hello and welcome to the five thirty in politics bypassed I'm deal internet today? We're gonna take a look at two of this week's biggest stories. First victim of Dante rate in Minnesota, and then the? U S: food and Drug Administration decision to pause, the use of the Johnson and Johnson Covert nineteen Roxy on Sunday, Brooklyn Centre Police officer shot and killed right a twenty year old black man, after it Kazakhstan is his death happened just ten miles away from the ongoing Derek chosen murder trial for the death of George Florid last back in the in the aftermath of Floyd staff, support for the black eyes matter, movement increased along with political interest in police reform. Today we're going to talk about how that conversation has evolved over the past year and where it stands

later in the shower were also gonna play a conversation for my colleagues at Podcast nineteen, which is five thirty, eight corona virus podcast discussing the US officials decision to pause the use of the Johnson and jobs have actually, but let's begin with, where public opinion on police reform and black lives matter stands almost a year after George for its death. Here with me to do that is five. Thirty politics reporter Alex Samuels, Hey Alex Hagen, as I mentioned last summer, after the killing of George Florid, we saw a significant increase in support for the black lives matter movement, and we talked about it on this podcast. At the time there was increasing support amongst Democrats, independence and Republicans alike according to a civic pull at the time. Overall, support for the movement moved from favouring be alarmed by seventeen point margin to a twenty eight point. Margin in just a matter of weeks show how has publicly

anyone on black lives matter changed since last summer's highs. So we think that big takeaway is that support for the black eyes matter. Movement is decreasing, so you say today, Abso surveyed, Americans last June, and saw support for the movement at sixty percent and then looked out where it was now, and it was only fifty percent, but it's hard to make a broad assessment of support or opposition, because so much of this depends on if you ask, and my group's you're looking ass, so among black Americans support for the movement has been high and it's always been high. Another point platform civics, as you mentioned, has been tracking support for bail em over the past four plus years or so, and found that black american support has been consistently in the eighty eight per entitle. So I believe, as of today, eighty five percent of black American say they support the black eyes matter movement and that compares shoe eighty eight percent. My students, who know a three percent drop, maybe not that much in the grand scheme of things

where we see the biggest change from last summer, though, is among White Americans, so their support for black eyes matter, PETE's shortly after Floyd staff that forty three percent and its current we back down to the high authorities, which is where it was before, Floyd died at your do. We have a sense of why we have seen more of a decrease in support, were the blacklist matter, movement amongst White Americans. So when the I think is important to note is that went Americans whenever Super Gung HO about black lives matter to begin with right, so it peaked at forty three a couple days after Floyd's death, but that was the highest. It had ever been according to civic stated before that it was only in the late twenty ease early. The mid thirty issues, depending on the type

appear, but the steep decline from summer of twenty twenty two now in twenty one people can drop that up to a number of reasons. Is it the decline in protest? Is it less media coverage on ongoing calls for police reform that make it easier for white? Paul to two now issues are raised. I don't know that seems to be a consensus among the experts. I talk to you, though, just because these issues of police reform have been less alien and not really in the media, as might show it's easier for people not pay attention to them, and I want to ask a lot of what about partisanship factor here last summer we saw that a cross Republicans independence, Democrats. There was significant movement and in fact, because democratic support was already relatively high, some of the biggest movement we saw it in favour of black eyes matter was a month's independence. and Republicans, so how have things changed since last summer, according to partisanship? Yes,

civics again tracks database on age, race say everything like that, but one thing that we found was: there was definitely a dip in support among white Republicans. It was a pretty big double digit decline from its opposition to black eyes matter in

We have twenty twenty two where they are now, and we saw that in a couple of other difference: demographic groups too, so the biggest dips and support for black lives matter among White Americans were people who are holders of people between the ages of fifty and sixty four Republicans and men. But Democrats have been a little bit more steady and their support for the workplace matter within what has this all men for support for police reform? More broadly, the two are definitely connected it. Public opinion is hey: hey. We support black eyes matter. We support police reform. It puts pressure on lawmakers to pass something and to do something quickly, but since public opinion tends to be so fleeing it ebb and flow of tragedy, there is less pressure on lawmakers now to act, because not many people are constantly telling them that they have to do something about this. I dont know if that would change after the leaves development in Minnesota, with Dante Rights death, but I do think it is important to note that,

It's because public opinion is so fleeting and makes it hard for lawmakers constantly be thinking about this one issue the. How do Americans feel about the police as an institution? Try? So you don't have a ton of data, on how people view police, but that using today, if so, survey that I mentioned earlier showed that as support for black eyes matter, declined trust in local police and law enforcement to promote justice and equal treatment increased. So it's at sixty nine percent today compared to just fifty say, percent from last June, but trust of the police to enforce laws equally and treat people of color fairly again. It's when those things are depends on who ass great, so an MP are PBS News. Our and Maris Poor found my fear that nearly half of black Americans, forty percent, have very low all to no confidence at all that local police tree black and white people the same

only twelve percent of White Americans had that same view, and so it looks like this. Racial competence gap and policing is only going to increase over time and restoring you're talking about some of the initiatives by lawmakers potentially to work on police reform, and I know that by summer there was biased, partisan support for this result, bills from Republicans add Democrats a lot of times. This ends up being a local issue. I municipal level issue, but where do things stand on the federal level today? This is big George Floyd acts that has passed the? U S house, it has the support of I then, but it's less clear where that bill warfare in the sad you have some more moderate Democrats like mansion words, not clean where he stands on the bill? You have sound Republicans, like Kevin Mccarthy, saying backs the passage of this bill. Solidified Democrats is this party who supports quote to funding the police

so that being said, if you need sixty votes in the Senate to get the bill pass, and it's not clear were all the Democrats and Republicans are completely opposed to it. I dont know if the bill will eventually make an into law. That said, Republicans are trying to pass their own version of some police reform. So TIM Scott, who is the last black republican senator he's, introduce a police reform bill by Democrats have criticized his bill is not going far enough, so his bill might pass the Senate he gets. It have support from Republicans and modern democratic than its, not clear her affair in the house. So you know with everything that's going on. There definitely pressure on lawmakers from both parties to get something pass. I just think because black eyes matter has become so politicize in the last few years. It's going to be hard for law makers to reach some sort of consensus, so we're talking about higher level things that you have taken on partisan me

symbolic, meaning, etc. Somewhat similar to the conversation we had about gun reform on the past earlier this week, which is that when you talk about very specific issues, there may be broad support. But when you back away- and you talk about guns more broadly things become very partisan- very quickly when it comes to actual specific measures that lawmakers might be considering for police reform. What kinds of things are their broad support for

so a poorly last week from box and data for progress found that nearly three fourths of Americans innocent his Republicans and Democrats either support or strongly support a federal ban on these chokehold? Seventy one percent of respondents said they want to and racial profiling and eighty four percent said there in favour of mandating police body Camry use and in these three categories and Republicans were less likely than Democrat to support the reforms. But Republicans did support mandating body cameras at nearly the same rate as democratic respondents and again when it comes that federal bill, the biggest hurdle has been the issue of qualified immunity. or the protection that shields police and other public officials from lawsuits if accused of his conduct. So the issue has been one of changes sought by Republicans and has been one of the few issues that Republicans I've taken issue with an essentially called a non starter. That seems to be the biggest tension point between the parties

So it sounds like there's some friction on the national level, but a lot of them a significant potential police reforms would be made on the local level in municipalities that are largely run by Democrats. What kinds of changes to policing had citys around the country made or tried to make? so nationally black lives matter and the protests sparked after Floyd's death, but new pressure on states and cities to scale back the force that officers can use on civilians. So a lot of the proposals that we saw, Post, Floyd and most the ones that were successful, dealt with the amount of force that officers are allowed to use and there are a couple different cities that passed bills related to banning, show colds or I believe it was Houston which is Floyd's hometown

the mayor, signed an order last June and banning the police use of neck restraints and chuckled, and the mayor also said that officers couldn't Neil on suspects neck, which led to Floyd staff. Have you seen proposals and other cities to that primarily dealt with officer use of force been some proposals to either defined or reallocate police funding, and there have been some success stories, but others have been a little bit less successful yeah I mean why has that conversation then, like what cities have actually decreased or moved Funding away from the police. Thus angels in Baltimore are the two that come to mind. They were both successful and re, allocating money away from police departments and in Austin Texas. The city council unanimously voted to live

police use of force and reduce their departments. Twenty twenty one budget. But again some of these define proposals have fallen short in Minneapolis, which is the biggest example I can think of the city were Floyd died. There are these promises to quote an policing ass? We know it and those fell short, because lawmaker is a failed to compromise, be there was an uptake and violent crime in the city you I'm in how have the calls by actors to do from the police shaped the conversation about police reform over the past year and public opinion. I wouldn't say it shaped the other night. I think in at the federal level, too. There's really only a small fraction of democrats calling for DE funding or even abolishing the police and anyhow bite in the president who, Has taken away more moderate sands when it comes to police reform boot before he was elected, he said something to the effect of most cops are good.

He made a clear line in the sand that he was in favour of defending the police and, even though for present Trump tried to tie widen to that movement. He ultimately was unsuccessful because it was very clear that Biden was against that movement, so I dont think these deef and proposals have derailed, what's happening at the congressional or local level for the most part, as we have also talked about on this progress, there's a bunch of mayoral elections going on this year around the country, ranging from New York City to Seattle, to Boston, to Saint Louis reason, marijuana

and their powers? Police reform being talked about in these elections mean please I'll. Tell is New York City, and so one thing that struck me as if some candidates, somewhere progressive candidates, who had once advocated for defending that why p d have started to distance themselves from those proposals, especially in a very competitive, may arise. For example, you have someone like Scott string herbs, Controller, who tend to eleven months ago, said that it was time to define them ip, but then earlier this year Amy or a forum. He was ass if he would commit to slashing the police departments, six billion dollar budget and half, and he responded with this less drastic proposal to put one billion over the span of four years and, of course, some black from activists in the city, but I think that in some cases there is fear that if you go too far left on defending the police that you're gonna Alien,

more moderate voters who might be key to winning some traces races. Why does public opinion look like when it comes to defining the fleet, The public has never really been in favour of defending the police in that and Capps leads Democrats and black Americans too, and even after Floyd staff at the height of the protests, there was never a consensus around you finding that police. I think what we found more support for was reallocating some police funding to other programmes, and maybe that's cutting just one or two per cent of the police budget and then giving it somewhere else. That's where we found more of the support, but when you say a defined by think sometimes that's conflated with abolish the police and when people see it that way, their way less likely to support it so

you know a year after these large protests nationwide to some extent conversation about structural racism in policing and other aspects of life? Does it seem like police reform is likelier are less likely because on one hand, awareness has increased significantly on the other hand, we ve seen something of a backlash and partisan polarization on the issue of police reform, and we have also seen em an uptake in violent crime and some cities. Where does that leave us almost a year after these large scale protests, and also in the middle of the Derek Chauvelin trial for the murder of George Floyd and the recent news of another police killing of a black man in Minnesota, eyelid gas. That public opinion on asking for police reform will increase. Just because, like you said the right killing and then also the fact that we might get a verdict initially,

case as soon as next week. That said, while I think there will be more protest in calls for change, I'm not sold on the fact that there's gonna be this thorough look into how we can change policing at the federal level and party. The reason I say that is because, after right staff, President Biden, big message was to urge com. Tell me all not to lose, but he didn't immediately common and what this means for Congress. That said, I do think there is mounting pressure on

by in an congressional Democrats to pass something considering during the majority. But what makes that even more complicated that even among Democrats, there is not really a consensus around what should pass and what the best path forward, as I mentioned that were awaiting the results of dark servants, murder, trial and the death of George floored. Of course that's can be up to the jars. But what do Americans think about that case and where accountability, wise thou command case is, in my opinion, anything but certain? And we ve written about this before how it's, in common for police officers to peace, legal consequences for excessive force, but one thing I find interesting as our image already of Americans are fifty seven percent of Americans. Think Chauvelin should be found guilty. According to a recent economists, you

all. But on the flip side, fifty six percent of registered voters told Marine Council in a separate survey that they're not following the trial closely and twenty one percent said it was because they didn't think anything would change so some sense amongst the american public that, regardless of the awareness that not much, will change right or it will figure so much for looking into this forest Alex. I really appreciate it. Yes, thank you. Pay me up next will listen to discussion from my colleagues over Podcast nineteen about the Johnson and jobs Vaccine but first today's podcast is brought you by another five: thirty, eight podcast hot takedown, each Tuesday check out five. Thirty, eight sports, podcast hot, take down where the hot takes up the sports world meet the numbers that prove them right or tear them down the crew digs into fiery opinions from the week in sports and measures them according to the animal

behind the issue they end each week show by diving into a rabbit hole of data from the strangest fifty point games in the NBA to the ever larger gullies of the end, a l don't mess hot takedown available every Tuesday, wherever you find your pot casts. Today's podcast is brought you by the pod cast start here. If it feels hard to keep up with the news every day, I have applied For you, it's called start here, and it's a daily show from our friends and colleagues and ABC News start here, gives you a quick stop forward understanding of the Daily NEWS, so you can get on with your dad. Everything from the latest uncovered to what's happening in Washington and what it means for you start here. Has you covered you'll even hear me, nay, and some of your favorite five thirty reporters on start here from time to time, clear reporting from ABC is most experienced. Journalists check out stark here wherever you listen to your podcast on Tuesday, the? U S, food and Drug Administration,

that it was recommending a pause in the administration of the Johnson and Johnson vaccine in order to study rare blood clots that had been reported in six people out of the nearly seven million doses of the vaccine administered. This has started debate. whether the FDA was taking the right course of action and how this could shape public opinion of covert nineteen vaccines, safety, we're still waiting for more data on that, but my colleague Anna Rothschild, who hosts five thirty AIDS, Podcast nineteen sat down with five thirty eight science writers, Maggie Curve and Cayley Rogers on Tuesday to discuss the FDA decision There's a clip of that conversation from podcast nineteen and for more be sure to subscribe to their show where ever you get. Your part casts You guys, so we heard this is this morning. Why has the FDA recommended this pause, so you probably remember that Asters Seneca has high

some issues, with a very rare and very specific clotting disorder? that is not just like in normal blood plot, but involves kind of a combination of symptoms that should normally you would think, be antithetical to one another so having blood clots, but also having a really low platelet count. It's called thrombosis Filipino with cerebrospinal sinus thrombosis, and now it is turned out that this same combination of symptoms has shown up in six cases of people who have been vaccinated with Johnson and Johnson in the United States of those six cases, humbly similar ban so there's only one death reported. There was also one other report of a pretty severe case where they were in hospital. They may still be in hospital from what I understand.

Six cases is a very small number of cases, but is there any sort of rhyme a reason to exactly who was getting these rare blood clots So I mean in these six cases that we have, they were women and they were all between the ages of eighteen and forty, eight, so kind of skewing younger. So I think it's important, though, to point out that six cases out of something like almost seven million doses administered, is not really enough to say anything particularly definitive about who is experiencing this. What risk factors might make somebody more likely to experience this. It's small number that it doesn't necessarily tell us anything and we could actually actually end up spotting. patterns where the patterns mean something else. So a good,

Ample of this is in Europe when they're having this side effects with asked resent occur is that it was kind of looking from that data like oh. This is something that is happening in people under fifty and in women, but then you kind of start looking a little bit closer at it and well. They were also giving Astrid Seneca primarily to people under fifty, and it was also one of the first fact scenes being given out to healthcare workers who are primarily women, so it could have been an effect of who was getting that vaccine more than who was likely to get clots. How does the background rate of this rear type of blood clotting compared to what we ve seen with Johnson and and soon, and then also with Astro Seneca, right well, I mean as well mention universe. We ve got so far. Six confirmed cases out of

nearly seven million doses. Again, we don't know for sure there's not a causal link. That's been established for sure it's just this has been reported after they got. The shop so could be unrelated could be related, but the thing that. important to note. Is you know a lot of people point out like oh the risk of blood clots? As you know, they are with being on the birth control pill from smoking like the risk of blood clots is higher. just in the general population, then with these vaccines, but people are kind of missing that this is more than just blood clots. Is this really rare so unusual disorder that can have then, and with this disorder? Typically, you see about five people who who get this condition of a million people per year, so it is quite rare and you know were obviously we still have to do some work to tease apart. How those rates compare and if it's different by different populations are different people at different risk groups. We just don't know that it is interesting, though

this is the same Cindy on the same, in a collection of symptoms that we have seen with the Astor Seneca vaccine in Europe, and that can lead to pauses on using back there and researchers now think that this is probably tied together around the form that both of those vaccines are made from, which is a dino virus. That's kind of used to carry information about the krona virus into ourselves and help ourselves manufacturer and bodies to protect against it So something about that Edina virus vector is producing this extremely rare syndrome. That's usually only seen in people who are taking a specific kind of blood dinner I mean and to be clear, I don't think the FDA has come out and said first certain that it is related to this sort of class of vaccines. These a den of virus vaccine,

That being said, they also have not seen these types of clots with the Madonna were Pfizer. Vaccines which use a different delivery system called am RNA so that their M Rna vaccines verses. These identifiers vaccines right either. very careful serve on how they framed this. We are listening to a press conference earlier today and they kind of stopped short of saying that it was a u no vaccine class dependent syndrome, but they were saying that they think that it's not a coincidence that its those too not just the fact that this is such if it was, regular blood clots? That would be one thing, but the fact that this is such a rare syndrome that typically we don't see that often in a normal population- and they both came up only with these two vaccines, but not with the other two is a flag to pay attention to and to get flagged ITALY

thing that we are paying attention to it. I know I've seen like some people sort of arguing that this shouldn't have been. This pause shouldn't have happened, that's you know it. It just kind of goods. here that it gives, like some sort of I don't know, credence, to untie vaccine fears, I think, is really spurious, because this is how the system is supposed to operate. We're supposed to pay attention to things. dangerous and things that we can do something about like this and we're supposed to do something about them. And that's what we see happening you I mean the fact that so so few cases of this come up, and the recommendation is still to pause. I think demonstrates how carefully there can the during the administration of these vaccines are not just throwing them Being like good luck, I hope it works. The way. A lot of any facts, people might feel this should give them more come,

knowing that, when rare things pop up we're still paying very close attention to it and trying to react to it immediately. Unfortunately, a lot of any facts vote don't don't view it that way. You know I was popping into some of my all communities that I track online and they were more or less celebrating basically saying this is what we suspected. These vaccines are dangerous. Here's proof of it and they're just like wait until find out how bad the other ones are, which is absolutely not based on any kind of fact. It sorted exemplifies that, like the oh who are going around telling you claiming to you that they have been doing all this research and they have found these dangers in oh they're, not the ones who found this danger. The experts are out there actually look.

for signs and red flags that represent real risks and they're doing something about it right this all this I got found because we have multiple, you, no checks and balances on vaccines after we do these large scale clinical trials, that involve say thirty thousand, people to see what happens with the vaccine once it's in even more people, because you can't have a million people in the clinical trial, it would be impossible to do so as we you know, administer these approve vaccines to more and more people. The government keeps monitoring them to make sure that they can track any extremely rare side effects as they arise. There was really sort of the process working. It's it's like all of our text allowances, inaction, I think it should be comforting to people. I understand why maybe it's not if you're, already anxious and feeling like

unsure about how the vaccine roll out might be going right. So is there a treatment for this rare condition? There is, I think, that it's one of the reasons why there actually putting this pause on this is that this is something that's treatable but its treatable in a way that is different from how you would normally treat a blood clots situation so part of what this pauses doing is giving getting a chance for this information to get disseminated among healthcare. workers, so that, if you show up as some who is having a blood clots problem and who has gotten vaccinated recently. They know to treat you in the correct way that will save your life. Well, let's talk about that. I know that there are a lot of will, you just got the January vaccine. We're gonna be concerned that this is going to happen to them. So what are sort of the signs in September to look out for

oh? I was talking to one of our readers actually dm to me earlier today. With this exact question kiss his wife had just gotten the J J vaccine, and I think that this is a really important point to make. Is that it seems like this is something that not only is it rare, but you will not if you're going to miss and it's something that is distinct from the very common side effects that go with all these vaccines. Where you can, I just feel, like you have a flu, you feel just second high fever and yucky. It doesn't look like that, so what we are talking about, is something that happens a media of nine days after vaccination? So it's also not an immediate thing and what it presents, as is shortness of breath, pain leg,

Spain and the abdomen and a headache that is so severe that we're talking about like something that would make you want to go, seek medical help. So that combination of things is very different. Just feeling sick. After getting a vaccine, it happens at a very different timing from when you just feel sick from getting the vaccine. and there is a way to treat it. So I think that that something that I mean to me at least to me at least that would have that like alleviate some level of anxiety, because I know I'm not going to mix it up with something else or dismiss it in myself. Right. It's it's both comforting because you won't mixed up with anything else and because there is actually a way to treat this and this pauses just giving the medical community the opportunity to sort of like get up to speed on on how to deal with these cases.

Should they arise in their hospitals, and I mean it could be the case that they they come up with some new recommendations for perhaps a sub group of people that might be better off choosing You know the fire, the Madonna instead of the ashes ethnic origins and Johnson there's gonna, be like a cost benefit analysis that they'll be but to put together based so that, so I know that in the UK right now, for example, their recommending that younger patients, Try to get the MRI a vaccine just because the risk of severe diseases a little less, so they can maybe spend a lot or time waiting to get the that vaccine, whereas if you're older, the risk of covert is most likely gonna way, any kind of risk of a very rare adverse

the fact- and I think even now, right, the FDA has recommended this pause. But if you have, you know a primary care doctor who is somehow able to give you a vaccine, and you are at really elevated risk, maybe you're older. Maybe you have pre existing conditions like diabetes. I think your medical provider is still in consultation with you allowed to recommend this. there's a really persuasive reason, tat administer it. I mean that I know that there were people that there have been people that were like actively trying to get the job J vaccine because it has a lower risk of being of some of these allergic reactions, and there are people with really high allergy risk, for whom this is absolutely the best choice is their sort of like a cut off date, by which you know after I've gotten this shot. I mean the clear: do you know what I mean

according to the press coverage that we were listening and on today, the latest that they saw this occur in the six cases that we have so far was three weeks after the vaccine. again, we only six cases, so it's kind of hard to dry the kind of conclusions from that. But if you got the vaccine six weeks ago and have you know you may be had a couple days of flew like symptom you're feeling, fine. Otherwise I I don't do that. I would lose any leap over. This will take you, those for speed With me today, I have to say I found this extremely encouraging and comforting, so I really appreciate your wisdom and knowledge and please keep me posted on what else you discover as the story, grasses. Yes, thanks for having a sun thanks Anna thinks Maggie. Make sure to subscribe, to podcast nineteen, to get regular updates on science surrounding the covert nineteen pandemic. That's ever today, mine

is dealing droop tony chow is in the virtual control room clear, better. Gary Curtis is on audio editing and get in touch my emailing us at podcast at five, thirty, eight dot com. You can also course treated us with any questions or comments. If you're fat of the show leave us waiting overview in the Apple podcast store or tells them about us thanks for listening and will cease her