logo
Is Trump Ready for Bird Flu?

Is Trump Ready for Bird Flu?

The Atlantic11-02-2025
President Donald Trump might have campaigned on lowering the prices of groceries, but even as egg prices have become a minor national crisis, he has stayed quiet about the driving cause of America's egg shortage: bird flu. Trump hasn't outlined a plan for containing the virus, nor has he spoken about bird flu publicly since the CDC announced last April that the virus had infected a dairy worker. Last week, the CDC, which has ceased most communication with the public since Trump took office, posted data online that suggested humans may be able to spread the virus to cats. The agency quickly deleted the information.
Bird flu has now spread to cow herds across the country, led to the euthanization of tens of millions of domesticated poultry, sickened dozens of people in the United States, and killed one. The virus is not known to spread between humans, which has prevented the outbreak from exploding into the next pandemic. But the silence raises the question: How prepared is Trump's administration if a widespread bird-flu outbreak does unfold? The administration reportedly plans to name Gerald Parker as the head of the White House's Office of Pandemic Preparedness and Response Policy, which was created in 2022 by Congress and is charged with organizing the responses of the various agencies that deal with infectious diseases. (I reached out to both Parker and the White House; neither replied.)
If the president names him to the post, the appointment might be the least controversial of any of Trump's health-related picks: Parker is an expert on the interplay between human and animal health who served in the federal government for roughly a decade. But confronting bird flu—or any other pandemic threat—in this administration would require coordinating among a group of people uninterested in using most tools that can limit the spread of infectious disease.
Trump's pick to lead the CDC, David Weldon, has questioned the safety of vaccines, and Jay Bhattacharya, the administration's nominee to lead the National Institutes of Health, vehemently opposed COVID shutdowns. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an anti-vaccine conspiracy theorist who likely will be installed as the head of the Department of Health and Human Services in the coming days, has implied that Anthony Fauci and Bill Gates have funded attempts to create a bird-flu virus capable of infecting humans, and that past threats of flu pandemics were concocted by federal health officials both to inflate their own importance and to pad the pockets of pharmaceutical companies that produce flu vaccines.
Many of Trump's health appointees are united in their view that the U.S. overreacted to COVID. They—and plenty of Americans—argue that measures such as masking, lockdowns, and vaccination mandates were unnecessary to respond to COVID, or were kept in place for far too long. Faced with another major outbreak, the Trump administration will almost certainly start from that stance.
One way or another, Trump is likely to face some sort of public-health crisis this term. Most presidents do. Barack Obama, for instance, dealt with multiple major public-health crises, each brutal in its own way. Zika didn't turn into a pandemic, but it still resulted in more than 300 American children being born with lifelong birth defects. Ebola, in 2014, killed only two people in the U.S., but allowing the virus, the death rate of which can be as high as 90 percent, to freely spread across America would have been catastrophic. In 2009 and 2010, swine flu led to more than 12,000 deaths in the U.S.; roughly 10 percent of the victims were under 18. Even if bird flu does no more than it already has, it'll still cause a headache for the White House. Bird flu continues to wreak financial havoc for farmers, which is then trickling down to consumers in the form of higher prices, particularly on eggs.
Step by step, the U.S. keeps moving closer to a reality where the bird-flu virus does spread among people. Last week, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reported that cows have now contracted the variant of the virus that was responsible for the recent fatal case in the United States. That means the chances of humans catching that strain are now higher than they were: Many recent human cases have been in dairy farmworkers. As cases of seasonal flu increase too, so does the chance of the bird-flu virus gaining mutations that allow it to spread freely between humans. If both viruses infect the same cell simultaneously, they could swap genetic material, potentially giving the bird-flu virus new abilities for transmission.
Parker clearly understands this danger. Last year, he spoke to USA Today about the potential for the virus to mutate and change the outlook of the current epidemic. He also wrote on X that 'federal, state, and private sector leaders need to plan for challenges we may face if H5N1 were to make the fateful leap and become a human pathogen.' How much leeway the Trump administration will give Parker—or whoever does run the pandemic-preparedness office—to keep the U.S. out of calamity is another matter.
Plenty of public-health experts have come to look back at the coronavirus pandemic and regret certain actions. Should bird flu worsen, however, many of the same tools could become the best available options to limit its toll. Parker, for his part, expressed support during the worst parts of the pandemic for masking, social distancing, and vaccinations, and although he said in 2020 that he doesn't like lockdowns, his social-media posts at the time suggested he understood that some amount of community-level social distancing and isolation might be necessary to stop the disease's spread. How eager the Trump administration will be to use such tools at all could depend on Parker's ability to convince his colleagues to deploy them.
The White House pandemic-response office was set up to play air-traffic control for the CDC, the NIH, and other agencies that have a role amid any outbreak. But having a job in the White House and a title like director of pandemic preparedness does not guarantee that Parker will be able to win over the crew of pandemic-response skeptics he will be tasked with coordinating. And his job will be only more difficult after Trump sniped at the purpose of the office, telling Time in April that it 'sounds good politically, but I think it's a very expensive solution to something that won't work.'
Although Trump appears to have thought better of dissolving the entire office, its director can't really succeed at fulfilling its purpose without the president's support. The only thing that could make persuading a group of pandemic skeptics to care about an infectious-disease outbreak more difficult is your boss—the president of the United States—undercutting your raison d'être. Parker has some sense of the enormity of the job he'd take on. In 2023, he tweeted, 'Pandemic Preparedness, and global health security have to be a priority of the President and Congress to make a difference.' In 2025, or the years that follow, he may see firsthand what happens when the country's leaders can't be bothered.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Social Security is 90. Can It Be Saved for Future Generations?
Social Security is 90. Can It Be Saved for Future Generations?

Newsweek

time12 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

Social Security is 90. Can It Be Saved for Future Generations?

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. August 14 marks Social Security's 90th anniversary - an achievement underscored by both its longevity and the scale of its impact. Social Security was created during the Great Depression to provide financial security for Americans. Signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt on August 14 1935, as part of the New Deal, it established a federal safety net funded through payroll taxes. It initially offered retirement benefits for workers aged 65 and older, with later expansions adding disability insurance and survivor benefits. The program's goal was to reduce poverty among the elderly and stabilize the economy by ensuring a basic income. More than 73 million Americans now receive benefits from the program, making it one of the most significant pillars of the nation's social safety net. But its future is far from secure. According to the latest report from the Social Security Trustees, the program's two trust funds - the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) and Disability Insurance (DI) funds - are projected to reach insolvency by 2034. At that point, benefits would be funded solely through incoming payroll taxes, triggering an automatic cut of around 21 percent unless Congress acts. This is not the first time Social Security has faced a funding cliff. In the early 1980s, the trust funds were similarly close to depletion. Lawmakers responded with reforms that included faster payroll tax increases, a gradual rise in the retirement age, and taxation of some Social Security benefits. Those measures extended the program's life, but four decades later, a new crisis looms. Today, as the crunch point sits less than a decade away, three distinct approaches have been tabled by lawmakers. Composite image created by Newsweek. Composite image created by Newsweek. Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Getty The Fair Share Act Introduced by Democrats Sheldon Whitehouse and Brendan Boyle, the Fair Share Act is aimed at shoring up Social Security and Medicare by targeting the highest earners. The bill would require taxpayers with incomes over $400,000 to pay Social Security taxes on all wage, self-employment, and investment income above that threshold. Under the current system, most taxpayers pay Social Security taxes on all their income - but because of the $160,200 wage cap, wealthier Americans stop contributing once they pass that amount in earnings. "This legislation would significantly extend Social Security solvency and would extend Medicare solvency by an estimated 20 years," Whitehouse and Boyle said. Tax attorney Nik Agharkar, owner and managing member of Crowne Point Tax, called the Fair Share Act "the clearest path to achieving long-term solvency" of the three options, noting that it could fund the program for 75 years. "Since the proposals made in the Fair Share Act increase taxes on our highest earners, which reverses decades of erosion to our payroll tax bases, while leaving middle- and lower-income workers untouched, it would likely be considered the most 'fair,' but certainly high-earners would disagree," Agharkar told Newsweek. A New Investment Fund A bipartisan offering comes from Republican Senator Bill Cassidy and Democratic Senator Tim Kaine. Their plan would create an additional investment fund separate from the existing trust funds. Unlike Social Security's current assets - which are invested exclusively in special-issued U.S. government bonds - the new fund would diversify into stocks, bonds, and other investments to secure higher returns. The proposal envisions an up-front $1.5 trillion investment to give the fund 75 years to grow. During that time, the Treasury would temporarily provide the cash needed, to be repaid once the new fund matures and begins supplementing payroll tax revenue. "There is a nationwide appetite to implement a bipartisan, commonsense plan like ours," Cassidy and Kaine wrote in a Washington Post op-ed. "Waiting until the Social Security Trust Fund is on the eve of crisis would have difficult and preventable consequences. Congress should seize the moment." Michael Montgomery, a political scientist at the University of Michigan-Dearborn, said this approach could represent the political middle ground. "Because it neither takes from future beneficiaries - something Democrats will oppose - nor requires high earners to contribute more - something Republicans will oppose - Cassidy-Kaine may be 'just right' for addressing Social Security and Medicare funding if our profoundly-divided Congress has the will to act," Montgomery told Newsweek. Raising the Retirement Age Another idea comes from the Republican Study Committee, which in March 2024 proposed "modest adjustments" to the retirement age for future retirees to reflect rising life expectancy. While not an official administration policy, the group includes 170 GOP lawmakers, among them allies of President Donald Trump. The committee said current seniors and those near retirement would not be affected. But analysis by the Congressional Budget Office shows that raising the age to 69 - up from the current 67 - could cut lifetime benefits by up to 13 percent for anyone born after 1971. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has said it would only close 35 percent of the funding gap, meaning that if implemented, it would need to be used in tandem with other policies to make a meaningful impact. Political "Goldilocks" Michael Montgomery framed the three proposals as a "political 'Goldilocks' scenario," and that political realities remain a significant barrier in a "deeply divided Congress." The Fair Share Act's reliance on higher taxes for the wealthy could likely face stiff resistance from Republicans, while the investment fund requires a massive one-time outlay that could be politically unpalatable in Congress. Raising the retirement age, while less costly in budget terms, could be politically toxic given its impact on working-class Americans. Nik Agharkar cautioned that none of the options are ideal. "We should do more to get Congress to increase spending on Social Security through budget negotiations," he said, warning that political gridlock could push the issue to the brink. How Do Americans Feel? Social Security is often referred to as the "third rail" of American politics due to its enduring popularity. So it comes as no surprise that Americans want a say in how to fix the funding crisis. A July 2025 survey from The Senior Citizens League (TSCL), one of the nation's largest nonpartisan seniors groups, shows that the most popular solution, backed by 50 percent of respondents, is eliminating the cap on earnings subject to payroll taxes, like in the Sheldon-Whitehouse proposal. Other favored options include creating a fast-track process for Congress to vote on Social Security legislation (38 percent), increasing the payroll tax rate (31 percent), and applying the 6.2 percent tax to investment income for high earners (29 percent). More drastic or market-linked proposals received far less support: only 19 percent backed investing payroll taxes in stocks or other assets, 18 percent supported raising the retirement age to 70, and just 1 percent favored reducing cost-of-living adjustments.

California High-Speed Rail Protects $4B in Federal Funding Amid Lawsuit
California High-Speed Rail Protects $4B in Federal Funding Amid Lawsuit

Newsweek

time12 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

California High-Speed Rail Protects $4B in Federal Funding Amid Lawsuit

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. California officials have reached an agreement with the Federal Railroad Administration that places $4 billion in federal grants for the state's high-speed rail project into a legal trust while a lawsuit challenging the funding cancellation moves through court. The agreement, which the California High-Speed Rail Authority confirmed to Newsweek, would set aside the funding while state authorities worked to prevent President Donald Trump's funding revocation. Why It Matters Years of delays and an inflated budget have damaged public and political faith in California's high-speed rail project, but the past few years have seen progress, with construction happening throughout the state and tracklaying set to begin later this year. Proponents of the project say that to call if off now, as many of its detractors in the White House desire, would waste years of advancement. That has not stopped Trump, a long-standing critic of the project, from regularly threatening to take away the federal funding that has been vital to the project's progress, a threat he and Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy carried out in July. An Amtrak Pacific Surfliner train headed north arrives at the Moorpark Train Station in Moorpark, California, on June 15, 2024. An Amtrak Pacific Surfliner train headed north arrives at the Moorpark Train Station in Moorpark, California, on June 15, 2024. Getty Images What To Know The agreement with the Federal Railroad Administration places the contested $4 billion into a legal trust, which state officials said would prevent the funds from being redirected while the legal challenge proceeded. The California High-Speed Rail Authority, which does not comment on pending litigation, confirmed to Newsweek that the agreement had been reached. The authority has previously called the Trump administration's funding decision an "unwarranted and unjustified" move that was "based on an inaccurate, often outright-misleading, presentation of the evidence." The project has faced long-running delays and cost increases since voters approved it in 2008, with early estimates near $33 billion and more recent estimates ranging broadly in reporting between roughly $128 billion and $135 billion. The authority and state officials have pointed to continuing construction milestones. Officials said the project had entered or neared a tracklaying phase, with 171 miles under active construction and more than 50 major structures completed. What People Are Saying California Senator Dave Cortese, the chair of the Senate Transportation Committee, said in a statement on the agreement: "I'm encouraged that the California High-Speed Rail Authority has reached an agreement with the Federal Railroad Administration to prevent $4 billion in federal high-speed rail funding from being lost while litigation is pending. "These funds were terminated under the Trump Administration following a compliance review, despite no findings of fraud, waste, or abuse. The Authority promptly challenged that decision in court, and this agreement ensures that the funding will remain available until the legal process is resolved. "As Chair of the California Senate Transportation Committee, I will continue to defend our progress on high-speed rail, and efforts like my bill SB 545 will help secure opportunities for major residential and commercial development along the high-speed rail corridor, creating the kind of public-private synergy that can help fund the infrastructure of the project itself and deliver long-overdue economic benefits to communities across the state." What Happens Next The state's lawsuit challenging the federal withdrawal was filed in U.S. District Court. Initial litigation is expected to proceed in the coming months, with the trust arrangement intended to keep the grants intact until the court resolves the dispute.

Russia Reveals Plans for Trump-Putin Alaska summit
Russia Reveals Plans for Trump-Putin Alaska summit

Newsweek

time12 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

Russia Reveals Plans for Trump-Putin Alaska summit

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Kremlin has confirmed the names of those who will attend the summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump in Alaska this Friday, August 15, among other details about the schedule. Alongside Putin will be Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Defence Minister Andrey Belousov, presidential aide Yuri Ushakov, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, and Special Envoy Kirill Dmitriev, who heads Russia's sovereign wealth fund. The summit, to be held at the Elmendorf-Richardson military base in Anchorage and centred on agreeing a settlement on Ukraine, will begin at 11:30 a.m. local time, the Kremlin said, according to state-run news agency RIA. It will begin with a head-to-head meeting between Trump and Putin, the Kremlin said, leading into negotiations between the two delegations and a working breakfast. Trump and Putin will then hold a press conference after the talks. This is a breaking news story. Updates to follow.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store