Stacey Abrams

So how important is it to not only have values-driven decision-making and science-driven decision-making, how important is it to have science-driven and scientific knowledge and experience to be the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Well, that brings us to the other nominees. So while a lot of attention has focused on RFK Jr. heading HHS, the two of the top jobs are also under consideration. And one of the pending nominees is Mehmet Oz. The other is Matt McCurry, both of whom are physicians, but who each have had controversial experiences.

Well, that brings us to the other nominees. So while a lot of attention has focused on RFK Jr. heading HHS, the two of the top jobs are also under consideration. And one of the pending nominees is Mehmet Oz. The other is Matt McCurry, both of whom are physicians, but who each have had controversial experiences.

And there have been questions about their fealty to scientific principles in their work or the implications of their policy proposals. So what do their nominations tell you about the incoming administration's thinking about this?

And there have been questions about their fealty to scientific principles in their work or the implications of their policy proposals. So what do their nominations tell you about the incoming administration's thinking about this?

So to your point about combining the need for science and for policymaking, what happens when you have a scientist who doesn't seem to believe or at least live those beliefs?

So to your point about combining the need for science and for policymaking, what happens when you have a scientist who doesn't seem to believe or at least live those beliefs?

And you just pointed out that we are already on shaky ground. And this administration is not only rejecting expertise or bringing in people who have demonstrated a flawed use of their expertise. But there's also, as you said at the top of the conversation, this intent to replace civil servants who have that expertise with hires who are based on loyalty and not capacity.

And you just pointed out that we are already on shaky ground. And this administration is not only rejecting expertise or bringing in people who have demonstrated a flawed use of their expertise. But there's also, as you said at the top of the conversation, this intent to replace civil servants who have that expertise with hires who are based on loyalty and not capacity.

You mentioned H5N1 as one of the possible outcomes. Can you talk a little bit more about the implications of this lack of capacity when it comes to public health, not just in terms of pandemics, but just the larger public health universe?

You mentioned H5N1 as one of the possible outcomes. Can you talk a little bit more about the implications of this lack of capacity when it comes to public health, not just in terms of pandemics, but just the larger public health universe?

Can you talk a little bit more about state and local public health preparedness? Because that's one of the issues we try to focus on here on Assembly Required. We have a lot of attention... that necessarily needs to be turned towards the federal government. But often the real levers of power, and particularly the accessible levers of power for our listeners, happen at the state and local level.

Can you talk a little bit more about state and local public health preparedness? Because that's one of the issues we try to focus on here on Assembly Required. We have a lot of attention... that necessarily needs to be turned towards the federal government. But often the real levers of power, and particularly the accessible levers of power for our listeners, happen at the state and local level.

So can you talk a little bit more about how state and local public health works and how public health preparedness works at that level?

So can you talk a little bit more about how state and local public health works and how public health preparedness works at that level?

Can you think of an example or a time when citizens or local citizens sort of raised the alarm and had an effect at the local or state level? Because sometimes it can feel like industry is too big and the problem is too big. We can't do anything about it. You've spent a lot of time advising local and national policymakers. When have you seen citizens actually take what you use and have an effect?

Can you think of an example or a time when citizens or local citizens sort of raised the alarm and had an effect at the local or state level? Because sometimes it can feel like industry is too big and the problem is too big. We can't do anything about it. You've spent a lot of time advising local and national policymakers. When have you seen citizens actually take what you use and have an effect?

Well, let's stay there for a second because, you know, I talked about the allergy to science among policymakers. But there's a second strain that seems to have affected segments of the general public. And, you know, Project 2025 and its acolytes, they tend to harp on the uncertainty of COVID and the changes we adapted to. And as you described,

Well, let's stay there for a second because, you know, I talked about the allergy to science among policymakers. But there's a second strain that seems to have affected segments of the general public. And, you know, Project 2025 and its acolytes, they tend to harp on the uncertainty of COVID and the changes we adapted to. And as you described,

the uneven and sort of patchwork response, which seemed to prove that nothing was true, therefore nothing would ever be true. You know, there was the, you know, first we all wiped down every surface, and then we realized wiping down every surface wasn't necessary. And opponents of science hold this up as proof that the public should turn against the scientist.