[Goose]

If I’m reading you correctly, you are stating that our lack of preparedness extends over time and Administrations.

Absolutely I am saying that. I think there can be no question this is the case. The CDC's own documents show this. The USPHS has also been neglected to the point it is a vestigial organization. Look at https://democracyjournal.org/magazine/if...e-fund-it/ After reading this article, consider it is referring to 6000 people. A drop in the ocean with COVID-19. The rot is deep and widespread.

If true, not surprising.  No political will to push that issue.  And the response would likely have been tepid at best.

There are two issues here. One is that the CDC could have and should have configured themselves to optimally respond subject to the constraints they had. They didn't do this. Instead of starting a program to involve industry and industrial labs in testing, which would have cost very little, they just ignored the problems. There are tons of things they could have done to make do with what they had. It would also be possible to involve specific members of congress in adding appropriations earmarked for particular CDC programs. Normally, I oppose this practice, but if real issues are being ignored that can be addressed at reasonable cost, it should be done. Earmarks are pork, but sometimes it does bring home some bacon.

The CDC became much more involved in epidemic response in the rest of the world. That is an important function, and it did help us avoid some epidemics spreading more widely. It is a valid role. They used USPHS personnel to do this. If you look at the reports praising the Ebola response in Liberia, you will eventually discover that the personnel are actually double-counted, with both agencies taking credit for the same people. Unfortunately, this type of response doesn't help with an epidemic that reaches the US. 500 people is a big deal in Liberia. It is nothing in the USA.

The second issue is that the people appointed to HHS and CDC management positions over the years have not been "doers". Lots of good sound bites, but no real desire to make changes and call attention to real problems. I am not convinced that Congress would have been tepid about a real alarm regarding our epidemic preparedness. Furthermore, fixing that kind of a problem is motherhood. Nobody can really oppose it. It is also lots cheaper than a lot of the other problems we have, and a lot better understood. Unfortunately no president appointed anything but  "yes men" to the leadership posts. It wasn't  a problem in the public mind and they made sure nobody tried to make it one. It is a culture issue.

[Goose]

If I’m reading you correctly, you are stating that our lack of preparedness extends over time and Administrations.

Absolutely I am saying that. I think there can be no question this is the case. The CDC's own documents show this. The USPHS has also been neglected to the point it is a vestigial organization. Look at https://democracyjournal.org/magazine/if...e-fund-it/ After reading this article, consider it is referring to 6000 people. A drop in the ocean with COVID-19. The rot is deep and widespread.

If true, not surprising.  No political will to push that issue.  And the response would likely have been tepid at best.

There are two issues here. One is that the CDC could have and should have configured themselves to optimally respond subject to the constraints they had. They didn't do this. Instead of starting a program to involve industry and industrial labs in testing, which would have cost very little, they just ignored the problems. There are tons of things they could have done to make do with what they had. It would also be possible to involve specific members of congress in adding appropriations earmarked for particular CDC programs. Normally, I oppose this practice, but if real issues are being ignored that can be addressed at reasonable cost, it should be done. Earmarks are pork, but sometimes it does bring home some bacon.

The CDC became much more involved in epidemic response in the rest of the world. That is an important function, and it did help us avoid some epidemics spreading more widely. It is a valid role. They used USPHS personnel to do this. If you look at the reports praising the Ebola response in Liberia, you will eventually discover that the personnel are actually double-counted, with both agencies taking credit for the same people. Unfortunately, this type of response doesn't help with an epidemic that reaches the US. 500 people is a big deal in Liberia. It is nothing in the USA.

The second issue is that the people appointed to HHS and CDC management positions over the years have not been "doers". Lots of good sound bites, but no real desire to make changes and call attention to real problems. I am not convinced that Congress would have been tepid about a real alarm regarding our epidemic preparedness. Furthermore, fixing that kind of a problem is motherhood. Nobody can really oppose it. It is also lots cheaper than a lot of the other problems we have, and a lot better understood. Unfortunately no president appointed anything but  "yes men" to the leadership posts. It wasn't  a problem in the public mind and they made sure nobody tried to make it one. It is a culture issue.