A record number of Indian Americans look to expand influence in US administration

A record number of Indian Americans look to expand influence in US administration

The Indian American community has propelled its way to relevance in American politics over the past two decades. The representation of the community has increased at every level with each election cycle, writes Frank F. Islam

Frank F. Islam

Frank F. Islam

Much of the focus of the US election coverage in the Indian and Indian American media has been about how both presidential nominees, President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden, have been courting Indian American voters. A less written about the fact is there are dozens of Indian American candidates in this election cycle running for federal, state, and local offices.

If Joe Biden defeats President Trump in November, Senator Kamala Harris will be leaving the Senate to serve as the Vice President of the United States.

Indian Americans a rising political force

But that will probably not end the Indian American representation in the US Senate next January.

Democrat Sara Gideon, who is half Indian American, like Harris, has an excellent chance of ousting incumbent Senator Susan Collins in Maine. Gideon, Speaker of the Maine House of Representatives, currently leads Collins, one of the most endangered GOP (Grand Old Party) senators by 6.5 percentage points in RealClearPolitics average of polls.

Gideon is not the only Indian American on the ballot for US Senate this November. Republican Rik Mehta, a biotech entrepreneur, and lawyer, is taking on Senator Cory Booker in New Jersey. Mehta is a heavy underdog against Booker, a popular senator, and former presidential candidate.  His candidacy, however, indicates the rising importance of Indian Americans in the electoral process.

In the US Congress, four Indian American members are seeking re-election – Representatives Ami Bera, Ro Khanna, Pramila Jayapal and Raja Krishnamoorthi – they are expected to retain their seats.

Two Democrats, Sri Kulkarni in Texas and Hiral Tipirneni, in Arizona, are in tight congressional races, each vying to become the first Indian American to get elected from their respective state.

Kulkarni, a former US diplomat, is running for the 22nd congressional district in Texas, which is an open seat in suburban Houston. Two years ago, he narrowly lost the district to the Republican incumbent, who is retiring from the House at the end of this year.

Tipirneni, a medical doctor, is similarly engaged in a competitive race in Arizona’s 6th district. Like Kulkarni, she made an unsuccessful run two years ago.

According to the Cook Political Report, an independent group that rates various races, both districts are toss-ups.  This means that they are highly competitive contests in which any candidate can win.

Rise of Indian Americans in public offices

For further proof of the coming of age of the Indian American community in electoral politics, one doesn’t need to go beyond Tipirneni’s district. The candidate the Mumbai-born doctor defeated to win her party’s nomination was also an Indian American, Anita Malik.

At the state level, more than half a dozen Indian American state lawmakers across the country are seeking re-election.

They include – New York Sen. Kevin Thomas, Washington State Sen. Manka Dhingra, North Carolina Sen. Jay Chaudhuri, Vermont Sen. Kesha Ram, Washington State Rep. Vandana Slatter, Kentucky Rep. Nima Kulkarni, Michigan Rep. Padma Kuppa and Arizona Rep. Amish Shah. All these legislators are Democrats.

In Ohio, Republican Niraj Antani, who was first elected to the House of Representatives in 2014, at the age of 23, is running for the state senate, and is expected to win.

Additionally, more than half a dozen Indian Americans are seeking positions in various statehouses. Some of them, such as Jeremy Cooney, a candidate for the New York state senate, are veterans of previous races. Others are newcomers gunning for state legislatures for the first time.  They include young and highly accomplished candidates like Rupande Mehta (New Jersey Senate), Nikil Saval (Pennsylvania Senate), and Jenifer Rajkumar (New York House).

Indian Americans are not just running for state and federal legislative offices.  From coast to coast, they are also making beelines for various state and local executive offices, ranging from state agencies and county positions to mayoral offices and school boards.

For example, Duke University professor and the former US President Barack Obama’s economic advisor Ronnie Chatterji is running for treasurer in North Carolina. And, in Virginia, Republican Puneet Ahluwalia just announced his candidacy for the lieutenant governor.

The Indian American community has propelled its way to relevance in American politics over the past two decades. The representation of the community has increased at every level with each election cycle. The substantial number of Indian American candidates who are on the ballot this year is proof of progress that has been made.

Shaping US politics and policies

Why does it matter that a much larger number of Indian Americans are holding and seeking political offices? What is its significance?

It is significant because in democratic society participation and representation in the political process matters.  It matters enormously in terms of the shaping and structuring of policies and programs and how they are implemented.

The Indian American community is one of the more recent immigrant groups in the United States. It is also one of the fastest-growing communities. It is important for the community to participate in the political process and make sure its voices are heard.

Politicians make the decisions on a myriad number of issues such as war and peace at the national level to resource allocation for education and infrastructure maintenance and development at the local level.  Therefore, it is important to be at the table where decisions are made. As the old saying goes, “If you are not at the table, you will be on the menu.”

Indian Americans need to be at the table not just for Indian Americans but for the future of America.

They need to be at that table to contribute to the strengthening of American democracy.  They need to be at that table to contribute to the forming of a “more perfect union” which will have seats at the table for all regardless of race, religion, or country of origin.

(The writer is an entrepreneur, civic and thought leader based in Washington DC. The views expressed are personal)

Trump vs Biden: Impact of American Elections

Trump vs Biden: Impact of American Elections

Frank F. Islam

Frank F. Islam

By Frank F Islam

On November 3, Americans will decide whether to give another four years to Donald Trump, the Republican candidate, or to give the Oval Office to former vice-president Joe Biden, the Democratic candidate. Their collective decision will impact the world, and India in particular.

The US election is being held in an atmosphere of deep polarisation, arguably not seen since the Civil War more than a century and a half ago. Opinion polls reveal that the majority of Americans have made up their minds on who they want as their next commander-in-chief.

For those who are not familiar with the American electoral system, it is not the popular votes that decide the winner, but an electoral college representing all states. In 2016, Donald Trump won the presidency because of his superior electoral college tally, despite losing to Democrat Hillary Clinton by nearly three million popular votes.

As with nearly all presidential elections of the past 20 years, this one will be determined by fewer than 10 key “swing” states. That is because most states are either strongly Democratic, such as California, New York and Massachusetts, or solidly Republican, such as South Dakota, Alabama and Mississippi. The swing states, this year, include Arizona, Florida, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. These are the states where both the Trump and Biden campaigns will be spending the bulk of their resources and time over the next eight weeks.

The most recent polls show Trump trailing Biden by a sizeable margin of 7-8 points nationally and by a slightly lower margin in most of the swing states. In large part, these poll results showing Biden ahead are attributable to Trump’s stewardship of the country during his tenure in office. And most especially his flawed performance during this election year on the so called bread and butter issues of health care and the economy. The president’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic raised serious questions within the electorate about his competence.

In order to protect the stock market, Trump went into campaign mode and told Americans that the virus was not a threat. Even after the virus began to escalate in terms of cases and deaths in March and April, Trump constantly underplayed its magnitude, fearing that it might jeopardise the economy—the primary issue he was planning to run his re-election campaign on. Trump was absolutely wrong about the impact of the coronavirus but correct about its impact upon the economy. The US economy tanked after the outbreak of the coronavirus intensified and 22 million people lost their jobs in March and April alone. Despite Congress’s pumping in over $2 trillion to address the coronavirus’ effect, more than half of those jobs have not come back and the economic recovery remains painfully slow.

Biden has vowed to shepherd America through the health crisis and guide the economy out of the current recession. He has some credibility in this regard as former president Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act was passed while Biden was Obama’s vice-president. And, Biden played a leadership role in guiding America’s recovery from the Great Recession more than a decade ago.

Another factor that contributes to Trump’s low poll numbers is that he has governed almost exclusively in the interests of his supporters. Since January 20, 2017, when he was sworn in as the president, Trump has seldom reached out to Americans who didn’t vote for him. Importantly, he never made any meaningful attempt to unify the country after a bitterly fought and acrimonious 2016 election.

This failure to bring the country’s citizens together became more pivotal this year after the killings of Black Americans by police and subsequent protests across the country which turned into riots in cities, such as Portland, Oregon and Kenosha, Wisconsin. This gave Trump the opportunity to play the “law and order” card and appeal to his base which is overwhelmingly White and to try to stoke “fear” in segments of American society. As the racial situation has become more volatile, Trump has made no effort to bridge the racial divide or reach out to Black Americans. Biden, by contrast, has put forward an inclusive agenda but has taken an assertive position against those who engage in violence and law-breaking.

As the presidential contest enters the home stretch, following the September 7 Labour Day holiday, the question becomes which candidate’s past performance, positions and messages will play best in the swing states. Trump’s base, which is mainly white males without college degrees, is well represented in many of the battleground states. That is why the president has a better chance in those areas than he does nationally.

The Biden campaign understands that and is making every effort to avoid the fate of the last Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton who didn’t do well and to emulate Barack Obama who ran very well in those states. The campaign strategy includes heavily targeting traditionally Democratic-leaning minorities and immigrant groups such as the Indian American community in those battleground states where they have a substantial presence.

The Trump campaign will be making a play for Indian American voters as well. The president has touted his close relationship with Prime Minister Narendra Modi, with whom he has appeared in two large public events in the past year, the last one being in Ahmedabad last February. Trump may have a slight impact.

But, in my estimation, most Indian Americans are likely to reject his overtures because they want America to remain inclusive and welcoming for immigrants like them. Indian Americans have an added incentive to vote for the Democratic ticket in November because Biden’s vice-president nominee Kamala Harris is half Caribbean American and half Indian American. From an Indian American perspective, a Biden victory would give the community a seat at the highest table of power in the United States for the first time.

Moving from the US to India, would Biden or Trump be better for the future of relations between these two largest democracies in the world? Some Indian analysts, especially those on the right, have concluded that Trump would be better for India than Biden. There is little evidence to support that conclusion. Relations with India have continuously advanced under every president since Bill Clinton. Each of his successors has taken ties to the next level. The landmark India-US civil nuclear deal was made possible by the administration of President George W Bush. President Obama, who visited the country during both his terms, re-branded the ties as one of the most defining relationships of the 21st century.

Contrary to the policies of his past three predecessors, little of substance has been accomplished during Trump’s time in office. On the other hand, bilateral trade has regressed because of Trump’s protectionist policies and personal style. Biden has been a friend of India throughout his Senate career and tenure as vice-president. As chairman of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he was a supporter of the India-US civil nuclear deal. He is also in favour of more trade with India, with less protectionism. His position on H-1B and immigration is more aligned with India than Trump’s.

If the past is a prologue, India-US relations would fare much better under Biden than Trump. The same would hold true for the future of Indian Americans and the United States. Trump would bring four more years of chaos and carelessness. Biden would bring four years of calm and compassion. Given the consequences of 2020 in the United States, in India, and around the world, it is time for calm and compassion.

American Workers Need Employment Benefits

American Workers Need Employment Benefits

Frank F. Islam

Frank F. Islam

What is needed at this time is a massive and targeted jobs bill. The goal for that bill should be: To put American Workers back to meaningful work in full-time jobs in as short a time frame as possible.

The jobs bill should be thought of as an employment benefits bill and an alternative to unemployment benefits. Unemployment benefits are definitely necessary as transitional tools.

They are not job creators, however, and do not restore the dignity that only a job can provide. Employment benefits do that by promoting a sense of independence and self-sufficiency.

We made that recommendation and observation in a blog posted on May 27. We share those thoughts again because the need for such a bill and employment benefits are even greater than they were just a little over two months ago. And sadly, that need may very well intensify through the end of this year and into 2021.

In May and June, it appeared that the economy was starting to rebound and jobs were coming back a little quicker than expected. That was due to the impact of the financial assistance provided through the CARES Act and the premature reopening in a number of states.

The virus proved the rapid re-opening was a mistake, as was the unwarranted belief that a recovery was imminent. To show where things stand today and what might be in store in the future, consider the following:

That is not a pessimistic assessment. It is a realistic assessment. That is because it is based upon fact rather than fiction.

Fiction is Donald Trump’s continuously asserting that one day Covid-19 will just magically disappear. Or, Larry Kudlow, Director of the United States National Economic Council, asserting on Sunday, July 26 — in spite of all the evidence to the contrary — that a “V-shaped recovery is still in place” for the American economy.

The only place that recovery is taking place is in Director Kudlow’s head. When the economic impact was first felt, there was some speculation that this might be a V-shaped recession.

That speculation is over. The V-shape has been thrown out the window.

Opinions among economists now vary as to whether this recession/depression will be W-shaped, U-shaped or L-shaped. None of these shapes will be good for the American economy or American workers.

In fact, they will most likely be very bad. Because, as Robert Samuelson of the Washington Post writes, drawing upon work and words of economists Carmen Reinhart and Vincent Reinhart, we are in a “pandemic depression.”

In all fairness to Mr. Kudlow, he has not been the only one in denial regarding the true state of the American economy. Senate Republicans have been in this delusional mode along with him.

That’s the only plausible — although not acceptable — reason for their not even considering an extension of the supplemental unemployment benefits of $600 per week provided through the CARES Act until about ten days before they were to expire on July 31. The $3 trillion HEROES stimulus package that the Democratic House passed on May 27 extended the $600 per week supplemental benefits through January 31, 2021.

The Republican senators were not only slow to act. They were also extremely stingy in the extension of unemployment benefits they proposed in their 1 trillion HEALS Act. The Act called for extending the supplemental benefits at $200 per week for August and September and then requiring each state to transition to a system offering a 70 percent wage replacement benefit and encouraging workers to return to the jobs.

This stimulus package might be called the HEALS Act. That’s a misnomer. What the Republican senators did, with the significant reduction of the benefits that would be provided through the Act, was to put their HEELS directly on the economic jugulars of American workers.

The Senate Republicans apparently decided to proceed in this manner because a group of their colleagues felt that unemployed workers were “gaming” the system. These senators thought laid-off employees were not returning to work because the benefits they were receiving were more than the wages they would be paid on their jobs. That was the senators’ opinion, based on no data.

A study by Yale economists found data did not support that opinion. In fact, it showed the opposite.

The Yale study conducted using data gathered between March 22 and for six weeks until early May concluded;

…We find that workers facing larger expansions in UI benefits have returned to their previous jobs at similar rates as others. We find no evidence that more generous benefits disincentivized work either at the onset of the expansion (CARES Act) or as firms looked to return to work over time.

The Yale study was not an outlier. As Catherine Rampell of the Washington Post reports, there are four other economic studies that present similar conclusions.

The Republican senators’ underestimation of the resilience and tenacity of the American worker, and their failure to act in a timely manner on their behalf, is inexcusable. It has put tens of millions of those without jobs into economic limbo.

Democratic leaders Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, and White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows met beginning in late July to try to try to agree on the scope and content of a new stimulus package. After prolonged discussions, there was a deadlock and the meetings came to a grinding halt on August 7. Each side blamed the other for the failure to reach a deal.

Shortly after the collapse of the congressional negotiations was announced, President Trump held a “press conference” at his Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, N.J. This conference, which appeared to be as much a campaign rally as a news briefing, was attended by reporters and members of the golf club.

In this session, Trump said he was considering using executive orders to do a number of things, one of which was providing some form of enhanced unemployment benefits. No specifics were given, however.

The next day he signed four executive orders — one of which would deliver additional unemployment benefits at a reduced rate of $400/week, versus the $600 furnished through the CARES Act. The states would have to provide 25% of that amount.

Some states may decide not to participate. And because this is a new program, it would require an alternative delivery system for those payments and would be extremely difficult to implement.

There is a question whether the President can legally take this executive action on unemployment aid. There is no question that if it is legal, the dollars available will be insufficient to meet the need. They will not pull those unemployed citizens who have become the unwitting and unwilling pawns in these political negotiations and presidential showmanship out of their economic limbo.

So, the remaining question, at this point, is when and if a new stimulus package will be implemented that will be scaled to the size of the need. The best case is that it will be sometime in the near term. The worst case is that there will be no package.

If there is no new package, the American economy writ large will collapse, as it has been artificially propped up and supported in its initial recovery by earlier stimulus funds. Our fondest hope for this country and its citizens is that there is a package which includes robust unemployment benefits.

Even if there is one, it will only meet part of the need for those who are unemployed. It will not address the underlying need of enabling and empowering them to go back to work.

That will require a targeted and massive jobs bill. As noted in our earlier blog, that bill should be comprehensive and include, but not be limited to, the following essential components:

There are numerous other recommendations that have been advanced that can be used to make the jobs bill as robust as it will need to be to help rebuild the American economy. Here are a few:

All of these are serious and substantive improvement proposals which would create jobs and enhance employment benefits. There is another recent proposal to help the American Worker that received a fair amount of publicity but was neither serious nor substantive.

It is the “Find Something New” initiative rolled out by the White House on July 14, an ad campaign and website designed to promote the benefits of skills training for careers in rising occupations that don’t require college degrees, such as computer support specialist, line installer, and registered nurse.

The initiative was spawned by the President’s National Council for the American Worker Executive Order. That Order issued on July 19, 2018 established the American Workforce Policy Advisory Board (Board) which is co-chaired by Ivanka Trump, Advisor to the President, and Wilbur Ross, Secretary of the Department of Commerce.

The Find Something New announcement and campaign were roundly criticized in social media as “tone deaf” and “clueless,” given what was and is going on in the American economy and for the American worker due to COVID-19. As importantly, these actions were not relevant to the mission of this Board, which is “…to provide a coordinated process for developing a national strategy to ensure that America’s students and workers have access to affordable, relevant and innovative education and job training…”

An ad campaign is not a national strategy. A listing of available programs and options for skills training does not guarantee their accessibility or affordability. Find Something New is smoke and mirrors, when what is needed are bridges and paths forward.

In conclusion, there is much work that needs to be done to deliver adequate employment benefits for the American worker. PPP is a starting line but not anywhere near the finish line.

The current economic conditions and problems have already outstripped the Great Recession of a little more than a decade ago and are beginning to rival the Great Depression of the 1930’s. Noted Harvard Professor Kenneth Rogoff — an expert on economic crises — has declared: “We are going to clock the worst recession since the Great Depression, regardless of how fast we bounce back. The virus is coming back, hard and fast. It really does look like this is going to have profound long-term impacts.”

As we noted in our earlier jobs post, during the time of the Great Depression, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal was centered on the 3 R’s: Relief, Recovery and Reform. The United States, American businesses, and American workers are still in the Relief phase.

This new stimulus package will continue that relief until we can gain control over the virus, which today is still controlling us. After that, a robust jobs bill will move the country and the American workers into the Recovery phase. And from there we can move on to the Reform phase and an American Renewal Plan to reverse the forces of repression and regression that hamstring our democracy today.

The American workers have made this journey before. They are prepared and want to make it again. If given the opportunity and the benefit of employment, they will do the hard work required to ensure that America remains and becomes an even better land of opportunity for all.

Leader Service to Country: The Enduring Call of John F. Kennedy

Leader Service to Country: The Enduring Call of John F. Kennedy

“Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.”

Frank F. Islam

Frank F. Islam

By Frank F. Islam

Those words spoken by President John F. Kennedy nearly six decades ago at his inauguration on January 20, 1961 have inspired generations and millions of Americans to serve their country. I am among them.

President Kennedy has inspired others through his deeds as well as his words. He was awarded the Navy and Marine Corps Medal of Honor for his heroic actions after the sinking of his PT 109 boat during World War II. He served with distinction as U.S. president from 1961- 1963 and before that as the U.S. Senator and Congressman from Massachusetts from 1947–1960. He made an indelible mark on national service with the establishment of the Peace Corps during his presidency to send volunteers to contribute to peace and progress in developing countries around the world.

In summary, JFK lived a life of service and provided platforms for others to join him. That is why it is fitting that the National Commission on Military, National and Public Service in its final report Inspired to Serve, issued in March of this year recommends building upon his contributions.

In the Executive Summary of its report, the Commission proposes that, “By 2031 — the 70th anniversary of President Kennedy’s call for Americans to serve the nation — the Commission envisions that 5 million Americans will begin participating in military, national or public service each year.” Achieving this target would be transformative, “minimizing the need for traditional military recruiting”; producing 1 million federally supported national service opportunities — “a more than tenfold increase from today’s numbers”; and, modernize Government personnel systems “to attract and enable Americans with critical skills to enter public service.”

In its 245-page report, the Commission present 49 robust recommendations and provides 45 pages of implementation guidance for bringing about that transportation. The recommendations include:

  • Revitalize civic education and expand service learning.
  • Promote cross-service marketing, recruitment and retention.
  • Strengthen and expand educational pathways for military service.
  • Establish new models for national service
  • Reform Federal hiring

Inspired to Serve is a landmark study that was developed based upon two and a half years of extensive research. It provides the road map for future legislative and administrative actions to expand and extend JFK’s service to country call to future generations. It builds upon the present and the past to move the country forward.

This is especially critical in these trying times when political polarization, systemic racism, and the economic and health consequences of Covid-19 has the country virtually impaled. As Senator John F. Kennedy advised a Loyola College alumni group in 1958 before he became President “Let us not despair but act. Let us not seek the Republican answer or the Democratic answer but the right answer. Let us not seek to fix the blame for the past — let us accept our own responsibility for the future.”

Indeed, it is not time to despair but to prepare. The bad news is that is unrealistic to think or believe that there will be any movement upon the Commission’s recommendations because of immediate priority needs and the chaos of this presidential election year.

The good news is that the report will be there as point of reference and action in 2021. The better news is that so many U.S. citizens have heard JFK’s call to service in 2020 and stepped forward individually and in groups to make the U.S. a better nation.

They include the Covid-19 heroes. The health care professionals and essential worker who did their jobs and the country moving during its lockdown. The JFK Library will be acknowledging the work of those in the frontline with individual stories on its website and by honoring a representative group of all of these heroes at its annual Profile in Courage ceremony next May.

They also include those on the sidelines and those in the streets. The tens of millions of Americans who stayed at home and sheltered in place during the first wave of the pandemic. And, the diversity of those who protested against structural and societal racism.

These brave Americans have enlisted in service to their country. There is much more to be done and the Inspired to Serve report provides the launching pad for doing much more.

Noted historian Robert Dallek titled his brilliant biography of President Kennedy, An Unfinished Life. JFK’s own life was tragically cut short. He lives on, however, through the lives of others who have and will serve this nation by making it a better and fairer place.

JFK’s call has been heard. It is an enduring one. It cannot and will not be silenced as long as there are Americans who are willing to put the interest of others above their own in order to create a more perfect union.

Covid-19: From the US, Lessons on What Not to Do

Covid-19: From the US, Lessons on What Not to Do

Frank F. Islam

Frank F. Islam

By Frank F Islam

Driven by politics rather than science, Donald Trump took a set of reckless decisions. Here are 10 lessons

The United States (US), which has the most expensive health care infrastructure in the world, remains, by far, the country most affected by the coronavirus pandemic with more than 3.5 million cases and around 140,000 fatalities as of July 15. Sadly, more than six months after the onset of the pandemic, the US appears to be far from flattening the infections curve.

These problematic conditions were created by a seriously flawed response to Covid-19 from its initial identification until today. There were 10 major deficiencies, all of which provide lessons on what not to do.

One, decisions were made politically, rather than scientifically. This failure began at the top with President Donald Trump.  He was initially dismissive of the coronavirus comparing it to the seasonal flu. He appointed Vice-President (V-P) Mike Pence to head a task force to advise on what to do but gave it no real authority.

Two, no national plan, backed by law, was devised to address the pandemic. The V-P’s task force developed guidelines for states and localities for testing, tracking and treatment of the virus; sheltering in place; and, the use of masks and social distancing to prevent its spread. These were only guidelines, not mandatory rules or law.

Three, the pandemic was treated as a state and local issue. There was no standardised federal intervention on the pandemic. The governors and local officials were made responsible for handling it. As a result, the approaches and results varied considerably from state to state.

Four, there was limited national access to testing, medical equipment and supplies. The federal government furnished a nominal amount of these, but the supplies and supply chain were woefully insufficient. The states were left to source these, and fought among themselves, to acquire these materials from overseas and private sources.

Five, there were mixed messages related to the pandemic. The task force held regular briefings until the country began to reopen and Trump essentially silenced it. He commandeered those briefings and used them to grandstand, argue with the press, contradict the medical experts, and even promote unproven drugs.

Six, there was a push towards a rapid reopening. Trump was always opposed to sheltering in place. He started suggesting considering reopening the country shortly after people started staying at home. He also tweeted to his millions of followers to liberate states such as Virginia and Michigan where he felt the governors might resist or be too slow in reopening. Trump appeared to be driven solely by his re-election possibilities, at the cost of public health.

Seven, reopening one part, based on relative success in another, ignored the nature of the disease. The original hotspots for the pandemic were primarily states and urban cities in the Northeast and Midwest and in California. By mid-May to early June, the spread was weakening in those locations and appeared to have peaked around the country. So states such as Georgia, Florida, Texas and Arizona moved ahead with relatively rapid re-opening. As a consequence, they became and are the new hot spots.

Eight, the US had no uniform enforcement mechanisms. The extent to which states enforced sheltering at home, wearing of masks and social distancing varied sharply. In some states such as Georgia and Texas with Republican governors and large cities with Democratic mayors, the governors only recommended these actions to battle Covid-19, while the mayors required them by law.

Nine, a misplaced prioritisation of economic concerns over health concerns. The reopenings were done almost solely to stimulate the economy which had cratered due to the pandemic. This had huge costs.

Ten, and perhaps most important, there has been the consistent rejection and discounting of expert advice. From the outset, Trump minimised the advice of experts such as internationally-renowned infectious disease and task force member Dr Anthony Fauci, and constructed his own alternative version of reality.

Overall and with a few exceptions in hard-hit states where individual governors demonstrated leadership, the US has managed Covid-19 reactively rather than proactively. A large part of this failure must be attributed to Trump who, after months of not wearing a mask, has only recently been seen in public wearing one, and who continues to insist that, at some point, the pandemic will just disappear.

Trump is a role model of what not to do personally, politically and professionally in response to a pandemic. His coronavirus playbook is a template for current and future national leaders on how not to fight a pandemic.

These are the primary lessons that India and other countries can learn from the US’ disastrous handling of this situation. India must pay heed, as cases are continuing to rise, indicating that possibly the toughest lockdown in the world did not yield the outcomes that had been anticipated. Sometime shortly, India will pass the grim milestone of one million cases to become the third nation to do so, after the US and Brazil.

That is bad news for India. There is a silver lining in the cloud though. That is because of its much lower fatality rate. Moreover, according to Indian government officials, 80% of active cases are from 49 of the country’s 720 districts, which mean a vast majority of the cases are restricted to less than seven per cent of the districts. By taking a targeted approach to testing, tracking and treatment to flatten the curve in these hot spots and ensuring no spread beyond these areas, the impact of the pandemic can be minimised going forward.