Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) speaks to a member of the press after a vote at the U.S. Capitol May 7, 2020 in Washington. (Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Jul 17, 2020
Public health experts on Friday panned a proposed amendment from a senior Democratic senator that would cut coronavirus aid money to states where leaders refuse to institute mask mandates.
Though the amendment was put forth by Feinstein as a way to compel better public health decisions, especially by many Republican lawmakers openly opposing mask-wearing and state-level mandates, Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP) president Dr. Adam Gaffney told Common Dreams the plan would only end up harming the most vulnerable.
"While policies to increase use of masks are logical public health measures, it makes zero sense to punish the residents of states for the decisions of their leaders by withholding crucial stimulus dollars as a legislative stick," said Gaffney. "States need urgent assistance now to maintain health, educational, and other social programs."
\u201cSenator Dianne Feinstein just pulled a very Dianne Feinstein move, announcing a proposed amendment to the next federal stimulus package that would withhold money from states where face masks in public are not yet mandatory. https://t.co/iQeEYpXlny\u201d— SFist (@SFist) 1595005975
Feinstein's plan would prohibit federal funding for any state without a statewide mask mandate. About half of all states have a mandate in place; in other states, like Georgia, leaders have resisted urgings from public health experts and efforts by local city and county officials to impose such a rule.
"This is a matter of life or death," Feinstein said in a statement, "and partisan politics shouldn't play a role."
\u201cHere is a portion of Feinstein\u2019s statement. What\u2019s absolutely ironic is that she\u2019s claiming to be above partisan politics and that \u201cthis is a matter of life and death\u201d.\n\nBut at this moment she is literally playing partisan politics and putting many people in danger.\u201d— Nicole Alexander Fisher (@Nicole Alexander Fisher) 1594947836
According to Benjamin Corb, public affairs director for the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, threatening to cut the funding makes as much sense as the White House's push to reopen schools.
"While I understand the temptation, using federal funds during a pandemic to force behavior (whether it be the administration and school reopening, or Sen.Feinstein and this policy) isn't the best way forward," Corb told Common Dreams in an email.
Corb acknowledged that the science supports Feinstein's contention that states should mandate masks, calling the science behind wearing masks to prevent transmission of Covid-19 "clear and indisputable."
"My concern is that Sen. Feinstein's proposal will hurt the average citizens of a state for the unwise actions of their governor or local leaders," said Corb. "Simply put--there have to be better ways to accomplish the goal of incentivizing mask wearing."
Why Your Ongoing Support Is Essential
Donald Trump’s attacks on democracy, justice, and a free press are escalating — putting everything we stand for at risk. We believe a better world is possible, but we can’t get there without your support. Common Dreams stands apart. We answer only to you — our readers, activists, and changemakers — not to billionaires or corporations. Our independence allows us to cover the vital stories that others won’t, spotlighting movements for peace, equality, and human rights. Right now, our work faces unprecedented challenges. Misinformation is spreading, journalists are under attack, and financial pressures are mounting. As a reader-supported, nonprofit newsroom, your support is crucial to keep this journalism alive. Whatever you can give — $10, $25, or $100 — helps us stay strong and responsive when the world needs us most. Together, we’ll continue to build the independent, courageous journalism our movement relies on. Thank you for being part of this community. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Public health experts on Friday panned a proposed amendment from a senior Democratic senator that would cut coronavirus aid money to states where leaders refuse to institute mask mandates.
Though the amendment was put forth by Feinstein as a way to compel better public health decisions, especially by many Republican lawmakers openly opposing mask-wearing and state-level mandates, Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP) president Dr. Adam Gaffney told Common Dreams the plan would only end up harming the most vulnerable.
"While policies to increase use of masks are logical public health measures, it makes zero sense to punish the residents of states for the decisions of their leaders by withholding crucial stimulus dollars as a legislative stick," said Gaffney. "States need urgent assistance now to maintain health, educational, and other social programs."
\u201cSenator Dianne Feinstein just pulled a very Dianne Feinstein move, announcing a proposed amendment to the next federal stimulus package that would withhold money from states where face masks in public are not yet mandatory. https://t.co/iQeEYpXlny\u201d— SFist (@SFist) 1595005975
Feinstein's plan would prohibit federal funding for any state without a statewide mask mandate. About half of all states have a mandate in place; in other states, like Georgia, leaders have resisted urgings from public health experts and efforts by local city and county officials to impose such a rule.
"This is a matter of life or death," Feinstein said in a statement, "and partisan politics shouldn't play a role."
\u201cHere is a portion of Feinstein\u2019s statement. What\u2019s absolutely ironic is that she\u2019s claiming to be above partisan politics and that \u201cthis is a matter of life and death\u201d.\n\nBut at this moment she is literally playing partisan politics and putting many people in danger.\u201d— Nicole Alexander Fisher (@Nicole Alexander Fisher) 1594947836
According to Benjamin Corb, public affairs director for the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, threatening to cut the funding makes as much sense as the White House's push to reopen schools.
"While I understand the temptation, using federal funds during a pandemic to force behavior (whether it be the administration and school reopening, or Sen.Feinstein and this policy) isn't the best way forward," Corb told Common Dreams in an email.
Corb acknowledged that the science supports Feinstein's contention that states should mandate masks, calling the science behind wearing masks to prevent transmission of Covid-19 "clear and indisputable."
"My concern is that Sen. Feinstein's proposal will hurt the average citizens of a state for the unwise actions of their governor or local leaders," said Corb. "Simply put--there have to be better ways to accomplish the goal of incentivizing mask wearing."
Public health experts on Friday panned a proposed amendment from a senior Democratic senator that would cut coronavirus aid money to states where leaders refuse to institute mask mandates.
Though the amendment was put forth by Feinstein as a way to compel better public health decisions, especially by many Republican lawmakers openly opposing mask-wearing and state-level mandates, Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP) president Dr. Adam Gaffney told Common Dreams the plan would only end up harming the most vulnerable.
"While policies to increase use of masks are logical public health measures, it makes zero sense to punish the residents of states for the decisions of their leaders by withholding crucial stimulus dollars as a legislative stick," said Gaffney. "States need urgent assistance now to maintain health, educational, and other social programs."
\u201cSenator Dianne Feinstein just pulled a very Dianne Feinstein move, announcing a proposed amendment to the next federal stimulus package that would withhold money from states where face masks in public are not yet mandatory. https://t.co/iQeEYpXlny\u201d— SFist (@SFist) 1595005975
Feinstein's plan would prohibit federal funding for any state without a statewide mask mandate. About half of all states have a mandate in place; in other states, like Georgia, leaders have resisted urgings from public health experts and efforts by local city and county officials to impose such a rule.
"This is a matter of life or death," Feinstein said in a statement, "and partisan politics shouldn't play a role."
\u201cHere is a portion of Feinstein\u2019s statement. What\u2019s absolutely ironic is that she\u2019s claiming to be above partisan politics and that \u201cthis is a matter of life and death\u201d.\n\nBut at this moment she is literally playing partisan politics and putting many people in danger.\u201d— Nicole Alexander Fisher (@Nicole Alexander Fisher) 1594947836
According to Benjamin Corb, public affairs director for the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, threatening to cut the funding makes as much sense as the White House's push to reopen schools.
"While I understand the temptation, using federal funds during a pandemic to force behavior (whether it be the administration and school reopening, or Sen.Feinstein and this policy) isn't the best way forward," Corb told Common Dreams in an email.
Corb acknowledged that the science supports Feinstein's contention that states should mandate masks, calling the science behind wearing masks to prevent transmission of Covid-19 "clear and indisputable."
"My concern is that Sen. Feinstein's proposal will hurt the average citizens of a state for the unwise actions of their governor or local leaders," said Corb. "Simply put--there have to be better ways to accomplish the goal of incentivizing mask wearing."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.