“If the publIc-health professIonals, If Dr.
[Anthony] Fauci, if doctors tell us we should take it,
I would be first in line. If Donald Trump tells us we
should take it, then I’m not taking it.”
That was Vice President–elect Kamala Harris’
response when asked by the moderator of an Oct. 7
debate whether she would get vaccinated against
COVID-19. It perfectly captured the politicization
of the U.S. response to COVID-19 under the outgo-
ing Trump Administration—and how dangerous that
red and blue tinting of the pandemic response has
been for the American public. Behaviors like wearing
masks and social distancing, which should be about
protecting public health, have turned into loaded
statements of party affiliation and were twisted into
campaign strategy, no doubt contributing to the high
death toll from the disease and a worrying erosion in
people’s confidence in the science that ultimately is
the only way out of the pandemic. Joe Biden’s pub-
lic-health team now faces a two-pronged challenge:
confronting a still mysterious virus that shows no
signs of waning, and convincing the American pub-
lic that parts of the pandemic response that began
under the Trump Administration— particularly vac-
cine development— remain untainted by political
influence.
Biden and Harris have already begun to tackle
that task; on Nov. 9, they announced the creation of
their COVID-19 advisory board, made up of promi-
nent public-health experts, former government of-
ficials and academics who will advise the new Ad-
ministration about their best options for controlling
the pandemic. As President, Biden can appoint new
heads of the government’s major health agencies, in-
cluding the Secretary of Health and Human Services;
the director of the National Institutes of Health; the
commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA); and the director of the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC). Public-health experts
have been critical of the lack of strong scientific guid-
ance from these agencies over the past year, and the
BIDEN’S
COVID-19
CHALLENGE
How will he get the U.S. pandemic
response back on track?
BY JAMIE DUCHARME
AND ALICE PARK
extent to which they appear to be influenced by the
White House. Changing the leadership would be a
signal that the Biden Administration will prioritize
science and scientific integrity, and help to restore
the public’s confidence in its pandemic response.
But replacing leadership could also backfire if
the ultimate goal is to generate respect for science
and scientists, since many, despite pressure from
the Trump Administration, managed to stand their
ground and not allow political pressure to compro-
mise scientific principles. During his time as Pres-
ident, Trump repeatedly manipulated the public-
health response to meet his own political needs: he
admitted in a recorded March interview to intention-
ally “playing [the pandemic] down” so as not to “cre-
ate a panic”; touted unproven treatments to give the
public a false sense of security; opposed an FDA cri-
terion for ensuring that COVID-19 vaccines are safe;
and even pushed vaccine makers to rush the clinical-
testing process so people could potentially be immu-
nized before the election.
Leading public-health experts, most notably
Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy
and Infectious Diseases and a member of the White
House Coronavirus Task Force, took every opportu-
nity to set the record straight when statements from
the White House contradicted the scientific facts.
And the FDA, with support from the pharmaceu-
tical industry, prevailed in not shortchanging the
ELECTION
2020
