WASHINGTON — Twenty-five states have identified cases of the new omicron variant of COVID-19, federal public health officials said Friday as they released new data on the first 43 U.S. cases.

Of those initial, confirmed cases, more than half were among people between the ages of 18 and 39, according to Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

About one-third of the infections were among individuals who recently had traveled internationally, Walensky said during a news briefing Friday. And 80%, or 34 individuals, were fully vaccinated, including some who had recently received a booster.

Most of the omicron infections so far have resulted in only mild symptoms, Walensky said, adding that’s in line with what would be expected among individuals who were fully vaccinated.

Walensky and other public health officials said early data suggests that getting a vaccine booster could bolster protection against the new variant, urging anyone who is currently eligible — including the 16- and 17-year-olds who became eligible this week — to get a follow-up shot.

While the unknowns of the new variant still loom, officials emphasized that the highly transmissible delta variant that caused the summer surge in infections still remains the main threat.

“Over 99% of cases in this country right now are caused by the delta variant, which is driving increases in cases and hospitalizations,” Walensky said.

The seven-day average of infections nationally increased by 37% over the last week, while hospitalizations increased by 16% and deaths rose by 28% over that same time period.

Those rising numbers come after families gathered for Thanksgiving last month, and many are preparing for holiday gatherings this month.

Asked for any guidance for those wondering if they should reassess holiday travel plans, Walensky said gathering together this season will require Americans to be “vigilant” about safety precautions. She reiterated the need to ensure those getting together are fully vaccinated and boosted if possible, as well as wearing masks in the weeks leading up to any gatherings and taking a COVID-19 test.

WASHINGTON — Former U.S. Sen. Robert J. Dole arrived at the U.S. Capitol for the final time on Thursday, for a Rotunda ceremony in which former colleagues and congressional leaders from both parties honored the life and career of the late Kansas political icon. 

President Joe Biden and others remembered Dole — who died Sunday at age 98, after being diagnosed earlier this year with stage 4 lung cancer — as a World War II veteran, a public servant, an acerbic comedian, and an advocate for the disabled.

“He too was a giant of our history. That’s not hyperbole,” said Biden after listing many of the former presidents and other icons memorialized in the U.S. Capitol — including another notable Kansan, former President Dwight D. Eisenhower, whose bronze sculpture is on display in the Rotunda.

Like Washington, Lincoln and those other towering figures, Biden said, Dole was a man “of wit and grace, of principle and persistence, of courage and conviction.”

The ceremony as Dole’s body lay in state — an honor bestowed on former presidents, senators and some military leaders — was witnessed by a limited, bipartisan crowd. Usually, the public also is allowed to pay their respects as well, but a broader viewing was eschewed due to the pandemic.

Still, the audience of invited guests reflected the across-the-aisle respect for Dole: much of the current Senate was seated surrounding his casket, as were a number of U.S. House members and an array of former lawmakers who served with the senator, close aides, and other friends.

First lady Jill Biden also joined her husband, along with Vice President Kamala Harris and second gentleman Doug Emhoff.

Other attendees included the full current congressional delegation from Kansas, as well as former Sens. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), Dan Coates (R-Ind.) and Trent Lott (R-Miss.), according to a list provided to the reporter pool.

His longtime wife, Elizabeth, and daughter, Robin, were escorted by service members for the formal arrival of his casket.

Praised for bipartisan approach

Top congressional leaders from both parties offered tributes to the Republican from Russell, Kansas, who served four terms in the House and more than four terms in the Senate, including more than a decade as the Senate Republican leader.

He stepped away from that political role after winning the Republican Party’s presidential nomination in 1996. He previously was the vice presidential nominee, running with President Gerald Ford in 1976.

In a legislative building grappling with a level of polarization and distrust among lawmakers that has paralyzed progress on many issues, Dole was praised as someone who worked with colleagues from both parties, and on a range of challenges facing struggling Americans. 

Biden, a Democrat, said that he and Dole disagreed on some matters, “but not on the fundamental things.”

“We still found a way to work together. We genuinely, we genuinely respected one another as colleagues, as fellow Americans,” Biden said. “It was real. It wasn’t fake. And we became great friends.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) lauded his efforts on expanding access to food stamps and his critical efforts in passing the landmark Americans with Disabilities Act. Dole suffered combat injuries during World War II that limited the mobility of his right arm for the rest of his life. 

“Bob Dole was a champion of those whose lives were marred by struggle, who came not from citadels of privilege, but from humble origins like his own,” said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).

They also remembered Dole’s penchant for humor. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) recalled then-Majority Leader Dole quipping that if he “had known we were going to win control of the Senate, we’d have run better candidates.”

Schumer riffed on the oft-cited quote from Dole about the “danger” of standing between Schumer and a reporter: “Don’t worry, Bob. It’s safe to be between me and the cameras today.”

He also described the emotional moment that unfolded when late Hawaii Sen. Daniel Inouye was given the same Capitol honor in 2012. Dole had recuperated from the wounds he suffered in World War II at the same military hospital as Inouye, and when he approached the casket, Dole rose from his wheelchair to offer a salute.

“As Bob approaches the pearly gates, let us take comfort he can reunite with his old friend once again,” Schumer said.

D.C. funeral on Friday, and a return to Kansas

After the words of remembrance, Biden and congressional leaders placed wreaths next to the casket. Biden put his hand on his heart while he stood by the wreath, and grabbed both of Elizabeth Dole’s hands on his way back to his seat.

When she approached the flag-draped casket, Elizabeth Dole briefly put her hand and then her head to the casket. 

Dole’s remains will remain overnight in the Rotunda, where other lawmakers and Capitol staffers were allowed to pay respects Thursday afternoon. At one point, Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), a combat veteran who was wounded during the Iraq War, offered a salute.

On Friday morning, there will be a formal departure ceremony, and then a funeral service at Washington National Cathedral.

His casket is set to arrive in Kansas on Friday evening, followed by a public memorial service and a ceremony at the Kansas statehouse on Saturday.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate passed a resolution Wednesday night to block President Joe Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate on private employers, with every Republican and two Democrats casting votes aimed at preventing that pending requirement. 

Democratic Sens. Jon Tester of Montana and Joe Manchin III of West Virginia joined with the GOP in backing the resolution, which passed  52-48.

Tester, a centrist Democrat representing a conservative state, cited concerns from business owners and other constituents in deciding to oppose the vaccine mandate set to kick in Jan. 4.

“Over the past few months, I’ve repeatedly heard concerns from Montana’s small business and community leaders about the negative effect the private business vaccine mandate will have on their bottom lines and our state’s economy,” he said in a statement ahead of the vote.

Tester said that with his vote, he was “defending Montana jobs and small businesses against these burdensome regulations.”

The Senate rebuke was the latest blow for the president’s proposed vaccine requirements, which have faced a slew of legal challenges. 

Related mandates requiring vaccines for health care workers and federal contractors have been temporarily blocked as lawsuits weave through the court system.

The next step for the congressional effort to halt the requirement on private employers would be a vote in the Democratic-controlled U.S. House, where all 212 Republican legislators have cosponsored a related resolution sponsored by Pennsylvania Rep. Fred Keller. 

White House press secretary Jen Psaki has said Biden will veto the resolution if it reaches his desk.

GOP decries mandate as federal overreach

Under the vaccination requirement outlined by Biden earlier this fall, private employers with at least 100 employees must either ensure their workers are vaccinated against COVID-19, or that they undergo weekly testing.

The requirement is projected to affect some 84 million American workers, and non-compliant businesses would face fines from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. 

Congressional Republicans are challenging the vaccine requirement under the Congressional Review Act, which can be used by federal legislators to overturn certain federal agency regulations. The vote under that act cannot be filibustered, so only a simple majority is needed.

GOP opponents of the requirement have decried it as an overreach of federal authority, and one that will have significant effects on the U.S. workforce at a time when businesses are having difficulties finding enough workers.

“This is not about being anti-vaccine,” said Sen. Steve Daines, (R-Mont.), during a news conference Wednesday, noting that he was part of the Pfizer vaccine trial. “I’m pro-science, pro-vaccine. But I’m anti-mandates.”

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican who survived polio as a child, made a similar argument on the Senate floor Wednesday, noting his own support for vaccines as he highlighted the judicial rulings that already have blocked aspects of the vaccination requirement. 

“The United States of America is a free country. The federal government, elites in Washington, cannot micromanage citizens’ personal choices without a legitimate basis in the law and the Constitution,” McConnell said. “And that goes double for presidents going far beyond the bounds of their office and their authority.”

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, (D-N.Y.), expressed frustration with the argument from Republicans that while they may have chosen to get vaccinated, others shouldn’t be required to do so.

“If the only damage was to the person — him or herself who didn’t get vaccinated — maybe some people would say that’s okay,” Schumer said. “But it’s not just to them: When there’s a large pool of people unvaccinated, even if it’s not the majority, that allows the COVID virus to spread, to mutate, to create new variants, and create stronger new variants.

“The biggest thing standing between us and the end of the pandemic is Americans who have refused to get vaccinated,” Schumer added. 

Americans divided over mandate

A Wall Street Journal poll released Tuesday found Americans sharply divided over the vaccine requirement on private sector employers, 50% in support compared to 47% opposed.

A slightly larger share of voters supported state and local vaccine mandates for public safety workers, such as police officers, firefighters and first responders, with 55% in favor and 44% opposed.

The Biden administration released a statement Tuesday evening saying the president “strongly opposes” the Senate resolution to undo his vaccine requirement. 

“At a time when COVID is on the rise, a new variant is on the loose, and more Americans are choosing to be vaccinated, it makes no sense for Congress to reverse this much-needed protection of our workforce,” according to the administration policy statement. 

“It puts our recovery in danger, and a vote for this resolution risks a return to shutdowns, layoffs, and closures that result from allowing COVID to spread more easily in the workplace.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Jon Tester of Montana is one of at least two Democrats who are expected to join every Senate Republican in a vote Wednesday night opposing President Joe Biden’s vaccine mandate on private employers.

In a written statement late Tuesday, Tester said that he’s heard from concerned constituents in his state about that pending requirement — which would direct employers with at least 100 employees to either ensure their workers are vaccinated against COVID-19 or that they undergo weekly testing.

“Over the past few months, I’ve repeatedly heard concerns from Montana’s small business and community leaders about the negative effect the private business vaccine mandate will have on their bottom lines and our state’s economy,” Tester said. 

“That’s why I intend to join a bipartisan majority of my colleagues in defending Montana jobs and small businesses against these burdensome regulations.”

Tester added that he “strongly” urges all eligible Montanans to get vaccinated as soon as possible.

The support from Tester and Sen. Joe Manchin III, (D-W.Va.), is expected to give Senate Republicans enough votes to pass the resolution seeking to undo Biden’s vaccine mandate, which is set to kick in Jan. 4.

The proposal would then go to the Democratic-controlled U.S. House, where all 212 Republican legislators have cosponsored a related resolution from Pennsylvania Rep. Fred Keller to nullify the vaccine mandate. 

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said Tuesday that Biden will veto the resolution if it reaches his desk.

Senate Republicans are challenging the vaccine requirement under the Congressional Review Act, which can be used by Congress to overturn certain federal agency regulations. The vote under that act cannot be filibustered, so only a simple majority is needed.

The president’s proposed vaccine requirements also have faced a slew of challenges in the courts. 

A related mandate requiring millions of health care workers to be vaccinated against COVID-19 was blocked by a federal judge in Louisiana as a lawsuit moves forward. A federal judge in Georgia also temporarily blocked across the nation a mandate set to go into effect for federal contractors next month.

The Biden administration released a statement Tuesday evening saying the president “strongly opposes” the Senate resolution to undo his vaccine requirement. 

“At a time when COVID is on the rise, a new variant is on the loose, and more Americans are choosing to be vaccinated, it makes no sense for Congress to reverse this much-needed protection of our workforce,” according to the administration policy statement. 

“It puts our recovery in danger, and a vote for this resolution risks a return to shutdowns, layoffs, and closures that result from allowing COVID to spread more easily in the workplace.”

WASHINGTON — State health officials on Thursday welcomed the Biden administration’s plan to require private health insurers to reimburse Americans for the cost of rapid, at-home COVID-19 tests—though the officials also raised questions about whether the process will be burdensome.

Making those tests more accessible will allow Americans to get results quickly and in the privacy of their own homes. That change may encourage more people to swab their nose when they first notice potential symptoms, experts from the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials told reporters.

“In this next phase of the pandemic, rapid access to rapid testing will be key,” said Dr. Nirav Shah, director of Maine’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, adding that it can help to combat potential surges and to pinpoint infections quickly so antiviral treatments can be used. 

But several challenges could limit the impact of the cost reduction.

That includes lingering problems with sufficient supplies, uncertainty about the details of the reimbursement process, and questions about any potential effect on the data that’s reaching state and local health departments about infections in their communities.

Official guidance in January

Under the proposal that President Joe Biden announced Thursday, three federal departments — Health and Human Services, Labor and the Treasury — will issue official guidance by Jan. 15 that will detail what exactly private insurers must cover when it comes to rapid COVID-19 tests.

Those insurers already are required to pay for the PCR tests that must be sent to a laboratory for processing and take longer for results.

The upcoming change requiring insurance coverage of rapid, at-home tests, won’t be retroactive. That means Americans who have been shelling out roughly $25 for a package containing two of the popular Abbott BinaxNOW rapid tests can’t submit receipts for tests they’ve already purchased. 

Other details of that requirement were unclear Thursday, including if there will be any limitations on the number of at-home tests that must be covered.

While the Biden administration has sought to reduce supply bottlenecks in producing those tests, Shah said some states are still having difficulty acquiring large volumes of the Abbott at-home tests. 

That brand, which has been found to be highly accurate, has been relied on heavily even as more options have come on the market. Part of that demand comes from familiarity: Those administering tests in large settings have become familiar with their use.

What if you test positive?

Another challenge with increasing the use of at-home tests will be ensuring that individuals know what to do if they test positive. 

Michael Fraser, ASTHO’s chief executive officer, said state health officials have been discussing whether those at-home tests should include an insert to help explain who to call and other next steps, so that contact tracing can occur.

“There is some concern that with the increase in at-home testing, getting those results reported to state health departments might be difficult, because the result doesn’t automatically go to public health authorities,” Fraser said.

However, there won’t be many results to get to state and local health officials if Americans with private insurance balk at fronting the money for tests while they await reimbursement.

Shah said a more accessible model would be to have individuals show their insurance card at a pharmacy as they would when getting a flu shot or picking up a prescription, rather than being charged at the register.

Having to pay for the tests, then wait for repayment, “introduces an access challenge for a lot of folks,” he said.

The Biden administration also plans to boost the number of free at-home tests distributed at community health centers and rural clinics, though those are intended to aid those who are not covered by private insurance.

WASHINGTON — Reimbursements for at-home rapid COVID-19 tests. Tougher testing requirements for international travelers. More emergency response teams to aid states combating infection spikes. 

And another big push to get Americans vaccinated.

Those are the latest steps to fight COVID-19 that President Joe Biden will be announcing Thursday, according to senior administration officials who briefed reporters Wednesday night on the efforts to stay ahead of a new, unknown variant of the virus and the next wave of infections.

Most significant for Americans who have been shelling out $25 for a package of two rapid COVID-19 tests will be the upcoming requirement that private health insurers reimburse the cost of those at-home tests. 

The U.S. has lagged far behind other countries in the production and use of those tests. The Biden administration has sought to speed up both the approval and manufacturing processes, and to lower the cost. 

By Jan. 15, officials with the departments of Health and Human Services, Labor and the Treasury will issue guidance to ensure that the 150 million Americans with private insurance can seek reimbursement for the cost of those rapid tests, according to a background memo ahead of the president’s announcement. 

Federal officials also will increase the number of rapid tests that are distributed at no cost through community health centers and rural clinics. 

Biden is scheduled to deliver remarks on the plan Thursday afternoon at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Md.

New travel rules

Little remains known about the new omicron variant of COVID-19, which was first identified in South Africa late last month. Federal health officials said Wednesday that the first U.S. case has been identified in California, where a traveler who returned from South Africa tested positive on Nov. 29.

Early next week, the federal government will tighten testing protocols for all inbound international travelers, who will need to test within one day of their departure for the U.S., regardless of their nationality or vaccination status. 

Domestic travelers also will need to keep wearing their face masks a little longer, with a masking requirement on public travel extended through March 18.

Next phase of vaccine push

Public health officials believe the current vaccines will continue to offer at least some protection against the new variant. Boosters are expected to further increase that protection, and administration officials say they are urging all eligible adults to get a booster shot. 

That message will be reinforced through outreach campaigns by pharmacies, AARP and Medicare. 

To increase vaccine uptake among eligible children, Medicaid will pay health care providers to talk to families about getting their kids over 5 vaccinated. New family vaccine clinics will launch to encourage adults and children to get their shots at the same time.

Help for schools, states

The new actions also will include a review of school quarantine policies, in an attempt to minimize disruptions to classroom time and parents’ work schedules. 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is expected to release in the coming weeks its review of alternatives to a 14-day quarantine that some districts have tried, such as allowing students to remain in school after a potential exposure if they pass a rapid test.

States also will be able to tap more help as they battle rising case counts. 

Some 60 emergency response teams will be on call to aid state officials, with clinical staffers, teams trained in using monoclonal antibody treatments, and epidemiological experts to conduct outbreak infections.

Similar teams assisted 27 states during the summer and fall surge, according to the administration.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court is weighing potentially sweeping changes to the right to an abortion, after two hours of arguments Wednesday morning on a Mississippi law that bans most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

The court’s conservatives, who hold a 6-3 majority, appeared through their questions to be sympathetic to Mississippi’s arguments that its law should be upheld—and they also seemed open to the possibility of undoing other precedent-setting abortion cases.

Supporters of the Mississippi law argued not only that it should be upheld, but that two key cases that have determined when a woman has the right to seek an abortion also should be overturned: the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision as well as the 1992 Planned Parenthood v. Casey ruling. 

That would allow states to decide if they want to allow the medical procedure within their borders, the lawyers contended.

“When an issue affects everyone, and when the Constitution does not take sides on it, it belongs to the people,” said Mississippi Solicitor General Scott Stewart, arguing that the precedents set in prior landmark abortion cases “have failed.”

Attorneys arguing on behalf of Mississippi’s only abortion clinic and of the federal government told the justices that the right to an abortion was correctly established in the Roe v. Wade decision and then reaffirmed in the Planned Parenthood v. Casey ruling.

Undoing that right would have devastating consequences for people seeking abortions throughout the country, they said. 

Some may be forced to travel out of state to seek care. If they lack the money and time off from work to do so, they may have no option beyond carrying a child to term, even if it is not in their best interest or that of their family, the lawyers said.

“There is no less need now than there was 30 years or 50 years ago for women to be able to make this fundamental choice for themselves about their bodies, lives and health,” said Julie Rickelman, senior director of litigation at the Center for Reproductive Rights.

“Why is 15 weeks not enough time?” Chief Justice John Roberts asked Rickelman. 

She noted that the Mississippi law would ban most abortions nine weeks earlier than the current legal standard, giving patients less time to navigate an array of regulatory barriers that some states have enacted to make it harder to seek an abortion. 

The Roe decision established a legal right to an abortion during the first two trimesters of pregnancy, or 26 weeks. In the Casey decision, the court ruled that people can obtain an abortion until viability, or the point when a fetus can survive outside the womb — generally about 24 weeks. 

The case argued Wednesday is Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health.

Ramifications for dozens of states   

Wednesday’s hearing came after the top court already has been grappling with abortion rights. 

Since announcing in May that the justices would take up the Mississippi case, the court has heard arguments over a Texas law designed to skirt the court’s past decisions and ban abortions about six weeks after a woman’s last menstrual cycle.

The pair of legal battles has thrust the contentious social issue back into the national spotlight, and thousands of activists in both support of and opposition to abortion rights flooded the sidewalks around the court on Wednesday to chant and wave signs.

Dr. Nisha Verma, an obstetrician-gynecologist who practices at Emory University in Atlanta, said she regularly attends local protests in support of abortion access, and is worried about what will happen in her state if Roe is overturned.

Many of her patients don’t know until their second or third trimester that they or their fetus have developed a medical issue that requires terminating a pregnancy, Verma said. 

“A lot of times this is an act of compassion, that people are trying to do the right thing in their pregnancy or [for] their existing children,” she said. 

The pending abortion case could spur a cascade of legal changes across two dozen states if justices back the restrictive Mississippi law — and potentially dismantle the landmark 1973 ruling affirming the right to an abortion.

A dozen states — including Louisiana, Tennessee, Missouri and Idaho — have “trigger laws” that would go into effect banning abortions if Roe v. Wade is overturned, according to the Guttmacher Institute, an organization focused on reproductive health and rights.

Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona and five others still have abortion bans that pre-date Roe v. Wade on the books, which would become enforceable again if the case is overturned.

Amanda Davis, of Virginia, said during an interview outside the court on Wednesday that she’s been attending protests against abortion rights since the 1990s. Her faith as a Christian helped her decide. 

“The Bible says do not murder, and I consider abortion murder,” Davis said. 

Debate over precedents

During Wednesday’s arguments, the court’s liberal members repeatedly emphasized the implications of undoing the prior rulings. 

“Will this institution survive the stench that this creates in the public perception that the Constitution and its reading are just political acts?” Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked at one point.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, one of the justices appointed by former President Donald Trump, giving the court its conservative majority, noted that if the Mississippi law is upheld, states would not be barred from allowing abortion. 

He listed a long line of major cases in which the Supreme Court overruled precedents, including Brown v. Board of Education, which found that racial segregation in schools violated the Constitution. 

If the court had adhered to its earlier decisions in those cases, Kavanaugh said, “the country would be a much different place.”

Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar underscored how deeply the Roe decision has been woven into everyday American life, noting that while some people don’t agree with the decision, they know what the court ruled and what it means if they have an unintended pregnancy.

“For the court to reverse course now, I think would run counter to that societal reliance and the very concept we have of what equality is guaranteed to women in this country,” Prelogar said.

WASHINGTON — When paid family leave was briefly dropped from congressional Democrats’ massive social spending and climate bill earlier this fall, the outcry was swift.

Women and caregivers suddenly were calling lawmakers and advocates, and they were sharing their own stories on social media in huge numbers, said Dawn Huckelbridge, director of Paid Leave for All, a national advocacy group, during a virtual event with reporters on Tuesday.

“I think people assumed this was a given, that why would you drop paid leave in a pandemic?” Huckelbridge said. “And when that happened, there was outrage.” 

She added: “Women, caregivers, have been dealing with unimaginable circumstances these last few years. And I think it felt tone-deaf to them.”

The Democrats’ “Build Back Better” bill that passed the U.S. House did ultimately restore four weeks of paid leave for workers who need to care for a new baby or ailing loved one or recover from their own serious illness. 

But that provision is at risk of deletion in the Senate, due to opposition from Sen. Joe Manchin III, (D-W.Va.).

Payback at the polls?

Huckelbridge and other advocates and Democratic pollsters who spoke to reporters on Tuesday said a failure to take action on a national paid leave program could have significant political consequences for Democrats in 2022.

The U.S. is one of only a few countries in the world — and the only wealthy country — that does not have a national paid family leave program.

Yet creation of such a program is overwhelmingly popular across party lines, particularly with younger voters and among suburban women in key battleground states.

“It may not be bipartisan in the Congress, but it is bipartisan with the public, particularly in America’s suburbs,” said Celinda Lake, of Lake Research Partners, who was the leading pollster for Biden’s 2020 presidential campaign.

It’s also one of the most popular provisions in the Build Back Better package. Research from Global Strategy Group, a Democratic consulting firm, found the issue has support that’s on par with allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices. 

Paid leave also was the only provision tested from that legislative package other than the Medicare provision that gained majority support from voters in both parties — a rare feat in an extremely politically divided era.

In the Global Strategy Group’s survey of battleground voters, Democrats trailed Republicans by 3 percentage points in a generic question of which party’s candidate a voter is more likely to pick. 

But in a follow-up question specifically comparing a Democrat who supports paid leave to a Republican who does not, Democrats hold a 13-point edge, said Joey Teitelbaum, lead researcher on the group’s battleground polling.

Teitelbaum said the research found the issue is one that may motivate voters who would otherwise stay home, but only if those voters see Democrats following through on promises of action on paid leave. 

One-third of voters in the survey said they would rather stay home on Election Day than vote for a Senate candidate who opposes access to paid leave, with higher shares of women ages 18 to 44 and Black female voters agreeing with that statement.

One key group of swing voters in the 2022 elections, Lake said, will be white, non-college-educated women ages 40 to 65 — a group that has many women in the “sandwich” years of caring for children and aging parents. 

Another key group will be women of color and younger women under 40, “who lean very Democratic, but also wonder what the Democrats are doing for them,” she added.

“So whether you’re talking about the strategy of persuasion, or you’re talking about the strategy of turnout, this is one of the few issues that is at the top of both of those agendas,” Lake said.

Manchin opposition

Moving paid leave from a campaign promise to a policy achievement will take a shift by Manchin, who has said he supports the idea of paid leave but does not back creating a new national program in the pending legislation.

Huckelbridge said Democratic Sens. Patty Murray of Washington and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, who have been heavily involved in work on a paid leave program, have told her and others that they believe Manchin is “movable” on the issue.

But they acknowledge that the current bill — which would be passed through the reconciliation process, allowing Democrats to approve it without any Republican votes — is the only path forward on the national level.

“We have to do this in Build Back Better. There is no bipartisan path anytime soon that will deliver real results for families,” Huckelbridge said. 

If that fails, advocates say the movement has grown stronger during the past year. In some states, the fight may move to the state legislature, describing a rise in state-level interest.

“We will see this be an issue in state legislatures and at the ballot box in states,” said Vicki Shabo, senior fellow for paid leave policy and strategy at the think tank New America. “And the federal issue is not going away either.”

WASHINGTON—A federal judge in Louisiana on Tuesday issued a ruling blocking nationwide the Biden administration mandate requiring millions of health care workers be vaccinated against COVID-19.

A suit challenging the mandate was led on behalf of multiple states by Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry, a Republican, and U.S. Judge Terry Doughty granted the states’ request for a preliminary injunction. 

Doughty said in his opinion that he extended the injunction beyond those states and to the entire U.S. because “there are unvaccinated healthcare workers in other states who also need protection.” 

States joining Louisiana in its suit, filed Nov. 15, included Montana, Arizona, Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Mississippi, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah and West Virginia.

Doughty, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, said that “this Court believes the balance of equities and the public interest favors the issuance of a preliminary injunction.”

“The public interest is served by maintaining the constitutional structure and maintaining the liberty of individuals who do not want to take the COVID-19 vaccine,” he wrote. “This interest outweighs Government Defendants’ interests. “

At issue is President Joe Biden’s campaign to ensure that workers throughout the country are vaccinated against COVID-19.

Under Biden’s order, many private-sector employees were required to get vaccinated or undergo weekly tests, while some 17 million health care providers at facilities participating in the federal Medicare and Medicaid health insurance programs must be vaccinated — with no option to choose weekly testing instead.

Under the requirement, health care workers were to be fully vaccinated by Jan. 4, 2022.

Becker’s Hospital Review reported earlier this month that a federal study found 30 percent of health care workers in 2,000 hospitals across the U.S. remained  unvaccinated as of Sept. 15.

“I applaud Judge Doughty for recognizing that Louisiana is likely to succeed on the merits and for delivering yet another victory for the medical freedom of Americans,” Landry said in a statement. “While Joe Biden villainizes our healthcare heroes with his ‘jab or job’ edicts, I will continue to stand up to the President’s bully tactics and fight for liberty.”

The Louisiana ruling followed another on Monday by a federal judge in Missouri that blocked enforcement of the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate for millions  in 10 states.

That ruling by U.S. District Judge Matthew Schelp, another Trump appointee, affected the states involved in that lawsuit: Missouri, Iowa, Kansas, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Arkansas, Wyoming and Alaska.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters Monday that the administration is “obviously going to abide by the law and fight any efforts in courts or otherwise” to prevent health care facilities from protecting their work forces.

WASHINGTON — Enforcement of the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate for millions of health care workers was blocked in 10 states on Monday, after a ruling by a federal judge in Missouri.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Matthew Schelp affects the states involved in the lawsuit, which include Missouri, Iowa, Kansas, and New Hampshire.

The others are North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Arkansas, Wyoming and Alaska.

At issue is President Joe Biden’s campaign to ensure that workers throughout the country are vaccinated against COVID-19. 

Many private sector employees will be required to get vaccinated or undergo weekly tests, while some 17 million health care providers at facilities participating in the federal Medicare and Medicaid health insurance programs must be vaccinated — with no option to choose weekly testing instead. 

Under the requirement, health care workers were to be vaccinated by Jan. 4, 2022.

In his 32-page opinion granting a preliminary injunction while the lawsuit proceeds, Schelp wrote that the state attorneys general challenging the mandate appear likely to succeed in their argument that federal health officials lack the authority to implement the requirement. 

He also agreed with claims from the plaintiffs that health care facilities will suffer staffing shortages due to the requirement. 

“The public has an interest in stopping the spread of COVID. No one disputes that,” Schelp, who was nominated by President Donald Trump in 2019, wrote in the 32-page opinion. “But the court concludes that the public would suffer little, if any, harm from maintaining the ‘status quo’ through the litigation of this case.”

In a statement after the ruling, Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt described the injunction as “a huge victory for healthcare workers in Missouri and across the country, including rural hospitals who were facing near-certain collapse due to this mandate.”

“While today’s ruling is a victory, there’s more work to be done, and I will keep fighting to push back on this unprecedented federal overreach,” Schmitt added. 

Several other lawsuits from states are pending in federal courts, challenging both the mandate on health care workers and the broader mandate on most private sector employees.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters Monday that the administration is “obviously going to abide by the law and fight any efforts in courts or otherwise” to prevent health care facilities from protecting their work forces.