Daily Archives: June 30, 2021

South Africas third COVID wave could be the worst yet – Al Jazeera English

Posted: June 30, 2021 at 2:48 pm

Cape Town, South Africa From his 10-bed private clinic in western Johannesburg, Bayanda Gumende is more used to treating renal diseases than COVID-19. But with the citys hospitals full, patients lingering in casualty wards for days and ambulances stuck waiting in car parks, that is beginning to change.

The 27-year-old chief nephrology technologist says he has been swamped with calls from patients desperate for oxygen and who cannot find it elsewhere. But with supply being limited, he is forced to prioritise.

It has taken a toll on me. It is very emotional to watch people taking their last breath. Some people are gasping for air. There is literally nothing you can do about it. You cannot save everybody, he says.

South Africa accounts for close to 40 percent of all COVID-19 deaths on the continent, with 60,038 officially recorded fatalities so far. It is currently in the midst of a third wave, driven by the rapid spread of the Delta variant, first detected in India, which is fast becoming the dominant strain.

Professor Salim Abdool Karim, a world-leading epidemiologist and former co-chair of South Africas Ministerial Advisory Committee on COVID-19, believes that a mutation related to furin an enzyme that cleaves the spike protein makes this variant particularly dangerous.

That cutting process is critical. It enables the virus to enter cells more easily, and therefore spread faster, he says. This variant is about twice as transmissible as the other variants of concern.

Science has translated into policy. In a televised address on Sunday, President Cyril Ramaphosa announced a raft of new restrictions, including the banning of all alcohol sales and gatherings, as well as an expansion of curfew hours from 9pm to 4am.

For Gumende, it need not have got to this point. Waiting until the virus has spread uncontrollably has forced us to move into a far harsher lockdown than was necessary, he says. They knew that the Delta variant was spreading across India. They should have banned flights from India to South Africa.

For now, Gauteng province home of the countrys financial hub, Johannesburg, and its administrative capital, Pretoria has been the epicentre of this third wave, accounting for more than 60 percent of new cases. As of Monday, the province had 81,399 active cases.

During a press briefing last week, provincial Premier David Makhura said, We are struggling. We are under extreme pressure. The pandemic is everywhere.

The situation in Johannesburg in particular has been aggravated after the 1,000-bed Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic Hospital was forced to close following a fire in April. But many believe the authorities are not entirely blameless.

Where is the preparedness of the existing system regarding ICU, oxygen, diagnostics and treatment? tweeted Tlaleng Mofokeng, the United Nations special rapporteur on the right to health.

Some large health facilities in Johannesburg, such as the Nasrec field hospital and the AngloGold Ashanti Hospital, sit empty. There are a lot of unemployed doctors and nurses, says Gumende. It just seems ridiculous to me that the government has not prepared at all.

If there is still some debate as to how South Africa became the worst-hit country on the continent, the way out of this crisis is clear, according to Karim.

The reality is that vaccination is a critically important part of trying to control the virus. We have to combine vaccination with some of our public health prevention measures.

While Ramapahosa has been among the leading global voices calling for vaccine equity and a waiver of production patents, his governments vaccination campaign has been slow. South Africa has administered just 2.9 million doses so far, despite receiving a total of 7.4 million vaccines. Less than 5 percent of the population have received a single dose.

Government critics, including opposition parties, say the rollout has been slow because of poor planning. But in his address on Sunday, Ramaphosa alluded to vaccine hesitancy.

There is still a lot of misinformation being circulated about the COVID-19 vaccine. False stories are being spread on WhatsApp groups, on social media, and by word of mouth about the COVID-19 vaccine, claiming that the vaccine is not safe, that it can make you sick, or that it doesnt work, the president said.

I have said it before, and I wish to say it again: Please think long and hard before you press share or send, he told South Africans. You are spreading panic, fear and confusion at a time when we can ill-afford it.

Still, the slow rollout has left many frustrated.

Celeste Bortz is a 59-year-old teacher from Johannesburg. Her husband has been in hospital, on oxygen, for the past six weeks.

My husband is 61 and missed the beginning of the vaccination programme by one week. If the government had been more on top of its game, things could have been so much better, she said.

In general, I like Ramaphosa. Last year he took the reins and locked down quickly. But I think the government could have handled this third wave better.

A series of corruption scandals related to COVID-19 spending have also shaken public confidence in the governments response to the pandemic.

In September 2020, a report (PDF) from the auditor general found serious shortcomings in the financial management of the governments COVID-19 initiatives from procurement of personal protective equipment, to hospital beds, to social relief grants.

Earlier this month, Health Minister Zweli Mkhize was placed on fully-paid special leave after awarding contracts to Digital Vibes, a communications company staffed by his former associates. An investigation is ongoing.

If, according to the presidency, this third wave could be the longest yet, Karim says it will certainly not be the last.

Were going to see more effective variants of the Delta and then were going to move on to the next one. Its basically humans versus the virus and its variants. Right now, the virus is gaining the upper hand. It is able to keep one step ahead of us.

Read the original here:

South Africas third COVID wave could be the worst yet - Al Jazeera English

Posted in Corona Virus | Comments Off on South Africas third COVID wave could be the worst yet – Al Jazeera English

Florida House asks staff to report when they got vaccinated for the coronavirus – Tampa Bay Times

Posted: at 2:48 pm

TALLAHASSEE On June 22, a staffer in Florida House Speaker Chris Sprowls office reached out to her colleagues with a request.

Please remind your staff to report when they are fully vaccinated, wrote Michelle Davila, the deputy chief of staff for operations and COVID-19 protocols, in an email reviewed by the Times/Herald.

Davila provided a link to a Google form in which respondents are asked to fill in the date they became fully vaccinated and the county in which they got their shots.

The form extols the virtues of the coronavirus vaccines. Getting vaccinated against COVID-19 adds one more layer of protection for you and those around you, it reads. Please do your part to keep the House a safe place to work.

Florida ranks toward the middle of the pack of the 50 states in vaccines administered per capita, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The survey is not mandatory for staffers. The final question allows those responding to deny the House the right to collect and use information regarding...vaccination status for the purpose of implementing the House COVID-19 protocols.

Last month, Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a law banning businesses, governments and schools from requiring the people they serve to provide evidence that they have been vaccinated. Violators can be fined up to $5,000 per infraction under the so-called vaccine passport ban.

DeSantis pushed hard for the ban during the legislative session. At the time, he argued requiring someone to disclose their vaccination status which some other countries have done in order to mitigate the spread of the disease is a violation of privacy.

The House collecting staffers vaccine data does not appear to violate the new law. Still, some lawmakers said they were surprised to see the House making the effort.

To me, its shocking that anybody would even ask the question in the state given the current state of affairs, said Sen. Jeff Brandes, R-St. Petersburg. Later in the interview, Brandes added: It doesnt seem like something that the Legislature would do given that they just told people they couldnt do this.

Tom Yu, a spokesperson for the House, said in an emailed response that any comparison between the House survey and a vaccine passport is silly.

The information collected does not restrict an employees access to or entry to House spaces or (an employees ability to) participate in any employment-related activities, Yu said. Instead, he noted, the survey would be used to allow vaccinated staffers to avoid quarantining in the event of an office outbreak.

The 2021 lawmaking session ran through March and April, but lawmakers returned to the capitol to do business starting in January near the time of Floridas reported coronavirus case peak. During the months of lawmaking in Tallahassee, the House and Senate tested lawmakers, staffers and members of the press weekly for the virus.

Yu said the form sent to staffers last week has been available to representatives and staff since April 7. Around that time, the Legislature tweaked its rules to allow vaccinated workers to skip the testing process. Staffers, journalists and members were given the option to report in a separate Google form when they were fully vaccinated.

Rep. Evan Jenne, D-Dania Beach, the House Democratic leader, said he supports efforts to collect information on who in the House office has been vaccinated, so long as its done securely and without coercion.

It does confirm how serious this thing still is, and that we are still in the midst of the pandemic, Jenne said.

Jenne said he too was having some trouble squaring the Houses efforts with the Republican rhetoric around the importance of vaccine privacy.

Optically, its not the best look to talk out of both sides of your mouth, Jenne said.

Sign up for our newsletter: Get Capitol Buzz, a special bonus edition of The Buzz with Steve Contorno, each Saturday while the Legislature is meeting.

Were working hard to bring you the latest news from the Floridas power players. This effort takes a lot of resources to gather and update. If you havent already subscribed, please consider buying a print or digital subscription.

Read the original post:

Florida House asks staff to report when they got vaccinated for the coronavirus - Tampa Bay Times

Posted in Corona Virus | Comments Off on Florida House asks staff to report when they got vaccinated for the coronavirus – Tampa Bay Times

The Facts and Gaps on the Origin of the Coronavirus – FactCheck.org

Posted: at 2:48 pm

In support of them, many people question why no intermediate animal has been identified yet and point to the proximity of a top coronavirus lab at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which is located about a half hour drive from the Huanan Seafood Market that was linked to many of the first COVID-19 cases in December 2019.

WIV is home to a lab headed by Shi Zhengli, a virologist famous for her work tracking down the bat origins of the last coronavirus epidemic. Her lab specializes in collecting coronaviruses in the field and then studying them to understand their potential for creating pandemics.

The lab has made chimeric viruses that mix and match different elements to better understand whats required to infect human cellswhichsomepeopleconsider to be gain-of-function experiments, although Shi does not. As wevewritten, there is no single definition of gain-of-function, but in this context it typically refers to modifications that aim to make a virus more dangerous or infectious to study potential disease pathways.

Shi told Science that some of her coronavirus research was conducted at biosafety level 2 (BSL-2) a basic lab safety level that some say is inadequate; this information has also been publicly available in the methods sections of published papers.

Fueling suspicions about the WIV is the institutes removal of its online database of samples and virus sequences in September 2019 and news of a U.S. intelligence report that three WIV researchers fell ill and sought care in a hospital in November 2019.

Some people also speculate SARS-CoV-2 could have come from an abandoned mine where researchers from Shis lab collected bat samples after workers removing bat guano fell ill with an unknown respiratory illness in 2012 and several died. It was a sampling effort there that turned up RaTG13, the bat virus Shi announced in late January 2020 that, at 96.2% similarity, is the closest of all known viruses to SARS-CoV-2 in its overall genome sequence.

A few proponents further argue that the genetic sequence of SARS-CoV-2 contains several unexpected features that are indicative of bioengineering and that its curious that the virus was so well suited to infecting people from the start.

Underlying all of the supposition is Chinas lack of transparency and cooperation to find the origin of the virus, which many interpret to be incriminating.

Shi, however, has vigorously denied having the virus or any of its potential precursors and says that no one in the lab has tested positive for the coronavirus, nor do they have antibodies against it. If thats true, then theres no way SARS-CoV-2 came from her.

Despite several lab leak narratives that claim RaTG13 could have been modified to create SARS-CoV-2, scientists who study viruses do not believe thats possible. As others have explained before, RaTG13s genome differs from SARS-CoV-2 by more than 1,000 nucleotides, making it too different to plausibly have served as a progenitor. RaTG13 is too divergent to be this ancestral virus, David Robertson, the head of viral genomics and bioinformatics at the University of Glasgow, told us.

Moreover, Shi says there is only a genome sequence for RaTG13 anyway live virus was never isolated from the sample and that she has only ever isolated three SARS-related bat coronaviruses.

The only way SARS-CoV-2 could have come from the lab, manipulated or not, is if the facility was in possession of a virus much more similar to SARS-CoV-2 than RaTG13, multiple experts told us.

I would estimate at least 99%, thats the minimum. It probably has to be 99.9% similar to make that kind of switch in the lab at all, said Robert F. Garry, a virologist at Tulane University School of Medicine. Theres just no evidence that they had anything close to that.

In an email interview with the New York Times in June, Shi shot down the notion that she performed risky gain-of-function research, saying her lab had never conducted experiments that enhance the virulence of viruses. She also said she had no knowledge of any sick employees at the institute in November 2019, as suggested by a U.S. intelligence report.

In May, the Wall Street Journal reported a few additional details on the timing and number of alleged sick workers from the report, including that they had sought care at a hospital; otherwise, it was the same information in a fact sheet issued by the State Department on Jan. 15, which said the researchers symptoms were consistent with both COVID-19 and common seasonal illness.

The credibility and significance of the report of illnesses during flu season remains unclear. No scientist has any way of verifying whether this is true or not, said Maciej Boni, an associate professor of biology at Pennsylvania State Universitys Center for Infectious Disease Dynamics.

In its article, the Wall Street Journal noted that officials have differing views on the strength of the intelligence and that in China, its common to visit the hospital for less serious ailments.

If several people did have COVID-19 and were quite ill, Garry said that would mean hundreds of other people would have had COVID-19 at some other level. The workers would also have generated antibodies. Thats where the seroconversion data comes in, he said, referring to the antibody tests the WIV says are negative.

Given that Wuhan had a huge surge of flu at the time, he said, it was likely any sick researchers had influenza.

Suspicions have also swirled around the bat viruses Shis group collected from a closed copper mine in Mojiang, Yunnan Province, with some opining that the mine workers mysterious lethal respiratory disease was COVID-19 or a disease caused by a similar coronavirus and that SARS-CoV-2 could have come from the mine.

A bat sample collected at the mine, which is located in southwestern China about 1,000 miles from Wuhan, in 2013 ended up producing RaTG13, a partial sequence of which made it into a publication in 2016 under a different name. In a November addendum to her 2020 paper describing RaTG13, Shi reported she had collected eight other SARS-related coronaviruses from the mine, which she described in a preprint posted on May 21. All of those viruses are nearly the same and are only a 77.6% match to SARS-CoV-2, falling on a separate branch of the viral family tree than both SARS-CoV-1, the virus that caused the first coronavirus epidemic, and SARS-CoV-2.

Some claim its fishy that Shi didnt disclose the sequences earlier or mention the pneumonia-like illnesses or mine in her publications. Shi explained in her addendum that her lab had tested serum samples from the sick workers for bat SARS-related coronaviruses and they were negative; she retested them more recently for SARS-CoV-2 and they also were negative. She also noted that all of the viruses were only distantly related to SARS-CoV-1 based on an initial check of a single gene sequence; RaTG13 was sequenced nearly in full in 2018 once sequencing technology in her lab had improved and had been renamed from its bat sample ID to reflect the bat species, the location and the sampling year. That sequence is what Shi was able to consult following the identification of SARS-CoV-2 in early 2020.

Nothing about the mine story seems abnormal, Garry said, calling it a distraction. He added that there would have been no reason for Shi not to report identification of a virus more similar to SARS-CoV-2 than RaTG13 if she had found one.

We wouldnt be having this conversation because she would have known which animal or species of bat it came from. And the natural origin would be solved, he said.

In an interview with Science in July, Shi had already shared the details on the name change and explained that her lab did not pay special attention to RaTG13 initially because it was not especially close to SARS-CoV-1.

Edward Holmes, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Sydney, told Science that her explanation made sense. Of course, they would have been mainly interested in bat viruses closely related to SARS-CoV not some random bat virus that is more distant, he said.

As for the missing database, WIV told the WHO team that there had been an online spreadsheet of samples for internal use and there had been plans to make an interactive system, but because of more than 3,000 cyberattacks the data was kept offline.

Its possible, of course, that the Chinese are lying about the database, negative coronavirus test results of WIV staff and that WIV or another facility had SARS-CoV-2 or its precursor in one of its labs.

Lab escapes of dangerous pathogens have happened in the past, including multiple instances with SARS-CoV-1 in China. Its nevertheless the case that there has never been a lab accident that sparked a pandemic or led to an outbreak of a novel pathogen, nor has there ever been a known breach at the WIV. (One incident frequently cited as an example of a lab accident, the 1977 influenza epidemic in Russia, is likely to have been a vaccine trial gone awry, not a lab release.)

The WHO team was not able to independently verify the labs virus collection or safety records, although that was never the mandate for the organizations origins studies.

Some scientists would nevertheless like a more comprehensive investigation.

Ralph Baric, an epidemiologist and coronavirus researcher at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill who previously collaborated with Shi and was a signatory on the Science letter criticizing the WHO, told us in a statement that the genetic structure of SARS-CoV-2 points to the virus originating in natural wildlife populations, most likely bats,thatpassed fromanimals to humans but that more investigationand transparency are necessary to define the origin ofthe pandemic.

For example,a rigorous investigation would have reviewed the biosafety level under which bat coronavirus research wasconducted at WIV, he added. It would have included detailed information on the training procedures with records, the safety procedures with records and strategies that were in place to prevent inadvertent or accidental escape.

Dr. W. Ian Lipkin, an epidemiologist at Columbia University and a co-author on an influential Nature Medicine paper from March 2020 that found it improbable that SARS-CoV-2 was manipulated in the lab, has also raised concerns about safety. He told former New York Times science reporter Donald McNeil that he was troubled by the fact that some of Shis coronavirus work had been done in BSL-2 labs.

Despite the storys suggestion that Lipkin might no longer agree with the Nature Medicine papers conclusion that the virus was not bioengineered, he confirmed to FactCheck.org that he did.

I said only that novel bat viruses should not propagated at BSL-2 and that this raised concerns about biosecurity at the WIV, he said in an email. I dont disavow the paper.

He has since told the Washington Post that its possible that WIV researchers might have unwittingly become infected with a coronavirus they hadnt yet characterized.

Possible, however, does not mean equally likely, as Lipkin readily acknowledged. And indeed, even some who signed the Science letter, such as Baric, think the most probable scenario is a natural one.

Seeing how the letter has been interpreted to support the lab leak hypothesis, one signatory, Caltech professor of biology and bioengineering Pamela J. Bjorkman, has backed away from it.

I thought the letter would have the effect of prompting more funding for searching for natural viruses in animal reservoirs, which I personally have always assumed represent the origin of SARS-CoV-2 infections in humans, she wrote in a letter to the podcast This Week in Virology. Perhaps naively, I did not anticipate that the letter would be used to promote the lab origin hypothesis.

Marc Lipsitch, a professor of epidemiology at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and another co-author of the Science letter, also told Vice that the letter has been misinterpreted as backing the lab leak hypothesis instead of being a call for more research. He has emphasized the lack of evidence on the subject and told CNN that the lab leak hypothesis is not a fringe theory and should be investigated.

On the flip side, there are a few scientists who have reversed their opinions and now think a lab origin is more likely than a natural one.

But many scientists especially the ones with the most expertise in coronaviruses find a lab origin unlikely, even if they cannot exclude it.

The finding of SARS-CoV-2-like viruses circulating in horseshoe bats in both China and Southeast Asia, coupled with the strong links of the first cases to animal markets in Wuhan are very compelling evidence SARS-CoV-2 is the result of an animal associated spillover much like SARS, said Robertson, the University of Glasgow virus bioinformatician, who has studied how SARS-CoV-2 might have evolved. On lab-leak, theres no evidence that SARS-CoV-2 escaped from a lab other than the coincidence of the Wuhan Institute of Virology being there.

Goldstein, the University of Utah coronavirus virologist, agreed.

We know that a majority of the first cases that were picked up were directly linked to animal markets in Wuhan. We know that these SARS-related coronaviruses circulate in animals; we know that people are infected with these viruses, he told us, citing a study Shis group did that found 2.7% of people in a rural village had antibodies against bat SARS-like viruses, indicating past infection.

Additionally, he said, a study published in Scientific Reports in June showed the presence of multiple mammal species illegally being sold in wet markets across Wuhan between May 2017 and November 2019, adding to the plausibility of how viral transfer might have occurred.

And so, kind of all the ingredients are there, the epidemiological links are there; the scientific evidence for the virus being engineered doesnt hold up at all, he said.

Garry, the Tulane virologist, also noted the past examples of natural spillovers, including SARS; the fact that the first four known COVID-19 cases in Wuhan had links to different wet markets, as shown in the WHO report and no sign that Shis lab had any virus close to SARS-CoV-2.

There is no evidence at all for a lab leak. Nothing scientific, its just an accusation, Garry said. You have to think one of the leading virologists on the planet is part of a major conspiracy that is involving hundreds of people.

Early in the pandemic we repeatedlydebunkedbaseless conspiracy theories circulating on social media about SARS-CoV-2 being bioengineered.

For example, there werebogus claimsthatthe virus contains HIV insertions andfalse claimsthat the virus was created by a prominent Harvard chemist who wascharged by the Department of Justice on Jan. 28, 2020, for making false statements about his ties to China.

Many scientists remain open to a lab escape of a natural virus, but fewer entertain the notion that SARS-CoV-2 was engineered. While this cannot be ruled out entirely, multiple coronavirus experts view this as implausible.

I am completely confident that the virus was not engineered, University of Pennsylvania coronavirus researcher Susan Weiss told us in an email.

University of Utahs Goldstein said it was virtually impossible, while Dr. Stanley Perlman, a coronavirus researcher at the University of Iowa, went with impossible.

In March, a group of scientists, including Kristian Andersen of Scripps Research and Garry of Tulane, published a paper in Nature Medicine that combed through the genome sequence for any signs of lab tinkering and concluded there were none.

Initially, the researchers had been suspicious that there were elements that were engineered. But upon closer examination, the group rejected that hypothesis, as we have written. (Contrary to some suggestions, the Andersen paper was not just an opinion piece that had no vetting by other scientists. A spokesperson for Nature Medicine told FactCheck.org by email that the paper was peer-reviewed.)

Even if scientists used methods that would not leave a trace of manipulation, as some lab leak proponents have suggested, that would still leave the arguably insurmountable problem of not knowing enough to create the virus.

No one would know how to do it, Perlman said. If one doesnt have the virus in hand, how do you decide to make this?

Recently, there has been additional speculation about SARS-CoV-2s furin cleavage site, which is a spot on the viruss spike protein thats cut by the enzyme furin to activate the spike and prepare the virus for entering cells. Experiments have shown the site is required for the virus to infect human lung cells and for viral transmission in ferrets. At first glance, the site is potentially curious, as its absent in coronaviruses that are closely related to SARS-CoV-2.

Furin cleavage sites, however, exist in many other coronaviruses, such as feline coronaviruses and the virus that causes MERS. Because similar sequences for the cleavage site are found in other coronaviruses, its presence is not at all suspicious or indicative of lab manipulation, Robertson said.

The lineage SARS-CoV-2 emerged from is under-sampled so its not surprising theres some unique properties in its genome, he added.

Thomas Gallagher, a professor of microbiology and immunology at Loyola University Chicago who studies coronaviruses, also said he did not think the furin cleavage site was a sign of engineering.

Some coronaviruses naturally have furin cleavage sites, others do not, he told us in an email. These cleavage sites evolve naturally under various natural selective pressures. The selective pressures are often powerful, so the furin cleavage site is a hotspot for coronavirus variation.

In a self-published story on Medium, later posted on the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists website, former New York Times journalist Nicholas Wade zeroed in on an ostensibly suspicious element of the furin cleavage site. Namely, that the underlying genetic sequence of the viruss cleavage site looked manipulated because of two CGG stretches that code for the amino acid arginine. Because CGG is not often found in coronaviruses, he argued, instead of evolving naturally, it was more likely that a scientist had gone in and inserted the site into the genome while doing gain-of-function research.

In support of his theory, Wade quoted David Baltimore,Nobel laureateand president emeritus of CalTech,as saying the furin cleavage site with its arginine codons was the smoking gun for the origin of the virus and that it made a powerful challenge to the idea of a natural origin for SARS2.

But on Twitter, Andersen pushed back, noting that while rare, CGG triplets are not unheard of in SARS-CoV-2s genetic sequence and are used to code for arginine 3% of the time. Indeed, some feline coronaviruses differ there from SARS-CoV-2 by just one nucleotide. And now that the world is awash in SARS-CoV-2 sequences, theres no sign of the virus mutating away from using those triplets at the cleavage site, which might be expected if the sequence was unnatural.

Informed of Andersens points, Baltimore told a journalist with Nature that he agreed that the site could have evolved naturally. FactCheck.org contacted Baltimore as well and in an email he acknowledged he shouldnt have used the phrase smoking gun because it sounds so definitive, although he added that he didnt think Andersen is giving enough credence to the possibility that the furin cleavage site had a non-natural origin.

Virologists, however, say there are plenty of other reasons why its incredibly unlikely that the furin cleavage site was engineered, starting with the fact that the site is not a very good cleavage site.

This is a pretty bad one; its not cleaved very efficiently by furin, Goldstein said.

In fact, he said that based on other coronaviruses with similar cleavage sites, its known that mutations that make the protein sequence closer to the SARS-CoV-2 sequence end up losing the ability to be cut.

If youre trying to insert a furin cleavage site, Goldstein said, why would you pick a furin cleavage site that is not actually a functional furin cleavage site in other viruses?

Additionally, the cleavage site exists as an insertion in the genome that strangely breaks up the triplets in what is called an out-of-frame insertion. Any scientist wanting to add a furin cleavage site would just plop it in nice and clean, Goldstein said. I dont how to explain from a scientific standpoint how ridiculous this is, the idea that you would do an out-of-frame insertion. It just makes no sense.

Garry, the Tulane virologist, was also baffled by the suggestion that the cleavage site sequence showed the virus had been engineered. Which graduate student or post doc would think to put it in out-of-frame? That part I just dont get, he said. This, for all the world, looks like a natural virus.

Another line of speculation is that instead of a scientist deliberately choosing what to modify, the virus was serially passaged through human cells or an animal. That, in theory, would eliminate the requirement for a scientist to know what to insert or change. Lab leak proponents often cite experiments with human cells or humanized mice as a potential way this could happen.

But Perlman, who has done experiments passaging coronaviruses in mice, said that would not work. Most of the time when you take viruses and pass them in tissue culture cells, you get cells that grow very well in tissue culture cells and nowhere else, he said. And humanized mice are still mostly mice, he said, so the virus would adapt to growing better in mice, not humans.

Itd have to be something nearer to a palm civet cat, which is a weird animal to be passaging it [the virus], Perlman explained.

Youd also need a starting virus that is much closer to SARS-CoV-2 than any known virus, he said, and even then, the virus youd end up with would almost certainly not be SARS-CoV-2.

As a result, Perlman said, such a scenario could be technically possible but is extraordinarily improbable. In his mind, the engineering scenario can be ruled out, although he still considered accidental release of a natural virus as an unlikely, but possible, pathway.

Further complicating the lab leak scenarios is that when SARS-CoV-2 is grown in the standard cells used to isolate and propagate viruses in the lab,the furin cleavage site is frequently lost, as is documented in multiple reports. The Shi lab, notably, used those cells with each of the three SARS-related bat coronaviruses it successfully isolated in the past.

Some have also argued that SARS-CoV-2 was too well adapted to infecting humans at the start of the pandemic and that this could indicate human design.

But Penn States Boni said thats a faulty line of thinking.

Theres no guarantee that something that crosses over has to be perfectly adapted or half adapted or a third adapted. Whatever happens, happens, he said.

The H1N1 swine flu pandemic in 2009, for example, he said, was very well adapted to humans and took off very easily and very quickly. It is not a sign that they were bioengineered, Boni said.

A paper he co-authored with Robertson in PLOS Biology pieced together SARS-CoV-2s evolutionary history and suggests that the viruss ability to infect a broad range of mammals evolved hundreds of years ago.

This would indicate that the SARS-CoV-2 progenitor did not have to adapt to humans much, if at all, Robertson said, because it had already become a generalist virus long ago, although he said an intermediate animal could very well still be involved in the transfer to a human.

For some, its more than a coincidence that a novel coronavirus outbreak began in the same place as Chinas premier coronavirus research lab.

But Wuhan is also a city of 11 million people and a hub for commerce, including the wildlife trade.

Theres thousands and thousands of large and small markets in a city like Wuhan where theres human-animal contacts every day, said Boni, who spent eight years doing field epidemiology in Vietnam. These human-animal contacts arent rare. People dont do their shopping at Whole Foods, people do their shopping at these markets.

Thus, while lab accidents do occur and Boni said the possibility should be investigated it doesnt really compare to the scale of human-animal contact that you have in a province like Hubei where theres 60 million people and on an average day 5 million of those people could have been in contact with an animal at a market.

Lacking more information, Boni said he thought a natural spillover for SARS-CoV-2 was a thousand times, a million times more likely than a lab leak.

Still, its true that there is no proof of a natural spillover, and some 18 months out from the first identified COVID-19 cases, the lack of an animal that transmitted the virus to humans has led some people to wonder whether there was one.

After all, with the first SARS epidemic in 2003, cat-like mammals known as palm civets were identified as possible intermediate hosts within several months and fingered more definitively within a year. And with MERS in 2012, it took about a year to find out that people had likely picked up the virus from camels.

But experts told us the delay is not unexpected.

Its not really surprising, said Goldstein. For one, unlike with the first SARS, the market linked to many of the early COVID-19 cases was quickly shut down, making it significantly more difficult to find any potential intermediate animals there.

You need to get lucky, he said. You have to go at the right time. If you go later, its going to be hard.

And, as Perlman, pointed out, If I were illegally trading in exotic animals and heard [a] SARS-CoV-2 pandemic was about to begin, the first thing Id do is take my exotic animals and high-tail it.

In China, it is not surprising that scientists did not find SARS-CoV-2 in potential animal sources immediately after the human outbreak in Wuhan. Nor does that result indicate there is a problem with the wildlife spillover theory, wrote Christine K. Johnson, director of the EpiCenter for Disease Dynamics at the One Health Institute at the University of California, Davis School of Veterinary Medicine, in an editorial in Scientific American. This is a difficult search that takes time.

There have been some efforts to look for an intermediate. The WHO reported that 80,000 wildlife and farm animal samples from China had been tested, all of which turned up negative for SARS-CoV-2. But Garry said that the figure is not as impressive as it might seem.

80,000 animals sounds like a lot, but a lot of those were domestic cattle and chickens and birds and things like that that wouldnt be expected to have SARS-CoV-2, he said. When you actually get down to the species that might have it, its maybe a few hundred samples at most.

Read the original post:

The Facts and Gaps on the Origin of the Coronavirus - FactCheck.org

Posted in Corona Virus | Comments Off on The Facts and Gaps on the Origin of the Coronavirus – FactCheck.org

Nearly 2000 Scots attended Euro 2020 events with COVID-19: health agency – CTV News

Posted: at 2:48 pm

LONDON -- Nearly 2,000 people who live in Scotland have attended a Euro 2020 event while infectious with COVID-19, Public Health Scotland said on Wednesday.

Thousands of Scots came to London for their game against England in the UEFA European Football Championship group stage on June 18.

Many headed to Wembley Stadium to see the game in person or gathered in the city center, while Hampden Stadium in Glasgow has also hosted games.

Of the 1,991 people identified as having attended a EURO 2020 event while infectious, 1,294 had traveled to London and 397 had gone to Wembley, Public Health Scotland said.

Cases were labeled if the person in question had seen a match at Hampden or Wembley, gone to a fanzone in Glasgow, or participated in an informal gathering at a pub or a house to watch a match.

There were only 38 reports of people attending Scotland's home game against Croatia while contagious, with 37 reports from Scotland's match against the Czech Republic at Hampden.

(Reporting by Alistair Smout. Editing by Andrew MacAskill)

See more here:

Nearly 2000 Scots attended Euro 2020 events with COVID-19: health agency - CTV News

Posted in Corona Virus | Comments Off on Nearly 2000 Scots attended Euro 2020 events with COVID-19: health agency – CTV News

Federalism System

Posted: at 2:47 pm

Federalism is a system of government in which power is divided between a national (federal) government and various state governments. In the United States, the U.S. Constitution gives certain powers to the federal government, other powers to the state governments, and yet other powers to both.

States have their own legislative branch, executive branch, and judicial branch. The states are empowered to pass, enforce, and interpret laws, as long as they do not violate the Constitution.

The federal government determines foreign policy, with exclusive power to make treaties, declare war, and control imports and exports. The federal government has the sole authority to print money. Most governmental responsibilities, however, are shared by state and federal governments and these include taxation, business regulation, environmental protection, and civil rights.

Federalism in the United States has evolved quite a bit since it was first implemented in 1787. Two major kinds of federalism have dominated political theory. There is dual federalism, in which the federal and the state governments are co-equals. Under this theory, there is a very large group of powers belonging to the states, and the federal government is limited to only those powers explicitly listed in the Constitution. As such, the federal government has jurisdiction only to the extent of powers mentioned in the constitution.

Under the second theory of federalism known as cooperative federalism, the national, state, and local governments interact cooperatively and collectively to solve common problems. Cooperative federalism asserts that the national government is supreme over the states.

Regardless of the kind of federalism, the Constitution does provide some very specific powers to both the states and the federal government. They are:

Read this article:

Federalism System

Posted in Federalism | Comments Off on Federalism System

Federalism in Germany – Wikipedia

Posted: at 2:47 pm

Administrative divisions of Germany. (Clickable image).

Overview of federalism in Germany

Federalism in Germany is made of the states of Germany and the federal government. The central government, the states, and the German municipalities have different tasks and partially competing regions of responsibilities ruled by a complex system of checks and balances.

German federalism dates back to the founding of the Holy Roman Empire in the Middle Ages, to the reforms that came with the Peace of Westphalia and to the constitution of the German Empire from 1871.[1]

Following German unification, German federalism came into conflict with German nationalism. Nationalists argued for power to be concentrated in the central government in Berlin, but were resisted by monarchs and their governments in the various German states outside the Kingdom of Prussia, with the Kingdom of Bavaria in particular keen to defend the rights afforded to it in the Imperial constitution.

After the end of World War II, the federal nature of Germany was restored, after having been effectively abolished under the Nazis. The current German constitution, adopted in 1949, protects Germany's federal nature in the so-called eternity clause.

Since re-unification in 1990, the Federal Republic has consisted of sixteen states: the ten states of the Federal Republic before re-unification ("West Germany"), the five new states of the former East Germany, and Berlin.

The Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany divides authority between the federal government and the states (German: "Lnder"), with the general principle governing relations articulated in Article 30: "Except as otherwise provided or permitted by this Basic Law, the exercise of state powers and the discharge of state functions is a matter for the Lnder."[2] Thus, the federal government can exercise authority only in those areas specified in the Basic Law. The states are represented at the federal level through the Bundesrat, which has a role similar to the upper house in a true bicameral parliament.

The Basic Law divides the federal and state governments' legislative responsibilities into exclusive federal powers (Articles 71 and 73), competing powers (Articles 72, 74), deviation powers (Article 72), and exclusive state powers (Article 70). The exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the federal government includes defense, foreign affairs, immigration, citizenship, communications, and currency standards, whereas the states have exclusive jurisdiction on the police (excluding federal police), most of education, the press, freedom of assembly, public housing, prisons and media affairs, among others.[3] Even in cases where the states have exclusive jurisdiction, they sometimes choose to work with each other and come to a basic agreement with the other states, which is then passed by the sixteen state parliaments and thereby enshrined into law nationwide. This is done in order to avoid legal patchworks. An example of this is the states' online gambling regulations.[4]

In the areas of nature conservation, university degrees, and university admission, among others, state legislation can deviate from (i.e. amend or replace) federal legislation.[3]

The federal and state governments share concurrent powers in several areas, including, but not limited to: business law, civil law,[3] welfare, taxation, consumer protection, public holidays, and public health. In many concurrent powers, however, state legislation only remains in effect as long as there is no federal legislation that contradicts its contents,[3] though the passage of such federal legislation may be subject to additional legal requirements, as stipulated by Article 72, Section 2 of the Basic Law.[2]

The areas of shared responsibility for the states and the federal government were enlarged by an amendment to the Basic Law in 1969 (Articles 91a and 91b), which calls for joint action in areas of broad social concern such as higher education, regional economic development, and agricultural reform.

International relations, including international treaties, are primarily the responsibility of the federal level but, as in other federations, the constituent states have limited powers in this area. As provided in Article 23, Article 24, and Article 32 of the Basic Law, the states (Lnder) have the right to representation at the federal level (i.e. through the Bundesrat) in matters of international relations that affect them, including the transfer of sovereignty to international organizations and, with the consent of the federal government, have limited powers to conclude international treaties.[5]

Some older treaties between German states and other countries also remain in effect. The BavarianAustrian Salt Treaty of 1829 (German: Konvention zwischen Bayern und sterreich ber die beiderseitigen Salinenverhltnisse vom 18. Mrz 1829), for instance, is the oldest European treaty still in effect.[6] 1957 the government of Bavaria used a revision of the treaty to actively claim the states' rights against the will and claims of the federal government.[6]

The Bundestag (meaning Federal Diet) is Germany's federal parliament and the de facto lower house of the federal legislature, and the Bundesrat (Federal Council), which represents the states at the federal level, is the de facto upper house. The entirety of the Bundestag is elected in a single federal election, which is typically held every four years, unlike the Bundesrat, which is composed of the sixteen state governments and therefore prone to change in its composition frequently, as the various states hold elections at different times with little to no coordination. As a result, the federal governing coalition (which requires a majority in only the lower house, i.e. the Bundestag in order to be able to govern, like in most other parliamentary systems) rarely has a stable majority in the upper house, i.e. the Bundesrat, and is therefore required to compromise with opposition parties in order to pass legislation that requires the Bundesrat's approval.

The Bundestag is typically the dominant body in ordinary federal lawmaking, however the Bundesrat's explicit consent (an absolute majority of members voting in favour) is required for every approval law, i.e. bills that affect state finances or administrational duties in some way,[7] which makes up roughly 40% of all federal legislation,[8] otherwise the bill is effectively vetoed and this veto cannot be overridden by the Bundestag. The Bundesrat also has the ability to veto every other type of legislation, so-called objection laws, by an absolute majority and two-thirds majority of all members, though this veto can be overridden by an absolute majority of all members and a two-thirds majority of voting members representing at least of half of all members in the Bundestag, respectively.[7]

A two-thirds majority of all members in the Bundestag and a two-thirds majority of all voting members (representing at least half of members) in the Bundesrat is required for any constitutional amendment.[7]

In a rotating fashion, Federal Constitutional Court judges are elected by a two-thirds majority vote by the Bundestag and the Bundesrat.[9] By a majority vote, judges of other federal courts (e.g. Federal Court of Justice) are elected simultaneously by both the federation and the states with each having half of the voting power.[10]

The president of Germany, a largely symbolic position given Germany's parliamentary system but nonetheless the official head of state, is also elected by both the federal parliament and state legislatures coequally (see: Federal Convention (Germany)).

The makeup of the Bundesrat and therefore the representation of the states at the federal level is fundamentally different from the upper houses of some other federal systems, such as the Swiss Council of States or the United States Senate. In those countries, upper house legislators are elected separately and are therefore independent from their respective state governments. In contrast, the members of the Bundesrat are merely delegates of state governments and invariably vote and propose laws as instructed by their respective governments, meaning the states exert direct influence over federal politics.

Since Germany is a member of the European Union, some of the powers the federal government constitutionally possesses are, in practice, exercised by EU institutions, namely by the European Parliament, the European Commission, the European Council, and the European Court of Justice. The EU policy areas, shared or exclusive, include, but are not limited to: monetary policy (Germany being a member of the Eurozone), environment, agriculture, foreign policy, internal market, customs union, and consumer protection. However, all of these powers were freely delegated to the EU by Germany (unlike in a federation where power is inherent and does not require delegation) and Germany remains sovereign and maintains the right to leave the union, therefore, the EU is not part of German federalism. Germany also maintains a large degree of control over EU policy through the European Council and its MEPs in the European Parliament.

Excerpt from:

Federalism in Germany - Wikipedia

Posted in Federalism | Comments Off on Federalism in Germany – Wikipedia

Concepts of Federalism – CliffsNotes

Posted: at 2:47 pm

Federalism is atype of government in which the power is divided between the nationalgovernment and other governmental units. It contrasts with a unitary government, in which a centralauthority holds the power, and a confederation,in which states, for example, are clearly dominant.

While the Constitution addressed only the relationship between the federal government and the states, the American people are under multiple jurisdictions. A person not only pays his or her federal income tax but also may pay state and city income taxes as well. Property taxes are collected by counties and are used to provide law enforcement, build new schools, and maintain local roads.

Throughout the 20th century, the power of the federal government expanded considerably through legislation and court decisions. While much recent political debate has centered on returning power to the states, the relationship between the federal government and the states has been argued over for most of the history of the United States.

Although the Constitution sets up a federal system, nowhere does it define what federalism is. However, the framers of the Constitution were determined to create a strong national government and address the shortcomings of the Articles of Confederation, which allowed the states too much power. In terms of the balance of power between the federal government and the states, the Constitution clearly favors the federal government.

The powers specifically given to the federal government are not as relevant to the expansion of its authority as the Constitution's more general provisions; that is, Congress is to provide for the general welfare (preamble) and ". . . make all laws which shall be necessary and proper . . ." (Article I, Section 8). In the Constitution as ratified, there is no similar broad grant of powers to the states. It emphasized what states cannot do (Article I, Section 10) and gave them authority in just a few areas namely, establishing voter qualifications and setting up the mechanics of congressional elections. This reduction in power was corrected through the Tenth Amendment, which reserved to the states or the people all powers either not specifically delegated to the national government or specifically denied to the states. The language in the general welfare and elastic clauses and the Tenth Amendment is vague enough to allow widely different interpretations. Because both federal and state governments can turn to the Constitution for support, it is not surprising that different concepts of federalism have emerged.

Dual federalism looks at the federal system as a sort of "layer cake," with each layer of government performing the tasks that make the most sense for that level.

The initial framing and ratification of the Constitution reflected this theory. Even those people supporting a stronger national government proposed that powers in the federal government be distinct and limited, with certain tasks enumerated for the national government in the Constitution and the remaining tasks left to the state governments. Because this theory leaves each government supreme within its own sphere of operations, it is also sometimes called dual sovereignty.

One more-extreme outgrowth of this theory is the idea of states' rights, which holds that, because the national government is not allowed to infringe on spheres left to state government, doing so violates the states' constitutional rights (especially the Tenth Amendment, which specifically reserves undelegated powers for the states). Federal government action in those spheres represents an unlawful seizure of power by one level of government at the expense of another. This view has historically been popular in the South, where it was viewed as preventing national government interference in the region's race relations, but it has been invoked elsewhere as well.

The problem with taking dual federalism this far is figuring out who defines where one layer ends and the next layer starts. Before the Civil War, some voices said that, to protect their rights, states could secede from the Union or declare national laws that affect them null and void but those arguments are no longer taken seriously. Instead, the U.S. Supreme Court resolves disputes within the federal structure, and because the Court is a national institution, it rarely favors the states.

The theory of cooperative federalism emerged during the New Deal, when the power of the federal government grew in response to the Great Depression. It does not recognize a clear distinction between the functions of the states and Washington, and it emphasizes that there are many areas in which their responsibilities overlap. For example, drug enforcement involves federal agents, state troopers, and local police. The federal government supplies funds for education, but the state and local school boards choose curriculum and set qualifications for teachers. (Interestingly, attempts to set national standards for students in certain subjects have raised concerns of federal intrusion.) The notion of overlapping jurisdictions is expressed by the term marble-cake federalism.

Cooperative federalism takes a very loose view of the elastic clause that allows power to flow through federal government. It is a more accurate model of how the federal system has worked over much of U.S. history.

Read the original post:

Concepts of Federalism - CliffsNotes

Posted in Federalism | Comments Off on Concepts of Federalism – CliffsNotes

Democracy, Oppn and federalism – Daily Pioneer

Posted: at 2:47 pm

At no point since Independence has India experienced such healthy and vibrant sense of federalism, irrespective of what the Opposition claims

An oft-repeated criticism by the Opposition is that since the current Government came to power in 2014, there has been a dilution in federalism which, in a large country, is believed to be an important facet of democracy. The question is: Has there been such a dilution? The issue of federalism can be discussed subsequently. Elections, both at the Centre and in States, have been held regularly and on schedule. COVID or not, polls recently took place in Kerala, Puducherry, Tamil Nadu, Assam and West Bengal.

If I remember correctly, there might have been Presidents Rule in one of our smaller States for a few days. Other than that, one can assert that Article 356 has not been used by the Centre; this is in contrast to even Jawaharlal Nehru who had used Article 356 to dismiss the Kerala Government when Indira Gandhi was Congress president. As Prime Minister, she made it a habit of imposing Presidents Rule, with West Bengal being a particular target under its United Front Government. Deputy Prime Minister Chaudhary Charan Singh outdid Indira; as soon as the Janata Party Government was formed in early 1977, he dismissed all State Governments with a Congress Ministry.

The most federal step taken since Independence has been the introduction of the Goods and Services Tax (GST). Simultaneous with the levying of the tax, on a retail bill of even Rs 100, the GST is shared in half by the States and Centre. This tax comprises virtually the entire indirect taxation of the country. Earlier, the former Planning Commission used to make an allocation annually, when the Chief Ministers came to meet its Deputy Chairman with a bouquet of flowers. This allocation had no accountability, nor was the amount of grant determined by any just and equitable measure.

Take the case of Article 370. Does its abolition not place all States or Union Territories on an even keel? The birth of this Article was illegitimate. Approved by the Nehru Cabinet, it slipped into the Constitution as a purely temporary measure. Parliament never saw the light of this Article. Years ago, an Englishman visiting India had asked me whether this was a special favour by a Kashmiri Prime Minister to the Kashmiris? What could I reply? Whatever may be the extent of federalism prescribed by the Constitution, it must be applied blindfolded. The other aspect of federalism in practice is the quality of the regional politicians. Go back to the first two decades after Independence. Assam had Gopinath Bordolai, West Bengal had BC Roy and Atulya Ghosh, Srikrishna Sinha and Anugraha Narayan Singh in Bihar, Chandrabhan Gupta in Uttar Pradesh, Ravishankar Shukla in Madhya Pradesh, C Rajagopalachari and later K Kamaraj in Tamil Nadu, S Nijalingappa in Karnataka, and so on. Compared with these tall leaders, we do not uniformly have comparables today. To a great extent, they operated by principles, whereas today, national issues, whether health, defence of the country or foreign affairs, politics is made thereof.

One latest example is the COVID-19 pandemic and the acquisition of vaccines. Some regional leaders probably thought that purchasing vaccines was a pleasure which the Prime Minister was monopolising. In response, the PM declared that any State that chooses to acquire vaccines can do so. Within two weeks, they found it to be a difficult task and declared that it was the Centres duty to arrange for the vaccines. Such senior figures as Chief Ministers ought to realise the difference between political and social issues to make a success of true federalism. And certainly not contradict themselves within a fortnight.

Many do not realise the differences between a Union of States, federalism and quasi-federalism, or a unitary State. Also not realised is that there is a difference between a number of independent States voluntarily coming together to form a federation, as was the case with the US. In India, basically, the British handed over to us a number of provinces; plus, there were princely States that were asked to merge with either India or Pakistan. There was no other option. Given the variety of our population, in BR Ambedkars view, the polity was such that India had to be more centralised than, say, the US.

It is noteworthy that the concept of federalism was born with the inauguration of the US Constitution in 1781. During the times when monarchy was the general rule, the question of federalism never arose. In Europe, except for Russia, most countries were of a medium size or smaller, hence the question of federalism never arose. And Russia was an empire autocratically ruled by the Czars. Even democracy was not by any means a rule and Great Britain stood out as a shining example of democracy. Germany took to democracy after World War I and by 1934 it was back to a dictatorship under Adolf Hitler. France began flirting with democracy after Napoleon was finally defeated and imprisoned on the island of St Helena.

(The writer is a well-known columnist and an author. The views expressed are personal.)

Follow this link:

Democracy, Oppn and federalism - Daily Pioneer

Posted in Federalism | Comments Off on Democracy, Oppn and federalism – Daily Pioneer

NYC Ranked Choice Voting Reminds Us Why Federalism Is a Blessing – National Review

Posted: at 2:47 pm

Eric Adams speaks an election night party in New York City, June 22, 2021.(Andrew Kelly/Reuters)

Thank goodness for federalism.

New York City, that paragon of clean and fair politics, decided to tinker with its voting system and implement ranked-choice voting for its mayoral-primary elections this year. Some advocate ranked-choice voting for more elections. The waiting period we are in right now is the best argument for why ranked-choice voting should stay right where it is.

As things currently stand, Eric Adams won 29.3 percent of the first choice votes. Maya Wiley won 20.3 percent. Kathryn Garcia won 18.1 percent. Andrew Yang won 11.9 percent. Everyone else was below 5 percent.

So, of course, were currently waiting to see whether Garcia has enough votes to win the election the one who finished third initially and was eleven points behind Adams.

There are political scientists out there who will explain to you why this is better and why, on paper, more voters will be satisfied in the end with the results. But in a time when trust in election integrity is already low, we dont need a system thats hard to report and hard to comprehend.

Please imagine how this would work in, say, a national presidential primary with ranked-choice voting. Consider what would have happened if it turned out that in 2016, for example, Donald Trump won 29.3 percent of the vote, Ted Cruz won 20.3 percent, Marco Rubio won 18.1 percent, and John Kasich won 11.9 percent, just like the mayoral breakdown. And imagine that if a week after the election, we get preliminary results that indicate its a battle between Trump and Rubio. Oh, and we wont actually know the final results for possibly two months. Theres plenty wrong with our current primary system, but that does not sound like an improvement. And we have plenty of reason to believe a national presidential primary would be even worse because, unlike an election in New York City, it would involve the varying capabilities of the election authorities of every local government in the country.

Eric Adams has already put out a statement saying the way the results have been announced rais[es] serious questions, and we dont even have the final results in yet. Thats pretty predictable because, well, he got the most first-choice votes by a lot, and any voting system where the guy who gets the most votes doesnt win is going to be questioned by the guy who gets the most votes.

This has already happened when ranked-choice voting in Maine resulted in Bruce Poliquin, the last Republican U.S. House member from all of New England, losing an election where he won the most first-choice votes in 2018. He sued to have the law invalidated as unconstitutional, and his case rattled around the courts from the beginning of November until he dropped his lawsuit on Christmas Eve.

Do we really want to give politicians more chances to be sore losers and rile up voters who believe an election was stolen from them? Eric Adams won the most first-choice votes. If he ends up losing and wants to say the election was stolen from him, his supporters arent going to be interested in some animated data visualization and a 2,000-word thinkpiece explaining why theyre actually better off.

So what does this have to do with federalism? If youre one of the approximately 320 million Americans who dont live in New York City, you dont have to care about any of this.

We let local governments try stuff, which is great. If New York City wants to keep confusing the heck out of its voters, thats up to them. Ranked-choice voting, on the merits, is not a completely ridiculous idea. But now we know that in practice, its confusing and creates more opportunities for distrust in electoral processes. And now you cant say its never been tried.

See the article here:

NYC Ranked Choice Voting Reminds Us Why Federalism Is a Blessing - National Review

Posted in Federalism | Comments Off on NYC Ranked Choice Voting Reminds Us Why Federalism Is a Blessing – National Review

Time for Centre to embrace cooperative federalism for bullet train project? – Economic Times

Posted: at 2:47 pm

Last week, China started operating the first bullet train in Tibet, linking Lhasa to Nyingchi near the border with Arunachal Pradesh. The construction of this 435 km line began in 2014 in one of the toughest terrains with 90 per cent of the track being 3,000 metres above sea level. A senior Chinese Communist party official who was formerly in charge of Tibet has spoken about rapid trade and economic benefits to the region and dropped ominous hints about the rail line acting as a fast track for the delivery of strategic materials in case of a border crisis with India. Over the last 15 years, China has developed the worlds longest high speed railway network with a total length of 37,500 km, accounting for two-thirds of the worlds high speed railway network.

Indias maiden effort in construction and operationalising a 508 km high speed railway corridor connecting Ahmedabad in the capital of the Prime Ministers home state of Gujarat with the countrys financial capital, Mumbai, stands in stark contrast to the clinical precision with which the Chinese have executed their mammoth infrastructure projects.

The construction was expected to begin in April 2020 with December 2023 as its initial completion date, which has now been pushed to December 2028, as only 23 per cent of 156 km of land has been acquired in Maharashtra as against 95 per cent of 348 km in Gujarat and 100 per cent of 4 km in Dadra and Nagar Haveli.

A closer look at the history of this marquee project of national importance will throw light on some of the key reasons for the delays and impediments.

The project was originally conceived in 2009-10 under the Congress-led UPA government as the 650 km Pune-Ahmedabad high speed railway corridor via Mumbai but the Pune-Mumbai leg was dropped in March 2013 under the UPA government by advancing specious reasoning of financial constraints.

A project that should have been a beacon of Prime Minister Narendra Modis cherished principle of cooperative federalism has ended up being badly embroiled as a centre-state dispute with simmering discontent among the citizens of Maharashtra. Both in the 2014 and 2019 Lok Sabha elections, 11.4 crore citizens of Maharashtra reposed their unflinching faith in the dynamic leadership and progressive, development-oriented policies of the Prime Minister by returning unprecedented mandates. A strong belief that the central government would espouse projects that would expedite rapid economic progress underpinned these mandates.

Of the total project cost of Rs 1.1 lakh crore, the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) has agreed to provide 80 per cent (Rs 88,000 crore) as a 50-year term loan at a meagre 0.1 per cent interest rate and a moratorium on repayments for 15 years. The remaining 20 per cent would be infused as equity contribution with 10 per cent (Rs 11,000 crore) being contributed by the Centre and 5 per cent each (Rs 5,500 crore) by Maharashtra and Gujarat. The government of Maharashtra had initially readily agreed to provide its share of equity for the project.

The Centre was insistent that a large, prime piece of land in Mumbais financial hub of Bandra-Kurla Complex (BKC) be allotted for constructing a terminus in Mumbai. The previous Maharashtra government led by the BJP and its allies and those in the Opposition were strongly opposed to this as Maharashtra was intending to build the International Financial Services Hub at that very spot. Not only would this hub have catapulted Mumbai as one of the top global financial centers but would also have yielded the state thousands of crores in revenue over the years. There is a widespread belief that the previous state government had cravenly given in to the immense pressure from the Centre and compromised the interests of its citizens by not being able to convince the Centre to opt for another alternative plot for the terminus in Mumbai and include more cities from Maharashtra like Pune and Nashik in the proposed route.

Citizens of Maharashtra are happy that their brethren from the neighbouring state of Gujarat would derive enormous trade and economic benefits as a result of connectivity of key cities of Ahmedabad, Vadodara, Anand, Bharuch, Surat, Valsad and Vapi with Mumbai. Besides providing efficient and quick connectivity for the approximately 19 per cent citizens of Gujarati origin staying in the vibrant Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR) with their ancestral state, the bullet train would act as a force multiplier for trade and economic activities in Gujarat, especially for the Gujarat International Finance Tec-City (GIFT City) at Ahmedabad, the textile and diamond behemoth of Surat that is building Indias largest Diamond hub (Diamond Research & Mercantile city or DREAM), the chemical and pharmaceutical industries in Vapi and Vadodara etc.

The legitimate question being posed by the citizens of Maharashtra who are contributing an equal amount of equity capital as Gujarat and parting with a prime parcel of land that would have been its International Financial Centre is whether the Centre is not committing grave injustice by scrapping the Pune-Mumbai leg of the proposed original route and not including the emerging industrial hub of Nashik by building a short spur on the route. Nashik holds the distinction of being one of the four holiest of the holy places that hosts the sacred Kumbh. It is one of Indias leading agro-processing hubs particularly for onions and grapes (the wine manufacturing capital of India), has many key defense establishments at Deolali and Ozar like HALs plane manufacturing township, and is home to a vibrant engineering and automobile cluster of industries.

Reports of Nashik and Pune being part of future bullet train projects connecting Mumbai to Nagpur and Mumbai to Hyderabad, respectively, are widely perceived to be red herring intended to placate the rising discontent among the states citizens and kicking the can down the road to a distant and uncertain future. No wonder there is mounting opposition in the state for facilitating the acquisition of land for a project whose costs far outweigh the benefits for the citizens of the state. A resource crunch due to the once-in-a-century pandemic has put additional pressure on the states coffers to optimize its costs.

This simmering discontent and disenchantment can easily be addressed if the Honourable Prime Minister intervenes personally and upholds the principle of cooperative federalism, by including the cities of Pune and Nashik in the route and directing the implementing agency to consider any suitable alternative plot for the development of terminus allowing the state to develop its International Financial Centre. This singular intervention would go a long way in allaying unfounded apprehensions gaining ground about grave injustice being meted out to Maharashtra and its citizens and reduce the trust deficit. It would help in creating a conducive environment for the state government to convince its citizens to part with their land for a project that would benefit them. It would be a fitting example of adherence by the Centre to the precept of Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas and Sabka Vishwas.

(Ajay Bodke is a politico-economic analyst. Views are his own)

Read more:

Time for Centre to embrace cooperative federalism for bullet train project? - Economic Times

Posted in Federalism | Comments Off on Time for Centre to embrace cooperative federalism for bullet train project? – Economic Times