considerations, the jobs that the majority of them would find themselves in does not allow them to protect themselves by looking into a computer and doing telework. most of them are essential, having to mingle in a society in which the virus is circulating. so right at the get-go, they have a greater risk of getting infected. and then we know from a lot of experience now that the situation regarding whether or not you have serious consequences, hospitalizations, incubation, complications, and a death related very strongly to the prevalence and incidence of underlying comorbid conditions, which are clearly disproportionately more expressed in the african-american population than in the rest of the population, and that particularly includes hypertension, diabetes, obesity, chronic lung disease, and kidney

disease. so unfortunately, we have a situation where it's sort of a double whammy of a negative capability of them to respond through no fault of their own because of underlying conditions and the conditions in which they find themselves. >> would you consider racism itself as being one of the illnesses of the african-american community and a more extraordinary way then these comorbidities? >> i think the question was what i consider the institution of racism as contributing. yes, thank you, congressman. but i mean, obviously, the african-american community has suffered from racism for a very, very long period of time, and i cannot imagine that that has not contributed to the conditions that they find themselves in economically and otherwise, so

the answer, congressman, is yes. >> i applaud your announcement of $100 million going to the morehouse medicine for contact tracing. i have introduced a bill which will put $100 million towards -- $100 million or more -- and for testing? >> thank you, congressman. we are going to need billions of dollars. through the cdc. have morehouse lead a consortium

of organizations and the national association of community health workers, council of urban, and the linkage to care needs for some of those also in the rural population. there is going to need to be a lot more than that to reach everyone. >> thank you, bobby. thank you, admiral. next is mr. upton from michigan. >> thanks very much, mr. chairman. and i really appreciate the testimony that we heard thus far and the interaction that we will have between all of our -- i guess, the first question i have is for dr. fauci. thank you for your service for short. in recent weeks, of course, you made this statement that there

have been as many as 100 million doses of the flu vaccine before the year. i have heard from a number of companies just in recent days, pfizer hopes to have perhaps a billion doses by the end of next year. calendar year '21. maybe even get into some production somewhat early. the approval -- the promise -- let's face it. what is your thought as to how

early we may see an emergency use authorization approval for any of these vaccines, based on what we know today and what scenarios we may see in the next number of months in terms of the approval? lay out what you think is a real distinct possibility of where we might end up being. >> okay, thank you for that. i didn't hear everything you said, but i think i got enough of it to answer your question, at least the last part, which i think is very important, and i welcome the opportunity to address this. the idea about the doses that would be available. you know, a hundred million doses at the beginning of the year. some companies say that they will have as many as a billion doses. i think that's real. most people would raise their eyebrows and think how's that going going to happen? things are being done -- companies are starting to plan to make doses even before they

know the vaccine works. so the risk of the speed is not risk to safety. it is not risk to scientific integrity. it is a risk to money. so, put that aside. the point that the congressman made i think is very important. we need to be careful that we don't jump because our need to get vaccines to those who needed that we do not definitively prove safety and efficacy before we make decisions about distribution. we've heard a lot about emergency use authorization. emergency use authorization is important, but it has to be done in a situation where you fulfill the criteria of emergency use authorization. i would be very disappointed if we jumped to a conclusion before we knew that a vaccine was truly safe and truly effective. because i wouldn't want the

perpetual ambiguity of not knowing whether or not it is truly safe and truly effective. that's the reason why we are doing several randomized placebo-controlled trials which power on the that could give us the answer. i hope that answers your question. >> well, what would be the earliest that you think under the best scenario that we am i see that along with -- i guess what actually be the fda that way at issue that -- >> the answer is yes. let me just quickly answer that and handed over to steve because he may want to answer that you're it we are going into the first phase one -- phase three efficacy trial in july. it takes at least a month to get to the second dose. it will take another couple of

months to accrue or enroll enough people that if there is a viral activity in the community and we have our sites not only in the united states but all over the world. in brazil, and in south africa, so if we get an efficacy signal, you are going to get an efficacy single more quickly than more cases that are pure now if it turns out that they are not a lot of cases, it may take longer. and that is the reason that you can't give an accurate prediction of when you are going to get those data. steve, do you want to take it from your? >> yeah, thanks, dr. fauci if you're a couple of issues. one, we are working with sponsors across the board. private industries, et cetera. those who are developing vaccines, and we are providing technical assistance regarding medical trial design, number of participants, including the trials, as well as the end points that we want to see to make adjudication about safety and effectiveness, and i

want to emphasize what dr. fauci said, and that is the acceleration is really around taking financial risk around the development process. the acceleration is not cutting corners with respect to the youth assessments of safety and effectiveness. the american people can rely upon the fact that the fda has many experience in the vaccine area. we've been doing this for years, and we will rely upon the science and data when it is available to us to make the decision. i cannot prejudge when that will happen. >> thank you. thank you, fred. next, we have ms. eshoo. >> thank you. morning. i would like to start. doctor, i expressed to you really my points about the most

prestigious institution in the world on infectious diseases and intervention. the united states today is number one -- number one in the world in infections. this is not anything that any of us can be proud of. the american people are in pain. there is confusion. because for many reasons. and i urged you, as head of cdc, to speak -- i know the agencies are talking to each other.

the american people are not hearing you. they deserve to hear the truth. we heard dr. fauci -- putting out information to the american people. the american people are divided on this issue of the virus. so i continue to urge you to speak -- put your jacket on and speak weakly to the american people. they want to know what's coming. my constituents asked me on a consistent basis what is our government doing? that's a haunting question. and so while we are doing the knife back and morning, good questions on the part of members. i really remain dismayed and deeply disappointed.

we need leadership coming out of the cdc. real leadership. it was an outrage that there was a gathering in tulsa. six of the presidents people were infected, and it's my understanding that two secret service agents were. how can the cdc allow this pandemic, this virus, to be something political? you have to push back. you are a scientist. you are a doctor. dr. hahn, i am sure you have read several articles regarding hydroxychloroquine. every study says it doesn't work in any setting. in fact, it has known side effects of cardiac issues being one. so there is a danger in terms of the side effects.

are you going to inform doctors across the country about -- >> thank you, congresswoman, for that question, and indeed we are. i can refer to that committee to several documents that we have put out over the last several weeks regarding hydroxychloroquine. with respect to the issues, we issued a safety alert, particularly around the combination of hydroxychloroquine with other drugs that might affect the heart, and as you know, we have taken recent action regarding -- >> specifically, have you specifically spoken directly to the american people? this notion about hydroxychloroquine -- >> yes, ma'am, there is a piece that is authored by me, as well as a piece that is directly to the american people about hydroxychloroquine -- >> i want to know if you have spoken out verbally to doctors

across the country. with all due respect. >> yes, ma'am. i appreciate the question, but every opportunity i've had to be in the media, i have communicated that same information -- >> i have another question, dr. hahn. there have been several articles -- political pressure being placed on the fda. stating unequivocally that any political pressure is applied to you, that you will immediately report that to this committee. >> i will certainly unequivocally state that i can tell you that i have not felt political pressure, nor has the fda, to make any decision in any specific direction. >> thank you.

>> it is about a direct political pressure. so, thank you for your response. >> thank you, ms. eshoo. next is mr. ladder from ohio. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thanks to our witnesses and all the hard work that you have been doing. we really appreciate it. dr. fauci, i know that our leader -- had brought some of the sub. could you further explain how an infected individual -- effective in the virus, and are you seeing different levels of antibodies and people who are infected, and what that means in terms of immunity? >> thank you very much for that

question, congressman latta. so we need to start off by saying that we need to assume you are dealing with an antibody test that has been validated by the fda or by the nih. thoughts important. a lot of the confusion out there. there are tests that are not validated here but let's assume you have a good test. whenever the body gets confronted with a virus and recovers, even when they don't recover, the body is stimulated to make antibodies. in general, the viruses that we have a lot of experience with, those antibody serve to protect you against exposure and infection after you are exposed to the same virus, so that's what we call immunological memory, and these proteins lock the virus. the one thing we do not know yet with covid-19 is the relationship between the type of antibody -- because the best antibody is called neutralizing

antibody. if this is a virus, and if this is where the virus binds to the cell, it blocks the virus binding to the cell. there are antibodies against other parts that are called binding antibodies. they don't mean much, so you've got to make sure that you get the right antibody. the second thing is what we still don't know is what the relationship between the antibody is, namely the level of antibody and the degree of protection. the third thing we don't know is how long or what the duration of antibody is going to be. we are going to find these things out as we study these individuals over months and a year or more. but remember, we are only a few months into this. so we know that they make antibodies. it is likely that they are protected for some period of time, but we don't know how long that is going to be. so the question i always get

asked, which is the subject, does that mean if you are exposed and you have antibodies, that you are protected? likely you are, but we don't know how long you are protected. >> thank you. dr. ty fields, dr. redfield, how will the vaccine be distributed to americans? >> thank you for the question. it is a question that is currently under discussion within the team to look at what the appropriate prioritization for distribution is. i want to just comment that it may be very dependent on what the product is viewed each of these vaccine products that are currently being developed may in fact have differential utilization for different populations. so, there is serious consideration to try to develop

those prioritization's, and it's going to be important to develop them, dependent on the products that they are going to be applied to. >> thank you. >> dr. hahn, and thanks very much for all your work, and thanks for taking my calls, especially on friday nights and on saturdays. i appreciate it. the fda providing emergency use authorization, you expect the fda to issue anymore for potential treatments in the fa fall? >> for potential therapies, is that what you asked, sir? so, we are working very closely with sponsors regarding the development of therapeutics, including with operational therapy. 131 trials ongoing right now. i anticipate that we will receive data regarding several therapies in the future, plasma being one of them, as we just discussed with congressman

walton. potentially also some anti-inflammatory agents as well for monoclonal antibodies. those are being accelerated through the pipeline and potential therapeutics as well as prophylactics moving forward. again, we can't prejudge the eua process because we have to see the data, but i do anticipate that we will be receiving data. >> my time has expired. thank you. >> next, we have colorado. >> thank you so much. i want to think of the and welcome all of you. my subcommittee and an investigation subcommittee a number of times, and just to let you know that we are going to be continuing our investigations both about how we responded to this and where we go in the future, so you can expect to hear from us. i have some brief questions for each witness, and i would like to start with you admiral gera

gerard. the chairman talks about the comments last week, saying that -- saying that the double -- when you do that, more people. cases are going up in the u.s. because we are testing far more than any countries -- this is what he said. and he also said this morning that he doesn't talk about it -- so they have been instructed to test less. i would ask you, as you are now in charge of overseeing the test, as the president asked you to do fewer test? >> thank you, and again, i want to clarify that neither the

president -- >> yes or no would work, admiral. >> now, neither the president nor anyone in the administration has instructed our suggested that we should do less testing. we are proceeding and just the opposite. we want to do more testing. >> okay. so i want to ask you, admiral, do you think that it is a good or a bad idea to do less testing so it will look like we have fewer cases? >> my purpose -- my purpose in leaving is to increase the number of testing. the only way that we will be able to understand who has the disease, who is infected, and can pass it, introduce appropriate contact tracing, is to test appropriately smartly, and as many people as we can. >> thank you so much. dr. fauci, i wanted to ask you, we have seemed out of the last few days that well cases are

going up in this country, deaths are going down. and i have seen some reporting in the media that in part that is because younger people who tend not to die from covid are the ones being infected. should we see this as a positive sign, or should we still be worried? >> i think it's too early to make that kind of link, congresswoman. let me explain. deaths always lag considerably behind cases. you might remember that at that time new york was in their worst situation where the deaths were going up, and yet the cases were starting to go down, the deaths only came down multiple weeks later. so you are seeing more cases now while the deaths are going down. the concern is if those cases that infect people who wind up

getting sick and go to the hospital, it is conceivable you may see the deaths going up. so i think it is too early to say because the deaths are going down. >> thank you, doctor, and i have another question, dr. fauci, for you. we have seen -- and i think you and i have talked about this. most vaccines take years, if not decades, to be approved and to be proved efficacious. and sometimes we don't find a vaccine at all. i have two questions for you. number one, do you believe that we will find a vaccine for the coronavirus? and number two, do you still stand by the prediction you gave us some months ago that we could actually have a vaccine by early 2021? >> i feel cautiously optimistic, congresswoman, that we will be successful in getting a vaccine. there's never a guarantee of

that, but that early data that we are seeing regarding the immunogenicity and the good responses makes me cautiously optimistic, knowing that there is never a guarantee. you remember i told your committee a few months ago at a vaccine would be available in a year to 18 months. i said that in january of 2019. 2020. a year from january is december. i still think there is a reasonably good chance that by the very beginning of 2021, that if we are going to have a vaccine, that we will have it by then. >> thank you very much, doctor. mr. chairman, i will give it back. >> thank you. next, we have mrs. rogers from washington state. i hope. >> i'm coming.

am i here? >> 5 minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank the ranking member for holding his hearing and appreciate our witnesses were testifying today. covid-19 is the challenge of the century, as others have said. it is that health and economic crisis of our lifetime. we mourn the deaths of over 100,000 americans, and we must remember that we are not out of the with yet. i want to especially express my heartfelt gratitude for that health care workers, first responders, emergency and essential workers who have been working around the clock to fight this virus, save lives, and keep our family safe. as our experts worked tirelessly to develop a vaccine and treatment, i'm confident there is no country in the world better equipped to lead for medical breakthroughs. we can't trust china to leave,

and that is why the trump administration has created programs like operational warp speed, bringing together the very best in the public and private sector to develop countermeasures. we are leveraging the power of artificial intelligence, supercomputing, machine learning. enhance our knowledge of the virus. top researchers and innovators who continue to be at the forefront of these breakthroughs. i look forward to learning more. understand what the administration is continuing to do to lead the development of these treatments that america needs so that we can usher in a new era of innovation in health care. to keep our family is healthy, save lives, and to ensure our economy booms again. we must get this right.

dr. fauci, as you know, maximizing the effectiveness of vaccines. would you just explain a little bit further what an atrovent is, and are there any in the pipeline? how will they play our role in the administration pursuit of the covid-19 vaccine? >> thank you very much for that question. it is our product distinct from the vaccine itself, but when given in conjunction with the vaccine, it enhances the power of the immune response, so if you have a vaccine that gives a level of response that's here, when you get an atrovent together with that, you often boosted to a much higher level. we use adjuvants in several vaccines. the nih has a major program in the pursuit and development of novel adjuvants of all different

types, and in fact, that's part of the program right now to accelerate the vaccine development capability, so it's a good question but very important part of what we do. thank you. >> thank you for that. dr. hahn, as you know, the decentralization of diagnostic test oversights has been very helpful in expanding the availability of diagnostic test for covid-19, but it's temporary. would you just speak to how the flexibility has benefited the general public and how you think it would be helpful in the future for outbreaks or novel viruses? >> thank you very much, congresswoman. i appreciate the question. as you pointed out, the flexibilities have allowed us to work with test developers. this has been throughout the covid pandemic with all of our medical products, a balance

between the oversight, so that we have tests that are valid, reproducible, accurate, but at the same time, allow the developers the ability to develop the tests, and we've developed this partnership that i think has been very fruitful moving forward. i particularly like it with respect to the flexibility given to the states. your state in particular which has an excellent public health laboratory as well as the university of washington. new york state is another example of this. those are the sort of things that we are looking at now as we talk about how we want to move forward, that we could potentially put in place on a permanent basis to facilitate test development. hopefully we will never be in a position again where we have to develop tests over such a short period back of time we have remarkably done during this time, but we really do need to talk about how these flexible things could stimulate the development of tests. >> great. well, thank you all. thank you all for your leadership, your commitment during this time.

the long hours. and the way that we are looking forward to make sure that we are prepared in the future. thank you. good to be with you. >> thank you. now we go to mr. doyle, coming to us from pittsburgh. mr. doyle? is mr. doyle -- >> sorry, mr. chairman. i forgot to unmute. can you hear me now [buzzer] >> yes, you are recognized for . >> thank you and also thank you to the ranking member. on behalf of the american people. this committee has continued to affect oversight for the trump administration shortcomings related to distributing personal protective equipment or ppe. when states and hospitals were faced with critical shortages of

the ppe such as masks and gowns, president trump passed the buck and said the federal government was "not a shipping clerk." we saw the result of the failure of leadership. on a national strategy, states have had to fend for themselves and even compete against themselves for critical supplies. it's become so desperate out there, that one former u.s. disaster official referred to the scramble as "lord of the flies." at a recent hearing that a subcommittee, michigan governor gretchen whitmer testified "the lack of centralized coordination at the central level created a counterproductive competition between the states and federal government to secure limited supplies, driving up prices, and exacerbating existing shortages." admiral giroir, let me ask you, do we have enough ppe for every frontline worker who needs it?

thousands of others whose jobs put them at risk. our people still having to reuse and 95 masks? and if we don't have enough, why hasn't the administration greatly expanded the manufacturing of the supplies? >> well, thank you for that question, and i will do my best to answer that. certainly running supply chains. but being a member of the unified coordination group at fema for the last several months, i am pretty familiar with this. and i think we all know that there was an absolute shortage of everything when this started. everyone in the world was looking for the same supplies, and we try to manage that both from increasing the supplies and using the dpa multiple times, for example, there were three investments. dpa title i for n-95.

to improve production. we estimate that the country in the fall, if there were a covid outbreak to this degree would need about 140 n-95's per month. we should have 180 million per month being produced domestically by that time. this was not available when we started in march. the industry was not here. this was all offshore. i will say cumulatively between march 1st and june 19, the government distributed or enabled the commercial distribution of 160 million n95 masks. 281 million gallons, over 16 billion pairs of gloves, so this was really an enormous effort. we need to be better prepared. this all needs to be onshore. we are working to have a 60 to 90 day supply.

we have talked to governors. many of the states are also doing their own supplies. 60 to 90 days, so confident moving from here on, as we ramp up domestic manufacturing, that we are going to be in a much better position than we were three months ago. >> thank you, admiral. dr. hahn, let me ask you, since the demand for ppe increased the spring, we have seen many actors with little experience in the supply field enter the market. reports have indicated that there were counterfeit or low quality products that don't meet safety requirements, unable to fill agreements. what steps is the fda taking to ensure that companies are not circumventing federal oversight and injecting potentially substandard ppe into the united states? >> thank you, congressman. this is a really important issue. during the height of this epidemic and the increased demand, we provided regulatory flexibility for companies and

insisted that they provide certification. certification that the ppe met the requirements that we have in place and that the foreign governments had in place, but we did something else with respect to that. we also partnered with the cdc with n95 to verify that in fact the sole certification of the validity of the efficacy of the ppe was in place. you correctly identified that for a variety of reasons. subsequent product that was shipped into the country did not meet the specifications. we immediately took action to make sure that those were and continue to monitor it very closely. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i see in my time has expired. i yield. >> thank you, mr. doyle. next, we have mr. guthrie from texas. >> melissa: so this is the house hearing on the coronavirus

for a response that we have been listening to. you of course recognize dr. anthony faucher. also dr. stephen hahn covering really good information. what do you need that you don't have right now, they were asked? they said essentially nothing. we heard dr. fauci say that it is realistic to believe that they will be 1,000 doses available at some point. that is not out of the question. we heard a lot about the antibodies, and conflicting information and tests out there all night, and they also said that they are going to be keeping a very close eye on the outbreaks that we have seen in both florida and arizona. joining us now is dr. marc siegel. a physician at nyu. you know, the one thing they talked about too was institutional memory, this idea, and i believe that was dr. anthony fauci who said we just have the able outbreak, but

we still didn't replace the ppe. we didn't build all of that back up, and this time, we want to have the institutional memory that we need to be prepared for the next pandemic. let's go out to you. >> marc: well, that's extremely important, melissa. we have the capability for that, and really important here, we are focusing so much on covid-19, let's not forget in the fall, we are going to have flu season. so the idea to be able to differentiate testing, we need the testing ability to do that. we need to be able to ramp up so that the next time, god forbid, something like this happens, we are not caught unawares. ebola was a small outbreak. we didn't have the stockpile. we didn't have that computers, we didn't have the testing. we were so far behind with testings, though that has put us in a real hole here. that is something that we are at

least going to try to fix going forward. we need massive testing so that we can contact trees. once you have it, who are you in contact with? how do we isolate? we have been so behind here, we can't afford that to ever happen again. >> melissa: yeah, they were each asked about 1,000 times, did the president ever ask you to slow down testing? no was their answer over and over again. did anyone in the administration even hints that you should slow down testing? they said no, just to clarify that. they were asked repeatedly about that. they also said, which was interesting, we want to make sure that everybody gets their regular flu shot as well, that that is really important, and we could avoid another 40, 50, 80,000 deaths possibly due to the regular flu. why is that so important, that we make sure we get our regular flu shot as well? >> marc: because, melissa, we are going to have a very difficult inability to tell the difference between flu and

covid-19. the symptoms are too similar, so at least even if the flu shot is only 60% effective, it will decrease the incidence of the flu and decrease therefore respiratory illness and death, overwhelming your hospitals. very, very important. also important to something i want to mention, something that dr. fauci just said. these are all mild cases. texas, florida. he pointed out, and did something that we can't dismiss, that unfortunately, you could see the depths catch up to this. most likely, that won't be the case because younger people have not had a severe illness, and we are seeing younger people get this, more than elder knee right now. but he is saying that we have to wage and follow that account over the next few weeks, which has definitely been on the decline. >> melissa: thank you. i want to give the rest of our panel here on "outnumbered." let's start with kennedy.

she is here with us. you have a question. go ahead. >> kennedy: i do. thank you so much, melissa. good afternoon, dr. siegel. i want to know. it is very confusing because we are getting a lot of conflicting reports, and well thought of "i don't know" in terms of prevention and antibodies. dr. fauci even said they are silly with money. they've got their resources, so are the great unknowns because it just takes time to study the virus and to understand how it's going to behave and affect people and affect things like antibodies, or is this just so bureaucratic that effective communication is impossible? >> marc: i think both of those are true, kennedy, but probably in this case, the first is foremost, which is best. it is not just making antibodies that matters. it is making something called neutralizing antibodies. are the antibodies you make, as

you recover from covid-19, got enough to actually attack the virus and stop it? that is a key question, and most likely the answer to that is yes. being very cautious in saying that, but there's a lot of evidence pointing to the fact that these antibodies work and that you are immune as you get over it. they are being very scientifically cautious, but the evidence will, if that is the case. bureaucracy slows it, but the science takes time. you need to study the convalescent plasma of people that have recovered. as you go to give it to someone else, with those antibodies, how much immunity to those antibodies give you? we are in the process of finding that out. it looks good. >> carley: is dr. siegel, it's carly. dr. fauci said something that gave me pause. if we get a vaccine, we should have won by the beginning of 2021, but that is concerning. does that mean that we also run the risk of possibly not being

able to find a vaccine to this virus? >> marc: it's possible. i will tell you how i read that. that's a very good point you are making, carley. he thinks we are going to get one. as you know, dr. fauci is very cautious, but he's a vaccine expert. the word that he used as "immunogenicity," meaning the idea that more than one of them is going to be able to create an immunity. i think he's saying when he says it's cautiously optimistic, i probably would take away the word cautiously and say he's optimistic. the problem is these are brand-new technology is almost across the board in the united states. there is about five great candidates, but they are new. they are using new technology. almost all of them, so we don't have a track record here, so we have to hesitate. it is still too early. we will know over the next month or two.

>> melissa: allred, dr. marc siegel, thank you so much for that. we are going to squeeze in a quick break and continue on the other side. don't go away. i've got great news for veteran homeowners. if you have a va loan, now's the time to call newday usa. their va streamline refi helps you take advantage of some of the lowest mortgage rates we've ever seen. one call to newday can save you $2000 a year. one call can lower your payments by this time next month without verifying your income, without getting your home appraised, and without one dollar out of pocket. it's the quickest and easiest loan newday's ever offered. one call can save you $2000 a year, every year.

>> melissa: fox news alert. president trump heading now to arizona where he will remind voters of his q2016 promises when he stops to commemorate the 200-mile of the new border wall. it comes on the heels of the president signing an executive order to temporarily cut off access to a number of employment-based visas. the white house says it will put out of work americans first in line for jobs amid the pandemic. the president also says that he intends to renew efforts to and dock protection. after the supreme court rejected his first attempt to do so. i want to bring in david webb. at the tech industry is very

sensitive to this idea. i have heard so many people say that it is interesting they take that position while they also talk about black lives matter. and then they employ very, very few black workers. the stats are abysmal. if you look at google, the highest number i have seen in print, 3.7% black employees. the alphabet company about 1%, but a lot of stats even lower than that at about 2.6%. only about 1% are black women in silicon valley. what do you think of this hypocrisy? >> david: well, that hypocrisy is in their virtue signaling, but the other side of this coin i think is more interesting from a realistic business discussion, which is what this is about. we need the workforce to get in and apply for this. so for those communities, education matters, and we need to improve that to get them on a

path to be available for these jobs. i'm not discounting the importance of these companies recruiting, but i am an american who believes in free-market capitalism and not force hiring, so we need various aspects of this. education, available workforce, hiring, rather than virtue signaling or false hiring based on color of skin. that is really what is needed here. >> melissa: jessica, what do you think about that? are there not enough trained minority professionals to fill the jobs in silicon valley? is that what the problem is? >> jessica: there are certainly more, and i hope that those organizations will make more of an effort to make sure that they are employing black and brown americans, but that is a separate issue from what is going on on the immigration front. the president went to arizona, and they are having an enormous covert outbreak as we just were dr. fauci talking about in the hearing, that he wants to be getting back to his signature issue, which is emigration.

he wants to visit the border wall and you talk about visas and people from elsewhere stealing jobs from americans. this was the most successful issue for the president in 2016 when he took the presidency. it did not work as well, though, in 2018, when they tried to say that caravans are coming, you are all in a lot of danger. but i see the present relief wanting to get back to his immigration issue routes, and i expect a tremendous amount of fearmongering to becoming very quickly. >> melissa: kennedy, i'm not sure old -- hang on. hang on. or it's a separate issue when you say that each on -- they want to get these visas in order to bring people into fill the jobs, and there are unemployed americans right here. an executive order saying that you will not bring other people and from other countries, trying to employ americans first. i don't know. is that are totally separate issue? >> kennedy: yeah. i think there is a false dichotomy here.

what we want is two things. we want to great economy with full employment, and sometimes that means you have to have immigrants come to this country and fill various jobs throughout society were in order to have that kind of full employment. so they can have a plethora of choices. the other thing, it's back to david's point, i agree. it starts with education. and what we need is -- yes, we need more stem training, but we need fewer -- i know that it is heresy for democrats, but it really does boil down to school choice, and if you live in a neighborhood that has horrible schools, you should not be beholden to send your child there, particularly if they have aptitude in stem. so, give parents the tools to make sure their kids can get a good education so we can fill those jobs in the next

generation with bright, fertile minds. >> melissa: yeah, kennedy knows what she's talking about. we both have kids in public schools in new york city, and there are a lot of great choices, but you have to be really tuned in, and you have to be an engaged parent, and you can find a way for your kid to one of those schools. there are other areas where you don't have that kind of choice, which is what you're talking about. carley, let me ask you about one of the issues i just got brought up here doesn't look bad to go to arizona right now, on the heels of here we have an uptick in florida and arizona in the number of cases, and the president is headed there. kind of always followed by a crowd. what are your thoughts? >> carley: i actually think this is right what the president should be doing. going to the border and pushing border security is something that really helped him win in 2016. he is going to definitely try to that issue to the forefront in 2020, but the most important thing is that he is talking about an issue, and if you

compare that to joe biden, who we are really notche not sure we stands, and he can be pliable, say what you will about president trump, whether you like him or hate him, he stands for several things. conservative justices, and he is going to push those issues to the forefront, including his america first agenda. so i do think that it is important that he starts getting back on the campaign trail. if he focuses on these issues and leave the bickering and some of the catty fights that he has on social media, i think that his numbers will increase. >> melissa: david, what do you think about that? >> david: i think it is important to go out and talk about the issues, melissa. i agree with carley. what we have got to do is focus on getting this country back. let's take a lesson from tulsa.

i know that the media is having a field day with the infections among the trump members, but they are going to likely recover. america is recovering from this, and i hear this on the radio all the time. let us get back -- we will figure out how to take care of ourselves and our families. we know there's risks, but dr. siegel has mentioned the downturn. 40% drop in fatality rates among those infected. we are going to survive this. the president is sending a message that we are americans. we are stronger than this. we will take care of it. we will treat our people, and we will continue as best as normal, that is a positive message for americans out there, no matter what kind of fearmongering or allies some in the media try to push. those are just facts. fearmongering over facts and data or vice versa. >> melissa: i think vice versa is what you meant there. thank you. thanks to everyone on the virtual couch.

i will be back with "outnumbered overtime" on the other side of this break. don't go away. ♪ stomize your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. what do you think? i don't see it. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ well i didn't choose metastatic breast cancer. not the exact type. not this specific mutation. but i did pick hope... ...and also clarity... ...by knowing i have a treatment that goes right at it. discover piqray, the first and only treatment that specifically targets pik3ca mutations in hr+, her2- mbc, which are common

and linked to cancer growth. piqray is taken with fulvestrant after progression on hormone therapy and has been proven to help people with a pik3ca mutation live longer without disease progression. do not take piqray if you've had a severe allergic reaction to it or to any of its ingredients. piqray can cause serious side effects including severe allergic and skin reactions, high blood sugar levels and diarrhea that are common and can be severe, and lung problems known as pneumonitis. tell your doctor right away if you have symptoms of severe allergic reactions or high blood sugar while taking piqray. your doctor will monitor your blood sugar before you start and during treatment and may monitor more often if you have a history of type 2 diabetes. before starting, tell your doctor if you have a history of diabetes, skin reactions... ...are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include rash, nausea, tiredness and weakness, decreased appetite, mouth sores, vomiting, weight loss, hair loss, and changes in certain blood tests. if you've progressed on hormone therapy, and have a pik3ca mutation... ...ask your doctor about piqray.

because the tempur-breeze° transfers heat

away from your body. so you feel cool... night after night. during the tempur-pedic summer of sleep, save $500 on all tempur-breeze mattresses. during the tempur-pedic summer of sleep, vby refinancing your va loan atl today's incredibly low rates at newday usa. newday's va streamline refi is the quickest and easiest refi they've ever offered. you can lower your payments by this time next month without having to verify your income, without getting your home appraised, and there's no money out of pocket. one call to start saving $2000 a year. every year. one call. then, sit back, relax and think about what you'll do with the savings.

call newday right now. >> harris: fox news alert, right no an atlanta man shot and killed by police in a wendy's parking lot, a shooting that sparked fiery protests. this is "outnumbered" over time, i am melissa francis in today for harris faulkner. a family friends gathering this hour for 27-year-old rayshard brooks' funeral at the historic ebenezer baptist church in atlanta, which was once dr. martin luther king jr.'s congregation. in the who will be giving today's eulogy speaking earlier. >> it's important for us to be present with his family as they deal with thisns