>> i'm so glad we had this time together. listen, join us back here. we'll be on the virtual couch tomorrow. see you then. ♪ >> sandra: minutes from now the casket carry justice ruth bader ginsburg scheduled to arrive at the supreme court where family and friends and her fellow justices will gather for a private ceremony after which justice ginsburg will lie on a table used for president lincoln. >> trace: lining the steps of the court as the casket arrives. the public will be able to pay its respects to ginsburg later today and tomorrow.

on friday her body will be moved to capitol hill where justice ginsburg will become the first woman ever to lie in state in the capitol. >> sandra: president trump moving forward to the plan to nominate her successor. the president saying he will make that announcement saturday as democrats promise to fight that confirmation with everything they have. >> president trump: i will soon be announcing that nominee. you will love it and be so happy. if you don't love it, don't vote for me, okay? >> if leader mcconnell presses forward the republican imagine or at the will have stolen two supreme court seats four years apart using completely contradictory rationales. >> we have an obligation under the constitution to fill the vacancy. >> sandra: fox team coverage for thu morning. bret baier and martha maccallum and shannon bream and john roberts and judge napolitano are standing by.

we begin with shannon bream. she is at the supreme court this morning. shannon, what are we about to see? >> it's a beautiful day in washington very quiet so far. a somber mood as we await later this hour the casket of justice ruth bader ginsburg will arrive and go inside the supreme court for a private ceremony. it will be the justices and their spouses, also her family and the ceremony today will be led by rabbi, she is married to former clerk of justice ginsburg from the 2014 term. a very personal family affair in many respects today. they will have the private ceremony and then justice ginsburg's casket will move to the outdoor portico area. she will remain there a couple of days so people who are lining up down the street here can pay their respects and pass by in this area. i'm struck today by this beautiful, cool, sunny day in washington

such in contrast the last time we went through the same event which was the death of justice scalia, the two of them so close. it was a bitterly cold, rainy day that day. we'll see similarities. you mentioned former clerks will line the steps here. that was a very moving sight as we saw with justice scalia's ceremony. the same today with justice ginsburg. all of those served clerks over the 27 years at the court will be part of the ceremony and escorting her today. we expect a lot of personal moments that we probably won't be privy to. the public part in which people who have gathered as you saw many crowds over the weekend bringing flowers and tributes starting today a little later they'll have their chance to come by in person and file by and pay their respects. >> sandra: we have all of that coming up in a few moments. we'll watch as the casket arrives at the supreme court. bret, bring you in as we see

the supreme battle heating up. chris wallace has revealed his debate topics for tuesday night as the atlantic writes this morning it could seal biden's fate. we'll see. one of the biggest topics will be the supreme court vacancy. what are we about to see, bret, as far as a battle to fill ginsburg's seat? >> listen, good morning. i think it will be contentious and things that we don't think about right now but as far as the arrows in the quiver as you look at the topics that chris wallace is going to bring up during the debate. as far as arrows in the quiver for democrats to delay or stop this, there aren't that many. things they can do to gum up the works. there are things they can do to delay it a bit. but as far as the votes and being able to move forward and do it, it is in the cards.

the question is how the hearings go and do they devolve into attacking whoever the nominee is. that's likely, but it's dangerous ahead of an election in which both sides are trying to analyze exactly how this is going to affect the ability to turn out their base. >> sandra: martha, the moment when mitt romney said this everything changed. listen. >> it's appropriate to look at the constitution and to look at the precedent that has existed since the beginning of our country's history. the garland decision was consistent with that and the decision to proceed now with president trump's nominee is consistent with history. >> sandra: what does this tell us about what lies ahead? >> mitt romney was a potential roadblock as we have seen him be in the past. it became clear yesterday morning that roadblock was not going to be in the way. i do think that from everything that i'm hearing, the wheels are turning very quickly on this and that the republican

side would like to start hearings very soon and would like to potentially get a vote in as early as october 29th in that time zone before the election. and i think that at the moment, they feel that the wind is at their back and they will be able to do that. we have learned on a daily basis there are twists and turns in all of this. you are looking at amy coney barrett, who is widely believed to be the strongest candidate here. there are indications she met twice with week with president trump and that it went quote very well according to people close to this situation. she is a judge on the u.s. court of appeals for the 7th circuit and she is a graduate professor and graduate of the law school of notre dame. she is clearly a very top contender here but i will point out the president will meet with barbara lagoa on friday. he will be in florida and we

all know from following president trump all these years that this is not over until it is over and people do expect that they will get along well and that she will be someone that he will also see as a very interesting candidate. but at this point the gravity appears to be on the side of amy coney barrett. >> sandra: we heard from senator joe manchin this morning on "fox & friends" and he had a lot to say and someone who said on the record he did not believe the senate should hold this vote before the election. here is senator manchin. >> if you look back when harry reid exercised the nuclear option which did away with the 60 vote threshold every democrat should evaluate how would that work for us. it will flip the other way no matter who comes in power. why would you go down that path? >> sandra: he laid out his reasoning why court packing and filibuster reforms are bad ideas. what did you take away from

that? >> well, that's great except that most of his party is going the other way. and the talk at least is to leave all the options on the table. the question that i posed to democratic senators and i talked to a number of different staffs if it was president joe biden and senate majority leader chuck schumer and this came up, this vacancy with 43 days left, would they move forward? the answer is yes. in the current environment because the court itself is such a big deal. what it does for the election, though, it changes the mind, the focus, of perhaps independents or moderate-leaning republicans who maybe don't like president trump or how he tweets or how he talks but they say wait, that's why i voted for him. this is really important in the long term. >> sandra: if i could finish off by putting those topics that chris wallace revealed for the big debate tuesday night. the supreme court vacancy going

to be a big one. trump and biden records, covid-19, economy, race and violence in our cities. integrity of the election. i mentioned the atlantic piece. trump says he isn't preparing. biden is sees the boxes to check. many democrats remain nervous. just how big is tuesday night going to be in the grand scheme of this election, final thoughts? >> the dichotomy between the two candidates are campaigning is enormous. president trump out there every other day at a huge rally and speaking with voters all along the way. and i think that one of the things that democrats are concerned about when you look at places like florida, for example, where you see president trump building in the latino vote. they are concerned that joe biden's inability or decision not to be out there and to be showing himself to these voters day in and day out in one way or another social distancing understood may be hurting him.

whether or not the president's warm-up of being out there every day will help him. it begins when the two people walk on the stage. one person can be on or off and anybody's guess right now. >> sandra: we'll cover every minute of it. great to see you this morning. >> trace: president trump planning to announce on saturday his nominee to replace the late justice ruth bader ginsburg on the supreme court and ramping up pressure on his democratic challenger joe biden to release a list of his potential picks. >> president trump: i made this list of potential justices and i'll tell you, it all changed. now i'm asking sleepy joe biden to give me a list and he doesn't want to do it. you know why? he can only put super radical left judges on. people that would destroy your country. >> trace: john roberts is live for us. john, where does the president stand this morning on that short list he is talking about? >> we'll get to that in a second.

first of all a little history, trace. back in 2016 part of the reason president trump won was because he put out a list of judges that he would potentially nominate to the supreme court. that energized conservatives who came out in droves to vote for him back in 2016 and the president would like nothing more than for joe biden to put out a list of potential nominees for the supreme court so that his campaign could use that list to try to turn moderate voters away from joe biden. now as to the list that we believe that the president is compiling sources close to the white house still believe that judge amy coney barrett of the 7th circuit court of appeals is the leading contender to fill the seat vacated by ruth ginsburg. democrats would have a field day attacking her wanting to overturn roe vs. wade but energy guyss conservative. lagoa is a top contender and larsen and jones rushing. evangelicals would love to put

her on the court because she is an evangelical. probably a little too early for her. republicans spent nine months back in 2016 arguing why judge merrick garland shouldn't be considered for the supreme court the president said it is imperative there be nine justices on the court as soon as possible in part of what the president said are anticipated problems around voting in the november election, including mail-in voting. listen here. >> president trump: the democrats know what they're doing is wrong and they want to go forward with it. i think you will need the nine justices. also i have a constitutional obligation to put in nine judges. >> republicans are going to move forward quickly. there might not be much democrats can do to slow down the process but they are threatening to potentially launch another round of impeachment proceedings against

the president to try to muddy up the waters. here is what the president said about that last night. >> president trump: did you hear today they want to impeach me again. they said if i submit the name of one of the most talented people in the world to be a justice of the supreme court, they want to impeach me. they want to impeach me if i'm following the constitution. think of it. this is crazy nancy. these people are stone cold crazy. >> the schedule for confirmation hearings won't be released until after president trump makes his announcement on saturday. lindsey graham said he plans to hold three days of hearing in the judiciary committee and sources close to the process tell me that they hope to get a vote in the full senate the last week of october. see how that goes, trace. >> trace: that is break neck speed. john, thank you. >> sandra: as the battle to replace the lead justice

ginsburg looms large on capitol hill senate republicans have enough support to make the nominee. as we await the cast get of justice ginsburg for a private ceremony at the supreme court our next guest reflects on her life and legacy. judge andrew napolitano join us, others are standing by as well as we remember justice ginsburg. it's official: national coffee day is now national dunkin' day! celebrate with a free medium hot or iced coffee with any purchase on september 29th. and when you save up to 60%, let's play! you're always a winner. you got... up to 60% off your hotel! >>but isn't that the only one? you're a winner! priceline. every trip is a big deal. because i want to be a part of something amazing.

- i know my gift to shriners hospitals for children makes a difference in the lives of children. - our support gives kids a bright future. - i give because when i see a child smile, i smile. - when you support shriners hospitals for children, you're joining thousands of other caring people like you who have helped kids like me and over 1.4 million other kids do amazing things. - will you call the number on your screen right now and give $19 a month, just 63 cents a day? you'll be making a life-changing difference for a kid just like me. - your support helps us do amazing things we never thought would be possible, and this is how we say thank you. - [child] thank you! (water splashing) - thank you! (trombone honking) - thank you! (buzzer buzzing) - thank you! - [child] because of your support, we can say thank you by having the life we wouldn't have had without shriners hospitals for children.

- my donation to shriners hospitals for children give kids a brighter future. - i donate money to shriners hospitals for children so children can heal and go home. - yay, shriners! - yay, shriners! - with your monthly gift, we'll send you this adorable love to the rescue blanket as another way to say thank you. plus, it's a reminder of all the children who now have hope because of your support. - will today be the day you send your love to the rescue? - go online right now to loveshriners.org to give your monthly support so more kids like me get the care we need to be kids. - thank you. - thank you for giving. - thank you for giving. - [child] please call right now to give. if operators are busy with other caring donors, please hold patiently, or go to loveshriners.org - [child] your gift, no matter how small, shows you care.

>> sandra: mitch mcconnell and republicans appear to have enough votes to move forward with the confirmation of president trump's supreme court nominee after utah senator mitt romney said he would support a floor vote. democrats are still vowing to do everything possible to stop a vote before election day. congressional correspondent chad pergram is live on capitol hill with the latest this morning. where does everything stand now? good morning. >> there is not a lot of options for the democrats here. they can delay it a little bit. parliamentary tricks they can try to pull delaying a few things but it is pretty limited. if there is 51 votes to forge ahead there are 51 votes and why republicans should be able to move this nomination

expeditiously in the next few weeks. what democrats can do is take it to the voters. it has consequences for both sides. republicans and democrats just before the election. here is the senate democratic leader chuck schumer. >> if republicans say to heck with it, we don't care about anything, the rules, the senate, the institution and just move forward everything americans value hangs in the balance. >> democrats fume that republicans are rushing to fill the seat in an election year when they blocked president obama's election year pick in 2016. republicans defend their maneuver and focusing on the potential candidates. >> historical precedent supports action in a case like this clearly. and the president has put forward a list of incredibly talented potential nominees including indiana's own judge amy coney barrett. >> amy barrett is on that short

list. a lot of noise about her meeting with the president a couple times this week. we'll find out when the president announces his pick at 5:00 eastern time saturday afternoon. >> sandra: next few days we'll be watching it all. chad pergram, thank you. >> trace: justice ruth bader ginsburg set the bar very high for her successor. colleague and friend antonin scalia said that ginsburg's legacy would be more profound than his because scalia's legacy was on restraining the court and ginsburg was on unleashing the court. judge napolitano joins us. when you say scalia's legacy is based on restraining the court. ginsburg's legacy on unleashing the court. what do you mean specifically? >> well, good morning, trace, always a pleasure to be with you. these were justice scalia's words in a private conversation

with me. and quite frankly he was talking about the reflection of the people who write history as on himself and justice ginsburg. so justice scalia believed the constitution was an instrument of restraint that while it established the government, it also restrained the government. justice ginsburg's view was 180 degrees from that. she believed that the constitution unleashed the federal government to right any wrong or solve any problem unless the behavior that congress engaged in was prohibited in the constitution. so when justice scalia in a private conversation with me was compared what he thought would be his legacy with justice ginsburg he was saying hey, my legacy is restraining the government. when you restrain the government you allow individuals to have more freedom. justice ginsburg's legacy is to unleash the government. when you unleash the government, you tell people how to live. the people that write history are more likely to favor what

she did than what i did. >> trace: we're watching the steps of the supreme court and seeing here people starting to line the steps. we anticipate that justice ruth bader ginsburg's casket will soon be arriving in the hears. hers. hearse. the white house has said they're going forward. >> i think the polls will be very important with respect to the six or so republican senators seeking reelection whose elections are under water meaning they have been trailing their democratic opponent consistently for a couple of weeks. i don't know that they'll kiss their careers goodbye on a vote that could be taken after election day than before. so they will put some pressure on mitch mcconnell, i think, to delay the vote. after all, the control of the senate might rise or fall on

this vote and mitch mcconnell really doesn't want to see himself minority leader come january. >> trace: we'll stay here on the steps of the supreme court so we won't put the quotes on the screen, judge. the "new york post" talking about amy coney barrett said she is the hands-down choice. the president would present the nation with an inspiring vision of what it means to be an american woman in 2020. one that could by turn surprise and captivate the suburban woman trump is keen to court while also delivering for the gop base. you have phil cox who is the former executive director of the gop governor's association both would be great picks, lagoa and barrett. they would energize the republican base. with lagoa there is likely an immediate, tangible impact on a critical swing state of florida meaning it would galvanize the cuban vote in south florida.

what are your thoughts on that, judge? >> well, the president is an astute politician. he wants to be reelected as well as his legacy on the court. i'm bias to judge barrett. we graduated from the law school, i'm a generation ahead of her and we have some of the same teachers and many mutual friends. i don't think she will bring the president-elect toreallly anything he doesn't already have, which is the catholic, traditional, conservative vote. judge lagoa might very well tip the scales in favor of the president in florida. now, if the president doesn't win the electoral votes in florida his path to victory is really very, very narrowed and right now he is behind depending which poll you look at from 1 1/2 points to 5 points in florida.

judge lagoa not only is a member of the cuban american community in miami, she is a former member of the supreme court of florida, an elected position. she is very popular with that community. will donald trump make this decision on the basis of what is likely to produce his reelection or will he make the decision on the basis of the person he thinks would best serve the needs that he has championed for the court? we'll find out saturday. >> trace: we shall find out saturday. we're still watching the steps of the supreme court there. many former law clerks of justice ginsburg lining the steps there. we anticipate the hearse will arrive any moment now. we point this out occasion naturally but not getting a lot of attention. you go back several years and judge lagoa was one of those who represented the family of elion gonzalez of the

5-year-old cuban boy who wanted to stay in the united states and the clinton administration wanted him to go back. there is that. you made an important point which is worthy of bringing up. whoever the nominee is, whoever president trump chooses at 5:00 on saturday afternoon, they will face an unprecedented gauntlet. your thoughts on that. >> well, as chad pergram and our other colleagues have pointed out the democrats have very few arrows to shoot. if they can tarnish the nominee by whatever means and for whatever reason, legitimate or illegitimate, their goal is to pick off just two republican senators. i believe they've already targeted which senators they want to try to pick off. get those senators to refrain from voting in favor. so when mitt romney and the others said in the past few days i'm in favor of going

forward, i think what they meant was i'm in favor of going forward with the process. it is almost inconceivable they would say i will vote for the nominee. they don't know who that is. one argument out there that senator graham the chair of the judiciary committee should dispense with public hearings in order to deny the democrats their opportunity to tarnish whoever the nominee is. i don't think he is going to do that. that would be a radical break with tradition. but they will try and tarnish the nominee. interestingly, trace, when now justice kavanaugh, then judge kavanaugh was the nominee. the member of the senate judiciary committee most fiercely aggressive towards him was senator kamala harris of california. now joe biden's vice presidential nominee. >> sandra: bret and martha still joining us as we look at the steps of the supreme court

awaiting the arrival of ruth bader ginsburg's casket on capitol hill. what an historic day this is in washington as we watch this. >> it is really somber and the people you see there former law clerks of justice ginsburg, other people who have worked with her, honorary pal bearers. the capitol police that worked at the supreme court will carry the cast get up those steps and they will then have a private ceremony inside the supreme court. this is a little different. it's extraordinary. usually in the past justices have laid in repose in the supreme court for one day. but this is recognizing that ginsburg was almost a cultural icon, the second woman to serve on the u.s. supreme court for almost three decades. and the transformational effort that she made for women's

rights in particular, this is an acknowledgement of that and it will enable all of the public over two days to pay their respects on that portico. >> sandra: as we watch this together, martha, and we are bow to see the arrival of the hearse carrying her casket and former law clerks lining the steps of the supreme court will serve as honorary pal bearers. they have lined the front steps there as we see the hearse arriving. what a day this is. >> indeed it is. it is remarkable to note all the young women on the steps of the supreme court. ruth bader ginsburg was a pioneer in attending law school in the 1950s. she started at harvard and went to columbia to finish her studies. she said of being a woman at harvard law school in 1956 you felt every eye was on you. every time you went to answer a question you were answering for your entire sex. it may not have been true but

you certainly felt that way. you were different and the object of curiosity. you can see all the people who gathered out there. she has become as bret was saying a cultural icon. when she first heard the expression the name of the documentary she didn't know what it meant. she told it was notorious rbg. we have a lot of common because we're both from brooklyn. a little different in stature those two people. you can't help but think of how tiny a woman ruth bader ginsburg but how large she loomed in the life of this court and in the lives of all of those people who stand there and wait for this moment, sandra. >> sandra: we see the pal bearers walking toward the casket. this is an historic moment at the supreme court this morning. ruth bader ginsburg's casket is

arriving in front of the supreme court at a beautiful morning in washington a private ceremony will be held with family and close friends inside of the supreme court. then the public will have their time for two days to pay their respects. let's pause and let our stations join us. this is fox news coverage of a ceremony at the supreme court honoring justice ruth bader ginsburg. i'm sandra smith in new york and you are seeing the casket of ruth bader ginsburg being carried in a short moment up the steps of the supreme court as family, friends, and former colleagues will pay their final respects in a private ceremony inside and then she will lie outside where the public will be able to say their goodbyes. bret, martha, shannon joining us from the supreme court this morning and bret, we all take this moment in together. shannon bream is live watching

all this happen. >> it's a beautiful day in washington and the plaza is lined with dozens of former clerks to now late justice ruth bader ginsburg. she has a wide and long history here on the court. 27 years since she was appointed back and confirmed in 1993. today folks will gather here privately, the justices and her colleagues and their spouses as well as her family privately in the great hall inside the supreme court. supreme court police officers are serving as her pall bearers as her casket arrives. the rabbi leading the ceremony is married to a former clerk of justice ginsburg. private services inside and then the public will have a chance. there is a line down the street for those who want to come by once her casket is at the portico the top of the steps of the supreme court where the public will be able to come by,

pay their respects. they have over the weekend gathered here leaving posters and candles and flowers and tributes to justice ginsburg. that will continue. then move across the street from here to the u.s. capitol and only the first woman to lie in state there. she has made her mark on history and on this court. today about honoring her in a somber, respectful way. the crowds are usually boisterous but today it is a different mood and one all about saluting her life, legacy and history, sandra. >> sandra: as we take this all in we are rereminded of all her significant accomplishments that we've been able to look back over the past several days since her passing on friday. joan ruth bader march 15th, 1933. she passed last friday. born in brooklyn, new york.

educated cornell, university, harvard, columbia law school 1959. what a remarkable force this woman was, bret. >> she really was a force. a transformative figure for the court. one of the things that i like to look back on is the relationship that she had with the former justice scalia and that special bond they had. even though they came from completely opposite ideologies and approaches in how they viewed the law and the constitution. when she -- the casket gets to the top here it will be put on a table created for abraham lincoln in 1865. it is on loan from capitol hill. it has been used before. once the service is done she will lay in repose under the portico for the public to view and say goodbye to her. >> sandra: it's interesting bret referencing back to her

relationship with justice scale leah. -- scalia. ---scale leah. i -- their friendship began when they were judges on the d.c. circuit in the early 198 0*s. what a beautiful friendship it was. you had the chance to talk to neil gorsuch as did i about some of those relationships inside of the court, martha. >> when you get a lifetime appointment and know you'll work together for many, many years there is a friendship that builds and we have all spoken to these justices at different points and learned about what a tight knit family it really is. when i think of justice ginsburg and justice scalia, they had quite a bit in common. they were both religious people.

she was jewish and she was catholic and they were both fervent about their faith. they both loved the opera, they loved the law. a great reminder we need to focus on the things we share and have in common and we share in our values more than the things that separate us. >> sandra: watch this together.

>> sandra: the justices have remained inside the great hall

as the pall bearers lined around the casket of ruth bader ginsburg in the great hall where a private ceremony will take place. justice kavanaugh, gorsuch and others where they will say their private goodbyes. she will lie in state. a private burial service will be held next week at arlington national cemetery. bret, as we watch this together the significance of this moment and here we are just over 40 days from election day 2020. what a year this has been as we honor and say goodbye to the late justice. >> you may be seated.

>> sandra: as we watch this together we're about to see it begin. as you can see in the background it's a 2016 portrait of justice ginsburg on display in the great hall. as you know that's tradition upon the passing of a justice to have a portrait displayed. your thoughts. >> two things. a rare glimpse for america to look inside the supreme court. this is also a time where these justices haven't been together because of covid-19. let's listen into the ceremony. >> blessed is god, the true judge. god has given, god has taken, praise be the name of aonai.

psalm23. ♪ >> psalm of david. god makes me lie down in green pastures and leads me beside the still waters. god restores my soul. god guides me in the straight path for god's namesake. yea though i walk through the valley of the shadow of death i will fear no evil.

for you are with me, your rod and your staff, they comfort me. you prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies. you have anointed my head with oil, my cup runs over. surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life and i shall dwell in the house of adonai forever. today we stand in mourning of an american hero, justice ruth bader ginsburg. in a moment i will speak to what she meant to all of us but first i would like to turn to her beloved family. the justice was a mother, a grandmother, and as we all know had one of the most extraordinary life partners in her beloved marty. to each of you, to the

justices' colleagues, to her law clerks, and to her court family the country mourns with you and sends you our deepest love and comfort. to be born into a world that does not see you or believe in your potential, that does not give you a path for opportunity or a clear path for education and despite this to be able to see beyond the world you are in, to imagine that something can be different. that is the job of a prophet. and it is the rare prophet who not only imagines a new world but makes it a reality in her lifetime. this was the brilliance and vision of justice ruth bader ginsburg. the torah is relentless in

reminding and instructing and commanding that we never forget those who live in the shadows. those whose freedom and opportunity are not guaranteed. 36 times we are taught that we must never forget the stranger. 12 times we are told to care for the widow and the orphan. this is one of the most important commandments of the torah, it is the torah's call to action. and it is also the promise written into our constitution. as justice ginsburg said, and i quote, think back to 1787. who were we, the people? they certainly weren't women. they surely weren't people held in human bondage. the genius of our constitution is that now over more than 200

sometimes turbulent years that we have expanded and expanded. this was justice ginsburg's life work, to insist that the constitution deliver on its promise that we the people would include all the people. she carried out that work in every chapter of her life. as an advocate arguing six times before this court for equal treatment for women and men. as a judge on the d.c. circuit and as a justice on this court. and as a path marking role model to women and girls of all ages. who now know that no office is out of reach for their dreams, whether that is to serve in the highest court of our land or closer to home for me, as the rabbi of their community.

nothing could stop justice ginsburg's unflagging devotion to this project, not even cancer. justice ginsburg, from generation to generation, we promise to carry forward your legacy. may you rest under the wings of god knowing that you have tirelessly served us and this great country, the united states of america. please rise. ♪ [rabbi singing]

♪ >> to the soul of ruth bader ginsburg who has gone to her eternal home. merciful one, we ask that our

loved one find perfect peace in your eternal embrace. may her soul be bound up in the bond of life. may she rest in peace and let us say amen. >> thank you, rabbi, for those compelling words. jane, jim, the entire ginsburg family, on behalf of all the justices, the spouses of the justices and the entire supreme court family, i offer our heartfelt condolences on the loss of ruth bader ginsburg. that loss is widely shared but we know that it falls most heavily on the family.

justice ginsburg's life was one of the many versions of the american dream. her father was an immigrant from odessa, her mother was born four months after her family arrived from poland. her mother later worked as a bookkeeper in brooklyn. ruth used to ask what is the difference between a bookkeeper in brooklyn and a supreme court justice? her answer, one generation. it has been said that ruth wanted to be an opera singer but became a rock star instead. but she chose the law, subjected to discrimination-in-law school and the job market because she was a woman, ruth would grow to become the leading advocate fighting such discrimination in court. she was not an opera star but she found her stage right behind me in our courtroom. there she won famous victories that helped move our nation

closer to equal justice under law to the extent that women are now a majority in law schools. she became a star on the bench where she sat for 27 years. her 483 majority concurring and dissenting opinions will steer the court for decades. they are written with the uneffected grace of precision. her voice in court and in our conference room was soft but when she spoke, people listened. among the words that best describe ruth, tough, brave, a fighter, a winner. but also thoughtful, careful, compassionate, honest. when it came to opera, insightful, passionate, when it came to sports, clueless. [laughter] justice ginsburg had many virtues of her own but she also

unavoidably promoted one particular one, humility in others. for example, on more than a few occasions someone would approach or call me and describe some upcoming occasion or event that was important to them and i knew what was coming. could i come and speak? but no, instead could i pass along an invitation to justice ginsburg and put in a good word? many of you have seen the famous picture of justice scalia and justice ginsburg riding on top of an elephant in india. it captured so much of ruth. there she was doing something totally unexpected just as she had-in-law school where she was not only one of the few women but a new mother to boot. in the photograph she is riding with a dear friend, a friend with totally divergent views. no indication in the photo that

either was poised to push the other off. for many years, of course, ruth battled serious illness. she met each of those challenges with a combination of candid assessment and fierce determination. in doing so, she encouraged others who had their own battles with illness including employees here in the court. and she emerged victorious time and again against all odds. but finally the odds won out and now ruth has left us. i mentioned at the outset that ruth's passing weighed most heavily on her family and that is true but the court was her family, too. this building was her home, too. of course she will live on in what she did to improve the law and the lives of all of us. and yet still ruth is gone and we grieve.

let us have a moment of silence for reflection. [moment of silence] >> may she rest in peace.

>> sandra: reflection and remembrance of the life and legacy of ruth bader ginsburg as you heard from chief justice john roberts just now calling

her a star on the bench. having served 27 years as a supreme court justice talking about her soft voice but one that everyone stopped to listen to when she spoke, calling her compassionate and honest delivering some moving remarks there inside of the supreme court as the justices for a private ceremony there inside of the court. justices and family and friends will now depart and then she will now go to lie in repose at the supreme court. today and tomorrow the public will be given their chance to say their goodbyes. please stay tuned to fox news channel for continuing coverage of the story. i'm sandra smith in new york. a beautiful day in washington, d.c. as you look outside the supreme court where we just saw the ceremony for -- private ceremony for friends and family of ruth bader ginsburg and the

sitting supreme court justices as they say their goodbyes to ruth bader ginsburg. joining us bret baier and shannon bream and martha maccallum. as they will depart and the public will get to say their goodbyes, shannon. >> they will. there were so many good lines and remembrances from the rabbi who spoke and also the chief justice and he talked about justice ginsburg loved opera growing up and wanted to be an opera star but turned out to be a rock star. she was bemuseed by her status as the notorious rbg. she thought it was funny that she was in her 80s and people wanted her autograph and "saturday night live" and the movie over the last couple of years. she was entertained by that. didn't take herself too seriously.

thought it was interesting that she was a pop icon. we saw her colleagues there as well including justice kennedy as well. as you guys mentioned earlier they haven't been together. they've been doing everything by phone. to be here and to be socially distanced and see each other and joined in this moment of grief is a very, very tight family at the court. there are only nine of them that served together usually at a time as is the general practice and they talk about the lunches and things they do together. that's on a very regular basis. they aren't to talk about cases. they don't talk about politics. they talk about books their reading, children, grandchildren. there is no one else who can understand what it is like to be a justice here other than those serving in that position. they're very protective of each other and genuinely have strong affection for each other. their families spend time together and travel together, opera as i mentioned with one of justice beginburg's passion and one of those things that bound her friendship with

justice scalia. they both enjoyed that. they traveled the world together. the last time we were here for this commemoration was his sudden death in 2016. today a bright, beautiful day as we remember justice ginsburg. the public will have an opportunity to come by for the next couple of days to pay their respects and someone who broke so many barriers and blazed a trail for women who wanted career and family. devoted to her husband who preceded her in death. she is survived by her children and grandchildren and they'll have a private ceremony and a burial at arlington national cemetery. right now the remembrances will be public. a quiet, respectful crowd for their chance to say goodbye as well. >> sandra: she will lie under the portico under the front steps of the building to allow for public viewing. of course, shannon, i know you spoke with neil gorsuch as well and he described some of those

relationships and even joked about played practical jokes on one another. i think we heard a bit of that from the chief justice a few moments ago. to bret after what we just saw the chief justice before him. the rabbi, a very powerful delivery, bret. her husband, clerked for justice ginsburg in the october term 2014, bret. >> 120 clerks on the steps there as honorary pall bearers who worked with justice ginsburg. i was struck by what shannon said. the supreme court is one of the rare places in washington that despite the partisanship we see across the country, that it is united as a family despite dissenting opinions, scathing opinions on all sides. at the end of the day they turn out to be friends.

one quick thing asked about the rbg status and the icon, one wrote in the atlantic today more than ever women's star for dignity and voice hold up a justice as hope for an empowered future. i think it summarizes where that status came from and she was really a transformative figure when it came to gender rights. she had a much bigger profile in a lot of different cases where she was the lead justice writing the opinion but her fight was to really make sure that men's work and women's work was the same and that there was no disparity between the two. she changed how this country worked. >> sandra: we are seeing white flowers being brought out to the front steps of the supreme court there where ruth bader ginsburg will lie in repose so

the public can pay their final respects and goodbyes outside of the supreme court. trace, you are joining us as well. martha maccallum still standing by. >> trace: interesting, market -- martha you hear that justice ginsburg new little about sports that was a running joke. you see these images inside the supreme court that we just saw, the tributes, unprecedented tribute paid to justice ruth bader ginsburg and then outside there is this continuing power struggle to fill her vacant seat. it is a striking contrast as we watch these ceremonies go forward. >> it is. and of course that goes on. it is worth pointing out that president trump has said that he would not name anyone until saturday. he plans to do that at 5:00 on saturday in order to allow for

all of these services and remembrances to be respectful and to take the time that is necessary for the nation to mourn the loss of this great supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg. i think it is worth reminding people what the world was like, what the country was like when she was trying to break through these barriers because as is evidenced by all of the women who we saw on the steps who had clerked for her and by the fact that chief justice roberts, there are now more women than men in american law schools across the country. she said in the 50s the traditional law firms were turning around on hiring jews, but to be a woman, jew and mother to boot. that combination was a bit much and it just makes me think a little bit about, you know, one of the candidates amy coney barrett who has a large family of seven children and ruth

bader ginsburg talked to her own clerks about being able to have it all. you can't always have it all at the same time but you can have it all and i think she showed that to a lot of young women coming up who wanted to have fulfilling lives with careers and also to raise their children. she found that really great balance, i think, of being warm and caring and caring about other people's children and their families and not being shy about talking about that and also obviously being so professional and so complete in the work that she did on the court as well. she leaves a legacy. regardless how you feel about the politics and decisions in these cases, it is a life well lived. >> trace: the history we're about to see is astonishing. the first woman to lie in state. briefly your thoughts on the fact that from the lincoln table loaned by congress to be the first woman to lie in state

is what we're about to see over the next couple days will be historic. >> sandra: we're watching it all unfold supreme court live this morning where the conversation critically moves to filling ruth bader ginsburg vacancy. chad pergram is live on capitol hill. as we see the services underway and the public will say their goodbyes for a couple of days the president has made clear he will announce his pick saturday 5:00 p.m. and the battle begins over that confirmation process, chad. >> that's right. it comes across the street in the next couple of days, ruth bader ginsburg will lie in state inside the u.s. capitol on friday. we're hearing late morning, midday for a couple of hours she will lie in state in statuary house, the old house chambers. the first woman to lie in state. rosa parks the civil rights icon lay in honor in the

capitol rotunda. then we're back to the fight filling the vacancy on the supreme court. republicans in the senate appear to have 51 yess to confirm a nominee in the next 4 to 6 weeks. here is the white house chief of staff mark meadows. >> generally republicans like to confirm republican nominees. so i don't know that that generally is considered a negative issue. >> democrats are crying foul saying republicans blocked president obama's nominee for the high supreme court in 2016. joe manchin called it hypocrisy at the highest level. >> when i talk to my friends and they tell me something i believe it. when they change their mind just because it is politically expedient it makes it hard for anyone to believe we're here for the right reasons. >> the timing is up in the air. have to get the nomination. then have to have a confirmation hearing probably

sometimes in the next two to three weeks. that part of the timetable is the most cryptic and put it on the senate floor. the goal is probably late october. however, there are some advantages and disadvantages on both sides of the aisle to doing this on either side of the election in early november. back to you. >> sandra: thank you for that, chad. >> trace: let's bring in our senior judicial analyst judge andrew napoleon. i know you saw the memorial to ruth bader ginsburg. your thoughts on that. >> i thought it was beautiful and moving and not surprising as our colleagues have pointed out, there is a great invisible line right across the supreme court where politics stops as you approach that line. the warmth and camaraderie, mutual support among judges notwithstanding their vast ideological differences is

profound. the political things that occur on the other side of the line toward the capitol building doesn't happen in the supreme court. one of the tools that ruth bader ginsburg often used to generate this camaraderie -- she admitted this, pretending she was hard of hearing. if a justice was making an argument in conference with just the nine of them with which she disagreed and that argument was aimed at what she just said, she would pretend she didn't hear it and everybody would sort of laugh and smile and she would proceed on. this is not to diminish the argument against her but to take the sting out of it by using an old-fashioned technique that her mother taught her. somebody is arguing with you, pretend you don't hear them. that was ruth bader ginsburg. >> trace: you talked about chad pergram saying it looks like republicans have the vote.

what do you make of the democrats response, packing the court, bringing more senators in and bringing in more states. what are your thoughts? >> i'm appalled at any effort to turn the supreme court into a super legislature. if the democrats want to pack the court as fdr attempted to but so horrifically unpopular he washed his hands of the whole thing. if the democrats want to add justices to the court to neutralize the votes of those who are there, they will start a tit-for-tat that will undermine the credibility of the court. and this nonsense about impeaching the president is purely absurd. you can only impeach the president for an impeachable offense. even if they did. even if the democrats in the house were foolish enough, absurd enough, insane enough to issue articles of impeachment now, that would not stop the

president's ability to offer the nomination and to help negotiate that nomination through the senate. look, senator manchin says he has been betrayed by his friends who spoke differently four years ago. i think bret baier was 100% correct if the shoe were on the other foot, if this were the last month of a democratic presidency and if the democrats controlled the senate and if they had a vacancy on the supreme court, they would be doing the same thing that the republicans are doing now. it is a game of power. when you have it, you use it. >> trace: final thoughts, judge. we talk about amy coney barrett and barbara lagoa being chosen and some have said if you choose lagoa it could be politically beneficial in the fight in florida. should it be about that, judge, or should it be about the best judicial candidate for this position? >> well, of course it should be

about the best judicial candidate for this position. the best judicial candidate is one who exemplifies and articulates the philosophical views of the president who is about to nominate her. if there happens to be a political benefit to that candidate, so be it. i'll sound like a democrat. i will quote fdr who once said good politics is good government. a lot of factors come into choosing a nominee. bill clinton took three months to choose ruth bader ginsburg. today she is an icon and historic figure. it took a long time for the clinton administration to decide on her. donald trump is going to take less than a week to choose her successor. i'm sure they batted around every conceivable argument where does she stand on this and that, who are her supporters who will it please and displease? and then once he makes the nomination, the arrows will be aimed at her back whoever she

is. >> trace: good insight. good of you to join us, thank you. >> sandra: we'll continue watching happenings at the supreme court. the nation's top doctors on capitol hill this morning. dr. fauci, cdc director redfield and others. >> expect serious focus on the trump administration's development of a covid-19 vaccine operation warp speed. republicans are likely to praise the vaccine effort for the fast pace of development saying the u.s. has never developed a vaccine this quickly before. you are looking at chairman lamarr alexander who asked one of the experts if his family will take the vaccine when it's available. democrats are likely to be critical of the trump administration noting the united states has passed the 200,000 killed by covid. president trump talked about the loss of american lives and

defended his response. >> if we didn't do it right you would have 2 1/2 million deaths. if you look at alternatives you could have 2 1/2 million deaths or something thereabouts. you could have a number that would be substantially more. with all of that being said we shouldn't have had anybody. >> facing the questioning dr. anthony fauci and dr. redfield and steven hahn and the admiral from health and human services. plenty of questions about vaccine timing, fda approval. other drug therapies to treat covid patients and cheaper and faster covid testing and a call for what congress must do going forward. lessons learned from covid. for example, making sure tests, treatments, and vaccines are produced here in the u.s. and creating and sustaining stockpiles of supplies needed in a public health emergency. >> sandra: we'll continue monitoring that hearing on capitol hill and bring ou

viewers news as we get it. >> trace: does he owe it to the american people to reveal his list of potential nominees, joe biden? what about his party's threat to pack the court. that's next. n out there that needs to refi his home, he may want to purchase, we can help them and provide that financial solution for they and their families. it's a great rewarding feeling. everybody in the company, they have that deference and that respect and that love for the veteran that makes this company so unique. r[y& [phone rings] "sore throat pain? try new vicks vapocool drops in honey lemon chill for a fast-acting rush of relief like you've never tasted in... ♪ honey lemon ahh woo vicks vapocool drops now in honey lemon chill

>> techand your car., we're committed to taking care of you >> tech: we'll fix it right with no-contact service you can trust. >> tech: so if you have auto glass damage, stay safe with safelite. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪

democrats pack the court, the supreme court?

senator harris. senator harris, should democrats try to pack the court next year? we will keep asking about that. senator harris has not host aide press conference since being named to the democratic ticket. unresolved things in the news today and if she and biden hasn't put significant -- this is joe biden's first trip to north carolina since he was still trying to ward off all the money spent here in the primary by michael bloomberg. campaign tells us the focus will be the economy. notable because the harris and biden events in swing states since ruth bader ginsburg's passing have focused more on covid-19. joe biden did not host any campaign events yesterday. he remained home in delaware but we are within one week of the first debate and we were

just told by the traveling press pool that is flying down here with joe biden that he said he will start the mock debate process tomorrow five days before the first contest. before his first showdown with president trump in cleveland moderated by chris wallace. we expect to see biden in cleveland sometime this afternoon. trace. >> trace: peter doocy live in charlotte. >> sandra: let's bring in judicial crisis network president carrie severino. thank you for being here. as we await the big debate you have the countdown clock on. next tuesday night will be nothing but huge for the outcome of this election. we'll all be watching that. ahead of that the president's pick will be 5:00 p.m. saturday and now the pressure is on joe biden to name names. "wall street journal" says biden refuses to say if he would go along with his party's court packing scheme and mr. biden in the name of letting

voters be heard is demanding republicans surrender and not confirm a new justice but giving voters no idea who he would appoint to the court beyond an identity politics pledge. he won't tell voters if he would resist his party's court packing scheme that could blow up its legitimacy. how much pressure will be on biden to name names? >> well, we can see he is cracking under some of the pressure already. this represents multiple flip-flops for him. back in 2016 he thought when he was vice president he thought president obama needed to have a hearing and vote on his nominee. he said if he were heading the judiciary committee he would go ahead with it and now he doesn't want to see that p haen. when he was running he was one of the few democratic contenders who said he didn't think there should be court packing. now he shifted and says he doesn't seem to want the rule it out. we know kamala harris is

someone who pushed for some of those things as well. already moving in that direction. people from the right and left saying who would you put on the court? he is trying to have it both ways here. he wants to pretend to be the moderate down the middle of the road thing but he also is trying to placate the most liberal branch of his party and the kind of people he will have to name on that list won't be the call it like you see it, read the word of the text of constitutional law. it will be activists that american people won't want to see on the court. >> sandra: mitch mcconnell who had this message to democrats who said the president should not fill the seat before election day. >> for some reason they cannot bear to see republicans governing within the rules as republicans doing exactly what americans elected us to do. so they threaten to wreck the makeup of the senate if they

lose a vote and to wreck the structure of the court is somebody is confirmed whom they oppose. >> sandra: now with mitt romney's support where do you see this battle going next, karrie? >> it seems to me like there are senators including leader mcconnell very strong statement in favor of let's move forward with this. the women on the short list of the president not only are outstanding role models, women, mothers, judges but also people who have been recently confirmed by bipartisan majorities in the senate. the senate looked at them the white house and senate. it wouldn't take very much to move forward with them. we have lots of precedent for it. justice ginsburg confirmed in 42 days. justice stevens took 19 days to his confirmation. there is more than enough time to get this done. >> sandra: here is chuck schumer. >> all i said is our first job is to get the majority back and

everything is on the table. but it was everything is on the table. we are going to look at how we can produce change. >> sandra: so that sets it up. as we know, the outcome of what happens in the days and weeks to come affects the court and the country for years to come. final thoughts. >> absolutely. i think i would take chuck schumer at his word. his threats against the court. he has been threatening gorsuch and kavanaugh this spring. i think they're serious. they want to pack the court, add judges and whatever else it takes when they have raw political power to influence the court. what will be most important to have judges like a barrett or lagoa who committed to the rule of law and the constitution. i look forward to one of them getting to be introduced to the american people and getting a confirmation vote. >> sandra: we'll see what happens next. great the talk to you. >> trace: key members of the

white house coronavirus task force testifying to a senate committee this morning where they say the fight against covid-19 now stands. plus the confirmation hearing for acting homeland security secretary chad wolfe also now underway on the hill. the tough questions he is expected to face next. an important message from medicare. fraudsters, they're out to get your medicare number so they can bill fake claims in your good name. don't give them that chance. just calling to confirm your medicare number. do you have your card available? for example, if the caller says they're from medicare,

watch out. it's probably a scam. don't give out your card number. and always check your claims statements for errors. report fraudulent charges to 1-800-medicare. guard your card. learn more at medicare.gov/fraud.

look, this isn't my first rodeo and let me tell you something, i wouldn't be here if i thought reverse mortgages took advantage of any american senior, or worse, that it was some way to take your home. it's just a loan designed for older homeowners, and, it's helped over a million americans. a reverse mortgage loan isn't some kind of trick to take your home. it's a loan, like any other. big difference is how you pay it back. find out how reverse mortgages really work with aag's free, no-obligation reverse mortgage guide. eliminate monthly mortgage payments, pay bills, medical costs,

and more. call now and get your free info kit. other mortgages are paid each month, but with a reverse mortgage, you can pay whatever you can, when it works for you, or, you can wait, and pay it off in one lump sum when you leave your home. discover the option that's best for you. call today and find out more in aag's free, no-obligation reverse mortgage loan guide. access tax-free cash and stay in the home you love. you've probably been investing in your home for years... making monthly mortgage payments... doing the right thing... and it's become your family's heart and soul... well, that investment can give you tax-free cash just when you need it. learn how homeowners are strategically using a reverse mortgage loan to cover expenses, pay for healthcare, preserve your portfolio, and so much more. look, reverse mortgages aren't for everyone but i think i've been 'round long enough to know what's what.

i'm proud to be part of aag, i trust 'em, i think you can too. trust aag for the best reverse mortgage solutions. call now so you can... retire better >> sandra: fox news alert. joe biden on his way to north carolina today stopped to talk to reporters on the ground in new castle, delaware. we believe he took and answered questions on prepping for tuesday night's big debate and he was asked about his stance on china. let's listen. >> talk to you when we get off the plane in north carolina. i think it would work better. that's up to you guys. okay? >> have you started preparing -- >> i've started to prepare but not gotten into it really heavily.

i will beginning tomorrow. >> mr. vice president, yesterday president xi said that he does not want a zero sum game if relation to china. if you are elected do you think that u.s. relations with china will be a zero sum gain? >> no. there is a lot at stake in this relationship and how we handle it. i will be firm on china's violation of human rights, its militarization in the south china sea and a whole range of things. a recent analysis points out that china knows i will be straight but they are also worried i will be tough. i make no excuses for them, none whatsoever. >> have you still vetting potential supreme court nominees even if not planning to release your list? >> the democrats should be going to the american people now. their voices are about to be heard. it is important they make it clear what is going to happen. what's about to happen the republicans if they vote for

the nominee, what's going to happen is women's rights as it relates to everything from medical healthcare is going to be gone. you will find that affordable care act, you should be out there campaigning. what's going to happen? women will be able to be charged more than men for same procedures again. pregnancy will be a pre-condition. we should go to the american people and make the case why this is a gigantic mistake and abuse of power. >> sandra: tough to hear with the plane, ambient noise and wearing the mask. what we heard from joe biden who was asked about preparing for the debate, he has started but hasn't gotten heavy into the preparation. he will be starting on that tomorrow. on china he said i will be firm. they know that i will be straight but i will be tough. that was joe biden on his way now to north carolina. now to capitol hill where there is a hearing underway, a senate committee hearing on federal covid-19 response dr. fauci is

now speaking. we'll dip in and listen here. >> pursuing in the future. i bring to your attention the fact that a number of individuals who vier logically have recovered from infection in fact have persistence measured in weeks to months of symptoms that does not appear to be due to persistence of the vierens. -- virus. fatigue, myalgia, fever and involvement of the neural system and cognitive abnormalities such as the inability to concentrate. we found to our dismay that a number of individuals who have completely recovered and apparently are asymptomatic when they have sensitive imaging technology, mri, are found to be a disturbing number of individuals who have inflammation of the heart. these are the kind of things that tell us we must be humble and do not completely understand the nature of this illness. next with regard to diagnostics

you know we have the protein program going to in the next several months allow us to have a considerable number of point of care testing. moving on to therapeutics, i mention to this committee sometime ago that the nih put together an expert panel for treatment guidelines which is a living document that reviews the literature as well as the areas of expertise that are pre-publication to help doctors throughout the world to address the clinical components of this outbreak. i must tell you that as of last night, there have been 4.5 million views of this treatment guideline so it clearly is helping people throughout the world. i want to mention two of the drugs that have actually now be part of this guidelines. remdesivir, which you've heard about has been shown in a placebo control trial to diminish the time to recovery

in individuals who are hospitalized who have lung disease. in addition, a commonly used steroid has been shown in a randomized placebo control trial involving more than 6,000 individuals has been shown to clearly and significantly reduce the 28-day mortality. in addition there are a number of other treatments including antiviral, convalescent plasma still being tested in trials and you mentioned appropriately and correctly that we feel optimistic about mono clonal antibodies being tested in an outpatient setting, inpatient setting. when an individual in a given family gets infected, if you give mono clonal antibodies to the rest of the family can you prevent the spread within the family unit. and finally nursing home prophylaxis. three companies are involved in this. finally the issue of vaccine.

we have put together what's called a strategic approach to covid vaccine development. as you mentioned, mr. chairman, there are six companies that the federal government is playing a role in helping to develop, subsidizing or supporting the clinical trials. we're harmonizing the trials so that information from one can be applicable to another. currently, there are three platform candidate vaccines that have entered into phase three trials. very soon there will be a fourth. as i mentioned to this committee, we feel cautiously optimistic that we will be able to have a safe and effective vaccine -- although there is never a guarantee of that -- early studies in animals and in human phase one and phase two indicate that individuals induce a response that is comparable to, if not better than natural infection. and so as these trials go on, we predict that sometime by the

end of this year let's say november or december, we will know whether or not these are safe and effective. as you mentioned, mr. chairman, right now doses of this vaccine are being produced so they will be ready to be distributed. i'll close with the comment that we feel strongly that if we have a combination of adherence to the public health measures, together with a vaccine that will be distributed to people in this country and worldwide, we may be able to turn around this terrible pandemic which we've been experiencing. thank you, mr. chairman. happy to answer questions later. >> thank you, dr. fauci. let's go to dr. redfield and then the admiral and then dr. hahn. dr. redfield, welcome. >> thank you to members of the committee and thank you for the opportunity to be here today. on behalf of cdc i also want to thank you for your continued support of our public health

professionals and their life-saving work that they are committed to 24/7. over 6700 cdc staff have been engaged in our agency's covid-19 response so far and more than 1200 have been deployed to more than 200 locations, tribal nations in the united states and abroad. i know that you join me in expressing our collective deep gratitude to the women and men of cdc for their resilience, their dedication, and their service to our nation. throughout this global pandemic cdc has brought its science expertise to the front lines, grounded in science and data, conducting rapid investigations of disease outbreaks that identify the highest-risk populations and settings and putting in place measures to prevent further spread of covid-19. understanding which populations are most at risk and how this virus spreads in various settings is critical in developing guidance and protecting the health of

americans. as you are aware in the united states we are approaching nearly 7 million cases and sadly over 200,000 deaths. every death means that a loved one was lost. but there is some progress to report. since the pandemic peaked on july 24th of this year we've experienced nearly a 50% reduction in daily cases and a 32% reduction in deaths. there has also been significant improvement in the mortality. during the peak of the epidemic april 17th, 75-year-old american had a mortality of about 46.8 per 100,000. by the end of august the numbers had declined to 10 per 100,000. these improvements, however, do not mean that we can let our guard down. over the last week we had an

average of over 40,000 cases and nearly 800 daily deaths. i do want to emphasize the shift in age in these case counts. the 18 to 25-year-olds currently make up over 26% of new infections and more than any other group. it is imperative that these young adults recognize that even though they are unlikely to get seriously ill from this virus they are major contributors to the spread of covid-19 in our country at this time. in order to understand what proportion of the population has been infected with covid-19 and what proportion remains at risk cdc is currently performing large scale testing across the united states. preliminary results appear to show that most americans have not been infected with the virus and are still vulnerable to the infection, serious illness and death. we hope to be able to post the analysis of the first round of this study in the next several weeks. as i've stated before, the cdc

encourages all americans to embrace the public health tools we have right now. wear a mask, maintain social distance, practice routine hand washing with vigilance, be smart about crowds and stay home when you are feeling sick. as we move into the fall, i want to add one more critically important step. flu vaccination. flu vaccination is safe. cdc encourages all americans to embrace the flu vaccine with confidence for themselves, their families, their loved ones and their communities. this year cdc has purchased an additional 9.3 million doses of adult flu vaccine at 18.5 million doses for children. this is a significant increase than previous years. when combined with the tools that i mentioned above, this could help our nation avert a very difficult fall and lessen the burden on our healthcare

system and save lives. to further strengthen our resilience cdc awarded money through the existing immunization prepareedness for flu season and a multiplex diagnostic test capable of measuring flu a and b as well as covid 2 using a single specimen and help the public health professionals identify infections with flu and covid. i also am announcing today an additional $200 million from the cares act funding that will be used as a first step to help the jurisdictions complete their individual plans and implement their covid vaccination in follow up in the playbook that we released last week. cdc is an integral part of

operation warp speed and leveraging our expertise to support and promote distribution and monitoring of the future covid-19 vaccines. in coordination with operation warp speed cdc is working closely with state and local community organizations on their detailed flexible plans for vaccine distribution. as i've emphasized in prior hearings now is the time to commit to sustained investment and core capabilities of public health. data analytics, laboratory resilience. workforce expansion and rapid response capabilities. years of underinvestment in public health infrastructure have led to a system that has been very tested in this current pandemic. covid-19 is the most significant public health challenge our nation has faced in more than a century. now is the time to build not only the public health core capability our nation needs but the capability that the people

of our nation deserve. as we work together collectively to fight covid-19 to end the pandemic cdc and all the outstanding women and men of cdc remain strongly committed to our mission to protect all americans from disease, threats, and to save lives. i want to thank you for your time and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you, dr. redfield. admiral, welcome. >> chairman alexander, ranking member murray and members of the committee i'm honored to update you on the nation's efforts to combat covid-19 with the specific focus on testing. recommended public health practices like wearing a mask, avoiding crowds, especially indoors and washing your hands combined with smart testing is the formula to effectively slow the spread, flatten the curve and save lives. by providing county-specific guidance to governors on a weekly basis, expanding and

managing supplies, providing the right tests to the right person at the right time, and developing an he can tably distributing safe and effective they are -- therapeutics. since the post memorial day peak in community spread the number of new covid cases is down as dr. redfield just testified. the number of people hospitalized with covid-19 is down 54%. the number of people in an intensive care unit due to covid are down 64% and deaths down 32%. to sustain these gains we must continue our disciplined mitigation efforts, especially wearing masks when we can't physically distance, avoiding crowds, particularly indoors, and increasing our screening and surveillance testing. now specifically regarding testing. the nation has performed over 106 million tests for the virus

causing covid-19. on 10 days we performed over 1 million tests per day. the federal government has purchased and delivered over 106 million swabs and 88 million tubes of media to states, tribes, and federal partners. starting on april 7 we've purchased and delivered to public health laboratories in every state and indian health service 2.5 million point of care molecular tests to support outbreak control and rural testing and implemented federal surge testing sites in 20 cities typically among asymptomatic young adults. we're at an inflection point in testing. this month we'll have available on average 3 million tests per day, nearly half of which will be rapid point of care. we have been building towards this inflection point and i have previously testified to its coming several times over the past months. now let me discuss two specific

testing initiatives. protecting the elderly has been, is, and will continue to be a foremost priority for this administration. so on july 14th we announced that every single eligible nursing home in america would receive a point of care instrument and testing supplies. we have delivered on this promise. all 13,850 eligible nursing homes have now received a total of 13,985 instruments in over 4.9 million rapid point of care tests ahead of schedule. on august 27th after months of planning and only one day after its fda authorization the administration announced a $760 million contract with abbott for the delivery of 150 million rapid covid-19 point of care tests. this test is easy to perform, does not require an instrument, delivers test results in 15 minutes or less and costs $5.

we have already deployed 65,000 of these tests in support of disaster operations in california, oregon, texas, and louisiana. last week we also shipped 974,000 tests to 7,600 nursing homes in areas of significant community transmission. 541,000 tests to over 5500 assisted living facilities with a certificate of waiver and 300,000 tests to the indian health service. this week shipping 249,000 tests to historically black colleges and universities and 2.6 million tests to assisted living, nursing homes, home health and hospices. in the coming weeks we will begin shipping millions of tests per week in support of our teachers and our students to open and keep open our k-12 schools. now i would like to close by recognizing my fellow officers in the public health service. the unformed service which i

have the honor of leading. 4,172 women and men have deployed 8,918 times in direct support of this pandemic. on the diamond princess cruise ship in japan to community-based testing sights and fema and task forces and nursing homes and field hospitals in hardest hit communities. i thank these officers and their families and on their behalf thank you in congress for supporting our training needs and the establishment of a ready reserve to supplement our ranks during future national emergencies. thank you for the opportunity to provide these remarks. >> thank you, admiral. dr. hahn, welcome. >> good morning, chairman and members of the committee. over the past several months i've had the honor to work shoulder to shoulder with fda career staff to fight the

pandemic. i'm proud of all fda employees and how they've measured up to this extraordinary challenge. the efforts of the fda's expert workforce are critical to insuring the safety and health of the american public at any time. but it is magnified during a public health emergency. our work on covid-19 and non-covid issues comes with unprecedented public scrutiny and sometimes criticism. any agency that has the broad responsibilities and far-reaching impact of fda particularly involving issues of public health can't expect to do its job without inviting controversy and disagreement. but it's also essential the criticism we get never shakes the underlying faith the public has and should have in fda and our commitment to protecting the public health. i am confident in the decisions that are being made related to covid-19 and that will be made in the coming months as we

continue to address this challenge of this pandemic. now i know there has been particular attention paid to a few of the decisions reached by fda over the past several months and want to assure you and emphasize that every one of the decisions we have reached has been made by career fda scientists based on science and data, not politics. fda represents science in action. often we must make realtime decisions based on ever-evolving data concerning a previously unknown, highly contagious virus that we are still learning about. and sometimes it is necessary to reverse decisions as new data emerge. this is inherent in the emergency use authorization process otherwise known as eua and akin to how a doctor might approach a patient in an emergency situation. constantly updating a treatment plan as new data emerge.

so in the interests of transparency i would like to take this opportunity to lay out the process we will use to review vaccines for covid-19. when a vaccine sponsor reaches the conclusion that the data from its phase 3 clinical trials are adequate to submit to fda, they will decide whether to apply for approval or emergency use authorization. this will be based upon the trial meeting pre-specified success criteria that were established by that sponsor. this is really important. they should also be consistent with fda recommendations regarding those criteria. fda will receive that application for submission and our career scientists will review all the data. fda made clear recommendations regarding the safety and

effectiveness of vaccines so that we can see that prior to the approval process. we will also work to provide additional information so that it is clear what we expect to see should a sponsor choose to submit an emergency use authorization application. as we've indicated previously, we plan on seeking advice from the vaccines and related biologic products advisory committee comprised of independent members screened for ethics conflicts. the safety and effectiveness data and the committee's decision will be public, although we will need to adhere to confidentiality requirements. the public will have an opportunity to comment. the process will be transparent and independent. fda career staff will then take the committee input into account as they make their decisions regarding the application or eua request. now before we were to issue an

eua if that were to happen, fda would have to determine among other things that the statutory standard is met. we expect that this would be demonstrated based on adequate manufacturing data to insure a vaccine's quality and consistency, and data from at least one well-designed phase three clinical trial that demonstrates its safety and efficacy in a clear and compelling manner. let me emphasize that again. data from at least one well-designed phase three clinical trial that demonstrates its safety and efficacy in a clear and compelling manner. fda also expects an eua request would include a plan for active follow-up to monitor safety among individuals who receive the vaccines. in the end fda will not authorize or approve a vaccine that we would not feel comfortable giving to our families.

on behalf of the 17,000 plus employees of the fda, i want to make the following commitments today to the american public and this committee. fda will not authorize or approve any covid-19 vaccine before it has met the agency's rigorous expectations for safety and effectiveness. to approve any vaccine will be made by the dedicated career staff at fda through our thorough review processes and science will guide our decisions. fda will not permit any pressure from anyone to change that. i will fight for science, mr. chairman. i will fight for the integrity of the agency, and i will put the interests of the american people before anything else. thank you and i look forward to answering your questions. >> thank you, dr. hahn. we'll turn to questions from senators. we have poor participation today.

keep your comments and questions within five minutes. for my five minutes i would like to ask for the courtesy of short answers so i can ask all my questions. dr. hahn, let me go back to two things you said. who makes decisions about safety and efficacy at the fda? do you do it? does career scientists do it, or does the white house do it? >> career scientists at the fda do it. we -- it's very clear. i am briefed on all major medical product decisions. overruling a center's decision is a very rare event. i have expressed on multiple occasions my intention and have done during this covid-19 to make sure that those decisions are made by career scientists in the centers. >> you refer to this. but once fda approves a vaccine, as we've said today tens of millions of doses ready, none can be distributed

until fda approves it. will you be willing to take that vaccine for you and for your family? >> absolutely yes, senator. mr. chairman. i have the complete and absolute faith in the expertise of the scientists who are terrific at fda. if they were to make a determination that a vaccine would be safe and effective i would do that and i would encourage my family to take it. >> dr. fauci you've seen lots of diseases, pandemics and responses to it. is the administration cutting corners in safety and efficacy in its effort to produce vaccines and treatments rapidly? >> not at all, mr. chairman. in fact, the rapidity of where we are right now are the technological advances in vaccine platform technology as well as the risks that were taken financially so that we'll

have doses available when the decision is made by the fda as to the safety and efficacy as you've heard from dr. hahn. no cutting corners. >> we're risking the taxpayers' money but not risking safety and efficacy. is that your testimony? >> yes, that's absolutely correct. >> millions of students are going back to school. is the smart thing for college administrators to do is send the college students home when the outbreaks occur on campus? >> absolutely not. mr. chairman. they should be able to accommodate the students in a facility, maybe a separate dorm or separate floor so they don't spread among the student body but do not send them home to their community because of the likelihood of then receding infection in a come unsee. -- community.

>> i've listened to your testimony the last several months. some people say your message is that you want to lock down the country in order to stop the spread of the vaccine. is that accurate? >> that's completely inaccurate. i've said multiple times we do not need to shut down. if we follow carefully and prudently the recommendations and the guidelines for opening america again, i believe we can do that safely and still accomplish the goal of opening the economy again. >> some people said it was political to ask the states to get ready to distribute the vaccine in october. is that true or false? >> that's false. the reason that that was done is because we want to make sure that when a decision is made that we will be ready to distribute the vaccine. >> dr. redfield, the british ambassador told me the government studies in the united kingdom based on serology testing 5 to 25% of their country's population

depending on the location has been exposed to covid-19. what does -- what about the american population? how many of us have been infected by covid-19? >> thank you, mr. chairman. cdc is in the process of a very large study across the entire united states measuring serology. as i mentioned, the preliminary results on the first round show that a majority of our nation, more than 90% of the population, remains susceptible. it varies in different geographic parts from states that have less than 1% with evidence of previous infection to some that have more than 15, 20 and one as high as 24%. we'll have that finalized and published in the next week or so. it does show that a majority of americans are still susceptible to this virus.

>> you are saying that based on the preliminary indications from your ser logical testing and studies that as many as 90% of americans are still -- still haven't had the virus yet. >> yes, sir. >> thank you. senator murray. >> thank you, mr. chairman. dr. redfield, we know that a lot of patients avoid getting a test or treatment because of cost and i've been pushing to make sure insurers have to cover covid treatment at no cost to patients as they fight this deadly disease. meanwhile president trump is fighting at the supreme court to overturn the affordable care act leaving 23 million people without health ininsurance and allow insures to discriminate against people with pre-existing condition. covid-19 could become a

pre-existing condition. will increasing the number of ininsured by tens of millions and increasing costs for the $133 million with a pre-existing condition make it easier or harder to contain that pandemic? >> thank you, senator, for the question. clearly access to timely healthcare is critically important in terms of public health. and in terms of this pandemic it is also true. access to timely effective healthcare remains an important public health measure. >> i take that if bomb yeah care is overturned it will be harder with the pandemic. we have to understand with cdc testing guidance for asymptomatic people exposed to

covid-19. i'm concerned about why cdc put out guidance that contradicted the widespread views of the medical and public health community was not drafted by cdc scientists and did not undergo cdc's strict scientific review process. dr. redfield, how is it a document published on cdc's website was not drafted by cdc scientists, nor underwent the agency's strict scientific review process? >> senator, the original testing guidance of august 26 had full engagement of individuals of cdc but it was a cooperative document that included the assistant secretary as well as the coronavirus task force. i will say the intent of that document, as i mentioned before, and i tried to clarify in my statement on august 27th,

was never to limit testing, never to limit testing of asymptomatic individuals. the attempt was to reengage the medical and public health community as part of testing so that there was a public health action that happens as a consequence of every test. it became progressively apparent that the guidelines were not interpreted in the manner in which we had intended them to be interpreted and that's what led me to realize we had to put out a clarification to make it explicitly clear that we believe very much that asymptomatic transmission is an important part of the transmission cycle of this virus. those individuals when they have been exposed should be tested. >> i appreciate that answer. i don't hear you answering the question. let me ask the admiral. coordinated editing of the --

the american medical association and state health departments recommend testing for asymptomatic people. i want to ask you on what scientific basis did members of the task force take a different position? scientifically. >> thank you, senator murray. i want to reiterate what dr. redfield said is that the original guidance that was published by the cdc with the -- with the approval of dr. redfield and the senior scientists did not un-- it did not recommend against testing asymptomatic individuals. in fact, there were multiple sentences that said it is important to test asymptomatic individuals but in certain circumstances it is important to do it within the context of public health or medical supervision. that's all it said. it was widely misinterpreted

and misrepresented and dr. redfield told the reason. we have done clear guidance and i issued a declaration to assure that providers have to be test asymptomatic individuals. >> identifying aerosols as common route of transmission of the virus that causes covid yet on monday cdc reversed course. dr. redfield you told me the earlier guidance was posted in error but given the trump administration track record it raises red flags. here is my question to you. if i want the best guidance on the latest science so i can protect myself and my family, can i trust cdc's website to give me that information? >> yes. i am going to say again that my agency and myself were committed to data and science and to give the american public the best public health recommendations we can based on that data and science.

and be open, if necessary, if the data and science changes, to modify that guidance based on that new data. we are committed to data and science and that will be the grounding of how we make these recommendations. >> i'm out of time but i'm concerned the american public needs to be able to trust the decisions that are made and what is posted on that website needs to be trusted. >> thank you, senator murray. senator enzi. >> thank you, mr. chairman for continuing to hold these regular hearings so that we and the american public can check on the federal efforts to fight the coronavirus. i know it can be hard for our witnesses to find the time to testify since they are all working very hard to respond to the pandemic but i appreciate them being here and their information. i'm glad to see we're making progress in planning how we distribute a safe and effective

vaccine when it's ready. i'm optimistic and pleased that there are all these efforts going forward. i hope we think through how to insure access, though, to rural areas. one of the things that i'm asked about that people have heard that some of the vaccine -- this is a question for dr. redfield and dr. hahn. some of the vaccines in phase three testing need to be stored at extremely cold temperatures. that's even by wyoming standards. it would be as low as negative 94 degrees fahrenheit. hospitals and nursing homes, pharmacies, dr.'s offices might all be places where americans can go to get their shots. however, they don't have the specialized freezers necessary to store the vaccine. especially in rural areas.

so very few of those -- is there another solution or how can we insure sufficient freezer and storage capacitors so there is access to the vaccine and it isn't just limited to major cities? >> thank you very much, senator. again, there is a total commitment to work that this vaccine is distributed in an equitable and fair way across our nation. the funding i announced today that will get out to the individual states could be able to really begin to operationalize their plans on the playbook is critical. each jurisdiction will have to address those issues particularly as you looked at the importance of cold change and how they will maintain that. clearly we have -- this is not something that we don't routinely do. i mentioned before cdc routinely administers and distributes over 80 million vaccine doses a year through

our routine work. we'll build on that. obviously the ability to bring all the pharmacies in is a very important step. these microplans that your state of wyoming will do will identify what gaps are day and over the next four, six, eight weeks to need to figure out strategies to fill the gaps to insure there is a proper cold storage for the vaccine distribution throughout this nation in an equitable way. we are committed to making sure that happens. >> dr. hahn do you have any comment on that? >> fda's role is to insure that the controls around manufacturing and storage are followed. if, in fact, a vaccine is authorized or approved that requires such cold storage as you mentioned, we will provide technical assistance and work with cdc to insure that that happens. >> thank you.

director redfield, do you anticipate that once the food and drug administration approves a vaccine that the centers -- you touched on this, the centers for disease control and prevention will have to work with the states to develop new, more detailed vaccine distribution plans? or will the work the states are doing in advance suffice? >> senator, it's very important and i want to stress, this is why it's so important the playbook we put out last week and the funding we announced today and we get these plans executed. we wanted to see the plans completed by october 16 so we can share best practices of other states to try to get these plans as rock solid as possible. i'm confident they will be some things that weren't thought of that will have to be dealt with as they come upon us. but it is my expectation that

each of the plans -- we've done the microplanning now in minnesota and north dakota, california, florida and philadelphia over the summer just to get a sense on the complexity of it. now we look for each of the 64 jurisdictions to complete that by october 16th. it's our hope that will really lay out the individual plans to get this vaccine he can tably distributed in that jurisdiction recognizing there will be things that come up that we have to work together to deal with as we see them. hopefully we'll be 95% of the way there based on the planning between now and october 16th. >> thank you, senator inzee. senator casey. >> thank you very much. i want to thank our witnesses for appearing and for their work. this week we've announced to the world that we've reached

the 200,000 grim milestone of deaths in america from covid-19. that number translates in pennsylvania into 8,000 deaths. so as we're thinking about those -- all those we've lost, we now have to consider the possibility that covid-19 could be and likely will be considered a pre-existing condition just as the affordable care act would be struck down by the supreme court in early november, at least the argument is starting then. at the same time we've got to consider the ravages of this disease, the covid-19 disease, in the context of nursing homes. i released yesterday with another senator a report that i'll hold up the cover of it. the headline on the report is the cost of inaction, 11 deaths an hour. 11 deaths an hour. that means in the months of july and august of this year 11 nursing home residents died

from covid-19 every hour. in total when you look at the total number from the beginning of the pandemic more than 78,000 residents and workers in long-term care facilities have died of covid-19. unfortunately the trump administration has no effective strategy, no effective plan in place to reduce this number. either to reduce the death number or the case number in long-term care settings. this is an american tragedy. there is no excuse for these numbers to keep going up. we should not allow the next couple of months to transpire and have the number of nursing home deaths or nursing home case number go up again. that is not the america we should be. now the majority in the senate could be doing something about this. the majority in the senate has been obsessed with confirmation votes.

all kinds of confirmation votes. all summer long. and we did a defense bill as well. but mostly almost all of our votes were on confirmations. now the senate majority is obsessed with getting a confirmation vote on the supreme court justice. i just have one question for the majority. when will senate republicans and the trump administration become obsessed, yes, obsessed with reducing nursing home deaths? let me get to our witnesses. i want to ask a question that dr. hahn was already kind enough to answer which is about the vaccine. and his response to that in terms of his own family, his own person. one of the most important challenges we face in developing and then distributing and administering a safe and effective vaccine is public confidence. as a way to demonstrate faith

in the integrity of both the approval process and to assure the american public that vaccines are safe i would ask the other three members of our panel if they will commit to receiving the covid-19 vaccine in public view once one becomes available and is authorized or approved by fda. starting with dr. fauci. >> thank you, for the question, senator casey. yes, i have said that in the past that if a vaccine that is shown to be and proven to be and authorized by the fda to be safe and effective, i certainly would take that vaccine and i would recommend to my family that they take that vaccine. yes. >> thank you. >> i have every confidence in the fda process.

i would have no hesitancy to take it and recommend it to my family. the question is a little bit inappropriate. people need to read that vaccine, they need to understand and have a discussion with their physicians or providers before you ask anyone to commit to that. but i just want to tell you i have complete confidence in the fda process. >> dr. redfield. >> yes, absolutely, as i would with my wife, children and 11 grandchildren i would recommend it to all of them and of course myself i would take it. i have total confidence in the fda in the process of getting us a safe -- if they give an eua i'm confident it will be safe and i'm ready to take it. >> dr. redfield i have a question for you of state information systems of the interim playbook. how many jurisdictions, immunization information systems meet all the standards

set forth in the playbook today? >> senator, i would have to get back to you to be able to answer that specifically. i will say that we are building on, as i mentioned, the system we regularly use in these 64 jurisdictions to distribute 80 million vaccine doses a year. in addition there will be additional information capacity that will be put into where there are new points of service where that technology currently doesn't exist. but i will have my team put together a comprehensive answer for that question for you. >> thank you. >> thank you. senator b*ur. burr. >> thank you to your agency and senator casey answering his question. the majority has been focused

on pandemic since 2002 when we passed legislation to create the architecture and protocols that allow dr. hahn, dr. fauci, dr. redfield to do what they are doing and we thank you for that. dr. hahn, have we made up new protocols for the review of a covid vaccine or are we simply following the protocols that we've used for every vaccine that every member of this committee, every member of congress and the american people have always seen as the gold standard? >> well, with respect to our approval or authorization of medical products, fda does represent the gold standard. now the statutory definition for an eua or authorization is different than it is for an approval but we're following those criteria. with respect to our performance during covid-19 i want to give you a few examples. in fact, you are correct. fda does represent the gold

standard of the our scientists are incredible and have done remarkable work here. one of the major things that distinguishes us from other regulatory agencies around the world is that we actually look at the primary data. we don't just look at a paper. we just don't look at a press release. we look at the primary data. our scientists analyze that data and we draw conclusions from that data. we did that with remdesivir, we did it with convalescent plasma and doing that with tests. so those are the sort of things that fda does that i believe represents the gold standard and allow us to have great confidence in the decisions that our career scientists are making. >> would it be appropriate to say the clinical trials, the phase three trials going on for four manufacturing are the most expansive and diverse trials that we've seen in recent memory just simply because they

are global trials and typically we haven't picked up that international data until post approval in many cases and reviewed it? >> senator burr, it's correct to say they're among the diverse trials. we were very clear in our june 30 guidance about what we needed to see with respect to efficacy, a floor, not a ceiling, a floor of 50% which led to the power calculations in these trials and therefore 30,000 plus volunteers in each of these trials. if you think about the number of trials ongoing, and plus the studies that were done before in phase 1 and phase 2, a great number of people who would have received these vaccines which will give us the data we need to see in order to make the determination. these have been very robust. the private sector and government has responded. it has been a great effort to get these trials together.

>> dr. hahn you talked about the steps of an applicant and their decision whether they applied for emergency use authorization or approval. the one thing i didn't hear you mention is the data safety monitoring board. dsmb which actually looks at the data prior to the application coming to the fda. is that, in fact, correct and is that another safety step? >> exactly. another check and balance if you will in addition to the others. let me just explain that if you will, sir. when a sponsor, someone that is developing a vaccine, a company performs a phase 3 clinical trial something called a data safety monitoring board. an independent board. they have set checkins to look at the data. now, when they meet, they can make a couple of determinations. one, if there is significant safety issues, they could stop the trial because of safety issues. number two, they could do what's called a futility analysis meaning that continuing that trial won't do

any good because there is not a statistical probability it will reach the primary endpoint and be successful. then, of course, they could have met the pre-specified criteria around effectiveness. prevention of infection and that would be another criteria used to say the data are mature, give it to the company and then the company can put that into an application to us. >> thank you. dr. fauci i want to turn to you real quick. the maderna vaccine works off a platform you created at niad. are you confident of the process that's going on at the fda that will, in fact, review the application of clinical data from that platform and as an add-on to that, would you also answer for members of congress, for the husband and wife that come to us and say my

husband got covid and i the wife didn't get it, how would a highly transmitable infection like this can two people live together and one be positive and one never get positive? if there is an answer -- >> that happens all the time with infections, senator. although a virus can be highly transmissible there is a great degree of vairability of a person's natural resistance to a particular type of an infection. so although a highly trance missable virus usually as an attack rate that's high we see all the time individuals who are exposed to someone with an infection who do not get the infection. if you look at the population as a whole, you see the kinds of things that we're seeing as this pandemic evolves that it is highly contagious. we have the same situation

where you had hiv where individuals were living with a person who had sex on a regular basis with someone with hiv and never got infected. another person could have sex one time with a person with hiv and get infected. that's the susceptibility to infection among individuals and it's conceivable. >> we're well over time. >> absolutely. the answer is yes i'm quite confident the fda's ability to review that technology and determine safety and efficacy based on the data of the trial. >> thank you >> senator baldwin. >> thank you, mr* chairman. dr. redfield in april the cdc staff conducted an investigation into a covid-19 outbreak at a meat packing plant in south dakota.

following the investigation, your staff sent a report to the state that was south dakota's department of health that included strong safety recommendations the cdc determined were necessary to stem the transmission of covid-19 at the plant. that report was dated april 21st of this year. last night it was reported that your office intervened and ordered that the safety recommendations be watered down. the next version of that memo dated the following day or april 22nd essentially adds the words if feasible to those strong safety protocols over and over again throughout the document. telling the plant essentially

that these recommendations were voluntary or optional. workers continued to work shoulder to shoulder at that plant and the plant ignored the safety guidelines. to date at least 1200 workers from that very plant have been infected with covid-19 virus, 34 have been hospitalized, and 4 have died. i will also note that in that same time period in april on tuesday, april 24th -- 28th, excuse me, that's when president trump issued his executive order basically naming meat packing as an essential industry and meat packing workers as essential workers. i would like to enter the two documents i referred to, the april 21st and april 22nd

safety recommendations concerning this meat packing plant. if that's okay, mr. chair, i would like unanimous consent to do so. i have think i heard somebody indicate that i got unanimous consent. dr. redfield, why did your office demand that these recommendations be watered down? >> thank you very much, senator. i wouldn't characterize it the way that you did. what i would say is that the field teams that we had that were in on the smithfield plant investigation you are referring to had a report that they did in the field and they shared it with the local south dakota health department. one of the critical things that needed to be stressed in that report was that cdc is not a regulatory authority. these were, in fact, recommendations.

the department of labor and osha have regulatory oversight and their report can direct that regulatory oversight. our report was recommendations and as that document was reviewed we wanted to make clarification to make sure people understood ours was a recommendation and not a regulatory requirement. >> thank you. i will note that osha and the department of labor have failed to issue anything but voluntary guidance as has cdc. there are no pandemic emergency standards in place for workplaces in the u.s. even though they've had eight months to work on this. that is not your responsibility. did your office have any contact with smithfield foods or the u.s. department of agriculture, or the white house concerning specifically this memo before it was edited?

>> no, not at that time. there is a multi-interagency discussions between labor, agriculture, and ourselves on a variety of the issues that intersect but in that regard again it was the -- the purpose was to stress clarity that we were not a regulatory agency. these were recommendations. >> well, given that i would ask you to consider changing the meat packing guidance. you could simply say we are not a regulatory agency but these are the safety protocols that we would recommend and not have if feasible, if feasible, if feasible. it makes it sound like these are not particularly important. if you can do it, great, if you can't. you can see these are our safety recommendations without

it being construed as an osha standard. and i would ask will you change that meat packing guidance in light of the death toll and harm? >> i appreciate your comments, senator. >> thank you, senator baldwin. senator paul. >> initially government officials were honest enough to admit that the goal of mitigation efforts, aka lockdown, was to flatten the curve. the area under the curve, the total deaths from the virus, would likely be the same. in other words, the lockdown was to mitigate the spike in viral deaths or hospitals would not be overwhelmed but the same amount of people would likely die with or without the lockdown. the media and frankly government officials seem to have forgotten this important caveat. flattening the curve morphed into a belief that we could change the course of the pandemic with an economic lock down and led to the recession

we're mired in. it is important we examine the data, learn from the data and try to avoid the manmade aspect of this calamity in the future. to those who argue the lockdown flattened the curve in new york and new jersey, the evidence argues otherwise. new york and new jersey wound up with the sharpest spike or highest death rate in the world at over 1700 deaths per millions in contrast, sweden had a relatively softer touch. few mandates and mostly voluntary guidelines. their death rate was 1/3 of new york and new jersey. some might argue that sweden and new york and new jersey are different populations. perhaps. but even the average death rate for the u.s. is now greater than sweden. in fact, the u.s. death rate is quite comparable to less developed parts of the world where social distancing is virtually impossible such as brazil, bolivia and ecuador which brings us to an important question.

is man really capable of altering the course of an infectious disease through crowd control? statistics argue a resounding no. the evidence argues that mitigation efforts have failed to flatten the curve. most countries regardless of public health policy suffered a significant spike in deaths and then a gradual decline. some will argue what about hong kong, taiwan, south korea, japan with low death rates. hong kong, taiwan and japan had stricter contact tracing but japan's rules were largely voluntary. the prime minister lacks the legal powers to enforce a lockdown. one explanation for the low death rate in much of asia the population may have a higher degree of exposure to coronavirus colds and therefore have more pre-existing cross reactive immunity. if scientists were interested there is a fascinating field of

inquiry looking at susceptibility to covid and assessment of whether people have pre-existing immunity to similar coronavirus. in fact, pre-existing cross reactive immunity to coronavirus may explain why we have so many people that have very little symptoms or asymptomatic. there are still many things we need to learn about this pandemic, it is important that we the people not simply acquiesce to authoritarian mandates without first making the nanny state prove their hypothesis. what we know is new york and new jersey and connecticut and rhode island still allow the highest death rates in the world. we also know that sweden who enforced few mandates ended up with a death rate 1/3 of new york and new jersey. we also know that the overall death rate for the u.s. now is essentially equivalent to that of south america where social distancing and mitigation efforts are virtually impossible. dr. fauci, today you said you

are not for economic lockdown, yet your mitigation recommendations from dating to baseball to restaurants to movie theaters have led to this economic lockdown. do you have any second thoughts about your mitigation recommendations considering the evidence that despite all the things we've done in the u.s. our death rate is essentially worse than sweden, equivalent to less developed world that is unable to do any of the things that you've been promoting? do you have any second thoughts? are you willing to look at the data that countries that did very little actually have a lower death rate than the united states? >> you know, senator, i would be happy at a different time to sit down and go over detail. you have said a lot of different things. you have compared us to sweden and there are a lot of differences and you said well, you know, there are a lot of differences between sweden but chair sweden's death rate to other comparable scandinavian countries. it is worse. so i don't think it's

appropriate to compare sweden with us. yes, we -- i think in the beginning we've done things based on the knowledge we had at the time and hopefully and i am and my colleagues are humble and modest enough to realize that as new data comes you make different recommendations. but i don't regret saying that the only way we could have really stopped the explosion of infection was by essentially -- i don't want to say shutting down. essentially having the physical separation and the kinds of recommendations that we've made. >> you have been a big fan of cuomo, the shutdown in new york and lauded new york for the policy. they had the highest death rate in the world. how can we jump up and down and say cuomo did a great job. he had the worse death rate in the world. >> you misconstrued that, senator and you have done that repetively in the past. they got hit very badly. they made some mistakes.

right now if you look at what is going on right now, the things that are going on in new york to get their test positivity 1% or less is because they are looking at the guidelines that we have put together from the task force of the four or five things of masks, social distancing, outdoors more than indoors, avoiding crowds, and washing hands. or they have developed >> or they've developed enough community immunity because they have enough immunity in new york city to stop it. >> i challenge that, senator. i want -- i would like to be able to do this. this happens with senator randall the time. you were not listening to what the director of the cdc said. that in new york it's about 22%. if you believe 22% is herd immunity i believe you are alone in that. >> there is also the pre-existing immunity with

those of cross reactivity which is about 1/3. >> i would like to talk to you about that also. there was a study that recently came out that pre-existing immunity to coronaviruss in a common cold do not cross react with the covid-19. >> thank you, senator paul. senator murphy. >> sandra: you have been watching a hearing on capitol hill with the nation's top health experts and the response to the coronavirus pandemic, an update on the development of a vaccine for covid. dr. fauci saying he is cautiously optimistic about vaccine progress. still suggesting that we may see something effective by november or december this year. when asked if the administration or anyone involved is cutting corners due to the upcoming election dr. fauci answering not at all. we'll continue to monitor that hearing on capitol hill as that was going on, president trump was at the white house honoring

veterans from the bay of pigs invasion back in 1961. that event just ended without him taking any questions. of course the nation awaits his highly-anticipated pick for the supreme court. that is now expected 5:00 p.m. on saturday. >> trace: the supreme court showdown with wide ranging ramifications from changing the direction of the high court for years to come to impacting the race for the white house. now just 41 days away. >> sandra: we have fox team coverage for you, judge andrew napoleon is live with analysis. chad pergram live on capitol hill but first to chief white house correspondent john roberts on another busy day in washington john. >> good morning. let's recap what the president just did in the east room. we were on the hearing in the president room. -- the bay of pigs invasion back in 1961. this is all part of hispanic heritage month and also

coincides with 20th anniversary of the boat lift. the treasury department will prohibit americans will stay in properties owned by the cuban government and the president will put restrictions on cuban made alcohol and tobacco and the president also noting the polls among hispanics are beginning to look better for him. the president also noting that 60,000 hispanics are police officers, 300,000 are members of the military, more than 50% of the people who are in customs and border protection are hispanic. the president considering his nominee for the supreme court. here is the four finalists as we know it. this isn't set in stone of course and could change. judge amy coney barrett, judge barbara lagoa, larsen and rushing still high on the list. he is close to making a decision if he hasn't made one already. at a campaign last night the president talking about the

importance of picking the right nominee. listen here. >> president trump: the appointment of a united states supreme court justice was much more important to the voters than i thought. and they're right, because they will set policy for 50 years. they will set policy whether it's life, whether it's second amendment. >> we'll hear from the president a couple of times in the 3:00 hour this afternoon. an event on social media with state attorneys general and one of his briefings at 6:00. it is a coronavirus briefing but of course sandra the president takes all kinds of questions on all different topics and i would just hazard a guess that the supreme court will be near the top of the list. >> sandra: you think? john roberts, thank you very much. >> trace: turning to capitol hill now where lawmakers are feuding over the replacement of a supreme court justice in an election year but it has happened before. congressional correspondent

chad pergram is live on cap tolle. -- capitol hill. >> they seem to have the votes. history is not on their side when it comes to the republicans. listen to the senate democratic leader chuck schumer on the floor this morning. >> madam president, i have a parliamentary inquiry for the chair. is there a senate precedent for confirming a supreme court nominee between july and election day in a presidential year? >> materials from the offices of the secretary of senate do not show such a precedent. >> thank you, madam president. >> senate last confirmed a supreme court nominee in an election year in january of 1940. justice frank murphy. then back to february of 1932. before that january 1916. so all were in election years but way before the presidential

election and why democrats are so upset. >> we look at history and this is going to be a precedent setting. it's a tough situation. we should be waiting and if i use the words of all my colleagues republican colleagues with merrick garland. let the people decide. >> there is a question here as to whether or not they could consider this nomination after the election in the lame duck congress essentially. the last time they considered a supreme court justice in a lame duck session this was 1880. william woods was confirmed in six days, december 15th to december 21st was the nominee of hayes who himself was a lame duck president. back to you, trace. >> trace: chad pergram live on capitol hill. he was talking about the historic perspective. up next judge andrew napoleon will give us his insight how it fits into history and what it means for the president's upcoming nomination next. some companies still have hr stuck between employees and their data.

entering data. changing data. more and more sensitive, personal data. and it doesn't just drag hr down. it drags the entire business down -- with inefficiency, errors and waste. it's ridiculous. so ridiculous. with paycom, employees enter and manage their own data in a single, easy to use software. visit paycom.com, and schedule your demo today.

>> sandra: senators from both sides of the aisle locked in what is shaping up to be a bruising battle to fill the seat of the late justice ruth bader ginsburg just weeks before election day. back with judge napoleon. you heard a bit of what chuck schumer had to say. i'll read you this bit from foxnews.com this morning looks back at the history of the decision like this, judge. 15 times in u.s. history a supreme court vacancy has arisen in a presidential election year. in seven of those 15 times voters put in place an opposite party senate. mcconnell's office said that only two of those seven nominations were confirmed. the last being in 1888 as you just heard from chad. mcconnell's office pointed to eight of the 15 times voters had chosen a senate majority of the same party as the president to which seven of those eight nominations were confirmed. a lot to follow but gives you an idea of the political battle

we're about to see, judge. >> you know, the history is interesting, sandra, to those of us who study the supreme court. i don't think the public cares about the history. if you like donald trump, if you want more people on the supreme court who think like justice gorsuch and justice kavanaugh, then you support the efforts to get fill in the blank whoever he will nominate confirmed as quickly as possible. if you don't like donald trump and want joe biden to be president, then you oppose these efforts. it appears that the republicans have the votes. senator schumer can make all of the historical arguments he wants. those arguments will fall on deaf ears both with republicans in the senate and with the public at large. now, if there is some defect in the nominee's character or background or published opinions, that might pry loose some republican senators. but i don't think the history will motivate them at all.

>> sandra: weeks to go. we know the president has announced he will be announcing his pick on saturday at 5:00 p.m. i'm sure you've seen the pressure on joe biden to reveal his picks. what do you think about that from your standpoint in an election year weeks out from election day and the pressure on the president's opponent to name names? >> well, donald trump came up with an innovation in 2016 which was the release of a list. he since has added to it several times. the current list was modified just two weeks ago. he is trying to goad joe biden into issuing a list so that he and his colleagues can attack the people on the list. normally judges are not attacked and they don't attack people and they don't defend themselves. they stay above the fray. so donald trump is the one changing the rules here and joe

biden is the one following tradition. >> sandra: judge andrew napoleon. appreciate that. thank you. great to see you. >> trace: back to breaking news on capitol hill where the members of the coronavirus task force are appearing before a senate committee. watch. >> who are promoting it. if several officials stand to gain financially from certain covid vaccines and not from others, then americans might reasonably worry the vaccine was pushed for personal profit and not because it was best for our health. so i have a question for all of our witnesses and i think you can answer with just a simple yes or no. dr. fauci, do you hold direct financial investments like stocks in any of the companies that are developing covid-19 vaccines? >> no. >> thank you. what about you, dr. redfield? >> no, senator. >> all right. dr. hahn.

>> no, senator warren. >> and admiral? >> no, senator warren. >> okay. thank you. so none of you stands to get richer if any particular drug company gets money from the government. i'm not surprised by your answers because federal ethic law prevents you from owning stocks like that. public health, not money, guide your work for the american people and that's exactly how it should be. dr. hahn, the fda is responsible for deciding whether a covid-19 vaccine is safe. in your opinion, if the fda officials making these decisions have financial conflicts, would that increase or decrease people's confidence in a covid-19 vaccine? >> senator, i'm not aware of anyone at fda that has a conflict related to vaccines involved in the decision-making process. it would be difficult for me to speculate on that since we have very rigorous standards in place. we have monthly review

particularly of senior officials, regular training and culture at fda that looks at the issue of self-declared as well as office of government ethics review of all conflicts. so one thing i would like to say, senator, if anyone is aware of anyone at fda who has a conflict related to these i would personally want to know. we will address that right away. >> i very much appreciate this because what you are saying is that financial conflicts are a real problem in the drug and vaccine development process. but here is the problem we've got. dr. slowey, the man that president trump selected as the government's quote vaccine czar, is a former drug company executive. the trump administration used a loophole in federal ethics law to hire him.

he owns $10 million of stock in gax owe smithkline, a drug company working on a coronavirus vaccine. according to documents released by the house yesterday he may own stock in a company working with maderna, another pharmaceutical company trying to make this vaccine. why does this matter? well, operation warp speed, the federal vaccine project that dr. slowey heads up as invested billions, that's billions of dollars in the companies that dr. slowey holds stock in. so dr. hahn, you and other fda officials involved in the covid-19 vaccine must comply with conflict of interest laws. you have just told me how seriously you take that. so can you explain to me why dr. slowey should get to play by a different set of rules? >> senator warren, i can't explain the situation.

i don't have any knowledge of what you describe. what i can tell you is that we have established a very bright line between operation warp speed and fda. we do not participate in their decisions. we provide technical assistance just as we would for any sponsor. >> so with all due respect, dr. hahn you told me financial conflicts of interest undermine the public's trust in a vaccine. dr. slouy has conflicts of interest. to boost the public's confidence, shouldn't he eliminate these conflicts? >> senator warren, i am not aware of the conflicts you are describing. >> hypothetically if the conflicts exist and we will only know if they exist if he makes a full disclosure but there is much evidence they exist. if the conflicts exist, should he resign? >> so in a hypothetical

situation that you are describing, again, i can't prejudge because i don't know the facts but i take seriously the issue of the conflicts of interest and how that might affect public perception. >> let me put it this way. congress should strengthen the federal ethics laws to root out this kind of corruption. it should pass the coronavirus oversight recovery ethics act, which is a bill i introduced, in order to prohibit conflicts of interest in the federal covid-19 response. and the first person to be fired should be dr. slaoui. the american people deserve to know that covid-19 vaccine decisions are based on science and not on personal greed. congress should pass my bill today. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator warren. senator cassidy? >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> sandra: you have been

watching this hearing on capitol hill. continued response from the top health officials in this country, advising the president on response to covid-19. talking about a vaccine. dr. fauci cautiously optimistic we will have one that is effective by year end. we will continue to monitor that for you. trace? >> trace: one of joe biden's former rivals looking to give the nominee a boost in a crucial swing state. michael bloomberg announced he helped raise $20 million so the exfelons in florida can vote in the election. this is days after the court ruled that florida felons must pay all fines about legal fees before they regain the right to vote. we're joined by pam bondi, the former florida attorney general. it's always good to see you here. ron desantis, the governor of florida won the victory in court saying the felons have to pay fines before they can vote and now michael bloomberg swooped in saying he has $20 million to help him pay the funds. >> he is trying to swoop in

our state many times. he has a weird obsession with florida. in 2015, he took out $10 million in the hit ads against me and fellow other attorneys general. how did that work out for him? not so great. then he runs for president. sinks hundreds of millions of dollars in the race and does not get one electoral vote in florida or anywhere else. i think he got one in american samoa. he comes in with hundreds of millions of dollars of hit ads in to our state. $108$100 million in the state. we are ahead in the polls so it's not working out for him either. he comes in trying to pay $20 million to pay fines for the convicted felons so they could vote. you know what? the republican registrations are up higher than they have ever been. we are closer than we have ever been. he needs to spend this money back in his state. people aren't leaving new york.

they're fleeing new york. he needs to get over this obsession with my state and focus on helping his state. it's not working for him. >> trace: is there a concern if you give a large amount of the felons a right to vote in felon, if you pay their fine, they would all vote? there is a lot of data out there that says a lot of them would vote democrat. are you concerned about that? >> well, right now again, the voter registration rolls are better than they have ever been for the republicans. the new voter registration. so, you know, it's being looked at. you know, we will wait to see what happens there. he needs to focus on helping people in his state. i wonder how many people are laid off who worked for michael bloomberg now. he needs to get over there in florida. everything he is doing is not working here. he needs to tread carefully on paying off the fines for felons. >> trace: yeah. 45 seconds left. it's very close. that the question and the concern you have now. joe biden leading in florida

in polls 48-47. that is among the florida registered voters taken from september 15 to 20. so this will be razor thin. every vote will count. final thoughts? >> trace, a poll just came out today an abc poll that has us up three. we have been all over this state. joe biden has no ground game in florida. we have the best ground game in the country. we have been all over the state. americans, floridians know what is important, the economy, and what trump has done for job growth and deregulation. the p.p.e. loans, with ivanka in tampa last week. and all the people who he saved with the p.p.e. loans, president trump. americans get that. they understand that. nor do they want to live in a socialist country. especially in florida with the cuban american population. >> trace: to your point, yeah, in the abc news/"washington post" poll, trump is up by four points. it's always good to see you. >> you too. >> sandra: busy morning and

a busy afternoon and the evening. president announcing a news conference at the white house at 6:00 p.m. eastern time today. the economy, job gain and the vaccine developments. we'll be watching that. thank you for joining us. "outnumbered" startes right now. >> harris: fox news alert. >> melissa: president trump taking a victory lap after the senate republicans appear to secured enough votes to advance. the president at a packed rally near pittsburgh last night hitting back at democrats pushing to block my nomination prior to the election. he applauded the republicans for handling of the high-stakes issue. watch. >> president trump: we are going to pick an incredible woman, brilliant woman. we have great support from the republican party. tremendous support. never been this unified before. the appointment of a united states supreme court justice