Wisconsin Republicans TRANSCRIPT: 4/8/20, All In w/ Chris Hayes

Guests:
Chris Murphy, Samantha Power, Kara Swisher, Tom Perez, Chandra Ford
Transcript:

 

JOY REID, MSNBC HOST: Absolutely beautiful “ALL IN” with Chris Hayes is up

next.

 

CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST: Good evening from New York. I`m Chris Hayes. From

the beginning, from the first reports of a new mysterious pneumonia in

China, and the first intelligence reports that our government got, there`s

been a question that has hung over the entire U.S. government, over the

whole world, but our government specifically as it thought about how to

deal with this. How fatal how dangerous is this disease?

 

Even though we know now know that there was a stack of reports warning that

the pandemic was coming, that it posed an enormous public health risk, the

people in the Trump ministration just seemed completely and utterly

clueless, dismissing the threat posed by the virus.

 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

 

SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R-LA): What`s the mortality rate so far nationwide –

worldwide?

 

CHAD WOLF, ACTING HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY: I believe – worldwide, I

believe it`s under two percent.

 

KENNEDY: How much under two percent?

 

WOLF: I will get you an exact figure. I`ll check with CDC on – they`re

monitoring the worldwide mortality rate, and I will – I can get that for

you.

 

KENNEDY: But you don`t know the mortality rate today. OK, what`s the

mortality rate for influenza over the last say, 10 years in America?

 

WOLF: It`s also right around that percentage as well. I don`t have that

offhand. But it`s about two percent as well.

 

KENNEDY: Are you sure of that? Are you sure of that?

 

WOLF: A little bit. Yes, sir.

 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

 

HAYES: Are you sure of that? It`s a good question, because he`s not. That

is the Acting Homeland Secretary – Security Secretary at the end of

February. Not only could he barely make his way through that question, he

was just flat wrong and way off. The mortality rate for seasonal flu is

about point 0.1 percent.

 

The strategy for the President of the United States has been to downplay

Coronavirus by insisting it was just like the flu even though that isn`t

even close to being true. Trump, of course, was even calling it the corona

flu. And when the World Health Organization estimated in early March, this

was a key moment. They came out and they said that the Coronavirus death

rate globally was about 3.4 percent. That`s a shocking and really

terrifying number, right? When they said that the President just dismissed

that on Trump T.V.

 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

 

TRUMP: Well, I think that 3.4 percent is really a false number. Now, this

is just my hunch. And – but based on a lot of conversations with a lot of

people that do this, because a lot of people will have this and it`s very

mild.

 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

 

HAYES: That`s just my hunch, you know. The data, whatever, it`s just very

mild. Right now, just based on the numbers we have, the overall global

mortality rate appears to be at around 3.4 percent. Now, the truth is we

still do not know that for certain, in part because – I should say, sorry,

the U.S. fatality rate appears to be about 3.4 percent.

 

Now, we don`t know that for certain in part because we have no idea how

many people have the virus. We know where you`re missing a lot of cases,

right, because the testing is limited. Even more awful, it becomes clear

every day that we are almost certainly missing a lot of deaths.

 

Today, in New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said that 779 people had died of

the virus in the state over 24 hours, a staggering number, but one which is

almost certainly too low. Right now, that number only counts people who

were confirmed to have had the virus, and a lot of people are dying from

Coronavirus without getting a test.

 

The Web site Gothamist have this unnerving report that in New York City,

around 200 residents are now dying at home each day compared to 20 to 25

such deaths before the pandemic. That`s 10 times the normal death rate. On

Monday alone, New York City`s first responders encountered 280 people in a

single day, who had just died at home without being tested. And so they

were not counted in the official tally.

 

Now, I should tell you, New York City now plans to report probable

Coronavirus deaths in addition to confirmed ones, which should get us

closer to an accurate number. But here`s what`s clear. Amidst all the

misinformation, and the hunches, and the nonsense that`s been skewed, the

virus is deadly. It is deadly and there could be no question of that. And

we have told you the stories are 29-year-olds and 40-year-olds, people

without health problems, succumbing to the disease.

 

This is just an unbelievably dangerous scourge making its way across our

world and country. And as the sheer danger and horror of it, has reared its

head has become impossible to deny, right? We are finally maybe starting to

bend the curve. The social distancing is working. Here in New York City,

for instance, we are seeing of slowing and hospitalizations. That`s

encouraging.

 

And just at this moment as we see just how deadly this thing is, the

President has taken this opportunity to tell people, we should really start

to move on. “Once we open up our great country, and it will be sooner

rather than later, the horror of the invisible enemy, except for those that

sadly lost a family member or friend, must be quickly forgotten.” Must be

quickly forgotten.

 

The President kind enough to throw an exemption for those of you out there

who knows someone who died, but for everyone else, just forget about it.

Just put it out of your mind. It never happened in America. That`s an

admission of guilt. That`s an admission of failure. And more than that, it

is a recipe for disaster.

 

First, from a medical standpoint, we cannot just forget about this. I mean,

Dr. Anthony Fauci has made this clear every time he gets near a microphone,

we cannot just go back to normal once we start to emerge from the worst of

this virus.

 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

 

ANTHONY FAUCI, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS

DISEASES: When you gradually come back, you don`t jump into it with both

feet. You say, you know, what are the things that you could still do and

still approach normal. One of them is absolute compulsive handwashing. The

other one is you don`t ever shake anybody`s hands. That`s clear.

 

The other thing, depending upon your status, the possibility that when you

are in a group of people that you can`t avoid the six-foot limit, and you

can`t stay out of 10 feet, that you might want to wear a cloth face

protection.

 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

 

HAYES: Things will not be the same for a while. The other reason Trump has

called to forget about all this is so disturbing is the sheer human toll.

And we`ve lost a colleague here at NBC News. We now know people who have

been sick. In the United States, we`ve lost more than 14,000 people to this

thing. Again, that`s just the official count. The real number is probably

much higher.

 

In the September 11th attacks, we lost nearly 3,000 Americans. And back

then the idea was that that attack, that brutal and sudden attack, that had

changed everything, that we had to completely alter and we did completely

alter American society spending trillions of dollars waging multiple wars,

changing every airport and entrance to every building. We had to completely

remake American society to prevent it from ever happening again.

 

And now we`ve lost four times as many Americans to this virus, and Donald

Trump wants us to just shrug it off and move on and forget about it. After

September 11th, we said we will never forget. And when it comes to this

unimaginable horror Donald Trump says it must quickly be forgotten.

 

For more on how the Trump ministration does not want anyone to look into

what is happening and how they`re handling the virus, I want to bring in

Senator Chris Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut.

 

Senator, one of the reasons I want to talk to you tonight, in cable news

coverage, we see a lot of tragedy partly because of the way the news works,

mass shootings, terrorist attacks, you know, plane crashes, things like

that. And the politics around those tragedy can get very ugly. You can

sometimes feel like people are cynically manipulating those deaths in favor

of a, you know, a preferred political agenda. But I`m just struck at this

moment. I mean, the grief here is immense. You know, Newtown and that and

what happened in Connecticut is a sort of defining event I think in your

political life. Like, how are you processing this and what does it say to

you to watch this just sheer lack of empathy at all from the White House?

 

SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): Yes, I mean, of all of the horrificness out of

the White House during the last three months, the President`s total

inability to be empathetic and to plug into the grief and the terror of

this disease is maybe the most alarming. I mean, listen, what we know, for

those of us that work in and around gun violence is that when you lose

someone unexpectedly to a violent act, there are normally 20 other

individuals, family members, friends, brothers, sisters, who experience a

diagnosable trauma because of that loss.

 

And I don`t know that it`s going to be very different when it comes to the,

you know, 30,000 40,000 people who were taken quickly because of this

virus, there are going to be ripples of grief and trauma that we are going

to be dealing with for decades. And, you know, that just speaks to the

enormity of the health care project that`s in front of us. It`s not just

about trying to control and eradicate the virus, it`s also about dealing

with the trauma and the mental health effects that are going to spill forth

for months and years after we have moved on from this national emergency.

 

HAYES: I thought there was such as tell in the President`s tweet today

which we don`t often read on air, about, you know, everyone is going to

have to forget this, because they`re both not wanting people to look into

the ways in which they were warned and ignore those warnings, but also what

they`re doing right now.

 

I mean, it is really striking to me, the President went out of his way to

remove the person who was appointed to be the Inspector General over the

trillions of dollars, right, in that rescue package, specifically $500

billion, remove this guy with a sterling reputation – Glenn Fine who`s

tussled with Republicans and Democrats alike. What does that signal to you

about what they plan to do?

 

MURPHY: Well, let me say one quick thing first, which is that we don`t have

the luxury of time here, right? You know, we can`t spend a year figuring

out what went wrong because the next virus isn`t going to wait for us. And

so, part of the reason many of us want to immediately start standing up an

international anti pandemic infrastructure is because we don`t know when

the next virus is going to arrive.

 

But what you`re referring to is the here and now of how the president is,

for instance, allocating the $2 trillion that we have given him. My worry

is the President is right now thinking first, second and third about his

reelection. And he is trying to arrange the politics surrounding him in a

way that he can use the infrastructure of the federal government to get

himself reelected.

 

He`s got $2 trillion that he`s sitting on now. Wouldn`t he love it if he

could be able to spend it to reward friends and punish enemies. He now has

an intelligence infrastructure without a meaningful, competent Inspector

General. He`s free to perhaps try to maneuver intelligence and the spin on

intelligence in order to favor his reelection.

 

So I just think this assault on inspectors general is not coincidental to

the general election effectively beginning.

 

HAYES: You know, the point you made there at the beginning and which ties

to the Inspector General to me, which is so important here is that I think

people can view this sort of idea of accountability and oversight as sort

of some kind of political score-settling. But there`s a Pressing

substantive need right now, right? Because the virus isn`t going to go away

till we have vaccine.

 

I mean, we know in 1980s, there was – there was a spring bump and then it

really hit in the fall, right? We don`t know that`s going to happen here

again but we`re in it right now. The mistakes that have been made or are

being made or going back to work too early, all of those things can cost

more lives in the moment.

 

MURPHY: Well, and if you don`t set up the public health infrastructure

necessary to test everyone who`s symptomatic, trace their contacts and then

quarantine, then you A, can`t get your hands wrapped around this particular

emergency, but then you don`t have that infrastructure set up for the next

round of Coronavirus or the next pathogen that hits.

 

So one of the clear stories to tell about what went wrong is that we lost

tens of thousands of public health workers since the great recession of

2007, 2009. And right now, there seems to be no plan from this

administration to rebuild them, and we don`t have time because this isn`t

going away and the next virus might be just around the corner.

 

HAYES: All right, Senator Chris Murphy, as always, it`s great to talk to

you. Thank you for your time.

 

MURPHY: Thanks.

 

HAYES: One of the key things about this crisis is the world is all facing

it together, all kinds of countries with all kinds of governments, all

kinds of leaders with all kinds of politics. The virus transmits just about

the same everywhere, it looks like. Every policymaker in the world is

facing the same set of choices. And it would be an ideal time for some

leadership in the United States, or the very least true global cooperation

across borders.

 

But as Samantha Power describes in her new op-ed in the New York Times,

perhaps the worst thing that could happen will be the U.S. pulling everyone

else down the wrong path. I`m joined now by Samantha Power, former U.S.

Ambassador to the United Nations in the Obama administration. What`s your

concern right now about the role the U.S. is playing globally in terms of

how the Trump administration is dealing with the pandemic?

 

SAMANTHA POWER, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS: Well, first,

just the backdrop, which is that a lot of communities, a lot of countries

in the world start with not a lot of safety nets. And so already, just the

toll that our economic shutdown, our pandemic in western countries is

causing in developing countries is already massive in terms of jobs lost,

farmers who have no place to send their produce because flights have ended,

or shipping prices have gone way up.

 

And so you already have a sort of obliteration of economies in the

developing world. And the pandemic is just starting to hit. And so for

example, a month ago in Africa, there were no reported cases, now there are

7,000. Bill Gates has warned that as many as 10 million people could be

infected or could even die in Africa.

 

So, you have this sort of looming, then you have the core fact that we the

United States, on wanting to get back to normal. I mean some want to leave

to get back to normal before it is at all safe and when it is reckless to

do so, but everybody wants to get back to normal.

 

And how do we get back to normal when we are so connected either through

trade through the global supply chain, which runs to places like

Bangladesh, which have really crowded refugee camps that house Rohingya and

an incredibly large informal economic sector, lots of really overpopulated

city areas, and an informal economy again, that the bottom will fall out of

it any day now.

 

So you asked, I think your question was, you know, how is the United States

faring? I mean, we go into the U.N. Security Council virtually or into the

G-7, and we want to fight about whether this is the Wuhan virus, or what to

call it. We`re not rolling up our sleeves and identifying a set of really

different lines of effort that needs to be pursued at once.

 

Every head of state in the world is focused on their own people right now.

That goes without saying, but we`ve got to look just a little bit down the

road in a way that we haven`t up to this point, and that we have

individuals who work for the United States government who will be working

on domestic response and further preparedness or catching up for the lack

of preparedness.

 

But we have a whole another crew of people who are capable of building a

global coalition to share information, to take advantage of the staggered

spread of the disease, to pool insights as it relates to the

experimentation going on now around vaccines, and to pool resources for

those countries that will never have a $2 trillion bailout for their

communities.

 

South Sudan has four ventilators. You know, in the United States, we have

26 doctors for every 10,000 people, in Africa there are three. And so when

it comes to gloves, and you know, ventilators, and protective equipment and

so forth, the kinds of things we have scrambled to make available for own

health professionals.

 

I completely get that the thought of thinking about other people is really

hard when our own frontline workers are struggling, but we`ve got to

somehow build our manufacturing cycles or at least pay for others to do so,

so that those resources are made available or, again, there`ll be a natural

catastrophe and the day where we actually sort of get to return to the

normalcy that we seek will be postponed even further than what the virus in

the United States currently projects.

 

HAYES: Yes. I mean, it`s interesting, even if you take – so take for the

moment, the humanitarian concerns, which to me are the most pressing and

morally urgent away and just talk pragmatically. I mean, when you look at

places like Hong Kong, right, they did a very good job of sort of tamping

down the virus. Now, they have people coming into Hong Kong who were

bringing it from elsewhere. There`s no universe in which this just stays

where it is if there`s some terrible, unrestrained pandemic and some part

of the world. Like, that`s not staying there. We are all on the same planet

as far as this virus is concerned.

 

POWER: I think that`s really true. (AUDIO GAP) Trump mindset generally is

so 18th century. You know, the notion that we can decouple from others, you

know, that there were ever walls that could insulate from us from this, and

we`ve just lived how unsustainable that is. And so I think, you know – I

mean, he`s not thinking about this at all. He thinks about himself. But

were he thinking about it in his Trump way, he would be thinking, we will

just continue the travel restrictions, or we won`t, you know, allow people

from that country into our country.

 

But how then do we return to normalcy given how many of our manufacturing

industry industries are dependent on parts coming from parts of the world

that don`t have the infrastructure to deal with this pandemic without our

support? So you know, I think what`s happening right now is that the United

States has AWOL in terms of global leadership.

 

China, you know, is in there sort of bilaterally handing out supplies, some

of which are defective, some of which hopefully will not be. But China has

no experience from all of its clout and for all of the ways in which it has

asserted itself and fill the vacuum that the U.S. has left in the last few

years with Trump`s arrival and his retreat from international

organizations. It has no capacity to build the kind of global coalition

that I`m talking about.

 

You know, this requires shaking the trees hustling, badgering people,

calling out government governments that are staging cover ups. China will

be in a great position to make that, to issue that, deliver that talking

points. So you know, you need a combination of actors at the helm, and the

U.S. and China need to be in relative partnership on this.

 

HAYES: All right, Samantha Power, thank you so much for sharing some time

tonight.

 

POWER: Thank you, Chris.

 

HAYES: Next, the President`s favorite network is just peddling conspiracy

theories and promises of miracle drugs. The danger of Trump T.V.

misinformation after this.

 

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

 

HAYES: President Trump has genuine medical epidemiological experts like Dr.

Anthony Fauci, helping, guide him through this pandemic to the extent that

he`s capable of doing that. He also has the self-appointed experts of Trump

T.V., and the President`s Council of T.V. advisors, who he pays very close

attention to are coalescing around the idea that the whole thing was

overblown and we just need to pump everyone full of the malaria drug and

get them back to work. This is just what you – what you heard if you watch

Trump T.V. just last night.

 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

 

TUCKER CARLSON, HOST, FOX NEWS CHANNEL: Whatever is happening, this

epidemic appears to be doing less damage than anticipated, and it`s

receding more quickly.

 

LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST, FOX NEWS CHANNEL: You feel it, don`t you, that

America is getting increasingly anxious about this shutdown.

 

SEAN HANNITY, HOST, FOX NEWS CHANNEL: The cure can`t be worse than the

problem.

 

BRIT HUME, SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST, FOX NEWS CHANNEL: We may or may not

have flattened the curve, but we`ve certainly flattened the economy.

 

CARLSON: Any discussion of how we might transition out of the shutdown back

into normal life, for some reason has become taboo in this country.

 

INGRAHAM: We just cannot have our people deny the ability to make a living,

go to school, attend worship services, travel as they wish, see their

friends.

 

CARLSON: As awful as this epidemic has been and will be, at least so far,

it hasn`t been the disaster that we feared.

 

INGRAHAM: Given the fact that the death rate for COVID-19 may end up being

only slightly worse than a very tough flu season, we want answers.

 

HUME: Is it really true that the reason that we`re beginning to think we

may have turned the corner on this because we all did what the doctors said

we should do, or is it because the disease turned out not to be quite as

dangerous as we thought?

 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

 

HAYES: The disease not as dangerous as we thought? It`s got a 3.4 percent

fatality rate here in the U.S., 10 percent in Italy, that we know of. More

than 14,000 Americans have died from this disease in the last few weeks.

More people are dying from it every day in New York than die total in a day

in New York in a normal day, but sure, not a big deal.

 

From the beginning of this outbreak, Fox News has posed a genuine public

health threat by first downplaying the severity of the disease, now rushing

to say it`s all over. People have been trying to convince their loved ones

not to listen to the dangerously false information in order for their loved

ones to stay safe.

 

One of those people is Kara Swisher, co-editor – co-founder and editor-at-

large of Recode. She wrote in The New York Times a better experience trying

to get her Fox News watching mom to take the health crisis seriously. And

Kara, I know you have a story that I`ve heard from a lot of people because

there are a lot of people in the country who have gotten the message that

it`s not that big a deal. And it has been hard to convince them to do the

kinds of things like, you know, physical distancing. And you can even see

now this like, sort of substrate of passive-aggressive resentment against

it that is coming off the airwaves over there.

 

KARA SWISHER, CO-FOUNDER AND EDITOR-AT-LARGE, RECODE: Sure, sure. I mean,

what they`re trying to do is they initially had very bad information on the

air, something that both my brother and I – my brother`s a frontline

doctor in San Francisco working on this problem. We were trying to get my

mom great information.

 

And so, one of the problems was we were pushing up against the stuff that

was being broadcast very early on by Fox News, much of which was highly

dangerous. And so, I wrote a column about it. And one of the things I think

they sort of went crazy the fact that I pointed out what a lot of people

are experiencing with their parents who only use Fox News as a news to get

their news.

 

Now, my mom looks at other news. Of course, she does. But it has a lot of

influence because she was repeating initially a lot of the original things.

It`s just like the flu, get back to work, it`s not a big deal, it`s a

democratic plot. All the talking points that were on there, she was

repeating to me. And so it took a while for us to get through to her that

she had to stay home, she had to be careful to choose in a high-risk group,

and that she needs to take care of herself.

 

And we couldn`t be there. She`s in Florida. She`s you know, far away. And

so it`s really important that the very bottom level of information on all

of these platforms have to be accurate health information. I don`t care if

she wants to go on about Nancy Pelosi or whatever Fox`s line of the day is,

like Chuck Schumer is whatever. That`s fine. You can argue that over

Thanksgiving dinner, Easter dinner. It`s fine. It`s not a big deal and it`s

just a matter of political opinion. But when it comes to health

information, it`s really important that it is safe, it is correct, and it

isn`t made up in some way in order to push a political point of view.

 

HAYES: Yes, and I should just – to sort of bend over backwards to be fair

here, right. I mean, there is a certain amount uncertainty that actually

does exist, the uncertainty about the spectrum of how – what the case

fatality rate is and how bad this will be, what the future holds, when we

get back to work.

 

SWISHER: 100 percent. Yes.

 

HAYES: All questions we asked every night and contrast to some of the

things we said there about no one`s asking when we get back to work and get

back normal. Literally, that`s all anyone cares about is thinking about it

right now because it`s you know, it`s awful. Right.

 

SWISHER: Yes. I don`t want to be here. I want to get out. Everybody –

 

HAYES: But, to me, the sort of –

 

(CROSSTALK)

 

HAYES: That`s the thing that`s dangerous right now, because I think we`ve

seen the president kind of A, B test his response here in real-time of it`s

not a big deal, it`s war. It`s not a big deal, it`s war. That we got to

lockdown. The Cure can`t be worse than the disease. And you`re seeing this

growing call from these people who have a lot of influence to say, you know

what, guys, it`s time to stop listening the Fauci`s of the world, get this

sucker open back up, and I worry about what that – what that will do, both

to the president and the people that watch if we, you know, do that

prematurely?

 

SWISHER: Absolutely. You know, the numbers are down because of the things

that have been done, that were safe that the doctors had prescribed. And it

seems to me that that`s what we should – we should be listening to, even

if you overreact to anything. And listen, I want to be working. I`ve lost

money. I – you know, I don`t like being in the house. It`s – like, it`s

kind of this fallacy that you want this to get worse. I wanted to get

better. I want – I want hydroxychloroquine to work, but I also would like

it to be safe.

 

And so everybody wants to get the economy going, and everyone wants to get

back to work. We don`t want to put these grocery workers at risk. We don`t

want to put the delivery people at risk. But there`s no vaccine for this

and so we have to be very careful and very judicious. And to – and to make

its – take hope. Everybody has hope in this world. To take hope and make

it into a cudgel is the strangest thing I`ve ever seen.

 

And it`s – and you know, just the other day my mom was saying, hey, it`s

going to be great because that`s human nature to want it to be great,

right? And my brother calls it magical thinking, you know, that`s great.

But reality is reality. It`s still quite dangerous and pernicious and there

is no vaccine yet, as yet, but – and not for a while, so we have to be

very careful.

 

HAYES:  Yeah, prepare for the worst and hope for the best is sort of the

recipe to get through all of this – and not just hope for the best and and

then try to will it to be so through your mental – what you`re saying on

the TV tube.

 

Kara Swisher, thank you for making some time tonight.

 

SWISHER:  Thanks a lot.

 

HAYES:  And coming up, the racial disparities of this pandemic. A new CDC

study find African -Americans are disproportionately affected by the

Coronavirus. We`ll talk about that next.

 

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

 

DR. STEFAN FLORES, NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY MEDICAL

CENTER:  Dr. Stefan Flores here. I recently came off shift working in the

emergency department here in New York City, the epicenter of this global

pandemic. Places like Elmhurst Hospital in Queens, Brooklyn and places like

Washington Heights where I was born and raised and where I now work are

disproportionately affected.

 

These communities where people come from lower socioeconomic backgrounds,

who are black and brown, these migrant communities, these are the people

that are disproportionately affected. They can`t afford to miss a paycheck.

They can`t socially distance. They can`t Uber or Lyft to work, nor can they

actually take work from home or Skype in or use a Zoom meeting.

 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

 

HAYES:  As states have started to break down their reporting on Coronavirus

by hospitalization and fatalities by race, and unsurprising but still

shocking set of disparities has emerged. African-Americans are getting sick

and dying of Coronavirus at much higher rates than white Americans.

 

In Milwaukee county, Wisconsin, for example, African-Americans make up only

26 percent of the population but 73 percent of the reported Coronavirus

deaths. In Louisiana, after African-Americans are 32 percent of the

population but 70 percent of the deaths from the virus there. In Chicago

where they are 32 percent of the city`s population they make up more than

two-thirds of the Coronavirus deaths.

 

Now, there are a lot of reasons for these disparities which extend back to

well, before the founding of the country. So we wanted to talk to someone

who spends their entire life and career studying exactly this. Dr. Chandra

Ford is a social epidemiologist, the founding director of the Center for

the Study Racism, Social Justice, and Health at UCLA, the lead editor of

Racism:  Science and Tools for the Public Health Professional.

 

Doctor, maybe we can start with just an overview of the short answer

version of this, which I know comes as zero surprise to you or anyone that

studies the intersection of race and health in the U.S. But why are we

seeing this disproportionate fatality rate and in some cases infection rate

among African-Americans and to a somewhat lesser degree Latinos?

 

DR. CHANDRA FORD, UCLA:  Well, this pandemic is happening not just in test

tubes, it`s happening in populations. And when we think about the ways in

which the virus spreads in populations, we have to consider the

inequalities that are already there. There are foundational inequalities in

terms of things like where people live, residential segregation, that

affects the access that folks have to hospitals, health care providers, and

even thinking about the ways in which testing has been accessible or not in

different communities. These things help to explain why we see disparities

across different populations.

 

HAYES:  Bill Cassidy said something today, Senator from Louisiana, about

the racial disparities I thought was interesting. He said, “by the way, I

think if you control for diabetes and hypertension, a lot of racial

difference would go away,” which I thought was sort of a fascinating

question begging way of approaching the problem, because of course, when

you`re talking about co-morbidities and health problems, those are of

elevated rates among African-Americans, but that sort of precisely the

point of the things you study about how we got to that point.

 

FORD:  Exactly. So I mean, part of the problem is that we can push

ourselves in a direction that`s not very constructive, and that is to begin

to think that there are certain groups of people who for reasons that are

somehow related to characteristics of these groups that lead them to have

these vulnerabilities to disease.

 

What we really need to be asking about is not just underlying conditions,

but the underlying inequalities that lead to whole communities having

higher and disproportionate rates of these conditions.

 

HAYES:  What are the ways in which this shows itself most intensely or

acutely outside the pandemic, right? So, I mean, this has led people I

think in someways to look at the broader statistics. And if you look at

life expectancy, particularly, or incidences of heart disease and things

like this, you find these remarkable disparities that are just laying

around before the virus comes in and kind of exacerbates it?

 

FORD:  Sadly, we see these kind of patterns across nearly every condition

that we can think of. There are exceptions, but so much of what we

experience as disease and disparities is actually rooted in our social

inequalities. And so when those social inequalities are not accounted for

in our strategies to address whole population-wide problems, it looks like

what we`re seeing is that some groups have some inherent sort of greater

risk for it.

 

So things like differential access to health care, but even once folks get

into health care systems, that there`s differential treatment. So that we

know for instance, black folks don`t always get the same quality of care or

the same aggressive treatment or the same kinds of referrals.

 

So with respect to this pandemic, once we are able to get testing available

or access to care, we`ll also be needing to think about how can we account

for these historical injustices not only in creating greater risk f or the

underlying conditions and also for exposure to COVID – excuse me, to

COVID-19 – but also in terms of ensuring that the care we provide is

equitable and ensures that the outcomes folks have long-term are also

equitable.

 

So, when we think about, for instance, mortality, that`s going to be

something that has to do with folks slipping through the safety net,

especially in the health care system. That`s on the far end of it, not just

what happens – who is more likely to get tested, but also if we see higher

rates of mortality disparities there, then we`ll be really concerned about

what`s happening within the health care system that`s not enabling all

folks to do equally well once they`re in care.

 

HAYES:  I see.

 

So, you`re sort of breaking it down to sort of the things that happen

before the health care system is treating the illness right now, the sort

of societal aspects of that, the sort of structural inequalities, the co-

morbidities, among certain communities in certain areas, and then the

actual way the health care system now is dealing with the pandemic and both

of those kind of compounding each other and is to be studied as we continue

to go through this. Dr. Chandra Ford, thank you so much for sharing your

expertise on this.

 

FORD:  Thank you.

 

HAYES:  All right, coming up, we`ve got the president reiterating his

desire to suppress voting in November, as Senator Bernie Sanders suspended

his campaign today. Electing a president in the middle of a pandemic is

next.

 

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

 

SANDERS:  I want to express to each of you my deep gratitude for helping to

create an unprecedented grass roots political campaign that has had a

profound impact in changing our nation. While we are winning the

ideological battle and while we are winning the support of so many young

people and working people throughout the country, I have concluded that

this battle for the Democratic nomination will not be successful. And so

today, I am announcing the suspension of my campaign.

 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

 

HAYES:  In the midst of this Coronavirus crisis and a near national lock-

down, Joe Biden has now become the apparent nominee for the Democratic

Party this November. Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders who says he plans to

stay on the ballot to collect delegates for the convention so he could

still have influence over the party platform has nonetheless, as you saw,

decided to suspend his campaign.

 

It was a strange end to Sanders` run, because of the strangeness of

everything right now. I mean, no one knows what it looks like to campaign

during a pandemic. He and Biden have been trying to figure it out for the

last few weeks. No now, nobody knows how an election in the pandemic even

works.

 

I mean, after Wisconsin`s primary vote yesterday, which was a shocking

debacle rammed through by the state`s Republicans, it`s unclear if any

actually primaries will happen until at least June, and who knows, really,

after that.

 

Back in 2015, when Vermont Senator Sanders announced that he was running

then as the kind of lone named challenger against Hillary Clinton,

generally he was seen as something of a gadfly on a kind of mission for his

cause. And five years later, he`s one of the most popular and influential

figures in the Democratic Party, although he clearly failed to build a

majority collision within that party for a second subsequent election.

 

That said, the end of this campaign is different. I don`t know what it is,

whether it`s the more collegial (ph) relationship between him and Joe Biden

or the strange awful urgent context of the moment we find ourselves in. The

relationship here seems much less strained than it did in the waning days

of the 2016 primary.

 

Today`s announcement brings to a culmination five years of work by Senator

Bernie Sanders. His campaign and his message have been extremely

transformative in not just the Democratic Party, but in the national dialog

and conversation about the solutions to problems we face and in a palpable

sense, the 2020 Democratic nomination process feels right now less

fractured, palpably, intense than it did actually the last time around in

2016.

 

But that said, it is very clear Donald Trump`s vision of how his path to

victory will work includes stoking civil war and dissension among Democrats

and suppressing the vote. We`re going to talk about both of those things

next.

 

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Renee Bacon says she just got off a nursing shift and

arrived here around 8:03, and was turned away.

 

RENEE BACON, MILWAUKEE VOTER:  I`m upset. I`m really upset. Because they`ve

been doing – saying so many different things about how we`re supposed to

vote, when to vote. And we can`t do it now. And they should keep the polls

open later.

 

I wish I had did an absentee ballot or something, but I didn`t know it was

going to be all this chaos.

 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  She wasn`t alone.

 

UNIDENITIFIED FEMALE:  I don`t know if I will even be allowed to vote

tonight. It is just all really frustrating, confusing„ let alone being out

here without a mask and being afraid to even come in the first place.

 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

 

HAYES:  That was the scene last night in Wisconsin. One voter terrified to

be out in a pandemic, another voter, a nurse, just getting off her shift,

denied her ability to vote, because she apparently missed the cutoff by

three minutes.

 

What happened yesterday was a result of an insane, reckless, dangerous

undertaking by Republicans in Wisconsin to hold an election during a global

pandemic, an act cheered on by the president, who clearly sees his path to

success in the general election by suppressing the vote and by stoking

dissension among Democrats.

 

In fact, he`s been very clear about both today. He lobbied Bernie Sanders`

supporters to come join the Republican Party. He tweeted that Republicans

should fight against mail-in voting, because, quote, “for whatever reason,

it doesn`t work out well for Republicans.”

 

Great line there, for whatever reason, meaning a lot of people can vote and

the more people who can vote, the more people vote for Democrats.

 

You know, and November may seem a long way off, but everybody like a long

way off, but everybody working to keep democracy thriving in this perilous

moment needs to be thinking about all of this right now.

 

Someone who is certainly thinking about all of this is Tom Perez, chair of

the Democratic National Committee, and he joins me now.

 

I guess we will start with the news of Sanders suspending the campaign and

what that means almost in a kind of institutional sense for you, and the

DNC.

 

TOM PEREZ, DNC CHAIRMAN:  Well, I have great respect for Senator Sanders.

Over the three-and-a-half years I have gotten to know him really well. And,

Chris, what he has added to the party, what he stood for, what he fights

for, and it is simply remarkable. He`s changed the conversation in America

for the better. And while he is out of the race, I know he`s not going to

be out of the fight.

 

And I know personally, because I had the privilege of watching him and the

vice president up close and personal. You mentioned it a few minutes ago,

they have a very good relationship, Chris, they may see particular issues

differently, but their values are fundamentally aligned. And they`re going

to come together. They are coming together.

 

And I`m so proud of all of the candidates who said I`m in it to win it, but

when that doesn`t happen I`m going to come together and unite the party.

And that`s exactly what we`re going to see. And the vice president is

exactly the right person for the moment.

 

HAYES:  It`s very clear that – you know, if you look at the polling and

the sort of political record of the president, and the incumbent President

Trump, he has struggled to build out his coalition. He`s got the sort of

chunk of people who won the election with fewer votes than his opponent. He

got about 45 percent of the vote. And that`s what he`s sort of stuck with

even at the high water mark.

 

And so victory comes from essentially causing – you know, shrinking the

other coalition, setting people against each other, and then trying to make

sure that you could suppress the vote. How do you view your role and the

Democratic Party`s role in dealing with those two strategies?

 

PEREZ:  You`re exactly right. The politics of arithmetic I learned from

Senator Ted Kennedy, my mentor, addition beats subtraction any day of the

week.

 

Joe Biden has been expanding the field throughout. His coalition of diverse

communities of color, his coalition of union people, of disaffected

Republicans, has swept him to this dramatic set of victories. And then you

look at what the president – the incumbent president is doing, an ever

shrinking base. This is his formula for success – an ever shrinking base

coupled with voter suppression.

 

So, what we`re going to see – I mean, the Club for Growth is spending

millions of dollars right now digitally trying to sow discord within the

Democratic Party. It`s not going to work.

 

You are going to see more voter suppression tactics. We see it down in

Georgia. They`ve established a voter fraud task force. That is a crock of

you know what. It`s designed to stifle the vote down there. We know that.

And that is why we and not just the DNC, but the Democratic ecosystem,

whether it`s Stacey Abrams and Fair Fight, whether it`s Eric Holder and The

Redistricting Commission, we are going to come together, and we are coming

together, to build the best infrastructure we`ve ever given to a nominee in

modern political history. And that`s why we`re going to win this race.

 

HAYES:  But wait a second, there`s more than that, though. That`s

infrastructure. You`re talking – all of that, everything you just said

could have been said in 2016 or 2018, right, but because of the

longstanding desire to suppress votes by Republicans, there`s a different

situation right now.

 

I mean, we saw what happened in Wisconsin yesterday. There`s genuine fear

about whether the Democratic Party, legislators and everyone, are going to

push, to concretize contingencies, so that we do not have a November rerun

of the debacle that we saw in Wisconsin yesterday?

 

PEREZ:  I`ve never been angrier about an election than I was about

yesterday`s election. And I`ve seen Texas with voter ID. I`ve seen South

Carolina. Yesterday was the Republican Party putting people`s lives in

jeopardy. It was the U.S. Supreme Court coming up with a remedy, Chris,

that couldn`t be actualized.

 

They were saying as long as your ballot is postmarked by the 7th, it will

count. There are scores of voters in Wisconsin who still haven`t gotten

their absentee ballot. They couldn`t do that. That is unconscionable.

 

And what we know about voter suppression now from Wisconsin is that they

will go to any length possible, including putting lives in jeopardy. And

that is why we are coming together.

 

We will sue when necessary. We will use courts of law. We will use courts

of public opinion. And most immediately, Chris, we`re going to have another

stimulus bill at the end of the month and we need to make sure that we

include in that bill more resources so that there are in every single state

the option to vote by mail, vote no excuse absentee. That`s what we have to

do, Chris, because you shouldn`t have to win the geographic lottery to

vote.

 

HAYES:  Yeah, that`s a bright line issue, I think, as we head towards this

next bill to me, democratically.

 

Tom Perez, thank you so much for joining us tonight.

 

PEREZ:  Pleasure.

 

HAYES:  That is ALL IN for this evening. “THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW” starts

right now. Good evening, Rachel.

 

 

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY

BE UPDATED.

END   

 

Copyright 2020 ASC Services II Media, LLC.  All materials herein are

protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced,

distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the

prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter

or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the

content.>