Joe Biden signs bill on COVID origins declassification
President Joe Biden signed a bipartisan bill Monday that directs the federal government to declassify as much intelligence as possible about the origins of COVID-19 more than three years after the start of the pandemic. The legislation, which passed both the House and Senate without dissent, directs the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to declassify intelligence related to China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology. It cites “potential links” between the research that was done there and the outbreak of COVID-19, which the World Health Organization declared a pandemic on March 11, 2020. The law allows for redactions to protect sensitive sources and methods. U.S. intelligence agencies are divided over whether a lab leak or a spillover from animals is the likely source of the deadly virus. Experts say the true origin of the coronavirus pandemic, which has killed more than 1.1 million in the U.S. and millions more around the globe, may not be known for many years — if ever. Biden, in a statement, said he was pleased to sign the legislation. “My Administration will continue to review all classified information relating to COVID–19’s origins, including potential links to the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” he said. “In implementing this legislation, my Administration will declassify and share as much of that information as possible, consistent with my constitutional authority to protect against the disclosure of information that would harm national security.” Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
Dan Sutter: Accountability for a lab leak
Back in 2020, I wrote about legal efforts to sue China over the COVID-19 pandemic. A recent report from the U.S. Senate Committee on Health Education, Labor and Pensions and an expose from Pro Publica, and Vanity Fair provide more evidence for a lab leak origin of COVID. How does a lab lead potentially affect accountability? I remain agnostic on the virus’ origins. The Pro Publica expose documents a serious safety emergency at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in November 2019 based on interpretation by multiple experts of communications posted on WIV’s website. The experts agreed that the exchanges were urgent, highly unusual, and involved top CCP officials. The expose also argues that the patent submission for a Chinese vaccine suggests work began in November 2019 or earlier, or before the virus allegedly emerged in December. Other prominent voices also promote the lab leak hypothesis. Two points seem particularly relevant. A virus usually requires some time to “learn” to spread efficiently in humans, yet SARS-CoV-2 spread remarkably efficiently by January 2020. And evidence of the virus in animals in the wild has yet to be documented. Economics uses methodological individualism to examine human interaction. We start with individuals’ goals, incentives, and actions. Methodological individualism precludes viewing any organization, firm, or government as a “unitary actor.” Governments employ thousands (or millions) of persons with divergent goals, while groups face significant challenges getting members to do what is in the common interest. This matters or evaluating the actions of top Chinese officials. WIV directors likely concealed details if a leak did occur. Decisions by top Chinese officials might seem malicious if we do not recognize they may not have had full information. The WIV’s culpability for a lab leak is clear. But what if the U.S. funded gain-of-function (GoF) research at WIV? Senator Rand Paul has interrogated Dr. Anthony Fauci over the possibility of such funding. Some commentators suggest banning GoF research. Although beyond my expertise, GoF research seemingly can provide valuable knowledge. Furthermore, I doubt research can be banned without draconian controls over research labs worldwide. We could halt NIH funding but cannot control what researchers do with private funding. A better approach might limit GoF research to the very most secure Biolabs. What about the Chinese government’s liability? I am not a lawyer and will not examine legal considerations. Most significantly, China almost certainly could not afford full compensation. The value of a “statistical” life, economists’ preferred way to evaluate deadly tradeoffs, is approximately $10 million. Two adjustments must be made for COVID. First, a downward adjustment based on the average age of victims. Second, an upward adjustment since values of statistical lives is based on voluntarily assumed risks, and “involuntary” risks are viewed differently. Suppose we decide on $5 million. The global COVID death toll currently exceeds 5.6 million. Some deaths have likely been “with” as opposed to “from” COVID, so let’s say 5 million deaths deserve compensation. This is $25 trillion. Only a fraction of China’s $18 trillion GDP could be taken annually for compensation. And then add in medical expenditures, school disruptions, and economic losses. What about partial compensation? Suppose a friend borrows and wrecks your car, and insurance will not pay. Your friend may be unable to fully cover your loss, but an offer to pay what he can afford would still be appreciated. The offer signals a lack of malevolent intent. Markets acknowledge the moral value of all participants, who must voluntarily consent to exchange and employment. Authoritarian nations do not respect the moral value of all. Market exchange is part of civilized behavior, and authoritarian nations are not entirely civilized. Does their government’s recent authoritarian turn and allegations of forced labor disqualify China from the global economy? Opinions will differ. Cooperation on the origins of COVID-19 and an offer of compensation if the lab leak hypothesis validates would signal a desire to remain in civilized company. Daniel Sutter is the Charles G. Koch Professor of Economics with the Manuel H. Johnson Center for Political Economy at Troy University and host of Econversations on TrojanVision. The opinions expressed in this column are the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the views of Troy University.
Tommy Tuberville joins legislation to investigate COVID-19 origins
Senator Tommy Tuberville joined Florida senator Marco Rubio and 14 other colleagues to introduce the Coronavirus Origin Validation, Investigation, and Determination (COVID) Act of 2022. This bill aims to press for an international investigation into the origins of COVID-19 at laboratories in Wuhan. If passed, the COVID Act of 2022 would authorize sanctions if the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) fails to allow such an investigation within 90 days of the bill’s enactment. Sen. Tuberville stated, “Since day one, the Chinese government has been anything but transparent and credible as we pushed for answers on the origins of this virus. That must change. This legislation will hold the Chinese Communist Party accountable for the American lives taken by COVID and make it clear that actions will be met with consequences.” According to the bill, the COVID Act would sanction the leadership of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) and its affiliated institutes and laboratories, including the Wuhan Institute of Virology. It would also suspend federal research funding across all academic fields for studies that involve the CAS. Additionally, the bill would impose a prohibition on gain-of-function virus research cooperation between any individual or institution based in the United States that receives federal funding and any People’s Republic of China-based individual or institution. Rubio stated, “For two years, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has stonewalled all efforts to uncover the true origins of COVID-19. We know the virus originated in China, however, the CCP’s attempts to obfuscate the truth has led to countless deaths and needless suffering worldwide. It is clear that Beijing will only respond to concerted pressure from the United States and the international community. My bill will force the CCP to the table.” Other bill sponsors include Senators Tim Scott, John Cornyn, Rick Scott, Kevin Cramer, Roger Marshall, Steve Daines, Chuck Grassley, James Lankford, Ben Sasse, Cindy Hyde-Smith, Mike Braun, Marsha Blackburn, Bill Hagerty, and John Kennedy.
Mo Brooks calls for Anthony Fauci’s termination in midst of controversial email release
Dr. Anthony Fauci, arguably America’s most well-recognized health official in the battle against COVID-19, assumed a central role in political controversy following a newly released slough of last year’s emails, giving rise to concerns about COVID-19’s origin and the controversial scientific research U.S taxpayers have funded. Yesterday, Congressman Mo Brooks (AL-05) joined several of his colleagues in a news conference to discuss auditing the correspondence and financial statements of Dr. Fauci. Fauci is no stranger to the spotlight, as the immunologist was one of the world’s most frequently-cited scientists across all scientific journals from 1983 to 2002, in addition to the world’s 10th most-cited HIV/AIDS researcher from 1996-2006. He has advised seven Presidents and was awarded a Presidential Medal of Freedom by President George H.W. Bush in 2008 for his efforts on an AIDS relief program. Serving as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) since 1984, Fauci is perhaps more widely recognized for leading the nation’s COVID-19 response as a White House coronavirus advisor during the Trump Administration. He continues to lead the nation’s pandemic response during his current role as chief medical advisor in the Biden Administration. However, Fauci’s consistently shifting narratives throughout the pandemic, in addition to frequent opposition towards President Donald Trump’s leadership, resulted in a sizable number of public critics, many of which included Trump White House officials. Peter Navarro, a Harvard-trained economist and China hawk who served as a top trade and economic policy advisor to President Trump, publicly criticized Dr. Fauci in a USA Today op-ed, outlining the many instances Fauci was mistaken during the pandemic. USA Today promptly attached a remorseful precursor to the article; an apologetic note addressed to readers for publishing any criticism of Fauci. One of the most notable examples Navarro specifies is the predictive memos he sent in January and February 2020, which grimly anticipated COVID-19 to be a deadly and impactful global pandemic. Senior officials shrugged off these warnings, including Fauci, due to Navarro’s hawkish views on China. “The lack of immune protection or an existing cure or vaccine would leave Americans defenseless in the case of a full-blown coronavirus outbreak on US soil,” Navarro’s January 29 memo to the National Security Council states. “The lack of protection elevates the risk of the coronavirus evolving into a full-blown pandemic, imperiling the lives of millions of Americans.” Weeks after Navarro’s warning was sent out, Fauci assured the media just how worried the American people should be about the pandemic when he expressed, “The danger of getting coronavirus now is just minusculely low,” Fauci stated. “As of today, on the 17th of February, the risk is really relatively low.” Since then, public criticism of Fauci continues to escalate as 3,000 pages of his emails from March and April 2020 were obtained under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) following a lawsuit filed by taxpayer watchdog group, the White Coast Waste Project. “Taxpayers have a right to know what the NIH knew about how its money was being spent at the Wuhan animal lab, and what NIH knew about a potential lab leak in late 2019 and early 2020,” stated Justin Goodman, vice president of advocacy and public policy at the White Coat Waste Project. “Transparency and accountability at home and abroad are critical in the quest to identify the origin of the COVID-19 pandemic in order to prevent another outbreak.” Fauci’s obtained emails point to the fact that he was indeed warned of the possibility that COVID-19 was engineered, a theory he remained adamantly opposed to throughout the pandemic. Kristian Andersen, the head of a viral genomics lab at Scripps Research in La Jolla, CA, emailed Fauci in February 2020 entertaining the possibility of COVID-19’s lab-based origin, “The unusual features of the virus make up a really small part of the genome (<0.1%) so one has to look really closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features (potentially) look engineered.” This week, Anderson addressed his involvement in these recently released emails, assuring that his newfound research discourages any lab-based scenarios while also claiming it is scientifically impossible to determine the origins of the pandemic, “As we stated in our article last March, it is currently impossible to prove or disprove specific hypotheses of SARS-CoV-2 origin.” Additionally, these emails raise questions surrounding the type of research U.S. taxpayers are funding. Under Fauci’s four-decade-long leadership, the NAIAD resides within the National Institute of Health (NIH), which allocates 80% of its federal funds to scientific research, including grants to foreign organizations. Fauci swore under oath that no taxpayer funds were used to fund research in Wuhan. However, in a later congressional hearing, he stated that the NIH earmarked $600,000 to study coronaviruses in Wuhan. NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins confirmed that $3.7 million in federal funds were sent to EcoHealth Alliance, a global nonprofit, of which $600,000 went to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). Fauci’s emails show a message received from the President of EcoHealth Alliance, Peter Daszak, thanking him for rejecting any lab-leak theories in April 2020. Daszak wrote to Fauci, “I just wanted to say a personal thank you on behalf of our staff and collaborators, for publicly standing up and stating that the scientific evidence supports a natural origin for COVID-19 from a bat-to-human spillover, not a lab release from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.” Daszak adds, “Your comments are brave, and coming from your trusted voice, will help dispel the myths being spun around the virus’ origins.” These concerns have led Congressional Republicans, including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), to call for Fauci’s dismissal from his role as NIAID director. Yesterday, Congressman Mo Brooks joined GOP lawmakers in a press conference to announce his support of the Fire Fauci Act. The bill would bring Dr. Fauci’s taxpayer salary to $0 and will require the Senate to confirm another individual to fill his position. “Dr. Fauci is consistent in just one thing and that is inconsistency,” Brooks said. “Why
University of Alabama denies report it is under investigation for ties to Wuhan COVID lab
The University of Alabama is denying that it is under federal investigation for possible ties to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). Annie Mapp from ABC3340 reported on Twitter, “The University of Alabama is under investigation by the federal government for improper ties to China.” #NEW: The University of Alabama is under investigation by the federal government for improper ties to China. More information at the provided link.https://t.co/XH2vTUDjw3 — Annie Mapp (@AnnieMapp_) December 23, 2020 WIV, which is owned by the Chinese government’s Academy of Sciences, includes a maximum biocontainment laboratory that may be closely linked to the origin and/or spread of the Chinese COVID-19 virus. UA President Stuart Bell received the investigation notice from the federal government, asking for “a full report of statutorily defined gifts, contracts, and/or restricted and conditional gifts or contracts from or with a foreign source to the U.S. Department of Education (Department).” The letter stated, “It appears that UA has failed to report an alleged partnership with the Wuhan Institute of Virology (“WIV”), in Wuhan, China.” The university is listed on the Wuhan Institute of Virology website as a “partner”. The University responded to Mapp. She posted a Twitter update stating, “#UPDATE: The University of Alabama sent me the following statement.” #UPDATE: The University of Alabama sent me the following statement @abc3340 pic.twitter.com/pPnLHJznxJ — Annie Mapp (@AnnieMapp_) December 23, 2020 The school is denying any connections to the WIV, and stated that they contacted the institute and asked that UA be removed from their website. The school never received a response to that request.
