46’s first 365 – POLITICO

With help from Joanne Kenen

BIDEN’S LONG YEAR — The first president from the First State is finishing his first year in office. But heading into a Wednesday press conference, Joe Biden’s White House is looking to avoid falling further into a sophomore slump.

To help us understand Year One of the Biden era, and what might be ahead, Nightly turned to White House editor Sam Stein for a Slack chat. This conversation has been edited.

What have we learned about Biden over the past 12 months?

I’m not entirely convinced there is a single through line for Biden’s first year. He started out quickly and decisively as he pushed the Covid relief bill and ramped up vaccine distribution. And you could even make the case that the Afghanistan withdrawal, as chaotic as it was, was a decisive call. He certainly didn’t bend on it despite ample pressure to do so.

But the latter half of the year has been defined by a series of instances where there either wasn’t much decisiveness on Biden’s part or he seemed caught off guard by events rather than shaping them. He was deferential to Congress on his big legislative items and got infrastructure but nothing else. And the spread of Delta and, subsequently, Omicron really overshadowed everything else and hampered the view he’d crafted as effectively managing the pandemic.

What is the most important thing that happened in Year One of the Biden presidency that anniversary coverage is forgetting?

I’ve seen this mentioned a few places — most recently from Ezra Klein — but I think it is underemphasized just how quickly we dug ourselves out of the economic doldrums of Covid. We threw trillions of dollars at the problem and it basically stabilized the job market and prevented people from completely falling through the cracks. The extended child tax credit created a historic reduction in child poverty. These were major, major social undertakings and they got relatively little notice.

The reason they got little notice is that success is rarely unambiguous. The trillions that helped stabilize the economy also contributed to the inflation crisis we currently have. And the extended child tax credit recently lapsed because Biden and Democrats in Congress couldn’t forge a final compromise on the Build Back Better bill.

What do people in the White House see as their biggest achievement and failure over the last year?

I would refer back to the last answer: the job gains and the reduction in child poverty. They also are pretty bullish on all the judicial nominations that they’ve gotten confirmed.

The failure is almost certainly with respect to getting Covid under control. Their response is that they underestimated just how deep the anti-vaccine sentiment would be among the public. And, maybe so. But their job is to understand the public and build policies around it. They were late to adopting mandates as a tool and then saw the business mandates knocked down in court.

I would add that, inside the White House, there is also a sense of failure that climate legislation has not passed. But they are holding on to the idea that they can take another run at pushing it in a revised Build Back Better plan.

Is the White House ready to make large changes in its legislative or messaging strategy with the midterms looming? Anything we might start to see at Wednesday’s press conference?

I think there are signs: some reports that Biden himself will become more public, other reports that they’re gonna scale back BBB to appease Joe Manchin. They’re also making real time adjustments to how they approach Covid — ramping up the availability of tests a day early with the new government website, as well as starting to talk about distributing masks, while stressing that they will not shut down schools or businesses or call for as much.

The question becomes: What good does this do them politically? There is a fairly hardened perception out there that the president is not managing the country’s crises competently. To the degree that the public sees him doing that competent management, it can help. And maybe that’s what Wednesday is about. Then again, if the pandemic lingers, if inflation isn’t resolved, if BBB remains stalled — even as Biden ramps up his involvement — he looks even more futile.

So much of what he wants comes down to things outside his control: Manchin’s whims, the oil market, whether a new strain comes after Omicron. I suppose it’s fair to say the presidency is not an easy job.

Welcome to POLITICO Nightly. Reach out with news, tips and ideas at [email protected]. Or contact tonight’s author at [email protected], or on Twitter at @tweyant.

— Biden plans mask giveaway as Omicron surges: The Biden administration will announce a plan Wednesday to distribute hundreds of millions of free, high-quality masks through pharmacies and community sites, three people with knowledge of the matter told POLITICO. The masks will be N95s that are sourced from the government’s Strategic National Stockpile, the people said, as part of an effort to ensure Americans can access the more-protective masks during a record surge of Covid-19 cases.

— Jan. 6 investigators target Trump’s court efforts to overturn election: The Jan. 6 committee is homing in on the key drivers of Donald Trump’s legal efforts to overturn the election, before he set his sights on Congress. The panel has subpoenaed Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani and campaign lawyer Jenna Ellis, who traveled the country attempting to encourage state lawmakers to overturn the results themselves.

— Figure at center of pro-Trump theories to speak with Jan. 6 committee Friday: Ray Epps, the former Arizona Oath Keeper at the center of pro-Trump conspiracy theories related to Jan. 6., intends to sit for a transcribed interview Friday with the Jan. 6 committee, his attorney said in a phone interview. Epps, who has become the centerpiece of an unsupported GOP claim that the FBI incited the mob that ransacked the Capitol last year, met with the Jan. 6 select committee in November and told them he had no relationship to the FBI or any other federal law enforcement agency. But the meeting was just a precursor to a more formal transcribed interview this week, said Epps’ lawyer John Blischak.

— Wireless companies agree to additional 5G curbs in bid to avert flight chaos: Verizon and AT&T have agreed to temporarily limit some 5G services near key airports, a measure intended to head off much of the chaos that airlines have been predicting will start in less than 24 hours when the new technology is set to go live. AT&T said today it has “voluntarily agreed to temporarily defer turning on a limited number of towers around certain airport runways” as the aviation and wireless industries work on additional ways for airplane equipment and 5G signals to safely coexist. In a statement, Verizon also noted it had “voluntarily decided to limit our 5G network around airports.”

— Langevin, McNerney won’t seek reelection: Rep. Jim Langevin (D-R.I.), the first quadriplegic elected to Congress, said today that he would retire after 22 years in office. Within 10 minutes, his announcement was followed by another retirement: Democratic Rep. Jerry McNerney of California. That brings the total number of Democrats departing the House next year to 28, compared to 13 Republicans who have announced they will retire or seek another office this year, not counting those who have already left office or passed away since the new Congress began.

FITTING THE VIRUS TO A T — Nightly contributor and Commonwealth Fund journalist-in-residence at Johns Hopkins School of Public Health Joanne Kenen emails Nightly:

We’re not a particularly scientifically literate society, but we’ve become at least somewhat fluent about antibodies this past year.

But antibodies, which are proteins in our blood, are only one part of our immune defenses. There’s another big part that’s often mentioned but less understood: T cells. I was curious: How much do we know about their role in fighting off the coronavirus? How long do they last? Some people have their antibody levels tested after vaccination. But does that tell the whole story? Does their blood have additional, and hidden, superpowers?

So I called Alexander Dent, a professor of microbiology and immunology at the University of Indiana, and asked him to explain T cells to me, in the context of Covid. Here’s my attempt to distill what I learned. (The professional immunologists among Nightly readers might want to skip to the next item.)

T cells are a type of white blood cell. They form in response to a particular threat, such as a virus or disease-causing bacteria. T cells are uniquely tailored to recognize a specific threat, in this case the coronavirus.

There are “Killer” and “Helper” T-cells. When they see an infected cell, they spring into action. The Helpers kickstart the production of antibodies. The Killers go … kill. If immunology were a Batman cartoon, they’d be the ZAP, BAM part.

“They can kill virally infected cells,” Dent told me. “It’s pretty potent — but you are killing your own cells.” (Which is preferable than having those infected cells kill you.)

Our antibodies glom onto parts of the coronavirus’ spike protein. That’s why a variant like Omicron, which involves many mutations or changes to the spike, is of concern. Because the virus’ spike is now different than the spike the vaccines were originally developed for, we’re more vulnerable to a breakthrough infection.

But the T cells, Dent explained, recognize different parts of the spike protein that are more stable. The Omicron mutations don’t matter as much; the Killers can respond.

But — you knew this was coming — there’s still a lot unknown about coronavirus and T cells.

T-cells can be life long (like the ones that respond to smallpox.). But we don’t know whether that’s the case for the current Covid virus. And while it’s pretty easy to run a blood test for antibodies, T cells are more complicated, and you can’t just ask your doctor to run a test on yours.

What is pretty clear is that these killer immune cells do develop in response to vaccines — and to boosters. In fact, Dent said, the T cell response that the mRNA vaccines elicited while the shots were being developed was one reason there was so much confidence that this new kind of vaccine would be effective.

How well our T cells will keep protecting us — and how well they protect vulnerable people with weakened immune systems who don’t generate a lot of antibodies after vaccination — isn’t yet known. But for now, the killers “are kind of a saving grace for these variants,” Dent said. “The cells can still respond well even if the antibodies don’t.”

BERLIN BRINGS UP NORD STREAM — Germany’s new government gave the clearest indication yet that it would discuss halting the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline if Russia attacked Ukraine, Hans von der Burchard writes.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz offered his strongest warning to date at a press conference with NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, where he was pressed about whether penalizing Nord Stream 2 was part of the “severe economic costs” Germany has said Russia will face if it invades Ukraine.

“It is clear that there will be a high cost and that all this will have to be discussed if there is a military intervention against Ukraine,” Scholz said.

Scholz said his government “stands by all aspects” of a deal his predecessor Angela Merkel reached with Biden last year, under which Germany promised to take action at the national level and press for EU sanctions should Russia “use energy as a weapon or commit further aggressive acts against Ukraine.”

Russia has amassed about 100,000 troops at the Ukrainian border, ramping up fears of looming Russian belligerence. A series of meetings last week between Russia, the U.S. and NATO allies failed to ease the tensions.

Latest from Foggy Bottom: Russia’s latest troop deployment to Belarus represents a hostile development in the ongoing dispute over the future of Ukraine, senior State Department officials said today, as U.S. and European officials ramped up diplomatic and economic pressure on Moscow. Nahal Toosi and Quint Forgey have the details.

CATCH-48 — Senate Democrats will stick together on this week’s vote to push their voting and election reform bill past Republican opposition. Then they’ll focus on isolating two of their own centrists, Burgess Everett and Marianne LeVine write.

The Democratic caucus is pressing forward with laying blame on Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) for the party’s failure to advance sweeping elections reform, thanks to their resistance to weakening the filibuster. The move carries considerable risk, given that Sinema and Manchin will be essential to any further success the party can muster this year — particularly on any resuscitation of Biden’s economic agenda.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), who has been speaking to Manchin on rules changes, said Democrats have tried to come up with a proposal that’s consistent with his and Sinema’s positions and that they aren’t worried the vote will alienate the two centrists.

“I was not a negotiator of the infrastructure bill — I was so happy they were, and I praised them for it, and I voted for it, and it’s going to be great,” Kaine said. “This voting bill is as important or more to many of us than the infrastructure bill. The time is nigh for a decision.”

The Senate Democratic caucus is set to huddle this evening to discuss the coming confrontation over changing chamber rules to help shore up the Voting Rights Act and enact federal election standards. Among their multiple options to defang the 60-vote requirement to get most bills through the Senate, Democrats are leaning toward voting on the revival of the so-called talking filibuster to the Senate, according to several people familiar with the situation.

Did someone forward this email to you? Sign up here.

*** This article has been archived for your research. The original version from POLITICO can be found here ***