
US Hospitals say feds are seizing masks and other coronavirus supplies - notRobot
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-04-07/hospitals-washington-seize-coronavirus-supplies
======
mdasen
[https://www.universalhub.com/2020/baker-got-krafts-
involved-...](https://www.universalhub.com/2020/baker-got-krafts-involved-
getting-those-masks-try)

The Feds seized 3M masks that Massachusetts purchased. The governor found a
supplier to get more masks and had the Patriots (football team) fly their jet
to China to pick them up to avoid seizure.

Massachusetts has transported 300,000 masks from that mission to NYC under
state police escort: [https://www.masslive.com/patriots/2020/04/coronavirus-
respon...](https://www.masslive.com/patriots/2020/04/coronavirus-response-
shipment-of-300000-masks-from-new-england-patriots-plane-en-route-to-new-york-
city-with-massachusetts-state-police-as-its-escort.html)

~~~
andrelaszlo
3M as in the mask manufacturer or as in 3E6? :D

~~~
supercollision
from the article, 3 million masks.

------
MrBuddyCasino
"But the agency has refused to provide any details about how these
determinations are made or why it is choosing to seize some supply orders and
not others. Administration officials also will not say what supplies are going
to what states."

This seems incredibly negligent at best. If they're afraid of being accused of
being partial, transparency about the rules and procedures are essential. They
way they handle it now will only stoke the fire of mistrust and conspiracy
theories. How can a government be this inept?

~~~
supercollision
100% serious, not a low-effort political comment: I don't think they're at all
afraid of being accused of being partial.

Over the last few years, one of the things that has bothered me the most is
that the strategy of saying "fake news" or "bad journalist" (for males) or
"nasty question" (for women) and proceeding full steam ahead is proving to be
remarkably effective. There is zero accountability.

~~~
DuskStar
At the same time, the opposing strategy of "everything is a scandal", "nothing
good comes from anyone with an R by their name", etc has made people with an R
by their name care less about _actually_ being involved in scandals. If you're
going to be tarred&feathered either way...

And these two strategies play off each other very well. More scandals
(legitimate and not) make each one less significant, which reduces the cost of
being involved in a scandal, which...

~~~
Brian_K_White
What opposing strategy? Which people with R's by their names are not guilty?
And what terrible things are they being falsely accused of?

------
CalRobert
How long can the federal government be actively opposed to the interests of
states before the whole thing crumbles? At some point the conflict would
manifest itself as a reduced quality of life I'd think?

~~~
CalRobert
I worry my comment wasn't substantive, but in this case I refer specifically
to confiscation of _medical supplies_ during a _pandemic_. It disincentivizes
being a well prepared or resourceful organization if your stuff will get taken
anyway. When do those disincentives break the whole system?

~~~
op03
You have to just remind yourself what signals come in during a crisis (esp new
kinds people aren't trained for) takes a while to make sense off. Nothing will
make sense initially.

Even for decision makers up and down the hierarchy. Most of the time people,
even responsible people with good intent, have no clue what the right move is.
But they have to make moves for all kinds of reasons. And problems compound.

It takes time for mistakes to surface and unwind things. So give it time.

~~~
true_religion
Assuming good intent only works if you trust the top decision makers to foster
that kind of organizational culture. Unfortunately, in the US, we have a
president who has burned most of his bridges, and has lost a lot of “benefit
of the doubt”.

And remember is not a dual choice between malice and good. The administration
could simply be incompetent, obsessed with control, and afraid to look weak by
having states take decisions on their own.

~~~
Fjolsvith
> The administration could simply be incompetent, obsessed with control, and
> afraid to look weak by having states take decisions on their own.

And they could have a bigger picture of happenings that you or I do not.

~~~
Brian_K_White
They have not so far since day one. It is irrational and highly suspect to
pick today to start claiming there is any doubt to grant any benefit of.

~~~
Fjolsvith
I feel the same way about your position.

------
alextheparrot
Just tired of this all... the whole handling of this has been insanely
incompetent, especially at the federal level

~~~
earthtourist
No question it's been suboptimal but "insanely incompetent" seems a stretch.
The most logical comparison would be to other similar countries. The U.S.
handling seems to have been much better than UK, France, Belgium, Spain,
Italy, Iran. Similar to Denmark, Austria, Germany, etc.

South Korea and China seem to be doing well but if they don't achieve herd
immunity, and other states do, they might end up prolonging their pain
significantly. Although they'll probably be better off because they'll have
time to prepare and benefit from medical advances.

It's hard to judge while we're in the middle of this. The demographics and
cultural habits probably play a big role. The reports generated after this is
all over will tell us who did what well. I predict the U.S. response will be
shown to have been much too slow, lacking in sufficent preparation, but not
insanely incompetent when compared globally.

~~~
ShorsHammer
I have a lot of friends across the planet and everyone seems to think they are
handling it better than others, when provided with proof otherwise they have a
toolkit of responses to murky the waters.

The US response has been utterly terrible. For a government that spends far
more per person on healthcare it's absolutely shocking. This isn't including
private/insurance payments.

Completely dropped the ball and the whole world is watching you do it.

Here's a nice quick map to view how it's playing out across the planet:
[https://google.com/covid19-map/?hl=en](https://google.com/covid19-map/?hl=en)

~~~
earthtourist
I'm basing my comments on data:
[https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/](https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/)

In what way did the U.S. "completely drop the ball"?

As far as I can tell there are two things that could have been done better:

1\. Much more funding for the National Stockpile of PPE and ventilators.

2\. An early attempt to do a lock down.

Testing could have been done faster, but given that no attempt was made at
containment, this likely would not have made any difference. It may have made
things worse in some cases.

How many other countries even have a National Stock pile with PPE and
ventilators? How many have cargo planes flying supplies? Hospital ships sent
to hot spots? Field hospitals like the ones designed by U.S. Army Corp of
Engineers? An organization with the capabilities of the CDC? The rapid-testing
from Abbot Labs?

The U.S. has done a reasonably competent job as far as I can tell. The U.S.
has a very good expert leading the federal response, in Dr. Fauci. How many
countries have such an expert in charge of their response?

~~~
TeMPOraL
> _Testing could have been done faster_

Testing could have been done at all, period. Until ~two weeks ago, US hasn't
been doing any meaningful testing; courtesy of a) FDA/CDC bureaucracy
boondoggle, and b) both state and federal governments still thinking "it's
just a flu".

> _no attempt was made at containment_

And why is that?

> _would not have made any difference_

Monitoring hotspots as they develop would vastly improve the ability to
control the spread. Perhaps social distancing measures would've started
earlier.

> _How many other countries even have a National Stock pile with PPE and
> ventilators?_

You mean the one that's being made by seizing PPEs earmarked for hospitals?

> _How many have cargo planes flying supplies?_

Everyone who has a cargo plane or can charter one.

> _Hospital ships sent to hot spots?_

It's just a moving hospital.

> _Field hospitals like the ones designed by U.S. Army Corp of Engineers?_

Everyone has their version of a field hospital.

> _An organization with the capabilities of the CDC?_

CDC was even more impotent in this case than WHO.

> _The rapid-testing from Abbot Labs?_

Strangely not used when it mattered.

\--

The rest of the world has been watching US response for almost two months now.
It's hard to see it as anything but the worst in the entire Western world.

~~~
earthtourist
1\. Early mass testing might have have flooded hospitals with scared people,
the same way it seem to in Italy. Whether it was incompetence or reluctance,
it may have been a positive thing that there wasn't mass testing.

2\. Containment wasn't seen as a viable strategy among virtually any free and
democratic country. Locking citizens up in apartment buildings wasn't
considered an option. What free country has achieved containment? Maybe South
Korea?

3\. The U.S. national stock pile had millions of PPE and 12,000+ ventilators.
The U.S. miltary also supplied thousands of ventilators. I'll ask again: which
other countries had comparable national stockpiles?

4\. Commercial cargo is extremely expensive currently which means demand is
high and supply is constrained. I'll ask again: which countries have their own
fleet of global-reach cargo planes?

5\. Okay it's "just a floating hospital" so how many other countries have
fully equipped hospitals they can float into port within days?

6\. Is everyone's version of a field hospital up to the specifications of the
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers? I doubt the U.S. field hospitals are inferior to
_any_ country's.

7\. The FDA and CDC has been working with drug and testing companies quite
competently, as far as I can tell. Other countries will almost certainly
benefit from the work the U.S. FDA/CDC are doing.

8\. The Abbot Labs test is in use, and it matters now. Again, who else had
such sophisticated tests so quickly?

You (and many others) seem to be watching a lot of news media that is designed
to entertain you, so you keep watching. It's not a bad thing that the U.S. is
held to a higher standard but you shouldn't be ignorant that you're holding it
to a higher standard. And you should keep your facts straight. Otherwise you
risk buying into a narrative that, while entertaining or appealing to your
biases, may be largely false.

------
ianleeclark
It's an interesting combination considering that states can't rely on federal
stockpiles, either. It's a failed state at some point and we may well be
accelerating to that point.

------
JohnTHaller
You can always buy new masks from the 3-week old companies set up by
Republican fundraisers: [https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/27/republican-
fundrais...](https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/27/republican-fundraiser-
company-coronavirus-152184)

------
101404
I don't get it.

How long can it take it build machines that produce masks?

It's been weeks with this shortage. By now, there should be some production
lines that spit out a couple of million a day off these things.

~~~
akvadrako
Nobody is willing to pay market rates for masks. There was a story about this
a couple days ago.

It’s really absurd how many trillions are being wasted on a shutdown but
hospitals don’t have the capability to buy masks.

~~~
101404
Even more absurd: if every person was legally required to wear a mask in
public, the shutdown could be far less strict and many businesses could open
again.

------
AKifer
Just yesterday, reading these lines in Atlas Shrugged: ... said Scudder. "When
the masses are destitute and yet there are good available, its idiotic to
expect people to be stopped by some scrap of paper called a property deed.
property rights are a superstition. One holds property only by the courtesy of
those who do not seize it. The people can seize it at any moment. If they can,
why shouldn't they ?" "They should" said Claude Slagenhop. "They need it. Need
is the only consideration. If people are in need, we've got to seize things
first and talk about it afterwards."

And that was written 2/3 a century ago.

~~~
Simulacra
"The proposal which they passed was known as the "Anti-dog-eat-dog Rule." When
they voted for it, the members of the National Alliance of Railroads sat in a
large hall in the deepening twilight of a late autumn evening and did not look
at one another."

------
pulisse
> [A FEMA rep] said the agency factors in the populations of states and major
> metropolitan areas and the severity of the coronavirus outbreak in various
> locales. [...] But the agency has refused to provide any details about how
> these determinations are made or why it is choosing to seize some supply
> orders and not others. Administration officials also will not say what
> supplies are going to what states.

What possible reason could there be for distribution not to be transparent?

~~~
buzzdenver
The usual reason: there are factors taken into account that the Federal
Government would not want you to see. For example whether it is a Rep or Dem
state, or if there is a close election coming up for governor or senate.

------
jfnixon
Wait, wait, you mean we shouldn't have an all-powerful, top down, one-size-
fits-all response? DC doesn't know best for everyone? Local decisions are
better for a diverse nation with many differing communities? Why next thing,
you'll be talking about the labs of democracy, where we try different
responses to see what works rather than bet it all on a single plan.

------
mschuster91
Follow the money should be the clue here to why this happens. It's a clever
plot IMO - states and hospitals pay for supplies, feds seize them, feds
redistribute them to other states - for payment or political favors (i.e.
praising Trump on Twitter), probably.

------
onetimemanytime
In theory it makes sense: Hospital in New Mexico has 2 million masks, while in
NY they have none. Being an emergency that can and should be done. I said in
theory...

~~~
earthtourist
Why not in practice? One of the positive features of this pandemic is that the
infection is peaking at different times across cities. That means it should be
possible to surge PPE/ventilators/personnel to the hot spots, and shift those
resources over time.

Anyone who disagrees with this strategy should suggest an alternative.
Allowing life-saving supplies to sit unused in hospital stockpiles while
people die seems like a pretty stupid alternative.

~~~
watwut
Hotspots are not getting excess of supplies. The stuff goes to places
politically aligned with president.

The same federal government that said few days ago that "The notion of the
federal stockpile was it’s supposed to be our stockpile. It’s not supposed to
be states’ stockpiles that they then use"

The same federal government that claimed governors should find their own
supplies.

The same federal government that gives masks to private companies and then
have countries outbid each other for them.

~~~
earthtourist
You're espousing an unfounded conspiracy theory based on a very forced
interpretation of one person's offhanded remark.

Instantly disprovable with facts:

1\. NY is not politically aligned with Trump in the least. They have received
a huge amount of federal support.

2\. Los Angeles is not politically aligned with Trump, they have also received
significant federal support.

This kind of intellectual dishonesty among the anti-Trump is as shocking as
Trump's own level of intellectual dishonesty.

~~~
loopz
Nothing about that person is intellectual, all about gaslighting and fear-
driven policing.

