Members of Congress face backlash as they get priority for scarce vaccine

WASHINGTON (SBG) — Members of Congress flooded social media over the weekend with photos of themselves receiving the first dose of a coronavirus vaccine, touting its safety and efficacy, but the prioritization of lawmakers sparked debate over how the government is deploying limited resources in a national public health crisis.

Officials aim to deliver the first dose of a coronavirus vaccine to 20 million people by the end of the month. As of Sunday, fewer than 3 million doses of Pfizer’s vaccine had been distributed and about 556,000 doses had been administered, but recent emergency authorization of a second vaccine developed by Moderna could accelerate the process.

The fact that hundreds of those scarce doses went to Congress, including many members who are young and relatively healthy, did not sit well with some experts, pundits, and social media users. Many saw prominent figures with political connections leapfrogging over the vulnerable populations that were supposed to receive the vaccine first.

“Whenever we have a scarce resource, one of the concerns is that distribution will be unfair...,” said Jennifer Reich, a sociologist at the University of Colorado Denver and author of “Calling the Shots: Why Parents Reject Vaccines.” “When it starts to look like there’s political favoritism, that can be really damaging to public trust.”

Emergency room physician Dr. Jeremy Faust noted he had not been able to get the vaccine yet, and thousands of other frontline health care workers at his hospital were still waiting for doses too. Though he recognized some benefit in lawmakers publicly taking the vaccine, he questioned why a healthy 49-year-old like Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., had become a top priority to receive it.

“Why any younger members (<<>65?) should do this now as opposed to closer to when their actual constituents will be eligible, is a bit unclear to me,” Faust tweeted.

In a letter Thursday, Capitol physician Brian Monahan informed members of Congress and their staffs that the National Security Council had designated vaccine doses to Congress to meet “long-standing requirements for continuity of government operations.” Members would be vaccinated first, followed by “continuity-essential” staff, and then other staff members until the supply is exhausted.

Lawmakers and federal officials have indicated they have little discretion in the matter. The National Continuity Policy outlined in Presidential Policy Directive 40 in 2016 calls for any continuity-of-government action taken by the executive branch to be accompanied by parallel action in the legislative and judicial branches.

“The American people should have confidence that they are receiving the same safe and effective vaccine as senior officials of the United States government on the advice of public health professionals and national security leadership,” National Security Council spokesman John Ullyot said in a statement.

President Donald Trump had questioned the prioritization of White House staff last week, tweeting that they should receive the vaccine “somewhat later in the program, unless specifically necessary.” However, Monahan issued an “unequivocal” recommendation to members of Congress to get vaccinated as soon as possible.

“There is no reason why you should defer receiving this vaccine. The benefit far exceeds any small risk,” he wrote.

Many members of Congress and Capitol Hill employees would fall into high-risk categories because of age or existing health conditions. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., who is 81, has also framed vaccinating legislators as a priority for ensuring Congress can function.

“Clearly, it is critical that we have the Congress in a condition where it can operate on a continuing basis, given the challenges that confront us of great immediacy,” Hoyer told reporters in early December.

Still, some lawmakers have been reluctant to be seen as receiving special treatment. Rep. Chris Jacobs, R-N.Y., 54, said in a statement that he believes all Americans should take the vaccine, but he would not put himself before others at higher risk.

“I will not be jumping the line to receive the vaccine simply because I am a member of Congress,” Jacobs said.

Despite the blowback over the vaccination of members of Congress, some experts say continuity-of-government concerns are valid. Legislators needing to quarantine because they were exposed or infected have disrupted official business on Capitol Hill, and a political leader’s severe illness or death from the coronavirus could be destabilizing.

“It ultimately does make sense to protect certain high-level officials as soon as possible,” said Devon Greyson, an assistant professor of health communication at the University of Massachusetts Amherst who studies vaccine hesitancy.

Earlier this month, a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advisory panel recommended that health care workers and people in long-term care facilities be the first to receive the vaccine. States were not obligated to follow that guidance as initial doses of the Pfizer vaccine were distributed, but many did.

That panel met again Sunday to discuss the next phase of the process, voting to recommend that the vaccine be administered to those who are 75 and older and about 30 million “frontline essential workers” who are at substantial risk of exposure, such as first responders, teachers, and grocery store employees.

“If we immunize the people who are most vulnerable first, then we bring down the risk for everybody,” said Dr. Lynn Goldman, dean of the Milken Institute School of Public Health at George Washington University.

Other essential workers, people over 65, and younger adults with serious medical conditions are expected to be included in a third wave of distribution. The rest of the general public would receive the vaccine after all those groups, likely beginning in the late spring or summer.

“Basically, it’s those most at risk and that would most likely benefit from a scarce resource, is usually how it's determined,” said Dr. Richard Marlink, director of the Rutgers Global Health Institute.

That can be a difficult balancing act, and it is one CDC advisers have publicly struggled with. It could be months until there are enough doses available to reach some of the lower priority populations, so putting one group first now means leaving others at risk as coronavirus cases surge.

“There’s two competing goals right now,” Reich said. “One is, do you use it to protect the people who are most likely to be detrimentally harmed by infection... The competing priority is, do we prioritize vaccinating those who are most central to operation of essential institutions.”

Vice President Mike Pence, 61, received his first dose of the vaccine on live television last Friday, and President-elect Joe Biden, 78, did the same Monday. President Donald Trump is not yet scheduled to take the vaccine, but the timing of his vaccination is complicated by the fact that he received an experimental antibody treatment when he was infected with the virus in October.

"I don't want to get ahead of the line, but I want to make sure we demonstrate to the American people that it is safe to take," Biden said of deciding to take the vaccine.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., the 31-year-old youngest member of the House, was among those who got the first dose of the Pfizer vaccine Friday. She documented the process on Instagram and solicited questions about the vaccine from her followers, dispelling misconceptions and encouraging them to take it when it is available to them.

“AOC BREAKS DOWN COVID VACCINE BEAUTIFULLY... Gets the Shot Herself,” a TMZ headline blared Sunday afternoon. Elle Magazine ran a story highlighting some of Ocasio-Cortez’s answers to questions about the vaccine, as well.

Goldman pointed to Elvis Presley taking the polio vaccine on live television in 1968 as an example of the positive impact prominent figures can have on public health. In this context, different segments of the population could be influenced by Republican and Democratic lawmakers getting the vaccine.

“Now, we’re so fractured that you probably do need a lot of different people to be role models,” she said.

Marlink acknowledged high-profile influencers promoting vaccination can help assuage public doubts, but that does not necessarily justify bending the rules so they can get the vaccine before their age or health dictates they should. Adhering to official guidance can also send a positive message.

“Sure, take the high-profile person, have them take their mother in, or go to a frontline worker in their family,” he said. “There’s other ways to lead.”

Polls indicate public confidence in taking a coronavirus vaccine has risen since October, but it is still lower than health officials would like. A Kaiser Family Foundation survey released last week found 71% of Americans would definitely or probably take a vaccine if it was safe and available for free.

However, some demographics are still more hesitant than others. Republicans, Black adults, and health care workers are among the groups least likely to be comfortable getting vaccinated, and lack of trust in the government and concerns about side effects were cited as the top reasons for reluctance.

If the intent of lining up members of Congress to get vaccinated before more vulnerable Americans was to bolster public confidence in the shot, it is not entirely clear it has had the desired effect. Amid an increasingly politicized pandemic, the decision has been widely scrutinized.

“If you want to inspire people to take it, have Fauci get his on live TV or something,” journalist Miles Howard tweeted Monday. “Many folks I know are just feeling resentful about Congress cutting the line.”

Among those venting frustration was Republican New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu, who tweeted that it was “ridiculous” that members of Congress were receiving the vaccine before long-term care residents. Noting the legislative gridlock that held up negotiations on a relief package for months, he asked, “Since when is doing nothing an essential function?”

“Every single one of those vials that’s being used for a congressman or a senator that has been doing nothing, that hasn’t been on the front lines, is another vial of vaccine that isn’t going to a nurse or a resident in a long-term care facility,” Sununu told NECN Sunday.

Anger from the left has been directed at Republicans who either downplayed the threat of the virus or supported President Trump as he cast doubt on the risk of the pandemic. Actor George Takei joked that he was hoping Rubio suffered an allergic reaction to the vaccine.

“Call me a radical lefty, but I think frontline workers should have access to the vaccine before Republicans in Congress who refused to take it seriously,” tweeted former Labor Secretary Robert Reich.

Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, was trending on Twitter Monday after she shared a photo of herself getting vaccinated. Many users observed that she had suggested earlier this fall that doctors were inflating coronavirus death rates for profit.

“What’s challenging in this moment in this story is there have been members who have been public about getting the vaccine who have been very critical of other public health interventions,” Jennifer Reich, the sociologist, said.

According to Goldman, a perception that Congress is cutting the line could play into existing complaints about disparities in treatment between the powerful and the rest of the population. That can fuel greater mistrust of government at a time when it is vital to convince people vaccines distributed by the government are safe.

“People are seeing that some people who are privileged are getting things other people don’t get in this pandemic,” she said.

Greyson doubts the backlash from the right and the left will damage public confidence in a vaccine, but it could stir further discontent with what is already a massive and politically precarious logistical undertaking. That is why publicly articulating the reasons behind prioritizing members of Congress is so important.

“I wouldn’t expect it to make the general public less likely to want the vaccine,” Greyson said. “However, it could cause some anger about the prioritization process, especially if the reason for vaccinating them now isn’t effectively communicated to the public.”