What States Should Do Instead of Demanding More Taxpayer Bailouts

/0 Comments/in , /by

Activists and policymakers on the left are trying again to grab Americans’ tax dollars to bail out state and local governments from their own poor budget choices, this time using the COVID-19 pandemic as an excuse.

Congress provided tens of billions of dollars in coronavirus relief to states as part of the CARES Act, of course. But those who view the federal government as a money machine for their causes appear determined to secure unfettered funds for state and local officials to spend.

Last month, liberal lawmakers were unsuccessful in their attempt to include those bailouts in congressional legislation creating the Paycheck Protection Program, designed to provide coronavirus relief to owners of small businesses and their employees.

“Not only would such a bailout set the stage for future mismanagement,” Heritage Foundation President Kay C. James argued at the time, “it is not the federal government’s role to use taxpayer dollars to finance states’ ordinary operations or encourage longer shutdown measures than necessary.”

The Daily Signal, Heritage’s multimedia news organization, asked state-based, free-market think tanks to weigh in on what’s happening in their states and the need to resist the allure of bumming billions more from Uncle Sam, as if hard-pressed taxpayers wouldn’t get stuck with the bill.

First, some background and context. Policy analysts at Heritage and other conservative organizations argue that policymakers should resist calls for U.S. taxpayers to bail out state and local governments.

Heritage’s own National Coronavirus Recovery Commission has recommended that Congress provide targeted and temporary economic relief for taxpayers, families, and businesses of all sizes.

Rachel Greszler and Adam Michel, two of the leading conservative think tank’s experts on related issues, make the case against using federal taxpayer dollars to cover states’ self-imposed fiscal woes, arguing that it would result in more such recklessness.

“COVID-19 is a public health crisis, not a pretext for states to request funding for things that are their own responsibility,” Greszler writes.

Michel criticizes the National Governors Association’s recent request for Congress to fork over $500 billion with no restrictions on using that money.

“Congress is making the same mistakes with some of the promised federal aid as lawmakers made with past federal bailouts,” Michel writes, adding:

Doubling down on this flawed strategy by sending more money, especially unrestricted money, to state governments would grow states’ budgets, increase future funding shortfalls, further undermine local decision-making, and set a dangerous precedent that could lead to further federal bailouts of the most irresponsible states. Instead, Congress should provide more flexibility to states by lifting unfunded mandates.

State-based public policy organizations—or think tanks—are making similar arguments to their states’ elected officials and other policymakers as they move to revive their coronavirus-battered economies.

Here’s how some of them responded to The Daily Signal’s invitation to assess what’s happening on their ground.

Florida: The James Madison Institute

Under Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, Florida addressed several challenges to the health care system that ensured we were not only better prepared for COVID-19, but future health stresses.

These steps included expanding telehealth; eliminating “certificate of need” laws governing establishment or expansion of health care facilities; allowing highly qualified nurses to practice at the top of their training; and allowing pharmacists to test and treat for flu, strep, and other routine conditions.

In addition, Florida passed comprehensive occupational licensing reform to better position the state for economic recovery and more quickly get Floridians back to work.

Our reserves are hefty, but there will be a limit to the pain. Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., is on board and probably all our state-level leadership in that money from any COVID-related relief legislation should not be used to fix problems that existed before the pandemic (i.e., pensions or awful budgeting practices).

However, if there is a package in Congress that deals solely with relief of revenues lost from mandated government shutdowns that affected the state budget, that will be a tough one for elected leaders to say “no” to based solely on principle.—Bob McClure, president and CEO, The James Madison Institute

Louisiana: Pelican Institute for Public Policy

Louisiana is no stranger to disasters. After Hurricane Katrina, a large influx of federal funds caused state spending to skyrocket, but unfortunately, Louisiana didn’t work to reprioritize state spending. As in other states, we don’t foresee a situation where federal dollars would be rejected in Louisiana.

Now, as new federal dollars start to pour in, Louisiana is considering passing much-needed limits on state expenditures to ensure it prioritizes funding. This will prevent the new federal influx from permanently increasing state spending and ensure that Louisiana lives within its means.—Daniel Erspamer, CEO, Pelican Institute for Public Policy

Maine: Maine Policy Institute

Mainers are getting restless. Recently, hundreds packed the streets of Augusta to protest the decision by Gov. Janet Mills, a Democrat, to continue a state of emergency and advance an arbitrary, phased-in reopening plan.

Maine Policy Institute has gathered more than 6,000 signatures supporting an alternative plan, emphasizing flexibility for businesses and trust in people. Republicans, in the minority, are urging legislative leadership to call a special session to end the state of emergency. But since Maine would lose federal relief funds, this is unlikely, as Senate President Troy Jackson, D-Allagash, has indicated.

Our executive branch and leadership in both chambers of the state Legislature seem to be keen on the possibility of accepting federal funds for COVID-19 relief.—Nick Murray, policy analyst, Maine Policy Institute

Maryland: Maryland Public Policy Institute

As Maryland grapples with the immediate public health crisis, the Maryland Public Policy Institute is shining a light on the looming fiscal and economic crises that will remain after COVID-19 subsides.

Gov. Larry Hogan, a Republican, wrote a letter to President Trump in his capacity as National Governors Association chairman asking for $500 billion in federal aid to states to help with budget shortfalls related to COVID-19. So he is definitely asking for aid for the states.

Our chief economist, Stephen J.K. Walters, is urging Maryland to halt plans for $32 billion in new public education spending. The so-called Kirwan plan could be paid for only with massive tax hikes, which, as I have written, will cripple taxpaying families and small businesses at a time they can least afford it.—Carol Park, senior policy analyst, Maryland Public Policy Institute

Michigan: Mackinac Center for Public Policy

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and legislative leadership agreed to cuts in a recent spending bill to address COVID-19. This included axing a corporate subsidy program for the tourism industry to $0. Whitmer, a Democrat, also has relaxed onerous “certificate of need” rules and expanded scope of practice opportunities for some medical personnel.

State Sen. Jim Stamas has called for government layoffs and Majority Leader Mike Shirkey has ordered Senate subcommittee chairmen to propose cuts of between 10% and 30% of the budgets they oversee. Both senators are Republicans.

Whitmer has publicly opposed the path to bankruptcy that U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., floated April 22. The Legislature seems to be preparing to bail itself out with real cuts.

On the previous billions sent to Michigan strictly for pandemic-related expenses, we have seen interest in some flexibility in how the money can be used.—Michael LaFaive, senior director of fiscal policy, Mackinac Center for Public Policy

North Dakota: Roughrider Policy Center

North Dakota’s revenues were running 7.6% higher than forecast early in 2020 and the state’s budget stabilization fund holds $700 million, roughly 25% of the budgeted expenditures for the remainder of the biennium.

Gov. Douglas Burgum, a Republican, can access the “rainy day fund” by making a 3% allotment across the board to the state budget, with further funds available after additional spending cuts of 1% and 2%. No budget cuts have been made to date, but the governor requested state agencies to reduce their budgets 5% to 15% for the next biennium.

North Dakota used funds from the CARES Act to shore up the unemployment trust fund. The governor and our state Legislature aren’t interested in more government bailouts and have no interest in bailing out poorly run states across the nation that do not show fiscal responsibility in good times.—Bette Grande, CEO and president, Roughrider Policy Center

Ohio: The Buckeye Institute

As recommended by The Buckeye Institute in its “Policy Solutions for the Pandemic” series, Ohio plans to strategically use its rainy day fund to help balance the state’s budget.

Ohio also is taking other prudent Buckeye-recommended steps such as freezing state hiring and cutting nonessential state spending by at least 20% and redirecting spending to cover costs related to COVID-19.

The state has delayed its biennial capital budget, which also will save taxpayer dollars during this crisis.—Rea S. Hederman Jr., executive director, Economic Research Center, Buckeye Institute

Oklahoma: Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs

The crisis caused by COVID-19 and the response to it has put a strain on state budgets. Fortunately, Oklahoma will be able to weather the storm a little better, thanks to policymakers’ actions in 2019.

In a year that saw record-breaking state revenue, Gov. Kevin Stitt, a Republican, insisted upon placing nearly a third of that surplus revenue into savings. These savings will allow Oklahoma to take a measured approach to budget cuts without resorting to tax increases or federal bailouts to prop up unsustainable spending.

Oklahoma policymakers haven’t taken a position on further federal aid to the state, but do believe that greater flexibility is needed in using current funds provided to states in the CARES Act.—Curtis Shelton, policy research fellow, Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs

Rhode Island: Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity

The Rhode Island General Assembly has not committed to reconvening. All public comments, however, make it clear that Rhode Island’s political leaders are “hoping and praying” for federal bailouts, so that they won’t have to cut or reprioritize any spending.

For example, the Providence Journal quoted state Sen. Sam Bell, a Democrat, as saying:

Rhode Island desperately needs to repeal the 2006 tax cuts for the rich, raising the top marginal income tax rate back to 9.9%. … Furloughs, layoffs, hiring freezes, or even keeping the hiring surge small would be incredibly reckless. Rhode Island is facing an enormous jobs crisis, and to stabilize our jobs market, a surge of state hiring is desperately needed.

The same article quotes state Reps. Mary Messier and Christopher Millea, both Democrats, as supporting boosting revenues by legalizing marijuana. Millea also proposes expanding online gambling.

In summary: Tax the rich, drug the poor, and gamble away middle incomes, while maintaining all government union jobs.—Mike Stenhouse, CEO, Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity

Tennessee: Beacon Center of Tennessee

Tennessee has shown both fiscal and regulatory restraint in combating the pandemic. The state Legislature passed a bare-bones budget before temporarily recessing in March, cutting $1.2 billion from the state’s original proposed budget.

Gov. Bill Lee, a Republican, has suspended more than three dozen health care, economic, and licensing regulations, several recommended by Beacon Center. Since then, Tennessee has become one of the first states to begin safely reopening.

The state would benefit from increased flexibility in how the existing $150 billion in federal pandemic funds for state and local governments can be used, such as providing tax relief or filling pandemic-related revenue gaps rather than incurring new spending.

However, given that Tennessee is well managed fiscally, any future bailout—of, say, pension systems—would be harmful.

We have the third best-funded pension system in America, so a bailout would involve our taxpayers forking over hard-earned money to more reckless states, in essence punishing us for other states’ poor decisions. Beacon Center’s policy recommendations and reopening guidance may be read here.—Justin Owen, president and CEO, Beacon Center of Tennessee

National: The Foundation for Government Accountability

Medicaid is the Pac-Man of state budgets. The program now eats up 1 out of every 3 state tax dollars spent. A provision in the Families First Act gives increased Medicaid funds to states but requires them to keep everyone on Medicaid, even ineligible individuals.

Congress can relieve some of the budget pressure on states, and resulting calls for further bailouts, by taking these handcuffs off states and letting them deal with their budgets.—Sam Adolphsen, policy director, The Foundation for Government Accountability, Naples, Florida

(For more from the author of “What States Should Do Instead of Demanding More Taxpayer Bailouts” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

The Schools Should Be the First Thing to Reopen, Not the Last

/0 Comments/in , /by

Even those promoting lockdown policies will readily admit that this virus will not go away until we achieve herd immunity in some form. What if I told you there is a risk-free way to get the youngest people to achieve herd immunity, shield the vulnerable populations, and avoid the incalculable cost of lost education and mental health for an entire generation of schoolchildren – not to mention freeing up their parents to work?

Closing schools was the biggest mistake of this lockdown, with the possible exception of banning non-emergency surgeries. They should have been the last thing to close, not the first thing. In fact, given that there is, statistically speaking, close to a 0% death rate among school-age children from the coronavirus, schools should never have been shut. They are certainly more essential than lawn and gardening or dog grooming and are perfectly capable of following the same guidelines. Now that the data and research are in, based on samples of millions of cases, it’s time to rectify that mistake first, not last.

Settled fact: The COVID-19 death rate among children is astronomically low

According to the CDC, three children aged 5-14 died of COVID-19 in the entire country. Another 42 died among those aged 15-24. Those are simply astounding numbers, given that numerous serology studies indicate that tens of millions of people have likely gotten the virus already. Moreover, once those numbers are so statistically insignificant, one would have to dig in to further research to see if those children had serious underlying conditions and/or perhaps died with COVID-19, not because of COVID-19, since we know how deaths are being counted.

If that is enough to shut schools and invite so much mental health, educational, social, and family upheaval, then we may die as a nation. According to the CDC, approximately 12,000 children die from unintentional injuries every year.

While an infinitesimal number of children did become sick enough to warrant hospitalization, according to the CDC, “For children (0-17 years), COVID-19 hospitalization rates are much lower than influenza hospitalization rates during recent influenza seasons.”

Further research is required to determine whether kids with pre-existing conditions (beyond immunodeficiencies) are at risk like adults and which conditions are at risk, but it’s settled science that healthy school-age kids are not at risk.

Obviously, the faculty is older, and clearly the schools would have to find replacements for those who are seniors or have health conditions, but that is no different from the policies we would recommend for any essential business that is open. It would be ludicrous to shut down the education and social environment of a generation of children indefinitely for those personnel shortfalls. That’s also why it’s incomprehensible for governments to leave open super-spreader subways for everyone, but ban children’s playdates.

But what about children spreading to a vulnerable population?

Inevitably, proponents of indefinite lockdown will charge, “Even if children have no risk of killing each other, they will spread it to their grandparents or vulnerable populations while they are asymptomatic and get them killed.”

Even if the premise of mass asymptomatic spread from kids to the elderly is rooted in science, it would not justify a full shutdown. One can easily still abide by guidelines not to have kids around vulnerable populations and for the kids from households with chronically ill people to stay home and get livestreams of their classes. Most young adults who are the parents of school-age children also have a remarkably low fatality rate, which has been proven from multiple data sets, even if it’s not quite as low as for children. And again, for those with parents or siblings with high risks, they would obviously be advised to stay at home, as would any healthy child who shows any signs of temporary respiratory illness or fever.

Take Florida, for example, the third largest state in the country. There has not been a single death in the age bracket under 24 and only 87 deaths for those under 55. How many of those had serious underlying conditions? This is in a state of over 21 million people. In Texas, a state of nearly 30 million people, there have been just 69 deaths among those under 60. In many of the smaller states, there are zero deaths of younger adults of any health status.

Even in New Jersey, the second-hardest-hit state, no school-age children died, while 360 under the age of 50 died, as of May 1. NYC is the only place in the country with statistically significant numbers of younger people (but not kids) who died, but broken down by those with health conditions, only 85 people under the age of 65 (most of them near the upper bound of the age bracket) died without underlying conditions. That is one-half of one percent of all New York City deaths.

Dealing with schoolchildren and their parents is a very manageable problem relative to the problem of the lockdown and can certainly be tailored state by state and county by county.

Evidence shows kids do not transmit COVID-19 to adults in significant numbers

Let’s take this a step further. Is there even a problem with kids being around grandpa? There are now several studies that show the entire premise of mass child-to-adult spread is completely unfounded, and there is certainly no definitive evidence showing that mass child-to-adult spread is a problem.

Switzerland opened its schools after failing to find a single case of child-to-adult transmission, instead positing that adults are the ones who transmit to children. The country has even advised that children under 10 can safely hug their grandparents. “Children are very rarely infected and do not pass on the virus,” said Dr. Daniel Koch, the head of the infectious diseases unit at the Federal Office of Public Health in Bern, last week. “That is why small children pose no risk to high-risk patients or grandparents.”

A U.K. study from the Royal College of Pediatrics found that at the very least, children “do not play a significant role” in spreading the virus: A 9-year-old British boy who contracted the virus in the French Alps failed to pass on the virus to a single one of the 170 people he was in contact with.

Iceland, which has done the most extensive testing per capita of any country and has, thus far, achieved very successful results, also found very little risk in child transmission. “We have not found a single instance of a child infecting parents,” said Kari Stefansson of the Icelandic company deCODE genetics.

Preliminary results from a smaller Dutch study found that “children play a small role in the spread of the novel coronavirus. The virus is mainly spread between adults and from adult family members to children.”

Australia is one of the only Western countries that left most schools open for most of the epidemic, and it also found that kids, contrary to popular theory, were not super-spreaders. Australia’s National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance (NCIRS) traced 900 contacts among kids who tested positive in schools and found that only two passed on the virus. It’s unclear whether those two receivers were other kids or adults.

At this point, the onus is upon our governments to demonstrate why closing schools and all its collateral damage is justified. If anything, having children spread it to each other is the lowest-risk path to generating more herd immunity, especially given that there is no evidence of any significant child-to-adult spread. And again, it’s understandable if we might want to be more cautious than the Swiss and still keep kids away from seniors, but that should not stop schools from reopening and children from playing with each other.

Taiwan never closed its schools and did not achieve worse results than the other Asian countries with similar demographics that did; it actually had the fewest deaths of all. Singapore closed its schools much later than Hong Kong, and it did not affect Singapore’s outcome, an observation noted by the CDC in a memo last month.

Certainly, weeks after the peak of the virus, it is indefensible for us not to reopen schools. Political amnesia works wonders in America, but have we all forgotten that New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, of all people, actually vigorously opposed the effort to shut local schools in March and believed it was totally unnecessary?

How a densely populated Israeli town full of children proves the folly of closing schools

For those doubting the accuracy of the numerous European studies demonstrating little or no child-to-adult SARS-CoV-2 transmission, the Israeli town of Bnei Brak serves as a real-life example. This is a town of 200,000, but it is as densely populated as Manhattan because it is composed almost exclusively of very religious Jews who each have extremely large families and live in close quarters. As Israeli researcher Yinon Weiss noted in his riveting article titled, “The Coronavirus Passover Miracle,” Israeli government officials warned that this town was a ticking time bomb of death because they were not following state guidelines on mitigation efforts.

So great was the fear of this town destroying all of Israel that the military was sent out to blockade the town before Passover so nobody could go into or out of the town. So what happened after Passover as the government prepared to survey the damage and dig mass graves for the numberless dead bodies? According to Weiss, 99.99% survived, and only a handful of people died. The town is now fully opened.

What happened?

According to Weiss, the median age of the town is an astoundingly low 17.5 years, less than half the median in the U.S. and much less than the rest of the young country of Israel. They likely passed the disease around very rapidly from child to child and achieved herd immunity with the lowest-risk population of the country – with the ultimate added benefit of more quickly shielding the vulnerable in the long run. The Jerusalem Post quoted local Israeli doctor Elon Ganor as predicting that 50%-60% of the population is likely immune.

Obviously, in most other cities and countries, the share of children isn’t large enough to shield the vulnerable by simply passing it among themselves without any mitigation efforts whatsoever as they did there. But the salient lesson that there is no meaningful risk for school-age children, especially if you keep them away from vulnerable populations, is absolutely a universal, established epidemiological point.

What is quite clear based on any legitimate scientific analysis and data is that there is a much greater case to open schools long before even opening businesses. Yet even the most hawkish governors on opening businesses are squeamish about opening schools because they are terrified of the politics, demagoguery, and media shaming. Which is just another indication why none of these impetuous, erratic, and hypocritical decisions are being driven by science, math, prudence, or regard for public health, but by politics and media virtue-signaling. (For more from the author of “The Schools Should Be the First Thing to Reopen, Not the Last” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

The Young and the Healthy Are Not Dying From COVID-19. Here’s Why That’s Vitally Important

/0 Comments/in , /by

Why is our approach to the virus the same for all people, when the virus itself is so overwhelmingly biased toward a defined group of people?

Understanding that this virus only kills the elderly and sick in statistically significant numbers does not diminish their lives or even the seriousness of the virus. This understanding magnifies the need for a strategy that lets out healthier and younger people keeping the country running while shielding the vulnerable population until the virus burns out.

According to Minnesota’s health department, 99.24% of all statewide COVID-19 deaths have occurred either in long-term care facilities, such as nursing homes, or among people with significant underlying health conditions, with the overwhelming majority (78%) of decedents in the former category. That would mean just three individuals who died of COVID-19 in Minnesota were outside a nursing home and had no underlying condition. That is a 0.05% fatality rate just out of the known cases, and we’ve seen from serology tests that the true number of cases is exponentially greater than the number who tested positive. This fact should change our entire approach to the virus.

While the numbers are not quite that stark in more densely populated states with more widespread outbreaks, we are witnessing the same pattern to varying degrees in most other states and most other countries. Over half the SARS-CoV-2 deaths in Massachusetts, Maryland, and Maine were in long-term care facilities, and the median age of death in most states was 82. That number is 75% in Rhode Island, 61% in Pennsylvania, 58% in Delaware, 57% in Oregon, and 56% in Colorado. Even in a more widespread outbreak state like Connecticut, nursing homes account for nearly half the deaths, and those over 70 account for 80 percent of the deaths.

Understanding the importance of this data point will give us a better sense of why locking down an entire society is unnecessary (and even counterproductive) and why a balanced strategy of “stratify and shield” would be much better, on all fronts, than lockdown.

The data is in and the facts are clear: We were lied to

We were lied to. At the onset of the global panic in early March, the World Health Organization said the virus had a 3.4% fatality rate. Then, the same powers that be scared the world by saying a new version of the virus was killing 10% in parts of Italy. Eventually, they did the same thing with New York City and warned us that the rest of the country would be like NYC.

In reality, they ignored the fact that this virus had already spread for several months and infected exponentially more people than the official testing showed, that most people were asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic, and that therefore, for most people, the fatality rate is a tiny fraction of the panic porn numbers – more in line with 0.1-0.3% or perhaps, as we will see, much less for some.

A fatality rate of 0.1%-0.3% is still very serious when factoring in the rate of contagion, the fact that it goes on well past the winter and early spring, and that, unlike the flu, there is no vaccine. However, it is nowhere near the numbers they are suggesting, and even in the New York City metro, which has for some reason been hit worse than any other region (more than half of deaths are from the tri-state region), the fatality rate is still well under 1% because at least 25% of NYC residents got the virus.

Breaking down the age and health status brackets — and why it matters

So now that we know SARS-CoV-2 is much less fatal than it has been advertised in order to justify lockdown policies, and all its human and financial tolls, there is no reason for a universal lockdown. The critical question, then, is what are the fatality rates by age, geography, demographics, and gender so that everyone is aware of their likely risk and can take precautions accordingly.

The truth is that the macro fatality rates we are seeing are very lopsided. Every virus has its quirks and particularities, and this one seems to have almost a linear increase with age. Kids have almost no risk whatsoever, which is why it makes no sense to close the schools. Younger adults have a very low risk. We also know that men seem to have a higher death rate than women and that black people seem to have a higher death rate than white people, while Asians have the lowest death rate. Genetics, unfortunately, plays a role, as well as some lifestyle and environmental/geographical factors.

But by far, the single biggest factors are age and health status. While the virus seems to be less deadly than the flu among small kids, slightly more deadly among younger, healthier adults, and significantly more deadly (but again, a fraction of what they claimed) among seniors, nursing homes and sick people are really in danger. Shouldn’t all our resources, regulations, and attention be directed toward shielding them while having as many others as possible achieve herd immunity, so this doesn’t keep coming back to threaten the vulnerable population?

Most serology studies in America (outside New York City) show a fatality rate of between 0.1% and 0.3% among all adults. That number is corroborated by hard data we are seeing in defined and confined populations, such as ships and prisons. Again, that is very low compared to what the media is telling us, but it might be much lower for other populations. First, all of the domestic serology tests excluded kids under 18. Their fatality rate is likely a fraction of that fraction. Second, what would happen if you removed those over 70 from the sample or even those over 60, and what if you removed those with chronic conditions from all age groups, but especially among seniors?

We don’t have a domestic sample yet that excludes seniors, but one study from Denmark could perhaps give us a partial answer. A large group of Danish epidemiologists published the results of a serology test from 9,496 blood donors who were tested for the antibodies in order to donate plasma to those sick with the virus, as we have begun to do in America. The sample was taken between April 6 and April 17 and only included donors aged 17-69. Thus, most kids were excluded but also anyone 70 or over. They used this random sample to discover the infection rate and extrapolate the number of total COVID-19 cases in Denmark, then compared it against the number of deaths for that age group. The result? An infection fatality rate of 82 per 100,000, or 0.082. That is less than 0.1%, and it even includes people in their 60s.

Obviously, this is just one survey, and genetics and demographics in America (which include more higher-risk black and Latino people) could result in a higher fatality rate, but this is very revealing. It also easily harmonizes with hard data we are seeing from states like Minnesota, where close to 80% of all deaths are in nursing homes, and that number rises to 99.24% when factoring in those with underlying health conditions as well. Putting these numbers together, it would make sense to suggest that kids have near zero risk and that adults 18-70 (especially under 55 or 60) might have a fatality rate significantly lower than 0.082% across many demographics and localities.

But it could be even lower.

As the Danish researchers wrote, “The death toll among all citizens below 70 years was used even though only 16 of 53 deaths appeared among individuals with no comorbidity. This was chosen because the denominator included all citizens in the age strata, thus, also individuals with comorbidity. The IFR including only individuals with not comorbidity is thus likely several fold lower than the current estimate.” (Emphasis added.)

Thus, for those who are of prime working age and also have no serious health conditions, the fatality rate is “several fold” below 0.082%. As such, it’s simply indefensible not to put them back to work and certainly send kids with an even lower risk back to school.

This point is punctuated even more by a similar study of blood donors from researchers in the Netherlands, whose serology testing data results a Dutch blogger actually broke down and extrapolated for fatality rates by age group.

As you can see, the 0.1% rate, which is often the benchmark given for the flu fatality rate, is not even attained until you get to the 50-59 age group. It’s significantly less for younger cohorts and still under a half a percent for those in their 60s. Of course, it’s nonexistent for kids. And again, all these age groups factor in those with underlying conditions as well as those who are healthy. We do not have a study of the fatality rate for people under 60 with no underlying health concerns.

Yes, this is one sample and from another country (with a much lower obesity rate than the U.S.), but it sheds light on the age breakdown of some of our top-line numbers from domestic studies and harmonizes with data in most states where the overwhelming majority, if not nearly all individuals, who died outside nursing homes had underlying health issues.

One doctor used the serology studies in L.A. and Santa Clara counties, which showed an overall fatality rate of 0.2%, and broke them down by age group based on confirmed tests and found similarly infinitesimal IFRs among younger strata as the numbers from the Netherlands.

Obviously, for reasons still being debated, the New York City area numbers are higher across the board, but nearly all of our country is seeing an experience closer to that of California and Minnesota, not New York. And even in New York, one comprehensive study found that 94% of fatalities in the area had at least one chronic illness and 88% percent had at least two.

Why are our governments not following the science and publishing the data?

This is undoubtedly a bad plague. But unlike in 1918, it attacks younger and healthier people in remarkably low numbers. There are certainly a lot of people at high risk, but the difference between shutting down everyone and shielding the vulnerable is the difference between a recession and an economic Hiroshima, a functioning health care system and a furloughed health system, a food crisis and a “mere” cut in jobs, wages, and 401Ks.

The Spanish flu was the most devastating pandemic of the 20th century because not only was it highly contagious, but it primarily attacked younger, healthier people between the ages of 20 and 40 with a fatality rate at least 20 times higher than the flu. Fast-forward to SARS-CoV-2, and our government and media are acting and governing as if this is the Spanish flu when, in fact, the effects of it, while very dangerous and for the most part more so than the typical flu, are nowhere near what they were in 1918. This is where understanding demographic fatality rates and a more targeted strategy of quarantine, as well as balancing rate of spread against achieving herd immunity with the lowest-risk population, is so much more achievable than it was in 1918.

It is simply indefensible that our government, which is sitting on more data than any other country, has not put out any information showing the fatality rates by demographics. While there is a lot about this coronavirus we still do not know, it is incontrovertibly clear that there is a lopsided danger for 15%-20% of the most vulnerable population and most pronounced in nursing homes. It makes no sense to use meaningless top-line numbers lumping in the whole population, including those least at risk, to shut down our society and kill more people with the lockdown itself.

The best way to balance all lives and the economy and mental health while protecting the vulnerable is to have the low-risk groups go out with proper precautions and allocate almost all of our resources on nursing homes. That is the scientific approach. That is the only compassionate strategy for the country at large.

On Wednesday, when Minnesota Department of Health Infectious Disease Director Kristen Ehresmann revealed that 99.24% of those who died were either in long-term care facilities or had serious underlying illness, KSTP reporter Tom Hauser followed up with the trillion-dollar question (59:36 of the audio). “So when Minnesotans look at that and they try to assess their own risk of having the worst possible outcome from COVID-19, which of course would be death, they will look at that and say, if I’m not in one of those two categories, why is this state shut down economically the way it is? How would you respond to them?”

The question remains unanswered. (For more from the author of “The Young and the Healthy Are Not Dying From COVID-19. Here’s Why That’s Vitally Important” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

States Can Declare Martial Law on Citizens but Can’t Stop Noncitizens From Voting

/0 Comments/in , /by

A broken clock is right twice a day, but our judiciary is always wrong, as it has perfectly twisted fundamental rights inside out and has flipped state and federal powers upside down.

We have finally discovered a power that the courts feel a state does not have. At a time when states are violating our rights to life, liberty, and property, restricting free movement, regulating interstate commerce and travel, and forming interstate compacts – all against the most basic foundations of our Constitution – the courts have finally stepped in to limit state powers. A federal court has ruled states cannot … ask for proof of citizenship to vote.

On Wednesday, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Kansas cannot require proof of citizenship at voter registration to ensure that noncitizens don’t vote, pursuant to a law duly passed by the state legislature in 2011. The court reiterated a lower court ruling that somehow this violates the phantom Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and that the state interest does “not justify the burden imposed on the right to vote.” The two judges (the third passed away) concocted their own law that states must first “show that a substantial number of noncitizens registered to vote” before enacting such measures.

To be clear, Kansas was not stripping the vote from anyone eligible to vote and merely required the most basic verification in order to protect the sovereignty of all citizens, as is required for so many other public or private benefits. States have full control over voter qualifications, according to the Constitution, voting is not quite an inalienable right, and the state is enacting the most narrowly tailored act to achieve the vital interest of protecting the franchise.

There is no greater interest in protecting the vote than ensuring noncitizens aren’t voting. This is not some far-flung fear, but a prima facie concern. We have a record level of immigrants in this country, and the motor-voter laws seamlessly register anyone who signs up for a driver’s license with nothing more than a voluntary honor system for immigrants to self-report. If anything, noncitizens are often harmed by weak verification, because some unwittingly sign up to vote and then are subject to deportation for violating federal law.

Yet now an unelected federal judge can crush a basic state power. Keep in mind, it’s insane to suggest that requiring proof of citizenship is a burden, because, by definition, anyone who is a citizen has a birth certificate. This is even less of a “burden” than requiring photo ID at the polls. Although states provide ID for free, there is theoretically a small percentage of people who don’t have ID. However, every citizen has a birth certificate. If they can produce one, there is no burden, and if they are not a citizen, how can they get standing to sue?

Now hold that thought as you watch this video of a Calumet County, Wisconsin, cop following a woman to her home because her child had a playdate in someone else’s house.

“Are you aware that we’re in a stay-at-home order right now?” says the male deputy. “I don’t need to explain that to you? Because I can if you need me to. … Your daughter is going to play at other people’s home and you’re allowing it to happen. … Stop having your kid go by other people’s home.”

Where are the lawsuits? A state can’t protect its vote from foreign nationals, but it can ban citizens from traveling to a neighbor’s home?

Yesterday, a Michigan judge refused to grant relief to plaintiffs who sued the governor’s order that prevented anyone from even visiting family or friends, without large gatherings. Judge Christopher Murray of the Michigan Court of Claims said that even these rights are “subject to reasonable regulation by the state” and that “those liberty interests are, and always have been, subject to society’s interests — society being our fellow residents.”

So, let’s get this straight. A state can’t simply place basic eligibility verification standards on voting or work requirements on Medicaid, but a state can restrict your movement entirely and shut down your way of life entirely. A state can potentially demand that you “show papers” to get approval to walk freely as “an essential worker,” but they can’t ask you to show proof of citizenship when you come to a state office to register to vote.

Where is the federal intervention when it’s actually warranted and actually violates the 14th Amendment? Remember, while extremely important, voting is not a fundamental inalienable right, like earning a living with one’s property and freedom of movement inside this country. Which is why there was a need for the 15th Amendment to ensure voting rights for freed slaves. Where is Attorney General Barr? Don’t just threaten lawsuits, file them immediately!

The 14th Amendment’s Privileges and Immunities Clause authorizes the federal government to enforce fundamental rights against the states violating them. Yet the same judges who fail to recognize these rights create new rights under the Equal Protection Clause.

In fact, Rep. James F. Wilson, R-Iowa, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee back in the 1860s who helped draft the 14th Amendment, spoke emphatically that it was “establishing no new right, declaring no new principle.” “It is not the object of this bill to establish new rights, but to protect and enforce those which belong to every citizen,” declared Wilson in 1866.

These judges only protect the fictitious new rights of criminals and foreign nationals or concoct positive privileges, such as the “right” to ballot-harvest or have six weeks of early voting, but not the foundational rights to exist freely belonging to every citizen.

In the irony of all ironies, the same people who use the Equal Protection Clause to strip states of their basic powers have no problem with states allowing Walmart and Home Depot to remain open with 500 people, but to close a small business that has three people in it. These same people allow dog grooming shops to remain open and snitch on hair stylists who try to open after they are forcibly closed!

But, of course, requiring every voter to show proof of citizenship, something inherently universal among every eligible voter, is unequal!

What’s becoming clear is that the only people with access to the courts now are criminals, illegal aliens, and abortion clinics. We have a country where the basic understanding of a fundamental right has been contorted 180 degrees. Negative, inalienable rights – the right to remain free of government punishment for merely breathing – are crushed with impunity and without due process, while the nonexistent privilege to vote without having to show basic eligibility is now a God-given right.

It’s also evidently a right for insurance companies to get $12 billion in “risk corridors” bailout funding for which Congress explicitly blocked appropriation. The Supreme Court ruled in their favor 8-1 on Monday. So now the Supreme Court appropriates money too?

We have an illegitimate government. Courts insert themselves into everything they have no business adjudicating, yet they are absent in protecting real liberties of individual Americans when they have been attacked more than ever.

As Calvin Coolidge warned on Memorial Day 1927 at Arlington National Cemetery, “The integrity of the Union rests on the Constitution. Unless that great instrument is to be the supreme law of the land, we could have no Union worthy of our consideration.” (For more from the author of “States Can Declare Martial Law on Citizens but Can’t Stop Noncitizens From Voting” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Antibody Tests Are Proving That Continuing Lockdown Is Senseless

/0 Comments/in , , /by

We are going to lose 40% of our national GDP this quarter, incur trillions in debt, lose our freedoms and privacy, and shed tens of millions of jobs – including of health care workers – due to the shutdown and panic porn peddled by the political class. But for what? For a virus that had already been spreading for months and has a case fatality rate well below 1%. We will be left with nothing from the lockdowns other than a virus that will be kept alive for longer and kill more people.

We no longer need to guess how pervasive the virus has been and therefore how low the fatality rate is. There are numerous serology tests being done throughout the country and the world that demonstrate the entire premise for the lockdown is counterproductive.

Miami-Dade County has now completed two rounds of random sampling for antibodies, and both surveys found a 0.18% fatality rate. The study sampled 32 municipal statistical areas in this county of 2.75 million people and found that between 4.4% and 7.9% of the population contained the antibodies. Extrapolating the survey results to the entire county’s population would mean that between 123,000 and 221,000 residents have already gotten the virus and that the fatality rate is therefore between 0.13% and 0.23%, for a median of 0.18%.

While many Florida counties are overwhelmingly populated by elderly residents, Miami-Dade is just a little above the national median age of the country, so it’s a good sample of the macro fatality rate when averaging out all age groups nationwide.

Most notably, the serology test found that “more than half had NO symptoms in the seven to fourteen days prior to screening.” That is a result similar to that of other countries, such as Iceland.

In other words, this thing was quietly spreading long before the lockdown, rendering the entire purpose of the lockdown moot.

Many other antibody studies have concluded there is a similarly low fatality rate. Antibody sampling in Santa Clara and Los Angeles counties netted similar results – between 0.12% and 0.20%. The fatality rate in Chelsea, Massachusetts, based on an extrapolation of a sampling there, would be around 0.16 percent. That is identical to the results of a recent antibody test in Denmark, which demonstrates a degree of consistency throughout the world. One serology test in Germany showed a slightly higher but still low fatality rate of 0.37%. And Germany has a higher percentage of seniors relative to its general population than the United States.

However, the more this virus runs its course and the more antibody testing takes place, it’s likely that the denominator of total cases will be much larger, further driving down the fatality rate. According to Reuters, a recent tally of 3,277 inmates in state prison systems in Arkansas, North Carolina, Ohio, and Virginia who had tested positive for the virus showed that 96 percent of them were asymptomatic. This is likely a relatively young population of predominantly males in their 20s and 30s.

If these surveys and tests showing wide asymptomatic spreading are representative of other places in the country and across the globe, it means that likely as many people have had SARS-CoV-2 as have the flu in a typical year. This has two important public policy implications: 1) The fatality rate is a fraction of what was suggested by the models that were used to justify the shutdown; and 2) This disease has spread so far and wide that implementing lockdowns and mass surveillance/contact tracing at this stage are like spitting into a sea.

Release the healthy; better protect the elderly and vulnerable

What is the punch line? If you are not elderly or chronically ill, you are less likely to die from coronavirus than most other things. Not only is the fatality rate of the virus overall only slightly higher than that of the flu, but it’s mainly targeting vulnerable populations. Over half the SARS-CoV-2 deaths in Massachusetts and Maine were in long-term care facilities, and the median age of death was 82. Nearly three-quarters of those in Minnesota were in long-term care facilities. That number is 75% in Rhode Island, 61% in Pennsylvania, and 43% in Connecticut.

New York and New Jersey appear to be the only states where the percentage is lower, but even in those hot spots, it was mainly those with chronic illnesses who died. A new paper published in the Journal of the American Medical Association by the Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research found that 94% of fatalities in the New York City area had at least one chronic illness and 88% percent had at least two. The comprehensive study analyzed data from about 5,700 coronavirus patients admitted to New York City and metro-area hospitals between March 1 and April 4, of whom 553 passed away.

Now, certainly there are still a lot of people in the country with chronic illness who are at risk. They need to be protected. But the way to protect them is by younger and healthier people going out to burn out the virus. “Quarantining” younger and healthier people who are least at risk of serious illness or death will ensure the virus continues to make comebacks after the summer and kills even more people. Tragically, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, while pushing lockdowns on everyone, actually compromised local nursing homes by forcing them to accept coronavirus patients straight from the hospital.

Moreover, this lockdown is weakening the immune systems of even healthy people by keeping them so isolated. As Dr. Dan Erickson warned in his lecture that has now gone viral, there will actually be more illnesses over time as people go out because their immune systems have been artificially weakened.

“When we all come out of shelter-in-place with a lower immune system and start trading viruses and bacteria, what do you think is going to happen? Disease is going to spike,” warned Erickson, whose urgent care clinics tested over half of the positive cases in Kern County, California. “And then you’ve got disease spike among a hospital system with furloughed doctors and nurses. This is not the combination you want to set up for a healthy society.”

Obviously, if this virus had a high death rate among the broad population, then you wouldn’t want to build up your immune system while increasing the chance of catching the virus. But we now see in most places the death rate is likely well below 1% among younger people. We take greater risks with our health every day.

The bottom line is that early on, when we knew little about the virus and were all spooked by what seemed to be going on in Italy, some degree of a shutdown made sense. But now that the data is in, there is no justification for a lockdown – other than for those who want to secure a long-standing progressive agenda that predated this virus. (For more from the author of “Antibody Tests Are Proving That Continuing Lockdown Is Senseless” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Leftist Elites Are Using Corona Crisis to Accomplish the ‘Change’ Promised by Obama, Hillary Clinton

/0 Comments/in , /by

Amid the government’s aggressive response to the coronavirus pandemic, many suggest that much of the United States is under de facto Martial Law. With citizens ordered to stay home, businesses forced to shut down, and even church services banned – with violators subject to onerous fines and jail time – it certainly feels that way.

And with some cities encouraging citizens to snitch on their neighbors suspected of skirting lockdown orders; with scenes of lone surfers and joggers, moms taking their kids to playgrounds, Christians sitting in their cars in church parking lots, and peaceful pro-life abortion protesters being ticketed or arrested and hauled off by police – despite practicing common sense social distancing – the U.S. has begun to feel more like communist East Germany under the Stasi’s reign of terror than the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Some state governors appear giddy with their new found powers to exert what amounts to tyrannical control over their citizens, as if the U.S. Constitution on display in the National Archives had been torn up in the same way House Speaker Nancy Pelosi brazenly ripped apart President Donald Trump’s speech as he wrapped up his 2020 State of the Union Address. . .

What leftist elites couldn’t accomplish under Obama, because of the massive pushback of the Tea Party that blocked them, they now hope to accomplish through the coronavirus pandemic. What they could not accomplish after their hopes were dashed, when Donald J. Trump came out of nowhere to beat Hillary Clinton in 2016, they now hope to accomplish by means of this crisis. (Read more from “Leftist Elites Are Using Corona Crisis to Accomplish the ‘Change’ Promised by Obama, Hillary Clinton” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

THE COVID-19 SCANDAL: Billionaire Bill Gates and WHO

/0 Comments/in , /by

The coronavirus scandal, with billionaire oligarch “pandemic expert” Bill Gates pushing horror scenarios into the media, has contributed to politicians’ reaction of fear. . .

The close relationship between Dr. Tedros and Bill Gates is illustrated by Tedros calling Gates “my brother” when opening speeches. Everyone else, such as the WHO-favored Norwegian prime minister, Erna Solberg, are addressed as dignitaries. Through its CEPI work, the current Norwegian government is allied with Gates, Norway funding billions into vaccine programs.

A strong defender of the current strategies of the WHO leadership, now under scrutiny for its mismanagement in reporting during the COVID-19 scandal, Solberg has taken a remarkable strong stance while other European leaders question the WHO. . .

Gates owns everything from charity to world vaccines, pays the WHO by the billions, funds NGOs and controls politicians who treat him like a king from the Middle Ages. He owns medical facilities, controls distribution channels and medical staff, owns the research, the vaccines, the health institutes, and was recently criticized by Robert Kennedy for his “messianic complex.” Just talk to Elon Musk.

It is a massive problem that non-democratically elected Bill Gates shapes our democracies with “philanthropist” billions. Gates pushed the idea of the pandemic of the century. He even suggested in a recent interview, that the opening up should not come until there is a digital immunity proof documenting who is vaccinated or not. The vaccine would be Gates-owned, we assume. (Read more from “THE COVID-19 SCANDAL: Billionaire Bill Gates and WHO” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

COVID-19: Is the United States Under God’s Judgment?

/2 Comments/in , , /by

What you believe about God makes all the difference in your approach to understanding the world and what is taking place with the COVID-19 plague. The WHO, World Health Organization of the UN, rightly identified COVID-19 as a pandemic, or a plague. Is God personally involved in what takes place in the physical world, or is He only concerned with the things of the spiritual world? Did He create the universe then essentially let it evolve as it has without His intervention? Or, is He working in the world today? Is He a personal God interested in a relationship with people in the world? Or, is He only an impersonal force, not involved with individuals? Of course, some people do not even believe God exists. Should we think that God has anything at all to do with COVID-19?

I believe that God exists, that He is personally involved with all who come to Him, and that He is active in the world today. Therefore, we can better understand what is taking place today by examining history. And the best history by which we can understand God’s actions is found in the Bible.

The most powerful action of God in the Old Testament period was that of the deliverance of His people, the Hebrews, from slavery in Egypt. That those events are historical is nearly beyond question. I will not deal with the historicity of the Bible in this paper as that has been demonstrated very well in a great number of books. I will show that the Ten Plagues leading up to the Exodus were attacks on specific false gods of Egypt. I will give a few passages of scripture in which God condemns the false gods wherever they are. My conclusion will show what God may be saying to us in our country in the midst of the COVID-19 plague.

God used numerous plagues in the Old Testament to instruct His people and to show His power. Plagues and famines are not always the work of God, but many are. Sometimes, they are the result of the work of Satan who has rebelled against God and is trying to destroy God’s people and His world. Even when they are the work of Satan, they may be used by God to teach His people to return to Him with their whole hearts. Other times, they are the specific work of God to force His will on people. The Ten Plagues were of this latter class of plagues. They are found in Exodus, chapters 7 through 12. They are also referred to in several other places in the Bible and are the central part of the Seder Celebration at Passover.

In the first plague, God turned the Nile River to blood. The fish died in the river and their odor filled the land. The Nile River was considered sacred. The Nile was worshipped as the primary source of Egypt’s culture and economy. The annual flooding brought new life and prosperity to the farmers. Egypt had nine gods: the River itself, and Khnum, Hapi, Sati, Osiris, Hathor, Neith, Sobek, and Apepi, who were specifically associated with the river. By striking the waters of the Nile, God struck the very core of their paganism. However, by their secret arts the Egyptian magicians also turned water red.

The second plague took place seven days after the first. God caused the Nile to teem with frogs. The frogs came out of the Nile and overran all the rooms of every building in Egypt. The magicians were also able to get frogs out of the river, but they could not get rid of them. So, Pharaoh asked Moses to get God to remove them. The frog was considered a sacred animal. Heka, the wife of Khnum, was the goddess of the frog. She was closely associated with Hapi, who is portrayed with a frog in his hand. Frogs were a protected species. What an awful thing for the Egyptians to not even be able to take a step without squashing one of their sacred frogs. When the frogs died, they were gathered into large piles and their stench filled the land of Egypt. The plague of frogs revealed the complete uselessness of Heka.

In the third plague God caused the dust of the ground to become lice, a small biting insect. The lice afflicted all the Egyptians and their animals. The magicians were unable to reproduce this sign. They said to Pharaoh that this had to be the very work of God. Egyptian priests had to be absolutely clean to do their duties in their temples. Even the presence of a single louse would keep them from doing their work. Their priestly ministry was completely shut down. The ministry of the priest was considered essential for the regulating of the seasons and the balance of nature. In the Egyptian pantheon, Geb was the god of the earth who protected the soil. Seth was the god of the desert dust storms. In this plague God was showing that neither had any power.

In the fourth plague swarms of flies covered all the Egyptian people and their houses. But in Goshen, the home of the Israelites, there were no flies. A clear distinction was made between the Hebrews and the Egyptians. In Egypt the beetle was known as a fly. The scarab beetle was the symbol of the sun god, Ra, and a symbol of eternal life. Though some believe this was the god attacked by the plague, another explanation is more likely true. An Egyptian god, Vatchit, was known as the “lord of the flies.” He was the Egyptian equivalent of Beelzebub mentioned in Luke 11:15-19 as the “ruler of the demons.” His name “Baal” means “Lord” and “zebub” means flies. God was showing His prowess over Vatchit with the plague of the flies.

In the fifth plague a deadly disease came on all the Egyptian livestock, cattle, horses, camels, sheep and goats. Not one of the livestock of the Hebrews was afflicted. Cattle, and especially the Apis bull, were considered sacred in Egypt. Sometimes that bull was called Serapis, or Osorapis. The bull was believed to result from a divine conception as a moon beam stuck a particular cow. It was considered to be the actual incarnation of the god, Ptah. The Apis bull was carefully tended by the priests and kept in seclusion, only exhibited on special occasions. Women would come in its presence lifting their dresses and exposing themselves to the bull to increase their powers of fertility. When it died, it was mummified and placed in a large sarcophagus that was rivaled only by those of the Pharaohs. The deadly disease on the livestock showed God’s supremacy over all sacred cattle. It demonstrated that Serapis, Osorapis, and the sacred bull were no gods at all.

In the sixth plague God had Moses take handfuls of soot and toss them in the air. The fine dust covered all the land of Egypt except for Goshen. All the people and animals of Egypt then had an outbreak of festering boils. The magicians were so affected that they could not come before Pharaoh. Imhotep was the chief advisor to Djoser, Pharaoh of Egypt about 1200 years before the Exodus. He was the architect for Djoser’s Pyramid, a great magician, and a great healer. Gradually he became recognized not as a man, but the chief god of healing equivalent to the Greek god, Asclepius. Temples were dedicated to Imhotep and had healing chambers within. Some of the rituals to achieve healing involved a burnt offering with the ashes then thrown into the air for a health blessing. An Egyptian goddess, Sekhmet, was the daughter of Ra and noted for healing from plagues. She also used plagues to bring trouble on those who did not worship her. God used this plague to show the helplessness of both Imhotep, and Sekhmet. Healing only came from the Lord God.

In the seventh plague God sent the worst hailstorm to ever hit Egypt. The hail was so terrible that any person or animal outside without shelter was killed. All the leaves were stripped off the trees and crops were destroyed. The barley had headed and the flax had bloomed so they were ruined. Only in Goshen there was no hail. Nut was the Egyptian goddess of the sky who protected against chaos and storms. Her husband was Geb, the god of the earth. She was one of the most ancient of the gods of Egypt. She bore 5 children including Osiris, Horus, Nephthys, Set, and Isis, all of which were important gods. She was depicted as a naked woman arching over all the earth with stars on all parts of her body. She swallowed Ra, the sun god every night so he could travel through her body and be born each morning. She was important to all the other gods and all people by her regulation of the day and night, and protection from storms. God showed that Nut could do nothing to end the hail storm He sent. She could not send any plague on the Hebrews.

In the eighth plague God sent a cloud of locusts so great that they covered all Egypt, ate every thing they could, and filled all the buildings of the Egyptians. Pharaoh’s officials pleaded with him to let the Israeli people go, but he refused, and the locusts came. Sobek, the god of animals and insects, was the one to provide protection from the Locust plague. He was depicted with a crocodile head and was ritually associated with Ra (fire), Geb (earth), Osiris (water), and Shu (air). It was believed that he could control all such elements (gods) to prevent locust plagues among other things he did. Prayers to Sobek often included child sacrifice. That may have been the intent of Pharaoh when, years before, he ordered the midwives to throw the male Hebrew children into the Nile to be eaten by the crocodiles. But, in this plague God demonstrated that Sobek was unable to protect the land.

In the ninth plague God sent thick darkness for three days, but the Israelites still had sunlight. Ra, the sun god, was the King of all the gods of Egypt. The leading god of Thebes was known as Amun. Later at the time of the Exodus, Ra was combined with Amun, and became known as Amun-Ra. Ra was the creator and most powerful of all the gods. The temple complex of Amun-Ra at Karnak is the largest religious building ever built. It covers over 200 acres and its hypostyle hall is the largest room of any religious building in the world at 54,000 square feet. Solar eclipses which darkened the sun were evil omens and required special rituals by Ra’s priests to heal. No one ever saw three days of darkness. Ra was undone, dishonored and paralyzed by this plague of darkness. The wisemen and officials of Pharaoh were all silent. Pharaoh told Moses to get out of his sight and never come before him again. But there was still one more plague to come that Moses announced to Pharaoh.

In the tenth plague God had the Hebrews make preparations. They asked all the Egyptians for articles of gold and silver. The Hebrew slaves became wealthy. They killed the Passover Lamb and put the blood on their door posts and lintels. They were to be fully packed and ready to go at a moment’s notice. At midnight, the death angel went through Egypt killing the firstborn of all the people from Pharaoh on down and the firstborn of all their animals. The only ones who were spared were the Hebrews who had put blood on their door posts and lintels. There were at least six gods that were to provide protection for the children of Egypt. Heka, the frog goddess, oversaw the development of babies both human and animal in the womb. Isis, who was considered to the divine mother of the Pharaoh. Her maternal aid was also sought for healing children. Min was the virility god who was called upon to produce an heir for Pharaoh. Horus, the son of Isis and Osiris, was the protector of the sons of Pharaoh. Bes was the patron protector of mothers and their children. The sixth was Pharaoh himself, considered to be the incarnation of Amun-Ra. God executed His final judgment against “all the gods of Egypt.” See Exodus 12:12.

Each plague attacked a particular part of the panoply of the Egyptian gods. All the gods of Egypt were interrelated. All of them were shown to be nothing more than helpless demons. The dominance of the priests of each god was destroyed. All other gods were shown to be powerless before the Almighty God. The benefits and promises of each false god were worthless. Of course, there were far more than ten false gods in Egypt. The hierarchy of gods were destroyed from the least to the greatest, even to Amun-Ra.

Later, after dividing the Red Sea and giving the 10 Commandments on Mt. Sinai to Moses, God made the following promise, or covenant, to the Israelites:

“My Messenger will go ahead of you and will bring you to the land of the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Canaanites, Hivites, and Jebusites. I will wipe them out. Never worship or serve their gods or follow their practices. Instead, you must destroy their gods and crush their sacred stones. You must serve the Lord your God, and He will bless your food and water. I will take away all sickness from among you. No woman in your land will miscarry or be unable to have children. I will let you live a normal life span. I will send My terror ahead of you and throw any nation you meet into a panic*. I will make all your enemies flee from you. I will send panic* ahead of you to force the Hivites, Canaanites, and Hittites out of your way. I will not force them out of your way in one year. Otherwise, the land would be deserted, and wild animals would take over. Little by little I will force them out of your way until you have increased enough in number to take possession of the land.” Exodus 23:23-30 (GWT), God’s Word Translation

[*Translation note: the first word panic refers to the enemy armies being “routed” before the Israelites. The second time it is used is an entirely different Hebrew word usually translated as “plague.”]

This covenant was made by God for the people of Israel and was accepted by them with a blood sacrifice on the first altar they made about two months after coming out of Egypt. This promise was kept by God perfectly. Unfortunately, the Israelis did not keep their part very long. Only a short time later, even as Moses was descending the mountain the second time carrying the stone tablets, the people had made a golden calf and were in a wild celebration around it. Over 3,000 were killed by the swords of the Levites at the command of Moses. This slaughter came on them specifically because they did not keep the first commandment, “The Lord is the only God. Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength,” Deuteronomy 6: 4, 5. After the death of the faithless generation in the wilderness, the Israelites led by Joshua, entered the Promised Land, and the word of the Lord was fulfilled exactly as He said in the promise quoted above. Twenty to thirty years after conquering the land, Joshua gave the following words to the people, “I will soon die like everyone else. You know with all your heart and soul that not one single promise which the Lord your God has given you has ever failed to come true. Every single word has come true,” Joshua 23:14. But the peace and prosperity they enjoyed at that time didn’t last long.

It wasn’t too many years after his death that again the people began to follow the gods of the people of Canaan. As a result, their enemies began to war with them and take their produce, animals, goods and even make the people slaves. God said that the reason these things happened to them was because they did not follow His first and greatest commandment. Judges 2:11-15 states clearly,

“The people of Israel did what the Lord considered evil. They began to serve other gods. The Israelites abandoned the Lord God of their ancestors, the God who brought them out of Egypt. They followed the other gods of the people around them. They worshiped these gods, and made the Lord angry… The Lord became angry with the people of Israel. He handed them over to people who robbed them… Whenever the Israelites went to war, the power of the Lord brought disaster on them. This was what the Lord said He would do in an oath. So, He made them suffer a great deal.” (GWT)

This same basic message is given through the prophets to the nation of Israel during the time of the Kings of Israel and Judah. Psalm 82:1: “God takes His place in His own assembly. He pronounces judgment among the gods.” Jeremiah 2:11: “Has any nation ever exchanged gods? (Their gods aren’t really gods.) Yet, My people have exchanged their Glory for something that doesn’t help them.” Jeremiah 16:20, 21: “People can’t make gods for themselves. They aren’t really gods. That is what I will teach them. This time I will make My power and My strength known to them. Then they will know that My name is the Lord.” Galatians 4:8: “When you didn’t know God, you were slaves to things which are really not gods at all.” (all preceding verses, GWT) Deuteronomy 7:20: “The Lord your God will also send a plague against them, until those who are left in hiding, perish before you,” Jewish Study Bible (Tanakh Translation). This last verse was part of God’s instructions to the Israelites to cleanse the Promised Land when they entered it. Over and over God warns the Israelites that they must never associate with the pagan gods, nor even mention their names. God judges the false gods and uses plagues to teach His people to trust in Him.

We must know that God never changes. He is always the same. The plagues He sent in the past were designed to help humans repent, that is “change the way you think and act, and turn to God, to have your sins removed. Then times will come when the Lord will refresh you,” Acts 3:19 (GWT) God knows better than we do as to what we need for true fulfillment and joy in our lives. We will never have satisfaction apart from Him. He sends plagues to cause us to turn back to Him.

Do we have any false gods in these United States of America? To answer that question, we must first understand what a false god is. The easy answer is that it is anything that we worship, or put before God as being a priority ahead of Him. It does not have to be something made of wood, stone or metal. It may be anything that we have in our hearts that comes to our attention before we look to Him for answers. If you have a problem, do you try to solve it yourself, or do you first ask the Lord about it? If you get sick, do you immediately go to the doctor, or do you first ask the Lord for healing? Ask yourself the question as to what you spend your time and money on, and you will begin to understand what is most important to you. With this understanding I would like to mention only three of the many false gods of the USA. There are many others. The COVID-19 plague ought to send us to God for His help and right understanding from Him.

Probably the false god in the USA that we are most involved with is our wealth, or economy. We spend more time on this one than any other thing in our lives. Certainly, we can justify our efforts by claiming that we have to make a living and take care of our families. That absolutely is true. But the issue is always, which comes first? God, or our wealth? This issue is never about the amount of wealth we have. Some with much wealth are rich toward God. Some who have very little of this world’s goods remain greedy for more. Where is our trust? Do we trust in wealth to keep us safe, or in God? Who do we trust to provide for our needs? Do we depend on what we are able to do for ourselves through what we earn, or God? The COVID-19 plague destroyed our powerful economy, the envy of the world.

The second false god I will mention is that of sports. Sports demands much of our time, from when we were young and participating in sports, until we are old and simply remain avid fans. Closely allied with sports is the false god of entertainment, specifically movies and TV. It is easy to see from the amount of money spent on tickets, on advertising, gambling, and concessions as well as the amount paid to the athletes and entertainers that this is a very important god in our society. Do we get as excited about the Lord as “our team”? Do we spend as much time with the Lord as we do our entertainment? Which come first in our lives? The COVID-19 plague ended all sports and most entertainment production.

The final false god that I will bring up, though there are many more, is that of sex. Sex trafficking and pornography are some of the largest businesses in the USA. They demand the time and money of the persons addicted to them. They bring immense heartache and problems into family relationships. They bring great harm to the children and women who are used so terribly. The lust and greed destroy both men and women. Far from being victimless, all participants are victims. Our Supreme Court has decreed that people can make up their own minds as to sex and marriage. It has really nothing to do with society as a whole. Sex and sexuality are thus defined as being part of our psychology, rather than our biology. Therefore, instead of treating the issue of confused thinking about sex, we make transgenderism a human right to be celebrated. If you observe the increased rate of suicide for those who go through sex-change operations as compared to those who don’t, you may come to believe that God has a better plan than we do. He wants to heal us of the pain and suffering that results from ignoring His plan.

When the COVID-19 plague arrived in the USA, it immediately attacked all three of our false gods: the strongest and most robust economy ever in our country, almost instantly destroyed; sporting and entertainment industries, shuttered; and sex trafficking and porn production, while not totally eliminated, greatly reduced. Do you suppose that God wants us to rely on Him more than these things? Is it possible that though God did not manufacture this plague, He may be using it to try to reach us? Are people now being more open to hear what God may say to them? Is it possible that a return to the worship of God by the majority of the USA may take place? Will our national motto really be true for us, “In God We Trust”? Will the words in our Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag ring true, “…one nation under God…”?

God’s invitation to us is, “Get your evil deeds out of My sight. Stop doing evil. Learn to do good. Seek justice. Arrest oppressors. Defend orphans. Plead the case of widows. Come on now, let’s discuss this! says the Lord… If you are willing and obedient, you will eat the best from the land. But, if you refuse and rebel, you will be destroyed by swords. The Lord has spoken,” Isaiah 1:16-20 (GWT).

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

How the Obamas Could Easily Win Eight More Years in the White House

/0 Comments/in , /by

As the president of the United States shelters in place with the White House press corps, and Joe Biden gibbers senselessly into the GoPro camera in his Delaware basement, this fall’s national election has been thrown into a cocked tricorn by the coronavirus. Many of Donald Trump’s retail-politicking strengths — the huge rallies, his command of crowds — have been neutralized, and while he still has control of the narrative from his bully pulpit in the West Wing, the national media remains dead set against him, and puts the worst possible spin on every word he speaks. . .

Still, as 2016 demonstrated, even when the fix is in, you never know. What the Democrats need in order to be sure of beating Trump is the perfect vice presidential candidate, one who will not only balance the ticket, push progressive causes, and check all the social-justice boxes but who will turn out the African-American vote in droves without Biden’s having to say a word or lift a finger. . .

So the choice is clear: Michelle Obama. Never mind that she has even less political experience than Hillary Clinton did when she ran for the White House, and has long said she disdains public office.

Currently, Michelle is in talks to possibly endorse Biden via a video and is said to be lending her name to a campaign fundraiser as early as next week, according to The Hill. “If she engages, God help Donald Trump, because she’s tough as nails and enormously popular,” former Democratic Party chairman of South Carolina Dick Harpootlian told the outlet. With her husband finally having endorsed Biden last week, the stage is now set. (Read more from “How the Obamas Could Easily Win Eight More Years in the White House” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Are We Sure Lockdowns Are Helping Instead of Harming in the Fight Against Coronavirus?

/0 Comments/in , /by

The contrast is unmistakable. All the western countries that implemented some degree of lockdown experienced an exponentially worse result than the Asian countries that kept their economies moving to some degree. There are obviously many variables at play, but before we destroy our jobs, liberty, and way of life under the guise of fighting coronavirus, are we certain that a lockdown strategy really helps and does not, in fact, harm our ability to develop herd immunity and rid ourselves of this virus?

We might want to take note of the observations emanating from Taiwan’s CDC. After all, it’s reported that Taiwan had just six fatalities from COVID-19, even though the country lies just 100 miles from China. Taiwan reportedly has just a few hundred cases, and its curve appears to have flatted just after a few weeks without any lockdowns and with schools remaining open. They isolated the symptomatic, quarantined the sick, and had border control earlier than anyone else. That was their recipe for success.

Well, the same CDC that led the best COVID-19 strategy worldwide came out with a study last month tracing 1,043 contacts of 32 COVID-19 patients and found that not a single transmission occurred outside those in their households or families. The study came out on March 19 and was posted on Twitter by former NYT reporter and lockdown skeptic Alex Berenson.

According to the findings, seven out of the 36 household contacts and five of the 47 family contacts wound up contracting the virus from the initial study group, while zero of the 960 non-family exposed individuals contracted the disease.

Which demonstrates that, as many have suspected, this disease is most transferable among families holed up in close quarters. The study does recommend “generalized social distancing,” but that is very different from a lockdown.

The data from Taiwan harmonizes with Japanese data that, according to the CDC, shows transmission of the virus is 18.7 times greater indoors than outdoors. “In a study of 110 case-patients from 11 clusters in Japan, all clusters were associated with closed environments, including fitness centers, shared eating environments, and hospitals, the odds for transmission from a primary case-patient were 18.7 times higher than in open-air environments,” wrote two researchers in a report published by the CDC on March 18.

So. Is locking everyone down – young and old, sick and healthy – together in families for extended periods of the time the best strategy? How will we develop herd immunity? This is the question the lockdown fascists like Dr. Anthony Fauci cannot answer. Aside from all the terrible collateral damage of a shutdown, who is to say more people will not die and the virus’ shelf life won’t be extended by hindering herd immunity rather than embracing it?

This is a red flag being thrown by prominent German American epidemiologist Knut M. Wittkowski. “With all respiratory diseases, the only thing that stops the disease is herd immunity,” said the world-renowned epidemiologist who headed the Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Research Design at the Rockefeller University, New York for 20 years. “About 80% of the people need to have had contact with the virus, and the majority of them won’t even have recognized that they were infected, or they had very, very mild symptoms, especially if they are children.” His full interview can be heard here.

As such, Dr. Wittkowski advocates for the exact opposite strategy. “So, it’s very important to keep the schools open and kids mingling to spread the virus to get herd immunity as fast as possible, and then the elderly people, who should be separated, and the nursing homes should be closed during that time, can come back and meet their children and grandchildren after about 4 weeks when the virus has been exterminated.”

Wittkowski warns that under the current strategy, “If we are preventing herd immunity from developing, it is almost guaranteed that we have a second wave as soon as either we stop the social distancing or the climate changes with winter coming or something like that.”

Thus, even after causing countless deaths and permanent economic and mental health devastation from a lockdown for several months, we will be back to square zero within a few days of ending the shutdown.

What is further maddening about the lockdown strategy is that it was implemented months after the virus was likely rampant in the population. It’s one thing to start a lockdown when the virus is small and contained, but as it stands now, we are locking down countless millions of people indoors with those who already have it. According to the L.A. Times, Dr. Jeff Smith, a physician who is the chief executive of Santa Clara County government, told county officials that based on their data, the virus was in the Bay Area of California, which is a big hub for Asian travel, “a lot longer than we first believed” — most likely since “back in December.”

The media is trying to credit California’s low per-capita level of COVID-19 fatalities to the lockdown policies, but perhaps the success is due to the early percolation of the virus and its ensuing herd immunity, created before the counterproductive lockdown.

Yes, people will get sick and die no matter what we do, and undoubtedly, many of those deaths prior to March were chalked up to what was thought of as a bad flu season. “This wasn’t recognized because we were having a severe flu season,” Smith said in an interview with the L.A. Times. “Symptoms are very much like the flu. If you got a mild case of COVID, you didn’t really notice. You didn’t even go to the doctor. The doctor maybe didn’t even do it because they presumed it was the flu.”

Obviously, it’s hard to compare all of the variables from state to state and from country to country, but a recent analysis showed there was no statistical difference between states that shut things down early vs. those that waited until later. Moreover, obfuscated in any analysis is the difference between commonsense distancing and hygiene measures vs. a lockdown involving shutdowns of all schools and businesses. Whereas everyone agrees the former are extremely helpful, the jury is still out on the effectiveness (or perhaps, counterproductiveness) of the latter.

Remember, the very same people like Dr. Fauci who failed to warn the public to take the virus seriously in January after numerous Chinese doctors warned about it on social media now want us to trust them about going to the other extreme. As late as March 9, Dr. Fauci said, “If you are a healthy young person, there is no reason if you want to go on a cruise ship, go on a cruise ship.” Anyone with common sense (and without the fancy degrees) could have seen the dangers of a petri dish like a cruise at that point, yet Fauci missed it. Now he’s telling us churches and businesses that carefully follow CDC distancing guidelines and don’t have massive crowds can’t stay open?

It’s truly astounding that a month into this lockdown, we still have no answers from the federal government as to when this virus began and how many people had it. That question will make all the difference in determining our strategy going forward. At this late juncture, after we have already seen the devastation of the lockdown’s side effects, don’t we want to know whether the cure is actually curing the disease and not making it worse? After all, who wants a form of chemotherapy that, after all the suffering, makes the cancer worse? (For more from the author of “Are We Sure Lockdowns Are Helping Instead of Harming in the Fight Against Coronavirus?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE