Last week thirty-eight mayors from major cities across America signed a letter to White House Covid Response Coordinator Ashish Jha, plainly observing the obvious about entry testing requirements: “The current policy is neither wise nor effective.”
It worked. The requirement has been lifted. The letter was the final straw to break the back of a rule that persisted despite never demonstrating the scantest evidence of any epidemiological benefit in the last 18 months. Amid mounting pressure from the public, the travel industry, and officials of both parties, the public health bureaucracy resolutely ignored all appeals to common sense.
But even now, the CDC is reportedly set to “reassess” the repeal in 90 days.
As with most ineffectual pandemic mitigations, misaligned incentives diverged the public interest from the interests of the technocrats creating policy. As a result, the US stood alone among peers in barring entry to travellers who tested positive for a virus that was already within its borders. Until the repeal, the rule caused immense stress for travellers, leaving some citizens stranded abroad, to the benefit of no one.
The policy existed only to feed itself. One well-connected startup found itself a primary beneficiary of what had effectively become a CDC-sponsored rent-seeking program. Since December 2020, “digital health solutions provider” eMed partnered with healthcare giant Abbott Laboratories to digitally certify results from Abbott’s BinaxNOW rapid antigen test. This digital certification was one of the only forms of self-administered test results accepted by the US for travel, and it was the most accessible by far.
For the service, eMed charged $150 for six tests or $70 for two. The only novel value eMed provides in this process is the certification of your test results, which itself only had value insofar as the US government continued to demand it. Put simply: the company would have had no product without the entry testing requirement.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe“For the individuals involved, there is no good reason to suspect any corrupt intent. It is merely a system of incentives that encourages good-faith actors to behave in ways unaligned with the public’s interests.”
For me, that’s the key insight of this article. There’s no need to invoke elaborate conspiracy theories to explain much of the pandemic response. The dysfunction was caused by technocrats pandering to other technocrats and reinforcing their shared world view. As the author notes, in a world of revolving doors, it’s a career killer to break with the technocratic consensus.
Overt conspiracy… Covert conspiracy.
Meticulously planned collusion… happenstance collusion.
Makes no difference to me. Adult people choosing to do evil, when doing the right, upstanding thing is always available.
Also worth noting, under the heading of ineffectual pandemic mitigations, that the US is still refusing to allow entry to unvaccinated adults, with or without a negative covid test.
That needs to end yesterday. ESPECIALLY when the allow Undeclared vaccine status along our south border with s steady stream of hundreds of thousands entering everyday! This is unrighteous and double standard as with all these policies.
“The policy existed only to feed itself.”
Could describe pretty much any “Covid response” policy this side of April 2020.
Raffi Keuroglian wrote, “As with most ineffectual pandemic mitigations, misaligned incentives diverged the public interest from the interests of the technocrats creating policy. As a result, the US stood alone among peers in barring entry to travelers who tested positive for a virus that was already within its borders.”
This American incompetence results from the fact that Washington uses affirmative action to give preferential treatment to African or Hispanic candidates for employment. The consequence is that the scientists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are less competent than their peers in Japan or Europe.
Multicultural diversity in the United States lowers the level of competence even further. Multicultural diversity involves mixing a superior culture (i.e., Western culture) with a bunch of inferior cultures. “Superior” means superior in the sense of responsibility, morality, honesty, diligence, work ethic, etc.
Get more info about this issue.