Nearly 700 vacancies at CDC because of Trump administration

chipotle
SaveComment41Like1
Comments (41)
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Iris GW

We don't need 'em. We're FINE. /sarcasm

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Jonnygun(zone 7)

Paywall. Earlier reporting from 2017 indicated that the cast majority were admin and such with exceptions for public health and a few other sectors. But, paywall.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
adoptedbyhounds

Your figures are from May, 2017.

What can you tell us about the current situation? I went to the CDC website, and there are job openings all around the world. If the CDC is suffering from a serious lack of workers in the US, it's not apparent on their website.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Nana H

Anyone with any real experience in running a " business " knows you only advertise or recruit for positions you have the budget to pay for. The cuts to the CDC budget over the last few years by definition means they had to suspend programmes and let people go and not replace.

From Fortune magazine

The Trump administration recently requested $2.5 billion in emergency funds to prepare the U.S. for a possible widespread outbreak of coronavirus. Critics, though, are pointing out that money might not be necessary if the administration hadn’t spent the past two years largely dismantling government units that were designed to protect against pandemics.

The cuts started in 2018, as the White House focused on eliminating funding to Obama-era disease security programs. In March of that year, Rear Adm. Timothy Ziemer, whose job it was to lead the U.S. response in the event of a pandemic, abruptly left the administration and his global health security team was disbanded.

That same year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) was forced to slash its efforts to prevent global disease outbreak by 80% as its funding for the program began to run out. The agency, at the time, opted to focus on 10 priority countries and scale back in others, including China.



6 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Jonnygun(zone 7)

The CDC did, and probably does, still have quite a bit of bloat.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Nana H

......and you know that how?

6 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Jonnygun(zone 7)

You can google it just like I did. The NIH is much much worse. Or it was...

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Nana H

Can't be bothered to expend any effort checking out a position if the the person stating it doesn't have any interest in supporting it.

However, I will suggest that we are all inclined to think the agencies and departments that don't fit with our priorities are bloated and wasteful while the ones we do support are underfunded.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Jonnygun(zone 7)

Whatever floats your boat.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
patriciae_gw(07)

Bloat is people who are prepared to deal with something that hasn't happened yet until it happens. It is happening. : (

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
patriciae_gw(07)

As in Ebola did not become a pandemic though it had the possibility to as many other diseases do. That is because it was vigorously dealt with on the ground with a ton of help from countries where it did not exist. A lot of that help came from us in spite of the conservatives in this country who bitterly complained about spending our money on something that " didn't benefit us" which has to be one of the dumber things a person can say and I heard it here on HT. I don't recall any liberals having that point of view though some might have. It is singularly shortsighted. I hope now that we are woke to the possibilities we will get working on this.

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
adoptedbyhounds

"As in Ebola did not become a pandemic though it had the possibility to as many other diseases do."

Not in dispute. What did you think President Trump was trying to do with his travel ban from countries where Ebola was rampant?

As for spending US taxpayer money on things "that don't benefit us" Americans are very generous, and the notion that we're unresponsive to global health issues is preposterous.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
catkinZ8a

LOL, vintage carp from the WA POO.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Joaniepoanie

Don’t give a rat’s behind what Trump has to say about it later today. He’ll lie, downplay it and blame everyone else, as usual, even though he’s scoffed at science and the environment from the beginning of his administration by defunding agencies like the CDC, NIH, etc..

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
patriciae_gw(07)

Again adopted, the travel ban had nothing to do with Ebola. Not one of the countries on the travel ban list had Ebola at the time. Sudan had a small outbreak over fifteen years ago but not since. So...….

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

Trump cuts are hurting disease control.

Trump keeps slashing pandemic response

In 2005, during the H1N5 bird flu scare, the US Agency for International Development ran a program called Predict to identify and research infectious diseases in animal populations in the developing world. Most new viruses that impact humans — apparently including the one causing the Covid-19 disease — emerge through this route, so investing in early research is the kind of thing that, at modest ongoing cost, served to reduce the likelihood of rare but catastrophic events.

The program was initiated under George W. Bush and continued through Barack Obama’s eight years in office; then, last fall the Trump administration shut it down.


That’s part of a broader pattern of actual and potential Trump efforts to shut down America’s ability to respond to pandemic disease.

As it happens, the Covid-19 problem arose from China, rather than from Africa, where the programs Trump shut down were working. But now that containment in China seems to have failed, the next big global risk is that the virus will spread to countries that have weaker public health infrastructure, from which it will spread uncontrollably — exactly the sort of countries where Trump has scaled back assistance.

Meanwhile, to the extent Trump has done anything in the midst of the crisis, his predominant focus seems to have been on reassuring financial markets, rather than on addressing the public health issue.


https://www.vox.com/2020/2/25/21150574/trump-coronavirus-cdc-cuts



4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Jonnygun(zone 7)

Yall funny. Let's call a halt to all air travel. Turn the containers around and ship em back. Tell NYC and every other major city to stay inside. Bunch of nuts. This is not that big a deal.



Yet.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
adoptedbyhounds

"Again adopted, the travel ban had nothing to do with Ebola."

The SCOTUS ruled otherwise. Look it up.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

Today——83 in Nassau County, NY are being monitored for the virus after returning from China. It’s not a big deal except to the vulnerable and we have no known treatment or vaccine.

Trump talks about how many die from the flu and we have a vaccine for that. There is none for covid.

Trump blaming Stock market drop on debate. Rofl. How lame!

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
bleusblue2

adoptedbyhounds

"Again adopted, the travel ban had nothing to do with Ebola."

The SCOTUS ruled otherwise. Look it up.

~~~~

I tried to look it up. I found a lot about a Texas Supreme Court ruling; nothing about SCOTUS. Yes, there was a second Ebola outbreak in Africa. My cutting and pasting function is worn out for today so maybe you can post what you've found about SCOTUS ruling on Ebola travel ban. I have been asked for "source" myself and complied.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
patriciae_gw(07)

The countries that were on the list

Iran

Iraq

Libya

Somalia

Sudan

Syria

Yemen

are the countries that were on the original travel ban. Of those countries only Sudan has ever had Ebolia and a very tiny subset of Ebola patients at that that dates mostly to the 70's and one incident in 2004. None of the other countries have had Ebola. From that we can figure that the travel ban had absolutely nothing what so ever with Ebola which is what I said. I know that the Scotus has found for Trump as to the administration being able to ban people but it has nothing to do with Ebola. So why did Trump decide to ban people from the other countries? None of them had Ebola at the time of the ban. None. So why? Could it be that they were Muslim and Trumps base is afraid of Muslims? Weak minded people afraid of Muslims? Maybe? Ebola it cant be.


4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Embothrium(Sunset Climate Zone 5, USDA Hardiness Zone 8)

the conservatives in this country who bitterly complained about spending our money on something that " didn't benefit us" which has to be one of the dumber things a person can say and I heard it here on HT

One among a thousand.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
jlhug

Trump signed a hiring freeze in Jan 2017. It was lifted in May, 2017. Your article is from May, 2017. Do you want us to believe that 700 out of about 11,000 employees at CDC quit within five months? And none were re-hired in the next 35 months?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_United_States_federal_hiring_freeze

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

Info on 2020 budget cuts (anyone have info on the 2019 budget impact for CDC?)

Among its proposals for CDC, the White House budget calls for a more than $236 million cut to chronic disease prevention and health promotion, a $146 million cut for the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, a more than $102 million cut to emerging and zoonotic diseases, and about a $52 million cut to CDC’s environmental health activities, including funding for asthma and childhood lead poisoning.

http://thenationshealth.aphapublications.org/content/49/3/1.2

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kitchenwitch111

Trump blamed the Dem debate for Monday and Tuesday's stock market drop even though the debate was Tuesday night but whatever.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

And he didn't do anything until after the 1st day of market losses.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
adoptedbyhounds

"Again adopted, the travel ban had nothing to do with Ebola."

PATRICIA, You are correct in stating that President Trump's Travel Ban was unrelated to Ebola. Thank you for your persistence in making your point. You were right and I was wrong.

The Trump Travel Ban which you referred to as a "Muslim Ban," was a restriction on persons traveling to the US from countries that did not provide sufficient information to allow the United States to properly vet them.

A divided SCOTUS upheld the President's authority to impose such a ban. For those who may not be aware, the SCOTUS has a blog. It's linked below.


FTA: The order under scrutiny at the court was the most recent of three orders issued by the president since he took office in 2017. The first order, issued on January 27, 2017, imposed a 90-day ban on the entry into the United States of citizens from seven overwhelmingly Muslim countries – Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen – and put a 120-day hold on the admission of refugees, although it contained an exception for refugees who were religious minorities in their home countries.

After the lower federal courts blocked the Trump administration from enforcing the January 2017 order, Trump replaced that order with a new and similar (although not identical) order in March 2017. That order also imposed a 90-day ban on the entry of citizens from six of the seven Muslim-majority countries included in the first order (removing Iraq from the list) and suspended the entry of refugees, this time without any exceptions for religious minorities. When lower courts barred the federal government from enforcing that order as well, the Trump administration went to the Supreme Court, which agreed in June 2017 to weigh in and allowed the government to implement part of the ban until the court could rule on the dispute. But that case was removed from the justices’ argument calendar in late September, after the March 2017 order expired and Trump issued the current version of the order.

The state of Hawaii returned to court to challenge the September 2017 order, arguing that – just like its predecessors – it violated both federal law and the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court allowed the government to implement the September 2017 order while it appealed lower-court rulings in favor of the challengers (a development that made today’s ruling less of a surprise, because the government would have needed five votes to block the lower court’s injunction barring enforcement of the order), and in January of this year the court announced that it would review the new challenge.

In his opinion for the majority, Roberts first rejected Hawaii’s argument that the September 2017 order exceeds the president’s authority under federal immigration laws. Section 1182(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Roberts explained, “exudes deference” to the president, giving him “broad discretion to suspend” the entry of noncitizens into the United States. Under this provision, Roberts reasoned, the president can block noncitizens from coming into the United States if he determines that allowing them to enter “would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.” And the president has done exactly that here, Roberts emphasized, because the September 2017 order was the result of a “worldwide, multi-agency review” that concluded that the entry restrictions in the order were necessary, for example, to prevent foreign nationals from coming to the United States from countries that did not share enough information about their citizens to allow U.S. immigration officials to vet them properly. “In short,” Roberts concluded, “the language of §1182(f) is clear, and the Proclamation does not exceed any textual limit on the President’s authority.”

The majority similarly rejected Hawaii’s contention that the September 2017 order violates another provision of federal immigration law, Section 1152(a)(1)(A), which bars discrimination based on nationality in issuing visas. Section 1182(f), Roberts observed, “defines the universe” of noncitizens who can get a visa to come to the United States; Section 1152(a)(1)(A) then prohibits discrimination based on nationality in granting or denying visas to those noncitizens. But Section 1152(a)(1)(A) does not, Roberts stressed, limit the president’s ability to block the entry of nationals of some countries. Indeed, he noted, other presidents have done exactly that: President Ronald Reagan suspended the immigration of Cuban nationals to the United States, while President Jimmy Carter issued an order denying visas to Iranian nationals. But Hawaii’s argument, Roberts wrote, would mean that both of those orders would violate the law. “Nor would the President be permitted to suspend entry from particular foreign states in response to an epidemic confined to a single region, or a verified terrorist threat involving nationals of a specific foreign nation, or even if the United States were on the brink of war,” Roberts pointed out.

The entire article is linked below. The actual ruling can be downloaded from the scotusblog as well at Trump vs Hawaii.

https://www.scotusblog.com/2018/06/opinion-analysis-divided-court-upholds-trump-travel-ban/

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

As long as the market wasn’t affected Trump didn’t seem to be worried. That got his attention after all these weeks. As Biden said we should be insisting China allow us to monitor and they need to open their doors to help. Stopping it at the source should have been imperative. Now we are not even supplied properly at POC with patients.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dandyfopp

Don't worry guys. Donnie is totally focused on this crisis.




2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chipotle


5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
patriciae_gw(07)

Why, you are welcome Adopted.

We never spend money on things that don't affect us. We spend money to make the world safe for Americans. It is called "enlightened self interest" and is the underpinning of all US policy. Making the world safer for others makes the world safe for us and that is why our CDC works with countries around the world to anticipate problems and stop them before the next plague hits. It has the positive advantage of saving non valuable lives at the same time. This is tongue in cheek sarcasm more or less of course but true. It would be nice if the world's richest country just did stuff to be nice but we don't even do that for our own.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
ubro(2a)

As Biden said we should be insisting China allow us to monitor and they need to open their doors to help. Stopping it at the source should have been imperative.


Ummm? Insisting? Would the US be fine if China insisted they get to monitor the US? This is for the WHO to monitor not the US, this a world problem.

China is working hard with the help of the WHO. We get lengthy updates on CBC almost every morning from a WHO panel as to what is happening and China is working with many experts from other countries.

As for stopping it at the source the amount of travel, the amount of industry that ships and receives goods from China and all the people involved is astronomical. You cannot cage everyone, we are a small world and unless every boarder is shut to all, even food transport, you will never control something like this, all it takes is one mis-step

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

Ubro, maybe monitor was a poor word choice. Why is it China won’t let in the CDC? Are you sure they allow WHO in because I read a WAPO article China was not sharing info or being open with WHO.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
patriciae_gw(07)

Absolutely Ubro and all the more reason for all the organizations that countries join in mutual support. Our world has gotten so small. It once took years for some disastrous disease to spread over the world with a good chance of dying out before it went everywhere but now it can take a few days. So why are we pulling out of international accords? Why all the foolish opposition to globalization?

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Linda

Globalization can't be stopped unless the world returns to a very primitive level of existence. Which could happen, of course.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Annie Deighnaugh

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-fire-pandemic-team/?fbclid=IwAR2aecJjL76MY9yR1I81_aFDup7stxgrprfq46-XDKYV8i8e78Wpp_7s6Yw

The Trump administration fired the U.S. pandemic response team in 2018 to cut costs. True.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

Trump et al apparently sees health protection as a non-specialty field. Anyone can do it.

"The White House official charged with leading the U.S. response to deadly pandemics left nearly two years ago as his global health security team was disbanded. Federal funding for preventing and mitigating the spread of infectious disease has been repeatedly threatened since President Trump’s election.

...

The recent conflict between officials at the State Department and the CDC over how to transport 14 American cruise ship passengers infected with the virus demonstrates the consequences of not having permanent leadership over global health security, Klain said. He also said a permanent White House team focused on infectious diseases might have staved off the backlash that came from local officials in Costa Mesa, Calif., and Anniston, Ala., over tentative proposals to quarantine coronavirus patients."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/trump-says-he-can-bring-in-coronavirus-experts-quickly-the-experts-say-it-is-not-that-simple/2020/02/27/6ce214a6-5983-11ea-8753-73d96000faae_story.html

Note Bolton had some plans about this - dismantled stuff - and then he was fired.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Current Resident(z4 WI)

OP, your heading is incomplete. It should read because of Trump, AND!!!! the Republican party establishment. The former would have gotten NOWHERE whatsoever, had it not been for the latter's enthusiastic support.

The Republican Partys intention has always been (or at least for the last few decades) to shrink govt and drown it in a bathtub.

They've openly stated this. Their intention is quite simply to undo anything remotely progressive of the last 100+ yrs & return to the days of the robber barons of the 1800s and take up where they left off.

Its a huge mistake to be so fixated only on the shenanigans of the most visible of the bunch. If any of the resident repubs here think youre gonna keep your publicly owned schools, parks, fire service, snow plowing - better contact your reps cos they have other plans.


Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
carolb_w_fl_coastal_9b(zone 9/10)

Did someone flag my comment here from earlier this morning?

Or was it user error or another houzz glitch?

Anyway, VP Pence appears to have his priorities clear, rest assured...

https://www.tampabay.com/florida-politics/buzz/2020/02/28/whats-on-mike-pences-schedule-as-coronavirus-point-man-a-fundraiser-in-florida/

"...the Friday night fundraiser is at the waterfront home of U.S. Rep. Vern Buchanan, a Republican who served with Pence in Congress. The report was published hours before Trump tapped Pence to quarterback the coronavirus response.

The event, hosted by the Florida Republican congressional delegation, benefits the National Republican Congressional Committee, according to the invite. A spokeswoman for the committee confirmed the fundraiser is still on...."

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
ubro(2a)

Ubro, maybe monitor was a poor word choice. Why is it China won’t let in the CDC? Are you sure they allow WHO in because I read a WAPO article China was not sharing info or being open with WHO.

In the WHO news briefings the CBC airs live most mornings some of the doctors have indicated that they came back from China. A joint mission did go in in Feb. Notice that the US is included so, IMO, for the CDC to get special access is maybe something China believes is not necessary. Listening to the WHO briefings is a very good way to get non inflammatory information, they are knowledgeable and clear.

  1. The Joint Mission consisted of 25 national and international experts from China, Germany, Japan, Korea, Nigeria, Russia, Singapore, the United States of America and the World Health Organization (WHO). The Joint Mission was headed by Dr Bruce Aylward of WHO and Dr Wannian Liang of the People’s Republic of China. The full list of members and their affiliations is available in Annex A. The Joint Mission was implemented over a 9-day period from 16-24 February 2020. The schedule of work is available in Annex B.

    and further:

  1. To gain first-hand knowledge on the field level implementation and impact of the national and local response strategy, under a range of epidemiologic and provincial contexts, visits were conducted to Beijing Municipality and the provinces of Sichuan (Chengdu), Guangdong (Guangzhou, Shenzhen) and Hubei (Wuhan). The field visits included community centers and health clinics, country/district hospitals, COVID-19 designated hospitals, transportations hubs (air, rail, road), a wet market, pharmaceutical and personal protective equipment (PPE) stocks warehouses, research institutions, provincial health commissions, and local Centers for Disease Control (provincial and prefecture). During these visits, the team had detailed discussion and consultations with Provincial Governors, municipal Mayors, their emergency operations teams, senior scientists, frontline clinical, public health and community workers, and community neighbourhood administrators. The Joint Mission concluded with working sessions to consolidate findings, generate conclusions and propose suggested actions.


    https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/who-china-joint-mission-on-covid-19-final-report.pdf

1 Like Save    
Browse Gardening and Landscaping Stories on Houzz See all Stories
Home Innovations Natural Swimming Pools: More Beauty, No Chemicals
Keep your skin and the environment healthy with a pool that cleans itself, naturally
Full Story
Life 11 Things to Expect With Your Remodel
Prepare yourself. Knowing what lies ahead during renovations can save your nerves and smooth the process
Full Story
Data Watch A New Houzz Survey Reveals What You Really Want in Your Kitchen
Discover what Houzzers are planning for their new kitchens and which features are falling off the design radar
Full Story