South Carolina editorial roundup: Thursday, Aug. 20, 2020

Recent editorials from South Carolina newspapers:

The Post and Courier

Aug. 16

Contact tracing is important work

Long before COVID-19 arrived, South Carolina employed about 20 contact tracers who called up those diagnosed with certain infectious diseases. These tracers asked about others who the patient might have exposed, then called those people to urge them to take special care.

Most of us likely didn't know contact tracing was even a thing because it was done so infrequently and on a relatively small scale. The pandemic has thrust this longstanding epidemiological tool into a bright new light. Unfortunately, a lot of people don't like what they see. That's too bad, and we hope attitudes change for everyone's sake.

The state's Department of Health and Environmental Control now has more than 700 contact tracers as it tries to limit the spread of the coronavirus, and it has about 600 more who can be brought in quickly, as needed.

They have tried to interview everyone infected, which is more than 100,000 in South Carolina so far. Tracers offer to help connect those infected to medical care, if needed, and they try to learn who those infected might have exposed. All answers are kept confidential, even from those whom someone might have infected. Privacy safeguards are important for ensuring the public's confidence in the program.

The state also has about 230 contact monitors who help. Each infected person usually comes in close contact with about three to 10 people, so that's a lot of calls to make to ensure everyone takes proper care of themselves and others.

The problem is that their effectiveness has been limited by those they are trying to help. Too many people either never answered their phone or, if they did, have been unwilling to be interviewed about those people with whom they have come into close contact, which is defined as being within 6 feet of someone for at least 15 minutes.

"We really just especially ask the public to help us when they get a call from a contact tracer," says Dr. Brannon Traxler, a DHEC physician consultant. "Don't be afraid, and please answer our questions. ... Maintaining privacy and confidentiality is very important to us."

Ideally, the state can drive down its rate of new COVID-19 cases by quickly reaching out to those who test positive, seeing who they have crossed paths with and then alerting those people that they might have been exposed and should get tested or take steps to limit their interactions with others in the short run. This can work to drive down infection rates.

Those who have not cooperated have had a variety of reasons, but some undoubtedly have been concerned about their privacy, even fraud. A source at the U.S. Attorney's Office says fraud and identity theft related to criminals posing as contact tracers has not been a big problem so far, but people should remain vigilant and know a contact tracer never will ask for money, your Social Security number, your bank account or credit card numbers or your immigration status.

Those with suspicions also can ask the contact tracer to send them an email, which should come from an address that ends with @dhec.sc.gov; any concerns also may be reported to the National Center for Disaster Fraud (1-866-720-5721 or disaster@leo.gov).

The State

Aug. 13

College football during a pandemic

Sometimes when you want something in the worst way, you put yourself in a position to do exactly that - to get what you desire in the worst possible way.

It's hard to shake that thought when it comes to the heartfelt calls by many college football players - most notably Clemson University star quarterback Trevor Lawrence - to be allowed to play games this fall amid the public health crisis of COVID-19.

That's certainly no dig at Lawrence, who has been an inspirational and admirable figure both on and off the field as a student-athlete.

But there is a very good reason why the Big 10, PAC-12 and many other major college athletic conferences have decided to postpone football this fall.

It's because these organizations realize the risk of putting college kids on football fields while COVID-19 remains an ominous menace isn't worth the "reward" of appeasing young athletes who may not be fully cognizant of what's at stake - nor the "reward" of pandering to everyone else who just wants to watch college football this fall.

It's a position based on common sense and sound judgment.

They are two attributes that the remaining holdout athletic conferences like the ACC (which includes Lawrence's school, Clemson) and the SEC (which counts USC as a member) need to show they possess, too.

The outliers should change course, join their peers and decide not to play football this fall. It's the right time to do the right thing in the best possible way.

AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH

What's the obvious fact that the "We the stubborn" segment appears intent on ignoring?

It's the reality that only two major sports have been able to successfully carry out their competitions without widespread positive COVID-19 tests among their athletes - and that's because they are playing games in bio-secure bubble environments.

While that may be an inconvenient truth for the ACC, SEC and other conferences still driven to playing football this autumn, it's also one they must stop dismissing.

MISGUIDED MYTH

What's the misguided myth that the "We the Stubborn" segment continues to nurture?

It's the nonsensical theory that because college football players are young and in elite physical shape, they have little chance of contracting COVID-19 while playing - and will have no problem recovering from the virus on the odd, oh-so-small chance that they do get it.

Someone should tell that to Indiana University freshman football player Brady Feeney, who is struggling to recover his health after contracting COVID-19 and has been passionately begging fellow young athletes to be aware of the danger posed by a virus that we're not even close to fully containing.

IGNORE THE AGENDAS

But all of us have an obligation as well. We have a responsibility to steadfastly tune out the noise from those whose agendas and interests are served if college football is unwisely played this fall.

Of course, the college football coaches will continue their shrill cries of "Let our guys play ball!"

But too many of them have already shown that their worldview in general is so narrow and limited that it barely extends beyond "Who are we playing this Saturday?" and "Where's my headset at?"

We should ignore them.

Of course, the members of the college football industry - in particular, the highly paid commentators and analysts - will continue their shrill cries of "Let's see some football!"

But in the best of times these sycophants act as though college football is more about the middle-aged guys walking the sidelines than the young ones between the lines - so why would they now suddenly change their focus toward the kids actually putting their bodies on the line?

We should ignore them.

And, of course, the cynical politicians like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis - who has invited schools in conferences that have postponed football to go rogue and play games in his state this fall - will continue their shrill cries of "Let the games go on!"

While appealing to patriotism is the last refuge of countless scoundrels, seeking to bask in the reflected glory of sports remains a reliable last recourse for countless opportunists in public office who are desperate to draw attention away from other matters.

We should absolutely ignore them.

Yes, it may be tempting to be swayed by the genuine pleas from Trevor Lawrence and other college football players who say they simply "want to play."

But one thing remains clear:

The right thing - the wise thing - is to not let them play at all this fall.

The Aiken Standard

Aug. 15

The 19th Amendment

It's right to worry about voting. President Trump is worried about voting by mail. Constituents are worried about safety at polling places. Election commissioners are worried about staffing the polls. And we all worry about election fraud. With the November election 79 days away, the topic of voting remains at the forefront of our minds.

Lest we forget, 100 years ago this month, voting was not something that all Americans were legally able to do. The 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states, "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."

For decades leading up to and including 1920, women's suffrage was radical. It was radical for women to be on equal footing with men and to have access to higher education, jobs, divorces, property rights and much more.

Today, voting is a right for all of us.

Reflecting on the 19th Amendment demands that we acknowledge the challenges that persisted long after the 36th state ratified it on Aug. 26, 1920. Women's right to vote wasn't just about sexism, it was also about racism evidenced by non-Caucasian women and men whose demands for equality led us to the 1965 Voting Rights Act that was needed to reinforce the right to vote regardless of race.

We talk about rights but maybe this is also about wrongs.

Frances Ellen Watkins Harper was a Black woman and leader who, along with Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, fought for women's rights. Harper championed equality for all citizens and eloquently stated that although rights are important, we also need to rectify the wrongs.

Literacy tests at the polls, guessing the number of marbles in a jar - Jim Crow-style rules designed to filter out non-white men from voting are easily recognizable past wrongs. Some of the reasons used to keep women from voting are just as wrong. It was said that allowing women the right to vote would destroy chivalry. Women are too emotional to vote. If allowed to vote, women would neglect their household duties and basically turn into men. Wrong on all counts.

In 1866, Harper gave a famous speech in New York City saying, "We are all bound up together in one great bundle of humanity, and society cannot trample on the weakest and feeblest of its members without receiving the curse in its own soul." We're all in this together. Our nation's laws, voting rights and access to the polls shouldn't be parsed out based on manmade values of one segment of our population.

Everyone can learn from history and this a great story for all of us who love our mamas.

The 19th Amendment was passed by Congress on June 4, 1919, but required 36 of our then 48 states to agree in order to give the voting right to millions of American women. Tennessee, the last state of the three-fourths necessary, stalled for months on ratification and it appeared doomed to fail. That was until a first-term Republican named Harry T. Burn, who'd been pressured by his party and Anti Suffragists to oppose the amendment, received a letter from his mother which he held in his pocket. It read, "Be a good boy" and ratify the amendment. After some delays, Burn broke the 48-48 tie and the amendment passed. There was backlash to his vote but that single "AYE" vote set his career path in public service in Tennessee. Burn was right to take his mama's advice.

Women legally had the right to vote since 1920, but the South Carolina General Assembly did not officially ratify the 19th Amendment until July 1, 1969. The General Assembly recognized Aiken's own Grand Dame of Women's Suffrage, Mrs. Eulalie Salley, at the Statehouse. Salley said, "I've been a Democrat all my life but I finally had to get an awfully good Republican to get this through." Salley was referring to Aiken's Sen. Gilbert McMillan who, along with his colleagues, passed the 19th Amendment unanimously.

By the summer of 1969, women in Aiken had been voting for nearly 50 years, so life didn't change much that day. But good sources say that, in true Aiken fashion, the best linens and fine China were dusted off and put to use at house parties and galas befitting the occasion.

It was the right thing to do.