On the Third Hand: Zika and Ebola

I’m a suggestible person, and there are only so many hours in the day.

I’m not following very closely the fight over how much funding the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) needs to prevent the spread of the Zika virus in the United States, and to help control the new Ebola (remember Ebola?) outbreak in West Africa.

So, on the one hand, I’m sincerely open to arguments that congressional leaders need to scour the Obama administration CDC funding for the Zika fight request carefully for traps that might be included such as: funding for birth control, new universal cell phone eavesdropping programs or funding for creating zombie armies.

But, on the other hand, I also know that I like my child, and that I like babies.

If the U.S. government lets my child get Ebola or lets someone else’s baby suffer severe, Zika-related brain damage because congressional leaders wanted to show Obama who’s boss by processing the request for the money for field hospital funding for Africa and mosquito-control funding for the United States slowly: That would not make me feel grateful towards Congress for handling the funding request with such admirable attention to detail.

See also: White House criticizes Congress for inaction on Zika money

My suspicion is that the claim managers at the health insurers stuck with paying the bills for the babies born with the repercussions of Zika — and the life insurers stuck with paying a flurry Ebola claims, while operating without the in-office help of employees subject to quarantine orders — would also have a hard time appreciating all of the effort Congress put into reviewing the CDC funding request.

Whoever really controls the necessary votes in Congress should get together with the outbreak experts at the Heritage Foundation, or Cato, or wherever the outbreak experts they like are located, via a conference call this weekend and have a clean bill ready for a vote by next Tuesday.