A18| Thursday, March 19, 2020 THE WALL STREET JOURNAL.
Many Democratic Media Myths Remain True
Reading between the lines of
Rahm Emanuel’s “Democratic Voters
Smash Media Myths” (op-ed, March
13), one gets the impression that he
doesn’t trust the media to be objec-
tive. His suggestion that journalists
have an ax to grind and are obsessed
with identity politics, money in poli-
tics and the desirability of Scandina-
vian-style socialism sounds a lot like
the complaints of conservatives who
are deemed right-wing loonies.
The same-day Notable & Quotable
from Bill Press writing for the Hill
notes that Joe Biden and Sen. Ber-
nie Sanders agree far more than
they disagree, including support for
universal health care, higher taxes
on the wealthy, a higher minimum
wage, student-debt forgiveness, free
or nearly free college tuition and an
expensive surge in the fight against
climate change. Some far-left Demo-
cratic voters who mesmerized themedia are making a pragmatic deci-
sion to back a more electable and
pliable Joe Biden. They are not
backing away from a commitment to
identity politics, neutering of big-
money campaign donors and cre-
ation of a Scandinavian-style wel-
fare state.
Mr. Emanuel’s case that Democrats
are more moderate than journalists
suggest uses three “center-left” rep-
resentatives in the House—Lucy Mc-
Bath of Georgia, Elissa Slotkin of
Michigan and Lauren Underwood of
Illinois—as examples of the true
Democratic core. Their ratings from
conservative groups still approach
zero and from progressive groups
approach 100%. In today’s Demo-
cratic Party, 90% of a far-left loaf
from Mr. Biden is better than none
from an unelectable Sen. Sanders.
MATTJOHNSON
Charlotte, N.C.LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Letters intended for publication should
be addressed to: The Editor, 1211 Avenue
of the Americas, New York, NY 10036,
or emailed to [email protected]. Please
include your city and state. All letters
are subject to editing, and unpublished
letters can be neither acknowledged nor
returned.
“I can’t remember if I’m off red meat,
or eating nothing but red meat.”THE WALL STREET JOURNALBringing Big-City Culture to a Wider Public
Regarding Terry Teachout’s “How
the Show Can Go On” (Sightings,
March 13): No new venture can be so
well planned that every risk is
avoided. My wife and I hope Broad-
way producers will embrace this phi-
losophy and follow Terry Teachout’s
recommendation that New York City
theaters consider live streaming
their performances.
We are part of that 65% of Broad-
way audience members from out of
town. We know how good the New
York theater scene can be because
we’ve seen “Hamilton,” “Hadestown,”
and “The Band’s Visit,” all performed
by the original casts. We also have
our favorite off-Broadway venues:
hat tip to the Irish Repertory The-
atre and the Brooklyn Academy of
Music.
Common-sense public-health re-
sponses to Covid-19 have made New
York’s rich cultural offerings unavail-
able to live audiences. But this cre-
ates an opportunity for Broadway
houses to dive into the online-audi-ence market that already exists. The
Metropolitan Opera has been offering
live-streamed performances for sev-
eral seasons. We recently attended
the matinee performance of “Porgy
and Bess” at a Nashville cinema. The
house was packed, with not an
empty seat to be had. PBS has
proved an audience exists for on-de-
mand viewing of recorded live the-
ater through its “Live From Lincoln
Center” and “Great Performances”
series.
Performers want and need to per-
form. Video technicians have the skill
and ability to bring live events to
most homes in America. Broadway
producers have the capacity for risk-
taking in their DNA. Surely this com-
bination of talent and resources can
find a way to bring America’s most
dynamic art form to what Terry Tea-
chout accurately describes as “an in-
visible audience of rapt viewers.”
Curtain up!
JOSEPHA.WOODRUFF
Franklin, Tenn.No Easy Answers to Coronavirus Disruptions
The heartbreaking “It May Not
Be the Virus That Kills Me” (op-ed,
March 13) by Prof. Mark C. Taylor
is an illustration of the delicate
balance that the war on the corona-
virus must strike. The calls for
closing down the economy to pre-
vent the spread of the virus may
not only send millions to the unem-
ployment line and crush businesses,
but may have huge health conse-
quences. The direct consequences
are in the article, and I wish Mr.
Taylor the very best. However, eco-
nomic development is tied to health
outcomes, and a recession usually
leads to adverse health conse-
quences (as evidenced in research
on the “2007-09 recession”). There
are indirect costs as well, as people
lose health insurance and the in-
vestment in research and in lifesav-
ing technology declines. Six hun-
dred thousand people died of
cancer in the U.S. in 2017.
If the indirect costs of the great
shutdown will lead to a 1% increase
in cancer deaths, then thousands ofpeople may die out of the limelight,
even as we celebrate our victory
over the coronavirus.
PROF.S.A.RAVID
Yeshiva University
New YorkSurely, as lifelong diabetics, we
know that failures do occur and we
take precautions and prepare for
those failures. I don’t accept that I
need to understand and manage my
life’s global supply chain—I simply
need to understand and accept that
I am ultimately responsible for my
own well-being. I better be sure that
I have a fail-safe backup for each
item in my medical kit. Heck, dia-
betics are lucky because we won’t
die immediately when we experience
a failure.
So please stop the academic “the
sky is falling.” Sure, there is a coro-
navirus crisis, and we and the world
are doing everything that can be
done to respond and survive.
STEPHENCARTER
Long Valley, N.J.Pepper ...
And SaltConvenient to Vote In California, but Better?
Regarding the letters of March 13
responding to your editorial “Cali-
fornia Steals Its Own Election”
(March 7): Those who waited until
the last minute to vote, on what is
supposed to be Election Day, had the
latest information regarding candi-
dates who had dropped out of the
running, making their vote more rel-
evant than those who voted earlier.
For example, many people who
voted early were disenfranchised be-
cause they wound up voting for can-
didates who had withdrawn by Elec-
tion Day.
If this year’s process improved
the experience for voters, why do we
have to wait a month or more to get
final results? The following is taken
from the California Secretary of
State’s website: “Election results are
updated as often as new data is re-ceived from county elections offices
after the polls close at 8:00 p.m. on
Election Day. Many ballots are not
counted on Election Day; county
elections officials plan to complete
their work by April 3, 2020.”
Sixty years ago I went into the
voting booth with my Mom and
watched her pull the levers for the
candidates and issues she supported
and, on pulling the curtain to exit
the booth, her vote was tabulated.
The next day we had final voting re-
sults. Counties spend millions of dol-
lars on new systems, have them ap-
proved by the secretary of state,
then when it comes to voting time,
the process slows instead of speed-
ing up as promised, causing undue
delays to voters and in the tabula-
tion of results.
MARKHARDING
Fountain Valley, Calif.Yes, the Fed Is Serving, but
Who Bellies Up to the Bar?
The Federal Reserve is making
capital and liquidity extraordinarily
available in this apprehensive eco-
nomic environment (“The Fed Re-
turns to 2008,” Review & Outlook,
March 16). Somehow this seems
akin to a bar offering deep dis-
counts to teetotalers.
GREGDEBSKI
Howell, N.J.The Economic Rout Accelerates
Y
ou know you have a big economic prob-
lem when you roll out your grand solu-
tion and markets tank another 6%. That
was the sorry story Wednesday,
as the Trump Treasury dis-
closed its $1 trillion proposal to
rescue the pandemic economy,
and the panic accelerated.
The rout in stocks was the
least of it. Oil fell 17% to about
$20 a barrel, which is lower than it’s been since
after 9/11. Financial markets also showed more
stress, as asset holders liquidated holdings even
in supposedly safe havens like Treasurys and
gold. Money managers are shedding those tra-
ditional hedges against risk because they fear
even those are too risky to hold. They’re liter-
ally selling those for cash to stick in the vault,
if not a mattress.
iii
Somehow we doubt this is what President
Trump had in mind Tuesday when he said his
rescue plan was to “go big,” by which he means
spend $1 trillion. We also doubt it’s what Fed-
eral Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell intended
when he told House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, ac-
cording to media leaks, that she also shouldn’t
worry about spending $1 trillion.
But “big” is irrelevant or worse if it’s aimed
at the wrong solution because you’ve misdiag-
nosed the problem. The market has figured out
that American commerce is shutting down right
before our eyes with no end in sight. Hotels are
at 10% occupancy, airline flights are two-thirds-
empty except for college kids on spring break
who think they’ll live forever. U.S. car makers
suspended production Wednesday to reduce
danger to their workforce and because people
don’t buy cars when they’re at home.
This national economic shutdown is acceler-
ating by the day, and second quarter GDP could
fall by 10% or more. For comparison, the worst
single quarter during the financial panic was
minus-8.4% at the end of 2008. Mass layoffs
could begin soon in the hardest hit parts of the
economy, spreading and growing if there’s no
sign of recovery.
The market has also figured out that Wash-
ington is even more panicked than the markets
and is throwing money at the wrong problem
in the wrong way. The Fed is deploying its
2008 tools to ease constraints in money mar-
kets, and that’s useful for the economy’s finan-
cial plumbing and banks. The commercial pa-
per facility is good for the biggest companies.
But this doesn’t address the dramatic and im-
mediate need for liquidity—financing, i.e.,
loans—across the breadth of American busi-
ness to survive this unprecedented economic
shutdown.
President Trump’s Treasury seems to think
this can be solved by handing out $500 billion
in cash to individual Americans in two install-
ments in April and May. Chuck Schumer and
Nancy Pelosi will see and raise. This won’t stim-
ulate much of anything, but it might even be tol-
erable as a political price if it helped to sell the
proper medicine for the larger economy.
Instead, Secretary Steven Mnuchin’s pro-
posal that he sent to Senate
Republicans includes $50 bil-
lion for the airlines, plus an-
other $150 billion in loans to
other affected businesses.
This is too little, too cumber-
some, and too political. Wait
until Congress attaches strings to that cash,
and wait until the bureaucrats get around to
doling it out. The airlines may get rescued, per-
haps with price and route controls attached, but
they won’t have many passengers if a million
Americans a month lose their jobs.
The same goes for another $300 billion for
a new small-business loan program to be ad-
ministered through private lenders, though it
isn’t clear what rules would apply or how long
this would take to set up. If it’s anything like
the Small Business Administration, prepare for
a long wait.
Former Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has
weighed in with a suggestion that the Fed buy
not merely Treasury and mortgage securities
but also corporate bonds. This also doesn’t di-
rectly address the business liquidity problem,
and Europe has been doing this for years with-
out much notable economic improvement.
iii
You don’t calm a panic by floating ill-consid-
ered trial balloons or chanting “go big” as an
illusion of proper and thoughtful action. Mar-
kets are panicked in part because they sense
that our political leaders are more panicked
than the public is.
You calm a panic first by looking like you
know what you’re doing. You explain that this
is a liquidity problem caused by an extraordi-
nary precaution against a virus that is closing
down businesses.The government needs to act
to prevent the liquidity panic from becoming a
solvency rout that becomes a banking crisis.
And it needs to act fast.
Mr. Mnuchin should adapt his pet plans and
work with Mr. Powell to set up a new facility
under Section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act
to provide financing to otherwise healthy busi-
nesses jeopardized by the pandemic shutdown
against good collateral. Kevin Warsh explained
this on these pages on Monday, and we elabo-
rated Tuesday. Mr. Mnuchin and President
Trump should also ask Congress to backstop
this facility, in case there are losses, with that
$150 billion Treasury has proposed for indus-
try-specific rescues. The Fed should be able to
set it up in a week.
This pandemic may be the biggest demand
shock to the U.S. economy since World War II.
The only alternative we see to this liquidity so-
lution is if the pandemic eases faster than we
think, or policy makers make a different calcu-
lation about viral versus economic risks. If we
don’t do the latter, we need to do the former
or suffer the economic damage.The Fed and Treasury
need to liquify business
now or liquidate later.
The Gig Economy to the Rescue
A
mericans have been urged to “social
distance” and those who may have
been exposed to the coronavirus to
self-quarantine. A decade ago this would have
been unpleasant but also impractical for most
people. Fortunately, there’s now an app, or
many, many apps, for that.
Uber and Lyft launched the so-called gig
economy a decade ago with apps that connect
riders with drivers. These apps now let cus-
tomers order rides, groceries and food delivery
through their smartphones. Now many Ameri-
cans who must commute to work can hail a
ride instead of taking mass transit where they
are more likely to pick up infections.
Restaurants in many states have been or-
dered to close with the exception of take-out
and delivery orders. These shutdowns would
no doubt be more onerous if not for delivery
apps such as GrubHub, DoorDash, Uber Eats
and smaller outfits around the country. Cus-
tomers don’t have to exchange cash with cou-
riers, and families can give the parental cook
a break without going out.
These apps are also helping to keep restau-
rants in business and workers employed. Uber
Eats says it is waiving delivery fees for more
than 100,000 restaurants to encourage more
people to order out, and GrubHub is deferring
commissions that it typically charges to inde-
pendent restaurants.
Americans in many cities can also get gro-
ceries and medicine delivered to their homes
thanks to apps like Postmates and Shipt. Tar-
get acquired Shipt in 2017, but the personal
shopping app also delivers from stores like
Costco, CVS and Kroger. In response to the
competition, Amazon has expanded fresh food
delivery.
Speaking of Amazon, this week the giant
online retailer announced it would hire
100,000 workers to meet increasing demand
for grocery and other online orders. This may
provide work alternatives for Americans laid
off in airlines, hospitality and other industries
affected by the coronavirus. It is also raising
its starting wage for workers at its fulfillment
centers to $17 an hour from $15.
Workers can also quickly sign up for work
on multiple apps and schedule their hours
around when they must take care of kids at
home. Progressives criticize this “on-demand”
work as somehow exploitative. But the coro-
navirus contagion is demonstrating that this
free-market flexibility can be a labor lifesaver
in a viral panic.Biden Wins, but Sanders Persuades
A
nother sign of the age: Chicagoland
Congressman Dan Lipinski, one of the
Democratic Party’s final antiabortion
holdouts, lost a primary election Tuesday by
two points, or about 2,500 votes. The tradi-
tional working-class Democrats who once chose
Mr. Lipinski—and his father before him—used
to be a keystone in the party’s base.
But the left today tolerates no dissent on
abortion. National progressives, including AOC
and Bernie Sanders, piled in to defeat Mr. Lip-
inski. Officially, the Democratic Party’s appara-
tus supports its incumbents, but few bigwigs
have gone out of their way to help Mr. Lipinski.
Two years ago his fellow Illinois Congressman
Luis Gutierrez called him “a dinosaur” and a
holdover from the party of 1980, who should
be “a relic in some museum.”
Apropos enough, Joe Biden spent decades
opposed to taxpayer funding of abortion, until
last summer when he revised his values to fit
the times. On Tuesday Mr. Biden swept prima-
ries in three states, carrying Florida by 39
points, Illinois by 23 and Arizona by 12, with
some ballots still uncounted. In each state, he
won men and women, whites and nonwhites,
people with and without college degrees. Mr.
Sanders is stepping back to “assess his cam-
paign,” his staff said Wednesday.
Yet look at the exit polling of Democrats.
Medicare for All registers 55% support to 33%
oppose in Florida; 61% to 32% in Illinois; and
58% to 34% in Arizona. In President Obama’s
old turf, Illinois, 43% say they want the nation’s
next leader to be more liberal than Mr. Obama.
Only 37% want a restoration of what Mr. Biden
sometimes calls “our administration.”
In remarks Tuesday night, Mr. Biden again
reached out to progressives. “Senator Sanders
and I may disagree on tactics,” he said, “but
we share a common vision.” He directed a
message to young Bernie voters: “I hear you.
I know what’s at stake. I know what we have
to do.” When will Mr. Biden get around to re-
assuring moderates and independents?
It’s Joe Biden’s moment, but his agenda and
Dan Lipinski’s defeat show how fast the party
is moving in Bernie Sanders’s direction.REVIEW & OUTLOOK
OPINION