning at 10 a.m. ET.

Houses of worship like churches and synagogues were automatically exempted from the provision, but religiously affiliated nonprofits like universities, charities and hospitals were not. Such organizations employ millions of people, many of whom want access to birth control for themselves and their family members. But many of these institutions say they have a religious objection to providing birth control for employees.

For these nonprofits, the Obama administration enacted rules providing a work-around to accommodate employers' religious objections. The workaround was that an employer was to notify the government, or the insurance company, or the plan administrator, that, for religious reasons, it would not be providing birth-control coverage to its employees. Then, the insurance company could provide free birth-control options to individual employees separately from the employer's plan.

But some religiously affiliated groups still objected, saying the work-around was not good enough, and sued. They contended that signing an opt-out form amounted to authorizing the use of their plan for birth control. Among those objectors was the Little Sisters of the Poor, an order of Catholic nuns that runs homes for the elderly poor.

The Supreme Court punted in 2016

The Little Sisters sued, and their case first reached the Supreme Court in 2016. At the time, Sister Constance Viet explained why she refused to sign any opt-out form, saying that "the religious burden is what that signifies and the fact that the government would ... be inserting services that we object into our plan. And it would still carry our name."

Back then, when the Little Sisters' case got to the Supreme Court, the justices basically punted, telling the government and the sisters to work together to try to reach a compromise that would still provide "seamless birth control" coverage for employees who want it, without burdening the Sisters' religious beliefs. Although the Little Sisters did eventually get relief from the lower courts, the fight over the accommodations rules continued right up to the end of the Obama administration.

But when President Trump came into office, the administration issued new rules that would give broad exemptions to nonprofits and some for-profit companies that have objections to providing birth-control coverage for their employees. And the new rules expanded the category of employers who would be exempt from the birth-control mandate to include not just those with religious objections, but those with moral objections, too.

New rules

Those new rules, currently blocked by lower courts, are what is at issue Wednesday in the Supreme Court.

"Many states are suing and none of them can find a single actual woman who claims she's been harmed," says Mark Reinezi, president of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which is defending the Trump rules against challenges brought by Pennsylvania and other states.

And, he adds, "there are many other ways to provide contraceptive coverage to people if they happen to work for religious objectors."

Rienzi says that employees who work for birth-control objectors can get coverage from their spouse's insurance plan, or by switching to a different insurance plan on an Obamacare exchange. And he says that birth control is also available under a program known as Title X, which gives money to state and local governments to provide health care for women.

But Brigitte Amiri, the deputy director the of ACLU's Reproductive Freedom project, says the idea that Title X could make up for the lost coverage is "a joke." Amiri notes that the Title X program has been underfunded for years, and the Trump administration has issued new regulations that in her words "decimated the program."

According to Amiri, "the Trump administration and Vice President [Mike] Pence have long wanted to ... take away coverage for contraception. They want to block access to birth control. They want to block access to abortion ... so this is all part and parcel of the overall attack on access to reproductive health care."

Potential consequences

She maintains that if the expanded Trump rules are upheld for religious objectors, hundreds of thousands of women across the country will lose their contraceptive coverage. Ultimately, Amiri says, there just is no way to maintain birth-control coverage for employees who work for religiously affiliated institutions unless that employer, as she puts it, is willing to "raise their hand" to opt out.

A break in birth-control coverage that big could have serious consequences, say say birth-control advocates. They note that the National Academy of Medicine, a health policy nonprofit, recommended the original rules because birth control is prescribed not just to avoid pregnancy but also to treat various female medical conditions. In fact, it is the most frequently taken drug for women ages 15-60. And it is expensive, $30 a month and more for pills, and as much as $1,000 for buying and having an IUD inserted.

Birth-control advocates say that's the very reason that a broad requirement to cover birth control in insurance was included in Obamacare. They say the new Trump rule improperly undermines that mandate.

But selling that argument to the Supreme Court will be hard. When the court last considered this issue in 2016, its makeup was far less conservative than it is now. Since then, two Trump appointees have been added to the court. And both of those appointees — Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh — have already indicated strong support for the notion that religious rights may often trump other rights.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

The Supreme Court justices heard oral arguments remotely this week, and for the first time the arguments were streamed live to the public.; Credit: Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images

For the first time in its 231-year history, the Supreme Court justices heard oral arguments remotely by phone and made the audio available live.

The new setup went off largely without difficulties, but produced some memorable moments, including one justice forgetting to unmute and an ill-timed bathroom break.

Here are the top five can't-miss moments from this week's history-making oral arguments.

A second week of arguments begin on Monday at 10 a.m. ET. Here's a rundown of the cases and how to listen.

1. Justice Clarence Thomas speaks ... a lot

Supreme Court oral arguments are verbal jousting matches. The justices pepper the lawyers with questions, interrupting counsel repeatedly and sometimes even interrupting each other.

Justice Clarence Thomas, who has sat on the bench for nearly 30 years, has made his dislike of the chaotic process well known, at one point not asking a question for a full decade.

But with no line of sight, the telephone arguments have to be rigidly organized, and each justice, in order of seniority, has an allotted 2 minutes for questioning.

It turn out that Thomas, second in seniority, may just have been waiting his turn. Rather than passing, as had been expected, he has been Mr. Chatty Cathy, using every one of his turns at bat so far.

Thomas broke a year-long silence on Monday in a trademark case testing whether a company can trademark by adding .com to a generic term. In this case, Booking.com.

"Could Booking acquire an 800 number, for example, that's a vanity number — 1-800-BOOKING, for example?" Thomas asked.

2. The unstoppable RBG

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg participated in Wednesday's argument from the hospital. In pain during Tuesday's arguments, the 87-year-old underwent non-surgical treatment for a gall bladder infection at Johns Hopkins Hospital later that day, according to a Supreme Court press release.

But she was ferocious on Wednesday morning, calling in from her hospital room in a case testing the Trump administration's new rule expanding exemptions from Obamacare's birth control mandate for nonprofits and some for-profit companies that have religious or moral objections to birth control.

"The glaring feature" of the Trump administration's new rules, is that they "toss to the winds entirely Congress' instruction that women need and shall have seamless, no-cost, comprehensive coverage," she said.

3. Who flushed?

During Wednesday's second oral argument, Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants, a case in which the justices weighed a First Amendment challenge to a federal rule than bans most robocalls, something very unexpected happened.

Partway through lawyer Roman Martinez's argument time, a toilet flush could be distinctly heard.

Martinez seemed unperturbed and continued speaking in spite of the awkward moment.

The flush quickly picked up steam online, becoming the first truly viral moment from the court's new livestream oral arguments.

4. Hello, where are you?

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, considered one of the most tech-savvy of the justices, experienced a couple of technical difficulties with her mute button.

In both Monday and Tuesday arguments, the first time she was at bat, there were prolonged pauses, prompting Chief Justice John Roberts to call, "Justice Sotomayor?" a few times before she hopped on with a brief, "Sorry, Chief," before launching into her questions.

By Wednesday she seemed to have gotten used to the new format, but the trouble then jumped to Thomas, who was entirely missing in action when his turn came. He ultimately went out of order Wednesday morning.

5. Running over time

Oral arguments usually run one hour almost exactly, with lawyers for each side having 30 minutes to make their case. In an attempt to stick as closely as possible to that format, the telephone rules allocate 2 minutes of questioning to each justice for each round of questioning.

Chief Justice John Roberts spent the week jumping into exchanges, cutting off both lawyers and justices in the process, to keep the proceedings on track. Even so the arguments ran longer than usual.

But in Wednesday's birth control case, oral arguments went a whopping 40 minutes longer than expected.

Justice Alito, for his part, hammered the lawyer challenging the Trump administration's new birth control rules for more than seven minutes, without interruption from the chief justice.

Referencing a decision he wrote in 2014, Alito said that "Hobby Lobby held that if a person sincerely believes that it is immoral to perform an act that has the effect of enabling another person to commit an immoral act, the federal court does not have the right to say that this person is wrong on the question of moral complicity. That is precisely the question here."

Christina Peck is NPR's legal affairs intern.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

An apartment in Pomona that leases through the Housing for Health Program. (Matt Tinoco/LAist)

Our California Dream collaboration is looking for solutions to some of California's most pressing problems, in this case, homelessness. An initiative in Los Angeles seeks to save taxpayer money by housing some of the most vulnerable residents — those who cycle from the street to the emergency room and back again.

The California Dream series is a statewide media collaboration of CALmatters, KPBS, KPCC, KQED and Capital Public Radio with support from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the James Irvine Foundation.

READ THE STORY AT LAist.com.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Embattled Korean Resource Center board president DJ Yoon takes interviews in a photo dated February 2014. ( ; Credit: Korean Resource Center via Flickr

In Los Angeles, another Asian American civil rights organization is in upheaval. A month after major layoffs at Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Los Angeles, the Korean Resource Center has lost more than half of its staff.  

The Korean Resource Center  is a leading advocate for low-income and undocumented Koreans. Its organizers worked on flipping Orange County from red to blue. Its legal staff provides free aid to immigrants. But 18 people have left in recent weeks, many upset with board president DJ Yoon and his management style. 

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Two tents in Hollywood erected beneath the 101 Freeway during a January rainstorm. (Matt Tinoco/KPCC)

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Screengrab from video on XY Lee's YouTube channel.; Credit: via YouTube

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Homeless advocates erected a line of tents outside the Echo Park office of City Councilman Mitchell O'Farrell Feb. 12, 2020 to pressure him into meeting with them.; Credit:

Members of several groups of homeless advocates from across Los Angeles converged on a homeless encampment at the north end of   Echo Park Lake on Feb. 12 to protest the routine weekly litter collection.

A cleanup crew assisted by park rangers and city police officers did a once-through the campsite for miscellaneous trash, followed closely by a chanting and critical crowd of protesters.

The homeless advocates had erected extra tents that morning in protest of what they consider invasive cleanups. They also were trying to get City Councilman Mitchell O'Farrell to agree to meet with them as a group, same as he has met with other local organizations of homeowners and residents.

O'Farrell's spokesman Tony Aranga had insisted staffers were willing to meet with individuals to address their housing and other support needs.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

; Credit: Courtesy Randy Newman

Read the full article at LAist

Oscar the Grouch. (Photo: Neilson Barnard/Getty Images); Credit: Neilson Barnard/Getty Images

Read the full article at LAist

A spike in texts and calls to crisis hotlines reflects Americans' growing anxiety about the coronavirus and its impact on their lives.; Credit: Richard Bailey/Getty Images

Normally, Laura Mayer helps the most acutely suicidal callers find the nearest hospital emergency room. But in a pandemic, that has become a crisis counselor's advice of last resort.

"It's a difficult decision because we do know that by sending them into an overburdened health care system, they may or may not get the treatment that they need," says Mayer, who is director of PRS CrisisLink in Oakton, Va., which also takes calls for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline. "The resources may or may not be there, and we're exposing them to the illness."

So instead, counselors are devoting more time to each caller, offering ad hoc therapy and coaxing them to talk through their pain. These days, that pain often has many sources: lost jobs, severed relationships and sick family.

"The type of call and the seriousness of the call is very different this year than it was in previous years," Mayer says. "There's environmental issues, internal issues, family issues. ... It's never one thing."

America's crisis centers and hotlines are themselves in crisis. As people grapple with fear, loneliness and grief, on a grand scale, those stresses are showing up at crisis hotlines. Not only are the needs greater, but their clients' problems are more acute and complex and offer a window into the emotional struggles Americans face.

Across the board, hotlines of all kinds are reporting increases in volume.

The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration saw a fivefold increase at its National Helpline in March. The Crisis Text Line says its volumes are up 40% in the pandemic, to about 100,000 conversations a month.

Volunteer counselors and good Samaritans are responding by lining up to help.

But Mayer says the heaviness takes its toll. Those offering this kind of support end up needing support themselves.

"This illness is starting to impact each of our crisis workers and counselors themselves personally," she says. "So everyone is kind of a client right now, and that's been really challenging."

Nancy Lublin, CEO and co-founder of the Crisis Text Line, says she is bracing for sustained need. "This echo of the physical virus, the mental health echo, we fear it's going to last a very long time and that the intensity will remain," she says.

Over the last two months, the focal point of the emotional pain has shifted, she says. Initially, the spike in traffic was over anxiety about the virus itself. That shifted to complaints of isolation. Now, texters talk of depression and grief.

"So we've doubled the number of conversations that are about grief, and there the top two words that we see are 'grandma' and 'grandpa,' " she says.

And it's no longer just young people texting. Adults are complaining of loneliness, sexual abuse and eating disorders.

"As the quarantines go on and continue, we're seeing it's the people over the age of 35 who are increasing at a higher percentage of our volume," Lublin says. "For the first time, we're seeing people over the age of 60 texting us."

Texting is an ideal medium, she says, for those stuck at home with no personal space: "You don't have to find a quiet space where no one else can hear you."

And for some, that might be the only form of escape. The text line has seen a 74% increase in references to domestic violence. "We see words like 'trapped' [and] 'hurt,' " says Lublin.

Many shelters have shut down, and some of those in-person centers, including the Salvation Army in Philadelphia, now rely on their own hotlines instead.

Arielle Curry, director of the Salvation Army's anti-human trafficking program, says many of her clients can't afford cell phones and have lost touch; those who remain in contact are in dire straits, searching for a shorter supply of money or drugs, and are often suicidal. Curry says addressing those acute emotional needs by phone is frustrating; sometimes she doesn't even know where they are and can't send help to intervene.

"You can't ... comfort someone and look them in their eyes and support them face-to-face," she says. That makes it hard, Curry says, not to feel helpless and hopeless herself.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Rick Bright, former director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, is seen here in 2018.; Credit: Toya Sarno Jordan/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Updated at 6:14 p.m. ET

The federal scientist who was ousted from his role as director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority has filed a whistleblower complaint with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel.

Rick Bright was a high-ranking federal scientist focused on vaccine development and a deputy assistant secretary with the Department of Health and Human Services. Last month, Bright said he was transferred to a "less impactful position" at the National Institutes of Health after he was reluctant to promote the use of drugs such as hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 patients.

In the complaint, Bright alleges a range of government wrongdoing by Dr. Robert Kadlec, the assistant secretary of preparedness and response at the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and others. Bright's boss was Kadlec, who in turn reported to HHS Secretary Alex Azar.

At the time of his removal, Bright said he had been ousted because of his "insistence" that the government spend funds on "safe and scientifically vetted solutions" to address the coronavirus crisis and not on "drugs, vaccines and other technologies that lack scientific merit."

Bright says in the complaint that he raised concerns about the need to prepare for the coronavirus in January but encountered opposition from Trump administration officials. He says he was transferred out of BARDA in retaliation.

According to the complaint, relations between Bright and Kadlec had been strained since 2018 or so, when Bright began "raising repeated objections to the outsized role Dr. Kadlec allowed industry consultants to play in securing contracts that Dr. Bright and other scientists and subject matter experts determined were not meritorious."

"Once the COVID-19 pandemic hit, however, Dr. Bright became even more alarmed about the pressure that Dr. Kadlec and other government officials were exerting on BARDA to invest in drugs, vaccines, and other technologies without proper scientific vetting or that lacked scientific merit," the complaint continues. "Dr. Bright objected to these efforts and made clear that BARDA would only invest the billions of dollars allocated by Congress to address the COVID-19 pandemic in safe and scientifically vetted solutions and it would not succumb to the pressure of politics or cronyism."

The complaint alleges that Bright made repeated efforts to get the U.S. government to make adequate preparations for coronavirus, but was stymied by political appointees leading the HHS, including Azar.

HHS did not immediately respond to NPR's request for comment.

Bright says that in an effort to get the word out to the public about the risks associated with hydroxychloroquine, he shared with a reporter nonclassified emails between HHS officials that "discussed the drug's potential toxicity and demonstrated the political pressure to rush these drugs from Pakistan and India to American households." He says Azar and Kadlec removed him from his post within days of publication of an article about chloroquine because they suspected he was the article's source.

Bright says he stopped receiving a paycheck on April 20 and has not been assigned any further duties.

News of the whistleblower complaint was made public by his attorney on Tuesday.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Two workers approach the entrance to Life Care Center in Kirkland, Wash., on March 13. An association that represents nursing homes is asking for billions of dollars in federal relief funds to cope with the coronavirus crisis.; Credit: Ted S. Warren/AP

With more than 11,000 resident deaths, nursing homes have become the epicenter of the COVID-19 crisis. Now, they're asking the federal government for help — $10 billion worth of help.

The American Health Care Association, the trade organization for most nursing homes, called the impact on long-term care facilities "devastating." In a letter sent this week to the Federal Emergency Management Agency and Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar, they ask for the federal government to designate relief funding from the CARES Act for nursing homes the way it has for hospitals.

The money would be used for personal protective equipment, salaries for expanded staff, and hazard pay. In addition, some of the funds would make up lost revenue for nursing homes that have been unable to admit new residents because of the outbreak.

The AHCA also wants nursing homes to have more access to testing and some members of Congress want that too. This week, 87 members of the House of Representatives sent their own letter to Azar, as well as to Seema Verma, the administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which regulates nursing homes. The letter asks those agencies to direct states — which have received billions of dollars for increased testing — to give priority to long-term care facilities.

The letter also notes that nursing homes are now required to report their numbers of COVID-19 infections and deaths to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, but that they can't meaningfully do this unless they can test everyone in the facility.

Democrats in both the House and the Senate have also introduced legislation intended to make things safer for both nursing home staff and residents. The bill would require nursing homes to take a range of actions, from providing better infection prevention, to supplying sufficient protective gear, to protecting a resident's right to return to the nursing home after they've been treated for COVID-19 at a hospital.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

The serious inflammatory syndrome sending some children and teens to the hospital remains extremely uncommon, doctors say. But if your child spikes a high, persistent fever, and has severe abdominal pain and vomiting that doesn't make them feel better, call your doctor as a precaution.; Credit: Sally Anscombe/Getty Images

Sixty-four children and teens in New York State are suspected of having a mysterious inflammatory syndrome that is believed to be linked to COVID-19, the New York Department of Health said in an alert issued Wednesday. A growing number of similar cases — including at least one death — have been reported in other parts of the U.S. and Europe, though the phenomenon is still not well-understood.

Pediatricians say parents should not panic; the condition remains extremely rare. But researchers also are taking a close look at this emerging syndrome, and say parents should be on the lookout for symptoms in their kids that might warrant a quick call to the doctor — a persistent high fever over several days and significant abdominal pains with repeated vomiting, after which the child does not feel better.

"If [the child is] looking particularly ill, you should definitely call the doctor," says Dr. Sean O'Leary, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at Children's Hospital Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus and member of the infectious disease committee for the American Academy of Pediatrics.

The new condition associated with COVID-19 is called Pediatric Multi-System Inflammatory Syndrome. Symptoms include persistent fever, extreme inflammation, and evidence of one or more organs that are not functioning properly, says cardiologist Jane Newburger, a professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School and director of the Kawasaki Program at Boston Children's Hospital.

"It's still very rare, but there's been a wave of cases. Physicians and scientists are working hard to understanding the mechanisms at play, and why only some children are so severely affected," Newburger says.

Some symptoms can resemble features of Kawasaki Disease Shock Syndrome. Kawasaki Disease is an acute illness in children involving fever, together with symptoms of rash, conjunctivitis, redness in the lips, tongue and mucous membranes of the mouth and throat, swollen hands and/or feet, and sometimes a large group of lymph nodes on one side of the neck, says Newburger. Some children with the condition develop enlargement of the coronary arteries and aneurysms in those blood vessels.

A small percentage of Kawasaki cases go on to develop symptoms of shock – which can include a steep drop in systolic blood pressure and difficulty with sufficient blood supply to the body's organs. Kawasaki disease and KDSS more often affect young children, although they can sometimes affect teens, Newburger says.

Some cases of the new inflammatory syndrome have features that overlap with KD or with KDSS — including rash, conjunctivitis, and swollen hands or feet. The new inflammatory syndrome can affect not only young children but also older children and teens.

But patients with the new syndrome have lab results that look very different, in particular, "cardiac inflammation to a greater degree than we typically see in Kawasaki shock syndrome," which is usually very rare, O'Leary says. In New York City and London, which have seen large numbers of cases of COVID-19 cases, "those types of patients are being seen with greater frequency."

Some patients "come in very, very sick," with low blood pressure and high fever, O'Leary says. Some children have had coronary artery aneurysms, though most have not, he adds.

Other patients exhibit symptoms more similar to toxic shock syndrome, with abdominal pain, vomiting and diarrhea and high levels of inflammation in the body, as well as the heart, O'Leary says. Most cases are treated in the intensive care unit, he says. Treatment includes intravenous immunoglobulin, which can "calm the immune system," says Newburger, as well as steroids and cytokine blockers.

The evidence so far from Europe, where reports of the syndrome first emerged, suggests most children will recover with proper supportive care, says O'Leary, though one adolescent, a 14-year-old boy in London, has died, according to a report published Wednesday in The Lancet.

Most children with the syndrome, O'Leary and Newburger note, have either tested positive for a current infection with the coronavirus, or for antibodies to the virus, which would suggest they were infected earlier and recovered from it.

And, according to case reports, some of the kids with the inflammatory syndrome who tested negative on coronavirus tests had been exposed at some point to someone known to have COVID-19. The inflammatory syndrome can appear days to weeks after COVID-19 illness, doctors say, suggesting the syndrome arises out of the immune system's response to the virus.

"One theory is that as one begins to make antibodies to SARS-COV-2, the antibody itself may be provoking an immune response," says Newburger. "This is only happening in susceptible individuals whose immune systems are built in a particular way. It doesn't happen in everybody. It's still a really uncommon event in children."

In late April, the U.K.'s National Health Service issued an alert to pediatricians about the syndrome. Reports have also surfaced in France, Spain and Italy, and probably number in the dozens globally, Newburger and O'Leary say, though doctors still don't have hard numbers. Newburger says there needs to be a registry where doctors can report cases "so we can begin to generate some statistics."

"Doctors across countries are talking to each other, but we need for there to be some structure and some science so that everybody can interpret," she says.

Earlier this week, the New York City Health Department issued an alert saying 15 children ranging in age from 2 to 15 had been hospitalized with the syndrome. Newburger says that she's been contacted about cases in New Jersey and Philadelphia, as well.

While the syndrome's precise connection to the coronavirus isn't yet clear, O'Leary says the fact that the children in most of these cases are testing positive for exposure to the virus, one way or another, provides one point of evidence. The sheer number of cases — small in absolute terms, but still "much higher than we would expect normally for things like severe Kawasaki or toxic shock syndrome" — provides another, he says.

And then there's the fact that most reports of the syndrome have come out of the U.K. and New York City, places that have been hit with large numbers of COVID-19 cases.

"It's pure speculation at this point," he says, "but the U.K. cluster kind of went up about a month after their COVID-19 infections went up, which would suggest that it is some kind of an immune phenomenon."

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Remdesivir, an experimental antiviral drug made by Gilead Sciences, has been authorized by the Food and Drug Administration for emergency use in treating severely ill COVID-19 patients.; Credit: Ulrich Perry/POOL/AFP via Getty Images

Now that the Food and Drug Administration has authorized remdesivir for emergency use in seriously ill COVID-19 patients, the experimental drug is another step closer to full approval. That's when most drugs get price tags.

Gilead Sciences, which makes remdesivir, is donating its initial supply of 1.5 million doses, but the company has signaled it will need to start charging for the drug to make production sustainable. It's unclear when that decision might be made.

"Going forward, we will develop an approach that is guided by the principles of affordability and access," Gilead CEO Daniel O'Day told shareholders during the company's annual meeting Wednesday.

In a quarterly financial filing made the same day, Gilead said its investment in remdesivir this year "could be up to $1 billion or more," much of it for scaling up manufacturing capacity.

The company also acknowledged that it's in the spotlight. "[G]iven that COVID-19 has been designated as a pandemic and represents an urgent public health crisis, we are likely to face significant public attention and scrutiny about any future business models and pricing decisions with respect to remdesivir," Gilead said in the quarterly filing.

How will the company balance its business calculations with the drug's potential value to society?

"Gilead has not yet set a price for remdesivir," company spokeswoman Sonia Choi wrote in an email to NPR. "At this time, we are focused on ensuring access to remdesivir through our donation. Post-donation, we are committed to making remdesivir both accessible and affordable to governments and patients around the world."

Among potential treatments for COVID-19, remdesivir, an intravenous drug that was once studied for Ebola, is one of the furthest along.

"It's hard to imagine a situation in which there will be more public scrutiny," said Michael Carrier, a professor at Rutgers School of Law who specializes in antitrust and pharmaceuticals. "On the one hand, Gilead will try to recover its R&D in an atmosphere in which it is able to potentially make a lot of money. On the other hand, the pressure will be intense not to charge what's viewed as too high a price."

Breaking with its usual practices, the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review, or ICER, an influential nonprofit that analyzes drug pricing, issued an expedited report on remdesivir.

"Under normal circumstances, we would be unlikely to do a report when the evidence is this raw and immature," ICER President Steven Pearson said in an interview with NPR. "But it was quite clear that the world is moving at a much quicker pace."

If the price is based just on the cost of making the drug, then a 10-day course of remdesivir should cost about $10, according to the ICER report. (Gilead said results of a recently completed study suggest a five-day course of treatment may be just as effective.)

But if the drug is priced based on the drug's effectiveness, ICER estimates it should cost around $4,500 — assuming the drug is proven to have some benefit on mortality. If it doesn't and the drug only shortens hospital stays, that value-based price goes down to $390.

Results from a federally funded study described by Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, suggested that remdesvir could reduce recovery time by a median of four days — 11 days to recovery for patients treated with remdesivir compared with 15 days for those who got a placebo. A potential survival benefit is less clear.

Rutgers's Carrier said he expects Gilead to set the remdesivir price somewhere between the $10 and $4,500 that ICER estimated. The company has already shown that it can respond to public pressure when it asked the FDA to rescind the orphan drug status it won for remdesivir, he pointed out.

"When you see that $10 figure, that sets a benchmark for a figure that is eminently affordable," Carrier said. Ultimately, he said a price more than $1,000 per treatment course would be unpopular.

Gilead "will be watched very carefully," he said, because of its prior history of pricing. He referred to two other Gilead drugs that drew scrutiny over high price tags. The company charged $1,000 per pill for Sovaldi, a cure for hepatitis C. And its HIV drug Truvada can cost $22,000 per year.

But there is such a thing as pricing remdesivir too low, said Craig Garthwaite, who directs the health care program at Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management.

"We don't think this is the only drug we need," he said, adding that remdesivir doesn't appear to be a "home run" against the coronavirus, based on existing data. "The thing that would worry me the most is that we're somehow telling people that if you take the risky bet to try, and you'll go after a coronavirus cure and you do it, you're not going to get paid."

Instead, he said he would like to see acceptance of a generous price for remdesivir to send the message to drug companies that the best thing they can do is "dedicate every waking moment to trying to develop that cure, and that if they do that, we will pay them the value they create," he said.

During a Gilead earnings call on April 30, analysts asked executives whether they could expect similar financial returns on remdesivir as they've seen with Gilead's other drugs.

"There is no rulebook out there, other than that we need to be very thoughtful about how we can make sure we provide access of our medicines to patients around the globe," Gilead CEO O'Day said. "And do that in a sustainable way for the company, for ... shareholders, and we acknowledge that."

On May 1, the FDA authorized remdesivir for emergency use, meaning it will be easier to administer to hospitalized patients with severe disease during the pandemic, but the drug is not yet officially approved. The federal government is coordinating distribution of the treatment.

Day acknowledged on the recent earnings call that the company "could" charge for remdesivir under an emergency use authorization, but he stressed that Gilead is donating its current supply, which should last through "early summer."

To date, the National Institutes of Health said it has obligated $23 million toward its COVID-19 remdesivir trial. And the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases did some of the early in vitro and animal studies with the medicine prior to the pandemic.

"Taxpayers are often the angel investors in pharmaceutical research and development, yet this is not reflected in the prices they pay," Reps. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, and Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., wrote in a April 30 letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar.

Concerned about remdesivir's price, they asked for a full breakdown of taxpayer funds that have gone toward the development of the medicine. "An unaffordable drug is completely ineffective," they wrote in the letter. "The substantial taxpayer investments in COVID-19 pharmaceutical research must be recognized."

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Among those protesting stay-at-home orders this week at the California Capitol in Sacramento were activists who oppose governments requiring vaccinations for school children.; Credit: Katie Orr/KQED

Protests over stay-at-home orders because of COVID-19 have become more common around the country. In California, a surprising group is behind some of them: those who oppose mandatory vaccinations.

On Thursday, a mash-up of people mingled on the sidewalk in front of California's state Capitol in Sacramento. There were Trump supporters wearing MAGA hats and waving American flags. There were Christians, singing along to religious rock songs and raising their hands in prayer. The event's MC. urged Gov. Gavin Newsom to tune into their event.

"Everybody up at the Capitol, tell Gavin Newsom [to tune in to] 107.9 FM, if he wants to hear what we have to say," the MC told the crowd over loudspeakers. "It could be kind of good for him!"

There were also mothers with their children at the rally. Many people were not wearing face masks or observing social distancing protocols.

They'd all come out to protest California's stay-at-home order, put in place to slow the spread of COVID-19. This week's event was built around the National Day of Prayer, and featured pastors and sermons. But it was organized by a group called Freedom Angels, which was originally formed to fight mandatory vaccine laws in the state.

At the beginning of the rally, the group's founders took the stage, including Denise Aguilar.

"Hello everybody, my name is Denise, I'm one of the founders of Freedom Angels," Aguilar said to a cheering crowd. "Thank you guys for being out here to let Gov. Newsom know we're not going away! We've said this for years!"

The group has become a fixture at the Capitol ever since California passed a law requiring school students to be vaccinated and a second law tightening restrictions on medical exemptions for those vaccines. But another Freedom Angels founder, Stefanie Fetzer, said they're not a single-issue group. She said these events are about promoting personal freedom.

"I think what we're seeing now is the predictive modeling that they came out with in the beginning didn't hold true. We aren't seeing the numbers that they predicted," Fetzer said. "And instead of backing off of the shutdown and the restrictive measures that Gov. Newsom implemented, he seems to be doubling down."

Attention-seeking strategy

Public health advocates point out that the reason those early predictions didn't come true is that aggressive social distancing measures — including stay-at-home orders — worked. Democratic state Senator Richard Pan, who authored California's vaccine laws, believes this anti-vaccine group is aligning with others protesting the stay-at-home order as a way to promote their cause. After all, Pan said, a vaccine would eventually allow the economy to reopen.

"They have staged these protests to basically find a way to get media attention for themselves. They fund raise off of their activities as well," Pan said. "So, frankly, many of the anti-vaxxers who are involved in this are really there for their own interests."

It's common for anti-vaccine groups to latch onto other controversial issues, according to epidemiologist and vaccine educator René Najera. For instance, he points to abortion.

"They try to say that there are aborted fetal cells in vaccines — which there are not — to try to get the anti-abortion people on their side," he said. "And then they flip it around and say, also, 'My body, my choice.'"

Najera said those tactics can have dangerous outcomes, including making people think twice about getting vaccines. In fact, he said, in 2019 the World Health Organization named vaccine hesitancy, or people's reluctance to consider vaccination, as one of the world's top 10 public health challenges.

"And we saw the effects of that," Najera said. "We saw a rise of measles in the United States to the point where the elimination status of the United States for measles was in jeopardy."

Najera is confident vaccine opponents aren't going away. He says, if anything, the rise of social media has made it easier for them to spread their message. What he finds most frustrating is that these anti-vaccines protesters aren't just making choices that affect their own families. Najera says choosing not to vaccinate their children and joining other large protests to spread their message puts the health of everyone at risk.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A woman wearing a mask walks past closed store fronts in the Astoria neighborhood of Queens on April 15 in New York City. States are beginning to implement phased reopening plans, in part to help businesses hit hard by the coronavirus.; Credit: Johannes Eisele/AFP via Getty Images

President Trump wants states to begin relaxing stay-at-home orders and reopen businesses after the spread of the coronavirus pummeled the global economy and killed millions of jobs.

The White House coronavirus task force released guidelines on April 16 to encourage state governors to adopt a phased approach to lifting restrictions across the country. Some states have moved ahead without meeting the criteria.

The task force rejected a set of additional detailed draft recommendations for schools, restaurants, churches and mass transit systems from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that it considered "overly prescriptive."

A number of states have already begun to lift restrictions, allowing for businesses including hair salons, diners and tattoo parlors to once again begin accepting customers. Health experts have warned that reopening too quickly could result in a potential rebound in cases.

States are supposed to wait to begin lifting any restrictions until they have a 14-day "downward trajectory" of influenza-like illnesses and confirmed virus cases, as well as sufficient hospital capacity and testing for health care workers.

Below is a summary of the three phases as outlined by the task force (read the full guidance here):

Don't see the graphic above? Click here.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

; Credit: /Janice Chang for NPR

The high school senior sitting across from Franciene Sabens was in tears over the abrupt amputation of her social life and turmoil at home. Because of the coronavirus, there will be no prom, no traditional send-off or ceremony for the graduates of Carbondale Community High School in Carbondale, Ill. And Sabens, one of the school's counselors, could not give the girl the one thing Sabens' gut told her the teen needed most.

"I want to hug them all, but I really wanted to hug that one," Sabens remembers.

Instead of a desk between counselor and student, there were miles of Internet cable and a computer screen. No hug. No private office. This is Sabens' new normal.

"Zoom is just not gonna ever bridge that gap," she says. "That one was pretty rough."

The job of the school counselor has evolved over the years, from academic guide to something deeper: the adult in a school tasked with fostering students' social and emotional growth, a mental health first responder and a confidant for kids, especially teens, who often need a closed door and a sympathetic ear. But the closure of nearly all U.S. schools has forced counselors like Sabens to reimagine how they can do their jobs. And the stakes have never been higher.

Why students need counselors now more than ever

Between closed schools, social isolation, food scarcity and parental unemployment, the coronavirus pandemic has so destabilized kids' support systems that the result, counselors say, is genuinely traumatic.

Sarah Kirk, an elementary school counselor in Tulsa, Okla., is especially worried about her students who were already at-risk, whose families "really struggle day to day in their homes with how they're going to pay the next bill and how they're going to get food on the table. Being home for this extended period of time is definitely a trauma for them."

For so many children, Kirk says, "school is their safe place. They look forward to coming. They don't want to leave when the day is over. And to take that away from them, I do worry about the traumatic experience that will cause for many of our students."

Counselors say part of the trauma comes from students being isolated from each other.

"In a middle school, that social piece is so important," says Laura Ross, a middle school counselor in Lawrenceville, Ga. Yes, they do a lot of connecting via social media, and that's still happening, "but that face-to-face and being with their friends... they're missing that."

Students are also experiencing a kind of grief "over what they've lost," Sabens says, especially seniors. "Losing out on the end of their senior years — something that they've dreamed about their whole life... has really been overwhelming for them. So there have been a lot of tears. There have been a lot of questions... 'What did we ever do to deserve this?'"

Unfortunately, there are no easy answers. Instead, Sabens says, she tries to let students know "that it's OK to not be OK. I mean, most of the world is not OK right now... It's OK to grieve about what you're losing because it is tragic."

Brian Coleman, a high school counselor in Chicago, says trauma is nothing new to many of his students, but he hopes awareness of the potentially traumatic effects of school closures means "trauma-informed care is going to really, really explode in ideally healthy, meaningful ways."

That means school leaders should right now be planning for the future, asking how they can best support students when they come back to school, Ross says, "making sure that we're prepared to deal with some of those feelings that are going to increase — of anxiousness, of grief, of that disconnect that they had for so long."

Broken connections

Not only are many students grieving and struggling with new trauma, it's also harder now for school counselors to help them. That's because counselors have lost one of the most powerful tools they had before schools closed: access. Before, counselors could speak to entire classrooms about bullying and how to manage their feelings, plus they enjoyed office space where students could drop in for a quick visit or schedule a tough conversation.

"I think about my eighth graders," says Laura Ross in Lawrenceville. "My office is in their hallway. I mean, they just stop by to say hello. They stop by when they're upset, just to come in and talk and, you know, figure out their feelings."

But all of that has changed. Today, a face-to-face video meeting is the closest a counselor can get to the old ideal. Before that can happen, though, Sabens says she has to find her students.

"Email, email, email, email — lots of emails," she says, calling it her "primary mode of communication with the students."

Connecting is even more complicated for elementary school counselors whose students generally don't have cell phones or email addresses. In Tulsa, Sarah Kirk says this inability to speak directly with children is "exactly what keeps me up at night."

So far, Kirk has mostly been in contact with parents and caregivers. "That's whose [phone] number I have... But it's really up to the parent if they want to hand the phone over [to the student]." She worries that, if a child is not OK at home and needs help, she won't know.

Kirk's focus on these calls has also shifted away from academics toward "the basic needs of our kids... making sure they have enough food. We're making sure they're safe."

Evelyn Ramirez, a first-year middle school counselor in rural Redwood Valley, Calif., agrees: "Our main priority right now is just to check the welfare of each student."

Ramirez, a first-generation Mexican-American, says online learning can put additional strain on immigrant and low-income families. "I feel for the students whose parents don't know English or don't really know how to help their students."

"It's no longer private"

NPR spoke with counselors across the country, from California to Georgia, Oklahoma to Ohio, and nearly all said they worry about even the best-case scenario — when they're able to connect with a student face-to-face using video chat technology. Their fear: privacy.

At school, "we have some sort of office space... where students can feel like they're having a private conversation with counselors," says Coleman in Chicago. "Now we're asking them to be vulnerable in some capacity at home. And for so many students, home is a space where they're triggered or they don't feel comfortable sharing ... because it's no longer private."

Yes, the student's bedroom door may be closed, says Ramirez in Redwood Valley, but "at any given point, someone can walk in or, you know, mom's down in the living room. She can probably hear [our] conversation." And that might keep students from really opening up about things like basic stress or even abuse.

The same holds true for many elementary school counselors.

"We do small group counseling for kids [who] are adjusting to a variety of changes, and there's an element of confidentiality that's built into that group," says Marie Weller, an elementary school counselor in Delaware, Ohio. "So I can't do a group online. I can't use Canvas or Zoom or Google Hangouts for a group because I can't get the confidentiality. So [I'm] trying to figure out, how can I check in?"

Getting creative

In Lawrenceville, Laura Ross admits: These have been trying times. But there's also a surprising upside, she says. The distance from students has forced her to get creative about how she uses technology to build a bridge back to them.

Before the outbreak, Ross helped create an after-school club for students who identify as LGBTQ+. When school closed, Ross set up a Google Classroom and asked if the club's members wanted to continue to meet virtually. "They definitely did. And the reactions were just a relief that they were still going to have the support of that club... the place that they could truly be themselves."

Ross says they even meet at the same time each week, just on Zoom.

On her last day in the office, before Ohio closed its schools, Marie Weller remembers starting to leave — then hesitating beside the childlike puppets she sometimes uses in her classroom counseling presentations. "Huh," she thought. "Maybe I'll be able to use these."

Weller and her fellow elementary school counselors say one important part of their job is making sure all students have the social-emotional skills and coping strategies they'll need to navigate a complex world. How can they do that now, from home?

Weller improvised.

She set up a smartphone camera in her house, surrounded by those puppets — a kind of surrogate classroom audience — and set about recording mini counseling lessons from her kitchen. Instead of the chime she normally uses to begin a lesson, she rings a mixing bowl with a red spatula. To teach kids about how and why they should filter what they say, leaving hurtful thoughts unspoken, she opens the coffee maker to show them how a real, paper filter works.

Weller does her own editing and even got permission from folk music favorites The Irish Rovers to use their song "What's Cooking In The Kitchen" as her opening theme. The resulting videos are brief, rich and charming, with lines like, "Your brain's amygdala acts like a guard dog."

And in Tulsa, Sarah Kirk is doing something similar, posting videos where she's sitting on the floor of her house, surrounded by colorful pennants and stuffed animals. Her dog, Crew, a cuddly 80-pound sheepadoodle (nearly as big as Kirk), even makes a camera-blocking cameo.

In her first episode, Kirk read a story meant to reassure children she can no longer hug. It's about how we all have an invisible string that connects us, even when we're far apart.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Eight-year-old Mariana Aceves is doing her math homework — subtraction by counting backwards — while sitting on the bed she shares with her mom, Lorena Aceves.

They're sitting on the bed because they have nowhere else to go: they live in an 8-foot-by-12-foot room called a tiny house. It's part of Seattle's transitional housing where people experiencing homelessness can live until they find a job and a place of their own.

There's room for the bed they share, a TV shelf, "and a little tiny plastic dresser, and then all of our clothing and our food goes underneath our bed," Lorena Aceves says.

Tens of millions of kids are taking classes online at home right now because of the coronavirus pandemic. That's hard enough for most families. But, if you're homeless and have no computer, sketchy wifi, and no quiet place to study, it's even more difficult. That's the case for the one and a half million school kids currently experiencing homelessness across the U.S.

When Seattle's schools closed in March, Aceves had to quit her new job, because she couldn't find childcare. She and her daughter have been holed up in their tiny house ever since.

"It's the boredom," Aceves says, "and me trying to reach out and find resources — work, a car, things like that — while also making sure that she's entertained."

Aceves and her daughter have a tiny amount of private space. Other homeless families have no privacy at all.

Sixteen-year-old Capelle Belij is living with his parents at a shelter, part of a network of family shelters in the Seattle area run by the nonprofit Mary's Place.

The Belijes share a room with two other families, divided only by curtains.

"My friends, like, come up to my bed space and ask if I want to play or something," Belij says. "If we had our own place, I could learn better."

Three-quarters of children and youth considered homeless live doubled-up with another family. That's the situation for the family of 17-year-old Michelle Aguilar. She's part of KUOW's youth reporting program, called RadioActive.

"I can't really find a specific space where it's like quiet and calm and I can actually have wifi," Aguilar says.

Since Aguilar's shared bedroom doesn't have wifi, she ends up in the living room or kitchen with the rest of her family.

"And they just, like, continue their chaotic life of yelling and screaming and, like, playing music and listening to the TV and cooking," she says.

"Whenever I'm, like, in the environment of it being really loud," Aguilar says, "I tend to, like, read over and over and over and over the assignment."

"We're definitely very concerned with there being an achievement gap during this time," says Tisha Tallman, the executive director of the National Center for the Education of Homeless Children and Youth. "The longer this goes, the more likely our children are to fall behind."

And, Tallman adds, schools provide much more than an education: many homeless kids get two meals per day there, and they rely on it as a safe and stable place to be.

Back in her tiny house, Lorena Aceves is trying to keep her daughter's education on track with a strict schedule of math, reading, and typing.

"Even though this is frustrating," Aceves says, "we are having this time together and that's something typically that we don't have."

Aceves says it's good to feel close to her daughter during a time that she has to stay far away from nearly everyone else.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

; Credit: /Dani Pendergast for NPR

Friday, March 13, was the last time Alexandra Sullivan saw her fellow yearbook staffers in person.

"We were trying to get as many pictures of people as possible 'cause we knew we wouldn't be able to take any more," Sullivan, 18, says.

Like most U.S. public school students, Sullivan is learning from home now. And much like her lessons, her work on the yearbook continues.

Sullivan is the yearbook profiles editor at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla. She's one of 10 seniors who were also on staff two years ago, when a gunman opened fire at their school. Back then, she and her classmates had to adapt to an unimaginable tragedy. Now, they have to adapt again – this time, to the pandemic.

"This book has to get done and we'll do whatever we have to do to finish it," she says, "which is exactly how we approached the '18 book."

Senior Caitlynn Tibbetts, the yearbook's co-editor-in-chief, was also on staff when the shooting happened. She says there's a collective grief among seniors over what their class — which has already lost so much — is losing now. They won't be able to dance together at prom, or walk across the stage at graduation.

"This class especially has gotten screwed over so much through the past four years," Tibbetts, 18, says. "The last two months were supposed to be the best, and they were supposed to make up for everything that we've been through. And it's really hard on us to kind of just watch it all disappear."

Amid all the uncertainty, she says, one thing is clear: The yearbook must get done, and it must get to students.

High school yearbooks are like time capsules. They record theater productions, which teams went to state finals, who was voted most likely to succeed.

And when a news event makes history – leaving a mark on students and society – it's the yearbook's job to document it. At Stoneman Douglas, that's meant changing plans just weeks before the yearbook is due.

Yearbook advisor Sarah Lerner says, "Having done one under unthinkable circumstances before, I hate to say that we're kind of, you know, used to it, but, for the seniors on staff, we are."

Two years ago, after the shooting, the yearbook staff pivoted to include remembrances of the victims. Tibbetts and Sullivan stepped up to help write them, and anything else that was needed at the last minute, while other yearbook staffers took time to attend funerals.

This year, they're making room for two new spreads about the pandemic.

"One of them is more of a factual-based one, how it's affected our community, including businesses," Tibbetts explains. "The other spread is focused on the effect it's had on us personally, both with online schooling and especially with seniors."

Logistically, putting the yearbook together and writing the new sections has been a challenge. Unlike 2018, they can't be in the same room with each other to finish the design.

"We have to social distance and our parents wouldn't let us go out," Tibbetts says.

They mainly rely on a group chat with everyone on the staff. "It can get hectic," Tibbetts says, "especially when it's all happening at like 12 a.m."

Lerner and her students missed the original deadline to finish the book, on April 6. But the printer, Walsworth, says the company is being flexible with Stoneman Douglas and other yearbook staffs across the country. Lerner says she's aiming to get the book in by the end of April.

Once the printed copies come back, more than 1,200 books will somehow have to be distributed to students. Lerner has some ideas for how to do that safely.

However, there's one important yearbook tradition they may not be able to save.

"We may not actually get to sign books this year," Lerner says. And that's been hard to accept.

"As a teacher, I really like to get my students to sign my book, you know, and I like to sign theirs and I like to see the kids carrying them around at school."

Lerner says she's sad that might not happen this year. But at least this time, the students of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School aren't on their own.

"Unlike the 2018 books, this situation is not unique to us," she says. "So there's comfort in knowing that all staffs are going through the same issue. It's not just us."

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

; Credit: CSA-Archive/Getty Images

This week, U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos announced that more than $300 million from the first coronavirus rescue package will go to two education grant competitions for K-12 and higher ed.

States will be able to apply for a piece of the $180 million allotted to the "Rethink K-12 Education Models Grant" and $127.5 million allotted to the "Reimagining Workforce Preparation Grant."

The money is 1% of the more than $30 billion set aside for education in the CARES Act. Those billions are intended to help states with the highest coronavirus burden.

States can access the money by creating proposals to fund virtual or work-based learning programs. The grant categories include two of DeVos' pre-existing pet policy ideas: "microgrants" that go directly to home-schooling families, and microcredentials that offer a shorter path to workforce preparation.

On the higher ed side, the secretary has long pushed for workforce-oriented education and shorter paths to a degree. She's been praised for this stance by online and for-profit colleges, while traditional institutions have been less sanguine.

Similarly, the secretary is a longtime advocate of alternatives to public schools, including home schooling. She has praised programs like Florida's Gardiner Scholarship, which provides up to $10,000 to the families of children with special needs to support home schooling. Last fall, DeVos proposed a $5 billion "Education Freedom Scholarship" program, which would have used federal tax credits to support, essentially, a voucher program that families could use both for private schools and home schooling.

While this week's announcement is significant for the policy directions it signals, it's a comparatively small amount of money. Education groups have asked the federal government for $200 billion (with a B) more in funds to maintain basic services.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

No field trips. No game rooms. No teddy bears. These are some of the CDC's guidelines for reopening schools, childcare centers and day camps safely in places where coronavirus cases are on the decline.

The guidance, which also covers restaurants, churches and other public places, was obtained by The Associated Press, which reports that the White House tried to keep it from coming to light. The New York Times quoted Mark Meadows, the chief of staff, as being concerned that the guidelines were "overly prescriptive."

The CDC does not have authority to enforce its guidance, which is intended for public information only; the actual policy decisions are up to state and local governments. Schools are closed through the end of the school year throughout much of the country, with the exception of Montana, which welcomed a handful of students back this week. Child care protocols are different in different states.

But millions of parents need child care so they can work, and socialization and stimulation for children who have been confined to home by lockdowns for weeks on end. This is the guidance that summer camps and day cares have been waiting for to make decisions about reopening safely.

The guidance says that where coronavirus is spreading rapidly, child care should only serve the children of essential workers. This is the case today in much of the country, which the guidelines refer to as "Phase 1".

In Phase 2, programs can expand to serve all children with enhanced social distancing measures, and in Phase 3, with a lower risk, social distancing will continue.

Recommended measures include:

Handwashing;

Cloth masks for staff;

Regular disinfection of all surfaces;

Six-foot distance "if possible," head-to-toe positioning with bedding;

As much outdoor air as possible — open windows, fans;

Restricting mixing of groups;

Restricting visitors, and staggering dropoffs and pickups to reduce contact among parents;

Limiting sharing of materials like art supplies or toys. Disinfecting them in between use.;

Avoiding soft toys that can't be easily disinfected;

Not using common areas like dining halls or playgrounds if possible. If it is necessary, stagger visits and disinfect in between;

Adjust operations based on local health data;

Monitor absenteeism.

The guidelines also emphasize keeping attendance at such programs local, to limit children bringing the disease from high to low transmission areas.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Patt's outfit for April 12, 2013.; Credit: Michelle Lanz/KPCC

You don’t believe it looking out your windows in Southern California today, but spring it is. Perhaps I am forcing the spring by wearing bouquets on my stems – I think I can identify ranunculus, poppies, dianthus, and maybe roses?

I don’t know how authentically botanical fabric print designers think they ought to be, but I have an unshakable childhood recall of a bedroom in my great-grandmother’s house wallpapers in blue roses, and I was for years thereafter convinced that I could grow myself some blue roses.

And is there a happier color than this jacket’s coral/peach, or a springier fabric than the cotton-blend pique? It’s not as strenuous a shade as it would be in its brightness equivalent elsewhere on the color wheel, like electric blue or acid green. [And if it were, well, I’d wear it anyway!]

But the cloche hat – Daisy Buchanan, eat your platinum heart out. The ruched ombre silk ribbon on the crown and the minute bits of bent and curled ostrich feathers, like hatchlings on the hat! [I like saying that even more than I like writing it: "ruched ombre." It sounds like a fantastical concoction of molecular gastronomy: "the rambutan brûlée this evening is topped with ruched ombre."?     

Any bets on whether the May release of "The Great Gatsby" will revive 1920s chic? Who’s ready for dropped waistlines, lower heels and  long sautoir necklaces?

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

COVID-19 Research and Development Sean's pick this week is COVID-19 Research and Development by MathWorks. We were recently introduced to this page which highlights uses of... read more >>

Before he Picks this Week's featured File Exchange submission, Brett would like to give a nod of appreciation to the developers of the Image Processing Toolbox. Back in September of 2018, I wrote... read more >>

Pedestrians walk by the Castro Theatre that has a marquee announcing that they are closed due to a statewide ordinance banning gatherings of more than 250 people in San Francisco, California. ; Credit: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Hollywood has come to a stand still. The film and entertainment industry has been hit hard by the coronavirus outbreak as theaters close, film releases and events are being postponed, and studios are putting a pause on film production.

The gravity of the coronavirus is being felt all throughout the country and Hollywood is not coming out of the outbreak unscathed. Social distancing measures being enforced to help control the outbreak has studios and theatres taking a huge hit. It’s predicted that about 170,000 people in the film industry will lose their jobs. Many of the lowest-paid positions and freelance jobs have been the first to go. From events to films, the industry is trying to strategize around the outbreak with no clear picture on how long these conditions could last. Hollywood unions, activist groups and nonprofits are coming together to help provide some kind of emergency relief for workers who are getting hit the hardest. It’s been a period of economic shock for the entertainment industry and it’s still too early to see what Hollywood could look like after the outbreak is over.

Today on AirTalk, we check-in with people in the entertainment industry who have been impacted by the outbreak and where might Hollywood go from here. If you work in entertainment, we'd like to hear from you! How are you coping as most productions are shut down? Join the live conversation by calling 866-893-5722.

Guest:

Andrew Wallenstein, co-editor-in-chief at Variety; he tweets @awallenstein

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) listens during a news conference in front of the U.S. Capitol.; Credit: Alex Wong/Getty Images

As we discussed last week on FilmWeek, entertainment industry professionals are among the hardest hit amid the stoppage of everyday work and life due to COVID-19. Whether you’re on camera or stage, or behind it, above the line or below it, production shutdowns mean that industry professionals who already rely on sporadic work as it’s available are left with few to no options for sustainable income. 

Last week, Congressman Adam Schiff and other members of Congress who represent areas with large constituencies that work in the entertainment industry sent a letter to House leaders asking them to provide relief for both freelance and contract entertainment industry workers. “The unique freelance nature of work in film, television, theater, and live music means that a large number of the professionals who make these productions possible work only sporadically—often with extended periods between paying jobs—and count on income from each project to make ends meet,” the letter said in part. “As a result, many of them can’t qualify for traditional unemployment benefits or paid emergency leave, yet will now be unable to cover their basic expenses due to lost work.” 

Today on AirTalk, Congressman Schiff joins us to talk about what relief both freelance and contract entertainment industry professionals can expect if the House passes the stimulus package that would provide financial aid to Americans during the coronavirus pandemic. 

Guest: 

Adam Schiff, U.S. Congressman representing California’s 28th Congressional District, which includes Burbank, parts of Pasadena, and Glendale, and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee; he tweets @RepAdamSchiff

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Talia Ryder and Théodore Pellerin in "Never Rarely Sometimes Always".
; Credit: Focus Features/Never Rarely Sometimes Always (2020)

Larry Mantle and KPCC film critics Lael Loewenstein, Peter Rainer and Christy Lemire review this weekend’s new movie releases and share their picks for the best movies and TV shows to binge, rewatch or see for the first time while you’re staying at home.

• "Never Rarely Sometimes" on VOD (for rent on Amazon Prime & FandangoNOW)

• "Bacurau" on virtual cinemas, including Laemmle's and Alamo Drafthouse

• "Slay The Dragon" on VOD, including iTunes

• "About A Teacher" on Amazon Prime Video

• "Dolphin Reef" on Disney+

• "Elephant" in Disney+

Guests:

Lael Loewenstein, KPCC film critic and film columnist for the Santa Monica Daily Press; she tweets @LAELLO

Peter Rainer, film critic for KPCC and the Christian Science Monitor

Christy Lemire, film critic for KPCC, RogerEbert.com and co-host of the ‘Breakfast All Day’ podcast; she tweets @christylemire

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Director Eliza Hittman on the set of her film "Never Rarely Sometimes Always".
; Credit: Focus Features/Never Rarely Sometimes Always (2020)

The film “Never Rarely Sometimes Always” was slated for a theatrical release in March, but due to COVID-19 screenings were postponed. Instead, the film is out on digital this week, currently sporting a 98 percent rating on Rotten Tomatoes and receiving critical acclaim both here on FilmWeek and nationwide as one of the best films of 2020 so far.

Writer-director Eliza Hittman’s third feature-length film is about two teenage girls Skylar (Talia Ryder) and Autumn (Sidney Flanagan) from rural Pennsylvania who travel to New York City for medical help after an unplanned pregnancy. Hittman says the idea for the film came to her when she read in a book about how some women in Ireland, which up until recently had very strict laws against abortions, would travel from Ireland to London in 24 hours just to get a procedure. It struck her as worthy of a screenplay, and the idea was born. As part of her research for the film Hittman went to a small coal-mining community in rural Pennsylvania and, even though she wasn’t pregnant, visited pregnancy centers, got tested, and talked with women getting treatment and counseling so she could, as she says, “write the scenes with credibility.”

Today on FilmWeek, we’ll air “The Frame” host John Horn’s interview with “Never Rarely Sometimes Always” director Eliza Hittman where the two discuss how Hittman came up with the idea for the film, her journey to rural America to find out what visiting pregnancy centers there is like, and how that informed the way she conceived and wrote the film.

Guest:

Eliza Hittman, writer and director of “Never Rarely Sometimes Always”

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Closing Night Party at last year's 2019 TCM 10th Annual Classic Film Festival in Hollywood, California. ; Credit: Presley Ann/Getty Images for TCM

Like all public events following the start of widespread stay-at-home orders from the state and federal government, the 2020 TCM Classic Film Festival was unfortunately cancelled this year due to health concerns posed by COVID-19. But festival faithful and classic film buffs won’t be left hanging this year.

Instead of a live, in person event, TCM decided to do a Special Home Edition of the annual festival that will air on the TCM Channel. The festival kicked off Thursday evening with a screening of the 1954 version of “A Star is Born” starring Judy Garland and James Mason and will include a number of films from past years’ festival lineups as well as ones that were slated for this year’s event. It ends late Sunday night (technically early Monday morning) with a screening of the 1982 film Victor/Victoria, for which Julie Andrews was slated to be in attendance at the 2020 festival before it was cancelled.

Today on FilmWeek, Turner Classic Movies hosts Ben Mankiewicz and Dave Karger join Larry Mantle to preview this year’s Special Home Edition of the TCM Classic Film Festival, talk about having to pivot due to the pandemic, and sharing some of their favorite films that are screening at this year’s event.

For a list of films and showtimes, click here.

Guests:

Ben Mankiewicz, host for Turner Classic Movies; he tweets @BenMank77

Dave Karger, host for Turner Classic Movies and special correspondent for the Internet Movie Database (IMDb); he tweets @DaveKarger

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Circus of Books storefront.; Credit: Netflix/Circus Of Books (2020)

Rachel Mason had, to a certain extent, the normal upbringing you’d imagine a family of five with small business owner parents would have. But in her documentary, ‘Circus of Books’, she pulls the curtain on the double-life her parents led as modest business owners and pillars of the LGBTQ community.

Karen and Barry Mason established West Hollywood’s Circus of Books on Santa Monica Boulevard in the 1980s. What seemed like an unassuming bookstore was actually a gay porn shop that became an institution in the LGBTQ community during a time when homosexuality was still largely unaccepted. The store was far from being a “bookstore with a circus theme”. The Los Angeles-based shop was the central hub for gay pornography around the country, once one of the main distributors for adult films. 

While the store was becoming a home for gay culture and pride, the Masons largely kept their business a secret from colleagues, friends, family, even their own children. It’s a central conflict that Rachel Mason explores throughout the film as the daughter of two shop owners caught between the pressures of maintaining a traditional family image and making a living as gay pornography distributors.

Today on FilmWeek, we’re joined by ‘Circus of Books’ director Rachel Mason for a conversation on her documentary and the experience of creating a film with her parents and their secret as the subject.

‘Circus Of Books’ is currently streaming on Netflix. For more on the film from LAist’s Mike Roe, click here.

Guest:

Rachel Mason, director of the Netflix documentary ‘Circus of Books’ and daughter of Circus of Books owners Karen and Barry Mason; she tweets @RachelMasonArt

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A still from "Spaceship Earth".; Credit: Neon/"Spaceship Earth" (2020)

Two months is a long time to be quarantined in one place. Just ask, well, pretty much anyone in the era of COVID-19. But imagine if you were quarantined for two years instead of two months, all in the name of science, and it was by choice!

In 1991, eight researchers did exactly that in Oracle, Arizona as part of a first-of-its-kind mission called BIOSPHERE 2. No, there was no failed BIOSPHERE 1 mission -- BIOSPHERE 1 is planet Earth. The mission’s goal was to create a living ecosystem inside a massive glass and steel facility to show that human life could be sustained in outer space. The idea was that whenever humanity finally did gain the ability to travel deeper into space and colonize another planet, a biosphere would need to be built first so that life could be sustained. But what started as a science experiment quickly evolved into a cultural phenomenon, and while some watched with bated breath to see whether the researchers could really create a living ecosystem in a controlled environment, others saw the project and those who were involved as a cult of sorts. Director Matt Wolf explores BIOSPHERE 2  the researchers (“biospherians”) who carried the mission out, what ultimately happened and the good and bad ways in which it became a cultural phenomenon.

Today on FilmWeek, “The Frame” host John Horn talks with Wolf about the making of the film and what can be learned from the biospherians about our current situation staying at home because of COVID-19.

Guest:

Matt Wolf, director of the documentary “Spaceship Earth"

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

New research has shed light on the factors needed to successfully implement pilot projects designed to reduce the dumping of unwanted fish by fishermen. The analysis of 15 European projects highlights the importance of involving the fishing industry in developing and implementing pilot projects.

Using 'gardening' techniques to actively restore endangered coral reefs is ecologically sound and economically feasible, according to recent research.

Populations of otters, grey seals and sea eagles are slowly recovering in Sweden, which is likely to be thanks in part to a ban on organochlorine chemicals, such as PCBs and DDT, in the 1970s, according to a new study. However, the research shows that negative effects of these chemicals on the reproductive health of female animals persisted for more than 15 years after the ban was introduced.

4 awesome discoveries you probably didn't hear about this week -- Episode 31

Image modeling for biomedical organs

Camera brings unseen world to light

4 awesome discoveries you probably didn't hear about this week -- Episode 32

AB 2293 bans drivers from using their personal policies and mandates that drivers have to be covered from the moment they turn on their app and look for customers.; Credit: Photo by Daniel X. O'Neil via Flickr Creative Commons

Amid all the talk about cutting-edge technology, much of Uber and Lyft’s success actually owes to that fact the ride-sharing companies have been able to exploit a basic loophole: The companies foist the cost of insurance on their drivers, but the drivers' insurance companies don’t know they are underwriting cars for hire, and even if drivers wanted to be honest and get a policy that would cover ride-sharing, they couldn’t, because no such policy exists.

AB-2293, introduced by Assemblywoman Susan Bonilla (D-Concord) and signed into law Wednesday by Governor Jerry Brown, tries to close the loophole by paving the way for insurance companies to offer hybrid personal/commercial policies by next summer.

Uber once derided the bill as a backroom deal between insurance companies and trial lawyers.

"The bill does nothing to enhance safety, yet compromises the transportation choices and entrepreneurial opportunities Uber offers Californians," the company wrote in a June blog post that encouraged customers to contact their representatives opposing the bill.

However, the company backed down and supported the legislation when Bonilla insurance requirements were lowered.

AB 2293 also specifically bans drivers from using their personal policies and mandates drivers have to be covered from the moment they turn on their app and look for customers, which is a response to the tragic accident on New Year's Eve in San Francisco when an UberX driver hit and killed a six year old child.

Uber argued that because the driver was waiting for a fare he wasn't working for the company at the time, so he wasn't covered by the company's insurance.

Larry Ellison, CEO of Oracle Corporation, gestures as he makes a speech during the New Economy Summit 2014 in this file photo taken in Tokyo on April 9, 2014. The company said Thursday, September 18, 2014, that Ellison would step aside as CEO and become chairman and chief technology officer.; Credit: TORU YAMANAKA/AFP/Getty Images

Oracle says Larry Ellison is stepping aside as CEO of the company he founded. The business software maker promoted Safra Catz and Mark Hurd to replace him as co-CEOs.

Ellison will reclaim the title of chairman at Oracle and is also taking the role of chief technology officer. Oracle says Ellison wants to focus on product engineering, technology development and strategy. Jeff Henley, Oracle's chairman since January 2004, is now its vice chairman.

Catz and Hurd were co-presidents of the Redwood Shores, California, company. Catz will be in charge of the company's manufacturing, finance and legal functions. Hurd will be in charge of sales, service, and other global business units.

Ellison founded Oracle Corp. in 1977 and was its chairman from May 1995 to January 2004.

File photo: Customers enter a Home Depot store on May 21, 2013 in El Cerrito, Calif.; Credit: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

The Home Depot says it has eliminated malware from its U.S. and Canadian networks that affected 56 million unique payment cards between April and September.

The Atlanta-based home improvement retailer said Thursday it has also completed a "major" payment security project that provides enhanced encryption of customers' payment data in the company's U.S. stores.

Home Depot also is confirming its sales-growth estimates for the fiscal year and expects to earn $4.54 per share in fiscal 2014, up 2 cents from its prior guidance.

In this file photo, job seekers line up to enter Choice Career Fair at the Los Angeles Convention Center on December 1, 2010 in Los Angeles, California. Overall, the number of unemployed Californians ticked up by 1,000 over the month to nearly 1.4 million for August 2014, but the rate remained unchanged, at 7.4 percent. The national unemployment rate is down to 6.1 percent.; Credit: Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images

California's unemployment rate is unchanged for a third month, holding at 7.4 percent in August.

The California Employment Development Department reported Friday that the state added 44,200 nonfarm jobs during the month, bringing the state total to 15.5 million in August.

Last month's gains mean the state has added 1.4 million jobs since February 2010, when the jobless number hit a peak of 12.4 percent.

Overall, the number of unemployed Californians ticked up by 1,000 over the month to nearly 1.4 million. The national unemployment rate is down to 6.1 percent.

Construction posted the largest increase over the month, adding 13,600 jobs. Manufacturing, financial activities, business services, education, health, leisure and government all added jobs in August.

Trade, transportation and utilities, along with information, posted job losses of 8,300.

Remdesivir, an experimental antiviral drug made by Gilead Sciences, has been authorized by the Food and Drug Administration for emergency use in treating severely ill COVID-19 patients.; Credit: Ulrich Perry/POOL/AFP via Getty Images

Now that the Food and Drug Administration has authorized remdesivir for emergency use in seriously ill COVID-19 patients, the experimental drug is another step closer to full approval. That's when most drugs get price tags.

Gilead Sciences, which makes remdesivir, is donating its initial supply of 1.5 million doses, but the company has signaled it will need to start charging for the drug to make production sustainable. It's unclear when that decision might be made.

"Going forward, we will develop an approach that is guided by the principles of affordability and access," Gilead CEO Daniel O'Day told shareholders during the company's annual meeting Wednesday.

In a quarterly financial filing made the same day, Gilead said its investment in remdesivir this year "could be up to $1 billion or more," much of it for scaling up manufacturing capacity.

The company also acknowledged that it's in the spotlight. "[G]iven that COVID-19 has been designated as a pandemic and represents an urgent public health crisis, we are likely to face significant public attention and scrutiny about any future business models and pricing decisions with respect to remdesivir," Gilead said in the quarterly filing.

How will the company balance its business calculations with the drug's potential value to society?

"Gilead has not yet set a price for remdesivir," company spokeswoman Sonia Choi wrote in an email to NPR. "At this time, we are focused on ensuring access to remdesivir through our donation. Post-donation, we are committed to making remdesivir both accessible and affordable to governments and patients around the world."

Among potential treatments for COVID-19, remdesivir, an intravenous drug that was once studied for Ebola, is one of the furthest along.

"It's hard to imagine a situation in which there will be more public scrutiny," said Michael Carrier, a professor at Rutgers School of Law who specializes in antitrust and pharmaceuticals. "On the one hand, Gilead will try to recover its R&D in an atmosphere in which it is able to potentially make a lot of money. On the other hand, the pressure will be intense not to charge what's viewed as too high a price."

Breaking with its usual practices, the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review, or ICER, an influential nonprofit that analyzes drug pricing, issued an expedited report on remdesivir.

"Under normal circumstances, we would be unlikely to do a report when the evidence is this raw and immature," ICER President Steven Pearson said in an interview with NPR. "But it was quite clear that the world is moving at a much quicker pace."

If the price is based just on the cost of making the drug, then a 10-day course of remdesivir should cost about $10, according to the ICER report. (Gilead said results of a recently completed study suggest a five-day course of treatment may be just as effective.)

But if the drug is priced based on the drug's effectiveness, ICER estimates it should cost around $4,500 — assuming the drug is proven to have some benefit on mortality. If it doesn't and the drug only shortens hospital stays, that value-based price goes down to $390.

Results from a federally funded study described by Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, suggested that remdesvir could reduce recovery time by a median of four days — 11 days to recovery for patients treated with remdesivir compared with 15 days for those who got a placebo. A potential survival benefit is less clear.

Rutgers's Carrier said he expects Gilead to set the remdesivir price somewhere between the $10 and $4,500 that ICER estimated. The company has already shown that it can respond to public pressure when it asked the FDA to rescind the orphan drug status it won for remdesivir, he pointed out.

"When you see that $10 figure, that sets a benchmark for a figure that is eminently affordable," Carrier said. Ultimately, he said a price more than $1,000 per treatment course would be unpopular.

Gilead "will be watched very carefully," he said, because of its prior history of pricing. He referred to two other Gilead drugs that drew scrutiny over high price tags. The company charged $1,000 per pill for Sovaldi, a cure for hepatitis C. And its HIV drug Truvada can cost $22,000 per year.

But there is such a thing as pricing remdesivir too low, said Craig Garthwaite, who directs the health care program at Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management.

"We don't think this is the only drug we need," he said, adding that remdesivir doesn't appear to be a "home run" against the coronavirus, based on existing data. "The thing that would worry me the most is that we're somehow telling people that if you take the risky bet to try, and you'll go after a coronavirus cure and you do it, you're not going to get paid."

Instead, he said he would like to see acceptance of a generous price for remdesivir to send the message to drug companies that the best thing they can do is "dedicate every waking moment to trying to develop that cure, and that if they do that, we will pay them the value they create," he said.

During a Gilead earnings call on April 30, analysts asked executives whether they could expect similar financial returns on remdesivir as they've seen with Gilead's other drugs.

"There is no rulebook out there, other than that we need to be very thoughtful about how we can make sure we provide access of our medicines to patients around the globe," Gilead CEO O'Day said. "And do that in a sustainable way for the company, for ... shareholders, and we acknowledge that."

On May 1, the FDA authorized remdesivir for emergency use, meaning it will be easier to administer to hospitalized patients with severe disease during the pandemic, but the drug is not yet officially approved. The federal government is coordinating distribution of the treatment.

Day acknowledged on the recent earnings call that the company "could" charge for remdesivir under an emergency use authorization, but he stressed that Gilead is donating its current supply, which should last through "early summer."

To date, the National Institutes of Health said it has obligated $23 million toward its COVID-19 remdesivir trial. And the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases did some of the early in vitro and animal studies with the medicine prior to the pandemic.

"Taxpayers are often the angel investors in pharmaceutical research and development, yet this is not reflected in the prices they pay," Reps. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, and Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., wrote in a April 30 letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar.

Concerned about remdesivir's price, they asked for a full breakdown of taxpayer funds that have gone toward the development of the medicine. "An unaffordable drug is completely ineffective," they wrote in the letter. "The substantial taxpayer investments in COVID-19 pharmaceutical research must be recognized."

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

"For Sale By Owner" and "Closed Due to Virus" signs are displayed in the window of Images On Mack in Grosse Pointe Woods, Mich. Congress is considering ways to help those struggling during the economic downturn and stabilize businesses hoping to reopen.; Credit: Paul Sancya/AP

Updated at 3:20 p.m. ET

Democrats and some Republicans are considering ways for the federal government to get money into people's pockets while the coronavirus is keeping much of the economy on ice.

Proposals for the next round of aid are being floated, and Democrats in the House are prepping another relief package as jobless claims continue to rise in the country. The Labor Department announced Friday that 20.5 million jobs were lost in April, pushing the overall unemployment rate to 14.7 %.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., hopes to release another bill, which is being crafted without the input of Republicans or the White House as early as next week.

"This is a reflection of the needs of the American people," Pelosi said Thursday. "We have to start someplace and, rather than starting in a way that does not meet the needs of the American people, want to set a standard."

The latest proposal from Sens. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Ed Markey D-Mass., is a plan for the federal government to provide $2,000 a month for every individual earning less than $120,000, including children and other dependents. The draft legislation would extend the payments until three months after the public health emergency is lifted.

The proposal is a vast expansion on the recovery rebate program that sent a one-time payment of $1200 to every person earning less than $75,000 and an additional $500 for every child.

The trio of Democratic senators wants to make the payments, which would be available to every U.S. resident, retroactive to March. They didn't provide a cost estimate for the ambitious proposal, and it's unclear whether Senate leaders have an appetite for payments like these.

Official scorekeepers at the Congressional Budget Office estimate that the existing one-time $1200 payment program in the CARES Act package enacted in March could cost around $300 billion. Republican leaders have signaled concerns with the growing cost of the relief bills that have already passed.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has called for a pause on any new aid.

"Let's see what we are doing that is succeeding, what is not succeeding, what needs less, what needs more," McConnell told reporters in April. "Let's weigh this very carefully because the future of our country in terms of the amount of debt that we are adding up is a matter of genuine concern."

Not all Republicans agree. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., has introduced a comprehensive response plan that includes a proposal to cover 80 percent of payroll for companies that rehire workers and a bonus for the companies that take advantage of the program.

"The federal government should cover 80 percent of wages for workers at any U.S. business, up to the national median wage, until this emergency is over," Hawley wrote in an editorial in The Washington Post. "The goal must be to get unemployment down — now — to secure American workers and their families, and to help businesses get ready to restart as soon as possible."

Hawley's proposal would cap payments at the national median income level. The median income can be calculated in several different ways. Hawley told St. Louis Public radio the payments could be as high as $50,000. Other calculation set the figure at roughly $33,000, a figure many Democrats say is not sufficient in higher-cost areas like cities.

House Progressive Caucus co-chair Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., has a separate version that would guarantee a worker's full salary up to $100,000 for three months. Jayapal's plan would automatically renew the payments on a monthly basis until consumer demand returns to pre-crisis levels.

The proposal has nearly two dozen co-sponsors but has not received an endorsement from party leadership.

Pelosi has not ruled out the possibility of including some minimum income payments in an upcoming coronavirus aid bill.

"We may have to think in terms of some different ways to put money in people's pockets," Pelosi said in an interview with MSNBC. "Let's see what works, what is operational and what needs other attention."

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to block Congress from seeking the materials, saying, "The government will suffer irreparable harm absent a stay."; Credit: Andrew Harnik/AP

The Supreme Court has temporarily put on hold the release of redacted grand jury material from the Russia investigation to a House panel.

The Trump administration is trying to block the release.

Last October, a district court judge ruled the Justice Department had to turn over the materials, which were blacked out, from former special counsel Robert Mueller's report into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

An appeals court upheld the decision, but the Trump administration, hoping to keep the evidence secret, appealed to the Supreme Court.

Chief Justice John Roberts' order temporarily stops the process. Lawyers for the House Judiciary Committee have until May 18 to file their response to the Justice Department's attempts to keep the materials from the House panel.

The Justice Department had until Monday to turn over the material following the appeals court order. But on Thursday, the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to block Congress from seeking it, saying, "The government will suffer irreparable harm absent a stay."

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Among those protesting stay-at-home orders this week at the California Capitol in Sacramento were activists who oppose governments requiring vaccinations for school children.; Credit: Katie Orr/KQED

Protests over stay-at-home orders because of COVID-19 have become more common around the country. In California, a surprising group is behind some of them: those who oppose mandatory vaccinations.

On Thursday, a mash-up of people mingled on the sidewalk in front of California's state Capitol in Sacramento. There were Trump supporters wearing MAGA hats and waving American flags. There were Christians, singing along to religious rock songs and raising their hands in prayer. The event's MC. urged Gov. Gavin Newsom to tune into their event.

"Everybody up at the Capitol, tell Gavin Newsom [to tune in to] 107.9 FM, if he wants to hear what we have to say," the MC told the crowd over loudspeakers. "It could be kind of good for him!"

There were also mothers with their children at the rally. Many people were not wearing face masks or observing social distancing protocols.

They'd all come out to protest California's stay-at-home order, put in place to slow the spread of COVID-19. This week's event was built around the National Day of Prayer, and featured pastors and sermons. But it was organized by a group called Freedom Angels, which was originally formed to fight mandatory vaccine laws in the state.

At the beginning of the rally, the group's founders took the stage, including Denise Aguilar.

"Hello everybody, my name is Denise, I'm one of the founders of Freedom Angels," Aguilar said to a cheering crowd. "Thank you guys for being out here to let Gov. Newsom know we're not going away! We've said this for years!"

The group has become a fixture at the Capitol ever since California passed a law requiring school students to be vaccinated and a second law tightening restrictions on medical exemptions for those vaccines. But another Freedom Angels founder, Stefanie Fetzer, said they're not a single-issue group. She said these events are about promoting personal freedom.

"I think what we're seeing now is the predictive modeling that they came out with in the beginning didn't hold true. We aren't seeing the numbers that they predicted," Fetzer said. "And instead of backing off of the shutdown and the restrictive measures that Gov. Newsom implemented, he seems to be doubling down."

Attention-seeking strategy

Public health advocates point out that the reason those early predictions didn't come true is that aggressive social distancing measures — including stay-at-home orders — worked. Democratic state Senator Richard Pan, who authored California's vaccine laws, believes this anti-vaccine group is aligning with others protesting the stay-at-home order as a way to promote their cause. After all, Pan said, a vaccine would eventually allow the economy to reopen.

"They have staged these protests to basically find a way to get media attention for themselves. They fund raise off of their activities as well," Pan said. "So, frankly, many of the anti-vaxxers who are involved in this are really there for their own interests."

It's common for anti-vaccine groups to latch onto other controversial issues, according to epidemiologist and vaccine educator René Najera. For instance, he points to abortion.

"They try to say that there are aborted fetal cells in vaccines — which there are not — to try to get the anti-abortion people on their side," he said. "And then they flip it around and say, also, 'My body, my choice.'"

Najera said those tactics can have dangerous outcomes, including making people think twice about getting vaccines. In fact, he said, in 2019 the World Health Organization named vaccine hesitancy, or people's reluctance to consider vaccination, as one of the world's top 10 public health challenges.

"And we saw the effects of that," Najera said. "We saw a rise of measles in the United States to the point where the elimination status of the United States for measles was in jeopardy."

Najera is confident vaccine opponents aren't going away. He says, if anything, the rise of social media has made it easier for them to spread their message. What he finds most frustrating is that these anti-vaccines protesters aren't just making choices that affect their own families. Najera says choosing not to vaccinate their children and joining other large protests to spread their message puts the health of everyone at risk.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.