The NPR Politics Podcast - Congress Tries To Reach COVID Funding Deal

Episode Date: March 28, 2022

COVID cases, hospitalizations, and deaths are down in the United States, but health experts say it's too early to declare victory over the virus. Lawmakers are trying to reach a deal to continue funding the federal response, as a contagious subvariant is fueling surges in Europe and Asia. This episode: White House correspondent Tamara Keith, acting congressional correspondent Deirdre Walsh, and health correspondent Allison Aubrey. Connect:Email the show at [e-mail] the NPR Politics Podcast Facebook Group.Subscribe to the NPR Politics Newsletter.Find and support your local public radio station.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Hi, this is Ayelet from Montclair, New Jersey. I will be turning 40 this year, and in the lead up to my birthday, I'm trying to accomplish 40 new things. One of those is sending a timestamp to the NPR Politics podcast. This podcast was recorded at 2.08 p.m. on Monday, March 28th. Things may have changed by the time you hear this, but hopefully I will be one step closer to accomplishing my birthday goal. Enjoy the show. We got you. Now just 39 more things to do. That's ambitious. I hope some of them are easier. Hey there, it's the NPR Politics Podcast. I'm

Tamara Keith. I cover the White House. I'm Deirdre Walsh. I cover Congress. And we are checking in on the state of the COVID pandemic in the U.S. today. So we have Allison Aubrey here from NPR's health team. Hey, Allison. Hey, Tamara. Hey, Deirdre. Good to be here. So we've got a little bit of politics, a little bit of science, and we are glad to have you joining us for it. Let's start with just the state of things. COVID cases, hospitalizations, and finally deaths are down in the United States right now. But Dr. Anthony Fauci said last week that it is too early to declare victory over the virus. This virus has fooled us before, and we really must be prepared for the possibility that we might get another variant.

And we don't want to be caught flat footed on that. So, Alison, what's he talking about there? I think he's looking across the Atlantic. He sees a surge in the UK and in other European countries. And throughout the pandemic, the U.S. has typically tended to trail the UK by two or three weeks. You know, cases are so low right now compared to winter, but there has been a plateauing in the decline, so a slowing in the rate of decline. And this is happening at the very time that the very contagious Omicron subvariant BA.2 has gained some traction. So there is some concern, but big picture, people in the US are much better protected given the combo of vaccines, immunity from natural infection,

and medicines to treat than anybody was a year and a half ago. So Allison, the federal government and the states have really done away with the COVID precautions that were in place for the Omicron surge, things like mask mandates, vaccine requirements. So given that and what you just said about, you know, cases overseas, how prepared is the United States for another surge? I think it depends on what happens in the next several months. Will Congress and the White House work out how to pay for vaccines and medicines going forward for COVID? Another factor is how good is the U.S. surveillance system going to be to spot potential new troublesome variants if they come around? You know, there's been a big effort to improve wastewater surveillance to serve as a kind of early warning system for an outbreak.

And this is a kind of passive surveillance becomes really important come fall when, say, people are no longer doing routine COVID testing. Everyone will still be going to the bathroom every day. And wastewater is a very good way to track how much virus is circulating. So the administration says the wastewater surveillance system needs to be funded. Deidre, when we talk about the federal funding, that does remain a great big question mark. The White House has been asking for more money. Congress passed this big budget bill that was like a freight train that you couldn't slow down. But the COVID money was thrown overboard. It was.

I mean, there was a bipartisan deal with the House and the Senate and the White House to include a little bit more than $15 billion in that broader spending bill that also had money for Ukraine and earmarks for members of Congress. But at the last minute, a group of House Democrats cried foul because part of the deal Democrats made with Republicans is that they were going to pay for the new spending. And they were, you know, offsetting it or they were paying for this new spending bill, clawing back some of the unspent COVID money that was going to the states. And a bunch of members from those states who hadn't, you know, spent the money but had plans for it, had budgeted things that they were already planning to do with the money, said they wouldn't vote for the bill, and they literally didn't have the votes to pass it.

So now there are negotiations going on, mostly on the Senate side, to try to come up with a bipartisan deal that can get 60 votes in the Senate. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has been working with Utah Republican Mitt Romney. So we're looking at probably something a little less than that was in that broader deal. And we'll see possibly maybe this week if they can get a deal together. Yeah. And we should say that there's been something of a back and forth over the last couple of weeks with members of Congress, especially Romney's been very vocal saying we need to know more about how this money has been spent, all of the money, and the White House saying

we've given it to you. And then last week, there was a briefing where the head of the COVID response, Jeff Zients at the White House, like literally held up a binder, right, Allison? That's right. He said, look, I've got 385 pages of documents and tables, and we have accounted for all of the money that has been appropriated for COVID. He basically says we're kind of headed into a funding emergency if Congress doesn't act. Time is of the essence, as we heard across the briefing today. With every day that passes, we risk not having the tools we need to fight COVID. I think the other thing that happened since this bipartisan deal sort of fell apart is there's been some reporting on some, you know, what you would call misuse of COVID funds. The Associated Press did a story about sort of

some of the money going to, you know, programs that really don't have a lot of direct link to COVID. So Republicans who are already raising questions are pointing to that report and saying that the tables that the administration showed them in terms of where all the money has gone so far included some of the big federal agencies like HHS, but didn't include some of the other agencies that also had COVID spending programs. So I think they're just sort of, you know, continuing to throw more asks onto the list for the administration before they're ready to support another bill. Allison, I want to circle around an important question, which is, what happens if this money doesn't come through or what is being lost?

What is the effect of the White House not getting the money that they're asking for? Is there a real world effect? Right now, I think the effect is a bit theoretical because it's unclear how much money will come through when. So I visited a federally qualified health clinic last week in Alexandria, Virginia. I interviewed the medical director. He said, yes, we're quite concerned. Anytime you talk about curbing funding, look, we've been able to vaccinate people because of direct government funding of the vaccination program. We have medicines here that we can deliver to our patients because of the direct funding from the federal government. I don't know how I would buy

these medicines if we weren't getting direct funding. But at the same time, he acknowledged that they have multiple streams of funding coming in, and it's not clear which ones might be at risk of being cut off. The Secretary of Health and Human Services, Javier Becerra, also weighed in on this last week at the White House. He basically said, look, we'll have to just keep moving money around to keep COVID prevention and treatments going if Congress doesn't act. We'll exhaust every dollar that we have. We'll use every dollar that we can, that is flexibly available to continue to provide for the need. Ultimately, he said they'd have to look for other ways to pay if Congress doesn't authorize more

funding. He said maybe moving towards allowing Americans to purchase vaccines or treatments through other means. All right, we're going to take a quick break. And when we get back, another round of COVID boosters. And we're back. And the FDA is expected to approve another booster dose, another vaccine dose for people aged 50 and over this week. Allison, what's the thinking behind that? Well, the reasoning is that immunity does diminish some over time. I mean, the protection against serious illness and death holds up, but particularly in older people and those who are immune compromised, prior studies have shown that boosters help shore up protection.

Now, there's not a lot of data yet on how much protection or how long protection would hold up from a fourth dose. Another question is what kind of booster may be best, one that combines protection against multiple variants, an Omicron-specific booster, or something different? So what we can look for this week may be the beginning of the process, it might be an authorization that it's okay to give a fourth dose. But I do think that there are a lot of questions that still need to be answered. All right, well, because this is the politics podcast, I do want to get back to the politics too, which is that COVID was obviously dominant in the 2020 election. We are now headed into these 2022 midterms. Deirdre, are people running for office even talking about COVID? Is this on the radar?

It is, but it's in a different way than it was in 2020. I think a lot of lawmakers, and they say a lot of their constituents are moving on from the pandemic. I mean, at least on Capitol Hill, you know, they lifted the mask mandate. The tours, the public tours are starting back up this week. But there are a lot of issues from the pandemic that are still hanging over the 2022 midterms. Issues like the impact that the pandemic had on education, issues about parents' rights, parents' concerns about the pandemic on their kids. I think there is still a lot of, you know, political debate about how lawmakers and states and governors handled the pandemic, and how they potentially didn't respond

to the concerns that parents raised. That's a big issue that I expect to hear a lot about. And I also think inflation because of, you know, supply chain issues related to the pandemic is probably the driving factor in the midterms. So it may not be sort of phrased the same way that it was in the 2020 election, but the pandemic is leading to driving debate about the sort of key issues that a lot of lawmakers are going to be talking about and running ads on right up until November. Right, because the pandemic was this huge disruptive thing that is continuing to this day to be hugely disruptive in various ways in the fabric of society and also in the, you mean, they know this is going to be a referendum on the Biden presidency. So, Tam, what are they saying about what the messaging from there is going to be going into the midterms? Well, they are definitely not in a mission accomplished spike the football mode,

but they are certainly trying to move the pandemic to a place where it is, you know, it's the background music, it is not the dominant thing that they are talking about or working about, not the dominant thing that the White House is talking about, as it was earlier in the administration, even as right now, the press secretary and deputy press secretary, both have COVID. So it, you know, it continues to be a thing that rears its head in ways that it will, because it is a contagious virus. But the White House is moving to this place where they are saying, look, all of the tools are available, especially if Congress comes through with the funding. But you know, there's medications, there's testing, there's at-home testing, all of these tools available. The White House is going to put them all in one

place so that they are easy to access and easy to find. And the message from the CDC is, you know, look it up, see what the level of COVID spread is in your region, and make your decisions based on that, whether to wear a mask or not. The idea is that they have, in theory, and Allison, I'd be curious what you think of this, but that they've sort of set up a You can, kids can take masks off at schools. It was very clear then kind of like, there's an old expression that all public health is local. And now the CDC is saying, all right, we're giving you a way to, we're giving you all the information you need.

Now you need to figure out how to act on the information. If cases go up, here's your tools to add protection back in. If cases go down, here's your tools to add protection back in. If cases go down, dial them back down. All right, well, we are going to leave it there for now. Alison Aubrey, thanks so much for joining us. It was great to be here. Thanks for having me. I'm Tamara Keith, I cover the White House. I'm Deirdre Walsh, I cover Congress. And thank you for listening to the NPR Politics Podcast.